Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 36

Thread: The Jesus wife parchment

  1. #1

    The Jesus wife parchment

    So I'm reading news stories of this ancient Egypt fragment which contains a phrase "Jesus says, My wife...." but every news story ends there! they elude to there being more, but they don't include it, So what does the manuscript actually say? ...anyone know?

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by AFL12 View Post
    So I'm reading news stories of this ancient Egypt fragment which contains a phrase "Jesus says, My wife...." but every news story ends there! they elude to there being more, but they don't include it, So what does the manuscript actually say? ...anyone know?
    Karen L. King, that's all you need to know. This woman is among the most liberal scholars in the world and a feminist. She was often quoted by Dan Brown when writing the Da Vinci Code. I never even heard this one, but there are so many attempts to rewrite history it's almost comical and few give these "discoveries" any real credence and most turn out to be far overstated, obscure, or a hoax. (BTW, You can also read the Nag Hammadi scrolls for some good 4th century fiction, if you'd like.)

    Obviously the healine is what they are selling here..

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...078791/?no-ist
    Last edited by ibleedgreen; 04-14-2014 at 01:38 PM.

  3. #3
    This one has passed the carbon dating test and is an old doc. dated anywhere from 200 to 400 years after Christ. I'm not in anyway believing what the text say, I just want to know what it does say. if it says anything more than , my wife lol. the hypocrisy in academia is well beyond rational. they discount thousands of first century historical manuscripts, which claim dates, people , locations and authorship. they attack them with bogus form criticisms and pseudo science. they try to discount and deconstruct it, yet they find one fragment with zero reference and two words and claim it refutes the overwhelming historical evidence of the canon . it really is comical, if it wasn't for the fact that they rip apart believing students who are not 100% equipped with the facts.

  4. #4
    the parchment is a bunch of sentence fragments. Jesus does say "my wife' but it's unclear if it's in the larger context of a story or if it's about himself.

    the whole thing is kinda crazy. to believe that Jesus a 33 year old male was also a virgin. Cmon.

  5. #5
    From the link I posted:

    The fragment was a shade smaller than an ATM card, honey-hued and densely inked on both sides with faded black script.

    The fragment’s 33 words, scattered across 14 incomplete lines, leave a good deal to interpretation.
    The dating and fact that it's Coptic places it in the same era of the Nag Hammadi scrolls, which have some pretty crazy tales and stories of a Gnostic Messiah.

    In addition, Jesus was also a fairly common name, so there would need to be some confirmation of this being Jesus of Nazareth, referring to him as the Messiah or God. But 33 words and 14 fragmented lines from the 4th century is irrelevant to anyone but one with an agenda like King. So there would need to be some corroborating evidence for her sensationalist claims, but that won't stop here .. ever.
    Last edited by ibleedgreen; 04-14-2014 at 03:07 PM.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    the parchment is a bunch of sentence fragments. Jesus does say "my wife' but it's unclear if it's in the larger context of a story or if it's about himself.

    the whole thing is kinda crazy. to believe that Jesus a 33 year old male was also a virgin. Cmon.
    Ever heard of monks, priests, celibacy or even a Nazarite oath, which restricts far more? Wow, your ignorance is far more stunning than any of these concocted non-stories.
    Last edited by ibleedgreen; 04-14-2014 at 02:32 PM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by ibleedgreen View Post
    Ever heard of monks, priests, celibacy or even a Nazarite oath, which restricts far more? Wow, your ignorance is far more stunning than any of these concocted non-stories.
    its pharisaical, LOL didn't Jesus address this when they lowered the cripple down through the roof tiles. "What's easier? to forgive sin? to raise the Lame? or to stay a virgin?? LMAO

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by ibleedgreen View Post
    Ever heard of monks, priests, celibacy or even a Nazarite oath, which restricts far more? Wow, your ignorance is far more stunning than any of these concocted non-stories.
    I don't understand why it's so important to believe this man never had a wife. He's a man. If he got through 33 years without seeing another woman, you aren't going to like the next conclusion which is that he wasn't interested in women.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by ibleedgreen View Post
    From the link I posted:


    The dating and fact that it's Coptic places it in the same era of the Nag Hammadi scrolls, which have some pretty crazy tales and very stories of a Gnostic Messiah.

    In addition, Jesus was also a fairly common name, so there would need to be some confirmation of this being Jesus of Nazareth, referring to him as the Messiah or God. But 33 words and 14 fragmented lines from the 4th century is irrelevant to anyone but one with an agenda like King. So there would need to be some corroborating evidence for her sensationalist claims, but that won't stop here .. ever.
    so there IS NO context? lol if you go back and read the articles from harvard you'd think he was describing his wedding photos! hypocrites!

  10. #10
    It's not really about being "so important" as much as being accurate. There is no record of a wedding, a marriage, children, and all the other myths and tales bandied about. All of them are based on incredibly unreliable, unsubstantiated, much younger or fabricated works and still require some imaginative interpretation (such as Jesus giving Mary a "holy kiss", which is presumed to mean on the mouth and is usually only seen within marriage; as a tattered part of the Gospel of Thomas states, circa 3-4th century AD.)

    No, what's "so important" to these leftist scholars is to inject their liberalism and feminism into the account, and thereby vindicate the raw deal women have had in the church and society. And of course there is the dubious motive of trying to un-deify Christ as just a man, or even suggest he was sinful in fathering children out of wedlock, etc.

    What's "so important" for people like Dan Brown is selling books.

    But sure, if the evidence showed Jesus was married or had kids, big whoop. But it does not.
    Last edited by ibleedgreen; 04-14-2014 at 03:26 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO