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.


Jesus Christ Had Two Kids With A Prostitute, ‘Lost Gospel’ Claims

page: 14
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:06 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know this is a late response but there was a theory that the image in the shroud was Jacques De Molay. It is said that after Jacques De Molay got tortured, he was covered in this so called Shroud while he recovered.

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:21 PM
a reply to: combatmaster

Since this thread got rehashed, your link goes to a book that was written well after the death of Jesus. First copies are from 600AD and they think it dates to the 2nd century. It was not found with any older apocryphal writings which have copies dating to at least 100BC. This is most likely a work of fiction based off of Genesis 41.

OT Apocrypha

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 01:21 PM
a reply to: starwarsisreal

Ok, but why was his head covered like he was dead? Usually when someone covers your head with a sheet, it means you are dead. Granted this was 2000 years ago, but I can't see that people would recover from their injuries completely covered by a sheet. Even 2000 years ago. Not to mention, did this guy not move around while he was recovering? There aren't multiple stains on the sheet to suggest multiple imprints due to moving body parts to trying to get more comfortable from time to time.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but the shroud actually being the real shroud that covered Jesus is a more believable story than what you are saying here.
edit on 23-12-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 02:12 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Hmmmm I was only stating the origin of where MK may have gotten his theory. I happened to come across the theory while reading about the Shroud of Turin.

Out of all the wacky theories in this thread the only thing I find plausible on was the idea Jesus has a family and that there may be a Secret Society protecting the descendants, just not how they portrayed on in the Da Vinci Code and the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. After all, the Vatican are known to silence anyone who threatens their position and wealth (The Cathars for example) and a hypothetical Jesus Descendant would truly destroy the legitimacy of the Vatican. Look at how they reacted when the Da Vinci Code came out. While it has many inaccuracies it does scared the Vatican to the core.

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 02:19 PM
a reply to: starwarsisreal

Oh I'm not attacking you or anything. I just quickly saw the holes in your idea so I was able to quickly point them out.

My personal idea is that Jesus was an amalgamation of several different spiritual leaders/rabble rousers of the day, or he was one guy who happened to have a cult of personality around him. This allows for him to have children and all that other stuff because it doesn't give some weird god complex around him.

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 03:01 PM
I agree 100% with the reviewer who described this book as: "hovers somewhere between comical and scary."

It is clearly nothing but fiction masquerading as fact.

The agenda is far too obvious...

At a press conference at the British Library, the authors — Mr. Jacobovici is a Canadian-Israeli film director, award-winning journalist, and writer... Barrie A Wilson despite his non Jewish sounding name is also Jewish. Jacobovici has been called a charlatan and a fraud by a trained and experienced Israeli Jewish archeologist named Joe Zias...

The document which they base their claim is an an ancient Syriac manuscript called Joseph and Aseneth, which found its way to the British Library on 11 November 1847 from a monastery in Egypt The manuscript is already known to experts in the field of early Christianity, the authors claim, albeit only in the later Latin and Greek translations. They claim to be the first to work with a Syriac version, which they have translated and “DECODED” to reach their conclusions.

Thus a document is DECODED after 167 years in the British Library by two Jews with NO ACADEMIC in these 167 years ever showing any interest in it So what academic background do these two geniuses have? In short neither Wilson or Jacobovici has any academic background in History Archaeology or Linguistics They don't seem to have any practical background in either discipline either Yet their DECODING of a Document which has been lying about for 167 years is being taken as pardon the pun “Gospel Truth”


Just don’t bother. Were it a Dan Brown-esque novel, positing a speculative interpretation about the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene utilizing a fanciful allegorical interpretation of a document written six centuries after Jesus came and went, I’d say buy it and have fun. Fiction can be so much fun! But the problem with this book is that Mr. Jacobovici believes what he’s writing. He believes his interpretation is true. He wants it to be true. And that hovers somewhere between comical and scary. I HAVE read the book and it really is worse than you might imagine.

The Lost Gospel - Not Lost, and Not a Gospel

The reviewer in The Los Angeles Times, no less (not some conservative Christian), calls it “perhaps the worst book ever written about Jesus.” The book is so ludicrous that it sounds hilarious. It illustrates the postmodernist principle that, if texts don’t have an objective meaning, anything can be interpreted to mean anything.

But surely not even the most hostile atheist can take this book seriously (drawing on the wordplay between the Sun and the Son, even though that only works in English!) But the thing is, people are buying this thing! The editorial reviews, including some by liberal theologians, think it’s great!

The worst book ever written about Jesus?

"There’s just one small problem with the Jacobovici-Wilson theory," Moss wrote. "Jesus and Mary are nowhere in the manuscript. It’s one version of a well-known ancient novel called Joseph and Aseneth, which discusses the life and times of the biblical patriarch Joseph (of technicolor-dreamcoat fame) and his relationship with Aseneth, the Egyptian woman he marries in Genesis 41:45. Not to be a killjoy fact-checker, but this does seem like an important detail to get right."

Writing at his blog, archaeologist and scholar Robert Cargill of the University of Iowa said, "The Lost Gospel is neither 'lost' nor a 'gospel.' Scholars have known about and have studied the Syriac version of Joseph and Aseneth, located in the British Museum, for a very long time. Simply employing symbolism does not an allegory make."

Scholars shred 'new' claims of Jesus' marriage and fatherhood

But at the end of this assessment I am driven to wonder whether even the authors take their arguments and conclusions seriously. Jacobovici, at the end of his response to the first two parts of my assessment, seems himself to be suggesting that I am taking them too seriously. Probably the most generous assessment of the book would be to suppose that the authors have all along intended it as no more than an entertaining joke – a joke at the expense of those ‘Pauline Christians’ they so obviously detest.

a real scholar on the so-called "Lost Gospel"

The Lost Gospel is truly nothing more than a trumped up conspiracy theory masquerading as legitimate scholarship. It is based on revisionist history, deconstructionism, distortions of biblical texts, and outright lies about early Christian beliefs.

Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson clearly have an ax to grind against Christianity, as was demonstrated in Jacobovici’s book and film about the so-called Jesus family tomb, which was grounded in the same shoddy methodologies.

This review has only scratched the surface of the numerous falsehoods promoted in the book. Joseph and Aseneth is an interesting piece of “historical fiction” written around the time of Jesus to give readers more backstory to an Old Testament figure. It was never lost, and it certainly is not a gospel.

Review of The Lost Gospel

edit on 23-12-2015 by Murgatroid because: felt like it...

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 03:02 PM
Another interesting information. Supposedly Mary Magdalene's remains was displayed in France.

A member here also referenced that many Churches throughout France were built on top of really old ones. The links above gave one example.

If Jesus and Mary did have kids, I find it plausible that after Jesus (or the original spiritual leader that eventually became him) got crucified, Mary fled to Gaul with the children to avoid persecution from the Pharisees.

After what happened was lost to history and the Vatican.

edit on 12/23/2015 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 03:30 PM
a reply to: starwarsisreal

Like I said above, the agenda behind this is far too obvious...

The quote below from a post about the book 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' confirms it...

Channel Four's The Real Da Vinci Code presenter Tony Robinson asked Michael Baigent the following question in relation to the claim that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and produced offspring:

Tony Robinson:
Do we have any evidence that there was a child?

Michael Baigent:
There's none whatsoever – that’s purely hypothesis on our part – but I think it's a plausible hypothesis - that the Holy Grail is the bloodline of David – and if Jesus and Mary Magdalene had been married and she was pregnant with this child – "yes, she would have carried the Grail to France" – and I think this is the way that we need to look at this material – Is it true? I don't know – Is it plausible? Yes.

Tony Robinson:
So the inspiration for 'The Da Vinci Code' and a whole Canon of secret Grail Hunts is no more than a Big Guess...

edit on 23-12-2015 by Murgatroid because: felt like it...

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 05:06 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
My personal idea is that Jesus was an amalgamation of several different spiritual leaders/rabble rousers of the day, or he was one guy who happened to have a cult of personality around him.

Well, it would certainly help account for the repeated claim in the New Testament that Jesus would appear to the Apostles as a number of different people, including often a child. In some way, that could be their way of saying that they recognized the "spirit" of Jesus in a variety of people and that it wasn't always the same person.

It would also go toward explaining how Jesus could "rise from the dead," since that particular spirit could embody different people, as well as the Apostles not immediately recognizing him after his "resurrection." (Mark 16:12) Being a completely different person would do that.
edit on 23-12-2015 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:29 PM
If my memory serves (so a big IF), I don't think anything in the scriptures mention the Magdalene being a prostitute. That's Pope Gregory talking, as he started that whole bit as I recall.

Pretty sure I even remember scripture mentioning Jesus' two brothers (James and Joseph) even a few times. Though some interpret them as being Jesus' cousins, the actual scripture seems clear enough.

One has to remember, there were many books of the bible that were thrown out by the Council of Nicea as they didn't support the narrative of Jesus as divine. So, it wouldn't surprise me that some scripture comes about telling of his life after resurrection.

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 03:12 PM
a reply to: Gazrok

I wrote this thread for this exact reason...

The council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the Canon of the bible...

You're talking about the council of Laodicea

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 03:30 PM
a reply to: arpgme


There are extant manuscripts that were written within 80 years, arguably close to 30 years after the crucifixion. But this one pops up, 1000 years ago and Christians world is crumbling?

Something doesn't last 2000 years just to have a shady piece of paper take the whole thing down.

top topics

<< 11  12  13   >>

log in