Ephesians – Authorship, Textualization & Repackaging – Podcast notes 9.27.19

Show notes for Ephesians podcast on 9.27.19

1. Authorship issues – probably deutero-Pauline, in other words, not written by Paul.
2. Why? Non-Pauline syntax, terminology, and view of the last days.
3. For example, much longer sentences. To me, this can be explained as “textual repackaging” – something I briefly address in the podcast. Scriptural texts are constantly being repackaged for the circumstances of the authors, scribes, and communities that used and textualized them. We see this in Ephesians and we see this in modern revelatory texts, as I briefly outlined in the podcast in relation to D&C 132. I have written a short post which works to explain the process by which Joseph Smith produced D&C 132 that you can read here. Edgar Goodspeed, in his study of Ephesians, has shown that the Greek texts of other Pauline epistles has been reworked into the text of Ephesians. In this manner, one can say that the text is Pauline, while Paul may not have been the technical “author” of this text, these are in a sense, his words. See the last 50 pages of Edgar Goodspeed, The Meaning of Ephesians, University of Chicago Press, 1932.
4. The backstory sounds pagan – see Ephesians 2.3
5. The text treats the backstory of the controversy of full status of Gentile Christians as totally resolved – see Ephesians 2.11-20… this makes Ephesians come much later than Galatians, where this controversy is ongoing and vexing Paul!
6. Ecclesiology = the doctrine of “The Church” this is the notion that a more organized church comes later in the first century, perhaps 90-100 A.D. or even later.
7. The author espouses accommodation of the hierarchical values of the Roman world, something that comes later as Christianity gains a foothold. Slavery is one such example – see Ephesians 6.5-9 “slaves, obey your masters!” δοῦλοι = douloi = slaves!
8. Layers of “Pseudepigraphy” or Levels of Authenticity
   1. Literal authorship – “I Mormon, wrote this with my own hand.”
   2. Dictation – Many of Paul’s texts were dictated… amanuensis. See Romans 16.22 … Also many scholars see 2 Corinthians as having been 2 letters that were later pieced together into one text. Many of Joseph’s Smiths revelations fit into this category.
   3. Delegated authorship. The author permits his disciples to take the author’s notes, thoughts, speeches, and assembles them into a treatise/letter. We see much of this in our church history, think Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith… The author gives permission to his disciples to write in his name. We see this in the Gospels. Evidence exists that Jesus did not write these, but authorized his followers to share his life and witness of his name.
   4. Posthumous authorship. The author dies and his followers take his ideas/speeches/notes and write in his name.
   5. Apprentice authorship. The church leader dies and his followers who were authorized to represent him honor his name by writing in his name as a tribute and to honor his teachings so that they continue and influence tradition.
   6. Honorable pseudepigraphy. Sincere followers honor the leader by continuing to produce texts in the author’s name that reflect the author’s beliefs, ideas, and values.
   7. Forgery. Documents are forged to gain influence due to the fact that the leader has influence and the forgers know that if they write in the name of the leader, their ideas will gain traction. (Powell, Mark A. Introducing the New Testament. Baker Academic, 2009, p. 224)
9. Predestination – Ephesians 1.4-5 Greek makes no distinction between foreordain and predestine – προορίσας – pro oreesas – Strongs #4309 (aorist tense- it has happened in the past) to predetermine, to appoint beforehand. Joseph Smith is going to be a strong advocate for anti-Calvinist doctrine in the Kingdom of God. He has a more liberal view of God, giving us more agency and power to act in our own religious lives (see 2 Nephi 2).
10. General tone of love – very little concerns in this text like Galatians. One concern: Ephesians 5.3-21, otherwise this is all about encouragement and a general counsel on how to live like Jesus.
11. Church organization – Ephesians 2.19-20, 4.11-13 – Latter-day Saints have used these texts to define Christianity.
12. How we should behave – Ephesians 4.26-32.
13. Household Codes – Ephesians 5.21-6.9 – social order. See also Colossians 3.18-4.1. Talk about “one flesh” in Judaism, the rib, the notion of temple, order, cosmos, salvation.
14. Ephesians 6.11 – “Put on” the armor = enduo = put on sacred vestments… this is a temple text. “Mystery” (Ephesians 6.19) = μυστήριον. Mysterion deals with temple, and the mysteries of the temple, covenants, oaths, etc.

More on non-Pauline writings – Pseudepigraphy

Non-Pauline texts (according to Biblical scholarship): 1-2 Timothy, Titus (the pastorals), Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians… For a total of 6 letters considered pseudepigraphal.

Marcus Borg writes, “In Ephesians, as in Colossians, many of the sentences are very long, unlike the commonly short and energized sentences of Paul’s genuine letters. (p. 353) Marcus Borg, Evolution of the Word: The New Testament in the order the books were written. Harper-Collins, 2012, p. 563. Borg writes, “Though all three letters (1-2 Timothy and Titus) claim to be written by Paul, most modern scholars see them as written long after his death in the first decades of the second century. There is a consensus that they were all written by the same person. But was that person Paul? For more than one reason, authorship by Paul has been rejected: The vocabulary and style are very different from those seven letters we are sure that Paul wrote. The “tone” is very different. The passion that marks Paul’s genuine letters is absent. Not just the passion of conflict, but the passion of insight, brilliance, and radiance. There are echoes of Paul’s language in the pastorals, but they are just echoes. The issues in the pastorals seem to belong to a later generation of early Christianity, the beginning of the process of “institutionalization.” Institutionalization was greatly to increase over the centuries, so we see it here in nascent form. This includes the delineation of leadership roles (qualifications for “bishops” and “deacons”), an emphasis on “official” teaching (what 2 Timothy 4.3 calls “sound doctrine”), and even directives for discerning which widows deserved the financial support of the community. All of this suggests a later period of time.”

This is also referred to in scholarship as “pseudepigraphy.” As Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler summarize in their analysis of Ephesians, “The similarity of this text (Ephesians) to the letter to the Colossians, which is also of uncertain Pauline authorship, suggests a false attribution of authorship (known as pseudepigraphy); in addition, its theology and vocabulary do not reflect Paul’s concerns, especially in presenting resurrection as a current rather than a future event (2.1-2.6; cf. Rom. 6.5-8; Phil. 3.10-11). It mentions “heavenly places” (1.3,20; 2.6; 3.10; 6.12) and speaks of Christ as “the head” of the church, which is “his body” (1.22-23; 4.11, 15-16), key theological expressions absent from the undisputed Pauline epistles. Nor does it deal with the relationship of the community to Torah, a major focus of Paul’s writings in Galatians and Romans. The text’s connection to Ephesus is also problematic: the words “in Ephesus” (1.1) are absent from some of the best early manuscripts. Defenders of Pauline authorship argue that the letter was written late in Paul’s ministry for a different audience (Marcion, a second-century Christian thinker, later condemned for heresy, suggested the Laodiceans). Without the opening and closing sections (1.1-2 and 6.21-24) the letter reads more like a sermon or exhortation addressed to Christian communities in general, rather than a letter specifically dealing with the problems and concerns of one community in particular. Levine and Brettler, The Jewish Annotated New Testament, Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 345.