Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Papyrus refers to Jesus' wife


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#121    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,625 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:56 PM

View PostDr. D, on 29 September 2012 - 07:52 PM, said:

For the traditional church, claims of Jesus marriage rank with all other heresies.  Their problem is that in modern times they can't solve it in the same way as they did with the Cathars.

Where we have to add that the Cathars followed the Manichean-Gnostic teachings, therefore the perfects were not married either.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#122    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:16 PM

View Postdocyabut2, on 29 September 2012 - 02:14 AM, said:

As a Christan I like to know the truth of the matter if Jesus was married, however nothing points to it.  The later gospic writers and painters want to make him more out of  man then a god, but that does not make him as married as  nessasarily true.

The gospel of John gives the witness as a man standing at the cross, the beloved?  


John-19 35  And he that saw [it] bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

I’m not sure what you mean when you say “nothing points to it.”  Nothing points to the idea that he wasn’t married, either.  According to Judaic custom at the time it was not only usual, but almost mandatory, that a man be married.  Except for certain groups of Essenes, celibacy was vigorously condemned.  In the early part of the first century, celibacy was compared with deliberate murder.  It was as obligatory for a Jewish father to find his son a wife as it was for him to ensure that his son was circumcised.

If Jesus had not been married, it would have been conspicuous to the society with which he had contact.  It would have drawn great attention and be used as part of the description to characterize him.

In the Book of John we find the story of the Wedding of Cana.  The bride and groom are not mentioned by name.  But strangely, Jesus is “called” to this wedding even though he had not yet started his ministry.  Equally strange, his mother is also in attendance.  By Hebrew custom, the bride, her mother and future mother in law and their friends arrive first to prepare everything for the ceremony.  The mother of the groom is in charge of the event.  Second to arrive are the invited guests and last to enter is the groom and his entourage.  Once joined to his new wife in matrimony, all his responsibilities to his parents have ended and he embarks upon a new life as husband and future father.  At the wedding at Cana, Jesus mother is apparently in charge because they go to her when all the wine has been consumed and they want more.  She goes to Jesus and he openly says, “What do I have to do with thee?”  He finally agrees and performs his miracle of the wine but we should note that Mary tells the servants to do whatever Jesus says, so she is obviously in charge of the wedding, just as the mother of the groom would be.


#123    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:18 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 29 September 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

Where we have to add that the Cathars followed the Manichean-Gnostic teachings, therefore the perfects were not married either.

More damaging was not the basic beliefs of the Cathars (reincarnation, Jesus was not the son of God, etc.) but the legends surrounding them, the most damning one being that Mary Magdalena taught them the prime elements of their faith.


#124    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,625 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:48 PM

View PostDr. D, on 29 September 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

More damaging was not the basic beliefs of the Cathars (reincarnation, Jesus was not the son of God, etc.) but the legends surrounding them, the most damning one being that Mary Magdalena taught them the prime elements of their faith.

But that is part of the Gnostic teachings, where the New Testament consists of the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of Maria besides the Gospel of Thomas and the Manichean teachings.

In any case, the Gnostic considered having children and therefore marriage as a sin because a soul was trapped into a body by that. A concept taken over by the Cathars, who practiced a little watered down version wherein only the perfects had to abstain from sex.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#125    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:57 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 29 September 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

But that is part of the Gnostic teachings, where the New Testament consists of the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of Maria besides the Gospel of Thomas and the Manichean teachings.

In any case, the Gnostic considered having children and therefore marriage as a sin because a soul was trapped into a body by that. A concept taken over by the Cathars, who practiced a little watered down version wherein only the perfects had to abstain from sex.

What I'm saying is that the thing that led to the slaughter of the Cathars was the idea that they had been taught these things by Maria Magdalena.  If the idea grew and it was believed that a woman who walked with Jesus taught that he was not really the son of God, the doctrine of the Church would be questioned and perhaps eventually ignored.  The Cathars were, after all, winning political elections and gaining social power.


#126    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,625 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 09:18 PM

View PostDr. D, on 29 September 2012 - 08:57 PM, said:

What I'm saying is that the thing that led to the slaughter of the Cathars was the idea that they had been taught these things by Maria Magdalena.  If the idea grew and it was believed that a woman who walked with Jesus taught that he was not really the son of God, the doctrine of the Church would be questioned and perhaps eventually ignored.  The Cathars were, after all, winning political elections and gaining social power.

But that was not due to their teachings, it was due to the habits of the perfects, something the Catholic church had to adapt to quite fast with a few more monk orders (The Capucines for example) that emulated their habits. (see Zoe Oldenbourg, La Buche de Montsegur) The amount of people actually participating in the Consolament rites were a very low minority. (See Ernest Forneiron, Le Mystere cathare).

The real reason for the Albiguense crusade were not the Cathars but the liberal inclination of its society. It was the only place in Europe where Jews had full citizen rights (we are talking middle ages), women were considered equal and the state was practically separated from the church (in as far as its influence) besides a few inheritance problems of the French kings in the Languedoc. The Cathars were just a good excuse.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#127    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,642 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 30 September 2012 - 12:40 PM

'Dr. D' timestamp qoute-
I’m not sure what you mean when you say “nothing points to it.”  Nothing points to the idea that he wasn’t married, either.  According to Judaic custom at the time it was not only usual, but almost mandatory, that a man be married.  Except for certain groups of Essenes, celibacy was vigorously condemned.  In the early part of the first century, celibacy was compared with deliberate murder.  It was as obligatory for a Jewish father to find his son a wife as it was for him to ensure that his son was circumcised.

If Jesus had not been married, it would have been conspicuous to the society with which he had contact.  It would have drawn great attention and be used as part of the description to characterize him.

In the Book of John we find the story of the Wedding of Cana.  The bride and groom are not mentioned by name.  But strangely, Jesus is “called” to this wedding even though he had not yet started his ministry.  Equally strange, his mother is also in attendance.  By Hebrew custom, the bride, her mother and future mother in law and their friends arrive first to prepare everything for the ceremony.  The mother of the groom is in charge of the event.  Second to arrive are the invited guests and last to enter is the groom and his entourage.  Once joined to his new wife in matrimony, all his responsibilities to his parents have ended and he embarks upon a new life as husband and future father.  At the wedding at Cana, Jesus mother is apparently in charge because they go to her when all the wine has been consumed and they want more.  She goes to Jesus and he openly says, “What do I have to do with thee?”  He finally agrees and performs his miracle of the wine but we should note that Mary tells the servants to do whatever Jesus says, so she is obviously in charge of the wedding, just as the mother of the groom would be.


It was a custom for women to help with relative`s weddings, does`t mean anything. Any how according to John`s time line,  Jesus traveled to Mount Olives and back to the temple where he had saved the women from stoneing , then traveled to Bethany and met with the women  that washed his feet , after the wedding at Cana, when Mary Magdaene was frist mention and as the women Jesus saved from the seven demons.

Jesus brought Mary of Magdalene the women to be stoned to her home at Bethany for her family to accept her.

Edited by docyabut2, 30 September 2012 - 01:39 PM.


#128    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:49 PM

It was a custom for women to help with relative`s weddings, does`t mean anything. Any how according to John`s time line, Jesus traveled to Mount Olives and back to the temple where he had saved the women from stoneing , then traveled to Bethany and met with the women that washed his feet , after the wedding at Cana, when Mary Magdaene was frist mention and as the women Jesus saved from the seven demons.

Jesus brought Mary of Magdalene the women to be stoned to her home at Bethany for her family to accept her.


And was it the custom for any one of them to be in charge of the wedding?  No.

And where do you find this bit of Mary Magdalena and the adulteress to be one and the same?  I want to see that part of the New Testament.  And where does it say he took her to her home?  In fact, he simply told her to go and sin no more.  And how does your time line prevent Jesus from being the groom at the Wedding at Cana?


#129    CRIPTIC CHAMELEON

CRIPTIC CHAMELEON

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 766 posts
  • Joined:27 Feb 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Annwyn

  • Without going out of my door
    I can know all things of earth
    Without looking out of my window
    I could know the ways of heaven

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:16 PM

I still like the Mary Magdalene [Magdala] story where she was most likely Jesus wife but they needed Jesus to be pure so they turned her into a whore.


#130    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,642 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 30 September 2012 - 11:58 PM

John states after the wedding at Cana, Jesus traveled to Mount Olives and saves a women from stoning for aduterly, then later travels to Bethney to Lazarus house, where his sister named Mary was washing Jesus`s feet with perfume and her hair, something only a women of pleasure would do.Mark specifys Mary Madaglene at the tomb, as the only women Jesus had saved from seven demons. So in the time line of events where did Jesus pick up Mary Magdalene who Jesus had to saved from the seven deadly demons? Surely If Mary Madalene was a wife he married at Cana, she would not have had to be saved from many demons.:)


In Latin tradition, Mary of Bethany is often identified as Mary Magdalene (of whom more is recorded in the gospels as well as in later traditions

http://en.wikipedia....Mary_of_Bethany


#131    Dr. D

Dr. D

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:15 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico

  • I love being me even though sometimes I'm still a stranger.

Posted 01 October 2012 - 01:24 AM

View Postdocyabut2, on 30 September 2012 - 11:58 PM, said:

John states after the wedding at Cana, Jesus traveled to Mount Olives and saves a women from stoning for aduterly, then later travels to Bethney to Lazarus house, where his sister named Mary was washing Jesus`s feet with perfume and her hair, something only a women of pleasure would do.Mark specifys Mary Madaglene at the tomb, as the only women Jesus had saved from seven demons. So in the time line of events where did Jesus pick up Mary Magdalene who Jesus had to saved from the seven deadly demons? Surely If Mary Madalene was a wife he married at Cana, she would not have had to be saved from many demons. :)


In Latin tradition, Mary of Bethany is often identified as Mary Magdalene (of whom more is recorded in the gospels as well as in later traditions

http://en.wikipedia....Mary_of_Bethany

First of all, you seem to accept tradition as readily as Scripture.  The old belief that only “a woman of pleasure” would wash Jesus’ feet comes from the event in Luke 7 when a woman who was a sinner, did the same.  That does not mean that any woman washing his feet in the future would be an equal sinner.  It only means she would be showing her honor to someone revered.  Given that the footwear of that time was sandals and the Roman roads were dusty, it became a habit for servants to assist visitors to wealthy homes in washing their feet.  It also became a gesture of admiration and respect to be done by anyone other than a slave or servant.  The humility shown by drying ones feet with their hair was to pay the ultimate homage.  It had nothing to do with a “woman of pleasure.”

It is also in this portion of Luke that we first hear of Mary Magdalene and since the Wedding at Cana is found only in John, we cannot know the amount of time passing between these events.  With the first mention of Mary Magdalene, however, it specifies that she had demons cast from her earlier.  How much earlier, we don’t know.  It is more than likely that the reference was not to actual demons but that Mary Magdalene had been a follower of Astarte where there were seven steps to the initiation and to remove her from that faith would have prompted this form of reference.

Yes, it is wholly possible that Mary Magdalene was the same Mary, sister of Martha.  We can give some evidence to this by the suggestion that she was sitting shiva and responded only to the command of Jesus.

You have not answered, however, where it was stated that the adulteress was taken by Jesus to her home.  And your timeline in no way prevents Jesus from being the groom.


#132    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,642 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 01 October 2012 - 02:41 AM

Dr. D' timestamp


First of all, you seem to accept tradition as readily as Scripture.  The old belief that only “a woman of pleasure” would wash Jesus’ feet comes from the event in Luke 7 when a woman who was a sinner, did the same.  That does not mean that any woman washing his feet in the future would be an equal sinner.  It only means she would be showing her honor to someone revered.  Given that the footwear of that time was sandals and the Roman roads were dusty, it became a habit for servants to assist visitors to wealthy homes in washing their feet.  It also became a gesture of admiration and respect to be done by anyone other than a slave or servant.  The humility shown by drying ones feet with their hair was to pay the ultimate homage.  It had nothing to do with a “woman of pleasure.”

It is also in this portion of Luke that we first hear of Mary Magdalene and since the Wedding at Cana is found only in John, we cannot know the amount of time passing between these events.  With the first mention of Mary Magdalene, however, it specifies that she had demons cast from her earlier.  How much earlier, we don’t know.  It is more than likely that the reference was not to actual demons but that Mary Magdalene had been a follower of Astarte where there were seven steps to the initiation and to remove her from that faith would have prompted this form of reference.

Yes, it is wholly possible that Mary Magdalene was the same Mary, sister of Martha.  We can give some evidence to this by the suggestion that she was sitting shiva and responded only to the command of Jesus.

You have not answered, however, where it was stated that the adulteress was taken by Jesus to her home.  And your timeline in no way prevents Jesus from being the groom.


right but with perfume could only meam a women of pleasure.

Edited by docyabut2, 01 October 2012 - 02:42 AM.


#133    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,054 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rincon de Loix, Benidorm

Posted 01 October 2012 - 01:11 PM

View Postdocyabut2, on 01 October 2012 - 02:41 AM, said:



right but with perfume could only meam a women of pleasure.

But is that true? Did only "women of Pleasure" use perfume? Did the rest of Humanity really smell terrible? Whatever happened to Myrrh and Frankincense....were they used only by "Women of Pleasure"?? If so then someone needs to tell the Magi not to be so disrespectful!!

I find this whole thread rather ridiculous - with tiny portions of an incomplete religious text (the Christian Bible - as determined by the Nycaea conference) being proferred to support an insupportable life of an unproveable person (Jesus Christ).


#134    moosehead

moosehead

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 66 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Davenport Ia

  • IS there happiness out there for me?

Posted 01 October 2012 - 02:19 PM

Of course the Catholic church is going to say that. It is that religion that began the council of Nicea to decide what would be in the bible. Women were not looked upon as people and not treated well as now in the Middle East.
IF Jesus did marry and Mary and the daughter escaped to Egypt then the bloodline continues. The Catholics wanted to make these rules and 'religion' to control the people. So the story of Jesus' marriage was stomped on. It would very odd for a Jewish man of his age to NOT be married. I think he was and Mary and the baby went to Egypt.
Catholics killed thousands of people who did not go along with this so called religion. Again killing people in the name of their 'gods'


#135    Bignose Goon

Bignose Goon

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Joined:23 May 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.

Posted 01 October 2012 - 02:53 PM

I believe Jesus is a myth, the story of Horus retold

http://www.pleasecon..._the_Horus_Myth





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users