Was Morton Smith a forger?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18321
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by Secret Alias »

Let me ask SG. When does he think the first criticism of Morton Smith or Secret Mark was published WHICH WASN'T DEVELOPED FROM (a) personal animus or (b) motivated by a defense of 'the true religion'? When did 'good' research into the forgery of Secret Mark begin?
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2269
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by StephenGoranson »

that day, Dec '60
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by John T »

Let's see if we can figure this out. Based on excerpts from “‘Secret Mark’: An Amazing Discovery,” Biblical Archaeology Review 35.6 (2009): 44–46, 48. Morton goes and lives in the Mar Saba monastery (1941). He sees an old book that turned out to be a 1646 edition of the letters of Ignatius of Antioch edited by Isaac Voss. He notices that the last couple of pages are left blank. Smith has a penchant for magic and homoeroticism. He comes back 17 years and lo and behold the blank pages now contained a handwritten Greek manuscript of the 18th century (judging by the handwriting), which purported to be a copy of a letter by the second-century church leader Clement of Alexandria. Morton takes photos of the letter and spends the next 15 years studying it. When scholars go back to Mar Saba and find the book they removed it from the monastery and take it to the Patriarchate library in Jerusalem where they wanted to scientifically test the ink. Sucks, darn, wouldn't you know it, no testing is allowed, certainty no dating of the ink. Of course scholars who visited the library later were not permitted to see the book. Soon after the letter disappears. Who could've thunk it?

Now to be clear, I did not say Smith forged the letter, nor am I saying that he wrote the letter for a monk at Mar Saba to forge. We know that because he needed help in deciphering the text. Smith wanted Jesus to be gay so bad that the monks gave him a touched up (doctored) manuscript made to order.

I understand that monks at the Mar Saba monastery take a vow of silence but I think that after the scholars left the monastery with Smith's Clement Letter, they all busted out in belly laughter. :lol:
Secret Alias
Posts: 18321
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by Secret Alias »

that day, Dec '60
I don't understand. What substantive issues were raised in December? Or is it the Trump "I hear" argument.
AP: But that didn’t mean that you supported what Assange is doing?

TRUMP: No, I don’t support or unsupport. It was just information. They shouldn’t have allowed it to get out. If they had the proper defensive devices on their internet, you know, equipment, they wouldn’t even allow the FBI. How about this — they get hacked, and the FBI goes to see them, and they won’t let the FBI see their server. But do you understand, nobody ever writes it. Why wouldn’t (former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John) Podesta and Hillary Clinton allow the FBI to see the server? They brought in another company that I hear is Ukrainian-based.

AP: CrowdStrike?

TRUMP: That’s what I heard. I heard it’s owned by a very rich Ukrainian, that’s what I heard. But they brought in another company to investigate the server. Why didn’t they allow the FBI in to investigate the server? I mean, there is so many things that nobody writes about. It’s incredible. https://apnews.com/article/c810d7de280a ... ac74690c83
Surely you don't mean that the minute 'questions' are raised that's the legitimate starting point of a serious investigation. There are ALWAYS questions raised about just about everything. My question was when did the serious questioning of the document begin in your opinion.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by John T »

Secret Alias wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:26 am Let me ask SG. When does he think the first criticism of Morton Smith or Secret Mark was published WHICH WASN'T DEVELOPED FROM (a) personal animus or (b) motivated by a defense of 'the true religion'? When did 'good' research into the forgery of Secret Mark begin?
"I [ Harvard professor Helmut Koester] first met Morton Smith in 1960 at a conference at which he presented Secret Mark for the first time. After that meeting I sought him out, asked for a copy of the transcribed text and began discussing the matter with him. I especially criticized him for suggesting that the initiation rite in the Secret Gospel indicated some homosexual ritual. He was quite open to my criticism, and we became friends. presents a fascinating textual analysis of Secret Mark. Koester includes an account of his relationship with Columbia professor Morton Smith who discovered Secret Mark (or forged it) and why he believes it is authentic."...Koester

Biblical Archaeology Review 35:6, November/December 2009
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2269
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by StephenGoranson »

if you don't think so, see reports in NY Times.
associating me with DJT is deeply disgusting, yet sadly typical of you SA.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18321
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by Secret Alias »

That's not the point. Our definition of 'serious' is I guess different. "Where's the car key?" is a question but not a serious question. It's a question. "There's a murder here let's investigate who did it?" is a serious question. When did the first "serious questions" get raised? You seem to be unable or unwilling to distinguish between "questions" and "serious questions."
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2269
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by StephenGoranson »

Pierson Parker
seriously questioned
that day
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by John T »

Secret Alias wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:26 am Let me ask SG. When does he think the first criticism of Morton Smith or Secret Mark was published WHICH WASN'T DEVELOPED FROM (a) personal animus or (b) motivated by a defense of 'the true religion'? When did 'good' research into the forgery of Secret Mark begin?
It depends on your subjective use of "good". Good by academic scholars or good enough for Huller? As we all know, nothing is good or true unless it is good and true in Huller's eyes.

"Stephen Carlson’s The Gospel Hoax [2005]: Morton Smith’s Invention of Secret Mark.15 The title says it all. Smith perpetrated the forgery to get back at his colleagues for not recognizing his genius.16 Carlson, a lawyer and currently a Ph.D. student in the Graduate Program in Religion (New Testament) at Duke University, claims to have found clues “in places scholars do not normally look.” Carlson relies on anomalies in the text that in his view confirm the forgery. For example, the handwriting reflects a forger’s tremor, and certain letterforms closely resemble the forms of these same letters found in marginal notations written by Smith."...Biblical Archaeology Review 35:6, November/December 2009 “Secret Mark”: An Amazing Discovery

Even, Bart Ehrman and Craig Evan thought it was a forgery. :cheers:
Secret Alias
Posts: 18321
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Was Morton Smith a forger?

Post by Secret Alias »

There are experts on both sides of the issue. As I said scholarship isn't dogma. At best we strive for suggestions. Whether or not people take up our suggestions is out of our hands. Scholarship isn't religion.
Post Reply