jesus' wife

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
#21
How could it possibly be THE text as many times as it has been translated and re-written??
Even bible scholars agree on that one. Yes I have links, off to get them :)
the first council of nicaea in 325AD for one, it threw out entire books of previously accepted scripture, like the book of Mary written by his mother.
on a side note Islam records that jesus spoke of spiritual matters from the cradle and that he did have a wife.
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#22
Now, take the King James and the versions directly translated from it. People with good Greek grammar can go and prove that the English versions translated from KJV are accurate to the Greek manuscripts we have. Further, those Greek manuscripts are consistent and go as far back as 400 AD.
I definitely agree that the KJV is the most accurate. It's the one our church uses, for that reason.

That said, there has been times in early and later church history where men convened to eliminate texts from scripture. And I mean, poor Jerome, bless his heart he did try and did pretty well for being self taught with Greek, made some HUGE errors. Lots of people use his version or versions based on his version. And even going from his Latin translations to English, just. It's hard to describe but a lot of nuances are lost in translation. My Latin prof studied under the pope's latin teacher in Rome (she's one of only about 100 fluent speakers in the world) and we sat down to read through Jerome's version of Christ's crucifixion. Just, dang. There's a lot there, that just doesn't come through in English.

As for whether it matters if he was married or not, unless people are making up doctrines that hinge on whether or not he was married (like priests having to be celibate), it doesn't really matter to your salvation. What does matter is doing the stuff he taught, like being kind and loving other people.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2012
Messages
556
Likes
11
Points
18
Location
Northeast
#23
It's very possible Jesus never even existed in the first place, though, I'm a bit agnostic on the whole issue. Many religions have characters which are considered myth by most nowadays.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
2,434
Likes
1
Points
0
Location
Oregon
#24
It's very possible Jesus never even existed in the first place, though, I'm a bit agnostic on the whole issue. Many religions have characters which are considered myth by most nowadays.
He is recorded in Roman accounts too. Its unlikely the Romans went along recording the acts of a fictional character.

The wikipedia page has plenty of links to thinks you might be interested in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
 

OwnedByBCs

Will Creep For Sheep
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
588
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Colorado
#25
It doesn't really matter to me. I believe Jesus was a person, but I do not and will not ever believe in any sort of divinity.
 

Danefied

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
1,722
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Southeast
#26
It always facinates me when self described secular humanists react with glee when trying to disprove something they do not even believe.
Glee? This is not glee. This is 100% apathy LOL
I don’t care one single flying flamingo if Jesus had a wife or not. Doesn’t change his message IMO one bit. What would Jesus having a wife prove or disprove?

Plenty of the Greek and Roman gods married or impregnated humans, why wouldn’t Jesus?
 

Lyzelle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
2,826
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Colorado
#27
Would you mind presenting your evidence for this please? Because there is a great deal of evidence that supports the Bible as we read it to today to be THE text as it was written.

'The Da Vinci Code' stuff has been debunked, many times over.
Council of Nicaea, for one. And there was more than one Council held on the Bible's scriptures, "facts", and translations. Jesus's divinity was a huge issue at the time. Still is.
 

Lyzelle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
2,826
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Colorado
#28
Glee? This is not glee. This is 100% apathy LOL
I don’t care one single flying flamingo if Jesus had a wife or not. Doesn’t change his message IMO one bit. What would Jesus having a wife prove or disprove?

Plenty of the Greek and Roman gods married or impregnated humans, why wouldn’t Jesus?
And ditto this. It honestly doesn't matter one way or another. But I personally find theological history far more fascinating than the practices.

And Jesus's story has a lot in common with older gods and saviors as well. Including, but not limited to, Mithra and Krishna. Dionysus, too. But supposedly those were all "devil saviors". "Fake saviors". Which really interests me, because I want to know how we know Jesus was a "real savior"? How does one prove that sort of thing. It's interesting.
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#29
And ditto this. It honestly doesn't matter one way or another. But I personally find theological history far more fascinating than the practices.

And Jesus's story has a lot in common with older gods and saviors as well. Including, but not limited to, Mithra and Krishna. Dionysus, too. But supposedly those were all "devil saviors". "Fake saviors". Which really interests me, because I want to know how we know Jesus was a "real savior"? How does one prove that sort of thing. It's interesting.
The whole point is that it can't be proved. Or disproved. If it could be proved there would be no point in faith. People would have a knowledge of it, so it would kind of defeat the purpose.

That's why science will never "prove" irrefutably that God exists. There will always be some pro and some con but neither will come down in an absolute. And that's also why God doesn't just be like, "HEY EVERYONE, I REALLY AM HERE. JUST THOUGHT YOU SHOULD KNOW."
 

