List of scholars believing Paul’s letters were interpolated

We know that forgery and interpolation of texts were very common in the ancient world so it is odd to hear some theologians insist that we should discount the possibility of any of Paul’s letters had been so doctored unless and until we find very compelling reasons — usually only by means of manuscript evidence — to think otherwise. Is this some hangover from the days when the Bible was supposed to be sacred and inerrant?

We do know not all biblical scholars take this advice, however. Here is a conveniently set out list of scholars who have argued that specific verses in the “authentic” Pauline letters were added by Christian scribes after Paul had departed the scene. The list is compiled from John Sturdy’s notes and published in 2007. Sturdy died in 1996 so the list includes no scholars who have added arguments for interpolations since then.

The publication, Redrawing the Boundaries: The Date of Early Christian Literature, was from a manuscript that Sturdy had been working on but never finished. His intent was to refute the early dating that had been published by in 1976 by John Robinson: Redating the New Testament. “This is simply mischief!”, said Sturdy more than once of Robinson’s book.

Here’s the list. Some of the names included are quite interesting. It’s also a good guide to see which verses have had most arguments for spuriousness pointed at them. (One passage I have suspected of being a scribal addition is Romans 1:3ff. Herman Detering roused my suspicions about those verses and others have also suspected it to be an attempt to “rewrite” Paul. See Another Possible Intepolation. But I see in this list the verses attract only one other scholar: Loisy.)

66                                  Redrawing the Boundaries

Appendix: List of Scholars Who  Have Deemed Various  Parts of the Corpus Paulinum Inauthentic

Romans

1:3-4 Loisy (1935: 9).

1:18-32, parts by Michelsen  (1876); Couchoud (1926); Harrison (1936:298f.); Carrington (1939); Hawkins (1941); O’Neill (1975: 40-45, continues until Rom. 2:29); Munro  (1983: 112f).

2:1, Bultmann (1947); Schmithals (1975, marginal  note).

2:13, Schmithals (1975, marginal  note).

2:14f., Weiss sees as a gloss.

2:15b-16, Sahlin (1953).

2:16, Bultmann (1947); Schmithals (1975, marginal  note); Koester.

3:9-20, Hawkins (1941).

3:10-18, Weisse (1833); Pierson  and Naber  (1886); Michelsen  (1887); van Manen  (1880); Schenke  and Fischer (1978: 142f.); O’Neill  (1975, vv. 12-18).

3:23-26, Hawkins  (1941).

3:24/25-26, Talbert (1966).

4:1 and 4:17b, Schenke  and Fischer (1978: 144) make the complicated suggestion that 4:17b really belongs at the end of 4:1. Weisse omits4:1.

5:1, Schmithals (1975, probably redactional).

5:5-10, Sahlin (1953) accepts in order 5, 8, 6, 9, 10; Schenke and Fischer (1978: 144) agree.

5:6-7, Keck (1979: 237-38); Schmithals (1975, marginal note).

5:7 Semler  (1810) thinks added  later.

5:12-21, Barnes (1947: 239); O’Neill (1975: 96-107).

6:17b, Bultmann (1947); Schmithals (1975, marginal  note).

7:25b, Bultmann; Schmithals (1975, marginal  note).

8:1. Weisse omits; Bultmann (1947); Schmithals (1975, marginal note).

10:17, Bultmann (1947); Schmithals (1975, marginal  note).

13:1-7, Pallis (1920); Loisy (1922: 104, 128; 1935: 30-31; 1936: 287); Windisch (1931); cf. Barnikol (1931b); Eggenberger (1945); Barnes (1947: 302, possibly); Kallas (1964-65); Munro (1983: 56f., 65-67); Sahlin (1953); Bultmann (1947).

15 and 16 together,  Baur (1836b; 1849; 1845); Schwegler  (1846: I, 296); Zeller (1854: 488); Volkmar (1856; 1875: xvff., 129ff.); Lucht (1871); Ryder (1898); Smith (1901); Scholten  (1876); Davidson (1882: 125-28; 1894: 126-31).

15:4b, Schmithals (1975, redactional).

16 as a whole, Weiss (1872); Hawkins  (1941); Knox (1954); Friedrich (1961).

16:17-20, Volkmar (1875); Pfleiderer  (1887: 145).

16:17-18, Loisy (1935: 29).

16:24, Cranfield; Mangold  (1884).

16:25-27, Reiche (1833); Krehl (1845); Delitzsch (1849); Davidson (1868:134-37; 1882:118-21; 1894:120-23); Lucht (1871); Hilgenfeld (1872: 469ff.; 1875:326f.); Pfleiderer (1873: 314); Seyerlen (1874); Volkmar (1875); Schultz (1876); Mangold  (1884: 44-81); Bruckner; Lipsius; von Weizsacker (1886: 334); Ji.ilicher (1894: 71); Corssen (1909: 1-45); Lake (1914: 359f.); Wendland (1912: 351); Weiss (1917: 534); Burton  (1921: 509); Loisy(1922: 106, 134); Harnack (1931); Barnikol (1931a; 1933:116-48); Dodd (1932: 245); Manson (1948); Gaugler  (1945); Zuntz  (1953); Michel  (1955: 19f.); Barrett  (1958: 10-13,  286); Friedrich  in RGG3    V, 1138; Beare (1962b: 112f.); Marxsen (1964); Fuller (1966: 56); Fitzmyer in Brown, Fitzmyer  and Murphy (eds) (1990: 292); Bornkamm (1969); Lohse (1972); Kasemann (1973); Cranfield (1975:6-9); Schmithals (1975); Vielhauer (1975: 187f.); Gamble (1977: 107-10, 123f.); Schenke  and Fischer (1978: I, 136f.); Elliot (1981); Dunn  (1988: 912f.); Ziesler (1989: 25); Donfried  (1970); Kamiah (1956).

1 Corinthians

As a whole Bauer; Pierson; Loman

1:2, Weiss (1917: 534); Gilmour  (1962: 688).

1:2b, Weiss (1910: xli, 3f.); Dinkier  in RGG3;  Schmithals (1965: 188f; 197  258);Schenke(1978:92f).

1:12, Weiss; Heinrici (1880); Pearce in Bowyer (1812); Goguel (1926: IV, 2); Michaelis.

1:16, Holsten  (1880: 461 n.9, not asserted absolutely).

2:6-16, Widmann (1979).

4:6, Straatman; van de Sande Bakhuyzen (1880).

4:17, Weiss (1910: xli, 120); Gilmour; Dinkier.

6:3, Holsten.

7:8, Holsten.

7:11ab, Holsten.

7:14, Holsten.

7:17, Weiss (1910: xli); Gilmour; Dinkier.

7:17-24, Munro  (1983: 80f.).

7:36-38, Holsten; Barnes (1947: 229).

8, as a whole, Munro  (1983).

10, as a whole, Barnes (1947).

10:4b, Holsten.

10:13, Clemen;  Pierson and Naber (1886: 81f.).

10:17, Clemen.

10:23-11:1, Munro 1983: 75-79).

10:29b-30,  Hitzig; Zuntz.

11:2-16, Loisy (1935: 60f., 73f.,); Walker (1975; 1983; 1989); Cope (1978); Trompf  (1980); Munro (1983: 69-75).

11:5b-6, Holsten.

11:10, Holsten; Lang; Wassenbergh (1815: 66); Straatman; Baljon; Owen; Lotze; Neander;  Baur (1845: 636).

11:11, Straatman.

11:11f., Weiss (1910: xli).

11:13-15, Holsten.

11:16, Straatman; Prins; Baljon; Weiss (1910: xli, 276f.); Gilmour; Dinkier.

11:23-28,  Straatman; Bruins;  Lehman  and  Fridrichsen (1922); Loisy (1922: 43, 67; 1935: 69-74).

11:30, Prins.

