Jesus Himself stated, “The kingdom of God is at hand” in Mark 1:15 [NIV]; however, it is recorded in the Gospel of Matthew that He also said “The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” [Matthew 4:17, 10:7 NIV] A quick examination of Scripture leads to the conclusion that the phrases “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven” are synonymous. So, is the kingdom of God NOW?

Most first century Jews, according to their understanding of Scripture, were looking for a Messiah who would provide theocratic rule thus delivering them from Roman oppression and immediately establishing the Kingdom of God – the Age to Come. The then-current age – “Satan’s Time” – was one of sin, sickness, demonic possession, and evil in which evil men were triumphant.[1]

Consequently, even though Jesus Christ healed the sick, drove out demons and even claimed to have forgiven sins, the majority of religious leaders did not recognize Him as the Messiah in part because He did not try to overthrow Rome. Since many of the Pharisees – one of the religious parties of the day – did not believe Jesus’ claim as the “I Am” [John 8:58] they wanted to stone Him for blasphemy!

Historical background

Writings of the Intertestamental Era

400 years had already elapsed between the writing of Malachi, the last Old Testament book to be recorded, and the era of Jesus’ earthly ministry. In the intertestamental period (the time between the Old and New Testaments), the Jews were not a free people most of the time instead subjected to the rulership of various empires. There were no prophets providing correction or guidance; and, consequently, it was a rather unhappy time. As a result, it was a period marked by a surge in the production of literary works, the most important of which were the Septuagint – the Greek translation of the Tanakh – what Christians know as the Old Testament (abbreviated LXX)[2], the Apocryphal & Pseudepigraphic writings (some of the Apocrypha were translated from the Hebrew and Aramaic and included as part of the LXX)[3], and the Dead Sea Scrolls.[4]

The word Apocrypha, from Greek derivation, means “hidden” which has a view of the works being either esoteric and only to be understood by the initiated or, “hidden” in that the nature of the writings are questionable or heretical[5]. The term Pseudepigrapha is usually applied to Jewish (and Jewish-Christian) writings from 200BC to AD200 and comes also from Greek etymology meaning the writings were attributed to fictitious authors[6] although some have authorship ascribed[7]. From both groups of works the subject of eschatology has a significant role. Taken all together, this literature appeared to have a profound effect on the pre-Christian and the immediate post-Resurrection era[8] up through the destruction of the Second Temple in AD70[9]. [Note: for the purposes of this article the “New Testament Apocrypha” including the so-called “Lost Gospels, ” Acts of Andrews, Epistles of the Apostles, etc. are not considered.]

…These and other writings emerged during the long silence that fell between the death of the last OT prophet, Malachi (about 400 B.C.), and the appearance of John the Baptist. To some extent these writings attempted to discern what God was saying to a nation that, though it had repudiated idolatry, still suffered under the dominion of a succession of pagan powers… [10]

At the Council of Jamnia in AD90 Jewish rabbis rejected the Apocrypha (of which parts were included in the Septuagint) as canonical[11]. Yet, some of the Apocrypha are included in the Catholic New American Bible as Deuterocanonical (meaning later added to the canon) books[12]. Some of the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine such as purgatory, masses for the dead, and obtaining the merit of God through good works come from these Apocryphal works[13].

The OT canon accepted by Protestants today was “very likely established by the dawn of the second century,” some time after the destruction of Herod’s Temple in AD70. However, the Apocrypha was still in common use by most Christians until the Protestant Reformation[14].

Societal Developments of the Period

Even though the Second Temple was in operation from 516 BC[15] until AD70[16,17] geographical constraints and oppressive regimes prevented easy travel for the typical Jew. Thus the synagogue was born. Synagogues can be likened to our modern day church buildings as they provided a convenient way to gather socially and to worship. Jesus Himself visited local synagogues [Luke 4:14-21; Matthew 12:9; Mark 1:21]; and, the Apostles [Acts 9:20, 13:5-43] and early Christian missionaries preached in them as well[18].

The Sanhedrin was a committee of Jews with recognized executive, legislative, and judicial power over Jewish faith and lifestyle during the Seleucid Empire (196 – 167BC), the Maccabean revolt (168 – 143BC) and within the limits imposed by Julius Caesar, Herod the Great, and Roman procurators during the Roman Empire (44BC – AD66).[19,20] Subordinate to the Sanhedrin were the religious parties or sects known as the Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and the Qumran community[21]. Since the Sanhedrin had authority over these sects and ultimate authority over capital cases (yet subordinate to Rome during Roman occupation), Jesus’ trial is seen as being conducted illegally[22].

Beliefs of the Sects

Not much is known about the separative and isolationistic Essene group except that they were very legalistic living both frugally and communally while limiting contact outside their sect. While they did not condemn marriage in principle it was avoided and celibacy was celebrated. Their sect was continued on by the adoption of children. There was an expectation of an impending apocalyptic battle between good and evil. Evidence of a soon to emerge Messiah is in their writings also[23].

Even less was known of the Qumran community until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) which were first unearthed in 1947. The Qumranians are likely a sect that broke from the Essenes. This extremely sectarian group rejected the Jewish leadership referring to them as “sons of darkness” and “men of the pit” while referring to themselves as “sons of light” and “sons of truth.” They firmly believed they were living in the end times[24].

From the DSS it is evident that the Qumranians were highly legalistic with a commitment to study the Torah. The Qumran group believed they were living in the end times and accepted the guidance of a certain “teacher of righteousness” [ed: probably based at least in part on Malachi 4:5] who was presumably preparing them for the Messiah. Their own writings about this “righteous teacher” are too sketchy to determine the exact role of this figure; however, it is apparent that the community accepted his interpretations of the prophetic OT books regarding eschatology. Since the Qumran believed in a resurrection of the dead, it may be assumed in studying portions of the DSS that they expected the “teacher of righteousness” to be martyred and eventually raised up[25]. Their Messiah figure, on the other hand, was more of a human son of David concept rather than a divine apocalyptic Son of man[26]. Some scholars construe that the Qumran belief system supports two or three Messianic figures[27,28].

As supernaturalists, the Pharisees believed in angels, demons, bodily resurrection [Acts 23:8], and immortality with reward for the righteous dead[29] in contrast with retribution for the unrighteous[30]. They were legalistic to the point of going beyond the Scriptures in attempting to adhere to the Torah; and, to this end added their own oral tradition to keep various points of the law. A good example of this is their view of the Sabbath [Mark 2:23-28]. The Pharisees “neglected the more important matters of the law – justice, mercy and faithfulness” [Matthew 23:23 NIV] creating a more works-based religion than one with a personal God.

The Pharisees believed both in man’s free will and the sovereignty of God yet thought neither would cancel out the other. Ethics such as human equality were emphasized in their teachings but not necessarily from a theological standpoint[31]. They expected the Messiah to restore Jewish freedom[32].

One credible source stated outright that the Pharisees believed in reincarnation[33]; yet, the general consensus among Christian scholars is that Pharisaical belief regarding immortality adhered to orthodoxy instead. However, in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic literature there are references to reincarnation[34]. In some camps, the Kabbalah was thought to be in use as early as the time of Moses as part of an oral tradition and reincarnation is one of the tenets of Kabbalistic doctrine[35]. While there are certainly some Jewish sects who currently espouse reincarnation[36], it is not clear when this doctrine first came about. The Apocryphal book Ecclesiasticus, or Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach[37], contains a warning against such esotericism [Sirach 3:20-22].[38]

The common people were predominantly middle class and identified mostly with the Pharisees in part because this party was of the same class[39]. It should be noted that not all Pharisees were of the same ilk as those represented in the NT. Some contemporaries within their own party recognized their hypocrisy and rebuked them for it[40]. Gamaliel appeared to try to honor a personal God with his words [Acts 5:33-41]. Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee, would, of course, become the Apostle Paul.

The Sadducees, more than any of these groups, had an interest in Temple ceremonies and sought a literal interpretation of the Torah. They appeared to reject extra-canonical sources for doctrine. As the most affluent of the religious groups, the Sadducees wielded political clout disproportionate to their relative size[41]. It is assumed that they held a large percentage of seats on the Sanhedrin.

The Sadducean view of eschatology was quite simplistic and widely divergent from the other sects as they did not believe in a resurrection [Matthew 22:23, Mark 12:18, Luke 20:27] or an afterlife and even denied the existence of a spiritual world altogether [Acts 23:8] attributing everything to free will[42].

Eschatological Views of the Pre-Christian and Immediate Post-Resurrection Era

With the exception of the Sadducean view, the predominant Jewish belief of the pre-Christian era included the imminent arrival of a Messianic figure (or figures assuming one of the viewpoints regarding the Qumran group) to deliver them from their Roman oppressors and immediately establish the Kingdom of God. Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stewart, in their book How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, describe the Jewish eschaton (view of the end of time) as the belief that the Messiah’s coming would usher in the “Age to Come” to be “characterized by the presence of the Spirit, righteousness, health, and peace.”[43]

Since Jesus Christ’s disciples/followers came directly from Jewish heritage or were familiar with Jewish eschatological beliefs, they were also expecting Him to soon usher in the Kingdom and overthrow Rome[44] while He was still on the earth. Consequently, Jesus’ arrest and subsequent death on the Cross was met with immense disillusionment among His disciples in part because of this assumption [Luke 22:61-62; 23:27, 48-49; 24:17-21]. However, their sorrow turned to joy with His Resurrection and Ascension!

Yet it was apparent that the end of the age had not come in full:

“Very early, beginning with Peter’s sermon in Acts 3, the early Christians came to realize that Jesus had not come to usher in the ‘final’ end, but the ‘beginning’ of the end, as it were. Thus they came to see that with Jesus’ death and resurrection, and with the coming of the Spirit, the blessings and benefits of the future had already come. In a sense, therefore, the end had already come. But, in another sense the end had not yet fully come. Thus it was already but not yet. [45] [emphasis in original]

First century Christians had to adjust their eschatological thinking to fit the events of the Resurrection and Ascension. However, apparently some were expecting the imminent return of Jesus Christ prompting the Apostle Paul to write the two Thessalonian letters to provide markers of what first must take place before His return. They still had a “kingdom now” mindset. This expectation of imminency with regard to Christ’s return continues in the mindset of most Christians today.

This “tension” between the already but not yet is an important hermeneutical tool in interpreting the New Testament[46]. Passages such as Colossians 3:1-2 illustrate this quite well:

1 Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. [NIV]

We are already raised up with Christ, yet we are still physically here on earth. However, since we have the future expectation of being raised with Christ, we are to already set our hearts and minds on heavenly things. Similarly, when Jesus said, “The kingdom of God is at hand” He was using this same principle. The Kingdom era has already begun; but, the consummation is yet to be fulfilled.

There are those today who are attempting to hasten Jesus Christ’s return by taking the not yet into their own hands. It is the doctrines of some of these which will be compared to the doctrines of the groups above in the second part of this article.

See Part II here.

Endnotes:

[1] Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas Stewart “The Gospels: One Story, Many Dimensions.” How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. second edition, 1993; Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; p 131

[2] Gaebelein, Frank E., Gen. Ed. “The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 1. 1979; Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 164-174. This section features Bruce M. Metzger as contributor.

[3] Gaebelein, Frank E., Gen. Ed. “Between the Testaments.” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 1. 1979; Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 179-192. This section features Harold W. Hoehner as contributor.

[4] Barker, Kenneth; Burdick, Stek, et. al. “The Time between the Testaments” NIV Study Bible. copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 1424-1425

[5] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 161 Metzger

[6] ibid. pp 162, 170

[7] Marshall, I. Howard; Millard, Packer “Pseudepigrapha” New Bible Dictionary. third edition, 1996; Intervarsity, Downers Grove, IL; p 985

[8] Gaebelein, Op.cit. pp 173-174 Hoehner

[9] Richards, Lawrence O. “Apocrypha” Richards Complete Bible Dictionary. 2002; World Bible Publishers, Iowa Falls, IO; p 76

[10] ibid.

[11] Marshall, Op.cit.

[12] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 162

[13] Richards, Op.cit.

[14] Barker, Op.cit. p 1425

[15] Richards, Lawrence O. “Ezra” Richards’ Complete Bible Handbook. 1987; Word, Inc., Dallas, TX; pp 233-234

[16] Wikipedia The Second Temple <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple> para 1; as accessed 10/17/10

[17] Richards, Op.cit. “The Second Temple” Bible Dictionary p 967

[18] ibid. “synagogue” pp 957-958

[19] ibid. “Sanhedrin” pp 894-895

[20] Gaebelein, Op.cit. pp 184, 189-191 Hoehner

[21] ibid. pp 192-193

[22] Richards, Op.cit. p 895

[23] ibid. “Essenes” pp 346-347

[24] Gaebelein, Frank E., Gen. Ed. “Dead Sea Scrolls.” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 1. 1979; Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 395-398. This section features William Sanford LaSor as contributor.

[25] ibid. pp 399-401

[26] ibid. pp 400-403 [The bulk of this information on the Qumran is from the work of William S. LaSor titled The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972]

[27] Barker, Op.cit. p 1427

[28] Hanson, Kenneth “The Wicked Priest” Dead Sea Scrolls: the Untold Story. 1997; Council Oaks Books, Tulsa, OK; p 82

[29] Richards, Op.cit. “Pharisees” p 782

[30] Barker, Op.cit. “Jewish Sects” p 1473

[31] ibid.

[32] Richards, Op.cit.

[33] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 192 Hoehner

[34] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 165 Metzger

[35] Wikipedia “Primary Texts” Kabbalah. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabbalah> para 2, also “History: Origin of Terms” para 1; as accessed 10/17/10

[36] Rich, Tracey R. “Resurrection and Reincarnation” Olam Ha-Ba: The Afterlife. <http://www.jewfaq.org/olamhaba.htm>  Copyright 5759-5760 (1999); Tracey R. Rich; para 4; as accessed 10/17/10

[37] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 166

[38] Confraternity of Christian Doctrine “Sirach” New American Bible. <http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/sirach/sirach3.htm> 2002; Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Inc., Washington, DC; Sirach 3:20-22; as accessed 10/17/10

[39] Richards, Op.cit. “The Common People” Bible Handbook p 443

[40] ibid. “The Pharisees” p 442

[41] Gaebelein, Op.cit. p 192 Hoehner

[42] Richards, Op.cit. “Sadducees” p 885

[43] Fee, Op.cit. p 132

[44] ibid.

[45] ibid. pp 132-133

[46] ibid. p 133

Jewish*

1. OT Apocrypha
2. DSS
3. OT Pseudepigrapha (esp. 1 Enoch)
4. Josephus: Jewish Antiquities, Jewish War
5. Philo: ???  (Recommendations on 2-3 works on where to start?)

*Need it be said that you read the OT itself first (possibly even from the LXX): Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Daniel, etc.?

Greco-Roman

1. Cicero: De Natura Deorum, De Finibis (both read like a 3 views on theology and ethics, respectively)
2. Plato: Timaeus, Phaedo, Symposium (longer works like The Republic will also repay attention given)
3. Epictetus and/or Seneca
4. Histories: Herodotus, Suetonius, Tacitus
5. Homer (which was the “Bible” of Hellenism)
6. Rhetorical handbooks by Quintillian or Aristotle

Mike Bird has a list here which has a similar focus, but also points to key secondary sources.

