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.
"If Jesus had a wife, then there is nothing extra Christian about male privilege, nothing spiritually dangerous about the sexuality of women, and no reason for anyone to deny himself or herself a sexual identity."
“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”
As for the Wisdom who is called 'the barren', she is the mother of the angels. And the companion of [the saviour was Mar]y Ma[gda]lene. [Christ loved] M[ary] more than [all] the disci[ples, and used to] kiss her [softly] on her [hand]. The rest of [the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval]. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Saviour answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.
Even way back when I was a Christian I was always open to the idea that Jesus had a wife. I was confused when those around me reacted to the idea with disgust or instant dismissal. Jesus, they assured me, was not a man with any lusts or sexual desires, because he was God. I didn't understand. In order for Jesus' sacrifice to mean anything (if it can even be called a sacrifice, but that's a subject for another time) than Jesus must have the ability to sin and must be fully man. This includes all the natural desires that men have. If Jesus doesn't at least have a passing desire for romance than how can he be considered a man?
Originally posted by Destinyone
Great find. Goes to further prove my theory that the wife of Jesus, was none other than Mary Magdalene...
The text from the New Testament is being dubbed "The Gospel of Jesus' Wife."
"The discovery of this new gospel," King said, "offers an occasion to rethink what we thought we knew by asking what role claims about Jesus's marital status played historically in early Christian controversies over marriage, celibacy, and family.
Professor Karen King got the scrap in 2011 from a collector, though its history before that remains unclear. Preliminary testing suggests it's legit, though King now wants other scholars to weigh in. If it holds up, it would be the first ancient text in which Jesus mentions a wife (many think it's Mary Magdalene) and would likely intensify all kinds of debates—from the celibacy of Catholic priests to the role of women in Christian ministry.
King also said that a professor who saw her report asked her if the text on the papyrus could have been a homily and not a gospel, an idea she said she had not considered.
Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.
"One cannot overrule that it might be him saying 'my wife as a church,' but in the context where he's talking about 'my mother' and 'my wife' and talking about 'my disciple,' the one thing you would not say is that the church would be 'my disciple.'"
Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Destinyone
I've always believed that also. I've also believed it royally pissed of Paul.
I don't see any reason why this isn't a 'good thing'... Then again, I don't agree with most Catholic dogma either.
It is an interesting new find though...