Historical-Critical Method

 Return to Home Page
Historical-Critical Method
in its Application to Statements Concerning Events in the Holy Scriptures
Christian Hartlich
JHC 2/2 (Fall 1995), 122-139. "Historisch-kritische Methode in ihrer Anwendung auf Geschehnisaussagen der Hl. Schrift," ZThK 75 (1978), 467-484. Published with permission from J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) Tübingen. Translated by Darrell J. Doughty. This exposition — which developed in common reflection with W. Sachs — was presented for discussion to the "Theological Workgroup" of the two Tübingen theological faculties in December 1976.
In present day theology — in the exegetical disciplines as well as dogmatics — one encounters a profound uncertainty about the validity of the historical-critical method that is connected with its application to statements concerning events in the Holy Scriptures. Alongside the methodologically uncertain and unfinished treatment of all other miracle stories, the interest of research focusses on the question whether and to what extent the historical-critical method is competent to make a judgment with regard to the central miracle of Christianity, the affirmation of the resurrection of Jesus as an event that really took place. Positions have recently been taken on this subject in numerous theological publications — with the prevailing tendency, in spite of the diversity of arguments, to protect the ontic primacy of Jesus affirmed by his resurrection, which elevates him above all other creatures, against historical criticism. The resurrection of Jesus is supposedly a singular fact; and regarding its determination the historical-critical method founders, and, according to its own presuppositions, must founder.
The fundamental theological axiom at work here can be summarized in one sentence: Without an objective, ontic grounding for christology in the resurrection event Christian faith has no basis. At the same time, however, there is also the desire — so far as possible — to proceed in a historical-critical way, in order to make the event of the resurrection of Jesus historically plausible. What results from this combination of a dogmatically established fact, on the one hand, and the undergirding of this factuality by historical substantiation, on the other, is the creation of a historical method for the private use of Christians: namely, a method whose consistent and unlimited application to similar statements about events in other religions is not questioned by Christian theology, but whose extension is nevertheless broken off by the same theology at that point where it enters into conflict with the theological axiom just stated. ...more