Posts Tagged ‘Virgin Mary’

English text of my blogarticle The Coptic fragment and Jesus’s ‘wife’, Norah4you 19 september 2012

The Coptic fragment and Jesus’s wife
© Johansson Inger E, translated from Koptiska fragmentet om Jesu ‘fru’ Gothenburg 19 september 2012-09-19

On Tuesday Harvard Professor Karen L King showed a coptic fragment from 4th century. Despite her professional opinion, the fragment has been known for a long time. From before the said owner got it in his hand in 1947. But for most people this might be today’s news. Before discussing the fragment I think it’s fair to say that:
* Nothing change if Jesus was or wasn’t married.
It’s all about Faith in God and Faith that Jesus was born as God’s own child. No paper regarding his family or his martial status changes that. Only those with weak Faith might question that.

It’s also in time of discussions among Ateists who question Jesus Christ. May God be with them. God is the one God no matter what name you as a human gives him. He is what he is no matter if you belive or not.

The issue of Jesus martial status has been discussed since around 280-320 AD. The coptic texts, found in the church close to the place where the fragment showed by Professor King was found, all but one have been shown to be forgeries from 4th century. And what’s more they were showed by Fathers of the Church, the Western Papal Church as well as the Eastern Ortodox Church to be forged back then. In other word known to be forgeries since 4th century. That’s one of the reasons the Gnostic believers and those of the Copts not belonging to either church never been accepted by other Christians as real Christian believers.

It’s sad that the Hon. Professor yesterday forgot (?) to tell that the lines she showed in the Greek text almost all Christian Bible’s have used to translate from the text is: Jesus Wife Mother Mary aiming at Virgin Mary who in Elderly Church history was known under that name. That’s the reason why we in West have many ‘Our Lady’s Church’; Liebfrauenkirche and a like names on churches. In other word Professor King hasn’t proven anything more than the fact that Coptic document had Jesus’s wife mentioned without the rest of the text. Anything what so ever written 300 years AFTER an event or a person lived never ever can be used as a proof of what happened. If it’s written far away the validity of the source is disputable as a source. It can be used as an indication of a belief. Nothing else.

It’s far more interesting even if it wasn’t made in place where Jesus lived to discuss the 1st century cup found the other year where it was written Jesus the Magician. That was found in what’s now Egypt.

Historian says piece of papyrus refer to Jesus’s wife, New York Times 19 september 2012

Regarding the other Gnostic and Coptic documents, ‘gospels’ and other please read:
Gospel of Thomas, Gotquestions.org and Should the Gospel of Thomas be included in the Bible?, Bible Questions answered

Handout photo of Karen L. King, Chicago Tribune 2012/09/18 Contrary to what Professor King say the fragment has been debated in sciece groups for many years. It’s not unknown. But the age of the fragment has been disputed. I accept that it’s now shown to be from 4th century. But that’s worth nothing at all in regards of Theories and Methods of Science. See above.
Was Jesus married? Ancient papyrus mentions his wife, abcnews.go.com 2012/09/18
Harvard Professor identifies scrap papyrus suggesting some early Christians believed Jesus was married, boston.com 2012/09/18 Please note what I wrote above – The Fathers of the Church never ever accepted the Gnostic and some of the Coptic believers as having true Faith.

God be with you all. He gives not what you pray for but what he sees you need to belive in him. Thus it doesn’t matter if a person have a high title and a high position or is one of all of us not having that. God never promote he gives anquestionable love to all who believes in him.

More 18.50 Does the Jesus ‘wife’ evidence change anything for Christianity?, Guardian.co.uk 2012/09/19 Of course it doesn’t change anything AND further more – the fragment is by no means any kind of EVIDENCE. Written more than 200 years later and not written in the same place Jesus lived. Two of the worst fallacies when Theories of Science validations are up. Bad scholars aren’t better than there argumentation and value of argumentation stand and fall on validity of the facts used for validating the premisses needed for an argument to be possible leading to a substainable conclusion!

Papyrus suggesting Jesus had wife scutinized, cbsnews.com 2012/09/19

Read Full Post »