Jesus May Have Had a Wife, Ancient Text Suggests

a reply to: 727Sky

Its better if you dont shut down people who happen to have a different opinion than you.

You might learn something.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Nope.
You recommend it?
Dont you think if Jesus was married we'd know about it already?

Sounds like a plot to disrupt the foundation of the Catholic church.

We learn new things every day about our past history.

Lags

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lagomorphe
Nope.
You recommend it?
Dont you think if Jesus was married we'd know about it already?
Sounds like a plot to disrupt the foundation of the Catholic church.

Which doesn't mean it's untrue.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck
www.awakenedwoman.com...

"There are many indications of intimacy and love between Jesus and Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic material. When Karen King was translating "The Gospel of Mary," she had to determine which Mary was being discussed because the Mary written about had no last name. She identified Mary as Mary Magdalene because twice in the text Mary was described as the woman Jesus loved more than the others. This refrain appears often in the Gnostic texts, and in "The Gospel of Philip" Mary Magdalene is described as the "companion" of Jesus. According to different scholars that word, in its original Greek usage, has innuendos of something more, perhaps of sexual partnership. Also in "The Gospel of Philip" are the provocative lines that "Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene upon the …. " The last word is missing in the papyrus document. Typically the missing word is translated as mouth. In the ABC Frontline special Elaine Pagels interprets this statement as symbolic and indicative of a transmission of knowledge but, given the other phrases of intimacy, her interpretation seems overly head-oriented. While all the academic scholars on the ABC program state there is no evidence for the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic or Orthodox texts available to us, most of them, particularly Karen King and Father Richard McBrien of the University of Notre Dame, were sympathetic to the idea of some kind of love relationship between Jesus and Mary. The ABC Frontline special ended with the commentator debunking the legendary underpinning of The Da Vinci Code but then saying, "The story of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is indeed a love story." "

www.answering-christianity.com...

There existed many different Bibles during the time of the Roman Emperor, Constantine, which were widely believed in by different Christian sects in the year 312. In other words, during the first 3 centuries of "Christianity" (300 years), 50 different canons with 100s of books/gospels combined existed! That is a lot of canons, a lot of books/gospels, and a lot of time (300 years) of different Christian religions existed. Also, Constantine's own "unified canon or bible" got lost and only small portions of it were found! So what we have today from "Bible(s)" are not even Constantine's books.

www.inq7.net...

"Interest in Mary Magdalene grew following the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic Gospels in 1945. The Gospel of Philip explicitly said Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene in the mouth, making the disciples jealous of her. Other gospels in the Nag Hammadi texts also spoke of the intimate relationship between her and Jesus, even referring to her as his "beloved."

Her importance was shown by her presence in major events of Jesus' life. She anointed his feet with a costly perfume, an act the disciples tried to stop but which Jesus allowed, making him live up to the title the Messiah, the "Annointed One." "

There were some disciples who, lets face it did not like women... Just as when the Catholic church was being formed IMO..

There were so many different sections and writings that were left out of the bible it should make one wonder if we have even a partial story..

Even today if you can find an old bible and compare it to a newer version some of the writings have been softened and changed to make the sayings more palatable to the new generation of readers. Try Matthew 15-21-28 for a blatant example of what I speak.

Well, Jesus was a Maverick Rabbi (in the Order of Melchezidek)... Jesus was Not ordained or certified by the official Jewish Sanhedrin/Rabbinical schools of his times...

'Wife' to Jesus was the Church the metaphor was most likely imposed on the person Jesus from the Nazorean/Essene Cult he grew up in and seeing that Jesus later accepted & lived the role of the 'Despised Messiah' the Cult held in extreme high regard. ( also: 'The Essene Teacher of Righteousness.")

the ancient paper and ink, only reinforces the idea that Roman or even Cleric scribes were busy creating derogatory storylines involving Jesus (the radical Rabbi = who would not lead a resistance against Roman occupation of the Levant/Jerusalem)...being an ordinary, carnal man & accomplished Magician with a wife was spread far & wide...

So, campaigns were devised to 'bring down' Jesus in the eyes of the Jews and Samaratans of the Era.


just a thought excercise

a reply to: 727Sky

He really had husband. Oh snap!

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

but the bible tells us what we NEED to know. It does not necessarily tell every there IS to know.

You sound blindly indoctrinated by All of this. How would you Know what You Need if You were not Informed of everything there IS to know....maybe what is being taught to you is but a glimpse forced onto you like blinders on a race horse?

so the bible can just be made up now. got it. explains everything.

Mary was a virgin. jesus was a Jew. His wife was...episcopalian?

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I suspect no-one will ever know 'the truth' about Jesus and his life. Shame its been so manipulated and twisted in so many of its interpretations.

Yes, no one will ever know the truth about Jesus as there still does not exist one single contemporary writing mentioning there even was such a person. The piece of the manuscript mentioned is believed to have been written 200-400 years after the supposed life of Jesus plus others have accused it of being a fake. Wake up and smell the roses, it is all manipulated and twisted. You can thank Christianity for the twisting plus destroying anything that may offer the truth. As I have said many times, "the Vatican needs to be in jail."

DaCook

a reply to: DaCook

Evil is always where you least expect it.

Google "Caesars massiah" for an interesting take on Jesus.

