Harvard researcher admits 'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' likely a forgery
Most biblical scholars surmised four years ago that the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" â€“ the text fragment written in ancient Coptic that supposedly called Mary the wife of the Savior â€“ was a fake.
Now, the Harvard professor who invested nearly four years of work on the fragment and has defended it in publications and conferences has reportedly also come to the conclusion that the story may have been created out of whole cloth, or at least out of Egyptian papyrus.
Bill Combs wrote: The evidence from manuscripts and versions suggests that, while not perfect, the Scriptures have been preserved in an essentially pure form such that we can rightfully affirm that the essential message of Scripture has not been lost or corrupted. We are justified, then, in referring to our reliable manuscripts and versions as the Word of God because they are tethered to the autographs and are sufficient representatives of them.
What does the doctrine of preservation mean for textual criticism? Since preservation is by secondary causation, through ordinary human means, only by careful examination of the preserved documents can the most accurate form of the text of Scripture be identified and ultimately preserved. The science (and art?) of textual criticism is thus essential....
excerpt from [URL=http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/03/bill-combs-on-divine-preservation.html]]] Bill Combs on divine preservation[/URL] You will also find a link to Dr. Wallace's comments on preservation in this article, [URL=http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with-dan-wallace.html]]]Interview with Dan Wallace[/URL]. See also: http://tinyurl.com/z6yq9sl
Wayfarer Pilgrim, actually apparently she fell for a scam. It could possibly ruin her career. The second article in the Atlantic that I put up a URL for, is ---looooong!!!--- but it really goes into detail on how a person could be taken in. Now this professor's feminist goals perhaps made her an easier pray for such scams, so do I feel overly sorry for her? --no.
Actually many Christians were misled in other matters of the Bible, Dr. James White pointed out that out in, [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=529152352572]]]http://tinysa.com/235348 (New Age Bible Versions Refuted)[/URL] This is right here on SA, and I put a URL which is basically transcript for this audio, in my comment to it.
She and Gail Ripplinger have a lot in common [URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]Canada says "NO!" to KJV only[/URL] by the way
I would suggest you read the original Atlantic articles not only the one that there's a link to, but if you have a huge amount of time, read the article, [URL=http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/the-unbelievable-tale-of-jesus-wife/485573/]]]http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/the-unbelievable-tale-of-jesus-wife/485573/ [/URL]
Moses wrote: Neo Evangelical doesn't trust their modern bibles just like that, they need the minds of their favorite scholars. Take away those modern scholars from their modern bibles and they all fall away, no one to defend their belief anymore, no one to quote to, nor to link to
Above typical "scholarly" apostate drivel is typical of products of modern evangJellyFish cemeteries.
A scholarly paper worth reading to catch the process that leads to potential revisions on the order of the Harvard blind guide.
At least read to page 9 and marvel at a "student of manuscripts" who quotes 2 Peter 1:21 to tell you that nowhere in the New Testament can we find divine authority for the text of the New Testament. Uhhhh? 2 Peter 3:16 anyone?
I had already stopped at this point as I mocked the textual "scholar" fools , when I moved on to [URL=https://www.whitehorseinn.org/article/the-problem-of-a-plastic-text-the-kloha-essay-on-text-and-authority/]]]John Warwick Montgomery on Plastic Text lies[/URL] Bart Ehrnan(error man) lies need this type response
Neo Evangelical doesn't trust their modern bibles just like that, they need the minds of their favorite scholars. Take away those modern scholars from their modern bibles and they all fall away, no one to defend their belief anymore, no one to quote to, nor to link to
I haven't put this up, for quite awhile---shame on me [URL=http://www.biblebb.com/files/howbible.htm]]]http://tinyurl.com/jpgvzj3 (How We Got Our Bible)[/URL] Saying Jesus had a wife is not only nonsense but blasphemy.
Also if you don't print out the above to keep handy Study Bibles such as [URL=http://www.amazon.com/Macarthur-Study-Bible-James-Version/dp/0849912229]]]http://tinyurl.com/hrxvtut )The Macarthur Study Bible ~ New King James Version)[/URL] has a section on this topic as well. Probably other good study Bibles would have notes on "How we got our Bible," as well.
Tares Among the Wheat (available from Adullam Films). certainly does a masterful job of mustering the evidence for Codex Sinaiticus' having been the work of paleographer Constantine Simonides. The story is that Simonides' uncle Benedict of Mt. Athos monastery in Greece, wanted to present Czar Nicholas of Russia with a fresh copy of the Greek Bible as thanks for the Czar's favors to the monastery. Simonides had the knowledge and the talent for such an undertaking and found an old but mostly blank book of parchment at the monastery as a foundation for the work and spent a year on the project.
But as it turned out, the death of his uncle and the unavailability of enough parchment to complete the intended project left the work unfinished, and eventually he was persuaded to give what he had done so far to St. Catherine's monastery at what is supposed by some to be Mt. Sinai, for their library.
Which is where Tischendorf found it a few years later and mistook it for an ancient text, or at least feigned to regard it as ancient although there is some evidence that he knew better.
This Harvard prof emulates paleontologists who love fake evidence for evolution- the "evolution of the Bible" fits their mythical lying worldview-