Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Origins of 'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' Begin to Emerge
Source:
Live Science
URL Source: http://www.livescience.com/51954-gospel-of-jesus-wife-origins.html
Published: Aug 24, 2015
Author: Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor
Post Date: 2015-08-24 21:47:48 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 19276
Comments: 135
Written in Coptic (an Egyptian language), the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, if authentic, suggests that some people in ancient times believed Jesus was married, apparently to Mary Magdalene. The truth may be finally emerging about the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife," a highly controversial papyrus suggesting that some people, in ancient times, believed Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. New research on the papyrus' ink points to the possibility that it is authentic, researchers say, while newly obtained documents may shed light on the origins of the business-card-sized fragment. Debate about the credibility of the "gospel" began as soon as Harvard University professor Karen King reported her discovery of the papyrus in September 2012. Written in Coptic (an Egyptian language), the papyrus fragment contains a translated line that reads, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife …'" and also refers to a "Mary," possibly Mary Magdalene. King had tentatively dated the papyrus to the fourth century, saying it may be a copy of a gospel written in the second century in Greek. [Read Translation of Gospel of Jesus's Wife Papyrus] Analysis of the papyrus, detailed last year in the Harvard Theological Review journal, suggested the papyrus dates back around 1,200 years (somewhere between the sixth and ninth centuries) while the ink is of a type that could have been created at that time. These findings have led King to support the text's authenticity. However over the past year many scholars have come to the conclusion that the papyrus is a modern-day forgery, though King and a few other researchers say they are not ready to concede this: "At this point, when discussions and research are ongoing, I think it is important, however difficult, to stay open regarding the possible dates of the inscription and other matters of interpretation," wrote King in a letter recently published in the magazine Biblical Archaeological Review. King has not responded to several interview requests from Live Science. Now, researchers at Columbia University are running new tests on the ink used on the papyrus. Initial tests published by the Columbia University team in 2014 indicated the ink could have been made in ancient times. Researchers are saying little until their report is published; however they did talk about one finding that could provide some support for its authenticity. A gospel steeped in mystery The current owner of the papyrus has insisted on remaining anonymous, claiming that he bought the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, along with other Coptic texts, in 1999 from a man named Hans-Ulrich Laukamp. This person, in turn, got it from Potsdam, in what was East Germany, in 1963, the owner said. Laukamp died in 2002, and the claim that he owned the text has been strongly disputed: Rene Ernest, the man whom Laukamp and his wife Helga charged with representing their estate, said that Laukamp had no interest in antiquities, did not collect them and was living in West Berlin in 1963. Therefore, he couldn't have crossed the Berlin Wall into Potsdam. Axel Herzsprung, a business partner of Laukamp's, similarly said that Laukamp never had an interest in antiquities and never owned a papyrus. Laukamp has no children or living relatives who could verify these claims. [6 Archaeological Forgeries That Tried to Change History] Over the past few months, new documents have been found that not only reconstruct Laukamp's life in greater detail, but also provide a new way to check the anonymous owner's story. King reported in a 2014 Harvard Theological Review article that the anonymous owner "provided me with a photocopy of a contract for the sale of '6 Coptic papyrus fragments, one believed to be a Gospel' from Hans-Ulrich Laukamp, dated Nov. 12, 1999, and signed by both parties." King also notes that "a handwritten comment on the contract states, 'Seller surrenders photocopies of correspondence in German. Papyri were acquired in 1963 by the seller in Potsdam (East Germany).'" After searching public databases in Florida a Live Science reporter uncovered seven signatures signed by Laukamp between 1997 and 2001 on five notarized documents. Anyone can search these databases and download these documents. These signatures can be compared with the signature recording the sale of the Gospel of Jesus's Wife — providing another way to verify or disprove the story of how the "gospel" made its way to Harvard. The signature of Hans-Ulrich Laukamp from September 1997. While Harvard University would have to work with forensic handwriting experts to verify the signature, the fact that these notarized documents exist, and are publicly available, presents the opportunity to see if Laukamp really did own the Gospel of Jesus's Wife. Forensic handwriting analysis, while not always conclusive, has been used to determine if signatures made on documents or works of art are authentic or forged. If Laukamp did own the papyrus, authentic or not, then the origins of the enigmatic text lie with him. The new Laukamp documents allow the story of his life between 1995 and 2002 to be told in some detail. However if Laukamp didn't own the papyrus and the anonymous owner has not been truthful, then further doubt would be cast on the papyrus' authenticity, and information leading to the identity, motives and techniques of the forgers could be found. Authentic or forged? One important find, which indicates the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a fake, was made last year by Christian Askeland, a research associate with the Institute for Septuagint and Biblical Research in Wuppertal, Germany. He examined a second Coptic papyrus containing part of the Gospel of John, which the anonymous owner of the Gospel of Jesus's Wife had also given to Harvard. This text was likewise supposedly purchased from Laukamp, and radiocarbon testing of that papyrus similarly found that it dates back around 1,200 years. [See Images of the Ancient Gospel of Judas] Askeland found that the text and line breaks— where one line of a text ends and another begins — are identical to those of another papyrus, published in a 1924 book. That second papyrus was written in a dialect of Coptic called Lycopolitan, which went extinct around 1,500 years ago. Askeland concluded that the John papyrus is a forgery. Furthermore, it shares other features with the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, Askeland said, suggesting both are forgeries. "The two Coptic fragments clearly shared the same ink, writing implement and scribal hand. The same artisan had created both essentially at the same time," Askeland wrote in a paper recently published in the journal New Testament Studies. King objected to this conclusion in her Biblical Archaeology Review letter, noting that the John fragment could have been copied in ancient times, long after Lycopolitan went extinct, from a text that had similar line breaks. In addition, James Yardley, a senior research scientist at Columbia University, told Live Science that the new tests confirm that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife holds different ink than the John papyrus. This could undercut Askeland's argument that the two papyri were written by the same person. "In our first exploration, we did state that the inks used for the two documents of interest [the John papyrus and the Gospel of Jesus's Wife] were quite different. The more recent results do confirm this observation strongly," Yardley told Live Science. He added that until his new research is published in a peer-reviewed journal, he doesn't want to say anything more publicly. And once it's published, Askeland and other researchers will have a chance to respond. Askeland's find is far from the only argument that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a fake: A number of scholars have noted that the Coptic writing in the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is similar to another early Christian text called the "Gospel of Thomas," even including a modern-day typo made in a 2002 edition of the Gospel of Thomas that is available for free online. That typo indicates the forgers copied from this modern-day text. King disputed this assertion in 2014, saying that ancient scribes made grammatical errors similar to the modern-day typo. King and communications staff at Harvard Divinity School have not responded to repeated requests for comment. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 101.
#2. To: cranky (#0)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
The proof thusfar has been that this fragment is a later fabrication...fraud. It's in the article. What these 'researchers' are after is to find something believing it contradicts the Scriptures we have now. They lose everytime because even though they tout scholarship, they fail to even understand the time period involved. Even in the days of the Apostles in the early 1st century there were already heretics they warned believers about. Let's put this in perspective. If today thousands of people wrote cranky was a stand up guy, that he gave to the poor and spent all his earthly wealth on hospitals for disabled children. Fast forward 1,000 years as everyone was going through 10's of thousands of the 'cranky archives' and they find out all these wonderful things about you. But someone digs one or two blogs on cranky calling him a child abuser, a cheat on his wife and a secret Hillary Clinton supporter. Shocking! Modern liberal 'scholarship' tells us the 10s of thousands of documents saying otherwise must be discredited for some jealous jerk who happened to spend a few bucks on his own blog site to bear false witness. That's exactly what you have with these fragments of ancient 'jerks' who were either deceived or had an axe to grind. But people who really know cranky and his works (which live on thousands of yers later by people inspired by what he did), know the jerk who wrote garbage about him is just a jerk who should be paid no mind.
I think I'll defer judgement until the peer reviewed paper is published. As far as the fragment of papyrus goes, either in is an authentic artifact dating from the fourth century or it is not. If it is authentic, it should be given the as much or as little weight as any other shard of papyrus, imo. And let the chips fall where they may.
