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: 13646
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 # 130.
#2. To: cranky (#0)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
From 'The Dan Rather School of "Proof"'? With as many witnesses to the life of Jesus as there were, and as many enemies as He had at the time, IF there were actual "proof" of a wife, Jesus' contemporaries and historians would have been all over it. EARLY ON. Instead we are asked to believe the most flimsy of obvious forgeries that crop up like clock-work every half-dozen years or so. Question for you: What of all the overwhelming proof and details of Jesus personal quotes, deeds, and acts; and of places, and things, of eyewitness accounts cited from the Apostles? Why are they so readily dismissed in lieu of these single sordid tabloid "discoveries"?
I didn't know there were any references made about Jesus of Nazareth during his lifetime. Even raising the dead didn't seem to inspire anyone enough at the time to record the event.
Even raising the dead didn't seem to inspire anyone enough at the time to record the event. Have you read the Gospels of the Apostles? Have you read of the incredible crowds Jesus would draw? Were they fictional accounts written but multiple sources?
My understanding is none of them were written at the time Jesus was living. Any contemporaneous accounts of Jesus's life would be appreciated.
If you knew the scant contemporaneous evidence of Caesar's Gallic Wars, you may see why your request is at best an uneducated approach.
I know one of his generals also published a work on the Gallic Wars. And I know Caesar's accounts were commented on by contemporaries. And I'm fairly certain evidence exists of battles waged during the campaigns. So I accept the Gallic Wars actually occurred which doesn't mean I wholeheartedly accept Caesar's version.
That general is long dead..."Jim the man is dead." Where is the manuscript evidence for the generals book? Is there an original copy? Did the Parthian Empire and warring Germanic tribes create a contemporaneous history of the Gallic Wars? If the answer is no (and it is), then why do you believe what Gaius Julius Caesar said in his own book, but the Bible authors somehow don't get the same standards? And I know Caesar's accounts were commented on by contemporaries. All dead now. Do we have their original autographs. No we don't. Do we have their manuscripts? If so, how many are there and what was the time lapse between the supposed autographs and earliest manuscript? Hint I gave the answer up thread on Caesar's Gallic Wars. There was a gap of 1,000 years. NT? less than 100 years. So you see why I think your demands are illogical and quite underinformed. And I'm fairly certain evidence exists of battles waged during the campaigns. So I accept the Gallic Wars actually occurred which doesn't mean I wholeheartedly accept Caesar's version. We know about the battles because people back then wrote about them. The winners wrote about those battles. The losers were crated in cages taken to Rome where many met their untimely demise. So we know only from the Roman perspective about Roman battles. As we find out about Christ from Christians. So your model for evidence doesn't hold up to even things you thought were clearly true in the history books. There is only one place left...Deckard's threads on conspiracy theories. Because that is where you end up, if you think Christianity was fabricated 100s of years later and no one wrote anything down until hundreds of years later. That would be the biggest scam in the history of mankind. If you want someone to come out and tell you..."Yes what you read in the Bible is true, Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God. He died in our place for the forgiveness of sins and rose three days later from the dead thus conquering death; That Jesus Christ changes lives and wants no one to perish but to come to Him in repentance...I'll tell you....It's true!
Aulus Hirtius was one of Caesar's general during the gallic wars. He also wrote a history of one of the campaigns. Many others may have. None have survived or been discovered, if they did (that I know of). Cicero (a contemporary of Caesar's and a Senator) critiqued Caesar's writing while Caesar and Hirtius were living (and presumably at least a few of the veterans). No one disputed that a series of conflict had occurred. So I have two independent first person accounts, evidence that the works were widely discussed at the time the purported events took place and physical evidence of battles in that same time period and at those same locations. I choose to believe there were a series of conflicts in Gaul between 58 and 51 bc that Julius Caesar participated in. So shoot me.
Cicero (a contemporary of Caesar's and a Senator) critiqued Caesar's writing while Caesar and Hirtius were living (and presumably at least a few of the veterans). No one disputed that a series of conflict had occurred. So I have two independent first person accounts, evidence that the works were widely discussed at the time the purported events took place and physical evidence of battles in that same time period and at those same locations. I choose to believe there were a series of conflicts in Gaul between 58 and 51 bc that Julius Caesar participated in. So shoot me. I'm not going to shoot you:) In fact I agree with you. Yes those battles did happen because we have manuscript evidence. What I don't understand is why you impose a different standard on the New Testament manuscripts. All of what you wrote above about deputies, historians and contemporary writings the NT meets or exceeds the standards of all of antiquity writings. The 12 disciples walked the earth with Jesus Christ. They witnessed His Resurrection. They spread the Good News of the Resurrection throughout the known world and planted churches. More writings ensued. Different authors, stating the same facts. All located in differing locations but united in the Gospel. The last Apostle, John lived to the end of the 1st Century AD. By then his writings (epistles) along with the second generation of Christians were circulating the New Testament texts; also writing their commentaries, homilies and confessions. These churches scattered all over the Roman empire were persecuted and most went underground for worship and fellowship. When persecution was lifted we have Christians throughout the Roman empire comparing NT texts and amazingly most of them had all of them.
Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that. I do not know of any. Everything I have read indicates that none of the miracles attributed to Jesus in His lifetime were recorded. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single, first person, eyewitness account. As far as I know, even the Gospels weren't written for decades, maybe centuries, after the fact. As with the gallic wars, I'd like to hear of an account that was recorded by eyewitness or participants and discussed publicly by others while he eyewitnesses/participants were still alive.
I do not know of any. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Jude, Peter. 4 were eyewitnesses to EVERY miracle of Jesus Christ. Luke explains in his gospel account the following: Luke 1: Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that. I do not know of any. Then we are back to the Julius Caesar discussion again. There are no contemporaneous accounts written by surrounding empires on his Gallic wars. He apparently 'eliminated' the opposition so to speak. So if you do not accept multiple Christian authors and Josephus and later Roman historians writing about the past, then you should apply the same standard to the history of the Roman empire. Everything I have read indicates that none of the miracles attributed to Jesus in His lifetime were recorded. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single, first person, eyewitness account. I don't know if you think there was a Jerusalem Times back then and a Bob Woodward following Jesus around, but there wasn't. See above...I laid out that the Apostles were eyewitnesses and they wrote this stuff down. And they as I indicated above received other eyewitness testimony. As far as I know, even the Gospels weren't written for decades, maybe centuries, after the fact. Ok, I see you did not read a lot of my previous posts. Because I laid that out too. Unless you believe Christianity is the best kept conspiracy theory, then there is no other conclusion than the Apostles who walked with Christ actually wrote this stuff. Because if you believe centuries later then someone is pretending to be Paul, Luke, Matthew et al. As with the gallic wars, I'd like to hear of an account that was recorded by eyewitness or participants and discussed publicly by others while he eyewitnesses/participants were still alive. Well yeah, I agree but those dudes are all dead. And their original documents are dust. We do have recopied manuscripts. The same Catholic monks who transcribed from the 5,000 extant NT manuscripts also transcribed the 10 or so manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic Wars. Starting to see now the secular history is held to a different standard...5,000 vs. 10 that's significant. Plus as I mentioned several times there was a gap of a 1,000 years in these Roman empire manuscripts. Not even a century for the Christian NT. That's 100 vs. 1,000! See above where I pointed out Luke's gospel. Sounds like a sound approach. Now compare 4 different author's accounts three of which were eyewitnesses themselves. Then see what they say of other eyewitnesses. You have the greatest of historical integrity within the NT Gospels, and epistles.
#132. To: redleghunter (#130)
Perhaaps not. But there was a second account of the gallic wars written by a second eyewitness/participant (Aulus Hirtius). And Caesar's account was openly discussed (in the Roman Senate by a Roman Senator) when survivors and veterans of the alleged battles were still living. And the records of those discussions (official Senate records) were created at the time the discussions occurred. And with all that publicity, no one came forward to debunk or deny the story of the gallic wars. But if you say Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Jude, Peter, et al, all wrote their gospels and took those gospels on the road to preach and that people who heard them preach were inspired to discuss those gospels and those discussions were recorded, then yes, I agree, there is as much supporting evidence for Jesus as there is for the gallic wars.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#11. To: Don (#2)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
#36. To: cranky (#11)
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
#42. To: Liberator (#36)
With as many witnesses to the life of Jesus as there were, and as many enemies as He had at the time
#45. To: cranky (#42)
I didn't know there were any references made about Jesus of Nazareth during his lifetime.
#73. To: Liberator (#45)
Have you read the Gospels of the Apostles?
#110. To: cranky (#73)
Any contemporaneous accounts of Jesus's life would be appreciated.
#116. To: redleghunter (#110)
If you knew the scant contemporaneous evidence of Caesar's Gallic Wars
#118. To: cranky (#116)
I know one of his generals also published a work on the Gallic Wars.
#119. To: redleghunter (#118)
Did the Parthian Empire and warring Germanic tribes create a contemporaneous history of the Gallic Wars?
#120. To: cranky (#119)
Aulus Hirtius was one of Caesar's general during the gallic wars. He also wrote a history of one of the campaigns. Many others may have. None have survived or been discovered, if they did (that I know of).
#129. To: redleghunter (#120)
The 12 disciples walked the earth with Jesus Christ. They witnessed His Resurrection. They spread the Good News of the Resurrection throughout the known world and planted churches.
#130. To: cranky, liberator (#129)
Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that.
Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.
Replies to Comment # 130. There are no contemporaneous accounts written by surrounding empires on his Gallic wars.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 130.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]