Skip to comments.A Faded Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus' Wife
Posted on 09/18/2012 2:35:59 PM PDT by Altariel
click here to read article
I knew that from seeing “Harvard”
Absolutely nobody at the Harvard Divinity School is going to believe in Jesus Christ.
I’ve studied the Bible since I was a child and I don’t care if Jesus had a wife. One of these days we will know.
Beyond the completely lack of authority for this scrap as a source of anything, even had Jesus said, “My wife...” he could well have finished with “My wife is the church”, or “My wife is my father’s will.”
The scrap is worthless on the face of it. Then consider this could be anything from satire to miscommunication on the part of the person penning the text on the scrap.
If Christ had a wife, we would most CERTAINLY know it. He would not have hidden it and his followers would not have hidden it.
Is that a joke? Now, we are supposed to believe he was just a normal guy. Those twelve believed him to be the Son of God, he proved it through his actions and his life. If he acted like everyone else he would not have been believed.
Not so fast...we live in the information age and things still get covered up or mislead today. Pretty simple to cover up Jesus marriage back then...cake walk actually...especially when very little was written and the biblical writings were for the most part "censored/approved" by the early Catholic church who as controlled by a small select group of men.
The church is the bride of Christ.
Indeed, Yeshua was a common name in those days.
So he chose the beginning of his three years of ministry which would culminate in his brutal slaying to get married?
“Jesus Christ became man.”. I would think Christ was married, love and sex are as natural as food and water. I wish it could be proven, because the implication is huge. Among many things, it would make marriage that much more sacred between a man and a woman
My apologies for not capitalizing the pronouns referring to Jesus. I goofed.
It was a note to his apostles concerning his wireless connection. Here it is with the missing parts (in parenthesis).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(...Fi isn't working and I want to watch Netflicks tonight.)
It wasn't Jesus. It was Henny Youngman, and he was saying: "Take my wife...please."
I question jumping to conclusions with one small reference but I would have no issue if it was shown he was married. In fact I would like it. There is no reason to think he would not be married.
The false myth of a wife of Jesus is to validate the blood line for King and Queen (the real Illuminati). It is a trick of Satan.
Liberalism is a mental illness ... none more evident in the so-called Religious Studies departments at any secular university.
There’s no reason Jesus Christ couldn’t have taken a wife. It’s entirely possible that He did, since I see nothing in scripture which would preclude it...
There are many other academics who have propounded that Jesus was married, that Mary of Magdala was his wife, and that there are references in ancient documents to the effect that she was the head of the Christian group in Jerusalem after the crucifixion.
I don’t know why this would create a problem within the Christian community if it were true other than it would overturn some Church rules that were made up by men many years after the events.
Can’t be proven; can’t be disproven.
If it was proven, it wouldn’t bother me to learn that Jesus had a wife.
As a matter of fact, it would actually fit in with God’s plan that His Son would experience all that we experience, feel all that we feel, suffer all that we have suffered.
(All the men say, “and boy do we suffer!”)
(All the women elbow their man in the ribs OWW)
But the fact is, there are so many well preserved and complete manuscripts from that time that are total fabrications and legends and crazy stories about Jesus; many of them read like revamped Greek legends or the Arabian Nights.
This scrap of a story is just that...a scrap of a story. It smacks of tabloid journalism to so overblow it before the jury is in, and yes, the timing is a little suspect.
If it actually turned out to be something, I don’t think so many Christians would be offended. But good sense and scholarship seem to indicate that this more points to the popularity of Jesus in this era, leading to popular rumor and a market demand for supposed secret manuscripts during a time of fervor for religious discussion and rampant cultic activity, rather than the testimony of a witness of Jesus Christ Himself.
My view from the cheap seats...
It seems unlikely to me that the Romans, knowing that Mary Magdalena was associated with Christ, would have allowed her to the crucifixion and not apprehended her UNLESS she was his wife, in which case it would have stood for a kind of in-yur-face moment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.