Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
QuoteReplyTopic: Papyrus Scrap Ignites Jesus Marriage Debate Posted: 20-Sep-2012 at 07:24
And the world keeps on turning and once again we revisit the age old question.
''King says the papyrus dates from the 4th century, but the age of the ink needs more testing.
The words are written in Coptic, a language of ancient Egyptian Christians, and the context of the words is unclear, as they appear on a scrap only a little larger than a business card.
King says the words do not prove Jesus was married, only that some early Christians may have thought so. Christian tradition has long held that Jesus remained unmarried.''
I don't think Jesus had a wife, if he did have she'd have dressed him better, also she'd never have let him run round with his mates. Can you image it "Jesus! What time do you call this, you been up half the night with those disciples again".
Edited by Toltec - 20-Sep-2012 at 08:04
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
I don't think Jesus had a wife, if he did have she'd have dressed him better, also she'd never have let him run round with his mates. Can you image it "Jesus! What time do you call this, you been up half the night with those disciples again".
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
One question CV, is there anything wrong according to Christian dogma if Jesus got married? I mean what stops it from being true from your perspective? Just interested.
One question CV, is there anything wrong according to Christian dogma if Jesus got married? I mean what stops it from being true from your perspective? Just interested.
As a historian Baal ole pard...the hypothesis doesn't necessarily fit well with the majority of sources that have been deemed credible at this point and for the last 1500 years or so in regards the development of Christianity....but I realize that's debatable.
As that dogma-doctrine was based on interpretation of the same, given the 'then' sources ie. oral recollections, the gospels etc..., as it was being developed. Primarily by the leaders of the varying sects within it and whom often times were in opposition with one another.....so there's the nail in yer shoe eh....
is there anything wrong according to Christian dogma if Jesus got married?
And that aforementioned finally developed dogma, aside from splinter groups then and or now, does not accept the premise....of a married Jesus Christus. So the traditional view would deem it heretical.
Otoh....As an individual wishes..... nothing stops it from being possibly true or better stated; being acceptable or believed. Evidence or not... dogma or not. That's an indivdual decision. Whether that individual is received with acclaim or dismissal today..positively or negatively.... is another story. Then you might have been burned alive..... Now? Probably just accused of being loopy.
My own experience has been that of the traditionalist; in that the originating church leaders did not specifically state it and consequently.. it therefore was not taught to me, in that regards, by their successors....simply because they rejected it in the development of the doctrine. And that's what I learned and have practiced for nearly six decades now.
Am I offended by the suggestion. Nope. Because for me it's simple.....I can still love admire and respect the Christ, if I choose, whether he was married or not. The idea of Jesus the human; having had a wife and or children does not threaten the value or the moral meaning of his teachings as far as I am concerned. Nor does it challenge my faith and or spirtuality.
Besides as the ghosts in the Dura are constantly reminding me...stranger things then that have already occurred on this world.
Be well.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 21-Sep-2012 at 05:06
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
It would seem that the news reported on this subject may or may not be what it seems, or at least this new report is trying to suggest.
Harvard journal: Jesus 'wife' papyrus unverified
A Harvard University journal says it hasn't fully verified research that purportedly shows some early Christians believed Jesus had a wife, even though Harvard's divinity school touted the research during a publicity blitz this week.
The research centers on a fourth-century papyrus fragment containing Coptic text in which Jesus uses the words "my wife." On Tuesday, Harvard Divinity School professor Karen King announced at an international conference that the fragment was the only existing ancient text in which Jesus explicitly talks of having a wife.
Harvard also said King's research was scheduled to be published in the Harvard Theological Review in January and noted the journal was peer-reviewed, which implied the research had been fully vetted.
But on Friday, the review's co-editor Kevin Madigan said he and his co-editor had only "provisionally" committed to a January publication, pending the results of the ongoing studies. In an email, Madigan said the added studies include "scientific dating and further reports from Coptic papyrologists and grammarians."
After Tuesday's announcement, The Associated Press raised questions about the fragment's authenticity and provenance, quoting scholars at the international congress on Coptic studies in Rome, where King delivered the paper. The scholars said the fragment's grammar, form and content raised several red flags. Alin Suciu, a papyrologist at the University of Hamburg, flatly called it a "forgery."
Boston University archaeologist Ricardo Elia said Friday that the Harvard Theological Review should delay publication until the fragment's owner and origins are more clearly documented.
Harvard has kept the owner anonymous, and Elia said that raises questions about professional ethics, because Harvard appears to be protecting the owner, a collector, from other claims to the fragment. The school has said the papyrus most likely came from Egypt, which means it could be Egypt's cultural property, Elia said.
"If it's real, it was looted and smuggled, most likely," he said. "If it's not real, then it shouldn't even be out there in the discussion."
Elia said "lurking behind all of this is the suspicion that the collector is doing this for the purpose of having the scholar authenticate a piece, and get a lot of attention to it, and then turn around and sell it."
King's announcement about the fragment, which she called the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, came after the school released details in advance to The New York Times and The Boston Globe, which gave the story prominent play. The Smithsonian Channel is planning to debut a program about it at end of the month........
'Jesus Wife' Research Leads To Suspicions That Artifact Is A Fake
Facingmounting doubts over the legitimacy of a business card-sized Coptic papyrus fragment that appears to quote Jesus Christ discussing his wife, the Harvard professor who acquired the artifact said Wednesday that she stands behind her findings, but is "open to questions about authenticity."
Karen L. King, the Harvard Divinity School professor whose announcement at a Coptic studies conference in Rome last week about a 1½-by-3-inch fragment inspired "Jesus' Wife" headlines worldwide, said the badly damaged artifact has been sent for testing. She said the tests should determine if it is from the fourth century as originally proposed, or if parts of it are a modern forgery, as an increasing number of scholars of Coptology and papyrology have suggested.
The fragment, which has eight mostly legible dark lines on the front side and six barely legible faded lines on the back, was never meant to prove Jesus was married, King said, since its writing dates back to hundreds of years after his death. It was intended to highlight that some early Christians may have believed he was married. That would be significant because debates over sexuality and marriage have dominated contemporary discussions about Christianity; the Catholic Church cites Jesus' celibacy as one reason its priests must not have sex or marry.
The legible lines on the front of the artifact seem to be a conversation between Jesus and his disciples. The fourth line of the text says, "Jesus said to them, my wife." Line 5 says "... she will be able to be my disciple," while the line before the "wife" quote has Jesus saying "Mary is worthy of it" and line 7 says, “As for me, I dwell with her in order to ..."
King, who carefully guarded her discovery until the Rome conference, released photos of the fragment and a draft of a related paper, scheduled to be published in theHarvard Theological Review. But after the conference, scholars quickly began to doubt the findings. Some said the handwriting, grammar, shape of the papyrus, and the ink's color and quality make it suspect. Others said the ink and papyrus should have been chemically dated before being publicly announced. The fact that the fragment's owner is unknown also has attracted suspicion.
King said the owner acquired the piece in 1997 from a German owner and wants to remain anonymous.
On Wednesday, bloggers began circulating a rumor that the Harvard Theological Review reneged on publishing King's 52-page paper titled, "Gospel of Jesus' Wife" because of doubts over whether the papyrus was genuine.
Helmut Koester, a professor emeritus of Harvard Divinity School and a former 25-year editor of the journal, said in an interview that he heard "they did not want to publish because of doubts from two respected scholars." Koester, who specializes in early Christianity and early Christian archaeology, added that after seeing an evaluation of King's work from a colleague in the field, he was "absolutely convinced that this is a modern forgery."
A call to the Harvard Theological Review was redirected to a Harvard spokesman, and Kevin Madigan, the journal's co-editor, did not reply to an email. But in an earlierAssociated Press article, Madigan said King's paper had only been "provisionally" accepted for a January publication. He said that there would be ongoing studies about the "scientific dating and further reports from Coptic papyrologists and grammarians.".............
One question CV, is there anything wrong according to Christian dogma if Jesus got married? I mean what stops it from being true from your perspective? Just interested.
One must be minful that in the Western world, Europe especially, but certainly in Obama's America, Christianity, and more specifically Catholicism, is under attack. They are under attack because the age old moral truths they hold are opposed to the moral truths of those of the Left. The Left considers it a matter of equality for women to be allowed to be priests, and for priests to be allowed to marry.
Such truths as these place these ideological factions in opposition. Thus if Jesus were married it would pull the rug from under Christian/Catholic doctrine and fall in line with the morality the Left abides by.
Of course one scrap of paper, written 400 years after Christ was alive, has no historical veracity whatsoever. It means nothing! But the Left gives it meaning, plays it up on the news shows, and before you know it they Christians questioning their belief system, or at least that's the hope. In short this has been nothing more than an opportunity for a political event, not an archeological mystery unearthed.
But I'm with Centrix in conclusion. The Christ, and his doctrines, stand apart from any Church or bureaucracy claiming to represent him. There are hundreds of Christian sects in the world all claiming a unique interpretation, but there was only one Christ, and it is hard to quarrell with a theology based on love and peace, which in effect is what Christianity was founded on.
I am wiser than he in that I do not think I know that which I do not know. - Socrates
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum