Papyrus Suggests Gospel of Jesus’ Wife
According to the Harvard Theological Review, scientists testing an allegedly ancient Egyptian papyrus have reported that no evidence can be found by them to conclude that the document is forged. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/04/10/new-tests-show-evidence-forgery-gospel-jesus-wife/IusII8b4eI86HgDTKipLhN/story.html
To HFS analysts, that’s a convoluted way to say: Looks real to us. When discovery of the papyrus was first reported, the Vatican promptly opined that is was fake. So today’s Harvard announcement flies in the face of Vatican opinions. http://harvardmagazine.com/2014/04/jesus-wife-fragment-appears-real
Why does it matter? The passionate crowd urging Catholic and Mormon priesthood for women want the document to prove that Jesus had a wife and considered her a disciple, meaning in today’s terms, He considered her a worthy holder of the priesthood. http://gospelofjesusswife.hds.harvard.edu
Not so fast, say theological academics looking closely at the text. First, the text came from a time at least several hundred years after the life of Jesus of Nazareth. The document offers no insight directly into times contemporaneous with teaching and service of Jesus. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/10/science/scrap-of-papyrus-referring-to-jesus-wife-is-likely-to-be-ancient-scientists-say.html?hpw&rref=science&_r=0
Also, and more significantly, in the time when the document appears to have been written, somewhere between the sixth and ninth centuries of the common era, many arguments about marriage, sex, and the status of women were presented in thousands of records. The translated text of this particular document includes Jesus’ reported use of the phrase, “My wife…” and it also says “…she will be able to be my disciple….” No context for these expressions comes out, leaving open obvious alternative meanings. http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/10/5600450/papyrus-gospel-of-jesus-wife-likely-wasnt-forged-scientists-claim
Distilling the big news down to street level, HFS analysts conclude that no one knows what the document means even if it really is what it appears to be, a sixth/seventh/eighth/ninth century letter arguing about some of the same things people argue about today. So your guess is as good as ours. What do you think?
