Papyrus refers to Jesus' wife

[libstaK]

I think it's a load of rubbish ,If it were true how would that effect the "Trinity "would we have to change it to

The Quadrality " The Father The son and the grandson and the holy spirit "

fullywired

Wait ... where is the wife in that? Meh, The father, the Son, the holy spirit, the grandson and THE BOSS.

[DONTEATUS]

IT is all too Funny ! Guess who`s comming to Dinner ? I wrote that ! maybe we need to look a bit closer,or at least remember that everything has a price?

[minera]

Im Caholic and have no problem in accepting the fact that Jesus may have been married. The church however has a different view. The believe in Aliens but not the fact that Jesus might have married a woman. Remember he was born of woman. I have noticed that ALL religions focus around the MALE and his control over the female.

[White Crane Feather]

Wasn't Jesus, being a Jew, pretty much required by jewish law to be maried by a certain age?

Edited September 19, 2012 by Seeker79

[questionmark]

Hmmm... why do I suspect that Christianism started as a Jewish sect that was hijacked by some misogynist and out came a new religion?

[Big Bad Voodoo]

There is no significant way in which Christ having a wife and kids detracts from any part of the bible or the significance of Christ. Nor his nature, nor the significance of his death, nor the possibility of his ressurection. Certainly it might offend some Catholic views which evolved in the centuries after Christ about women, sex and marriage.

I think it very probable that Christ was married and perhaps had children, although many jewish men did not marry until they were reasonably old because they had to prove themselves capapble of providing for a wife and family.

I just correct your post with capital C on Christ and Chatolic.

Btw I dont think it can offened Chatolics on rest I agree.

Edited September 19, 2012 by the L

[keithisco]

Even Luke (Gospel according to...) refers to Mary Magdelene as his most beloved above the other regular disciples.

A huge kick in the teeth to the Roman Catholic dogma of Male Supremacy...

[Abramelin]

Hmmm... why do I suspect that Christianism started as a Jewish sect that was hijacked by some misogynist and out came a new religion?

Wasn't his name Paul?

[Abramelin]

I agree. Christs message is unaffected.

It does open up some interesting posibilities though......

"Jesus said to them, 'My wife and seven sons.........."

"Jesus said to them, 'My wife is a Roman you know?"

"Jesus said to them, 'My wife's father, Mr Abbas is coming over for dinner...."

"Jesus said to them, 'My father, whom you all know as Tiberius, was going to come for dinner, but at the last moment Caesar sent him and and the rest of his cohort to Germania'.

(Tiberius Iulius Abdes Pantera).

Now that would be something..lol.

[puckmomma]

I would accept it as fact. The Vatican knows about all the historical life of Jesus and now they have some explaining to do.... This could even change the dynamics in the Church.... Might make women accepted in the priesthood... Thats if the Vatican is'nt on damage control and don't accept this document.

I really don't see any negative in this but who knows. My question would then be is there a blood line and could that be a reason he was crucified. And what of the Knight's Templar? What secrets were they really hiding?

[The Dreamer - Hybrid89]

Im not a very religous individual anymore, infact ive practically no belief left. If jesus did actually exist, I wouldnt be surprised if he was married. he was human, he had needs, he was entitled to love?

[MJNYC]

I'm Catholic and I have no problem with Jesus being married. I think priests should be allowed to be married too.

I think the Catholic church does have a lot of explaining to do on this and should change their tune.

[questionmark]

Wasn't his name Paul?

Mr. Saint Paul I believe. And his steps to evangelize were so well guided that 3 times a captain put a ship on poop he was traveling on. Not recorded is whether this was due to his preaching or because somebody tried to send him a message that never got there

[Joven]

jesus was a jew and was supposedly "rabbi" which means teacher. by law, if my memory serves me correctly, rabbi had to be married. not sure if there was an age requirement where one had to be married by. the issue of mary magdelene comes about from the removal of the sacred feminine from the christian faith. just as the wife of God was removed from all current versions of the bible. lots of editing by various peoples with various agendas has polluted the word necessitating the taking of the current Word and adding a bit of salt to make it palatable.

[la_paloma_blanca]

Wasn't Jesus, being a Jew, pretty much required by jewish law to be maried by a certain age?

Christ was considered somewhat of a heretic.

[la_paloma_blanca]

It could possibly be accurate and authentic. Considering very few words and sentences, it could refer to anyone's wife including the scribe's.Not to mention Jesus and Mary were two very common names during that era.

[Professor Buzzkill]

jesus was a jew and was supposedly "rabbi" which means teacher. by law, if my memory serves me correctly, rabbi had to be married. not sure if there was an age requirement where one had to be married by. the issue of mary magdelene comes about from the removal of the sacred feminine from the christian faith. just as the wife of God was removed from all current versions of the bible. lots of editing by various peoples with various agendas has polluted the word necessitating the taking of the current Word and adding a bit of salt to make it palatable.

He would definitely be considered unusual if he wasn't married. I suppose we may never know the truth.

The gospels were altered from religious texts to political texts in 325A.D, with unsuitable things removed (like any positive mention of the feminine).

[MidKn13ght]

The act of crucifing jesus was merely an illusion to hide jesus and his family so he may live a "normal" life...... Well thats my thoughts.... ofcourse what do i know...im justa a caveman.....

[TheMacGuffin]

Ever since I did my own reading and thinking about religion, I decided that Jesus was married to Mary of Magdala and that the wedding feast at Cana was probably referring to his own marriage. He probably had children as well.

For the life of me I cannot see what the big problem with this would be, or why the Catholic Church had to insist he was the celibate son of a virgin mother--no matter that the Bible says he had brothers and sisters!

After all, the message matters far more than these things, doesn't it?

[SSilhouette]

John, the Gospel of "John", is the only apostle that there is no mention of "his" family lineage. He is often referred to as "the beloved apostle, closest to Jesus". Many biblical scholars familiar also with the Gnostic Gospels voted out by the Council of Nicea for inclusion in the bible, believe that John is actually code for Mary Magdalene. In the Gnostic Gospel of [beings with a P, not Paul], there is a discussion of jealousy amongst the diciples of how close Jesus was to Mary [John] and he "kissed her on the mouth" often. Some scholars believe that this jealousy lead to Mary's accounts being drummed out of the bible; well, at least with her name on it.. That and the patriarchy of the time would not abide by any woman speaking the word of God. Interestingly, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene was referred to by the others as "strange to us"..ie: she had some conversations with Jesus about the nature of God and man's purpose that none of the others were privy to. And, large chunks of Magdalene's Gospel have destroyed parts torn out. Since everyone knew about Mary's relationship with Jesus and they were afraid of completely excluding her accounts from God through her exposure to her very close and unique version of Jesus' teachings. They simply changed her name to "John" and the rest is history, not herstory.

In various paintings of the last supper, a woman is shown to the right of Jesus, seated next to him. The official statement on this from the roman catholic church is that "john was a young man with no facial hair". But there are breasts, a woman's jaw, small hands...etc. It was Mary Magdalene, not "John". She was the beloved apostle.

Edited September 20, 2012 by SSilhouette

[docyabut2]

Jesus went to many weddings. I sure if he was married they would have mention his own wedding. Jesus and John the baptist may have been of the Essenes that did`nt marry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essenes

[White Unicorn]

Ever since I did my own reading and thinking about religion, I decided that Jesus was married to Mary of Magdala and that the wedding feast at Cana was probably referring to his own marriage. He probably had children as well.

For the life of me I cannot see what the big problem with this would be, or why the Catholic Church had to insist he was the celibate son of a virgin mother--no matter that the Bible says he had brothers and sisters!

After all, the message matters far more than these things, doesn't it?

I can't remember where I heard it but it was said the Catholic Church in the beginning had a few married priests and then they started leaving "church" funds to their family and the parrishes needed more money. The doctrine of celebacy came after that to make sure none of the church's funds would be left to heirs of the priest instead of the parrish.

[SSilhouette]

Here is a link to the Gnostic Gospel of Mary Magdalene. The first six pages are missing. http://gnosis.org/library/marygosp.htm

Here is an excerpt concerning Magdalene attested to in the Gospel of Philip: http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gop.html

"There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary, his mother, and her sister, and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion. His sister and his mother and his companion were each a Mary..."

I think it was the Gospel of Magdalene herself that has the account of jealousy of Mary by the other apostles: [Peter & Andrew the most of which]

"Peter said to Mary, "Sister, we know that the Saviour loved you more than the rest of women. Tell us the words of the Saviour which you remember - which you know (but) we do not, nor have we heard them." Mary answered and said, "What is hidden from you I will proclaim to you." And she began to speak to them these words: "I," she said, "I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, 'Lord, I saw you today in a vision.' He answered and said to me, 'Blessed are you that you did not waver at the sight of me. For where the mind is, there is the treasure.' I said to him, 'Lord, how does he who sees the vision see it through the soul or through the spirit?' The Saviour answered and said, 'He does not see through the soul nor through the spirit, but the mind which [is] between the two - that is [what] sees the vision...'

(the mid-section of the original text is missing) ...etc.

...

When Mary had said this, she fell silent, since it was to this point that the Saviour had spoken with her. But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, "Say what you (wish to) say about what she has said. I at least do not believe that the Saviour said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas." Peter answered and spoke concerning these same things. He questioned them about the Saviour: "Did He really speak with a woman without our knowledge (and) not openly? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to us?"

Then Mary wept and said to Peter, "My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I thought this up myself in my heart, or that I am lying about the Saviour? Levi answered and said to Peter, "Peter, you have always been hot - tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Saviour made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Saviour knows her very well. That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect man and acquire him for ourselves as He commanded us, and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Saviour said." ... and they began to go forth [to] proclaim and to preach." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/mary.html

[Hawken]

Ever since I did my own reading and thinking about religion, I decided that Jesus was married to Mary of Magdala and that the wedding feast at Cana was probably referring to his own marriage. He probably had children as well.

For the life of me I cannot see what the big problem with this would be, or why the Catholic Church had to insist he was the celibate son of a virgin mother--no matter that the Bible says he had brothers and sisters!

After all, the message matters far more than these things, doesn't it?

I would agree that Jesus teachings are what is most important. After his resurrection, Those that followed his teachings saw themselves as Jewish

but of a different sect. Not Christian. It was the Roman Catholic Church that more less made it Christian. Now Protestant Christians allow marriage.

I think The Catholic Church should do the same. Maybe they won't struggle as much getting clergy in the priesthood.

[SSilhouette]

Some of the world's most sublime and often unsung prophets have been just ordinary people living ordinary lives. All the virgin birth, vestments, altars, and even holy days additions came about because of the Roman Empire trying to sell Constatines' new religion [christianity] to the pagans. He figured if he could get them to assimilate their relgions into his, he could assimilate their real estate into Rome's. And what we have from that today is the Roman Catholic Church. Various redactions of the bible were really just political adjustments to keep the Empire intact. The Gnostic Gospels were rejected in part because they preached freedom of thought alongside reverence to God. The Romans knew freedom of though = rebellion often so...you have their version of the truth in the bible.