God’s Ghostwriters: Enslaved Christians and the Making of the Bible
Candida Moss, Little Brown, £25

IT HAS long been accepted by both Biblical scholars and laypersons that a small number of individuals, such as the Gospel authors (Mathew, Mark, Luke and John) and the prolific letter writer St Paul, solely composed large parts of the New Testament.

Candida Moss, biblical scholar and Professor of Theology at the University of Birmingham, shatters this myth in her latest book as she shines a light on the origins of Christian scripture. Moss bestows long overdue credit upon the countless unnamed individuals (many enslaved) who played pivotal roles in composing parts of the New Testament as well as ensuring that Christianity spread across the known world during the precarious climate that existed in the church’s early years. 

The insights contained within God’s Ghostwriters give both theists and atheists alike much upon which to reflect.

Moss explains in great detail how, in the early days of Christianity, the mundane work of taking dictation from the named authors of the New Testament, transcribing these texts, reading them to assembled audiences of early Christians, and even disseminating these works was performed by individuals on the lowest rungs of society. These unnamed and uncredited individuals were mostly educated slaves, though might also occasionally have been former slaves or day labourers. The last two groups had a precarious existence and were at risk of being (re-)enslaved.

These works were crafted at a time when slavery was ubiquitous across the Roman world and both pagans and early Christians alike owned individuals whom they could mistreat or kill with no repercussions.

Moss cites the example of St Paul, said to have written some of his epistles in prison, and explains that he would not have been in a position to write such letters himself while incarcerated in a poorly lit underground cell and likely lacking any writing tools. Accordingly, St Paul would have relied on the labour of others (perhaps a slave loaned by one of his supporters) to note down his words through the cell window.

Moss asserts that these anonymous and lowly individuals helped shape texts that would eventually become books of the New Testament, showing how their influence is deeply woven through the scripture that forms the core of Christian belief. The scribes could amend the text while taking dictation from the Gospel “writers” or when making a fresh copy of an earlier text. 

This was often done with good intentions, such as a modern-day proof-reader or editor might do to improve how a document reads or to eliminate any possible ambiguities. However, on other occasions, slaves and other oppressed groups used the aforementioned opportunities to subtly insert their predicament into the story such that the final product might resonate with others from their class. 

Moss draws attention to biblical stories that look kindly on the plight of the wretched or which foretell the great reward they would receive in heaven; other stories show that the wealthy and powerful are not immune to judgement and punishment in the afterlife.

Moss writes that even the very architecture and ambience of hell, as described in the Bible, is a reflection of the earthly punishments slaves across the Roman empire could easily face — prisons at the time were dark, foul-smelling, underground places that might be either sweltering or freezing and which would be replete with wailing, gnashing of teeth, excrement and worms. 

Slaves who opposed their earthly masters might be sent to such places of torment; in the same way the Bible declares that those who oppose their heavenly master God are at risk of suffering similar punishments after death. Concurrently, the hell of the Bible is described by Moss as an equal opportunities dystopia where neither the least nor the most powerful is able to escape punishment, including cruel masters or other individuals who abused their position while alive.

Moss notes that whilst some parts of the New Testament favour those held in bondage, other passages were later used to condone or justify slavery in the middle to latter centuries of the last millennium. This is perhaps because such texts reflect both the voices of the oppressed mixed with those of ancient society’s upper echelons. Moss advocates for 21st-century readers of the Bible to be aware of these lurid aspects of Christian history.

Moss does not disregard the work of the New Testament’s known authors but explains that their books would likely not have existed in their current form or had such widespread influence had it not been for the labour of numerous unknown and (mostly) enslaved persons. For modern readers, this ought not to detract from the words of the New Testament but rather encourage us to view its message as reflecting the voices of many rather than only a few. Doing so increases its authenticity as the ideas contained within represent a wider cross-section of ancient society and ensure the gospel of the alienated and downtrodden is not forgotten.