(11 votes, average: 4.91 out of 5)
Loading...If Christians made up stories about Paul, did they also make up writings allegedly by Paul?
My two previous posts were about fabricated narratives connected with Paul both from outside the New Testament and in the NT book of Acts. After posting, I realized that after lo these many years, I’ve never discussed at any length the related topic, non-canonical Pauline forgeries, writings that claim to be written by Paul but were definitely not.
I leave out of consideration here the six “disputed” Pauline epistles of the New Testament – Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus. There are very good reasons for thinking none of these were written by Paul either (they all, of course, explicitly claim to be), but I’ve dealt with those before (see What about Forgeries IN the New Testament? Is it Possible?, Forgeries in the Name of Paul, Pauline Forgeries: 2 Thessalonians as a Test Case, for example) and will no doubt do so again.
Here I’m interested in less familiar writings. You probably know
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!
Hi, Bart,
1) Is the OT mentioning that the God of the jews is not only for them and not only they should worship him and keep his commandments but so should all the rest of the world? Is it or not exclusive for the jews in the OT?
2) Could you point out the historical evidence/documents that say that Quirinius was not governor of Syria when Herod lived, but only 8 years after his death?
Thanks
1. Most of the OT understands him to be the God of the Jews to whom alone he gave the law. Some parts suggest he will be using Israel to reach the entire world (e.g., the second part of Isaiah, e.g.) 2. Josephus, Antiquities, 18.1-3 (ten years, not eight)
How reliable is Josephus as a source? Are there additional sources that support the incongruity between the time of the census and Jesus’ birth?
He’s pretty reliable when he’s conveying information about matters he’s not personally committed to; when he describes Jewish attitudes and actions and perspectives he has to be considered with particular care, since he was writing to a Roman audience and wanted both to satisfy them and explain Judaism to them. We also have dated coins from his reign that confirm what Josephus says.
I asked this on a previous post but it hasn’t been approved by moderation, but how did the writings of a Paul come to be lumped in with the rest of Scripture, especially in fundamentalist circles? Or in simpler terms, when did Christians start looking at his writings as divinely inspired? Surely many pastors and biblical scholars are aware of the authenticity issues surrounding these letters.
I did answer. The first reference to Paul’s writings as Scripture is 2 Peter 3:16.
In revelation 1:10 Do you think the writer referring to the “lords day” as a sunday? The “on the lord’s day” me it read’s more like the day of Jesus’s Revelation or some major important event, like the one everyone has been waiting for, the day Jesus is coming back on the clouds (the day of our lord’s coming “the lords day”) not referring to something unimportant like a specific day of the week, which seems to me to be out of context. Thank You.
Yes, it is usually taken as the first reference to Sunday as the Lord’s Day. Notice it is referring to the particular day he was writing on (in the past tense), not a future event.
Ahh I see (past tense, not a future event.) And the Sunday thing, basically its a 1 in 7 chance Christ appeared to John on Patmos on a Sunday in this verse? (rev 1:10) I’ve just never found any attestation for this reference being on ANY particular day of the week let alone on a Sunday. It’s just seems in Christianity everyone says or understands things (like this) all the time but, no proof of what they are saying is even readily available. (proof texts, bible) I don’t know if you experienced this when you were younger as a Christian.
Evidence is not always at a high premium….
As for the Sunday question, is it basically a 1 in 7 chance Christ appeared to John on Patmos on a Sunday in this verse? (rev 1:10) I’ve just never found any attestation for this reference being on ANY particular day of the week let alone on a Sunday.
I suppose the prior question would be if Christ appeared to John at all….
One can certainly understand, if not sympathize, with Marcion’s view, especially if he didn’t have the New Testament’s Book of Revelation in front of him as a point of comparison. I’m curious as to how much of what we know as the New Testament today Marcion would have had access to?
All we know is that he had the ten books of Paul and a form of Luke. Whether he knew of other sources is hard to say.
“My two previous posts were about fabricated narratives connected with Paul both from outside the New Testament and in the NT book of Acts.” However, your posts gave no evidence that narratives in Acts were fabricated. Acts would have been a natural source of inspiration for the later fictions, so it is not enough to show that they have some elements in common.
Hello! A little off-topic, but do you have any scholarly source you’d recommend on the historical chronology of 1st century Christianity? All the fun classic questions like “what were the years of Jesus’s preaching”, “what year did Jesus die”, “where was Paul when”, and so on.
I’ve read the fourth volume of Lester Grabbe’s “A History of Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period” which covers a lot of the Jewish background in the era of Roman Judea & the Tetrarchy, what evidence exists for which events, etc., just looking for a similar source on the Christian side.
I have a timeline on p 83 (8th ed.) of my textbook The New Testament. Baic answers: Jesus’ life 4bce-30ce/ letters of Paul 50-60 CE; Mark 70-80 CE; Matthew, Luke 80-100 CE; etc.
Could you tell us more about “At about the time the presbyter of Asia Minor was propounding stories about Paul that led to splits over the roles of women in the church…” or direct us to blog posts that discuss the arguments over women’s roles in the church?
If you do a word search on the blog for “women’s role” you’ll find some posts.
The Geneva Bible is one of the most historically significant translations of the Bible into English, preceding the King James Version by 51 years. It was the primary Bible of 16th century English Protestantism and was used by William Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, John Donne and others. Because the language of the Geneva Bible was more forceful and vigorous, most readers strongly preferred this version to the Great Bible.
1) Do you have any important comments about The Geneva Bible?
2) So, were there three major bibles back then: The Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the King James Bible?
3) If the King James was a toned down version of The Geneva Bible, was The Geneva Bible a better translation?
Thank you.
They are all variations/editings of the Tyndale Bible. When people go on about the marvels of the language of the KJV, they are often, unknowingly, referring to language minted by Tyndale himself. If you want a full scoop, you mnay want to check out the lecture I gave on teh whole thing some years ago, here: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=Ehrman+Youtube+o+the+King+James&mid=047E2198D386C6CBDB8B047E2198D386C6CBDB8B&FORM=VIRE
Thank you.
Ephesians 6:12
King James Bible
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Geneva Bible of 1587
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, and against the worldly gouernours, the princes of the darkenesse of this worlde, against spirituall wickednesses, which are in ye hie places.
Young’s Literal Translation
because we have not the wrestling with blood and flesh, but with the principalities, with the authorities, with the world-rulers of the darkness of this age, with the spiritual things of the evil in the heavenly places;
So, someone was complaining that the KJV did not say we wrestle against “the authorities,” worldly governors [government].
Well isn’t that the same as principality (a state ruled by a prince)?
No.
Supposedly, in traditional Christian angelology, principality is the third highest order of the ninefold celestial hierarchy; and, power is the fourth highest.
Highest orders
Seraphim
Cherubim
Ophanim (thrones)
Middle orders
Dominions
Virtues
Powers
Lowest orders
Principalities
Archangels
Angels
= = =
In Judaism, Bene Elohim, Sons of God, are only ranked 8th out of 10 [Mishneh Torah by Maimonides].
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_angels
Paul calling Jesus an angel, but of what rank?
I’d assume the highest rank there was.
I recently purchased 2 of your Great Courses and also have 2 of Jodi Magness courses. Now if you have someone that is knowledgeable in ancient astronomy, the 3 of you might come up with a very good theory on why the Apocalyptic literature appeared when it did. I have my theory. Precession of the Equinoxes. It was end of the Age of Aries (The Ram), opposite sign Libra (The Law) and Moses. Two thousand and some years ago they were entering the Age of Pisces (fish) and Virgo (virgin) They expected the end of the world. Interesting the same phenomenon is happening today as we enter the Age of Aquarius, (society) and Leo (lion) The ancients were star watchers. They lived by them. Not much is written directly about the celestial events happening but was what the prophecies were all about. I have a couple more ideas about this subject and would love for scholastics to study. Thank you, Lois
Lois, you may be interested in a related idea. Around the first century (BCE or CE, not sure), some modern scholars consider that access to astronomical info from 2000 or so years earlier than THAT (Sumerian maybe?), may have led some learned folks of that time to realize the Age of Aries had previously supplanted the Age of Taurus (as you know, the bull).
Since the Celestial sphere was thought to be the “outermost” shell, within which everything, include pagan deities, etc, were contained, only some kind of ”super deity”, greater and “stronger?” than the celestial sphere itself could be capable of moving it.
Such a deity in the distant past had “slain Taurus”. A Persian divine personage, Mithras, had a story of such a sort in his biography. The idea (as I read it in BAR in the early Nineties), is that this was the kernel of the whole Mithraic Mystery cult popular in the roman army across the empire for some time. (and that their rituals may have included being showered with the blood of a being-slain bull.)
Hi Bart!
Do our earliest post-apostolic writers (Polycarp, Clement, Papias. Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and so on) have inconsistencies among themselves and does those writtings point out generally accepted erroneous traditions, legend stories within these early Christians that even fundamentalists do not accept?
Yup, sure, lots of issues with their writings as well, contradictions, historical mistakes, and so on. IN terms of legendary stories, look up Papias through a word search on the blog and check out what he says about how Judas died and about Jesus’ teachings about how many grapes would be on a grapevine in teh coming kingdom!
Marcion’s view that the God of the Old Testament is not evil despite being wrathful and devoid of true love seems strange to me.
Perhaps Marcion thought that we have no right to critisize a god for what he does with his own creation, so that a god can set up any laws he wants, and they become automatically just.
So the God of the Old Testament, his laws, and his actions, are just but not kind, and the god has no moral obligation to be kind.
Is that how Marcion thought?
He may have thought something like that. But plenty of people still today think God is incredibly wrathful but not evil.
Hi, Bart,
I have a difficulty understanding the following:
Does the Jesus saying of Matthew 24:36 *correlate* or *contradict* with passages such as Matthew 24:34? Is it correct to say that Jesus knows that it will happen that generation but doesn’t know exactly when (like day/hour)? First, I imagine maybe he doesn’t know the hour or day exactly, but certainly before anyone who he talked to would die. What do you think?
Second (and this is another topic), it’s quite strange since he’s God and he wouldn’t know. Sounds like God the father restricted the son in knowing the end of times, but at the same time they’re one and Jesus is God himself. Doesn’t make much sense. What do you say? Again, my logic turns to polytheism.
Yes, it’s usually taken to mean he knows it’s coming soon but not sure of the day or hour.
And in Matthew Jesus is not the all-knowing, all-powerful God. But you’re right, if a believer thinks he is, it could be a bit of a problem that he doesn’t know the end was coming.
My unscholarly ahistorical lay person take: Jesus is indeed all-knowing, all-powerful God, but out of humility chooses to only access that which is revealed to Him by the Father. In other words, Jesus has repressed Foreknowledge. Something like that. Again, may not be theologically accurate, but it always worked for me 🙂
Bart,
1) What are some reliable historical documents from the time of early christianity other than the NT that attest the existance and credibility of (some of) the Gospels’ events?
2) What does Jesus mean in Matthew 26:29?
3) You imply (I hope I’m not mistaken) that the last words of Jesus as presented in Mark are his (correct me if I’m wrong). I personally think that it is probably not what he said, because Mark 15:34 is exactly the phrase uttered by David to God. In my theory, the author of Mark might want to suggest the authenticity that Jesus was the Mesiah (because his phrase *as uttered by David* could have been correlated as a prophecy in the OT). What do you think of this? Could the phrase be simply a coincidence or common wording?
4) A question about the centurion that appears at the end of the gospels. Apart from the contradiction in the wording, in one account saying that Jesus “was God” and another “was innocent/rightous”, how would the disciples know what a roman would say? What language were the romans speaking and what language did the men in the time of Jesus (even Jesus himself) have spoken?
I’d prefer if you would restrict yourself to one or maybe two questions / day if possible? C’est possible? And if you’d like to know what a verse means, you should quote it so other readers know what you’re reverring to. 1. There aren’t any outside sources that refer to any of the specific events discussed in the Gospels. 3. No, I’m not saying Jesus actuall said these things. 4. No, the centurion never calls jesus God; he calls him the “son of God” — big difference. And right, Aramaic speaing Jews would not have understood the cneturion.
Marcion’s only fault was that he was the first to organize a large-scale missionary action. With the canon of scriptures/textbooks and with his own management experience. He was the first to achieve a positive financial result, thanks to which he was able to develop his organization and support others with money (Tertullian) and writings (prologue to John). Before others acquired the know-how and became effective, his organization was unrivaled to such an extent that Iraeneus complained that his students were transferring to it.
Marcion became a heretic because that is what theology serves. There is no point in complaining that a competitor is better and more efficient. He must be made a heretic. This then repeats itself at clock frequency. An exemplary conflict from the 4th century between friends, student and teacher, Eustathius of Sebasta and Basil the Great, shows that these methods never get old.