Were Gnostics the original Christians?

Posted on 2015/02/19 by Christadelphians

[this is a sample of text from the book “Living on the edge” by Jonathan Burke]

Were Gnostics the original Christians?

There is no evidence that Gnostics were the first Christians, or that the earliest Christians borrowed from Gnostic beliefs; Gnosticism did not even exist in the first century.[1] No Gnostic documents have been found which pre-date Christianity.[2] [3]

The earliest Gnostic written works found, all date to a time long after Christianity was well established.[4] There is no evidence that any New Testament books contain references to Gnosticism,[5] [6] and no evidence that Gnosticism was a rival to the earliest Christians.[7]

Gnosticism did not exist in the first century, only pre-Gnostic ideas which later became incorporated into Gnosticism during the second century.[8]

________________________________

[1] ‘But it is now widely agreed that the quest for a pre-Christian Gnosticism, properly so called, has proved to be a wild goose chase.’, Dunn, ‘The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul’, p. 9 (2003).

[2] ‘Even if it could be proven that any of the previously discussed works or, for that matter, any of the NH tractates are non-Christian Gnostic documents, that would not in itself be evidence for pre-Christian Gnosticism.’, Combs, ‘Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism and New Testament Interpretation’, Grace Theological Journal (8.2.207-208), 1987.

[3] ‘And even if we are on solid ground in some cases in arguing the original works represented in the library are much older than extant copies, we are still unable to postulate plausibly any pre-Christian dates.’, McRae, ‘Nag Hammadi and the New Testament’, pp. 146–47, in Combs, ‘Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism and New Testament Interpretation’, Grace Theological Journal (8.2.208) , (1987).

[4] ‘Egypt has yielded early written evidence of Jewish, Christian, and pagan religion. It has preserved works of Manichaean and other Gnostic sects, but these are all considerably later than the rise of Christianity.’, Unger, ‘The Role of Archaeology in the Study Of the New Testament’, Bibliotheca Sacra (116.462.153), 1996.

[5] ‘Some modern researchers suggest that several NT and related texts evidence contact with “Gnosticism” in various stages of its development. Texts that especially stand out are Paul’s Corinthian correspondence, Colossians, Ephesians, the Pastoral Epistles, Jude, 2 Peter, and the letters of Ignatius of Antioch (d. ca. 115) and Polycarp of Smyrna (d. ca. 165) among others. But even here the issues discussed are diverse, demonstrating a complex assortment of competing new religious movements, but no evidence of “Gnosticism.”’, Freedman, ‘Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible’, p. 509 (2000).

[6] ‘Scholarship must in all likelihood abandon the hypothesis that a cohesive Gnostic movement204 is reflected in Paul’s letters.’, Lüdeman, ‘Primitive Christianity: A Survey of Recent Studies and Some New Proposals’, p. 150 (2003).

[7] ‘If in all likelihood, with the possible exception of the Simonians, there was no such thing as a rival Gnostic movement within or competing with Pauline Christianity, the question arises whether there ever was a specific Gnostic myth as an entity of its own.’ , ibid’, p. 151.

[8] ‘The full-fledged Gnosticism of later church history did not exist in the first century A.D.21 An incipient form of Gnosticism was present, but Schmithals makes the error of reading later Gnosticism into the first century documents.’, Schreiner, ‘Interpreting the Pauline Epistles’, Southern Baptist Journal of Theology (3.3.10), Fall 1999.

Additional note:

Tim Wallace I remember when I did ‘text and traditions’ in year 12, the teacher explaining the the gospel of John was all about fighting gnostism… i vaguely remember learning about it. I had never heard about gnostism until that class.

Living On The Edge It was an idea which gained some traction years ago, and took a while to be debunked. It hasn’t been taken seriously by the scholarly consensus for years, but plenty of textbooks are still being used which make this claim.

Additional reading:

+++

Gnostic Media Flashback Interview: The Qabalah – Gene Odening (sgtreport.com)
We continue our discussion on the Trivium and Quadrivium and go for a full-blown as we complete this series with the Qabalah and the mystery schools with Gene Odening.
Real Truth Will Set You Free (mylordmyfriend.com)
in Colossians, the Apostle Paul, had to deal with false teaching called Gnosticism

Gnosticism led to theological compromise, we can’t comprise The Truth of God’s Word. One of the compromises of Gnosticism was Christ Jesus was not unique, which opposes the Gospel message. If Christ is not so, Christianity is no worse but certainly no better than any other faith.

Another compromise of Gnosticism, it lead to moral abuse, with a catch cry ‘Soma sema’, ‘The body is a tomb’. Our bodies are not tombs for the soul, but temples for The Holy Spirit to reside.

Another compromise of Gnosticism led to false religious practices. Treating religious rules as if these rules could lead to God. If that wasn’t bad enough, early Gnosticism claimed that those who followed their teaching possessed wisdom {gnosis} and were superior.
An Ancient Theologian explains Tradition (notforitchingears.com) Originally posted on Dead Heroes Don’t Save:
Irenaeus, a 2nd century theologian, defended Christianity from the Gnostic philosophies that were popular at the time. His 5 volume work, Against Heresies, dedicates the first two volumes to describing the Gnostic views and then precedes to dismantle them in the remaining volumes.
+
The heretics did not just offer a different worldview. They were using Scriptures to uphold their ideas – which centered on two gods – a good one and an evil one. It was the evil god who created the physical world that we must rid ourselves of.
Carl Jung: “Christ was referred to as the fish.” (carljungdepthpsychology.blogspot.com)
Christ was referred to as the fish.

In a papyrus which has recently been discovered and is in the British Museum he is referred to by the secret sign XP.

The sign >!( is formed from it.

These signs appear in Gnosticism, St. Paul’s sayings are undoubtedly connected with Gnosticism.

On Gnostic gems we find the symbol of the vase, the vase of sin.

The Gnosis is a disturber of the peace of the Church, but it is full of psychological truths, many yet undiscovered.
A Masonic One World Conspiracy – Freeman on GW Radio (gnosticwarrior.com)
Freeman has lectured extensively on the secret signs and symbolism of Freemasonry, the ancient astronaut hypothesis, trauma-based mind control, social engineering, government conspiracy, human cloning, technologies of the future, and synchronicity.
New blog at Occult Minds (heterodoxology.com)
esotericism scholars can learn from some of their colleagues studying Gnosticism.
Framing Paul: An Epistolary Biography by Douglas Campbell (Eerdmans, 2014) (andygoodliff.typepad.com)

Too often Pauline scholarship operates with no overarching frame, no account of how the letters are related to one another, the order they come in and the underlying account of Paul’s life which explains their contingency. Campbell’s argument is that a biography, that arises out of the data in the letters, and at the same time explains them, this will ‘ground all subsequent interpretative work on Paul rather more accurately and firmly than hitherto has been the case’ (p.404).

Campbell argues that to construct Paul’s biography we must begin with his letters and leave to one side the account of Paul’s life in the Book of Acts. We must begin with the primary data. Too many Pauline scholars too readily accept the account in Acts or work with an approach that borrows both from Acts and the letters as equal sources. Campbell’s approach builds on that done by John Knox and John Hurd.

Why think that (1) … Jesus existed?

Posted on 2014/07/28 by taanathshiloh

Christianity is a historical faith. Christianity is founded on the figure of Jesus and so it really matters whether Jesus was a real person or not. If he did not exist then our seeking ends there. But if Jesus did exist then we can move on to the more interesting questions of what he did, who he claimed to be and in what ways he is special.

What is unusual about the question of Jesus’ existence is that it is a loaded question. The majority of historians recognize that Jesus existed and yet you will find plenty of skeptics who think that the existence of Jesus is still an open question. Of all known individuals from the first century AD very few feature in as many sources written within living memory as Jesus and yet of all known individuals from the first century AD it is Jesus whose existence is doubted. This disparity between what reliable historical methods indicate and what skeptics choose to doubt tells you something about the sort of question this is.

So let’s recap the evidence, starting with non-Christian sources. Perhaps the most well-known source is Josephus, who in one passage talks about “Jesus … a doer of wonderful works”, whom Pilate condemned to the cross (Antiquities 18.63-64). Many people think this text has been tampered with because it includes the line “he was the Christ” (and it’s unlikely that Josephus, a Jew, would have said that) so we cannot be sure what this passage originally wrote. But this is not the only time Josephus mentions Jesus. In another passage he talks about an early Christian elder, who was stoned to death; Josephus describes him as “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ” (Antiquities 20.9).

Mara bar ‘Serapion: Assyrian Stoic philosopher in the Roman province of Syria

Another Jewish writer, Mara Bar-Serapion, mentions a “wise king” whom the Jews put to death in a letter to his son. Many scholars believe this “wise king” was Jesus. The Talmud, the book of Jewish tradition, also contains stories about Jesus. Though greatly embellished and particularly anti-Christian, the Talmud refers explicitly to the death of Jesus “on the eve of the Passover” (Sanhedrin 43a).

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus c. 69 AD Rome, Roman Empire

Jesus is also mentioned by two Roman historians. Tacitus records that “Christus … suffered the extreme penalty” under Pontius Pilate (Annals 15.44) and Suetonius mentions one “Chrestus”, whose followers were causing disruption in Rome (Life of Claudius 25). The Roman satirist Lucian writes about the founder of Christianity, who was crucified (The Death of Peregrine).

It is significant that early critics of Christianity, like the Platonist philosopher Celsus, did not dispute that Jesus existed – they only disputed the claims he made.

Of course, our main source of information about Jesus comes from texts written by Christians in the first century. These include texts from the late 40s or early 50s, like James and the Didache; texts from the mid-50s, like Paul’s letters to the Corinthians, Thessalonians and Romans; and, of course, the gospels, which probably date from the 60s or 70s. All easily within living memory of the events of Jesus’ life.

This is why historians do not doubt the existence of Jesus – you’d need to ignore all the evidence.

Additional reading:

+++

Evidence Of Jesus IS Meaningless (thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com)
Sextus, who claimed this reference of Thalius, was a christian who’s life was dedicated to christianity full time (motive of lying and fabrication).
Book Review: Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus (Part IV) (diglotting.com)
Pokorný’s application of the criterion of dissimilarity. He uses it in regards to the analysis of “the stylistic and rhetorical peculiarities of the early Jesus traditions”. He mentions that while the criterion of dissimilarity has been heavily criticized in recent times, it “does not mean that [it] should be abandoned” (338). But regarding the criterion of multiple attestation, Pokorný notes that its validity “is limited” and that he “would almost warn against it” (339).In an attempt to sketch an image of Jesus, Pokorný analyzes the Pauline evidence, the Synoptic traditions, and the Johannine traditions.
The Historicity of Jesus: Ancient Pagan Sources (3dchristianity.wordpress.com) + Josephus on Jesus: Evidence for Jesus’ Existence?Thankfully, there are non-Christian ancient documents that mentioned Jesus that we can turn to. There are, at least, seven ancient Classical or Greco-Roman authors who mentioned Jesus that scholars have attested as authentic. And there are various ancient Jewish writings as well, the most famous being the Jewish historian Flavious Josephus.
+
we have a historical corroboration of the New Testament that Jesus and James existed, they were brothers and that early Christians were in trouble with the religious authorities of Judaism, and persecuted.
+
look at pagan Greco-Roman authors as sources for the historical Jesus
+
We learn that about 80 years after Jesus was crucified, Christians have grown in such number that they were a threat to the Roman Empire and were being persecuted. We learn that early Christians met regularly on a determined day (perhaps Sunday) and sang hymns to Christ as if Christ is god. Also that early Christians were rather exemplary in their moral behaviour. And that early Christians would not worship or bow down to other gods/idols/images, and would not revile or curse Christ. The overall tone here suggests that Pliny assumed Christ was a real person whom the Christians worshiped.
“Is This Not the Carpenter?” – References to Jesus outside the Christian Sources (vridar.wordpress.com)
Grabbe sugests that Tacitus more than likely had access to imperial archives and accordingly argues the likelihood that Tacitus did indeed pore through those official documents to acquire his material, including the fact of Christ’s crucifixion under Pilate.
+
I was particularly disappointed that Grabbe failed even to point out that in one of the key passages in Suetonius that the name appearing there, Chrestus, was a common slave name of the day. Readers are led to understand only one possibility: that Suetonius confused the name Christ for Chrestus:

Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [the emperor Claudius] expelled them from Rome.

Maybe this did originate as a confused account of Jewish Christians. Even if so, it tells us nothing about a Jesus in Galilee over a decade earlier. The passage appears to understand “Christ” (if this was originally meant) as a figure the troublesome Jews believed was in their midst in Rome.
Jesus’ Existence, Myth of Fact? (theperfectprescription2014.wordpress.com)
Even without reference to Scripture the case for the existence of Jesus is as axiomatic as the case for any other historical figure such as Julius Caesar. Extra biblical material compiled by historians and archaeologists is replete with attestations that the Lord Jesus walked on earth in the flesh. Bible students interested in studying further about the testimonies of non-Christian historical sources can look up the following ….
Secular Historians Prove Jesus was a real Historical Person (nathanaelcoffman.wordpress.com)
What we tend to overlook, as Christians, is that many seek to disprove Christianity by disproving the historical figure of Christ. One internet article writer said, “Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct” (“Welcome…”). There are many others who feel this way and even have well formulated arguments to support these claims. This paper shall seek to disprove the “Jesus the cultural concept,” by quoting ancient historians who mention Jesus. To further the argument that Jesus was a real historical man who lived and died (and resurrected) on this earth, one could use the work of secular historians. Through a chronological listing and study of these secular historians and their writings, one could prove both the legitimacy of the secular historians as well
Craig S. Keener: Jesus Existed (huffingtonpost.com)
Contrary to some circles on the Internet, very few scholars doubt that Jesus existed, preached and led a movement. Scholars’ confidence has nothing to do with theology but much to do with historiographic common sense. What movement would make up a recent leader, executed by a Roman governor for treason, and then declare, “We’re his followers”? If they wanted to commit suicide, there were simpler ways to do it.One popular objection is that only Christians wrote anything about Jesus. This objection is neither entirely true nor does it reckon with the nature of ancient sources. It usually comes from people who have not worked much with ancient history. Only a small proportion of information from antiquity survives, yet it is often sufficient.
6. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Jewish Sources (vridar.wordpress.com)
Joe Atwill, Bill O’Reilly, and Josephus sitting in a tree… (unsettledchristianity.com)
Atwill’s most intriguing discovery came to him while he was studying “Wars of the Jews” by Josephus [the only surviving first-person historical account of first-century Judea] alongside the New Testament.
+
I do believe Mark is writing against Rome (Vespasian) and even fellow Jews (Simon bar Giora) by using known stories he is doing so based on a historical figure and a pre-existing outline. This is the only way it would work and the only way Mark could appeal to /an/Christians.
Josephus on Jesus: Evidence for Jesus’ Existence? (3dchristianity.wordpress.com)
Proof of Jesus outside the Bible (thatfaith.wordpress.com)
The Jesus debate: Man vs. myth (religion.blogs.cnn.com)
Encouragement doesn’t “just happen” | Darkness Inverte
The Central Challenge of Discipleship: Recognizing Jesus
Letter to a friend on Jesus and the end of the age of decay
Jesus in the Talmud

Marriage of Jesus 5 Papyrus fragment in Egyptian Coptic

Posted on 2014/05/22 by Marcus Ampe

In the previous chapter we saw how Mary Magdalene was portrayed in the 3° century Pistis Sophia. The 2° century writing of the Gospel of Mary, portrays Mary as a source of secret revelation because of her close relationship to the Saviour. At one point Peter asks,

“Sister, We know that the Saviour loved you more than the rest of women. Tell us the words of the Saviour which you remember – which you know but we do not nor have we heard them” (section 10, trans. George W. MacRae and R. McL. Wilson).

Mary reveals what the master-teacher had told her, not as a physical man on earth, but in a vision. When she would have been the wife of Jesus, why did he not spend time enough with her to talk about such matters and why did he have to come to her in a vision?

Mary reports herself that several of the disciples were none too impressed by Mary’s purported insights into heavenly things. Andrew responded to her revelation by saying

“I at least do not believe that the Saviour said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas” (section 17).

Such remarks, and the one of Peter who asked:

“Did he really speak privately with a woman and not openly to us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?”

may be inserted in the writings on purpose to give it more credibility? But also from the replies we do not get a clear insight that the woman speaking would have received such a special place to become the spouse of the Messiah. they also seem to doubt that Jesus would have spoken privately to that woman, called Mary Magdalene. Again when she would have been his wife than Jesus would certainly have taken time to speak with her privately.

In the canonic gospels we come to hear Jesus calling Peter a satan. This is now also repeated by Levi who speaks up for Mary. He chides Peter because he has

“always been hot-tempered.”

and says:

“Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Saviour made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Saviour knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us” (section 18).

For many having in the Gospel of Philip having the most suggestive passage:

“And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, ‘Why do you love her more than all of us?’ The Saviour answered and said to them, ‘Why do I not love you like her?’ When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. Then the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness” (sections 63-63).

Women around Christ – Do not be Afraid (Photo credit: Lawrence OP)

The text may very well use the metaphor of kissing to say that Jesus revealed truth to Mary. If this is true, the The Gospel of Philip is consistent with what we have seen elsewhere in the Gnostic gospels. But also by kissing a woman on the mouth this should not yet mean he had a very intimate relationship with her as a lover. He also just could have been very befriended or have considered himself as a protector of her, and as such kissing her affectionately. (In certain cultures it is also not strange to kiss other people on their mouth, without having to be the husband or wife.)

In 2012 professor Karen L. King announced the existence of a papyrus fragment with writing in Egyptian Coptic that includes the words, “Jesus said to them, ‘my wife…'”. She and her colleague AnneMarie Luijendijk named the fragment the “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife” for reference purposes. King has stated that the fragment:

“should not be taken as proof that Jesus, the historical person, was actually married”.

The “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife,” a papyrus written in Coptic and containing text that refers to Jesus being married, is looking more and more like it is not authentic, research is revealing.

Papyrological examination, scientific analysis of the ink and papyrus, and various forms of imaging were performed by multiple professional teams. These usually included comparative testing of a fragment of the Gospel of John in Coptic. No evidence of modern fabrication (“forgery”) was then found. Scepsis brought many interested to discuss and research the matter. Today not all are so sure about all the papyrus material being ancient. Some even say it is clear that it is for 100% a forgery, because even the papyrus may be old the ink is not so old. According to several researchers the papyrus can be dated to the seventh to eighth c.c.e. and might the carbon composition of the ink, too, be consistent with ancient inks. Microscopic imaging was used to investigate whether the ink might be pooled in damaged sections of the fragment in ways that would indicate it had been applied after the damage had already been done. No evidence of such pooling was found.

Harvard University, which announced the papyrus’ discovery, has fallen silent on the artifact, not responding to requests for comment on new developments suggesting the find is a forgery. Giovanni Maria Vian, the editor of the Vatican’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, had already called it a fake in September 2012 in an editorial that accompanied an article by leading Coptic scholar Alberto Camplani. For him the brownish-yellow, tattered fragment, about one and a half inches by three inches is a “clumsy forgery.”

According to a British theologian the finding of the papyrus could proof what he said already for some time, that:

“God, also known as Yahweh, had a wife named Asherah.”

And that the God had come to earth as a man and has taken a wife here on earth to. In 1967, Raphael Patai was the first historian to mention that the ancient Israelites worshipped both Yahweh and Asherah. The theory has gained new prominence due to the research of Francesca Stavrakopoulou, who began her work at Oxford and is now a senior lecturer in the department of Theology and Religion at the University of Exeter. Last December her findings where again broadcasted on the little screen in Belgium.

Those who consider Jesus to be God and do find he had to have a wife, may find them in both teachings. Some on the other hand say the “mother god Asher” was herself reincarnated in Mary (Maria/Myriam/Miriam), who gave birth to her son Jesus, the “incarnated Yahweh”. Those people do not wonder why their god than would have come to the earth as a reincarnation in the from of Jesus, when the Divine Creator of the World detest those who believe in reincarnations and returning ghosts. Though the Bible is clear that God is a ghost (John 4:24) who can not be seen by man or they would die (Exodus 33:20) and Jesus was seen by many people, who did not die [though God is not a human being or a god who tells lies (Numbers 23:19)].

The papyrus text has been constructed out of small pieces – words or phrases – culled from the Coptic Gospel of Thomas. Yes this gospel keeps turning up. For those who like jigsaw puzzles and patchwork, here they can find their patchwork of words and phrases which might be copies of writings with lots of fantasy.

According to Karen L. King and AnneMarie Luijendijk

This is the only extant ancient text which explicitly portrays Jesus as referring to a wife.

But she also warned that

It does not, however, provide evidence that the historical Jesus was married, given the late date of the fragment and the probable date of original composition only in the second half of the second century. Nevertheless, if the second century date of composition is correct, the fragment does provide direct evidence that claims about Jesus’s marital status first arose over a century after the death of Jesus in the context of intra-Christian controversies over sexuality, marriage, and discipleship. Just as Clement of Alexandria (d. ca 215 C.E.) described some Christians who insisted Jesus was not married, the fragment suggests that other Christians of that period were claiming that he was married. {See Stromateis III, 6.49; Greek text in Otto Stählin (ed.) Clemens Alexandrinus. Stromata Buch I-VI (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1906) 218}

Gospel of Mary, discovered in 1896. P. Oxyrhynchus L 3525, Papyrology Room, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

High resolution digital photography and additional manipulation with Photoshop also aided in decipherment of both recto and verso, as well as viewing the manuscript itself in daylight and with magnification. Careful examination was also made of certain letters, especially the all-important alpha on the heavily inscribed side of the fragment (“recto”) in line 4, which reads “my wife”. If a sigma had been overwritten by this alpha, the meaning would have been changed from “the woman” to “my wife.” No evidence of overwriting is evident.

King has also done more research on the history of what early Christians had to say about Jesus’s marital status and on the interpretation of the fragment itself. She argues that the main topic of the fragment is to affirm that women who are mothers and wives can be disciples of Jesus — a topic that was hotly debated in early Christianity as celibate virginity increasingly became highly valued. In the previous chapters I spoke about that attitude opposite women. From the canonic gospels we can understand that there were single women, young ones, but also mothers and older women who followed Jesus, becoming his disciples and making themselves new pupils.

Preceding articles:

Marriage of Jesus 1 Mary, John, Judas, Thomas and Brown

Marriage of Jesus 2 Standard writings about Jesus

Marriage of Jesus 3 Listening women

Marriage of Jesus 4 Place of the woman

To be followed by:

Marriage of Jesus 6 Jesus said to them “My wife”

Marriage of Jesus 7 Impaled

Marriage of Jesus 8 Wife of Yahweh

Marriage of Jesus 9 Reason for a new marriage

Marriage of Jesus 10 Old and New Covenant

Find also:

In Dutch:

+++

Papyrus fragment put to test (news.harvard.edu)
A wide range of scientific testing indicates that a papyrus fragment containing the words “Jesus said to them, my wife” is an ancient document, dating between the sixth to ninth centuries C.E. Its contents may originally have been composed as early as the second to fourth centuries.
‘Gospel Of Jesus’ Wife’ Papyrus Is Ancient, Not Fake, Experts Say (huffingtonpost.com) incl. Video
An ancient, business-card-sized papyrus fragment that appears to quote Jesus Christ discussing his wife is real, Harvard University announced Thursday. The fragment caused international uproar when it was revealed by a Harvard historian in September 2012, with prominent academics and the Vatican swiftly deeming it a forgery.
How the ‘Jesus’ Wife’ Hoax Fell Apart (online.wsj.com)
Then last week the story began to crumble faster than an ancient papyrus exposed in the windy Sudan. Mr. Askeland found, among the online links that Harvard used as part of its publicity push, images of another fragment, of the Gospel of John, that turned out to share many similarities—including the handwriting, ink and writing instrument used—with the “wife” fragment. The Gospel of John text, he discovered, had been directly copied from a 1924 publication.”Two factors immediately indicated that this was a forgery,” Mr. Askeland tells me. “First, the fragment shared the same line breaks as the 1924 publication. Second, the fragment contained a peculiar dialect of Coptic called Lycopolitan, which fell out of use during or before the sixth century.” Ms. King had done two radiometric tests, he noted, and “concluded that the papyrus plants used for this fragment had been harvested in the seventh to ninth centuries.” In other words, the fragment that came from the same material as the “Jesus’ wife” fragment was written in a dialect that didn’t exist when the papyrus it appears on was made.
‘Gospel of Jesus’s Wife’ Looks More and More Like a Fake (nbcnews.com)
since the investigation was published, Live Science has been in contact with an agency in Berlin that issues permits for the exportation of antiquities. Representatives of that agency said they could find no record that a papyrus like this had been exported from their office. It’s possible that the Gospel of Jesus’s Wife papyrus was exported from elsewhere in Germany or from the European Union.
Radical feminists say it’s misogynist to reveal “Jesus’ wife” hoax (revisionistreview.blogspot.com)
I’ve counted 10 different university-level scholars chiming in on two different online sites to heap coals upon the head of anyone who dares to think that King made a mistake, or that she should have consulted a wider range of experts before she helped the Smithsonian turn the papyrus scrap into a television documentary (which finally aired May 5) rather than afterward, as she did.
+
On May 5, the online magazine Religion Dispatches, published by USC’s Annenberg School of Communications and Journalism, featured an article by Eva Mroczek, a religious studies professor at Indiana University, complaining about the title of one of Askeland’s blog posts: Jesus Had an Ugly Sister-in-Law.” Illustrated by a Walt Disney still of Cinderella’s homely siblings (stepsisters, not sisters, but close), Mroczek’s article took Askeland to task for “the sexist language — the use of an ugly woman as a metaphor for a sloppy, forged, worthless text.”Poor Askeland! Bet he never thought that calling a scrap of papyrus “ugly” was a misogynist attack on women! Even Bagnall had deemed the Jesus’ Wife fragment “ugly” in a 2012 interview in the Boston Globe. Mroczek had earlier taken Askeland to task about the word “ugly” in a comment on his blog post. And after Mroczek’s article appeared, he edited the word out of the post’s title.
New evidence casts doubt on ‘Gospel of Jesus’ Wife’ (religion.blogs.cnn.com)
Anonymity, in the world of antiquities, is often a bad sign, compounding the inherent uncertainty when dealing with texts that are bought and sold rather than discovered in a firm archaeological setting.Then there were aspects of the text itself that seemed suspicious.For a fragmented scrap of papyrus, it seemed to have an awful lot of important content on it. Not only did Jesus refer to “my wife,” he also potentially described a certain Mary – perhaps Mary Magdalene? – as “worthy” and capable of being a disciple.It is (almost) too good to be true.At the same time, the handwriting seemed surprisingly sloppy.
Historian Says Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus’ Wife (nytimes.com)
Dr. King first learned about what she calls “The Gospel of Jesus’s Wife” when she received an e-mail in 2010 from a private collector who asked her to translate it. Dr. King, 58, specializes in Coptic literature, and has written books on the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Mary of Magdala, Gnosticism and women in antiquity.The owner, who has a collection of Greek, Coptic and Arabic papyri, is not willing to be identified by name, nationality or location, because, Dr. King said, “He doesn’t want to be hounded by people who want to buy this.”When, where or how the fragment was discovered is unknown. The collector acquired it in a batch of papyri in 1997 from the previous owner, a German. It came with a handwritten note in German that names a professor of Egyptology in Berlin, now deceased, and cited him calling the fragment “the sole example” of a text in which Jesus claims a wife.

Marriage of Jesus 4 Place of the woman

Posted on 2014/05/21 by Marcus Ampe

Several people would like to see the non-canonical gospels as reliable historical sources, which should have to be part of the Bible. In case they would have to be part of the Scriptures, first of all we could question why they were not recognised by God as part of His Word and protected as such. The time laps between the last writings by the apostles and the later writers is also too big. For the authorship most credible scholars date the writing of the non-canonical gospels in the second or third century C.E. (with the possible exception of the Gospel of Thomas, which may have been written in late 1st or early 2nd century).

These texts are so called to be written by original disciples of Jesus, including Mary, but these disciples had nothing to do with the actual writing of the extra-biblical gospels.

Gheorghe Tattarescu – Magdalena, (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The repeated reference in the Gnostic texts of Mary as being loved by Jesus more than the others has been seen as supporting the theory that the Beloved Disciple in the canonical Gospel of John was originally Mary Magdalene, before being later redacted in the Gospel. In case she would have been the wife of Jesus it is strange that we can find in the Gospel of Thomas, Simon Peter asking to Jesus that Mary would leave them.

“for women are not worthy of Life.” {Gospel of Thomas}

Would a disciple say something like that to their teacher, when that person is his wife? In reply Jesus said:

“I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” {Gospel of Thomas; section 114; trans. Thomas O. Lambdin}

In here there is also no speak of transgender issues, having females to become male. In that time saying to be a male, had to do with being strong or making decisions. I also agree there was still at that time the higher position of the male figure. As such talking about being or behaving as a male should be taken as a symbol of the person his or her spiritual or divine nature.

In The Dialogue of the Saviour there is also no hint to be found that the man of the dialogue, who is Jesus the Christos or Christ, would have been the husband of Mary.

In The Pistis Sophia Jesus calls the woman Mary the blessed one, beyond all women upon the earth,

“because [she shall be] the pleroma of all Pleromas and the completion of all completions” (section 19).

Male figures may have been considered the ones who could best present their knowledge. But in the writings of the New Testament we also can find women who read the Bible in front of children and slaves, so that they also could hear and grow up with the knowledge of the Good News. Such women, like Mary where considered worthy followers by Jesus, because they fulfilled the task given by him to spread the Good News. Their witnessing brings proof of their “fullness of knowledge” and therefore of the “spiritual life within them”. In the Gnostic Gospels Jesus is shown to be impressed with Mary’s spiritual excellence that he promises not to conceal anything from her, but to reveal everything to her

“with certainty and openly” (section 25).

She is the blessed one, who will

“inherit the whole Kingdom of the Light” (section 61).

In none of the books is written that she would come to sit next to Christ and his Father. In case those writers really thought Mary Magdalene was the wife of Christ, would God not have placed her sitting next to her husband?

