P
patrick457
Guest
Here’s a bio and bibliography.
divinity.cam.ac.uk/directory/simon-gathercole
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_J._Gathercole
If you ask me, I’d say he’s more reputable than all those sensationalistic media outlets.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
divinity.cam.ac.uk/directory/simon-gathercole
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_J._Gathercole
If you ask me, I’d say he’s more reputable than all those sensationalistic media outlets.
F
Faith1960
Guest
He specializes in Christology and Christology of the Gospels. He sounds reputable and qualified to speak on this topicHere’s a bio and bibliography.
divinity.cam.ac.uk/directory/simon-gathercole
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_J._Gathercole
If you ask me, I’d say he’s more reputable than all those sensationalistic media outlets.
An archaeologist who specializes in Jerusalem and Israel archaeology also once told me there is nothing that tells us Jesus was married and even Karen King says this has no bearing on the marital status of the historical Jesus.
F
Faith1960
Guest
biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/is-the-gospel-of-Jesus-wife-a-fake/
Both my links are current, written this year, one on July 13, I think, and this one in April.
Both my links are current, written this year, one on July 13, I think, and this one in April.
P
patrick457
Guest
Larry Hurtado also introduces issue in question.New Testament Studies I should note two of his comments in the comment box:
…] I simply cited the precedents of figures such as Jeremiah (portrayed as ordered by God to remain unmarried in view of his special mission), and John the Baptizer (likewise, celibate on account of his prophetic mission). My point is that it wasn’t singular for Jesus to have been celibate. He too seems to have felt a special mission/calling conducted with eschatological urgency. As you may know, the saying ascribed to Jesus in Matt 19:10 about those “who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” is often thought to allude to John and to Jesus.
===
Was Jesus married? All indications are no. It was, to be sure, somewhat exceptional for a Jewish male not to marry. But not without precedent or analogy. The biblical prophet, Jeremiah, for example, is pictured as commanded by God not to marry (Jeremiah 16). John the Baptizer wasn’t married, whom Jesus affirmed as a true prophet. Indeed, if seems the case, Jesus at an early age saw himself as specially called to a prophetic role, he might well have felt obliged to forego marriage.
Sometimes I hear a few people say that “Since Jesus was a rabbi / a Jew, He must have been married.” Leaving aside the issue of what a “rabbi” is (the word ‘rabbi’ in Jesus’ time did not mean the exact same thing it does today), you can’t really use this or that cultural norm or expectation (“it was uncommon for men / rabbis not to marry then,” etc.) as a 100% guarantee that Jesus did marry. Because - as everybody knows - in real life there’s always the ‘wild cards’ who make generalizations difficult because they don’t always follow the cultural norms. Who’s to say that Jesus was not one of these ‘wild cards’ Himself?
…] I simply cited the precedents of figures such as Jeremiah (portrayed as ordered by God to remain unmarried in view of his special mission), and John the Baptizer (likewise, celibate on account of his prophetic mission). My point is that it wasn’t singular for Jesus to have been celibate. He too seems to have felt a special mission/calling conducted with eschatological urgency. As you may know, the saying ascribed to Jesus in Matt 19:10 about those “who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” is often thought to allude to John and to Jesus.
===
Was Jesus married? All indications are no. It was, to be sure, somewhat exceptional for a Jewish male not to marry. But not without precedent or analogy. The biblical prophet, Jeremiah, for example, is pictured as commanded by God not to marry (Jeremiah 16). John the Baptizer wasn’t married, whom Jesus affirmed as a true prophet. Indeed, if seems the case, Jesus at an early age saw himself as specially called to a prophetic role, he might well have felt obliged to forego marriage.
Sometimes I hear a few people say that “Since Jesus was a rabbi / a Jew, He must have been married.” Leaving aside the issue of what a “rabbi” is (the word ‘rabbi’ in Jesus’ time did not mean the exact same thing it does today), you can’t really use this or that cultural norm or expectation (“it was uncommon for men / rabbis not to marry then,” etc.) as a 100% guarantee that Jesus did marry. Because - as everybody knows - in real life there’s always the ‘wild cards’ who make generalizations difficult because they don’t always follow the cultural norms. Who’s to say that Jesus was not one of these ‘wild cards’ Himself?
M
mdgspencer
Guest
The Catholic Church has long ago decided what are the books of the Bible. The other very many purported Scriptural books, generally from groups with strange religious beliefs, were all rejected. It would be best to disregard other books, considering them not the divine word of God, but rather coming from the mind of a man, and not inspired by God.
And how could I, not expert in such an area, be expected to reinvent the Bible myself, adding books based on my own judgment?
And how could I, not expert in such an area, be expected to reinvent the Bible myself, adding books based on my own judgment?
P
patrick457
Guest
Over at Mark Goodacre’s NT Blog:
The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife: A Call for Closure (Guest post by Andrew Bernhard of gospels.net)
Whodunnit?
That’s the big question that remains unanswered about the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife, and I must confess that I’m a bit confused as to why. It seems clear to me that the person who originally brought forward this tiny papyrus fragment could probably shed quite a bit of light on its mysterious origins. Yet, the identity of this individual remains shrouded in secrecy.
While Karen King granted anonymity to the self-identified manuscript collector who brought her the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife (and has honorably kept her commitment), I would suggest that the situation has now changed materially. At this point, it seems very likely that the still unidentified owner of the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife provided Professor King with at least six fake documents (both ancient and modern) . . . and lied about where he or she obtained the papyrus fragment.
The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife: A Call for Closure (Guest post by Andrew Bernhard of gospels.net)
Whodunnit?
That’s the big question that remains unanswered about the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife, and I must confess that I’m a bit confused as to why. It seems clear to me that the person who originally brought forward this tiny papyrus fragment could probably shed quite a bit of light on its mysterious origins. Yet, the identity of this individual remains shrouded in secrecy.
While Karen King granted anonymity to the self-identified manuscript collector who brought her the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife (and has honorably kept her commitment), I would suggest that the situation has now changed materially. At this point, it seems very likely that the still unidentified owner of the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife provided Professor King with at least six fake documents (both ancient and modern) . . . and lied about where he or she obtained the papyrus fragment.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.