Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics (74 page)

And so, the stylistic unity of the work shows that whoever wrote the rest of the narrative of Acts also wrote the we-passages. Moreover, one cannot argue that the author edited out the stylistic oddities of the source otherwise to make it conform to his narrative, since the reason for thinking that the passages come from a different source in the first place is a stylistic oddity (the shift in person). If he edited everything else, why did the author of Acts not edit the pronouns? It is not convincing to argue that the first person pronouns were left in the source—or added to it—precisely in order to show that at this point of the narrative the author is using a source, even a particularly reliable source. When are first-person pronouns ever used in narratives to indicate the presence of a source?
⁷³
What they are used for, with remarkable frequency, as will be seen shortly, is to verify that the author was an eyewitness to the accounts being narrated. First-person narratives authorize an account as having come from someone who would know the truth of what he relates, not in order to indicate that the author has used someone else’s account.

3. The Use of First-Person Accounts in Narratives of Sea-Travel

First suggested by E. Plümacher and argued most influentially by Vernon Robbins, this is the view that the author of Acts was following standard narratological practice from antiquity, where travels on sea were typically narrated in the first person.
⁷⁴
As Robbins puts it, after citing examples from the Odyssey, the Aeneid, Alcaeus, Heraclitus, Aeschylus, Varro, and others, “There is a natural propensity for portraying sea voyages through the medium of first-person narration.”
⁷⁵

As attractive as the view appeared for a time, it has come under sustained attack by those who have looked yet deeper into the matter.
⁷⁶
John Reumann, for example, rejects “the notion that ‘we’ for a sea voyage was a ‘classical convention’ in antiquity, let alone a necessary feature of style.”
⁷⁷
And after giving numerous counterexamples, Susan Praeder concludes: “There are first person and third person sea voyages in ancient literature, no passage is set in first person narration simply because it is a sea voyage, and there are no convincing parallels to the shifts
from third person narration to first person narration in Acts.”
⁷⁸
Instead, significantly for my purposes here, “first person and third person narration are signs of authorial participation and nonparticipation, respectively.”
⁷⁹

In my view, that is exactly right. With the case of Acts, however, the claim to participation is false, since the author was not, in fact, a companion of Paul. And a book that makes a false authorial claim is a forgery.

4. The Author Is Making a False Claim to Have Been an Eyewitness

Historians were commonly maligned in antiquity for not knowing what they were talking about. Polybius, for example attacks the historical narratives of Timaeus because all of his knowledge was based on book learning, rather than personal experience. His fault: “he does not write from the evidence of his eyes.”
⁸⁰
As a nonparticipant in the kinds of stories he narrates “he is guilty of many errors and misstatements, and if he ever comes near the truth he resembles those painters who make their sketches from stuffed bags.” He is like other historians “who approach the work in this bookish mood. We miss in them the vividness of facts, as this impression can only be produced by the personal experience of the author.” Polybius goes on, then, to malign historical writers “who have not been through the events themselves.”
⁸¹

In his first preface, the author of Luke-Acts stresses his personal involvement in doing his research (book learning, of sorts) into the events he is to narrate (Luke 1:1–4). As we have seen, the first person “we” necessarily embodies the “I” of the two prefaces to the two works. It is best to understand the use of the plural pronoun in Acts as an authorizing technique. In using the pronoun in this way Luke is not—contrary to what is widely claimed—doing something highly unusual in Christian or other literature. Quite the contrary, the first-person pronoun (both singular and plural) was widely used in ancient texts, Christian and otherwise, precisely in order to provide authority for the account, as a rapid survey can show. This list provides a number of instances, and is meant to be illustrative rather than exhaustive:

• John 21:24—“And we know that his testimony is true.” The author differentiates himself (as is not always recognized) from the “beloved disciple” to imply a personal acquaintance with him and his testimony and to provide a firsthand assurance of the accuracy of his testimony.

• 1 Cor. 15:8—“As to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” Paul uses the first person to stress that he can attest to the reality of the physical resurrection of Jesus.

• 2 Cor. 12:2—“I know a person in Christ who, fourteen years ago, was snatched up to the third heaven.” The “person” of course was probably Paul himself, and his account in the first person (“I know a person”) provides authorization that in fact this is an event that really happened; in the context the narrative is used, in part, to establish Paul’s credentials in the face of Corinthian opposition.

• 2 Peter 1:16–19—“We did not follow cleverly devised myths.… We heard this voice from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure.” The author, falsely claiming to be Peter, uses a first-person-plural narrative to place himself with other apostles in the presence of Jesus at the crucial moment of the Transfiguration in order to validate his own message and to denigrate the message of his opponents (who were
not
eyewitnesses).

• 1 John 1:1–4—“What we have heard and seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled … and we have seen and bear witness and proclaim to you the eternal life … what we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you so that you might have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the father and with his son Jesus Christ; and we are writing these things to you so that our joy might be made complete.” The prologue to 1 John is narrated in first-person plural, and it specifically stresses that the author and unnamed others (implied: the other apostles) had a real, tactile experience of the Word of Life.
⁸²
The physicality of the manifestation of the word—stressed in the Prologue—plays an enormous role in the rest of the account, in opposition to the secessionists who have denied that “Jesus Christ came in the flesh.” By narrating it in the first-person plural, the writer validates his alternative version, on the basis of personal experience.

• Gospel of Peter 26, 59–60—“But I and my companions were grieving and went into hiding, wounded in heart. For we were being sought out by them as if we were evildoers who wanted to burn the Temple. While these things were happening, we fasted and sat mourning and weeping, night and day, until the Sabbath.…” “But we, the twelve disciples of the Lord, wept and grieved; and each one returned to his home, grieving for what had happened. But I, Simon Peter, and my brother Andrew, took our nets and went off to the sea. And with us was Levi, the son of Alphaeus.”
⁸³
Un-like the canonical Gospels, this one is written in the first person by Peter, an unimpeachable authority for the accounts narrated.

• The (Greek) Apocalypse of Peter, passim—“When the Lord was seated on the Mount of Olives, his disciples came to him. And we besought him and entreated him.… ‘Declare to us what are the signs of your coming and of the end of the world.… And our Lord said to us.… And I, Peter, answered and said to him.… And he showed me in his right hand the souls of all men.” And so on. In the Akhmim fragment the realms are seen by Peter himself: “And I saw also another place opposite that one, very squalid; and it was a place of punishment.… And I saw the murders and those who were accomplices.…”
⁸⁴
The first-person narrative authorizes the account: Peter himself was given the tour of heaven and hell by Jesus.

• The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, passim—“The Savior … said to me, Peter, blessed are those who belong to the Father.…” “When he said this, I saw him apparently being arrested by them. I said, “What do I see Lord?” The entire account is narrated in the first person to verify the accuracy of what is reported to be the teachings of Jesus and the true account of his crucifixion.
⁸⁵

• The Apocryphon of John:—“One day when John the brother of James … went up to the temple,… a Pharisee named Arimanios came up to him and said to him, “Where is your teacher, whom you followed?”: I said to him.… The Pharisee said to me.… When I John heard this … I was distressed within.… At the moment I was thinking about this, look the heavens opened, all creation under heaven lit up, and the world shook.” The first-person narrative authorizes the vision that follows, and the mystical revelation that it entails of the origins of the pleroma and the world of humans.
⁸⁶

• The Apocryphon of James, passim—“You have asked me to send you a secret book revealed to me and Peter by the master, and I could not turn you down. … Be careful not to communicate to many people this book, that the Savior did not want to communicate even to all of us, his twelve disciples.”
⁸⁷
The author can assure the reader of the truth claims of the book, available only to the chosen few.

• Many others of the Nag Hammadi writings, for the same reasons.

• Irenaeus,
To Florinus
, quoted by Eusebius in
H.E
. 5. 20—“When I was still a boy I saw you in Lower Asia in Polycarp’s company. … I have a clearer recollection of events at that time than of recent happenings … so that I can describe the place where the blessed Polycarp sat and talked, his goings out and comings in, the character of his life, his personal appearance, his addresses to crowded congregations. I remember how he spoke of his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord; how he
repeated their words from memory; and how the things that he had heard them say about the Lord, his miracles and his teaching, things that he had heard direct from the eye-witnesses of the Word of Life, were proclaimed by Polycarp.…” Irenaeus can vouch for his firsthand knowledge of Polycarp, who had firsthand knowledge of the apostle John. Since Eusebius quotes this correspondence, he stands within a direct line of eyewitnesses back to the apostles of Jesus.

• Protevangelium Jacobi, ch. 18—“But I, Joseph, was walking, and I was not walking. I looked up to the vault of the sky, and I saw it standing still, and into the air, and I saw that it was greatly disturbed, and the birds of the sky were at rest. I looked down to the earth and saw a bowl laid out for some workers who were reclining to eat.”
⁸⁸
The chapter was not found in the oldest version of the Protevangelium but was added by a later redactor; its move from the third-person narrative about Joseph to a firsthand account of how time stood still when the Son of God appeared serves to authenticate the miraculous event of the incarnation by an eyewitness.

• Infancy Gospel of Thomas 1—“I, Thomas the Israelite, make this report to all of you, my brothers among the Gentiles, that you may know the magnificent childhood activities of our Lord Jesus Christ—all that he did after being born in our country.”
⁸⁹
In the epilogue found in the Latin version, an editor adds the claim, “I have written the things that I have seen … and behold, the entire house of Israel has seen … how many signs and miracles Jesus did.…” Both are editorial additions to the text, making them redactional forgeries. Both function to verify the accuracy of the reporting.

• Pseudo-Matthew, prologue—“I, James, son of Joseph the carpenter, who have lived in the fear of God, have carefully recorded everything I have seen with my own eyes that occurred at the time of the birth of the holy Mary and of the Savior.”
⁹⁰
The claim to be Jesus’ half-brother allows the author to set forth his narrative as deriving from an eyewitness.

• The Apostolic Constitutions 1.1 and passim—“The apostle and elders to all those who from among the gentiles have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ.…” “When we went forth among the Gentiles to preach the word of life.…” “We the twelve assembled together at Jerusalem …” “I Philip make this constitution.… I Bartholomew make this constitution … I Thomas make this constitution.… I Matthew … make a constitution.…” “I James, the son of Alphaeus, make a constitution.…” These directions for church leaders and polity come straight from the apostles themselves.

• The Martyrdom of Polycarp 9.15—“As he entered the stadium a voice came to Polycarp from heaven.… No one saw who had spoken, but those
among our people who were there heard the voice.” “And as the fire blazoned forth we beheld a marvel—we to whom it was granted to see, who have also been preserved to report the events to the others.” At precisely the moments at which the reader may doubt the account—when, that is, a supernatural element is introduced—the author introduces a first-person voice to assure the reader of the accuracy of what is related.
⁹¹

• The Martyrdom of Ignatius, 7—“Now these things took place on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of January, that is, on the twentieth of December, Sun and Senecio being then the consuls of the Romans for the second time. Having ourselves been eye-witnesses of these things.… When, therefore, we had with great joy witnessed these things, and had compared our several visions together, we sang praise to God, the giver of all good things, and expressed our sense of the happiness of the holy [martyr]; and now we have made known to you both the day and the time [when these things happened].”
⁹²
The accuracy of the report is guaranteed by having come from eyewitnesses.

• The Martyrdom of Marian and James, 1—“I refer to Marian and James.… Both of these … were bound to me not only by our common sharing in the mystery of our faith but also by the fact that we lived together in a family spirit.… And it was not without reason that in their close intimacy they laid upon me the task which I am about to fulfill.”
⁹³
A close companion of the martyrs presents himself as a particularly reliable witness to their deaths. The first person recurs throughout the narration, although the narrator, for some reason, is, unlike his companions, not in danger.