Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Dr Kurt Aland
Textual Critic
Example of words omitted in the Nestle/Aland Critical Text
and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. John 6.51
DR KURT ALAND
Textual Critic
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 4
5M/12/07
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 1
DR KURT ALAND
Textual Critic
by A. Hembd, MACS
Reformation International Theological Seminary
A consultant to the Society
D
r Kurt Aland is perhaps the Received Text which was used by all
most renowned Biblical the great translations of the
textual critic of the Reformation, including the Authorised
20th century. Born in Version in the English language (also
Berlin in 1915, he died in Münster/ known in some parts of the world as
Westphalia in 1994. The most famous the ‘King James Version’). Thus, the
modern English versions of the New versions translated from this new
Testament—the Revised Standard ‘critical’ text differ significantly from
Version, the New American Standard our Authorised Version as well.
Version, the New International Version,
and the English Standard Version—are At present, the NIV and the ESV are
all grounded on, and, for the most part, sweeping evangelical churches in the
translated from, Dr Aland’s work. These United States and Britain. Thus,
translations utilise as their principal modern churchgoers are being
text (with its critical apparatus and profoundly influenced by Aland’s Greek
alternate readings) the United Bible Text, and so also by his peculiar views
Societies version of the Greek New of the text. This is because the very
Testament, a version over which verses that modern churchgoers are
Dr Aland was a principal editor. Indeed, reading in their Bibles reflect the
the UBS version third edition (1983) is theological and textual views of
virtually the same as Aland’s own Dr Aland, which underlie his choices for
twenty-sixth edition of the Nestle-Aland readings and variant readings for every
text: such was his influence over the verse in the original Greek, from which
UBS text.1 these new versions are translated.
The Nestle-Aland Greek 26th edition However, very few churchgoers even
and the UBS 1966 and 1983 Greek know the name of Dr Kurt Aland. Many
texts differ widely from the common ministers do—the Nestle-Aland text is
1
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 2
the one that they buy when in *Proverbs 30.5 ‘Every word of God is
theological seminary (as is required for pure: he is a shield unto them that put
students in Westminster Theological their trust in him.’
Seminary). They have heard in their
text-critical classes of Dr Aland’s How much of Scripture is inspired,
prowess as a scholar. Yet very few inspired indeed by God? ‘All Scripture.’
ministers know what Dr Aland’s ‘All scripture is given by inspiration of
theological views are concerning the God.’ The original Greek word for
inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture. ‘inspired’ means ‘breathed out by
God’. All Scripture is breathed out by
We come then to the point of this God—every word of it. Accordingly, all
paper, namely, to show concerned Scripture is as pure as God Himself.
readers what Kurt Aland’s theological No abiding corruption can enter into it.
views are concerning Biblical Though mistakes have entered some
inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility. copies of the original language texts,
though heretics have even mutilated
But first, we must lay down some some copies, yet, in the good Providence
fundamental premises. This paper is of God, by the Holy Spirit, the true
the review of a Bible-believer, and Church has been enabled always to
unashamedly so. Accordingly, we are recover the true reading from the copies.
not backward to affirm that, if we are to
understand the text of the Old and New Because Scripture is breathed out by
Testaments, we must know what the Bible God, the man of God is ‘perfect’, or
says of itself. And so, we affirm that: ‘complete’. He is complete in that he
has need of no other reference.
*We must believe that the Bible is Obviously, he is not sinlessly perfect:
the inspired, inerrant Word of God, ‘…there is no man that sinneth not’
because the Bible itself says so. (1 Kings 8.46). But he is ‘perfect’ in
this sense: he is perfectly furnished
*We must believe that God with all that he should ever need to
preserves His Word, by His Holy know, on this side of eternity, to equip
Spirit, in the line of His true him for his ministry in this world—so
Church—again, because the Bible that, as we have said, he has need of
says so. no other reference. Indeed, the only
other references he may want to consider
would be good commentaries on the
We must believe that the Bible is Scripture itself, to help him understand
the inspired, inerrant Word of the Scripture better. But even these
God, because the Bible says so. commentaries the man of God would
read as subordinate to the inspired
*2 Timothy 3.16–17 ‘All scripture is Scripture itself. Oh, the man of God is
given by inspiration of God, and is complete in his being throughly furnished,
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for by the fully-inspired words of God!
correction, for instruction in
righteousness: that the man of God The very thing that makes the man of
may be perfect, throughly furnished God complete and throughly furnished
unto all good works.’ unto all good works is the verbal
2
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 3
Accordingly, the Scripture, indeed all We must not doubt the purity of God’s
Scripture, is breathed out and inspired Word, nor doubt His covenant
by God still. The Scripture, every word faithfulness to preserve it. He Who
of it, is still profitable for doctrine, for cannot lie promises to preserve His
reproof, for correction, for instruction in Word; He promises to do so in that
righteousness: hence, it is also very Word. ‘All Scripture is breathed out
inspired still. Despite its being copied by God.’ ‘Every word of God is pure.’ As
by men, despite mistakes and errors Isaiah 59.21 tells us, God’s inspired
having been introduced into some of words, all of them, shall be preserved
the copies, yet, in the good Providence in the line of the true Church, for ever.
of God by the Holy Spirit, the true
Church has always been able to
recover the original readings, so that
We must believe that God
we still have the inspired Word of God, preserves His Word, by His Spirit,
infallible and inerrant. in the line of the true Church.
There may be spelling or stylistic *Isaiah 59.20–21 ‘And the Redeemer
differences in some of the words or shall come to Zion, and unto them that
their forms in the present manuscripts, turn from transgression in Jacob, saith
but the essential words, in all their the LORD. As for me, this is my
meanings, are still there—the inspired, covenant with them, saith the LORD; My
inerrant words of God. The Holy Spirit, spirit that is upon thee, and my words
in the Church, has helped the true which I have put in thy mouth, shall not
Church always to recover and maintain depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the
the true reading (Isaiah 59.21). mouth of thy seed, nor out of the
mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the
And how pure are the Words of God? LORD, from henceforth and for ever.’
Totally pure. ‘Every word of God is
pure’, says Proverbs 30.5. ‘Every word The Lord says, ‘this is my covenant
of God is pure: he is a shield unto with them’. With whom? With those
them that put their trust in him’. Every that ‘turn from transgression in Jacob’.
word of God is pure. It is pure still. It is These would be those who know
pure, by the good Providence of God, ‘repentance unto life’— that saving
preserving the inspired Word of God, work of the blessed Holy Ghost—by
for the man of God, so that he need the Holy Spirit, convincing them of sin,
not have recourse to any other work— righteousness, and judgment, and
3
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 4
savingly illuminating their minds with Moses sprinkled both the book and the
the knowledge of the blessed Redeemer people. Why? Because this
who has come for them. With these, foreshadowed how that the blood of
and these alone, God makes His Christ would be sprinkled on both the
covenant. He sends the Redeemer to people of God and upon the very words
Zion, for them, and for them alone. of God that God would use to keep
them. In other words, Christ purchased
And what is this covenant with them? both His people and the words of God
The covenant is, that the spirit that is by His precious blood. When the blood
upon them, and the words that are in of Christ ceases to be efficacious, then
their mouth, shall not depart out of the people of God can be lost. When
their mouth, nor out of the mouth of the blood of Christ is no longer living
their seed, nor their seed’s seed. For and warm, then the purity of God’s
how long? ‘For ever.’ words will be lost.
The Lord makes a covenant with His No, this can never be! Whatever the
Zion, with those that turn from blood of Christ touches, it purchases.
transgression in Jacob. His Spirit shall The blood of Christ has purchased the
not depart from them; neither will His purity of all the words of God in all ages,
Words. God will preserve all His words for you, for me, if we will but believe it.
for them; ‘every word of God is pure’.
Why? So that He may be a shield to Now, with whom is this promise made?
His saints, even by His Word. God will With those that turn from transgression
keep all His Word, the Scriptures of our in Jacob, and with their seed, and their
salvation, inspired. Why? So that the seed’s seed, even for ever. The Spirit
man of God may be perfect, so that he will continue with them. The efficacy of
may be complete, so that he may be the blood of Christ will continue with
throughly furnished unto every good work. them. By the covenant of this blood,
and the workings of the Holy Spirit, this
Indeed, this very promise is because of true Church will be able to discern the
the Redeemer, spoken of in Isaiah words of God in all ages; and by the
59.20, Who is Christ Jesus our Lord, good Providence of God all His words
the Desire of all nations, that One who will remain with them.
comes to Zion. Because of Him, God
makes this wonderful covenant. And thus, we should be looking to the
Indeed, we see in Hebrews 9.19 that original language texts that have been
Moses sprinkled not only all the used by the historic true Church.
articles of the tabernacle and the
people, but yes, even the very book of
the Law, the Word of God, with the
What we must look for in a
blood. Hebrews 9.19 says, ‘For when textual critic
Moses had spoken every precept to all
the people according to the law, he When we would evaluate the work of a
took the blood of calves and of goats, textual critic—one who would compile
with water, and scarlet wool, and a text of the original languages for the
hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, Bible—we must look for a man who
and all the people’. believes the things which we have just
4
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 5
discussed. He must believe that the books, going back to the earliest of
Bible is the Word of God, because times, attribute the authorship of the
‘every word of God is pure’. He must Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
believe that God has promised to John, as did all the Church Fathers
preserve that Word pure, in every age. going back to the earliest ages of the
He must also believe that God will do Church. (For more detail on the
this in the line of the true Church. variations that exist in the headings,
and yet how they all attribute
authorship to the men, the author
An examination of Dr Kurt refers the reader to F.H.A. Scrivener’s
Aland’s views on the excellent work A Plain Introduction to
inspiration of the Bible the Criticism of the New
Testament,1.65–71.)4 Thus, there really
It can be rather difficult to find anything is no manuscript or patristic evidence
that openly displays Dr Aland’s views whatever, other than mere conjecture,
concerning the inspiration, inerrancy that could merit Aland’s questioning
and infallibility of the Scriptures. However, who authored them. But
there are three little-known works of his unquestionably, a man who doubts the
that are most revealing, two relatively canonicity of several books of the
early works, written in 1961 and 1962, Bible—specifically, 2 Peter, James, 1
and one later work, in 1985. and 2 John, and Jude—cannot at all
believe in Bible inerrancy. How can the
We address first the two earlier works. Bible be infallible, if it has several
One is entitled ‘The Problem of books in it that do not belong there?
Anonymity and Pseudonymity in
Christian Literature of the First Two It may be asked, “But The Problem of
Centuries’, written in 1961.2 In that the New Testament Canon was written
booklet, Dr Aland denies the apostolic in 1962. Did Dr Aland ever renounce
authorship of the Four Gospels, the these views? And similarly with ‘The
Catholic Epistles, the Pastoral Epistles, Problem of Anonymity and
and Hebrews. The other work is Pseudonymity’. That was written in
entitled The Problem of the New 1961. Did Aland renounce its views?”
Testament Canon, written in 1962.3 In
this work, Dr Aland expresses his No, he did not. Indeed, he had ample
doubts as to the canonicity of several opportunity to renounce these views in
New Testament books. his much later book entitled A History
of Christianity, published in German in
Now, we must interject the following. 1980 and in English in 1985.5 In this
With respect to the apostolic book, Aland discusses his theories
authorship of the Four Gospels, these concerning the origins and the
books in their titles begin ‘The Gospel evolution of the New Testament text,
according to Matthew’ or ‘The Gospel including the settling of the Canon and
according to Mark’, and so on. Though the apostolic authorship of the
some may question whether the titles Gospels, the Catholic Epistles, and
are inspired per se, yet we cannot deny Hebrews. Yet he says nothing in that
that the titles of all the complete Greek work to renounce his former views. To
manuscripts of the New Testament the contrary, he cautiously confirms
5
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 6
them, even adding shockingly disdainful, books that should be included in the
higher critical views of the Catholic New Testament. Dr Aland is in this
Epistles—James, Jude, 1 and 2 Peter, pamphlet raising a question of whether
and 1, 2, and 3 John. We will discuss new books not included in the Bible
what he says in A History of Christianity ought to be included, and also of
toward the end of this paper. whether books now included should be
excluded. In the conclusion of his
Denying the canonicity of certain books booklet, he does not advocate the
of the Bible is certainly the more inclusion of any new books, but he
blatant of his errors. For that indeed is seriously advocates that we consider
a denial of the verbal plenary dropping 2 Peter, Hebrews, Revelation,
inspiration of Scripture itself. For that Jude, and 2 and 3 John.
reason, we shall begin by addressing
Dr Aland’s work concerning the Canon. Says Dr Aland, pages 24–25:
After that, we shall address what he
says in ‘The Problem of Anonymity and In spite of all the imperfections
Pseudonymity in Christian Literature of and uncertainties which surround
the First Two Centuries’. Next, we shall the formation of the Canon, we
address what he says in A History of must express our belief that the
Christianity. Finally, at the end of this decision of the early Church
paper, we shall evaluate the validity of cannot be bettered by any
Dr Aland’s work, in the light of extension. It cannot be said of a
Scripture, specifically, Isaiah 59.20–21. single writing preserved to us
from the early period of the
We proceed now to examine The Church outside the New
Problem of the New Testament Canon. Testament that it could properly
be added to-day to the Canon: a
The Problem of the New revision of the New Testament
Testament Canon Canon would be possible only by
the suppression of what was then
At the beginning of this work, Kurt pronounced canonical, not by
Aland writes the following: ‘This extending the Canon in any
brochure embodies the text of a lecture direction of our choosing.
written for the Second International [emphasis added]
Congress on New Testament Studies
which met at Christ Church, Oxford, in In other words, he poses himself a
September 1961’.6 The pamphlet, conservative by saying somewhat
then, is a lecture that Dr Aland ‘cautiously’ that we ought not to
delivered to a worldwide convention of adopt any new books. However, says
New Testament scholars. he, we may well considering rejecting
some books. He later expresses his
Just the title of the work is enough to view that the Epistles of Ignatius
raise eyebrows. The Problem of the surpass 2 and 3 John, Jude, and even
New Testament Canon? What ‘problem’? 2 Peter, thus implying, on pages 26–27,
that 2 and 3 John, Jude, and 2 Peter
For the reader not acquainted with the are candidates for being dropped.
term, ‘Canon’ means the listing of He says:
6
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 7
7
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 8
8
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 9
In short, Dr Aland does not believe the Church was working with
Bible to be the Word of God. inadequate standards of
Accordingly, the promise of keeping discrimination. In view of this,
God’s words is not with him. Why? the actual result of the Canon
Because he is not of the true Church; can only astonish the observer
he is not one who ‘turns from again and again. It remains
transgression in Jacob’. To the inexplicable if, behind the
contrary, he is an unbelieving sceptic. human activity and the
Nor is Dr Aland a divinely-appointed questionable standards of men,
steward or guardian of the holy Word of one does not presuppose the
truth. We must rather fear that he is control of the providentia Dei,
likely to be an agent of the devil to the working of the Holy Spirit…
corrupt it. ‘He that is not with me is [p. 14, emphasis added]
against me’ (Matthew 12.30).
However, this is not an infallible
working, according to Dr Aland, in that
Other grave errors in Aland’s he believes that very possibly, several
work The Problem of the New books should be deleted from the
Testament Canon Canon!
We have mentioned already, in passing, Now, what are the ‘grave scientific
how Dr Aland asserts in his pamphlet errors in external standards’ which
that, in some cases, the early Church the early Church Fathers committed?
Fathers came to choose the right
books but on ‘erroneous premises’. For one, says Dr Aland, the Church
Fathers were mistaken about the
Says Dr Aland: apostolic authorship of some of the
books. Says he, the Epistles of
It cannot be gainsaid that the Ignatius were not included in the
external standards which the Canon because they were not
early Church applied in written by an apostle. But Jude and
canonizing the New Testament certain books were admitted into
Scriptures are, when looked at the Canon, because ‘supposedly’
from the viewpoint of modern they were written by an apostle,
scientific knowledge, insufficient when, in fact, they really were not.
and frequently even wrong. The And thus, he argues for considering
views accepted by the present- deleting them.
