Comments about ‘Hamblin & Peterson: Does papyrus prove Jesus was married?’

If 350 years AD is too long after Jesus' life to prove that something is factual, then what does that say about the Nicene Creed, which occurred around the same time.

I doubt that Hamblin and Peterson are going to be defending the Nicene Creed any time soon.

Dr. Petersen the real impact would be on "traditional Christianity's" definition of the nature of God, and the reality of a physical resurrection. Unfortunately, you are correct the little piece of 4th century papyrus is insufficient.

Jesus talks about those who are radically committed to serving the kingdom of God—those who are "eunuchs" for the kingdom of God (Mt 19:12). Since Jesus saw the kingdom as embodied in his ministry and his actions, it makes the most sense to see Jesus himself as the quintessential "eunuch for the sake of the kingdom."

Paul discusses the relationship between husbands and wives in 1 Corinthians 7, being able to cite the example of a married Jesus would have come in handy. Likewise, it would have been useful to point to Jesus’ wife when Paul argues that he and his collaborators have the right to bring a Christian sister along on their missionary trips to help with temporalities. Paul certainly drew on the example of the other apostles who brought their wives to help (1 Cor 9:5). Surely if Jesus had been married his example would have trumped that of Peter.

Well we certainly know that the papyrus wasn't used to translate the Book of Abraham don't we?

"A married Jesus, however, would call into serious question any tendency to denigrate or repudiate the material world."

The ascetic Jesus of popular belief also cuts against the grain of the Jesus who was accused of being a wine-bibber who kept company with sinners. Not that I'm arguing that Jesus was married, but the ascetic tradition does get in the way of seeing him on a more human level.

Herby,

"If 350 years AD is too long after Jesus' life to prove that something is factual, then what does that say about the Nicene Creed, which occurred around the same time."

The Nicene Creed says more about early fourth centure Christianity than about the times of Jesus and Paul.

"A married Jesus, however, would call into serious question any tendency to denigrate or repudiate the material world — a world that, after all, the God of the Genesis creation story repeatedly pronounced "good."

Not really. LDS do not denigrate the God of creation when he made them incapable of reproducing before the Fall. I would not call this "good".

"Such an affirmation of femininity, and, frankly, of biological reality, would starkly contradict historical tendencies in traditional Christianity to disparage the physical body."

The author fails to point out how traditional Christianity disparages the physical body.