The Gospel of Jesus' Wife

[Faith1960]

Remember a couple of years ago there was all that hoopla about a fragment of papyrus that some thought meant Jesus might’ve been married?
Does anyone have any new information on it that points it to be false?

From what I read, it’s unlikely to be a forgery.

Are there any non-Biblical sources that support Jesus being single?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

If Jesus had been married and had a child, that information would certainly have been preserved in the Bible and/or Sacred Tradition.

 

[Darryl_B]

Remember a couple of years ago there was all that hoopla about a fragment of papyrus that some thought meant Jesus might’ve been married?
Does anyone have any new information on it that points it to be false?

From what I read, it’s unlikely to be a forgery.

Are there any non-Biblical sources that support Jesus being single?

It’s fake. Unfortunately the journalistic are into sensational rather than sense.

 

[Faith1960]

It’s fake. Unfortunately the journalistic are into sensational rather than sense.

Almost everything I’ve read says it’s a genuine fourth century copy of what was probably written in the late second century. Is there some recent news I’ve missed?

 

[GEddie]

Where were the wife and children during the events of the Passion? The Resurrection?

Where were they when His followers transitioned into the Church?

They weren’t there because they were never there.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Faith1960]

Where were the wife and children during the events of the Passion? The Resurrection?

Where were they when His followers transitioned into the Church?

They weren’t there because they were never there.

ICXC NIKA

This brings up my next question; forgive my lack of Biblical history, but this papyrus may be copied from a Gnostic gospel. How do we know that all the Gnostics were wrong in what they said? IOW, how were the canonical Gospels chosen and on what grounds were the Gnostics rejected?

 

[Petaro]

It would be easier to comment on the authenticity of the scrap of papyrus if you could be more specific in your references.

 

[Darryl_B]

Almost everything I’ve read says it’s a genuine fourth century copy of what was probably written in the late second century. Is there some recent news I’ve missed?

Almost everything I’ve read on that side says that people “feel” it is genuine.

Almost everything I’ve read on the other side is based on critical analysis.

1. Dubious history.
2. Lack of the rest of the text.
3. Crisply cut edging.
4. Compilation of Gospel of Thomas phrases with some rearrangement.
5. Despite being fragmentation the minor amount of text is sufficient to comprehend most lines (subjects and verbs) something unlikely in partial lines of text.
6. Specific content with an agenda.

The question is really what is the statistical chance of this “finding” matched against “feelings”.

 

[Nacho45]

Almost everything I’ve read says it’s a genuine fourth century copy of what was probably written in the late second century. Is there some recent news I’ve missed?

It being old does not mean its accurate. The Gnostic gospels are old as well.

 

[mikeeh]

Remember a couple of years ago there was all that hoopla about a fragment of papyrus that some thought meant Jesus might’ve been married?
Does anyone have any new information on it that points it to be false?

From what I read, it’s unlikely to be a forgery.

I think you’re referring to the Gospel of Mary. It is indeed a fragment of papyrus and only a few sentences long, and like all the other non-canonical gospels its writing style is not like the Gospels in the Bible. Most of the non-canonical gospels I’ve read either don’t focus enough on Jesus so they’re more like the genre of “Acts” or they don’t focus on what Jesus truly came for. It’s not a forgery, but I wouldn’t call it accurate to the life of Jesus. It was probably written by someone trying to start a new sect.

Are there any non-Biblical sources that support Jesus being single?

Well scientifically speaking, there’s research that shows mothers carry the cells of their children in them for the rest of their lives. That means Jesus’ mother would have had divine cells in her for the rest of her life, so when she died she was assumed into heaven body and soul because of those divine cells. If that happened to the mother of Jesus, it would probably happen to any children he would have had and I don’t think there are any records of other people rising up to heaven body and soul. So if Jesus did have a wife, he probably did not have children. Of course, Jesus knew his fate, so it wouldn’t make much sense to marry someone if he knew he would be killed in such a short time.

 

[katy]

This brings up my next question; forgive my lack of Biblical history, but this papyrus may be copied from a Gnostic gospel. How do we know that all the Gnostics were wrong in what they said? IOW, how were the canonical Gospels chosen and on what grounds were the Gnostics rejected?

Check out the site New Advent. It has the Catholic Encyclopedia that will have some info on how the Bible was put together. (It was done very carefully by Church Councils). I expect this site, Catholic Answers, also has some reliable articles.

 

[Dorothy]

This brings up my next question; forgive my lack of Biblical history, but this papyrus may be copied from a Gnostic gospel. How do we know that all the Gnostics were wrong in what they said? IOW, how were the canonical Gospels chosen and on what grounds were the Gnostics rejected?

There is an excellent DVD from Ignatius, (about an hour) titled “Lost Gospels or False Gospels?”

It has a wealth of information about Gnostic gospels.

Father Mitch Pacwa and many others on the DVD teach about Gnosticism.

 

[TimothyH]

Almost everything I’ve read says it’s a genuine fourth century copy of what was probably written in the late second century. Is there some recent news I’ve missed?

There are two things being discussed. The authenticity of the date and the authenticity of what it teaches. These are two different things.

There are lots of authentic writings from the second, third and fourth centuries which contain unorthodox teaching. Nobody disputes that the document about Jesus having a wife is an authentic document from its time. What is disputed is whether it teaches truth or fallacy.

There are documents about the heresy of Docetism from the second century. Arius wrote about the heresy of Arianism in the third and fourth centuries. No one claims that their documents weren’t written when they were, only that they don’t contain orthodox teaching.

I want to say, “Who cares when it was written?” It could be an authentic document from the time of Moses for all I care. What I care about is whether it teaches truth. Any document which claims that Jesus was married does not teach truth.

-Tim-

 

[hu324b]

I have to agree there is no mention in the gospels of Jesus being married - and it makes no sense - when Jesus raised lazarus from the dead it would of been obvious in the gospel that Jesus was married to Mary M. and as we know not long after was the crucifixion - there just was no time for this in Jesus ministry. He meets them at the beginning of his ministry and it ends with the raising of Lazarus who was their brother and then Jesus goes on to his crucifixion. The time line in the Gospel says no. And it does not fit Jesus nature or mission.

Some guy writes a fictional novel and everyone wants to take it as fact.

The holy spirit guides the church in the cannon so we have to believe what has been put forth is true - we can’t add more to it after the fact - the holy spirit was the churches guide.

I personally don’t believe it and don’t understand this need by some people to marry Jesus off.
Its a false document probably written in a attempt to cause scandal in the faith.

 

[Darryl_B]

I have to agree there is no mention in the gospels of Jesus being married - and it makes no sense - when Jesus raised lazarus from the dead it would of been obvious in the gospel that Jesus was married to Mary M. and as we know not long after was the crucifixion - there just was no time for this in Jesus ministry. He meets them at the beginning of his ministry and it ends with the raising of Lazarus who was their brother and then Jesus goes on to his crucifixion. The time line in the Gospel says no. And it does not fit Jesus nature or mission.

Some guy writes a fictional novel and everyone wants to take it as fact.

The holy spirit guides the church in the cannon so we have to believe what has been put forth is true - we can’t add more to it after the fact - the holy spirit was the churches guide.

I personally don’t believe it and don’t understand this need by some people to marry Jesus off.
Its a false document probably written in a attempt to cause scandal in the faith.

It also nullifies the concept of the bride of Christ, the Church.

 

[St_Redemption]

This brings up my next question; forgive my lack of Biblical history, but this papyrus may be copied from a Gnostic gospel. How do we know that all the Gnostics were wrong in what they said? IOW, how were the canonical Gospels chosen and on what grounds were the Gnostics rejected?

The canonized Gospels were written by persons who knew Jesus or had a close relationship with somebody who knew Jesus. They were also written much closer to Jesus’ life than were the other Gospels. We don’t even know who wrote the other Gospels. Sure they gave them names…such as “The Gospel of Judas” etc…but we reasonably know that those were not the people who wrote them.

 

[UbiCaritas15]

For something that far back in history to be considered close to factual, it would have to be confirmed by other sources. No biblical source, and they were all written separately, mentions a spouse. No other extra biblical sources do either. It may be an actual document from really long ago. That doesn’t mean it contains things that come close to fact.

 

[Faith1960]

I think you’re referring to the Gospel of Mary. It is indeed a fragment of papyrus and only a few sentences long, and like all the other non-canonical gospels its writing style is not like the Gospels in the Bible.

This papyrus is called The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife. It doesn’t mean He WAS married, that’s just what they started calling it.

 

[Faith1960]

There are two things being discussed. The authenticity of the date and the authenticity of what it teaches. These are two different things.

There are lots of authentic writings from the second, third and fourth centuries which contain unorthodox teaching. Nobody disputes that the document about Jesus having a wife is an authentic document from its time. What is disputed is whether it teaches truth or fallacy.

There are documents about the heresy of Docetism from the second century. Arius wrote about the heresy of Arianism in the third and fourth centuries. No one claims that their documents weren’t written when they were, only that they don’t contain orthodox teaching.

I want to say, “Who cares when it was written?” It could be an authentic document from the time of Moses for all I care. What I care about is whether it teaches truth. Any document which claims that Jesus was married does not teach truth.
-Tim-

To be fair, is there anything that teaches Jesus was single other than no mention of His having a wife?

 

[TimothyH]

For something that far back in history to be considered close to factual, it would have to be confirmed by other sources. No biblical source, and they were all written separately, mentions a spouse. No other extra biblical sources do either. It may be an actual document from really long ago. That doesn’t mean it contains things that come close to fact.

That’s right. That’s the whole point.

People are all freaked out because it is really old but there are plenty of really old documents which teach heresy. A manuscript which says 2+2=5 doesn’t become true just because it is verified to have been written at the time of Jesus.

The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife is authentic document from the fourth century. It contains horrible errors. There is nothing more to discuss.

-Tim-