From Dan Wallace–
News flash: Harvard Theological Review has decided not to publish Karen King¹s paper on the Coptic papyrus fragment on the grounds that the fragment is probably a fake.” This from an email Dr. Craig Evans, the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia University and Divinity College, sent to me earlier today. He said that Helmut Koester (Harvard University), Bentley Layton (Yale University), Stephen Emmel (University of Münster), and Gesine Robinson (Claremont Graduate School)–all first-rate scholars in Coptic studies–have weighed in and have found the fragment wanting. No doubt Francis Watson’s comprehensive work showing the fragment’s dependence on the Gospel of Thomas was a contributing factor for this judgment, as well as the rather odd look of the Coptic that already raised several questions as to its authenticity.
Honestly, I don’t see how anyone simply looking at the fragment can imagine it to be ancient. It’s absolutely a modern fake. There’s no question. Look at the papyrus. Look at the ink. Look at how dark the ink is. The ravages of time are in no way evident.
This thing is a fake and it seems to me that only those wishing to 1) assert the ‘importance’ of ‘ancient gnostic texts’ for modern Christianity; or 2) out and out fraudsters will continue to support its ‘authenticity’.
- And Now The Motive For the Announcement of the ‘Jesus’ Wife’ Fragment May Be Coming to Light (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)