In 1985, Lyle M. Eslinger published Kingship of God in Crisis (1985). In the first part of the book, Eslinger offered a critique of the history of criticism regarding 1 Samuel 1–12. According to him, the historical critical method losses sight of the whole meaning of the text. Similar to Gunn, Eslinger dealt with his delineated text only. Eslinger approached the …show more content…
Edelman attempted to approach 1–2 Samuel as a “historian.” Such an approach provided her with insight necessary to understand how the original audience would have understood the text. She proposed that an understanding of how, when, and why the narrative of Saul was constructed would reveal pre-existing sources. Edelman read the text as a complete literary unit. She did not raise any historical judgments or concerns; however, she noted the need for such consideration but rejected its value in being addressed in her reading (or literary analysis). Accordingly, “discussions concerning philology, textual reconstruction, and ancient social customs or structure” occurred as needed. In essence, Edelman tried to discern the purpose of the material added to the pre-existing