Customer Reviews

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha & the New Testament

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The Pseudepigrapha are a collection of several dozen scriptures, generally Jewish ca. 200 BCE to 200 CE, that did not make the cut, that is, did not get included in the Old Testament, Apochrypha or New Testament (NT). The Pseudoepigrapha reflect doctrines and preoccupations of various sects, that is, they are not consistent with each other as, say, the books of the New Testament are consistent with each other. The Pseudepigrapha have separate textual histories and have survived in diverse manuscripts and languages, including Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopic, Greek, Latin, and Slavonic. In two other volumes, James Charlesworth has assembled translations of the Pseudepigrapha. (In this year, 2001, Amazon is selling those two volumes for $40 each.)

"The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha & the New Testament" looks like it might have been an aborted introduction to that two-volume edition. Charlesworth addresses his discussion to serious biblical scholars to explain exactly how the Pseudepigrapha should and should not be used. For example, late in the book he takes several pages explaining the Pseudepigrapha's evidence that Hebrews and James in the NT could have been composed before 70 CE, not after 80 CE as previously thought.

I have read this book and see why another reviewer complained that it was too slow to draw conclusions based on the evidence of the Pseudepigrapha. But what kind of conclusions do we crave? Pop science shows on TV tend to pander to our appetite for the sensational, but Charlesworth does not waste time debunking Revelation or revealing startling new evidence about the youth of Jesus.

The book is concerned with the minutia of linguistic and textual hermeneutics that the casual reader would simply not care about but the specialist and scholar would. I give it four stars because it is good for that narrow audience. Everyone else should first get better acquainted with the Bible.

Dr. Charlesworth's most recent book on the Pseudepigrapha is short (about 100 pages) and is a great introduction, but it also leaves more to be desired. What Dr. Charlesworth shows is that yes, there are a number of parallels between the Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament. But, what I was hoping to find in this book was a more thorough analysis of what these parallels might mean for the New Testament. If the authors really were aware of these extra-canonical texts (assuming that they really were extra-canonical) and were actually influenced by them, then do any of the NT writings take on new meaning? Do they take on different meanings? How could they enhance one's understanding of a particular text? Or, can they shed any light on the New Testament at all?

Again, this book is a great introduction to the Pseudepigrapha. But, it only begins to shed light on their relationship(s) to the New Testament and leaves the reader hoping that some time soon, someone will come along and dispell much of the remaining darkness.

Much or the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha - those scripture attributed to one yet written by another - were part in partial of the libraries of the New Testament writers. Their influence on the Essene and Qumran communities as well as the new Christian movement is most profound. Professor Charlesworth has once again given the modern reader a most scholarly tome; an insight for all who want to understand the world in which the New Testament originated. A must read for those seeking truth and proper prospective in interpreting the Word of God. I give it two thumbs up and praises on high. -Jim Wylder, Meadowdale Ministries