Forged! Bart Erhman’s Disengenuous Allegations

In the first century, letters were written with a reed pen using ink made from soot, gum and water on to 9 1/2” x 11” papyrus sheets  which could hold around 150–250 words.[1] Since even Paul’s shortest letter, Philemon, contained 335 words, all of Paul’s letters joined the papyri sheets to form a scroll.  Because this was an expensive and labor intensive process, one could ill afford false starts. Due to this and the general lack of education, trained scribes called amanuenses were frequently employed for writing letters.[2] For example, from Romans 16:22 we learn that Tertius was Paul’s amanuensis. Similarly, Peter tells us in 1 Peter 5:12 that he used Silvanus as his secretary. It also appears to be standard operating procedure for the actual author to compose a final salutation in his own hand (2 Thess. 3:17; Gal. 6:11).

A crucial issue to New Testament scholarship is the degree of freedom an amanuensis had in vocabulary and style. It seems natural that the more trusted and familiar the relationship, the more editorial the role. According to Carson and Moo,

Many scholars think that the influence of various amanuenses may explain the differences in Greek style among the Pauline letters, rendering it difficult, if not impossible, to draw conclusions about authorship based on such criteria.[3]

This is a vital yet overlooked fact in modern authorship disputes. Still yet, even highly critical scholars must face this issue as a potential defeater to their arguments. A prime example being Bart Ehrman, who in his sensationalistic book Forged acknowledges, “Virtually all of the problems with what I’ve been calling forgeries can be solved if secretaries were heavily involved in the composition of the early Christian writings.”[4] It seems entirely feasible, if not likely, that they were.

Many modern scholars argue that some New Testament books might be pseudonymous. Pseudonymity refers to the practice when a writer purposefully attributes someone else’s name to a document. Pseudepigraphy refers to the documents which are believed to be falsely attributed.[5] Sometimes the author likely thought that by attaching a well-known name to a work, it had a better chance of being taken seriously. Other times there was indeed mal intent as in the case of the Acts of Pilate which blasphemously slandered the character of Jesus.[6] Other possible explanations which have been offered include students honoring a leader posthumously or even for reasons of personal safety in the face of unpopular polemics.[7] While some books are better evidenced than others, left wing sensationalists like Ehrman attach the pseudepigaphal label to more accepted New Testament books like Acts. The term “forged” usually refers to a counterfeit of something which already exists. In this case, its more marketable than “pseudonymous.” While scandalous titles like Forged or Misquoting Jesus generate sales, they present a disingenuous portrait of the New Testament. While scholars may argue, none of the New Testament books are proven to be pseudonymous. There are excellent defenses for traditional authorship of every book presented in the New Testament introductions by D.A Carson and Douglas Moo or Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black referenced in this essay.

The church fathers that were responsible for selecting the cannon were particularly interested in authorship. For example Eusebius writes, “Paul’s fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews saying that it is disputed by the Church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by Paul.”[8] Of course, today Hebrews is considered anonymous as it is not officially attributed to any author. The book makes no claim. This distinction is paramount in that no deception is perpetrated. In contrast, the Epistle to the Laodiceans was ascribed to Paul but the Muratorian Canon refers to it as “forged in Paul’s name.”[9]

Furthermore, there were many works attributed to Peter such as the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. Eusebius also records the work of an early apologist Serapion who wrote, “For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ; but we reject intelligently the writings falsely ascribed to them, knowing that such were not handed down to us.”[10] Similarly, Tertullian rejected the book, The Acts of Paul, not only by its heretical content but due to its doubtful authorship.[11] In general, the books were thoroughly examined based on orthodoxy and authenticity of authorship.[12] It seems clear that the early church would never knowingly accept a forged book as canonical.

The onus is on those who uphold the idea that the writing of pseudonymous letters was an accepted practice among the early Christians to produce some evidence for their view. On the contrary, the evidence we have is that every time such a writing could be identified with any certainty, it was rejected. (Carson and Moo, 344)

The ethics of Jesus and the apostles were decidedly partial to integrity and transparency. It seems likely that those early Christians with serious concerns for truth and piety, being far more contemporaneous to the era of authorship, got it right. Modern scholars who want to revise history are not in such a position and have questionable motives. Erhman’s own confession that the use of amanuenses potentially overthrows all of his indictments consigns his own work Forged to a questionable genre.

 


[1]Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament : Its Background and Message, 2nd ed. (Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 335.

[2] Lea and Black, The New Testament, 334.

[3]D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005) , 335.

[4]Bart D. Ehrman, Forged: Writing in the Name of God–Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are (New York: HarperOne, 2011), 134.

[5]Carson and Moo, An Introduction, 337.

[6] Carson and Moo, An Introduction, 338.

[7]Lea and Black, The New Testament, 338.

[8]Eusebius, Church History, 3.3.5.

[9]Peter Thomas O’Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians, The Pillar New Testament commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999), 41.

[10]Eusebius, Church History, 6.12.3.

[11]Lea and Black, The New Testament, 340.

[12]Lea and Black, The New Testament, 341.

The Coherence of Paul’s Conversion Accounts


The conversion of Paul is an extremely perplexing fact of history for skeptics.  Paul was an ardent opponent of Christianity and had everything to gain by destroying its claims. He persecuted the early Christians with zeal and thought he was serving God. When someone must confess such a drastic error in embarrassing detail, it is not likely they are fabricating their testimony. Accordingly, the testimony of a hostile witness is considered extremely convincing in a court of law. For these reasons skeptics have concocted fanciful theories such as Paul suffering from temporal lobe epilepsy[1] or conversion disorder.[2] Yet these desperate attempts do not account for the evidence of Jesus’ empty tomb or the eye witness testimony of the disciples or the appearance to and conversion of the once skeptical brother James. Paul was not in the frame of mind to hallucinate the risen Jesus and he does not fit the medical profile of someone who is likely to experience conversion psychosis.  For this reason skeptics seek to nitpick at the details in Acts to derive contradictions.

I have charted the three accounts of Paul’s conversion and color coded the key parallel phrases as a means to demonstrate the basic consistency of the accounts.  Paramount is to note the context of each passage. The first (Acts 9:1–19) is told by the narrator Luke. The second version (22:3-16) is told in Paul’s own words after he was arrested at the temple and taken to the barracks. The third is Paul’s testimony before King Agrippa. Accordingly the first has detail Paul would be unaware of like Ananias’ commission from God. The second and third have more detail in the message from Jesus to Paul reflecting the first person. From my arrangement and color coding it is readily apparent that the basic account is the same and that the minor discrepancies are merely the normal variations found when someone recalls an important event. They also reflect the contextual emphasis based on the setting.

Acts 9:1-19 Acts 22:3–16 Acts 26:8–19
1 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 

2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

 

3 “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God as all of you are this day. 

4 I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering to prison both men and women,

5 as the high priest and the whole council of elders can bear me witness. From them I received letters to the brothers, and I journeyed toward Damascus to take those also who were there and bring them in bonds to Jerusalem to be punished.

 

8 Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?
9 “I myself was convinced that I ought to do many things in opposing the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
10 And I did so in Jerusalem. I not only locked up many of the saints in prison after receiving authority from the chief priests, but when they were put to death I cast my vote against them.
11 And I punished them often in all the synagogues and tried to make them blaspheme, and in raging fury against them I persecuted them even to foreign cities. 12 “In this connection I journeyed to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests.
3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 

4 And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”

5 And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.”

7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.

8 Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus.

9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.”

11 And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying,

12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.”

13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem.

14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.”

15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel.

16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.”

 

 

6 “As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me. 

7 And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’

8 And I answered, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’

9 Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me.

10 And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.’

11 And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.

 

13 At midday, O king, I saw on the way a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, that shone around me and those who journeyed with me.
14 And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.
15 And I said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.
16 But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you,
17 delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles—to whom I am sending you
18 to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’
19 “Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision. 

 

 

 

17 So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 

18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized;

19 and taking food, he was strengthened. For some days he was with the disciples at Damascus.

 

 

12 “And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there, 

13 came to me, and standing by me said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that very hour I received my sight and saw him.

14 And he said, ‘The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Righteous One and to hear a voice from his mouth;

15 for you will be a witness for him to everyone of what you have seen and heard.

16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

 

 

 

The coherence is much more significant than the minor variations.  It is consistent that Paul was persecuting the Christians and in that duty he was approaching Damascus when he was suddenly enveloped by a blinding bright light. He heard a voice but his traveling companions only heard a sound. Skeptics make much of the fact that 9:7 says they heard the voice but 22:9 reads that, “they heard not the voice” in the old King James.[3] This is merely a case of an unfortunate translation choice on the part of the KJV.  While the Greek term, ἀκούω, can be rendered “hear”, it is also is used for “understand” or “comprehend” as in the case of Mark 4:33.[4] Modern translations reflect this rendering. While the atheist Dan Barker has criticized this as unjustifiable[5], the alleged contradiction seems drastically overstated because it is entirely possible to hear and not understand. Furthermore, in the third account (Acts 26:8–19), Paul supplies an additional detail that the voice spoke in Hebrew. Perhaps it is as simple as the fact his companions did not comprehend Hebrew?

The details that are consistent are far more significant. Paul fell to the ground and heard Jesus asking him why he was persecuting Him. While the third account to Agrippa presents a general summary of Paul’s commission, the other two give more detail. Jesus told him to travel onto Damascus where he would be told what to do. Blinded, he was led to the city by his companions where he fasted for three days. The first account provides the details about Ananias, who God had convinced to encourage and heal Paul. Paul was healed, converted and baptized and began to preach in Damascus.  According to his writing in Galatians, Paul then spent some time in alone in the Arabian Desert. I suspect he studied the Old Testament prophecies like Isaiah 53 and developed his theology. He also may have received additional revelation from the Lord during that time.[6] The results are self-evident in his composition of nearly half the New Testament.

Let’s say I am on a jury hearing your case. If your mother says you are a wonderful person and can be trusted, I still would have my doubts. However, if someone who dislikes you testified that you were honest, I would be inclined to think you trustworthy. The conversion of an enemy is powerful evidence. Even more, what could be more convincing than the complete turn around of an educated and skillful opponent with nothing to gain? Paul had everything to lose by converting yet the historical record is clear and undisputed. Paul went from persecutor to preacher of the Gospel. The only adequate explanation is that he met the risen Lord.

 

 


[1] D Landsborough, “St Paul and temporal lobe epilepsy,” J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.;50, no. 6 (June 1987): 659–664.

[2] Gary R. Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2004), 114.

[3] Skeptics Annotated Bible http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/acts/9.html compared with http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/acts/22.html (accessed 5/18/2011).

[4]James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains : Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), DBLG 201, #8.

[5] Dan Barker, Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America’s Leading Atheists. (Berkely: Ulysses Press, 2009), 246–50.

[6]Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament : Its Background and Message, 2nd ed. (Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 296.

I Am the Resurrection and the Life

We love our conveniences and because they can be largely attributed to scientific progress, science has become the new priesthood. Yet their prevailing consensus for man’s destiny is a bleak one, death is final. The Bible tells a different story. Jesus Christ conquered death.  John’s gospel is unique in its theological discourse on the deity of Jesus Christ. Seven times Jesus is recorded as saying “I am” attached to a metaphor (Jn. 6:35, 8:12, 10:9, 10:11, 11:25, 14:6, 15:5). These seven statements provide a unique window in which to view the person of Jesus. The words “I am”, ego eimi in Greek, had an unambiguous connotation to Jesus’ first century Jewish audience. When Moses first encountered Yahweh in the burning bush, he was given a mission to bring his people out of Egypt. Moses balked asking God, “who he would say had sent him?” God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you’ ” (Ex 3:14).  The “I am” statements by Jesus are nothing short of a claim to be that voice in the bush. Fortunately, whenever modern higher criticism casts doubt upon Jesus’ claim to divinity, the Pharisees faithfully come to the rescue. For they had no doubts that Jesus was claiming to be the “I am” of the Torah. This is beyond question as they subsequently attempt to stone him for blasphemy (Jn. 5:17-18, 8:58-59). Of the famous seven “I am” statements found in the gospel of John, I believe the fifth, “I am the resurrection and the life” is the most explicit proclamation of Jesus’ power and deity.

The context of this astonishing statement is last of the great sign miracles discussed in the fourth gospel, near the end of Jesus public ministry. We learn that Jesus friend Lazarus is ill. The home of Lazarus was in Bethany, near Jerusalem (Jn. 11:1, 30; 12:1), located south east of the Mount of Olives.[1] Jesus was a close friend of the family. Mary, the sister of Lazarus, is identified as the one who anointed the Lord and wiped his feet with her hair (cf. Jn.12:3). This unforgettable act will be retold in eternity as both Mark (Mk.14:9) and Matthew (Mat.26:13) immortalize.[2] In fact, Jesus was likely a frequent guest (Matt. 21:17; Lk. 10:38–41; Jn. 11:17). The sister’s message, “Lord, he whom you love is ill” also reveals the close relationship. It employed the word phileo meaning “to love as friend.”[3] His personal affection for the family was shared, evidenced when speaking to the disciples Jesus also called Lazarus “our friend” (Jn.11:11).

