Jesus: It Seems Had A "Wife" After All.

#1
orangeblooded2

orangeblooded2

**Temple of Truth**
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
9,076
Likes
358
#1
#2
#2
I'm not sure this is evidence that Jesus was married, and the article makes sure to explain that:
King has never argued that the fragment is evidence that Jesus was actually married. It would have been composed much later than the gospels of the New Testament, which are regarded as the earliest and most reliable sources on the historical Jesus and which are silent on that question.
Click to expand...
 
#3
#3
Your title reads as if Jesus is stating "Did have a wife after all.".

Which is confusing at first glance.
 
#6
#6
From a different article on the net.


I took very seriously the comments of such a wide range of people that it might be a forgery,” Dr. King said in an interview this week. She said she is now very confident it is genuine.

“When you have all the evidence pointing in one direction, it doesn’t make it 100 percent, but history is not a place where 100 percent is a common thing,” Dr. King said.
 
#7
#7
Would it make a difference? If proven 100% accurate, Jesus was married, would it shake anyone's faith?
 
#8
#8
VolsNSkinsFan said:
it was written 800 years after he died
Click to expand...

Actually it is between 400 years before he lived to 800 yrs. after depending on the study. The u of arizona study's scientific team came to doubt their study based on having enough material. Additionally a lot of people have a lot of problems with carbon dating being the standard bearer.
 
#11
#11
orangeblooded2 said:
Actually it is between 400 years before he lived to 800 yrs. after depending on the study. The u of arizona study's scientific team came to doubt their study based on having enough material. Additionally a lot of people have a lot of problems with carbon dating being the standard bearer.
Click to expand...

Wife of Jesus Coptic Papyrus: Brief Methodological Musings - Bible Epigraphy - - Rollston Epigraphy

he first time that I saw a good image of this papyrus (early fall of 2012), I was suspicious about its authenticity and told my wisdom lit class (which happened to ask about it one evening, during a class in the early fall of 2012) that I believed it to be a probable modern forgery….the ink and the script just didn’t look right to me.
Click to expand...

lso, it is also possible for someone to scrape off (e.g., from a papyrus) ancient ink from the words of some mundane ancient inscription….and then add a little water to the dried ink which had been scrapped off and then resuse the ink. Some people (including some scholars) assume that modern forgers are not all that bright (and thus would not be that clever in forging something). In contrast, I believe that modern forgers (at least from the final quarter of the 20th century and on) are quite sharp…..and for good reason they try to be very clever: after all, there is much money to be made and modern forgers knows this….so, as for this piece, I remain very suspicious of its authenticity. Perhaps it’s ancient….but I doubt it.
Click to expand...

Christopher Rollston - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

papyrus_front_lg.jpg
 
#14
#14
If Jesus was God's attempt to live as a flesh and blood man then it makes sense that he would marry. (Or at least as much sense as any of it makes).
 
#16
#16
orangeblooded2 said:
Seems Dan Brown and those pesky conspiracy theorist were right after all.



New tests show no evidence of forgery in ‘Gospel of Jesus’s Wife’ - Metro - The Boston Globe



.....I don't really have a problem with this, i know some will. It has long been suspect. And with the release of this info, which went mostly unnoticed by the general public 18 months ago. I am waitng now to see how the world relegions respond as well as the general public.
Click to expand...

Your post seems to rest on the assumption that this Jesus character actually existed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#17
#17
Chris4Vols22 said:
What difference would it make if it were ever confirmed?
Click to expand...

The Council of Nicaea which Roman Emperor Constantine was well know to be as political as any event in history. What book gets into the cannon which does not. Some of those books that did not make it in are in doubt and cover some of this to a degree. Legitimising this legitimises those books to a degree. Not to mention the other that remain locked in Vatican vaults never having seen the light of day. A small thing but a good thing considering the subject matter.
 
#19
#19
Chris4Vols22 said:
What difference would it make if it were ever confirmed?
Click to expand...

The only major difference it would make in the long run would be the ramifications it might have on the other Gospels that have been discovered over time and are not included in the Bible as we know it. While most are incomplete and not considered canonical with the four Gospels in the Bible, there is the exclusion of same from the Bible as it's known today. The Gospel of Thomas for example is not a historical account of Jesus' life, but rather a collection of (supposed) sayings and stories attributed to Jesus. The veracity of which was questioned by religious scholars.

And also the basic questioning of how Jesus has been portrayed for 2000 years by organized religions. The same organized religions that have omitted the Gospels of Thomas, Phillip and Mary based on the interpretation that they are generally apocryphal.

So the difference could end up a division as to the completeness or even accuracy of the Bible as we know it.
 
Last edited:
#20
#20
orangeblooded2 said:
His exsistance is the most documented in the history of the world. It is more to your point to question who and what he was.
Click to expand...

Negative. It is documented by only a small handful of sources; and, we don't even know who the authors of those sources were. After that, his existence is written about, but it is always rooted in those first spurious sources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
therealUT said:
Negative. It is documented by only a small handful of sources; and, we don't even know who the authors of those sources were. After that, his existence is written about, but it is always rooted in those first spurious sources.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of historians agree that Jesus was a real person. What their methodology is for coming to that conclusion I do not know, as I am not a historian.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
Chris4Vols22 said:
What difference would it make if it were ever confirmed?
Click to expand...
Because People that are married become one according to the Bible...so pretty important. Also a lack of compassion from His wife since she is not mentioned to be around the crucifixion.

On the flip side, it was customary for a Rabbi to be married.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top