13, in entirety,  Lehmann and  Fridrichsen;  Loisy (1922: 43, 67); (1935: 69-74); Barnes (1947: 230); Titus (1959); Schenke  (1978).

14:33-38, Munro (1983: 68f.).

14:33, Weiss (1910: xli); Gilmour; Dinkier; Loisy (1935: 73).

14:33b-35, Kiimmel; Straatman;  van  de  Sande  Bakhuyzen (1880); Holsten  (1880: 495-97);  van Manen  (1880: 284-85);  Genootsch (1880: 259f.); Schmiedel  (1891); Weinel; Weiss (1910: 342); Allworthy (1917: 95-97); Dinkier; Loisy (1922: 43; 1933: 20 n.6; 1948: 363; 1961: 287); Leipoldt (1952); Zuntz  (1953); Wendland (1954); Conzelmann (1969: 289f.); Ruef (1971: 154f.); Scroggs (1972); Munro (1973; 1983: 15f.); Jewett (1978); Perrin and Duling (1982: 180).

14:34-35, only Heinrici;  Pfleiderer (1887: 169n); Easton (1947); Fascher (1953); Leipoldt (1954); Schweizer (1959: 152); Fitzer (1963); Bittlinger (1967); Barrett (1987: 699-708); Murphy-O’Connor (1979: 81-84). Cf. also Clemen  (1894: 49f., as displaced  but not therefore ungenuine).

15, as a whole, Barnes (1947: 228).

15:3-11, Straatman, van Manen, Teylers.

15:5b, Holsten.

15:2lf., 42-49, O’Neill (1975: 96).

16:22, Schmiedel;  Baljon (1884); Holsten  (1880: 450f.); Rovers; Bruins.

2 Corinthians

1:1b, Schmithals; Schenke and Fischer (1978: 112).

3:12-18 and 4:3, 4, 6, Halmel (1904).

3:17, 18b, Schmithals (1958; 1969: 286ff.).

4:4, Baljon; Wassenbergh.

5:16, Schmithals; Giittgemanns (1966: 290ff.).

6:14-7:1, Schrader (1835: IV, 300f.); Ewald (1857: 12, 282f.); Straatman (1863: I, 138-46);  Baljon; Holsten  (1868: 386); Michelsen  (1873); Rovers (1874: I, 137); van de Sande Bakhuyzen  (1880: 266f.); Davidson (1882: 60; 1894: 63); Krenke!(1890: 332); Halmel (1904: 115-29); Jiilicher and Fascher (1931: 87f.); Groussow (1951a, 1951b); Dinkier in RGG 3 IV, 18, 22; Fitzmyer (1961); Gnilka  (1968); Georgi  (1986/7:  21-22);  Marxsen  (1964); Braun (1966: 201-204);  Fuller (1966: 41-42); Wendland (1968); Rissi (1969: 79-80); Klinzing (1971: 172-82); Dahl (1972: 62-69); Betz (1973); Gunther (1973: 308-13); Perrin and Duling (1982: 182); Vielhauer  (1975: 153); Bultmann (1976: 169); Schenke and  Fischer  (1978:  llOf.,  117f.); Lang; Findeis (1983: 66); Klauck (1988: 60-61); Wiirzburg (1988: 60-61); Kuhn (1951-52; 1954); Jewett (1978: 433 n.4).

11:32-12:1, Michelsen  (1873).

12:2, Matthes; Rovers (1870); Scholten  (1876).

13:13, Burton  (1921: 509); Goodspeed (1945; 57); Furnish  (1984: 587); Barrett.

Galatians

Burton  (1921: lxix-lxx) notes those who doubt  the epistle as a whole. They include (NOT Evanson), Bauer (1850-52); Loman (1882); Pierson (1878); Pierson and Naber (1886: 26f.); Steck (1888); van Manen; Friedrich (1891); Kalthoff (1904); Johnson  (1887); and Robertson.

O’Neill (1972) suggests extensive interpolations: see Murphy-O’Connor in RB 82 (1975: 143f.).

2:3-8, Warner (1951).

