Posted on 04/11/2014 6:35:46 AM PDT by Renfield
In 2012, Harvard researcher Karen King revealed the "Gospel of Jesus' Wife."
A small piece of papyrus, the lightly worn document was written in Coptic Egyptian, with parts missing and ink faded, and didn't say much. But what it did say, wrote Ariel Sabar in Smithsonian Magazine two years ago was enough to “send jolts through the world of biblical scholarship—and beyond.”
The fragment’s 33 words, scattered across 14 incomplete lines, leave a good deal to interpretation. But in King’s analysis, and as she argues in a forthcoming article in the Harvard Theological Review, the “wife” Jesus refers to is probably Mary Magdalene, and Jesus appears to be defending her against someone, perhaps one of the male disciples.
“She will be able to be my disciple,” Jesus replies. Then, two lines later, he says: “I dwell with her.”
The papyrus was a stunner: the first and only known text from antiquity to depict a married Jesus.
The new document had a curious past. It was given to King by an anonymous source, and, as Sabar notes, some pieces of the papyrus' history seemed a little too convenient. It didn't take long for the suggestion that the new gospel was a forgery to arise. (Indeed, the possibility was a reservation of King's.)
According to new research, however, scientists are now largely certain that the document is a true piece of early text, and not a modern forgery. Spectroscopic analysis of the ink, says the New York Times, revealed the text was from thousands of years ago.....
(Excerpt) Read more at smithsonianmag.com ...
Highly doubtful. It’s not an Arabic text.
Arabic text didn’t come the exclusive language of Islam until after the 8th century.
Anybody know the whereabouts of Dan Rather in and around AD 100?
The Koran wasn’t even codified until the 8th century well after the death of Momo.
They dutifully reported the importance he felt women were in his ministry. They just thought that was an error. When they were reporting on Jesus' life, therefore, it stands to reason they would omit his wife, just air brush her from the picture. They must have been right, too, because they all did it. Since they represent 100% of the evangelists of The Good News, it's a settled view.
What the heck, the synoptic gospels were written so soon after Jesus' death that those evangelists would know as first hand eye witnesses that Mrs. Christ had to be expunged if Jesus' life was to have the proper impact. And God knows Jesus certainly would be clueless on impacts and invitations and vocations.
John came along so far down the road that he was probably senile when he wrote his. Nevertheless, some of his writings have convinced me that Jesus thought there was hope for salvation for even such as me i.e. John wrote his for me, personally.
Maybe we can get The Good Book fixed in the next edition.
The Koran wasn’t even codified until the 8th century well after the death of Momo.
Yes. I know. mohamMadMan was illiterate so he certainly didn’t write it.
My point was that the koran could be considered ancient. It means little to me just like the gnostics and these new ancient documents.
Before anyone gets too worked up over this, does anyone realize how many people were named Jesus back then? Or even today for that matter.
I can honestly type: “A few years ago I was surprise to run into Jesus and his wife at the folk life festival.”
Of course when we went to high school his name was pronounced “hey-sus” but written out you really can’t tell the difference.
Thanks!
The headline: "Not a modern fake"
No place in the Smithsonian article do these charlatans point out that this little fragment has been dated from 600-900 ad. ""An analysis published by American researchers in April 2014 showed that the fragment is ancient and dates to between the sixth and ninth centuries."
It is not thousands of years old. In fact, it is roughly 750 years after Christ's resurrection.
But...they knew that. And they know they're not saying what they know.
This article is a fake, a sham...a shame.
It's like me writing down a fake quote from an early American. Did you know that Thomas Jefferson said, "Burger King is my favorite hamburger."
There you have it. TJefferson's own words written by me 250 years later.
Surely, that makes it an accurate quote.
The Muslims who invaded Egypt and enslaved Egypt's Coptic population did not write in Greek or in Coptic.
They were Arabs, and the ones who could write wrote in Arabic.
There are no Muslim texts from the period in either Greek or Coptic.
There are many forgeries from antiquity. Also, some gnostic groups taught Jesus was married and Mormonism still teaches Jesus was probably married and a polygamist.
and..... the Holy Grail, the vessel containing the blood of Christ, is the son of Mary aka Mary Magdalene, that was in the south of France where she fled after the crucifixion
Maybe a copy of some trifle of Gnosticism.
or old paper with old materials to make a new fake.
Asians have been making new ancent wood carvings for years. Experts have a probling telling the real vs fake.
I am not buying this.
Smithsonian has been wrong many times. (see orvil and Wilbur wright)
True, His message and life are great; but without His being the Incarnate God and Crucified Savior, his words would remain the message of a very good carpenter who perhaps dabbled in hallucinogens.
Did not know the National Enquirer was in print then
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
