I invite the reader to refer to the original PDF for the accurate rendering of the Coptic and Greek characters.
I apologize for posting what is a scientific paper on an arcane subject here. However, given the publicity that the recent discovery of the purported reference to Jesus' wife received, I choose not to wait till the popular media picks up the analysis of the nature of the discovery.
posted on 09/25/2012 5:53:19 PM PDT
These were antiChristians doing this. It was obvious a set up
posted on 09/25/2012 5:54:13 PM PDT
To: NYer; narses; Salvation; SunkenCiv
posted on 09/25/2012 5:54:33 PM PDT
(fear them not)
Isn’t there a warning in the Old Testament about people making up their own gods to suit themselves? And a commandment of some sort?
posted on 09/25/2012 5:59:48 PM PDT
In the first reports of this 'discovery', the woman made it very clear that this fragment did NOT confirm the existence of a wife for Jesus. She stated clearly that it was a fragment of a larger piece that should not be taken out of context to fit a lager agenda.
Has this part of the story been cast by the wayside now?
posted on 09/25/2012 6:08:12 PM PDT
(Cogito, ergo conservatus sum)
So, what the author is saying is that based on a purely linguistic analysis of language and content the fragment is probably a modern forgery. Given that this Harvard professor can give absolutely no provenance for the fragment the probability that this is a fake goes off the charts.
thanks for the heads up about this latest fake by the leftists.
posted on 09/25/2012 6:40:35 PM PDT
I don’t understand what is the big deal if Jesus had a wife or not it. He is a Jewish man. Jewish men get married. I don’t see how any of that would change His life or Him being the Redeemer.
posted on 09/25/2012 6:43:13 PM PDT
I believe Prof. King thinks the text was originally written in Greek and later translated into Coptic. If the author was a Gnostic living in Egypt in the second century, he or she might have imitated other Gnostic texts so having similarities to other Gnostic writings would not necessarily show that it is a modern forgery.
Would there be a way to determine the age of the ink without destroying the papyrus?
To: annalex; SunkenCiv; Vendome
I think my next satire will be mocking this crap... in my own strange way
posted on 09/25/2012 10:35:37 PM PDT
This is very interesting. I note the reference to Morton Smith’s controversial “discovery”. Textual analysis also says that Smith is a faker.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson