Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: SF1900 on September 18, 2012, 02:32:56 PM
-
Bodybuilding related because its quite apparent Jesus lifted weights in this pic
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3334/3496795249_522728521b.jpg)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/the-gospel-of-jesus-wife_n_1891325.html?1347990916&ncid=webmail1
A discovery by a Harvard researcher may shed light on a controversial aspect of the life of Jesus Christ.
Harvard Divinity School professor Karen L. King says she has found an ancient papyrus fragment from the fourth century that, when translated, appears to indicate that Jesus was married.
The text from the New Testament is being dubbed "The Gospel of Jesus' Wife." The part of it that's drawing attention says, "Jesus said to them, 'my wife'" in the Coptic language. The text, which is printed on papyrus the size of a business card, has not been chemically tested to verify its dating, but King and other scholars have said they are confident it is a genuine artifact.
"Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married, even though no reliable historical evidence exists to support that claim," King said at a conference in Rome on Tuesday. "This new gospel doesn’t prove that Jesus was married, but it tells us that the whole question only came up as part of vociferous debates about sexuality and marriage. From the very beginning, Christians disagreed about whether it was better not to marry, but it was over a century after Jesus’s death before they began appealing to Jesus’ marital status to support their positions."
King, who focuses on Coptic literature, Gnosticism and women in the Bible, has published on the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of Mary of Magdala. She presented her research Tuesday evening in Rome, where scholars are gathered for the International Congress of Coptic Studies.
The idea that Jesus was unmarried and chaste is largely accepted by Christian denominations and forms the backbone of the practice of celibacy among Roman Catholic priests.
"Beyond internal Catholic Church politics, a married Jesus invites a reconsideration of orthodox teachings about gender and sex," said journalist and author Michael D'Antonio, who writes about the Catholic Church, in a blog on The Huffington Post. "If Jesus had a wife, then there is nothing extra Christian about male privilege, nothing spiritually dangerous about the sexuality of women, and no reason for anyone to deny himself or herself a sexual identity."
The quote about Jesus' wife is part of a description of a conversation between Jesus and his disciples. In the conversation, Jesus talks about his mother twice and speaks once about his wife. One of them is identified as "Mary." His disciples discuss whether Mary is worthy of being part of their community, to which Jesus replies, “she will able to be my disciple.”
The fragment has eight incomplete lines of writing on one side and is badly damaged on the other side, with only three faded words and a few letters of ink that are visible, even with the use of infrared photography and computer-aided enhancement.
The private owner of the papyrus first approached King in 2010. King said she didn't believe the document was authentic, but the owner persisted. She then asked the owner to bring the papyrus to Harvard, where she became convinced it was a genuine early Christian text fragment. Along with Princeton University professor Anne Marie Luijendijk and Roger Bagnall, director of the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, King claims to have confirmed the document is real. The document's owner has not been named and King said he does not want to be identified.
It's unclear when the text was initially discovered. The owner who showed it to King found it in 1997 in a collection of papyri that he acquired from the previous owner, who was German. The papyri included a handwritten German description that had the name of a now-deceased professor of Egyptology in Berlin who called the fragment a "sole example" of a document that claims Jesus was married.
The scholars believe the text is from Egyptian Christians before the year 400, as it is written in the language used at that time. Since writing appears on both sides of the fragment, scholars believe it came from a codex, a kind of book, and not a scroll. The scholars also believe the document is a translation of an earlier one that was likely written in Greek.
King notes in her research that the idea of Jesus' celibacy hasn't always existed, and that early Christians debated whether they should marry or practice celibacy. It was not until around the year 200 that Christian followers began to say Jesus was unmarried, according to a record King cites from Clement of Alexandria. In his writing, Clement -- an early theologian -- said that marriage was a fornication put in place by the devil, and that people should emulate Jesus by not marrying.
One or two decades later, Tertullian of Carthage in North Africa declared that Jesus was "entirely unmarried" and told Christians to remain single. But Tertullian did not come out against sex altogether and allowed couples to get married one time, denouncing divorce and remarriage as overindulgent. A century later, the First Epistle of Paul to Timothy said in the New Testament that people who forbid marriage are going by the "doctrines of demons," but did not include anything about Jesus being married in order to make the point.
The point of view that ultimately became dominant was that celibacy is preferred as a high sexual virtue among Christians, but that marriage is needed for the sake of reproduction.
"The discovery of this new gospel," King said, "offers an occasion to rethink what we thought we knew by asking what role claims about Jesus's marital status played historically in early Christian controversies over marriage, celibacy, and family. Christian tradition preserved only those voices that claimed Jesus never married. The Gospel of Jesus's Wife now shows that some Christians thought otherwise."
The life of historical Jesus is often a matter of controversy, and this is not the first time it's been proposed that Jesus was married. Most recently, Dan Brown's novel "The Da Vinci Code" depicted Jesus as being married to Mary Magdalene. The book was published as fiction, but nonetheless attracted loud criticism from Vatican officials.
UPDATE: 4:28 p.m. -- Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.
"One cannot overrule that it might be him saying 'my wife as a church,' but in the context where he's talking about 'my mother' and 'my wife' and talking about 'my disciple,' the one thing you would not say is that the church would be 'my disciple.'"
Even before King's discovery, there has been speculation that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. "I do not think Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene," King clarified Tuesday, adding, "whether he was or was not married ... I really think the tradition is silent and we don't know."
King also said that a professor who saw her report asked her if the text on the papyrus could have been a homily and not a gospel, an idea she said she had not considered.
King added that she hopes the discovery will diminish the view outside of academic circles that the debate over marriage and sexuality in the early church is "fixed and over." In current church debates over issues such as same-sex marriage and marriage among Catholic priests, "having more voices from the early church and a better, more accurate version of early Christianity is more helpful," she said.
-
YAWN
-
By the way, I must admit:
(http://static.tumblr.com/mfxyxgh/wZ5m5ze9a/tldr.jpg)
But thought others may read the whole thing :D
-
YAWN
Hey, I dont believe in Jesus either, I just like to watch a good spirited debate among GBers :)
-
So Jesus was able to turn a whore into a housewife? Call that a real miracle!
Or was it that she was able to bamboozle Jesus?
-
So Jesus was able to turn a whore into a housewife? Call that a real miracle!
Or was it that she was able to bamboozle Jesus?
I wonder what Uberman will say about this.
-
I wonder what Uberman will say about this.
I'm already stifling my yawns.
-
I'm already stifling my yawns.
sons and girl.....
:D :D
-
Bodybuilding related because its quite apparent Jesus lifted weights in this pic
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3334/3496795249_522728521b.jpg)
how dare you insult the greatest prophet
Me and my christian hommies are going to kill you and burn your embassies (and any pets for good measure)
PS-romney may not participate as he is not christian
-
yaaaaaaaawn i am falling asleep wake me up when there is an interesting post.
-
I wonder what Uberman will say about this.
Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter
How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?
-
yaaaaaaaawn i am falling asleep wake me up when there is an interesting post.
Wait till Uberman chimes in!
-
Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter
How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?
Imagine if Jesus was married to a guy :o :o
-
Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter
How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?
jesus was twice divorced when he died. He had twelve kids that followed him around
when god incarnated he took it seriously: he fornicated, got drunk, masturbated, had sex with trannies, etc etc
anything less than that would mean that he could not save us.
-
Imagine if Jesus was married to a guy :o :o
Hard to imagine, they would have nailed his 5 ft body to cross well before he became a "public nuisance and rebel rouser".
Many different texts from that time talk about those issues, and "eunuchs"---born ones or made ones. Many for man's pleasure. Apparently in Islam, there are three types--ones with no balls, ones with no balls and bat, and ones with no bat, but balls. All three were made.
Thus, this gets into a discussion of why in Islam would these men need to be made like that and for what "purposes"....
Seems like some folk have been doing a good "tuck job" when it comes to denial.
-
Hard to imagine, they would have nailed his 5 ft body to cross well before he became a "public nuisance and rebel rouser".
Many different texts from that time talk about those issues, and "eunuchs"---born ones or made ones. Many for man's pleasure. Apparently in Islam, there are three types--ones with no balls, ones with no balls and bat, and ones with no bat, but balls. All three were made.
Thus, this gets into a discussion of why in Islam would these men need to be made like that and for what "purposes"....
Seems like some folk have been doing a good "tuck job" when it comes to denial.
What??
-
What??
well, he said that what if Jesus was married to a man, I said that due to the strictness of Judism of the time, that would be forbade, and he would have been strung up...
Also, I mentioned that in the Arabic world, that there are apparently 3 diff types of "made" eunuchs---many of these were either made due to punishment, keeper of harems, or for man's pleasure, and I was alluding to some Islamic leaders denying that Homosexuality exists within the Arabic-Islamic world
**a few days ago, an old Vietnam vet asserted to me that the Spartan soldiers were all eunuchs, hence the eunuchs.
-
Thanks for sharing!
P.S. Islam does not say anywhere that Prophet Jesus did not marry :)
-
In his writing, Clement -- an early theologian -- said that marriage was a fornication put in place by the devil, and that people should emulate Jesus by not marrying.
lol.. that made me laugh.
The thing is, Jesus was a rabbi, and rabbis are to be examples for the community and being married was one of them... At 12 jewish boys would potentially marry and or become rabbis as they become men.
The church doctrine of celibacy is contrary to God's law and commandments. God created us male and female, to procreate on this earth, to find comfort in our spouses. Instead look at what priests have achieved, homosexuality and abuse of boys and girls... they are going against God's creation and order.
I always found this obsession of being against sexuality in christianity weird.
Only God knows in the end the truth in the matter. The church only has speculation and chose what to say, do to defend their own power and grasp over people. The same goes for the pauline teachings of the trinity
UPDATE: 4:28 p.m. -- Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.
Without even seeing it or touching it... the church and christians are already conjecturing meanings that are not there to defend the trinity -_- As then they would have the problem of God has a wife now.
-
The also Koran says that Mohammed married a 9 year old girl......
And if it says in the Koran that Jesus was married it must be the fragments of what Mohammed could remember from when he learned of the Torah and Bible while travelling out of Arabia.
At best, the Koran versions are from later texts as they would have been written even far later than the originals.
-
lol :) Unfortunately the qur'an and the bible are absolutely nothing alike.
The bible is many books intervowen in different languages, with different unknown authors, with different writings styles, even in the same books themselves different styles. It's quite evident even reading the translations that where Paul is ranting he is really ranting.
The qur'an is completely different to that of the hadith which are the sayings of Muhammad (pbuh) as well.
The qur'an is a very distinct piece of literature and literary arabic grammar, fusha arabic has been actually derived from the qur'an. No past or modern arabic literature can come close to it, that is why it says produce a surah like it or even a verse like it.
It is such an intricate piece of work, using very few words, tells so much, it has rhyme and beauty yet is not poetry as poetry usually is pretty meaningless especially in contrast to the arabic and how much information it delivers.
Anyhow
-
lol :) Unfortunately the qur'an and the bible are absolutely nothing alike.
The bible is many books intervowen in different languages, with different unknown authors, with different writings styles, even in the same books themselves different styles. It's quite evident even reading the translations that where Paul is ranting he is really ranting.
The qur'an is completely different to that of the hadith which are the sayings of Muhammad (pbuh) as well.
The qur'an is a very distinct piece of literature and literary arabic grammar, fusha arabic has been actually derived from the qur'an. No past or modern arabic literature can come close to it, that is why it says produce a surah like it or even a verse like it.
It is such an intricate piece of work, using very few words, tells so much, it has rhyme and beauty yet is not poetry as poetry usually is pretty meaningless especially in contrast to the arabic and how much information it delivers.
Anyhow
Of course the Koran is in one writing style, Mohammed wrote it when he was meditating in his cave. And yes he apparently couldn't read or write....apparently.
-
Muhammad didn't write it but recited it as it was revealed to him.
FYI, the quran was revealed over a period of 23 years. Each ayaht (verse) came at one time or another. In the end it was compiled as instructed how by Muhammad (pbuh) in what is the complete qur'an today.
Muhammad (pbuh) had tens of thousands of companions/witnesses to God's revelation. Many of them were memorizers of the qur'an. The best of them were responsible for preserving the qur'an and in Abu Bakr's time it was agreed to compile it all at once. Otherwise the qur'an was kept in memories of people, parchments, bones, sheep skin, etc...
Muhammad (pbuh) and late rhis companions just relayed the revelation of God word for word. And thankfully we have it today word for word. Unlike the bible and its many deriatives clearly meddled by human hands and not from God.
-
Muhammad didn't write it but recited it as it was revealed to him.
FYI, the quran was revealed over a period of 23 years. Each ayaht (verse) came at one time or another. In the end it was compiled as instructed how by Muhammad (pbuh) in what is the complete qur'an today.
Muhammad (pbuh) had tens of thousands of companions/witnesses to God's revelation. Many of them were memorizers of the qur'an. The best of them were responsible for preserving the qur'an and in Abu Bakr's time it was agreed to compile it all at once. Otherwise the qur'an was kept in memories of people, parchments, bones, sheep skin, etc...
Muhammad (pbuh) and late rhis companions just relayed the revelation of God word for word. And thankfully we have it today word for word. Unlike the bible and its many deriatives clearly meddled by human hands and not from God.
Do you not see the irony here?
-
Not at all.
The bible is not God's word while the qur'an is God's word. People merely preserved it and transmitted it. Mind you we didn't have computers or microsoft word. Parchments, sheep skin, bones, etc... are ways people noted things down until paper was widespread by Muslims waaay later.
-
Not at all.
The bible is not God's word while the qur'an is God's word. People merely preserved it and transmitted it. Mind you we didn't have computers or microsoft word. Parchments, sheep skin, bones, etc... are ways people noted things down until paper was widespread by Muslims waaay later.
That's not logical.
There's no proof for one or the other, only blind faith.
Every single religion says the exact same thing.....which in turn leads to conflict, war, more misery and suffering.
-
That's not logical.
There's no proof for one or the other, only blind faith.
Every single religion says the exact same thing.....which in turn leads to conflict, war, more misery and suffering.
There's no proof? Comparing the two. The quran wins. Period.
I can prove the bible instantly as not God's word.
You cannot disprove the quran as not God's word.
I have on the contrary provided something in the other thread and you just brush it off as 'so what'.
Who would have had the knowledge of the earth and water percentage at that time? Greeks? lol. This is just ONE thing.
The perfection of the quran is immaculate. The bible is rants upon rants in some parts. It is clearly a mix of God's word, messenger's words, historian's words, rabbi's words, scribe's words, unknown's words, forgeries/additions/manipulations, arithmetic errors, etc...
-
There's no proof? Comparing the two. The quran wins. Period.
I can prove the bible instantly as not God's word.
You cannot disprove the quran as not God's word.
I have on the contrary provided something in the other thread and you just brush it off as 'so what'.
Who would have had the knowledge of the earth and water percentage at that time? Greeks? lol. This is just ONE thing.
The perfection of the quran is immaculate. The bible is rants upon rants in some parts. It is clearly a mix of God's word, messenger's words, historian's words, rabbi's words, scribe's words, unknown's words, forgeries/additions/manipulations, arithmetic errors, etc...
Your statement lacks logic.
Basing the argument on numbers in an old book is plain ridiculous and clutching at straws.
-
No it's not illogical.
If something is from God. Can it have errors in it?
-
No it's not illogical.
If something is from God. Can it have errors in it?
Once again, completely illogical.
-
Your illogical illogical claim is illogical :o
The qur'an is free of errors unlike the bible. The quran does not go on endless rants like the bible (clearly a sign of man's writings), the example of numerical 'coincidences' like the ones i posted shows that its a book not written by men. Why? Its a book with about 80000 words in it, without computers take a guess how someone would achieve this and assure it is so?
You havent read the quran and i very much doubt most of the fellas on here have ever read the bible either (OT or NT portion)
-
No it's not illogical.
If something is from God. Can it have errors in it?
In Surah 71:16, Allah claims that he made the moon a light. But the moon isn't a light; it merely reflects light from the sun. That seems like a pretty glaring error. I can keep pointing out more, but by your own admission, one is enough to disprove the divine origin of your grimoire ;D
-
Your illogical illogical claim is illogical :o
The qur'an is free of errors unlike the bible. The quran does not go on endless rants like the bible (clearly a sign of man's writings), the example of numerical 'coincidences' like the ones i posted shows that its a book not written by men. Why? Its a book with about 80000 words in it, without computers take a guess how someone would achieve this and assure it is so?
You havent read the quran and i very much doubt most of the fellas on here have ever read the bible either (OT or NT portion)
The sun disappears in a pool of murky water...?
The history of Alexander the Great in the Koran is also taken from a fable version of the story and he died at 33 not at 'ripe old age'. I actually remember reading about these and other errors in the book 'Alexander the Great' by Robin Lane Fox.
Judging by the lists, the book is riddled with errors, including numerical errors......
http://www.lightshinesindarkness.com/history_errors_koran_1.htm
http://answering-islam.org/BehindVeil/btv7.html
-
In Surah 71:16, Allah claims that he made the moon a light. But the moon isn't a light; it merely reflects light from the sun. That seems like a pretty glaring error. I can keep pointing out more, but by your own admission, one is enough to disprove the divine origin of your grimoire ;D
Yes you are right. Except if you read the arabic it actually means reflected light. The correct translation is reflected light. So yes that is a knowledge of God that he provided in the quran that the sun is a shining light while the moon is a reflected light.
You pointed out nothing but a mistranslation :)
The Quran distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: Light (Noor) for the Moon, and Lamp (Siraaj) for the Sun.
In Arabic word Noor mean: "[be revealed], [TO RECEIVE LIGHT], [to be lighted]"
This clearly means reflected light, because it receives light from the sun and it is lighted and revealed by it. The arabic language has a far superior vocabulary to that of english. A single entity like light can be worded with multiple words meaning different things. The english just has 'light' and 'light' and you have to add other words to describe it.
-
Yes you are right. Except if you read the arabic it actually means reflected light. The correct translation is reflected light. So yes that is a knowledge of God that he provided in the quran that the sun is a shining light while the moon is a reflected light.
You pointed out nothing but a mistranslation :)
The Quran distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: Light (Noor) for the Moon, and Lamp (Siraaj) for the Sun.
In Arabic word Noor mean: "[be revealed], [TO RECEIVE LIGHT], [to be lighted]"
This clearly means reflected light, because it receives light from the sun and it is lighted and revealed by it. The arabic language has a far superior vocabulary to that of english. A single entity like light can be worded with multiple words meaning different things. The english just has 'light' and 'light' and you have to add other words to describe it.
Of course knowing that the moon only reflects the sun's light was known to the ancient Greeks, who knew of the heliocentric nature of our solar system. So the distinction made isn't really something that can only be attributed to divine inspiration.
-
Oh right, the greeks again. It's been a while since i had a raging atheist rant about the greeks and the quran stealing from them if not the bible. I find it endlessly amusing.
So what is your response to the percentage of water/earth found in the qur'an? Another greek discovery?
-
Oh right, the greeks again. It's been a while since i had a raging atheist rant about the greeks and the quran stealing from them if not the bible. I find it endlessly amusing.
So what is your response to the percentage of water/earth found in the qur'an? Another greek discovery?
The important question here is how do you explain the historical and factual errors in regards to the life of Alexander the Great in the Koran?
As mentioned earlier, whoever wrote the Koran obviously relied on a local text.
-
The important question here is how do you explain the historical and factual errors in regards to the life of Alexander the Great in the Koran?
As mentioned earlier, whoever wrote the Koran obviously relied on a local text.
This addresses your question in detail:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/5701.htm
-
This addresses your question in detail:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/5701.htm
They're obviously now trying to claim that figure is in fact not Alexander the Great due to it following the story of a specific fable based on Alexander (originating from Afghanistan I believe) in which the 'facts' are similar to those stated in the Koran.
This indicates where they got the information from when writing the text.