Christian

1. Apostolic Fathers
2. NT Apocrypha
3. Nag Hammadi
4. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus

Pseudo-Ezekiel - Dead Sea Scroll Manuscript 4Q386Pseudo-Ezekiel Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Tsila Sagiv, photographer

If you watch television or read books and magazines, you’ve noticed that, over the past 20 years, there has been a steadily increasing groundswell of attention paid to the Bible-specifically deconstructing it and the authority it has with many people. Unfortunately, many folks today take seriously the notions that either some parts of the Bible simply fell out of use and disappeared for the canon, some books were placed in the canon but later intentionally removed for whatever reason(s), or that some books should have been part of the Bible but were rejected (and in some cases, banned altogether in any form and destroyed). I say unfortunately and call these things notions intentionally. I mean to downgrade their popular status as hard facts. What little truth exists in these notions has been so overstated that these ideas are no longer truth, when all is said and believed.

If someone were to simply read a one-off article in Time or Newsweek or watch a program on the History channel, one might get the idea that there has been such a deep conspiracy within “the church” to villify innocent texts which were intended to be collected with and included in the canon of the New Testament. These poor letters, books or manuscript fragments were subjected to undue prejudice by the big, bad powerful Christians and sealed away, never intended to  be seen again by mortal man. The idea is that their contents would patently disrupt or destroy the beliefs, theology and authority of “the church” and therefore had to be rejected and made to disappear.

It would be a very boring way for the average reader or viewer of these articles and programs to interact with the idea of lost books of the Bible and to find out that they weren’t really lost at all. That doesn’t sell airtime or issues. Scholars have a word to describe these writings. Pseudepigrapha. It means “falsely attributed writings”. The vast majority of these writings were not even written until many years (typically hundreds) after their claim to be written. But all were recognized  as containing blatant falsehoods or were nonsensical altogether-usually both.

When I see these articles in the magazines, read through the books and watch the shocking television programs on this subject (year after year-usually Easter and Christmas), I think three things. First, I’m disappointed that editors everywhere continually (again, yearly) allow their writers to sensationalize this kind of banal field of manuscript study to the point that it’s aparrently ushering in a philosophical and spiritual paradigm shift for mankind. Second, I wonder how many people honestly eat this stuff up and digest it without thinking that another course to the meal is in order. I finally get to the point that I realize it’s ultimately best that people who otherwise wouldn’t, are being exposed to manuscript study and the formation of Scripture. At least the conversation is being brought up and put out there. What will you have to say the next time it is?

To start with, it appears that they were Jewish (cf. ‘Alexander’ in 1:20 with Acts 19:33‑34) – they were particularly interested in ‘myths and endless genealogies’ and ‘worldly fables’, wanting to be teachers of the Mosaic Law, forbidding marriage (probably between Jews and non-Jews) and abstaining from certain foods (1:3‑7; 4:3, 7).  Their way of establishing doctrine was through ‘speculation’, ‘fruitless discussion’, ‘worldly empty chatter’, ‘the opposing arguments of what is falsely called “knowledge”’, ‘controversial questions and disputes about words’ (1:4, 6; 6:4, 20), all of which were characteristic of Jewish religious education.  Evidently they based their teaching on the Law, but in a way Paul described as ‘unlawful’ (1:7‑10), that is, failing to recognise its primary purpose to convict Israel of sin.  Judaism of the first century AD had a wide variety of popular religious writings, generally referred to as ‘apocalyptic’ or ‘pseudepigrapha’, for which ‘myths’, ‘fables’, ‘speculation’ and ‘endless genealogies’ would all be appropriate designations.  One of the most popular was the book of 1 Enoch, which Jude quotes in 1:14‑15 to convict his opponents who valued it, much as Paul quoted the Stoic poet Aratus and the Cretan poet Epimenides to the Athenians (Acts 17:28; also Tit 1:12).

The false teachers in Ephesus are also accused of maintaining their controversy-based teaching methods out of conceit (at being teachers?), and treating religion, or godliness, as a way of making money (1Tim 6:3‑5; cf. 1Pet 5:2).  This may connect with the greed of those condemned by Peter and Jude as ‘rushing headlong into the error of Balaam’ (2Pet 2:14‑15; Jude 1:11), apparently referring to those who like Balaam were prepared to speculate and teach on any popular subject of the day in order to accumulate wealth.  This was perhaps the first century equivalent of the ‘prosperity gospel’ in our day.  The letter of James to the Jewish believers throughout the Roman empire has a similar message about greed.  He calls on believers to endure the present persecution (Jas 1:2‑4, 12‑13; 5:7‑11), picked up and expanded upon in Peter’s first epistle (cf. 1Pet 1:6‑8; 4:2, 7‑8; 5:8‑9), but has to rebuke his hearers for worldly wisdom (Jas 1:19‑26; 3:1–4:1) which is evidently associated with riches and bringing disunity into the church (1:9‑11; 1:27–2:17; 4:1–5:6).  Some of the false teachers Paul attacks in Ephesus had also already fallen into the immorality of lifestyle condemned by Peter and Jude (1Tim 1:9‑10, 19; 4:2; 5:19‑20), although Paul reminded Timothy that the false doctrine of others would sooner or later manifest itself in sinful deeds (5:24‑25).

However, the primary problem, for which Hymenaeus and Alexander had been excluded from fellowship, was deliberate ‘blasphemy’ (1:20).  Blasphemy is slander or disrespectful speech about God, and in this case it is most likely that this refers to their teachings about Jesus, because Paul himself admits he too was formerly a blasphemer (1:13).  It is worth considering what Paul says about Jesus, therefore, to see whether we can discern behind his statements what the false teachers were saying.  In 2:5, Paul clearly states the central doctrine of Judaism – “there is one God” (cf. Deut 6:4; John 10:30‑33) – but then with the same breath states the equivalent about Jesus – “one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”.  Judaism of the first century AD gave a prominent mediatory role to angels (cf. Acts 7:38, 53; Gal 3:19; Heb 2:1‑4), but in this verse Paul not only reaffirms Jesus’ full humanity, but his exaltation comparable to God Himself, such that denial of Jesus’ unique status as mediator is equally blasphemy.  Paul later quotes a well-known early Christian creed about both the humanity and the exaltation of Jesus (3:16), just as he had done in the letter to the Philippians a few years earlier (Php 2:6‑11).  The false doctrine being taught was contrary to the sound words about [or ‘of’] the Lord Jesus Christ, and it would also lead its hearers away from godliness (6:3).  We will find below that John’s first epistle to the Ephesians, probably just a few years after Paul was arrested and taken back to Rome, would have to deal with the consequences of both the doctrinal and moral failure of false teachers on those who remained in the church after their departure.

The Situation in Crete (Titus)

The letter Paul wrote to Titus also appears to have been written around the same time as his first letter to Timothy, because here also he has not yet been arrested for the second time.  The ‘wind of doctrine’ Titus has to address in his teaching is almost exactly the same as Timothy is encountering in Ephesus.  Here it is explicit that the false teachers are mostly Jewish (1:10), characteristically rebellious (1:10; 2:5, 9, 15; 3:1‑3) and greedy for money (1:11), particularly interested in Jewish myths and commandments of the Law (1:14), and advocating doctrine that defiles the mind and leads to a defiled moral conscience as well (1:15‑16; 2:12‑14; 3:3, 8).  Their methods of education involve ‘empty talk’, ‘foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law’, and controversy-based teaching methods (1:10; 3:9, 10‑11).  The ‘testimony’ of God that was manifested ‘at the proper times’ in both Jesus’ first coming and His sure return in glory (1Tim 2:6; 6:14‑15; cf. 1:1), is once again central to Paul’s letter to Titus (1:2‑3; 2:11‑13; 3:4‑7), probably consciously in opposition to the ‘mocking’ teaching of those times that Peter and Jude speak against (2Pet 3:1‑13; Jude 1:14‑18, 21).

The Pseudepigrapha
The Pseudepigrapha, like the Apocrypha, demonstrates a variety of views concerning women. Some considered women a blessing (Asen. 1-9), others as generally evil and sexually immoral (T.Reub. 5.1, 3). Let us investigate further two important texts.

T.Job 24.7-8
ὥστε τολμῆσαι ἀναισχύντως ἐξελθεῖν εἰς τὴν ἀγοράν κατανύγησα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ μου ὅτι οὐκ ἀρκετὸν προσαιτεῖν ἄρτος παρὰ τῶν ἀρτοπρατῶν. καὶ τὸν ἀρτοπράτην εἰπε<ῖ>ν· Δὸς μοι ἀργύριον καὶ λήψει // so that I dared to go forth shamelessly into the market, stabbed to my heart that it did not suffice to beg bread from the bread seller. And when the bread seller said: “Give me money and you shall receive.”

This text tells of Job’s wife boldly entering into the marketplace due to the dire straits of their family. This text illustrates that it was considered shameful for a woman to enter the market in 1st cent BCE to 1st cent CE in Egypt (or possibly in the Essene community).  This social code would have seriously impeded public interaction between a man and a woman in that time and place. However, as the context of this reference makes clear, such interaction, though shameful, did occur in rare circumstances.

Jos. Asen. 7.8
Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Πεντεφρῆς· κύριε, ἐκείνη ἣν ἑώρακας ἐν τῷ ὑπερῴῳ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀλλοτρία, ἀλλὰ θυγάτηρ ἡμῶν ἐστι, παρθένος μισοῦσα πάντα ἄνδρα, καὶ ἀνὴρ ἄλλος οὐχ ἑώρακεν αὐτήν ποτε εἰ μὴ σὺ [μόνος] σήμερον // And Pentephres said to him, “O lord, the woman you have seen in the upper floor is no stranger! She is our daughter, a virgin, who scorns men; and no other man has ever seen her, apart [only] from you today.

Pentephres is Aseneth’s father and he was speaking to Joseph, who was courting his daughter. This text shows that men only infrequently had public interaction with unmarried women. This bears continuity with much of the material concerning public interaction between men and women in the Apocrypha. This social code, again, appears to be motivated by the perceived necessity for sexual purity (cf. T.Reub. 5.1, 3). Listed out below are some other Pseudepigraphical writings that weight in on this discussion:

1. 1 Enoch 98.2: Women, particularly virgins, wore jewelry in front of men.
2. 3 Baruch 3.5: It was notable that women were made to do work with men. Even a pregnant woman was made to work immediately before and after her delivery of the infant.
3. Test.Job 24.7-10: It pierced the heart of Job’s wife to go into the market, because it normally would have brought shame upon her, though the situation demanded she go. It was also remarkable that she sold her hair.
4. Abraham A 10.8: Abraham sees a man and a women having sex in plain sight during a vision of the world “as it was in that day”.
5. Joseph and Aseneth 2.12-15: Aseneth’s virgin chamber had a window that faced people passing by, with the result that they could see into her room.
6. Joseph and Aseneth 4.8, 11: Aseneth scorns her father for suggesting she marry Joseph, tells him that she doesn’t want to marry him, and this silences her father. Importantly, on a rhetorical level, this behavior is characterized as negative and implicitly likened to the behavior of pagans (Cohick, 53) as seen by her repenting of this as an error and confessing her sin to God as part of her conversion in 13.12-14. Conversely, it is her father that helps to change her mind while her mother remains silent. Further a male angel prepares her for her wedding.
7. Joseph and Aseneth 6.4: Aseneth states that the beauty of Joseph strikes her.
8. Joseph and Aseneth 7.2-4: Joseph used to be molested by women who wanted to sleep with him, so Joseph tells Aseneth that she must leave his sight.
9. Joseph and Aseneth 7.7: Aseneth, a virgin, had never been seen by a man before Joseph saw her at her parents house for a meal.
10. Joseph and Aseneth 8.4-7: Joseph refused to kiss the mouth of the idol worshipping Aseneth, but would, however, placed his hand in between her breasts. Though quite different from our Modern Western culture, this apparently was a sign of piety on Joseph’s part.
11. Joseph and Aseneth 20.2-5: Aseneth demands to be the only virgin women who washed Joseph’s feet [in public].
12. Joseph and Aseneth 21.1: It does not befit a man who worships God to sleep with his wife before the wedding.
13. Life and Adam and Eve 26.2: God put women under the will of man in creation.
14. Test.Reub. 5.1: Generally, women were thought to be evil.
15. Test.Reub. 5.3: Generally, women were thought to be sexually immoral.

In light of the Pseudepigraphical writings concerning the public interaction between men and women, the fact that Jesus traveled with women and included them on his preaching tours (cf. Luke 8.1-3) must have seemed scandelous to certain strands of Second Temple Judaism. Jesus was not gynophobic or heterophobic like much of the writing of the Pseudepigrapha seem to evince. Perhaps, again, this was due to his stringently high standards concerning sexual purity (cf. Matt 5.27-30) and his high view of marriage, sex, and women (cf. Mark 10.1-12).

My gut tells me that we might be seeing something akin to a Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis here. More to come on this later …

The following two resources have recently found their way onto my shelf.

First, Charlsworth’s two-volume set of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha has been reprinted by Hendrikson (now in compact, paperback form) for the low, low price of $39.99 (see Christianbook.com for this deal).  Volume 1 contains some of the key Apocalyptic works (e.g.,  1 Enoch, Greek Apocalypse of Ezra), in addition to the “testaments” of various Patriarchs (Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Testament of Job, etc.)  Volume 2 contains some of the rewritten biblical texts (e.g., Jubilees), wisdom literature (Ahiqar) and some of the interesting scriptural expansions and Hellenistic fragments (the fragments of Ezekiel the Tragedian are especially interesting).  All in all, this is a fascinating set of primary texts helping us to see some of the trajectories at work in early Judaism.

Second, Penguin Classic Books has published a collection of Talmudic writings entitled The Talmud: A Selection (not even $11.00 on Amazon.com).  Material is taken from both of the Talmudim (Bavli and Yerushalmi) and the editing is very intuitive.  The editor (Norman Solomon) has tried to indent some of the excurses and tangents taken by the Rabbis so as to make it easier for readers to keep track of the main arguments.  Biblical texts, Mishnaic citations, the words of the Talmudim and introductions written by the editor are set apart by font styles to make keeping track of the inter-textuality much easier.  Furthermore, the book contains a helpful introduction for those of us unfamiliar with the Rabbinic tradition, and several appendices and indexes to use in referencing material from this selection of texts.

While serious students of both the Pseudepigrapha and Talmud will need to go beyond the books cited here and utilize scholarly editions of these texts, these volumes provide an easy way of accessing this material in English.  What biblical students will find in these texts is examples of the trajectories taken by different forms of early and Rabbinic Judaism.  Though not all of these trajectories are evident in the biblical texts (OT or NT), some are and when they are, readers will find greater appreciation for the subtleties of religious development.

Extreme and unbalanced claims are easy to make.  Some will say that Christians must read early and Rabbinic Judaism in order to properly understand Christian theology from the OT and the NT.  Others will say that early and Rabbinic Judaism contribute nothing to our understanding of the OT and the NT.  What careful students will find, however, is that their understanding of the social world of both the OT and the NT can indeed be enhanced via these texts, but also that early Christianity can not be simplistically pigeonholed based on materials found herein.

Ancient writings are fun to read.  By neglecting these texts, we miss out on a glimpse into the history of ideas.  Early Christianity did not happen in a vacuum, neither did early Judaism.  Similar treatment of themes and similar concerns evidenced by Christian and Jewish groups in the final centuries BC and first centuries AD help us to better appreciate the conceptual similarities that existed between communities in the ancient world, and also help us to better grasp just how different is our own conceptual world here in 2010!

