Newly revealed Coptic fragment has Jesus making reference to 'my wife'
September 18th, 2012
03:28 PM ET

Newly revealed Coptic fragment has Jesus making reference to 'my wife'

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
[twitter-follow screen_name='EricCNNBelief']

(CNN) - A newly revealed, centuries-old papyrus fragment suggests that some early Christians might have believed Jesus was married. The fragment, written in Coptic, a language used by Egyptian Christians, says in part, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife ..."

Harvard Divinity School Professor Karen King announced the findings of the 1 1/2- by 3-inch honey-colored fragment on Tuesday in Rome at the International Association for Coptic Studies.

King has been quick to add this discovered text "does not, however, provide evidence that the historical Jesus was married," she wrote in a draft of her analysis of the fragment set to appear in the January edition of Harvard Theological Review. The divinity school has posted a draft of King's article to which AnneMarie Luijendijk, an associate professor of religion at Princeton University, contributed.

"This fragment, this new piece of papyrus evidence, does not prove that (Jesus) was married, nor does it prove that he was not married. The earliest reliable historical tradition is completely silent on that. So we're in the same position we were before it was found. We don't know if he was married or not," King said in a conference call with reporters.

"What I'm really quick to say is to cut off people who would say this is proof that Jesus was married because historically speaking, it's much too late to constitute historical evidence," she continued. "I'm not saying he was, I'm not saying he wasn't. I'm saying this doesn't help us with that question," she continued.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

In the accounts of Jesus' life in the Bible, there is no mention of his marital status, while the accounts do mention Jesus' mother, father and siblings. The four Gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - tell the story of Jesus' birth and early childhood then skip to his short, three-year ministry before detailing his death and resurrection.

The idea that Jesus was married is not a new one.

In other writings about the life of Jesus from antiquity suggest Jesus may have been married to Mary Magdalene, a disciple who was close to Jesus. Author Dan Brown also used the idea of Jesus being married as a jumping off point for the fictional novel "The Da Vinci Code." King dismissed that notion in her call with reporters.

“There’s no indication we have that Jesus was married,” said Darrell Bock, a senior research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. “One could say the text is silent on Jesus’ marital status is because there was nothing to say.”

Initial dating for the honey-colored fragment by the team of scholars puts the papyrus piece coming out of the middle of the second century.

King is referring to the fragment as the "The Gospel of Jesus' Wife" or "GosJesWife" as a short hand for reference, and noting that the abbreviation does not mean this scrap has the same historical weight as the canonical Gospels.

Biblical scholars often use the term gospel to refer to a genre of ancient writings featuring dialogue between Jesus and his disciples, King notes in her paper. The Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Judas are just a few of the ancient accounts about the life of Jesus that Christians do not consider canonical.

Read this story in Arabic

At the conference, King said another professor suggested the fragment could have come from the text of a homily, or sermon, where the writer was using this phrase as a literary device. She told reporters that while she will consider that as a possibility, the fragment is “probably a gospel. Probably from the second century and most close to the Gospels of Mary, Thomas and Philip.”

Bock agreed with the notion that the text fragment shared similarities with those gospels, called the Gnostic Gospels, which were the writings of an early outlier sect of Christians. He said the text could be referring to a "gnostic rite of marriage that is a picture of the church and Jesus, not a real wife."

But he added, "it’s a small text with very little context. We don’t know what’s wrapped around it to know what it’s saying.”

Bock said it’s likely to be a gnostic text if it proves to be authentic. “The whole text needs vetting. She’s doing the right thing to release it and let scholars take a look at,” he said, adding “it’s a little bit like trying to analyze the game in the first quarter.”

“It’s a historical curiosity but doesn’t really tell us who Jesus was,” Bock said. “It’s one small speck of a text in a mountain of texts of about Jesus.”

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

The owner of the fragment has been identified by King as a private collector who has asked to stay anonymous. The owner brought the fragment to Harvard have King examine it in December 2011.

King then brought it to the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World at New York University. Roger Bagnall, the institute's director and an expert on papyrus, examined it and determined it to be authentic, Bangall confirmed to CNN.

Ariel Shisha-Halevy, professor of linguistics at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, who was asked to examine the authenticity, according to the draft of the article, told King via e-mail, “I believe - on the basis of language and grammar - the text is authentic. That is to say, all its grammatical ‘noteworthy’ features, separately or conjointly, do not warrant condemning it as forgery.”

Little is known about the origin of the text. Because both sides of the fragment have writing on them, King said it could have come out of a book rather than a scroll.

"Just like most of the earliest papyri of the New Testament and other literary and documentary papyri, a fragment this damaged could have come from an ancient garbage heap," the King says building on prior research by Luijendijk.

King writes "the importance of the 'Gospel of Jesus’ Wife' lies in supplying a new voice within the diverse chorus of early Christian traditions about Jesus that documents that some Christians depicted Jesus as married."

The Smithsonian Channel also announced Monday that it will air a special on King's findings on September 30.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Bible • Christianity • Jesus

soundoff (4,539 Responses)
  1. old ben

    OK, it's pretty obvious that Jesus was gay. So, evidently he kept this wife to keep up appearances. I think we don't hear about her much because she was sort of like the Michele Bachmann in that marriage, and he really just wanted to be out dancing with John or whoever, and he just really probably did not want to listen to her yapping. (I mean give the guy a break – he might have even had a phobia of reptiles.) It makes perfect sense – well just as much sense as anything else in that tabloid.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:41 am |
    • 1cath1

      what a sad, ugly, lonely little person you paint for all of us to see

      September 19, 2012 at 10:57 am |
    • nojinx

      I don't think Jesus was lonely. Voices in your head can make you feel like you always have a friend around.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:39 am |
    • .

      1cath1. Girl, you need to get some. You are pretty sad yourself.

      September 19, 2012 at 12:05 pm |
  2. Wallace

    This either proves Jesus had a wife or that early christian made up stories about him.

    Either way, the myth-believers will make up explanations to preserve their fragile grip on reality.


    September 19, 2012 at 10:40 am |
    • Kyle

      There are Roman historical figures that wrote about Jesus so are they lying too.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:53 am |
  3. Server4x

    Drunken fisherman walks upon a baptizing ceremony at the river. Preacher grabs him and asks "are you ready to find Jesus".
    Drunk says "yes I am". Preacher dunks him into the river, and then asks "Did you find Jesus", drunk says No. Preacher dunks him again, and the answer is still no he did not find Jesus. Preacher dunks him a third time, and holds him under for 30 seconds, and asks once more "Did you find Jesus". Drunk replies "NO, are you sure this is where he fell in?"

    September 19, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Father Francis

      Now, that is funny !!

      September 19, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
  4. zanio

    Does it really matter if he was married or not? Would it give his words any more or less power? The Bible doesn't say either way, nor does the Qu'ran. Jesus gave humanity a message, his marital status wouldn't change that message one iota. So, as interesting as this find is, it doesn't say anything about modern faith, or Jesus' message.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Kyle

      You also have to remember that the Bible refers to the Church as the Bride of Christ

      September 19, 2012 at 10:53 am |
    • Father Francis

      The church is the bride of Frankenstein.

      September 19, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
  5. Cyd Cooper

    I pray that people would stop believing in what man,woman,or child tells them and actually pick up the word of God(BIBLE) and see what God says to us!! A record of Jesus Christ Geneology(Ancestry) can be found inMatthew1:1-17. And Matthew 1:23 says Immanuel means "GOD WITH US"..Jesus was God in the flesh!! I KNOW that God would have told us in His Holy Bible if Jesus was married!! Jesus Christ is married to mankind and died for mankind!! Also: We will not be married after dying and rising from dead. God tells us in Mark 12:25 we will be like the angels and NOT be married. So wipe the dust off of God's word The Bible and actually read what it says and stop believing in man's guessing games because of some discovery that they found to glorify their own egos!!

    September 19, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Clarence LeBlanc

      Is not the Bible a man made edited text of a bunch of different things men said God said. Oh yes...and how many languages has it been translated from. If there was a God he would probably have a good laugh reading the Bible if not completely embarrassed.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:44 am |
    • Get a Grip

      Expand your mind and knowledge read some of the other religious tomes. The bible is not the only crap shoot out there. For example if you pi*ss off Brahman you maybe relegated to come back as a genital crab, enjoy. Now if you want to have some fun right here on earth, try Pastafairianism, spaghetti and beer and no hell to speak of.
      RAmen Peace and love from the FSM.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:59 am |
  6. Jon

    I should make a new Religion. It's like Atheism, it takes up none of your time. You don't have to do anything good or bad, and once you die you go to heaven with 73 virgins...

    September 19, 2012 at 10:37 am |
    • truth be trolled

      Your idiocy is showing, WOW.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:42 am |
    • No Thanks

      You can keep your 73 virgins, give me a dozen slu*tty pros that know what they are doing.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:48 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      For $30 you can become an ordained minister in the Church of the Subgenius, the only religion that offers eternal salvation or triple your money back.
      Praise "Bob"!

      September 19, 2012 at 10:59 am |
    • Father Francis

      73 virgins...

      All in thier 80's.
      Some still have thier teeth.
      Come and get it.

      September 19, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
  7. Jo

    Why don't people realize that the Bible as we know it was heavily edited, cut down and added to by the college of cardinals in the 6th century? Not to mention it could have been horribly translated. For goodness sake, whether he was or he wasn't you can't take the bible at face value. Personally, I believe he was married simply because it would have been extremely odd in those times not to be, but if you think about it in terms of church politics, saying he was married takes away power from the male hierarchy of the church. Frankly, not to be too blunt, but even the Trinity was probably originally The Father, the Mother and the Son and that got cut down to The Father, son, and Holy Ghost. Just saying...

    September 19, 2012 at 10:37 am |
    • Topher


      "Why don't people realize that the Bible as we know it was heavily edited, cut down and added to by the college of cardinals in the 6th century?"

      Well ... where's the evidence this happened?

      "Not to mention it could have been horribly translated."

      Because we have very early copies in the original languages. And since we have a lot of smartypantses today, we can read them in their original language and compare them to the books we have today. And that's also why we can take each translation and see some are better than others.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:45 am |
    • realbuckyball

      What the hell ? The College of Cardinals was not creted until the 11th Century. And there is no evidence they ever changed the Bible. What, you think you get to just make upn sh1t, and post it ?

      September 19, 2012 at 10:55 am |
  8. Steve

    I think most people do not realize that, unlike all other historical figures we believe in, there was not one contemporary mention of Jesus. He someone slipped the attention of every historian who lived during his supposed lifetime. In other words, he never existed.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:36 am |
    • realbuckyball


      September 19, 2012 at 11:00 am |
    • realbuckyball

      Woops YouTube : Was Jesus a Myth

      September 19, 2012 at 11:01 am |
  9. Jorge

    There's a bunch of ANTICHRIST OUT THERE

    September 19, 2012 at 10:33 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      “Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.”
      —1 John 2:18

      Of course, "the last hour" was 2,000 years ago.
      I think you're a little late if you're waiting for anti-christs.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:47 am |
    • Father Francis

      Nope, the Anti-Christ is running around in the vatican wearing a dress.

      September 19, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
  10. Horus

    Oh dear, another claim about the god-man who never was. When "they" find confirmation of Jesus being anything more than an evangelical of his time from a non-christian contemporary source, then I might revisit my position.....nah. He was a man who was crucified (unfairly) for political reasons. His supernatural story is nothing more than recycled and revisioned myths and folklore that preceeded him. It is far from unique, and the "cross" held religious meaning long before Jesus was, like many, executed upon it.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:33 am |
    • Topher

      There's at least 10 of these sources.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • Horus

      @Topher – name one contemporary that confirms the supernatural abilites of Jesus. To my knowledge there are only two from the period that even directly mention "Kristos" at all. One foot note, and one believed to be edited later. None mention "Jesus". I am talking non-Christian pieces. Anything Christian is biased, and would be considered using the source to support the source.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:41 am |
    • God

      Horus, I have a question for you. Why are atheist so angry about what someone else believes in. That is just as senseless and stupid as your point of view about my existence. Seriously quit being a hypocrite and pushing views on others. Get over it. Leave people alone, and quit being so angry. See you soon for a big "I told you so."


      September 19, 2012 at 10:45 am |
    • Horus

      @God – your existance can neither be proved or disproved. I am an Apatheist, meaning I am indifferent to whether "god" exists. I am far from angry, in fact I have a rather enjoyable life – in part because I haven't wasted it worrying about what might be. I don't push my views on others; like many I enjoy discussing both opinions and facts. btw it is a fact that there were many "god men" before "Jesus". It is also a fact that ALL religions were born of man's conjecture. Whether you choose to believe they were divinely inspired is up to you. IMHO every religious text I've ever read is clearly based on "man's" perceptions, not some being capable of creating the entire universe – of which we are merely a spec of sand.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:51 am |
    • Topher


      Yeah, I know you atheists don't like Josephus. Here's the list of the othere non-Christian sources from the time ...

      Josephus; Tacitus (a Roman historian); Pliny the Younger (a Roman politician); Phlegon (a freed slave who wrote histories); Thallus (a first-century historian); Seutonius (a Roman historian); Lucian (a Greek satirist); Celsus (a Roman philosopher); Mara Bar-Serapion (a private citizen who wrote to his son) and the Jewish Talmud.

      And here's a very interesting quote ...

      "Just how many non-Christian sources are there that mention Jesus? Including Josephus, there are ten known non-Christian writers who mention Jesus within 150 years of his life. By contrast, over the same 150 years, there are nine non-Christian sources who mention Tiberius Casesar, the Roman emperor at the time of Jesus. So discounting all the Christian sources, Jesus is actually mentioned by one more souce than the Roman emperor. If you include the Christian sources, authors mentioning Jesus outnumber those mentioning Tiberius 43 to 10!" ... from "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" by Frank Turek and Norm Geisler

      @Topher – name one contemporary that confirms the supernatural abilites of Jesus. To my knowledge there are only two from the period that even directly mention "Kristos" at all. One foot note, and one believed to be edited later. None mention "Jesus". I am talking non-Christian pieces. Anything Christian is biased, and would be considered using the source to support the source.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:57 am |
    • God

      @ Horus, Ok, thats a respectable stance, however I wouldn't think that you'll get very far by belittling others beliefs. I.E: "Oh dear, another claim about the god-man who never was."

      September 19, 2012 at 10:58 am |
    • Kyle

      Tacitus (a.d. 55-120), the greatest early Roman historian, wrote that Christus (Greek for Christ) had lived during the reign of Tiberius and “suffered under Pontius Pilate, that Jesus’ teachings had already spread to Rome; and that Christians were considered criminals and tortured in a variety of ways, including crucifixion.”[18]

      Suetonius (a.d. 69-130) wrote of “Chrestus” as an instigator. Most scholars believe this is a reference to Christ. Suetonius also wrote of Christians having been persecuted by Nero in a.d. 64.[19]

      Pliny the Younger was an imperial magistrate under Emperor Trajan. In a.d. 112, Pliny wrote to Trajan of his attempts to force Christians to renounce Christ, whom they “worshiped as a god.”

      Emperor Trajan (a.d. 56-117) wrote letters mentioning Jesus and early Christian origins.

      Emperor Hadrian (a.d. 76-136) wrote about Christians as followers of Jesus
      Early Christians wrote thousands of letters, sermons and commentaries about Jesus. Also, creeds which speak of Jesus, appeared as early as five years after his crucifixion.[26]

      These non-biblical writings confirm most New Testament details about Jesus, including his crucifixion and resurrection.[27]

      Incredibly, over 36,000 complete or partial such writings have been discovered, some from the first century.[28] These non-biblical writings could reconstruct the entire New Testament except for a few verses.[29]

      Each of these authors writes of Jesus as a real person. Christ-mythers disregard these accounts as biased. But the question they must answer is: How could a mythical Jesus have so much written about him within a few decades of his life?

      September 19, 2012 at 11:02 am |
    • Horus

      @topher – Only two that you mention are universally accepted – If memory serves, Josephus's writing was two lines regarding Christians in general and how they were causing trouble in Rome. Pliny, I believe, is the one that may have been edited years later by Christians to give more credence. There is not one non-Christian, credible, eyewitness account of Jesus's supernatural powers, or his alleged rising from the grave. That's just the cold hard facts.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:05 am |
    • Horus

      @Kyle, as with Topher, you seem to miss my point. I asked for authenticated (universally accepted) non-Christian contemporary pieces that support claims of supernatural abilities. I do not doubt a man named Jesus existed. If you read all of my post you would know that. There are zero, non-Christian eyewitness accounts to the "miracles".

      September 19, 2012 at 11:09 am |
    • Topher


      That's kinda hard to do when whenever we give you a source (I gave you 10) you complain they aren't acceptable sources. Just because you don't like them because they go against your worldview doesn't mean they aren't relevant.

      I'd like to think that if you saw the miracles you'd believe and would thus be a Christian, though sadly that wasn't always the case. And how about Judas Iscariot for someone who saw the miracles but wasn't a Christian. Of course, he killled himself before he could write anything.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:17 am |
    • Jon

      @god – The reason many atheists and agnostics appear "angry" is because there are many people in government who want to push their religious beliefs on us. If we aren't vocal, then we will be forced into a society where we are controlled by people who we disagree with.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:39 am |
    • realbuckyball

      You are a liar. Show us the poll of scholars. Prove your "scholars this, and scholars that". You've been brainwashed by your apologetics class. The references you give "prove" nothing about the New Testament. They have all been debunked, and the CERTAINLY do not prove the resurrection. Why did NONE of the natural historians of the day say NOTHING about the earth quake in Matthew, or all the zombies running around ?

      September 19, 2012 at 11:47 am |
  11. Steve

    That's because the Jesus tale was a complete fabrication and there was in fact no savior named Jesus to ever walk the earth. It is a collection of made up stories with a political motive.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:32 am |
    • Topher

      You do know that most historians (even secular ones) believe Jesus was real, right? The question is whether He was really God or not.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:34 am |
    • Jorge

      You will see for you self the day you"ll drop dead, Then it will be to late for you

      September 19, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • JFF

      Oh yeah, great political motivation. Invent a "ruler" who is brutally martyred then follow in his footsteps and be killed you selves.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Grey Ice Water

      "Oh yeah, great political motivation. Invent a "ruler" who is brutally martyred then follow in his footsteps and be killed you selves"

      Actually martyrdom IS what set Christianity off.

      Martyrdom in Rome literally made Christianity super popular and eventually turned Constantine, who is the main reason Christianity is as popular as it is today.

      Maybe if you dug your head out of the sand every once and awhile you'd understand the actual implications of martyrdom.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:52 am |
    • Steve

      Yes, you are all right. I am sorry. I am an @hole.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:04 am |
    • Kyle

      @ Grey Ice water.. you have to remember that most people will respond with ridiculous answers that come from them personally and usually without research into the subject.. thats just how things are these days

      September 19, 2012 at 11:07 am |
  12. nojinx

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why the Bible's history of editors did not let this gospel in. Nothing makes a man more human than to strap him with the ol' ball-n-chain (so to speak).

    September 19, 2012 at 10:32 am |
    • Kyle

      the Bible also mentions the Church as the Bride of Christ so that could be what it means and not that he had a wife... if only some people would actually look things up themselves

      September 19, 2012 at 11:08 am |
  13. Mage McGeeze

    Was Santa married? None of the known historians that lived during the time when Jesus supposedly lived ever even mention him. God never spoke to anyone ever. I can't believe I have to remind people that all books were written by human beings. This is more proof that America is seriously lacking in its knowledge of science as 95 percent of the worlds hard scientists are atheist. Faith is defined as belief with absolutely no proof. This is the opposite of science. I can't believe I am stuck on this planet with a bunch of stupid, fact ignoring, talking snake believing monkeys. CNN needs to get real.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • 1cath1

      You sound very confused, angry, and a bit ignorant in your comment. Did you mention that you were atheist? Oh, that explains it. BE GONE SATAN

      September 19, 2012 at 10:52 am |
    • Grysaard

      You wise Scientist – Can you please scientifically explain to me where did the stuff came from that caused the "BIG BANG" – if you cannot do that your so called science are based on a belief and not on facts as you so eagerly would like to promote – so – then your view is also based on faith and not science, because science should be able to observed and tested, but faith must be taken and believed. God's word does not go against science but your type of science goes against your own scientific rules.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:01 am |
    • Oneforall777

      Mage McGeeze: Do you really think that God (the Creator of the world and you), would actually write, just because YOU think he should. God used men to write FOR him. A Supernatural being doesn't do what humans do. Humans were made for HIS pleasure, not the other way around. God doesn't need to prove anything to you. You need to prove things to him.

      And before you get all in a tizzy and start talking about fantasy and fairytales, why do you think there are 56 pages of comments on this article, including yours? BECAUSE every single human being has inside his DNA the Moral Law, Scientists have never and will never be able to explain it. How do you explain what makes a human being know what is right and what is wrong, they always have, ALWAYS – why? It's called the Moral Law and you know it and I know it and every one of the 7 billion people on this planet and who ever lived knows it and that is NOT fantasy.

      When you have a world filled with liars and adulterers and murderers and greed and selfishness (even though we know what's right and what's wrong but we do it anyway) and the God that created you loves you so much that he needs to sacrifice his Son for all of us who have not kept his Law, in order to wipe out those terrible sins, then you should be praying that you're counted as one who kept his Laws. Narrow is the way that leads to salvation my friend.

      It makes me sad how many on these comment boards work for the Adversary, Satan -the fallen angel, prince of this earth. So close was he to God originally that he can try and duplicate what God does, unfortunately it is only a counterfiet. Satan is happy when people deny God, it's exactly what he wants. Satan is called the father of lies. Is that who you want to follow?

      September 19, 2012 at 11:04 am |
    • Satan

      1cath1. Come to me cath, I need some.

      September 19, 2012 at 12:21 pm |
    • Father Francis

      You sound very confused, angry, and a bit ignorant

      This a standard response from all Christians ?

      September 19, 2012 at 3:00 pm |
  14. finnlassy

    Jesus referred to his church as his wife. Since "he said to them" and not "he said to her" leads me to believe he could be talking to his church.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:30 am |
    • Steve

      Yeah right, keep apologizing for absurdities and trying to make sense of things for which no sense can be made. There were plenty of people named Jesus at that time, it was a very common name, but there was no godman Jesus. It is complete fabrication.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:34 am |
    • Horus

      ....or he was a polygamist ;-}

      September 19, 2012 at 10:36 am |
    • Kyle

      if there were plenty of people named Jesus at that time then start telling me about some of them

      September 19, 2012 at 11:11 am |
  15. Logic

    And Jesus said..."Take my wife,...please!"

    September 19, 2012 at 10:29 am |
  16. Doc Vestibule

    People who take offense to discoveries like this are the same kind of folk who get bent out of shape when it's pointed out that Jesus wasn't white.

    September 19, 2012 at 10:28 am |
  17. Jorge

    He was also a judge in AMERICA GOT TALENT. Give me a brake

    September 19, 2012 at 10:27 am |
  18. skytech

    "my wife, "whom he identifies as Mary

    September 19, 2012 at 10:26 am |
  19. Vester Holman

    Jesus was referring to his bride (church). In the Bible he often refers to his bride as being his church when he returns!! So, Jesus' wife would be his church without blemish!!

    September 19, 2012 at 10:25 am |
    • Topher

      Exactly the point I was about to make.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:30 am |
    • Jorge

      I AGREE 100 percent, These's scholars need to read the Bible a little Better

      September 19, 2012 at 10:30 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Once again:
      The Bible is such a gargantuan collection of ancient metaphors, allegories, and contradictions that it can be interpreted in any number of ways to support any number of positions – hence there are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity.
      What makes you certain that YOUR interpretation is the correct one?
      How do you know whether Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, oriental Orthodox, As.syrian, Byzantine, Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, Anabaptism, Brethren, Methodist, Pietism, Apostolic, Pentocostal, Charismatic, African Initiated, United, Quakers, Couthcotti.tism, Millerism, British-Isrealism, Latter Day Saints, Mennonite, 7th day Adventism, Kelleyism, Co.oneyism, Shakers, Methernitha, Strigolniki, Yehowism, Christadelphians, Christian Science, doukhobors, Iglesia ni Cristo, Makuya, Molokans, Subbotniks, Ebionism, Martinism, Rosicrucians, Rastafarianism, Santo Daime, or Umbanda is the REAL interpretation of your God's words?

      If the One True Deity, shaper of The Universe, wishes their words to be transmitted and adhered to, they should have been a bit less ambiguous. Expecting people to select The Truth out of limitless possibilities on faith alone seems a sloppy way to run things – especially if the punishment for a wrong choice is eternal torment.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:32 am |
    • Mark

      So the biblical experts say there is not enough evidence to make a determination, yet you, who has never seen the fragment, declares that it is talking about the church. RIDICULOUS!!

      Don't you know Jesus was gay and the desicples were his gay friends. Jesus was betrayed by judas because of the love triangle among Jesus, Paul & Judas. judas wante Paul for himself and so he got jesus out of the way by turning him over to the Romans.

      What this means is "Jesus liked to suck!"...

      September 19, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • biodan

      Exactly. It's as if these people have never read Revelation.

      Rev_19:7 Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his Bride has made herself ready;
      Rev_21:2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
      Rev_21:9 Then came one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues and spoke to me, saying, "Come, I will show you the Bride, the wife of the Lamb."

      September 19, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Topher

      Hey, Doc, how's it going?

      Which essential doctrine of the Bible are you worried about Christians not agreeing on?

      September 19, 2012 at 10:39 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Morning Toph.
      How about The Trinity, for starters?

      September 19, 2012 at 10:42 am |
    • Doc Vestibule


      Because Revelation is the most believable, credible book of the Bible, what with the 7 headed dragons who spew torrents of water and eat pregnant ladies.
      But I can never remember whether the dragon comes before or after the locust that wears armor and a tiny little crown and has the face of a man, the hair of a woman, the mouth of a lion and the tail of a scorpion.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:45 am |
    • Topher

      What about the trinity?

      September 19, 2012 at 11:00 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      The very concept of the Trinity!
      There a plenty of non-trinitarian Christian denominations like the Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, Dawn Bible Students, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Members Church of God International, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, La Luz del Mundo, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarian Universalist Christians and the United Church of God...
      The very idea of the Trinity didn't become Christian dogma until some 300 years after Christ's death, and even then it was quite a debate at the Council of Nicea....

      September 19, 2012 at 11:20 am |
    • Topher


      I can't speak for all of those (because I've never heard of several of them) but I do know many of the ones you cite are not considered to be Christians or are outside of orthodoxy.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:26 am |
    • Jon

      Jorge – sorry, but I think these scholars know a GREAT deal more about the subject than you will ever know.

      September 19, 2012 at 11:42 am |
    • Father Francis



      1.The work or vocation of a minister of religion.
      2.The period of tenure of a minister of religion.


      department – office – government – cabinet

      I dont see anything about a church in this.
      Jesus had a "ministry" not a church.
      Jesus called the church, his bride ?
      Me thinks somebody has messed with the bible.
      You dont marry your church.

      September 19, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
  20. George

    That's crazy, I dont think god will hide if Jesus was married, I know he talks about the wife and Groom . scholars are always digging Junk up, Pretty soon they will saying that Jesus is a judge on

    September 19, 2012 at 10:24 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      I don't think God is hiding anything – but you have to admit that the Bible omits a lot of important details about Christ's development as a man/messiah.
      What was doing between the ages of 12 and 30?

      September 19, 2012 at 10:27 am |
    • birch please

      Says the person who thinks a god actually wrote the bible.... sigh

      September 19, 2012 at 10:28 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      To whom are you referring?

      September 19, 2012 at 10:30 am |
    • Eric G

      Uh, Doc......... I don't think you want to know what a 12 year old boy is doing most of the time.

      Do unto yourself what you would rather do unto others.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Eric G
      My theory is that He only got into the Messiah business becuase we was a terrible carpenter.
      He probably spent those years trying to learn how to make a chair that doesn't wobble.

      September 19, 2012 at 10:41 am |
    • Ship Hits The Fan

      If Jesus was married, i think he would have 12 angry boyfriends.

      September 19, 2012 at 3:09 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.