Is ‘The Gospel of Jesus’s Wife’ a revelation or a hoax?

[MADem]

A couple of snips don't do this article justice. Worth a read, though...

Earlier this month, a Coptic papyrologist from Australia visited Harvard to have another look at the papyrus.

Yet his will not be the last word on what may be, centimeter for centimeter, the most controversial scrap of ancient paper ever seen. The case remains one of the most high-profile and confounding academic mysteries in recent memory.....

........

With that advice in mind, King eventually argued that the Coptic fragment was probably genuine — a fourth-century copy of a Greek composition from the second century, she hypothesized.

King never thought the fragment was evidence that Jesus actually had a wife. But she believed it showed that some early Christians portrayed him as married as they debated celibacy and the role of women in the church, specifically wives and mothers.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/11/28/the-case-gospel-jesus-wife-still-isn-closed/gJo7KfDFywXEJ8dLFFjdrK/story.html

[TexasProgresive]

1. Be a bit difficult to tell

Questions I have: \
1st - Is it an autograph?
If so then the author has no direct knowledge of Jesus as the papyrus is from the 8th century.

2nd - If it is not an autograph and is a copy of an earlier papyrus was the original work the account of someone who knew Jesus or was it a work of fiction?

3rd - Does it make any difference to me as a Christian?
Not a bit of it. It makes no difference to me if Jesus was married and possibly left children behind or not. Some people get all in a twit about this stuff but like all studies of antiquities. It's like interpreting the Bible there seems to be so much clarification that just muddies the waters.

[MADem]

2. Oh, sure. I thought it was an interesting article, though.

There are more questions than answers at this stage.

[thucythucy]

3. Bookmarked for later reading.

Thanks.

[restorefreedom]

4. the two main issues imo

are the autheticity of the artifact itself and the interpretation of what it says. unfortunately, the possibility of what it says seems to be influencing the legitimacy of its existence as an ancient text.

i have to wonder if the text said something about a conversation Jesus had with his father or a comment on his confrontation with satan if the artifact's veracity would be questioned. some are very invested in the idea that jesus was not married, and that will affect their acceptance of this as a genuine article.

as a non christian who has a great deal of admiration for Jesus, it matters to me not at all if he had been married. but i felt the same way when i was a christian. the married state is seen as a respectable and desirable way of life, so i don't understand why people would be upset at the idea that he may have been married.