marcus florian

As well as being disrespectful to the holy scriptures, an objection to the ‘Higher Criticism’ I read is that its origin is in German anti-semitism. Mid 19th century Germany was the high point of classical criticism, professors of philology were held in extraordinary esteem and they did a demolition job on the Greek poems of Homer. They dissected the poems into multiple authors from different periods. Wellhausen and co wanted to do the same to the bible texts. They were virulently anti Jewish and a revival in Germanic paganism and Arian pseudo-scientific racial theories encouraged them to attack what they saw as un-German Jewish culture and so they wanted to tear up the scriptures in the same way they had attacked Homer. They invented the ‘Jahwist’,the ‘Elohist’ the ‘Deuteronomist’ and sources “J, E, D & P” Why do modern bible commentaries perpetuate their imaginary system?

Hello ,I wouldn’t call myself a collector of commentaries but have accumulated a few over the years. I mostly use Cornelius a Lapide (most volumes) I also have Critici Sacri vol 1 only, 2 vols of Synopsis Criticorum, , some medieval comms eg Strabo and Maurus. As you see these are all older commentaters. I used to have copies of more recent ones eg New Cambridge Bible but I began to dislike the aproach of the so called ‘higher criticism’ where they deconstruct the sacred text as if it were a redaction from different sources. I found this discrespectful, almost a pseudo-science and prefer the interptation which goes back to Origen and the Alexandrians exploring 5-fold exegesis, allegory typology etc.