It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Papyrus mentions Jesus wife authentic?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 06:44 AM
The onus is as much on those who claim Jesus was not married as it is on those that claim he was. The Bible is silent on this matter. The contextual evidence indicates to me that he was indeed married and it is not hard to see why those continuing his mission would wish to conceal that fact - power struggles as always.

Right at the beginning of his 3 year ministry we have a wedding with unnamed bride and groom, where Jesus plays a prominent role.

the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. (John 2:9-10 KJV)

Does this not clearly link "bridegroom" with the "thou"? No need for marriage certificates, we have the actual wedding.

The accounts of Jesus being a brat as a kid etc., is that not the Gospel of Thomas?

Why do Christians make such a massive deal out of Jesus having a wife? Come on, is Mary Magdalene really just a following prostitute? Nonsense. It is obvious she was important, maybe even funded the missions, and the bunch of guys supporting him didn't like it one bit. After his death it was a free-for-all to push their own agendas.

Related, but slightly off topic, here is a fun logic puzzle about the crucifixion: how many people were there?
We are told:
1. Mary Magdalene (mentioned by Matthew, Mark, and John)
2. Mary the mother of James and Joses (mentioned by Matthew and Mark)
3. The mother of Zebedee's sons (mentioned by Matthew)
4. Salome (mentioned by Mark) [Who is this Salome??]
5. Mary the mother of Jesus (mentioned by John)
6. Mary the wife of Clophas (probably Joseph's brother) (mentioned by John)
7. An un-named sister of Jesus' mother (mentioned by John)
8. The un-named Beloved Disciple (mentioned by John)

Minimum I get is 3 people, more realistically 4.

edit on 593u10214bSundayu by Buziblu because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 09:05 AM

reply to post by Metallicus

Not just the Council of Nicaea, but with Peter's concepts of a patriarchal religion. From the inception of Jesus' apostles, Peter saw no place for women, as common for Judaic law in that period.

Don't forget Paul's writings. If a dude name Paul ever even wrote them, since manuscripts for even the earliest books found (Thomas I think (?) of course not included in bible) are from 79 AD to around 150 AD.

Edit: One of the sources or links from it said:

A wide range of scientific testing indicates that a papyrus fragment containing the words, "Jesus said to them, my wife" is an ancient document, dating between the sixth to ninth centuries CE. Its contents may originally have been composed as early as the second to fourth centuries.
edit on 4/13/2014 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 09:09 AM
reply to post by Buziblu

My lord there were alot of women named Mary back then..

Didn't realise this thread had as many replies! My apologises on not replying.

I wanted to really ask the question which alot of you seem to have clocked onto is Why does it matter if he was married? Where does it say he wasn't?

Though such a big event in a persons life more of a question is why was it left out that he was married? In modern day marriage pretty much stems from religious beliefs, you would think the Church especially to keep that tradition (arguably the biggest practiced tradition in faith) a secret/outright denial.

I myself do not see any problem if this guy was married/divorced/a single pringle.

Also too the people replying saying he is non existent etc, how do you know these things? It is actually impossible to prove he didn't exist therefore you are completely putting your faith into the fact he doesn't exist biased on your own knowledge. In essence your trying to slam somebody for putting their faith into his belief where your only proof is implementing faith yourself, do yourself a favour.

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 09:20 AM

reply to post by Sparta

I saw this article earlier and am glad that you posted it here.

This is very interesting. I think many of us already knew that Jesus was married, but it didn't fit with the narrative that was being being told by the Council of Nicaea when modern Christian doctrine, and later the bible, were being put together.

This is a great find. I love it when we can piece together the past with solid evidence.

edit on 2014/4/10 by Metallicus because: sp

I find it amazing that modern religions including the Vatican who purport to want to follow god and in Christian faith Jesus that they are not willing to recognize that the scriptures they follow may not be all inclusive since they originated in ancient times and were indeed edited and changed through history.

Seems to me that if you want to know God's word you should be actively seeking out the truth rather than what was handed down to you by ancient men with obvious agenda's.

New writings discovered that can be verified MUST be considered as potentially the word of God, even those that were thrown out or excluded and not made part of canon.

To deny truth is to deny God and one must open your mind to change and truth rather than just accepting scriptures that are obviously manipulated by man. The Vatican should not only embrace new scripture but they should be digging around in the ancient world to discover the truth that may have been hidden or forgotten. To not do that is to deny the true God.

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 10:17 AM
Just a simple question, what is more likely in that age.
A 30years old man with no wife OR a 30years old man with a wife?

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 10:34 AM
I find it slightly odd that Jesus' mother is given such high prominence. Makes me wonder if it's just to distract from the other Mary.

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 04:35 PM
reply to post by Sparta

Has this question ever been asked.

Is this referring to the son of God "Jesus" or some guy named Jesus (pronounced "Hey Zeus")?

I'm asking this because every thing I have read about this, nothing has ever said "the son of God".

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 04:42 PM
the reason 'the powers that be' want to keep his marriage a secret or ignore these new development, is to protect the bloodline from possible offspring...if it is true he was married, that means he was having sex...either children were produced from that or not. If they're were children produced, where does the bloodline lead? If there weren't children produced, does that make Jesus infertile, less of a man or worse (in the eyes of the church) practicing birth control....

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 05:48 PM

reply to post by Sparta

Has this question ever been asked.

Is this referring to the son of God "Jesus" or some guy named Jesus (pronounced "Hey Zeus")?

I'm asking this because every thing I have read about this, nothing has ever said "the son of God".

People probably think you are joking but "Hey Zeus" really was the way the Greeks pronounced Iesous. Personally, I don't think Zues had anything to do with the individual named Yeshua though.

That being said, I do suspect the Greeks had their own agenda and were certainly trying to imply that Christ was just another incarnation of Zeus. It seems to be a likely part of their plan.

All those old cultures like the Greeks, Romans and Egyptians were extreme believers in magic and one of their biggest beliefs was that saying a gods' name aloud somehow 'brought down' the god and made him manifest upon the earth.

Christ probably got blamed for a lot of things that may have had far more to do with Zeus. The Romans probably really loved the name Iesous too, because they worshiped Zeus as well, only under the name of Jupiter.

Everybody had an agenda...

By the way, the name 'Jesus' wasn't used at all until around 1400 AD. The name Yeshua was pretty much forgotten and never used except perhaps by a handful. Until 1400 AD, everybody used the name Iesous when they were speaking of Christ.
edit on 13-4-2014 by Riddles because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 02:30 AM

Just a simple question, what is more likely in that age.
A 30years old man with no wife OR a 30years old man with a wife?

Back then, 30 year old men used to marry 15 year old girls. Or so I have been told, never examined the evidence on this one myself.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 02:48 AM
I have studied some theology, I am no expert by any means, but I have also done a lot of varied reading on the subject of Jesus and his authenticity. Having also been a Catholic since I was born I like to think I have some perspective on this. It makes sense to think that Jesus was in fact married, there is considerable evidence to attest to this fact, a significant point being that he was allowed to teach in the temples and he was called 'Rabbi'. As many have already pointed out teachers in the temples in this position had to be married.

There are a number of reasons or hypothesis as to why the writers of the 'primary' gospels kept the fact that Jesus was married out of the texts (We all know that other 'lesser' gospels contain reference to his wife; 'lesser' being that they were not selected to be included in the Bible due to unsubstantiated content.) Jesus knew he could die and those around him would be persecuted thus he kept his wife's identity low key, his disciples did not want women interfering in what they were doing, Romans did not see women as important in office or power, etc, etc.

Much of the Church's early history revolves around stamping out pagan religions, especially those that signify the Earth Mother or other female religious deities that had powerful influences in early pagan religions. The early church therefore stamped out these 'heresies' and to put Jesus forward as the perfect patriarchal figure he had to be untainted by woman. Even his mother had to be a perfect virgin! Thus reflective of many early societal religious beliefs. Thus the fact that Jesus was married and may even have had children becomes anathema to the fathers of the Church. This belief is therefore perpetuated throughout history until our present day where we have the power to question unlike ever before. We have access to knowledge and information of the past that none before us have ever had except these powerful institutions and now...we question.

Now we have access to information that has been restricted to a select few throughout history. Absolutely the Church should be worried that people will start to question the past, question what was told to people throughout history as the 'Truth'.

What the Fathers of the Church need to do now is to realise that this is the case and review everything they have known about the past and begin to let go. People need to be allowed to decide for themselves what they believe in and not be told what to believe in, the only way I think the church can survive into the future in any way is to begin to open itself up to the past, to accept that perhaps some of the lines they have been touting may not have been entirely accurate and start making changes.

is that likely to happen? If it was Pope Benedict I would have said the Church would be teetering on collapse within 20 years. Pope Francis seems to understand a little more of what society is demanding of the Church but I still don't think the stoic elements within the Church will allow any such changes to occur on any grand scale. He might extend the slow death its facing but unless he can gain control of the elements in the Church who would see a heralding in of the grand old days of the absolute authority of the Church by Divine right society will soon realise for itself that the Church is a dinosaur unable to face change and turn away from it leading very quickly to its ultimate downfall.

I like and respect a lot of what the Church does for people throughout the world but I also think that sometimes the Church gets it wrong and needs to be willing to take a good hard look at itself and do whatever is necessary to make things right, not hide behind rhetoric, dogma and falsities.
edit on 14-4-2014 by Spectrumdez because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 03:26 AM
reply to post by Sparta

Probably not, basically because Jesus and God are fictional characters.


posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 04:04 AM

reply to post by Sparta

Of course he had a wife. I and many others believe that a Jewish man not having a wife in his thirties back then was unheard of. Boys were maried away at an early age, it was probably very common in the Jewish culture back then.


edit on 12-4-2014 by MerkabaMeditation because: (no reason given)

we heard that, by 30, right?

would He have been stoned to death by not being married?

where was He in His early age?

we are talking about Jesus, aren't we?

somethings kinda go out the window with God involved.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 04:19 AM

It's authentic to the 7th century Egypt.
It's not a historical document.
It's most likely 'historical fiction'.

thanks FF.

it doesn't say who she was or anything else.

like an, "and oh, btw...."

like someone has said, "you don't believe that Jesus was real but believe He was married?"

lol! (not talking about you)

it wouldn't matter to His message if He was, but that's not what is written.

also, He was around for only a few years.
weren't all the other gods in history married?

aren't nuns the "brides of Jesus?"

these stories/rumors are things to bring Him down to a human level.

same with discounting miracles.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 04:34 AM

reply to post by maceov

The stipulation made that he had to marry by 30 is not accurate. He was honorarily called Rabbi because of His grasp of the scriptures and His authority and vast knowledge pertaining to the scriptures.

yes you are right the age was younger it seems. Why would people not be mentioning that he was not taking a wife as he should.

i. Among the Jews of that day, marriage was a sacred duty. If a man was unmarried after the age of 20 - except to concentrate on the study of the law - he was guilty of breaking God's command to "be fruitful and multiply." According to Barclay, they said that by not having children he killed his own descendants, and had lessened the glory of God on earth.

could it be He was Jesus the Christ? seriously?

i don't know, if He didn't marry, who am i to bitch?

no one outside His followers believed He was the Son of God. or the Messiah.
even then...

they wanted someone to kick the romans asss's. big white horse and shiny save the jews.

Jesus was another curve ball from God. remember David?

i like people that break the rules and i think Jesus did that in style.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 04:46 AM


Just a simple question, what is more likely in that age.
A 30years old man with no wife OR a 30years old man with a wife?

Back then, 30 year old men used to marry 15 year old girls. Or so I have been told, never examined the evidence on this one myself.

time is running out when u only live to 35.

no, they were still in jr. high, not working in the fields and stuff.

maybe for regular people ya had to be married to NOT be called a looser. doubt that applied or affected JC.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 05:56 AM
reply to post by Cinrad

Back then, 30 year old men used to marry 15 year old girls. Or so I have been told, never examined the evidence on this one myself.

It is still the case in many parts of the world. Married at 14 is common in Ethiopia and Yemen, to name two examples. Youngest I interviewed in Ethiopia was married at 6, divorced then remarried at 11.

If Mary, mother of Jesus, was pregnant at such an early age then I very much doubt it was from a boyfriend. Cultures like that strictly control young girls and abuse is widespread. Life has changed little in 2000 years.

reply to post by tsingtao

time is running out when u only live to 35.

This is a misconception. Most die in infancy, if you get past the first 5 years then you have a decent chance of reaching old age. The average age of death for the entire population may be in the 30s though.

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 05:59 AM
how much of this bull can they keep coming up with ?

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 08:05 AM
Link to article Fragment with translation

Some famous guy in his 30s was married...who would of thought it?

posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by tsingtao

no one outside His followers believed He was the Son of God

Well yeah...if they believed they became a follower....

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in