Mon Mar 25 07:55:20 1996

From majordom  Mon Mar 25 07:55:20 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA20055; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 07:55:20 +0500
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 07:55:33 -0400
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: nichael@sover.net (Nichael Lynn Cramer)
Subject: Re: "Magdalen Manuscript"?
Cc: dwashbur@nyx.net
Content-Length: 1434
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

David Washburn wrote:
> ...[re: Magdalen Manuscript/p64]...

Hi Dave

Others have pointed to recent discussions on this topic that appeared on
this list (and on IOUDAIOS).  Two other, easily accessible, in-print
discussion of this material are:

Graham Stanton, "A Gospel Among the Scrolls?", Bible Review, Dec 1995.

Graham Stanton, _Gospel Truths?: New Light on Jesus and the Gospels_
(Trinity Press, 1995).

(The BR article (primarily selections from the book) focuses on p64 and the
proposal, put forth by Jose O'Callaghan that certain fragments discovered
at Qumran contained portions of the NT.  The book is a "popular" survey of
the current state of contemporary NT scholarship.  The book covers a very
wide range of topics and, while there are several places where I wished
that the book had contained a bit more detail, it is a very nice overview
of the material.  A good book, rich in bibliographic detail, for those of
us who view these things from the sidelines or for a friend who wonders
what is actually going on in the field.)

As James Adair pointed out, Thiede's claims have virtually no support among
NT scholars.  This article and book do a very nice job of explaining why
this is so.


Nichael                       |   "Just because it didn't happen         |
nichael@sover.net             |            don't mean it ain't true."    |
http://www.sover.net/~nichael | -Yogi Berra [paraphrasing Mircea Eliade] |

Back