The New Testament | Course Paper

Unlock access to all the studying documents.

View Full Document

1.Define the term pseudonymity and explain its practice among Hellenistic-Jewish and early

Christian writers.

Student Response

Question 1: Define the term pseudonymity and explain its practice among HellenisticJewish and early Christian

writers.

Pseudonym: Noun: A fictitious name, especially one used by an author. [Pseudonymity:

The act of using a pseudonym.] (Oxford University, 2018)

Pseudonymity is the practice of writing anonymously under the guise and authority of a trusted

or known author in a specific genre or field of expertise. Generally, this distinction is applied to

ancient writing since the practice is considered unlawful in modern times. In the first century CE,

this practice was deemed to be common and accepted as long as the writing stayed true to the

attributed author’s original works, philosophy, and theology. There are many examples of this

practice in Hellenistic-Jewish society as well as early Christian writing. A speechwriter was

often used for important Greco-Roman and Hellenistic oratorical events. Letters of state and

business were also written by professionals. Usually, a writer would use a scribe or secretary; the

writing would then be published (sometimes years or decades later) as a finished product with

interpretation or input by the secretary or scribe. Much as an editor might correct or polish a

manuscript before publication. (Baum, 2017 pg. 392-395) In some instances, the author’s work

is found in fragments and is reconstructed pseudonymously, so that the authority and respect

engendered by the author of origin can remain intact. (Baum, 2017 pg. 383-392) (The New

Testament, 1989 pg. 312-313). Translation from Hebrew to Greek or Latin, or any number of

other translations, necessitated a translating secretary to convert the author’s words into the

intended audience’s native language, in an understandable text. (Baum, 2017 pg. 396-398)

The primary issue is the problem of incongruity between canonical authority and scholarly

expectations of true authorship. These two standards seem at odds; if the question were solely

based on these two mutually exclusive standards, then there would be no resolution possible.

However, by digging deeper into situational concepts and the intentions and traditions behind the

use of Pseudonymity, historically and in the instance of first-century Christian writings included

in the Cannon; we can see that the intent is not to claim authorship, in an intellectual property

sense as we would in modern times, but to continue with authoritarian traditions as accepted in

the era in which they were written. Modern tendencies, which take a situation out of context and

try to apply current standards, is the root of this issue. “Precisely in this lies the motive and

justification for their pseudonymous attribution, which is to be understood not as a claim about

literary origins but as an assertion of authoritative tradition (Gamble, 1988 pg. 562).”

References:

Baum, A. D. (2017). Content and Form: Authorship Attribution and Pseudonymity in Ancient

Speeches, Letters, Lectures, and Translations—A Rejoinder to Bart Ehrman. Journal of Biblical

Literature, 136(2), 381-403. doi:10.15699/jbl.1362.2017.200369 Retrieved from: https://web-aebscohost-

com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=3e055c4f-1d07-4396-a907-

1ccaaaa00f95%40sessionmgr4006&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=124564

579&db=lfh.

Gamble, H. (1988). Pseudonymity and Canon (Book). Journal of Biblical Literature, 107(3), 560.

Retrieved from: https://web-b-ebscohostcom.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=c9b5786d-bb77-

4ce8-be16-

5a26df205ca2%40pdc-vsessmgr03&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=7159096&db=lfh.

Outside Sources:

Oxford University Living Dictionaries: English. (2018) Pseudonym. Oxford, England. Oxford

University Press.

The New Testament. (1989). In B. W. Anderson (Ed.), The Books of the Bible (Vol. 2, pp. [115]-

381). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Retrieved from

http://link.galegroup.com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/CX1386700050/GVRL?u=tel_a_bethel

c&sid=GVRL&xid=b43f5c83.

Words: 522

2. In what specific ways concerning Jesus’ return does II Thessalonians differ from Paul’s first

letter to the Thessalonians? Why do some scholars think that it was written after Paul’s death?

Student Response

Question 2: In what specific ways concerning Jesus’ return does II Thessalonians differ

from Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians?

Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians makes the apocalypse seem imminent. He mentions the

end coming suddenly so that Christians must be ready at any moment, and with stealth (1

Thessalonians 5:2), indicating no one knows the exact moment of the second coming. (Harris,

2015 pg. 388-389). 1 Thessalonians notes, a list of signs, which will forecast the apocalypse.

Paul’s desire to prepare the church for Jesus’ second coming may have been taken too literally,

and his next letter to the Thessalonians seems to be in response to this issue. Whether written by

Paul or a pseudonymous writer, 2 Thessalonians addresses a concern, which Paul himself would

have addressed, in a consistently Pauline manner. (Wilcox, 2018)

Question: Why do some scholars think that it was written after Paul’s death?

Scholars question Paul’s authorship because in 2 Thessalonians the shift from imminent to

sometime in the future is unmistakably marked. Thessalonians 1 and 2 are quite similar, with

only minor differences which points to the possibility that it was one of Paul’s close associates,

who were very familiar with his theology and ecumenical philosophies, that was the author of 2

Thessalonians. (Foster, 2012 pg. 154-155)

Paul could very well have employed a secretary to transcribe his thoughts and write

Thessalonians 1. Scholars believe Paul’s eyesight may have been bad near the end. That same

secretary could have been the person who wrote 2 Thessalonians; he may have believed it was

what Paul would have said. The time span between the letters is significant, leading some to

believe Paul may have begun a message he didn’t personally finish, this leads to another

possibility; Paul’s secretary may have known about Paul’s intent to write to the Thessalonians,

and what he intended to say to them. The secretary may have been instructed or felt it was his

duty to complete Paul’s work. (Saunders, 2017 pg. 180-181) Furthermore, the theological

maturity or development between the two Thessalonians is comparatively advanced from first to

second; Eschatological differences are also apparent. There are many words and sentences

duplicated, and sentence complexity is not stylistically Pauline, which leads some scholars to the

hypothesis that Paul wouldn’t need to copy words and phrases from his own writings. It has been

argued that this was done to make it appear as if Paul had written 2 Thessalonians. (Wilcox,

2018) (Harris, 2015 pg. 388-389)

1 Thessalonians 5:2

For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

References:

Foster, P. (2012). Who Wrote 2 Thessalonians? A Fresh Look at an Old Problem. Journal for

The Study of The New Testament, 35(2), 150-175. doi:10.1177/0142064X12462654. Retrieved

from: https://web-b-ebscohost-com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/results?vid=0&sid=5ad5b899-

db39-4984-b7f1-fbd586f45459%40pdc-

vsessmgr02&bquery=Who%2BWrote%2B2%2BThessalonians%253f%2BA%2BFresh%2BLook

%2Bat%2Ban%2BOld%2BProblem&bdata=JmRiPWE5aCZkYj1idWgmZGI9YzhoJmRiPWxm

aCZkYj1vZnMmZGI9cGRoJmRiPWJ3aCZjbGkwPUZUJmNsdjA9WSZjbGkxPVJWJmNsdjE9

WSZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl.

Harris, S. (2015). New Testament: A Student’s Introduction. New York City: McGraw-Hill

Publishing. (pg.386 – 457).

Saunders, C. D. (2017). I & II Thessalonians: A Commentary. Religious Studies Review, 43(2),

180-181. doi:10.1111/rsr.13005. Retrieved from: https://web-b-

ebscohostcom.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=b328a4f1-2e7e-414b-bcb8-

0b0531798eb2%40sessionmgr101.

Wilcox, J. (2018) Skepticism About the Second Coming. Bethel University Curriculum:

REL1020 Attend.. Retrieved from:

https://www.betheluniversityonline.net/cps360/default.aspx?SectionID=18&tabid=156#/unit/5/A

ttend.

Words: 507

3. Summarize the arguments for and against Paul’s authorship of Colossians.

Student Response

Question 3: Summarize the arguments for and against Paul’s authorship of Colossians.

Scholars have long argued the authorship of Colossians. Similarities include: both letters are

written while Paul is imprisoned, they include Timothy in the narrative, they both mention a lot

of the same people, the vocabulary is very different from the earlier letters. Paul’s reiteration and

lack of new insight could be construed as an indication he was not the author. This begs the

conclusion that there may be a second author, perhaps one of Paul’s Disciples. The most

compelling argument concerns the theology contained in the Pauline letters. Many Scholars

believe it is too advanced to be exclusively Paul’s writing. The style is decidedly different. Other

Scholars believe the letter was written later in Paul’s life and reflects his further study and

scholarly maturity. It could also be that he was addressing a situation that required a different

approach which altered his usual style of writing. Perhaps, it is a combination of all or some of

these reasons. For instance, Douglas Moo “rightly draws attention to the futurist statements and

finds in the letter many instances of a balanced “now/not yet” perspective typical of Paul’s main

letters (Arnold, 2010 pg. 386).” (Harris, 2015 pg. 390-391) (Wilcox, 2018)

References:

Arnold, C. E. (2010). [The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon]. Catholic Biblical

Quarterly, 72(2), 385-386. Retrieved from: https://web-b-ebscohost-

com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=57c983a6-c92e-4088-a91a47d67916baa9%40pdc-

v-sessmgr06.

Harris, S. (2015). New Testament: A Student’s Introduction. New York City: McGraw-Hill

Publishing. (pg.386 – 457).

Wilcox, J. (2018) Skepticism About the Second Coming. Bethel University Curriculum:

REL1020 Attend.. Retrieved from:

https://www.betheluniversityonline.net/cps360/default.aspx?SectionID=18&tabid=156#/unit/5/A

ttend.

Words: 259

4. What is the relationship that Paul seems to think best describes the union between the Church

and Christ in the book of Ephesians? What are the implications for Christians in this union?

Student Response

Question 4: What is the relationship that Paul seems to think best describes the union

between the Church and Christ in the book of Ephesians?

The scholarly interpretation in (Harris, 2015 pg. 392) describes the Ephesian letter, in light of its

content, to be non-Pauline in origin. However, it is in line with his theology which was the seed

of universal acceptance in the Church by Gentiles and Jews, alike. While the main theme of

Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Church involves the union of all creation with Christ, which is

manifested by the worldwide scope of the Church as it grew, Paul did not live to see a worldwide