« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Where is the Christian outrage?

By: tooncesthecat (Diary)  |  September 20th, 2012 at 10:39 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Dr. Mary L. King, Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard University, claims to have discovered a papyrus fragment which provides “evidence” that Jesus was married.  Dr. King has a long history of claiming that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.  This theory flies in the face of orthodox Christianity and is unsupported by Scriptural authority.  She has previously cited claims from the gnostic “Gospel of Thomas” and “Gospel of Mary” found at Nag Hammadi.  Her latest evidence is based on a fragment no larger than a business card, which purports to be from the 5th century (over 400 years after Jesus).  The scrap is from an unknown manuscript, from an unknown author, and of unknown provenance.  The fragment has not even been subjected to scientific analysis to determine whether it comes from the 5th century or is a more recent forgery.  Christians should be outraged.

Dr. King further conflates this scrap into an entire “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife”, placing it on a par with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—Canonical Scripture for which we have multiple complete texts that have been authenticated from a much earlier period close to the time of Jesus.  She would be laughed out of any meeting of professional historians with a claim based upon such a flimsy piece of documentation.  It is as though I were to find a post-it note that says that John Smith was married to Pocohantas.  We know, factually, that Pocohantas married John Rolfe and we have contemporaneous primary sources to support that fact.  This simply doesn’t stand the test of objective historical analysis.

And yet, The Smithsonian Channel will premiere a special documentary about the discovery on September 30 at 8 p.m. ET.  Why is an agency of the U. S. government promoting this assault of the foundations of Christianity.  Why are my tax dollars being spent to attack my faith?

I have to wonder if airing of this video will send angry mobs of Christians by the tens of thousands into the streets, attacking American embassies around the world.  Will Christians become so enraged that the founder of their faith has been insulted, disparaged and demeaned by this video that they will tear down the American flag and hoist the Christian banner in its place.  And, if they do, what will be the reaction of the Obama administration and the American media.  Will they claim that Christians are understably angry and that this Harvard professor is responsible.  Will they ask the Smithsonian Channel to remove the offending video.  I doubt it.  I expect they would call these Christians “fanatics”, extremists”, “nut-jobs” and worse.

I invite you to read some of the coverage in the media already:

From the N. Y. Times:  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49075679/ns/technology_and_science-the_new_york_times/#/?ocid=ansmsnbc11

From the Huffinton Post:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/the-gospel-of-jesus-wife-_n_1891325.html

From the Baptist Press:  http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=38755

From the Smithsonian Magazine itself:  http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/The-Inside-Story-of-the-Controversial-New-Text-About-Jesus-170177076.html?c=y&story=fullstory

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • irishgirl

    I saw those headlines this week and I am outraged, but also sickened and saddened. No, we will not whip up into an angry mob and demand that the offending video be removed and demand the professor’s arrest. I didn’t know that about the Smithsonian channel. That’s pretty disgusting. There can no longer be any doubt that Christian persecution exists (in many forms).

  • Melody Warbington

    The first relevant word in your diary, and maybe the only one, is “claims.” Claims come and go. Christians know whereupon our faith lies, i.e., the inspired word of God. And there’s nothing King or anyone else can claim that will change that.

    My husband asked me as I sat down in church at our Bible Study services last night if I had heard about the “proof Christ was married.” I imagine King would be insulted to learn she gave us a good laugh which is the appropriate response and about as much as I can muster.

    On second thought, I still have a lot of homemade tea party signs. Maybe I can recycle with some new slogans and start a protest.

    • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

      If your husband saw this and thought it was “proof”, what will be the reaction of other Christians who are not as commited to Christ as the two of you are? Will they be led to follow false doctrines? Will they turn away from their faith completely? I see this as the latest example of efforts to undermine the Christian faith and create a false narrative about Jesus. When will we become outraged? When will we refuse to accept these attacks on our faith? When will we demand that the government stop promoting heresy?

      • Melody Warbington

        I guess the sarc didn’t come through – my husband was being sarcastic when he asked if I’d heard the “proof.”

        I understand your point, but mine is that this is nothing new. Folks have been spouting heresy about Christianity for 2000 years, and Christians refuse it each and every day by teaching the truth. I did not mean to imply that we should take it lightly, but we don’t march in the streets. Rather we help those with weak faith and those inclined to follow false teachers through encouragement, edification and rebuke.

        However, in the political context of restricting freedom of religion, i.e., Obama forcing the violation of conscience, etc., that’s a different story.

        • http://about.me/l.v.johnston lvjohnston

          Scripture warns against false teachers and prophets several times. The relevant response is that the believer – a sheep among wolves – must be as harmless as a dove yet as shrewd as a serpent (paraphrase of Matt. 10:16). Now *that’s* a mental image to guide our speech and actions.

  • Ausonius

    Those acquainted with early Christianity, especially with the evidence from the Dead Scrolls, know that debates occurred about the nature of Christianity, and various “Christianities” competed for a while, until things began to coalesce into what we recognize today.

    The Acts of the Apostles show the first and most important problem: do you need to be a Jew (i.e. get circumcised) to become a Christian? Correctly deducing that in the religious marketplace – and the Roman Empire was a real Mall of Religions – any religion requiring adult circumcision would be difficult to sell, Saint Paul wins the debate.

    This is just one example of how things were worked out: other gospels existed, but the majority of early Christian leaders weeded out those with awry theologies.

    So even if an early gospel claims Jesus was married, that this tradition did NOT survive into Christianity shows that it was rejected.

    • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

      But this is neither a “gospel” (it is a fragment of 8 lines) and it is not “early” (it was written 400 years later than Jesus and at least 300 years after the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). There is no evidence from the earliest Christian writers, including not just canonical scripture, but Church Fathers, and even the gnostic writings that Jesus was married or that this was a tradition that did not survive. This is a total fabrication that does not stand the test of historical analysis. This is not a matter of different theological interpretations, it is a matter of historical fact.

