Sunday, January 23, 2022

The Bible’s textual history: dubious theories and forgeries – part two

In part one of this series (link) the 20th century forgery known as the “Archaic Mark” was examined. In this second post of the series, another highly probable forgery shall be delved into: the document that has been titled the “Secret Gospel of Mark”.

I do not remember the exact year—sometime in the early 1980s—when I my eyes for the first time saw Morton Smith's book, The Secret Gospel - The Discovery and Interpretation of the Secret Gospel According to Mark", during one of my frequent browsing sessions at Powell's Books in Portland, Oregon. That same day, I bought the book, and shortly thereafter, read it. The dustcover of the book mentioned that, "an edition of the Greek text of the letter of Clement and the Secret Gospel will be published by Harvard University Press under the title, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark." On my next trip to Powell’s, I was able to obtain a copy of the tome. The Secret Gospel is a mere 148 pages, but the second book is considerably longer, 454 pages; both were published in 1973.

Within the pages of the two tomes Smith informed his readers that during his 1958 visit to the Greek Orthodox monastery at Mar Saba—located about 12 miles SE of Jerusalem—he discovered a manuscript that claimed to be an letter by Clement of Alexandria to an individual named Theodore (Theodoros). Smith took photographs of the manuscript and had them developed upon his return to Jerusalem. He then transcribed and translated the document. The following is his English translation:

From the letters of the most holy Clement, the author of the Stromateis. To Theodore.

You did well in silencing the unspeakable teachings of the Carpocrations. For these are the "wandering stars" referred to in the prophecy, who wander from the narrow road of the commandments into a boundless abyss of the carnal and bodily sins. For, priding themselves in knowledge, as they say, "of the deep [things] of Satan", they do not know that they are casting themselves away into "the nether world of the darkness" of falsity, and boasting that they are free, they have become slaves of servile desires. Such [men] are to be opposed in all ways and altogether. For, even if they should say something true, one who loves the truth should not, even so, agree with them. For not all true [things] are the truth, nor should that truth which [merely] seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith.

Now of the [things] they keep saying about the divinely inspired Gospel according to Mark, some are altogether falsifications, and others, even if they do contain some true [elements], nevertheless are not reported truly. For the true [things], being mixed with inventions, are falsified, so that, as the saying [goes], even the salt loses its savor.

[As for] Mark, then, during Peter's stay in Rome he wrote [an account of] the Lord's doings, not, however, declaring all [of them], nor yet hinting at the secret [ones], but selecting what he thought most useful for increasing the faith of those who were being instructed. But when Peter died a martyr, Mark came over to Alexandria, bringing both his own notes and those of Peter, from which he transferred to his former book the things suitable to whatever makes for progress toward knowledge [gnosis]. [Thus] he composed a more spiritual Gospel for the use of those who were being perfected. Nevertheless, he yet did not divulge the things not to be uttered, nor did he write down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord, but to the stories already written he added yet others and, moreover, brought in certain sayings of which he knew the interpretation would, as a mystagogue, lead the hearers into the innermost sanctuary of that truth hidden by seven veils. Thus, in sum, he prepared matters, neither grudgingly nor incautiously, in my opinion, and, dying, he left his composition to the church in Alexandria, where it even yet is most carefully guarded, being read only to those who are being initiated into the great mysteries.

But since the foul demons are always devising destruction for the race of men, Carpocrates, instructed by them and using deceitful arts, so enslaved a certain presbyter of the church in Alexandria that he got from him a copy of the secret Gospel, which he both interpreted according to his blasphemous and carnal doctrine and, moreover, polluted, mixing with the spotless and holy words utterly shameless lies. From this mixture is drawn off the teaching of the Carpocratians.

To them, therefore, as I said above, one must never give way; nor, when they put forward their falsifications, should one concede that the secret Gospel is by Mark, but should even deny it on oath. For, "Not all true [things] are to be said to all men". For this [reason] the Wisdom of God, through Solomon, advises, "Answer the fool from his folly", teaching that the light of the truth should be hidden from those who are mentally blind. Again it says, "From him who has not shall be taken away", and "Let the fool walk in darkness". But we are "children of Light", having been illuminated by "the dayspring" of the spirit of the Lord "from on high", and "Where the Spirit of the Lord is", it says, "there is liberty", for "All things are pure to the pure".

To you, therefore, I shall not hesitate to answer the [questions] you have asked, refuting the falsifications by the very words of the Gospel. For example, after "And they were in the road going up to Jerusalem" and what follows, until "After three days he shall arise", [the secret Gospel] brings the following [material] word for word:

"And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightaway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb, they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over [his] naked [body]. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan."

After these words follows the text, "And James and John come to him", and all that section. But "naked [man] with naked [man]," and the other things about which you wrote, are not found.

And after the [words], "And he comes into Jericho," [the secret Gospel] adds only, "And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them." But the many other [things about] which you wrote both seem to be, and are, falsifications.

Now the true explanation, and that which accords with the true philosophy . . . [The Secret Gospel, pp. 14-17/Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark, pp. 446, 447; the second volume excludes all the brackets and italics.]

As related in his books, Smith initially had reservations concerning the authenticity of the letter/manuscript; but after extensive research—which included assessments from a number of his scholarly peers—he came to accept it as genuine.

As I recall, I remained more reserved, leaning towards the position that it was a forgery—though not definitively so. I did no further research into the matter after my first reading of the two tomes in the early 80s—that is until this current investigation into the textual history of the Bible.

Thanks to the internet (and some recent purchases), I have been able to solidify my initialsomewhat tentativeview that the letter/manuscript is a forgery; reaching the conclusion that it was Morton Smith himself who was the forger. One book in particular convinced me of this: Stephen C. Carlson’s, The Gospel Hoax – Morton Smith’s Invention of Secret Mark (2005).

I read this book over the last few days, checking as many of the references Carlson provided that I could find online. I have also obtained and read a number of works that have been critical of Carlson’s assessment, finding those works falling short in their attempts to discredit Carlson. I was able to discern that the critics I read seemed to reject the supernatural origin and character of the Bible and Christianity, resorting to naturalist explanations for the founding of Christianity. I suspect that this may have influenced their support for Smith.

Work on this post began yesterday, and part of my plans for the format of the post was to provide a number of quotes from Carlson’s book. However, this morning while checking some references online, I discovered that a PDF version of the book is now available online LINK;  so rather than providing excepts from the book, interested folk can now read the entire book for themselves.

Shall end this post with the same question I asked in part one of this series: are there other possible forgeries of Biblical manuscripts that scholars have also misjudged?


Grace and peace,

David

No comments:

Post a Comment