dog-on

You disagree that religious texts are used as marketing materials?

vid

I think you downplayed how unlikely it is to be a "fragment of gospel" as people imagine it.

That papyrus contains only about 13 letters (not sure now how many exactly). To fit it to gospel text, you need to change one of those letters, and even then, the line layout doesn't fit gospel. For that to fit, you need to omit one passage from original text, and only after that you get a match.

AFAIK, original research did these alternations BEFORE searching for match: if that is true (I am not very sure), it would be clear manipulation towards desired result. Can't remember exactly where, but I remember someone claimed that with these options (one letter change, omiting passage), he found some 16 matches in ancient texts. Unfortunatelly, I don't remember exact sources for these claims, might be wrong.

And those things are not only one that decrease probability of gospel fragment: there is unlikely early copy you mentioned (how many copies would there be existing by then?), and you need to assume early composition date (as you obviously do, that is for different topic).

And even if it is copy of text close (not identical) to todays' gospel, it doesn't automatically mean it comes from early copy of gospel as we have it now. It could very well be just some textual tradition preceding composition of gospels.

Roger Pearse

No, I certainly knew that it was a tiny snippet. As I understood it (unless things have changed), the controversy was over one letter, and how it should be read. That's always rather marginal stuff.

I felt that the argument put forward by Thiede and friends didn't seem to work very well, but I also didn't feel any strong urge to be dogmatic about it. It isn't a matter of deep religious importance to me that it must NOT be a bit of a gospel, as the tone of some writing on the subject indicates it is to some people. (IIRC the preface to Graham Stanton's "Gospel Truth" expresses venom towards Thiede in terms that would earn Stanton a punch in the face in any pub in Britain). I just don't believe that there is adequate evidence that it is.

I agree that few copies would exist soon after composition, relative to later on. In addition, our evidence is of composition in Rome, not Judaea, in Greek for that audience. So the text also has to wander across to Judaea (not impossible) and then out to the desert (not impossible). But... is it likely? I can see the issue.

I wouldn't feel comfortable with the argument that we should argue probability based on our theories about how many copies exist, tho. What do *we* know?

Not early -- which to me involves claims of the 30's and 40's; merely in line with the ancient evidence. The need to date the gospels late seems to have a historical connection with the need of Germans in the 1890's to avoid worshipping a god who was Jewish.

While this is true, I think that we must not multiply witnesses unnecessarily.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Rick Sumner

I'm not quite sure what you think is disputed here? That it lists "resurrection" as a sign? I don't think there can be much doubt of that. Certainly it has the same formula used in Mt and Lk in their answer to John the Baptist.

This hugely understates the situation. I don't think there can be much doubt that the DSS provide a wealth of insight into the millieu and mindset that gave birth to Christianity.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Rick Sumner

This is, in fact, not the consensus at all. The consensus is that there is no direct relationship. ie The DSS are not about Jesus, or do not represent a Christian movement.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Rick Sumner

As an aside that might be germane here, many of the cave 7 Greek fragments have been identified as belonging to a Greek copy of 1Enoch, collectively known as pap7QEn. 7Q5 was, unfortunately, not among the fragments identified.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Rick Sumner

As an aside (and not directed at you in particular, Toto), it has puzzled me since the day I started posting on these boards how fickle many posters here are when it comes to carbon dating the DSS. How reliable c-14 is always seems to depend on whether or not Robert Eisenman has been mentioned lately.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

vid

I recall reading that there are other interpretations, without ressurection, are possible. But it is long since I read about DSS, so I can't tell you where. Likely some christian apologetic site.

I meant direct links to christianity, of course it gives us great insight into society where christianity had its roots.

Ben C Smith

If you are referring to 7Q5, there are at least three problems with the identification, which I outline on my website. I find the identification quite unlikely.

Of course, I agree with you that high emotion has no place in the investigation.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

I suppose a clever enough interpretation could remove whatever the text had to offer.

I have the text of 4Q521 up on my site. The translation does not follow the text line by line, but here is the relevant section (emphasis added):

And the Lord will perform marvellous acts such as have not existed, just as he sa[id, for] he will heal the badly wounded and will make the dead live [ומתים יחיה]; he will proclaim good news to the poor and [...] he will lead the [...] and enrich the hungry.

Compare Isaiah 61.1, but especially Matthew 11.5 = Luke 7.22.

Ben.