An Important Update on the Jesus Wife Manuscript Fragment: The Forger May Have Simply Plagiarized Phrases and Strung them Together

Since I’ve raised this forged fragment before, I thought I’d highlight a proposal one scholar has made for how a recent forgery might have been produced.  I think this is fascinating reading!  Dr. Andrew Bernhard has outlined how it was likely done.  It seems the forger was dependent upon a specific version of the Gospel of Thomas, possibly even in an already published interlinear of the Coptic Gospel of Thomas.  For those of you who do not know what an interlinear is, an interlinear has a critical text in the original language, with word by word or phrase by phrase interpretations placed between the lines of the original language text.  This would be similar to a forger using a Greek interlinear that your average priest/pastor might use, taking phrases directly from, say, the Gospel of Luke, and then trying to produce a forgery that made it look as though he had found another early fragment.  Of course, fewer people know Coptic and Coptic interlinears, so perhaps the forger thought his/her chances of deception were higher.  I must tell you, though, that that strikes me as such a gamble, as those who know Coptic, from my experience, are quite familiar with the world of published Coptic.

Anyhow, this blog post (from a well established academic, Dr. Mark Goodacre) highlights the main points and links to Dr. Berhard’s article:

http://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/jesus-wife-fragment-further-evidence-of.html

A blessed weekend to everyone!  I hope to turn to Erickson’s article on Slavophilism in American Orthodoxy on Monday or Tuesday.  Really, it’s a good article and important to American Orthodox history, especially the history that intersects with the Russian Mission to North America.

4 thoughts on “An Important Update on the Jesus Wife Manuscript Fragment: The Forger May Have Simply Plagiarized Phrases and Strung them Together

    • Sorry for the late reply, here. I haven’t kept up with what the Forum did or did not say about this, so I don’t know if they “jumped on her bandwagon,” nor have I seen any evidence that they did it because of King’s political positions, but I do think that those who may have wanted it to be true might well be disappointed.

  1. What the gnostic writings has to do with the true gospel of salvation? Through history many people had and still tried to strip Jesus of His deity.The marriage is taken to be proof that He was not God in the flesh,but only a mortal man.Lies sell very well but the truth always prevails and anything based on a lie is a lie.The Holy blood Holy grail pretend that Jesus escaped death on the cross and married Mary Magdalene.Then da vinci code pretend a secret marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the real blood of the grail is inside Mary based on the painting of the last supper by leonardo da vinci.Now a scholar has a writing words on a papyrus about Jesus wife and titled that papyrus in the shape of a credit card,a gospel! Actually in the above fake stories there is a very dangerous and deceiving lie about the real blood and the wife.The truth is that REAL and HOLY blood is on Jesus’ forehead and not in the womb of Mary Magdalene or any other woman.This is revealed in the true story the coin of the temple by souheil bayoud.As for the wife,the impossibility of the marriage of Jesus,is like the physical resurrection which cannot be seen by the blinds and is not revealed to opponents to Orthodox Christianity and the Church.

    • Of course, there are always people developing legends and stories and various theories. I agree. I simply have discussed the recent manuscript fragment because it is relevant to scholarship concerning early Christianity and precisely because there are people who take interest in such things.

Leave a Reply

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

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>