In my mind, it is not very likely the most belligerent people on the planet are suddenly going to turn the other cheek, submit to their masters, and give to Caesar what is Caesar's. Not possible. It is more likely the Gospel was created by the Romans as war-time occupation propaganda to cool off the Jews.

What? Only one wife? No concubines? I wonder what happened to his kids.

originally posted by: DaCook

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I suspect no-one will ever know 'the truth' about Jesus and his life. Shame its been so manipulated and twisted in so many of its interpretations.

Yes, no one will ever know the truth about Jesus as there still does not exist one single contemporary writing mentioning there even was such a person. The piece of the manuscript mentioned is believed to have been written 200-400 years after the supposed life of Jesus plus others have accused it of being a fake. Wake up and smell the roses, it is all manipulated and twisted. You can thank Christianity for the twisting plus destroying anything that may offer the truth. As I have said many times, "the Vatican needs to be in jail."

DaCook

There are some sources other than the bible that show that Jesus existed. Also, there are references in other historical writings that a man that they think was Jesus, moved somewhere about the time of his supposed crucification and started another similar religion. Was it Jesus that was really on that pole being crucified?

I read quite a few articles about Jesus's training up to the point of becoming the messiah in the bible. Funny that trying to debunk something you wind up finding evidence that supports it. The thing is, the information I found would not be accepted by Christians, they do not want to hear that someone else took Jesus's place on the cross or that he was married or that he was just what they would consider a messiah back then.

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

. Even if he had children with her I would not be upset. His purity is still intact.

How so?
( If he existed )...the laws of entropy would suggest from his initial dip in this mortal coil universe he'd be subject to the Laws of Entropy...downhill all the way.

originally posted by: Lagomorphe
Poor sod!

"Jesus, look at you, sitting in front of your tablet all day, not ever sweeping the stone floor. No friends, just those 12 blokes that come over always eating all the wafers and drinking the wine.. no woman will ever want you."
"Shut up mom.. god.. I'll get a wife then, OK? get off my back, for my sake.. Shyahh.."

Gnarly Jesus was still a dude.

originally posted by: 727Sky

originally posted by: Lagomorphe
Poor sod!

hahahaah Actually I hope he was married and got to enjoy the love of a woman.

The love of a woman.. Ha.

the one candle that cannot be unlit.. which will burn your existence down.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Nope.
You recommend it?
Dont you think if Jesus was married we'd know about it already?

Sounds like a plot to disrupt the foundation of the Catholic church.

I don't think it's beyond the means of the council of Nicea to decide Jesus should be portrayed as pure, with his devotion to his faith replacing any need for a physical companion. Like others, I've no reason to think it's unlikely he wouldn't be married - but that's easy to assume from a distance without having other comparable characters of the time to measure against.

originally posted by: Village Idiot
Jesus also had a older brother, James, from the same mother. Kinda puts a dent in the immaculate conception thingy.

I think one of the reasons TPTB hide information on Aliens is so that, if we found out Aliens existed in other constellations, why would God send his only begotten Son to this little planet and not the others?

Anyways, good op, been following that, seems to be legit, especially the ink matching the papyrus age.

James was Christ’s brother, oh wow
Oh wait, so what?
Christians have been reading that in the bible for nearly a couple of thousand years
Think you are overreacting a bit there

Old news

originally posted by: Lagomorphe
Poor sod!

I wonder if his wife made him do the dishes and take the garbage out.

There are some sources other than the bible that show that Jesus existed. Also, there are references in other historical writings that a man that they think was Jesus, moved somewhere about the time of his supposed crucification and started another similar religion. Was it Jesus that was really on that pole being crucified?

I read quite a few articles about Jesus's training up to the point of becoming the messiah in the bible. Funny that trying to debunk something you wind up finding evidence that supports it. The thing is, the information I found would not be accepted by Christians, they do not want to hear that someone else took Jesus's place on the cross or that he was married or that he was just what they would consider a messiah back then.





It is well documented there are zero contemporary writings about Jesus so that means anything written about his life is pure bunk. I am not the Lone Ranger regarding lack of evidence:

"A 2015 survey conducted by the Church of England, for instance, found that 22 percent of adults in England did not believe Jesus was a real person."

The earliest known mention of a "Jesus" was by Josephus and Tacitus. Josephus was born in the year 37 CE, and Tacitus was born in 55 CE, neither could have been an eye-witness of Jesus. The "greatest man (demigod) to every live left no footprints at all. We have zero evidence of his existence. Any stories of Jesus have been made up.

DaCook

The person who they refer to as Jesus did exist, the time frame seems to be off by over ten years though. Jesus was not his name though, Yeshua or something like that was his name. I do not know where the name Jesus came from, it is wrong. He was trained by a group of monks from what I read, his name appeared in their records along with John the Baptist. I think it was with a group named something like the exquine, maybe the nazarine version, but it appears he went up north to the mountains to study too. When in training his name was changed, the records seem to show that . I spent about three months reading a lot on this subject, translations from different countries and writings of researchers who researched the hell out of that. Of course, the Christians did not want to accept these people's research, it would undermine some of the basics of Christianity that we were told is important.

I am just saying that the person...Yeshua is real. And I believe he was trained to be a holy man. During the time he left home with his parents to when he went out into the desert was many years which he spent studying the ways of the group he studied with.

Was he the son of god? I think he was what they consider a Messiah. Also some of the ancient Muslim writings have information about him, Islam actually accepts his existance as real but does not accept his ways as correct.