Loading...Even though we don’t have the forgeries of Pauline letters connected with Marcion (they’ve all been lost or destroyed by orthodox Christians), we have other letters forged in Paul’s name that appear to be opposing Marcion (you don’t need to read the previous posts to make sense of this one; but if you want to learn more about Marcion — see the two posts preceding). These surviving letters are forgeries written to oppose forgeries, an orthodox attempt to fight fire with fire. One of the most interesting is Paul’s alleged Third Letter to the Corinthians!
Here’s what I say about it in my book Forged (HarperOne, 2011).
******************************
Third Corinthians
It was quite common for “orthodox” Christians (that is, Christians who accepted the theological views that eventually became widely accepted throughout Christianity) to charge “heretics” (those who taught “false teachings”) with forging documents in the names of the apostles in order to support their views. We will see much more of this phenomenon in chapter five. The Gospel of Peter, for example, was charged with being heretical, as teaching a docetic view of Jesus. But orthodox Christians forged documents of their own. We have far more of this kind of forgery, since orthodox writings were more likely to be preserved for posterity, even if they were not actually written by their alleged authors.
Everyone familiar with the New Testament knows that
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Greetings,
Dr. Ehrman, thank you for sharing all this valuable knowledge with us. . I wanted to ask you two questions, and your response, irrespective of its nature, will undoubtedly elevate my spirits to celestial heights. Most likely you have encountered these inquiries previously, I venture forth with them nonetheless:
1. Considering the directive in Matthew 15:24, alongside the explicit instructions from Jesus in Matthew 10:5-6, how might we reconcile the apparent shift in approach reflected in Matthew 28:19-20? Furthermore, could the Greek term ἔθνη carry multiple interpretations within this particular scriptural context?
2. In reference to the profound declaration in Exodus 3:14, “I am who I am,” where the phrase “I am” is equated with God, does John 8:58 suggest, “before Abraham existed, I am God”? Or does it imply “God existed before Abraham and He conveyed these truths to me”? If Jesus’s intention was to express “before Abraham was, I embodied divinity,” wouldn’t a more accurate rendition align closely with Exodus 3:14, such as “Before Abraham was, ‘I am’ ‘I am’”?
1. Matthew appears to be saying that during Jesus’ ministry the message of his salvation was to be taken only to Jews. But when they rejected it (see 27:25) then it was to be taken to “all the nationsl” 2. John 8:58 appears to be saying both that Jesus is himself on equal footing with I Am (God) and that he pre-existed. The “I am” phrase in Exodus 3 is not always doubled “I am I am”
A question, Bart. In 1 Corinthians, Paul says, “For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.” So, if I follow, the change Paul mentions here is simply that resurrected bodies will be free of sin. Is that correct? So then, does Paul think that at the Final Judgement, a believer’s body will literally be physically raised from the grave, zombie-like, and that someone who died in a fire would still have the same burns and disfigurement they were buried with? If so, should we take Paul’s experience with the risen Christ to be one where Paul encounters the actual, scourged and crucified (though now sinless), body of Christ? A difficult concept, I must say. Thanks for your time.
He doesn’t indicate explicitly what the bodies would look like, but since his point is that the resurrection will be glorious immortal bodies that have transformed out of the bodies that were buried, I’d say he almost certainly doesn’t think they would still have their wounds. (Or, say, if they were cremated, that they would be raised as ashes.)
Given the change in attributes from the OT God to the NT God, how much time elapsed between the writings of the two testaments? Were the teachings of Jesus the sole reason for God’s “evolution” and the two-God theory?
The books of the Hebrew Bible span possibly from the 10th c BCE to 2nd c. BCE; the NT writings were mainly written in the second half of the 1st c. CE. There were other Jewish writings that talk about a second Yahweh sitting next to him on a throne; moreoever, Jesus himself — hisotircally — almost never certainly talked about two Gods or identified himself as God.
Hi Bart,
A neophyte question: “Establishing a church in X location” is so common when reading about the far-flung ministry of Paul. To help me visualize, what would a new church or a newly converted population look like in this context? Are we talking a handful of new believers? Dozens? Hundreds?
Moreover, what would the practiced religion of a first-century Pauline convert look like? A proto-“mass” centered around Eucharist? Would they have lived communally, sharing resources, or go about their day-to-day like before but with newfound personal convictions?
While the theology is fascinating, I’m equally fascinated by the practical, daily life of these new communities. Can you recommend some sources that help paint that picture?
Best,
Tim
Good quetoins — but it would take a few chapters to answer. I do talk about it in my book Peter, Paul, and mary Magdalene. Short answer: “Church” in greek just means an assembly. It could be a tiny group of a few people. Some of Paul’s churches may have had dozens (Corinth maybe more). But his mission was to go from one urban area to the next, convert some people, get them on their feet as a church, then move to the next place, on the assumption they themselves would convert more . They met weekly (Sunday’s probalby), read scripture, prayed, talked together, taught each other, had commemorative meals together. A good study is Wayne Meeks, The First Urban Christians.
Hi, Bart,
I ask for your patience so please bear with me on the following (I will make 2 comments on this post):
1) Are there indicators in Paul’s writings that there were earlier written sources (such as Q, M,L or any other) from which he drew his doctrine and got inspired to write himself? Or was it only oral tradition he had access to?
2) Does the Bible say whether on his ressurection, Jesus was bodily (in flesh) brought to life, or is he portrayed as having a newly, divine body, not like before? I think of Luke 24:39 + Luke 24:41 Why would he need something to eat as if his body asked for food to function? But then in the story says he vanishes and walks through walls like a ghost (or maybe a miracle?)
And also, which version of body does the Biblie portray all the other people will rise into on the judgement day?
3) Who does Zechariah refer to as shepard and flock in 13:7-9?
4) Who do you think is one of the best jewish rabbi OT interpretor/commentator?
1. No, no compelling reasons to think Paul used earlier written sources; 2. It’s not an either/or. All the authors think his resurrectdion was bodily. Paul thought his body was transformed into a glorious, immortal body, but that it was the body transformed, not a different body; Luke and John have more of the idea that it’s the same body, wounds and all (and a digestive tracek, since he’s able to eat!)
The continuation:
5) Could you expand on these 2 arguments regarding Jesus claimimg to be divine, leaving John aside? (1) Jesus is worshipped as God in Matthew 14:33 and 28:9. Isn’t it a blasphemy on part of the disciples and why did Jesus not say anything about it? (2) Mark 14:61-62 = the mentioning of “I am”
6) Lastly, not a question, but a thought that emerged into my mind thinking about what you say of the apocalyptical Jesus: He never stated or asked that his teachings be written down, but only that people hear the good news (as of the end of times), so how come people say it is the word God wanted to preserve and protect and spread to the world living 2000 years later, as we do? Clearly my first statement is backed up by the so many years after the event that the NT was written. I imagine this is also what you think. I haven’t read your books yet. Started with the Introduction to the NT.
I appreciate all the questions! But I can’t answer them all! Could we stick to two a day? When Jesus is “worshiped” the word that is used is one that refers as well to how people prostrate themselves before a (secular) king, so it doesn’t mean he is God. 2. Mark 14 may sound like he’s claiming to be the great I am, but in the context it doesn’t appear so. He is answering the questoin: are you the messiah, and he says I am. That’s a normal affirmative response to a questoin — you can see it in John 9:9, for example.
What an fascinating way to rebut a “heretic”, forge scripture that opposes their view! I never considered that this sort of thing happened in early Christianity. “Forged” will definitely be added to my reading list. I’m currently reading your book on Heaven and Hell and I’ll be sure to make a comment here on the blog if I have any questions about it.
Hi Dr. Ehrman,
(This question is separate from the post above). In Matthew and Luke we read that Jesus was called a glutton and a drunkard by some. Is it likely that these rumors were actually circulating? Why would the writers make up such a defamatory story? It always seems to me as if Matthew and Luke are taking the opportunity to deny a persistent gossip.
Quick second question: I heard in your podcast that you are in Amsterdam this summer. Are you planning to give a lecture there?
It may be that these views are historically right, that Jesus was accused of not being a separationist but one who mingled with the common folk and so was not seen as a rigorous ascetic (whether he was or not) but was a companion of those who, well, liked to party.
I’m afraid I won’t be giving any lectures there. It’s the start of my cruise to some of the major cities of Western Europe, basically Amsterdam to Lisbon.
There is an interesting presentation on Resurrection by Dr Ali Ataie. (https://youtu.be/eU02_xwZlDg?feature=shared). While this is obviously coming from an apologist point of view, I’d like to know the merits and demerits of this line of reasoning.
Hi Bart
Paul says we must put on incorruptible bodies doesn’t he. So the the perishable becomes imperishable etc. (1 Cor:15) To me that sounds like having a different body than the earthly one altogether. A heavenly body in fact. Is that one possible understanding of this somewhat opaque doctrine?
It’s different in a sense, because it is *transformed*. The analogy he uses is a seed. Take an acorn. The oak grows out of it. What grows is not a huge acorn. But the tree is the transformation of the seed.