'Wife of Jesus' reference in Coptic 4th Century script

Feb 2012
536
6
England
An ancient scrap of papyrus makes explicit reference to Jesus having a wife, according to a renowned expert in Christian history.
Harvard divinity professor Karen King unveiled the 4th-Century Coptic script at a conference in Rome.
She said researchers had identified the words "Jesus said to them, 'my wife'", which might refer to Mary Magdalene.
Christian tradition holds that Jesus did not marry - but Ms King said in early years it was subject to debate.
The provocative find could spark debate over celibacy and the role of women within Christianity, she added.
But the announcement sparked scepticism from some theologians.
Jim West, a professor and Baptist pastor in Tennessee, said: "A statement on a papyrus fragment isn't proof of anything. It's nothing more than a statement 'in thin air', without substantial context."
Wolf-Peter Funk, a noted Coptic linguist attending the same conference as Ms King, said there were "thousands of scraps of papyrus where you find crazy things," and many questions remained about the fragment.
'Worthy disciple'
Ms King said the document, written in ancient Egyptian Coptic, is the first known scripture in which Jesus is reported to cite his wife.
She said the 4th-Century text was a copy of a gospel, probably written in Greek in the 2nd Century.
She said initially she was sceptical about the yellowish brown papyrus, and started from the notion that it was a forgery - but that she quickly decided it was genuine.
Several other experts agreed, she said, but the "final judgment on the fragment depends on further examination by colleagues and further testing, especially of the chemical composition of the ink".
Ms King said the script was not proof of Jesus's marital status.
"It is not evidence, for us, historically, that Jesus had a wife," she said.
"It's quite clear evidence, in fact, that some Christians, probably in the second half of the 2nd Century, thought that Jesus had a wife."
Ms King said it revealed the concerns of early Christians with regards to family and marriage matters.
A video filmed by Harvard University reveals experts were "sceptical" before examining the ancient scrap of papyrus
"From the very beginning, Christians disagreed about whether it was better not to marry, but it was over a century after Jesus's death before they began appealing to Jesus's marital status to support their positions.
"What this shows is that there were early Christians for whom sexual union in marriage could be an imitation of God's creativity and generativity and it could be spiritually proper and appropriate."
Bible scholar Ben Witherington III, a professor in Kentucky, said the term "wife" might simply refer to a female domestic assistant and follower.
Private owner
According to Ms King's research team, the text also quotes Jesus as telling his followers that Mary Magdalene is worthy of being his disciple.
This, in turn, casts new doubt on the long-held belief that Jesus had no female disciples, and raises issues about Mary's biblical role as a sinner, the researchers said.
Ms King presented the document at a six-day conference held at Rome's La Sapienza University and at the Augustinianum institute of the Pontifical Lateran University.
The faded papyrus is hardly bigger than a business card and has eight lines on one side, in black ink legible under a magnifying glass.
The private collector, who owns the fragment, has asked to remain anonymous because "he doesn't want to be hounded by people who want to buy this", Ms King said.
She said he had contacted Ms King to help translate and analyse it.
Nothing was known about the circumstances of its discovery, but because of the script used she had concluded it must have come from Egypt.


Analysis

Kate Cooper Prof Ancient History, University of Manchester
This papyrus text shows how a single fragment can change how we see history.
Its unveiling could not be better-timed to generate controversy in the English-speaking world, coming just weeks before the Church of England takes a crucial vote on women bishops.
Since the late 2nd Century, Christians have debated the theological significance of Jesus's close relationships with women. Did his female followers have the ability to "speak for Jesus" after his death, in the way that Peter and other male disciples were invited to?
The idea of Jesus as a married man will generate its own controversy - but it would have seemed less surprising to early Christian communities when husband-wife missionary couples, like Prisca and Aquila in the letters of the Apostle Paul, were well known.
Later, Jesus began to be remembered as an ascetic teacher, but in fact the canonical New Testament sources do not comment on his marital status


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19645273#panel1
 
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
First rule about church club...

I love how theologians who only follow a three hundred year old tradition yet pretend that it is thousands of years old attempt to discredit discovery. I worship Jesus, but it would be really cool to know he had a wife. perhaps he may have even had children. I honestly never considered that idea until the Catholic church threw a fit about the davinchi code. I think the human life of Jesus would be an interesting part of it to study.

Just to let you know all Christians are not bats--t nuts.
 
Feb 2012
536
6
England
It would certainly put the 'cat amoungst the pigeons' wouldn't it?

Peter had a wife and a mother in law. I don't know what the standing on that is do you? Did he leave his wife when he became a disciple and if so, is that the recommended/expected move to make?
 
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
It would certainly put the 'cat amoungst the pigeons' wouldn't it?

Peter had a wife and a mother in law. I don't know what the standing on that is do you? Did he leave his wife when he became a disciple and if so, is that the recommended/expected move to make?

I am not exactly sure, there isn't really any scripture that answers that Queston.
 
May 2012
215
37
The motherland
The Coptic fragment discovered by the Harvard professor is not the first script which insinuated Jesus's close relationship with Mary Magdalene and the Gnostic Gospels generally refer her as a "companion" of Jesus and the Copts were notorious for producing apocryphal books such as the Gospel of Mary. Perhaps Mary was one of his disciples but she was denied a major role in his ministry because of her gender and she was not even allowed to travel around without being accompanied by a male at the time and her position was further undermined by the Church which censored apocryphal books referring to Mary.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
And your proof or are you just saying it's fake to avoid rethinking your beliefs?

It shouldn't require a rethink of someone's beliefs. It really is a detail, it has no effect on who Jesus is. Or what he did, but i am a supporter of unshskeable faith.

Its been deemed authentic by the people who have athenticated it. So scientifically speaking it absolutly is not fake
 
Jul 2009
5,893
474
Port St. Lucie
It shouldn't require a rethink of someone's beliefs. It really is a detail, it has no effect on who Jesus is. Or what he did, but i am a supporter of unshskeable faith.

Its been deemed authentic by the people who have athenticated it. So scientifically speaking it absolutly is not fake

I know what your saying but he (I'm assuming it's a he) just flat out said it was fake. It was a blatant example of a recessionary and I called him on it.
 
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
I know what your saying but he (I'm assuming it's a he) just flat out said it was fake. It was a blatant example of a recessionary and I called him on it.

I backed you up but if he is christian I questioned his faith to boot.
 
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
I just think it's funny how faith is said to be able to move mountains but it can't accept a possability of jJesus having a wife, that can't gel?
 
Aug 2012
123
0
I am thinking that the news does not reach America at all.

A New Testament scholar claims to have found evidence suggesting that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a modern forgery.
Professor Francis Watson, of Durham University, says the papyrus fragment, which caused a worldwide sensation when it appeared earlier this week because it appeared to refer to Jesus's wife, is a patchwork of texts from the genuine Coptic-language Gospel of Thomas, which have been copied and reassembled out of order to make a suggestive new whole.In a paper published online, Watson argues that all of the sentence fragments found on the papyrus fragment have been copied, sometimes with small alterations, from printed editions of the Gospel of Thomas.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/21/gospel-jesus-wife-forgery
 
Jan 2012
1,975
5
Texas
My faith is strong enough that a scrap of paper can't do any damage to it.

Watson has the right to think what he wishes. And perhaps the wording was changed and so on the bible definitly has been watered down through the centuries. But Jesus's personal life wasn't talked about much in the Bible, mainly because the bible isn't a biography of Jesus. Details were l left out because they are arbitrary.

I just refuse to join in this knee jerk reaction that all findings that are not valid unless they are backed up in the Bible by some charlatans interpretation.
 
Oct 2012
4,429
1,084
Louisville, Ky
If Jesus actually did have a wife...It makes perfect sense, unless he was ....uh...had different interests.
 
Oct 2012
4,429
1,084
Louisville, Ky
Answer me this first: How many people 2012 years ago were named Jesus?

I suppose that depends on an understanding of history, and linguistics.

"
Yeshua (ישוע, with vowel pointing יֵשׁוּעַ - yēšūă‘ in Hebrew)[1] was a common alternative form of the name יְהוֹשֻׁעַ ("Yehoshuah" - Joshua) in later books of the Hebrew Bible and among Jews of the Second Temple period. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling Iesous, from which comes the English spelling Jesus.[2][3]
The Hebrew spelling Yeshua (ישוע) appears in some later books of the Hebrew Bible. Once for Joshua the son of Nun, and 28 times for Joshua the High Priest and (KJV "Jeshua") and other priests called Jeshua - although these same priests are also given the spelling Joshua in 11 further instances in the books of Haggai and Zechariah. It differs from the usual Hebrew Bible spelling of Joshua (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ y'hoshuaʿ), found 218 times in the Hebrew Bible, in the absence of the consonant he ה and placement of the semivowel vav ו after, not before, the consonant shin ש. It also differs from the Hebrew spelling Yeshu (ישו) which is found in Ben Yehuda's dictionary and used in most secular contexts in modern Hebrew to refer to Jesus of Nazareth, though the Hebrew spelling Yeshua (ישוע) is generally used in translations of the New Testament into Hebrew[4] and used by Hebrew speaking Christians in Israel. The name Yeshua is also used in Israeli Hebrew historical texts to refer to other Joshuas recorded in Greek texts such as Jesus ben Ananias and Jesus ben Sira.[5]
In English the name Yeshua is extensively used by followers of Messianic Judaism as well as other Christian denominations who wish to use what they consider to be Jesus' Hebrew or Aramaic name."
 
Oct 2012
300
21
Flower Mound, TX (In the basement.)
LOL!

That doesn't answer the question, now does it?

If there were others with the same name as Our Lord, Jesus, then this is a silly thread and/or topic.
 
Oct 2012
4,429
1,084
Louisville, Ky
LOL!

That doesn't answer the question, now does it?

If there were others with the same name as Our Lord, Jesus, then this is a silly thread and/or topic.

If you understand the point, it makes perfect sense. You wish to know how many people named "Jesus" there were when Jesus was around...the answer is 0..none...Ziltch...

The name as you know it did not exist...there were many names that eventually led to the name, but it was non-existent....period.

Jeebus is as accurate as Jesus in this argument.
 
Oct 2012
300
21
Flower Mound, TX (In the basement.)
If you understand the point, it makes perfect sense. You wish to know how many people named "Jesus" there were when Jesus was around...the answer is 0..none...Ziltch...

The name as you know it did not exist...there were many names that eventually led to the name, but it was non-existent....period.

Jeebus is as accurate as Jesus in this argument.

Well, Duh.

Then how many were called "whatever" His name was?
 
Top