Jesus'S Wife: Referred To In Coptic Papyrus Fragment

[nosmelone]

now maybe if it was a 1st century target wedding registry then we'd be on to something...but until then its just food for thought.

[BCSpace]

Jesus' marital status is irrelevant to the Gospel as it is provided in Biblical and BoM scripture

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

[Bill Hamblin]

There are some links and discussion on Interpreter:

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/new-discovery-jesus-said-to-them-my-wife/

[Tacenda]

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

You are onto something most assuredly. The FLDS and other polygamist that are breakoff groups of the church, believe that Jesus was married and lived polygamy. Maybe it was our belief at one time also.

[MiserereNobis]

If the scrap is geniune it only proves it was written a long time ago. Not everything people write is true. How does this help in any way whatsoever?

Ahab, we've had our disagreements in the past, but here I am with you.

Just because a scrap (it is a scrap, the size of a cell-phone they say) of writing appears from the past that mentions Jesus had a wife really has little bearing on whether or not He did have one. Who wrote the scrap? What was the context? Can you imagine a scrap of paper you threw into your trash appears 2000 years later and people point to it as evidence? That would be kinda silly, eh?

Though, I must say, I'd be amused if my grocery list made the front page of the newspapers a couple of millenia from now

[MiserereNobis]

Given that it was Coptic and in the fourth century it is more than likely a reflection of Gnosticism that permeated the beliefs of the Egyptians at the time and coincides with the Nicean Council.

Just to be clear, Gnosticism is a condemned heresy, so the fact that it temporally coincides with the Nicean Council doesn't mean it had anything to do with the Nicean Council.

[MiserereNobis]

now maybe if it was a 1st century target wedding registry then we'd be on to something...but until then its just food for thought.

Ha! Of course, wine would be conspicuously absent from that registry, but not because of the word of wisdom, but because Jesus figured His wine was better than any vintners

[MiserereNobis]

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

I'll say that from an outsider's point-of-view, this seems to be the logical conclusion of the LDS view on marriage. From a Catholic point-of-view, marriage is not required nor necessary, so the question of Jesus' marital status does not hinge on this issue.

[MiserereNobis]

You are onto something most assuredly. The FLDS and other polygamist that are breakoff groups of the church, believe that Jesus was married and lived polygamy. Maybe it was our belief at one time also.

Is there any historical evidence to this? I'm curious. Did the LDS church (hmmm, whatever that means... leaders, prophets, etc) teach this prior to the prohibition of polygamy?

[Hestia]

Topics merged. This is like the 4th thread on this. Check before you start.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

The Danites planted that evidence to justify Brigham's musings on the matter.

I saw something about this on TV...this seems to from a source?? Other than LDS...

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Is there any historical evidence to this? I'm curious. Did the LDS church (hmmm, whatever that means... leaders, prophets, etc) teach this prior to the prohibition of polygamy?

The Bible gives various clues concerning the "relationship" between Jesus and Mary.

[Rob Bowman]

I have a collection of links to 20 articles pertaining to the fragment on the Religious Researcher blog, entitled "Karen King's Jesus Wife Papyrus."

[Tacenda]

Is there any historical evidence to this? I'm curious. Did the LDS church (hmmm, whatever that means... leaders, prophets, etc) teach this prior to the prohibition of polygamy?

I'm not where I can post a link but it is on fairlds.com or search "Was Jesus a Polygamist?".

[shalamabobbi]

I'm not where I can post a link but it is on fairlds.com or search "Was Jesus a Polygamist?".

Is this the one you're looking for?

http://en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Was_Jesus_married/Was_Jesus_a_polygamist

[RobertAC]

Given that it was Coptic and in the fourth century it is more than likely a reflection of Gnosticism that permeated the beliefs of the Egyptians at the time and coincides with the Nicean Council.

I would tend to agree. It is evidence of a debate and nothing more. The earliest writings from the New Testament are generally thought to be certain of Paul's letters, and my recollection is that Paul mentioned that Jesus was celibate. Assuming that Paul's writings on the topic were translated faithfully through time, it would be powerful evidence that Jesus never married. While Paul may not have met Jesus in person, he did know of men who did.

[Damien the Leper]

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

The operative phrase here is LDS theology. LDS theology is not the authority on the matter. Simply because LDS have used deductive logic doesn't validate the point. There is still no evidence to appropriately suggest that Jesus was or is married. He's not hitched to Mary Magdalene or Sophia as some popular groups may suggest.

[Damien the Leper]

The Bible gives various clues concerning the "relationship" between Jesus and Mary.

Let's make sure we don't revisit the wedding at Cana. It would only diminish any possible argument.

[cdowis]

I remember a report that JS identified an individual as a direct descendant of Christ. Perhaps someone can identify the source.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

But is faith actually an appropriate or logical response? What does faith explain if anything at all?

Faith teachers and reaches us too look beyond ourselves, and it so we lose our lives in the service of others...this is the pure love of Christ. When life becomes all about us and the focus turns to ourselves alone we all are lost. I love you brother, but I have news for you as well, the new, the avatar you now use is the opposite, of everything I have just said, and destruction lying at the end if that road. " Come unto the holy on of Irael and be perfected in him" PM me Val...let's talk, I fear something I have said could had helped confused.

[Damien the Leper]

Faith teachers and reaches us too look beyond ourselves, and it so we lose our lives in the service of others...this is the pure love of Christ. When life becomes all about us and the focus turns to ourselves alone we all are lost. I love you brother, but I have news for you as well, the new, the avatar you now use is the opposite, of everything I have just said, and destruction lying at the end if that road. " Come unto the holy on of Irael and be perfected in him" PM me Val...let's talk, I fear something I have said could had helped confused.

The shift I have made was inevitable. To an extent I fought kicking and screaming to hold onto what is now a defunct religious identity. I am of the opinion that if I continued on that path of faith and seeking rebaptism, I would be dishonest not only to others I interact with but more importantly to myself. It would be disingenuous.

I will no longer be governed by religious bureaucracy. I can't stomach losing liberty to theocracy or the political agendas of two party system/hoax.

The path of destruction I forsee is when people of all walks of life bow down to the pious and anti-liberty faction that is the oligarchy and its birth child corporatism.

IOW, I will no longer be oppressed by the fascism of religion and American "Democracy".

[Tacenda]

In skimming over information pertaining to Jesus being a polygamist, sometihing I read startled me when it said that the reason for Jesus' crucifiction was because of his polygamy! I've NEVER heard anything like that before and it reminded of someone else who was murdered possibly because of living polygamy (JSJR). Anyone hear of this before?

[BCSpace]

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

You are onto something most assuredly. The FLDS and other polygamist that are breakoff groups of the church, believe that Jesus was married and lived polygamy. Maybe it was our belief at one time also.

That marriage is a requirement and Jesus is our Exemplar is official doctrine even now.

[BCSpace]

I disagree. Marriage is a requirement for salvation and eternal life in LDS theology. If it was so important that he was baptized, it is just as important that he was married. If Jesus is our Exemplar, he must be married now and would have to have been married at some point prior to his resurrection (when degree of glory is assigned). So it must have occured in mortality or in the spirit world.

The operative phrase here is LDS theology. LDS theology is not the authority on the matter. Simply because LDS have used deductive logic doesn't validate the point. There is still no evidence to appropriately suggest that Jesus was or is married. He's not hitched to Mary Magdalene or Sophia as some popular groups may suggest.

Have to disagree again. If the LDS Church is true, and there is no reason whatsoever to suppose it's not unless one is an atheist (LDS doctrine being the most consistent and compatible with the Bible of any Christian doctrine), then Jesus is-was married.

But I would agree it is more interesting to see the early Christian view of this issue come up.

[Damien the Leper]

Have to disagree again. If the LDS Church is true, and there is no reason whatsoever to suppose it's not unless one is an atheist (LDS doctrine being the most consistent and compatible with the Bible of any Christian doctrine), then Jesus is-was married.

But I would agree it is more interesting to see the early Christian view of this issue come up.

True is subjective. It is illogical and unnecessary to propose a finality on authoritative institutions. Looking at Jesus, Matthew and Paul it is important to recognize that they each fundamentally represented different forms of Christianity.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Valentinus