If interested in catching a snap shot of this society long past, these books are a great place to start!

_______________
Andrew

I’ll need to reread the post a few more times (as well as Van Der Toorn’s chapter), but I think he’s presented a very helpful rubric for use in framing this discussion!

___________________
Andrew

Some brief definitions:
Apocrypha:That hidden away. Originally things were hidden because they were too esoteric for the average joe.  Later the idea became that these things were hidden because they were false, or at least questionable.

Deuterocanonical: of the second canon. The first canon are the universally received books of the Hebrew Tanakh or Protestant Bible. The division was cooked up during the sixteenth century during the debates on Old Testament canon revolving around the Council of Trent.

Anagigoskomena: things read. This fits the classic idea that these books not found in the Hebrew Tanakh are to be read as instruction, devotion, and example, but not to establish doctrine. This is a distinction practiced by some Roman Catholic authorities before the Council of Trent, the Anglican Church, and at least part of the Orthodox church.

Oh, and while we’re on the subject, the Jewish reaction to these eighteen books is interesting. Most of them were never considered part of Jewish scripture, but over the centuries many rabbis have been very interested in some of them (Sirach/Ecclesiasticus in particular). Much of the material might have entered Jewish consciousness more through oral sources as the actual documents, for the details in the various Maccabees and Judith (who somehow along the way got associated with Hanukkah) stories in Jewish literature don’t necessarily match those in the actual books.

Those of you whose religious tradition accepts the importance of these books will have to bear with me now as I make a very short case for Protestant/Evangelical study of them, all of which most people have probably heard before. Nevertheless, in short, the reasons are three:

1. Tradition: Protestantism didn’t spring from nowhere. These books and the debate about them are part of the history and foundation of the various Protestant denominations. Studying them makes one more aware of his roots and his extra-denominational Christian fellows’ viewpoint.

2. History and historical background: 1 Maccabees in particular is a main source of the history of the intertestamental period, and even the mangled history in some of the books point to actual events. Likewise even those apocryphal books which are regarded as historical fiction still serve as background to the thought and culture of the bible, as a number of the books were plainly popular in the Second Temple period, based on discovered remains of copies.

3. Theology:  Religious cultural background, in short. What people were thinking and writing in the times that lead to our New Testament. These books are a distinct Jewish part of that thought process from roughly 300 BC to 100 AD. There’s plenty more books, including a mountain of Greco-Roman ones and what are termed apocrypha and pseudepigraphia to form that background of thought, but these apocrypha are the most familiar in style and content of the lot.

There, having laid out all that background, I can now get to the real point of this post: What’s an easy way to study the “Apocrypha” in the internet age?

1. Try the resources listed on one of my most popular blog posts, about electronic apocrypha and pseudepigraphia, unsurprisingly. Add to that a trip to e-Sword Users where you can get “A Catholic Commentary on Scripture” and “Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859″ for esword 8.x and 9.x.

2. Buy a bunch of books. Lock up your wallet and credit cards, this gets expensive fast:

a. Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Editions of the Bible:

1. NRSV with Apocrypha: The standard bearer, with the most complete selection of apocrypha in its day.

2. ESV with Apocrypha: A reader’s edition of the popular conservative formal translation with the addition of the same apocrypha as the NRSV.

3. New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS): Recent translation of the Greek OT, which includes the standard apocrypha, thus doubly useful for apocryphal study and examining the OT translation the apostles used.

4. The Apocrypha translated by Edgar Goodspeed: One of the first twentieth century modern english translations of most of the apocrypha, and one of the more easy to read.

5. New Living Translation Bible, Catholic Reference Bible: Out of print but still often available used or in bookstore backstock, this is probably the easiest to read translation of the various apocryphal books (together with Today’s English Version, aka the 6.  Good News Translation, Catholic Edition (GNT)), but not officially approved by the Roman catholic hierarchy. My leather-like edition has cross-references, a small concordance, and a useful verse finder for topics in the front.

7. The Parallel Apocrypha: Out of print, pricey but still available used and lurking in bookstore corners. This is your one stop multiple translation source, including Greek, KJV, Douay, Knox, TEV, NRSV, NAB and NJB. It also has very interesting and useful essays about the apocrypha and various churches’ views on them preceding the actual apocrypha that I used to craft the introductory part of this blog.

“Okay”, you say, “but what if I want to do more than read these books? What if I want to actually study them a bit?”

That’s where study bibles come in, along with a couple of one volume bible commentaries:

8.  New Interpreter’s Study Bible (NRSVA): fast becoming the new scholarly standard. Available in several bindings.

9. Harper Collins Study Bible(NRSVA): The gold standard of the Nineties, revised in 2006. Several bindings available.

10. New Oxford Annotated Bible: Multiple editions, including a forthcoming fourth edition any second now. Not only in NRSVA but also an older 11. RSVA version.

12. New Jerusalem Bible: A Roman Catholic translation, noted for its literary style and in this edition, loads of short but very pointed and useful study notes.

13.  Harper Collins Bible Commentary: Another standard updated. Based on the NRSVA’s fuller canon.

14. Oxford Bible Commentary: Large in size as well as scope, this is Oxford’s answer to the Harper Collins and the next competitor:

15. Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible: One of the latest of these scholarly one volume heavyweights, Eerdmans’ claim to uniqueness is that it also adds commentary on 1 Enoch to the apocrypha.

16. New Jerome Commentary: An increasingly dated Roman Catholic standard work that includes much material about specific Roman catholic thought about the bible, along with the more standard scholarly commentary.

“Yes”, you add,”but what if I want to actually study these apocrypha in depth? What then?”

Well, first you cry. See the price for one paperback commentary set here for why. The Anchor Bible commentary series is no better alternate, financially.

However, there is a less than optional alternate. Yes, e-books from the internet for free! They’re outdated,  and they use the KJV or the Revised Version for base text (some original translations are in there, but they’re still bible English, if you know what I mean). But they do really dig into the text and they are free (can’t say that too often).

So without further ado, here are the e-books I found on the Apocrypha for your amusement and edification. (At last! The real reason for this already over-long post!!)

17. The Story of the Apocrypha: Edgar Goodspeed, American translator of the Apocrypha, gives a brief overview of the Apocrypha including previous translations and summaries of each book’s contents. Almost new by archive standards.(1939)

18. Readings from the Apocrypha: A “greatest hits” selection from the various apocryphal books in the KJV translation.(1922)

19. An Introduction to the Books of the Apocrypha: Now we start the serious scholarly tomes. Relatively new for archive books (1935)

20 and 21. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament edited by R.H. Charles: vol 1: Apocrypha; vol 2: Pseudepigraphia. The same volumes as on my other blog post, but added here individually. A standard work still, I believe.(1913)

22. Lange’s Commentary on Holy Scriptures vol. 15: The Apocrypha: 1873, but it’s huge, with small print, and free.

23.  Holy Bible(KJV) with Revision and Commentary-Apocrypha: vol. 1 and vol. 2: Addition to the Speaker’s Commentary (1888)

24. 1 Maccabees: Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (1897)

25. The Apocrypha: Greek and English in Parallel Columns: For the hardcore researchers and Greek students wanting something less familiar than the New Testament to work with.(1871)

26. The Apocryphal Books of the Old and New Testament: A bonus; this is a brief layman-friendly summary of the apocrypha of both testaments.(1908)

And finally, if you want to read the bible through in a year with the apocrypha included, you can find several useful reading plans for this here, courtesy of Kevin Edgecomb and Esteban Vazquez. You can use the NRSVA or the ESVA for the whole bible, or the NETS for the OT alone.

