Mummy mask may reveal oldest known gospel of Mark.

[Cool Cat]

There are a few news sources publishing this so I thought it to be okay to post here:-

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/01/22/mummy-mask-papyrus-may-reveal-oldest-known-gospel/

Look forward to it being published!

[Cool Cat]

Here is a more skeptical news item on it:-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/20/biblical-scholar-says-hes-found-the-oldest-known-gospel-inside-a-mummy-mask/

.........Evan’s findings have neither been published nor subjected to the rigors of peer review. But if authentic, the find has the potential to alter the perspective with which scholars view the Gospel of Mark and perhaps bring the life and times of Jesus into clearer focus. Other scholars, who appear to be working with Evans, have also thrown their weight behind the discovery.

But much of the find is still murky. The lead scholars say they have signed a nondisclosure agreement to maintain their silence on the Gospel until their findings are published.

Still, thanks in large part to Live Science, more details of the discovery have begun to seep out. Stressing that he couldn’t elaborate too much due to the nondisclosure agreement, Evans said they were able to date the fragment through three methods: carbon dating, handwriting analysis, and studying the other documents found in the same mummy mask.

There’s still room for skepticism. Dating ancient manuscripts is a notoriously spotty business, and the margin of error can yawn across decades. And especially in the case of Mark, decades could mean the difference between heralding the oldest known Gospel, and just another ancient Biblical text. “As we have seen many, many times before, artifacts and manuscripts that surface with fantastic claims tend to much less than they are claimed to be,” wrote John Byron of the Ashland Theological Seminary.

[Stavro]

Interesting find, if true, but the CNN article casts some serious doubts on the claims.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/living/gospel-mummy-mask/index.html

 

"These questions are not necessarily challenges to the authenticity of the text. They are, rather, a recognition that, until the scholarly world has been granted access to this papyrus, the public statements made about it are no more revelatory than if we announced that we had found Moses' private copy of Genesis in a hummus container, and we'll show it to you later."

 

Why run to the media just to repeatedly push back the publication (originally 2012, now 2017) while not allowing any accredited researchers to speak on the subject? This sounds like building up hype for an eventual sale, not a valid attempt to add to the scientific community.

[Trina]

Oh wow! I love this type of thing if it's real. I am really looking forward to knowing what it says. Thanks for sharing!

[Dages]

Interesting find, if true, but the CNN article casts some serious doubts on the claims.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/living/gospel-mummy-mask/index.html

 

"These questions are not necessarily challenges to the authenticity of the text. They are, rather, a recognition that, until the scholarly world has been granted access to this papyrus, the public statements made about it are no more revelatory than if we announced that we had found Moses' private copy of Genesis in a hummus container, and we'll show it to you later."

 

Why run to the media just to repeatedly push back the publication (originally 2012, now 2017) while not allowing any accredited researchers to speak on the subject? This sounds like building up hype for an eventual sale, not a valid attempt to add to the scientific community.

 

Exactly, that's a shame... what a waste of time.

[Qapla]

Oh wow! I love this type of thing if it's real. I am really looking forward to knowing what it says. Thanks for sharing!

 

If the "truth" of this find will not be available till 2017, I will not look forward to it at all .... I would prefer the New System, instead!

[Trina]

I'm with you brother John!

[Dustparticle]

It does not matter what year it comes out. I wonder if God's name is in it? Unless it was taken out. The book of Mathew was written in 41 C.E. and Mark was written around 20 years after. If I'm right, George Howard mentions that Shem Tob the book of Mathew had Gods name in a form in which that indicate that Shem Tob had some older rightings of the book of Mathew and indicated that God's name was in it.

 

 So, no matter what the book of Mark brings out, it is proven otherwise that God's name should be in the Greek Scriptures.

[GStorrs46]

   "Mose's private copy of Genesis in a hummus container ? " Now there's a little bit of hyperbole we rarely see. But one has

to admit,... part of an ancient papyrus of Mark in  a mummy mask ? That is a real case of taking it with you when you go ! I'll

wait to see if the FDS later has any comments on it. As it is, in one of the most recent magazines ( I don't remember off the

top of my head which one ), they do have a nice article on the John Ryland's Fragment, which at present is the earliest manu-

script we have of the Christian Greek Scriptures ( circa 125 C.E. ).

 

                                                                                                                                                                         GStorrs46

[ChocoBro]

Call me a conspiracy nut, but I've become very wary of anything they say archaeologists have found. I do not believe arcaheology to be fool-proof or hoax-proof. However, it is definitely a powerful tool to influence people's opinions.