Biblical Criticism: Reader-Response

What is the most recent form of biblical criticism, and how has it effected biblical study today?

The most recent form of biblical criticism is Reader-Response
Criticism. This form goes back to Germany and the Sixties to the Konstanz School of literary studies. This form of criticism since then has continued to gain a foothold into how we interpret Scripture. This form recognized the reader as superior to the text itself and has an active role that reveals and completes the meaning through their interpretation.

There are some obvious problems that arise from this form of modern literary theory on how we read and understand the Bible. One of the cultural affects of postmodernism is that language is indeterminate—it does not communicate a stable meaning and there is no such thing as absolute truth. Reader-response criticism is relative and subjective to the reader. This puts the focus not on the Word of God nor does it have any connection with illuminating the Scripture by the work of the Holy Spirit. This subjectivity is seen in the writings of Stanley Fish, one of the more radicals in this approach and makes this statement. "…the text as an entity independent of interpretation and responsible for its career drops out and is replaced by the texts that emerge as the consequence of our interpretive activities."

This type of study has lead to a liberal view of studying the Bible where experience rather than sound doctrine is the true essence. It places doctrine within the believing community rather than viewing and studying it as final and absolute truth. In doing so, the final authority for theology must be a community event, and the Holy Spirit not only speaks through the text but within that community. Although I believe that we must not only study theology but that we are to exercise what we believe this must agree to the truth of God's Word and must take precedence over the community. If we are to follow Reader response criticism this would mean that each community could discover for itself its own truth.

Vanhoozer in his book entitled Is There a Meaning in This Text is a helpful guide in understanding language and how the language of the Bible carries meaning about God, people and how scholars read and interpret the Bible today. It is also talks about the Holy Spirit's work of illumination. I do believe that just a simplistic or mechanical study of the Bible will not have the impact on us that God intends. Meditation is one of those keys (Josh 1:8; Ps 1:2) and we need to come back to the question of the Holy Spirit in the study of the Bible. It's not a feeling it's a supernatural act of "illumination."

In conclusion, I like what Osborn suggested in his book on how to "do" a system of theology:

(1) Theology must always further the righteousness and holiness of the saints and reflect "historic supernatural Christian orthodoxy." (2) It must also reflect exegetical truth, biblical theology, and at the same time build bridges to life today. (3) It must reflect constant dialogue with biblical teaching and exude the impact of the Holy Spirit in spiritual understanding. (4) It must continually engage culture and the ideas that drive it, then present the gospel as the way forward to solving the prevalent issues. (5) It should maintain dialogue with Catholic, Orthodox and mainstream liberal Protestant thought, refusing the isolationist mentality that destroyed witness in the past (2000:186–89).