If Jesus had a wife

[TemplarKormac]

If this manuscript (previously considered a forgery) which shows that Jesus had a wife is in fact true, it would destroy and debunk every argument which homosexuals and gay rights advocates use to say that "the Bible doesn't forbid homosexuality" or "Jesus doesn't mention homosexuality." Just by him being married to a woman, it would end all debate about what Jesus himself thought of homosexuality.

Though, there is a lot of mystery surrounding this manuscript, it should still be considered a bad sign for those who participate in, or advocate homosexual activity/equality. The days of trying to use the Christian faith to justify this behavior would be over. I myself don't care what homosexuals do in their own time or with one another; but they will have to accept (if this is in fact true) the fact that Christianity--and the central figure of the faith--did not condone or accept homosexuality.

This is an observation, as such it is not a statement of fact.

 

[Smilebong]

"But Reverend James Martin, the editor of America, the national Catholic magazine, said there remained considerable evidence that Jesus was unmarried.

“It is incredible that the four Gospel writers wouldn’t have mentioned Jesus’s wife if he had one,” he argued. “They mentioned everyone else in his family.”

Jesus had a wife, say scientists, as ancient papyrus scroll verified - Americas - World - The Independent

 

[TemplarKormac]

"But Reverend James Martin, the editor of America, the national Catholic magazine, said there remained considerable evidence that Jesus was unmarried.

“It is incredible that the four Gospel writers wouldn’t have mentioned Jesus’s wife if he had one,” he argued. “They mentioned everyone else in his family.”

Jesus had a wife, say scientists, as ancient papyrus scroll verified - Americas - World - The Independent

Yeah, so I acknowledged in my opening statement. "If" is a big word here. And I have the same mindset as this man does. Where was his wife when he died on the cross? Where was his wife in the Garden the day he rose? Where was she the day he ascended back into heaven?

Just because there is more evidence to suggest he never married, doesn't mean that we should dismiss this evidence either. It would be intellectually dishonest.

 

[Smilebong]

"But Reverend James Martin, the editor of America, the national Catholic magazine, said there remained considerable evidence that Jesus was unmarried.

“It is incredible that the four Gospel writers wouldn’t have mentioned Jesus’s wife if he had one,” he argued. “They mentioned everyone else in his family.”

Jesus had a wife, say scientists, as ancient papyrus scroll verified - Americas - World - The Independent

Yeah, so I acknowledged in my opening statement. "If" is a big word here. And I have the same mindset as this man does. Where was his wife when he died on the cross? Where was his wife in the Garden the day he rose? Where was she the day he ascended back into heaven?

Just because there is more evidence to suggest he never married, doesn't mean that we should dismiss this evidence either. It would be intellectually dishonest.

Right, but this is from 6-8th century and there are no fragments from earlier that include it. It is 500 years after the events in question. That is like saying that someone in 2013 wrote a book about the King of England in 1579.

 

[TemplarKormac]

"But Reverend James Martin, the editor of America, the national Catholic magazine, said there remained considerable evidence that Jesus was unmarried.

“It is incredible that the four Gospel writers wouldn’t have mentioned Jesus’s wife if he had one,” he argued. “They mentioned everyone else in his family.”

Jesus had a wife, say scientists, as ancient papyrus scroll verified - Americas - World - The Independent

Yeah, so I acknowledged in my opening statement. "If" is a big word here. And I have the same mindset as this man does. Where was his wife when he died on the cross? Where was his wife in the Garden the day he rose? Where was she the day he ascended back into heaven?

Just because there is more evidence to suggest he never married, doesn't mean that we should dismiss this evidence either. It would be intellectually dishonest.

Right, but this is from 6-8th century and there are no fragments from earlier that include it. It is 500 years after the events in question. That is like saying that someone in 2013 wrote a book about the King of England in 1579.

Sure, but then if that were true, then the events of the Bible could be disproven simply by the fact Gutenberg printed a copy of the Bible in 1454, almost fourteen and a half centuries after. There were no "complete" copies of the Bible in that form previously either.

Something to think about.

 

[Politico]

So the question is settled.

 

[Gracie]

Nobody knows much about Jesus younger years. The bible is quite silent about that. So what else is silent in those pages?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Nobody knows much about Jesus younger years. The bible is quite silent about that. So what else is silent in those pages?

Good question. Although we do know what happened when he was 12 years old and was taken to the synagogue by his parents. He schooled the scholars of the day. Other than that, we don't know very much about him other than his ministry and his occupation and the fact he is the Son of God.

 

[Politico]

Exactly. We don't know.

 

[strollingbones]

jesus was a common name used by many...a scrap of paper proves nothing....

 

[Billo_Really]

There is no way Jesus was married.

Because no wife would believe the resurrection. First he leaves on a Friday night with 12 others guys, she doesn't see him for 3 days, he comes back looking like he hasn't slept and says he was dead.

What wife would buy that?

 

[Disir]

It took a good 8 centuries to develop a Christology. I don't see anything remotely close to a condemnation of homosexuality in that scrap of papyrus. It does, however, raise other interesting questions concerning clerical celibacy and the role of women in the church. Those were (and still are) hot topics for a good couple hundred years.

Further, now your dealing with Gnostics. So, if you discounted the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary before, do you reconsider your stance?

 

[TemplarKormac]

It took a good 8 centuries to develop a Christology. I don't see anything remotely close to a condemnation of homosexuality in that scrap of papyrus. It does, however, raise other interesting questions concerning clerical celibacy and the role of women in the church. Those were (and still are) hot topics for a good couple hundred years.

Further, now your dealing with Gnostics. So, if you discounted the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary before, do you reconsider your stance?

I do see a condemnation, mainly in the fact that if proven true, Jesus was married to a woman, not another man. Such a communion would make clear what his views were regarding it.

Moreover, I haven't discounted either of those non canonical books, but I also believe the Bible we have today is the divinely inspired word of God. If God wants to add to his word, he would do so... but it doesn't appear likely.

 

[rightwinger]

It took a good 8 centuries to develop a Christology. I don't see anything remotely close to a condemnation of homosexuality in that scrap of papyrus. It does, however, raise other interesting questions concerning clerical celibacy and the role of women in the church. Those were (and still are) hot topics for a good couple hundred years.

Further, now your dealing with Gnostics. So, if you discounted the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary before, do you reconsider your stance?

I do see a condemnation, mainly in the fact that if proven true, Jesus was married to a woman, not another man. Such a communion would make clear what his views were regarding it.

Moreover, I haven't discounted either of those non canonical books, but I also believe the Bible we have today is the divinely inspired word of God. If God wants to add to his word, he would do so... but it doesn't appear likely.

It may prove that Jesus was not a homosexual. Are you claiming that if Jesus wasn't married that he may have been homosexual?

 

[Smilebong]

Yeah, so I acknowledged in my opening statement. "If" is a big word here. And I have the same mindset as this man does. Where was his wife when he died on the cross? Where was his wife in the Garden the day he rose? Where was she the day he ascended back into heaven?

Just because there is more evidence to suggest he never married, doesn't mean that we should dismiss this evidence either. It would be intellectually dishonest.

Right, but this is from 6-8th century and there are no fragments from earlier that include it. It is 500 years after the events in question. That is like saying that someone in 2013 wrote a book about the King of England in 1579.

Sure, but then if that were true, then the events of the Bible could be disproven simply by the fact Gutenberg printed a copy of the Bible in 1454, almost fourteen and a half centuries after. There were no "complete" copies of the Bible in that form previously either.

Something to think about.

Yes, but Gutenberg's bible was based on the earliest manuscripts. My point is, no early manuscripts contain this. This is the only one.

 

[Chuckt]

This is old news.

Did Jesus Have a Wife? No.*|*Rev. James Martin, S.J.

 

[Disir]

It took a good 8 centuries to develop a Christology. I don't see anything remotely close to a condemnation of homosexuality in that scrap of papyrus. It does, however, raise other interesting questions concerning clerical celibacy and the role of women in the church. Those were (and still are) hot topics for a good couple hundred years.

Further, now your dealing with Gnostics. So, if you discounted the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary before, do you reconsider your stance?

I do see a condemnation, mainly in the fact that if proven true, Jesus was married to a woman, not another man. Such a communion would make clear what his views were regarding it.

Moreover, I haven't discounted either of those non canonical books, but I also believe the Bible we have today is the divinely inspired word of God. If God wants to add to his word, he would do so... but it doesn't appear likely.

Because he didn't marry a male? That isn't something that has the capacity to be "proven" and this allows you to maintain that stance. JC allegedly dies in 35 CE. No eye witnesses and no one cared enough to write anything down, he didn't care enough to write anything down. Nothing until 55 CE and an alleged Paul shows up.

Where do you find that Irenaeus was divinely inspired? His was a political move and a power grab. You are running into heretics and willing to pull enough to attempt to justify your stance--or so it seems.
Irenaeus: Against Heresies - Book 1

I find your stance fascinating because you have to reconcile the heretics with the bible.

 

[hobelim]

Nobody knows much about Jesus younger years. The bible is quite silent about that. So what else is silent in those pages?

The gospels are really not completely silent about the missing years.

when the gospels say that Jesus was tempted by the devil in the wilderness and lived among the wild beasts the authors are telling the reader that Jesus was living in the uncultivated non Jewish areas, the wilderness, and running around with Romans, the wild beasts, presumably doing what wild beasts do.


If Jesus was ever married, and as a Jew he most likely was, he either left his wife or she threw him out into the streets for any number of implied reasons, drinking, prostitutes, wild living, whatever, until he had a divine revelation and repented for sin when he was baptized by John ,rose from the dead, 'the heavens opened up to him' and started all that crazy talk about right and wrong and good and evil and life and death , claiming that he learned the truth from God.

 

[guno]

"But Reverend James Martin, the editor of America, the national Catholic magazine, said there remained considerable evidence that Jesus was unmarried.

“It is incredible that the four Gospel writers wouldn’t have mentioned Jesus’s wife if he had one,” he argued. “They mentioned everyone else in his family.”

Jesus had a wife, say scientists, as ancient papyrus scroll verified - Americas - World - The Independent

The christian bible wasn't codified as the christian bible until the Counsel of Nicea in 325 CE, that is when the decision was made to what books were to be included in the christian bible and what books were left out First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main theological issue had always been about Christ. Since the end of the apostolic age, Christians had begun debating these questions: Who is the Christ? Is He more divine than human or more human than divine? Was Jesus created or begotten? Being the Son of God, is He co-equal and co-eternal with the Father, or is He lower in status than the Father? Is the Father the one true God, or are the Father, Son, and Spirit the one true God?

A priest named Arius presented his argument that Jesus Christ was not an eternal being, that He was created at a certain point in time by the Father. Bishops such as Alexander and the deacon Athanasius argued the opposite position: that Jesus Christ is eternal, just like the Father is. It was an argument pitting trinitarianism against monarchianism.

Constantine prodded the 300 bishops in the council make a decision by majority vote defining who Jesus Christ is. The statement of doctrine they produced was one that all of Christianity would follow and obey, called the “Nicene Creed.” This creed was upheld by the church and enforced by the Emperor.

 

[G.T.]

How does someone heterosexually married or not "confirm" their views on homosexuality?

Dont see the logic there.

Im heterosexually married and fully support homosexuals being civilly married as long as the state recognizes marriages at all. One doesnt preclude the other, weird.