Conference on the Secret Gospel of Mark

Thanks to Phil Harland for sending over the details of this colloquium:
--
Ancient Gospel or Modern Forgery? The Secret Gospel of Mark in Debate

Tony Burke and Phil Harland have been busy arranging a special colloquium on the Secret Gospel of Mark at York University (to be held Friday, April 29, 2011). We would like to invite scholars and students who are interested to attend. The public is also invited to the evening session.

For information and registration, go to:
http://www.tonyburke.ca/yorkchristianpocrypha/

Here is the information for the conference:

“Ancient Gospel or Modern Forgery? The Secret Gospel of Mark in Debate”

April 29, 2011, York University (Vanier College)
Scholarly Discussion (9 am-5 pm) and Public Debate (7-9 pm)

Featuring: Scott Brown, University of Toronto; Tony Burke, York University; Bruce Chilton, Bard College; Craig Evans, Acadia Divinity College; Phil Harland, York University; Charles Hedrick, Missouri State U.; Peter Jeffery, U. of Notre Dame; Marvin Meyer, Chapman University; Allan Pantuck, U. of California; Pierluigi Piovanelli, U. of Ottawa; Hershel Shanks, Editor of Biblical Archaeology Review.
--

The Morton Smith segment of Jesus: The Evidence excerpted

Over on Salainen Evankelista, Timo Paananen follows up my post on Jesus: The Evidence, Episode 2 on Youtube (the one with Morton Smith) by helpfully excerpting the section of Jesus: The Evidence Episode 2 that features Morton Smith, at the same time correcting the aspect ratio. As Timo says, there is a lot in the episode of interest, for me not least in seeing footage of the late Werner Kümmel, but those specially interested in Secret Mark and Morton Smith may find the repackaged clip more accessible and helpful:

Morton Smith, Mar Saba and Jesus: The Evidence

Sometimes the intriguing stories of twentieth century discoveries can remind one of discussions about the first century. One of the big questions in Pauline chronology is: how many times did Paul go to Jerusalem? And now one of the questions that emerges in the discussion of Morton Smith's discovery of the Secret Gospel of Mark is: how many times did Morton Smith visit Mar Saba, the location of the discovery of the manuscript in 1958?

On Salainen Evankelista, Timo Paananen discusses whether or not Morton Smith went back to Mar Saba after 1958 and he posts a photograph of Morton Smith that recently appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review. The picture, which is from the archives of the Jewish Theological Seminary, makes it quite clear that Smith was there, and Timo speculates that "it was taken in the late 1970s, or even early 1980s".

I am pretty sure that I am able to provide the date and the occasion. I am lucky to have a good memory, and I can recall seeing Morton Smith on the Channel 4 (UK) documentary Jesus: The Evidence, talking about Secret Mark, in 1984. According to the BFI, the three-part series was broadcast in April 1984. My memory is enhanced not only by the fact that at the time my parents had recently purchased a Betamax video recorder, which I used to tape the series, but also by the fact that I had my first appearance on TV criticizing the series that same month, on the show Right to Reply (I was a precocious teenager, I am afraid!).

I think I remember seeing Morton Smith at Mar Saba on the documentary, and I also recall talking some years later to the researcher on the programme, who talked about filming with Morton Smith. Luckily, there is a short clip from the documentary available on Youtube (erroneously given as a "BBC TV" series, a common mistake):



(Ignore the title, which is the uploader's). Unfortunately, the clip does not feature Smith at Mar Saba. He is inside a library or an office, probably in America. But I am sure you'll agree that it is still fascinating. If I can get my hands on those Betamax videos I made twenty-five years ago, I can check the whole section on Smith.

In a comment on the above mentioned post, Allan Pantuck notes:

In one of the other photos I found, he appears on the same hill with what looks like a film crew, so it is possible he was being filmed for some kind of documentary.

So it seems all but certain that this is the occasion for Smith's last visit to Mar Saba.

Tony Chartrand-Burke on Secret Mark at the SBL

Tony Chartrand-Burke today offers an excellent summary of the session on Secret Mark at the 2008 SBL Annual Meeting, which I chaired, and on which I offered a briefer summary here in with my general travel diary from the conference (Some More SBL). Tony concludes his interesting post with some some of his own reflections and I would like to comment on these, not least because I think that Tony may be a little unfair to those he criticizes here:

Many who came out of the session may have been surprised at Brown’s demeanour. But I think it justified. The two main writers against the authenticity of the text, Carlson and Jeffery, are not biblical scholars. Their arguments are not based on the methodology used by biblical scholars. Yet many of their readers have been convinced by them, likely because their arguments merely confirmed in their minds what they hoped would be the case and not because the readers had sufficient knowledge of the contents of the text, nor of previous scholarship on it to make an informed decision.

First, Tony appears to underestimate Stephen Carlson's scholarship (I will comment on Stephen Carlson since he and his work is much better known to me than Peter Jeffery's). It is true that Stephen does not yet have his PhD in this area, but he is already an outstanding scholar whose work is widely admired by those in the guild. He was already published in New Testament Studies (Clement of Alexandria on the "Order" of the Gospels) before his book on Secret Mark was written, and he has, of course, made pioneering contributions to the advancement of scholarship on the internet. But the point at issue in both the book and the recent SBL session is one not of credentials but of the quality of scholarship. Stephen has produced some fine scholarship on an issue that has been log-jammed for years. Indeed it may be that the outsider's perspective has helped Stephen to shed light on the issue. I understand that some people disagree with Stephen's conclusions but I hope that we can all agree on the quality of the scholarship.

Second, I think we should be wary of the idea that those who agree with Carlson and Jeffery do so out of ignorance or prejudice. Speaking for myself, I wrote an endorsement for The Gospel Hoax because I read it carefully in the light of familiarity with other scholarship on the issue and I was persuaded by its case. I know of others who feel the same way.

Tony continues:

Furthermore, Brown and Pantuck have crafted some very detailed responses to Carlson and Jeffery that seem to be getting overlooked—Ehrman, for one, did not seem to be cognizant of the one article refuting the salt claim, and there were two allusions made to the size of Brown’s and Pantuck’s responses, as if thorough, detailed scholarly work was a bad thing. Brown is justifiably frustrated at the state of so-called scholarship (much of it he called “poppycock”) on Secret Mark.

I regard the remark about "so-called scholarship" here as unfortunate. Similarly, I regarded Scott Brown's references to "poppycock" in the session as unfortunate. On issues as important as this, it is generally preferable to keep one's language measured and to focus on the key issues of scholarly disagreement. I don't recall the references to "the size of Brown's and Pantuck's responses", though my guess would be that the point of mentioning it is that a response to a large and detailed piece is inevitably time-consuming; it is something that cannot be taken lightly. Nevertheless, it is worth bearing in mind that Peter Jeffery has produced a lengthy response to Scott Brown's review of his book. Moreover, sometimes an author may legitimately choose not to respond to a review or an article, feeling that it is up to the reader to weigh the arguments on both sides.

Tony goes on to reflect on the role played by Secret Mark in the work of those he discusses in his recent "Heresy Hunting" article, but I am not sure how relevant this is to the discussion at the SBL, which was a balanced one in which I did not pick up any kind of ideological objection to the authenticity of the text.

SBL Secret Mark Session

As Stephen Carlson (Hypotyposeis) and Loren Rosson (The Busybody) have mentioned, we have a session on Secret Mark in the Synoptics Section this year. The SBL On-line program has recently been updated so that it includes the following details:

SBL 24-97 Synoptic Gospels
11/24/2008
1:00 PM to 3:30 PM
Room: Room TBD - Hotel TBD

Theme: Secret Mark after Fifty Years

Mark Goodacre, Duke University, presiding

Birger A. Pearson, University of California, Santa Barbara, "The Secret Gospel of Mark: A Twentieth-Century Fake" (20 min)

Stephen C. Carlson, Duke University, "Can the Academy Protect Itself from One of Its Own? The Case of Secret Mark" (20 min)

Allan J. Pantuck, UCLA, "Can Morton Smith's Archival Writings and Correspondence Shine Any Light on the Authenticity of Secret Mark?" (20 min)

Scott G. Brown, University of Toronto, "Fifty Years of Befuddlement: Ten Enduring Misconceptions about the 'Secret' Gospel of Mark" (20 min)

Charles Hedrick, Missouri State University, Respondent (20 min)

Bart Ehrman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Respondent (20 min)

Discussion (30 min)

More from the SBL program in due course.

Peter Jeffery's Response to Scott Brown

In working through the email mountain, I have now reached mid-April, with thanks to Peter Jeffery for alerting me to his response to Scott Brown's review of his book, which has already been mentioned by a good number of bloggers over the last few weeks:

The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled: Reply to Scott G. Brown (PDF)

It is a very interesting read, though it does not include one of my favourite parts from the earlier draft which is still available on his website, the example of "extended double entendre" quoted from Alan Dundes and Carl Pagter's Urban Folklore from the Paperwork Empire, the supposed speech by a feminist to a woman's organization that is in fact not that.

The response is to a very lengthy review of Jeffery's book by Scott Brown that was published in the Review of Biblical Literature last September. At the time, I commented:

As someone who has written more extensive RBL reviews myself, I must say that I like the fact that this electronic journal is using its lack of print restrictions to do things like this, a good use of the flexibility electronic publication provides.

Having praised RBL on that occasion, I will offer my criticism on this occasion: I would have thought that the flexibility that electronic publication provides would make it an obvious option for them to have published Jeffery's response, especially as the original review was so lengthy. I can't think of a good reason for them to avoid publishing Jeffery's response, and there are some strongly worded comments to the same effect at the end of his piece.

Jeffery is charting reactions to his book on his website.

Review of Biblical Literature latest

Latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature under the NT and related heading. One particularly interesting feature (and I am commenting at the top of the post today rather than the bottom, because it turns out that many miss the comments at the bottom) is the first on the list here, a whopping 47 pages by Scott Brown on Peter Jeffery on Secret Mark. As someone who has written more extensive RBL reviews myself, I must say that I like the fact that this electronic journal is using its lack of print restrictions to do things like this, a good use of the flexibility electronic publication provides. I also look forward to Stephen Carlson's comments on this review.

ESSAY REVIEW (47 pages)
Peter Jeffery
The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled: Imagined Rituals of Sex, Death, and Madness in a Biblical Forgery
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5627
Reviewed by Scott G. Brown


Peter Busch
Magie in neutestamentlicher Zeit
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5705
Reviewed by Mladen Popović

Martin Goodman
Judaism in the Roman World: Collected Essays
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5848
Reviewed by Judith M. Lieu

Isaac Kalimi and Peter J. Haas, eds.
Biblical Interpretation in Judaism and Christianity
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5842
Reviewed by Craig A. Evans

Andreas Köhn, ed.
Ernst Lohmeyers Zeugnis im Kirchenkampf: Breslauer Universitätspredigten
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5704
Reviewed by Michael Labahn

Michelle V. Lee
Paul, the Stoics, and the Body of Christ
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5596
Reviewed by Richard A. Wright

Alastair H. B. Logan
The Gnostics: Identifying an Early Christian Cult
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5710
Reviewed by Jon Ma. Asgeirsson

Francisco Lozada Jr. and Tom Thatcher, eds.
New Currents Through John: A Global Perspective
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5572
Reviewed by Uta Poplutz

David Pastorelli
Le Paraclet dans le corpus johannique
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5671
Reviewed by Jörg Frey

Vincent A. Pizzuto
A Cosmic Leap of Faith: An Authorial, Structural, and Theological Investigation of the Cosmic Christology in Col 1:15-20
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5813
Reviewed by Matthew E. Gordley

Gregory Wong
Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges: An Inductive, Rhetorical Study
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5652
Reviewed by Klaas Spronk

Patterson on Evans on Secret Mark

There's a very interesting review by Stephen Patterson of Craig Evans's Fabricating Jesus on the latest SBL Review of Biblical Literature. There was one note that I found a bit disappointing, though, a passing comment on Evans on Secret Mark,

His view, in brief, is that Secret Mark was forged by Morton Smith—citing evidence from an attorney and apparent handwriting analyst. . .

Stephen Carlson's Gospel Hoax is a fine piece of work, with several scholarly endorsements, that deserves proper mention in this context, rather than the implied disparagement here. Although Evans was viewing a pre-publication version of Carlson's book, the latter has now been out for almost two years, and it should not be passed over lightly. Let me add, though, that I think Patterson's review makes some very interesting points and is well worth reading; I just wanted to comment briefly on that comment.

Review of Biblical Literature Latest

Last couple of Review of Biblical Literature listings, those under the NT or related headings:

David Tuesday Adamo, ed.
Biblical Interpretation in African Perspective
Reviewed by Jan van der Watt

Eve-Marie Becker and Peter Pilhofer, eds.
Biographie und Persönlichkeit des Paulus
Reviewed by Günter Röhser

April D. DeConick
Recovering the Original Gospel of Thomas: A History of the Gospel and Its Growth
Reviewed by Eric Noffke

David L. Dungan
Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament
Reviewed by Jean-François Racine
Reviewed by Garwood P. Anderson

Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino
The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence That Could Change History
Reviewed by Jonathan Reed

Israel Knohl
The Divine Symphony: The Bible's Many Voices
Reviewed by Richard S. Briggs

Moisés Mayordomo
Argumentiert Paulus logisch? Eine Analyse vor dem Hintergrund antiker Logik
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

Steven Roy
How Much Does God Foreknow? A Comprehensive Biblical Study
Reviewed by Craig L. Blomberg

Wolfgang Schrage
Der 1. Brief an die Korinther: 1 Kor 1,1-6,11
Reviewed by Mark W. Elliott

Blake Shipp
Paul the Reluctant Witness: Power and Weakness in Luke's Portrayal
Reviewed by Ruben Dupertuis

Hans Strauß
".eine kleine Biblia": Exegesen von dreizehn ausgewählten Psalmen
Reviewed by Gert T. M. Prinsloo

James D. Tabor
The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity
Reviewed by Bert Jan Lietaert Peerbolte

Stephen C. Carlson
The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
Reviewed by Craig L. Blomberg

Michael E. Fuller
The Restoration of Israel: Israel's Re-gathering and the Fate of the Nations in Early Jewish Literature and Luke-Acts
Reviewed by M. Eugene Boring

Joseph H. Hellerman
Reconstructing Honor in Roman Philippi: Carmen Christi as Cursus Pudorum
Reviewed by Jason Lamoreaux

David G. Horrell
An Introduction to the Study of Paul
Reviewed by Christopher Stanley
Reviewed by Stephen Westerholm

Henry Ansgar Kelly
Satan: A Biography
Reviewed by Jim West

Bernhard Mutschler
Das Corpus Johanneum bei Irenäus von Lyon: Studien und Kommentar zum dritten Buch von Adversus Haereses
Reviewed by Riemer Roukema

John F. A. Sawyer, ed.
The Blackwell Companion to the Bible and Culture
Reviewed by Dan W. Clanton Jr.

Albert Wifstrand; Lars Rydbeck and Stanley E. Porter, eds.
Epochs and Styles: Selected Writings on the New Testament, Greek Language and Greek Culture in the Post-Classical Era
Reviewed by Steven Thompson

Earl Richard Lectures

I came across some useful on-line papers today at the Religious Studies Department at Loyola University. They have a lecture series there called the H. James Yamauchi, S.J. Lectures in Religion and several of these are available on-line, including some of interest to New Testament scholars and students:

Jesus, Mark and the Modern Reader
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 22 2000)

The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas: A Lost, Secret Vision of Jesus
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 17 1993)

The Rich Young Ruler or the Generous Centurion: Early Christianity and Worldly Possessions
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, March 5 1989)

Stephen Carlson Interview Archived

The radio programme featuring Stephen Carlson talking about Morton Smith's invention of Secret Mark, Keeping the Faith, is now available in an on-line archived version, either downloadable MP3 or a Real Audio stream:

Keepin' the Faith

Stephen Carlson on the radio on Secret Mark

A reminder that Stephen Carlson is on the radio right now on Keeping the Faith (6 pm, Eastern Time) and you can listen on-line at:

Listen to Will

Quick -- tune in while you can!

Update (19.23): a most enjoyable programme, a full hour on the topic, and unlike much radio it went at a leisurely pace so that there was time for the details to come through. I couldn't catch it all, unfortunately, with supper to cook, beds to make etc., but what I caught was good. One good point that I found it useful to have spelled out was the extent to which Smith disdained the fact that scholars often do not check their references; they don't do the kind of thorough research they should, something that explains the planting of the M. Madiotes clue. Highlight: Steve Shoemaker asks Stephen what Morton Smith would have thought about his book and Stephen replies: "I hope he would have said: 'Good job!'"

SBL Monday: the rest

[Note, an earlier post deals with events that came chronologically after the events in this post (a bit like Luke-Acts?), because I finished that one first.]

After the Historical Jesus section at which Ted Weeden was speaking, I bought some more books, and was pleased to see that Continuum were now offering 50% discount (early 40%), so it was almost worth having waited. I say almost because I had wanted to get the three volumes of Davies-Allison on Matthew, which was super-cheap, but it seems that everyone else wanted it too and only volume 2s were left. Maybe next time. I might blog on some of my other purchases over the coming days.

I spent a little too long at the book exhibit, though, because I missed the very beginning of Stephen Carlson's Secret Mark paper. Apparently one of the speakers dropped out, so Stephen was on 25 minutes early. (Strong mental note: make extra allowances for such things in the future). But I heard almost all of it, thankfully, and it was a tour de force. Stephen presented extemp, and regular readers will know that I am a fan of that, and the talk was clearly illustrated with all the relevant samples of the hand of Secret Mark, the hands of other mss from Mar Saba, and the hand of Morton Smith himself; readers of the book will know about M. Madiotes and Stephen brought up all the relevant information about this character (I won't spoil it for those who have not read the book yet -- it's my favourite part) in dramatic fashion, with one bullet point at a time on the left, and then a photograph of Smith added on the right; at the point when it was added, there was a general laugh of surprise and recognition. Stephen added one interesting element not in the book, where the text of a word had been written around one of the foxing stains in the book.

I felt a little sorry for the speaker who was on after Stephen, since virtually the entire room got up and left just as he started, and there were only about seven or eight of us left, and some of us no doubt because we were not quite quick enough.

There was a reception for Stephen Carlson's book in the evening in the Baylor University Press suite, with some nice food (some high quality beef, asparagus, cookies). There was no booze, though, and afterwards several of us retired to the Independence Brewery Pub and continued our conversations. That pub is a definite must-visit if you are in Philadelphia -- a great variety of good draft beers and not too expensive (by American standards, at least; at $3 or so a pint, we are in the range of a standard English pub pint).

The Mystery of Mar Saba @ Hypotyposeis

One not to miss -- an interesting post on Hypotyposeis on the links between James M. Hunter, The Mystery of Mar Saba first published in 1940 and the Secret Gospel of Mark discovered by Morton Smith in 1958. There's a link to a post on a blog called Christian CADRE that spells out the story and provides further links of interest.

More on Mark's Other Gospel

Over on Xtalk, Loren Rosson has a useful review of Scott Brown's new book on the Secret Gospel of Mark:

Mark's Other Gospel (Review)

Carlson on Secret Mark latest

On Ricoblog, Rick Brannan has the latest on Stephen Carlson, The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark including a link to the Baylor website (previous link) with a cover pic (as above) and a synopsis. Table of contents and excerpt are promised, but not yet available.

Update (21.17): I meant to mention earlier how I thought that the Publishers Weekly comments on Secret Mark quoted by Rick Brannan could well stick. Just look at this for sell-ability:

"a real-life Da Vinci Code detective story set in academia".

(And I'd read Stephen Carlson over Dan Brown any day of the week!).

Scott Brown's Secret Mark dissertation on-line

Further to my previous post on this topic, it's worth noting that you can read Scott Brown's University of Toronto dissertation on-line at Theses Canada:

The more spiritual gospel: Markan literary techniques in the longer Gospel of Mark
Scott G. Brown

Go to that page for the details and the PDF download. This is the 1999 thesis on which Brown's new book is based.

More Secret Mark

Michael Pahl has more on Secret Mark: Both Sides of Secret Mark . The new article on Macleans.ca to which Michael is referring is here (via Bible and Interpretation):

Mark's secret gospel
What does a contested text say about Jesus, gay sex and baptism?
BRIAN BETHUNE

It features an account of the public spat between Jacob Neusner and Morton Smith (cf. Jim West's excerpt on Biblical Theology). The catalyst for the article is the new book by Scott Brown, Mark's Other Gospel. Unlike Stephen Carlson, Brown does not think that Clement's letter is a forgery. Indeed, he thinks that the letter is genuine and that it quotes part of a genuine expanded edition of Mark, the "Mark's Other Gospel" of the title. Wilfred Wilfrid Laurier University Press, who published Brown's book last week, have a ringing endorsement from John Kloppenborg, in the light of which it will be interesting to hear what Brown and Kloppenborg make of Stephen Carlson's book. Having read Stephen's manuscript, I would say that the case is so strong that I would be very surprised if anyone will still seriously be able to maintain that Clement's Letter to Theodore (and Secret Mark) is not a forgery.

Wilfred Wilfrid Laurier Press also feature a short interview with Brown:

Interview with Scott G. Brown
Mark's Other Gospel

. . . . There's no reason to suspect forgery. I strongly doubt that someone other than Mark wrote this text because it accords with Markan theology (imitators have their own agendas), elucidates some long-standing enigmas in the canonical gospel, and uses literary techniques that are distinctively Markan yet were not noted by scholars of Mark prior to Smith's discovery of the letter . . . .

Brown is even more forthright in the article cited above:

"Even close up, on the ground, I couldn't see the forgery. The gospel incident quoted in Clement's letter reflects a profound comprehension of Mark's literary techniques -- subtle matters of composition that experts had not yet realized when the letter was discovered."

I suppose that my concern with that would be that it does not require "profound comprehension of Mark's literary techniques" by experts in general, but by just one of them. My own impression of the man is that he had a brilliant mind and certainly the erudition necessary to see things others did not. One should not underestimate Morton Smith.

Stephen Carlson and Secret Mark

It's good to see the announcement on Hypotyposeis about Stephen Carlson's forthcoming SBL paper on Secret Mark. Already the bunch of comments to that post give an idea of just how much interest this is going to generate. It's good to hear that Stephen's short book on the topic is forthcoming. I am lucky enough to have read an earlier draft and I can say that what I have seen is a really superb piece of scholarship and an utterly convincing case. I look forward very much to publication.

Update (16.40): Michael Turton feels the same way.

Update (Saturday, 21.53): Amazon are already taking orders for Uncovered: Morton Smith's Secret and the Anatomy of an Academic Hoax.

Kaler on Ehrman's Lost Christianities

One of the latest reviews I particularly enjoyed from Review of Biblical Literature (see previous) was Michael Kaler's Review of Bart Erhman's twin Lost Christianities and Lost Scriptures. I have recently obtained and begun reading Lost Christianities myself and am finding it compelling reading, full of interesting insights and well worth its cover price. I am a particular fan of scholarly writing that is accessible to the broader public and Ehrman is a master of the art. One of the things I particularly like about the way Ehrman goes about this is that he appears always to be thinking not just about that broader public but also about the graduate students and scholars too. I would defy anyone to find nothing new here. Anyway, Kaler is an enthusiast for Ehrman's books too, though he adds some useful points by way of criticism.

The point in Kaler's review that caught my attention was his footnote 2 on the first page, relating to the Secret Gospel of Mark:

While his discussion of the issue is gossipy (in a good way) and engrossing, I found Ehrman's conclusion to this intricate and fascinating affair to be artificially ambivalent. He spends most of the chapter clearly implying that Morton Smith forged the letter of Clement that contained the Secret Gospel and then at the end refuses to commit himself. "I am not willing to say that Smith . . . forged the letter which he claimed to discover. . . . But maybe Smith forged it. . . . Or maybe this is a genuine letter by Clement of Alexandria" (89). To my mind, Ehrman should either have taken an explicit and definite stand or rewritten the chapter so as to present the facts in a truly neutral, unbiased way."

I quite agree with Kaler here and found myself reacting in the same way to this chapter. In fact Ehrman's "artificially ambivalent" attitude surprised me somewhat given his robust presentation of the same material in a talk to the Textual Criticism section of the SBL Annual Meeting in Toronto (2002). My memory of that talk (other than my colleague David Parker flashing up on screen for some time a picture of his back garden as he attempted to get his powerpoint presentation together while Bart was speaking) was that it was strong in its implication, allowing the circumstantial evidence to point the finger at Smith; Ehrman's tone was at best faux naif.

So why is Ehrman so reticent to state more strongly in print that he thinks Morton Smith may have forged the Secret Gospel of Mark? His stated reason is the following:

I am not willing to say that Smith was a latter-day Dionysius the Renegade, that he forged the letter of Clement which he claimed to discover. My reasons should be obvious. As soon as I say I am certain he did so, those pages cut from the back of the book will turn up, someone will test the ink, and it will be from the eighteenth century." (Lost Christianities: 89).

I am not sure that this is strong enough. Scholarship of this kind is about taking risks, but risks that are staked on one's careful and considered reading of the evidence. I've written a book arguing against the existence of Q and attempted there, as well as elsewhere, to make quite clear that I do not think that such a document ever existed. I could have held back for fear that someone might dig it up and show me up for a fool, but it's a risk that I was willing to take because I am fully persuaded that the Q sceptical case is right. In other words, it's always possible that someone will produce Q and surprise me, but my research persuades me that this is unlikely to happen. I'm not sure what is gained by holding back for fear of future possibilities that one thinks are unlikely to materialise.