The Messiah: A Married Polygamist

[Zakuska]

Scroll that mentions Jesus's wife is ancient, scientists confirm

A ancient piece of papyrus that contains a mention of Jesus' wife is not a forgery, according to a scientific analysis of the controversial text, US researchers said Thursday.
 

The fragment is believed to have come from Egypt and contains writing in the Coptic language that says, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife...'" Another part reads: "She will be able to be my disciple."

Its discovery in 2012 caused a stir. Since Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married, it renewed long-running debates over celibacy and the role of women in the church.

The Vatican's newspaper declared it a fake, along with other scholars who doubted its authenticity based on its poor grammar, blurred text and uncertain origin.

Never before has a gospel referred to Jesus being married, or having women as disciples.

But a new scientific analysis of the papyrus and the ink, as well as the handwriting and grammar, show that the document is ancient.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-04-scroll-mentions-jesus-wife-ancient.html#jCp

 

Edited December 8, 2015 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

The geneology of Jesus Christs Offspring as Evidence by FamilySearch.org

Quote

 

Fifteen minutes or so had passed, and it was about time for us to leave. But our elderly host was not about to let us depart without showing us something special. “Gentlemen, I’ve got something interesting to show you,” he said, in a hushed, lowered tone. By the sound of his voice, we were evidently supposed to know we were in for a real treat. He took us over to a computer at the far side of the room, and began to talk, as geneology buffs are known to do, about how far back in time much of the geneological work at the prison extended. Finally, he decided to share with us his cherished treasure. He tapped a few buttons on the keyboard, thereby taking us to a screen that contained a numbered list of names for whom vicarious ordinances had supposedly been performed. We looked at the list of names and the gentleman directed our attention to several names at the top. Name #1 was an anglicized version of a Hebrew name that seemed strangely familiar.

“Do you recognize this name?” the gentleman asked me.

“No. Who is it?” I asked.

“This is Jesus Christ,” our host proclaimed confidently. He then pointed to 3 or 4 names listed right under Jesus’. These names also appeared to be Hebrew in origin, but I didn’t recognize them.

“Who are these people?”, I asked him.

“They are Jesus Christ’s children,” he replied solemnly.

I was, to put it mildly, taken aback by this “revelation.” I had surely heard the notion that Jesus “was married” before, but I had never seriously entertained the idea that he had multiple, biological offspring, much less that such offspring were “known” to the LDS Church. Of course, I was skeptical.

“Sir, how exactly do we know that Jesus had children, and that these are there names?,” I inquired skeptically.

There was a long pause, a knowing gaze directed into my eyes, and then an unforgettable response: “Trust me, Brother. WE KNOW.”

And that was the end of the conversation. It was time to leave, and we promptly did so.

Needless to say, I was not particularly impressed by the inmate’s “testimony.” He tried to accompany it with some of the bells and whistles often employed by those who don’t want to make compelling arguments, but would rather hope that the “inherent truthfulness” of their words would somehow resonate forth and convince their listeners. It didn’t work. (Instead, I left the prison feeling deeply disturbed about how the Church screens its members’ geneological submissions).

Despite my misgivings about this incident, however, I tell you this story for your edification. Perhaps I am just a cynical, secular Churchmember-of-little-faith who can’t recognize he’s been made privy to certain “Secrets of the Kingdom” even when they slap me in the face. Perhaps there are others of you who have eyes to see and ears to hear, if only vicariously through my story. Ya think?

Questions:

1. Granted that there is no formal “doctrinal” position on the question of Jesus’ marital status, do you tend to believe that Jesus was married during his Earthly ministry? If so, why? If not, why not?

2. This prison incident left me with an uneasy feeling about geneology generally. What kind of quality controls does the Church have with respect to geneological submissions? Can any Tom, **** and Wackjob submit bogus names into the “system”? Is there any reason to believe that half the entries in the Church geneological archives aren’t the product of some old geezer’s vivid imagination? (This question may betray my total ignorance about geneology, but I put it out there seriously).

 

http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/05/24/how-i-know-jesus-was-married-and-had-kids-too/

 

Edited December 8, 2015 by Zakuska

[Calm]

Are you using this as evidence that Christ had children?

Did you read it?

Quote

Needless to say, I was not particularly impressed by the inmate’s “testimony.” He tried to accompany it with some of the bells and whistles often employed by those who don’t want to make compelling arguments, but would rather hope that the “inherent truthfulness” of their words would somehow resonate forth and convince their listeners. It didn’t work. (Instead, I left the prison feeling deeply disturbed about how the Church screens its members’ geneological submissions).

Why did you leave out this part:

Quote

 

The year was 1995 or 1996. I was a student at BYU, and my Elders Quorum President was Dan Richards (occasional commenter at T&S). Dan had somehow gotten involved in running Sacrament Meeting services at the men’s prison at the Point of the Mountain (between Provo and Salt Lake City), and one weekend he asked me to participate. I was invited to prepare a talk and deliver it to the LDS inmates during Sunday services, so I and several others travelled with Dan to the prison. Once there, we stood up in front of scores of LDS convicts, gave our talks, and then sat down. The whole meeting was fairly uneventful.

After the meeting was over, however, things became more interesting. One of the older LDS inmates offered to give us a tour of a portion of the facilities. He wanted to show us the room where he and certain other LDS inmates worked on geneology during their free time. We agreed to accompany him. Once we arrived in the room, we saw a series of computers that had been set up for geneological purposes. The inmate proceeded to show us how he and others worked on their geneology, and my eyes started to glaze. (I’ve never been particularly fascinated by the nuts and bolts of geneology — Sorry).

 

 

Edited December 8, 2015 by Calm

[Zakuska]

25 minutes ago, Calm said:

Are you using this as evidence that Christ had children?

Did you read it?

Why did you leave out this part:

 

Nope. I didn't leave out that part.  Its quoted above. Im just adding more food for thought.

If I where adding it as evidence I would have given the IGI numbers.  I'd really like those to verify.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

Here's some Geneologies for Christs siblings...

Of course they would have Ancestors alive today.

Quote

Mary

Joseph

Cleopas

another Mary

Jesus

James d.62

Joses

Simon

sister

sister

Jude

Simeon d.106

Jude

Menahem

Elzasus

James

Zoker

Nascien

?

Bishop Judah Kyriakos fl. c. 148–49

 

                     Matthat bar Levi
                                  |
        Eleazar                   |
        |                     Heli/Eliakim
        |                           |
        Matthan              _______|___________
        |                   |                   |
        |                   |                   |
    Mary + GOD         = Joseph (1st) =   Clophas (2nd)
          |                                     |
          |               ______________________|_________
          Jesus          |      |     |      |      |     |
          5 BCE – CE 28. |      |     |      |      |     |
                       James  Jose  Judas  Simon  Mary  Salome
                         d. CE 62     |   d. CE 101
                                  ____|____
                                 |         |
                                 |         |
                             Zechariah   James
                           alive in the reign of Domitian

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_of_Jesus

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[JLHPROF]

Ogden Kraut may be a big old apostate fundamentalist writer, but when I came across and read "Jesus Was Married" I never doubted for a second after that this was true.

And as I've studied and learned more of the gospel, there is no doubt in my mind that Mary was practicing the ordinance of the Second Anointing between a husband and wife when she anointed Christ against the day of his burial that she might have claim on him in the resurrection - why else did his resurrected form appear to her first?

Edited December 9, 2015 by JLHPROF

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, MDalby said:

When Mary of old came to the sepulchre on the first day of the week, instead of finding Jesus she saw two angels in white, ?And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She said unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, or husband, and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.? Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife. Where will you find a family so nearly allied by the ties of common religion? Well, you say, that appears rather plausible, but I want a little more evidence, I want you to find where it says the Savior was actually married.
(Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, 2:81)

Not sure why you cut the quote off there.  President Hyde goes on to provide the "evidence" as he understands it.

[Zakuska]

26 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Ogden Kraut may be a big old apostate fundamentalist writer, but when I came across and read "Jesus Was Married" I never doubted for a second after that this was true.

And as I've studied and learned more of the gospel, there is no doubt in my mind that Mary was practicing the ordinance of the Second Anointing between a husband and wife when she anointed Christ against the day of his burial that she might have claim on him in the resurrection - why else did his resurrected form appear to her first?

