New Early Christian Text, Indicates Jesus May Have Been Married

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Well, Christians believe otherwise. On this issue, the textual evidence is on their side. All you have is a few common names and some Renaissance imagery.

reply to post by chr0naut


The theory that Jesus had a lover has been around for a long time, way before this scrap of paper was ever found so I think my train of thought is on point, however scattered it may be (if that makes sense lol).

What are these facts that I'm extrapolating? Something written down 2,000 years ago that has passed through countless hands, been edited and re-edited, interpreted and re-interpreted, and added to and subtracted from cannot be seen as "fact" because there are way too many chances that this "fact" could have been altered along the way, and the bible has been altered, I'm certain of that.

reply to post by Astyanax


I agree, but it doesn't hurt to think outside the box sometimes. I think it makes sense personally but that's probably because I'm not afraid of hell anymore.

Just another excuse given to a public who want to deny the only Saviour that this world will ever have. Just another nail for them to drive in their coffin of denial.

Adam - Man
Seth - Appointed
Enosh – Mortal
Kenan – Sorrow
Mahalalel – The blessed God
Jared – Shall come down
Enoch – Teaching
Methuselah – His death shall bring
Lamech – Despairing
Noah – Comfort and rest

Put those name meanings into a complete sentence and you get: Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow, (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching. His death shall bring (the) despairing comfort and rest

Knowing that this is the very claim of scripture from the very beginning, Genesis, I find it very troubling just how many supposed Christians are still eating and drinking from the whore of Babylon's table. Just as Eve was taken from the side of Adam, so too is Christ's bride, from the blood and water which poured from His Side at Calvery. His life passed on to His faithful.

'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.' (Genesis 2:23).

"So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord, the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband." (Ephesians 5:28-33)

The fact that Jews still await their Messiah, which will be the son of perdition, should be enough reason for anyone to know why the Jew owned media constantly pushes garbage like this in the lands of the descendants of Israel. The fact that it's their speaking images which also blasphemy Christ Jesus at every opportunity should alert people, but the delusion is too strong in a population already deceived by lawlessness. They will, unfortunately, accept their false son because they ingested enough of this poison. Their ears are itching for these sensational and tantalising lies instead of the very Word of God Almighty which they all but reject.

So let me get this straight. The bible, which has thousands of manuscripts, along with tens of thousands of quotations from 1st century Christians, can't be trusted? However a scrap of papyrus with an unverified tale is believable? Glad we were given a heads up in Galatians chapter 1, not that any of you would believe it, unless it was written on a piece of toilet paper


8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by chr0naut

 

The theory that Jesus had a lover has been around for a long time, way before this scrap of paper was ever found so I think my train of thought is on point, however scattered it may be (if that makes sense lol).

What are these facts that I'm extrapolating? Something written down 2,000 years ago that has passed through countless hands, been edited and re-edited, interpreted and re-interpreted, and added to and subtracted from cannot be seen as "fact" because there are way too many chances that this "fact" could have been altered along the way, and the bible has been altered, I'm certain of that.

I have made a study of the manuscripts (many of which are now online and can be directly reviewed by the scholar), specifically those of the New Testament and my conclusion is that, except for a few unimportant words or phrases, the fidelity to the original intention behind the text is still there in modern translations.

The thing is that everyone on these boards like ATS keeps saying is that the manuscript texts came about more than 100 years after Jesus walked the Earth, but this is totally and provably wrong.

Jesus was crucified in AD 33. Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70. That's only 37 years difference.

When Jerusalem was destroyed the Temple (the centerpiece of Jewish faith) was not only burnt down, but the foundations were also dug up by the Romans trying to ensure that they didn't miss out on any of the melted gold. The end of the Temple also meant the end of religious observance (sacrifices and offerings).

At the same time, the last vestige of Jewish political power was broken, more than one million Jewish citizens were killed in the city and the start of the mass migration (the Diaspora) away from what had been Israel had begun.

Yet despite the enormity of all this, none of the New Testament writers mentioned it. The most likely reason that they made no mention is that, at the time of writing, the fall of Jerusalem hadn't happened.

That puts the writing of most of the New Testament texts LESS than the 37 years between Jesus death and the fall of Jerusalem.

I feel sure that if you studied the actual manuscripts, their history and translations, you would not make such claims.

The earliest manuscripts that we have are essentially saying the same thing as modern Bibles. All this furious 'editing' you imply is going on, is contrary to the intention of all translators and seen as abhorrent to true believers.

The problem i have with this "discovery" is the same as that of those that "discovered" it, ie it is from the 4th century. That is a long time after the guy was around. Imagine hundreds of years of chinese years and then throw religion into the mix and you have a serious test of reliability.

However, the prospect of Jesus being married certainly doesn't surprise me. In point of fact, at that time of history, i would be absolutely amazed if Jesus wasn't married or had a lady friend (Mary Magdalene). Not having a wife in that period (especially considering occupation, location, etc) would actually be more of a miracle to me than him "walking on water".

reply to post by chr0naut


Interesting points Chronaut. I actually do not think a lot of people understand the Jewish Wars from that period. Proportionally, it is believed that more Jews were killed during the Jewish Wars than during the Holocaust in WW2. The Romans systematically went through the province, village by village and town by town, destroying symbols of nationhood, killing men, women and children, etc. After the fall of Jerusalem, the Romans spent a further 3 years carrying out punitive punishments all over the province.

For those interested, read the works of Josephus "The Jewish War" - eye witness testament.

During the sack of Jerusalem, the Romans sacked and looted the Temple Precinct. This included stealing all of the Temple Tabernacle. Vespasian commissioned the Arch in Rome to celebrate this war. Part of this shows the Triumph through Rome following this war, including the procession of stolen loot. The scenes clearly show that amongst other things, the Romans took the Menorah from the Temple Mount. Basically, the Romans attempted to destroy the Jewish religion.

The mass delusion continues.....

Fictional characters get married all the time. What's the big deal?

Its not like he was a real person, or anything like that.

SHOCK HORROR! Jesus did normal things like marry!

Its comforting to think that our most celebrated human being experienced the nagging ways of a wife!

A documentary by James Cameron (The Titanic director) was made in 2007 called 'The Lost Tomb of Jesus' that claimed they found what was called the Talpiot Tomb, the Jesus family tomb. Ten ossuaries were found in a cave that was excavated at a construction site which had inscriptions on these ossuaries: Here are a couple:

Maria- Hebrew name "Mirium" ("Mary")

Mariamene e Mara- Greek for 'Mary known as the Master'. Filmmakers believed this to be Mary Magdalene.

The documentary suggests that Jesus was married to Mary Magdelene because this tomb could only have family members buried there.


This was a controversial film that had a lot of critics so it's interesting that this papyrus comes out claiming Jesus had a wife.

I have no idea what to make of all this but I think it would be neat if Jesus was, in fact, married to Mary Magdalene.

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
The bible is missing some twenty years of Jesus' life, so no reason to think he wasn't married.

That, or he spent a lot of time masturbating!

Explains the "second coming" *ducks*.

Seriously- The woman who has instigated this is the first woman to hold this office. I smell some sort of plot, myself. I'll be amazed if she didnt plant this, or it's a fake, and she gets discredited.

Originally posted by prevenge

Originally posted by Destinyone
Great find. Goes to further prove my theory that the wife of Jesus, was none other than Mary Magdalene...

It also pushes further in the direction that actual spiritual physical ascendance and evolution towards the divine realm lies in intimate sexuality between lovers... something that will be among the great revelations.. something many people will be uncomfortable with. that Jesus ascended through sexuality.

No he didn't.

First of all, this is a gnostic test.

Second of all, the true gnosis is that Christ, is really our intercessor, so Sophia, METAPHOR, and while they had accounts of his life, the actual true gnosis was that this was in Spirit, that Christ did not come to earth in the Flesh.

In any case, I believe in Christ, whether Spirit of Immanuel, for He/She still is Immanuel and our Guidance, the way back home.

The actual meaning of His life, if metaphor, or if He came and embodied this meaning (my Faith doesnt disappear if its either way, still have it no matter what. because the Spirit of Peace and Love is real, and of the One, in infinity we are One-111111111111111111111111111111...................'s forever, we don't merge into one being, we are infinite One's, with the Infinite Spirit of Peace and Love between us, like Fibre Optics, never joining, never becoming Finite and Never Ending. That is closest thing we get to God or else we're talking about the Infinite Good Family above, which is not the One God belief. Again, my faith goes beyond the ISMS and opinions here and I'm good either way, if there is is the God between us, or if there is the Good Family, there is still the only thing that truly matters, (aside from the progression to Love and Goodness of all spirit/soul) The Highest Love And Goodness In Existence! So I'm good either way.

Now with all of that, the true metaphor buried in Christ's life regards the TAO, and the precious pearl, which according to ancient Taoist Alchemy was the Formation of the Light Body, and "The Kingdom of God within" a rather literal thing, for our world is the reflection on the glass. We have to turn the sleeve inside out to Time-Space to be home.

The whole thing is referring to Astral Travels and Waking Up, and shining in real light.

What ascended Christ is not SEX, though sex isn't bad when its not selfish, BUT HIS GOOD WORKS.

Its this: base chakra, lesson, look after the temple, or health, seek healing, and work with energy, to protect and keep healthy the Temple of the Spirit, in order to help others.

Second one, overcome any selfish sexuality.

Third: Individuality. Discipline, Free Will, Life's Work.

Fourth: Unconditional Love.

Fifth: THROAT MEANS SERVICE TO OTHERS, MINISTRY!

That is what leads to the rest.

Otherwise you open your pineal and phone the wrong number and connect to Legion and Lower Astrals.

WIthout Right Intent, Right Word/Actions and GOOD WORKS, STO, you phone will phone a lower frequency match.

THe pineal, mentioned in Genisis, 32 30, is the phone line home, if you are STO.

Christ's message was STO, not his sexual life.

I thought Jesus pushed someone off a roof when he was 9? Isn't that a sin? ....and when he was younger than that he wandered off for 3 days against his mothers orders, and when they found him he said " didn't you know i had to be in our fathers house" ...( mouthing off maybe? ) ....the bottom line is...if he was real....he was human or part of humanity. I'm sure there are some event within his life that could be considered a sin. Maybe not one of the ten commandments, but something that is sinful too. ..if your saying he never sined because he followed the 10 commandments, then that's fine. But there are other sinful things in the world.
As for being married, and having a child. Yep, I'd put money on it. ..and of course the child would be kept secret. Otherwise the child would be hunted down and killed by Jesus's enemies. ...and maybe the child was concieved and born after Jesus died on the cross . Because there is the theory that he didn't die on the cross, that he was drugged by herbs from the piercing of the spear, fell into a mild coma, slow heart rate, and rescues from the chamber that night. That's why there wasn't a body in the chamber . And those drugs/ herbs do exist, and did exist back then....and there are rumors that jesus was seen walking the land after he died on the cross.

reply to post by Meldionne1


If we are to believe ALL the various different sects and groups that were Christian or Christian gnostic.

But that probably didn't happen, if we are using discernment and only reading things our hearts are pulled to with Love.

Of course, the Old Testament and some of Pauls' anti women and anti slave statements, didn't pass the discernment of my heart and I knew that was not God./Goodness, but the Beast instead talking, Paul is Rome, which was the opposite of what the Gnostics taught, for women were equal and slavery is HARM TO OTHER, so it would be a CRIME.

By the way, I don't really know if Christ was married, I assume he may have been. But the merrivingian line doesnt really go to Christ. Our family has that as well, but it's more like a lineage that goes to Sumar and Egypt, and its why so many grey type DNA abductions occur if you have those markers.

the concept of celibacy , is a roman addendum , that has no biblical foundation .

Well, it stands to reason that he was married. Nobody would've listened to an unmarried, 30 yr old Jew back then. They just wouldn't have given him the respect.

Originally posted by thePharaoh
"new".....so are they still making them.....i thought the studio and writers died about 2000 yrs ago...hmmmm, might be a remake!

lol
peace

I think by "new" she means that this one was recently discovered and didn't get locked away in the Vatican's vaults before becoming public.

reply to post by kingofmd

The bible, which has thousands of manuscripts, along with tens of thousands of quotations from 1st century Christians, can't be trusted?

Good point,

Many on these forums don't even believe that Christ existed, the most starred and flagged topic ever proves my point.