Christian Scholars Not Fazed by 'Gospel of Jesus' Wife'


By Lillian Kwon, Christian Post Reporter
September 20, 2012|5:41 pm



The so-called "Gospel of Jesus' Wife" isn't sending shockwaves through the Christian world as some publications have reported. In fact, many are dismissing the ancient fragment as either insignificant or forged.

"This is sensationalism masquerading as scholarship," said R. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in a commentary Thursday.

"One British newspaper notes that the claims about a married Jesus seem more worthy of fans of Dan Brown's fictional work, The Da Vinci Code, than 'real-life Harvard professors. If the fragment is authenticated, the existence of this little document will be of interest to historians of the era, but it is insanity to make the claims now running through the media."

The fragment that was unveiled this week by Professor Karen King of Harvard Divinity School is a small, torn papyrus that has eight incomplete lines of Coptic script. King, who received the fragment from an unnamed private collector, says it is a fourth-century CE codex. Nothing is known about the circumstances of its discovery except that it may have been excavated from an area in Upper Egypt.

What has the media buzzing is one particular phrase on the papyrus: "Jesus said to them, 'My wife ... "

King has stated clearly that this does not prove that Jesus was married. It is simply evidence that some early Christians may have debated Jesus' marital status. Still, that nuance gets easily lost in discussions and amid "hype," Dr. Joel B. Green, Fuller Seminary's professor of New Testament Interpretation, expressed to CP.

Christian scholars largely are not fazed by the discovery.

Sean McDonough, professor of New Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, told CP that he believes the papyrus "is simply the latest in a seemingly endless parade of sensationalist headlines obscuring sober historical thinking about the Bible."

"At best, we have a scrap of papyrus that perhaps (the fragmentary nature of the piece makes it impossible to have any clear idea what it is actually about) one person in the ancient world, who wrote about Jesus centuries after the fact (Karen King, the scholar who unveiled the piece, suggests late second century, but at this point this is speculation) suggested he had a wife," McDonough contended. "As King herself says, it tells us nothing about the actual facts as to whether Jesus had a wife. Yet headlines continue to state that a 'historical document' says Jesus had a wife."

Dr. Christian Askeland, an expert in Coptic manuscripts, revealed that those who specialized in Nag Hammadi and early manuscripts are either "extremely skeptical" about the fragment's authenticity or convinced it's a fake.

Askeland attended the International Congress of Coptic Studies in Rome on Tuesday where King unveiled the discovery.

"I have not met anyone who supports its authenticity, although I do not doubt that there must be some," he wrote in a blog Wednesday.

He noted that the fragment is "not a literally codex leaf."

"Everyone to whom I have spoken is agreed on this. Gregor Wurst has publically noted that this fragment resembles the erratic nature of magical texts," Askeland explained.

"What is lacking is convincing evidence which could outweigh the absolute weirdness of the supposed manuscript."

Scholars at Tyndale House believe, on the basis of the limited evidence currently available, there is a possibility that the script is genuine. The ink, however, would have to be destroyed for C14 testing to prove the authenticity of the piece.

But even if it is proven to be authentic, Christian scholars still view it as insignificant. Historical texts, including the four Gospels in the New Testament, do not say Jesus was married.

"The only historical documents about Jesus that can be reliably dated to the first century – namely the four canonical gospels – make no mention of Jesus having a wife," said McDonough. "They fully support the traditional view that Jesus had no wife. The recent papyrus find does nothing to change this."

Mohler, meanwhile, raised suspicion about the motive behind all this. Though King expressed her desire to avoid sensationalism, Mohler pointed to the curious title she gave the fragment.

"King was so concerned about avoiding sensationalism that she titled the fragment 'The Gospel of Jesus' Wife?'" he posed.

The Southern Baptist theologian believes that those behind the new finding are trying to cast doubt on the New Testament.

"The energy behind all this is directed to the replacement of orthodox Christianity, its truth claims, its doctrines, its moral convictions, and its vision of both history and eternity with a secularized – indeed, Gnositicized – new version," he stated.

"Just look at the attention this tiny fragment of papyrus has garnered. Its few words and broken phrases are supposed to cast doubt on the New Testament and the doctrines of orthodox Christianity. A tiny little fragment which, even if authentically from the fourth century, is placed over against the four New Testament Gospels, all written within decades of Jesus' earthy ministry."



Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-scholars-not-fazed-by-gospel-of-jesus-wife-81974/#8zGtBTeCxParx95P.99

he could have said 'my wife is the church',,,who knows

I am dismissing the significance and doubting anything will come from it,,,

If it turns out Jesus did have a wife, so what? He is still my savior.

good point

he would no doubt have done so to please God , as he did everything,,

yet, I find it hard to think he would have a wife and be so committed to the disciples instead,,,

I think his wife was his job God sent him to do.

Most likely either a fake or penned by some esoteric sect. Same with early jews, some of whom gave Yahweh a wife in their literature. (gnostic Christianity, btw, has been well known for a really long time)

I heard that in those days the term wife could mean someone who cooks and cleans not necessarily one who is married.

FIRST-PERSON: The facts about the 'Jesus' wife' fragment
Thomas White
Posted on Sep 19, 2012



FORT WORTH, Texas (BP) -- With all the media publicity over Karen King's release of information about the fragment of "Jesus' wife," pastors likely will receive questions from members this weekend or in the near future.

For us, there will be two main questions. First, was Jesus married and does it matter? Second, what does "she will be able to be my disciple" mean in the discussion over proper women's roles? I was interviewed by a local media representative, and since I had to do a little research I thought I would share it with others.

The Facts About the Fragment:

-- The fragment is smaller than a business card, with eight lines on one side legible under a magnifying glass, with about four words per line.

-- The fragment comes from the middle of a text, which means you lose context on all sides.

-- They think the fragment comes from the fourth century. It is written in an Egyptian language -- Coptic, and is thought to be a translation of a second-century document. This has not yet been verified.

The Facts About Karen King:

-- The Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard Divinity School, she holds the oldest endowed chair in the United States (1721).

-- Her books include "The Secret Revelation of John;" "The Gospel of Mary of Magdala: Jesus and the First Woman Apostle;" "What Is Gnosticism?;" "Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity;" "Revelation of the Unknowable God;" "Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism" (editor); and "Women and Goddess Traditions in Antiquity and Today" (editor).

-- King currently is teaching a class titled "Women, Sex, and Gender in Ancient Christianity."

-- For reference purposes, King has named the "gospel" of which this is a part the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife."

No matter how good a fish tale you weave, this fragment is small. You can see the translation at Boston.com (http://www.bo.st/PUeBsU). Also, the document dates too late to have impact. The Gospels have authenticity because of the date of their writing, the connection to an eyewitness, and consistency with the rule of faith. Any fragment too far removed from Jesus' time loses credibility because of the distance from Jesus' life, and we can't know who wrote it or what agenda that person may have had. At best, this document tells us what some people were thinking in the second or fourth century. Yes, it is interesting, but no, it does not change anything. Bottom line is that we have older and more reliable documents in our Bibles.

Check the sponsors. King has an agenda. The naming of the fragment and the naming of the gospel play into her research field of women's roles and unknown gospel accounts. This is like a hunting show demonstrating how you can't kill a deer without a Rage broadhead on your arrow. Then at the end of the show you find out the only sponsor is Rage. While King may be considered a fine academic scholar, she has an agenda.

Was Jesus married? The New Testament never says so. We would expect to find this information in the Gospels if Jesus had a wife. Furthermore, Paul, when discussing this issue of marriage, notes in 1 Corinthians 9:5 that Peter was married. He likely would have stated Jesus also married to make his point, but he doesn't. Most theories of Jesus' wife have him married to Mary Magdalene. Even King says it is unlikely that Mary was Jesus' wife because she is known by the area of her birth, and if she was married, she would be known by her husband.

What about women disciples? Jesus treated women better than did anyone of that time. He had believers and followers who were women, and He appeared to a woman first after the resurrection. So if "disciple" means "follower," which it likely does in the second or fourth century, then there is not an issue here. But don't miss the possible agenda. The New Testament clearly lists that men made up the twelve. The deacons chosen in Acts were men. Scripture gives the man the authority in the home and in the church.

At the end of the day, this unverified fourth century Coptic fragment from an unknown source written by an unknown author doesn't compare to the New Testament record in our Bibles. So we should take advantage of this opportunity to reassure our congregations of the reliability of Scripture and warn them of the feminist agenda that pervades our society.






--30--
Thomas White is Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary's vice president of student services and communications. This column first appeared at his blog, www.thomaswhite.wordpress.com. Get Baptist Press headlines and breaking news on Twitter (@BaptistPress), Facebook (Facebook.com/BaptistPress ) and in your email ( baptistpress.com/SubscribeBP.asp).


http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=38755&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+delicious%2Fgqlf+%28Christian+Headlines+Top+Headlines%29