Preceding articles:

Marriage of Jesus 1 Mary, John, Judas, Thomas and Brown

Marriage of Jesus 2 Standard writings about Jesus

Marriage of Jesus 3 Listening women

To be followed by:

Marriage of Jesus 5 Papyrus fragment in Egyptian Coptic

Marriage of Jesus 6 Jesus said to them “My wife”

Marriage of Jesus 7 Impaled

Marriage of Jesus 8 Wife of Yahweh

Marriage of Jesus 9 Reason for a new marriage

Marriage of Jesus 10 Old and New Covenant

+++

The Top Six Alternate Gospels and Scriptures (glitternight.com)
Everyone but the most sheltered Christians have known for centuries about the alternate, or apocryphal gospels. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the four canonical or “official” gospels that were accepted by the mainstream church but there were dozens of other gospels with wildly varying versions of the story of Jesus.
The Importance of Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic Gospels (writedge.com)
Most of us have grown up knowing Mary Magdalene, but with not enough information about her part in the Christian story. In the New Testament, she has a relatively minor role beyond her witnessing the resurrected Jesus in the Gospel of John, but in the Gnostic Gospels, her role is much more important. In them, she not only is the witness to the Resurrection, but an important disciple of Jesus, and possibly his lover or wife.
+
This example shows her not only to have received new teachings from Jesus, it also shows the opposition and prejudice she faced from most of Jesus’ male disciples due to her being a woman. In the Jewish culture of Jesus’ day, women were considered to be and treated as inferior to men; therefore, it comes as no surprise that Mary Magdalene would be put down by most of the male disciples, and her presence would be opposed by them. This prejudice against women would later carry on in to Petrine/Pauline Christianity, which still today, in spite of progress made in such churches as the Anglican and Episcopal churches allowing women to take more leadership roles such as joining the priesthood, for instance, besets much of the Christian religion, ranging from the Roman Catholic Church’s continuing opposition to women joining the priesthood to fundamentalist Protestantism’s insistence on women’s only role being that of the stay-at-home wife and mother, and its continuing attempt to turn the clock back on women’s rights to an idealized 1950s in the United States.
The Resurrection Myth (venitism.blogspot.com)
Jesus was a lower-class bisexual preacher from Galilee, who, in hysterical apocalyptic fashion, proclaimed that the end of history as he knew it was going to come to a crashing end, within his own generation. God was soon to intervene in the course of worldly affairs to overthrow the forces of evil and set up a utopian kingdom on earth. It didn’t happen. Instead of being involved with the destruction of God’s enemies, Jesus was unceremoniously crushed by them: arrested, tried, humiliated, tortured, and publicly executed.Soon afterwards his followers began to say that, despite all evidence to the contrary, Jesus really was the messiah sent from God.
A Kiss Before Crucifying (vovatia.wordpress.com)
Gnosticism predates Christianity, and Ehrman proposes that it was a response to Jewish apocalypticism. The apocalyptic view is that, while evil forces are now in charge of the world, God is ultimately in control and will soon set things right. Jesus himself is generally regarded as an apocalyptic preacher, but since there were elements of his teachings that presented a less worldly and more ideal view than traditional Judaism, Gnostics gladly adopted him as a mouthpiece for their own views. In their belief, Jesus was not the son and representative of the Demiurge worshipped by mainstream Jews, but rather of a higher, non-material god.
The Forbidden Gospel of Mary Magdalene (humansarefree.com)
For Jean Yves-Leloup, the founder of the Institute of Other Civilisation Studies and the International College of Therapists, Mary Magdalene is the intimate friend of Jesus and the initiate who transmits his most subtle teachings.His translation of the Gospel of Mary is presented in his book The Gospel of Mary Magdalene along with a commentary on the text which was discovered in 1896, nearly 50 years before the Gnostic Gospels at Nag Hammadi were found.

The Gospel of Mary can easily be divided into two parts. The first section (7,1-9,24) describes the dialogue between the risen Christ and the disciples. He answers their questions concerning matter and sin.
+
The second section of the text (10,1-23; 15,1-19,2) contains a description by Mary of special revelation given to her by Christ. At Peter’s request, she tells the disciples about things that were hidden from them.
Was Jesus Married? (part One) Nothing in the Bible Says He Was and Nothing in the Bible Says He Was Not***so After You Read the Below You Be the Judge and Get Ready for the Religious Shock of Your Life***from Tlgrwcorporate (tlgrwcorporate.wordpress.com)
There is no hint in The Dialogue of the Savior of a marriage between Jesus and Mary (or the Savior and Mary). She is seen, once again, as central among the disciples of the Savior, and as a person with special insight.
+
The silence of the New Testament gospels has given rise to a cacophony of conflicting voices. Some see in these writings a plot to cover up the truth about Jesus. Others see the silence of the gospels as proof that Jesus could not have been married. It does seem rather fantastic to imagine that if Jesus had been married to Miriam of Magdala, whom we know as Mary Magdalene, or to any other woman for that matter, this fact would have been completely omitted from all of the earliest records of Jesus’ life. Those who claim that the earliest Christians conspired to hide this information because it confirmed the fact that Jesus wasn’t divine forget that the supposed conspirators often gave their lives because they believed Jesus to have been divine. Would they have died for something they knew to be a lie? I rather doubt it.
Jesus Chooses the Twelve Disciples // Jesus Teaches and Heals (travismikhailblog.wordpress.com)
apostles: Those who will preach the gospel and lead the early Church. They are emissaries invested with Christ’s royal and priestly authority. Like the 12 patriarchs of Israel (Gen 35:22-26), Jesus chooses 12 men to be the father figures of the renewed kingdom of Israel, the Church.
Scientific Tests Show ‘Gospel of Jesus’ Wife’ Wasn’t Faked (nbcnews.com)
The studies, published Thursday in the Harvard Theological Review, represent the latest chapter in the years-long saga surrounding what Harvard theologian Karen King has dubbed the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife. King brought the text into the global spotlight in September 2012, at a symposium in Rome, but the publication of her analysis was held up for more than a year when questions were raised about the text’s authenticity.
+
“These kinds of texts are notoriously repetitious,” he told NBC News. “The problem is, this gets sensationalized. What it proves is something we already knew, that certain Gnostic groups in the second, third and fourth centuries did think of Mary as Jesus’ companion. We just didn’t have that word ‘wife.'”
Religulous Hoi Polloi (venitism.blogspot.com)
Religious practices change all the time—just ask Catholics who celebrated mass in Latin until the 1960s or Protestant groups that started ordaining women as ministers in the 1970s. But are there certain core beliefs that can never change?Conservative theologians within the church argue that Schaefer’s defrocking was justified because church law, by definition, must be upheld—otherwise, it is not a church law. They maintain that homosexuals are welcome in the church, but that one should abstain from the practice of homosexuality.

Lord in place of the divine name

Posted on 2014/03/13 by Belgian Biblestudents - Belgische Bijbelstudenten

Substitutions Kyrios (Lord) and Theos (God)

Page from the Dutch Professorenbijbel (“Professors Bible”), a translation of the Latin Vulgate of the Books of the New Testament. This part, covering the Pentateuch, was published in 1904. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

During the second or third century of the Common Era, the scribes substituted the words Ky′ri·os (Lord) and The·os′ (God) for the divine name, Jehovah, in copies of the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Other translations, such as the Latin Vulgate, the Douay Version (based on the Vulgate), and the King James Version, as well as numerous modern translations (NE, AT, RS, NIV, TEV, NAB), followed a similar practice. The divine name was replaced by the terms “God” and “Lord,” generally in all-capital letters in English to indicate the substitution for the Tetragrammaton, or divine name.

In departing from this practice, the translation committee of the American Standard Version of 1901 stated:

“The American Revisers, after a careful consideration, were brought to the unanimous conviction that a Jewish superstition, which regarded the Divine Name as too sacred to be uttered, ought no longer to dominate in the English or any other version of the Old Testament, as it fortunately does not in the numerous versions made by modern missionaries. . . . This personal name [Jehovah], with its wealth of sacred associations, is now restored to the place in the sacred text to which it has an unquestionable claim.”—AS preface, p. iv.

The Tetragrammaton rendered into a name

A number of translations since then (An, JB [English and French], NC, BC [both in Spanish], and others) have consistently rendered the Tetragrammaton as “Yahweh” or have used a similar form.

The New World Translation of the Holy Scriputres (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Under the heading Jehovah (In the Christian Greek Scriptures), evidence is also presented to show that the divine name, Jehovah, was used in the original writings of the Christian Greek Scriptures, from Matthew to Revelation. On this basis, the New World Translation, used throughout this work, has restored the divine name in its translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, doing so a total of 237 times. Other translations had made similar restorations, particularly when translating the Christian Greek Scriptures into Hebrew.

When discussing “Restoring the Divine Name,” the New World Bible Translation Committee states:

“To know where the divine name was replaced by the Greek words Κύριος and Θεός, we have determined where the inspired Christian writers have quoted verses, passages and expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures and then we have referred back to the Hebrew text to ascertain whether the divine name appears there. In this way we determined the identity to give Ky′ri·os and The·os′ and the personality with which to clothe them.”

Explaining further, the Committee said:

“To avoid overstepping the bounds of a translator into the field of exegesis, we have been most cautious about rendering the divine name in the Christian Greek Scriptures, always carefully considering the Hebrew Scriptures as a background. We have looked for agreement from the Hebrew versions to confirm our rendering.”

Such agreement from Hebrew versions exists in all the 237 places that the New World Bible Translation Committee has rendered the divine name in the body of its translation. — NW appendix, pp. 1564-1566.

To impede spreading the name of God

Already from the beginning of times there were people who did not like to spread the name of the Divine Creator. We should all be aware nothing has changed Who created all wonders of nature. Several people do everything to have the Name of the Divine Creator not be known. they would not like to see others having enjoying a close relationship with Him who is the Sovereign Master.

We do know that the world speaks about a lot of gods. We also should come to recognise that there is an evil foe. The Bible explains:

“The god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers.”

The god of this present ungodly world is also called “Satan“, which means the “Adversary“. There are many adversaries of God in this world. They not only blaspheme the Name of God. They want to keep you in darkness so that your heart will not be illuminated with “the glorious knowledge of God.”

“Satan” or the adversary does not want you to know Jehovah by name. How, though, does Satan blind people’s minds?

4 Therefore, since we have this ministry through the mercy that was shown us, we do not give up. 2 But we have renounced the shameful, underhanded things, not walking with cunning or adulterating the word of God;+ but by making the truth manifest, we recommend ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God.+ 3 If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things*+ has blinded the minds of the unbelievers,+ so that the illumination* of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God,+ might not shine through.+5 For we are preaching, not about ourselves, but about Jesus Christ as Lord and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God is the one who said: “Let the light shine out of darkness,”+ and he has shone on our hearts to illuminate them+ with the glorious knowledge of God by the face of Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:1-4-6).

Blinding the world

The gods of this world blind many and the adversaries of God managed to get far by creating a lot of confusion in people’s mind. Certainly with taking away the Name of God out of the Holy Bible or the Holy Scriptures they managed it that many became so confused that they could not see clear any more in the different characters of figures in the Bible. seeing at so many places the world ‘lord’ they do not know any more of which lord is been spoken. As such “Satan” has also used false religion to hinder people from coming to know God by name.
For example, in ancient times some Jews chose to ignore the inspired Scriptures in favour of tradition that called for avoiding the use of God’s name. By the first centuries of our Common Era, Jewish public readers had evidently been instructed, not to read God’s name as it appeared in their Holy Scriptures, but to substitute the word ʼAdho·nai′, meaning “Lord.” Doubtless, this practice contributed to a tragic decline in spirituality.

Jesus making the Name of his Father known

Many lost out on the benefits of a close personal relationship with God.
What, though, about Jesus?
What was his attitude toward Jehovah’s name?

Jesus declared in prayer to his Father:

“I have made your name known . . . and will make it known.” (John 17:26)

Jesus would undoubtedly have pronounced God’s name on numerous occasions when he read, quoted, or explained portions of the Hebrew Scriptures containing that important name. Jesus would thus have used God’s name just as freely as all the prophets did before him. If any Jews were already avoiding the use of God’s name during the time of Jesus’ ministry, Jesus would certainly not have followed their tradition. He strongly criticized the religious leaders when he said to them:

“You have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.” (Matthew 15:6).

We should wonder if we would like to take the tradition of those Jews or certain churches, and continue not using the Name of God.

Continuation of the use of God’s Name

Faithful followers of Jesus continued to make God’s name known after Jesus’ death and resurrection. Jesus’ apostles and disciples continued in the tradition of their master teacher and used God’s name in their inspired writings.

Professor Howard notes:

“When the Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew form of the divine name, the New Testament writers no doubt included the Tetragrammaton in their quotations.”

At Pentecost 33 C.E., the very day the Christian congregation was formed, the apostle Peter, quoting from a prophecy of Joel, said to a multitude of Jews and proselytes:

“Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.” (Acts 2:21)

32 And it must occur that everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe;+ for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will prove to be the escaped ones,+ just as Jehovah has said, and in among the survivors,* whom Jehovah is calling.”*+ (Joel 2:32)

13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah* will be saved.”+ (Romans 10:13)

Calling onto lords

All those translations where is only written ” that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” do not give a clear picture which lord has to be called on. Translations which use: “whoever calls on the name of ADONAI will be saved.’” however do not leave a doubt. In the early 20th century Bible translations in case the Name of God was not used they mostly placed full capitals, so that people still could see that it was the Lord God been spoken of and not the Lord Jesus Christ. But nearing the end of the 20th century the use of capitals was put aside and people could not see any difference between the Lord God Jehovah (Lord of Lord of lords) or His son the Lord of lords or Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus Christ.

Many miraculously shaped in their mother’s womb, got their cells and their DNA sown by the Most High Creator of heaven and earth. You would think they would like to know the Founder of their being and to get a good relation with Him. For building a good relation we do have to come to know the person very well. And when we do really love somebody we do use his or her name and not a detached “sir”, “lord” or “madam” or “misses”.

Early Christians helped people from many nations to come to know Jehovah by name. Thus, in a meeting of the apostles and older men in Jerusalem, the disciple James said:

“God . . . turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name.” (Acts 15:14).

Satan sowing apostasy by no proper name

Nevertheless, the enemy of God’s name did not give up. Once the apostles were dead, the opponents of God, the wicked ones and His enemies, wasted no time in sowing apostasy.

38 the field is the world.+ As for the fine seed, these are the sons of the Kingdom, but the weeds are the sons of the wicked one,+39 and the enemy who sowed them is the Devil. The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things,* and the reapers are angels.(Matthew 13:38, 39)

2 However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you.+ These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them,+ bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. (2 Peter 2:1)

For example, the nominal Christian writer Justin Martyr was born about the time John, the last of the apostles, died. Yet, Justin repeatedly insisted in his writings that the Provider of all things is

“a God who is called by no proper name.”

Replacing the Name

When apostate Christians made copies of the Christian Greek Scriptures, they evidently took Jehovah’s personal name out of the text and substituted Ky′ri·os, the Greek word for “Lord.” The Hebrew Scriptures did not fare any better. No longer reading God’s name aloud, apostate Jewish scribes replaced the divine name in their Scriptures with ʼAdho·nai′ more than 130 times. The influential translation of the Bible into Latin that was completed by Jerome in 405 C.E. and that came to be called the Vulgate similarly omitted the personal name of God.

Vulgate Clementine, edition from 1714 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Today, scholars are aware that Jehovah’s personal name appears some 7,000 times in the Bible. Thus, some widely used translations, such as the Catholic Jerusalem Bible, the Catholic La Biblia Latinoamérica in Spanish, and the popular Reina-Valera version, also in Spanish, freely use God’s personal name. Some translations render God’s name “Yahweh.”

Sadly, many churches that sponsor Bible translations pressure scholars into omitting God’s name from their translations of the Bible. For example, in a letter dated June 29, 2008, to presidents of Catholic bishops’ conferences, the Vatican stated:

“In recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel’s proper name.”

The letter gives this pointed direction:

“The name of God . . . is neither to be used or pronounced.”

Furthermore,

“for the translation of the Biblical text in modern languages, . . . the divine tetragrammaton is to be rendered by the equivalent of Adonai/Kyrios: ‘Lord.’”

Clearly, this Vatican directive is aimed at eliminating the use of God’s name.

Protestants have been no less disrespectful in their treatment of Jehovah’s name. A spokesman for the Protestant-sponsored New International Version, published in English in 1978, wrote:

“Jehovah is a distinctive name for God and ideally we should have used it. But we put 2¹⁄4 million dollars into this translation and a sure way of throwing that down the drain is to translate, for example, Psalm 23 as, ‘Yahweh is my shepherd.’”

In addition, churches have hindered Latin Americans from knowing God by name. Steven Voth, a translation consultant for the United Bible Societies (UBS), writes:

“One of the ongoing debates in Latin American Protestant circles revolves around the use of the name Jehová . . . Interestingly enough, a very large and growing neo-pentecostal church . . . said they wanted a Reina-Valera 1960 edition, but without the name Jehová. Instead, they wanted the word Señor [Lord].”

According to Voth, the UBS rejected this request at first but later gave in and published an edition of the Reina-Valera Bible “without the word Jehová.”

Deleting God’s name from his written Word and replacing it with “Lord” hinders readers from truly knowing who God is. Such a substitution creates confusion.
For example, a reader may not be able to discern whether the term “Lord” refers to Jehovah or to his Son, Jesus. Thus, in the scripture in which the apostle Peter quotes David as saying:

“Jehovah said to my Lord [the resurrected Jesus]: ‘Sit at my right hand,’”

many Bible translations read:

“The Lord said to my Lord.” (Acts 2:34, NIV)

In addition, David Clines, in his essay “Yahweh and the God of Christian Theology,” points out:

“One result of the absence of Yahweh from Christian consciousness has been the tendency to focus on the person of Christ.”

Thus, many churchgoers are hardly aware that the true God to whom Jesus directed his prayers is a Person with a name — Jehovah.

Learn to know and use God His Name

You may be convinced that it does not really matter, but did you ever thought it perhaps could be really very important. those who pray ‘the Lord’s prayer’ did they ever think what it would mean to “hallow God His Name”?

As it was important for the son of God, Jeshua (Jesus Christ) to have people get to know his Father’s Name, it is still important today that as many people as possible come to get to know the Name of the Most High God. It is true our world still may see a war going on against the divine name and against those who like to use the Name of God. The adversary of God has cleverly used false religion in the process. However, the reality is that no power in heaven or on earth can stop the Sovereign Lord Jehovah from making His name known to those who want to know the truth about him and his glorious purpose for faithful humans.

If you are interested in getting to know more about that God with His special or set-apart (holy) name, we would be pleased to come to talk with you are to bring you in contact with people who could give you a Bible study. May we first advice you to start yourself putting all doctrines you might have learned in your early church life or of which you might have heard, to put them away, to have an open mind to receive the words of the scriptures like they come to you.

To have not to many difficulties to know about whom is spoken, you best use a Bible where the Name of God is used, either by the placing of the Tetragammaton or by the Name Jehovah or Yahweh. choosing a Bible with Jehovah His name in it, you soon will get the picture and shall come to understand who is who.

Please do not hesitate to ask us question should they arise, and make an effort to regularly read the Bible, the Word of God.

Preceding: Lord and owner

Tetragrammaton in Phoenician (1100 BC to 300 CE), Aramaic (10th Century BC to 0) and modern Hebrew scripts. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Of interest:

+++

From other websites:

Humbled in my bed.
I truly owe it all to Him. He has given me so much. So much.All I know About Divine Healing
While there do seem to be particular individuals that the Lord provides the gift of healing to on a more regular basis it seems that healing in the Christian church is more about corporate faith than it is about individual faith. There is also a somewhat inexplicable nature to who gets healed and who does not get healed and the reasons why healing does or does not occur.
+
I know it doesn’t make sense to cooperate with a supreme being who has no need of you. But while I have been very perplexed by the role of Sovereignty in Divine healing I have also come to recognize the role of human agency. That God has a specific Will that people can know and act on, and if they do not act upon will not happen, is a rather strange concept to a Calvinist. Yet, again and again I have seen this principle demonstrated in the healing ministry.
Why Is God’s Name Missing From Many Bibles ?
God does not need to be distinguished from other gods.
Some translators have made this statement. Who are we to say that God doesn’t need a name ? God deemed it necessary to name all the stars in the heavens, and to place his name upon people that he liked, and upon places that were important to him. His own word the Bible – emphasizes the importance of a name. The translators of the Bible did not remove Satan’s name from the Bible – nor did they remove the names of numerous false gods from the Bible.“non-superstitious Jewish translators always favored the name Jehovah in their translations of the Bible.
On the other hand one can note that there is NO Jewish translation of the Bible with Yahweh.”
–M. Gérard GERTOUX; a Hebrew scholar, specialist of the Tetragram; president of the Association Biblique de Recherche d’Anciens Manuscrits
I Love You Jehovah
Jehovah you’re name I’ll defend I’ll declare all your wonders right down to the end You’re the light of my life the breath of my days the beauty of children the warmth of sun’s rays You give me great hope when life’s looking bleak the words in your Bible of wisdom they speak Oh Jehovah […]“Jehovah” and “Jehoshua”
Call upon ”Jehovah” and His Saviour The Jews looked forward to a Jewish Messiah that would be sent to them by Jehovah God. This Messiah would bring Salvation to them. He was to be Jehovah’s means of Salvation – hence, he would bear the name “Jehoshua”which means Jehovah’s Salvation. All this information was snuffed out by the Romans when they attempted to blot out the Jewish Connections to Christ.
The Romans made Christianity their state religion shortly after the Apostles died. The Romans corrupted Christianity to a great degree, by destroying Christ’s connections to Judaism and replacing them with pagan religious teachings and holidays.
Correctores were hired to alter the bible in thousands of places – in an attempt to distance Christ from his Jewish heritage. The name of Jehovah was replaced by “LORD” or “GOD”. Other scriptures were also deleted, added or altered in order to support the new state religion.

+++

ΠΙΠΙ and the Use of Hebrew in Greek Manuscripts (glanier.wordpress.com)
One of the most fascinating parts of the seminar involved reading an old fragment of the Greek translation of Deuteronomy 31, during which one of the professors in attendance made what we thought was a joke about early Christians misreading the name for the LORD in the synagogue and saying “Pipi.” Turns out…he wasn’t joking. The reason behind this embarrassing mistake provides a nice little (short) tour into the world of scribal habits and ancient manuscripts.
+
According to Jewish tradition as later codified in the Mishnah (specifically the Halakha), when the Hebrew Bible was read in the synagogue by Jews – and possibly even earlier in the first temple period, though that is debated – the covenant name of God was usually not pronounced (according to some Jewish writings, YHWH could be spoken, or, rather, sung, in some circumstances, such as priestly prayer or when reciting the Numbers 6 benediction). Rather, they substituted “Adonai” any time YHWH appeared in the text, and if they needed to refer to YHWH as the written name, they usually called it “HaShem” (The Name). Honoring this tradition, the Masoretes inserted the vowels for “Adonai” everywhere YHWH appeared, functioning as a sort of global “replace-all” to indicate what should be read aloud (qere) from the written text (kethiv).
How Accurate is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures? (illustrationstoencourage.wordpress.com)
Prior to the release of the New World Translation (NWT), Jehovah’s Witnesses generally used theKing James Version or the American Standard Version of the Bible. Early literature produced by the Witnesses quotes these versions and uses them for source documentation. Because of the fact these versions employed the use of the English language in its antiquated form, a need arose to have a modern translation that updated such dated vernacular.
+
Consider, it was not merely by chance that Jesus taught his followers to put God’s name first in their prayers. (John 6:9) That name was clearly of crucial importance to him, since he mentioned it repeatedly in his very own prayers. On one occasion when he was praying publicly to God, Jesus was heard to say, “Father, glorify your name!” And God himself answered, “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.” (John 12:28, the Jerusalem Bible.) This is one of the three recorded times that God himself spoke directly from the heavens to the earth. Clearly, an important issue.
Has anyone else noticed the profound disrespect (thevoiceofmary.wordpress.com)
Expressions such as G..d..n are commonly used in all, or most languages, everyday. This kind of abusive talk demeans Jehovah and his grand name. It should reflect on our lack of accurate knowledge; and a flagrant contempt for Jehovah and his magnificent name. Who among us would appreciate the name of a loved-one used in this insulting context? God has seen his name and reputation sullied over the centuries.Names designate and distinguish us from others. Our name identifies us as this specific individual, with these particular qualities. It is one of the most important ways a person is known and recognized. His name, Jehovah represents him. Jehovah is the name of the one true God. God’s name was chosen by him. For an individual to know God and all that his name means and represents, signifies more than a mere acquaintance with the word. (1Chron. 6:33) It actually means knowing the person—-his purposes, activities and qualities as revealed in his word.