day New Testament critics on
matters of authorship or date of Says Dr Aland:
the New Testament Scriptures
are, in many cases, different from …[S]imply because of this
those held in the early Church… obvious lack of apostolicity no
[p. 14, emphasis added] one even thought of accepting
the Epistles of Ignatius into the
[I]t is clear as the noonday that Canon, whereas the Epistle of
even in the previous age of the Jude (and others), because of
Church [the third century] the the declaration of authorship
9
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 10
So, Dr Aland denies that 2 and 3 John, The titles aside, the Pauline and
Jude, and 2 Peter were really written by Catholic Epistles, and the Gospel of
those men. John, are quite specific as to who
wrote them by the opening statements
Similarly, Dr Aland hints at his belief made within the Epistles themselves.
that the Four Gospels, noble as he Though there is some variation in the
considers them to be, were nonetheless exact wording of the headings in the
not written by the Apostles to whom Synoptic Gospels, yet they all agree
they were ascribed. He states that, in with all the Church Fathers as to who
reality, those Gospels were compiled wrote them. (As we’ve mentioned,
from a previous Gospel, and then, these Scrivener’s Plain Introduction explains
four new versions were ‘distinguished some of these variations.) There really
from each other by the names of is no reason why we should doubt the
authors’, hinting that the books were authorship of the Synoptic Gospels;
not really written by those men. there is no manuscript or patristic
evidence to the contrary. Much more is
We now quote Dr Aland again. the case with the Catholic Epistles, the
Epistles of Paul, and the Gospel of
It is certain that in many John. The internal evidence of the
communities there were, besides books themselves makes it beyond
one or more of the four Gospels, doubt who the authors are. If we can
also apocryphal gospels in use, doubt who wrote the Gospel of John
sometimes even in official use. and the Catholic Epistles, when the
The starting point must, however, books themselves tell us who wrote
generally have lain with one them, we may also doubt many of the
Gospel, which was the Gospel; the facts and doctrines within those books!
use of several Gospels together
(only now are they distinguished And so, we find in Dr Aland a
from each other by the names of scepticism approaching that of
10
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 11
11
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 12
For this reason, in the earlier editions To explain the above footnote briefly,
of the NIV we find statements like this what Dr Aland is saying is, ‘The following
one which is printed at the beginning of early texts omit John 7.53–8.11, and we
John 8: give those readings an {A} reading’.
(He refuses even to consider evaluating
The earliest and most reliable the other reading, which he considers
manuscripts and other ancient spurious.) The {A} means, ‘We believe
witnesses do not have this to be the true reading, with
John 7:53–8:11.8 virtually absolute certainty’. Aland then
lists p66 and p75, two early papyrus
These words echo Dr Aland’s words in manuscripts found in upper Egypt by
his magnus opus entitled The Text of Martin Bodmer—in the same area
the New Testament, written in where the infamous Gnostic library of
collaboration with his wife Barbara, and the Nag Hammadi cave was
translated into English by Erroll F. discovered. (Upper Egypt was infested
Rhodes.9 In that work, page 232, we with Gnostics.) Aland then also lists ℵ
find the following explanation for the or Sinaiticus, a manuscript so called
use of brackets in the footnotes of the because it was discovered by
UBS and Nestle-Aland Greek texts: Constantin von Tischendorf (a textual
critic who also was a heretic) ‘on a
Words enclosed in single shelf’, unused, in a monastery in
brackets [ ] have only a dubious Mount Sinai. Aland proceeds to list ‘A’,
claim to authenticity as part of which is Codex Alexandrinus, a
the original New Testament manuscript that Theodore Beza of the
writings. A text enclosed in Reformation in Geneva had, but which
double brackets [[ ]] is clearly not he rejected along with the rest of the
part of the original text; e.g., Reformers, because of that
however early the tradition of the manuscript’s many historical and
pericope of the Woman Taken in grammatical errors. Aland then also
Adultery [in John 7:53–8:11] may lists ‘B,’ which is Codex Vaticanus,
be, it is certain that these verses which was for centuries in the Vatican,
did not form a part of the original and which was known of by Erasmus,
text of the gospel of John when it the compiler of the first versions of
was first circulated in the Church. Textus Receptus. Erasmus rejected
[emphasis added] Vaticanus out of hand as corrupt.11
After ‘B’, Dr Aland lists ‘C’, which is
How does Dr Aland come to this Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus, so
conclusion? We may see from his called because it also contains a Greek
notes on John 7.53–8.11, found in the translation of thirty-eight sermons by
first edition of the United Bible an early Church Father named Ephraem
Societies’ Greek text (1966).10 In this of Syria. This manuscript is similar to
12
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 13
13
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 14
early Egyptian papyri and upon his three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew,
inferences which he draws from the Mark, and Luke) differ from each
genuine problems of the authorship of other on a number of particulars.
certain patristic and apocryphal works. Another reason for these
(There were indeed many spurious differences is that each of these
works of that period that claimed to inspired evangelists wrote from
have been written by the apostles. his own point of view and
However, Aland infers from this that according to his own literary plan.
also certain books of the New But these differences are not
Testament were not written by the men contradictions. By faith we know
whose names appear in the titles, but that the Holy Spirit does not
rather, they were written by men using contradict Himself and that if at
pseudonyms.) But before we proceed any point we are unable to
to Dr Aland’s views, let us look at the harmonize the several Gospel
orthodox view of the authorship of the narratives with each other it is
Four Gospels, from Edward Hills’s because some fact has escaped
famous book, Believing Bible Study, us or has not been revealed.12
published by Christian Research Press
in 1967. On page 34 of that book, In addition to those deeds and
Dr Hills correctly states: words of Jesus which all the
Apostles were able to remember
When the time approached, in and which formed the substance
the plan of God, for the oral of the oral Gospel and of Matthew,
Gospel to be set down in writing, Mark, and Luke, the first three
Matthew, an Apostle, and Mark written Gospels, there were
and Luke, followers and deeper elements in the teaching
companions of the Apostles, were of our Lord which were retained
inspired by the Holy Spirit to mainly in the sensitive mind of
perform the task. The Gospel John, ‘the disciple whom Jesus
which these three evangelists loved.’ For many years the Apostle
wrote down was the same oral John meditated privately on these
Gospel which had been preached sublime discourses of the Saviour.
everywhere, and was expressed Finally, in his old age he was
in the same familiar words. This, inspired by the Holy Spirit to add
we may well believe, is why the his Gospel to the other three…13
written Gospels of Matthew,
Mark, and Luke agree together so Dr Hills proceeds on page 35 to specify
closely in wording and in subject how likewise the Catholic Epistles, and
matter. At the same time, all the epistles of Paul, were then
however, there were differences. written by the very apostles whose
Matthew wrote down the Gospel names appear in those inspired books.
as he remembered it. Those
other Apostles from whom Mark We have seen how Dr Hills asserts (and
and Luke received their rightly so) that the authors of the Four
information remembered the Gospels were indeed those whose
Gospel in a somewhat different names appear in the titles of those
way. This is one reason why the inspired books. And what does Dr Hills
14
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 15
say of those who say otherwise? Let us the Spirit of truth, is come, he will
see how he addresses the notion that guide you into all truth’. The Spirit of
the Apostle John was not the author of God is a Spirit of truth, who only leads
the Gospel of John, from The King James his disciples into the truth. This was
Version Defended, pages 69–70 (again, especially so with the inspired apostles
published by Christian Research Press). and evangelists who penned the books
of the New Testament. The Spirit of
The most common hypothesis, God would never inspire a man to sign
however, among naturalistic critics or inscribe a book with a pseudonym.
is that the Gospel of John was Nor would the Spirit of God, who
written not by the Apostle John promised to remain with the true
but by another John called the Church for ever, allow the Church to
Elder John, who lived at Ephesus corrupt the words of God, so that they
at the end of the first century A. D. should ascribe a book to a false
and who also wrote the Epistles author. Rather, Isaiah 59.21 tells us
of John. This would make the that the Spirit of God, and God’s words,
Gospel of John a forgery, since it would remain with His true Church, for
claims to have been written by the ever. Accordingly, the true Church would
disciple whom Jesus loved not willingly contaminate the text; and
(John 21:24), that intimate any unintentional corruptions, by the
follower who beheld Christ’s glory Holy Spirit working in Christ’s Church
(John 1:14), who leaned on his would also be found out and purged.
bosom (John 13:23), and who
viewed with wondering eye the But what does Kurt Aland say on this
blood and water flowing down matter? We proceed by examining
from his riven side (John 19:35).14 ‘The Problem of Anonymity and
[emphasis added] Pseudonymity in Christian Literature of
the First Two Centuries’.
In other words, anyone who would say
that the Gospel of John was not written
by the Apostle John, would make that
Kurt Aland on the authorship
inspired book a forgery, given the of the Four Gospels
internal claims to the contrary.
On page 5 of this work, Dr Aland says
And indeed it would be. If this author the following:
were to write this present work, and
then subscribe with Edward Hills’s Let us start with anonymous
name, would it not be a forgery? It literature. In my opinion, it is
would: a most dishonourable and beyond doubt that all the gospels
unethical forgery at that! were published anonymously. Our
present opinion about their
We may not believe that the Holy Spirit authors dates from information
is the author of lies. No, the Spirit of which derives from the time of
God is emphatically the Spirit of truth: Papias or later. Not only the four
John 14.17, John 15.26, John 16.13, canonical ones, but also the other
and 1 John 4.6. Indeed, John 16.13 gospels of the earlier period were
specifically tells us, ‘Howbeit when he, not thought of as ‘the gospel of
15
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 16
16
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 17
note that even p66 has for its title ‘The manuscripts in the Christian world at
Gospel according to John’, as Aland the time, because, indeed, there were
has already admitted. p66 is the same well over a million, or perhaps, millions,
manuscript as Bodmer Papyrus II.) of Christians. It is not at all responsible
to make conclusions from such a
Suppose you were a heart patient. statistically insignificant sampling as
Would you want to take a newly three manuscripts out of tens of
patented heart medicine that had been thousands.
tested using only three people? Or
suppose you were a businessman. Nor is it advisable to base our
Would you want to predict marketing conclusions upon how certain very
trends for your new product, based on early Church Fathers may have referred
a survey of three people? to the Gospels. Again, we have very
few writings of any Church Fathers
I think not. Then why should standards from that early period: only three or
for research studies be lower for four, in fact.
examining texts of the Holy Writ?
So Dr Aland’s assertion that ‘none of
Also to be considered is this fact: all the early manuscripts of the period had
three of the above-mentioned the titles and subscriptions in them’ is
manuscripts are from the same untenable. He cannot prove this. Three
locale—upper Egypt, not far from the manuscripts and three or four early
Nag Hammadi cavern—where a Gnostic Church Fathers prove nothing,
library was uncovered. Certainly, we especially when one of the three
would not want to take a new heart earliest manuscripts, a copy of the
medicine, if we were a heart patient, Gospel of John, indeed has the title
that had only been tested on three ‘The Gospel according to John’ in it.
members of the same family! Why, no!
They may have dramatically different Moreover, with respect to the earliest
genetics than we have. We may suffer Church Fathers—the so called
harmful side effects that they wouldn’t ‘Apostolic Fathers’—none of them deny
because of their genetic makeup. that the Four Gospels were written by
Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Rather,
So also with the three manuscripts the writings we have of these simply
under consideration. They all came don’t reference the Four Gospels.
from a certain ‘family’. They all came Three of the early Fathers to which
from Upper Egypt, an area known to be Aland refers are Clement of Rome,
heavily infested with Gnostics and Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of
Gnostic literature. And we know from Smyrna. In the only written work we
the early Church Fathers that heretics have of Polycarp, Polycarp liberally
of that period, especially the Gnostics, quotes from the Epistle of Paul to the
hewed and hacked the Scriptures. One Philippians, but he does not cite the
only need read Irenaeus and Tertullian Four Gospels. Ignatius mainly appeals
for confirmation of this. to the authority of the local bishops.
Clement mainly appeals to the Old
Moreover, there would unquestionably Testament and to natural reasoning.
have been tens of thousands of However, we only have a total of about
17
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 18
eleven works from these men, plus two Dr Aland’s claim that the
or three anonymous works like The Catholic and Pastoral Epistles
Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle to
Diognetus. were written by pseudonymous
authors examined
Moreover, beginning with Papias, a little
after AD 100, and especially with On page 4 of ‘Anonymity and
Irenaeus, at around AD 180 (Adversus Pseudonymity’, Dr Aland says:
Haereses III,1.1), we find all the early
Fathers saying, to the man, that the To the category of pseudonymous
Four Gospels were indeed written by writings I would like to ascribe:
the men whose names appear in the the Pastorals, 1 and 2 Peter,
titles of those books. James, Jude, possibly Hebrews,
2 and 3 John, possibly the gospel
Though the titles themselves vary in of John, the Didache, and the
their words, particularly in Matthew, non-anonymous New Testament
Mark, and Luke, yet they all apocrypha. Whether or not we
unanimously agree as to whom the have to assign the epistles to the
authors are. There is really no Colossians and to the Ephesians
manuscript or patristic evidence that to this category is controversial.
warrants Dr Aland’s overturning the
longstanding, generally held view. (A ‘pseudonymous’ writing would be
one that was written by an author who
As we proved from Dr Hills, to claim was using a false name, a name that
that the Gospel of John was written was not his own. Aland is here claiming
by another would make that work a that the authors of the Pastorals, 1 and
forgery. This is especially so with the 2 Peter, James, Jude, 2 and 3 John and
Gospel of John, which supplies possibly Hebrews, were not written by
considerable internal evidence as to the apostles whose names appear in
its author. Its author, as Hills notes, the titles of the books, nor by the men
was one who was present with the professing to have written them in the
Lord at the Last Supper, who was an opening verses, but that these epistles
eyewitness of the Lord’s sufferings on were rather written by other men, who
the cross, and who was present when feigned being those other men.)
the Lord manifested himself to the
apostles when they had been fishing, On page 6 he continues his discourse
in John 21. Yet, as we shall see, on pseudonymous writings. In this
Aland will later specifically claim in section, he explains his hypothesis as
his History of Christianity that the to why these writings came to be. He
Gospel of John was not written by the says that the writer, an anonymous
Apostle John. writer, was ‘under the power of the
Spirit’, and because of this, it could be
But now we proceed to examine said that it was not he, but Christ and
Dr Aland’s claims that the Pastoral the apostles preaching through him.
Epistles and the Catholic Epistles were Thus, Aland opines, it was actually
written under ‘pseudonyms’. legitimate for the man, a non-apostle,
to subscribe an apostle’s name to his
18
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 19
19
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 20
as these: 1 Corinthians 16.21 ‘The reading. The Holy Spirit of God would
salutation of me Paul with mine own never inspire a man to forge the
hand’; or, again, Colossians 4.18 ‘The signature of another to his own
salutation by the hand of me Paul. document; neither would he ‘inspire’ a
Remember my bonds. Grace be with man to feign being another famous
you. Amen’. It is commonly understood man while writing a text.
that Paul personally handwrote that
salutation into the epistle, that its Of course, it was the Church’s
readers could then ascertain Paul’s discerning that the Didache had not
own personal handwriting. Of course, been written by an apostle that caused
when the amanuensis of the epistle them to reject it from the Canon.
also personally carried the epistle to
the congregation to whom it was But Aland does not acknowledge this,
written, he also would confirm that Paul because he does not know ‘the
indeed had written those words, and scriptures, neither the power of God’
that Paul indeed had dictated the (Mark 12.24). He continues on page 8:
entire epistle.
When the pseudonymous writings
In summary, then, Paul always certified of the New Testament claimed the
that the letters he was sending were authorship of the most prominent
indeed by him, and by no forger. He did apostles only, this was not a
this by writing a personal handwritten skillful trick of the so-called fakers,
salutation in the letters, in the in order to guarantee the highest
presence of those eyewitnesses who possible reputation and the widest
would bring the letter to the church to possible circulation for their work,
which it was written. In all cases, but the logical conclusion of the
eyewitnesses of Paul’s writing the letter presupposition that the Spirit
were the ones who delivered it. himself was the author of the
work. [emphasis added]
Indeed, Paul’s hearers would have been
looking for such confirmations, given Notice carefully the words ‘when the
that Paul had specifically warned his pseudonymous writings of the New
hearers not to be deceived by ‘letter as Testament claimed the authorship of
from us’ (2 Thessalonians 2.2)—Paul’s the most prominent apostles’. What he
salutation with his own hand was ‘the is saying here is that there are books
token in every epistle’ (3.17). in our New Testament which were
written by pseudonymous authors,
Nor can we accept Aland’s view that a writers forging the name of an apostle
man’s being inspired by the Spirit as being the author of the work. Aland
would justify his signing another man’s proceeds to state openly that the
name to his inspired document; not at Pastorals and 2 Peter were
all. Paul did not do this, and he was pseudonymous works.
certainly under the inspiration of the
Spirit. The Spirit is a Spirit of truth, who So, he says on page 9:
guides Christian believers into the
knowledge of the truth, including who It is much more difficult to
wrote the epistle that they were answer some other questions
20
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 21
21
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 22
22
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 23
James, the brother of the Lord; by is the same Kurt Aland of 1961 and
Jude, James’s brother; by the 1962, only worse.
prince of the apostles, Peter; by
John, the son of Zebedee; if the Certainly Aland’s entirely subjective
Gospel of John was really written condemnation of the Catholic Epistles
by the beloved disciple of Jesus), reveals him for what he is: a German
then the real question arises: was higher critic. He is a higher critic who
there really a Jesus? Can Jesus uses subjective reasoning to adduce,
really have lived, if the writings of in his opinion, how the text was
his closest companions are filled created and transmitted. Specifically,
with so little of his reality? The he makes subjective assessments of
catholic epistles, for example, those Epistles, to adduce that they
have so little in them of the could not have been written by the
reality of the historical Jesus and eyewitnesses of the Lord, because
his power, that it suffices for they demonstrate so little of the
James, for example, to mention historic Christ and His power. Accordingly,
only Christ’s name in passing… he infers they were not written by
those eyewitnesses, but by other men
When we observe this—assuming who forged the names of the apostles
that the writings about which we to their texts. Clearly, in A History of
are speaking really come from Christianity Aland still holds to his
their alleged authors—it almost blasphemous notions which he
then appears as if Jesus were a expressed in his earlier work, ‘The
mere phantom and that the real Problem of Anonymity and Pseudonymity’:
theological power lay not with that men, under the power of some
him, but with the apostles and ‘spirit’, forged the names of apostles
with the earthly church…’ to their works because they were
[p. 106, emphasis added] speaking as the apostles did (though
not in their original power and
To the writer of this tract, the experimental knowledge).
foolishness of these statements
almost equals the wickedness of their We have already seen that Aland
blasphemies. The epistles of Peter doubts the apostolic authorship of the
paint Christ as a mere phantom? The Gospel of John in the passage quoted
life of Christ expressed in the precepts above. He was so bold as to say: ‘(…if
of James had to have been written by a the Gospel of John was really written by
man who really didn’t know Christ at the beloved disciple of Jesus), then the
all? These statements are not only real question arises: was there really a
wicked; they are downright strange. Jesus?’ It is astounding to this author
that Dr Aland can even dare to state
How can a man who holds the inspired that the Gospel of John paints the
Catholic Epistles in such contempt, historical Christ as a mere phantom,
making such derogatory statements as but he is bold and shameless to do so,
these, really believe that they are indeed is he not? But now, we briefly consider
the inspired, inerrant Word of God, that remarks proving his scepticism with
merit a place in the inspired Canon? He regards to the apostolic authorship of
simply cannot. The Kurt Aland of 1985 all the Gospels.
23
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 24
In the passage below, Aland condemns Despite all the lack of principles,
two notions. He condemns the higher despite all the arbitrariness,
critical notion that the Four Gospels despite all the errors—what the
were written in the second century. But church has received in the New
on the other hand, he condemns the Testament stands on an
notion that the Four Gospels were incomparably higher level than all
indeed written by the four evangelists the other early Christian
whose names appear in the titles of literature. None of the writings of
those books. Says he: the Apostolic Fathers can even
remotely compare with those of
Thus Mark’s Gospel was written the New Testament…’
shortly before the year 70, and [pp. 113–114, emphasis added]
Matthew’s Gospel not too long
afterward. Luke’s Gospel So, even though in Dr Aland’s opinion
originated shortly before 80 the Catholic Epistles are rather poor—
(prudent scholarship will not they depict a phantom Christ and are
allow us to date it very much obviously the work of men who did not
later), and John’s Gospel belongs know the reality and power of the
to the time around A.D. 90–95. historical Christ—yet their work still
The late dating of these Gospels somehow excels the Apostolic Fathers
far into the second century including Ignatius. Perhaps he thought
(which used to be considered up- that he might appease us by these
to-date and by which people comforting remarks.
judged a theologian’s
‘scholarship,’ just as people on Elsewhere in the work, Aland questions
the other side measured a the Pauline authorship of Ephesians—
theologian’s piety by whether he but we defer further consideration of
held the names ascribed to the this work. It is abundantly clear Dr Aland
individual’s writings as really was not of the true Church, nor in the
‘genuine’) has become obsolete, line of the true Church. Hence,
and we hope will not return. according to Isaiah 59.20–21, he is
[p. 99, emphasis added] not one of those by whom the true
words of God should be preserved.
So we see that Dr Aland rejects out-of-
hand the authorship of the Four
Gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
Conclusions
John, with even greater vehemence
than he had in 1962. Dr Aland has exercised a very powerful
and dangerous influence upon the
Only in one respect does Aland seem textual views of our modern Bible
to have mitigated his contempt for the translators. He clearly does not believe
Catholic Epistles. Previously, in The the Bible to be the Word of God.
Problem of the New Testament Canon, Believing the Bible to be the Word of
he had said that the Epistles of God is plainly the foundation of saving
Ignatius excelled them. However, in faith. Faith comes by hearing,
A History of Christianity, he revises his Romans 10.17 tells us; but this
views to the following: hearing is by the Word of God. Paul’s
24
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 25
first epistle to the Thessalonians 2.13 which I have put in thy mouth, shall not
specifically tells us that those who depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the
believe did not receive the Word of God mouth of thy seed, nor out of the
as if it were the word of men, but as mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the
the Word of God. ‘For this cause also LORD, from henceforth and for ever.’
thank we God without ceasing,
because, when ye received the word of We grant that there are good men and
God which ye heard of us, ye received it women who mistakenly have embraced
not as the word of men, but as it is in the ‘new scholarship’ and the newer
truth, the word of God, which effectually translations based upon Greek texts
worketh also in you that believe.’ By the compiled by men like Dr Aland. (The
phrase ‘you that believe’, Paul clearly textual critics of the modern Greek text
shows that he means that all believers, who preceded Dr Aland were of a like
along with the Thessalonians, are of bent, but reviewing all their doctrinal
such a mind. Accordingly, anyone who views is beyond the scope of this
does not believe the Bible to be the paper.) But to such good men and
Word of God is not a true believer. women, men and women who actually
do believe in the inerrancy and
Being as Dr Aland was not a true infallibility of God’s words, yet who have
believer in any sense, we cannot deem embraced the Nestle-Aland text, we
him to be of the line of the true Church would beseech them to consider their
by which the true readings of Scripture ways. Is it wise to put one’s stock in
would be preserved. such an important matter as to what
really comprises the Word of God, into
We need to be grounded in a theology the hands of a serious errorist like Dr
of the Scriptures which is grounded in Aland? Does not God’s Word and its
the Scripture itself. And what saith the doctrine concerning its own inspiration
Scripture? and transmission in every jot and tittle,
and that, through the true Church, that
*2 Timothy 3.16-17 ‘All scripture is Church that ‘turns from transgression’,
given by inspiration of God, and is make it altogether unfitting for an
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for unbeliever to edit its sacred texts?
correction, for instruction in What saith the Scripture?
righteousness: that the man of God
may be perfect, throughly furnished ‘And the Redeemer shall come to Zion,
unto all good works.’ and unto them that turn from
transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
*Proverbs 30.5 ‘Every word of God is As for me, this is my covenant with
pure: he is a shield unto them that put them’ (emphasis added). With whom is
their trust in him.’ this gracious and glorious covenant?
And what are its provisions?
*Isaiah 59.20–21 ‘And the Redeemer
shall come to Zion, and unto them that The covenant is with them that ‘turn
turn from transgression in Jacob, saith from transgression’. It is with those
the LORD. As for me, this is my who know saving repentance unto life.
covenant with them, saith the LORD; My Granted, good men of the past appear
spirit that is upon thee, and my words at times to have cited a poor version of
25
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 26
a text—if indeed their own works were 5. Kurt Aland, A History of Christianity, 2 vols.
copied correctly! But the true Church at Philadelphia, PA, USA: Fortress Press, 1985.
large nonetheless recovered the better 6. Aland, Problem of the New Testament Canon,
reading. To that Church, and to its p. v.
Providentially Preserved text, we ought
to, and indeed must, look. 7. Edward Freer Hills, The King James Version
Defended (Des Moines, IA, USA: The Christian
Research Press, 1984), pp. 104–5.
We need to stay with the versions of
the Bible translated from the historic 8. Holy Bible: New International Version (East
texts of the true Church—the Textus Brunswick, NJ, USA: International Bible Society,
Receptus in the Greek for the New 1986), p. 83.
Testament and the Hebrew Masoretic 9. Kurt and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New
Text for the Old. The translators of our Testament, Erroll F. Rhodes, trans., 2nd ed. Grand
Authorised Version were Bible-believing Rapids, MI, USA: William B. Eerdmans
men, under the covenant of God. Let us Publishing Co., 1995.
stay with the ancient landmarks, with 10. Greek New Testament, 1st ed. Stuttgart,
the tried and faithful work of the Germany: Wurtemburg Bible Societies,1966. This
translators of the Authorised Version. footnote was retained in the second edition
(1968), changed in the third (1975) to indicate
*Jeremiah 6.16 ‘Thus saith the LORD, that the passage should be included, and
Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask changed in the fourth (1993) to again indicate
for the old paths, where is the good omission.
way, and walk therein, and ye shall find 11. Erasmus no doubt was aware of the Vatican
rest for your souls.’ manuscript perhaps as early as 1521. His
familiarity is more fully seen in his 1533
correspondence with Sepulveda regarding the
Endnotes differences between Vaticanus and Erasmus’s
1. Michael Marlowe, ‘Bibliography of Textual Greek texts, and the prior’s similarity to the text of
Criticism’, www.bible-researcher.com/bib-a.html, the Latin Vulgate. Yet Erasmus chose not to
accessed 27 February 2007. correct his Greek text to reflect those differences.
It is thought by many that Erasmus found
2. Kurt Aland, ‘The Problem of Anonymity and Vaticanus to be inferior to the Greek manuscripts
Pseudonymity in Christian Literature of the First on which he built his texts—and perhaps a
Two Centuries’, The Authorship and Integrity of corruption of the Greek text—and thus chose not
the New Testament: some recent studies by to use it.
Kurt Aland, et al. London, England: SPCK, 1965.
12. Edward Hills, Believing Bible Study (Des
3. Kurt Aland, The Problem of the New Testament Moines, IA, USA: The Christian Research Press,
Canon. London, England: A. R. Mowbray & Co., 1967), p. 34.
1962.
13. Ibid.
4. F. H. A. Scrivener, Plain Introduction to the
Criticism of the New Testament, 2 vols. Eugene, 14. Hills, The King James Version Defended,
OR, USA: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. pp. 69–70.
26
A122 e:A122 Kurt Aland 22/11/2007 13:03 Page 28