tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post4459244585355722565..comments2024-03-21T14:59:20.729-04:00Comments on NT Blog: Jacobovici and Wilson's "Lost Gospel"Mark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-33772925021602114682013-10-17T09:12:48.854-04:002013-10-17T09:12:48.854-04:00Richard Bauckham has sent a very helpful comment o...Richard Bauckham has sent a very helpful comment on this post, which is too long to post in this comments thread and deserves a separate post of its own, so I will promote it and post it above.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-8077127895084533732013-10-16T22:06:02.960-04:002013-10-16T22:06:02.960-04:00Many thanks for these interesting comments. To be ...Many thanks for these interesting comments. To be fair to them, Jens, it's not press release so much as book blurbs & Barrie Wilson's website that I am drawing attention to here. So at this point, they are being guarded about their discovery / theory. My guess is that in fullness of time, they will reveal more. I happened to stumble upon it because of my interest in and googling of "lost gospels".<br /><br />I have to admit that I would be a bit disappointed if this turns out simply to be a kind of allegorical reading of the Syriac text of Joseph and Aseneth found in Zacharias Rhetor (as anon. and Dan suggest above). Joseph and Aseneth is one of my favourite texts and as some will know, I have had a website up on it since 1999, and I've spent lots of time with it over the years. Although I would approach any new claims with an open mind, as I mentioned above, I think it would be extraordinarily difficult to justify a reading according to which it was composed as an allegory of Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene. I've read the Moses of Ingila correspondence too and although it describes the text as allegory (θεωρία), it certainly does not suggest an allegory of Jesus and Mary.<br /><br />But could they really be referring to this text? Since it's neither "lost" nor a "gospel", I think the description would be seriously off base. And I am not sure where they would get the material about Tiberius and Sejanus, let alone Jesus' two children, so it may be that they have a different text in mind. <br /><br />However, I must admit that there are indeed uncanny resemblances between Joseph and Aseneth and the hints they provide about their text -- it is 29 chapters long, the manuscript of Zacharias Rhetor is found in the British Museum (now the British library), it is in Syriac and it dates from the sixth century (well, they appear to claim the fifth). It is certainly not first century, but it may be that the blurb there confuses the date of the work (Joseph and Aseneth may well be first century) with the date of this Syriac textual witness. Further, the "Gentile priestess" comment could make sense if they are planning to associate Aseneth with Mary Magdalene.<br /><br />Perhaps the most obvious link between the book's pre-publicity and Joseph and Aseneth, though, is the note about "bride of God", since this is the way that Aseneth is described in IV.2.<br /><br />I hope, however, that this identification is incorrect and that these links are purely coincidental, since Joseph and Aseneth is not in any sense a "lost gospel", and the Syriac text is explicitly secondary to the Greek text, which is primary (as confirmed by Moses of Ingila).Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1059905094047223852013-10-16T09:08:19.538-04:002013-10-16T09:08:19.538-04:00I am just trying to imagine the expression on your...I am just trying to imagine the expression on your face as you write 'I will approach this with an open mind.' Ian Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08440727613424469331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-90353505997321415782013-10-15T17:22:57.225-04:002013-10-15T17:22:57.225-04:00This is blogging at its best: exposing the nonsens...This is blogging at its best: exposing the nonsense even before it appears.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10236291721790244010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-85791152706108417572013-10-15T06:32:28.548-04:002013-10-15T06:32:28.548-04:00The Syriac ms in question is BL Add 17202 which, a...The Syriac ms in question is BL Add 17202 which, as another contributor has pointed out, contains the ecclesiastical history of Zecharias Rhetor. That's not quite accurate - in fact it contains a Syriac translation/epitome of that history written in 569 by a monk. The compilation which the monk produced also included various rather random material in the first two books which were not from Zechariah himself. One of these was a Syriac translation of the History of Joseph and Asenath, which is a reasonably well known Greek apocryphon. This is (I assume) the text which they have 'decoded' to refer to Jesus and Mary. The Syriac translation itself was made by a known individual from the middle of the 6th century and has no sigificance for the reconstruction of the original Greek which is well enough known (and edited) from Greek mss. <br />What perhaps made it look 'mysterious' to these authors was the fact that whenever the History has been translated (and there are 2 English versions of it) this material has been omitted, simply because the editors saw little point in reprinting something that was easily available elsewhere and really had nothing to do with the rest of the church history with which they were interested.<br />I suppose the hypothesis they will attempt to justify is that some people (?Syrians ?Greeks) read the J&A story as an allegory of Jesus and Mary and meant it to be understood that way. I expect it will be a difficult hypothesis to demonstrate to anyone other than Discovery Channel viewers...Dan Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06790176598442902819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-16958409175290538852013-10-14T09:47:26.461-04:002013-10-14T09:47:26.461-04:00I'm intrigued, but suspicious, of the language...I'm intrigued, but suspicious, of the language that purports to "decode the basic symbolism" of a text. Perhaps it will be compelling, but it seems to suggest something of an allegorical interpretation. Todd Brewerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00772180067629494117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1986045797454349252013-10-14T08:02:51.901-04:002013-10-14T08:02:51.901-04:00Mark,
This is the page to which the above comment...Mark,<br /><br />This is the page to which the above commenter referred:<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zacharias_Rhetor&diff=next&oldid=436547193<br /><br />(This is from the edit history of Zacharias Rhetor.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01139547360019959563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45510029187267499772013-10-14T02:44:07.785-04:002013-10-14T02:44:07.785-04:00Yes, there it is in my email files from 2012. The ...Yes, there it is in my email files from 2012. The text they decoded is Zacharias Rhetor's Ecclesiastical History. The line "Additionally, Simcha Jacobovici & Barrie Wilson have an upcoming partial translation of Historia Miscellanea in their forthcoming book, The Lost Gospel, which they claim is a coded text relating to the marriage of Jesus of Nazareth" used to be on wikipedia's page about Zacharias - it no longer is, but the Jacobovici-Wilson's book is still listed in the bibliography.<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04791591604392626851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-53102146194063035182013-10-14T02:21:48.401-04:002013-10-14T02:21:48.401-04:00The term "decode" is a giveaway for Thie...The term "decode" is a giveaway for Thiering's "pesher" style of documentary analysis.<br /><br />I seem to remember looking this up a few years ago, and finding a passage from the supposed lost gospel, which said nothing like what the writers claimed it did, until it is "decoded".Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04791591604392626851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45549724971297604792013-10-13T16:30:01.826-04:002013-10-13T16:30:01.826-04:00If the book is as badly written as the blurb, it w...If the book is as badly written as the blurb, it will truly be a sight to behold.Keen Readerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171491573514489497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-11192335873263958352013-10-13T16:16:54.931-04:002013-10-13T16:16:54.931-04:00Often we hear concerned, environmentally aware Ame...Often we hear concerned, environmentally aware American citizens say that they don't want pipelines constructed to bring nasty, noxious substances into their country from Canada.<br /><br />So just say no to Jacobovici and Wilson's financially lucrative conduit of unadulterated sh*te!Keen Readerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171491573514489497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-41629175505496409982013-10-13T16:05:59.380-04:002013-10-13T16:05:59.380-04:00As the evenings darken and the Brits hole up for t...As the evenings darken and the Brits hole up for thew Winter, this will be more exciting than Downton Abbey!Your new nickname around these parts is Tenacious G !!<br />juniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02507008277448098176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-5698184808618213152013-10-13T15:53:12.927-04:002013-10-13T15:53:12.927-04:00"I will approach the claims made with an open..."I will approach the claims made with an open mind."<br /><br />You're a better man than I, Charlie Brown.<br /><br />I hate science by press release.<br /><br />Whatever happened to that 'conclusive' 1st century fragment of GMark that some apologist tried to bamboozle Bart Ehrman with last year?Jens Knudsen (Sili)https://www.blogger.com/profile/14078875730565068352noreply@blogger.com