Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/11/2014 6:35:46 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: Renfield

Note how quickly academia will claim such items to be proof, while they simultaneously reject the truth of the entire Bible.


30 posted on 04/11/2014 7:06:39 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

Oh this again...

It rears its head every now and then.


33 posted on 04/11/2014 7:09:54 AM PDT by sigzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield
The mainstream media sure likes to distort anything related to religion. The title of this article is misleading as it implies that, since manuscript experts have determined that the manuscript in question is not a "fake" (meaning it may have been created about the 10th century-- about 800 years after the last New Testament books were written), that implies that it "proves" that Jesus had a wife-- which it does not. Reading the article, the researchers themselves make clear this is a *Gnostic* text. The Gnostics were not Christians, as the headline erroneously states, but were an esoteric dualist sect (similar to the modern New Age movement) that incorporated aspects of the beliefs of the religions around them, including Christianity. So, no-- no early Christians believed that Jesus was married. Nice try, MSNBC.

Sometimes you hear it asked, "What difference does it make if Jesus were married or not?" There's a lot of things you can say to that, but it boils down to truth. There is no evidence, biblical or otherwise telling us Jesus was married--an important detail of his life if it was so.

36 posted on 04/11/2014 7:12:50 AM PDT by fidelis (Zonie and USAF Cold Warrior)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

Pre-nup????


37 posted on 04/11/2014 7:16:08 AM PDT by Cyman (We have to pass it to see what's in it= definition of stool sample)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

The early church had many groups trying to hijack what Christianity was and meant. Several of these groups were fascinated with redefining who and what Jesus was to fit into their belief system they were developing. Most of these groups were the people that the New Testament was warning the early first century church to beware of their teachings and in some cases were kicked out of the church by the apostles.

So in modern times, when they dig up one of the writings of one of these groups it immediately trumps the gospels and New Testament because it satisfies the current desire to redefine Christianity and Jesus by the secular left. They always fail to mention that these new findings come from the opposition camp of early Christianity and usually spin it like it was lost information that the guys in the first century just were not aware of and did not publish in the Bible.


39 posted on 04/11/2014 7:36:47 AM PDT by Gen-X-Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield
If the earliest the parchment could be from is 650AD, how could it be "thousands of years" old.

Reporters should not be expected to be epigraphers, but they should be expected to be proficient in 4th grade math.

40 posted on 04/11/2014 7:41:15 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield
Indeed, this makes perfect sense. There can no longer be doubt that the four evangelists clearly loved Jesus, but thought he was so wrong to include women in his world.

They dutifully reported the importance he felt women were in his ministry. They just thought that was an error. When they were reporting on Jesus' life, therefore, it stands to reason they would omit his wife, just air brush her from the picture. They must have been right, too, because they all did it. Since they represent 100% of the evangelists of The Good News, it's a settled view.

What the heck, the synoptic gospels were written so soon after Jesus' death that those evangelists would know as first hand eye witnesses that Mrs. Christ had to be expunged if Jesus' life was to have the proper impact. And God knows Jesus certainly would be clueless on impacts and invitations and vocations.

John came along so far down the road that he was probably senile when he wrote his. Nevertheless, some of his writings have convinced me that Jesus thought there was hope for salvation for even such as me i.e. John wrote his for me, personally.

Maybe we can get The Good Book fixed in the next edition.

48 posted on 04/11/2014 8:14:08 AM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

Before anyone gets too worked up over this, does anyone realize how many people were named Jesus back then? Or even today for that matter.

I can honestly type: “A few years ago I was surprise to run into Jesus and his wife at the folk life festival.”

Of course when we went to high school his name was pronounced “hey-sus” but written out you really can’t tell the difference.


51 posted on 04/11/2014 8:35:48 AM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

There are many forgeries from antiquity. Also, some gnostic groups taught Jesus was married and Mormonism still teaches Jesus was probably married and a polygamist.


55 posted on 04/11/2014 8:57:41 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian. I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

and..... the Holy Grail, the vessel containing the blood of Christ, is the son of Mary aka Mary Magdalene, that was in the south of France where she fled after the crucifixion


56 posted on 04/11/2014 9:58:18 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

Somebody digs up scrap papyrus from 1500 years ago or thereabouts that has “Jesus” and “wife” on it, and they go, non-ironically, “Jesus had a wife? Sounds legit.”

We note that the Bible has four accounts of Jesus’ life, and 23 other letters and books, all attested to have existed back to the first century or very shortly thereafter, none, and I mean none, of which mention Jesus having a wife, and they go all Jeff Lebowski on us: “Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”


80 posted on 04/12/2014 4:01:28 PM PDT by RichInOC (2013-14 Tiber Swim Team)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Renfield

2000 years from now, they are going to claim, “Deep Throat “ is the Clinton sex tape just because they are from the same time frame.


83 posted on 04/13/2014 7:20:14 AM PDT by Sensei Ern (FUBO (and Fallujohn Boehner, too))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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