When people use titles such as; God, Lord, Dios, or Theo instead of using his personal name, Jehovah becomes devoid of distinction and identity, as the rightful sovereign of the universe. They mistakenly believe these words are God’s name. God spelled with a capitol “G,” is defined as a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, originator and ruler of the universe. He is the principle object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions; also defined as a very handsome man and/or a powerful ruler or despot. Does anyone see the abject manner in which our loving Father is treated; the desecration of his holy name.
The Divine Name and Greek Translation (larryhurtado.wordpress.com)
In comments to my previous posting (about some recently published Oxyrhynchus papyri), the question was raised about how the divine name (YHWH; יהוה) was handled in earliest Greek translations of the Hebrew scriptures. In Septuagint manuscripts (dating from ca. 3rd century CE and later), “Kyrios” (Greek: “Lord”) is used rather frequently. But some have proposed that the earliest practice was fairly consistently to translate YHWH with “Kyrios” (κυριος), others that the Hebrew divine name was initially rendered phonetically as ΙΑΩ (“Iao”), and others that the divine name was originally retained in Hebrew characters. To my knowledge, the most recent discussion of the matter is the recent journal article by Martin Rösel, “The Reading and Translation of the Divine Name in the Masoretic Tradition and the Greek Pentateuch,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 31 (2007): 411-28.
What’s in a name? (quest4light.net)
Hidden in plain sight from the reader of the English translations of the Bible are several linguistic nuances that range from how the shaping of the letters are to the number of letters in a parshat to the different names used for the Almighty. You don’t even have to go very far – in the book of Genesis the following names are used – Elohim, YHVH, YHVH Elohim, El Shaddai, and Yah. Some attribute this to multiple authors whose works were compiled and redacted numerous times before the canon was sealed and others believe that the various names are in relation to the different attributes of God. The 2 most commonly used names in Jewish Scripture (aka Old Testament) are Elohim and YHVH. These names have different meanings and I will focus on these 2 names for now.
I AM…………………….The name of God and endless potential. (cancercuredmylife.wordpress.com)
I Am that I Am (אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, ʾehyeh ʾašer ʾehyeh [ʔehˈje ʔaˈʃer ʔehˈje]) is a common English translation (JPS among others) of the response God used in the Hebrew Bible whenMoses asked for his name (Exodus 3:14). It is one of the most famous verses in the Torah. Hayah means “existed” or “was” in Hebrew; “ehyeh” is the first person singular imperfect form and is usually translated in English Bibles as “I will be” (or “I shall be”), for example, at Exodus 3:12. Ehyeh asher ehyeh literally translates as “I Will Be What I Will Be”, with attendant theological and mystical implications in Jewish tradition. However, in most English Bibles, this phrase is rendered as I am that I am.”^[1]
How Factual is the Bible? (glimpsesofgeula.wordpress.com)
Shore’s book Coincidences in the Bible and in Biblical Hebrew offers dozens of incidents in which the Hebrew words in the Bible offer hidden information about the objects or people they represent, information which, in many cases, couldn’t have been known or measured until modern times.“This is not gematria,” Shore says. “Gematria, adopted by rabbis and Jewish Bible interpreters, suggests that if two Hebrew words share the same numerical value, there’s then a ‘secret’ that binds them together. By contrast, the Hebrew word, ‘heraion‘ (pregnancy) has the same numerical value as the duration of human pregnancy, 271 days.”
The Bible Simplified….. (jesusisms.wordpress.com)
1) So many pages 2) Those seemingly endless pages are sooooo thin. 3) It seems difficult to read 4) Seems difficult to understand. Etc Etc Etc….The thing is, while all of those and more may seem or even possibly be true….the Truth is, the more you Keep On reading it, Keep On seeking its information, the more the above intimidating distractions, which satan uses to discourage you with, will disappear and the information comes out like a flaming torch of light.
Names of God in Judaism: EMET excerpt selected by אלוה אל (powersthatbeat.wordpress.com)
The Hebrew letters are named Yod-Heh-Waw-Heh: יהוה; note that Hebrew is written from right to left, rather than left to right as in English. In English it is written as YHWH, YHVH, or JHVH depending on the transliteration convention that is used. The Tetragrammaton was written in contrasting Paleo-Hebrew characters in some of the oldest surviving square Aramaic Hebrew texts, and it is speculated that it was, even at that period, read as Adonai, “My Lord“, when encountered.According to Jewish tradition, in appearance, YHWH is the third person singular imperfect of the verb “to be”, meaning, therefore, “God is,” or “God will be” or, perhaps, “God lives”. This explanation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — “I am”.
Of Gods and Languages: On “When God Spoke Greek” (lareviewofbooks.org)
These days the Christian Bible is usually regarded as the Greek New Testament added to the Old Testament, which is a reordering of the Hebrew Bible. If we read the Bible in English, we do so in the assurance that the first part is soundly translated from the Hebrew and the second from the Greek. Catholics include some Jewish Apocrypha, those Scriptures without Hebrew originals (and several most likely composed in Greek anyway), while Protestants reject them.

	On to a baptismal ce… on Get Your Wonderful Disease-pro…
	Reden om kennis in u… on Fundamenten van het Geloof 13…
	What is expected of… on Lovers of God, seekers and lov…
	What is expected of… on Being in tune with God
	Wat wordt er van een… on Wettisch tegenover wet
	Wat wordt er van een… on Fundamenten van het Geloof: 7.…
	Intense conflict in… on A multi-front war between Isra…
	Wat betekent het om… on Kerkzijn in een ik-gerichte…
	What does it mean to… on Being Religious and Spiritual…
	What does it mean to… on Members of the ecclesia unitin…
	What does it mean to… on How do I know if I’m cal…
	What does it mean to… on The Pastor Theologian
	No necessity for fas… on 8 Reasons Christian Holidays S…
	How to find out that… on Lovers of God, seekers and lov…
	How to find out that… on Patriarch Abraham, Muslims, Ch…

Stepping Toes

Things said on this site possibly can upset someone

Tag Archives: 1° Century

Were Gnostics the original Christians?

Why think that (1) … Jesus existed?

Additional reading:

Marriage of Jesus 5 Papyrus fragment in Egyptian Coptic

Find also:

In Dutch:

Marriage of Jesus 4 Place of the woman

Lord in place of the divine name

Substitutions Kyrios (Lord) and Theos (God)

The Tetragrammaton rendered into a name

To impede spreading the name of God

Blinding the world

Jesus making the Name of his Father known

Continuation of the use of God’s Name

Calling onto lords

Satan sowing apostasy by no proper name

Replacing the Name

Learn to know and use God His Name

Of interest:

From other websites:

Related articles

Rate this:

Share this:

Additional reading:

Related articles

Rate this:

Share this:

Find also:

In Dutch:

Related articles

Rate this:

Share this:

Related articles

Rate this:

Share this:

Substitutions Kyrios (Lord) and Theos (God)

The Tetragrammaton rendered into a name

To impede spreading the name of God

Blinding the world

Jesus making the Name of his Father known

Continuation of the use of God’s Name

Calling onto lords

Satan sowing apostasy by no proper name

Replacing the Name

Learn to know and use God His Name

Of interest:

From other websites:

Related articles

Rate this:

Share this: