Layers of Pseudepigraphy – Authorship Issues in the Epistles

Layers of “Pseudepigraphy” or Levels of Authenticity

Occasionally when I am talking with friends about the authorship of scriptural texts I get inquisitive looks when discussing the idea that some of the New Testament is pseudepigraphal, or not authentically written by the author that claimed to have written the document. If we look at the problem with little thought or consideration, this can be troubling. But if we slow down, analyze how these texts came to be, and examine our own religious history as well as the history of all of Christianity and textual production (especially of religious texts), we can seen the problem differently, hopefully with a perspective that can strengthen rather that lessen our faith.

  1. Literal authorship – “I Mormon, wrote this with my own hand.” In the faith tradition of the Latter-day Saints and in most of traditional Christianity, this is what most of us think of when it comes to authorship. We generally make the assumption that Moses wrote the 5 books of Moses, and that Paul wrote the epistles in the New Testament.
  2. Dictation – Many of Paul’s texts were dictated to a scribe, sometimes referred to as amanuensis, or scribal assistance through dictation. See Romans 16.22 … Also many scholars see 2 Corinthians as having been 2 letters that were later pieced together into one text. Many of Joseph’s Smiths revelations and writings fit into this category.
  3. Delegated authorship. The author permits his disciples to take the author’s notes, thoughts, speeches, and assembles them into a treatise/letter. We see much of this in our church history, think Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith… The author gives permission to his disciples to write in his name. We see this in the Gospels. Evidence exists that Jesus did not write these, but authorized his followers to share his life and witness of his name.
  4. Posthumous authorship. The author dies and his followers take his ideas/speeches/notes and write in his name. There could be degrees of authenticity here – actual written documents would be a higher form or writing than memories or notes from speeches, for example.
  5. Apprentice authorship. The church leader dies and his followers who were authorized to represent him honor his name by writing in his name as a tribute and to honor his teachings so that they continue and influence tradition. The Pastoral epistles are considered by many to be the work of later followers of the apostle Paul that took his sermons, thoughts, and overall religious beliefs and then packaged these into these letters. While we certainly do not know for sure if this is the case, there is much evidence in history that this is a strong possibility. 1
  6. Honorable pseudepigraphy. Sincere followers honor the leader by continuing to produce texts in the author’s name that reflect the author’s beliefs, ideas, and values. There seems to be little difference between #5 and #6 on this list in my view. The main distinction seems to be in possession of materials, memories of ideas, speeches, and thoughts of the original author. Something could be honorable pseudepigraphy and yet be very close to apprentice authorship and vice versa, yet if one has known the original author and been authorized to represent their ideas, this would certainly be a higher form of pseudepigraphal construction in my view. There could also be degrees of honorable pseudepigraphy – what if you were closely associated with friends of the original author yet never knew him personally? This could be much different than a later author, separated by decades of time, with nothing to go on but a few remaining letters of the dead author.
  7. Forgery. Documents are forged to gain influence due to the fact that the leader has influence and the forgers know that if they write in the name of the leader, their ideas will gain traction. Many documents in the early Christian era fit this description. 2

Notes

  1. E.Y. Hincks, The Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, Journal of Biblical Literature Vol. 16, No. 1/2 (1897), pp. 94-117. Hincks states, “But the question is not, if Paul did not write them, who did?” but, ” Did he? ” If he did not, somebody else did. Possibly we may not find out who he was. What then ? We do not know who wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews. That fact does not make us less confident that Paul did not write it.” While I agree with Hincks that these are two separate questions, in my mind, once you ask the first question, “Did Paul write this?” then that automatically puts us in a position to ask the second, “If not Paul, then who did?” Philip Towner handles the question this way: “Differences in style, vocabulary, and theology and descriptions of heresy that they held must be second century Gnosticism (that) tipped the scales away from the traditional view (of authentic Pauline authorship of the Pastorals). The majority of modern scholars maintain that the Pastoral Epistles are pseudepigraphal- that is, written pseudonymously (in Paul’s name) sometime after Paul’s death (so Dibelius and Conzelmann, Brox, Barrett, Hanson, Houlden, Karris, Hultgren). Most today locate these three letters around the turn of the century, suggesting that the author aimed to revive Pauline teaching for his day or to compose a definitive and authoritative Pauline manual for denouncing heresy in the postapostolic church…” (p. 15) According to the consensus of modern scholarship, someone other than Paul, perhaps a disciple or a later church leader, wrote in his name. Among the commentators who maintain that the Pastorals are inauthentic (or pseudonymous) are Dibelius and Conzelmann (1972), Quinn (1992), Brox (1989), Karris (1979), Barrett (1963), Hanson (1982), Houlden (1976), Easton (1948) and Hultgren (1984). Among those in favor of authenticity are Fee (1988), Kelly (1963), Guthrie (1957), Spicq (1969), Jeremias (1975), Hendriksen (1957) and Johnson (1987). Lock (1924) seems to be uncertain. For the view of the Pastorals as letters incorporating fragments, see Barclay (1975) and Harrison (1921). The questions involved are not necessarily easily answered, and a definitive solution is not likely to be forthcoming. Philip H. Towner, 1-2 Timothy & Titus, Intervarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois, 1994, p. 15 and 31.
  2. Powell, Mark A. Introducing the New Testament. Baker Academic, 2009, p. 224. See also Bart Ehrman, Forged: Writing in the Name of God-Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are, Harper One, 2012.