Forged

Another attack on Scripture

FORGED
Writing in the Name of God — Why the Bible's authors are not who we think they are
By Bart Ehrman
HarperCollins. 292 pages. £19.99
ISBN 978 0 062 012 616

By now, readers of EN will be aware of the nature of the works of Bart Ehrman, former evangelical turned agnostic propagandist and biblical critic.

His special gift is popularising biblical liberalism. This latest book attacks the traditional authorship of biblical writings. The issue is vital: the central issue in canonicity is apostolicity — that the New Testament books were written by apostles or close associates such as Mark (with respect to Peter) and Luke (Paul), and were written in the Apostolic Age — i.e. before the end of the first century. This is a major reason for rejecting later apocryphal works such as the so-called ‘Gospels’ of Thomas and Peter. Clearly, if someone other than Paul wrote Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, the author was lying, and his book, not being possessed of apostolic authenticity, has no place in the canon. If what Ehrman says is true, this would apply to most of the New Testament! Hardly surprising that Islamic polemicists find his writings so useful.

Allegations already answered

There is nothing new under the sun, and neither is there in Ehrman’s book; his allegations have often been made before by liberal academics — and answered by conservative scholars. The difference is that, through this book, these views are not uttered in the cloistered world of the seminary or university, but before the general public. Clearly, the impact of a best-selling work of this nature is to undermine not only faith in the Bible, but its very possibility. If the Bible writings were actually largely forgeries written by men falsely claiming to be apostles and close associates, they are not works of truth — and thus cannot be divine revelation. Essentially, Christians would have no genuine evangelistic message; the Church would be based on a lie.

Setting up his readers

Once again, Ehrman has sacrificed scholarly discussion for brevity or polemic. For example, he acknowledges that apocryphal works, alleged to be by Philip or Mary Magdalene and others (pp.17,19), were written ‘after the days of the apostles themselves’ in the second and subsequent centuries. He then comments: ‘Most of the books of the New Testament … were written during the first century’. Yet if any New Testament books are later than the first century, they obviously fail the criterion of apostolicity. Almost from the start one gets the feeling that readers are being ‘set up’ for the idea that the early Christians were at best na•ve, at worst duplicitous, in canonical matters. Yet this is contradicted by the fact — as quoted by Ehrman (p.18) — that Tertullian recorded how a church in second-century Asia Minor disciplined an official for writing a book in Paul’s name. A more famous example from the same century is that of Bishop Serapion of Antioch who denounced the ‘Gospel of Peter’ for its docetism — and thus not apostolic.

Are all Rembrandts forgeries?

Ehrman names his first chapter ‘A World of Deception and Forgeries’. The implication is that forgery was rife among professing Christians, and so we should not be surprised to find forgeries in the New Testament. However, even a layman knows that in art, there have been attempts at forgery. Doubtless, someone might want to attempt a forgery of Rembrandt, but does that mean that all Rembrandts are forgeries? The reason one could attempt such a forgery is because there are genuine Rembrandts! Moreover, art experts can detect forgeries — especially easy if one possesses the provenance of a piece — that is, if one has a record of transmission (and purchase, in the case of art).

Known couriers

This is a major failing of Ehrman’s book — he does not consider the role of transmission in the first century. The Roman Empire had no general postal service, other than for official communications, so any private correspondence had to be carried by paid couriers, slaves or friends. Philippians 2.25 informs us that Epaphroditus performed the role of courier for Paul. Epaphroditus was himself sent to Paul from the church at Philippi (4.18). Hence, the receiving congregation would be familiar with the messenger, undermining any possibility of forgery. There are greetings to various individuals in the epistles, such as the long list in Romans 16, to Archippus in Colossians 4.16, or greetings from people whom the church(es) in question evidently knew — 1 Corinthians 16.19, Philippians 4.22, Colossians 4.10ff, Philemon 23-24 (cf. also Hebrews 13.24). This provides a guarantee of authenticity — the churches in question could always have contacted such people if they received a dubious communication.

Eyewitnesses

Alongside ‘forgery’, Ehrman refers to ‘false attribution’ — specifically of the gospels (p.220ff). Once again, Ehrman claims that the Gospels are ‘anonymous’, and so again we should note Richard Bauckham’s point in Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (p.300ff) that, in classical times, the initial circulation of many ancient biographies would have been among ‘friends or acquaintances of the author who would know who the author was from the oral context in which the work was first read’. Hence, the recipients were aware of their authorship — all the more so if the gospels were circulated by known couriers. Ehrman claims that the four Gospels were only later attributed to their traditional authors in order to include them in the canon — a claim ignoring the tradition of transmission, and implying deceit on the part of church leaders.

A pastor’s job

Unfortunately, Ehrman’s work is likely to have a wide readership and will be utilised by both atheist and Islamic polemicists — all the more reason for elders and pastors to pre-empt this in their congregations by providing evidence for the correct attribution of the New Testament writings to their traditional authors. Failure to do so will leave the field open for critics like Ehrman — and for Islamic propagandists in their areas.

Writing in the name of God