What About Extra-Biblical Sources?

One of the most prominent factors involving the Jesus Seminar is their decision to favor "extra-canonical" sources, that is, books (particularly gospels) which are not found in the Bible. Some of these books are found in the Apocrypha, but the favored sources are those in what is called the Nag Hammadi Library. Discovered in the 1940s in Egypt, these books are largely gnostic in nature, and many members of the Seminar date these books before the gospels in the New Testament. However, we have already seen that some of these scholars use questionable dating techniques indeed, so their dating of the Nag Hammadi Library can be called into question as well.

Among the books favored by the Jesus Seminar scholars are the Gospel of Thomas (called GosThom by scholars), the Gospel of Peter, and the Cross Gospel. Particularly, GosThom is a favorite because almost all of its 135 verses begin with the phrase, "And Jesus said . . ." This makes it essential in showing that a "sayings source" existed, thus providing impetus for the Q arguments. The case is then made that this gospel either pre-dates the New Testament gospels or is at least contemporary with them, giving the more liberal scholars a work from which they work backward (in establishing Q) and forward (in proving their thesis on the historical Jesus).

There are however, significant problems with dating GosThom early (A.D. 50-70). First, it lacks any independent attestation until the early third century, suggesting that it is probably a second century work. Second, the gnostic nature of the writing also makes a second century date more likely. Finally, almost to a man, the scholars who pioneered the work on this gospel (following its discovery in 1945) date this work around A.D. 140, significantly after not only the life of Jesus, but also the New Testament gospels.

These problems hardly bother the Seminar scholars, as they are perfectly willing to continue using these and other "extra-canonical" sources to prove their point. Here is how ridiculous it can get: "There are, for Crossan, a total of thirteen sources that qualify for his earliest strata. Of these, five are hypothetical reconstructions: an 'early' layer of GosThom, a triple-layered Q, a Miracles Collection, an Apocalyptic Scenario, and the 'Cross Gospel.' Three are obscure fragments of papyrus texts . . . And one is known only from several patristic citations: the Gospel of the Hebrews. Only the remaining four are fully extant documents_and these all happen to be canonical: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 Corinthians, and Romans.

"This already may seem like a meager data pool from which to reconstruct a historical Jesus, but in practice the situation is worse. For the papyri fragments are of such little value, and the secondary references to the Gospel of Hebrews so few, that little use is made of either by Crossan. Moreover, and most significantly, because of Crossan's understanding of Paul, virtually no use is made of his epistles (the only extant documents he has!). Hence, functionally speaking, Crossan's historical Jesus is completely reconstructed from a data pool that has been largely reduced to a hypothetical 'early' layer of GosThom, a hypothetical 'Cross Gospel,' and a hypothetical triple-layered 'Q Gospel.'""¹

This kind of scholarship is most certainly fraudulent, designed to prove only what the scholar wishes it to prove. Incidentally, it should be pointed out that another set of papyrus fragments have been put forth in a new book called Eyewitness to Jesus as fragments of the Gospel of Matthew. These fragments are said to date from around A.D. 70, which would seriously undermine the Jesus Seminar's dating of Matthew and Mark.

There is no solid reason to reject the gospels of the New Testament over the works listed above. This is an attempt to destroy what really constitutes eyewitness accounts to the real Jesus. The Seminar must accomplish that destruction if they are to succeed in presenting a Jesus who is radically different from the one in which we believe. Do not be fooled by scholarship which is rooted in presuppositions, hypotheticals and religious bias. Examine the proofs for yourself, and come to the New Testament Jesus, and believe.