Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

wka writes "Scientists at Oxford University have made a major breakthrough in their study of a large collection of Greek and Roman writings. Many of the documents known as the 'Oxyrhynchus Papyri' (found at 'ancient rubbish dump in central Egypt') are 'meaningless to the naked eye - decayed, worm-eaten and blackened by the passage of time.' Using an infrared technique originally developed for use with satellite imaging, scientists are able to view the original writing, which 'could lead to a 20 per cent increase in the number of great Greek and Roman works in existence'. Thus far, works by Sophocles, Lucian, Euripides, Hesiod and others have been (re-)discovered. Additionally, scientists think they 'are likely to find lost Christian gospels.' (via The Light of Reason)"

Comments

Re:God willing...

[Fished]

It's already been written: Matthew 5-7. You might want to take a read sometime.

Re:The significance of "new" gospels...

[Anonymous Coward]

Early gospels have virtually no historical value? What the hell? That's like claiming that the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence are of little historical value.

I'm guessing you're referring to 'historical' in the sense of the gospels recording historical events. What about the rest of the world? People used the rhetoric and ideas of Christianity to address problems outside the usual scope of the religion, or tried to mold the religion to fit personal or political objectives. These lost gospels tell us how people use religion, whether or not the religion has any sort of cosmic truth to it.

And, as scholars are the people who write the history books, they are the ones who determin what has historical value.

Your post reminds me of the religion students who used to take Greek with me at university. "Why are we reading Attic Greek?" they would ask, "We only need Koine to read the Bible!" There's far more to the ancient world than the 50-something (depending on denomination) books of the Bible, and even the Bible doesn't represent a self-contained system of information.

Re:twenty + comments

[ScentCone]

mostly just bashes on Christians

Well, you can imagine why people in the sciences might be a little snarky on this subject. A lot of the history of Christianity revolves around bashing people who try to point out the actual reality of the universe. Those people (scientists) do get a little tired of the unrelenting "seek to tear down" (to use your phrase) attitude from the religious side of the spectrum. So, must of the comments in that tone about this article are made in the context of a more-secular-than-usual audience, and presume a certain world-weariness on this subject.

You don't find this interesting ????

[anat0010]

You don't see historical value here ? How has the 2nd century view of Christ changed from the modern interpretation ?
Your example suggests that only 150 years after his death Christ was viewed as a super-human avenging spirit. 2000 years later we view him as a meek and mild self-sacrificing man. Yet the text of the gospels remains them same.
If you fail to see any interest here, I suspect you are more interested in reiterating the rhetoric of your teachers rather than studying early Christianity and interpreting the scriptures in the context of the epoch in which they were written and the church founded.

Nonsense

[Fished]

Critical scholarship (i.e. scholarship that has no a priori commitment to the historical reliability of the gospels) dates the gospels more or less as follows:

Mark - 68-75
Matthew - 80
Luke - 80-85
John - 90

Then, consider that most scholars date Thomas in its present form no earlier than 145. Any "new" gospel is likely to be much later. Further, there is good evidence to suggest that the Canonical four existed in proto-forms much earlier, with a proto-Mark dating back to the 40's.

Also, it doesn't help your case that you point to a couple of "Jesus Myth" sites to bolster your case. You realize that these people are considered to be a joke in the world of New Testament scholarship, don't you? The "anti-Jesus" advocates are far worse than the "pro-Jesus" advocates, so far as distorting history goes. I would suggest you read a good, standard intro to new testament, such as Raymond Brown's, before you continue to spout this bilge.

Re:Potentially Interesting Finds, and a correction

[STrinity]

For a very interesting read, and a very thought provoking read, try:

Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

It really shows how much the Roman Catholic church has lied, cheated and killed to remain in power.

Too bad it's a work of fiction.

Look, I'm a hard-core atheist who believes organized religion is the biggest scam ever created, but that doesn't mean I have to accept every crazy depredation laid against a church. HBHG belongs in the same category with books about J. Edgar Hoover being on the Grassy Knoll, and Elvis living in Peoria under an alias created for him by the Federal Witness Protection Program.

And while we're at it, the Catholics didn't burn witches in the dark ages; it was a heresy to even believe in them until the High Middle Ages, and it was the Protestants who made witch hunting an organized sport.