Many make the common mistake in thinking that the eighteen Apocrypha Books found in the Roman Catholic Bibles (and others) were originally part of the Bible, and that the Protestant Reformers in the 16th century were the ones who took them out of the Bible.  Because of this mistaken thought, many may question if there were other “legitimate” books of the Bible left out, like the Gospel of Thomas and other such writings.

The word Canon means ‘a measuring rod’ and is the standard by which other like things is measured against. The thirty nine Old Testament books make up the Hebrew Canon, and the 27 New Testament books complete the Biblical Canon. Thus the word Canon now is often meant to represent the whole Bible.

The Old Testament was written between 1,400 years before the birth of Christ to about B.C. 400, and is considered the inspired Word of God for the Jewish leaders recognized these sacred books as having Divine Origins. The Apocrypha and other books were written between about BC 300- AD100. Many of these entertaining, but spurious books began to claim divine inspiration, usually by asserting it was written by some great biblical person, such as Moses or Abraham. These Jewish writings are part of a collection of writings know as Pseudepigrapha writings. So, where does the Apocrypha, which means “hidden things,” fit in?
The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew primarily. But by the 3rd century BC Greek became the language of the day and the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek. That translation is known as the Septuagint and is often represented by the Roman numerals LXX. This is because seventy Jewish scholars is said to have been brought together by the Egyptian Pharaoh Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247BC), to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek for the library in Alexandria.  Some believe that these translators felt that additional books would benefit readers by providing historical and background information about the Jewish people and their culture, so some of the Apocrypha were appended to the Septuagint.  However others claim that there is no evidence of their inclusion into the Septuagint for the codices which attest an Apocrypha collection are late, between the 4th and 5th century A.D. Regardless, the Apocrypha was never seen as additions to the Canon, but as study helps, much like the articles and information in modern day Study Bibles. No claim of Divine Origin was ever given to these books by the Jewish people or by the Christian community for over 1500 years.

At about A.D. 400, the Bible was translated by Jerome into Latin and is known as the Vulgate. This Latin translation was commonly used by the Roman Catholics and it contained the Apocryphal books. Yet, the Apocryphal books were not accepted as part of the Canon by the Catholics.

During the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century the Catholic Church was challenged to prove their doctrines by Scripture only (Sola Scriptura). To their amazement Roman Catholics found that many of their doctrines were not supported by the Canon, the Bible. But they did find that some of their erroneous doctrines were supported by the Apocrypha.  For survival’s sake it became necessary for the Roman Catholics to add the Apocrypha to the Canon.  So, during the midst of the Reformation, in 1545, the Roman Catholic Church convened what is called the Council of Trent and in April of that year the Council declared that the Apocrypha books was also part of the Bible.  So, for the first time in history, because the Roman Catholic Church could not be seen as being wrong and to justify their doctrinal errors, the Apocrypha books became part of the Canon, dubbed as Deutero-canonical Books (second Canon) because they came later.

The following are some of the historical, chronological and doctrinal errors that the Apocrypha books submit and the Catholic Church accepts:

1. Prayers and Offering for the Dead                                      2 Maccabees 12:41-46

The Catholic Church collects millions of dollars each year from this un-biblical practice on the pretext that the people whose souls are being prayed for might be “loosed from sin” and be transferred to heaven.

2. Atonement and Salvation by Almsgiving                    Ecclesiasticus 3:33; Tobit 4:11

Although the Bible teaches that salvation is by grace alone, the Roman Catholics add “good works” as a condition, and collect multiple millions and perhaps, billions worldwide, from people seeking salvation through good works.

3. Pre-existence of Souls                                                                 Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20

This Apocrypha teaching says that souls have always existed and that the human body receives a pre-existing soul. The Bible does not teach this.

4. The Doctrine of Emanations                                                  Wisdom of Solomon 7:25

The Bible teaches that out of nothing God created the heavens and the earth. Emanation is the theory that, like a spider’s web which comes from its body, the universe and everything in it is an emanation from God.

5. Suicide is Justified                                                                          2 Maccabees 14:41-46

Life is sacred in the Bible and the taking of it is not accepted, “Thou Shalt not Kill” is one of the Ten Commandments.

6. Cruelty to Slaves Justified                                                         Ecclesiaticus 33:25-29

The Bible says to be merciful to slaves                                               (Deuteronomy 23:15-16).

7. Other Errors

Time and space does not permit a full covering of all that the Apocrypha falsely teaches and the Roman Catholics, and others, accept. A short listing of some can only be given: The Sanction of lying; Hatred for the Samaritan people; The encouragement of magical incantations; The acceptance of assignation; Interceding angels in man’s affairs; and perhaps the worse, the doctrine of Purgatory. None of these are found in the Bible.

Many claim that the Biblical books have been altered and manipulated, but the historical data disposes of such thoughts. The Canon has received special preservation and protection by the Jews and Christians alike. But not until the Council of Trent in 1545 has the Apocrypha books been admitted into the Canon, as a reaction against the Protestant Reformers. The Canon of God, the sixty-six books of the Bible is pure, without error, and preserved for the edification and instruction of all humankind.

Dr. Gary S. Day

Oct. 28, 2009

Texts with Critical Apparatus

2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch (NEW edition)
The Testament of Job
1 Enoch (In progress)
Testament of Adam (In progress)

Texts without Critical Apparatus

Testament of Abraham
The Life of Adam and Eve
Visions of Amram (NEW)
The Letter of Aristeas
Aristeas the Exegete
Aristobulus
Artapanus
3 (Greek Apocalypse of) Baruch
4 Baruch (Paraleipomena Ieremiou)
Cleodemus Malchus
Eldad and Modad
Eupolemus
The Apocryphon of Ezekiel
Ezekiel the Tragedian
Vision of Ezra (NEW)
The History of the Rechabites (NEW edition)
Jubilees
The Lives of the Prophets
Assumption of Moses (Testament of Moses) (NEW)
3 Maccabees
4 Maccabees
Philo the Epic Poet
Pseudo-Eupolemus
Testament of Solomon
Theodotus

You should check it out.

Pseudepigrapha[1]—meaning “false writings”—are books pretending to be written by someone else, such as the Apocalypse of Peter that was clearly not written by Peter. From the second century BC to the second century AD, it was practically the norm for Jewish religious writings to be pseudepigraphical.

To show just how widespread these texts were, the reader may excuse the following incomplete and rather disorderly list of pseudepigrapha on which we have definite information: Book of Noah, First and Second Enoch, Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, A Vision of Jacob, An Apocryphon of Judah, The Words of Levi, The Last Words of Kohath, The Visions of Amram, Reworked Pentateuch, An Annotated Law of Moses, Jubilees, Words of Moses, Three Tongues of Fire, Psalms of Joshua, Prophecy of Joshua, Vision of Samuel, Psalms of Solomon, A Collection of Royal Psalms, Assumption of Moses, Apocalypse of Baruch, 4-6 Ezra, Apocalypse of Zephaniah, Apocalypse of Abraham, Prayer of Joseph, Book of Eldad and Modad, Apocalypse of Elijah, Apocryphon of Elisha, Apocryphon of Malachi, Proto-Esther, Oracles of Hystaspes, Testament of Job, Greek Apocalypse of Baruch, Testament of the Three Patriarchs, Apocalypse of Peter, Testament of Hezekiah, Testament of Abraham, Vision of Isaiah, Christian Sybillines, Apocalypse of Paul, Apocalypse of Thomas, Apocalypse of Stephen, Apocalypse of Esdras, Apocalypse of the Virgin, Apocalypse of Sedrach, Apocalypse of Daniel, Revelation of Bartholomew, and Questions of Bartholomew.

In addition, Daniel of the Old Testament and 2 Peter of the New Testament are generally considered pseudepigraphical, and several scholars classify other books of the Bible as pseudepigrapha as well.

