Evidence for God from Science

New papyrus found, article below.

http://www.news.com.au/world/ancient-te ... 6476990894

If Jesus really did have a wife this lends weight to the argument that he really did suffer like the rest of us.

Sorry no offence ladies but I couldn't help it.

Well, the article is from Australia so it's gotta be true.

A dingo stole my baby.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:A dingo stole my baby.

I just saw that Australia has one of the world's most dangerous beaches, because dingos eat babies there. I thought pitbulls were bad dogs, but they've got nuthin on dingos.

Jesus has a wife...she is called "the Church".

neo-x wrote:Jesus has a wife...she is called "the Church".

Hammer meet nail.

Context is everything and right now we do NOT know the context of the verse in question.
Jesus having a wife is irrelevant to any Christian doctrine and would not effect anything anyway, there is no prohibition for a jewish "rabbi", prophet or messiah to NOT have a wife and some of the apsotles were married and there never was any prohibition against marriage untill much later.
The fact is that if Jesus was married there would have been no issue in stating that in the NT and it probably would have been mentioned by historians like Tacitus or Pliny or Josephus, perhaps even used by critics ( they certainly made use of the rumour he was illegitimate).
There is no conspiracy in regards to Jesus martial status.
What is know is that about the time of this papryus, it was very common ( especially the coptic ones like this one) to "make things up" to add to the "legend" of Christ, either to make him more human or less human.

This sounds like the typical gnostic writings from the 3rd and 4th century of which there were many.
The Gnostics believed such things such as Judas was the apostle and didn't really betray Christ but instead corroborated secretly with Jesus to make sure Jesus was crucified and that Jesus imparted the secrets of eternal life to Judas alone .

There were so many wacky stories coming from the Gnostics , and the early Christians stamped out many fantasy views lime these. Let's not even get into the fact that the historicity of gnostic documents were extremely poor compared to the historicity of the new testament scriptures. Stories like this were a dime a dozen in the 3rd and 4th century.
This sort of thing doesn't even show up on my radar screen.

If I recall correctly, Karen King, the Harvard professor whose name appears in the linked article, distinctly stated that this find sheds no light on the historical Jesus. It is certainly an interesting find (the type the media really likes to spread around), but I don't think anyone is going to take it very seriously.

Icthus wrote:If I recall correctly, Karen King, the Harvard professor whose name appears in the linked article, distinctly stated that this find sheds no light on the historical Jesus. It is certainly an interesting find (the type the media really likes to spread around), but I don't think anyone is going to take it very seriously.

Correct Icthus and notice that in anti Christian sites like yahoo you wont have the title new find sheds no light on the historic Jesus, but instead tries to sensationalize it in a way that is anti Christians. Yahoo is anti-Christian ?

I cant believe it

Icthus wrote:If I recall correctly, Karen King, the Harvard professor whose name appears in the linked article, distinctly stated that this find sheds no light on the historical Jesus. It is certainly an interesting find (the type the media really likes to spread around), but I don't think anyone is going to take it very seriously.

I am sure someone will bring it up in a book or movie, LOL !

I used to give scholars that benefit of the doubt when "sensationalist claims" were made by them, thinking that it was just the press, but ever since Barth Ehrman I realized that they KNOW what sells and they market accordingly.
After all, she was the one that titled it " The Gospel of Jesus wife".