This is also a good book on the subject.

http://www.margaretstarbird.net/the_woman_with_the_alabaste.html

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[carbon dioxide]

11 hours ago, JAHS said:

The fact that Mary(His mother) was worried about the supply of wine and that she presented the problem to Jesus, suggests that Mary was the hostess of the wedding and that Jesus was the groom. Traditionally, the mother of the groom was the wedding hostess and it was the groom's responsibility to provide the wine. (John 2:1-10)

Not only that but the bridegroom is given praise to keeping good wine.  If Jesus was not the bridegroom, the bridegroom got praise that he did not deserve.  He did nothing.  In fact he failed.  Jesus had to bail him out.

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, katherine the great said:

It should probably be considered that it was quite standard for a king in that time and place to have many wives--often princesses from neighboring kingdoms.  So it stands to reason that the imagery associated with any great king from David's perspective would have had many wives.  Oh, and all people of European descent are probably related to Charlemagne.  That includes you.

Yes and people tend to not understand how this works.  We worry about how patriarchal blessings may differ between siblings but in reality, after all these thousands of years all of us probably have blood of every tribe of Israel in our veins anyway. 

I guess everyone really is a part of a "Royal Priesthood"!

[mfbukowski]

And we wonder why we do not know about Heavenly Mother.

[theplains]

I saw some commentary at http://www.easyenglish.info/psalms/psalm045-taw.htm and http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/guz/view.cgi?bk=18&ch=45

Thanks,Jim

[Calm]

18 hours ago, Zakuska said:

Things that make you go Hmmmm...

Why is Christ seated at the head of the Table in the "Grooms" chair?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_at_Cana#/media/File:Jacopo_Tintoretto_-_Marriage_at_Cana_-_WGA22470.jpg

Because Christ is viewed as the most important person there by the artist?

Is there any reason to believe this picture is even close to historically accurate?  Could it not simply be an important guest table and not the table where the groom himself is sitting?

Cfr it is the groom's chair.

And btw your link  is not the picture it indicates.  Can't insert Right link  glitch.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Calm

[Zakuska]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Because Christ is viewed as the most important person there by the artist?

Is there any reason to believe this picture is even close to historically accurate?  Could it not simply be an important guest table and not the table where the groom himself is sitting?

Cfr it is the groom's chair.

And btw your link  is not the picture it indicates.  Can't insert Right link  glitch.

To answer your CFR: Per-wedding etiquette, Bride and Groom sit at the focal point at the head of the table (or head table) with their parents.  Mary is sitting next to Christ on the right side (notice her halo)

Quote

 

The Bridal Table: The bride and groom may sit at a long rectangular head table or round table at the focal point of the room, or alternatively, at their very own 

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&q=groom%20sits%20at%20the%20head%20of%20the%20table&oq=groom%20sits%20at%20the%20head%20of%20the%20table&aqs=chrome..69i57.6535j0j7

He's being cast as the Groom in the room.

Here again...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_at_Cana#/media/File:Gerard_David_-_The_Marriage_at_Cana_-_WGA6020.jpg

Christ is sitting in the Grooms chair at the head of the table.  His wife/wives seated next to him and his mother there as well.

Here again. Christ is the Focal point being cast as the Groom seated next to the Bride (holding her hand) and his Father (Halo around head) seated next to him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_at_Cana#/media/File:Giorgio_Vasari_-_Marriage_at_Cana_-_WGA24290.jpg

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[mtomm]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

And we wonder why we do not know about Heavenly Mother.

If we knew we wouldn't have to speculate. 

[volgadon]

13 minutes ago, mtomm said:

If we knew we wouldn't have to speculate. 

We know enough to see that the wedding at Cana could not have been Jesus', hasn't stopped rampant speculation.

[mtomm]

57 minutes ago, volgadon said:

We know enough to see that the wedding at Cana could not have been Jesus', hasn't stopped rampant speculation.

It's amazing, we know quite a bit about the Savior we still speculate a lot, it's accepted and maybe even encouraged. But if we speculate or make assumptions about HM that's bad. Why is that? (That might just be a rhetorical question.)

[Zakuska]

24 minutes ago, mtomm said:

It's amazing, we know quite a bit about the Savior we still speculate a lot, it's accepted and maybe even encouraged. But if we speculate or make assumptions about HM that's bad. Why is that? (That might just be a rhetorical question.)

We're missing 90% of his life experiences.

 

Quote

 

Jesus' Marriage to Mary the Magdalene Is Fact, Not Fiction

The publication on Nov. 12, 2014 of the book I co-wrote with Prof. Barrie Wilson, The Lost Gospel: Decoding the Ancient Text that Reveals Jesus' Marriage to Mary the Magdalene, has caused a worldwide theological firestorm, including demonstrations in India. I was even the butt of one of Bill O'Reilly's attacks and have challenged him to an on-air debate. So far, he's demurred.

I think the reason for all this negativity is that the proof for the historical marriage between Jesus of Nazareth and the woman known as Mary the Magdalene has become overwhelming. Even before our findings, everything -- everything -- pointed to a marriage, and nothing -- nothing -- argued for Jesus' celibacy. The only thing that continues to argue for Jesus' celibacy is 2000 years of theological bullying. This may come as a shock to most people, but the fact is that none of the four Gospels say that Jesus was celibate. The Gospels call Jesus "Rabbi" (Matthew 26:49, Mark 10:51, John 20:16). Rabbis, then as now, are married. If Jesus wasn't married, someone would have noticed.

The greatest promoter of celibacy for Christians was Paul. On every other matter of Jewish law -- and Paul was a Jew called Saul at birth -- Paul was lax. He threw out Kosher laws, ignored Sabbath observance and prayed that the hands of ritual circumcisers shake so that they cut off their own penises when they perform circumcision (Galatians 5:12). Only when it came to sex Paul was more severe than Moses and Jesus put together. Why? The answer may lie in Paul's background.  

NOTE TO SELF: What a Prayer! 

As everyone knows, "Paul of Tarsus" came from Tarsus, an area of modern-day Turkey. What people don't know is that in the Tarsus of Paul's day they worshipped a god named Attis. Perhaps not coincidentally, Attis was a dying and resurrecting god. He was called "the Good Shepard", and his earliest depictions show him with a sheep across his shoulders. All these images were later incorporated into the iconography of Paul's version of Christianity. Put simply, Paul's Jesus looks a lot like Attis.

Attis had a great love in his life, Cybele. On their wedding night, Attis decided to make the supreme sacrifice and offer his testicles on the altar of his love. He surprised his virgin bride by castrating himself. This idea was a big hit in the Tarsus of Paul's day. Attis' priests, the Galli, would imitate their god by going into a frenzy, emasculating themselves and offering their testicles as holy sacrifices. Not surprisingly, this once-popular religion died out. For his part, Paul didn't promote literal castration -- although some early Pauline Christians, e.g. Church Father Origen, did castrate themselves. In the spirit of Attis, Paul advocated abstinence and celibacy, even in marriage (e.g. "It is good for a man not to touch a woman," 1 Corinthians 7:1). Had Jesus been celibate, Paul would certainly have invoked him as an example when arguing for celibacy. But he doesn't. Never once does Paul argue that Christians should be celibate, because Jesus was celibate. Not once!

...

In 1947, in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, the Gnostics got their revenge. At that time, several of their Gospels were found hidden in jars. They all tell the same story -- Jesus was married. More than this, for his Gnostic followers, Jesus' marriage and sexual activity was more important than his death and resurrection. Simply put, they were more interested in his passion in bed than in his "Passion" on the cross.

What does archaeology have to say about a married Jesus?

In 1980, in Talpiot, just outside of Jerusalem, archaeologists discovered a 2000-year-old burial tomb. In the tomb there were ten ossuaries i.e., limestone coffins. Six of them were inscribed. One of them had the Hebrew/Aramaic name "Jesus son of Joseph" scratched on its side, another "Maria," yet another -- "Yose" -- a nickname referred to in the Gospels as belonging to one of Jesus' brothers (Mark 6:3, Matthew 13:55). A fourth ossuary was inscribed with the name "Matthew" and a fifth -- the only one in Greek -- with the name "Mariamene," a Greek version of "Mary" associated in all of Greek literature with one woman only -- Mary the Magdalene. Even more disturbing for Pauline Christians, a sixth inscribed ossuary -- apparently of a child -- had the name "Judah, son of Jesus" carved on it.

...

This brings us to our "Lost Gospel". It appears to be a sixth-century Syriac (Christian Aramaic) text that is a translation of an earlier Greek text (fourth or second century) that Prof. Barrie Wilson and I believe preserves a first-century tradition. The text, in the rare manuscript section of the British Library for the past 160 years, is ostensibly about the biblical Joseph, of multi-colored coat fame, and his obscure wife Aseneth. But in the Syriac community from which this Gospel emerged, "Joseph" was a stand-in for Jesus, and Aseneth, "had many children by the Crucified" (Hymn 21 of Ephrem the Syrian). Clearly, we are dealing with a very thinly encoded text, concealing a Gospel that would otherwise have been destined for the bonfire.

In our manuscript, Joseph -- a.k.a Jesus -- is identified with the sign of the cross traced in blood. Some have argued that this manuscript does not refer to Jesus. If so, why the sign of the cross? Why the blood, and why is he explicitly called the "Son of God"? As for Aseneth, our manuscript depicts her as living in a "tower." The Hebrew for "tower" is "Migdal", hence Mary the Magdalene. It's not her last name, folks. It's a title. It means "Mary the Tower Lady."

In our Lost Gospel, she is depicted as a Galilean Phoenician priestess that abandons idolatry after meeting and falling in love with Jesus. They marry, but she's not simply "Mrs. Jesus." She is a partner in redemption referred to as the "Daughter of God" and "The Bride of God." Our Lost Gospel states that Jesus and Mary had two children and it witnesses to the idea that, for their earliest followers, Jesus and his wife Mary were co-deities embroiled in the politics of their times.

Pauline Christians can continue to have faith in a celibate savior who is divorced from his family, his people and his times. But for me, the most important revelation in this long ignored manuscript has to do with a foiled plot on Jesus and Mary the Magdalene's lives, about 13 years before the crucifixion. If our historical sleuthing is correct, this text is a Gospel before the Gospels and we can finally return Jesus to the historical context from which Paul removed him.

Simcha Jacobovici is a three-time Emmy-winning filmmaker and New York Times bestselling author. His book on the subject, "The Lost Gospel", is already on sale. The companion documentary "Bride of God" will air on Discovery Science, December 14 and 21.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simcha-jacobovici/jesus-marriage-to-mary-th_b_6225826.html

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Zakuska said:

We're missing 90% of his life experiences.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simcha-jacobovici/jesus-marriage-to-mary-th_b_6225826.html

Okay so I'm not saying that Jesus was married and I'm not saying that he wasn't (I don't really care actually and I think there are good arguments on both sides) but Simcha Jacobovici???  He is a serious pseudoscientist, albeit a likeable and entertaining one.  I do smile whenever I think about him.   

[katherine the great]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

Is there any reason to believe this picture is even close to historically accurate?  Could it not simply be an important guest table and not the table where the groom himself is sitting?

Not to mention the fact that they are all sitting in chairs at a European style table.... (Not at all the configuration of a typical feast in time and place)

[Zakuska]

19 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Okay so I'm not saying that Jesus was married and I'm not saying that he wasn't (I don't really care actually and I think there are good arguments on both sides) but Simcha Jacobovici???  He is a serious pseudoscientist, albeit a likeable and entertaining one.  I do smile whenever I think about him.   

"pseudoscientist" Huh?

 

Quote

 

Simcha Jacobovici (/ˈsɪm.hə jəˈkoʊbɵvɪtʃ/; born April 4, 1953) is aCanadian Israeli film director, producer, freelance journalist, and writer.

Simcha Jacobovici earned a B.A. in Philosophy and Political Science (with honors) from McGill University and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Toronto. He is an Adjunct Professor of Religious Studies at Huntington University,^[1] an affiliate of Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario. Jacobovici has been a guest lecturer at numerous conferences and on various campuses including Yale University, Johns Hopkins University, McGill University, UCLA, and York University. He is married and the father of five children.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simcha_Jacobovici

Credentials look pretty good to me.

