Post Reply
Page 1 of 7  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Who Wrote the Bible, by Bart Ehrman
4 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2011 - 2:36PM #1
RJMcElwain
Posts: 2,982

This was just posted on the Huffington Post. Thoughts?


 



Bart D. Ehrman




Who Wrote The Bible and Why It Matters


Posted: 03/25/11 08:38 PM ET


Follow


 


1 Timothy , 2 Peter , Paul's Letters , The Bible , Bible Authorship , Biblical Authors , Christian History ,   Christianity , Early Christianity , Epistles , Who Wrote The Bible , Religion News





Apart from the most rabid fundamentalists among us, nearly everyone admits that the Bible might contain errors -- a faulty creation story here, a historical mistake there, a contradiction or two in some other place. But is it possible that the problem is worse than that -- that the Bible actually contains lies?


Most people wouldn't put it that way, since the Bible is, after all, sacred Scripture for millions on our planet. But good Christian scholars of the Bible, including the top Protestant and Catholic scholars of America, will tell you that the Bible is full of lies, even if they refuse to use the term. And here is the truth: Many of the books of the New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity, claiming to be a famous apostle -- Peter, Paul or James -- knowing full well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.


Most modern scholars of the Bible shy away from these terms, and for understandable reasons, some having to do with their clientele. Teaching in Christian seminaries, or to largely Christian undergraduate populations, who wants to denigrate the cherished texts of Scripture by calling them forgeries built on lies? And so scholars use a different term for this phenomenon and call such books "pseudepigrapha."


You will find this antiseptic term throughout the writings of modern scholars of the Bible. It's the term used in university classes on the New Testament, and in seminary courses, and in Ph.D. seminars. What the people who use the term do not tell you is that it literally means "writing that is inscribed with a lie."


And that's what such writings are. Whoever wrote the New Testament book of 2 Peter claimed to be Peter. But scholars everywhere -- except for our friends among the fundamentalists -- will tell you that there is no way on God's green earth that Peter wrote the book. Someone else wrote it claiming to be Peter. Scholars may also tell you that it was an acceptable practice in the ancient world for someone to write a book in the name of someone else. But that is where they are wrong. If you look at what ancient people actually said about the practice, you'll see that they invariably called it lying and condemned it as a deceitful practice, even in Christian circles. 2 Peter was finally accepted into the New Testament because the church fathers, centuries later, were convinced that Peter wrote it. But he didn't. Someone else did. And that someone else lied about his identity.


The same is true of many of the letters allegedly written by Paul. Most scholars will tell you that whereas seven of the 13 letters that go under Paul's name are his, the other six are not. Their authors merely claimed to be Paul. In the ancient world, books like that were labeled as pseudoi -- lies.


This may all seem like a bit of antiquarian curiosity, especially for people whose lives don't depend on the Bible or even people of faith for whom biblical matters are a peripheral interest at best. But in fact, it matters sometimes. Whoever wrote the book of 1 Timothy claimed to be Paul. But he was lying about that -- he was someone else living after Paul had died. In his book, the author of 1 Timothy used Paul's name and authority to address a problem that he saw in the church. Women were speaking out, exercising authority and teaching men. That had to stop. The author told women to be silent and submissive, and reminded his readers about what happened the first time a woman was allowed to exercise authority over a man, in that little incident in the garden of Eden. No, the author argued, if women wanted to be saved, they were to have babies (1 Tim. 2:11-15).


Largely on the basis of this passage, the apostle Paul has been branded, by more liberation minded people of recent generations, as one of history's great misogynists. The problem, of course, is that Paul never said any such thing. And why does it matter? Because the passage is still used by church leaders today to oppress and silence women. Why are there no women priests in the Catholic Church? Why are women not allowed to preach in conservative evangelical churches? Why are there churches today that do not allow women even to speak? In no small measure it is because Paul allegedly taught that women had to be silent, submissive and pregnant. Except that the person who taught this was not Paul, but someone lying about his identity so that his readers would think he was Paul.


It may be one of the greatest ironies of the Christian scriptures that some of them insist on truth, while telling a lie. For no author is truth more important than for the "Paul" of Ephesians. He refers to the gospel as "the word of truth" (1:13); he indicates that the "truth is in Jesus"; he tells his readers to "speak the truth" to their neighbors (4:24-25); and he instructs his readers to "fasten the belt of truth around your waist" (6:14). And yet he himself lied about who he was. He was not really Paul.


It appears that some of the New Testament writers, such as the authors of 2 Peter, 1 Timothy and Ephesians, felt they were perfectly justified to lie in order to tell the truth. But we today can at least evaluate their claims and realize just how human, and fallible, they were. They were creatures of their time and place. And so too were their teachings, lies and all.


Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and the New York Times bestselling author of 'Misquoting Jesus' and 'Jesus, Interrupted'. His latest book, 'Forged: Writing in the Name of God -- Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are', is now available from HarperOne.


 

Robert J. McElwain

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Supposedly)Thomas Jefferson

"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral."
St. Thomas Aquinas

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. Plato
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2011 - 2:50PM #2
Dutch777
Posts: 9,129

Bob:


Thanks for this thread; Bart Ehrman is a favoite of mine.


I'll call the township library and put this on "call / hold" for myself.

The Path
To Moon Lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own Dharma*Path
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2011 - 2:53PM #3
RJMcElwain
Posts: 2,982

Mar 30, 2011 -- 2:50PM, Dutch777 wrote:


Bob:


Thanks for this thread; Bart Ehrman is a favoite of mine.


I'll call the township library and put this on "call / hold" for myself.




Agreed. He's an excellent writer and a brilliant theologian.

Robert J. McElwain

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Supposedly)Thomas Jefferson

"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral."
St. Thomas Aquinas

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. Plato
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2011 - 9:32PM #4
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

Yes he is an excellent theology historian.  I have even seen him in a couple of tapes or so.  BUT, he has nothing new to say.  Apparently he feels obliged to publish a book every year and he repackages the same things.  Nothing that was included in this writeup above is new.  He has said it all before.

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2011 - 10:55PM #5
Nino0814
Posts: 1,762

Perhaps one reason why Bart Ehrman needs to repeat the message is due to the poor education most have on the Church's history with the Bible.  I am amazed how little the average so-called "Bible-Believer" knows about what the Bible actual says, not to mention their lack of knowledge of Biblical scholarship.


Dr. Ehrman raises an interesting point that does not seem to square with the most nuanced views of Biblical inspiration (such as, God inspired historical events, or the lives of the writers, but not the actual writing of the text).  Would an inspired person or an inspirational event cause someone to pen a letter in someone else name as a cloak of authority? 


While this practice was commonly done in the first century, it certainly falls short of our standards of honesty, not to mention what we would expect from a divinely inspired writing. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2011 - 8:15AM #6
Dutch777
Posts: 9,129

Mar 30, 2011 -- 9:32PM, JimRigas wrote:

Yes he is an excellent theology historian.  I have even seen him in a couple of tapes or so.  BUT, he has nothing new to say.  Apparently he feels obliged to publish a book every year and he repackages the same things.  Nothing that was included in this writeup above is new.  He has said it all before.




I get the same impression regarding +Spong.  After the first three books or so, the repitition factor creeps in.  I'll read Ehrman's new book; maybe I'm jumping to conclusions.  I've read three of his works and they're excellent.

The Path
To Moon Lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own Dharma*Path
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2011 - 8:22AM #7
Dutch777
Posts: 9,129

Mar 30, 2011 -- 10:55PM, Nino0814 wrote:


Perhaps one reason why Bart Ehrman needs to repeat the message is due to the poor education most have on the Church's history with the Bible.  I am amazed how little the average so-called "Bible-Believer" knows about what the Bible actual says, not to mention their lack of knowledge of Biblical scholarship.


Yes.  The fundies consider real biblical scholarship and critique as an assault on their deeply held value system and upon God's "word".  They consider this a profound evil.  This is obscurantism; they don't understand and don't want to understand.  I've encountered this when I lived in Southern Appalachia.  They inhabit a different universe.


Dr. Ehrman raises an interesting point that does not seem to square with the most nuanced views of Biblical inspiration (such as, God inspired historical events, or the lives of the writers, but not the actual writing of the text).  Would an inspired person or an inspirational event cause someone to pen a letter in someone else name as a cloak of authority? 


People have done some really strange things in the name of religion.  People have burned others at the stake in the name of the Loving God.  Go figure.


 


While this practice was commonly done in the first century, it certainly falls short of our standards of honesty, not to mention what we would expect from a divinely inspired writing. 


I agree that a forgery is a forgery, no matter how some try to explain it away.





The Path
To Moon Lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own Dharma*Path
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2011 - 3:36PM #8
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

I will come down on the side of Tradition.


 

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Apr 01, 2011 - 1:23AM #9
kurnell
Posts: 309

IMHO, Erhman has lost his own faith and through his writings , he seeks to undermine the faith of others.

Treasure your experience of God,however it comes to you.Remember that Christianity is not a notion but a way.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Apr 01, 2011 - 7:51AM #10
Dutch777
Posts: 9,129

Mar 31, 2011 -- 7:17PM, Nino0814 wrote:

Mar 31, 2011 -- 8:22AM, Dutch777 wrote:

 



 


Honest, and straight forward! Then how do you relate to these texts? 


The church through the ages has deemed these texts to have spiritual value; I respect that.


I don't hold any text, sacred or secular, to the standard of inerrancy and divine dictation.


For me they are holy and sacred like the rest of the canon, and just as human in their origin. 


Texts of spiritual value, whether the author is known or unknown, will stand the test of time.





The Path
To Moon Lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own Dharma*Path
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 7  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook