Search

This article attempts to answer the following question: why did the author of the apocryphon called 1 Apocryphal Apocalypse of John choose to efface himself and adopt John as his pseudonym? Why not Peter or Paul? This paper argues that the author of 1 Apocryphal Apocalypse of John intended to harness the audience attached to John, the seer of Revelation, by taking his name as a pseudonym. This paper sustains this claim by demonstrating that, in antiquity, each author had a specific pool of readers, often made out of friends and accolades of the author. Thus, authors' names evoke an audience attached to them. When an author takes another person's name to write under, he does so out of necessity, because he does not have an audience. But, when he takes another's person name, he does so hoping to trick the audience of the impersonated into reading him. Based on this insight, this article concludes that the author of 1 Apocr. Apoc. John wanted the readers of canonical Revelation to engage with his work and that he achieved his purpose as evinced by the fact that the titles of both works share an uncanny resemblance, ranging from identical titles to similar wording. Since titles in antiquity were given to the works by their readers, the most logical explanation for canonical Revelation and 1 Apocr. Apoc. John having the same titles is that they both shared the same readers. Finally, this article argues that, in line with recent research on the use of pseudepigraphy in Jewish, Christian, and Roman contexts, the author of 1 Apocr. Apoc. John wanted to be read by CR's readers because he wanted to expand, criticize, rework, and update CR's eschatological discourse, exemplified by a close reading of how 1 Apocr. Apoc. John criticized, reworked, and updated CR's presentation of the resurrection to bring it in harmony with late Christian reflection on the subject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many scholars treat the speeches in Deuteronomy as Persian-era pseudepigraphic compositions attributed to Moses to enhance their acceptance among readers and hearers. As part of a larger project this essay examines Moses' self-portrayal in Deuteronomy 3:12-26. After brief observations on the narrator's account of Moses' allotment of the Transjordanian territories of the Amorite kings Sihon and Og in Numbers 21:21-35, this study focuses on Moses' own recollections of that moment in Deuteronomy 3:12-21 and its sequel in 3:23-29. The results reinforce significant negative features that are observable earlier in this address (1:9-18; 1:22-25; and a critical refrain in 1:37; 3:26; 4:21). By casting a literary selfportrait incompatible with the increasing idealization of Moses in Israelite historical and literary traditions over time, they undermine theories of late pseudepigraphic composition of the first address (1:6-4:40). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article attempts to answer the following question: why did the author of the apocryphon called 1 Apocryphal Apocalypse of John choose to efface himself and adopt John as his pseudonym? Why not Peter or Paul? This paper argues that the author of 1 Apocryphal Apocalypse of John intended to harness the audience attached to John, the seer of Revelation, by taking his name as a pseudonym. This paper sustains this claim by demonstrating that, in antiquity, each author had a specific pool of readers, often made out of friends and accolades of the author. Thus, authors’ names evoke an audience attached to them. When an author takes another person’s name to write under, he does so out of necessity, because he does not have an audience. But, when he takes another’s person name, he does so hoping to trick the audience of the impersonated into reading him. Based on this insight, this article concludes that the author of 1 Apocr. Apoc. John wanted the readers of canonical Revelation to engage with his work and that he achieved his purpose as evinced by the fact that the titles of both works share an uncanny resemblance, ranging from identical titles to similar wording. Since titles in antiquity were given to the works by their readers, the most logical explanation for canonical Revelation and 1 Apocr. Apoc. John having the same titles is that they both shared the same readers. Finally, this article argues that, in line with recent research on the use of pseudepigraphy in Jewish, Christian, and Roman contexts, the author of 1 Apocr. Apoc. John wanted to be read by CR’s readers because he wanted to expand, criticize, rework, and update CR’s eschatological discourse, exemplified by a close reading of how 1 Apocr. Apoc. John criticized, reworked, and updated CR’s presentation of the resurrection to bring it in harmony with late Christian reflection on the subject.

This essay sets the stage for a larger project examining the validity of pseudepigraphic and pseudonymous approaches to the composition of Deuteronomy.1 The concern of this essay with Moses is not to offer a biography of the man, but to trace the evolution of the perceptions of the man from his earliest biographers to the end of the Second Temple period and the emergence of the New Testament. The survey of the history of literary characterizations begins with his portrayal in biblical narratives where he appears as the principal human character (Exodus-Deuteronomy), followed by the Deuteronomistic historiographic narratives (Former Prophets), the prophetic books (Latter Prophets), and the Writings, both the poetic texts (e.g., Psalms) and the priestly chroniclers' narratives, and then moving on to extrabiblical sources. While the purpose of this study is to gather the data on the evolution of perceptions of Moses, it concludes with brief reflections on the significance of our findings for theories of the composition of Deuteronomy, particularly Moses' first address (1:6-4:40). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars of pseudepigraphal letters have recognized that pseudepigraphy troubles the identification of the alleged addressee with the historical addressee. This means that the rhetorical addressee is a matter of choice. Building on Benjamin Fiore's work on exemplarity, I argue that Timothy as addressee of 1 Timothy helps the Pastor articulate specific aspects of his program. Timothy, like Paul, is an example and serves as a link between Paul's exemplarity and this letter's readers. Through Timothy's exemplarity, the Pastor legitimates young leadership, addressing a second-century controversy in the Jesus movement. Finally, the Pastor reframes Timothy's reputation, distancing him from Jewish law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within Biblical scholarship, there have been a limited number of studies which examine ancient literacy and education in relation to the production of the Deutero-Pauline letters. When such topics are addressed together, the discussions rarely go beyond some generalities, and this article seeks to partly address that gap. Literacy rates in the Greco-Roman world, of which the earliest Christians were a part, are universally agreed to be significantly lower than modern literacy rates, with most estimates being between 5 and 15%. This fact, coupled with the limited number of Christians by the end of the first and the beginning of the second century CE, should be taken more seriously when considering how the Deutero-Pauline literature came to be produced and, eventually, circulate with other authentic Pauline letters. In short, this article will argue that when the realities of the educational landscape of the New Testament world are taken in conjunction with what we know about textual production, early Christian communities and leadership structures, there is a plausible argument to be made that those who were responsible for at least some of the Deutero-Pauline letters may be hiding in plain sight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interpreters commonly designate two phrases in Jubilees, "the book of the first law" (6:22) and "the words of the law" (30:12), as explicit references to the already written Pentateuch that thus transparently acknowledge the historical context of its own production. However, these supposedly earthly writings are penned by the angel, and interpreters identifying them as already existing Torah seem to equivocate about whether they belong to an earthly or heavenly corpus. Supplementing the work of David Lambert, this article argues that the phrases can be coherently construed as references to heavenly writing, the archetype based on which Moses writes Torah. They therefore harmonize with the putative context of Sinai revelation, rather than compromising it. And the resulting absence of any explicit reference to the Pentateuch can be comprehended in light of Jubilees's strategies for claiming authority. Determining the referents of these two phrases is consequential for our understanding of Mosaic pseudepigraphy more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues for a new interpretation of Ephesians based on its self-referentiality. Taking as my starting point the standard view that Eph 3:3–4 refers to the preceding portion of Ephesians, I explore how the text works rhetorically. I argue that in Ephesians 3:3–4 the author reflexively authorizes Ephesians as a revelatory text that provides privileged access to "the mystery" and to "Paul" as its mediator figure. Eph 3:3–4 thereby commends its readers to approach the epistle as textualized revelation. I advance this thesis through a contextual examination of Eph 3:2–13 with attention to three sets of comparanda. First, the Pesharim and Hodayot provide relevant witnesses to the textualization of revelation in early Judaism. Second, Quintilian's depiction of ideal reading and the reception of Eph 3:3–4 by Origen and Jerome provide an opportunity to reimagine the epistle in light of ancient readerly landscapes. Third, depictions of inspired individuals endowed with divinely granted "insight" provide a revelatory framework for understanding σύνεσις in Eph 3:4. To conclude, I suggest further avenues of research that the present interpretation of Ephesians might open, including light it sheds on Ephesians's pseudepigraphy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In early Christian literary production, Peter emerges as an early apostolic figure of prominence ripe for a prolific textual afterlife, lending his name to a wide range of literature. These works include 2 Peter, which is widely recognized as a pseudepigraphal writing. Here, the author argues that pseudepigraphy is a form of exemplarity—the constructive and strategic usage of a figure from the past as a model for the present and future. Within this model, 2 Peter is read as a pseudepigraphon styled and traditioned as a second, testamentary epistle of Peter, the leader of the apostles. Second Peter's authoritative status is doubted in the early stages of the canonical process. But the ongoing transmission of the reputation of Peter, attested for example by the manuscript tradition, aids this work's establishment as a Petrine text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within Biblical scholarship, there have been a limited number of studies which examine ancient literacy and education in relation to the production of the Deutero-Pauline letters. When such topics are addressed together, the discussions rarely go beyond some generalities, and this article seeks to partly address that gap. Literacy rates in the Greco-Roman world, of which the earliest Christians were a part, are universally agreed to be significantly lower than modern literacy rates, with most estimates being between 5 and 15%. This fact, coupled with the limited number of Christians by the end of the first and the beginning of the second century CE, should be taken more seriously when considering how the Deutero-Pauline literature came to be produced and, eventually, circulate with other authentic Pauline letters. In short, this article will argue that when the realities of the educational landscape of the New Testament world are taken in conjunction with what we know about textual production, early Christian communities and leadership structures, there is a plausible argument to be made that those who were responsible for at least some of the Deutero-Pauline letters may be hiding in plain sight.

This article deals with a motif that appears repeatedly in the history of the Western traditions of esotericism and alternative spirituality. The motif is an essentially simple one: a person claims to have discovered an older, previously hidden text containing sacred knowledge, and he then duly circulates that knowledge to the world. The term “discovery narrative” may be used to describe this phenomenon. Perhaps surprisingly, discovery narratives have generally been neglected by scholars of esotericism. This article traces occurrences of the motif through history and examines both the drivers behind its usage and the tensions which appear to be inherent within it.

Greek papyri dating between the 2nd and the 4th centuries AD bear testimony to treatises about hieroscopy, the study of animal entrails, especially the liver, for the purpose of divination. The present article is dedicated to the best preserved handbook on this divinatory technique, P.Ross. Georg. I 21, which provides detailed instructions on how to "read" the entrails. A new critical edition of the papyrus is presented with translation and commentary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Epistle of James is one of the most overlooked texts in the New Testament. This is partially due to Luther's judgement of the epistle as anti-Pauline. This article suggests that James should rather be seen as an early reception of Paul that brings new insight into the Pauline legacy of the late first century. James also helps us understand more about the theological issues of its day. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article challenges the historical existence of the 'Johannine community' – a hypothesized group of ancient churches sharing a distinctive theological outlook. Scholars posit such a community to explain the similarities of John to 1, 2 and 3 John as well as the epistles' witness to a network of churches. Against this view, this article calls attention to evidence of literary contact between the four texts and the presence of dubious authorial claims in each. Taken together, these features cast John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John as unreliable bases for historical reconstruction, whose implied audiences and situations are probably fabrications. The article proceeds to develop a new history of the Johannine texts. Those texts represent a chain of literary forgeries, in which authors of different extractions cast and recast a single invented character – an eyewitness to Jesus' life – as the mouthpiece of different theological viewpoints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pseudo-Paracelsian Philosophia ad Athenienses (1564) draws upon many of the ideas of Paracelsus but combines them with many other elements not found in the genuine works of the Swiss physician. After discussing the details of its edition, we summarize its content, then examine its possible sources, including the authentic texts of Paracelsus by which the unknown author will have taken inspiration. We discuss specifically the question of uncreated prime matter and provide a number of criteria allowing us to consider the treatise as spurious. Finally, we argue that the unknown author wrote this text and ascribed it to Paracelsus in order to produce a more Platonist Paracelsian cosmology than that of the genuine treatises of Paracelsus, which apparently disappointed the unknown author in this regard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces the pseudo-Paracelsian treatise Aurora Philosophorum (last third of the sixteenth century) and focusses on the contexts of a specific genealogy of knowledge presented in this text. It reaches from a divine origin of human knowledge to the universities of the author's times. Here, the transfer of science throughout history is described as a process of continuous decline. The concept of knowledge negotiated by this text is conceptualized not as theory alone: knowledge has a genuine in-strumental and practical aspect. The article also presents the principles of the forthcoming edition and commentary of the handwritten and printed copies of the Aurora Philosophorum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early modern alchemical literature is full of pseudonymous corpora. One of the most famous of these is connected with the name Basil Valentine, a supposed Benedictine monk and master of both medicinal and transmutational chymistry. Accreted over a period of nearly a century, the Valentine corpus is complex and heterogeneous. This paper endeavors to organize and recount the construction of the corpus by an array of authors, editors, publishers, and bibliographers, to sort out some of its strata, and to trace the origins and modifications of some of its texts. This exercise will be useful not only for further investigations of Basil Valentine and other pseudonymous chymical corpora, but also for broader studies of forgery and book history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay probes and problematizes purported distinctions between religious pseudepigraphy and literary deceit. When we attend to what ancient religious pseudepigraphs say about lying, we may be more inclined to recognize the intention to deceive. Apologies for ancient religious pseudepigraphs sometimes resemble defenses for alleged modern forgeries, raising the possibility that academics may not be sufficiently alert to the extent of dishonesty lurking in our source material. In this respect, grappling with ancient lies may also help us recognize modern ones. In any event, the current moment—marked by crises of forgery and falsehood—call for a greater awareness, and increased suspicion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Central Asia in the early eleventh century, the Chorasmian scholar Abū Rayḥān al-Bīrūnī recognized that the Arabic works attributed to Hermes Trismegistus were inventions of recent centuries falsely written in the name of the ancient sage of legend. He did, however, accept the existence of a historical Hermes and even attempted to establish his chronology. This article presents al-Bīrūnī's statements about this and contextualizes his view of the Arabic Hermetica as he derived it from Arabic chronographic sources. Al-Bīrūnī's argument is compared with the celebrated seventeenth-century European criticism of the Greek Hermetica by Isaac Casaubon. It documents a hitherto unknown but significant event in the reception history of the Hermetica and helps to illustrate al-Bīrūnī's attitude toward the history of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why did Sethian gnostic authors write pseudonymously? In addition to making a claim to authority, gnostic pseudepigraphy, exemplified by The Three Tablets of Seth, was multiple and performative, implying that the self is multiple—a manifestation of selfhood at different levels of a single reality—and that performing one's self as multiple provides a path to higher knowledge of one's self and thus of God. That is, gnostic pseudonymity stems from a distinctive understanding of the self and functions as a mystical practice that performs that understanding. The eschewal of pseudonymity in Valentinian literature reflects different conceptions of the self and of the path to gnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the implications of pseudonymity for the interpretative process, arguing that we need to take into account the pseudepigraphal attempt to achieve a "reality effect" by employing tropes and concerns from authentic Pauline letters to lend the forged writing an air of verisimilitude. But in this way our ability, if we judge a text pseudepigraphal, to discern reality from appearance is severely problematized, and we should therefore consider the possibility that pseudepigraphal letters should be treated more as rhetorical compositions than as epistolary literature, since all the ostensive elements of epistolarity are fictionalized in a pseudepigraphal letter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reassesses the evidence for determining the form of 4Q369 "Prayer of Enosh" and, in light of this assessment, considers how the composition could function rhetorically. Based on textual and comparative literary evidence, the article proposes that the extant text is structured by a genealogical framework (1 i 9-10) in which historically-oriented prayers are attributed to specific patriarchal figures like Enosh (1 i 1-7) and Enoch or one of his near descendants (1 ii 1-12). These formal aspects of the composition are seen to have important rhetorical consequences: they position the implied audience as a third party between God and the esteemed figures from the remote past and they frame the prayers as accurate forecasts of salvation history. Together these features provide grounds upon which pious readers could have confidence in the inevitability of God's fidelity until the eschaton. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article inquires into the implicit pseudepigraphal construction of James the brother of Jesus as highly literate in the canonical letter attributed to him. Traditional, form-based approaches to the letter genre are set aside in favour of appreciating the production and composition of (pseudepigraphal) letters within the context of Ancient Mediterranean book culture, particularly the association between scribal literate ability and social status. The pairing of James' literary ability with the transmission of Jesus tradition is an image propagated in other early Christian literature, including the Apocryphon of James and the pseudo-Clementine Epistula Petri. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Noting that, in the Hebrew Bible, law, but not narrative, is attributed to Moses, this paper argues that the notion of the "Torah of Moses" as revealed literature, word for word dictation to Moses, is to be traced to a late Second Temple construction of the Pentateuch as apocalypse. The move is evident in the Book of Jubilees, who introduces his work with a detailed account of revelation at Sinai that includes his own work, the "Divisions of the Times," an apocalypse, but not the "Torah of Moses." However, as Jubilees overlaps with Genesis in great measure and, it is argued, refrains from alluding to the Pentateuch throughout, the claim would seem to be that the "Divisions of the Times" actually preceded the Pentateuch as one of its sources. The implications of this view for understanding Rewritten Bible and interpretation in the late Second Temple period are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historians of antiquity and of the modem and postmodern world have made advances in defining esotericism and mysticism and ought to be in conversation with one another. Collaborative work among scholars of esotericism of diverse periods is at a beginning stage, despite shared methodologies and commitment to undergirding studies in cultural and historical contexts. Contemporary study of esoteric rhetoric aids our understanding of hiddenness, secrecy and revelation in ancient Jewish and Christian texts. The practice of pseudepigraphy in antiquity, which obscures a text's author, may be related, though, to religious experience or to a traditionary process. Scholars who are aware of misrepresentations of esotericism have a responsibility to consider manifold reasons for the practice of pseudepigraphy, in contrast to the scholars who associate use of pseudonyms with duplicity and malfeasance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]