Ancient gospel of Jesus' Wife 'not a fake'.

[Mycroft]

Scientist says a papyrus fragment that mentions Jesus's wife is likely ancient, probably dating between the sixth and ninth century, latest research shows.

Papyrus Mentioning Jesus's Wife Is Likely Ancient and Not Fake, Scientists Say


Now this is a bit interesting indeed, chaps and chappettes. I'm not saying Jesus did exist, or that he did have a wife, but it's quite interesting that some fellow in the 6th century would have been writing about it.

 

[Pegg]

Scientist says a papyrus fragment that mentions Jesus's wife is likely ancient, probably dating between the sixth and ninth century, latest research shows.

Papyrus Mentioning Jesus's Wife Is Likely Ancient and Not Fake, Scientists Say


Now this is a bit interesting indeed, chaps and chappettes. I'm not saying Jesus did exist, or that he did have a wife, but it's quite interesting that some fellow in the 6th century would have been writing about it.

Jesus was a very common name. I wouldnt put too much stock into it.

 

[Mycroft]

Jesus was a very common name. I wouldnt put too much stock into it.

I merely noted it was interesting.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Harvard Theological Review says in the article published Thursday:

"Over the past two years, extensive testing of the papyrus and the carbon ink, as well as analysis of the handwriting and grammar, all indicate that the existing material fragment dates to between the sixth and ninth centuries CE [Common Era]. None of the testing has produced any evidence that the fragment is a modern fabrication or forgery."​

Testing by a research scientist at Columbia University, using a technique called micro-Raman spectroscopy, determined that "the carbon character of the ink matched samples of other papyri that date from the first to eighth centuries CE," the Theological Review says. [source]

So we now know that Christians with fringe positions wrote stuff sometime "between the sixth and ninth centuries CE." Absolutely amazing!

 

[Shiranui117]

I'm going to have to agree with Jayhawker here. That scrap proves nothing. Even if Jesus was married, it wouldn't put a dent in Christian claims; in fact, if He was married, that would have been very helpful to the Church in the early centuries of Christianity, and we would be touting that proudly today.

 

[steeltoes]

I think it proves Jesus existed, or at least that his wife did.

 

[Mycroft]

I'm going to have to agree with Jayhawker here. That scrap proves nothing. Even if Jesus was married, it wouldn't put a dent in Christian claims; in fact, if He was married, that would have been very helpful to the Church in the early centuries of Christianity, and we would be touting that proudly today.

I'm not attempting to put a dent in anything.

 

[Huey09]

I'm going to have to agree with Jayhawker here. That scrap proves nothing. Even if Jesus was married, it wouldn't put a dent in Christian claims; in fact, if He was married, that would have been very helpful to the Church in the early centuries of Christianity, and we would be touting that proudly today.

If it were true would anyone be up for a Davinci's Code style search for the son of the son of God?

 

[Iti oj]

If it were true would anyone be up for a Davinci's Code style search for the son of the son of God?

lets do it!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think it proves Jesus existed, or at least that his wife did.

Seriously? How?

 

[Shiranui117]

If it were true would anyone be up for a Davinci's Code style search for the son of the son of God?

If it were true, we'd know exactly who Jesus' wife and children were, who their descendants are and where they lived... The Church would have never suppressed Jesus having a family, especially since during the early days of Christianity, the Church was having trouble against people like the Gnostics and Docetists who denied that Jesus was even human. Jesus having a wife and children would be pretty good proof that He was human...

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

So we now know that Christians with fringe positions wrote stuff sometime "between the sixth and ninth centuries CE." Absolutely amazing!

They were writing it in the first century and they are writing it today.

Although 'fringe' just means 'minority' so I'm not sure how that's relevant.

 

[Sleeppy]

I'd be glad to hear Jesus married. For man, it's not good to be alone!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

They were writing it in the first century and they are writing it today.

Although 'fringe' just means 'minority' so I'm not sure how that's relevant.

Correct - you are not sure. I'm OK with that.

 

[Mycroft]

I think, all in all, all it does is confirm that people were writing rubbish in the 6th century just as with any other time in history.

...Or that Dan Brown has a time machine.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now this is a bit interesting indeed, chaps and chappettes. ... it's quite interesting that some fellow in the 6th century would have been writing about it.

I think, all in all, all it does is confirm that people were writing rubbish in the 6th century just as with any other time in history.

"interesting indeed … quite interesting … all it does …"

Good grief!

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Correct - you are not sure. I'm OK with that.

Imagine if everyone were wise enough to be unsure of such things.

Yes, I sometimes dream of paradise, Jay.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

So a person who may or may not have existed, may or may not have been married. How edifying.

 

[Mycroft]

"interesting indeed … quite interesting … all it does …"

Good grief!

Be at peace, sir. Be at peace.

 

[IHaveTheGift]

Jesus was a bachelor.

But to ponder if he would've had a child, would the baby just be human?