“Feminist and liberationist criticism may be viewed as subcategories of reader-response

criticism, since they read the text from a particular viewpoint whether from the view of women,
ethnic minorities, the poor, or the politically oppressed.” 149

“Deconstruction begins with the premise that language is inherently unstable and imprecise.
Since words can mean many different things, all communication and hence all meaning, is
constantly shifting and relative. Any piece of literature can be “deconstructed” to reveal its
ambiguity and hence its meaninglessness.” 150

“The evaluative point of view is the worldview, beliefs, and values which the implied reader is
expected to adopt. The Gospels affirm the evaluative point of view of God, and his agent Jesus
Christ.” 152

“Story time refers to the passage of time in the world of the text. Narrative time is the manner in
which story time is presented. Story time can be narrated slowly or quickly. It can stop, move
forward, or move backward (flashback).” 152

“Rhetoric refers to the narrative patterns and literary devices used by the author to achieve a
response and literary devices used by the author to achieve a response. Some of the more
common rhetorical features in the Gospels are repetition, chiasm, inclusion, and intercalation.”
152

“Rhetorical criticism uses categories developed in the ancient world to evaluate the rhetorical
methods used to produce a desired effect on readers.” 153

“Structuralism seeks to identify conventional patterns – a “deep structure” – which lies behind
the surface structure of the Gospel narratives. Structuralists seek an objective analysis of the text
through the identification of universal and stereotypical features of plot, character, and setting.”
153

“Liberationist and feminist approaches seek to read the text from the perspective of those who
are less empowered or oppressed.” 153

“The perspective of this text is eclectic, utilizing narrative and redaction criticism, with a
constant eye on the historical, social, literary, and theological nature of the Gospels.”
 Regarding feminist and liberationist criticism, the way in which readers use this form of

criticism can be indicative of their backgrounds. When reading the text behind the views of those

oppressed or within the margins, the message interpreted becomes vastly different than those of

for example, a deconstructionist. It becomes greatly important to understand the dynamics

between the discrepancies of the interpreters themselves. A text telling the reader something that

may be controversial regarding the actions of God towards the rich may be held in high standards

by those who read from a feminist and liberationist point of view. In comparison, a view from a

deconstructionist may perceive the reading as meaningless due to the everchanging nature and

imprecision of the words used within the text itself.

Evidently, everyone reads the text behind different lenses. Everyone will be perceive the

text differently from their uproots in the world, as well as from their specialized reading

perspective. However, it is also important to understand that the various evaluative points the

reader is expected to adopt regarding the Gospel and their view of God and Jesus Christ. In that

regard, regardless of reading perspective, if all were to adopt the reading perspective the Gospel

expects the reader to adopt, there would be less discrepancies and a greater understanding of the

text itself. It becomes evident when looking at the various types and understandings of God and

Jesus Christ in religion itself. Various “dialects” (for lack of a better word) are brought up

because of such misunderstanding between people and the text itself.

I find this divide comical because it seems as if the Gospel is meant to adopt uniformity

between people in mode of thinking and understanding. The goal is to understand the text from

what the text implies. Though this is sparingly difficult due to the differences between people

regarding their background and therefore personal biases.