It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

New tests say Jesus DID have a wife. There goes celibacy!

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Really? Well, if it isn't speaking about teachings or beliefs, what is it then? Jesus was in the middle of speaking about false prophets, was He not? He was speaking of that very thing right before He uttered the line you posted.

Are we to believe it was sin and the condition of your life He was talking about, as most Christians believe? Because as we know (or we should know) salvation isn't dependent on what you do in your life.




posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   

JudgeEden
notice that their profession of faith has them believe in one church, the Catholic church.

notice that their profession of faith has them believe in Jesus ... that he was of virgin birth and died and rose, and that he'll come again. Catholic comes under the Christian umbrella. Just like Baptist. Just like Church of Christ. Just like Episcopalian. They all believe in their individual Christian church denominations. They are all Christian.

Of which no Christian has part in.

Wrong.

Lastly, just because it may seem bizarre to you, doesn't mean there is no truth to it.

What you are saying is dead wrong. That's all there is to it.

Side note - Are you a 'Chickie'??



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I thought you must have been a Catholic (or were one). Usually only a Catholic goes through this much trouble to maintain this "Christian" label that they have.

I don't mean to be offensive, truly, I don't. But I do realize that some of what I say IS offensive. Just because you were a Catholic for 20 years doesn't mean you knew everything regarding the faith. I was a Christian for that same amount of time and I didn't even fully know about my own faith until I was in my mid 20's.

What is bizarre to me, is that you feel as if both of these parties are the same. By this logic, all Christians are Catholic, right? Most wouldn't agree with that, but that would be the case. If Catholics are known as Christians, and Catholics are Christian, then it stands to reason that all Christians are Catholics.

Most also seem to glaze over the fact that Christianity (as outlined in the Bible) is much older than Catholicism.

Anyway, my intention was not to derail this topic and turn this into some kind of debate. So I wont drag this on further.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   

JudgeEden
reply to post by Akragon
 


Really? Well, if it isn't speaking about teachings or beliefs, what is it then? Jesus was in the middle of speaking about false prophets, was He not? He was speaking of that very thing right before He uttered the line you posted.

Are we to believe it was sin and the condition of your life He was talking about, as most Christians believe? Because as we know (or we should know) salvation isn't dependent on what you do in your life.


Words are useless if not put into practice...

Their fruits are exactly the opposite of what you're saying... which came from Paul by the way not Jesus...

IF one says he "believes" in Jesus, and doesn't do what he asked of us... Their faith is dead... non existent... even a lie

Know them by their fruits, not their words...





reply to post by FlyersFan
 


What is a chickie?

lol

edit on 11-4-2014 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by JudgeEden
 


We're splitting hairs here. Regardless of the labels, Catholics are the only Christians that force their priests to be celibate. That isn't due to an interpretation of scripture because scripture is clear that leaders of the church are permitted to be married (the only stipulation as someone else already pointed out, is that they must only have one wife).

Paul states that it is better to be celibate if a man is capable of it, but if he is unable to do so he should take a wife. Similarly, nowhere does Jesus himself say anything about celibacy in the church, and we don't even know if Peter (whom catholics claim is the first pope) was married. Given Peter's background, it would seem he probably was married.

Catholics originally derive their policy on celibacy from the council of nicea, where it was decreed that priests were not allowed to marry after they were ordained (but could be ordained if they were married prior). That means that for close to 300 years (the 300 years closest to Jesus and the Apostles), Church leaders were not forbidden to marry. It is Catholic dogma, not Christian theology that forbids church leaders to marry.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Just curious... what is a "chickie"?



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Oh really? I'm wrong about Christians having no part in the Catholic Church? I know that Catholics would allow a Christian to be a part of them, but that would either make them apologetic or pseudoCatholic.

What I meant was, no Christian will have a part of the Church. We don't believe there is any "true" Church. The Church is made up by the body of believers, it is figurative; a collective; not confined to a building, or taking authority from a Pope who stands over this Church. Unfortunately, many Christians make their own Pastors into Pope-like status.

What the hell is a Chickie? Not something I'm familiar with.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

JudgeEden
What is bizarre to me, is that you feel as if both of these parties are the same.

What is bizarre to me, is that you think that is what was said. It wasn't.
All protestant denominations, as well as the Catholics are Christian.
They have their different interpretations of scripture. But they are all Christian.

By this logic, all Christians are Catholic, right?

That makes no sense. You are using fuzzy math. It sounds like you don't understand basic sets/subsets in math. All Christians are Christian. Catholic, Episcopal, Methodist, Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, Church of Christ .... etc .... all Christian ... all subsets under the Christian umbrella.

Most also seem to glaze over the fact that Christianity (as outlined in the Bible) is much older than Catholicism.

That's what the protestant denominations claim. However, the Catholics say otherwise.
It's a matter of scripture interpretation.

Again ... Are you a 'Chickie'??



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Yeah, you're right, it was Paul. My mistake.

However, no one is perfect, as stated many times in scripture. One should be careful to judge ones salvation just because they may not do what is expected of them. There are many people spoken of in the Bible that, had they lived today, no Christian would accept.

Two examples would be both King David and his son Solomon.
edit on XAprpmvAmerica/ChicagoFri, 11 Apr 2014 17:09:08 -0500092014-04-11T17:09:08-05:00k by JudgeEden because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   

JudgeEden
Oh really? I'm wrong about Christians having no part in the Catholic Church?

CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIAN. So yes, you are wrong about Christians not having any part of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has one billion Christians in it. Protestant fundamentalist Christians won't have anything to do with the Catholic Christians ... and they refuse to admit that Catholics are Christian even though Catholics clearly are. This is due to their own anti-Catholic indoctrination. Catholics have their own anti-fundamentalist indoctrination so they are no better when it comes to ignorant bigotry.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Catholics have their own anti-fundamentalist bigotry too? I'm almost surprised you admit that. You should read some quotes by some ancient Popes, as they echo this "anti-fundamentalism" you mention.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   

JudgeEden
What the hell is a Chickie? Not something I'm familiar with.

Are you getting your 'catholics aren't christians' junk from Jack Chick tracts?
Or is it just the usual fundamentalist preacher rhetoric coming through? Or perhaps both?
Jack Chick Tracts



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Lol, I haven't read a Chick tract in years.

No, he's not a source that I've learned from, though there was a time I took him somewhat seriously. However, he preaches works based salvation, which is a lie. Not to mention he takes part in scaring people with the belief of Hell, which is a WHOLE other conversation in itself.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

JudgeEden
Catholics have their own anti-fundamentalist bigotry too? I'm almost surprised you admit that.

Truth is truth. The Catholic Church is anti-Fundamentalist AND the fundamentalist protestants are ignorant when it comes to the Catholic church. Too bad many of the fundamentalists can't see past the typical fundamentalist 'Catholics aren't christian' programming they have received. Bigoted indoctrination is a sad thing.

edit on 4/11/2014 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   

FlyersFan

JudgeEden
What the hell is a Chickie? Not something I'm familiar with.

Are you getting your 'catholics aren't christians' junk from Jack Chick tracts?
Or is it just the usual fundamentalist preacher rhetoric coming through? Or perhaps both?
Jack Chick Tracts



OKay, I'm not Catholic but Christian and not even a very Orthodox one, but FlyersFan is Christian. Catholics are Christian, as Augustine said "In fundamentals, unity".

We believe in the most fundamental belief that Jesus is the Christ, who came into this world foretold of old, for the purpose of salvation of mankind and renewing the fellowship with God and that His birth was by a virgin, as it was prophesied. We believe that faith is necessary and that grace is a gift.

The methods might be different, but fundamentally we are the same.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   

killjoy99
reply to post by Annunak1
 


its amazing that a book claimed and heralded as the truth is a living document, always trying to stay relevant, always being updated to try and fit modern times... i understand that as new evidence comes out it may contradict previous claims.. but people kill each other over these books.. They condemn one another over the translation of these texts... they claim this to be proof and use it as a validation of their beliefs which this book originally instilled in them.. Until we can completely dismantle organized religion globally we will remain as the good books say, sheep always looking for a shepherd. Sorry.. may be off topic, not meant to derail thread..



Would love your opinion on this . www.biblebelievers.org.au...



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 12:30 AM
link   
New tests do not say that. They say the document is not a fake, not that it is true. It being real is not unusual.



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 03:07 AM
link   

@ DeadSeraph...1) This is not proof that Jesus was married. Your own source acknowledges that. It was written in 7 or 800 AD.

Pretty much this. It can be deduced that the claim that Jesus had a wife, appeared much after Jesus' exit. Or do ATSers just prefer to jump to a conclusion after reading a thread title?



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 03:28 AM
link   

@DeadSeraph...

Paul states that it is better to be celibate if a man is capable of it, but if he is unable to do so he should take a wife. Similarly, nowhere does Jesus himself say anything about celibacy in the church.
Jesus did say something about becoming ''eunuchs'' for the sake of the kingdom of heaven ...that is IF one is able to, so he wasn't forcing it upon anybody else. Unless you want to take it literally, ''becoming as eunuchs'' can be interpreted as absistence from sex. Also, the bible portrays celibacy as 'virtuous'. Like, the chosen 144000 are said to be virgins. Why couldn't they have been married men? ___________________________________________________As for catholic celibacy, they can argue its from the Bible aol they want...but the bible only suggests it within a context.....as opposd to forcing it as a rule for priests.



posted on Apr, 12 2014 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


one could also argue that eunuch could be interpreted as being gay...

For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.




new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join