Was Jesus married?

Jason could have a moment here where he realizes that Santa in not real.
 
I wouldn't deny anyone their right to believe in anything they want, they can believe the Hulk is real or that Little Women is the literal truth, it only begins to matter when they start impinging on others and trying to enforce their views as being the only correct one. It does seem odd however that in an established religion such as Christianity where everyone accepts that their main focus Jesus was born Jewish and kept to his traditions, ideas and worship that we have someone who differs so much from that established idea. I know some think the Old Testament is literal and some think it's allegorical and others that it's all madeup but none of these groups doubt it's Jewish. It seems indeed that Jason is denying the existance of Judaism which goes against all historical facts, if you leave out the religious aspect there is still the people to consider. Who does he think the Jewish people are?
 
So... we shouldn't point out the texts of the Qu'ran, the Torah itself, the Ethiopian Bible, or the rest of the "Apocryphal" texts...? It might help his understanding..? Yes?
 
EXACTLY - now you're thinking Elder. The entire Bible speaks to almost every aspect of Jesus's life; his adopted father, mother, half sister and half brothers but NOTHING of his wife! It is not that he couldn't have had a wife - having a wife is not sinful it is the fact that the scriptures would have mentioned something so special yet didn't.


Uh...yeah. First off, there would have been nothing special about his having a wife at all-it was a cultural expectation. The only one in all of the New Testament we can guess with any certainty to not have had a wife would have been Paul, and, as a Pharisee, it's likely that he was married, and, in 1st Corinthians, 95-7, he does mention "a wife," so it's entirely possible that he had one-Eusubius used this verse in 325 A.D. to show that Paul did have a wife, but I digress...

Just as believers can say about God to atheists, so I say to you:absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

No, the Bible makes no mention of Jesus's wife. Nor does it mention his beard, his long hair, his tools,(or, for that matter, his being a "carpenter,") his diet, his eyes, or his sword. All things that he's likely to have had, or that we can be certain he had, at least, inasmuch as we can be "certain" that he existed.

Of course, "the Bible," as you know it, is largely the creation of men, who discarded Gospels that do mention Jesus's wife.
 
Christianity doesn't use Judaism's books. Judaism uses the story and prophecies of Christ to create a religion around God's law. Being a Jew will not save your soul according to the Son of God.

Jason Brinn

Congratulations, Jason. You have written the most asinine statement I have ever read. Could this perhaps be called putting the cart before the horse? I've been a chaplain assistant for 12 years, and served with some of the best chaplains in the army, ans some of the worst, too. And every single one of them would be laughing if they read what you just wrote.

It is a RIDICULOUSLY contrived interpretation of reality.

The Tanach (the old testament) is a Jewish compilation of Jewish scripture. And the Tanach was QUOTED by paul, and loosely quoted by a couple of the gospel writers. By LITERAL definition, Christian's used Jewish scriptures.

*facepalm*
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Just an aside here to sidetrack the thread for minute ...as the troops here deploy to deploy to Afghan I'd like to salute a brave bunch of Christians who take tolerance to a new level and manage to be there for everyone whatever religion and with none, they don't try to convert, they listen, offering tea, quiet wisdom and dry humour They are brave under fire as they aren't armed. I salute the Christian padres who accompany their regiments through thick and thin.
Thank you.
 
Just an aside here to sidetrack the thread for minute ...as the troops here deploy to deploy to Afghan I'd like to salute a brave bunch of Christians who take tolerance to a new level and manage to be there for everyone whatever religion and with none, they don't try to convert, they listen, offering tea, quiet wisdom and dry humour They are brave under fire as they aren't armed. I salute the Christian padres who accompany their regiments through thick and thin.
Thank you.

I'll pass your thanks to my niece (MP, equestrienne), who is now in theatre. She also fondly salutes our Allies who bravely fight along side us :asian:
 
I know I have an educated understanding from studying the time thats it. Jesus was/is not Joshua Bar Joseph. You don't know what I think messiah means because I haven't stated that yet - unless you can read minds. NO ONE said the things that Jesus did, if you think so then you are mistaken or deceived.

Jesus said he is THE ONLY way to God. Jesus said he is GOD. I am pretty sure that's new to Judaism - at least the priests of that time thought so. Nothing in scripture has been changed by anyone EVER - unless you'd like to prove that and then you'd be the first since they were written 2000 years ago.

Judaism uses our books. I can't explain something to someone arguing about how they know it already - your cup appears full.


The Jewish concept of Messiah is not G-d. The Messiah will be a man of the line of David (strike one). Will gather all Jews to Israel (strike two). Will usher an era of world peace (strike three), will have a male heir who will reconstitute the Danhedrin (strike four) and build the Third Temple (strike five).


Judaism uses none of Xtianity's books, quite the reverse. And we read them in the original language.
 
Christianity doesn't use Judaism's books. Judaism uses the story and prophecies of Christ to create a religion around God's law. Being a Jew will not save your soul according to the Son of God.


Just WOW. You have no concept of historical and erligious matters do you.

Rough timeline.
4,000 years ago, G-d tells Abraham to leave for a land He will give him and He will make him a great nation.
3,000 years ago, The Jews leave Egypt and wander in the desert to find the only piece of land in the Middle East that has no oil. It's rare enough that it takes them 40 years to find it. Along the way, they haved a rest stop at the foot of a mountsain. Moses decides that mountain climbing is good exercise, goes up and G-d gives him the Torah.
2,000 years ago, A good Jewish boy is born. We know he was Jewish because a) he lived at home until he was 30, b) went into his father's business and c) thought his mother was a virgin. The boy decides to do something that's always been popular with Jews, and calls himself the Messiah. Jewish history is replete with those making such claims.
1,800 years ago, 4 guys from Liverpool, opps, 4 guys decide to write about the Jew Yoshua, the book's a hit.

How can you possibly claim that the Tanach is not antecedant to Xtian books? Bu quirk of location, I went to Catholic school, never heard anybody even hinting at such a thing. AAMOF, Xtians are rather fond in mistranslating and/or interpreting Jewish books to find references of Jesus.
 
A nice piece on the new fragment:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...roversial-New-Text-About-Jesus-170177076.html

King makes no claim for its usefulness as biography. The text was probably composed in Greek a century or so after Jesus’ crucifixion, then copied into Coptic some two centuries later. As evidence that the real-life Jesus was married, the fragment is scarcely more dispositive than Brown’s controversial 2003 novel, The Da Vinci Code.


What it does seem to reveal is more subtle and complex: that some group of early Christians drew spiritual strength from portraying the man whose teachings they followed as having a wife. And not just any wife, but possibly Mary Magdalene, the most-mentioned woman in the New Testament besides Jesus’ mother.


The question the discovery raises, King told me, is, “Why is it that only the literature that said he was celibate survived? And all of the texts that showed he had an intimate relationship with Magdalene or is married didn’t survive? Is that 100 percent happenstance? Or is it because of the fact that celibacy becomes the ideal for Christianity?”
 
I am actually quiet shocked, to be honest.

I was not quiet sure where to put my post initially.

It is astounding how a small word can fire up a conversation and controversy.
 
I am actually quiet shocked, to be honest.

I was not quiet sure where to put my post initially.

It is astounding how a small word can fire up a conversation and controversy.

Good job! :lfao:

Seriously, it's one of main-stream Christianity's "sacred cows."

Jesus was celibate. Jesus was pure. Jesus was too good for any earthly woman Jesus was above the desires of the flesh.

Jesus was a man. The Bible makes no mention of his testicles, but I'm certain.......well, you get the picture. :lol:
 
Good job! :lfao:

Seriously, it's one of main-stream Christianity's "sacred cows."

Jesus was celibate. Jesus was pure. Jesus was too good for any earthly woman Jesus was above the desires of the flesh.

Jesus was a man. The Bible makes no mention of his testicles, but I'm certain.......well, you get the picture. :lol:

Yeah, I know. He didn't go down stream for 25 paces to use the bush either...
 
If one was a cynic one could say if he was sent here to know suffering he certainly was married......... and probably had teenage kids!
 
If one was a cynic one could say if he was sent here to know suffering he certainly was married......... and probably had teenage kids!

butbutbut: Honor your parents...if not, they could off you, no?
 
butbutbut: Honor your parents...if not, they could off you, no?

Jewish kids can twist their parents round their little fingers for most parts. My daughter ( age 27) perfected as soon as she could talk how to say 'daaaad?' in such a way that she hadn't said the final 'd' before her dad said yes :)
 
Seriously, it's one of main-stream Christianity's "sacred cows."

Jesus was celibate. Jesus was pure. Jesus was too good for any earthly woman Jesus was above the desires of the flesh.

Yup.

Jesus was a man. The Bible makes no mention of his testicles, but I'm certain.......

The Pope has to have them, so...
 
Back
Top