tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5380249125951802124.post2189547032271223279..comments2023-06-14T03:52:29.452-07:00Comments on Ari's Blog: Ehrman's Forthcoming BookArihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15844298036103120083noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5380249125951802124.post-68696113990364263302010-11-09T03:21:37.686-08:002010-11-09T03:21:37.686-08:00When Ehrman is speaking for an audience he tends t...When Ehrman is speaking for an audience he tends to become loose in terms and analogy in order to create shock value. I am sure in the above book he will use the term loosely as it is the title. In <i>Jesus Interrupted</i> he breaks the remaining 19 works (he counts Revelation as by "a John") as (1) "Misattributed writings. As we have already seen, the Gospels are probably misattributed. John the disciple did not write John, and Matthew did not write Matthew..."; (2) "Homonymous writings. The term “homonymy” means<br />“having the same name.” A “homonymous writing” is one that is written by someone who has the same name as someone who is famous. For example, the book of James was no doubt written by someone named James, but the author does not<br />claim to be any particular James..." and (3) "Pseudepigraphic writings. Some books of the New Testament were written in the names of people who did not actually write them..." (all from page 113).Arihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15844298036103120083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5380249125951802124.post-43312759310794171892010-11-08T11:08:03.159-08:002010-11-08T11:08:03.159-08:00I went to a presentation he gave about a year ago ...I went to a presentation he gave about a year ago on the subject. He had a pretty lousy definition of "forgery." He defined a "forgery" as any document with either no, or a false authorial claim. Thus, he dismissed 20 of the 27 books in the NT as "forgeries," even though many are anonymous (only the 7 undisputed letters of Paul escaped the title). It's quite fair to use the word forgery to describe pseuepigraphic works (or, at least that's one legitimate interpretation), but I found it quite strange that he called anonymous works forgeries. Hopefully he's changed his definitions since then. I went into that presentation wanting to be sympathetic to Ehrman but wasn't impressed :-(.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com