Clivedurdle

Is there a bias in biblical studies against apocryphal and forged works?

My approach would be to take all the evidence we have and ensure it is part of the conclusions we come to.

I get the impression that forged and apocryphal stuff is demoted in terms of evidence, when what should happen is it should be studied just as carefully as anything else. It will give important clues about thinking, context, time and place.

Concentrating on the new testament feels misleading and actually assuming that perspective is more valid than others.

mountainman

The "Gnostic Gospels and Acts" are NOT the divinely inspired canon.
The orthodox belief was in the canon, the whole canon and nothing but the canon.
The "Gnostic Gospels and Acts" were written by uninspired human authors.
The NT apocryphal books were authored by vile, despicable heretics.


The New Testament Apocryphal Corpus - Academic Summaries and Overviews

An Index of Summary Comments

"insipid and puerile amplifications" [Ernest Renan]

"excluded by their later and radical light" [John Dominic Crossan]

"severely conditoned responses to Jesus ... usually these authors deny his humanity" [Robert M. Grant]

"they exclude themselves" [M.R. James]

"The practice of Christian forgery has a long and distinguished history" [Bart Ehrman]

"The Leucian Acts are Hellenistic romances, which were written to appeal to the masses" [Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard]

"The key point ... [NT Apocrypha] have all been long ago considered and rejected by the Church.

"The names of apostles ... were used by obscure writers to palm off their productions; partly to embellish and add to ... partly to invent ... partly to support false doctrines; decidedly pernicious, ... nevertheless contain much that is interesting and curious ... they were given a place which they did not deserve." [Tischendorf]

"Gnostic texts use parody and satire quite frequently ... making fun of traditional biblical beliefs"[April Deconick]

"heretics ... who were chiefly Gnostics ... imitated the books of the New Testament" [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

"enterprising spirits ... pretended Gospels full of romantic fables and fantastic and striking details, their fabrications were eagerly read and largely accepted as true by common folk who were devoid of any critical faculty and who were predisposed to believe what so luxuriously fed their pious curiosity." "the heretical apocryphists, composed spurious Gospels in order to trace backward their beliefs and peculiarities to Christ Himself." [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

"the fabrication of spurious Acts of the Apostles was, in general, to give Apostolic support to heretical systems, especially those of the many sects which are comprised under the term Gnosticism. The Gnostic Acts of Peter, Andrew, John, Thomas, and perhaps Matthew, abound in extravagant and highly coloured marvels, and were interspersed by long pretended discourses of the Apostles which served as vehicles for the Gnostic predications. The originally Gnostic apocryphal Acts were gathered into collections which bore the name of the periodoi (Circuits) or praxeis (Acts) of the Apostles, and to which was attached the name of a Leucius Charinus, who may have formed the compilation." [Catholic Encyclopaedia]


See also The New Testament Apocryphal Corpus: Listings by (1) Chronology and (2) Type

The Act of Peter A
The Acts and Martyrdom of Andrew A
The Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew A
The Acts of Andrew and John (*H) A
The Acts of Andrew and Matthew (*H) A
The Acts of Barnabas A
The Acts of Bartholomew A
The Acts of John the Theologian A
The Acts of Luke A
The Acts of Mark A
The Acts of Matthew A
The Acts of Paul and Thecla A
The Acts of Peter and Andrew A
The Acts of Peter and Paul A
The Acts of Philip A
The Acts of Pilate A
The Acts of Polyeuctes A
The Acts of Simon and Jude A
The Acts of Thaddaeus A
The Acts of the Martrys A
The Acts of Timothy A
The Acts of Titus A
The Acts of Xanthippe, Polyxena, and Rebecca A
The Death of Pilate A
The History of John A
The History of Joseph the Carpenter A
The Acts of Andrew (*H) A - LC
The Acts of John (*H) A - LC
The Acts of Paul (*R) A - LC
The Acts of Peter A - LC
The Acts of Thomas A - LC
The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles A - NHC 6.

The Correspondence of Jesus and Abgar C
The Correspondence of Paul and Seneca C
The Epistle of the Apostles C
The Epistle to the Laodiceans C
The Letter of Peter to Philip C
The Report of Pilate to Tiberius C
The Report of Pilate to the emperor Claudius C

An Arabic Infancy Gospel G
The Gospel of Bartholomew G
The Gospel of Gamaliel G
The Gospel of James (Infancy) G
The Gospel of Judas G
The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene] G
The Gospel of Nicodemus G
The Gospel of Peter G
The Gospel of Philip G
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew G
The Gospel of the Ebionites G
The Gospel of the Egyptians G
The Gospel of the Hebrews G
The Gospel of the Lord [by Marcion] G
The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary G
The Gospel of the Nazoreans G
The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles G
The Gospel of Thomas G
The Gospel of Thomas - A 5th Century Compilation G
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Greek Text A] G
The Secret Gospel of Mark G

The Prayer of the Apostle Paul NHC 01.1
The Apocryphon of James NHC 01.2
The Gospel of Truth NHC 01.3
The Treatise on the Resurrection NHC 01.4
The Tripartite Tractate NHC 01.5
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul NHC 02.1
The Gospel of Thomas NHC 02.2
The Gospel of Philip NHC 02.3
The Hypostasis of the Archons NHC 02.4
On the Origin of the World NHC 02.5
The Exegesis on the Soul NHC 02.6
The Book of Thomas the Contender NHC 02.7
The Apocryphon of John NHC 03.1
The Gospel of the Egyptians NHC 03.2
Eugnostos the Blessed NHC 03.3
The Sophia of Jesus Christ NHC 03.4
The Dialogue of the Savior NHC 03.5
The Apocryphon of John NHC 04.1
The Gospel of the Egyptians NHC 04.2
Eugnostos the Blessed NHC 05.1
The Apocalypse of Paul NHC 05.2
The Apocalypse of James (First) NHC 05.3
The Apocalypse of James (Second) NHC 05.4
The Apocalypse of Adam NHC 05.5
The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles NHC 06.1
The Thunder, Perfect Mind NHC 06.2
Authoritative Teaching NHC 06.3
The Concept of Our Great Power NHC 06.4
Plato, Republic 588A-589B NHC 06.5
The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth NHC 06.6
The Prayer of Thanksgiving NHC 06.7
Asclepius 21-29 NHC 06.8
The Paraphrase of Shem NHC 07.1
The Second Treatise of the Great Seth NHC 07.2
The Apocalypse of Peter NHC 07.3
The Teachings of Silvanus NHC 07.4
The Three Steles of Seth NHC 07.5
Zostrianos NHC 08.1
The Letter of Peter to Philip NHC 08.2
Melchizedek NHC 09.1
The Thought of Norea NHC 09.2
The Testimony of Truth NHC 09.3
Marsanes NHC 10.1
The Interpretation of Knowledge NHC 11.1
A Valentinian Exposition NHC 11.2
Allogenes NHC 11.3
Hypsiphrone NHC 11.4
The Sentences of Sextus NHC 12.1
The Gospel of Truth NHC 12.2
Unknown NHC 12.3
Trimorphic Protennoia NHC 13.1
On the Origin of the World NHC 13.2

Community Rule Oth
John the Evangelist Oth
The Apocryphon of James Oth
The Apocryphon of John Oth
The Avenging of the Saviour Oth
The Book of John Concerning the Death of Mary Oth
The Book of Thomas the Contender Oth
The Book of Thomas the Contender Oth
The Consummation of Thomas Oth
The Didache [Teaching/Doctrine of the Apostles] Oth
The Giving Up of Pontius Pilate Oth
The Martyrdom of Matthew Oth
The Mystery of the Cross-Excerpt from the Acts of Oth
The Narrative of Joseph of Arimathaea Oth
The Passing of Mary Oth
The Pistis Sophia - Excerpts Oth
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul Oth
The Sophia of Jesus Christ Oth
The Teaching of the Apostles Oth
The Teachings of Addeus the Apostle Oth
The Three Steles of Seth Oth

The Apocalypse of Adam R
The Apocalypse of James - First R
The Apocalypse of James - Second R
The Apocalypse of Paul - and fragments R
The Apocalypse of Peter - and fragments (*R) R
The Revelation of Esdras R
The Revelation of John the Theologian R
The Revelation of Moses R
The Revelation of Paul R
The Revelation of Peter R
The Vision of Paul R

(144 row(s) affected)

Toto

I think that this is the tendency among non-evangelical scholars. For some scholars, it is a question of demoting the canon to the status of the apocrypha and treating all of this as forged or fanciful.

davidbach

Are there any other kind of scholars?

Doug Shaver

It depends mainly on who is doing the study. Within the academic community at large, probably not, but at some institutions, probably a lot.

mountainman

It should be studied perhaps even more carefully that anything else because it represents evidence (in an otherwise VACUUM of evidence) which is one step removed from the authorship of the new testament canon. Its chronology is all important.

Presently its chronology is being controlled by the pathological reliance upon references furnished within the preserved writings of the orthodox heresiologists, even when it is generally admitted that these orthodox authors were hostle witnesses to both the books of the NT apocrypha and their authors. In simple terms, the apocrypha were unauthorized non-imperial publications.



I am happy to argue that the Tetrarchy of Gospels existed before Constantine in order to argue the case that the NT apocryphal corpus was authored after the publication of the Constantine Bible c.325 CE.

They are IMO simply a Greek literary reaction to the imperial publication of the books of NT canon.
They were abruptly damned, banned, prohibited and subject to destruction.
They became too hot to preserve as the 4th century progressed.
In the end there was only one way to preserve them - they had to be hidden.
This is perhaps why they got the name "apocrypha" [hidden].