 |
|
|
|
 A scholarly article based on the 'Jesus Wife' fragment was delayed as researchers waited on further testing.
January 3rd, 2013
02:30 PM ET
'Jesus Wife' fragment gets more testing, delays articleBy Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Editor (CNN) - One of the most anticipated articles in religion circles will be absent from the pages of the January edition of the Harvard Theological Review. Harvard Divinity School professor Karen King's final article on the "Jesus wife" fragment did not make the scholarly journal because further testing on the Coptic papyrus fragment has not been finished. King announced the findings of the 1.5-by-3 inch, honey-colored fragment in September at the International Association for Coptic Studies conference in Rome. In a draft version of the article submitted for publication in the January edition, King and her co-author said the scrap had written in Coptic, a language used by Egyptian Christians, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife," but was then cut off. King said the fragment dates to the 4th century but could be a copy of an early gospel from the 2nd century. King and her research partners dubbed the hypothetical text "the Gospel of Jesus' Wife." Despite King's insistence, the discovery did not prove anything definitive on the marital status of Jesus. The announcement of the papyrus scrap exploded in the media. "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 [Jesus] was married or not," King told reporters in a conference call from Rome in September. 5 questions and answers about Jesus' 'wife' A dealer took the fragment to King for analysis and translation in 2011. The dealer wishes to remain anonymous, she said. "We're moving ahead with the testing, but it is not yet complete, and so the article will await until we have the results," King said in an email to CNN. "The owner of the fragment has been making arrangements for further testing and analysis of the fragment, including testing by independent laboratories with the resources and specific expertise necessary to produce and interpret reliable results. This testing is still underway," Kathyrn Dodgson, director of communications for the Harvard Divinity School, said in a email to CNN. "Harvard Theological Review is planning to publish Professor King’s paper after conclusion of all the testing so that the results may be incorporated," Dodgson said. "Until testing is complete, there is nothing more to say at this point." Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter In her original article King explained how a papyrus expert had dated the fragment to the right time frame and how an expert on Coptic linguistics said the grammar seemed to fit the time period, as well. But what was untested in the early goings was the ink used on the papyrus. Elaine Pagels, a professor from Princeton University who is an expert on gnostic writings such as this one, noted to CNN in September "You can find boxes filled with Coptic fragments," but what makes this one significant is for the first time it explicitly has Jesus referring to "my wife." Faking antiquities is not uncommon, which is part of the reason so many critics questioned the authenticity of a text that potentially went against nearly every other ancient text concerning Jesus. Other scholars refused to comment on the find until the full battery of testing could be completed. “The academic community has been badly burned,” Douglas A. Campbell, an associate professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School said in September, noting how similar discoveries have turned out to be fakes. The provenance of the document, "the history of where it came from and how they got it,” was a great concern to Campbell and other academics. The Vatican newspaper weighed in on the matter in late September mincing no words and calling the fragment “a fake.” CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories On the day King announced the fragment, the Smithsonian channel announced it had been working with King for months on a documentary about the find and the authentication process. It had been slated to air in early October but was pulled back. Tom Hayden, general manager of the Smithsonian channel, said in a statement in October the delay "will enable us to present a richer and more complete story. We will be announcing a new premiere date in the coming weeks." No announcement has been made as to when the premier will happen. |
  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.  |
|
|
|
Jesus did not actually exist and there were many contradictory made up stories about him in the 1st and 2nd centuries by the various Christian sects. One of the sects gained power by virtue of the Roman Empire int eh 4th century and was then able to butcher the other sects and burn all their books.
Athena and the educratists get around. She's a party girl.
Why do most historians and scholars agree that Jesus did exist then?
@JW: historians and scholars do not agree.
Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus
Thomas L. Brodie
"Jesus did not exist as a historical individual"
Bart Ehrman
http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/05/15/bible.critic/index.html (debunks the bible)
In another Bart D. Ehrman book his introductory statement is similar to mine, there was likely some dude named jesus but there is no proof he was divine.
So, you list scholars who've proved some dude named jesus existed. We list scholars who say no special jesus existed. And then we both post OTHER people who call our experts crazy and uneducated.
And around we go herding translucent cats in a dark basement, landing back down on your belief versus our need for proof. So until we have that proof, jesus son of god did not exist. And since we know the bible is a book of lies concocted by men, and there exists nothing else that could even be considered proof, your god doesn't exist either. Since god doesn't exist it's a safe assumption any jesus mentioned in a holy book was just a regular dude built up via myth.
But I will leave the door cracked for you that there exists the chance that one day there may be proven a creator.
I am not saying anything about his divinity. What makes it so unlikely that there could have been an individual named Jesus who had a following?
Bart Ehrman converted to an evangelical agnostic when he ran into his own little stumbling block about "suffering". He's a pro at keeping food on the table.
@JW: there is no proof your jesus existed. There may have been some dude named jesus, it seems probable enough, even though there isn't any proof to it. There were apparently plenty of religious kooks claiming divinity, as there are now.
FYI, I only bring up Ehrman because it seems to be Chad's pet scholar to bring up. I really have no interest in going over biblical scholar's studies. It's all boring and always ends with no proof: you either believe it or you don't.
Lindy,
I have had a couple of people over the years who thought that The Last Supper was painted live, on-scene! Sheesh! Of course it was Leonardo DaVinci's artistic representation as @Bet said. The beardless, feminine-looking one next to Jesus is supposed to to apostle John, not Mary Magdalene.
DaVinci painted several feminine-looking males – there's a picture of Angel Gabriel here (and some comments regarding the Mary M. deal):
http://godwords.org/posts.php?id=53
(heh, it's even a Christian website)
* sorry, wrong spot...
Bride and Wife are not Literal terms. When the Bible speaks of his Bride or Wife it is speaking of his relationship with the Anointed(The Little Flock) who will rule with him in Heaven.
if you read the rest of the inscription it is obvious he isnt talking about a church but about a person
To an astute reader of and one who studies the Bible, this is crystal clear.
The literality is up to the reader. Do you interpret the bible literally or not? if you do, then every word of the bible is the inerrant word of god and you should be out stoning to death people who work on the sabbath. If you take the bible as allegory than any part of it is open to any interpretation you wish. I like to think in this case "wife" means "cabbage."
Jesus was a real person in history, but real person in history is much different than the one we know in our completely fallible translations today. Could he have been married, why not? There is absolutely nothing to prevent that. The only thing we think prevents it is our error-prone theologies, christologies and soteriologies. Like our error-riddled translations, these systems of belief are subject to constant revision and are, therefore, not perfect as we'd like to believe. Jesus might have been married, he might have used curse words when he hit his thumb with a hammer and he might have even farted on occasion, and laughed about it. Get over it. He was a real man, not some mythological figure we made up to suit our purposes.
There's a complete lack of evidence that he was a real person in history. That is wishful thinking.
One day hopefully religion will be outlawed and the planet will forever be a better place.
I'm sorry to disagree with you, but you are wrong. With very few exceptions, no scholar, atheist or Christian, would agree with you on that account. In fact, the only scholars that deny the existence of an historical Jesus are the mythecists. Among them, only a few qualify as genuine scholars, and they do some asinine things with the scriptures. I encourage you to read the works of the agnostic/atheist biblical scholar Bart Ehrman. Saying that Jesus existed as a real person in history does not equate to mythology. It simply acknowledges that someone by that name existed and that he was a Jew, and that he was born a little over 2000 years ago and had a following. They wrote many artifacts about that person, and then a mythology rose up around those writings. But a real man existed 2000 years ago with the name of Jesus. He had a devoted following and he was crucified by a Roman governor named Pontius Pilate. Of that, we can be sure.
I question the value of religion myself. I don't think it would do any good to outlaw it, but we would do better to realize that religion doesn't provide all the answers. Science is far more reliable in some areas than religion, but I do not that negates the value of faith in others. What you place your faith in is not in question here. It could be in a football for all I care. The point is that you probably need faith in at least a few areas to make it through this life, regardless of any scientific prowess you possess. My wife is a scientist. She teaches chemistry at a college, but she has faith. That doesn't prevent her from seeing that the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old the universe is about 14 billion years old. Faith does not have blind you to the facts. So, next time you say we ought to outlaw religion, think a little more carefully. Religion and faith are just as diverse as the bodies of science we mistakenly think provide all the answers. By the way, I'm not arguing that you should take up religion or faith. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be fine with you if you were an atheist. All I'm saying is that you need to be a little more tolerant of those who have faith, and that defending the historical Jesus is not an exercise of faith.
Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus
Thomas L. Brodie
"Jesus did not exist as a historical individual"
Bart Ehrman
http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/05/15/bible.critic/index.html (debunks the bible)
In another Bart D. Ehrman book his introductory statement is similar to mine, there was likely some dude named jesus but there is no proof he was divine.
So, you list scholars who've proved some dude named jesus existed. We list scholars who say no special jesus existed. And then we both post OTHER people who call our experts crazy and uneducated.
And around we go herding translucent cats in a dark basement, landing back down on your belief versus our need for proof. So until we have that proof, jesus son of god did not exist. And since we know the bible is a book of lies concocted by men, and there exists nothing else that could even be considered proof, your god doesn't exist either. Since god doesn't exist it's a safe assumption any jesus mentioned in a holy book was just a regular dude built up via myth.
Extra-biblical (i.e., non-Christian writers of the time, Josephus, Pliny the Younger and Tacitus, wrote about Jesus and his followers. I recognize that mythecists accuse later Christian followers of interpolating their own comments into their writings, but again, other scholars disagree. Remember, saying that an historical Jesus existed is not an admission of faith in the same. It merely recognizes that Jesus did, in fact, exist as an historical person. That is all, nothing more.
End Religion,
Read everything I wrote above. What point did I make that would contradict your points? The main point I made in the beginning stands. "Jesus was a real person in history, but real person in history is much different than the one we know in our completely fallible translations today."
There isn't any proof a dude named jesus lived. I would assume it is likely but I'm not a bible scholar myself. The problem with saying "Jesus was alive and preaching back then" is the same as me saying "God doesn't exist" – either statement's sentiment can be interpreted differently, it just gets old to say it over and over.
A dude named jesus may have existed but there is no proof there was ever any son of any god or that there was anything supernatural about said dude. When I say "jesus never existed" I am talking about the son of god since that is how most people I interact with perceive the label "jesus".
There may be a creator but there is absolutely zero proof of any god's existence, let alone the Abrahamic god many faiths believe in. When I say "god never existed" I am referring to that god. Mankind's entire pantheon never existed. But there still could be some creator, we don't know.
Actually, the Josephus writings are highly suspect, Tacitus is probably reporting what he was told by christians, and Pliny only comments that christians existed. There is nothing to imply that a real Jesus existed. although personally I believe that the myth was based on a real person, or perhaps a combination of several.
So Bill G, how is it that your god can't do better than show his face once in 2K years (at best, and even that is highly questionable)? Reasonable doubt is more than justified, and furthermore, the ass hole Christian god that purportedly would torture someone forever merely for holding such doubt does not deserve to be worshipped. In fact, such a creature should be in jail for human rights abuses.
So, no thanks, Christians. You can keep your ass hole of a god that you've made. To yourselves. Quietly, please.
In Jesus's time, society expected you to be married fairly young. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Jesus may well have been married and even had children.
Jesus was a character in a book, he wasn't even real. Way too many holes in that story bub.
I see the Lord's children has lost faith through their hearts. Your hearts has harden toward the reality trough the media. When you are on your death beds the reality of heaven and hell will come into play. Some might repent to the Lord. Other might not care at all if Hell does exits. Than on the judgment day set before the hand of God, we will be judge for our good and evil deeds in this world. Lord Jesus was also half man and the son of God. Jesus I believed marriage was to Mary Magdalene. Take a look at the Last Supper picture. At first glance everyone think that all of these men are Jesus disciples, but look again. A red hair figure is sitting by Jesus side. This is a picture of Mary Magdalene, go ahead and take a good hard look. I look at the Lord Last Supper all of these years thinking everyone was Jesus disciples. Apostle John is call the "Beloved Disciple" in the Gospel of John. I have been doing research all the way back to the beginning of time. I believe that Mary Magdalene is the beloved disciple. And another thing Mary Magdalene also has a book know as the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Mary "Jesus mother.". Adam and Eve had a blood line of children's. Now why would God not let his son Jesus have a blood line of his own children. Rumor has it the Mary Magdalene is burry underneath her church with three children's. God work trough people through history. Don't you think that God never suffer once because he love us each and ever one of us. Stop and think, "God was hurt over Adam and Eve sins. How many times did God forgive his chosen children the Israelites? Jesus does exits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Search beyond the source. Also our world will have world peace before the earth is destroy.
There is no "Last Supper picture". There are many paintings that represent what artists think a "Last Supper" might have looked like had it occurred, but they are simply paintings, not reality. They came from the artist's imagination.
I'll assume you mean Leonardo da Vinci's painting, since it's the most famous of the Last Supper images. But it's a painting, created by a man. It's beautiful, but it is not evidence that any of the people in the painting ever existed.
In one's mind these stories r so real. Now if u were born somewhere else on this ROUND planet u would have a totally different set of beliefs.
Lindy,
I have had a couple of people over the years who thought that The Last Supper was painted live, on-scene! Sheesh! Of course it was Leonardo DaVinci's artistic representation as @Bet said. The beardless, feminine-looking one next to Jesus is supposed to to apostle John, not Mary Magdalene.
DaVinci painted several feminine-looking males – there's a picture of Angel Gabriel here (and some comments regarding the Mary M. deal):
http://godwords.org/posts.php?id=53
(heh, it's even a Christian website...)
Lindy, please add this documentary to your scholarly studies, though since you've already done all research back to the beginning of time you probably already uncovered this gem.
http://youtu.be/2skwoHvw-3w
Religion: the fragment is fake becasue it contradicts our interpretation of the scriptual canon. so we can make this determination a priori without even examining it, just as we did with the Copernican claim of a heliocentric solar system.
Science: we will have to do a lot of testing to determine if a claim for authenticity might even be probable, much less true, to warrant further testing..
If you are serious, I have but one word for you: nonsense!
In the first place, which canon do you mean? Second, no canon is inspired. Those are man-made collections determined by mere mortals. Another point is that it is not the job of historical artifacts to uphold canonicity or to conform to our theological dogma. Their only function in life is to give witness to what someone said or wrote at some point in history. Whether they are authentic or not remains to be seen in many cases, but the same can be said of many so-called canonical passages. Furthermore, a fragment such as this may provide key evidence of an earlier Christianity regardless of its ability to uphold the accepted dogma of today, which may be proven heresy in the future. If you go to bible school and seminary, you'll be exposed to everything I just wrote and much, much more. If you've already gone, maybe you need to go back and review your notes.
He was probably married as he should of been. Only reason he was remembered anyway is how they all killed him off. Considering religion on him was made after he was tortured to death, means that the crasy murderers wrote it.
allegedly tortured.
Next thing you idiots will be sayin', "He got knocked up!"
@wmd "Considering religion on him was made after he was tortured to death"
=>what about Jesus claim while He was alive that He was the Jewish Messiah?
Chad
Who cares what claims were made in a fictious book? Gandalf conjuring up the giant eagles was so cool, though.
Actually, crucifiction on a cross was the standard way of execution at that time. This was the way the Romans executed criminals, including the two who were crucified with Jesus
@John not the Baptist "Who cares what claims were made in a fictious book?"
@Chad "what investigation have you done into the bible to substantiate your claim that it is fict itious?"
======
@Christians Are Simple Minded People "Actually, crucifiction on a cross was the standard way of execution at that time. This was the way the Romans executed criminals, including the two who were crucified with Jesus"
@Chad " I agree"
Chad
Lets face the fact Chad, you are the worst kind of religious freak, I can do the same as you, I can express my FAITH that jesus and the god of Isreal is untrue fictious rubbish, FAITH requires no proof.
I agree with you, strong atheism (making the statement that the God if Israel does not exist) requires faith.
Belief in the God of Israel does require a faith, however, that faith is based on evidence.
Chad
The burden of that proof is on you. Your constantly entreating people why they reject the god of Isreal is as you know a false premise. So please present what you believe as evidence and we can judge whether it meets the standard of proof, peer reviewed if you like.
Indeed, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you claim that the God of Israel does not exist, then you have a burden of proof to establish that.
Since I claim that the God of Israel does exist, I then also have a burden of proof, I believe that burden is satisfied with:
origin of the universe
fine tuning of the universe
origin of life on earth
fossil record
empty tomb of Jesus Christ.
Chad
Look up the meaning of faith, you idiot.
Chad
You do not even have a clue what the burden of proof entails. I have made no claim that the god of Isreal does not exist, never. Of course he exists in his story book as every other fictional character does, next you will demand that I prove Oliver Twist or Tom Sawyer existed beyond the mind of the author. I will totally agree that your delusion exists, I make no claim that he does not, but no one can convince me that it is real..
Chad, I have asked you before for the non-biblical, contemporary accounts of the "empty tomb" but if you've responded, I haven't seen it. Could you please provide evidence of this event?
@tallulah13, I have asked you before for contemporary, non-biblical accounts of the lives of Pontius Pilate, Socrates, Plato, King Herod, Quirinius and Caiaphas, but if you've responded, I haven't seen it.
Could you please provide that evidence of those lives?
🙂
@John not the Baptist "I have made no claim that the god of Isreal does not exist, never. "
=>so then, if you are not claiming that the God of Israel does not exist, then what evidence are you using to show that the bible is a "fictitious book"?
Chad: So you're admitting you don't have evidence for the "Empty Tomb" thing you keep claiming. As for those other people you name, which ones currently have churches which insist that they exist and that we must obey their words? I'm not familiar with those religions. Could you please clarify?
LOL
@tallulah13 "So you're admitting you don't have evidence for the "Empty Tomb" thing you keep claiming"
@Chad "ah.. no 🙂
the point being made is that using your "contemporary, non-biblical" is a non-sense requirement (which is why you make it )
A. there are no "contemporary" written accounts of virtually ANY ancient person. This is because recording history was something done after the fact, and only for rulers like Caesar.
B. excluding from consideration the ancient doc uments that we have from a variety of sources just because they were later collected in one location precisely because they were authentic, is utter nonsense.
"the evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning...It is a curious fact that historians have often been much readier to trust the New Testament records than have many theologians." - F. F. Bruce
Chad's homies must give him a shasta blasta for each time he posts.
Jesus is pregnant with Justlin Beiber's lovechild.
Thank you for making it clear why your "evidence" is non-existent, Chad. I appreciate your willingness to admit that you are simply full of bull.
ah, LOL, no..
the problem is not the lack of evidence, the clear problem is your nonsense restrictions on the evidence we have 🙂
namely; if your requirement for doc umentaion is that it be:
1. written at the same exact time the events being recorded occurred (not at a later date)
and
2 be written by a person who was an enemy of the person whose activity is being recorded
then, there simply is no evidence, or ANY person in ANY of ancient history.. NONE. nobody,
seems pretty absurd when you spell out "contemporary non-biblical" means doesnt it, that's why historians dont even discuss that kind of nonsense 🙂
Chadillyicious is being a dishonest t w a t again: instead of proving what he knows he cannot, he puts the onus onto someone who doesn't believe in the first place...convincing no one at all but his ego. Coming to him and saying "please convice me" turns into "well, why don't you believe?" Fvcktard. I can see why people dislike the patronizing, condescending little weasel. The only thing I believe about Chadaladadingdong is that I believe he's not at all the orator for the divine that he believes he is. Bah!
Look at all Chard's pretty emoticons! It's like Christmas! As usual, they're a sign he's foundering yet again.
"Here Comes Honey Boo Boo" is especially popular south of the Mason-Dixon line and also among Sarah Palin supporters.
What about the provenance of this section of ancient script? I haven't seen where it was discovered and by whom.
The whole thing about Jesus has been so exagerated by the early christians to the point that nowadays its really very impossible to know the truth without reading other religious scripts and join pieces together. Nowadays The whole bible from Genesis to Reveltion is so full of contradiction to the point that one will start to dout the whole of christinity. Just recently, The pope agreed that jesus was really not bone on the 25th of December. HOW COULD THE WORLD GO SO WRONG FOR 2000 YEARS? A religion which is full of deceptive stories could not be a source of guidance.Its time for everyone to come out of that thight coner of beliving in those early christian whrites. We all know that the original Bible does not exist as the real one was all burnt and another one was written by the prophet Esra which he himself douth someparts. When you really study the Bible one will come to the conclution that; 1, Jesus did not really die on the cross. 2; did not ascend to the skies, 3, He lived and died on earth at a ripe age 120 years and had families. His tomb is found in India where he settled with the lost juws to complete his mission. I have hard facts to all these things that i have said and can back my up from the bible and other religious books. Dont rely on only as it does not contain much that can guide mankind as morned preachers has turned a God sent perfect man to be God Himself. They really missed the point. And end up just telling us only what we want to hear.
The bible has no mention of his birth being on the 25th of December. I suggest you read Lee Strobel's book The Case for Christ. Being a non-believing journalist Stobel went out to proof that Jesus was not God. I think you will find his research interesting. Have a good one.
@drammeh "The whole thing about Jesus has been so exagerated by the early christians to the point that nowadays its really very impossible to know the truth without reading other religious scripts and join pieces together"
@Chad "the only way your statement could possibly be true, is if you had complete knowledge of what Jesus life and claims actually were, and could compare them with what it being related today.
what investigation did you do to come into possession of this knowledge?
========
@drammeh "The whole bible from Genesis to Reveltion is so full of contradiction to the point that one will start to dout the whole of christinity."
@Chad "such as.. what?
=====
@drammeh "Just recently, The pope agreed that jesus was really not bone on the 25th of December. HOW COULD THE WORLD GO SO WRONG FOR 2000 YEARS?"
@Chad "the bible doesnt say when Jesus was born.
The use of 12/25 seems to have been established circa 350AD.
=======
=====
@drammeh " A religion which is full of deceptive stories"
@Chad "such as.. what?
=====
@drammeh "We all know that the original Bible does not exist as the real one was all burnt and another one was written by the prophet Esra which he himself douth someparts.
@Chad "not sure where you got that misinformation, wrong on every count.. Pretty typical atheist though to just take off and run with misinformation..
=====
@drammeh "When you really study the Bible one will come to the conclution that; 1, Jesus did not really die on the cross. 2; did not ascend to the skies, 3, He lived and died on earth at a ripe age 120 years and had families. His tomb is found in India where he settled with the lost juws to complete his mission"
@Chad "?????
that's all I can say.
pretty typical athesit however, in that utter lack of any supporting evidence for a view doesnt seem to phase you in the slightest...
=====
@drammeh "I have hard facts to all these things that i have said and can back my up from the bible"
@Chad "no you dont"
wow
Do not even try try to answer the CHAD he will use every deceit known to mankind to end at that the same point that the god of Isreal is real, that is his only end point, so why bother. Intresting that he cites the taxi cab objection in terms or science, but his rabid conclusion is preset and reverses from where the cab has stopped.
Using common sense and drawing simple logical conclusions,, No doubt the bible and jesus stories were just man made fabrications. Sad religions continue to brainwash children and cycle them into the fearful lunatics promoting silly beliefs in later adulthood. Fear does work as a brainwashing tactic. Deny it's fear and you could be the next terrorist.
@tell the truth "Using common sense and drawing simple logical conclusions,, No doubt the bible and jesus stories were just man made fabrications"
->"no doubt"
how can it be common sense to draw a conclusion, an acknowledged guess, based on no investigation?"
Chad- I've never seen you contest that the bible was written by men. How else were its stories fabricated?
what evidence do you have that any of the bible is fabricated?
none...
It exists. It is an artifact. It was fabricated.
LOL
you need better bait.
Chin up, Chad. If we can get you to be a little more consistent in your thinking and improve your grasp of facts, I'm very confident we can get you over this God of Israel thing.
you need better bait..
My issue with Jesus not having is own biological children, is that his purpose was to "live as man, over come temptation, and die without sin". If Jesus did not have children then he never had the option to over come the temptations and responsibilities that all parents must go through. Therefore Jesus has no authority to judge or forgive the sins of parents.
As a parent I will be damned if I let a childless Jesus judge and forgive my sins. On my judgment day I will request that I be judged by someone like Abraham or Moses. Both men that knew the temptation and responsibility of choosing god over their families. Something we are told Jesus could have never known.
If Jesus did not have a child his mission was failure. Whether Jesus was married or not is a non-issue. Being a parent is not a sin, even if out of wedlock.
@DavidS
" On my judgment day I will request that I be judged by someone like Abraham or Moses. "
Awesome, while I will be burning in the pit of hell or some such, you'll be making requests on judgement day... I love it ! 😀
Peace...
Abraham was asked to kill his child, Jesus was asked to kill himself. Ask a parent which is easier. Mosses gave more to god than Jesus ever could, if Jesus had no child to give.
If you can't understand the need for Jesus to have a family then your theology is broken.
You want to be judged by the biggest mass murderer of all time Moses ?
Jesus is not the one going to judge you on the day of judgement. Almighty God Himself is going to do that. ' SITTING ON A THRONE JUDGING THE 12 TRIBES OF iSREAL' is a metaphorical language. dont take it literally.
@DavidS
" If you can't understand the need for Jesus to have a family then your theology is broken. "
I do understand your point, David, I wasn't missing anything. I found it funny, as I have never heard of someone getting to "make a request on who gets to judge them" on judgement day. 😀
As for me, if I didn't make it clear from my first post... I don't believe in any of it anyway... re: "I'll be burning in the pit of hell" etc...
Good luck with your request on judgement day !
Peace...
Bar none, without question, that is the most asinine line of logic I have ever heard.
God is the biggest mass murderer of all time. They left the part out of the Bible where God says, "Do as I say, not as I do."
Just accept him as your savior...we all have issues and questions about God...nothing wrong with that.
+1 on the weasel factor. Did you advise Solomon when he was writing Ecclesiastes?
You have profoundly misunderstood the sacrifice that Jesus made if you presume that Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son or Mosses' 40 years in the wilderness compare to the atonement. The Christ took upon himself the sins of all. He suffered until he sweat as it were great drops of blood. His sacrifice was not merely the torture and the crucifixion but the suffering for sins of others. A suffering that no mortal being could bear.
I'd just like to point out that the English version of Moses has on "s," not two.
Last time I checked, "Mosses" was a species of air plant, and I don't think we have to answer to air plants on judgment day, unless of course we're thinking about all the damage we did to the planet through pollution and global warming. In that case, we have no excuse, and the mosses will prevail over us in the Court of Eternal Law.
Excuse me. Mosses were a species. I stand corrected by myself. Thank you.
Graham, do some research on your c r a c k e r s. They were healthy once.
It must be absolute hell to wake up in the morning, look in the mirror and realize you're Sarah Palin. If it were me I would close the garage door, sit in the car and start the motor.
the fact is there are many gospels written during the time of the bible that have been forbidden and are lost (probably) in the bowls of the vatican even though there was no vatican...several times men of the church have got together and decided what they wanted us to know and what not...they probably decided what they wanted to change to....it has been translated many many times and still people swear it is the literal words of god
Thank y ou! All I have to do is look at the milky way and realize all the stars are suns, millions and millions with their own solar systems, and that's only the minutest part of the universe. I"m to believe that god hears my prayer and thinks "Oh, I see Falcon has a problem. Let me solve it."
LARRYB, you are so right. The early prist have succeeded in modifying and changing the whole thing to suit their way of lives to the point that nothing can now be considard correct. Thats why from Genesis to Revelation is full of contradictions. The question will come to mind. Does God contradict Himself? If the answer is no. then the whole bible is manmade.
Anyone claiming the bible is the literal word of god and the work of a single author, has apparently missed the dozen or so times scribes break from telling the story to introduce themselves and their contemporary opinions. If you want to see a dazzling display of exaggeration, start with the gospel of Mark (written by not a disciple, but by a man who witnessed Paul speaking and then interviewed members of the crowd) which is oldest and shortest and ends at the open tomb. Then skip ahead a few decades to gospels of Matthew and Luke to see how many ancient folktales they squeezed in during that 30 year gap.
If I remember my Coptic, I believe an accurate interpretation of the text reads, "...and I, the Lord Jesus, sayeth unto you that whoever placeth upon the stone-hearth bread a pickled herring shall have to answer to my nagging wife..."
I can get behind that one. Putting pickled herring anywhere near the fire stinks up the whole tent.
Funny, I always just assumed he was gay.
Well it wouldn't surprise me. You know the case has now been made for gay marriage from the Bible so they tell me.
Even if all the testing comes out solid, such a snippet proves nothing.
Consider:
Jesus said, "My wife, if I had one, would not let me have this beard."
Jesus said, "My wife, if I had one, would surely nag me until I would look forward to the crucifixion as 'me' time."
@JohnNotTheBaptist: Since most of us don't have particle accelerators and such in our basements, we leave it up to the scientists to perform these experiments. I'm a fan of physics, but reading any explanation of these experiments by a common person without an advanced physics degree it all looks like a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. In the end, you're taking their word for it that they actually did what they say, and their interpretation of the results. Isn't that kind of stupid – it's almost like.... oh, I don't know – Faith, maybe?
YOU'RE stupid. We have to rely on others' interpretations on many things every day. Our doctors' interpretations on tests they claim to have ordered, the doctors have to rely on the laboratories' claim to have actually performed the tests. We have to rely on human resources as having accurately taken out all the taxes we owe, etc. With zealots like you, common sense science makes no difference – you'll believe what you want without or in spite of the evidence. In that case, some zealots can claim Jesus was married and others can claim he was not, and both arguments are as solid as vapor.
The difference is, if you sat on a classroom long enough, you would understand the science and wouldn't need to take it on faith.
Sure, those science holy men wouldn't lie, EVER! But hey, they're under a lot of peer pressure. 'Sides who would want to see a lifetime of work laughed at?
raulisodo
Well, OK, you are a moron. Lets hope you do not need a medical procedure that needs the latest scientific results because I know you will be to stupid to allow them to perform the procedure because you do not have FAITH. You sound exactly like the religious that could not grasp Galileo and the earth not being the center of the universe, as Forest would say, stupid is what stupid does.
raulsido
Sorry I can't stop.
You...Yes, doctor, I know I need a kidney transplant but I have never performed one in my basement work shop, so why would I take your word it would work, on faith? Man you are stupid.
It's a shame Karen King and Harvard can't find better use for their resources and talents, like solving real problems in the world today rather than run around trying to find out whether an old scrap of paper states whether Jesus was married or not. There's no proof that Jesus ever existed other than texts written several decades after his supposed existence. What a waste of time, talent and money.
It's a shame you have nothing better to do than disparage their work.
Actually, Andrew, it's not. With all the problems in the world brought about by global zealotry and fanatical religious devition, I think resources are better spent address issues like hunger, homlessness and global warming. I'd rather have Harvard use its money trying to get innocent war viticms out of Syria rather than performing expensive tests on scraps of papyrus which aren't going to sway zealots one way or the other. Who cares? All religion is myth. Jesus is no more legitimate than Zeus or Horus.
Well, Harvard will cover up for the Big O and blast the lady army officer with innuendos so what the hey to you expect from a religious insti tution? (Broadwell) AKA the broad path to destruction.
I'd posit that it's the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls that will eventually be instrumental in dissolving the Abrahamic religions from society. What has been translated already fragments the dogma of these religions. The first sentence of Genesis alone tells you that the gods live on earth, not in the sky, and they use their own hands to cut down trees. Many of the translations contain the exact same language from related tales of Egyptian pharoas. In another decade, we will have a much more accurate portrayal of these original beliefs rather than the edited fiction anthologies people read in churches/temples/mosques today.
Seyedibar, I see you're a devotee of the "WEGOD", too. What makes you think libraries will be here in a decade? Faith much?