In light of Jesus close relationship and the urgency of the request, Jesus’ response seems all the more perplexing at first. They were at least a day’s journey from Bethany and the disciples, like the sisters, were afraid that Lazarus might die. Dr. Towns thinks that perhaps Lazarus had already expired by the time Jesus received the message.[4] The sequence of events does make it likely.  Jesus foreshadows the imminent miracle when he replies that the end result would not be what it appeared. He said, “This sickness will not end in death”, rather that God would “be glorified” (Jn. 11:4). This seems alien to our human experience because of our temporal perspective. We are bound in time. In contrast, God as an eternal omniscient spirit has providentially ordained events and circumstances apart from our ability to perceive or conceive. Pointing to this reality, Jesus had made a similar comment concerning the blind man he previously healed.  When he was asked whose sin had caused the man’s disability, Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him” (Jn 9:3). Indeed, it seems as if at times God wants to remove all plausible deniability to a sign miracle. For instance, before calling down fire from heaven, Elijah had the priests of Baal pour water on the firewood (1 Ki. 18:33).  For this reason, instead of rushing to Lazarus’ side, Jesus stayed where he was for two days longer.

Jesus then tells the disciples that Lazarus has merely fallen asleep and that he is going to waken him. Obtuse as ever, they reply, “he will recover” (Jn.11:12).  Finally Jesus drops the euphemism and tells them “plainly,” or “with boldness” (Greek parrēsia̧), that Lazarus is dead (Jn.11:15). Driving divine providence home, Jesus says he is actually glad he was not there so that they would believe. Death is the great unknown and arguably the primal fuel for all human anxiety. Morris writes, “As far as men were concerned, the position of Lazarus, who had been in the grave four days, was hopeless.”[5] Even more, Jesus wants to risk stoning by going the way of Jerusalem. I sometimes think that Thomas was the scientist of the group because he is famous for demanding to see the evidence for himself. In step with his skeptical predisposition, he speaks for the hopelessness of the natural man’s temperament when he laments, “Let us also go, that we may die with him” (Jn.11:16).

Jesus finally arrives only to find a scene of mourning and sorrow. I believe Jesus tears (Jn. 11:25) are really over the general state of unbelief he encounters even amongst his closest friends. By this point, it had been four days since Lazarus died. To bolster my argument that God seeks to dispel plausible deniability, I contend the four days were by skillful design:

There was a well-known Jewish belief (attested from about a.d. 200) that the soul of a dead person remained in the vicinity of the body “hoping to reenter it” for three days, but once decomposition set in, the soul departed. John wants us to know clearly that Lazarus is truly dead and that the miracle of Jesus cannot be construed as a resuscitation.[6]

Martha went out to meet Jesus and bemoaned his delayed arrival. When Jesus replied that Lazarus would rise, she acknowledges that she is a believer in the ultimate resurrection on the last day. This alludes to the fact the Jews really did not have a category for individual resurrections. The Jewish doctrine was largely based on the general resurrection of the dead in Daniel 12:2, which we now know occurs after the Parousia and is expounded on in Revelation chapter 20. It is at this point that Jesus delivers the great statement, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (Jn 11:25-26).  Dr. Towns writes that, “Martha had expressed her faith in the resurrection as a principle, but Jesus now reveals the resurrection as a person.”[7] Even more, Jesus is not only pointing to his own future resurrection but also to his deity, for he even claims to be life itself. Never disappointing, Jesus delivers Lazarus, grave clothes and all, providing evidence that death is not final. A truth he expands upon and confirms with his own triumph over the grave.

The hopeless absurdity of modern man is best encapsulated by the belief that death is the cessation of being. The scientific consensus is one of philosophical naturalism and materialistic reductionism. We humans are merely bodies and brains, the products of random unguided forces. If it’s true there is necessarily no real meaning or ultimate significance to life and certainly no final justice. Despite this pathetic flee from ultimate accountability, I believe most people intuitively know better. It is only by burying oneself under heaps of rationalistic denial and Darwinian obfuscations that one arrives at such a pitiful worldview. Our thought life and nightly excursions into the dream state speak to a deeper metaphysical truth, even to children. Science is still mystified by the life force albeit all of its fortuitous accomplishments. We have a sense of our immaterial self which is greater than unintentional chemical reactions. This is only adequately explained by the idea that we spiritual beings having a material experience. Genesis records, “then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature” (Ge 2:7).  Life is breathed by God. Jesus’ fifth “I am” statement is a claim to be one and the same.


[1]Moisés Silva and Merrill Chapin Tenney, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 3, H-L, (Grand Rapids, MI: The Zondervan Corporation, 2009), 1009.

[2]Gerald L. Borchert, vol. 25A, John 1-11, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1996), 349.

[3] Elmer Towns. The Gospel of John: Believe and Live. (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2002), 106.

[4] Towns, John, 106.

[5] Leon Morris. Jesus is the Christ: Studies in the Theology of John. (Grand Rapids MH: Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 1989), 38.

[6]Gary M. Burge, The NIV Application Commentary: John (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 315.

[7] Towns, John, 109.