As far as the fragment of papyrus goes, either in is an authentic artifact dating from the fourth century or it is not. If it is authentic, it should be given the as much or as little weight as any other shard of papyrus, imo. How many peer reviews does this fragment need? It has already been reviewed several times and deemed a forgery. How many times was "Jesus has a wife" been recopied? Where is the manuscript evidence?
And let's pause for a moment to think about whether it really makes any difference, theologically, that Jesus had a wife or not. Let's given the Mary Magdelene theorists the greatest slack and say "Ok, Mary Magdelene, former sinner, became Jesus' wife." That would explain why Jesus revealed himself to her first after the resurrection, and why he would speak to her tenderly. But beyond that, does it change ANYTHING about the faith? No. It doesn't change a single thing. It changes some ideas about the practice of the religion - example: clerical celibacy. But then, the Scriptures already tell us that Jesus healed Peter's Mother-in-Law, and Peter was the first Pope, so it changes less than appears. For those who (foolishly) think that bloodlines matter (foolishly: because ALL are descended equally from Noah and Naamah, and from Adam and Eve), then let's suppose that Jesus and Mary Magdelene even had children. Once again, so what? "Royal blood" and "bloodline" concerns are the concerns of vaguely pagan medieval warlords. God never suggested that any attention be paid to them at all, other than in the context of titles to ancestral clan farms in Israel, under the old covenant. Spiritual guidance doesn't flow with bloodlines but with the breath of God's spirit into each individual - and Jesus said that all who believed were his brothers and sisters. If Jesus had a wife and child, it would change some ecclesiology, but it would not change theology at all (except to the extent that men have confused ecclesiology with theology - which is to say, except to the extent that men have fallen under the spell of idolatry). Bottom line: there's no "gotcha" there even if Jesus DID have a wife, and children. And if there are living lineal descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdelene in the world today, they either have favor with God, or not, depending on whether they believe and keep the commandments, just exactly like everybody else. There are very probably descendants of Nephilim in the world today. The Basques may be their descendants. The Rh negative blood type may be the marker of that peculiar ancestry. They're just men, neither specially blessed nor specially cursed. Having a fallen angel as a 55-times great grandparent means nothing. What matters is whether you love God and keep the commandments. That's what God said. MEN add importance to other things. But God said "Don't add". So don't.
Let's given the Mary Magdelene theorists the greatest slack and say "Ok, Mary Magdelene, former sinner, became Jesus' wife." That would explain why Jesus revealed himself to her first after the resurrection, and why he would speak to her tenderly. But beyond that, does it change ANYTHING about the faith? Only for people who were raised to believe that sex is dirty. For them,it pretty much shatters their whole sense of what Christianity is all about.
Pete, you still miss the mark by miles. AND... you're projecting. Sex may certainly be "dirty" to YOU, but there is such a thing as what is appropriate -- even in Pagan-Land where moral relativity reigns supreme (as your "God.") Sex in certain contexts one of God's gifts to both man and woman (as husband and wife.) You never concede you monumental ignorance -- especially on a subject that you are completely oblivious on. This is an alien subject for you.
#121. To: Liberator (#101)
You clearly have me confused with someone else.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#11. To: Don (#2)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
#15. To: cranky, Don, GarySpFc, liberator, Vicomte13 (#11)
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
#24. To: redleghunter (#15)
It's in the article.
#25. To: cranky (#24)
I think I'll defer judgement until the peer reviewed paper is published.
#29. To: redleghunter (#25)
#59. To: Vicomte13 (#29)
And let's pause for a moment to think about whether it really makes any difference, theologically, that Jesus had a wife or not.
#101. To: sneakypete, Vicomte13 (#59)
Vic: "Does it [the theory] that Jesus had a wife or not...change ANYTHING about the faith?"
PETE: "Only for people who were raised to believe that sex is dirty. For them,it pretty much shatters their whole sense of what Christianity is all about."
Replies to Comment # 101. Sex may certainly be "dirty" to YOU
End Trace Mode for Comment # 101.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]