Interpreting The New Testament By Daniel Harrington

The book, Interpreting the New Testament, written by Daniel Harrington, is an introduction to the various types of literary and textual criticism that form the basis of good hermeneutics. Harrington begins with introducing the New Testament materials and some examples of how literary criticism might be used in figuring out what the New Testament authors meant. He moves on to a discussion on textual criticism. To provide examples of how confusing textual criticism can be, Harrington discusses Matthew 6:33 and 1 John 5:8. Both passages, Harrington explains, have variant manuscripts which might give a different theological meaning or emphasis depending on which one you used and proceeds to show which one, by the method of textual criticism, that

Redaction critics look at the choice of material, the order of that material and the changes made from the traditional material to determine the theological aims of the author. In other words, to make a theological point, the authors omit certain material, because it detracts from the focus, and choose certain material that helps them accomplish their purpose.

Harrington concludes by talking about the overarching aims of the “exegesis” method and further talks about the factors that affect interpretation which are more fundamental, like pre-existing biases and

One of the more obvious is the complete and utter disregard of the reader response criticism. On the other hand, Watson talks about reader response criticism as one would talk about a controversial subject and seems to think that there might be some redeeming qualities found within reader response criticism. There are several reasons why this might be so. First, Harrington could have such an opinion of reader response criticism that he does not consider it a form of criticism at all. After all, Harrington’s primary focus appears to be the exegetical methods of criticism. There is another possibility. Judging from the methods of reader response criticism, it seems very much a product of a post-modern world, with the focus on subjective meaning and the uncertainty of language. The reason Harrington does not discuss reader response criticism, even if to point out its flaws, could be simply that, when Harrington wrote his book, reader response criticism had not yet come to popularity. Watson, however, treats reader response, not as a true exegetical method, but as something which, for better or worse, seems to be ingrained in today’s society. Watson maintains that reader response criticism might be able to be used in a more balanced way. A point that Harrington makes that Watson does not, is that, if the Two-Document Theory is ever disproved, then most of the redaction criticism work on the