Jesus’ Wife is Dead

The Biblical World has the latest:

The story about the Jesus’ wife papyri seems to have run its course. The biggest news to come out in the last  few weeks is that it looks like the script on the fragment may have been copied from a Gospel of Thomas website. The reason this has been suggested is that the version of Thomas on the website has a typo, the scholar transcribing the text left out the direct object marker. When the papyri is compared to the website it has the same typo. It looks like someone may have forged the fragment from the website, but didn’t know Coptic or Thomas well enough to realize the problem.

For more on the story see:
Mark Goodacre  and James McGrath. Also, a nice overview of the story and how it has played out can be found in the Guardian, the NYPOST and Tech News.

 

Rulers of Israel and Judah

The rulers of Israel and Judah in the time of 1 Kings and 2 Kings.

HT

 

On Applying for a PhD in Biblical and Theological Studies

Prof John Byron shares some thoughts on applying for a PhD in Biblical and Theological Studies on his blog, The Biblical World.

Give them a read.

They Who Dig Pits: Eilat Mazar and her Critics

Bible Places Blog:

The controversy surrounding the work of Eilat Mazar in Jerusalem is the focus of a recent article written by Morey Altman for the Jerusalem Report. At the heart of the conflict is the role of the Bible in archaeological interpretation.

Eilat Mazar readily concedes the use of Scripture as a guide but acknowledges the limitations of the Bible as an historical document. “The fact is all historical documents are biased because they are written by people.”

But she’s also critical of those who too readily dismiss the use of the Bible as a reference tool. “You don’t want to go the other extreme and ignore a document that’s potentially helpful. Information at hand, whether we’re talking about the Bible or historical documents, may direct us a certain way, but the minute you start excavating, you are obliged by very high scientific standards,” she maintains. “We can use the Bible as a starting point, just as archaeologists working in the Near East have always done,” she tells The Report. “People investigated what they knew, and they knew the Bible.”

Nevertheless, Finkelstein’s concerns go beyond the validity of Scripture. “It is not clear whether the wall was an outer wall or an inner wall within the city,” he tells The Report. “And in any event, no 10th century BCE city-wall has ever been found in Jerusalem.”

I hope that Finkelstein wasn’t trying to make the argument that Mazar could not have found a 10th-century wall because no 10th-century wall has ever been found.

The article concludes with a quotation from Mazar that she still has a few secrets.

Biblioblog Rankings – October 2011

Are out.

Thre are some good blogs to check out. Others, you shouldn’t really bother with.

 

What Did Jerusalem Look Like in Bible Times?

For a quick snapshot of how Jerusalem expanded from the City of David, to the time of Solomon, to the time of Hezekiah, to the time of Nehemiah, to the time of Jesus—this gives a nice overview:

But it’s also helpful to see some reconstructions in 3D. The City of David site has put together a good flyover video from David’s time, and Sephirot has an accurate 3D model of the temple in Jesus’ time.

Source

On Reading the Whole Bible

A note to Biblical academics:

I am always astonished to discover that there are some biblical academics who will admit that they have never actually read all of the Bible. Yet, it is often these very same academicians who harp on the absolute necessity of knowing the original languages. Don’t get me wrong. I am profoundly grateful for the opportunity to learn Hebrew and Greek. But for me and my house, if I had to choose between knowing the biblical languages or reading the whole counsel of Scripture in translation, the latter would be my choice hands down. Similarly, I am perplexed that there are some within the academy who have failed to read the entirety of the Scriptures and yet trumpet the importance of primary sources when it comes to biblical studies. Do they not realize that the Scriptures are the ultimate primary source? Can one really rightly claim to be a biblical scholar who has read all of the Gilgamesh Epic, Philo, or the Apostolic Fathers and yet have pages in their Bibles which have never passed in front of their eyes? I am stunned by those who can claim to keep up with their disciplines (e.g., NT, OT, the Prophets, Paul, etc.) because they read the most influential journals and the seminal monographs and yet cannot recall the last time that they have read some of the books of Scripture.

Ad fontes—back to the Bible.

 

Are the Four Gospels Historically Verifiable? (Arguments in Favor).

Dr Taylor Marshall was an Episcopal priest who is now a member of the Catholic Church. He blogs at Canterbury Tales and I find myself linking to his site often. Today, he asks: Are the Four Gospels Historically Verifiable? (Arguments in Favor):

Some claim that the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are not historical or are later documents not actually written by St Matthew, St Mark, St Luke, and St John.

Here are some quick facts demonstrating the historicity of the Four Gospels:

1. The Didache (written between AD 70 and 100 quotes the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. It also refers to the “gospels” (plural) revealing that there already more than one.
2. Saint Clement (the fourth pope circa AD 96) in his epistle to the Corinthians contains ten quotations from both Matthew and Mark.
3. The Epistle of St Barnabas (circa 90-130) quotes Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
4. St Ignatius of Antioch (d. AD 108) quotes Matthew, Luke, and John.
5. Papias (circa AD 120) spoke of all four Gospels and said that Matthew first wrote the words and acts of Christ in the Hebrew language which was later translated into Greek.
6. St Justin Martyr knew all four Gospels and refers frequently to Luke.
7. Tertullian (ca. AD 200) spoke of the Gospels “of Matthew and John the Apostles and Mark and Luke the disciples of Apostles.”

There is literally no other literary work that has this much early testimony to support it. The writings of Cicero and Caesar do not even come close – to say nothing of Plato and especially Homer. The Gospels are the best attested historical documents known to mankind. The Gospels have more historical witness than even the Old Testament, which is rather amazing when you think of it.

List of Biblioblogs and Related Blogs

Seems like the Biblioblog library is up and running… and this blog is there!

You can check out the entire list of Biblioblogs and Related Blogs here.

The Shortest Verse in the Bible

Jesus wept” is, by some definitions, the shortest verse in some Bible translations. But what does it mean and what is its context?

Bibledex, they’re back!