Subject: Re: Apocrypha

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 19:42:26 -0500 (EST)

At 05:28 PM 4/14/97 -0400, you wrote:

>The Apocalypse of Adam is preserved in a single manuscript, 
>codex 5 of Nag Hammadi, yet Charlesworth includes it in his 
>collection of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Is he 
>right? 

I haven't decided yet.  As I do not yet know enough (!).

>	The problem here is the definition of the 
>terms, apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, etc. I would rather 
>speak about literature, namely, Jewish literature 
>from the Hellenistic Period, or Christian literature 
>from the early Imperial Period, and avoid terms like 
>apocrypha or pseudepigrapha, since they imply a value 
>judgment (a pretty negative one).

This is an excellent suggestion.  The entire question of the "canon" is
fraught with difficulties (see the forthcoming article by P. Davies in "The
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures").

>	To some, this might sound like political 
>correctness, but IMO the terms apocrypha and 
>pseudepigrapha have done more harm that good.
>

True.

>PS. A similar discussion started on OT Pseudepigrapha list 
>run by James Davila presently at St. Andrews in 
>Scotland. Anyone interested could visit St. Andrews 
>web-site.
>

There is an excellent bib on the site as well.  The course is utterly
fascinating and Professor Davila is doing an excellent job at it!

>*************************************************
>Alexander Mirkovic
>Senior Teaching Fellow for Koine Greek
>Graduate Department of Religion
>Vanderbilt University
>Email: [email-masked]
>Phone: (615) 421-8331
>*************************************************

Jim
(from the other side of TN).

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Adjunct Professor of Bible, Quartz Hill School of Theology
[email-masked]