Posted on 04/10/2014 8:26:11 PM PDT by NYer
Finally!
Hey, you know I was thinking that it was almost Easter and there hasn't been some shocking new revelation that Jesus wasn't real or he was real but was actually just a plumber from Poughkeepsie (which oddly enough was the name of a small town in Israel.) ((Not really))
So a new study has come out saying that the proof that Jesus had a wife is kinda' old. Yeah, that's actually what the study said. A piece a parchment supposedly says "Jesus said to them my wife." That's old news. But the new news is that the parchment is really old.
Some are calling it the "Gospel of Jesus' Wife." And by "some" I mean people who don't actually believe in the actual gospels.
In 2012, the discovery of a tattered papyrus fragment rocked the biblical studies community after some alleged its text proved that Jesus was married.Isn't it funny how she wants to move beyond the forgery questions and move on to the topic of women priests and priests getting married. Hmmm.
Now tests show the fragment is not only likely legit — it's also superold.
The controversial fragment known as the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" dates to between the sixth and ninth centuries, and could possibly date back as early as the second to fourth centuries, according to a newly published study in the Harvard Theological Review.
The fragment, which contains the words, "Jesus said to them, my wife," first came to light several years ago. Harvard University Divinity Professor Karen L. King, who announced the fragment's existence at a conference in 2012, was quick to point out that the fragment does not prove that Jesus had a wife.
"The main topic of the fragment is to affirm that women who are mothers and wives can be disciples of Jesus — a topic that was hotly debated in early Christianity as celibate virginity increasingly became highly valued," King said in a statement...
Not everyone agrees that the document is legitimate. Brown University professor Leo Depuydt wrote a rebuttal to the findings in which he calls out "gross grammatical errors." He said the fragment is so clearly a phony that it "seems ripe for a Monty Python sketch."
In an interview with the Boston Globe, King said, “I’m basically hoping that we can move past the issue of forgery to questions about the significance of this fragment for the history of Christianity, for thinking about questions like, ‘Why does Jesus being married, or not, even matter? Why is it that people had such an incredible reaction to this?’ "
Just proof that Dan Brown’s ancestor was also a fiction writer. :)
Well, to be more accurate, He's engaged; the marriage supper hasn't happened yet, but it will.
Jesus was married to Peter, no doubt.
This message has been approved for posting by OKCupid.
Big difference, Dude. As the only sinless man to have ever walked the earth, Jesus was not subject to the lusts and temptations of mankind. He came to be a living witness to God, to fulfill the law, and to die for all sins.
Were he to have married and had children then this would have been the life of an ordinary man, not God in flesh. And our faith would be a lie.
Incidentally, you might recall that the "Jesus married" notion is exactly the hidden secret revealed at the end of Dan Brown's bestseller, "The DaVinci Code."
What difference, at this point, does it make? There are 1+ billion of his followers, and do we really care if he was married or not? Did he have kids too? If so, there is some real royal blood flowing through the veins of earth’s population.
I thought he was gay - it gets so confusing....
Only jokes could be this ancient;
And Jesus said, "Take my wife..."
Thanks. But I’m not quite sure. There is absolutely no sin in being married and having children. Indeed, it’s part of the divine plan for us. And it’s one if the very first commandments to be fruitful and multiply. Many would argue that there is a sin of not obeying the above, and both the Church and Judaism teach the centrality and sacred nature of marriage and family life. . And at the very least, since Jesus came as a human, his being married would have served as a good example for us. I’m listening and not arguing just trying to understand better is all. Thanks.
You are right. Thanks for the clarification.
The book of Thomas, the book of Mary, and other gnostics were old too. The koran is old too.
And I don’t have a bit of use for any of them.
Had a nice young Jewish man of that time NOT been married, it would have been unusual enough to be noteworthy.
Proves? No. I would say, strongly suggests.
:) Please put me back on your ping list.Thank you.
None whatsoever.
So ... fake but accurate, part deux?
Harvard Divinity Professor. Why does Harvard need a professor of candy?
Heretical beliefs have been rejected since the very beginning of Christianity. Only a modern "scholar" could be confused into thinking that heresy has some special significance by dint of age.
Unless...
Ordinary men and women are simply the embodiment of God, as Jesus was, and he is more the Great Example than the Great Exception.
He came to be a living witness to God, to fulfill the law
And no other human being ever could do that? Are we not witnesses to God every moment?
If God is Omnipotent, then is God not Infinite? Otherwise, there would necessarily be a limit on God's power.
Now if God is Infinite, then mustn't God be boundless? So how could anyone or anything be "not of God" or outside that which is Infinite? And how could there be anywhere God is not, including inside you and me?
Does that not make us "the image and likeness of God" in a very literal sense?
Was Saul of Tarsus married?
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.