It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by esdad71
To believe that Jesus could not have married is to believe that the Mary truly experienced the Immaculate conception. I would believe that articfical alien insemination occured before the God coming to her in a dream to tell her she was pregnant with the son of god.I was raised Irish Catholic so i was taught the teachings of the Church
Originally posted by MKugs
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by Jazzerman
PS- I haven't read "The Da Vinci Code", but I have heard its a great read
Again - www.davincihoax.com...
I think all of those idiots dont know what they are talking about
Originally posted by Jazzerman
All Rabbi's are teachers whether they have a synagogue or not. Thus, for Jesus to become a Rabbi he had to be married. Why is this so hard to understand? It seems pretty clear cut to me...
Be careful of stating your opinions as fact without documentary backup of any kind...
The Greek we read today in the 4th (John's) Gospel, for example, was written down sometime AFTER AD 100, so it was 30 YEARS AFTER the Destuction of the 2nd Temple in Jerusalem when the Saduccean priests were killed off, and the term RABBI was more popular since they filled the power vaccum (a process which has extended Rabinnic (i.e. non sacrificial non-Torah abiding) Judaism to this day)
My question was actually whether or not the term RABBI/RABBONI was a RETROJECTION of a LATER TERM into an earlier narrative when the gospels circulated AFTER the destruction of the 2nd Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70.
Let me know your SOURCE for a pre 70 usage of the term Rabbi, if you happen to have come across on in the literature.
I do not know of any confirmed written documentary sources for the specific use of this specific term RABBI before AD 70 (i.e. 35-40 years after the execution of R. Yehoshua for armed rebelllion against Rome) and the earliest Gospels circulated around AD 75-80 (e.g. Mark) and the so called Gospel of John the Elder (whoever he was) did not hit the streets until about AD 110, so cannot be used as evidence of an early use of the term, RABBI.
The gospels (circulating AFTER the 1st Jewish Revolt, which made the Jews persona non grata in the Empire) tended to de-Judaeise or de-Hebrewise Jesus ...
Also I don't think we can say whether or not the historical "Jeeezzuzzz" had one wife, or two wives or three wives since there is no documentation either way.
I don't know where you get the idea of Miryam leaving "Iesous" a Widower however.
Again, give us a document to work with to substantiate this bogus claim (and generically citing "Vatican documents prove..." is far too vague a reference to take seriously)...
So..... "Somewhereinbetween".... please explain your claims a little if you would please...for extraordiinary claims require extraordinary evidence, as they saying goes...!!
Originally posted by marg6043
That Christians will stop believing in it? Not it will not, but as new generations are born the more skeptical it becomes, but the hold that the Church and the bible has in humanity will always be there but with a different view of the facts, people is more educated now and they can make their own interpretacions if they wish.