Here is a misleading piece of journalism about biblical history. These journalists are totally ignorant of biblical historical research and what FORGERY means in that context.
When Biblical scholars talk of forgery, they are not meaning someone alive today trying to fabricate an ancient text (as these journalists think).
Religious writing in early Christianity was rife with authors "writing as" apostles and sidekicks who observed the whole thing go down - forgers. That is what forgery refers to in historical Biblical research. Some did it well and some did it poorly. Biblical historians analyze many factors to determine if a biblical text is a forgery. One way is to compare a piece of writing with other known works of the presumed author. For example, Paul may have written a lot of his own stuff. He was educated and literate. But some texts claiming to be Paul's don't fit his writing style or even his known beliefs in some cases. In the New Testament, only a portion of Paul's writings are considered authentic. Some are forged and almost ALL of the other NT books are forgeries. Click the thumbnail upper right for more.
Think about it. The apostles and probably Jesus were poor illiterate working class stiffs. They didn't write shit. Centuries later, oral traditions were written down by Greeks and others who claimed they were mere scribes writing down verbatim exactly what they saw and heard the apostles and Jesus do and say (even though some of them were writing as much as 4 centuries later!).
So when the biblical scholars say they do not think THIS text is a forgery, it means they have a pretty good idea that it matches other writings by a known and credible author of the time. I am not sure if they specify the author in this article, because it's a shitty article.
By the way, historical Biblical study (as opposed to lame ignorant devotional study) is pretty awesome, in much the same way that studying history or anthropology or evolution is awesome. Your eyes will truly be opened and your mind enlightened if you go at the Bible from a scientific angle. Just saying...