Kritik teks (Alkitab): Perbedaan antara revisi

'''Kritik teks''' adalah salah satu metode [[Hermeneutika Alkitab|penafsiran]] [[Alkitab]] yang mempelajari [[teks]] yang ada secara terperinci untuk memahami makna yang terkandung di dalamnya.

 

* Perbedaan sumber asal.

* Perbedaan interpretasi pada saat menerjemahkan.

Kritik teks sudah dimulai dari zaman kuno tetapi metode kritik teks modern untuk [[Alkitab]] [[Kristen]] yaitu [[Perjanjian Lama]] dan [[Perjanjian Baru]] berawal dari rasionalisme abad ke-17 dan ke-18 dan dikembangkan dalam konteks pendekatanan ilmiah kepada humanitas (terutama sejarah) yang tumbuh pada abad ke-19.<!-- Studies of the Old and New Testaments were often independent of each other, largely due to the difficulty of any single scholar having a sufficient grasp of the many languages required or of the cultural background for the different periods in which texts had their origins.

-->

<!--

Astruc's methods were adopted by German scholars such as [[Johann Gottfried Eichhorn]] (1752–1827) and [[Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette]] (1780–1849) in a movement which became known as the [[higher criticism]] (to distinguish it from the far longer-established close examination and comparison of individual manuscripts, called the [[lower criticism]]); this school reached its apogee with the influential synthesis of [[Julius Wellhausen]] (1844–1918) in the 1870s, at which point it seemed to many that the Bible had at last been fully explained as a human document.

The implications of "higher criticism" were not welcomed by many religious scholars, not least the Catholic Church. [[Pope Leo XIII]] (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical ''[[Providentissimus Deus]]'';<ref>Fogarty, page 40.</ref> but in 1943 [[Pope Pius XII]] gave license to the new scholarship in his encyclical ''[[Divino afflante Spiritu]]'': "textual criticism ... [is] quite rightly employed in the case of the Sacred Books...Let the interpreter then, with all care and without neglecting any light derived from recent research, endeavor to determine the peculiar character and circumstances of the sacred writer, the age in which he lived, the sources written or oral to which he had recourse and the forms of expression he employed".<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_30091943_divino-afflante-spiritu_en.html Encyclical ''Divino afflante Spiritu''], 1943.</ref> Today the modern [[Catechism of the Catholic Church|Catechism]] states: "In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression".<ref>[http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PQ.HTM Catechism of the Catholic Church, Article III, section 110] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140816202810/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PQ.HTM |date=August 16, 2014 }}</ref>

-->

 

Kritisisme tekstual Alkitab Ibrani membandingkan versi [[naskah Alkitab]] dari berbagai sumber (tarikh berdasarkan naskah tertua yang terlestarikan dari setiap keluarga/famili tekstual):

| colspan="5" style="background:#66cdaa;"|

|-

|-

| colspan="5" style="background:#66cdaa;"|

Sebagaimana dalam naskah-naskah [[Perjanjian Baru]], munculnya perubahan, korupsi dan penghapusan, terutama dalam teks-teks Masoret, disebabkan oleh para juru tulis (''soferim''; ''scribes'') kuno yang tidak menangani kesalahan penyalinan secermat di waktu-waktu kemudian.<ref>Tov 2001, p. 9</ref>

 

 

 

Dalam melihat [[Alkitab Ibrani]] sebagai [[Perjanjian Lama]], hampir semua varian tekstual tidak bernilai penting dan tidak mempengaruhi doktrin kepercayaan. Professor [[:en:Douglas Stuart (biblical scholar)|Douglas Stuart]] menyatakan: "Secara jujur dapat dikatakan bahwa ayat-ayat, pasal-pasal, dan kitab-kitab dalam Alkitab akan terbaca umumnya sama, dan memberikan kesan yang sama kepada para pembaca, meskipun orang memasukkan semua bacaan ''alternatif'' yang ada ke dalam teks yang menjadi dasar terjemahan [bahasa Inggris] saat ini."<ref>{{cite book|last=Kaiser|first=Walter|title=The Old Testament Documents: Are They Reliable & Relevant?|year=2001|publisher=InterVarsity Press|page=48|url=https://books.google.com/?id=FbKhwkrCoD8C&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48#v=onepage&q&f=false|isbn=9780830819751}}</ref>

 

