Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Bret Ripley
2nd Counselor
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:55 am

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by Bret Ripley »

dwt1978 wrote:
Sun Apr 16, 2023 5:37 pm
I'd be interested in knowing the titles of any scholarly works on Pseudepigrapha, that class parts of the Bible under that heading.
This is not to say the quoted statement is false. Only that I've never heard the Bible classed as pseudepigrapha.
Here are a couple of sources that discuss the classification of certain "Pauline" epistles as pseudepigrapha:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _Testament

https://library.villanova.edu/Find/Record/1505751/TOC
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by honorentheos »

dwt1978 wrote:
Sun Apr 16, 2023 5:37 pm
This is not to say the quoted statement is false. Only that I've never heard the Bible classed as pseudepigrapha.
As terminology regarding classifying books in the Hebrew and Christian scripture it is true its use is to define books not in the Hebrew or most Christian canons whose authorship is attributed to important scriptural figures. It's useful in that context for categorizing these texts separately compared to other categories such as canonical and apocryphal texts as those accepted as canonical in the case of the former, and those not accepted as canonical but included as having scriptural value in the case of the latter. In this usage the purpose of the term is to keep one class of texts separate from canonical texts. It's not the only use of the term and it's not how the OP is using the term as we are discussing a text included in Mormon canon.

It's use in both the OP and as I'm using it is the general definition referring to texts whose authorship is presented as coming from a historic important figure to give it weight rather than presented under it's true authorship. This is useful for examining the relationship between belief in the value of scripture and authority. And major sections of the Bible are pseudepigraphical in that their claimed author did not author the texts but they are presented that way to give them authority the actual author couldn't command.

The books of the Pentateuch are generally understood to have not been written by Moses but represent a combination of sources compiled into their canonized form and attributes to Moses. The priestly authors who amended and concatenated the material passed it off as Moses' own words roughly during the period of the Babylonian captivity and the subsequent second temple period.

Isaiah is generally understood to be the work of two or possibly three authors, that latter presented as the words of Isaiah to give them prophetic weight.

The Psalms are the work of various writers and not King David.

As Bret notes above, New Testament scholars are generally in agreement that many of the letters of Paul are pseudepigraphical. Revelations was not written by John the apostle, and the Gospels are of unknown actual authorship but attributed to people whose claimed proximity to Jesus is meant to give them authority and weight.

Asserting that the traditional claimed authors of scripture are literally the author of scripture is one of the more clean differentiators between fundamentalist and progressive religions. And it tells you something about the believers in each and where they see authority deriving from. Fundamentalist authority derives from the source while progressive authority derives from the perceived value. The first gives a source absolute authority while the latter requires agreement.

In that sense it is interesting to see Mormonism grapple with the topic as the literal authorship claims of their scripture are challenged. And this relationship between fundy/progressive is not isolated to believers. In this thread Shulem presented the critical fundamentalist view that the authority of the Book of Abraham is black or white. Disprove the book is of ancient origin, the argument is won.
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by huckelberry »

honorentheos wrote:
Sun Apr 16, 2023 6:56 pm
dwt1978 wrote:
Sun Apr 16, 2023 5:37 pm
This is not to say the quoted statement is false. Only that I've never heard the Bible classed as pseudepigrapha.
As terminology regarding classifying books in the Hebrew and Christian scripture it is true its use is to define books not in the Hebrew or most Christian canons whose authorship is attributed to important scriptural figures. It's useful in that context for categorizing these texts separately compared to other categories such as canonical and apocryphal texts as those accepted as canonical in the case of the former, and those not accepted as canonical but included as having scriptural value in the case of the latter. In this usage the purpose of the term is to keep one class of texts separate from canonical texts. It's not the only use of the term and it's not how the OP is using the term as we are discussing a text included in Mormon canon.

It's use in both the OP and as I'm using it is the general definition referring to texts whose authorship is presented as coming from a historic important figure to give it weight rather than presented under it's true authorship. This is useful for examining the relationship between belief in the value of scripture and authority. And major sections of the Bible are pseudepigraphical in that their claimed author did not author the texts but they are presented that way to give them authority the actual author couldn't command.

The books of the Pentateuch are generally understood to have not been written by Moses but represent a combination of sources compiled into their canonized form and attributes to Moses. The priestly authors who amended and concatenated the material passed it off as Moses' own words roughly during the period of the Babylonian captivity and the subsequent second temple period.

Isaiah is generally understood to be the work of two or possibly three authors, that latter presented as the words of Isaiah to give them prophetic weight.

The Psalms are the work of various writers and not King David.

As Bret notes above, New Testament scholars are generally in agreement that many of the letters of Paul are pseudepigraphical. Revelations was not written by John the apostle, and the Gospels are of unknown actual authorship but attributed to people whose claimed proximity to Jesus is meant to give them authority and weight.

Asserting that the traditional claimed authors of scripture are literally the author of scripture is one of the more clean differentiators between fundamentalist and progressive religions. And it tells you something about the believers in each and where they see authority deriving from. Fundamentalist authority derives from the source while progressive authority derives from the perceived value. The first gives a source absolute authority while the latter requires agreement.

In that sense it is interesting to see Mormonism grapple with the topic as the literal authorship claims of their scripture are challenged. And this relationship between fundy/progressive is not isolated to believers. In this thread Shulem presented the critical fundamentalist view that the authority of the Book of Abraham is black or white. Disprove the book is of ancient origin, the argument is won.
Honorentheos, you make worthwhile observations here and an interesting one about the different take on authority for fundamentalists and progressives. I was unsure just why I kept having the urge to post some sort of on the other hand take. I decided part of the urge was defense of Shulems comment about lying. It may be he is oversimplifying but he does have a point.

I was thinking of a simple comparison between book of Abraham and Hebrews in the New Testament. The author of that essay makes no special claims of authorship. There is no effort to appear from a time period different than its actual composition. We have an unknown author presenting a real picture of first century Chrisian belife and understanding. Early on it was collected with Pauls letters and perhaps at times refered to as Paul. There were ancient scholars as well as latter Protestant leaders who observed that Hebrews just does not fit Paul and clearly is by somebody else. I understand that the King James Bible put the title , "Paul's letter to the Hebrews" to introduce it. At that point it could be said it became Pseudepigripha. But this is no lie or deception there instead we have a mistaken attribution. I can faintly remember as a youth thinking the letter was Pauls. I have no difficulty now seeing it as written by some unknown author. You correctly point out that much of the Bible has unknown probably committees for authors.

Quite different is the presentation of the book of Abraham. It is clearly presented as written by Abraham and it was not. I think Shulem points out that that observation undermines the claims of authority and trustworthiness made by Joseph Smith for himself and his office. That would be true even if people for reasons unknown to me decided the communication in the book was of sufficient value to view it as inspired .

////
I did go down a bit of a rabbit hole wondering when the belief Genesis was written by Moses got established. I found that it was accepted in Mishna a couple hundred bc. It is possible you are correct about the claim going back to around 500 bc. I have wondered how that worked. I do find myself thinking that the books of the Torah are compiled from multiple sources so the editors may not of thought of themselves as authors. They possible believed that they were fitting together what Moses wrote and came to them in many pieces. One person might imagine that transmission line as strong while there is reason to see it as very long and attenuated. Either way a person still might view Moses as the ultimate source and thus author(even if the word selection and much of the story grew up in tradition over the centuries)

Google sent me to several,(I could have followed more) sites attempting to support or demonstrate straight Moses authorship. What I found was embarrassingly naïve. People want to believe Moses wrote out the scrolls. I suppose there is comfort in that like wanting to believe Joseph found Abrahams actual scroll.

I find myself adding, for honesty, that I find myself viewing the material in the Torah as such a mixed bag , best and worst of scripture, that neither the fundamentalist or progressive side of me is entirely happy. If I ran things Genesis would have an introduction explaining these parable like stories are presented to contemplate the problem of being human. Exodus would end with Sinai.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Hebrews author vs. Book of Abraham author

Post by Shulem »

huckelberry wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:36 am
I decided part of the urge was defense of Shulems comment about lying. It may be he is oversimplifying but he does have a point.

<snip>

Quite different is the presentation of the book of Abraham. It is clearly presented as written by Abraham and it was not.

Unlike the author of Hebrews, the author of the Book of Abraham makes it abundantly clear who is doing the talking:

  • "I, Abraham"
  • "And his voice was unto me: Abraham, Abraham"
  • "So I, Abraham, departed as the Lord had said unto me"
  • "I, Abraham, was sixty and two years old"
  • "And I, Abraham, arose from the place"
  • "And I, Abraham, journeyed"
  • "I, Abraham, concluded to go down into Egypt"
  • "I, Abraham, told Sarai, my wife"
  • "And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim"
  • "I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord’s time"
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Hebrews author vs. Book of Abraham author

Post by honorentheos »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2023 2:23 am
huckelberry wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:36 am
I decided part of the urge was defense of Shulems comment about lying. It may be he is oversimplifying but he does have a point.

<snip>

Quite different is the presentation of the book of Abraham. It is clearly presented as written by Abraham and it was not.

Unlike the author of Hebrews, the author of the Book of Abraham makes it abundantly clear who is doing the talking:

  • "I, Abraham"
  • "And his voice was unto me: Abraham, Abraham"
  • "So I, Abraham, departed as the Lord had said unto me"
  • "I, Abraham, was sixty and two years old"
  • "And I, Abraham, arose from the place"
  • "And I, Abraham, journeyed"
  • "I, Abraham, concluded to go down into Egypt"
  • "I, Abraham, told Sarai, my wife"
  • "And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim"
  • "I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord’s time"
honorentheos wrote:
Sun Apr 16, 2023 6:56 pm

Asserting that the traditional claimed authors of scripture are literally the author of scripture is one of the more clean differentiators between fundamentalist and progressive religions. And it tells you something about the believers in each and where they see authority deriving from. Fundamentalist authority derives from the source while progressive authority derives from the perceived value. The first gives a source absolute authority while the latter requires agreement.

In that sense it is interesting to see Mormonism grapple with the topic as the literal authorship claims of their scripture are challenged. And this relationship between fundy/progressive is not isolated to believers. In this thread Shulem presented the critical fundamentalist view that the authority of the Book of Abraham is black or white. Disprove the book is of ancient origin, the argument is won.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by honorentheos »

huckelberry wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:36 am
You correctly point out that much of the Bible has unknown probably committees for authors.
That isn't really my claim. My argument here is that much of the Judeo-Christian scripture tradition is built on claims of authority through misrepresented authorship.

Using Paul as the easiest example, when speaking of canon vs apocrypha vs pseudepigrapha, the thirteen epistles attributed to Paul are all "canon" and not pseudepigrapha. They are in "the book" and their content considered "scripture". There are other writings not in the book that are considered pseudepigraphic epistles as they are written as if Paul was the author yet they were kept out of canon because the authorship claims were accepted as false. These include 3rd Corinthians and the Epistle to the Alexandrians as examples either we have or mentioned in history.

But of the thirteen canonical epistles, six are now generally believed to be pseudepigraphic in that the claimed authorship in the writings and/or by tradition attributing them to Paul is understood to be wrong. While Hebrews specifically doesn't claim Paul wrote it in the text, others such the two epistles to Timothy are written as if by Paul but scholars believe them to be pseudepigraphic.

The Gospels are claimed to be written by an associate of Peter, a physician to Paul, and two apostles. The claims are intended to give the books more authority than if their actual authorship had been presented. It's likely numerous "gospels" of exactly that nature were lost to history because some dude's testimony of Jesus doesn't mean much to history.

Biblical authority has long been derived from the belief the texts were written by people of note who were present for the claimed events.
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by huckelberry »

Honorentheos, I see 27 books in the New Testament. Of those five are pretty clearly pseudepigraphic. Three more with Paul claims, Ephesians ,Colossians and 2 Thessalonians may ,or may not, be. For reasons that you have noted people of a fundamentalist turn of mind apply and cling to speculated authorships for books with unknown authors.

The significance of these observations is a pretty mixed bag to my mind.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Backyard Professor Responds: Book of Abraham as Pseudepigrapha

Post by honorentheos »

huckelberry wrote:
Sat Apr 22, 2023 1:36 am
The significance of these observations is a pretty mixed bag to my mind.
As noted earlier, how significant it seems from person to person is the point.

How critical is it to your Christian beliefs that the books of the New Testament were authored by their traditionally claimed author? How far removed from that claim could the actual author get before you might no longer view the text as scripture?
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Hebrews author vs. Book of Abraham author

Post by Shulem »

honorentheos wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2023 4:49 pm
Fundamentalist authority derives from the source while progressive authority derives from the perceived value. The first gives a source absolute authority while the latter requires agreement.

<snip>

In this thread Shulem presented the critical fundamentalist view that the authority of the Book of Abraham is black or white. Disprove the book is of ancient origin, the argument is won.


Mormons in Nauvoo truly believed the document was an original autograph written by the very hand of Abraham himself while he was in Egypt. The Mormons took Joseph Smith at his word in that he literally translated the hieroglyphic text written by Abraham's dusty hand and converted it to the English language.

The words "I Abraham" written on the papyri were understood to have been physically written by the same ancient person who was speaking in the physical sense. Joseph Smith enjoyed the authority of performing the translation by the supposed power of God and the saints got to enjoy whatever value they could get from the message of the text.

But in the end, Joseph Smith had no authority to translate Egyptian into English and the text has absolutely no redeeming value except in the fantasies developed by those who believe the lie. Such are Mormons today who believe the lie and spread the lie like a disease. The Book of Abraham is full of germs! Touch not the unclean thing!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

AWOL

Post by Shulem »

And so, where is Philo Sofee? It seems he is on hiatus.

Oh where oh where did Philo go?
Post Reply