Lyzelle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
2,826
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Colorado
#30
The whole point is that it can't be proved. Or disproved. If it could be proved there would be no point in faith. People would have a knowledge of it, so it would kind of defeat the purpose.

That's why science will never "prove" irrefutably that God exists. There will always be some pro and some con but neither will come down in an absolute. And that's also why God doesn't just be like, "HEY EVERYONE, I REALLY AM HERE. JUST THOUGHT YOU SHOULD KNOW."
Well, yeah, faith and all. But that's why I personally believe that religion should be a very private and personal thing. No one will ever agree and nothing can be proved unless there's historical fact, so there's really no reason to try and put "faith" into law, schools, and force it on other people. Everyone has their own right to believe in something different, even if a book is telling you that you don't, you really do.

Which is why if Jesus had a wife, and it was proven historical fact, it wouldn't change much. Some people will still declare it a lie, others will add it in to their beliefs, others already thought it. So in the end, it's interesting, but it doesn't really matter.

Unless they find a living descendant of Jesus. Then that might be cool.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
#31
And ditto this. It honestly doesn't matter one way or another. But I personally find theological history far more fascinating than the practices.

And Jesus's story has a lot in common with older gods and saviors as well. Including, but not limited to, Mithra and Krishna. Dionysus, too. But supposedly those were all "devil saviors". "Fake saviors". Which really interests me, because I want to know how we know Jesus was a "real savior"? How does one prove that sort of thing. It's interesting.
Don't forget Odin.

And every Green Man archetype on the planet. ;)
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#32
Well, yeah, faith and all. But that's why I personally believe that religion should be a very private and personal thing. No one will ever agree and nothing can be proved unless there's historical fact, so there's really no reason to try and put "faith" into law, schools, and force it on other people. Everyone has their own right to believe in something different, even if a book is telling you that you don't, you really do.

Which is why if Jesus had a wife, and it was proven historical fact, it wouldn't change much. Some people will still declare it a lie, others will add it in to their beliefs, others already thought it. So in the end, it's interesting, but it doesn't really matter.

Unless they find a living descendant of Jesus. Then that might be cool.
Definitely agree, especially with the first paragraph. :)
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#34
Perun too. :p

Interestingly, Jove (as in, By Jove!) would have been pronounced by Ovid as yaw-way. Jupiter (yoo-pee-tayr) means "Father Jove" in the dative case. So the Romans totally rogued the Hebrew YHWH and slapped his name on the Greek Zeus. It made my English teacher's head explode. lol
 

Lyzelle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
2,826
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Colorado
#35
Perun too. :p

Interestingly, Jove (as in, By Jove!) would have been pronounced by Ovid as yaw-way. Jupiter (yoo-pee-tayr) means "Father Jove" in the dative case. So the Romans totally rogued the Hebrew YHWH and slapped his name on the Greek Zeus. It made my English teacher's head explode. lol
Lol, a lot of Latin translations are like that.

MY head exploded in my Latin classes. Lol. I had this on my binder: "Latin is a dead language, as dead as can be...killed off all the Romans, and now it's killing me".
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
#36
Perun too. :p

Interestingly, Jove (as in, By Jove!) would have been pronounced by Ovid as yaw-way. Jupiter (yoo-pee-tayr) means "Father Jove" in the dative case. So the Romans totally rogued the Hebrew YHWH and slapped his name on the Greek Zeus. It made my English teacher's head explode. lol
The Romans pretty much rogued everything. They weren't much for original thinking.
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#37
Lol, a lot of Latin translations are like that.

MY head exploded in my Latin classes. Lol. I had this on my binder: "Latin is a dead language, as dead as can be...killed off all the Romans, and now it's killing me".
lol! My teacher HATED when people called it dead. She spent the first semester doing nothing but classical pronunciation, and after that it was the only language we were allowed to speak in class. That's when it clicked with the English class. lol.

She used to be on a panel that Oxford graduate students going for their doctorates in Latin had to present to. She said it made her screaming angry that NONE of them know how to pronounce the language they were trying to get a doctorate in, and nobody else on the panel even cared because it was "dead".
 

Lyzelle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
2,826
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Colorado
#38
Oddly enough, mine was the same way with the pronunciation. He was neat, though, and in the upper levels it was generally only maybe 3-5 students per class so we were a bit more relaxed with the speaking it in class.

I personally found it sad that our first books were elementary level books from other countries! I never realized until I took those classes that Latin is definitely NOT dead.
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#40
The Romans pretty much rogued everything. They weren't much for original thinking.
For the longest time I thought they at least came up with their own names. It used to irritate me that they "stole" the Greek pantheon and just renamed everyone. Ah well.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top