评论
打印
Both men felt that the debate over the manuscript’s authenticity had become unmoored, an emotional proxy for broader fights among historians of Christianity.
两人都觉得，关于这份手稿真实性的争论已经失去了立足之地，成为基督教历史学家之间更广泛斗争的情感代言人。
On one side were conservatives who saw the Church-authorized collection of Christian books—the New Testament—as divinely inspired.
一方是保守派，他们认为教会授权的基督教书籍集--《新约》--是神的启发。
On the other were generally liberal scholars, who gave equal—or greater—historical weight to early Christian texts outside the New Testament canon.
另一方面，通常是自由派学者，他们给予新约正典以外的早期基督教文本同等或更大的历史权重。
As if to sell Secret Mark to their conservative colleagues—and help prove it authentic—liberals tended to deny the text’s sensuality.
为了向他们的保守派同事推销《马可福音》--并帮助证明它的真实性--自由派倾向于否认文本的淫荡性。
Its homoeroticism, many claimed, was nothing more than Morton Smith’s misreading.
许多人声称，该书中的同性性爱无非是莫顿·史密斯的误读。
But to Landau and Geoffrey Smith, there was no escaping it: The text depicts Jesus spending the night with a desperate, lovestruck young man.
但对于兰道和杰弗里·史密斯来说，这是无法逃避的：文本描绘了耶稣与一个绝望的、痴迷于爱情的年轻人共度一夜。
The circumstances of the discovery were admittedly complicated.
无可否认，这一发现的情况很复杂。
What Morton Smith claimed to find at the monastery wasn’t some first edition of Secret Mark on papyrus.
莫顿·史密斯声称在修道院发现的并不是纸莎草纸上的《秘密马可》的初版。
It was a copy of a letter that quotes Secret Mark.
这是一封引用秘密马克的信的抄写本。
The letter’s author appeared to be the second-century Church father Clement of Alexandria.
这封信的作者似乎是公元2世纪亚历山大港的教父克莱门特。
Addressed to an unknown man named Theodore, the letter calls out Secret Mark’s sexual innuendo.
这封信是写给一位名叫西奥多的不知名男子的，信中提到了《秘密马可》的性暗示。
Some early Christians may have seen the gospel as portraying “naked man with naked man,” Clement writes, but Clement condemns such views as false and “utterly shameless.”
克莱门特写道，一些早期基督徒可能认为福音描绘的是“裸体男人和裸体男人”，但克莱门特谴责这种观点是错误的和“完全无耻的”。
Morton Smith gave them more credit.
莫顿·史密斯给了他们更多的信任。
In a baffling passage in the Christian Bible’s Gospel of Mark, he noted, a nameless young man drops his linen garment and “flees naked” when Jesus is arrested at night in Gethsemane.
在基督教圣经《马可福音》的一段令人费解的文字中，他指出，当耶稣在客西马尼夜间被捕时，一个不知名的年轻人脱下了他的亚麻布衣服，赤身裸体地逃跑了。
If you spliced Secret Mark into canonical Mark, Morton Smith thought, you had an explanation: Jesus and his young follower had been caught in the act.
莫顿·史密斯想，如果你把秘密马可和规范马可结合起来，你就有了一个解释：耶稣和他的年轻追随者被当场抓获。
Byzantine scholars had begun finding evidence, from as early as the fourth century, of same-sex couples: monks who shared a cell, traveled as a pair, and supported each other’s lifelong quest for spiritual perfection.
拜占庭学者早在公元四世纪就开始发现同性伴侣的证据：僧侣们共用一间房，结对游行，互相支持对方，毕生追求精神上的完美。
Brent Landau and Geoffrey Smith, the Texas scholars, immersed themselves in early Christian literature—looking at word choices, storylines, theological debates—to see where Secret Mark might fit.
德克萨斯州的学者布伦特·兰道和杰弗里·史密斯沉浸在早期的基督教文学中--研究词语选择、故事情节、神学辩论--看看《秘密马可》可能适用于哪里。
They concluded that it didn’t.
他们得出的结论是，情况并非如此。
It appeared, Landau told me, “as if somebody had gone through the Gospels and found all these instances where Jesus seemed to be in some sort of intimate or erotic relationship,” then “meshed them all together.
兰道告诉我，看起来就像是有人翻阅了福音书，发现了所有这些耶稣似乎处于某种亲密或性爱关系中的例子，然后将它们整合在一起。
