This is a revision of David Meade’s dissertation. Here’s a quick review below, with a link to the full review. The book is not very palatable to those of conservative persuasions. Yet, he honestly struggles with and posits a solution to the idea of pseudonymity and the authority of canon.

Contributions:

  • Demonstrates how one might consider these works to be pseudonymous and still authoritative, with an overarching theory.
  • Gallagher’s review says: “M.’s argument that certain NT authors used the device of pseudonymity not to demonstrate literary attribution but to continue authoritative tradition and apply its revealed wisdom to changing situations remains plausible”

Weaknesses:

  • Assumes the documents are pseudonymous in nature, without dealing with the question of pseudonymity.
  • His OT examples may not be able to establish a pattern for his NT examples. Isaiah and Proverbs were not regarded as properly pseudonymous even in the critical manner in which he describes them. Daniel may have grown in the intertestamental period, but the additions were rejected for their pseudonymity

FULL REVIEW

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *