Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Origins of 'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' Begin to Emerge
Source:
Live Science
URL Source: http://www.livescience.com/51954-gospel-of-jesus-wife-origins.html
Published: Aug 24, 2015
Author: Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor
Post Date: 2015-08-24 21:47:48 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 13515
Comments: 135
Written in Coptic (an Egyptian language), the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, if authentic, suggests that some people in ancient times believed Jesus was married, apparently to Mary Magdalene. The truth may be finally emerging about the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife," a highly controversial papyrus suggesting that some people, in ancient times, believed Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. New research on the papyrus' ink points to the possibility that it is authentic, researchers say, while newly obtained documents may shed light on the origins of the business-card-sized fragment. Debate about the credibility of the "gospel" began as soon as Harvard University professor Karen King reported her discovery of the papyrus in September 2012. Written in Coptic (an Egyptian language), the papyrus fragment contains a translated line that reads, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife …'" and also refers to a "Mary," possibly Mary Magdalene. King had tentatively dated the papyrus to the fourth century, saying it may be a copy of a gospel written in the second century in Greek. [Read Translation of Gospel of Jesus's Wife Papyrus] Analysis of the papyrus, detailed last year in the Harvard Theological Review journal, suggested the papyrus dates back around 1,200 years (somewhere between the sixth and ninth centuries) while the ink is of a type that could have been created at that time. These findings have led King to support the text's authenticity. However over the past year many scholars have come to the conclusion that the papyrus is a modern-day forgery, though King and a few other researchers say they are not ready to concede this: "At this point, when discussions and research are ongoing, I think it is important, however difficult, to stay open regarding the possible dates of the inscription and other matters of interpretation," wrote King in a letter recently published in the magazine Biblical Archaeological Review. King has not responded to several interview requests from Live Science. Now, researchers at Columbia University are running new tests on the ink used on the papyrus. Initial tests published by the Columbia University team in 2014 indicated the ink could have been made in ancient times. Researchers are saying little until their report is published; however they did talk about one finding that could provide some support for its authenticity. A gospel steeped in mystery The current owner of the papyrus has insisted on remaining anonymous, claiming that he bought the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, along with other Coptic texts, in 1999 from a man named Hans-Ulrich Laukamp. This person, in turn, got it from Potsdam, in what was East Germany, in 1963, the owner said. Laukamp died in 2002, and the claim that he owned the text has been strongly disputed: Rene Ernest, the man whom Laukamp and his wife Helga charged with representing their estate, said that Laukamp had no interest in antiquities, did not collect them and was living in West Berlin in 1963. Therefore, he couldn't have crossed the Berlin Wall into Potsdam. Axel Herzsprung, a business partner of Laukamp's, similarly said that Laukamp never had an interest in antiquities and never owned a papyrus. Laukamp has no children or living relatives who could verify these claims. [6 Archaeological Forgeries That Tried to Change History] Over the past few months, new documents have been found that not only reconstruct Laukamp's life in greater detail, but also provide a new way to check the anonymous owner's story. King reported in a 2014 Harvard Theological Review article that the anonymous owner "provided me with a photocopy of a contract for the sale of '6 Coptic papyrus fragments, one believed to be a Gospel' from Hans-Ulrich Laukamp, dated Nov. 12, 1999, and signed by both parties." King also notes that "a handwritten comment on the contract states, 'Seller surrenders photocopies of correspondence in German. Papyri were acquired in 1963 by the seller in Potsdam (East Germany).'" After searching public databases in Florida a Live Science reporter uncovered seven signatures signed by Laukamp between 1997 and 2001 on five notarized documents. Anyone can search these databases and download these documents. These signatures can be compared with the signature recording the sale of the Gospel of Jesus's Wife — providing another way to verify or disprove the story of how the "gospel" made its way to Harvard. The signature of Hans-Ulrich Laukamp from September 1997. While Harvard University would have to work with forensic handwriting experts to verify the signature, the fact that these notarized documents exist, and are publicly available, presents the opportunity to see if Laukamp really did own the Gospel of Jesus's Wife. Forensic handwriting analysis, while not always conclusive, has been used to determine if signatures made on documents or works of art are authentic or forged. If Laukamp did own the papyrus, authentic or not, then the origins of the enigmatic text lie with him. The new Laukamp documents allow the story of his life between 1995 and 2002 to be told in some detail. However if Laukamp didn't own the papyrus and the anonymous owner has not been truthful, then further doubt would be cast on the papyrus' authenticity, and information leading to the identity, motives and techniques of the forgers could be found. Authentic or forged? One important find, which indicates the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a fake, was made last year by Christian Askeland, a research associate with the Institute for Septuagint and Biblical Research in Wuppertal, Germany. He examined a second Coptic papyrus containing part of the Gospel of John, which the anonymous owner of the Gospel of Jesus's Wife had also given to Harvard. This text was likewise supposedly purchased from Laukamp, and radiocarbon testing of that papyrus similarly found that it dates back around 1,200 years. [See Images of the Ancient Gospel of Judas] Askeland found that the text and line breaks— where one line of a text ends and another begins — are identical to those of another papyrus, published in a 1924 book. That second papyrus was written in a dialect of Coptic called Lycopolitan, which went extinct around 1,500 years ago. Askeland concluded that the John papyrus is a forgery. Furthermore, it shares other features with the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, Askeland said, suggesting both are forgeries. "The two Coptic fragments clearly shared the same ink, writing implement and scribal hand. The same artisan had created both essentially at the same time," Askeland wrote in a paper recently published in the journal New Testament Studies. King objected to this conclusion in her Biblical Archaeology Review letter, noting that the John fragment could have been copied in ancient times, long after Lycopolitan went extinct, from a text that had similar line breaks. In addition, James Yardley, a senior research scientist at Columbia University, told Live Science that the new tests confirm that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife holds different ink than the John papyrus. This could undercut Askeland's argument that the two papyri were written by the same person. "In our first exploration, we did state that the inks used for the two documents of interest [the John papyrus and the Gospel of Jesus's Wife] were quite different. The more recent results do confirm this observation strongly," Yardley told Live Science. He added that until his new research is published in a peer-reviewed journal, he doesn't want to say anything more publicly. And once it's published, Askeland and other researchers will have a chance to respond. Askeland's find is far from the only argument that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a fake: A number of scholars have noted that the Coptic writing in the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is similar to another early Christian text called the "Gospel of Thomas," even including a modern-day typo made in a 2002 edition of the Gospel of Thomas that is available for free online. That typo indicates the forgers copied from this modern-day text. King disputed this assertion in 2014, saying that ancient scribes made grammatical errors similar to the modern-day typo. King and communications staff at Harvard Divinity School have not responded to repeated requests for comment. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: cranky (#0)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
He was not allowed to masterbate. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
What if the document is proven not to be a forgery? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Maybe, Jesus read in the Old Testament, "be fruitful and multiply" or something like that.
How many times are they going to 're-rinse this Gnostic nonsense.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Proven? By whom? The people who want it desperately to be true?
God is multiplying. The many Christians who believe in God is proof of multiplying.
Possibly for the same reason(s) He needed disciples? There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Hard to say. Maybe when the evidence is conclusive, one way or the other. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
For the same reasons everyone else needs a wife? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
What's wrong with it being true? Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Uhhhh,it is Christians having all that "dirty sex" that are multiplying,and Christians by definition believe in the Christian God. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The proof thusfar has been that this fragment is a later fabrication...fraud. It's in the article. What these 'researchers' are after is to find something believing it contradicts the Scriptures we have now. They lose everytime because even though they tout scholarship, they fail to even understand the time period involved. Even in the days of the Apostles in the early 1st century there were already heretics they warned believers about. Let's put this in perspective. If today thousands of people wrote cranky was a stand up guy, that he gave to the poor and spent all his earthly wealth on hospitals for disabled children. Fast forward 1,000 years as everyone was going through 10's of thousands of the 'cranky archives' and they find out all these wonderful things about you. But someone digs one or two blogs on cranky calling him a child abuser, a cheat on his wife and a secret Hillary Clinton supporter. Shocking! Modern liberal 'scholarship' tells us the 10s of thousands of documents saying otherwise must be discredited for some jealous jerk who happened to spend a few bucks on his own blog site to bear false witness. That's exactly what you have with these fragments of ancient 'jerks' who were either deceived or had an axe to grind. But people who really know cranky and his works (which live on thousands of yers later by people inspired by what he did), know the jerk who wrote garbage about him is just a jerk who should be paid no mind. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
By those standards the whole Old Testament is a fraud. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I think everyone is missing the point. He has the ultimate control over mind body and soul. You need air to breath. You need water and food for nourishment. You don't actually need sex to survive. You don't need other people to survive. These are things we "want" but don't "need".
The article gave ample evidence this and other Gnostic texts are forgeries. The latest they can place these fragments is 1200 years ago. That's not very 'ancient' when it comes to fragments and manuscripts. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Until they make everyone the same as them. I find many of this stuff comes from the Jewish people who really dislike Christianity because some Christians have been very abrasive to them. No one likes to be challenged about their beliefs. It doesn't have to be just Jewish people but they tend to be the ones that promote this crap the most.
The Bride of CHRIST is the church. Not the RC church, but the body of believers known as Born Again Washed in the Blood of the Lamb Christians.
The Dead Sea Scrolls say otherwise. When these researchers find thousands of fragments that "Jesus had a wife" then you can jump for joy. But this is only one fragment and the author is unknown, the ink is in question for the time period of the 'paper' used. Also, the NT points to the use of the "OT" (TaNaKh) both Hebrew and Greek version. The OT is quoted in the NT and Jesus Christ picks up a scroll in Luke 4 and reads from the Prophet Isaiah. The forgery in question in the article has no such linkages or uses in history. Let us visit how this one, ONE, forgery stands with the manuscript and historical evidence of the Bible the OT (TaNaKh) and NT (Brit HaHadashah): Old Testament The following is a list of the oldest Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament that are still in existence. •The Dead Sea Scrolls: date from 200 B.C. - 70 A.D. and contain the entire book of Isaiah and portions of every other Old Testament book but Esther. •Geniza Fragments: portions the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic, discovered in 1947 in an old synagogue in Cairo, Egypt, which date from about 400 A.D. •Ben Asher Manuscripts: five or six generations of this family made copies of the Old Testament using the Masoretic Hebrew text, from 700-950 A.D. The following are examples of the Hebrew Masoretic text-type. ◦Aleppo Codex: contains the complete Old Testament and is dated around 950 A.D. Unfortunately over one quarter of this Codex was destroyed in anti-Jewish riots in 1947. ◦Codex Leningradensis: The complete Old Testament in Hebrew copied by the last member of the Ben Asher family in A.D. 1008. Translations The Old Testament was translated very early into Aramaic and Greek. •400 B.C. The Old Testament began to be translated into Aramaic. This translation is called the Aramaic Targums. This translation helped the Jewish people, who began to speak Aramaic from the time of their captivity in Babylon, to understand the Old Testament in the language that they commonly spoke. In the first century Palestine of Jesus' day, Aramaic was still the commonly spoken language. For example maranatha: "Our Lord has come," 1 Corinthians 16:22 is an example of an Aramaic word that is used in the New Testament. •250 B.C. The Old Testament was translated into Greek. This translation is known as the Septuagint. It is sometimes designated "LXX" (which is Roman numeral for "70") because it was believed that 70 to 72 translators worked to translate the Hebrew Old Testament in Greek. The Septuagint was often used by New Testament writers when they quoted from the Old Testament. The LXX was translation of the Old Testament that was used by the early Church. 1. The following is a list of the oldest Greek LXX translations of the Old Testament that are still in existence. ◦Chester Beatty Papyri: Contains nine Old Testament Books in the Greek Septuagint and dates between 100-400 A.D. ◦Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus each contain almost the entire Old Testament of the Greek Septuagint and they both date around 350 A.D. New Testament There are over 5,600 early Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament that are still in existence. The oldest manuscripts were written on papyrus and the later manuscripts were written on leather called parchment. •125 A.D. The New Testament manuscript which dates most closely to the original autograph was copied around 125 A.D, within 35 years of the original. It is designated "p 52" and contains a small portion of John 18. (The "p" stands for papyrus.) •200 A.D. Bodmer p 66 a papyrus manuscript which contains a large part of the Gospel of John. •200 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 46 contains the Pauline Epistles and Hebrews. •225 A.D. Bodmer Papyrus p 75 contains the Gospels of Luke and John. •250-300 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 45 contains portions of the four Gospels and Acts. •350 A.D. Codex Sinaiticus contains the entire New Testament and almost the entire Old Testament in Greek. It was discovered by a German scholar Tisendorf in 1856 at an Orthodox monastery at Mt. Sinai. •350 A.D. Codex Vaticanus: {B} is an almost complete New Testament. It was cataloged as being in the Vatican Library since 1475. Translations Early translations of the New Testament can give important insight into the underlying Greek manuscripts from which they were translated. •180 A.D. Early translations of the New Testament from Greek into Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions began about 180 A.D. •195 A.D. The name of the first translation of the Old and New Testaments into Latin was termed Old Latin, both Testaments having been translated from the Greek. Parts of the Old Latin were found in quotes by the church father Tertullian, who lived around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote treatises on theology. •300 A.D. The Old Syriac was a translation of the New Testament from the Greek into Syriac. •300 A.D. The Coptic Versions: Coptic was spoken in four dialects in Egypt. The Bible was translated into each of these four dialects. •380 A.D. The Latin Vulgate was translated by St. Jerome. He translated into Latin the Old Testament from the Hebrew and the New Testament from Greek. The Latin Vulgate became the Bible of the Western Church until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500's. It continues to be the authoritative translation of the Roman Catholic Church to this day. The Protestant Reformation saw an increase in translations of the Bible into the common languages of the people. •Other early translations of the Bible were in Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic, Slavic, and Gothic. •1380 A.D. The first English translation of the Bible was by John Wycliffe. He translated the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate. This was a translation from a translation and not a translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. Wycliffe was forced to translate from the Latin Vulgate because he did not know Hebrew or Greek. There's much more here: History of the Bible: How The Bible Came To Us And here: When were the New Testament Books written? Perspective is important. After reviewing the above we have this to compare: •Caesar’s Gallic Wars was written in the first century B.C. There are only 10 manuscripts in existence. The earliest textual evidence we have was copied 1,000 years after the original. •Aristotle’s Poetics was written in the fourth century B.C. There are only 5 manuscripts in existence. The earliest textual evidence we have was copied 1,400 years after the original. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
PING
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Usually the atheist variant. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
I think I'll defer judgement until the peer reviewed paper is published. As far as the fragment of papyrus goes, either in is an authentic artifact dating from the fourth century or it is not. If it is authentic, it should be given the as much or as little weight as any other shard of papyrus, imo. And let the chips fall where they may. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
As far as the fragment of papyrus goes, either in is an authentic artifact dating from the fourth century or it is not. If it is authentic, it should be given the as much or as little weight as any other shard of papyrus, imo. How many peer reviews does this fragment need? It has already been reviewed several times and deemed a forgery. How many times was "Jesus has a wife" been recopied? Where is the manuscript evidence? "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
You are talking about dirty sex, and I'm talking about souls that acknowledge God as Savior. The Holy Bible talks about the children of God.
Where in the Holy Bible does it talk about Christ having a wife? It does talk about the family of God: brothers, sisters, mother, father. Who is the Bride of Christ, according to the Book of Revelation?
If the science is valid, then it will be deemed a forgery again. That's fine with me. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
And let's pause for a moment to think about whether it really makes any difference, theologically, that Jesus had a wife or not. Let's given the Mary Magdelene theorists the greatest slack and say "Ok, Mary Magdelene, former sinner, became Jesus' wife." That would explain why Jesus revealed himself to her first after the resurrection, and why he would speak to her tenderly. But beyond that, does it change ANYTHING about the faith? No. It doesn't change a single thing. It changes some ideas about the practice of the religion - example: clerical celibacy. But then, the Scriptures already tell us that Jesus healed Peter's Mother-in-Law, and Peter was the first Pope, so it changes less than appears. For those who (foolishly) think that bloodlines matter (foolishly: because ALL are descended equally from Noah and Naamah, and from Adam and Eve), then let's suppose that Jesus and Mary Magdelene even had children. Once again, so what? "Royal blood" and "bloodline" concerns are the concerns of vaguely pagan medieval warlords. God never suggested that any attention be paid to them at all, other than in the context of titles to ancestral clan farms in Israel, under the old covenant. Spiritual guidance doesn't flow with bloodlines but with the breath of God's spirit into each individual - and Jesus said that all who believed were his brothers and sisters. If Jesus had a wife and child, it would change some ecclesiology, but it would not change theology at all (except to the extent that men have confused ecclesiology with theology - which is to say, except to the extent that men have fallen under the spell of idolatry). Bottom line: there's no "gotcha" there even if Jesus DID have a wife, and children. And if there are living lineal descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdelene in the world today, they either have favor with God, or not, depending on whether they believe and keep the commandments, just exactly like everybody else. There are very probably descendants of Nephilim in the world today. The Basques may be their descendants. The Rh negative blood type may be the marker of that peculiar ancestry. They're just men, neither specially blessed nor specially cursed. Having a fallen angel as a 55-times great grandparent means nothing. What matters is whether you love God and keep the commandments. That's what God said. MEN add importance to other things. But God said "Don't add". So don't.
If authentic, suggests that some people in ancient times believed Jesus was married, apparently to Mary Magdalene. HA! "IF authentic". Also discovered by "researchers" on ancient papyrus ("If authentic"): 1) "Jesus' mother wore Army boots" Forensic handwriting analysts at both Harvard Theological Review journal and Columbia U. are studying whether or not Jesus' signature has been forged. TMZ and LBGT researchers are looking closely into what may actually be a sordid tabloid past of Jesus that has been covered up for over 2000 years.
Who else was going to do his laundry and make him sammiches?
No...but they will not escape eternal doom either.
Are you actually considering this blatant BS as a possibility??
Propaganda is best repeated. With as many faith-challenged, fools and pods are out there hoping the Bible and Gospel is a lie, absurdity through the power of suggestion plants just enough doubt to justify rolling the dice on the lot of their soul.
Interesting insight. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
From 'The Dan Rather School of "Proof"'? With as many witnesses to the life of Jesus as there were, and as many enemies as He had at the time, IF there were actual "proof" of a wife, Jesus' contemporaries and historians would have been all over it. EARLY ON. Instead we are asked to believe the most flimsy of obvious forgeries that crop up like clock-work every half-dozen years or so. Question for you: What of all the overwhelming proof and details of Jesus personal quotes, deeds, and acts; and of places, and things, of eyewitness accounts cited from the Apostles? Why are they so readily dismissed in lieu of these single sordid tabloid "discoveries"?
Yep the above is 'pin the tail on the donkey' time. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
I suspect most of these people who dwell only in a Material World they can "see" in their hearts *know* the truth, but won't surrender it, their spirit and soul to it to God. As a gesture of ultimate contempt (as had recently and suddenly deceased good friend) they reject their Lord of Lords. This most stubborn act and exercise of having both a passive tantrum while holding their breath till they're blue (until God shows up on their doorstep) only serves to sabotage one's own soul forever. It's the only way pseudo-disbelievers (who call themselves "Agnostics" and Atheists") feel they can "diss" a God who refuses to make an encore appearance (at their whim.) In the meantime these same people demand the God they reject make THIS moral plane a "fair" place -- if not a premature Heaven.
Yup. I don't understand that grossly imbalanced "burden of proof" dynamic from a rational person. They'd rather pin the tail on a flea rather than on the tail of an elephant.
Wrong premise; It's a matter of humoring a lie perpetrated by those with a subversive agenda. Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage? Irrelevant to the lying claim that Jesus "had a wife".
Uhhhh....You missed the mark by approximately a thousand miles.
I didn't know there were any references made about Jesus of Nazareth during his lifetime. Even raising the dead didn't seem to inspire anyone enough at the time to record the event. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
It's in the article. What these 'researchers' are after is to find something believing it contradicts the Scriptures we have now. They lose everytime because even though they tout scholarship, they fail to even understand the time period involved. Even in the days of the Apostles in the early 1st century there were already heretics they warned believers about. Amen. We can only imagine the degree of suppression by heretics of all things Jesus' soon after His death and resurrection as eyewitness testimony and word spread throughout the Mediterranean. IT FAILED. Because the evidence and testimony was overwhelming. This recent kind of bogus "research" and "scholarship" using the prestige and clout of such intellectual hotbeds as Harvard and Columbia hopes to net the usual hit & run readers of headlines-only. The pods will ONLY remember the headlines and Twitter it to each other (Didja hear?? Jesus had a WIFE!!"), remaining oblivious to the subsequent dismissal of yet one more attempted "researched discovery" and fraud.
This most stubborn act and exercise of having both a passive tantrum while holding their breath till they're blue (until God shows up on their doorstep) only serves to sabotage one's own soul forever. It's the only way pseudo-disbelievers (who call themselves "Agnostics" and Atheists") feel they can "diss" a God who refuses to make an encore appearance (at their whim.) In the meantime these same people demand the God they reject make THIS moral plane a "fair" place -- if not a premature Heaven. I will consider the above an indictment of our post-modern world. We must increase our prayers that all who fit the above category will seek God's Grace and Mercy. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Even raising the dead didn't seem to inspire anyone enough at the time to record the event. Have you read the Gospels of the Apostles? Have you read of the incredible crowds Jesus would draw? Were they fictional accounts written but multiple sources?
It is clear from NT Scriptures that the marriage bed is undefiled. Regardless of what some medieval clergy may think. So not a case of 'sex' within marriage. It is a case of consistency. We have over 5,000 manuscript evidences of the NT texts. Not one even hints at Jesus being married. But we do know from those same evidences, Jesus had a mother, an earthly 'step-father' and brothers and sisters. They are all mentioned but not a wife. No mention of a wife. We hear "brothers of Jesus", "Mother of Jesus" but not even a hint of "wife of Jesus." So unless this fragment comes directly from an Apostle and predates the NT Scriptures, it is unreliable. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Yes, and the Time of Decision must be made soon for all. Too many are falling by the wayside. Jeremiah 5:21 Matthew 13:13 Matthew 13:14 Mark 8:18 John 12:40 Acts 28:26 Romans 1:20 Romans 11:8 Isaiah 6:9 Isaiah 6:10 Isaiah 43:8 Jeremiah 4:22 Jeremiah 6:10 Ezekiel 12:2 Zechariah 7:11
Perhaps you should study Mormon books?
I agree with you: Jesus did not have a wife. If he had one, it would have probably been recorded (unless God, for some reason, decided to not inspire its recordation). But if he did, it doesn't change theology one whit. It would change ecclesiology only (and who but professional clergymen cares about that?). It's a tempest in a teapot, the whole thing.
I hear that the northern hemisphere of Kolob is lovely this time of year!
As many times as it takes for people to believe them... Translation: This will never end!! LOL. I remember TC posting this some time ago on LP. Think it is time to have it in the LF archives:) "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Proven? By whom? The same people that verified the authentuicity of what is accepted as original writings that make up Scripture. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Not people...The Holy Spirit. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Un,huh. And what are they,other than oral tradition handed down over generations that were finally put into written words? When these researchers find thousands of fragments that "Jesus had a wife" then you can jump for joy. I won't be jumping for joy or disappointed. I don't really care other than in a "good for him,maybe he wasn't queer after all" sort of way. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
By people with an agenda who NEED it to be a forgery to keep their particular brand of faith alive. "It's a forgery,ah tells ya!" is a claim 1,000 miles long and a fraction of an inch deep. It's no more a forgery than any other text claiming to be from the time of Jesus that was written in the 4th Century. Some people just can't stand to see their dogmas put on a chain. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Define "dirty sex". It is all sex,or just any sex that isn't approved by some church authority? Or is it what is commonly known as "kinky sex"? If so,please define it. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It doesn't. The Bible was obviously written by women-hating homosexuals,so maybe/probably it is not 100 percent accurate and truthful? You DO know it is just a book that was written by many different people and even edited by more people who decided what to leave in and what to leave out,right? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Let's given the Mary Magdelene theorists the greatest slack and say "Ok, Mary Magdelene, former sinner, became Jesus' wife." That would explain why Jesus revealed himself to her first after the resurrection, and why he would speak to her tenderly. But beyond that, does it change ANYTHING about the faith? Only for people who were raised to believe that sex is dirty. For them,it pretty much shatters their whole sense of what Christianity is all about. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Who else was going to do his laundry and make him sammiches? His "Boy Ward Robin",that dresses in flashy rubber tights? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The way *I* see it,Jesus was a threat to the political powers that be at the time,and if anything,THEY would be the ones that promoted the idea that this man in his 30's only hung around with hairy-legged men and never had sex or any other close relations with any female. What better way to turn people away from a political threat to your power than to suggest the leader of this new movement is a homosexual? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Wrong premise; It's a matter of humoring a lie perpetrated by those with a subversive agenda. No,it is a legitimate question. Please answer it. What would be wrong with Jesus having a wife? Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage? Irrelevant to the lying claim that Jesus "had a wife". No,it cuts right to the heart of it because if you don't think of sex as something evil or "dirty",why would you care about Jesus having had a wife? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Really? How? Please give me facts,not dogmatic faith. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
LOL! Yeah,but if there is one thing you can rely on ignorant,superstitious people to do,it is to piss off somebody that has the power to destroy the whole world. Good call! Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It is clear from NT Scriptures that the marriage bed is undefiled. Regardless of what some medieval clergy may think. Un,huh. "Marriage bed UNDEFILED". Nothing prejudicial there,is there? BTW,PLEASE correct me if I am wrong,but isn't the "New and Improved" New Testament even newer than the 4th Century scroll fragment that is the source of this thread? Doesn't that mean,by your OWN logic,that the entire NT must also be fraudulent? We hear "brothers of Jesus", "Mother of Jesus" but not even a hint of "wife of Jesus." Yeah,we even hear a LOT about the "Jesus Baby Daddy" who was NOT his mother's husband,and who violated his own commandments by impregnating another man's wife. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I posted a lot more Pete than citing the DSS. The written Word of God started long before the manuscripts and fragments we have today. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Frankly the opposite. Kept alive because the mountain of evidence points to this fragment as being a fraud. Here's some perspective. There are over 5,000 owners of the Topps 1967 baseball card of Mickey Mantle. Here it is BTW: Now, some collector comes along almost 50 years later and explains to everyone in possession of the 5,000 1967 Mickey Mantle Topps baseball cards that what they have is actually a fraud. That 'he' is in possession of the one and only authentic 1967 Mickey Mantle baseball card. That Topps had it wrong. TV had it wrong. Thousands of pictures had it wrong. But this lone collector says "THIS IS IT" instead: "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Yes I will correct you...You are incorrect. If you read the post I provided you would see the manuscript evidence is centuries earlier. If you went to some of the links I provided you would see late 1st Century and early 2nd Century church theologians quoted from what we call the NT. If we were to take just the writings of the church fathers from the first three centuries, we could piece together an entire OT and NT...even without the manuscripts. That is what is called a dual independent check. And the Bible both OT and NT surpasses this. Yeah,we even hear a LOT about the "Jesus Baby Daddy" who was NOT his mother's husband,and who violated his own commandments by impregnating another man's wife. Now you are just being cynical and silly. Plus showing you are commenting on something you have little knowledge on. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
I knew there was a damn good reason for me not liking the Yankees... Pete, I know you have a hate relationship with the Holy Bible. I know the Holy Spirit was responsible for writing the Holy Bible and responsible for ensuring the Scriptures stayed true to truth and the purposes of God for revealing the Scriptures to mankind.
You used the term "Dirty Sex." I repeated your term. Shouldn't you do the defining?
Why is that? There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
My understanding is none of them were written at the time Jesus was living. Any contemporaneous accounts of Jesus's life would be appreciated. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
It is my understanding that every book in the Bible was written long after the death of Christ. Now,how this applies to the Torah and other religious written texts,I have no idea. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In other words,written from 100 to 200 years after the events written about. Yeah,we even hear a LOT about the "Jesus Baby Daddy" who was NOT his mother's husband,and who violated his own commandments by impregnating another man's wife. Now you are just being cynical and silly. Plus showing you are commenting on something you have little knowledge on. Who was the Jesus baby daddy? Who was the Jesus mother,and who was she married to? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Not really. Just the evil bastards that use it and interpret it in such a way as to turn their followers into mindless robots full of fear. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
#26. To: sneakypete (#14) You are talking about dirty sex, and I'm talking about souls that acknowledge God as Savior. The Holy Bible talks about the children of God. Don posted on 2015-08-25 10:13:20 ET Reply Trace Private Reply Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Nothing. Adam had one. Abraham had several. Isaac had one. Jacob had two. Joseph had one. Moses had one. Peter, the first Pope had one. There would be nothing at all wrong with Jesus having a wife. History doesn't record him having one, so he probably didn't. If history showed him having one, the Church would not have a celibacy rule for the priesthood. That's the tangible ecclesiological difference it would make, but it would make no theological difference at all. In fact, if he had a wife, one wife, and (because he was Son of God) was always faithful to her, and remained married to her to the end, then his human marriage would be yet another exemplary archetype of how men are supposed to behave, in this case when they are married. But we don't have history showing that, so he probably didn't. Not really much more to say about it. It's not a big deal either way.
The first three commandments given to humanity upon creation were: Reproduce! Increase! Fill the land and subdue it! Those same commandments were repeated after the Flood. Men and women are supposed to permanently pair off and have lots of babies. Sex isn't dirty.
Read Titus 3:10
Not really. Just the evil bastards that use it and interpret it in such a way as to turn their followers into mindless robots full of fear. Me too?
The celibacy rule has more to do with the Catholic Church keeping money and property than anything else. Parishioners were "buying a slice of Heaven" by leaving money and property to Parish Priests,and married Preists would leave it to their children when they died,cutting Rome and the Pope out of the wealth. The solution was to bar Priests from marrying so that any property or money left to them ended up belonging to The Vatican. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I couldn't agree more. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Me too? Is that what you do? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I think priestly celibacy was more a matter of curbing abuses. Today, there's too much pedophilia. Back then, the problem in undisciplined, backward Europe was that in confession parishioners really told priests their sins, and many priests were not paragons of virtue, and used the fact they had secrets to extort sexual favors and even marriage out of otherwise unwilling women. There were also the dynastic issues to which you referred all over medieval Europe - it was a feudal society living at a low level, so every sinecure such as a priesthood was a boon, and people did try to pass along the offices. But the reforms came out of a monastery - Cluniac monks spread the rule of celibacy and urged it. The papacy only agreed later. So celibacy did not come to the clergy as a top-down thing, but as a bottom-up reaction to a problem. The top later adopted the reform as a rule, and surely there were other benefits to it. Seeing the worst motivation in everybody all the time is unseemly. People are simply not that disciplined in their evil to be able to carry it forward so tightly for millennia.
I referred to your post where you mentioned "dirty sex." I passed over your term and went to the question you were asking. Reproduction doesn't have to mean sex which produces children. Reproduction can also mean having spiritual children. That was my response to your post.
Well, if one likes this "gospel", one might like Mormon books even better.
certainly not internationally if at all. But, if I do, I have no one to blame but myself, for I don't read or use commentary by others, all of my Bible studies and conversations are based upon what God said, not what man says He said. And while I know you are wrong when it comes to Scripture and Christ, I do have a ton of respect for your political insight, and would not want you turning away from me.
Let me give you something to ponder. There is no mention of the US in end times, the US is not Babylon. That said, while my writings on this subject go back to 1998, recently something that Donald Trump said, got my attention and gave me pause. He said something about you don't have a country if you have no borders and/or laws. One of the first things Do did was give Israel defined borders, defined so precisely that we today know not where they are. I would submit to you, that since we are a nation of laws for some but not all and a nation with no southern, eastern , western or northern border, that prevents illegal entry, we are not a nation. Why would God bother to mention a non nation in His book?
You mean the New Testament? "Long after" is how long in your understanding? The eyewitnesses to His works and words lived long after Jesus' death and resurrection. His Apostles/disciples were the main authors of the NT. You have the crucifixion and resurrection occur circa AD 33. Here's how the various books of the NT are dated as following: A Chronological Order of the New Testament From the link above you will see roughly 80% of all the NT books were penned in circulation before 70 AD. Which means from 33 AD until the actually penning of the various NT books, the Apostles who walked the earth with Christ were alive and were the 'bipedal' human based life form of the New Testament. The arguments that the NT was written hundreds of years later in the 3rd Century AD don't hold water. We have church leaders and theologians in the late 1st century and throughout the 2nd century quoting entire Gospels and epistles in their theological and pastoral works. Add to this the era was one of persecution for Christians. They were spread out, did not see each other's works or letters and yet they all quote the very same Gospel and Epistles. That is evidence written versions of the NT texts were in wide cirulation throughout the Roman Empire. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
With regards to the early church fathers AFTER the Apostles. Which means these men in the late 1st and early 2nd century had written copies in circulation. I went into that quite a bit in my previous post. Who was the Jesus baby daddy? Who was the Jesus mother,and who was she married to? I recommend you read Luke chapter 1. Perhaps if you entered with the knowledge that God is the Creator of all things and Master of His own Creation, Luke chapter 1 would not be so difficult to understand. The Son of God was manifest in the flesh as Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. The woman with this high honor was Mary. Mary's bloodline reaches back through the tribe of Judah to King David. Mary was betrothed to Joseph when the following occurred: Luke chapter 1: 29 But when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. 30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” 34 Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” 35 And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God. 36 Now indeed, Elizabeth your relative has also conceived a son in her old age; and this is now the sixth month for her who was called barren. 37 For with God nothing will be impossible.” 38 Then Mary said, “Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
As far as I know, this is no 'gospel' and no one claims it is. It is a fragment of papyrus of uncertain origin. Whether it is authentic or not, there's is no context that I am aware of that could possibly lead one to believe this is a fragment of a 'gospel'. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
EXACTLY.... "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
What does that mean? Is a part of your claim based on a belief that sex has to be for reproduction purposes? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Bob,it was people who wrote the books of the Bible,not God,and we all know that people are not infallible. All of us,regardless of who we are,tend to "color" our beliefs based on personal prejudices,likes,and histories. Others even "color" their beliefs based on what they think will bring them power and wealth. These people are called "politicians". And while I know you are wrong when it comes to Scripture and Christ, No problem there. People that agree with me too much scare me a little. I think they want something. Besides,I am not in love with my theories to the point where I confuse them with "facts that fit everyone". Opinions are personal and it is only a happy coincidence when they are identical to indisputable facts. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You mean the New Testament? "Long after" is how long in your understanding? 100 years,but only because you are forcing me to pick a number. The truth is that two sane adults can witness an event while it is happening,and see and report it in different ways the same day. Plus we all know that memories tend to fade and even change as we grow older and look at things from a different and more mature POV. Then there are the oral traditions that are handed down from illiterate generation to illiterate generation,and we all know those stories shift as time passes. BTW,thanks for the chronological order. I had never seen that before. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Who was the Jesus mother,and who was she married to? Why not just give me a direct answer? We both know who the claimed father was,but I want to "hear" you say it. I recommend you read Luke chapter 1. Perhaps if you entered with the knowledge that God is the Creator of all things and Master of His own Creation, Luke chapter 1 would not be so difficult to understand. The flip side of that is perhaps if you were to read it with a open mind instead of as a True Believer,you might also see it differently? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
BTW, that happens to be Gary's site. Gary is pretty expert on this area of manuscripts and evidence concerning the dating of these NT books.
BTW, that happens to be Gary's site. Thanks,and "Good for you,Gary!" Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Any contemporaneous accounts of Jesus's life would be appreciated. Not written while Jesus was alive, true. But later on, in cases many years. But then how many contemporary biographies are written while someone is actually alive? What we still have is multiple corroboration and sources of Jesus' words, deeds, and places during His life by several eyewitnesses. In all of history there is no testimony quite like it. Within context, "testimony" is not as simple as having just four Gospel writers hovering around Jesus with pad and pencil in hand. The Gospels were a collaborative effort as there were many eyewitnesses. A brief overview of note: The historical archaeological and literary evidence demonstrates that in the first century A.D. books were written and published with the title and name of the author placed at the end of the papyrus roll (also sometimes in the front) on which they were written or copied and on a tag attached to the outside of the papyrus roll called in Greek, a sillybos and in Latin a titulus. They were not usually placed in the text itself. This was the normal custom of identifying the author of a book in the Roman world in the first century. The author did not normally identify himself in the text itself, but like today’s title page, his name was placed along with a title in a location on the document but outside the text. Several rolled up papyrus rolls would be stored in a round canister called a capsa with their tags placed at their tops so each roll could be easily identified. There is no historical archaeological or literary evidence that the four NT gospels did not follow this normal custom of having the names of the authors of the gospels identified in this way when they first published and distributed their original gospels and their copies. All subsequent copies of papyrus rolls would also follow this practice. In fact, as we have demonstrated in our article entitled “Authorship of the NT Gospels” the authors of the four NT gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were well-known as the authors and their authorship was never disputed by the early church. (Matthew): The universal testimony of the early church fathers is that Matthew the Apostle wrote the Gospel of Matthew in both Hebrew and Greek. The Time Period of the Publishing of Matthew’s Gospel Matthew’s first version/edition of his gospel was when he went to other lands. There are two lines of evidence which give us the general time period this happened. It had to have happened after the Jerusalem council in 50 A.D. where the specifics of the gospel and its relation to the Mosaic Law and the gentiles was finally defined. This coincides with what Irenaeus says that Matthew’s gospel was published during the time Peter and Paul were preaching and establishing the church in Rome. Matthew wrote his gospel for the Jewish Christians that they might understand how Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy thus proving that he was indeed the messiah and Savior of Israel. (Mark): The historical literary evidence demonstrates that Mark, the close associate of Peter the apostle, wrote the Gospel of Mark from the preaching of Peter and published it first in a private edition for the church at Rome and then in public edition for the church at large. Mark was requested by certain Roman Christians to write down Peter’s testimony of Jesus after Peter had left Rome. (Luke): The historical literary evidence demonstrates that Luke, the close associate of Paul the apostle, wrote the Gospel of Luke and published it after the publication of the private edition of Mark’s gospel and before the publication of the public edition of Mark’s Gospel. The Gospel of Luke was composed for Gentiles who had become Christians. (John): The historical literary evidence demonstrates that John the Apostle wrote and published the Gospel of John after the publication of the other three gospels while he was living in Ephesus. The Gospel of John was composed by John at the urging of his Christian friends to complement the Synoptic Gospels by providing a Gospel that was focused on the spiritual truths taught by Jesus and demonstrated in his life and ministry. http://www.jesusevidences.com/originntgospels/originntgospels.php Additional notes from another source: Four Gospels – The Authors John, the son of Zebedee, was called a “Son of Thunder.” His book was written a bit later than the others around AD 85-90 after the destruction of Jerusalem (in AD 70). This book is often called the book of love. http://www.allabouttruth.org/four-gospels.htm
Pete, you still miss the mark by miles. AND... you're projecting. Sex may certainly be "dirty" to YOU, but there is such a thing as what is appropriate -- even in Pagan-Land where moral relativity reigns supreme (as your "God.") Sex in certain contexts one of God's gifts to both man and woman (as husband and wife.) You never concede you monumental ignorance -- especially on a subject that you are completely oblivious on. This is an alien subject for you.
Are you masquerading as a snarky 12 year old today or...spit-balling teenager from the back of Miss Crabapple's class? FAIL.
Pete, I don't know what kind of sexual hang up you have going: it isn't really my business. But, if Christians had a problem, they wouldn't be having the many kids they do.
So sez the rebel against truth and victim of "Gawd" and Atheist (oh, sorry -- "agnostic"-Atheist.) You are painfully oblivious to your own triple-wrapped chain of lies around yourself as though they're some kind feathered boa of vanity.
I don't wanna know. It's too ugly.
The minimum standard for witness testimony in the Torah (Law) is for two witnesses. However, how about hundreds? 1 Corinthians 15 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed. BTW,thanks for the chronological order. I had never seen that before. By God's Grace, the link is the hard work of your SF buddy GarySpFc. It's a great site to visit if one has questions about the Bible and the Christian faith. Then there are the oral traditions that are handed down from illiterate generation to illiterate generation,and we all know those stories shift as time passes. I would agree that the goat herder culture of the Hebrews in Moses time has literacy challenges to say the least...according to our modern standards. However, Moses himself was raised in Pharoah's household. That would include the best of ancient Egyptian education and knowledge. As witnessed in the Book of Exodus, God actually writes and gives Moses most of the Torah Laws. Then we see portions of the book where Moses writes down what God tells him. Since the Sinai sojourning there was a written record of Torah (the Law) handed down. In the Book of Joshua, God commands him to write it down again on stone to be preserved. We see throughout the Hebrew historical books of the Bible the people falling away, God sends prophets to warn and correct them, and we see instances of the written Law found to confirm the warnings of the prophets. Not just word or deed of the prophets. All of God's words also came with His Power. Miracles and signs. So even in the OT we have three consistent but differing sources of witness. The written word; the prophets who God spoke to and the demonstrated Power of God over His own creation. So I for one would not hang too much on the 'illiterate generation to illiterate generation.' From the time of Moses, when things were written down, to the time of Christ a priestly office was established reading Torah and transcribing what was already written. As the Hebrew language progressed so did the priestly office in the development of language. God also commanded every Israelite coming out of Egypt to have the 10 commandments written on their door posts, taught to their sons and established dressing attire to remind them of the 10 Commandments. So that covers the oral end and the written end, and the priestly end of it is the teaching (hearing) part. Sometime future maybe days, weeks, years etc. the world will get one more chance to witness all of the above on a widescale basis--- written+prophets+Power---However, the Bible tells us most people will EVEN THEN reject God for the pursuit of their own pleasures. For Christians, everyday life we have the written word, the fellowship of believers and the miracle of the New Birth. This is what Jesus Christ left us until He comes again in Glory and Power. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Would you like a box of Kleenex, or shall we just call the Waaaaambulance? You DO know it is just a book that was written by many different people and even edited by more people who decided what to leave in and what to leave out,right? Well, DUH. The Bible is God's inspired word; It is COMMON SENSE that He willed the "edit" of EXACTLY what remained of that inspired word. Are you such a simpleton that you believe the Creator of all things does not nor can not impose His will? But if you wanted "Gawd's" own autograph, Moses knew a little something about *that* after he emerged with the Ten Commandments. But because you didn't see this happen in Nam or on Tee-Bee, it can't be true either, huh?
The flip side is, Luke chapter 1 is crystal clear what was going on. Jesus Christ was to be born. Son of the Living God. Immanuel "God with us." Now maybe the Mormans 'read it' different as they believe Gabriel did not show up but God the Father had 'sex' with Mary. Now the Mormons are an interesting case. Joseph Smith fits your category of religious fraud. He received personal visions no one else witnessed much like Muhammad did. None of what either one wrote came with the Power of God. No miracles, no fulfilled prophecy etc. In fact both the writings of Smith and Muhammad have predictions in them that never came to be. The Biblical standard for prophecy is a 1.000 batting average. Anything else...false prophet, false message. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Well, you got the first part right; Jesus DID threaten the PTB at the time. As to the reading the rest of your cartoonish theory....I would strongly suggest that you NOT consider Moonshine the "Breakfast of Champions." What better way to turn people away from a political threat to your power than to suggest the leader of this new movement is a homosexual? HUH??!? Bwaaahaa!! The insanity is strong with you.
If you knew the scant contemporaneous evidence of Caesar's Gallic Wars, you may see why your request is at best an uneducated approach. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Nothing. IF this agenda-based claim were true; AND Jesus wasn't who He said He was -- SINLESS. Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage? Your problem is that you can't help but think of Jesus Christ as an undisciplined, egomaniacal, selfish, horny, fool. In other words, more or less like you or anyone else that's ever lived. NEWSFLASH: HE WASN'T. ... Not only that, "meeting a nice girl" and marrying wasn't His mission in this life. But because you disbelieve Jesus entire reason for being born, you can only think in your own terms, reasons, and purpose of "life." It [the lying meme of Jesus' "wife"] cuts right to the heart of it because if you don't think of sex as something evil or "dirty",why would you care about Jesus having had a wife? If you can't understand a subject, you invent your own reality. Why is that my fault?
Really? How? Please give me facts,not dogmatic faith. You can lead an azz to water, but you can't make him drink it.
Good post. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Here it is BTW: Now, some collector comes along almost 50 years later and explains to everyone in possession of the 5,000 1967 Mickey Mantle Topps baseball cards that what they have is actually a fraud. That 'he' is in possession of the one and only authentic 1967 Mickey Mantle baseball card. That Topps had it wrong. TV had it wrong. Thousands of pictures had it wrong. But this lone collector says "THIS IS IT" instead: Lol...excellent. Even a ten year old should understand that example. And then all it takes are a bunch of "experts," researchers," and "scientists" to appear on Yahoo, CNN, and National Geographic to brainwash the pods into their alternative reality. ("But...but...Joe Schmoe's Mickey Mantle card is REAL!! Our well-tooled brainiacs in from the bowels of Columbia U., Hahvahd, and Princeton" say so!") (Hey Unc -- whose card was Red supposed to use as an example? Rusty Greer?? ;-)
Thanks, brutha.
I know one of his generals also published a work on the Gallic Wars. And I know Caesar's accounts were commented on by contemporaries. And I'm fairly certain evidence exists of battles waged during the campaigns. So I accept the Gallic Wars actually occurred which doesn't mean I wholeheartedly accept Caesar's version. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Oh! You might want to research the difference between evidence between proof and evidence. Proof is subjective, whereas evidence is objective. The Christian faith is based on historical evidence. Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced … more true than truth itself—Irenaeus, Against Heresies
That general is long dead..."Jim the man is dead." Where is the manuscript evidence for the generals book? Is there an original copy? Did the Parthian Empire and warring Germanic tribes create a contemporaneous history of the Gallic Wars? If the answer is no (and it is), then why do you believe what Gaius Julius Caesar said in his own book, but the Bible authors somehow don't get the same standards? And I know Caesar's accounts were commented on by contemporaries. All dead now. Do we have their original autographs. No we don't. Do we have their manuscripts? If so, how many are there and what was the time lapse between the supposed autographs and earliest manuscript? Hint I gave the answer up thread on Caesar's Gallic Wars. There was a gap of 1,000 years. NT? less than 100 years. So you see why I think your demands are illogical and quite underinformed. And I'm fairly certain evidence exists of battles waged during the campaigns. So I accept the Gallic Wars actually occurred which doesn't mean I wholeheartedly accept Caesar's version. We know about the battles because people back then wrote about them. The winners wrote about those battles. The losers were crated in cages taken to Rome where many met their untimely demise. So we know only from the Roman perspective about Roman battles. As we find out about Christ from Christians. So your model for evidence doesn't hold up to even things you thought were clearly true in the history books. There is only one place left...Deckard's threads on conspiracy theories. Because that is where you end up, if you think Christianity was fabricated 100s of years later and no one wrote anything down until hundreds of years later. That would be the biggest scam in the history of mankind. If you want someone to come out and tell you..."Yes what you read in the Bible is true, Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God. He died in our place for the forgiveness of sins and rose three days later from the dead thus conquering death; That Jesus Christ changes lives and wants no one to perish but to come to Him in repentance...I'll tell you....It's true! "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Aulus Hirtius was one of Caesar's general during the gallic wars. He also wrote a history of one of the campaigns. Many others may have. None have survived or been discovered, if they did (that I know of). Cicero (a contemporary of Caesar's and a Senator) critiqued Caesar's writing while Caesar and Hirtius were living (and presumably at least a few of the veterans). No one disputed that a series of conflict had occurred. So I have two independent first person accounts, evidence that the works were widely discussed at the time the purported events took place and physical evidence of battles in that same time period and at those same locations. I choose to believe there were a series of conflicts in Gaul between 58 and 51 bc that Julius Caesar participated in. So shoot me. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Cicero (a contemporary of Caesar's and a Senator) critiqued Caesar's writing while Caesar and Hirtius were living (and presumably at least a few of the veterans). No one disputed that a series of conflict had occurred. So I have two independent first person accounts, evidence that the works were widely discussed at the time the purported events took place and physical evidence of battles in that same time period and at those same locations. I choose to believe there were a series of conflicts in Gaul between 58 and 51 bc that Julius Caesar participated in. So shoot me. I'm not going to shoot you:) In fact I agree with you. Yes those battles did happen because we have manuscript evidence. What I don't understand is why you impose a different standard on the New Testament manuscripts. All of what you wrote above about deputies, historians and contemporary writings the NT meets or exceeds the standards of all of antiquity writings. The 12 disciples walked the earth with Jesus Christ. They witnessed His Resurrection. They spread the Good News of the Resurrection throughout the known world and planted churches. More writings ensued. Different authors, stating the same facts. All located in differing locations but united in the Gospel. The last Apostle, John lived to the end of the 1st Century AD. By then his writings (epistles) along with the second generation of Christians were circulating the New Testament texts; also writing their commentaries, homilies and confessions. These churches scattered all over the Roman empire were persecuted and most went underground for worship and fellowship. When persecution was lifted we have Christians throughout the Roman empire comparing NT texts and amazingly most of them had all of them. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
You clearly have me confused with someone else. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Yeah,causen we all know there is no such thing as Christian hypocrites,right? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Which one of us believes in magic and miracles,you,or me? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
ROFLMAO! Good one! Are you such a simpleton that you believe the Creator of all things does not nor can not impose His will? Speaking of simpletons that will believe anything...... Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
HUH??!? Bwaaahaa!! The insanity is strong with you. Let's see,a single guy in his 30's that only hangs around with hairy men and who has never had sex with or any kind of personal relationship with a female..... Yup! Sure sounds like a raging heterosexual! Good call! Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
There you go bringing Obama into a Biblical discussion! "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Uh,huh. Please explain how having a wife is a sin. I think it is hilarious that you have all these sexual hangups that are so obvious Stevie Wonder has to wear shades to look at them,and you are completely blind to how you are exposing yourself. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Well,Bathhouse Barry IS a long-time member of the Church of Hate Honkie. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that. I do not know of any. Everything I have read indicates that none of the miracles attributed to Jesus in His lifetime were recorded. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single, first person, eyewitness account. As far as I know, even the Gospels weren't written for decades, maybe centuries, after the fact. As with the gallic wars, I'd like to hear of an account that was recorded by eyewitness or participants and discussed publicly by others while he eyewitnesses/participants were still alive. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
I do not know of any. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Jude, Peter. 4 were eyewitnesses to EVERY miracle of Jesus Christ. Luke explains in his gospel account the following: Luke 1: Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that. I do not know of any. Then we are back to the Julius Caesar discussion again. There are no contemporaneous accounts written by surrounding empires on his Gallic wars. He apparently 'eliminated' the opposition so to speak. So if you do not accept multiple Christian authors and Josephus and later Roman historians writing about the past, then you should apply the same standard to the history of the Roman empire. Everything I have read indicates that none of the miracles attributed to Jesus in His lifetime were recorded. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a single, first person, eyewitness account. I don't know if you think there was a Jerusalem Times back then and a Bob Woodward following Jesus around, but there wasn't. See above...I laid out that the Apostles were eyewitnesses and they wrote this stuff down. And they as I indicated above received other eyewitness testimony. As far as I know, even the Gospels weren't written for decades, maybe centuries, after the fact. Ok, I see you did not read a lot of my previous posts. Because I laid that out too. Unless you believe Christianity is the best kept conspiracy theory, then there is no other conclusion than the Apostles who walked with Christ actually wrote this stuff. Because if you believe centuries later then someone is pretending to be Paul, Luke, Matthew et al. As with the gallic wars, I'd like to hear of an account that was recorded by eyewitness or participants and discussed publicly by others while he eyewitnesses/participants were still alive. Well yeah, I agree but those dudes are all dead. And their original documents are dust. We do have recopied manuscripts. The same Catholic monks who transcribed from the 5,000 extant NT manuscripts also transcribed the 10 or so manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic Wars. Starting to see now the secular history is held to a different standard...5,000 vs. 10 that's significant. Plus as I mentioned several times there was a gap of a 1,000 years in these Roman empire manuscripts. Not even a century for the Christian NT. That's 100 vs. 1,000! See above where I pointed out Luke's gospel. Sounds like a sound approach. Now compare 4 different author's accounts three of which were eyewitnesses themselves. Then see what they say of other eyewitnesses. You have the greatest of historical integrity within the NT Gospels, and epistles. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Pete, I believe that if you could point out one real Christian hypocrite, you would say that the Christian Faith is built on hypocrisy.
Perhaaps not. But there was a second account of the gallic wars written by a second eyewitness/participant (Aulus Hirtius). And Caesar's account was openly discussed (in the Roman Senate by a Roman Senator) when survivors and veterans of the alleged battles were still living. And the records of those discussions (official Senate records) were created at the time the discussions occurred. And with all that publicity, no one came forward to debunk or deny the story of the gallic wars. But if you say Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Jude, Peter, et al, all wrote their gospels and took those gospels on the road to preach and that people who heard them preach were inspired to discuss those gospels and those discussions were recorded, then yes, I agree, there is as much supporting evidence for Jesus as there is for the gallic wars. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
No,it just seems that way because so many well-known Christian leaders are scum-sucking hypocrites. Putting aside the leadership of the various organized cults,I have no doubt at all that the average Christian from any denomination you care to mention seeks religious faith with nothing but the best and most sincere of intentions,even if they may sometimes fall short. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
All you have to do is check it out. The Bible is there for your examination. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
That's true. Several variations, in fact. I use an Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha that was required for a comparative religion class. And so is the historical record available for my examination, of which there are also several versions. I don't have any particular problem with any or all of them. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#2. To: cranky (#0)
#3. To: Justified, cranky (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#4. To: Don, redleghunter (#2)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
#5. To: Justified (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#6. To: cranky (#0)
#7. To: SOSO (#4)
#8. To: buckeroo (#5)
#9. To: Justified (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#10. To: redleghunter (#6)
How many times are they going to 're-rinse this Gnostic nonsense.
#11. To: Don (#2)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
#12. To: Justified (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#13. To: Don (#7)
Proven? By whom? The people who want it desperately to be true?
#14. To: Don (#8)
The many Christians who believe in God is proof of multiplying.
#15. To: cranky, Don, GarySpFc, liberator, Vicomte13 (#11)
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
#16. To: redleghunter (#15)
The proof thusfar has been that this fragment is a later fabrication...fraud.
#17. To: SOSO, buckeroo, cranky, sneakypete (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#18. To: cranky (#10)
Maybe when the evidence is conclusive, one way or the other.
#19. To: redleghunter (#6)
How many times are they going to 're-rinse this Gnostic nonsense.
#20. To: cranky (#0)
#21. To: sneakypete, GarySpFc, liberator, tomder55, cranky, A K A Stone, BobCeleste, Don, CZ82, Chuck_Wagon, *Bible Study Ping* (#16)
By those standards the whole Old Testament is a fraud.
Manuscripts
Manuscripts
#22. To: Justified (#19)
#23. To: Justified (#19)
It doesn't have to be just Jewish people but they tend to be the ones that promote this crap the most.
#24. To: redleghunter (#15)
It's in the article.
#25. To: cranky (#24)
I think I'll defer judgement until the peer reviewed paper is published.
#26. To: sneakypete (#14)
#27. To: sneakypete (#13)
#28. To: redleghunter (#25)
It has already been reviewed several times and deemed a forgery.
#29. To: redleghunter (#25)
#30. To: cranky, Don, GarySpFc, Vicomte13 (#0)
The current owner of the papyrus has insisted on remaining anonymous, claiming that he bought the Gospel of Jesus's Wife, along with other Coptic texts, in 1999 from a man named Hans-Ulrich Laukamp. This person, in turn, got it from Potsdam, in what was East Germany, in 1963, the owner said.
2) "Jesus was the thrice-divorced transgendered alcoholic father to three children (one lesbian, one homo, and one also a tranny)"
3) Autographed papyrus of his 'Sermon On The Mount', signed with the note, "Party ON, Garth! Best Wishes, Jesus and Mary Christ"
#31. To: Justified (#1)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#32. To: Don (#2)
Heretics and scoffers will not give up until the very end.
#33. To: SOSO, Don, redleghunter (#4)
What if the document is proven not to be a forgery?
#34. To: redleghunter (#6)
How many times are they going to 're-rinse this Gnostic nonsense.
#35. To: Liberator (#34)
With as many faith-challenged, fools and pods are out there hoping the Bible and Gospel is a lie, absurdity through the power of suggestion plants just enough doubt to justify rolling the dice on the lot of their soul.
#36. To: cranky (#11)
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
#37. To: Liberator (#36)
Question for you: What of all the overwhelming proof and details of Jesus personal quotes, deeds, and acts; and of places, and things, of eyewitness accounts cited from the Apostles? Why are they so readily dismissed in lieu of these single sordid tabloid "discoveries"?
#38. To: redleghunter (#35)
#39. To: redleghunter (#37)
Yep the above is 'pin the tail on the donkey' time.
#40. To: sneakypete, Don (#13)
What's wrong with it being true?
#41. To: sneakypete (#14)
Uhhhh,it is Christians having all that "dirty sex" that are multiplying,and Christians by definition believe in the Christian God.
#42. To: Liberator (#36)
With as many witnesses to the life of Jesus as there were, and as many enemies as He had at the time
#43. To: ranky, Don, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, sneakypete (#16)
The proof thusfar has been that this fragment is a later fabrication...fraud.
#44. To: Liberator, GarySpFc (#38)
I suspect most of these people who dwell only in a Material World they can "see" in their hearts *know* the truth, but won't surrender it, their spirit and soul to it to God. As a gesture of ultimate contempt (as had recently and suddenly deceased good friend) they reject their Lord of Lords.
#45. To: cranky (#42)
I didn't know there were any references made about Jesus of Nazareth during his lifetime.
#46. To: sneakypete (#13)
Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage?
#47. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc (#44)
I will consider the above an indictment of our post-modern world. We must increase our prayers that all who fit the above category will seek God's Grace and Mercy.
Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not:
This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don't you remember?
"He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them."
"'Go to this people and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving."
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that could not see and ears that could not hear, to this very day."
He said, "Go and tell this people: "'Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.'
Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."
Lead out those who have eyes but are blind, who have ears but are deaf.
"My people are fools; they do not know me. They are senseless children; they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil; they know not how to do good."
To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? Their ears are closed so they cannot hear. The word of the LORD is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it.
"Son of man, you are living among a rebellious people. They have eyes to see but do not see and ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious people.
"But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and covered their ears.
#48. To: cranky (#0)
#49. To: redleghunter (#46)
#50. To: A Pole (#48)
Perhaps you should study Mormon books?
#51. To: redleghunter (#6)
“Let me see which pig "DON'T" I want to vote for, the one with or without lipstick??" Hmmmmm...
#52. To: Vicomte13, A Pole, TooConservative, liberator (#50)
I hear that the northern hemisphere of Kolob is lovely this time of year!
#53. To: Don (#7)
#54. To: SOSO (#53)
The same people that verified the authentuicity of what is accepted as original writings that make up Scripture.
#55. To: redleghunter (#21)
The Dead Sea Scrolls say otherwise.
#56. To: redleghunter (#25)
How many peer reviews does this fragment need? It has already been reviewed several times and deemed a forgery.
#57. To: Don (#26)
(Edited)
You are talking about dirty sex,
#58. To: Don (#27)
Where in the Holy Bible does it talk about Christ having a wife?
#59. To: Vicomte13 (#29)
And let's pause for a moment to think about whether it really makes any difference, theologically, that Jesus had a wife or not.
#60. To: Liberator (#31)
Why would Jesus need a wife?
#61. To: Liberator (#36)
With as many witnesses to the life of Jesus as there were, and as many enemies as He had at the time, IF there were actual "proof" of a wife, Jesus' contemporaries and historians would have been all over it. EARLY ON.
#62. To: Liberator (#40)
What's wrong with it being true?
#63. To: Liberator (#41)
Uhhhh....You missed the mark by approximately a thousand miles.
#64. To: Liberator (#43)
We can only imagine the degree of suppression by heretics of all things Jesus' soon after His death and resurrection as eyewitness testimony and word spread throughout the Mediterranean.
#65. To: redleghunter (#46)
Are you so programmed to think of sex as an evil act that you think Jesus would go to hell for having sex? Even inside a marriage?
#66. To: sneakypete (#55)
And what are they,other than oral tradition handed down over generations that were finally put into written words?
#67. To: sneakypete, GarySpFc, liberator, tomder55, CZ82 (#56)
By people with an agenda who NEED it to be a forgery to keep their particular brand of faith alive.
#68. To: sneakypete (#65)
BTW,PLEASE correct me if I am wrong,but isn't the "New and Improved" New Testament even newer than the 4th Century scroll fragment that is the source of this thread?
#69. To: redleghunter (#67)
“Let me see which pig "DON'T" I want to vote for, the one with or without lipstick??" Hmmmmm...
#70. To: sneakypete (#58)
#71. To: sneakypete (#57)
#72. To: A Pole (#48)
Perhaps you should study Mormon books?
#73. To: Liberator (#45)
Have you read the Gospels of the Apostles?
#74. To: redleghunter (#66)
The written Word of God started long before the manuscripts and fragments we have today.
#75. To: redleghunter (#68)
If you went to some of the links I provided you would see late 1st Century and early 2nd Century church theologians quoted from what we call the NT. If we were to take just the writings of the church fathers from the first three centuries, we could piece together an entire OT and NT...even without the manuscripts. That is what is called a dual independent check. And the Bible both OT and NT surpasses this.
#76. To: Don (#70)
Pete, I know you have a hate relationship with the Holy Bible.
#77. To: Don (#71)
You used the term "Dirty Sex."
#78. To: sneakypete (#62)
(Edited)
No,it is a legitimate question. Please answer it. What would be wrong with Jesus having a wife?
#79. To: sneakypete (#59)
#80. To: redleghunter (#21)
#81. To: sneakypete (#76)
Pete, I know you have a hate relationship with the Holy Bible.
#82. To: Vicomte13 (#78)
History doesn't record him having one, so he probably didn't. If history showed him having one, the Church would not have a celibacy rule for the priesthood.
#83. To: Vicomte13 (#79)
Men and women are supposed to permanently pair off and have lots of babies. Sex isn't dirty.
#84. To: BobCeleste (#81)
Not really. Just the evil bastards that use it and interpret it in such a way as to turn their followers into mindless robots full of fear.
#85. To: sneakypete (#82)
#86. To: sneakypete (#77)
#87. To: cranky (#72)
#88. To: sneakypete (#84)
#89. To: Redleghunter (#51)
#90. To: sneakypete, GarySpFc, tomder55, liberator (#74)
It is my understanding that every book in the Bible was written long after the death of Christ.
#91. To: sneakypete (#75)
In other words,written from 100 to 200 years after the events written about.
26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!”
#92. To: A Pole (#87)
Well, if one likes this "gospel", one might like Mormon books even better.
#93. To: A Pole, liberator, TooConservative (#87)
Well, if one likes this "gospel", one might like Mormon books even better.
#94. To: Don (#86)
Reproduction doesn't have to mean sex which produces children. Reproduction can also mean having spiritual children.
#95. To: BobCeleste (#88)
(Edited)
certainly not internationally if at all. But, if I do, I have no one to blame but myself, for I don't read or use commentary by others, all of my Bible studies and conversations are based upon what God said, not what man says He said.
#96. To: redleghunter (#90)
It is my understanding that every book in the Bible was written long after the death of Christ.
#97. To: redleghunter (#91)
Who was the Jesus baby daddy?
#98. To: sneakypete, GarySpFc, redleghunter (#96)
BTW,thanks for the chronological order.
#99. To: TooConservative, GarySpFc (#98)
BTW,thanks for the chronological order.
#100. To: cranky (#73)
(Edited)
My understanding is none of them were written at the time Jesus was living.
“First Century Papyrus Rolls Did Not Usually Have the Author’s Name in the Text Itself.”
The authors of the four Gospels each bring a unique perspective:
Chapter 26 details the betrayal by Judas Iscariot and the Last Supper, more accurately known as the Passover Meal (Seder). Matthew ends his account with Jesus’ death on the cross, His resurrection from the dead, and in chapter 28, Jesus issues the Great Commission.
Mark begins setting the stage of Jesus’ ministry by featuring the ministry of John the Baptist. John was God-sent to “prepare the way of the Lord.” He preached primarily to the Roman Christians on “baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” Though people flocked to hear Mark, he declared another would come who was even mightier than he.
He stated in Mark 1:8 “I baptized you with water; but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” After John baptized Jesus (as an example to all), Mark records much concerning Jesus’ public service. Covering Jesus’ ministry in Galilee and beyond, Mark records numerous miracles of healing, casting out demons, and feeding “five thousand from five loaves of bread and two fishes.” Jesus preached about resisting temptation, blessing little children and serving others. Jesus said to resist false gods and false prophets and promised His return for all believers.
Though Mark’s book contains some of the same topics of the other Gospels such as the Crucifixion and Resurrection, he concludes by letting us know that the Lord ascended to heaven and is sitting “on the right hand of God.” About one-third of Mark’s gospel is devoted to the last week of Jesus earthly life.
Luke traveled with Paul on his missionary journeys. He presents Jesus as the Savior available to the world and as a compassionate healer and teacher. Luke writes a treasured account of the birth of Jesus in chapter 2. However, he most accurately records the actions and teachings of Christ from the very beginning and helps his readers comprehend the sure way of salvation. His book attests to the way we are to live and become a faithful child of God.
John’s portrayal of Jesus and His love is clearly shows that Jesus is not just an ordinary human being. John illustrates how Jesus is indeed the eternal Son of God and tells us of Jesus meeting with people personally, preaching to large crowds, and lovingly training His disciples. John shows that this divine man offered “life” and changed the hearts of people from hard and hate-filled to kind and loving. Though not every listener responded or accepted His gift of eternal life, Jesus continued to reveal God to those who would hear.
John recorded many of Jesus’ acts and teachings, as do the first three Gospels, but he distinctively interprets them so we might apply spiritual meaning. He says in John 20:31 “But these have been recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and so that through believing you may have life in his name.” John uses spiritually pertinent words such as love, life, light and living water3 to further impact His message of salvation that is from Jesus to us all.
#101. To: sneakypete, Vicomte13 (#59)
Vic: "Does it [the theory] that Jesus had a wife or not...change ANYTHING about the faith?"
PETE: "Only for people who were raised to believe that sex is dirty. For them,it pretty much shatters their whole sense of what Christianity is all about."
#102. To: sneakypete (#60)
#103. To: sneakypete (#94)
#104. To: sneakypete (#56)
Some people just can't stand to see their dogmas put on a chain.
#105. To: Don, sneakypete (#103)
Pete, I don't know what kind of sexual hang up you have going: it isn't really my business.
#106. To: sneakypete, GarySpFc (#96)
The truth is that two sane adults can witness an event while it is happening,and see and report it in different ways the same day. Plus we all know that memories tend to fade and even change as we grow older and look at things from a different and more mature POV.
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
#107. To: sneakypete, Don (#58)
The Bible was obviously written by women-hating homosexuals...
#108. To: sneakypete (#97)
The flip side of that is perhaps if you were to read it with a open mind instead of as a True Believer,you might also see it differently?
#109. To: sneakypete (#61)
The way *I* see it,Jesus was a threat to the political powers that be at the time,and if anything,THEY would be the ones that promoted the idea that this man in his 30's only hung around with hairy-legged men and never had sex or any other close relations with any female.
#110. To: cranky (#73)
Any contemporaneous accounts of Jesus's life would be appreciated.
#111. To: sneakypete (#62)
No,it is a legitimate question. Please answer it. What would be wrong with Jesus having a wife?
#112. To: sneakypete (#63)
Uhhhh....You missed the mark by approximately a thousand miles.
#113. To: Liberator (#100)
http://www.allabouttruth.org/four-gospels.htm
#114. To: redleghunter, sneakypete, GarySpFc, tomder55, CZ82 (#67)
Here's some perspective. There are over 5,000 owners of the Topps 1967 baseball card of Mickey Mantle.
#115. To: redleghunter (#113)
#116. To: redleghunter (#110)
If you knew the scant contemporaneous evidence of Caesar's Gallic Wars
#117. To: cranky (#11)
Some people prefer proof to faith, I guess.
#118. To: cranky (#116)
I know one of his generals also published a work on the Gallic Wars.
#119. To: redleghunter (#118)
Did the Parthian Empire and warring Germanic tribes create a contemporaneous history of the Gallic Wars?
#120. To: cranky (#119)
Aulus Hirtius was one of Caesar's general during the gallic wars. He also wrote a history of one of the campaigns. Many others may have. None have survived or been discovered, if they did (that I know of).
#121. To: Liberator (#101)
Sex may certainly be "dirty" to YOU
#122. To: Don (#103)
But, if Christians had a problem, they wouldn't be having the many kids they do.
#123. To: Liberator (#104)
So sez the rebel against truth and victim of "Gawd" and Atheist (oh, sorry -- "agnostic"-Atheist.) You are painfully oblivious to your own triple-wrapped chain of lies around yourself as though they're some kind feathered boa of vanity.
#124. To: Liberator (#107)
The Bible is God's inspired word; It is COMMON SENSE that He willed the "edit" of EXACTLY what remained of that inspired word.
#125. To: Liberator (#109)
What better way to turn people away from a political threat to your power than to suggest the leader of this new movement is a homosexual?
#126. To: sneakypete (#125)
Let's see,a single guy in his 30's that only hangs around with hairy men and who has never had sex with or any kind of personal relationship with a female.....
#127. To: Liberator (#111)
Nothing. IF this agenda-based claim were true; AND Jesus wasn't who He said He was -- SINLESS.
#128. To: redleghunter (#126)
There you go bringing Obama into a Biblical discussion!
#129. To: redleghunter (#120)
The 12 disciples walked the earth with Jesus Christ. They witnessed His Resurrection. They spread the Good News of the Resurrection throughout the known world and planted churches.
#130. To: cranky, liberator (#129)
Then there should be contemporaneous accounts written by eyewitness or participants corroborating exactly that.
Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.
#131. To: sneakypete (#122)
#132. To: redleghunter (#130)
There are no contemporaneous accounts written by surrounding empires on his Gallic wars.
#133. To: Don (#131)
Pete, I believe that if you could point out one real Christian hypocrite, you would say that the Christian Faith is built on hypocrisy.
#134. To: cranky (#132)
But if you say Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Jude, Peter, et al, all wrote their gospels and took those gospels on the road to preach and that people who heard them preach were inspired to discuss those gospels and those discussions were recorded, then yes, I agree, there is as much supporting evidence for Jesus as there is for the gallic wars.
#135. To: redleghunter (#134)
The Bible is there for your examination.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]