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 ...
Ping
Could be an ancient fake...
Just an old fake.
What idiots! EIGHTH century. EGYPTIAN. Figure it out folks: it’s Muslim.
Based on what? I think this "expert" King is injecting some wishful thinking on her part.
Basically irrelevant, none of Jesus’ works depended on him being single...
The Koran could be considered ancient too. So are the gnostics like the book of Thomas, the book or Judas, the book of Mary, etc.
That doesn’t mean I believe any of them.
Sure it could be ancient. So were many of the false gospels that were never adopted by the Church.
Jesus' wife? Ludicrous.
anyone else remember when James Cameron found the tomb\body of Jesus during Holy Week?
Neither was the “Donation of Constantine”. Age doesn’t impart honor to anything but wine and whiskey. Well, there may be a few exceptions to that.
What was frustrating is that I can’t find a complete translation. Unless it specifies “wife” what it may refer to is the bond Jesus had with his mother. She was his first disciple. She knew before Cana and in fact at the Annunciation that this person was/is the Son of God.
Possible—the hint that Jesus was married has been out there for a long time. BUT in truth, does it change the Message of Jesus? Not one bit. People who focus on this or his Virgin Birth are forgetting his message and life. As a wise old monk told me once—”Jesus didn’t die for you—he lived for you.”
Between the sixth and ninth centuries, allegedly. Still makes it hundreds of years newer than the earliest manuscripts of the Canonical Gospels. If it dates from that time period, I would conclude it is a Gnostic document, and therefore doesn’t come from an early and authentic tradition.
99% of Muslims were illiterate in those centuries. Their alphabet was "invented" only to put the Koran in writing.
Since they lived in deserts there were no trees for writing materials or sources for papyrus.
I also don't think it was Muslim either because they were simply too backward to produce something like this papyrus.
Cheese.
I like cheese.
Amazing amount of past tense in your post about muslim stupidity... ;)
Amen.
He lived to tell us how to live.
Two thousand year old fan fiction?
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.