When I began Bible college over 25 years ago, I didn’t understand the cultural and historical forces that gave rise to modern biblical scholarship. Like many eager students stepping into theology classes for the first time, I came with a deep reverence for Scripture but little awareness of the intellectual movements that shaped how the Bible came to be studied in universities. Coming to grips with this background didn’t weaken my faith—it gave me a framework for understanding why questions are asked the way they are, and how to thoughtfully engage both critics and believers in conversation. It helped me see that the world of biblical studies isn’t a battleground of faith versus doubt, but often a landscape shaped by deeper cultural currents.
The Rise of Higher Criticism
The roots of what we now call “higher criticism” stretch back to the Enlightenment—a period from the 17th to 19th centuries marked by a growing confidence in human reason, scientific discovery, and historical analysis. During this time, thinkers began to question longstanding authorities, including church traditions. This intellectual climate led scholars to examine the Bible not only as sacred Scripture, but as a historical document—asking when certain books were written, by whom, and for what purpose.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, German universities became hotbeds for this approach. Scholars like Julius Wellhausen developed theories such as the Documentary Hypothesis, arguing that the Pentateuch was composed from multiple sources over time rather than being authored solely by Moses. In the New Testament, critical approaches questioned traditional authorship, the historical reliability of the Gospels, and the development of early Christian theology. These efforts became known as “higher criticism,” in contrast to “lower criticism” (what we now call textual criticism), which focused on the words and manuscripts themselves.
To many devout Christians, these academic shifts felt deeply unsettling. Higher criticism often approached the Bible like any other ancient text—stripped of divine inspiration, miracles, or sacred authority. While some scholars maintained their faith while engaging this work, others embraced more skeptical conclusions. The net result was a growing divide between the academy and the church.
The Reaction: Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism
This divide sparked a significant reaction in the early 20th century. As modernist theology and critical methods grew in influence—especially in seminaries and mainline denominations—conservative Christians began to rally around the “fundamentals” of the faith. The Fundamentalist movement insisted on core doctrines like the inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth, the resurrection of Jesus, and the reality of miracles. These were seen as non-negotiables in contrast to the liberal theology they perceived as undermining biblical authority.
Out of this movement eventually emerged modern evangelicalism. While evangelicals shared many concerns with fundamentalists, they sought greater engagement with the broader world—academically, culturally, and socially. They developed their own institutions, seminaries, and publishing houses that upheld a high view of Scripture while still taking academic study seriously. Scholars like Carl F.H. Henry, F.F. Bruce, and later N.T. Wright and others represent this stream of scholarship: critical in method, but confessional in spirit.
Why This Still Matters Today
Understanding the context in which higher criticism arose—and how Christians responded to it—is crucial for those of us engaging Scripture seriously today. It helps explain why some conversations around the Bible are charged with suspicion, and why evangelical seminaries still teach both critical methods and theological commitments side by side.
It also reminds us that the questions we ask of the Bible often say as much about us—our culture, our fears, our values—as they do about the text itself. Learning about these developments helped me read Scripture not with less faith, but with more clarity and appreciation for the complexity of God’s Word in human history.
Today, whether you’re studying in a classroom, preaching in a pulpit, or having conversations with skeptics and seekers, this historical lens can help you listen better, think more clearly, and speak more faithfully.
