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)
What you are talking about is not a “part of the story” but rather points to the fact that Karen King is a reasonable human being.
The author makes a mention of her disclaimers in the first paragraph of the article, so obviously he is not casting anything by the wayside.
posted on 09/25/2012 6:13:28 PM PDT
(fear them not)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson