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.

 

So what if jesus was married with a wife and kids

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
I think we see eye to eye on this subject, S4G.

The more I read stuff that you (and a select few others) write, the more inclined I am to do more reading and research.



Woot! Now that helps me feel successful. My hope is that these searches are successful for you too and if there's anything I can do to help, please feel free to ask.


[edit on 25-5-2006 by saint4God]




posted on May, 25 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   
The Gnostics basically had three secrets that are essentially heretical and would likely get you killed by TPTB at the time if they knew you went along with them:

1) The true "God" is unknowable, unfathomable and can't be defined, dealt with or imagined in any way we humans are capable of. So things like prayer or having a "personal relationship" with God are useless and egotistical.

2) Existence and the world as we know it was created by a separate, very powerful entity (called "Yaldaboath," "Saklas," or "Samael"), that is basically an insane, paranoid schizophrenic entity who mistakenly thinks he is God.

3) Knowing the above on an individual level (not through church dogma) is the only way to understand and transcend this existence, and free yourself from the blind leadership of the church.

So depending on if you think this hypothetical "Jesus" was a Gnostic or not would have a lot to do with if you thought he was a father and had a family. Personally, since a marriage and married life are never mentioned anywhere, even in obviously heretical texts, I doubt that he was ever considered to be married. But then, the Jesus story is so patchwork, full of holes and confusing that it's practically useless to reach a clear conclusion about it.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu
So depending on if you think this hypothetical "Jesus" was a Gnostic or not


Given the criteria set above, he clearly was not. I appreciate the lesson on Gnosticism, as I've only had light exposure previously.


Originally posted by Enkidu
But then, the Jesus story is so patchwork, full of holes and confusing that it's practically useless to reach a clear conclusion about it.


Full of holes? How so? I agree that it can be confusing because it is counter-cultural. We choose to love money, think only of ourselves, and place blame upon others. It is true Christ was against these things.

[edit on 26-5-2006 by saint4God]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   
The full of holes comment relates to so much that is missing about his life.

We have been told the parts that matter to the original orthodox church.

What about so many things that were destroyed in the Alexandria Library.

Getting back to the original subject, why would it matter if Jesus was married?

One, the founder of the new orthodox church believed in celibacy for reasons I won't go into.

The church had been denouncing the Emperors for claiming that they as humans, considered
themselves Gods.

How then could it be that Rabbi Jesus as a mere human could be divine, not an easy concept
to promote in those days.

Above all this was the discrimination against women on any intellectual level.

Leadership was a guy thing and to some still today not much has changed.

Being human and married would mean that Jesus was merely a prophet.

Having children would have definitely complicated the church's explaination of
how things were or how we should accept them to be.

Mary and her children and their children's children would always be in great danger.

But as we have seen with all this recent contoversy, it is the possibility of Mary's marriage to Jesus
and the possibility of children that would have made people question the truth of what they
have been told by the church and therefore question the bible's accuracy.

Even with all this, it does not affect the message that Jesus was trying to teach us.

It does not affect our faith in God.

It only makes us question the accuracy of what the church has been teaching.

The rules, the regulations, the restrictions on women, the pomp and circumstance
of denominational rituals, the opinions and multitude of different interpretations of the texts, the wealth and power of organised religion, all these factors are works of men.























[edit on 26-5-2006 by FallenFromTheTree]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

The full of holes comment relates to so much that is missing about his life.


We've been through where the account of his life is found in the Bible. Also, Christ himself says:

At that time Jesus said to the crowd, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. - Matthew 26:55

He did not go "missing". Interesting how we're focused on what he didn't say yet ignore what he did say.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
We have been told the parts that matter to the original orthodox church.

What about so many things that were destroyed in the Alexandria Library.


Ask Him what you want to know. It is as if Christians only rely on a Book as their source for information. This is not so.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Getting back to the original subject, why would it matter if Jesus was married?

One, the founder of the new orthodox church believed in celibacy for reasons I won't go into.


Specifically who are we talking about? I agree over time there was a move to celibacy. Some say for political and financial reasons (both are not correct motivations to have), but Paul spoke out about the apostle's rights to have wives even though he did not have one.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
The church had been denouncing the Emperors for claiming that they as humans, considered
themselves Gods.


And?


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
How then could it be that Rabbi Jesus as a mere human could be divine, not an easy concept
to promote in those days.


Christ addresses that so there's no need for me to. Christianity isn't about "easy concepts" either. God don't fit in a box, sorry.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Above all this was the discrimination against women on any intellectual level.


Where in Christ's words or the Bible is that?


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Leadership was a guy thing and to some still today not much has changed.


Deborah, esther, what Paul says about women and their house demonstrate there is female leadership in the church.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Being human and married would mean that Jesus was merely a profit.


An interesting point. I'd like to think on this for a while and think you may be right (but rather a prophet).


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Having children would have definitely complicated the church's explaination of
how things were or how we should accept them to be.

Mary and her children and their children's children would always be in great danger.


Another very good point I think. Why would Christ put a spouse and children in danger? He don't think he would.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
But as we have seen with all this recent contoversy, it is the possibility of Mary's marriage to Jesus
and the possibility of children that would have made people question the truth of what they
have been told by the church and therefore question the bible's accuracy.


People question the Bible/church/what he said without this topic. Rightly so, as Paul says, "Test everything". Ask the hard questions and get the hard answers.


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Even with all this, it does not affect the message that Jesus was trying to teach us.

It does not affect our faith in God.

It only makes us question the accuracy of what the church has been teaching.

The rules, the regulations, the restrictions on women, the pomp and circumstance
of denominational rituals, the opinions and multitude of different interpretations of the texts, the wealth and power of organised religion, all these factors are works of men.


With anything extra-Biblical, I agree which is why I believe it is imperative that one finds a Bible-following church. The worlds of Christ warn against corruption. If we listen to him, we'd be able to recognize it very quickly.


[edit on 26-5-2006 by saint4God]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   
A Bible Following church....exactly what is that?

there are as many diverse theologies as there are bible following churches....what Christ intended and what we have today are very different things. And do the people planning War, killing untold tens of thousands, do they attend a Bible Following church as well..? Church means nothing, what you DO, that is the Test.


Christ was a Man...and he was a Teenager, and he was a child, and he was a Baby...and he needed to have his diapers changed, and he had adolescent issues, and he had relations....this does not reduce him, nor affect what he taught. God made us in his image, man and woman.
Christ is God,and he was a Man. To think he did not look at a Woman, or enjoy her company, or desire her as any man does....this is as ridiculous as thinking he did not need his diapers changed.

Salvation does not come to those blindly accepting what they are taught in Church.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
My comments are not meant to undermine your faith becasue I know they won't

I only ask that you consider possibilities.

2000 years is just a spec of time in human history.

Look how much we have learned in the last century alone.

One of my close friends has a remarkable collection of artifacts found while hunting
on historic hunting grounds here in Virginia.

He has Smithsonian verified arrowheads dated 10,000 years ago.
Verified 5000 year old stone tomahawk heads, and numerous cutting tools.

The precision detail of his oldest arrowhead is amazing.

My point is that much of our history is still unknown and it is no secret that much was lost, deliberately and tragically destroyed or hidden away.

Wealth and power breeds corruption.

It was true 2000 years ago as it is today.

Your faith tells me that you got the general idea which is all anyone could hope for.
If you treat your fellow man with kindness and follow the most basic 10 commandments'
you're way ahead of the crowd.

The destruction of historical artifacts is clearly the greatest crime against humanity.
So is keeping the truth hidden by those with something to gain.

We see it now with so much being hidden under the flag of National Security.

This is not a new concept.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by toolman
A Bible Following church....exactly what is that?


What that not only knows what the Bible is, but has read it, understood it and most importantly applies it.


Originally posted by toolman
And do the people planning War, killing untold tens of thousands, do they attend a Bible Following church as well..?


Apparently not.


Originally posted by toolman
Church means nothing, what you DO, that is the Test.

Christ was a Man...and he was a Teenager, and he was a child, and he was a Baby...and he needed to have his diapers changed, and he had adolescent issues, and he had relations....this does not reduce him, nor affect what he taught. God made us in his image, man and woman.
Christ is God,and he was a Man. To think he did not look at a Woman, or enjoy her company, or desire her as any man does....this is as ridiculous as thinking he did not need his diapers changed.


Interesting opinions, got facts?


Originally posted by toolman
Salvation does not come to those blindly accepting what they are taught in Church.


Christ gives the criteria for salvation in John 3:16.

[edit on 26-5-2006 by saint4God]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by toolman
Christ is God,and he was a Man. To think he did not look at a Woman,
or enjoy her company, or desire her as any man does....this is as
ridiculous as thinking he did not need his diapers changed.


Why would He desire her sexually when he knows her so much more
intimately? Remember .. He was there in the beginning... He was
there when men were created ... He knows the number of hairs upon
our heads ... He is connected to our very SOULS. Why would He
bother with something like sex? Why would he come on a mission
to save souls and indulge in marriage and children all the while
fully knowing that he was to die young and that would leave them
as orphans and a widow? That wouldn't be very god-like and it
wouldn't have been in His nature.

How do I know His nature. Scripture. His mission is clearly spelled
out. He knew it when He came. He knew it the whole time.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
Show me something that is written by Jesus Himself, and is authentic,
that he did not have a spouse, and I will believe what you claim.


I'm not being a smart a** here ... but isn't that backwards?
You are assuming something exists and then asking that it
be proven not to. The scientific method is that it DOES NOT
exist until proven to.

There are no references to Christ having a wife and child.
Not in scripture. Not in church historical documents. Those
documents do date back to the very beginning of the church.

So .. it would seem the burden of proof that He had a family is
on those saying that He did .. not on those saying that He didn't.

Like I said .. this is sincere .. I'm not being a wise acre.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I believe that there may be extraterrestrial life out there somewhere.

I have no proof, only a gut feeling that it's possible.

There are books and many recorded accounts of this being true, but I still have no proof.

For me it's a matter of faith logic and reasoning.

I must also accept that IF a highly advanced civilzation did visit out planet long ago
many would have considered them to be Gods.

Religion is man's attempt to explain that which can not be explained or proven.

Just for the sake of argument, imagine trying to explain artificial insemination 2000 years ago.
Also imagine trying to explain a coma and then reviving from that coma.

These are not opinions based on fact, but they are possibilities we know to be true now with
modern science.

I do also believe in God ( by any name ) simply because our world is filled with too many wonders, but I don't why.

For all I know we're nothing more than an ant farm being studied from above.

Faith is good, it helps us cope with reality, but it can also be misguided.









[edit on 26-5-2006 by FallenFromTheTree]




top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join