2:7b-8, Straatman, van Manen (1890: 513ff.); Volter (1890: 90); Barnikol (1931a); Schenke and Fischer (1978: 79-81); O’Neill  (1972).

2:18, Schmithals (1973).

3:16b, Burton  (1921: 509f.).

3:19a, not in text of P46; it contradicts the context, and can be explained from Romans 5:20. See Gaston (1982); Eshbaugh (1979); and Walker (1988).

3:20, Burton  (1921: 190-92. “possibly”).

4:25a, Schmithals (1973); Schenke; O’Neill (1975); Bentley (1962); Mace (1729, who  omits  it from  Sinaiticus);  Mill; Schott;  Prins  (1872); Naber (1878, “insertion work  of an ass”); Holsten  (1880: 17lf.);  van de Sande Bakhuyzen {1880}; Baljon {1889: 185}; Thijm  (1890}; Cramer {1890}; Clemen;  Burton {1921: 259f.).

5:7, whole verse Scott.

5:7b, Semler; Koppe; Holsten {1880: 175}.

5:16-24, [Sturdy asks how Pauline this really sounds].

Philippians

Baur and Schwegler held the whole epistle non-Pauline; as apparently did Volkmar and Hitzig

Davidson  {1882: 164)  refers  to early division  theories. For  the early attempt to exclude parts of the epistle see Volter (1892}; Clemen {1894).

1:1b, Bruckner;  Volter {1892}; Schmiedel  {1902}; Moffatt {1918: 171}; Riddle and Hutson (1946: 123); Marxsen {1964: 57}; Fischer{1973}; Schenke and Fischer (1978: 126}.

2:6-11, Loisy {1935: 91f.; 1948: 364}; Bruckner  (1885; 1890: xix, 219ff.}; but cp. Marxsen  (1969: 22-37}; Holsten {1876}; Barnikol {1932b}; Barnes (1947: 244, “perhaps open to some doubt; it might be a development at the end of the first century of our  era”}; Berlage {1880: 80ff.}; Schmiedel  {in part).

3:1-4.9 Schrader apud Davidson {1882: 158).

3:1, Clemen.

3:2, 5, Weisse.

3:9, Wassenbergh.

3:10f., Schmiedel.

3:18, Laurent.

3:20, Bruckner; Clemen.

4:2f., Ewald.

4:3, Schenke {1978: 128).

1 Thessalonians

Queried  in whole by Schrader {1836}; Baur {1845: 480ff.}; Noack {1857}; Volkmar (1867: 114ff.}; van der Vies (1865}; Holsten {1877).

1:2-10, Fuchs {1963-64).

1:9-10, Friedrich (1965}.

2:1-16, Loisy (1935: 85).

2:13, Wassenbergh.

2:14-16  van der  Vies; Ritschl {1847}; Rodrigues  {1876}; Pierson  and Naber;  Spitta  (1889: 501; 1901: 190}; Schmiedel  {1891: 17}; Pfleiderer; Teichmann (1896}; Mansfield;  Drummond; Loisy {1922: 135, 139; 1935: 85}; Goguel; Bammel (1959}; Eckhart {1961}; Schmithals {1965: 89ff.).

2:15f., Koster {1980}; Schmidt  (1983}.

3:2b-5a, Loisy (1922:135, 139f.).

3:5, Clemen; von Dobschiitz; Eckhart.

4:1-8, 10b-12, Eckhart.

4:1-12, Munro {1983: 86-88).

4:1, Schenke  and  Fischer (1978: 70); Friedrich  {1973; 1976}; Harnisch {1973}; Eckhart {1961}; Hitzig (1856}; Schmiedel (1891: 34}; Weiss; Schenke and Fischer {1978: I, 70).

Philemon

Queried by Baur and Holtzmann.

5-6, Bruckner.

19a, Zuntz.

Jiilicher and Fascher (1931: 23f.) lists scholars  who find interpolations in Philemon.  These include  Clemen;  Paulus (1904}; and Hagge {1876}.

---

If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!

---