Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remember That First-Century Mark Fragment? Now itís been published, thereís good news and bad news.
Stand To Reason ^ | 06/01/2018 | Amy K. Hall

Posted on 06/02/2018 5:38:46 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Six years ago, Dan Wallace announced in a debate with Bart Ehrman that a paleographer had dated a recently-found papyrus fragment of Mark to the first century. Since then, I’ve received many requests for updates, and I finally have one to give.

The fragment has now been published, and there’s good news and bad news. The bad news is that its official date is late second or early third century. Dan Wallace has written a post explaining what happened and offering an apology. Here’s a brief excerpt:

In my debate with Bart, I mentioned that I had it on good authority that this was definitely a first-century fragment of Mark. A representative for who I understood was the owner of FCM urged me to make the announcement at the debate, which they realized would make this go viral. However, the information I received and was assured to have been vetted was incorrect. It was my fault for being naïve enough to trust that the data I got was unquestionable, as it was presented to me. So, I must first apologize to Bart Ehrman, and to everyone else, for giving misleading information about this discovery. While I am sorry for publicly announcing inaccurate facts, at no time in the public statements (either in the debate or on my blogsite) did I knowingly do this. But I should have been more careful about trusting any sources without my personal verification, a lesson I have since learned.

His warning is one we should all heed. Michael Kruger adds to this:

I suppose this whole affair is a good reminder about the nature of scholarship, particularly the study of ancient manuscripts. Any study of the ancient world needs to be approached with caution and patience, but particularly the study of ancient texts. A first impression of ancient manuscripts is just that, a first/preliminary impression. And sometimes further study and reflection can lead to different results.

A first-century fragment would certainly have been exciting, so obviously this news is disappointing in that sense, but Kruger notes good and bad reasons for being disappointed, saying that in terms of scholarly impact, “Given how fragmentary it is, it is unlikely to have changed the debate over the reliability of the text in any meaningful way.”

You can read more of Wallace’s explanation and apology here. He was prevented by a non-disclosure agreement from discussing any of this until now, and I’m sure it must have been maddening for him to not be able to set the record straight.

Having said that, the good news is that the Mark fragment has been dated to the late second or early third century! Larry Hurtado reminds us not to lose perspective on this find:

Though not now judged to be “first-century,” this fragment of Mark is still important, doubling the number of manuscript witnesses to GMark from before 300 CE (the only other one being the Chester Beatty Gospels codex, P45).

He adds in another post:

My note about the newly published items included in vol 83 of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri [which included the Mark fragment in question] reminded me that to date, over 100 years after the excavations there, the vast hoard of papyri shipped to Britain by Grenfell & Hunt (in hundreds of metal boxes) remains stored and unpublished. This latest volume brings the number of published items well past 5,000. But by some estimates this leaves several hundred thousands of papyrus fragments, perhaps more, yet to be studied and published.

That only in this latest volume do we have a remarkably early fragment of the Gospel of Mark, as well as fragments of a couple of other NT writings, shows that gems continue to be found in that hoard. And who knows what else lies there?



TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: bible; epigraphyandlanguage; godsgravesglyphs; gospel; gospelofmark; manuscripts; markfragment; oxyrhynchus; oxyrhynchuspapyri; papyri; papyrus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 06/02/2018 5:38:47 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

FYI: Late 2nd or early 3rd century fragment of the Gospel of Mark.


2 posted on 06/02/2018 5:41:45 PM PDT by Pollster1 ("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

But was it King James version?


3 posted on 06/02/2018 5:42:45 PM PDT by DaxtonBrown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

A lot of things were added to Mark in the later years. Finding earlier fragments will surely clear up a lot of things.


4 posted on 06/02/2018 5:43:02 PM PDT by SkyDancer ( ~ Just Consider Me A Random Fact Generator ~ Eat Sleep Fly Repeat ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

.
Nothing Greek is likely to be first century.
.


5 posted on 06/02/2018 5:45:31 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

.
A lot of things were added to all NT writings in the mid 4th century, by Eusebius, to please Constantine.

Manuscript copies of the Hebrew original writings of all of the gospels have been located in Vatican archives, in what is known as the “junk box.”

They will become available soon. They are linked online, but are not well identified by the titles used by the librarians.
.


6 posted on 06/02/2018 5:53:03 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

.
Pharisees version.


7 posted on 06/02/2018 5:54:48 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

See Tremontant, “The Hebrew Christ”, and Carmignac,
“Birth of the Synoptics”, to see how Jewish the gospels
are, how (very obviously) they were written very early,
and by eyewitnesses.

All the supposed “scholarship” proposing very late writing,
is simply demolished.


8 posted on 06/02/2018 6:26:42 PM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

P52 is about 105 AD.


9 posted on 06/02/2018 6:45:48 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

Of course not!


10 posted on 06/02/2018 7:43:09 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Or Aramaic.


11 posted on 06/02/2018 7:44:26 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
Thanks Pollster1, more from the Oxyrhynchus papyri, see those related keywords, not too bad about the original dating error.

12 posted on 06/02/2018 8:29:53 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (www.tapatalk.com/groups/godsgravesglyphs/, forum.darwincentral.org, www.gopbriefingroom.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

.
Neither Yeshua, nor his disciples spoke or were literate in Aramaic.

The presence of the ancient Hebrew MS is the icing on that cake.

The Maccabees were not liars, they were victors.


13 posted on 06/02/2018 9:19:44 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

.
Well, now the hard evidence is there and cannot be denied.

There was no Greek spoken in Judea.


14 posted on 06/02/2018 9:22:05 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Greek was the common language of the eastern Mediterranean. Since the Macedonian conquest of the Middle East, Koine Greek was the language of trade and the Greek/Macedonian and Roman rulers of what is now Israel. Think about the British colonies in Africa and the Indian subcontinent. The common people spoke the indigenous languages, but the courts and trade were conducted in Greek. No doubt the Pharisees and the apostle Luke were conversant in Greek. Luke was a Gentile and likely spoke Greek, as did the apostle Paul. The Pharisees would have conversed with Pilate and Herod in Greek. Jesus preached entirely in Aramaic, of course. The canonical Gospels do not indicate that he ever spoke Greek. However, many Old Testament citations in the New Testament were from the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. So Greek would have had the same status in Judea as English had in India or Kenya.
15 posted on 06/02/2018 9:41:59 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All

Greece and Aramaic not as prevalent as _scholars_ used to think, during 1st century Israel


16 posted on 06/02/2018 10:05:19 PM PDT by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam ; Dems may change USAgov completely, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All

Myself and others are so curious, where the Vatican has hidden all the earliest manuscripts, and when YHVH will cause them to be brought out of hiding...


17 posted on 06/02/2018 10:07:04 PM PDT by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam ; Dems may change USAgov completely, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 1ofmanyfree; 21twelve; 24Karet; ...
Thanks Pollster1.

18 posted on 06/03/2018 5:47:01 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (www.tapatalk.com/groups/godsgravesglyphs/, forum.darwincentral.org, www.gopbriefingroom.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

What about koine Greek?


19 posted on 06/03/2018 7:11:14 AM PDT by Biggirl ("One Lord, one faith, one baptism" - Ephesians 4:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

190 to 290 AD


20 posted on 06/03/2018 7:20:40 AM PDT by xzins (Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson