Redaction criticism is the theory held by many scholars that those that translated the early biblical writings altered them so that the bible could appear to be more legitimate. The criticisms reduce the quality of the bible writings by casting doubt on the inspiration value of some of its messages rendering the bible as untrustworthy as a historical document. The basis of redaction is that the second writer who is copying the work reduces, omits and alters the original work. Such is the case of Smooth Criminal by American rock band Alien Ant Farm. The original song was by Michael Jackson. Since the song appears to be a near replica to the original by Michael Jackson, the song by Alien Ant Farm can be analyzed to figure out what has been added, what has been omitted and what has been modified from the original song. With the song, like with the biblical gospels, it is assumed that the song Smooth Criminal by Alien Ant Farm was changed since the singers wanted to portray something different with the song.
The song by Alien Ant Farm was done to make fun of the original hit by Michael Jackson. This is portrayed by the fact that some of the antics that are in the song are done are unique to the original artist. From the moon walk dance that is showed in the song to the antigravity lean and performing in a boxing ring which is symbolic of the bar fight in the original song show that the singers in the band (the redactors) try to mimic the original artist with a comic twist. Since the band is the one that has changed the original, they can be referred to as the redactor. Another thing that is altered from the original is the tempo of the song. In the original, the sing starts with high tempo and slows as the song concludes and the singer stops singing. This antic tries to show that the world would be darker or duller without the singer. The redactor tries to change this by applying a high tempo throughout the song. This antic resonates better with the audience of the time that the song was produced. The same changes were applied by the redactors of the early biblical writings so as to change how the message would be perceived by target audience. The changes that are usually made from the original versions are usually done so that the reader can have a different opinion of the original.
Some of the gospels have used these redactional techniques in their translations of the early biblical writings. One clear example is Mathew’s account of the life of Jesus as translated from Mark’s account. According to the two scholars, Mark seems to have written about the life of Jesus before Mathew which makes his work the original. Since Mathew’s work seems to be a derivative of the work by Mark, Mathew is the redactor in this case. Another thing that shows the gospel according to Mark to be the original is the date in which the two accounts were written. According to scholars, the gospel according to Mark was written between 65 to 70 C.E. The gospel by Mathew was written much later estimated to be between 80 to 85 C.E (Ehrman 78). In his account of the gospel, Mathew has altered many subtle aspects of the account by Mark.
In the specific excerpts from the two gospels, the original scripture by Mark has been altered by Mathew by addition and modification. For example, Mathew3:4-10 is modified and added slightly from Mark 1:4-6 (Ehrman 79). In Mathew, the verses are more concentrated on what John the Baptist was wearing and what he ate. The same account by Mark is more focused on what John the Baptist was doing. The text by Mathew say that John wore sack clothes and mainly fed on locusts and honey while on the other hand the account by Mark say that John the Baptist was emerging from the desert preaching. According to Mark what John the Baptist wore and ate comes later in the text. This also means the redactor also omits the fact that John was from the desert when he came to baptize people in the river Jordan.
Since it already established that Mark’s account is the original version of the two on basis of the date, verse 7 to verse 10 of the two accounts seem to differ by the virtue that Mathew’s account has been added from the original. On Mathew, verse 7 is centered on the criticism of John the Baptist of the Pharisees and the Seduces when they come for baptism. This criticism by Mathew of these two groups is an addition from the original account since in Marks account, John the Baptist did not criticize anyone that came for baptism (Ehrman 79).
In Mathew account, verse 11 and 12 of the account by Mathew contain addition from the account by Mark. This addition can be termed as a threat to those that do not accept baptism for repentance. It can be termed as a threat since John the Baptist tells all those that dot repent will be burnt by eternal fire. This in contrast of the account by Mark which does not contain this. Another alteration of the two accounts is the conversation between Jesus and John the Baptist. According to the gospel by Mark, there is no record of any conversation happening between the two prior to the baptism of Jesus. Since this is the original account, it can be assumed that the redactor added the conversation in his account. According to Mathew, John the Baptist told Jesus of his unworthiness to baptize him before Jesus convinced him to do it.
One of the purposes of changing altering the narrative from the original is to change how the message is perceived by the reader. In this case the account by Mathew who is the redactor contains elements that would resonate more with the reader than the account by Mark. The account by Mathew contains the threats and insults which in turn have more impact than the comparably plain account of Mark. For instance Mathew adds how John the Baptist reacted when he saw the Pharisees and the Sadducees. This shocks the viewer more in comparison to the account by Mark who says nothing about the people who came for baptism.
Since all the gospels are concerned with life of Jesus and the impact that he has on Christian life, the alterations in Mathew’s account play a big role in emphasizing the holiness of Jesus. Both Mathew and Mark state how John the Baptist predicted the coming of Jesus and how holy he was in verses 11 and 12 in Mathew and 7 to 8 in Mark (Ehrman 79). The redactor adds to this account in verse 14 when he adds the conversation between John and Jesus which further exemplifies Jesus’ holiness. It can therefore be assumed said that the purpose of redaction by Mathew was to enforce the ideas that Mark was trying to put across. The logic behind this conclusion is that in the analyzed text show that there is no instance of contradiction between the texts. They all have the same narrative with the only difference being that the account by the redactor having more details than the other.
For example there are multiple instances that the two texts show similar themes. One of the most reoccurring themes from these two excerpts is the fact that Jesus is holy. This example is shown in the prediction of John the Baptist. Mathew 3:11-12 and Mark1:7-8 show John predicting that “one who is more powerful” (Ehrman 81) than him was about to come and unlike him, He would baptize the people with the Holy Spirit. This is symbolic of the holiness of Jesus. Another proof of this is that in both texts, John sees himself as unworthy of baptizing Jesus. He explains that he is unworthy of even “carrying his shoes” (Ehrman 81), since shoes step on the ground they are deemed unclean and the fact that John says he is unworthy of carrying Jesus’ shoes show how holy Jesus is.
Another theme that is similar in both the original and the redacted version is the baptism of Jesus. The baptism of Jesus is narrated in almost similar details in the both Mark’s and Mathew’s story. According to both of them, Jesus approached John the Baptist and although John the Baptist deemed himself unworthy of the task, he baptized Jesus anyway. The heavens opened up and a voice was heard saying that Jesus was the son of God (Ehrman 82). The only minor difference was that in the original account, the voice addressed Jesus and the in the redactor account, the voice was addressing the people. This difference can be attributed to the fact that the reactor wanted to change the impression that the reader had of Jesus in his role as the son of God.
Works Cited
Ehrman, Bart. A Brief Introduction into the New Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.
