Jude2 Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 "Researchers say the new scrap of spiritual papyrus is a portion of the the Gospel of Mark, the second chapter of the New Testament. The gospel scroll fragment dates to approximately 90 AD. Scientists were able to zero in on the paper's age by analyzing handwriting, comparing it to the other texts found in the mask, and (most convincingly) via carbon dating."Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/#ixzz3PWtNLYBU http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/ They said there are other Christian writing also, do we know what they say yet? 1
mfbukowski Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 "Researchers say the new scrap of spiritual papyrus is a portion of the the Gospel of Mark, the second chapter of the New Testament. The gospel scroll fragment dates to approximately 90 AD. Scientists were able to zero in on the paper's age by analyzing handwriting, comparing it to the other texts found in the mask, and (most convincingly) via carbon dating."Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/#ixzz3PWtNLYBU http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/ They said there are other Christian writing also, do we know what they say yet? They say "Read the Book of Mormon". 3
danielwoods Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 Evans said that the research team will publish the first volume of texts obtained through the mummy masks and cartonnage later this year. It will include the gospel fragment that the researchers believe dates back to the first century. http://www.livescience.com/49489-oldest-known-gospel-mummy-mask.html
rameumptom Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 On Bart Ehrman's blog today, they noted that it may be as early as 80 AD. This is the first 1st century fragment from Mark ever found. There are hundreds of Egyptian sarcophagus masks, many in very poor condition. The program is to deconstruct the ones in bad shape (not museum quality), so as to get what they can from the papyri used in the masks. The Mark fragment is not very large, but they do not say how large it is. It was to be published later this year, but now sounds like they are holding off a couple years to add a few more fragments from the NT into the book.
JLHPROF Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 They said there are other Christian writing also, do we know what they say yet? Does it matter? If they were left out of the canonized Bible they aren't God's word according to any traditional Christian group. They would have to be rejected along with any other scripture that didn't make the cut.
halconero Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Does it matter? If they were left out of the canonized Bible they aren't God's word according to any traditional Christian group. They would have to be rejected along with any other scripture that didn't make the cut. But highly important for both scholarship and heck...even us as Mormons. I would put the other Early Christian Writings in the same category as the Apocrypha in Doctrine and Covenants, that there is much truth, much revelation, but it has to be carefully read with the Spirit. 1
Coreyb Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 But highly important for both scholarship and heck...even us as Mormons. I would put the other Early Christian Writings in the same category as the Apocrypha in Doctrine and Covenants, that there is much truth, much revelation, but it has to be carefully read with the Spirit.That verse always makes me wonder, shouldn't we treat all scriptures that way?
Robert F. Smith Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Even before this amazing discovery, we already had thousands of scraps of papyrus along with various early codices of the Bible, and of the various books therein. We build the critical texts of the Bible from such fragments, whether Hebrew, Greek, or other ancient language, and that is what constitutes our understanding of the Canon of Scripture. Scholars have been working on such critical texts now for centuries, and these new discoveries will simply add to the total number of fragments and variant readings of Scripture which help us get back to the earliest and best readings. We have done the same with the manuscripts of the Book of Mormon. This also applies to a full range of other ancient literature, from the epic poetry of Homer to ancient Egyptian texts going back thousands of years before Christianity. Who knows what we will find? But there will be surprises galore coming from what everybody thought was just paper mache in very poor condition. What a treasure trove from such an unlikely source!! 2
Popular Post Brian 2.0 Posted January 23, 2015 Popular Post Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) They released a picture of their work in progress. Looks like they've put some good minds on it. Edited January 23, 2015 by Brian 2.0 5
Stargazer Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 That verse always makes me wonder, shouldn't we treat all scriptures that way? Of course!
Calm Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Cautions: http://fornspollfira.blogspot.com/2015/01/on-reports-of-new-gospel-of-mark.html There are reports (here, here, here, here, here, here, and here) about a new fragment of the Gospel of Mark dated to AD 90. Sifting through the initial reports, I have a few initial reactions.The dating to AD 90 is far too precise for paleography. Business hands are found on legal documents with precise dates and they are only datable to the nearest half century. Literary hands are harder to date and any date given that is more precise than the nearest century should be viewed with skepticism. The papyrus was found with others in cartonnage. This means that we should expect the fragment to be small. I would not expect that it will have much in the way of textual variants because the size of the piece will probably preclude it from having a lot of text. On the other hand, if it is really early, I would expect the text not to match the standard text very closely. The style of the cartonnage should provide us with another dating criterion. Unfortunately, the photographs of mummy masks do not seem to be of the mask from which the papyrus was taken. Papyrologists and archaeologists have different views of the objects that contain writing, and different views on issues associated with those objects. One of these issues is the ethical issue of extracting papyrus from cartonnage. Basically, imagine making a paper-mache object out of old newspapers. Hundreds of years later historians and art-historians will have different views about whether or not to destroy the paper-mache object to look at the historical newspapers. The difference in view comes from which object the scholar thinks is important. If you think the texts are more important, you will favor extracting them. If you think the crafted object is more important then you will favor not extracting the texts. There are advantages and disadvantages to both positions and what to do with an archaeological object sometimes involves certain trade-offs. Before they get on their high-horse, archaeologists should remember that archaeology involves systematic destruction. Recently a couple of very good papyrologists assigned new dates to most of the New Testament papyri. Many of them dated much later than New Testament scholars have dated them. The theological dating of papyri tends to assign them much earlier than they should be. This looks like a case of theological dating. Craig Evans is a good and insightful New Testament scholar but he is not a papyrologist. I would be somewhat surprised if the conditions existed in Egypt in the first century for a copy of the New Testament from that time period to be preserved. To make an argument for the existence of such a text also implies an argument for the state of Christianity in Egypt. We will have to wait for the publication to appear before we can comment on more than probabilities. The publication is supposed to come out from Brill, but I cannot locate anything that looks like it on their list of forthcoming publications.
Calm Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Not going to touch that formatting, could be hours trying to clean it up, please go to the original site if that annoys you.
Uncle Dale Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) "Researchers say the new scrap of spiritual papyrus is a portion of the the Gospel of Mark, the second chapter of the New Testament. The gospel scroll fragment dates to approximately 90 AD. Scientists were able to zero in on the paper's age by analyzing handwriting, comparing it to the other texts found in the mask, and (most convincingly) via carbon dating."Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/#ixzz3PWtNLYBU http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/ They said there are other Christian writing also, do we know what they say yet? The most interesting part of this set of discoveries lies in the CONTEXTof the text -- not the literary context, but the physical context in Egypt. The various scraps of discarded papyrus assembled to make Roman-erapapier-mache in Egypt could not have come from a time before the initialwriting of the fragments' contents -- nor from very much later than thelatest scrap of papyrus in the mix. An analog would be your finding a trove of gold coins in you backyard.If the latest coin in the bunch was minted in 1846, you can bet that thetreasure was buried prior to the California Gold Rush and the greatoutpouring of U. S. "eagles" during the 1850s. If the earliest mint-markwas 1840, you can bet that the coins were not buried in 1839 or before. The fragments of classical writings disentangled from a Roman-eramummy mask present a more complex case, than does a coin trove,but the basic principle remains the same. If the mix of fragmentscontains some authentic line, unique to Philo, then the papier-machewas not mixed up prior to his birth. If carbon dating averages outat 90 C.E., then the fragments were assembled after Philo's death. A more precise dating of this sort of textual mixture may be difficult,however. Analysis based upon writing styles may be off by decades(or even centuries for traditional scriptural works). And, even if theparticular papyrus fragment is carbon-dated at c. 90 C.E., the inkof its words may have been applied in 100 C.E. or even 200 C.E. Finally, discovery of a few lines paralleling the phraseology of Markmay not be adequate evidence for attributing the text to Mark itself.The words may have come from a pre-Mark text, used in compilingthe Gospel; or they may be an example of rare coincidence; or theymay be the result of some writer quoting from the authentic Mark,before that Gospel was ever "published" -- as an example: from aprivately circulated early Christian letter, which quoted from a"pre-publication" oral version of the Markan passage(s). Interesting stuff -- no doubt. But, if a guy named Chandler passes through your town, sellingEgyptian mummies accompanied by texts "in the hand of Abraham,"be wary... very wary. UD Edited January 24, 2015 by Uncle Dale 1
Teancum Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 "Researchers say the new scrap of spiritual papyrus is a portion of the the Gospel of Mark, the second chapter of the New Testament. The gospel scroll fragment dates to approximately 90 AD. Scientists were able to zero in on the paper's age by analyzing handwriting, comparing it to the other texts found in the mask, and (most convincingly) via carbon dating."Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/#ixzz3PWtNLYBU http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/21/Oldest-known-gospel-retrieved-from-mummy-mask-researchers-claim/6771421859193/ They said there are other Christian writing also, do we know what they say yet? Cool!
Recommended Posts