 

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[katherine the great]

7 minutes ago, Zakuska said:

"pseudoscientist" Huh?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simcha_Jacobovici

Credentials look pretty good to me.

 

It has nothing to do with his credentials.  It is his methods.

[Zakuska]

13 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

It has nothing to do with his credentials.  It is his methods.

More...

Quote

 

Jacobovici is a three timeEmmy winner for Outstanding Investigative Journalism^[2][3] and a New York Times best selling author.^[4] His filmmaking awards also include a certificate of Special Merit from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, a Gold Medal from the International Documentary Festival of Nyon, three U.S. CableACE Awards,^[5][6] a Royal Television Society Award, two Gemini awards, an Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award, two Gold Dolphins from the Cannes Corporate Media & TV Awards,^[7][8] a Jack R. Howard Award from the Scripps Howard Awards for In-Depth National and International Coverage,^[9] the Norman Bethune Award from the Canadian Medical Association for Excellence in International Health Reporting^[10] and, from the Overseas Press Club of America, two Edward R. Murrow Awards and a Carl Spielvogel Award.

As an early advocate of airlifting Ethiopian Jews to Israel, he wrote an op-ed piece on the subject for New York Times and made a documentary entitled Falasha: Exile of the Black Jews.^{[11][12][13][14]} In 2013, his film (co-produced and directed by his associate Ric Esther Bienstock) Tales from the Organ Trade explored the sale of kidneys. His 1991 film on the Arab-Israeli conflict Deadly Currents was runner-up for the Peace Prize at theBerlin Film Festival.^[15]

 

Pray tell... Does academia usually award "poor methodology" with such accolades?

Quote

Investigative archaeology

Over the past decades, Jacobovici has engaged in what he calls "investigative archaeology." His most controversial claim is the identification of a tomb in Jerusalem as that of Jesus of Nazareth and his family. The tomb was discovered in the Talpiot neighborhood.^[16] In 2012, he investigated a Second Temple-era burial cave in Armon Hanatziv by means of a robotic arm with a camera. He believes the cave may be the burial site of disciples of Jesus.^[17]

Jacobovici hosted three seasons of The Naked Archaeologist on VisionTV in Canada^[18][19] and The History Channelin the United States. In 2013, the series began to be broadcast on the Israel Broadcast Authority (IBA) Channel 1.

Jacobovici has written for The New York Times, International Herald Tribune, The Globe and Mail, Los Angeles Timesand other newspapers. He blogs on SimchaJTV,^[20] The Times of Israel^[21] and The Huffington Post.^[22] He occasionally writes for the Jerusalem Post.

He has been interviewed on numerous television shows, among them Anderson Cooper 360, Larry King Live,The Oprah Winfrey Show, NBC Today Show, and ABC Nightline.

His new book with Professor Barrie Wilson, The Lost Gospel: Decoding the Ancient Text That Reveals Jesus’ Marriage to Mary the Magdalene, was published in November 2014 (Pegasus in the US & HarperCollins in Canada).

Jacobovici is also the co-author of two eBooks; “Michelangelo’s Angels and Demons"^[23] and “The James Revelation",^[24] published by Zoomerbooks, as a companion to his television series “Biblical Conspiracies”.

 

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[Zakuska]

His... "Bride of God "

Which aired on Discovery Science last year.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjlu9jS0s_JAhVI4IMKHaH6AncQtwIIIzAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DelOiM0TPUq4&usg=AFQjCNGtTBbfZzH4i3-2_46vSsLVzHvZXQ&sig2=0fvhriPS2eg2OcmAASzPyw

[Zakuska]

Read it online...

THE LOST GOSPEL: Jesus' Marriage to Mary Magdalene 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=14&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjlu9jS0s_JAhVI4IMKHaH6AncQFgheMA0&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.delbourgo.com%2Flost-gospel-jesus-marriage-mary-magdalene-bride-god-simcha-jacobovi-barrie-wilson%2F&usg=AFQjCNFt5cYEf95fLWKz6YrIU_Pv75DK6w&sig2=QNOqDJqgODhg76MQhr2H5w