<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
A:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">“<b>TWO
ARE BETTER THAN ONE” MINISTRIES</b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Jim
& Marie Watt</b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Tel:
<a href="tel:253-517-9195" target="_blank">253-517-9195</a> - Email:
<a href="mailto:jmbetter@gmail.com" target="_blank">jmbetter@gmail.com</a></b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"><b>Web:
<a href="http://www.2rbetter.org/" target="_blank">www.2rbetter.org</a></b></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">September 20, 2012</p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">
<br></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
H1 { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
H1.western { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif }
H1.cjk { font-family: "DejaVu Sans" }
H1.ctl { font-family: "Lohit Hindi" }
H2 { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
H2.ctl { font-family: "Lohit Hindi" }
A:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style>
</p><h1 class="western" style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">The
Gospel of Jesus’ Wife? When Sensationalism Masquerades as
Scholarship - <br></h1>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Thursday, September
20, 2012</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/files/2012/09/122487884.jpg"><font color="#000080"><img src="http://www.albertmohler.com/files/2012/09/122487884-300x199.jpg" name="graphics1" align="BOTTOM" border="1" height="199" width="300"></font></a>The
whole world changed on Tuesday. At least, that is what many would
have us to believe. <em>Smithsonian</em> magazine, published by the
Smithsonian Institution, declares that the news released Tuesday was
“apt to send jolts through the world of biblical scholarship —
and beyond.” Really?</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">What was this news?
Professor Karen King of the Harvard Divinity School announced at a
conference in Rome that she had identified an ancient papyrus
fragment that includes the phrase, “Jesus said to them, ‘My
wife.’” Within hours, headlines around the world advertised the
announcement with headlines like “Ancient Papyrus Could Be Evidence
that Jesus Had a Wife” (<em>The Telegraph</em>).</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a name="more-24657"></a>
The <em>Smithsonian</em> article states that “the announcement at
an academic conference in Rome is sure to send shock waves through
the Christian world.” The magazine’s breathless enthusiasm for
the news about the papyrus probably has more to do with advertising
its upcoming television documentary than anything else, but the
nation’s most prestigious museum can only injure its reputation
with this kind of sensationalism.</p>
<h2 class="western" style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Related
Posts</h2>
<ul><li><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/2008/06/02/the-gospel-according-to-jesus-20-years-later/">The
Gospel According to Jesus — 20 Years Later</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/2011/07/19/reparative-therapy-homosexuality-and-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ/">Reparative
Therapy, Homosexuality, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/2008/07/01/hip-hop-and-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ/">Hip-Hop
and the Gospel of Jesus Christ</a> (Audio)</p>
</li><li><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/2008/06/03/transracial-adoption-and-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ-2/">Transracial
Adoption and the Gospel of Jesus Christ</a> (Audio)</p>
</li><li><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/2006/04/10/the-gospel-of-judas-still-a-media-item/">“The
Gospel of Judas” — Still a Media Item</a>
</p>
</li></ul>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><strong>A Fragment
of a Text, an Even More Fragmentary Argument</strong></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">What Karen King
revealed on Tuesday was a tiny papyrus fragment with Coptic script on
both sides. On one side the fragment includes about 30 words on eight
fragmentary lines of script. <em>The New York Times </em>described
the fragment as “smaller than a business card, with eight lines on
one side, in black ink legible under a magnifying glass.” The lines
are all fragmentary, with the third line reading “deny. Mary is
worthy of it,” and the next reading “Jesus said to them, ‘My
wife.’” The fifth states, “she will be able to be my disciple.”</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">The papyrus
fragment, believed to be from the fourth century, was delivered to
Professor King by an anonymous source who secured the artifact from a
German-American dealer, who had bought it years ago from a source in
East Germany. As news reports made clear, the fragment is believed by
many to be an authentic text from the fourth century, though two of
three authorities originally consulted by the editors of the <em>Harvard
Theological Review</em> expressed doubts. Such a find would be
interesting, to be sure, but hardly worthy of the international
headlines.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">The little piece of
ancient papyrus with its fragmentary lines of text is now, in the
hands of the media, transformed into proof that Jesus had a wife, and
that she was most likely Mary Magdalene. Professor King will bear
personal responsibility for most of this over-reaching. She has
called the fragment nothing less than “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife”
— a title <em>The Boston Globe</em> rightly deemed “provocative.”
That same paper reported that Professor King decided to publicize her
findings before additional tests could verify the fragment’s
authenticity because she “feared word could leak out about its
existence in a way that sensationalized its meaning.” Seriously?
King was so concerned about avoiding sensationalism that she titled
the fragment “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife?”</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">This is
sensationalism masquerading as scholarship. One British newspaper
notes that the claims about a married Jesus seem more worthy of fans
of Dan Brown’s fictional work, <em>The Da Vinci Code,</em> than
“real-life Harvard professors.” If the fragment is authenticated,
the existence of this little document will be of interest to
historians of the era, but it is insanity to make the claims now
running through the media.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Professor King
claims that these few words and phrases should be understood as
presenting a different story of Jesus, a different gospel. She then
argues that the words should be read as claiming that Jesus was
married, that Mary Magdalene was likely his wife. She argues further
that, while this document provides evidence of Jesus’ marital
status, the phrases do not necessarily mean he was married. More than
anything else, she argues against the claim that Christianity is a
unified body of commonly-held truths.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Those familiar with
Karen King’s research and writings will recognize the argument. Her
2003 book,<em> The Gospel of Mary of Magdala: Jesus and the First
Woman Apostle</em>, argued that another text from the era presented
Mary Magdalene as the very model for apostleship.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><strong>A
Preference for Heterodoxy</strong></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">The thread that
ties all these texts and arguments together is the 1945 discovery of
some 52 ancient texts near the town of Nag Hammadi in Egypt. These
texts are known to scholars as Gnostic literature. The texts present
heretical narratives and claims about Jesus and his message, and they
have been a treasure trove for those seeking to replace orthodox
Christianity with something different.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Several ambitions
drive this effort. Feminists have sought to use the Nag Hammadi texts
to argue that women have been sidelined by the orthodox tradition,
and that these Gnostic texts prove that women were central to the
leadership of the early church, perhaps even superior to the men.
Others have used the Nag Hammadi texts to argue that Christianity was
diverse movement marked by few doctrinal concerns until it was
hijacked by political and ecclesiastical leaders, who constructed
theological orthodoxy as a way of establishing churchly power in the
Roman Empire and then stifling dissent. Still others argue that
Christianity’s moral prohibitions concerning sexuality, and
especially homosexuality, were part of this forced orthodoxy which,
they argue, was not the essence of true Christianity. More than
anything else, many have used the Nag Hammadi texts as leverage for
their argument that Christianity was originally a way of spirituality
centered in the teachings of a merely human Christ — not a message
of salvation through faith in a divine Jesus who saves sinners
through the atonement he accomplished in his death and resurrection.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Professor King,
along with Princeton’s Elaine Pagels, has argued that the
politically powerful leaders who established what became orthodox
Christianity silenced other voices, but that these voices now speak
through the Nag Hammadi texts and other Gnostic writings. Writing
together, King and Pagels argue that “the traditional history of
Christianity is written almost solely from the viewpoint of the side
that won, which was remarkably successful in silencing or distorting
other voices, destroying their writings, and suppressing any who
disagreed with them as dangerous and obstinate ‘heretics.’”</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">King and Pagels
both reject traditional Christianity, and they clearly prefer the
voices of the heretics. They argue for the superiority of heterodoxy
over orthodoxy. In the <em>Smithsonian</em> article, King’s
scholarship is described as “a kind of sustained critique of what
she called the ‘master story’ of Christianity: a narrative that
casts the canonical texts of the New Testament as a divine revelation
that passed through Jesus in ‘an unbroken chain’ to the apostles
and their successors — church fathers, ministers, priests and
bishops who carried these truths into the present day.”</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">King actually
argues against the use of terms like “heresy” and even “Gnostic,”
claiming that the very use of these terms gives power to the forces
of orthodoxy and normative Christianity. Nevertheless, she cannot
avoid using the terms herself (even in the titles of her own books).
She told Ariel Sabar of<em> Smithsonian</em>, “You’re talking to
someone who’s trying to integrate a whole set of ‘heretical’
literature into the standard history.”</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><strong>Orthodoxy
and Heresy: The Continual Struggle</strong></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Those who use
Gnostic texts like those found at Nag Hammadi attempt to redefine
Christianity so that classic, biblical, orthodox Christianity is
replaced with a very different religion. The Gnostic texts reduce
Jesus to the status of a worldly teacher who instructs his followers
to look within themselves for the truth. These texts promise
salvation through enlightenment, not through faith and repentance.
Their Jesus is not the fully human and fully divine Savior and there
is no bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Were these writings
found at Nag Hammadi evidence of the fact that the early church
opposed and attempted to eliminate what it understood to be false
teachings? Of course. That is what the church said it was doing and
what the Apostles called upon the church to do. The believing church
did not see heresy as an irritation — it saw heterodoxy as
spiritual death. Those arguing for the superiority of the Gnostic
texts deny the divine inspiration of the New Testament and prefer the
heterodox teachings of the Gnostic heretics. Hauntingly, the
worldview of the ancient Gnostics is very similar, in many respects,
to various worldviews and spiritualities around us today.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">The energy behind
all this is directed to the replacement of orthodox Christianity, its
truth claims, its doctrines, its moral convictions, and its vision of
both history and eternity with a secularized — indeed, Gnositicized
— new version.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">Just look at the
attention this tiny fragment of papyrus has garnered. Its few words
and broken phrases are supposed to cast doubt on the New Testament
and the doctrines of orthodox Christianity. A tiny little fragment
which, even if authentically from the fourth century, is placed over
against the four New Testament Gospels, all written within decades of
Jesus’ earthy ministry.</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in">“The Gospel of
Jesus’ Wife?” Not hardly. This is sensationalism masquerading as
scholarship. Nevertheless, do not miss what all this really
represents — an effort to replace biblical Christianity with an
entirely new faith</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><u><b><br></b></u></p><p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><u><b>NOTE</b></u><span style="text-decoration:none"><b>:
</b></span><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">
</span></span><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="text-decoration:none"><span style="font-weight:normal">Dr.
R. Albert Mohler, Jr. serves as President of The Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary - the flagship school of the Southern Baptist
Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world. See</span></span></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><b><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="text-decoration:none"><AlbertMohler.com> </span></font></b><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="text-decoration:none">for other postings of like value as the above. </span></font><b><font style="font-size:11pt" size="2"><span style="text-decoration:none"><br>
</span></font></b></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="CENTER"></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>TO
SUBSCRIBE - Please Email: <a href="mailto:mailing-subscribe@2rbetter.org" target="_blank">mailing-subscribe@2rbetter.org</a></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>TO
UNSUBSCRIBE - Please Email: <a href="mailto:mailing-unsubscribe@2rbetter.org" target="_blank">mailing-unsubscribe@2rbetter.org</a></b></font></p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-top:0.01in;margin-bottom:0in" align="LEFT"><font size="3"><b>FOR
ARCHIVE ARTICLES - Web:<a href="http://2rbetter.org/pipermail/mailing/" target="_blank">http://2rbetter.org/pipermail/mailing/</a></b></font></p>