Now it is hard for us in the twenty-first century to understand the mindset that produced such an array of—from our perspective—preposterous writings. If I wrote a book claiming to be a lost work of Shakespeare, I would get into serious trouble. In 1983, one of Germany’s major magazines, the Stern, actually published what it claimed to be Adolf Hitler’s diaries. When they turned out to be forgeries (=“pseudepigrapha”), the man who had produced them had to serve a prison sentence of several years. The chief editors resigned, and the incident remains the biggest scandal in German journalism, aside from it being a source of great embarrassment for the Stern.

Such is our high standard of truth and our ability to self-critically examine our sources.

Not so in Judaism at the time of Christ. Forgeries were the norm. “Diaries” of almost all biblical characters were popping up regularly without creating a scandal.

How come? And who on earth wrote these fictions sold as facts? The question of the hidden authors’ identity is all the more puzzling in that these books clearly preach the fear of God. How could the writers so obviously revere God and want their fellow believers to live righteously, but use forgeries as a medium to preach their message? Forging Hitler’s diaries is one thing; forging the words of the Holy God another thing altogether. Did the writers not feel a pinch of hypocrisy? There they were, elaborating on the fires of hell awaiting the godless, while remaining completely unafraid that their fraud might land them in those same flames.

Well, ultimately we (or at least I) do not know for sure what was going on in their minds, but their way of thinking was clearly quite different from ours. They seemed to have lacked the kind of self-analysis that makes you stop in your tracks and say, “Wait a second. How can I possibly know the things I am writing?” When they penned a supposed revelation of the ancient biblical character Enoch, they might have thought that Enoch really did have such a revelation and that someone should have written it down a long time ago.

They might have also genuinely believed themselves to be inspired by God to “recover” these ancient revelations. A passage in the pseudepigraphical book 4 Ezra illustrates this well. It was written at about the same time as several books of the New Testament, and some churches (such as the Russian Orthodox) actually included it in their Old Testament canon. The book recounts the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 586 BC and claims that the Scriptures were destroyed at that time, too. Ezra then prays for God’s Holy Spirit to inspire him in writing down what had been lost, and in a forty-day period he dictates to scribes ninety-four books—without a break. “And when the forty days were ended,” says 4 Ezra, “the Most High spoke to me, saying, ‘Make public twenty-four books that you wrote first, and let the worthy and the unworthy read them; but keep the seventy that were written last, in order to give them to the wise among your people. For in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the river of knowledge.’ And he did so.”[2]

This episode about Ezra is, of course, itself pseudepigraphical and completely fictitious, written in the first century to lend authority to other Jewish writings (the “seventy”) in addition to the generally accepted Scriptures (the “twenty-four”). All the same, it does show that the writer of 4 Ezra might have believed it possible to actually be inspired by God to write down lost Scriptures, and he might have considered his own account of Ezra to be just such a lost story.

Whatever the precise cause of the pseudepigraphical practice, however, they show one thing: The culture in which the New Testament books were written lacked critical self-analysis. Attributing your own words and ideas to another religious figure was not an exception, and certainly nothing outrageous. Pious readers—and maybe even the writers themselves—believed in these forgeries.

This fact puts a serious damper on any argument in defense of the historical reliability of the Gospels. The burden of proof lies with the Christian apologist who says that, in spite of its widespread forgeries and its lack of epistemological self-analysis, the culture of first-century Judaism nevertheless produced religious works of great historical accuracy.

It also confronts the Christian apologist with a question: Why would God choose to reveal His Ultimate Truth to mankind in a culture with so little ability to distinguish truth from falsehood? Is it not rather like singing to a deaf man and expecting him to teach others the song?

Read more about this issue in The C. S. Lewis Book on the Bible.

[2] 4 Ezra 14:45-48; NRSV.

It is sometimes argued by scholars of the New Testament that forgery was so common in the ancient world that no one took it seriously: since the deceit could normally be easily detected, it was never really meant to fool anyone. (p.115 of Jesus, Interrupted by Bart D. Ehrman 2009)

Ehrman continues:

I have spent the past couple of years examining the ancient discussions of forgery and have come to the conclusion that the only people who make this argument are people who haven’t actually read the ancient sources.

Ancient sources took forgery seriously. They almost universally condemn it, often in strong terms.

(My original post was an outline of Anthony Grafton’s first chapter of Forgers and Critics discussing the extent of literary forgeries in the ancient world – I picked this title up after reading a citation from it in Ehrman’s book.) 

Ten reasons for ancient forgeries (adapted from Ehrman’s list):

Money: Major libraries paid well to acquire “original” copies of texts since later hand-copies too often contained too many errors. “If librarians were paying cash on the head for original copies of treatises of the philosopher Aristotle, you’d be surprised how many original copies of treatises would start to turn up.” (p.116)

To denigrate opponents: A philosopher Diotemus was said to have forged and circulated 50 obscene letters in the name of his philosophical opponent Epicurus — to damage the reputation of Epicurus. Ehrman wonders if some of the more bizarre claims of Christianity’s “heretical sects” were similarly forged to discredit them.

To oppose other teachings: One of many examples is 3 Corinthians claiming to be by the apostle Paul to counter gnostic teachings that the general resurrection would not be ”in the flesh”.

To give divine authority to one’s own teachings: Ehrman cites the ancient Sybylline oracles. Christians put their own teachings (e.g. the coming of the Messiah) into the mouth of ancient pagan oracles.

Humility – maybe but maybe not: A late argument is that followers of a famous teacher would write their own treatises under the name of their revered teacher or school’s founder since their arguments are what he would have said anyway. Ehrman observes that this argument is a late one rationalizing the many treatises written under the name of Pythagoras, and cites studies questioning its validity.

Love? Tertullian claims (in On Baptism) of the bishop who was found guilty of forging the stories of the Acts of Paul and Thecla: 

But if certain Acts of Paul, which are falsely so named, claim the example of Thecla for allowing women to teach and to baptize, let men know that in Asia the presbyter who compiled that document, thinking to add of his own to Paul’s reputation, was found out, and though he professed he had done it for love of Paul, was deposed from his position. How could we believe that Paul should give a female power to teach and to baptize, when he did not allow a woman even to learn by her own right? Let them keep silence, he says, and ask their husbands at home. 

The fun of fooling others: Both Grafton and Ehrman retell the story of the 4th century b.c.e. philosopher Dionysius who claimed a play he wrote was actually by famed dramatist Sophocles. His intention was to ridicule a notable contemporary, Heraclides, who believed the play to be a genuine work of Sophocles. When Dionysius alerted Heraclides to an acrostic pattern in the text spelling out Dionysius’s own boyfriend, Heraclides responded that the pattern was purley coincidental Dionysius led Heraclides through other clues until he was forced to see a final acrostic that spelled out an insult against Heraclides personally. “When Heraclides had read this, we are told, he blushed.” (Grafton, p.4.)

To fill in the gaps: Many later Christian forgeries were of this kind. The missing childhood years of Jesus were filled in by accounts of Jesus’s childhood supposedly by “Thomas” (meaning Twin) and apparently referring to Jesus’ disciple brother, Jude. In Colossians Paul had mentioned a letter to the Laodiceans. A couple of letters claiming to be this work of Paul’s finally turned up in the second century.

To fight fire with fire: 4th century Emperor Maximinus ordered that a text, the Acts of Pilate in which Pilate is vindicated as justifiably crucifying Jesus, be read in all schools throughout the Roman empire. Christians responded with their own Acts of Pilate in which Pilate is said to have expressed his belief in the innocence of Jesus. The Apostolic Constitutions, a fourth century book claiming to be written by the Twelve Apostles, warns readers against reading anything falsely claiming to be by apostles. 2 Thessalonians, another forgery claiming to be from Paul, warns against reading letters falsely attributed to Paul.

