“Jesus’ Wife Gospel Fragment”—the News is there’s No News

 By Nigel Tomes, Jan. 10, 2013

It’s been all quiet regarding the (so-called) “Jesus’ Wife Gospel Fragment” for a while. Compared to the furor which erupted last September when Harvard Prof. Karen L. King announced her “discovery” of the business-card-sized fragment, containing just 33 words, including “Jesus said, ‘My wife’…,” the recent silence is significant.

King’s Article delayed

It’s significant also because January, 2013 was the month when Dr. King’s much- publicized paper was to be published in a scholarly journal from Harvard University, the Harvard Theological Review [HTR]. Her Sept. article carried the banner, “Forthcoming Harvard Theological Review 106:1, January 2013,” which added a note of authenticity to her claims. Now we’re told that King’s paper will miss the Jan. issue because ink tests on the fragment aren’t complete. A Harvard spokesperson said the fragment’s owner “has been making arrangements for further testing and analysis of the fragment, including testing by independent laboratories with the resources and specific expertise necessary to produce and interpret reliable results.” That merely repeats an earlier statement. Moreover, she added, “HTR planned to publish the article 'after conclusion of the all the testing so that the results may be incorporated.  Until testing is complete, there is nothing more to say at this point’.” We note also that a “world premiere,” by the Smithsonian TV channel, is also delayed indefinitely. So, the news is there’s no news.

Papyrus 'shows Christ married Mary Magdalene'—Daily Mail

Despite the lack of substantive news the UK’s Daily Mail tabloid tried to sensationalize this update. A headline reported, breathlessly, “Harvard delays article intended to resolve mysteries of papyrus which 'shows Christ married Mary Magdalene'.” [Daily Mail, Jan. 7, 2013] It continued, “A highly-contentious document which allegedly proves that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene is at the centre of a fresh dispute about its authenticity.” However, the truth is that Prof. King never claimed that the papyrus (even if it’s authenticated) “proves that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene.” Prof. King clearly states that her paper, “does not… provide evidence that the historical Jesus was married, given the late date of the fragment…” Plus, there’s no “fresh dispute” about authenticity—scholars have asked if this fragment is a fake from the first! Obviously the Daily Mail doesn’t let the facts get in the way of a good story!

Fragment gets more testing, delays article—CNN

So ran a weekend piece in CNN’s Belief Blog [Eric Marrapo, Jan. 3, 2013] "We're moving ahead with the testing, but it is not yet complete, and so the article will await until we have the results," Dr. Karen King told CNN in an email.

Explaining the delay, CNN reported that “Faking antiquities is not uncommon, which is part of the reason so many critics questioned the authenticity of a text…’ The academic community has been badly burned,’ Douglas A. Campbell, Assoc. Prof. of New Testament at Duke Divinity School said in September, noting how similar discoveries have turned out to be fakes.  ‘The provenance of the document--the history of where it came from and how they got it,’ was a great concern to Dr. Campbell and other academics,” CNN reported. Yet, issue of the history of the “Jesus’ Wife Gospel Fragment”—the matter of “great concern” to Campbell and other academics-- has never been addressed. It remains shrouded in mystery, which is one reason why a “red flag,” questioning Dr. King’s claims, remains.

Scholars Not Holding their Breath

CNN reported that “many critics questioned the authenticity of a text …[while] Other scholars refused to comment on the find until the full battery of testing could be completed.” But Dr. Anthony Le Donne of the Univ. of the Pacific (Stockton, CA.) objects to this characterization, which (he says) “gives the impression that we are holding our collective breath, waiting to see how the ink tests will come out.” With a little effort, he says, CNN, “could have found a few well-respected scholars who might have given a more informed answer about the fragment.” [Le Donne,“…Caution Misleading concerning the ‘Mrs. Christ’ Fragment?” The Jesus Blog, Jan. 5, 2013]

Ink Tests can be Faked

We live in an era in which forgers compete with testers to fool authenticity tests. It’s comparable to doping athletes trying to outfox drug tests (think Lance Armstrong & the Tour De France). In view of this, Dr. Le Donne’s argues “it should be made clear that ink can be mixed for the purpose of cheating the standard tests.  It will not surprise anyone familiar with this process to learn that the ink tests for this fragment come back inconclusive.  If so, where are we left?” Le Donne asks, “I would argue that we are not ‘left where we started’, but we are left with the compelling arguments in support of fraud.”  The latest CNN post, he alleges is misleading, since, “it suggests that most scholars don't really have an opinion.Not the case.”

“Compelling arguments in support of fraud”

As we reported in earlier posts on this topic, Prof. Francis Watson, of the University of Durham, UK and Andrew Bernhard of Oxford Univ., both presented compelling cases why the (so-called) “Jesus Wife Gospel Fragment” should be judged a forgery. Bernhard asserts that “it is now fair to begin openly describing the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife as a modern forgery ...The possibility that Gospel of Jesus’ Wife is a genuinely ancient writing seems extremely remote.” These scholars (plus many others) are not holding their breath, anxiously awaiting test results on Prof. King’s Coptic fragment.