Ancient gospel of Jesus' Wife 'not a fake'.

[sojourner]

I think it’s highly unlikely Jesus had a wife or was romantically involved with a woman. The canonical Gospels mention Jesus mother, father, brothers and sisters but no mention of a wife or lover. With most men a wife is the closest person to him, but Jesus never even hints at a wife. He had created many parables using every day things. He had the opportunity to incorporate a wife into any one of them, but never did. It would have been uncommon at Jesus age not to be married, but it is not something unheard of. The Essenes were celibate at least most of them were. Today celibacy is uncommon, but it does exist. Catholic priests come to mind. None of the non-canonical Gospels mention Jesus having a wife either. If we lump all the known Gospels together, there is more to support Jesus being single rather than being married.

In that culture, how would mentioning a wife add to the theological thrust of any of the gospels? [Hint: it wouldn't.]

 

[roger1440]

I don't know. I have a different view of that verse but it is very close to yours.

I just want to leave you with an idea, even though the Lord Christ is God, he is still the Son of Man, so I would have no problem with him enjoying the fullness of human experience including falling in love, being married and having sex.

Heck, even though he was God, his mother still probably had to change his diapers when he was a baby. So he had that human experience.

Are you implying the “fullness of human experience” must include “falling in love, being married and having sex”? Catholic priests, monks and nuns would argue that, not to mention Buddhist monks. We can also add the Essenes while we are at it.

 

[roger1440]

In that culture, how would mentioning a wife add to the theological thrust of any of the gospels? [Hint: it wouldn't.]

The metaphors are borrowed from Jewish scripture. Israel is God’s spouse. Israel had cheated on God. Ezekiel had even referred to Israel and Judea as a whore and prostitute. Read the Song of Songs. What is it about? Is it about the love between a man and woman? Is it about the love between a Man and God? Maybe the story is about the love between Israel and God. I think it may be about all three. Whoever wrote it was very creative and insightful.

 

[roger1440]

In that culture, how would mentioning a wife add to the theological thrust of any of the gospels? [Hint: it wouldn't.]

3 They became prostitutes in Egypt, engaging in prostitution from their youth. In that land their breasts were fondled and their virgin bosoms caressed. 4 The older was named Oholah, and her sister was Oholibah. They were mine and gave birth to sons and daughters. Oholah is Samaria, and Oholibah is Jerusalem.
5 “Oholah engaged in prostitution while she was still mine; and she lusted after her lovers, the Assyrians—warriors 6 clothed in blue, governors and commanders, all of them handsome young men, and mounted horsemen. 7 She gave herself as a prostitute to all the elite of the Assyrians and defiled herself with all the idols of everyone she lusted after. 8 She did not give up the prostitution she began in Egypt, when during her youth men slept with her, caressed her virgin bosom and poured out their lust on her. (Ezekiel 23:3-8)​

 

[roger1440]

In that culture, how would mentioning a wife add to the theological thrust of any of the gospels? [Hint: it wouldn't.]

"She lusted after her paramours, whose genitals are like those of donkeys, and whose emissions are like those of horses." (Eze 23:20)

That is prpbably the most sexually graphic verse in the entire Bible. Good ole Ezekiel couldn't have gotten more graphic then that if he tried.

 

[fantome profane]

Here you go imposing modern standards onto ancient circumstances. It would have been HIGHLY likely, if Jesus were married, that he would have children. remember: Jesus was Jewish. For the ancient Jews, children = salvation/God's grace.

I am aware of that and I believe I acknowledged it in that post when I said that it would be uncommon for a married man of 30 not to have children. Still however you want to phrase it, an unlikely situation, even a highly unlikely situation, is not an impossible situation. There were ancient Jewish married couples living at that time who did not have children. It happens. It happens today that some couples cannot have children, and it happened in first century Palestine that some couples could not have children.

 

[sojourner]

Are you implying the “fullness of human experience” must include “falling in love, being married and having sex”? Catholic priests, monks and nuns would argue that, not to mention Buddhist monks. We can also add the Essenes while we are at it.

It usually does, but it's not mandatory. Celibacy wasn't the rule for the first 600 years or so of the Roman church -- was never the rule in the Celtic church, nor in the Eastern church. For the Christian, celibacy is a curiosity that has long been enforced and has also long been in question.

 

[sojourner]

The metaphors are borrowed from Jewish scripture. Israel is God’s spouse. Israel had cheated on God. Ezekiel had even referred to Israel and Judea as a whore and prostitute. Read the Song of Songs. What is it about? Is it about the love between a man and woman? Is it about the love between a Man and God? Maybe the story is about the love between Israel and God. I think it may be about all three. Whoever wrote it was very creative and insightful.

the Song of Songs is patently erotica. It's included to show that erotic passion is part and parcel of a Godly life.

 

[sojourner]

"She lusted after her paramours, whose genitals are like those of donkeys, and whose emissions are like those of horses." (Eze 23:20)

That is prpbably the most sexually graphic verse in the entire Bible. Good ole Ezekiel couldn't have gotten more graphic then that if he tried.

None of this has anything to do with the gospels. :no:

 

[sojourner]

I am aware of that and I believe I acknowledged it in that post when I said that it would be uncommon for a married man of 30 not to have children. Still however you want to phrase it, an unlikely situation, even a highly unlikely situation, is not an impossible situation. There were ancient Jewish married couples living at that time who did not have children. It happens. It happens today that some couples cannot have children, and it happened in first century Palestine that some couples could not have children.

Ok, but in that culture it would have been highly likely that there would have been children, so his tying the two together is not only a plausible scenario, it would be the most likely scenario. Your casting a shadow of doubt based on an unlikely scenario is simply blowing smoke and frankly looks like a cheap bid for skepticism just for the sake of creating an argument. Unless you have some compelling evidence that chances were likely that Jesus or his wife were impotent or barren...

 

[fantome profane]

Ok, but in that culture it would have been highly likely that there would have been children, so his tying the two together is not only a plausible scenario, it would be the most likely scenario. Your casting a shadow of doubt based on an unlikely scenario is simply blowing smoke and frankly looks like a cheap bid for skepticism just for the sake of creating an argument. Unless you have some compelling evidence that chances were likely that Jesus or his wife were impotent or barren...

I am not creating an argument, other than saying such a thing is possible.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Are you implying the “fullness of human experience” must include “falling in love, being married and having sex”? Catholic priests, monks and nuns would argue that, not to mention Buddhist monks. We can also add the Essenes while we are at it.

Jesus wasn't a Catholic priest nor a Buddhist monk and there is no evidence that he was an Essene, Jesus seems to be against their sort of asceticism. What evidence we do have seems to suggest that Jesus was acknowledged and recognized as a Rabbi and was done so by the Pharisees. And back then rabbi's were community leaders and they were generally married.

 

[Breathe]

100% human like Jesus.

Do you mean this in a non-Trinitarian way, or as though they would have only inherited Jesus' human nature?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Do you mean this in a non-Trinitarian way, or as though they would have only inherited Jesus' human nature?

Well Jesus did not have divine DNA, everything biological about him was completely human.

 

[Breathe]

Well Jesus did not have divine DNA, everything biological about him was completely human.

Ah yeah, I get what you mean. I thought it'd be better to ask for clarity though.

 

[dantech]

Scientist says a papyrus fragment that mentions Jesus's wife is likely ancient, probably dating between the sixth and ninth century, latest research shows.

Papyrus Mentioning Jesus's Wife Is Likely Ancient and Not Fake, Scientists Say


Now this is a bit interesting indeed, chaps and chappettes. I'm not saying Jesus did exist, or that he did have a wife, but it's quite interesting that some fellow in the 6th century would have been writing about it.

Where and when can I get baptised? I'm convinced now!:yes:

 

[Shiranui117]

Where and when can I get baptised? I'm convinced now!:yes:

Just walk into your nearest Orthodox church, announce your interest in the Faith and ask for instruction.

 

[roger1440]

None of this has anything to do with the gospels. :no:

But it does. In Jewish scripture the union between God and Israel is illustrated as a metaphor using Israel as God’s wife. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke use a somewhat similar metaphor with the virgin birth. Jesus is the metaphorical personification of sinless Israel, the Israel that never went astray. Jesus is born from above and also from below. The union in these Gospels is the same exact union found in Jewish scripture. The virgin birth story isn’t about some hot Jewish chick getting knocked up without a man. Plain and simple, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke portray Jesus as Israel. John’s Gospel uses a different metaphorical angle. In John’s Gospel, God is portrayed as Jesus. John’s Gospel, read as a metaphor, would not be blasphemous to Jewish theology. For nearly two thousand years gentiles have been telling Jews they don’t understand their own scripture. It is actually the other way around. Gentiles don’t understand the Gospels. The Gospels were written by Jews, for Jews, using Jewish metaphors. The Gentiles had interrupted these stories as literal.

 

[shawn001]

Scientist says a papyrus fragment that mentions Jesus's wife is likely ancient, probably dating between the sixth and ninth century, latest research shows.

Papyrus Mentioning Jesus's Wife Is Likely Ancient and Not Fake, Scientists Say


Now this is a bit interesting indeed, chaps and chappettes. I'm not saying Jesus did exist, or that he did have a wife, but it's quite interesting that some fellow in the 6th century would have been writing about it.

I bet he got his "Honey Do List" done fast.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' Looks More and More Like a Fake - NBC News

Ok. Now what OP?