Life and Language

I have just finished reading the history of the story about: the wife of Jesus, appearing straightforwardly in the Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 41 No.3. (BAR).  This story began with the claim by Simcha Jacobovici that he had found a papyrus fragment, about the size of a calling card, referring to Jesus’ wife.  There was no documentation for validity, or adequate explanation of the mystery.  Further there was great doubt engendered by other undocumented and unusual claims made by the same man – one of which was that he had a nail used at Christ’s crucifixion.  Written by a friend of Simcha, but objective in tone, the extended article stated: BAR does not publish Simcha’s most far-fetched claims.  During the months following the announcement of the fragment there appeared stories and even a best-selling novel about Jesus’ marriage, the birth of a son, and living descendants in our time.  The academic world put down the claim, sometimes in fierce language.  Just about the time the event was fading the highly respected Karen King, from Harvard Divinity School, came out with a paper on the same topic drawn from a different source.  Suddenly the interest rose, and the idea of a Jesus-marriage was given some serious consideration.  With significant support and resistance, King held to her point of view.  It began to gain some traction as she released materials so to evaluate the language, the papyrus, the ink used, and to provide evaluation.  Matters looked better for the theory until there was discovered another document obviously from a later period than that of Jesus for origin that offered the initiation of the same message as that found in the first material.  There grew significant doubt about the ancient bits that appear to be forgeries. 

Are the documents forgeries?  The BAR article closes as follows: . . . . even King has acknowledged that this argument [for forgery] is substantive.  It’s worth taking seriously.  And it may point in the direction of forgery.  The author closes with a two sentence paragraph: I contacted Karen King to see what her present position is. She did not return repeated E-mails.  In my studies through decades, beginning in 1940 following high school, I have often been disappointed in statements and projects alleging faithfulness to Scripture and scholarship, offered to readers and listeners as proven and authoritative – studies that did not meet the criteria of research for truth and meaning.  Because my professional life overlaid my secular vocation as well as Christian ministry, I was exposed to considerable research in secular interests.  At first I was surprised at the contradictions, the shallow efforts, sometimes the chicanery and inventions of persons who were well aware of the values of scientific investigation, but violated the process for their own interests.  Be assured that some of what passes for scholarship is flimsy. Scholarship is cursed by enemies.

I broke away from the above paragraph for lunch.  Returning to my desk I first picked up the newspaper, leafed through and lighted upon an article dedicated to improving language usage.  The title of the article by Stephen Wilbers: Can we fix our poor language skills?  He had written in a similar vein earlier and this article offered squibs from the communications he had received relative to the theme.  The remarks included: I am appalled at the lack of knowledge. Didn’t these people take English in school? . . . Another blames it on teachers: who aren’t correcting this usage and are probably saying it themselves.  A teacher wrote: . . . . about 20 years ago many businesses adopted a casual dress code for Fridays. . . . this quickly led to blue jeans and other forms less than casual, i.e., sloppy attire.  Maybe our language usage has followed the lax standard of dress. . . . It pains him, because poor language skills are everywhere now.  Silbers writes here: One hundred percent of readers who responded to my last column agree: We’re going downhill, and there’s no reversing the trend.  My own view is that the two factors declined together, perhaps aided by each other, but the forces of culture are many.  Some are subtle.  The problem is complicated.  Further, anything in human behavior and habit can be reversed or improved if enough persons follow the lead upward.  The matter will gain attention when benefits reward those who move upward – and decline will punish.  We must be willing to work at the business of human presentation including style to truth.  What will the future say of current generation’s words and search for truth?