Did jesus have Babies?!? Why not?

Okay, im sure almost everyone knows the whole Da Vinci Code + Holy Blood, Holy Grail conspiracy. Jesus was married to Mary magdalene(maybe), and even (maybe) had babies! Well, personally, i do believe jesus had children, not sure it was necessarily with Mary Magdalene. I also believe Jesus, after the ressurection, and after he supposedly ascended into heaven(ppl. naturally assume when a great spiritual teacher asscends in a cloud up into the skies, that of course he must be asscending into heaven) that he spent his last years in the country of India, where he also spent his lost years. In India he settled down finally(hell i would after soo much suffering) had children(maybe just a few, maybe many), and eventually entered Mahasamadhi(this is a hindu term for when a great spritual master/yogi dies at will, they simply leave their body) after a long life(im guessing 120-140 yrs old). This is the basics of my bias/opinion of Jesus after the crucifixion, now on to the point of this thread.

Allrighty, christians might actually appreciate this thread for all i know, but im going to show that maybe Jesus DID have a wife children, and ended with a long life after the crucifixion. BASED on what you may read from the BIBLE. You would have a hard time denying this since christians are supposed to believe that the Bible is the truth. Allright, ill stop making you wait, please open and turn your bibles to Old Testament book of Isaiah, chapter 53 verse 10. I'll repeat in abbreviated version, Isaiah 53:10.
This is a prophecy of the messiah(jesus)...and it prophecized that jesus would have a long life(after his teachings were done) with many children.

NLT(New Living Translation) Isaiah 53:10
But it was the LORD's good plan to crush him and fill him with grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have a multitude of children, many heirs. He will enjoy a long life, and the LORD's plan will prosper in his hands.

NIV(New International Version) Isaiah 53:10
Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [a] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

KJV(King James Version) Isaiah 53:10(Takes on a more old fashioned approach to children using the term "seed" instead)
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Jewish Tanakh from www.sacred-texts.com...
53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to crush him by disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in restitution, that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the Lord might prosper by his hand:

Okay, interested in the replies, enjoy, im sure the rest speaks for itself...
Best wishes,
Dani

Originally posted by Vesuvius 13
BASED on what you may read from the BIBLE. You would have a hard time denying this since christians are supposed to believe that the Bible is the truth.

Christians are also suppose to go forth and multiply.. I'm sure he would have been obligated to lead his sheep by example.

The idea that Jesus was married and had children is not as unbelievable as certain people say. He was a famous, charismatic man and naturally, women would have taken an interest in him.

"The Da Vinci Code" is of course a work of fiction - the author has never claimed otherwise. Those of us who have read the novel and found that it does not portray the church is such an unfavourable light, have to wonder why it was so harshly condemned by the Vatican.

The book does, however, raise some questions about the absence of the sacred feminine from modern organised religion, and the subsequent historical suppression of women in Christian society. This appears to be the main point of the novel. It does not set out to prove that Jesus was married, but rather that women are unjustly cast as inferior in religious tradition. This point is overlooked by many who claim to have read "The Da Vinci Code".

You are on the right road but that fork in the road awhile back, when you went left, you should have turned right.

John 1:12 But as many as received Him(accepted Christ as Savior), to them He gave power to become the sons(and daughters) of God, even to them that believe on His name; Which were BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD.

Jesus did come to have children, but as we see not through physical means , but through spiritual means. When we accept Christ we are changed and our spirit is reborn. Our sins are washed away and God has adopted us into His family and we are heirs with Christ.

Okay, im sure almost everyone knows the whole Da Vinci Code + Holy Blood, Holy Grail conspiracy. Jesus was married to Mary magdalene(maybe), and even (maybe) had babies! Well, personally, i do believe jesus had children, not sure it was necessarily with Mary Magdalene.

So you believe that Jesus existed and was killed like the bible says?

What about the rest of the bible? Have you read it? Or only the davinci code?

I also believe Jesus, after the ressurection, and after he supposedly ascended into heaven .... that he spent his last years in the country of India, where he also spent his lost years. In India he settled down finally... had children..., and eventually entered Mahasamadhi(this is a hindu term for when a great spritual master/yogi dies at will, they simply leave their body) after a long life(im guessing 120-140 yrs old).

To the best of my knowledge the 'Jesus in India' idea was manufactured in the late 19th century by a traveller and conman named Notovitch, who published a 'gospel' he said he had obtained from a Tibetan monastery. He was unmasked as a fraud by British officials working in the area who went to the monastery in question and asked the monks about him and his finds.

An overview of his book can be found in Edgar J. Goodspeed, Strange New Gospels, Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1931), , chapter 2.

Some of the articles which revealed the fraud were published in Nineteenth Century (1894) magazine

Such fraudulent gospels have been manufactured for centuries by people with a religious, political or monetary agenda. The earliest examples appear in the second century; some are still being made now. The interesting thing is that they give a picture of the hopes and values of the target market, and how different these are one from another, and from the real ancient texts about Jesus. And each language group has its own set, usually different to those circulating at the same time in English.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

A correction: I find that the idea predates Notovitch, so I'm not sure when the idea appears first.

[edit on 30/4/2005 by roger_pearse]

Didn't you read the story?

He was inbred. So he was sterile.

I personnaly dont see a proble with Jesus having children and beeing married, because beeing married and having children inside the wed-lock is not a orblem according to Christian faith.

The problem i see with this is, how far will ppl go to claim that the are the "TRUE DESCENDENTS OF JESUS"... cant you see the can of worms this would open ??? there are already nasty disgusting theologies like "Serpent Seed" and "Christian Identity" going around , and spreading alot of hatred among ppl, proclaming that the "white race" are the ONLY true descendents of Jesus and therefore they are "GOD'S ONLY Children"... i dont think this wolrd need more "Pandora's boxes"... if Jesus had children or not ... who cares, there is no Birth Certificate and neither do we have Jesus' DNA to have a paternity test... I would say live it alone...

Concentrate on having GOD IN YOUR HEART

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
I personnaly dont see a proble with Jesus having children and beeing married, because beeing married and having children inside the wed-lock is not a orblem according to Christian faith.

The problem is one lie will lead to another and another and then pretty soon Jesus becomes a smart guy who lived for a while and did what everybody else did. Lies about God will rip peice by peice who He really is until there is nothing different about God.

God is different, Jesus came for a reason, to die for sin. People who died back then were wrapped in strips of cloth wound around their body. When Jesus was born He was wrapped in swaddling clothes. That means strips of material were wound around His body after He was born. From His birth He was destined to die.

You have to keep weeds out of a garden if you want to have a harvest of worthwhile food. You have to keep lies out of who God is if you want to know the truth about Him.

This is yet another 'piece' of the Anti-Christian conspiracy.

Its goal is to discredit Christ enough to push christianity to the fringes. Its just about there. Then they will make laws saying the bible is hate speech. Canada, Pennsylvania, Europe )

Now that the bible is classified as an originator of hate speech, in the same group with NAZI propaganda, the KKK, and other naer do wells, outlawing it all together during some crisis will be quite easy.

Its very close people. The same way you didnt notice some of the things I told you, you wont notice the truth when it happens. Not many would 'knowingly' and 'willingly' follow satan if they knew who it was.
Get the truth now, its your only protection

I don't want to get into a religious debate with anyone or anything as I am simply answering the question that was asked .....

No I do not believe that Jesus had any biological children.

The second part of the question was why?
Because I do not believe that Jesus was ever an actual living person, therefore it would be kind of hard for him to have kids.

I don't "believe" in the work of the HBGB authors. I don't "believe" in the stories of the NT. I don't believe (without the quotes, this time) that if Jesus lived and procreated it would negatively impact Christianity.

I do believe that all this business of denying any possibilty that any of these theories and congectures have merit based on pure dogmatic dogma is silly in the extreme.

I'll keep reading, studying, hoping for the truth to come out one day. Who knows whether mankind will ever develop some new, heretofore unknown, techniques of exploring history will prove anything one way or another. I can hope for that, though.

I'm totally interested in fact; no interest whatsoever in what is commonly called "faith". If you like "faith" more than "fact", that's all good. It's just not for me.

Originally posted by Al Davison

I'll keep reading, studying, hoping for the truth to come out one day.

So this leaves me wondering, you want the truth, but so far you haven't found it. What will be the "thing" that makes it apparent that you have found the truth.

