 |
Web Hosting by Netfirms | Free Domain Names by Netfirms |
|
|
|
Identifying forgeries in the Bible often calls for some hard detective work. There is no "royal road." Every clue, every nuance, no matter how subtle or insignificant it may seem, must be followed to its logical conclusion. Sometime the results are ambiguous and frustrating. They remain questionable, and I will point out a couple of examples. But perseverance often pays off, and the data confirm a suspected Bible forgery. So, although some of the suspected Bible forgeries may ultimately be proved authentic, others certainly will be substantiated. The so-called Pauline epistles are a good case in point.
Paul was a Jew born at Tarsus, a city in Cilicia. The year of his birth is not known exactly but scholars put it at about 5 CE. His Jewish name was "Saul" which he used within the Jewish community with "Paul" being the Greek version. He is believed to have died in Rome around 65 CE. Paul was a contemporary of Jesus. Outside the New Testament letters (epistles), there are no reliable sources for his life. In the New Testament the so-called Pauline epistles begin after the Book of Acts and include the next thirteen entries. They all begin with the words "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the . . ."
Answer for yourself: But did he really write them?
According to scholarly analyses, Romans, I and II Corinthians, I Thessalonians and Galatians are genuine. Opinion is divided on the authenticity of Philippians and Philemon. Ephesians, Colossians, II Thessalonians, I and II Timothy and Titus are held by most scholars to be forgeries written considerably later than the time of Paul. The story of Paul's conversion to Christianity and his career as a missionary is given in the Book of Acts and was probably written many years after his death. Therefore its authenticity is also questionable.
The purpose of this article is to review the bases for evaluating the Pauline epistles as to their authenticity or lack thereof. Before reviewing the epistles themselves, however, let us consider some general observations of scholars concerning the Pauline epistles and other early Christian documents.
Graham, Lloyd M., Deceptions and Myths of the Bible, 1979
Page
410: Paul is but the Moses of the New Testament, carrying on where
Joseph or in this case, Jesus, left off. The cue to this parallel is given
in Acts, chapter 7 which recounts the whole story of Moses so that we may
see the connection.
Martin, Michael, The Case Against God, 1991
Page 38:
The first Christian documents to characterize Jesus in a way that roughly
corresponds to the accounts in the gospels (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 2
Peter, 1 Clement, seven letters of Ignatius of Antioch) were written
somewhere between 90 and 110. This is after the gospels had been written
and circulated. Why does no biographical information appear in the earlier
documents (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Hebrews, 1 Peter and possibly also
the letters of James and 1, 2, and 3 John?) The only plausible answer to
this question is that Jesus’ biography is pure fiction invented late
in the 1st century. It was unknown to the earlier writers such as Paul.
Page 56: An important clue against the historicity of the Jesus of the gospels is that the early and later non-Pauline epistles picture him differently. Those likely to have been written before 90 (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and James,) refer to Jesus in basically the same way as do the authentic Pauline epistles. They stress the resurrection and second coming but do not refer to the ethical teachings or the miracles Jesus allegedly performed; they say nothing about his birth, baptism, trial, crucifixion, and death. On the other hand, the later epistles, those written after 90 (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus,) begins to portray Jesus as he is in the gospels placing him in a definite time period as do other late first century documents such as 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude, the first epistle of Clement, and the letters of Ignatius and Polycarp. They obviously were influenced by the gospels.
Ephesians, thought to have been written between 80 and 90, is one of the earlier Pauline forgeries. It gives no detail of Jesus’ life and teachings and consequently provides no conformation that Jesus lived in the early part of the first century. In 4:25-32 the author advocates speaking the truth, controlling anger, doing honest work, and being mutually forgiving and kind, yet he never cites the teachings of Jesus. One can only infer that he had no knowledge of them.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
20: - It often comes as a shock to many lay readers to learn that the
(authentic) epistles of Paul predate the gospels. Although the gospels
present versions of the life of Jesus (4BCE? - 30?), they were actually
written between 70 and 110. The authentic Pauline epistles were written
between 50 and 60. Therefore,
it is these epistles, not the gospels, which provide the most plausible
clues as to how the earliest Christians regarded Jesus.
Page 22: The Pauline epistles considered to be genuine are so completely silent concerning the events that were later recorded in the gospels as to suggest that these events were not known to Paul, who could not have been ignorant of them had they really happened.
These letters make not a single reference to the parents of Jesus nor to the virgin birth. They never refer to a place of birth (for example, by referring to him as Jesus of Nazareth). They give no indication of the time or place of his earthly existence. They do not refer to his trial before a Roman official, nor to Jerusalem as the place of execution. They mention neither John the Baptist, nor Judas Iscariot, Jesus’ alleged betrayer. They do, of course, mention Peter, but do not imply that he, any more than Paul himself, had known Jesus personally and been associated with him during his alleged lifetime.
Paul’s failure to mention Peter’s denial of Christ (Mk.14:30, 66-72, and parallels) is highly significant. Paul’s letter to the Galatians reveals that his position as leader of the Christian community at Antioch was threatened by Peter (a.k.a. Cephas), whom he calls a hypocrite (Gal. 2:11-13). The denial coupled with Jesus’ stern warning in Matthew 10:33 would have been a powerful weapon he could have used against Peter. Why didn’t he? Paul’s silence is rightly interpreted as compelling evidence that the denial story is a late Christian forgery.
Paul claims to have won converts "by the power of signs and wonders" (Rom. 15:19). He seems to be completely unaware that Jesus said that there shall be no sign given to this generation (Mark 8:12). He also fails to mention the many wonders (miracles) which, according to the gospels, Jesus routinely performed. He obviously didn’t know of them.
Another striking feature of Paul’s letters is that one could never gather from them that Jesus had been an ethical teacher. In fact, Paul presents a considerable amount of ethical teachings in his own name, with no suggestion that Jesus had taught anything of the kind, even though the gospels later put exactly the same doctrines into Jesus’ mouth.
Mack, Burton L., Who Wrote The New Testament, 1995
Page
126: First and Second Corinthians are authentic but are actually
collections of portions of six different letters.
Page 137: Romans is authentic. It provides a comprehensive elaboration of Paul’s theology and is the earliest systematic treatise of a rationale for the Christian myth.
Remsberg, John E., The Christ, 1909
Page 41:
Four Epistles, - Romans, 1st & 2nd Corinthians, and Galatians - are
generally admitted to be the genuine writings of Paul. They are believed
to have been written about a quarter of a century after the alleged death
of Jesus. In fact, they are the only documents in the entire New Testament
whose authenticity can be maintained and whose author is known.
Robertson, Archibald, The Origins Of Christianity, 1954
Page
105: The Paul of Galatians and the Paul the Acts are two different
men.
First Corinthians is for the most part authentic but appears to have been altered probably after Paul’s death (10:1-22.)
Page 109: Second Corinthians affords conclusive evidence that the Jesus of Pauline Christianity was not the same as the Jesus portrayed in the gospels. The Pauline Christ is "the Spirit" (3:17-18) and "the image of God" (4:4)as opposed to the real person of the gospels.
Page 144: Philippians is composed of three letter fragments crudely joined together.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
21: Romans, 1& 2 Corinthians and Galatians are universally
accepted as authentic. The computer techniques tried on them by Morton and
McLeman have confirmed that they have a common author. Internal evidence
indicates that this author wrote before 70, for the references to his
contacts with a Christian community at Jerusalem show that the
catastrophic destruction of that city in the Judeo/Roman War (67 - 70) had
not yet occurred. Indeed, Paul must have been a Christian before 40 for he
tells how King Aretas of the Nabateans, who is known to have died in that
year, had sought to have him arrested because of his Christian activities
(2 Cor. 11:32). He probably wrote somewhere between 55 and 60 for he tells
the Galatians that he had been a Christian for at least fourteen years at
the time of writing.
Eddy, Patricia G., Who Tampered With The Bible? 1993
Page
26: Although purported to have been written by Paul, the relatively
complex church organization reflected by the Pastorals did not exist until
many years after Paul’s death.
Mack, Burton L., Who Wrote The New Testament, 1995
Page
206: The Pastorals were undoubtedly written during the first half of
the 2nd century. They were not included in Marcion’s list of Paul’s
letters (ca.140). Quotations from them first appear in Irenaeus’ Against
Heresies (180) and their content fits nicely into the situation and
thought of the church in the mid-second century. Their attribution to Paul
is a forgery for their language and thought are clearly unPauline. Also,
references to particular occasions in the lives of Titus, Timothy, and
Paul do not fit with reconstructions of that history taken from the
authentic letters.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible
Page 300 NT: The
vocabulary and style of these letters differ widely from the acknowledged
letters of Paul; some of his leading theological themes are entirely
absent (the union of the believer with Christ, the power and witness of
the Spirit, freedom from the law), and some of the expressions bear a
different meaning from that in his customary usage ("the faith"
as a synonym for the Christian religion rather than the believer’s
relationship to Christ).
Oxford Companion to the Bible
Page 574 (Paraphrase):
Second Timothy, although attributed to Paul, is found by many scholars to
be so unPauline in vocabulary, style, theological concepts, church order,
emphasis on tradition and in contrast with the chronology of his career as
given in Acts and Romans, that it is widely considered to be a forgery.
Remsberg, John E., The Christ, 1909
Page 41: That the
Pastorals are forgeries is now conceded by all critics. According to
German critics they belong to the second century. They were certainly
composed after the death of Paul.
Robertson, Archibald, The Origins Of Christianity, 1954
Page
129: As to the Pastorals, most scholars now agree that they are
second-century forgeries. They deal with second-century situations. These
documents were not written by Paul.
Wells, G.A., Did Jesus Exist? 1986
Page 17-18:
It is widely agreed that the Pastorals are mostly forgeries although Titus
and 2 Timothy may contain some genuine notes from Paul.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
90: Analyses show all the Pastorals were from the same hand but not
from Paul's hand. For example, Paul’s theology is very imperfectly
represented in them. Also, the controversy over keeping the Jewish law was
a hot topic in the authentic Paulines. Whereas in the Pastorals it is no
longer an issue. Therefore, they must be of a later date.
Page 94: The church hierarchy described in the Pastorals is much too advanced to represent that of the early church of Paul’s day. In 1 Tim. 3:6 it says "the bishop must not be a recent convert," a statement which shows that at the time of writing the church had been in existence for quite some time.
Eddy, Patricia G., Who Tampered With The Bible? 1993
Page
184: Second Thessalonians was forged in Paul’s name shortly
after
his death or during the late stages of his imprisonment in Rome. Scholars
believe it was written to offset the disappointment and unrest then rising
in the Christian community resulting from the unfulfilled promise of an
imminent second coming (2 Thes. 2:1-8).
Mack, Burton L., Who Wrote The New Testament, 1995
Page
112: Second Thessalonians was not written by Paul. It lacks the
personal warmth, reminiscences, and references characteristic of the
authentic letters. Almost one-third of it is verbatim copy from 1st
Thessalonians. The eschatology reflects a development of Christian
apocalyptic thinking of the kind that took place only after the
Judeo/Roman war. Second Thessalonians adds nothing to our knowledge of
Paul’s gospel. Its only importance is in documenting the fact that
some "Pauline epistles" were forged.
Remsberg, John E., The Christ, 1909
Page 41-42:
Second Thessalonians, a self evident forgery, declares 1st Thessalonians
to be a forgery (3:17).
Robertson, Archibald, The Origins Of Christianity, 1954
Page
108: Second Thessalonians is a forgery. Its vocabulary is peculiar; it
deals with a theme (the persecution of the righteous which is to precede
the second coming) mentioned nowhere else in the authentic Pauline
epistles; and it seems to be written expressly to discredit the statement
in 1st Thessalonians that "the day of the Lord" will come "as
a thief in the night" (5:2,) i.e., any day now and without warning.
Wells, G.A., Did Jesus Exist? 1986
Pages 17-18:
Second Thessalonians is considered to be a forgery. It presents an
ecclesiastical organization of a more advanced kind than existed in Paul’s
day.
That letters were written in Paul’s name (forged) is clear from exhortations not to be misled "by some letters purporting to be from us" (2 Thess. 2:2,) and from the fact that the author of this epistle finds it necessary (3:17) to authenticate himself with his signature.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
49-50: Most investigators regard Second Thessalonians (half the length
of the first) as having been derived from the first letter. If Paul had
written Second Thessalonians, it seems unlikely that he would have used so
many of the same phrases. Also, The second letter is in an entirely
different style than the first.
Second Thessalonians contradicts First Thessalonians regarding the second coming. In the first letter Jesus is expected to return soon and will come unheralded "like a thief in the night," at a time of apparent peace and security (5:1-3). In Second Thessalonians the second coming is not to be expected soon. According to chapter 2 it will be preceded by a series of upheavals. So the contradiction is sharp. If the end will be preceded by catastrophes, then it will not come when all is peace and security.
It is difficult to assign a precise date to Second Thessalonians. However, most scholars suggest the mid-80s.
Mack, Burton L., Who Wrote The New Testament, 1995
Page
183: The letters to the Ephesians and Colossians, thought to have been
written between 80 and 90, were not written by Paul. There is no
suggestion of the personal Paul in either of them. The style, the
vocabulary, and the rhetoric are different from the authentic Paulines.
They were written in Paul’s name after his death probably by scribes
loyal to the school that survived him. They are included among the Pauline
letters because by the time the church started drawing up lists of
literature acceptable for public reading in the third and fourth
centuries, Ephesians and Colossians were already a part of the "letters
of Paul."
Martin, Michael, The Case Against God, 1991
Page 184:
In Ephesians Paul’s teachings are diluted. No mention is made of his
heated arguments for freedom from the Jewish law, the justification of
sinners, faith in Christ, scriptural precedence, epic revisions or
apocalyptic scenarios and threats. These are the topics that dominate the
authentic letters.
Page 188: Paul used the term "congregation" to refer to a local group whereas the author of Ephesians used the term in the singular to refer to the church universal.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible
Page 272 NT:
There are important contrasts between Ephesians and the letters that we
can confidently ascribe to Paul. Many of the words in Ephesians do not
appear elsewhere in the apostle’s correspondence, and some important
terms have a different meaning here from their meaning in letters that are
surely Paul’s. The style, with its loose collection of phrases and
clauses and long sentences, is not characteristic of Paul’s writing.
Ephesians is, therefore, judged to be a forgery.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
21: Colossians is judged to have been written not by Paul but by one
of his pupils. Paul’s ideas as expressed in Romans (6:3-5) have been
greatly modified.
Page 53: Ephesians was written about 90, some 25 years after Paul’s death. During Paul’s lifetime the terms for admitting gentiles into the church was at the core of a protracted controversy. Ephesians addresses the gentiles (2:11) in a situation where such problems have been solved. Therefore, it has to be of a much later date.
Wells, G.A., Did Jesus Exist? 1986
Pages 17-18:
Colossians and Ephesians are considered forgeries. They present an
ecclesiastical organization of a far more advanced kind than existed in
Paul’s day. For example, according to Ephesians 2:20-21 the faithful
are said to be dependent for salvation not directly on Jesus but on
officers of the Church. This is a clear contradiction of 1 Cor. 3:10-11
which reads: According to
the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have
laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take
heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than
that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
The Epistle to the Hebrews, although not designated a Pauline epistle, is included here out of interest.
Graham, Lloyd M., Deceptions and Myths of the Bible, 1979
Page
410: "The Epistle to the Hebrews was written by Barnabas, not by
Paul" said Tertullian (160?-230?)
Page 410: "Who wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews God only knows," Origen (185?-254?)
Mack, Burton L., Who Wrote The New Testament, 1995
Page
189: The author of Hebrews is unknown. However, it was not Paul. Its
concept of Christianity is different from any of the early Christian
writers.
Remsberg, John E., The Christ, 1909
Page 42:
Hebrews does not purport to be a Pauline document. Martin Luther says in
the Standing Preface to his N. T., "The Epistle to the Hebrews is not
by Paul, nor, indeed, by any apostle." In fact, the spurious origin
of Hebrews is recognized right away because it never claims authorship by
Paul.
Wells, G. A., The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 1988
Page
55: Many Bibles ascribe Hebrews to Paul although it does not purport
to come from him and is not written in his style. A major concern of the
author of Hebrews is to argue that God had set aside as outmoded the
sacrificial system of the old covenant. But the writer who intended to
discredit Jewish sacrificial ritual might reasonably be expected to point
to the destruction of the temple in 70, had he been writing after this
date. If he had written after 70 he could hardly have been unaware of this
catastrophic event. For this reason it is reasonable to assume that
Hebrews was written sometime between 60 and 70.
The failure of the author to refer to gospel material germane to his argument is important. He was obviously unaware of the gospels and the Jesus they portray. Also, the author takes the view (unknown to Paul) that there can be no second repentance (6:4-6). Apostasy (the denial of scripture) is the unforgivable sin. Therefore, he could not have been aware of the story of Peter’s denial.
Of the thirteen epistles ascribed to Paul in the Bible, only five can be identified as authentic with any degree of certainty. Yet, all thirteen are headed with the bold inscription, THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO . . . Such blatant subterfuge by the writers of these ancient religious documents in the face of undeniable evidence amounts to a most scandalous and irresponsible deception. As we have found and are continuing to see for ourselves is that the later writers of the New Testament were refuting Marcion's First New Testament and his "allegorical" Christ. This refutation consisted of letters forged in the name of Paul in order to not only claim authority for these forgeries by drawing upon the name of Paul but also to make it appear that Paul was anti-Gnostic when in fact the reverse is true. Marcion, a strong advocate of Paul, collected all the known letters of Paul that existed in and around 140 and presented them and his "allegorical" Christ in the First New Testament. Rome will counter this later through proto-Catholics like Irenaeus and others through the altering these earliest documents as well as the pure invention of others. Through deception, lying, and deceit Rome will alter the earliest held beliefs about "the Christ" and turn this Spiritual concept into a man and we find this man as Christ Jesus of the New Testament. Not only through the forging of the Gospels but the corruption of existing Pauline writings and the creation of others Rome was able to create a historical Jesus and make it appear as if Paul was a supporter of this historical Christ as well. If one takes the time to sift through what was contained in the First New Testament of Marcion and at the same time is familiar with Gnosticism and their allegorical understanding of the Christ then this deception become as plain as the nose on your face. Thus the scholars and their testimony above which helps us see the facts for themselves. Much written later in Paul's name is completely opposite of not only what he believed but the Jerusalem church as well concerning "the Christ." I know of no minister of the gospel who has ever had the intestinal fortitude go before his congregation and make this revelation. They, instead, proudly promote themselves as paragons of virtue and honesty; purveyors of truth - the only truth. Either ignorance of these facts or intellectual dishonesty is their stock in trade. During my life I have met both but far and away they simply don't know since never studying hard enough to learn these things.
Rom 11:25-26 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Col 1:27 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: (KJV)
