Papyrus Egerton 2

Intro From Bernard.

"The following translation is based on the Greek text printed in Kurt Ehrland's article "Papyrus Egerton 2: "'Missing Link' zwischen synoptischer und johanneischer tradition" found in New Testament Studies 42.1; the text is reprinted from A. de Santos Otero's Los Evangelios Apocrifos. Two different line numbers are printed because a new numbering system was developed after the identification of Papyrus Köln 255. The first line numbers use the most recent system; the original line numbers are printed second, when applicable."

LINK

[here the healing of the lepper is presented almost word for word, and other passages from the canonicals with only slight veriations in the wording]

quote:
Then Jesus said to the lawyers, "Punish everyone that behaves unjustly and is lawless, but do not punish me . . . how he does what he does? Turning to the leaders of the people, he said this word: "Search the scriptures in which you think you have life. These are a testimony to me. Do not think that I came to accuse you to my father. The one accusing you is Moses, in whom you have hoped." Then they said, "We know that God spoke through Moses, but you, we don't know where you've come from."In reply, Jesus said to them, "Now you are being accused for your unbelief through the things that he bore witness to. For if you believed Moses, you would believe in me. For he wrote to your fathers about me. . ." They plotted in the crowd to take up stones together and try to stone him. And the rulers laid their hands on him that they might seize him and hand him over to the crowd, but they were unable to seize him because the hour of his betrayal had not yet come. But the Lord went out right through the middle of them and withdrew.

Now a leper came to him and said, "Teacher Jesus, when I was traveling with lepers and eating with them in the inn, I also became leprous myself. But if you wish, I will be made clean." So the Lord said to him, "I do wish. Be made clean." And immediately the leprosy departed from him.

[the bit about traveling with lepers and eating in an inn is an addition not in the canonicals. This indicates that there was another older text upon which the canonical version was based--see Koester]

Then Jesus said to him, "When you go, show yourself to the priest and offer the cleansing sacrifice commanded by Moses and sin no more. . ." After coming to him, they exactingly tested him, saying, "Teacher Jesus, we know that you have come from God. For the things you do bear greater witness than all the prophets. Tell us then, when it is possible to pay the rulers the things that belong to them, should we pay them or not?" But Jesus knew their plan and warned them sternly and said to them, "Why do you call me teacher with your mouths, since you are not hearing what I am saying? Well did Isaiah prophesy about you when he said, "This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far distant from me. In vain, they worship me . . . command[ments . . .
. . . being in a shut-in place . . .has been subordinated uncertainly . . . its unweighted weight . . . But although they were at a loss as to his bizarre question, Jesus, while he was wandering, stood on the lip of the Jordan river, and stretching out his right hand . . . and he sowed on the river, and at that time . . . water and then . . . and . . . before them, he brought forth fruit . . . much . . . to . . .

This next one is a facinating little fragment. I don't think anyone knows what it really goes to, it's a small bit from some "lost Gospel" that seems very much like the canonicals.

The Fayyum Fragment
The following translation is based on the Greek text printed in Jack Finegan's Hidden Records of the Life of Jesus.

quote:
As he led them out, he said, "You will all fall away tonight according to the scripture: 'I will strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered.'"Then Peter said, "Even if everyone else denies you, I won't." Jesus said, "Before the cock crows twice, you will deny me three times today."

[that's a perfect agreement with the canonicals but different enough that shcolars don't say it's a fragment of Mark or Matthew but a lost Gospel]


Epistle of the Apostles

[from the same Website as above, Bernard. I've discussed this; this passag indicates remarkable agreement with several canonical pericopes but is not the same]

quote:
5 Thereafter was there a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and they bade him with his mother and his brethren, and he changed water into wine. He raised the dead, he caused the lame to walk: him whose hand was withered he caused to stretch it out, and the woman which had suffered an issue of blood twelve years touched the hem of his garment and was healed in the same hour. And when we marvelled at the miracle which was done, he said: Who touched me? Then said we: Lord, the press of men hath touched thee. But he answered and said unto us: I perceive that a virtue is gone out of me. Straightway that woman came before him, and answered and said unto him: Lord, I touched thee. And he answered and said unto her: Go, thy faith hath made thee whole. Thereafter he made the deaf to hear and the blind to see; out of them that were possessed he cast out the unclean spirits, and cleansed the lepers. The spirit which dwelt in a man, whereof the name was Legion, cried out against Jesus, saying: Before the time of our destruction is come, thou art come to drive us out. But the Lord Jesus rebuked him, saying: Go out of this man and do him no hurt. And he entered into the swine and drowned them in the water and they were choked.Thereafter he did walk upon the sea, and the winds blew, and he cried out against them (rebuked them), and the waves of the sea were made calm. And when we his disciples had no money, we asked him: What shall we do because of the tax-gatherer? And he answered and told us: Let one of you cast an hook into the deep, and take out a fish, and he shall find therein a penny: that give unto the tax-gatherer for me and you. And thereafter when we had no bread, but only five loaves and two fishes, he commanded the people to sit them down, and the number of them was five thousand, besides children and women. We did set pieces of bread before them, and they ate and were filled, and there remained over, and we filled twelve baskets full of the fragments, asking one another and saying: What mean these five loaves? They are the symbol of our faith in the Lord of the Christians (in the great christendom), even in the Father, the Lord Almighty, and in Jesus Christ our redeemer, in the Holy Ghost the comforter, in the holy church, and in the remission of sins.

This is just a small sample. It would be a monumental task to coordinate all the paraells and agreements in all the "other books." It's not just those one might call Gospels, but Acts, and epistles and other fragments. In all the literature there is no other story. There are differences, different sayings, and as we go fruther in time the Gnostic stuff becomes more esoteric an dabstract and less and less like the canonicls. But none of them ever offer another version or deny the 11 basic points I made above. None places Jesus death in another city, or by another method, or denies the empty tomb or any of that. they all include MM and the major Apostles. Why is this when there are two versions of Herculaes life, 14 of Tamuz, and several others of every major myth? But of this story there is only one core story. Here is a list of "alternate" works, Gospels, Acts and fragments of letters, and in all of it there is only one Jesus story. Just to get a sense of how many there are, here is a list, but it isn't even complete, or near complete. And in all of this I defy anyone to find one example where one of the basic points I laid out in the begining is replaced with another version. There are differences of course, in the number of women at the tomb, or the exact word order and so on, but none of those Major points is replaced. No versions where he dies in Egypt or where he is stoned or with a totally different set of Apostoles.



<= Next: Hist. Jesus argument V: The web of Historicity.


Rebuttle to Peter Kirby's diatribe againgst this argument

The Religious A priori