Historian Says Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus' Wife
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:45:43 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Religion & Philosophy (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  Historian Says Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus' Wife
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Historian Says Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus' Wife  (Read 1564 times)
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 18, 2012, 01:39:56 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/us/historian-says-piece-of-papyrus-refers-to-jesus-wife.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2012, 02:05:03 PM »

Not unexpected. Who Jesus was (and wasn't) was still being ironed out.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2012, 02:17:39 PM »

The Bible calls him a "Rabbi" umpteen times, thus stating unequivocally that he was married. It also refers to Peter's mother-in-law in one throwaway sentence but not to any wives of the disciples'.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,220


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2012, 02:18:41 PM »

Fourth-century Coptic? Okay. Wake me up if they find Q and it's in there or something.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2012, 12:22:57 AM »

The Bible calls him a "Rabbi" umpteen times, thus stating unequivocally that he was married.

Not really.  The Aramaic רבי refers to not just the Jewish religious office but also "master" in general.

In any case, even assuming the transcription and translation are correct, this lone papyrus doesn't really prove anything about whether he was actually married.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2012, 06:32:14 AM »

In any case, even assuming the transcription and translation are correct, this lone papyrus doesn't really prove anything about whether he was actually married.

Nor does the NT prove that he wasn't. That's the problem I guess with any curiousities that emerge from history to shine a light on an historical religious figure. If it didn't fit when his life works were being collected then it won't fit now regardless of whether it is unknowably factually correct or not.
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2012, 10:13:54 AM »

Okay, cool. Doesn't affect my religious beliefs one way or another, so just a cool historical tidbit, whether real or fake.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,112
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 20, 2012, 12:14:40 AM »

     It's not as if the metaphorical notion of a "bride of Jesus" is particularly unprecedented anyway. I could foresee the Church treating this as scriptural basis for the nunnery. Given that this little bit comes with no real context, there's really nothing wrong with such a reading.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2012, 12:32:32 AM »

     It's not as if the metaphorical notion of a "bride of Jesus" is particularly unprecedented anyway. I could foresee the Church treating this as scriptural basis for the nunnery. Given that this little bit comes with no real context, there's really nothing wrong with such a reading.
Good point - The Book of Revelations speaks of the Church as the bride of Christ (though I doubt the sect that produced this papyrus held to the NT canon as anything like we know it).
Logged
Spanish Moss
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2012, 07:02:05 AM »

There are non-canonical gospels that indicate this, the theory that Jesus may have been married (particularly, to Mary Magdalene) is nothing new.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2012, 09:29:13 AM »

There are non-canonical gospels that indicate this, the theory that Jesus may have been married (particularly, to Mary Magdalene) is nothing new.
Luther believed that.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,220


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 04, 2012, 10:22:21 AM »

There are non-canonical gospels that indicate this, the theory that Jesus may have been married (particularly, to Mary Magdalene) is nothing new.
Luther believed that.

Cite?

Anyway, I personally think that this sort of frenzy over the idea that Jesus was married or involved in some kind of sexual relationship is frankly ridiculous and also a little insulting to Mary Magdalene and her position as Apostle to the Apostles, but whatever.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 04, 2012, 10:38:40 AM »


Cite?

Anyway, I personally think that this sort of frenzy over the idea that Jesus was married or involved in some kind of sexual relationship is frankly ridiculous and also a little insulting to Mary Magdalene and her position as Apostle to the Apostles, but whatever.

I would think, given that he was a man in his early 30's when he died it would be ridicuous not to have had a sexual relationship. We will of course never know because all if not most evidence that contradicts what the early Church decided was canonical is either destroyed or has been supressed. It's why there can never be a genuine discussion about the place of Jesus of Nazareth in history because we are limited to what we are able to scrutinise. It's a bit like not being able to revisit a biography of Mark Twain now that we have access to his memoirs. There's nothing we can do about it now of course, but if new pieces come to light can't we be honest about their implications?
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,220


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 04, 2012, 10:43:39 AM »
« Edited: October 04, 2012, 11:05:36 AM by Nathan »

I would think, given that he was a man in his early 30's when he died it would be ridicuous not to have had a sexual relationship.

I don't understand this logic. Or, I do, but I don't understand why you think it's universal in its application.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, but it seems like this one particular issue is one that people spend far more time thinking about and often grasping at straws over than the actual significance of attempting to score this kind of inane point merits.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2012, 11:32:23 AM »

There are non-canonical gospels that indicate this, the theory that Jesus may have been married (particularly, to Mary Magdalene) is nothing new.
Luther believed that.

Cite?
Apparently it's just one of those things that float around and become true by being repeated often.
What Luther actually wrote was quoted by a fawning contemporary as having said is that they had an adulterous relationship.
Which probably did not mean what it seems to mean, though we cannot be entirely sure.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2012, 12:23:08 PM »

Who cares?  Does it really matter whether or not Jesus was married?
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2012, 03:15:55 PM »

Who cares?  Does it really matter whether or not Jesus was married?

Not really. If he had children on the other hand, it would.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.045 seconds with 13 queries.