British scientist denied that Jesus was married

0 4

Secrets of the past: Scientist denied that Jesus was married. British scientist Francis Watson has denied the authenticity of a papyrus allegedly containing new details of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. According to the information available, the analysis of text, University of Durham /University of Durham/ came to the conclusion that «virtually certain» that caused a wide debate in academic and public circles, the fragment is not genuine. As it turned out, it marked the influence of the books printed much later.

Британский ученый опровергли, что Иисус был женат


Previously, the scientific world was skeptical about the research of Harvard University Professor /Harvard University/ Karen king, who claimed to have discovered new information about the earthly life of Jesus Christ, including his marriage to Mary Magdalene. Based on the study consisting of eight rows of small papyrus fragment Dating from the fourth century, she came to the conclusion that Christ is not only really existed, but supposedly had a family.

As noted, the text on drevnerusskom language was found in still unclear circumstances. King reported that he came to her in 2010, when Harvard University asked the collector with a request to translate the text. According to him, he acquired the papyrus in 1997 in Germany, where the fragment came in the early 80-ies of the last century. Where was the papyrus before that is unknown.

Watson insists that this text is fake. In his opinion, it is a compilation of fragments of the true gospel of Thomas in Coptic, which was re-designed. In the Internet report, the Briton argues that the papyrus may be ancient and belong to the IV century, but the words that it is possible to discern, reflect the characteristics of modern printed books.

«I would be very surprised if it were not a modern forgery, although it is possible that he /the text was written in a similar way in the fourth century,» said Watson. He did not criticize the king directly. However, he noted characteristics that indicate that the originator was not the bearer of the Coptic language. This is a «polite expression» means that the text is still modern, said the commentators.

In turn the Elin Suciu from the German Humboldt University /Humboldt Universitat also believes that «we are talking about fake». «The text doesn’t look authentic when compared with the Coptic manuscripts of the IV century,» he said, according to the materials .

Response from the king in this regard is not followed.

Total 0 Votes

You might also like