The Jesus Freaks Will Hate This

[Cato]

So evidence created 700 years after the fact is good enough for you in this instance, how convenient.
Talk about being Gullible...

Are you seriously this dense? Nobody is claiming that the scrap proves Jesus was married, only that believers lost their shit at the mere possibility. This on top of the fact that those of you that believe stories told long after the supposed events simply turn a blind eye to a similar source because it doesn't jive with your accepted narrative.

[Huggy Bear]

Or maybe you guys need to brush up on your Latin.

Hard to brush up on something I never learned, though, speaking personally. No one else in this thread even used the word crucifix, so I don't know why you'd say "you guys".

Jesus was crucified was he not? doesn't matter if you mentioned it or not (which YOU did) that's what were discussing.

Also, show me exactly where it describes what the "cross" actually looked like...

Where what says what the cross looked like? The bible?
Well, it uses the word cross, right? And "cross" means "a geometrical figure consisting of two lines or bars perpendicular to each other, dividing one or two of the lines in half."

Exactly! so the common depiction of the cross would fall under that definition wouldn't it?

---

So evidence created 700 years after the fact is good enough for you in this instance, how convenient.
Talk about being Gullible...

Are you seriously this dense? Nobody is claiming that the scrap proves Jesus was married, only that believers lost their shit at the mere possibility. This on top of the fact that those of you that believe stories told long after the supposed events simply turn a blind eye to a similar source because it doesn't jive with your accepted narrative.

What are you talking about? The article clearly states Jesus was married, here I'll post it for you again...

Title of article

9 things you think you know about Jesus that are probably wrong

Then the article states Jesus was

1. Married, not single.

It then goes on to say

Jesus and his disciples would have been practicing Jews, and all great rabbis we know of were married. A rabbi being celibate would have been so unusual that some modern writers have argued Jesus must have been gay. But a number of ancient texts, including the canonical New Testament, point to a special relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus. The Gospel of Phillip says, “[Jesus] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth.”

Are you saying that minimalist doesn't believe the article he posted as, and I quote:
"Calm, rational, solidly-based demolition of their stupid jesus shit."
?

[rexbeccarox]

Uh, Huggy, did you miss the word, "probably"?

[watchamadoodle]

@Huggy74, would it disturb you if Jesus was married with children? I'm not claiming that the evidence for this is very persuasive, but would it disturb you?

[Norman Humann]

Jesus was crucified was he not?

That's kind of what the article is addressing, among other uncertainities about Jesus.

The Romans did not have a standard way of crucifying prisoners, and Josephus tells us that during the siege of Jerusalem, soldiers nailed or tied their victims in a variety of positions. Early Christians may have centered on the vertical pole with a crossbeam because it echoed the Egyptian ankh, a symbol of life, or the Sumerian symbol for Tammuz, or because it simply was more artistically and symbolically distinctive than the alternatives.

doesn't matter if you mentioned it or not (which YOU did) that's what were discussing.

Yes, I did and that's my point. I meant that you said "we" should brush up on "our" Latin when I was the only one using the word crucifix. It has little to do witht he discussion, though, so let's drop it.

Exactly! so the common depiction of the cross would fall under that definition wouldn't it?

I don't know what your point is. That the bible says Jesus was crucified? Yes, it does. And?

[Nope]

@Huggy74, would it disturb you if Jesus was married with children? I'm not claiming that the evidence for this is very persuasive, but would it disturb you?

I have never understood why Jesus has to have been celibate. Sex is an important aspect of the majority of humanity. If he really wanted to experience being human, it makes sense that he would have consummated a marriage with a woman. Modern Christians shouldn't have any problem with Jesus not being virginal when he died.

[Huggy Bear]

Uh, Huggy, did you miss the word, "probably"?

You should be addressing Minimalist, seeing how he apparently considers the article a "demolition"....

---

@Huggy74, would it disturb you if Jesus was married with children? I'm not claiming that the evidence for this is very persuasive, but would it disturb you?

Seeing how it would contradict the book of Revelation, yes it would disturb me.

Revelation 21:9
And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.

Jesus does have a wife, but it's not how you perceive it with the carnal mind.

[Cato]

Uh, Huggy, did you miss the word, "probably"?

Right after he completely ignored the weighty argument to the married idea; namely, it would have been highly unusual for a Rabbi his age not to be married with children.

[Huggy Bear]

Uh, Huggy, did you miss the word, "probably"?

Right after he completely ignored the weighty argument to the married idea; namely, it would have been highly unusual for a Rabbi his age not to be married with children.

But it wasn't THAT unusual was it? Paul for a fact wasn't married, so you cant just "insinuate" something because you think of it as unusual...

[Nope]

Paul was not married when he wrote his portion of the epistles but we don't know if he was always single. He might have had a wife at some point.