Ancient Papyrus About The Wife Of Jesus Not Faked (video and picture)

The New York Times is reporting that an ancient papyrus with information about the wife of Jesus is not a modern fake.

A faded fragment of papyrus known as the “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife,” which caused an uproar when unveiled by a Harvard Divinity School historian in 2012, has been tested by scientists who conclude in a journal published on Thursday that the ink and papyrus are very likely ancient, and not a modern forgery. MOREHERE

According to other sources:

The “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife” is the name given to the text on a papyrus fragment with writing inEgyptian Coptic that includes the words, “Jesus said to them, ‘my wife…’”.^[1] The text on the fragment is alleged to be a fourth-century translation of what is said to be “a gospel probably written in Greek in the second half of the second century.”^[2]

Professor Karen L. King (who announced the existence of the papyrus in 2012) and her colleague AnneMarie Luijendijk named the fragment the “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife” for reference purposes^[3] but have since acknowledged the name was controversial.^{[note 1]} King has insisted that the fragment, “should not be taken as proof that Jesus, the historical person, was actually married”.^[4] Luijendijk and fellow papyrologist Roger Bagnall authenticated the papyrus with Luijendijk suggesting it would have been impossible to forge.

The Vatican‘s semi-official newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, has claimed the gospel is a “very modern forgery”.^[5] A number of independent scholars have since provided evidence to support this view, suggesting the papyrus includes textual mistakes (a typographical error) identical to those made only in a particular on-line modern iteration of corresponding texts.^[6]

However, Professor Alberto Camplani of the Sapienza University of Rome, who was asked to carry out the analysis on which the Vatican’s newspaper based its article, is now skeptical about the papyrus fragment being a forgery, stating in a 2012 television documentary: “My first impression was that it was a fake, but I saw the fragment in a newspaper in a bad photograph. Today I am more inclined to believe that it is an ancient papyrus and not a modern forgery.”^[7] Elsewhere, Professor Camplani added that the papyrus text, “should be read purely symbolically.”^{[8] MOREHERE}