New tests say Jesus DID have a wife. There goes celibacy!

reply to post by WordsAreAvenues


I don't put stock in that document.

My opinion is based on normal human behaviour, ie, getting married.

DeadSeraph
reply to post by Annunak1

 

1) This is not proof that Jesus was married. Your own source acknowledges that. It was written in 7 or 800 AD.

2) The vatican's stance on celibacy is not the Christian stance on celibacy. Christian churches allow their pastors to marry. That debate has nothing to do with this papyrus (personally, I find the catholic position on celibacy for priests to be ridiculous).

Oh, and there is already a thread on this with a much less sensationalistic title here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 11-4-2014 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)

Yep,

The christian stance on Celibacy is greatly misunderstood, stemming from reign of Constantine. Once it was the state religion many of the cultist and pagan practices where incorporated to make the state religion more palatable to the masses things like Celibate priest and priestess, solstice celebrations, etc.

The Bible even says the leaders of the church should be the HUSBAND of one wife, so if you really want to get technical Polygamy is more of a modern taboo, as in the times of the bible it was very common.

You also can see in the song of Solomon the views on relations in marriage, very graphic and often skipped over and again for some reason catholic doctrine as well as many protestants turns it into a poem about the love for the church...

Modern Christianity seems to have tact on many of their own "moral" qualms, and thats not even dealing with the core issue of the OP.


as for the document, people don't understand, that the bible as it is comes from a Majority of sources matching, and with the few random sample sources that don't agree being dismissed. It is the typical way of verifying ancient documents, as an example,

Say we have 5000 copies of Gilgamesh from antiquity, and you find 3 copies that don't agree with the minor detail, well being that the evidence is the majority of the copies disagree, and with ancient printing techniques being what they where (hand written) it is the lesser source that is dismissed as either a forgery, or an off shoot of the main material with out as much credence.

That matters, because you than get books thrown in with Catholic Bibles, to justify stances they take from tradition, sources that aren't as plentiful as the core text, the so called apocryphal books.

This one pyprus would have to be verified by many more sources or similar evidence to be lent credence, it would be like an archaeologist of the future reading a Post about a politician here, and taking that as 100% truth.

Annunak1

Char-Lee
reply to post by Annunak1

 

Timothy 4

3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.

Certain foods. Can you tell me more about what kind of foods? I know that pork is a big no no and i think i heard or read somewhere that shellfish are also a big no no.

If only people who believed and knew the truth would get food than the food problem these days will be solved as many will die of starvation....

The Jewish laws about forbidden foods were not to be held for the non jews. But even in their day the priest were adding to the laws and forbidding people to eat certain foods on certain days, which was not the law and not ordered by God it simply gave them control over people, and was wrong of them.

Jesus fulfilled the old laws.

Acts 10:9-16
New International Version (NIV)
Peter’s Vision

9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

reply to post by Annunak1


According to my Chaplain where I work the church at one point was ok with marriage. What ended up happening is that when a priest would pass his money and possessions would go to his wife...church then said, we should be getting that money and so no priests would marry from that point forward.

Anyone seen the movie "The Man From Earth"?

If not, I highly recommend it. It could be seen for free on YouTube. It is one of the best low budget movies I've seen to date.

It also had one of the wildest spins on who Jesus is.

reply to post by Annunak1


Sorry OP, but I posted this yesterday:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

InverseLookingGlass
reply to post by Annunak1

 

Why would "believers" start paying any attention to scientists now? It kind of ruins the party doesn't it?

If the Bible stated 2+2=5, which in essence it does many times, that is supposed to be truth.

Let's examine this in Quantum thinking (outside of the box) instead of Eucledian mathematics.

2+2=4

However as 2+2=4 are all parts of the sum and therefore 1, as in echad, then allegorically it does equal 5.

If there are 2 tires in the front and 2 tires in the back, you have 4 tires, but you don't have 5 tires, but 1 set of tires. Now these 4 tires + 1 car = 5 or riding in a moving car.

Don't ever forget echad.

truthseeker84
Anyone seen the movie "The Man From Earth"?

If not, I highly recommend it. It could be seen for free on YouTube. It is one of the best low budget movies I've seen to date.

It also had one of the wildest spins on who Jesus is.

I saw it, it was an interesting concept.


It was definitely an interesting framing for it (obviously due to budget) but the setting worked.

worth a watch.


ETA:Spoilers bellow.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
He was Jesus, and being an immortal from the dawn of time, he had simply seen all the mistakes man had made, and was just being cool and trying to get people to not make those mistakes. That is not the central premise in the movie, just a side premise that is mentioned when he brings up things he has done.

WarminIndy
Let's examine this in Quantum thinking (outside of the box) instead of Eucledian mathematics.

2+2=4

However as 2+2=4 are all parts of the sum and therefore 1, as in echad, then allegorically it does equal 5.

If there are 2 tires in the front and 2 tires in the back, you have 4 tires, but you don't have 5 tires, but 1 set of tires. Now these 4 tires + 1 car = 5 or riding in a moving car.

Don't ever forget echad.

What!?!?!?! I'd say go ahead and forget the echad and instead choose to have your math actually make sense and be useful. Why doesn't it surprise me that it would take a religious concept such as the echad to make 2+2 equal anything but 4. Also, what is Quantum thinking??? Is that supposed to make what you wrote sound scientific???

You have 4 tires man. Not 5 and not 1 although you do have one set and one car, but still have 4 tires.

mOjOm

WarminIndy
Let's examine this in Quantum thinking (outside of the box) instead of Eucledian mathematics.

2+2=4

However as 2+2=4 are all parts of the sum and therefore 1, as in echad, then allegorically it does equal 5.

If there are 2 tires in the front and 2 tires in the back, you have 4 tires, but you don't have 5 tires, but 1 set of tires. Now these 4 tires + 1 car = 5 or riding in a moving car.

Don't ever forget echad.

What!?!?!?! I'd say go ahead and forget the echad and instead choose to have your math actually make sense and be useful. Why doesn't it surprise me that it would take a religious concept such as the echad to make 2+2 equal anything but 4. Also, what is Quantum thinking??? Is that supposed to make what you wrote sound scientific???

You have 4 tires man. Not 5 and not 1 although you do have one set and one car, but still have 4 tires.

So you thought philosophically about it.

4 tires = 1 set. Now add on the number of spark plugs. I said it all equals you riding in a car down the street.

AlphaHawk
reply to post by WordsAreAvenues

 

I don't put stock in that document.

My opinion is based on normal human behaviour, ie, getting married.

edit on 11-4-2014 by AlphaHawk because: (no reason given)

The concept of that Jesus MUST have been married because He was a Jewish man, really doesn't mean much at all because there was NEVER any commandment that men MUST be married. And if we look at that, John the Baptist wasn't married and neither was Paul.

They also were Jewish men of the first century.

WarminIndy

So you thought philosophically about it.

4 tires = 1 set. Now add on the number of spark plugs. I said it all equals you riding in a car down the street.

Right. Sum of it's parts and all that right. Philosophically speaking everything equals 1. That still makes for very bad and unusable math, Practically speaking.

reply to post by WarminIndy


I'm sorry, but that's an awfully botched attempt at trying to explain Discrete Mathematics.

P.S. Euclid focused on Geometry, not logic based Math.

parad0x122
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

I'm sorry, but that's an awfully botched attempt at trying to explain Discrete Mathematics.

P.S. Euclid focused on Geometry, not logic based Math.

Euclid isn't logic based?

And yes, not everything we have been taught is actually all there is.

reply to post by WarminIndy


No, what I'm saying is that the area of Math I think you were trying to tap into to support your argument would be Discrete Math.

What do religious texts say before Christianity tried to become the United States of Religions?

Wife and concubines!

New tests say Jesus DID have a wife.

Um ... not even close.


The tests show that the document is from the 700s Egypt. It isn't a modern forgery.
That doesn't mean it's a historically correct document. It just means that they can
date it to the 700s in Egypt.

It's most likely historical fiction ... like we do nowadays.
Someone heard the story of Jesus and wrote their own version with 'filler'.

There is no evidence at all that Jesus had a wife.
(Unless you count gnostic stories as fact.)

DeadSeraph
2) The vatican's stance on celibacy is not the Christian stance on celibacy.

- Catholics ARE christians.
- Catholics get their celibacy rules from their interpretation of scripture.

So the accurate thing to say is that SOME Christians believe their shepherds should be celibate
whereas others do not ... and both groups base their beliefs on their own interpretation of scripture.

reply to post by WordsAreAvenues

I also plead the 2nd!..The Bible is proof! I repeat! The Bible is proof! We are living in the New Testament as of when you posted your uneducated opinion! It really doesn't take a educated being to see that the bible is proof! Wars,Rumors of wars,storms,murders,etc.,just to name a few.SOURCE:World News,CNN,ABC,NBC,etc, just to name a few.Just get the bible(Read every book)my buddy and look around! Father bless him because he doesn't know better!

WarminIndy

mOjOm

WarminIndy
Let's examine this in Quantum thinking (outside of the box) instead of Eucledian mathematics.

2+2=4

However as 2+2=4 are all parts of the sum and therefore 1, as in echad, then allegorically it does equal 5.

If there are 2 tires in the front and 2 tires in the back, you have 4 tires, but you don't have 5 tires, but 1 set of tires. Now these 4 tires + 1 car = 5 or riding in a moving car.

Don't ever forget echad. ''Allegorically it does equal 5" Stop! Hold it! No matter how you put it to make yourself look educated!
And you also said quote ''4 tires+ 1 car=5'';referring still about tires,that post kind of caught my eye to! Bud 5 should never be in the equation of 2+2.I just don't care which way you put it.PROOF:Common sense SOURCE:Go back to school

What!?!?!?! I'd say go ahead and forget the echad and instead choose to have your math actually make sense and be useful. Why doesn't it surprise me that it would take a religious concept such as the echad to make 2+2 equal anything but 4. Also, what is Quantum thinking??? Is that supposed to make what you wrote sound scientific???

You have 4 tires man. Not 5 and not 1 although you do have one set and one car, but still have 4 tires.

So you thought philosophically about it.

4 tires = 1 set. Now add on the number of spark plugs. I said it all equals you riding in a car down the street.