The study of the author's influence on the oral tradition is called redaction criticism.

Redaction criticism may be viewed as the child of text criticism and form criticism.

Redaction criticism regards the author of the text as editor (redactor) of his or her source materials.

What is Redaction Criticism?

However, Childs refuses to speak of canonical criticism as if it were on a level with form criticism or redaction criticism.

Redaction criticism, also called Redaktionsgeschichte, Kompositionsgeschichte, or Redaktionstheologie, is a critical method for the study of biblical texts.

Related to Source Criticism is Redaction Criticism which seeks to determine how and why the redactor (editor) put the sources together the way he did.

From the perspective of redaction criticism, the focus would be on the theological motif in that attention is not given to Daniel's gifts, nor his Chaldean education.

Using redaction criticism, Gundry argued that Matthew tailored the story of Jesus, sometimes unhistorically, to meet the needs of the Gospel's intended audience.

This work, which approached Lukan theology by way of Redaction Criticism, paved the way for much scholarly discussion in the second half of the twentieth century.

Redaction criticism studies "the collection, arrangement, editing and modification of sources", and is frequently used to reconstruct the community and purposes of the authors of the text.

John H. Sailhamer views the "canonical approach" has including the "canon criticism" of Childs, as well as composition criticism, redaction criticism, and text linguistics.

With each passing century, historical criticism became refined into various methodologies used today: source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, tradition criticism, canonical criticism, and related methodologies.

He identified Martin Noth and Gerhard von Rad as the Fathers of Redaction Criticism in Old Testament Studies.

Then redaction criticism is of limited value, but its methods can help to bring out the special interests of the editor and so lead to a fuller appreciation of the theology expressed in his work.

Other foci of his apologetics have included challenging the methodology, assumptions and conclusions drawn in higher criticism of the Old Testament and form and redaction criticism of the gospels.

The task of redaction criticism is to determine how the editor (redactor) of a biblical book utilized his sources, what he omitted and what he added and what his particular bias was.

Sometimes it is wrongly asserted on the basis of redaction criticism that what has been added or modified in a text is unhistorical when it could simply be the addition of another source or perspective.

Perrin specialized in the study of the New Testament, and was internationally known for his work on the teaching of Jesus, as well as on the Redaction Criticism of the New Testament.

Unlike its parent discipline, form criticism, redaction criticism does not look at the various parts of a narrative to discover the original genre; instead, it focuses on how the redactor(s) has shaped and molded the narrative to express his theological goals.

When he submitted his proposed commentary to Frank Gaebelein, general editor of the series, Gaebelein pronounced the commentary acceptable; but the subeditors Merrill C. Tenney and James M. Boice objected to its use of redaction criticism.