It is time for a new New Testament.

Over the past century, numerous lost scriptures have been discovered, authenticated, translated, debated, celebrated. Many of these documents were as import­ant to shaping early-Christian communities and beliefs as what we have come to call the New Testament; these were not the work of shunned sects or rebel apostles, not alternative histories or doctrines, but part of the vibrant conversations that sparked the rise of Christian­ity. Yet these scriptures are rarely read in contemporary churches; they are discussed nearly only by scholars or within a context only of Gnostic gospels. Why should these books be set aside? Why should they continue to be lost to most of us? And don't we have a great deal to gain by placing them back into contact with the twenty-seven books of the traditional New Testament – by hearing, finally, the full range of voices that formed the early chorus of Christians?

Such provocative words are found on the inside flap of a book published March 5, 2013, authored by Hal Taussig, entitled, A New New Testament: A Bible for the 21st Century Combining Traditional and Newly Discovered Texts (New York: Houghton Mifflin). And no, when you read that title you are not "seeing double," nor have you stumbled upon a grammatical blunder. The title, rather, is a clever way of drawing your attention to what is, in fact, an age-long conversation in the church, one that began with the idea of "pseudepigrapha," shortly after the books of the New Testament were inspired.

Knowing Our Terms⤒🔗

The early church used the word "pseudepigrapha" (from the Greek pseudepigraphos, "false [pseudo] super­scription [epigraphos]") when referring to religious works that were falsely attributed to an apostle of Jesus Christ. You may come across modern literature that, while ultim­ately speaking of pseudepigrapha, uses different words.

You will frequently find that the word "pseudepigraphy" is used interchangeably with the word "pseudonymity" ("under a false name").

We are familiar with pseudonyms, or "pen names:" Mark Twain was actually Samuel Langhorne Clemens; George Orwell was really Eric Blair. These modern authors had their reasons for using pen names, just as the ancients did, as we will see. You will also encounter terms such as "New Testament Apocrypha," or even "New Testament Pseudepigrapha." Such titles are rather unappealing, since they imply that the writings to which they refer are in effect part of the New Testament itself, when in fact they were all written after the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, with some even dating from the Middle Ages.

What is more, we need to make a distinction between apocryphal and pseudepigraphical works. The matter of apocrypha is concerned primarily with canonicity (were such books considered Scripture?); the matter of pseudepigrapha is concerned chiefly with authenticity (were such books written by an apostle of the Lord?), and only then with canonicity.¹

So let's follow the vocabulary used by the early church and busy ourselves with the term "pseudepigrapha."

Motives for Pseudepigrapha←⤒🔗

The past century and a half have witnessed the redis­covery of pseudepigrapha that have prompted new ques­tions about which books should be included in the canon of Scripture. So let's take a few moments to see how exact­ly these writings came about in the first place.

Historians have identified a legion of motives. Here are some of the more prominent ones:²

1. For financial gain. The great library of Alexandria, for example, had a great demand for copies of the writ­ings of famous authors, and monetary rewards were therefore offered to those who provided a copy of an author's writings.
    
2. Out of malice. A writer may have wanted to malign an enemy, so he would publish, under the name of his rival, nasty things about cities or well-known individ­uals and have such writings then disseminated to such places or people.
    
3. To bolster the credibility of one's own teaching or doc­trine. To do so, a pseudepigrapher would invoke the name of an important figure in history, often an apostle.
    
4. Out of modesty, real or alleged. This strange motive, of considering your writings of such a calibre that they should be attributed to a biblical writer, flows into the next.
    
5. To be read more widely.
    
6. To be considered filled with the Spirit. Some authors believed they had been filled with the Holy Spirit to carry out this task.

There were many such writings that began to appear in the Christian church in the early days of the second century. These writings were representative of every type of genre in the New Testament: Gospels (e.g., Gospel of Peter); Acts (e.g., Acts of John); Epistles claiming to be written by Paul (e.g., Epistle to the Laodiceans); and Apocalypses (e.g., Second Apocalypse of James).

Some Examples←⤒🔗

It has been estimated that there were about three hun­dred books of this nature. The following are some of the more well-known pseudepigraphic works:

1. The Gospel of Thomas (written mid-second century). This is likely the best known pseudo gospel. Some think this gospel contains authentic sayings of Jesus not found in the NT gospels. It includes stories of miracles Jesus apparently performed as a child, such as fashioning twelve sparrows from clay and making them fly, and cursing a young boy who withered like a tree. Most infamous is the last line of the gospel: "Jesus said ... 'For every woman who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.'" Not only does it contain such absurd stories, but it also has a strong Gnostic flavour, denying the humanity of Jesus Christ.
    
2. The Gospel of Peter (mid-second century). This work is focused mainly upon the crucifixion and resurrec­tion of Jesus. It contains such stories as a "giant" Jesus exiting the tomb, with a cross following him and even starting to speak! Also in this gospel there are some Gnostic tendencies, denying the humanity of Christ, with Jesus hanging on the cross while feeling no pain, and crying out, "My Power, my Power, why have you forsaken me?"

Verdict of the Early Church←⤒🔗

What are we to think? What about Taussig's senti­ments, that those "scriptures" not included in the New Tes­tament ought to be integrated into the church, and into our worship? Is it not time for a new New Testament?

Not in the least! Those closest to the writings of the New Testament had a few things to say on the matter. They had a number of criteria for accepting writings as authen­tic, and therefore canonical, and as we go through some of these criteria, we will note where applicable how the pseudepigrapha do not fit the bill.

1. Divine qualities: Inspired writings bear the marks of something that is from God. Calvin wrote that Scrip­ture is "clearly crammed with thoughts that could not be humanly conceived. Let each of the prophets be looked into: none will be found who does not far ex­ceed human measure" (Institutes, 1.8.1). The inspired, Scriptures speak clearly that they are from an infinitely wise, creative, and excellent Author. These Scriptures can only be recognized and discerned, then, by those in whom God resides by his Spirit (1 Cor 2:10-14). And as God is a God of unity and harmony, never contra­dicting himself (Titus 1:2), so it is with his Scriptures. Books such as the Gospel of Peter and the pseudonym­ous letter of Paul to the Laodiceans were very early on condemned as heretical, which played a significant role in determining their status as pseudepigrapha.
    
2. Corporate reception: As the Spirit has been poured out on the church, so it stands to reason that his testimony in the hearts of individual believers would materialize in a corporate recognition and reception of God's Word. That does not mean that, by default, total unity regarding the canon would be there - wasn't. But the church throughout the ages has experienced substantive unity. The church as a community of redeemed sinners has a place in the au­thentication of the canon, and though the church's recognition of the canon did not happen overnight, the canonical books were being used as Scripture by the end of the second century.³ Pseudepigrapha were being used as well, but not endorsed.
    
3. Apostolic origins: The apostles were the mouthpieces of Christ and given the task of recording his redemp­tive message. Early Christians, therefore, consistently rejected books known to be forged in the name of an apostle. The Apostle Paul stated in 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2, "We ask you, brothers, not to become easily un­settled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come." Interesting that this comes from a letter that many claim is pseudepigrapha. If the author was not Paul, then we have a forgery that condemns forgeries. But if Paul did write it, then he is condemning the practice of pseudonymity.

The matter of deception played into this, since pseudonym­ous authors went out of their way to convince the reader that they actually were apostles. This deception bears no compatibility with the inspired Word of God.⁴ The Mu­ratorian Canon (c. AD 180), which is the earliest canon­ical list of many of the New Testament books (twenty two of the twenty-seven), refers to the Epistle to the Alexan­drians and the Epistle to the Laodiceans as "both forged in Paul's name to (further) the heresy of Marcion, and several others which cannot be received into the catholic Church" (Mur. Can. 64-66).

Divine Qualities are Obvious←⤒🔗

At the same time, the above criteria are all connected to one another. You cannot speak of one without speaking of the others. To quote Michael Kruger,

Divine qualities exist only because a book is produced by an inspired apostolic author. And any book that has an apostolic author, due to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, will inevitably contain divine qualities. In addition, any book with divine qualities (and apostolic origins) will impose itself on the church and, via the work of the (Spirit), be corporately received.⁵

This is in some ways an echo of Article 5 of the Belgic Confession which echoes the teaching of Scripture on its authority:

We receive all these books, and these only, as holy and canonical, for the regulation, foundation, and con­firmation of our faith. We believe without any doubt all things contained in them, not so much because the church receives and approves them as such, but especially because the Holy Spirit witnesses in our hearts that they are from God, and also because they contain the evidence thereof in themselves; for, even the blind are able to perceive that the things foretold in them are being fulfilled. (Emphasis added.)

The recognition of the church is an important element ­the, sheep hear their Shepherd's voice – but the "testimony of the Holy Spirit in our hearts that they are from God" is essential for distinguishing between authentic Scriptures and pseudepigrapha.

We have, therefore, good ground for affirming that our twenty-seven books of the New Testament belong, and that the numerous fanciful and heretical works penned later are not inspired by the Spirit.

Useful or Useless?←⤒🔗

As we imply in Article 5, pseudepigrapha cannot be used for the regulation, foundation, and confirmation of our faith. But does that mean we should disregard them alto­gether? Let's not toss the proverbial baby out with the bath water; there are useful things we can learn from them.

In Article 6 of the Belgic Confession, we make our con­fession about the Apocryphal books, and we can just as well think here of the pseudepigrapha: "The church may read and take instruction from these so far as they agree with the canonical books." They can provide further in­sights into the cultural, political, and economical world in which the New Testament Scriptures were written, and as such, present material that can flesh out our study of the teachings of our Lord Jesus and his apostles.

Of course, that comes with a caveat. These books con­tain heretical teachings that buffeted the early church. So we have to be on our guard. What the Spirit does not in­spire, so far as church writings are concerned, is open to thoughts that deviate from God's Word. Taussig wrote on page 489 of his book, "(The Gospel of Mary) inspired women to think of themselves as real leaders in conventionally male-dominated situations. The Gospel of Thomas proclaims the radical availability of God inside people..."⁶ We have to be aware that pseudepigrapha are not only about his­tory; they teach theology as well, man-made theology to be precise.

So do we need a new New Testament? No. For near­ly 2000 years, it has been recognized that God's New Covenant word comes to us exclusively in these tested and proven writings. Only these twenty-seven books are inspired by the Holy Spirit, recorded by the apostles, and received by the church, for the basis, benefit, and bol­stering of our faith.