Who knows whether mankind will ever develop some new, heretofore unknown, techniques of exploring history will prove anything one way or another. I can hope for that, though.

Its kinda ironic, but according to the bible, you will find out at one of two resurrections. We will give an account for every idle word. Our whole life.
Complete historical review.

Originally posted by roger_pearse

To the best of my knowledge the 'Jesus in India' idea was manufactured in the late 19th century by a traveller and conman named Notovitch, who published a 'gospel' he said he had obtained from a Tibetan monastery. He was unmasked as a fraud by British officials working in the area who went to the monastery in question and asked the monks about him and his finds.

An overview of his book can be found in Edgar J. Goodspeed, Strange New Gospels, Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1931), , chapter 2.

Some of the articles which revealed the fraud were published in Nineteenth Century (1894) magazine

Such fraudulent gospels have been manufactured for centuries by people with a religious, political or monetary agenda. The earliest examples appear in the second century; some are still being made now. The interesting thing is that they give a picture of the hopes and values of the target market, and how different these are one from another, and from the real ancient texts about Jesus. And each language group has its own set, usually different to those circulating at the same time in English.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

A correction: I find that the idea predates Notovitch, so I'm not sure when the idea appears first.
[edit on 30/4/2005 by roger_pearse]

Hello, yup i know this, here the names of quite a few others that say they went to a buddhist monastery where they were confronted by a buddhist monk with documents saying Jesus had been in india, Tibet, etc. during his lost years. The first one you mentioned was Nicholas Notovitch, Elisabeth Caspari(whom had no precious knowledge of publications by Notovitch and others), Swami Abhedananda, and the most well respected of these was Nicholas Roerich. A philosopher, artist, author, and adventurer/explorer. There are legends about the travelings of jesus(called issa in india) in india during his lost years all over the east. And as Nicholas Roerich had put it "In what possible way could a recent forgery penetrate into the consciousness of the whole East".
However this thread wasnt started to talk about this topic, we can start another thread for that.

This is yet another 'piece' of the Anti-Christian conspiracy.

Its goal is to discredit Christ enough to push christianity to the fringes. Its just about there. Then they will make laws saying the bible is hate speech. Canada, Pennsylvania, Europe )

Now that the bible is classified as an originator of hate speech, in the same group with NAZI propaganda, the KKK, and other naer do wells, outlawing it all together during some crisis will be quite easy.

Jake no offense.......but, what the heck are you talking about?
No this isnt an anti christian thread. This thread is very simple, to point out the prophecy of Isaiah 53:10 and gather everybodies opinions of it. CAN WE PLEASE KEEP IT THAT WAY? Thankyou...And yes i have read most of the bible, so stop picking on me...

Anyways, people please keep it on the subject...And after the nonchristians all have there chance to input their opinions(as well as yours) then you can feel free to bash em all you want.
Best wishes,
Dani

Jake no offense.......but, what the heck are you talking about?
No this isnt an anti christian thread.

Not the thread. Not you. The topic. Its not new. Its part of the overall picture.
As we approach the end..you will see more and more of stuff like this

Originally posted by Vesuvius 13
This thread is very simple, to point out the prophecy of Isaiah 53:10 and gather everybodies opinions of it. CAN WE PLEASE KEEP IT THAT WAY? Thankyou.

I already said I thought there were no bioological children. And I am more than familiar with the passage you speak of. Perhaps it is in the metaphorical sense. I don't know.

Perhaps the children that are spoke of are those such as Jake?

Perhaps before you ask if he had children you should ask if he could of?
www.truthbeknown.com...

[edited for additional point]

[edit on 30-4-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]

Jesus did not have babies. HE DID NOT marry Mary Magdelon. He did not have any realation with her.

Accept the Lord as your Savior.

This is the best info on this thread.

As for children, true he did have them!

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
to point out the prophecy of Isaiah 53:10 and gather everybodies opinions of it.

That's a verse about the salvation that Jesus offers to mankind(His bruising brings us the chance for real life). When our spirit is reborn we become children of the Living God. We are no longer seperated from Him. Jesus came to bring us spiritual life that will cause our soul to have new life and in turn someday our physical bodies will have new life.