      • Ausonius

        I am using “gospel” with a small “g” to designate a non-canonical gospel. The scrap may indeed be a “total fabrication” which will not be known until assorted chemical tests are performed. My point is that it will be irrelevant whether it is a forgery or not. Even if it does date from c. 300 A.D., or if it dated from 50 A.D., does not matter. The tradition is that Jesus was unmarried, and where does that come from? From the writings chosen to become the New Testament, which were seen as the most accurate and most theologically correct out of others which may have been circulating. We know that several were excluded. One example is the gospel of Thomas, which may have been written as early as 50 A.D. or as late as 120-140 A.D. By the 2nd century, it was already being excluded and called heretical by various early Church Fathers.

  • ateam

    Thank you for this fine piece of knowledge. I appreciate the perspective and the depth. And if the readers of this haven’t done so already, the article by Thomas White at Baptist Press is an insightful, balanced look at the subject.

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    A number of scholars who heard Dr. King’s presentation and have seen the fragment are now questioning its authenticity. This from AP story by Nicole Winfield:
    Stephen Emmel, a professor of Coptology at the University of Muenster who was on the international advisory panel that reviewed the 2006 discovery of the Gospel of Judas, said the text accurately quotes Jesus as saying “my wife.” But he questioned whether the document was authentic.
    “There’s something about this fragment in its appearance and also in the grammar of the Coptic that strikes me as being not completely convincing somehow,” he said in an interview on the sidelines of the conference.
    Another participant at the congress, Alin Suciu, a papyrologist at the University of Hamburg, was more blunt.
    “I would say it’s a forgery. The script doesn’t look authentic” when compared to other samples of Coptic papyrus script dated to the 4th century, he said.
    See full story at: http://news.yahoo.com/doubts-over-harvard-claim-jesus-wife-papyrus-165816944.html .
    Whoever said: “You can’t make this stuff up” apparently wasn’t a Professor of Divinity at Harvard University.

  • Viet71

    What first-person documents exist regarding Jesus?

    For example, the writing of someone who witnessed Jesus speaking and made a written record of it.

    I ask out of ignorance.

    • streiff

      It is generally believed that the Gospel of John was written by St. John, the disciple. Does that count?

      • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

        Not to mention a whole passel of epistles by both John and Peter.

        • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

          Some scholars also believe that the non-canonical “Gospel According to Thomas”, which is a collection of Jesus’ sayings, dates to the first century, and constitutes an actual eye-witness account (attributed to the disciple Thomas) of Jesus’ spoken words. Over half of the sayings included are also found in at least one of the 4 canonical gospels. Some point to this manuscript as clear evidence of the “Q” source, used by the synoptic gospels.

    • Ausonius

      “First-person” would not technically apply to the four Gospels, since they are written in the third person. You can find all kinds of debates on authorship: some of the New Testament writers (e.g. Peter, John) were obviously eyewitnesses, but debates continue on whether they actually wrote what is attributed to them, or whether one of their followers transcribed what they said.

      For a Catholic view on the problem: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm

  • fightnright

    Another collaboration between the MSM and the academy left.

    Sounds to me like this sham ‘researcher’ has to regularly improvise crap-tastic bait for the press by which Christian-haters can hook her more research money from The Ford Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities, to keep her bogus little Harvard enterprise ‘published not perished’, and their own symbiotic relationship thriving.

    Look up her background; I’ll bet her scholarship in gender studies and religion and violence is just as valid.

  • streiff

    In fairness to Dr. King, the news coverage of her paper is much more sensational than the paper itself. You can find the paper here:
    https://dl.dropbox.com/u/14912948/King_2012_GosJesWife.pdf

  • norris

    Even if the writing is from the first century ,could there have other men named Jesus ? Are all ancient manuscripts to be believed as absolute truth?

  • http://about.me/l.v.johnston lvjohnston

    The link provided by streiff in this thread shows that the current
    unnamed owner of the fragment has sat on this since at least 1982.

    Why was Dr. King contacted by the owner? She states in the paper’s
    introduction that she is ‘neither a papyrologist nor a Coptic linguist”
    and had to seek advice on it’s authenticity from those who are.

    There have been several recent attempts to belittle or denigrate the Gospels as irrelevant in today’s modern world. The “Jesus Project” comes to mind as but one example. The fact that some contributors take great pleasure in their scientific
    and methodical approach while dancing around the issues of what
    “Inspired By God” means to a Christian says all that I need to hear when
    considering their conclusions.

    Why it’s sudden importance? The timing of this ‘news’ so near the election could very well be yet another attempt to distract and undermine the voice of believers, who are outraged and incensed by it and rightfully so. It’s easy for the MSM to say, “See, the Christians are all crazy. What they have to say can just be ignored.”

    The fact that the media ‘masters’ decided to release and promote this fragment speaks loudly – to me anyway – that they are willing to present anything in their attempt to discredit the truth as understood from the Holy Scriptures.

    Play their game, I will not!

  • jamesm

    The words he Jesus spoke are clearly written. If Jesus would not be outraged then why should we? Did he not say “The truth will set you free”

  • http://aaroninvestigates.wordpress.com/ constructiveconservative

    The answer to your underlying question is really quite simple.

    Intimidation, violence, threats, and fear do work.

    My one small contribution to fighting the truth in what I suggest above is to ensure that those who express dissatisfaction with me or my company for whatever reason are more likely to receive my full attention if they express themselves without resorting to any of the above…even to the point where if I overhear reluctance to bring it to my attention I make sure I address it.

    Just my effort to support a less stressful environment.