Is Mara bar Serapion’s Letter a Forgery?
The letter has been claimed to include no
Mara bar Serapion was a stoic philosopher. He is noted for a lengthy letter that he wrote to his son. The letter was composed in Syriac, written sometime between 73 AD and the 3rd century. Many Christian apologists have suggested that Mara bar Serapion is alluding to Jesus Christ in this letter. But there are several problems with that theory.
First, a nonChristian like Mara bar Serapion would never have referred to Jesus as a “king.” Only dedicated and reborn Christians refer to Jesus as their Lord of lords and kings of Kings, not pagans.
Second, Jesus was not known as a “king.” In fact, according to Bruce Chilton and Craig A. Evans (“Studying the Historical Jesus,” pp. 455–457), “the term ‘king of the Jews’ has never been seen in the Christian literature of antiquity as a title for Jesus.”
Third, Jesus was not known as a “wise king.” The only Jew known to be a “wise king” was King Solomon, who was in fact a *king,* and whose *wisdom* was known throughout the ancient world. What is more, King Solomon is well known for being the author of many books of *wisdom* in the Bible.
Fourth, Mara bar Serapion does not even mention the terms “Jesus” or “Christ.” And when referring to famous heroic philosophers who died, and what happened after their death, he never mentions Jesus’ resurrection. Even if he didn’t believe it, he would have, at least, mentioned the *rumor* of Jesus being raised from the dead. The fact that he doesn’t mention it at all means that he’s not talking about Jesus:
[Robert E.] Van Voorst adds two factors
that indicate Mara was not a Christian, the
first being his failure to mention the terms
Jesus or Christ. The second factor (also
supported by Chilton and Evans) is that
Mara's statement that Jesus lives on based
on the wisdom of his teachings, in contrast
to the Christian concept that Jesus
continues to live through his resurrection,
indicates that he was not a Christian.
Fifth, the language of the document suggests that Mara bar Serapion is referring to an actual king who enacted new laws and established new practices. For example, Jewish tradition ascribes ritual hand washing and eruvin to King Solomon, who also served as a Judge (e.g. the “Judgment of Solomon”). He was also responsible for building the first temple, and for instituting new laws of how the temple services would run:
Nay, Socrates did ‘not’ die, because of
Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the
statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King,
because of the new laws which he enacted.
Sixth, there’s something very odd about the reference to the Jews in this letter. This is quite a long letter, which is based entirely on Greek philosophy. Scholars are in agreement that Mara bar Serapion was a Stoic philosopher and a pagan. As a rule, Stoic philosophers held Jewish teachings in contempt, and so they would never have placed them on a par with the teachings of Socrates, Plato, and Pythagoras. We know this from the apostle Paul who was scoffed at when preaching to stoic philosophers in Athens (Acts 17:15-34). The addition of the “Jewish” element, therefore, reads like a non sequitur, like a strange interpolation that doesn’t belong there… It sounds as if someone added it at a later time. And it seems as if the author (or editor?) got things wrong. Pythagoras was not burned, and King Solomon was not killed. And the expulsion of the Jews might be a reference to the deportation of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BC, or to that of Judah in 586 BC:
The letter refers to the unjust treatment of
‘three wise men’: the murder of Socrates,
the burning of Pythagoras, and the
execution of ‘the wise king’ of the Jews.
Now that I have offered my critique, let’s actually read that portion of the letter that apologists have employed time after time as evidence for the historicity of Jesus. Do you think that this pericope constitutes strong evidence for the existence of Jesus? Hardly! Not by a long shot:
For what benefit did the Athenians obtain
by putting Socrates to death, seeing that
they received as retribution for it famine and
pestilence? Or the people of Samos by the
burning of Pythagoras, seeing that in one
hour the whole of their country was covered
with sand? Or the Jews by the murder of
their Wise King, seeing that from that very
time their kingdom was driven away from
them? For with justice did God grant a
recompense to the wisdom of all three of
them. For the Athenians died by famine;
and the people of Samos were covered by
the sea without remedy; and the Jews,
brought to desolation and expelled from
their kingdom, are driven away into every
land. Nay, Socrates did “not” die, because
of Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the
statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King,
because of the new laws which he enacted.