=== Perjanjian Baru ===

Teks kuno [[Perjanjian Baru]] meliputi lebih dari 5.800 naskah [[bahasa Yunani]] manuscripts, 10.000 naskah [[bahasa Latin]] dan 9.300 naskah dalam bahasa-bahasa kuno lain (termasuk [[bahasa Suryani]], [[bahasa Slavia]], [[bahasa Etiopia]] dan [[bahasa Armenia]]). Naskah-naskah itu memuat sekitar 300.000 varian tekstual, sebagian besar meliputi pertukaran urutan kata dan perbedaan penulisan yang trivial.<ref name=wallace_on_majority>{{cite web|last= Wallace|first= Daniel|title= The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical?|url= https://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical|accessdate= 23 November 2013|deadurl= no|archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20131203000201/https://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical|archivedate= 3 December 2013|df= }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last= Westcott and Hort|title= The New Testament in The Original Greek: Introduction Appendix|url= https://books.google.com/?id=7ZxUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2&dq=The+New+Testament+in+the+Original+Greek#v=onepage&q&f=false|accessdate= 23 November 2013|year= 1896}}</ref> Jadi selama lebih dari 250 tahun dilakukan kritis teks mendalam, para sarjana Perjanjian Baru dapat menyatakan tidak ada varian tekstual yang mempengaruhi doktrin apapun. Profesor [[D. A. Carson]] menyatakan: "tidak ada dari apa yang kita percayai secara doktrinal benar, dan tidak ada dari apa yang diperintahkan kepada kita untuk dilakukan, yang diubah oleh varian-varian itu. Ini benar untuk tradisi tekstual manapun. Penafsiran perikop-perikop individual dapat saja dipertanyakan; tetapi tidak pernah ada doktrin yang terdampak."<ref name=wallace_on_majority/><ref>

{{Cite book

}}

</ref>

In the 19th century important scholarship was done by [[David Strauss]], [[Ernest Renan]], [[Johannes Weiss]], [[Albert Schweitzer]] and others, all of whom investigated the "[[historical Jesus]]" within the Gospel narratives. In a different field the work of [[H. J. Holtzmann]] was significant: he established a chronology for the composition of the various books of the New Testament which formed the basis for future research on this subject, and established the [[two-source hypothesis]] (the hypothesis that the gospels of [[gospel according to Matthew|Matthew]] and [[gospel according to Luke|Luke]] drew on the [[gospel of Mark]] and a hypothetical document known as [[Q document|Q]]). By the first half of the 20th century a new generation of scholars including [[Karl Barth]] and [[Rudolf Bultmann]], in Germany, [[Roy Harrisville]] and others in North America had decided that the quest for the Jesus of history had reached a dead end. Barth and Bultmann accepted that little could be said with certainty about the historical Jesus, and concentrated instead on the [[kerygma]], or message, of the [[New Testament]]. The questions they addressed were: What was Jesus’s key message? How was that message related to Judaism? Does that message speak to our reality today?

 

! width="20%"|Jenis teks !! width=" 10%" |Tarikh!!Ciri!! Versi Alkitab

|-

|-

|-

|}

 

 

 

Textual criticism uses a number of specialized methodologies, including [[eclecticism]], [[stemmatics]], copy-text editing and [[cladistics]]. A number of principles have also been introduced for use in deciding between variant manuscripts, such as ''[[Lectio difficilior potior]]'': "The harder of two readings is to be preferred".<ref>Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812) published several editions of the New Testament. In his 1796 edition, he established fifteen critical rules, including a variant of Bengel's rule, ''Lectio difficilior potior'', "the hardest reading is best." Another was ''[[Lectio brevior|Lectio brevior praeferenda]]'', "the shorter reading is best," based on the idea that scribes were more likely to add than to delete. {{cite web | url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/rules.html#Griesbach |title=Critical Rules of Johann Albrecht Bengel|publisher=Bible-researcher.com|accessdate=2010-03-16| archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20100213010108/http://www.bible-researcher.com/rules.html| archivedate= 13 February 2010 | deadurl= no}}</ref> Nevertheless, there remains a strong element of subjectivity, areas where the scholar must decide his reading on the basis of taste or common-sense: Amos 6.12, for example, reads: "Does one plough with oxen?" The obvious answer is "yes", but the context of the passage seems to demand a "no"; the usual reading therefore is to amend this to, "Does one plough ''the sea'' with oxen?" The amendment has a basis in the text, which is believed to be corrupted, but is nevertheless a matter of judgement.<ref>[[David J. A. Clines]], "[http://www.shef.ac.uk/bibs/DJACcurrres/Postmodern1/Methods.html Methods in Old Testament Study]", section ''Textual Criticism'', in ''On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1'' (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: [[Sheffield Academic Press]], 1998), pp. 23–45.</ref>

 

 

 

[[Phyllis Trible]], a student of Muilenburg, applied and developed his methods, while adding her own [[Christian feminism|Christian feminist]] perspective to biblical scholarship.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Tull|first1=Patricia K.|editor1-last=Haynes|editor1-first=Stephen R.|editor2-last=McKenzie|editor2-first=Steven L.|title=To each its own meaning : an introduction to biblical criticisms and their applications|date=1999|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|location=Louisville, Ky.|isbn=978-0664257842|edition=Rev. and expanded.|chapter=Chapter 8: Rhetorical Criticism and Intertextuality}}</ref>{{rp|158-159}}<ref name=UTSaid>{{cite web|title=Finding Aid for Phyllis Trible Papers, 1954-2015|url=http://library.columbia.edu/content/dam/libraryweb/locations/burke/fa/awts/ldpd_5635427.pdf|publisher=Archives of Women in Theological Scholarship The Burke Library Columbia University Libraries Union Theological Seminary, New York|accessdate=4 April 2018|date=2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Vater|first1=Ann M.|title=Review of God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality|journal=Journal of Biblical Literature|date=1980|volume=99|issue=1|pages=131–133|doi=10.2307/3265712|jstor=3265712}}</ref>

 

 

===Psychological criticism===

* [[William F. Albright|William Albright]] (1891–1971): profesor pada [[Johns Hopkins University]] dan pendiri "[[:en:biblical archaeology|biblical archaeology (arkeologi Alkitab)]]" yang mendukung otentisitas naskah-naskah kuno Alkitab, terutama [[Perjanjian Lama]].

<!--* [[Albrecht Alt]] (1883–1956): berperan dalam debat awal mengenai agama leluhur di Alkitab; <!-- ; he was also an important influence on the generation of mid-20th century German scholars like [[Martin Noth]] and [[Gerhard von Rad]]-->

<!--* [[Margaret Barker]] (1944–): maintains that the polytheistic practices of the First Jewish Temple survived and influenced gnosticism and early Christianity

* [[Walter Bauer]] (1877–1960): redefined the parameters of orthodoxy and heresy with his multiregional hypothesis for the origins of early Christianity

* [[Thomas Jefferson]] (1743–1826): Presiden Amerika Serikat. Pengarang "Jefferson Bible", sebuah rekonstruksi Perjanjian Baru yang menghilangkan rujukan bersifat mujizat.

* [[Baruch Spinoza]] (1632–1677): filsuf Belanda, yang mengumpulkan diskrepansi, kontradiksi dan anakronisme dari Taurat dan berpendapat bahwa Taurat tidak dapat ditulis oleh Musa. Pendapatnya disanggah secara detail oleh [[Jean Astruc]].

* [[David Friedrich Strauss]] (1808–1874): kritikus Jerman yang berfokus pada penelitian [[Yesus sebagai tokoh dalam sejarah]], terutama dengan bukunya ''Das Leben Jesu''. Pendapatnya sudah ditinggalkan karena temuan-temuan arkeologi modern.

<!--* [[Thomas L. Thompson]] (1939–): penyanggah kesimpulan Albright mengenai arkeologi dan sejarah Pentateukh-->

* [[Joseph Wheless]] (1868–1950): ahli hukum Amerika Serikat yang menentang bahwa Yesus pernah hidup.-->

* [[R. N. Whybray]] (1923–1997): penyanggah asumsi "kritik sumber" yang mendasari [[hipotesis dokumen]].

 

== Lihat pula ==

| volume=

| issue=

}}

* {{cite book

|author=Birch, Bruce C., Walter Brueggemann, Terence E. Fretheim, and David L. Petersen

|isbn = 0-334-00294-X

|location = London

|publisher = SCM Press; Philadelphia: Trinity Press International

}}

|volume=

|issue=

|publisher=HarperSanFrancisco

|authorlink=Bart D. Ehrman

== Pranala luar ==

* [http://www.shef.ac.uk/bibs/DJACcurrres/Postmodern1/Possibilities.html David J. A. Clines, "Possibilities and Priorities of Biblical Interpretation in an International Perspective", in ''On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998'', Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: [[Sheffield Academic Press]], 1998), pp.&nbsp;46–68] See Section 6, Future Trends in Biblical Interpretation, overview of some current trends in biblical criticism.

* [http://biblicalauthorship.blogspot.com/2011/07/library.html Library of latest modern books of biblical studies and biblical criticism]