You want to understand the New Testament. But shortly after delving into your studies you cannot help but notice the fact that there are lots of perspectives and ideas concerning the New Testament. If you are not a well-informed student of the Word, you might end up with the wrong resources in your hand, going down the wrong path. You don't want that. I don't want it either. So, how do we begin assessing the various books and commentaries to gain an awareness of where to go? Approaches to New Testament studies boils down, in a general brush stroke, to two main schools of interpretation:
The Evangelical Approach and the Critical Approach.
The Evangelical approach is not necessarily anti-critical or non-critical, but the Critical approach is, very much not evangelical. And although both approaches utilized the same methodologies, to various extents and results, there are fundamental differences that separates the two. But because there is a very wide spectrum of both evangelical and critical scholars, and because of the shared methodologies, it is easier to label them as tendencies rather than sharply defined camps that opposes each other. So when you read a book or a commentary on the New Testament, look for the tendencies. So what are the tendencies?
The fundamental difference between the Evangelical position and the Critical approach is their view of the supernatural. The Evangelical believes that there is a one true God, the God of the Bible, who acted miraculously in history. The Critical, on the other hand, developing from the Rationalism of the Enlightenment denies any miraculous or supernatural elements, not just for the New Testament but for all religion as well.
A second difference, more specific to the New Testament, is in their view of the length of the New Testament's composition period. Critical scholars like to assume a long, evolutionary development of the New Testament content and theology that lasted approximately 150 years. Evangelicals, contrary to this view, say that the New Testament was written during a shorter, possibly much shorter period. For the most part, they believed most of the books of the New Testament, if not all, were written before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
A third difference is in their view on the origin of the Gospel story. The Critical school tends to see the Gospel as the creation of primitive church communities dispersed throughout the Roman Empire. To them, Jesus did not really have a Gospel. His followers (the church) made it all up to give credence to their cause. Evangelicals, on the other hand, accepts the Gospel stories of Jesus as authentic history.
A fourth difference is in their view on the unity and diversity of the New Testament books. The Critical view emphasizes the fact that there are too many inconsistencies within the New Testament for it to make a coherent continuous thought. There is discontinuity within the New Testament.To them, the stylistic differences of each book highlights multiple traditions or versions of the Gospel that are in various ways parallels, contradictories, and unrelated to each other. To them, these differences points to "Christianities" rather than a Christianity. The Evangelical view understands the New Testament as having a diversity of the witnesses to Christ. They may have different forms, styles, and vocabularies in relating the Gospel, but they all agree in theology.
A fifth difference is in their view of the historicity of the New Testament. Should we view the New Testament as authentic history? Because the Critical view sees discontinuity within the New Testament, they therefore regard the New Testament as historically unreliable. And because the New Testament records supernatural phenomena, it is rejected on philosophical grounds. Their conclusion is that the New Testament is a bunch of myths with certain elements of truth woven into it. The Evangelical view, of course, accepts the New Testament as historically reliable.
Another difference is in their view of the nature of New Testament Christianity. The Critical view believes that Christianity was the result of its environment. The divine Son-ship, the crucifixion, second coming, atonement, etc. of Christ are derived from the many other religion of the ancient world. Evangelicals, on the other hand, believes the New Testament to be witnessing to God's revelation in Christ.
There you have it. Next time you are reading a book about the New Testament, a commentary, an article, a devotional or even an introduction to the New Testament book, look for the tendencies of the author. Ask and evaluate. Do which does this author lean towards?