Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/23/2012 1:33:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

See also related article here:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-scholars-not-fazed-by-gospel-of-jesus-wife-81974/

TITLE: Christian Scholars Not Fazed by ‘Gospel of Jesus’ Wife’


2 posted on 09/23/2012 1:34:13 PM PDT by SeekAndFind (bOTRT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

There is no evidence either way proving Christ was single or married. I go with married since it would be hard for a man of his age to be single in that time period.


5 posted on 09/23/2012 3:01:04 PM PDT by WilliamRobert (Death to the GOPe traitors and tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

The guy in this lead article gives An awfully wimpy defense. This by a FReeper, Gen-X-Dad, from another thread, in but a few paragraphs does a much bettter job, in my opinion:

“Ancient documents written by gnostics, heretics, and opponents of the first century church get dug up by today’s media in an attempt to demoralize Christians. Gnostics, heretics, and opponents of the first century church wanted to redefine Christianity in their time. They were booted out and their documents and alternative beliefs were not considered relevant by the early Christians.

Two thousand years later, these alternative documents are presented as more accurate, revealing, and credible than any other historical Christian document. Even though historical Christian documents have been scrubbed inside out by archaelogists and historians in an attempt to prove or disprove the Bible. This is being done because the alternative documents promotes the agenda of the anti-Christian faction, that permeates media and entertainment, to redefine Christianity in modern times. So in some sense, the modern day gnostics, heretics, and opponents of Christianity are picking up the baton from their ancient counterparts.”

Ray-gun and I really liked How this guy, Gen-X-Dad, put it.


8 posted on 09/23/2012 4:20:20 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GreyFriar

ping for later


9 posted on 09/23/2012 5:52:44 PM PDT by GreyFriar (Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Matthew 19:12

“For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

I believe Our Lord was referring to Himself in that last phrase.


11 posted on 09/23/2012 8:20:19 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
The word used by Tertullian, spado, translated above as "celibate," means "eunuch" (from the Greek spadon).

I recall reading, a long time ago, about some Muslims somewhere (Pakistan? Afghanistan?) who believed that they were descendants of Jesus. So the idea isn't new--but their belief may have nothing to do with some gnostics in Egypt.

12 posted on 09/24/2012 1:58:25 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson