Pseudo-What?
Such deceptive works are written after the purported author's death by another
person or duing his life by someone who is not commissioned to do so
These are not the same as anonymous texts
Anonymous Texts
Judges
The Gospels
Acts
Hebrews
Supposed Pseudepigraphal Texts
Daniel
Isaiah
Some Pauline and Petrine Epistles
James
Jude
Revelation
I. Pseudonymity in Greco-Roman and Jewish Writings
Authors of no reputation would often write using the pseudonym of an older,
reputable figure in order to secure a hearing for their own work.
Specific attributions of authorship were not typically found within ancient Jewish
writings. These were customarily anonymous.
That said, they have found two pseudonymous letters form extra-biblical Jewish
sources and a few extra-biblical Christian epistles
oThese are very few
oThese do not resemble any NT epistles
oThese are from a much later date
II. Forgery Detection in Antiquity
a. Ancients are no fools
b. Ancients employed criticism of style, vocabulary, teaching, and
anachronisms to determine if a forgery existed.
c. HOWEVER, these do not always get it right!
Who wrote Revelation?
John the Son of Zebedee
John the Elder
John Mark
Another John
John the Baptist
Cerinthius
A forger who went by John
A. The Early Church's view of forgery
i. The language used by early church leaders in reference to pseudonymous
works clearly describes them as fraudulent and deceptive.
ii. Their commitment to getting the canon correct fueled this in a big way.
iii. All of this took place in a period when a great deal of heretical literature
attributed to the apostles was circulating.
B. New Testament View of Forgery
i. 2 Thess. 2:2
ii. 2 Thess. 3:17
iii. Pauline signature in the NT indicate the apostles' use of a secretary and
provided readers with a sign of this letters' authenticity and authority
(see 1 Cor. 16:21; Gal. 6:11; Col. 4:18; Phlm.19)
iv. Revelation 22:18-19
C. Biblical Appeals for Truth
i. Old Testament Appeals
1. Leviticus 19:11
2. Proverbs 12:22
3. Isaiah 63:8
ii. New Testament Appeals
1. 1 Timothy 4:1-2
2. Ephesians 4:25
3. Colossians 3:9
CASE STUDY
1. Daniel
Claims of Critical Scholars
Written by unknown author
During the Jewish resistance to Antiochus IV Ephephanes
("Maccabean Thesis")
2nd century BC
Claims of Daniel
Written by the prophet Daniel
During the time of the Babylonian captivity
6th century BC
Support for "Maccabean Thesis"
Too accurate to be predictive
Cite differences between Daniel 1-6 and 7-12
Placement in the Hebrew Bible among the writings suggests a later date.
Some suggests the variety in language suggests a later date
Counterpoints against the "Maccabean Thesis"
Daniel exhibited extensive knowledge of sixth-century events than would seen
impossible for a second-century writer
Daniel does not present a hostile view towards authorities (inconsistent with
Maccabean setting)
Josephus makes plain that Danie's prophecies were well known before Alexander the
Great in 323 BC
Jesus and the NT writers believed Daniel composed the book (see Matt. 24:15; Heb.
11:23-34)
The book declares itself to be written by Daniel (Daniel 12:4)
20 fragments from Quran of Daniel (nine complete manuscripts of Daniel from
Qumran).
Highly unlikely that the book of Daniel was composed during this same period
Inclusion in the LXX by 130BC
The Book of Ezekiel contains three allusions to Daniel (14:4; 10;28:3)
Case Study #2: Pastoral Epistles
Claims of Critical Scholars
Pastoral epistles were written after Paul's death
Writers used Paul's name to strengthen authority
Some suggest they were written by a later admirer with the inclusion of
genuine Pauline notes/quotes.
Claims of traditional view
Pastoral Epistles were written by Paul
Paul uses his name to imbue the letters with apostolic authority
These were written later in Paul's church-planting career
Support for Critical View
Vocabulary and style differences between pastoral epistles and other
letters (175 hapax legomena)
Church structure referenced in these letters is too sophisticated
Heresies addressed surfaced much later
Different doctrinal emphases
Allusions to events that aren't in the book of Acts
Support for Traditional View
Different words for different subject matter/experiences
Structure was sophisticated from the start (Acts 20:17-28; Phil. 1:1; Rom.
12:8)
Jewish elements and asceticism along with incipient Gnosticism were
being opposed by Paul regularly (Gal. 2; Rom. 14)
Different occasions required different emphases
Acts is not exhaustive
Why does this all matter in the grand scheme of things?
We must trust the Bible
