More musing on the life and wife of Jesus

I do find this week’s news about the discovery of a tiny piece of ancient papyrus on which is written a reference to Jesus’ wife fascinating. I especially enjoyed this piece by the Guardian’s religion writer Stephen Bates about the academic debate on all this. He writes:

The fragment of fourth-century Coptic writing on a rectangular piece of faded papyrus no more than eight centimetres by four contains eight lines written in black ink apparently including the words: “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …'” Far from being the start of a music-hall joke, the extract continues: “she will be able to be my disciple,” before being cut off.

Karen L King, the Hollis professor of divinity – the oldest endowed academic chair in the US – who made the discovery, told the New York Times: “These words can mean nothing else.”

She should know – King is a Coptic scholar and author of books on the heretical Gnostic gospels from which claims about Jesus’s marriage originate. Cautious academic that she is, she hasn’t leapt off hither and thither in a private plane like Dan Brown’s hero, but has shared her discovery with other scholars who believe that the papyrus sliver may be genuine, though its provenance is obscure. It is apparently owned by an anonymous private collector, who bought it in 1997 from a German professor who is now dead – a suitably mysterious touch.

Roger Bagnall, director of New York University’s Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, who was shown the fragment, told the paper: “It’s hard to construct a scenario that is at all plausible in which someone fakes something like this. The world is not really crawling with crooked papyrologists.”

Read the full column here.

Category : The Lead

Comment Policy
Our comment policy requires that you use your real name and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted

One Comment
  1. There’s a fallacy here that mirrors the big central problem of The Da Vinci Code: someone (Leonardo, some 4th Century heretic) thinking that Jesus was married doesn’t really mean Jesus was married. It isn’t just that it’s not proof: it’s barely evidence.

    I find it fascinating that many of the people who claim that the Gospels, or other parts of scripture, are inherently non-historic (because of a lack of non-scriptural corroboration) are the same people who find some sort of meaning in (for example) a few words on a scrap of paper written 300 years after the fact.

    (I do have to day, though- two unrelated Gnostic sources- one that refers to a woman who “tempted” Jesus, and a second where Jesus seems to be hitting on a woman of the same name, raised my eyebrows and curiosity at least a little.)

    I thought the Jesuit priest in the earlier Cafe story had the best reaction, essentially that it probably isn’t true, and that it doesn’t matter all that much if it is.

    Interest in this stuff does present an excellent opportunity for Episcopalians, though, if we’re willing/able to take it. Unlike our Protestant brothers and sisters, our liturgy and traditions reach back into the distant past, touching on whatever it is that people find so fascinating in these sorts of things. And unlike our Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters, there’s enough theological room to consider gnostic and heretical thought without being ridiculed or driven out.

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *