Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-20-2010, 08:10 PM

The prefix pseudo- (from Greek ψευδής "lying, false") is used to mark something as false, fraudulent, or pretending to be something it is not.

It appears that the literature history of early (and later) Christianity is saturated and heavily characterised with these figures, identified by scholarship over the centuries. The purpose of this thread is to attempt to gauge the extent of this situation by compiling a list of known authors for whom it is generally recognised that other works, previously thought to be written by these authors, are now assessed to have been written by "someone else". The general format of the list is thus --- Author and Pseudo Author.

For the moment, to keep things simple, we need not cite the actual texts attributed to either side of the list. Here is a start to the list. I am hoping others may instantly be aware of other authors in this category, and can add these to the list.

Authors and Pseudo Authors in "Early Christianity"

Paul and Pseudo Paul
Peter and Pseudo Peter
Mark and Pseudo Mark
John and Pseudo John
Luke and Pseudo Luke
Matthew and Pseudo Matthew

Justin Martyr and Pseudo Justin
Clement and Pseudo Clement
Hegesippus and Pseudo Hegesippus
Lucian and Pseudo Lucian
Tatian and Pseudo Tatian
Irenaeus and Pseudo Irenaeus
Tertullian and Pseudo Tertullian

Eusebius and Pseudo Eusebius
Cyril and Pseudo Cyril
Augustine and Pseudo Augustine

Any-more and Pseudo Any-more?

arnoldo · 03-20-2010, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The prefix pseudo- (from Greek ψευδής "lying, false") is used to mark something as false, fraudulent, or pretending to be something it is not.

It appears that the literature history of early (and later) Christianity is saturated and heavily characterised with these figures, identified by scholarship over the centuries. The purpose of this thread is to attempt to gauge the extent of this situation by compiling a list of known authors for whom it is generally recognised that other works, previously thought to be written by these authors, are now assessed to have been written by "someone else". The general format of the list is thus --- Author and Pseudo Author. . .

Any-more and Pseudo Any-more?

[/indent]

The gnostics new it was all a scam and attacked these authors via comedy and satire.

Quote:

Then we may emulate our predecessors, the ancient Gnostics. They knew that to broadcast their message indescriminantly would be to cast pearls before swine, and that if they tried it, they might wind up being trodden underfoot, persecuted. The goal was not to change the world, an impossible task, as the endless disappointments of electoral politics and peoples’ revolutions alike make clear: “meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” No, the goal is to spread the word, to be there to assure others, just awakening to their alienage, that they are right. There is a truth higher than God, that there is another world of truth they may attain to. It may sound elitist, but then who says who is and is not among the elite? Only each individual. The mass may scoff or get mad, but through argument and paradox and essay and comedy we must raise our questions and it will be reward enough to see another Prodigal come to himself and snap out of the illusion that he belongs among the pigs.

Robert M. Price

April 29, 2000

http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.c...ticgnostic.htm

Toto · 03-21-2010, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
The gnostics [k]new it was all a scam and attacked these authors via comedy and satire.

...http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.c...ticgnostic.htm

This is a gross misinterpretation of gnosticism and of what Price wrote.

mountainman · 03-21-2010, 04:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The gnostics new it was all a scam and attacked these authors via comedy and satire.

The authors and their respective "counterpart pseudo authors" are generally not regarded as gnostics, but as "reliable" sources for the orthodox version of "early christian history". The above list is probably nowhere near comprehensive.

mountainman · 03-21-2010, 03:44 PM

Here's four more ....

Barnabas and Pseudo Barnabas
Polycarp and Pseudo Polycarp
Origen and Pseudo Origen
Ignatius and Pseudo Ignatius

That brings this list to a total of 20.
I am sure there are alot more of these.
Hello?

Are the words of the prophets
written on the subway walls?

The sources used by Eusebius for the authors of antiquity who furnish us with all the information that we will ever have concerning "Early Christianity", once believed to be genuine, appear in the light of centuries of academic scholarship to be consistent with a continuous admixture of authors and their pseudo-counterparts. Why? Does anyone have even an educated guess why this state of affairs exists? What's going on?

The TF and the Agbar correspondence might permit the following entries:

Josephus and Pseudo Josephus
Jesus and Pseudo Jesus

The story of the historical Jesus seems more than a little fragmented with false authors -- it seems heavily characterised by an agglomeration of falsely attributed literature and falsely attributed authorship. This to me at least suggests a fabrication, which is slowly coming apart at the seams.

When any interested parties go and research the generally cited estimated dates for the pseudo authors above, the 4th century (or later) is most often given as the century of the false "production". Why is this I wonder?

03-20-2010, 08:10 PM	#1
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Integrity problems - Authors and Pseudo Authors in "Early Christianity" The prefix pseudo- (from Greek ψευδής "lying, false") is used to mark something as false, fraudulent, or pretending to be something it is not. It appears that the literature history of early (and later) Christianity is saturated and heavily characterised with these figures, identified by scholarship over the centuries. The purpose of this thread is to attempt to gauge the extent of this situation by compiling a list of known authors for whom it is generally recognised that other works, previously thought to be written by these authors, are now assessed to have been written by "someone else". The general format of the list is thus --- Author and Pseudo Author. For the moment, to keep things simple, we need not cite the actual texts attributed to either side of the list. Here is a start to the list. I am hoping others may instantly be aware of other authors in this category, and can add these to the list. Authors and Pseudo Authors in "Early Christianity" Paul and Pseudo Paul Peter and Pseudo Peter Mark and Pseudo Mark John and Pseudo John Luke and Pseudo Luke Matthew and Pseudo Matthew Justin Martyr and Pseudo Justin Clement and Pseudo Clement Hegesippus and Pseudo Hegesippus Lucian and Pseudo Lucian Tatian and Pseudo Tatian Irenaeus and Pseudo Irenaeus Tertullian and Pseudo Tertullian Eusebius and Pseudo Eusebius Cyril and Pseudo Cyril Augustine and Pseudo Augustine Any-more and Pseudo Any-more?

03-21-2010, 03:44 PM	#5
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Here's four more .... Barnabas and Pseudo Barnabas Polycarp and Pseudo Polycarp Origen and Pseudo Origen Ignatius and Pseudo Ignatius That brings this list to a total of 20. I am sure there are alot more of these. Hello? Are the words of the prophets written on the subway walls? The sources used by Eusebius for the authors of antiquity who furnish us with all the information that we will ever have concerning "Early Christianity", once believed to be genuine, appear in the light of centuries of academic scholarship to be consistent with a continuous admixture of authors and their pseudo-counterparts. Why? Does anyone have even an educated guess why this state of affairs exists? What's going on? The TF and the Agbar correspondence might permit the following entries: Josephus and Pseudo Josephus Jesus and Pseudo Jesus The story of the historical Jesus seems more than a little fragmented with false authors -- it seems heavily characterised by an agglomeration of falsely attributed literature and falsely attributed authorship. This to me at least suggests a fabrication, which is slowly coming apart at the seams. When any interested parties go and research the generally cited estimated dates for the pseudo authors above, the 4th century (or later) is most often given as the century of the false "production". Why is this I wonder?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.