Gospel of Jesus's Wife is fake, claims expert

Originally posted by Guyfriday
The story in the Bible about the wedding could be read to mean that Jesus was really the Grooms Father. If that was the case, then Jesus would have been married (since he was a Rabi). I could see Bible scholars trying to cover up that kind of fact since it would mean that another largely important aspect of Jesus' life was ignored by the church.

The "Catholic Church" as established by Paul (a questionable guy to say the least) did a lot to destroy the teachings of Jesus, and the faith of his followers. Every time one of these "Lost" books pop up, it amazes me how quickly they get discredited by some New Testament Scholar. One has to wonder why a poorly done chop-job like the Bible is so highly defended by a few people, when Jesus himself said that you must question your faith in order to strengthen it.

The groom's father?? He was 30 years old in this story.

Originally posted by benrl

Originally posted by sylent6
Jesus wife is God's organization, his government, his people. People its symbolic.

Yep, people don't seem to understand Jesus constantly called the church his Bride.

I would like to see in writing where Jesus was constantly calling the church his Bride. Jesus never knew the church, he only new synagogues. Church and Synagogue are not interchangeable as words.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


I think he is referring to when Jesus will rule out of Jerusalem during the 1000 year reign and then the New Jerusalem descends to hover over Jerusalem at the end of the 1000 year reign and the New Heaven is created. (I think, been a while since i looked at that, speaking of which, good topic to study in today!)

reply to post by Jerseymilker


www.gotquestions.org... That link pretty much explains it for you. Short too. Also has the scripture in it. No point in posting it when i would be posting exactly how that explains it and plagiarizing.

I have an extremely open mind about this whole thing, but then I'm an atheist so I have no baggage to bring with it. I do find it extremely interesting that we keep finding these snippets from the early years of the Christian church that seem to contradict large chunks of the official orthodox version of events - which means that some people have been selectively pruning things over the years. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Jesus had a wife. If he even existed that is.

Originally posted by Jerseymilker

I would like to see in writing where Jesus was constantly calling the church his Bride. Jesus never knew the church, he only new synagogues. Church and Synagogue are not interchangeable as words.

First of all, "the church" wasn't created until after Christ's death. The whole message of "the church" was to be that Christ died for our sins so that we would have eternal life. This is why Christ told his disciples to wait until after his death to go out and preach the message of the resurrection. We have to rely on his disciples' messages, as given to them by the Holy Spirit, to know that the church was Christ's bride (as written in the Bible).

Here's something everyone should take into consideration...

When Christ was on the cross and the three Mary(s) were at the foot of the cross (Mary his mother, Mary his aunt, and Mary Magdalene), Jesus specifically asked his disciple (John) to look after his mother and take her into his home after his death. There is no mention that anyone should look after his "wife" or children once he died. Why do you think that was?

Originally posted by Deetermined
Here's something everyone should take into consideration...

When Christ was on the cross and the three Mary(s) were at the foot of the cross (Mary his mother, Mary his aunt, and Mary Magdalene), Jesus specifically asked his disciple (John) to look after his mother and take her into his home after his death. There is no mention that anyone should look after his "wife" or children once he died. Why do you think that was?

a) Isn't it possible that given the highly odd references to Mary Magdalene in many places, she was his wife?
b) What makes you think that any of his last words were accurate?

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


I think the many mentions of Mary Magdalene were because she may have been the most devoted of the disciples. Let's face it, many of the disciples had their moments of doubts and weaknesses that Jesus had to constantly remind them of who he was and why he was there. Mary never questioned him. She knew exactly who Christ was after he cast seven demons out of her and she never looked back afterward.

As for what Jesus said being accurate, we could argue that all day long as well as this tidbit recently found, so that would rule out any discussion on this topic altogether and be moot from both sides.

My opinion:

Jesus did not preach a religion. Thank God!! Religion is not unity!

He did not say He was God, but called us all Gods (sons of God).

He was a son of man and son of God, a brother who taught unity and love and also reincarnation.

His sheep are his followers of unity and what he stood for.

His church was a creation not by him, but for control and does not represent his teachings unless it strives and teaches unity, not division.

If he is to be married to anything or anyone in the future, from what I have learned from the Bible, he will have had to have done so in the literal as well (the Word manifests in threes) . Otherwise he did not and will not marry anything.

Marriage symbolizes unity.... as one. Thats his entire message. The people that follow unity in thought and word are his bride/church/temple/followers.

I thought it was in someone's collection for sometime and it just got notched since he (the owner) had been working with a woman from a university. Which she translated.

I think it is just cut and lacks the rest of the context. I've seen people chop up these scrolls before.
As far as fake I doubt it. Read The Gosphel of Tomas. There is a lot of things that sound like this in it and which The Gosphel of Tomas is real and old it is not accepted by the church. I'm not sure of authors or where these were wrote but I figure they're related to the author/s of the rest of the Coptic ghnostic texts. They really had some crazy infusion of churches in Egypt so I don't see this as fake. Is what is written true? I don't know.

Originally posted by TheLonewolf
Just read the article and it's riddled with "he believes, he thinks and he say's" Just because someone thinks, says or believes something does not make them an expert..How do we know this guy isn't a ignorant, narrow minded bible thumper? So i just looked this guy up and guess what? He is a bible banger..Go figure, he would dispute this

edit on 21-9-2012 by TheLonewolf because: (no reason given)

Funny because wasnt the original story put out by a "bible thumper" ? Just sayin

reply to post by adjensen


First of all, Jesus always refer to his Church as his Bride, this knowledge is as old as the Gospel itself!
The Messiah not only came for redemption of man, also to bear witness to the truth, if he was married he would of made sure that the World knows about it, God has nothing to hid.
A quick glance of the actual text, looked like someone was tampering with it, like a kid in school changing his grade from a F to a A...

Originally posted by MCL1150
reply to post by adjensen

 

First of all, Jesus always refer to his Church as his Bride, this knowledge is as old as the Gospel itself!
The Messiah not only came for redemption of man, also to bear witness to the truth, if he was married he would of made sure that the World knows about it, God has nothing to hid.
A quick glance of the actual text, looked like someone was tampering with it, like a kid in school changing his grade from a F to a A...

Do you really believe God has nothing to hide?

Why the need for a veil then?

Why a need for dark anything like dark souls, dark spirits, dark matter, dark energy and so on?

For the seeker, there is a lot hidden, and Jesus can be said from an individual to reveal what is hidden only its up for interpretation and debate as we see here.

Do you think Jesus's church is Christianity or the heart of man itself?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by lucidclouds

 

I believe that the Bible manipulates the words and story of Jesus. I think some of his teachings are wonderful and other are out of character and therefore, a forgery. Either that or their was more than one Jesus, a passive healer and mystic and a would be warrior, wanting bring in the "New Age" to Jerusalem, the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

I think that the basic teachings of Jesus are universal and true, and therefore too dangerous for the PTB to just give to us. I don't trust the "Church" to truly care about our salvation, and therefore has preserved the "word of God" for our benefit. I think it's filled with falsehoods and lies to distract us from the true teachings and the true path to freedom and enlightenment.

Where does Jesus talk about the Kingdom of Heaven being an Eartly Kingdom. Verses please.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


I think he is referring to when Jesus will rule out of Jerusalem during the 1000 year reign and then the New Jerusalem descends to hover over Jerusalem at the end of the 1000 year reign and the New Heaven is created. (I think, been a while since i looked at that, speaking of which, good topic to study in today!)

Right, This ideology exemplifies the belief that that "kingdom of Heaven" is to be an Earthly kingdom. There is actually a lot to be said about the Jesus who promised that his disciples would not die until they see his kingdom on Earth. And a lot of scripture to examine along these principles, but that's for another thread.

reply to post by windword


Speaking of the "kingdom of heaven", which is only used in place of the "kingdom of God" in the book of Matthew and none of the other books...here's what Jesus had to say about it...

Matthew 25:1-13

1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.

3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:

4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.

5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.

6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.

7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.

8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.

9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.

10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.

11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.

12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.

13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Professor Francis Watson, of Durham University, says the papyrus fragment, which caused a worldwide sensation when it appeared earlier this week because it appeared to refer to Jesus's wife, is a patchwork of texts from the genuine Coptic-language Gospel of Thomas, which have been copied and reassembled out of order to make a suggestive new whole.

Why would anyone want to do that? See, the Church has plenty of reasons to lie; power and influence being only the tip of that particular iceberg. The Church has very big reasons to lie about the nature of Jesus' relationship to other people, because it has to promote his divinity, which inherently must deny certain human aspects of his life.

That expert on papyrus claimed it was a legitimate discovery. Which means that even if it was forged, it had to be forged in the same time period. But if the opposite of Christianity was to be one of the commoners at best - and at worst, a heathen - then why try to forge Jesus' marriage? What's the point of that? Why make that kind of lie if it wouldn't benefit anyone?

This is a weak argument. Someone is getting paid to say, "This is suspicious here," when in reality they are saying, "Save face! Save face! Jesus must not be painted as a mortal teacher! He was divine, so let us smear this new artifact that dare suggest he wasn't!"

Or so it appears to me. I can't think of very many good reasons to create this sort of lie, whereas the Church has all kinds of interests to protect by smearing this artifact. Damage control!

"I think it is more or less indisputable that I have shown how the thing was composed," he said. "I would be very surprised if it were not a modern forgery, although it is possible that it was composed in this way in the fourth century."

Okay - we're fairly certain it's modern, but if it isn't modern, it's possibly ancient? How does this make sense? And this guy appears to be working entirely on his own...no team of highly experienced researchers studying the papyrus using the latest in technology, but still more than enough to declare this document a fake?

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by adjensen

 

Gospel of Jesus's Wife is fake, claims expert,

Wow! an expert!! What would we do without experts?

Yeah, that helped move the thread forward. Thanks for your input.

reply to post by Deetermined


I take that to mean the Kingdom is within.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


Being of the Jewish faith Jesus would have had to have had a wife. It was required by doctrine. He was a man of faith, he would have obeyed the laws of his religion.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Well not impossible is it ? At 30 you could have a 15 year old child. Its not advisable but not impossible either.