In my previous post I said a bit about “forgeries” in the NT, that is, books whose authors claimed to be a famous person (Peter, Paul, James, Jude), knowing full well they were someone else. In the ancient world, these books were called “lies” (pseudoi) or “books inscribed with a lie” (pseudepigrapha). But why would a Christian author lie about who he was? How could he live with himself?
I discuss the matter at length in my books Forged and even more in Forgery and Counterforgery. In my textbook, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (Oxford University Press) I can discuss the matter only briefly in a sidebar box, to give my students a sense of the situation in antiquity. With this post I’ll be concluding for now my thread giving some of these kinds of boxes, but since this is such an intriguing subject, I’d like to set it up by first quoting a paragraph from my book Forged, about the author of Ephesians, who claimed to be Paul (lying about it), even though he placed such a premium on the “truth.
It is striking that in his instructions about the Christian “armor” the author of Ephesians also tells his readers to “fasten the belt of truth around your waist” (6:14). Truth was important for this writer. Early on he refers to the gospel as “the word of truth” (1:13). He later indicates that the “truth is in Jesus” and tells his readers to “speak the truth” to their neighbors (4:24-25). He also claims that the “fruit of the light” is found in “truth” (5:9). How ironic, then, that the author has deceived his readers about his own identity. The book was written pseudonymously in the name of Paul by someone who knew full well that he was not Paul. Falsely claiming to be an impeccable Christian authority, this advocate for truth has produced a pseudepigraphon, a “falsely inscribed writing.” At least that is what ancient critics would have called it, had they known the author was not Paul. And so, some Christians went into battle armed not with truth but with deception. Possibly they felt justified in lying about their identity. There was, after all, a lot at stake.
So, why would someone do that? Didn’t they know lying was wrong? Here’s my new box in my textbook that gives (in very short order) my own views of the matter.
******************************
Box 25.4 What Do You Think?
Forgery: Why Would a Christian Do It?
Early Christians repeatedly insist that it is important to tell the truth. Is it conceivable, then, that some Christian authors – such as the authors of 2 Peter or of 1 Timothy – claimed to be persons other than who they were, that unknown authors would write books claiming to be Peter or Paul, knowing full well that they were someone else? How could they live with themselves if they did that? How could they justify their behavior?
As it turns out, in ancient Christianity there were two views of lying. The view that ended up becoming very popular might be seen as one extreme. It is a view associated with the famous church father of the fourth to fifth century, Augustine. Augustine’s view was that a Christian should never lie, ever, under any circumstances. Even if telling a lie would prevent a loved one from experiencing the torments of hell forever, you should not do it.
There were plenty of other people who disagreed (which is why Augustine had to argue his view so forcefully: lots of people didn’t buy it). It was widely thought by other Christians that in some circumstances a person was perfectly justified in telling a lie. This view can be traced way back in both the pagan and Jewish traditions.
Greek philosophers such as Plato, for example, indicated that sometimes lying was the right thing to do. It is perfectly all right to lie to your daughter if that gets her to take her medicine, since otherwise she might die. It is absolutely acceptable for the general of an army to lie to his troops that reinforcements were on their way if they were losing heart in the midst of battle.
So too in the Jewish tradition, in the Hebrew Bible, in the book of Genesis, Abraham lied about Sarah, saying she was his sister, in order to save his own skin (Genesis 12). If he hadn’t he may well have been killed, and there would have been no nation of Israel. In the book of Rahab the prostitute lied about not knowing where the Israelite spies were (Joshua 2). If she had not done so, they may have been arrested and Israel may never have been able to conquer the Promised Land.
Many people in the ancient world, including many Christians, thought that it was acceptable to tell a lie if doing so would lead to a greater good. The authors of the early Christian writings were all convinced that what they had to say was for the greater good. Is it possible that some of them thought that it was acceptable to lie about their own identities in order to convey that truth? If so, then they may have had pure motives, even if others would have condemned them for doing what they did.
You must be logged in to post a comment.Share Bart’s Post on These Platforms
14 Comments
Leave A Comment
The tradition of lying to support the truth is alive and well. During my time in the church I heard many of what I call “preacher stories” which were certainly fabrications but told as if they were gospel truth. My favorite is the one about NASA computers finding a missing day in the ancient past, confirming the stories told in Joshua 10 and 2 Kings 20 when God manipulated time. Some versions even have specific names and facilities included. Anyone who knows anything about computers or the development of the calendar knows how silly this is, but I have heard it repeated by sincere Christians. I once called out a friend who repeated another story online, set in New York, but he swore it was true because he heard it from a fellow Christian in New York. All it takes is one person to get the ball rolling, both in Biblical times and now.
On the subject of Biblical lies, is it a fair interpretation to say that Jesus was lying in John 7:8-10? If so, how would the likes of Augustine have responded to it?
He would say you misinterpreted it. 🙂 (He could have meant it at the time, e.g., and then changed his mind)
The phrase “that I write with my own hand” isn’t found in Ephesians. I think of it as the Paul Signature. Well it’s not in Ephesians. Forgery.
So why would Ephesians have been forged? I think the answer is found in chapters 5 and 6. I don’t interpret the gospels (teachings of Jesus) as really supporting the future continuation of marriage and having children. And with an apocalyptic end times view there’s no reason for it since the end is coming soon. Matthew 19:12, to renounce marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. If you were single as a follower of Jesus at the time, I think you were expected to stay that way and not get married. If you were married you were expected not to divorce, unless there was infidelity, however you were not supposed to marry again afterwards.
Ephesians 5 and 6 strongly supports marriage and having children because it is analogous to relationship between the church and Christ.
There was a big problem within the church going on with the issue of marriage and slavery. What does lord mean?
Ephesians was forged to clarify these problems. Paul and the apostles had more authority.
Bart,
Don’t you agree that we always doubt that we have the original version of any Biblical text (in both the OT and NT)? Therefore we have no idea who inserted the names of the various authors. Some unknown person — probably an official in some regional church association — ordered this change and also ordered the gathering and destruction of all existing copies showing any other names. Since earlier copies had spread wider, some copies with other names continued to exist and be copied.
Bill Steigelmann
I agree up to the point that “an official…ordered” it. I don’t see any evidence of that.
So, the “Pro Lying” faction believes that it is okay to lie, if it serves the greater good. The writer of Ephesians feels that the letter will have a greater impact if it’s perceived to be from Paul, and not from Harvey, and he’s probably correct. But isn’t that what all liars believe – that the lie is justified? (And aren’t some lies justified? – Those pants don’t make your butt look fat).
My real question is, if God truly exists, and God is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, why would He need people to lie for Him? Why isn’t the truth sufficient?
The plural of pseudos isn’t pseudoi but pseudea or pseude – as with Odysseus to Penelope ‘eiske pseudea polla legon etymoisin homoia’. I’d look up the reference if I wasn’t on holiday. Third declension. For heaven’s sake
Sorry. (Aren’t pseudea pimples?)
Hi Dr. Ehrman, do you think the same logic can be applied to some of the most egregious interpolations? i.e. the scribes added those bits because they thought they were ‘spiritually true’, even though they had not been penned by the original author?
It might be one of the options, though I’d say there are not too many surviving interpoloations (that is, an addition to a text which is unattested in any of our surviving manuscripts). It is sometimes argued that something got added to a manuscript because it was found as a marginal note and a later scribe thought it belonged in the text, e.g.,
I would assert that lying continues to be a Christian tradition. Most clergy know the things we are learning here, but don’t dare say it to their congregations. Would they view this as “for the greater good (helping people come into the fold by withholding uncomfortable truths),” or could we cynically assign their motives as for their personal good, i.e., job security only? Also, many people who assert things as true that can’t possibly be (biblical inerrancy, provably implausible science, etc.) have to, on some level, know they are lying. Is their stance supportable, biblically? I don’t pretend to think they can be justified morally, but maybe it is biblically permissible.
I think a distinction can be argued between a lie that is ‘aspirational’ versus a lie that is intentionally ‘deceptive’.
Example of an aspirational lie: Proverbs 22:6 “Bring up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it….” This is an aspiration not a prediction, as most parents know.
Intentionally lying about being a more famous or recognized person is intentionally deceptive.
An aspirational lie may not even be considered a lie because it is in fact a goal hoped for and stating Proverbs 22:6, presents that aspirational goal. In this case the main problem is with people who want to claim it is a promise rather than an aspirational goal.
Similarly is Paul lying or making an aspirational statement in Romans 8:31 “If God is for us who can be against us?” Paul certainly was against Christians he persecuted earlier in his life when God was for the Christians. Could be that the aspirational statement is the basis for the remainder of Romans 8 describing “…sufferings of the present time not to be compared with the glory that will be revealed in us…”
The pseudepigraphers determination of benefit did not take into consideration that their letters would later be considered to be divinely inspired and therefore inerrant, providing them with unchallengeable authority for later generations.