Top-notch scholars including several coptologists, Helmut Koester (Harvard University), Bentley Layton (Yale University), Stephen Emmel (University of Münster), and Gesine Robinson (Claremont Graduate School) judges the Gospel of Jesus' Wife to be a fake, according to Dan Wallace. On this ground, Harvard Theological Review are hesitant to publish the fragment.
Here is the "news flash" from Daniel Wallace:
News flash: Harvard Theological Review has decided not to publish Karen King¹s paper on the Coptic papyrus fragment on the grounds that the fragment is probably a fake.” This from an email Dr. Craig Evans, the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia University and Divinity College, sent to me earlier today. He said that Helmut Koester (Harvard University), Bentley Layton (Yale University), Stephen Emmel (University of Münster), and Gesine Robinson (Claremont Graduate School)–all first-rate scholars in Coptic studies–have weighed in and have found the fragment wanting. No doubt Francis Watson’s comprehensive work showing the fragment’s dependence on the Gospel of Thomas was a contributing factor for this judgment, as well as the rather odd look of the Coptic that already raised several questions as to its authenticity.
Yesterday, however, Religion News Service published a statement by a spokesperson of Harvard Divinity School, Jonathan Beasley, denying that the publication of the fragment had been outright rejected – there is suspicion about the fragment which is therefore subject to testing:
Dr. King’s `marriage fragment' paper, which Harvard Theological Review is planning to publish in its January, 2013, edition – if testing of the ink and other aspects of the fragment are completed in time – will include her responses to the vigorous and appropriate academic debate engendered by discovery of the fragment, as well as her report on the ink analysis, and further examination of the fragment.
See also Near Emmaus.
Here is the "news flash" from Daniel Wallace:
News flash: Harvard Theological Review has decided not to publish Karen King¹s paper on the Coptic papyrus fragment on the grounds that the fragment is probably a fake.” This from an email Dr. Craig Evans, the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia University and Divinity College, sent to me earlier today. He said that Helmut Koester (Harvard University), Bentley Layton (Yale University), Stephen Emmel (University of Münster), and Gesine Robinson (Claremont Graduate School)–all first-rate scholars in Coptic studies–have weighed in and have found the fragment wanting. No doubt Francis Watson’s comprehensive work showing the fragment’s dependence on the Gospel of Thomas was a contributing factor for this judgment, as well as the rather odd look of the Coptic that already raised several questions as to its authenticity.
Yesterday, however, Religion News Service published a statement by a spokesperson of Harvard Divinity School, Jonathan Beasley, denying that the publication of the fragment had been outright rejected – there is suspicion about the fragment which is therefore subject to testing:
Dr. King’s `marriage fragment' paper, which Harvard Theological Review is planning to publish in its January, 2013, edition – if testing of the ink and other aspects of the fragment are completed in time – will include her responses to the vigorous and appropriate academic debate engendered by discovery of the fragment, as well as her report on the ink analysis, and further examination of the fragment.
See also Near Emmaus.
Is Helmut Koester a coptologist? I still respect his opinions. The list runs much longer this, although I think many do not want to get involved. Thanks, Tommy.
ReplyDeleteThanks Christian, corrected.
ReplyDeleteInasmuch as there's already a YouTube video featuring Dr. King describing the fragment and its (alleged) historical setting, with several shots of the papyrus itself, it already is published in some sense.
ReplyDeleteYours in Christ,
James Snapp, Jr.