To authenticate one’s own views: The most effective way to convince others of one’s own doctrinal views was to write a book expressing those views but claiming it is authored by an apostle. Hence early Christianity has produced many works among both the “orthodox” and “heretics” alike all claiming to be written by apostles or women followers of Jesus.

The prologue to 3 Baruch, a second century CE Jewish text [1], includes several biblical allusions. The most interesting to me is the allusion to Isa. 5:1-7, the Song of the Vineyard. The text and translation are as follows:

Κύριε, ἵνα τί ἐξέκαυσας τὸν ἀμπελῶνά σου καὶ ἠρήμωσας αὐτόν; τί ἐποίησας τοῦτο; καὶ ἵνα τί, Κύριε, οὐκ ἀπέδωκας ἡμᾶς ἐν ἄλλῃ παιδείᾳ, ἀλλὰ παρέδωκας ἡμᾶς εἰς ἔθνη τοιαῦτα, ὅπως ὀνειδίζοντες λέγουσιν· Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς αὐτῶν;[2]

“Lord, why have you set fire to your vineyard and laid it waste? Why have you done this? And why, Lord, did you not requite us with another punishment, but rather handed us over to such heathen so that they reproach us saying, ‘Where is their God?’”[3]

The following elements allude to Isa. 5:1-7:

1. The reference to Lord’s vineyard (τὸν ἀμπελῶνά σου)
2. The question ‘Why have you done this?’ (τί ἐποίησας τοῦτο;), echoes the wordplay in Isa. 5:1-7 in the LXX of τί ποιήσω ἔτι (‘what more might I do’) and τί ποιήσω (‘what I will do’) to my vineyard
3. The reference to God laying waste (ἠρήμωσας) to his vineyard parallels the MT’s making it a waste (ואשיתהו בתה) and the LXX’s making it unto a wasteland (ὡς εἰς χέρσον)
4. The Lord’s setting fire (ἐξέκαυσας) to his vineyard in 3 Bar. 1:2 is parallel to the companion passage to Isa. 5:1-7, Isa. 27:2-5, which speaks of God burning (אציתנה) his vineyard in the MT and burning up (κατακαίω) in the LXX

Having established an allusion to Isa. 5:1-7 in 3 Bar. 1:1-2, what can we say about how Baruch interprets this text? And what light, if any, does this shed on the Parable of the Wicked Tenants?

1. 3 Baruch associates the destruction of the vineyard with being ‘handed over’ (παρέδωκας) to gentiles (εἰς ἔθνη τοιαῦτα) just as the Parable of the Wicked Tenants begins with the vineyard being handed over (ἐξέδετο) to tenants. If the Parable and 3 Baruch have similar things in mind, the setting of the Parable is in exile under ‘foreign’ occupation.
2. 3 Baruch uses the story of the Vineyard from Isa. 5:1-7 as a way to speak about his present circumstances in the light of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE.[4] Jesus uses the story of the Vineyard from Isa. 5:1-7 to interpret his present circumstances in light of his judgment upon the temple leadership and his own mission.

In light of the preceding discussion, it is my opinion that 3 Baruch 1:1-2 is further evidence to a growing body of literature[5] that contributes to our understanding of the Parable of the Wicked Tenants as a typical Jewish interpretation of the Song of the Vineyard. I believe this sheds light on the Parable, especially helping to establish its context wherein the people are in exile under the rule of ‘tenants.’ It also adds weight to the argument that it is entirely likely that the Parable of the Wicked Tenants, as it is recorded in the Gospels, goes back to the historical Jesus, because it is a typical Jewish interpretation of Isa. 5:1-7

Notes

[1] See Daniel C. Harlow, “The Christianization of Early Jewish Pseudepigrapha: The Case of 3 Baruch,” JSJ 32/4 (2001): 423.

[2] The Greek text is from J.-C. Picard, ed., “Apocalypsis Baruchi Graece,” in Testamentum Iobi, Apocalypsis Baruchi Graece (Leiden: Brill, 1967), 81-96, as reproduced by The Online Critical Pseudepigrapha (http://ocp.acadiau.ca/index.html).

[3] Translation from H.E. Gaylord, Jr., “3 (Greek Apocalypse of) Baruch: A New Translation and Introduction,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, ed., James H. Charlesworth (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1983), 662-79.

[4] Harlow, “The Case of 3 Baruch,’ 420.

[5] See for example Craig A. Evans, Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies (Bostan, MA: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001); George J. Brooke, “4Q500 1 and the Use of Scripture in the Parable of the Vineyard,” in idem., The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005, 235-60; and Johannes C. De Moor, “The Targumic Background of Mark 12:1-12: The Parable of the Wicked Tenants,” JSJ 29/1, (1998): 63-80.

“The blessed and glorious ever-virgin Mary, sprung from the royal stock and family of David, born in the city of Nazareth, was brought up at Jerusalem in the temple of the Lord. Her father was named Joachim, and her mother Anna. Her father’s house was from Galilee and the city of Nazareth, but her mother’s family from Bethlehem. Their life was guileless and right before the Lord, and irreproachable and pious before men. For they divided all their substance into three parts. One part they spent upon the temple and the temple servants; another they distributed to strangers and the poor; the third they reserved, for themselves and the necessities of their family.” — The Gospel of the Birth of Mary

“In the history of the twelve tribes of Israel we read there was a certain person called Joachim, who being very rich, made double offerings to the Lord God, having made this resolution: my substance shall be for the benefit of the whole people, and that I may find mercy from the Lord God for the forgiveness of my sins.” — The Protevangelion of James

Whatever the source of these writings, it was believed by many in the early Church that Mary’s parents were extraordinarily righteous. They took Mary, at the age of three, to the temple, dedicating her to the service of the Lord. They visited her frequently until her teen years, before the Annunciation, when they “entered the Kingdom of God”: Joachim at 80 and Anna at 79.

“Let us sing praises to Joachim and Anna, the couple honored by God (and they are His kinsmen). They have borne us the Maiden who in a manner beyond understanding gave birth to Him Who though fleshless, became the incarnate to save the world. With her they intercede for our souls.”

Update: The eSword links are all v8 files. Go to Biblesupport.com to search for v9 format files of these.

R.H. Charles’s massive two volumes on Old Testament writings: e-books (This is the R.H. Charles index page, because a number of his books are classics you might want to read)

Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Sibylline Oracles: all for e-sword: here. (Lots more stuff to intrigue and confuse you here.)

A Miscellaneous Collection of Old and New Testament related writings in one big e-sword file: here (UPDATE: It occurs to me this is likely an eSword 8> file. Most people are using eSword 9< now. Try this link for what may be the same file (I don’t use 9+, and the description is nonexistent.)

You can find Targummim, Apostolic Fathers, and some Nag Hammadi writings, in original languages and translation at this excellent webpage: E-sword Original Languages Library (Under Resources: E-sword Modules on the left sidebar)

A great many of these texts were collated from the Internet, particularly the Internet Sacred Text Archive

Baruch 5:1-9

^1 Jerusalem, take off your robe of mourning and misery;

put on the splendor of glory from God forever:

^2 Wrapped in the cloak of justice from God,

bear on your head the mitre

that displays the glory of the eternal name.

^3 For God will show all the earth your splendor:

^4 you will be named by God forever

the peace of justice, the glory of God’s worship.

^5 Up, Jerusalem! stand upon the heights;

look to the east and see your children

Gathered from the east and the west

at the word of the Holy One,

rejoicing that they are remembered by God.

^6 Led away on foot by their enemies they left you:

but God will bring them back to you

borne aloft in glory as on royal thrones.

^7 For God has commanded

that every lofty mountain be made low,

And that the age-old depths and gorges

be filled to level ground,

that Israel may advance secure in the glory of God.

^8 The forests and every fragrant kind of tree

have overshadowed Israel at God’s command;

^9 For God is leading Israel in joy

by the light of his glory,

with his mercy and justice for company.