“Jesus Had a Wife” Gets Coverage on CBS and ABC

[CrusaderFrank]

Fragment from the Gospel of Barack

...Mao...redistribute....Starkey...

 

[DriftingSand]

I want to make sure that I understand your reasoning. Since the bible is silent on whether or not Jesus was married, then, you consider this is evidence that he was NOT? Do you realize just how lame that argument is? I mean, Jesus talked about how the children should come unto him, so doesn't that imply that he had children?

I'll go even further. I am silent on whether or not I am married. So, Am I?

I want to make sure that I understand your reasoning. Since the Bible is silent on whether or not Jesus was a heroin addict then you consider this evidence that He was NOT? Do you realize just how lame that sort of reasoning is?

See ... I can do it to.

Jesus calls his followers sheep but that doesn't mean that they are so your argument that He uses the term "children" to represent His followers doesn't mean that He literally fathered them. Using that logic would mean that His "wife" gave birth to everyone on planet earth who believes in Him! Don't be so silly.

 

[Statistikhengst]

You are aware that a "Church" is a "Congregation." Christ says that where two or three are gathered together in His name there He is on the midst of them. Also, under the New Covenant, the body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Old Covenant temple was destroyed not long after the death of Christ. So "the Church" began at the time of Christ when He gathered His sheep (believers).

It is pretty obvious to me that what [MENTION=3135]jillian[/MENTION] meant was that, during the time that Yeshuah was founding his Church, the only template that his followers, who initially were only Jews, had to follow, was the Avodath Hakodesh (the Jewish Sacred Service) and so, wherever they met, they would have considered it a "Temple".

About the 2 or more thing (in the Greek he also said 2 or more, not 2 or 3), that is ALSO based on Judaism, but scaled down. In Judaism, in order to have a group prayer service, you need a group of at least 10 (a "minyan"), but there were many parts of Judea where there were not yet enough converts to Christianity to even form a group of 10 and so Yeshuah scaled down the requirement from 10 to "2 or more". That is the only logical explanation for why he did this and it makes total sense, but that still has nothing to do with use of the term "Church" or "Temple" - at that time, certainly, new Christians in Judea used the word and thought of "Temple". Now, those who became Christians outside of Judea, for instance, in Greece, would have been free to include a new word for the building or area in which they chose to worship. The very fact that at least three apostles of Christ admonished the Churches in Greece about incorporating any pagan rites into their services tells you right there that the apostles, who themselves were first Jews (save Paul, if I remember correctly), still very much had the Avodath Hakodesh in mind when addresses such issues and they could see their new religion changing before their very eyes, due to, surprise, surprise, geography.

Not only that, the "Church" as we know it (or think that we know it) was founded ca. 200-300 years after Yeshuah himself, with the Council of Nicea, or?

So here, the two of you are arguing semantics. No need for that.

And likewise you are arguing samantics. There are various definitions of the word church and we are not in agreement to the definition used when referring to the church as the bride of Christ.

That being said, the main topic of this thread is that Jesus may of had a wife, and this wife was a woman, not a church using whatever definition of church we may select. I don't beleive the Christian bible that is commonly used today supports the notion that Jesus had a wife. However, other sources do support that Jesus had a wife. I don't think we currently have evidence that proves one or the other at this time.

Actually, I was just clearing up the difference between use of Church and Temple.

But I certainly respect your view.

 

[DriftingSand]

again... there WAS NO CHURCH. there was a TEMPLE

You are aware that a "Church" is a "Congregation." Christ says that where two or three are gathered together in His name there He is on the midst of them. Also, under the New Covenant, the body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Old Covenant temple was destroyed not long after the death of Christ. So "the Church" began at the time of Christ when He gathered His sheep (believers).

It is pretty obvious to me that what [MENTION=3135]jillian[/MENTION] meant was that, during the time that Yeshuah was founding his Church, the only template that his followers, who initially were only Jews, had to follow, was the Avodath Hakodesh (the Jewish Sacred Service) and so, wherever they met, they would have considered it a "Temple".

About the 2 or more thing (in the Greek he also said 2 or more, not 2 or 3), that is ALSO based on Judaism, but scaled down. In Judaism, in order to have a group prayer service, you need a group of at least 10 (a "minyan"), but there were many parts of Judea where there were not yet enough converts to Christianity to even form a group of 10 and so Yeshuah scaled down the requirement from 10 to "2 or more". That is the only logical explanation for why he did this and it makes total sense, but that still has nothing to do with use of the term "Church" or "Temple" - at that time, certainly, new Christians in Judea used the word and thought of "Temple". Now, those who became Christians outside of Judea, for instance, in Greece, would have been free to include a new word for the building or area in which they chose to worship. The very fact that at least three apostles of Christ admonished the Churches in Greece about incorporating any pagan rites into their services tells you right there that the apostles, who themselves were first Jews (save Paul, if I remember correctly), still very much had the Avodath Hakodesh in mind when addresses such issues and they could see their new religion changing before their very eyes, due to, surprise, surprise, geography.

Not only that, the "Church" as we know it (or think that we know it) was founded ca. 200-300 years after Yeshuah himself, with the Council of Nicea, or?

So here, the two of you are arguing semantics. No need for that.

I realize that you are touching on the beliefs and practices of the Hebrew Roots/Messianic Judaism. I reject the idea that Christians are bound by the laws of the Old Covenant and believe we've been set free under the teachings of the New Covenant. We can NEVER be perfect under the Old Covenant regulations for if we even break one law we've broken them all (James chapter 2). Christ and Paul both emphasize how we are to live: avoid backbiting, lasciviousness, murder, theft while being charitable, patient, and considerate (paraphrased and abbreviated).

Christ and Paul DID enter the temples of that day but not because they were practicing Judaism. They went to spread the Gospel message. What better way to reach a lot of people than to go where they were congregated.

Romans 8:2, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death."

Galatians 6:2, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."

Galatians 5:14, "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

Matthew 7:12, "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

Romans 13:8, "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."

Throughout the New Testament we see this theme. Love fulfills the law. Abstaining from pork or resting on Saturday are not required under the New Covenant. Christ nor His Apostles ever command it.

Our rest is in Christ:

"Matthew 11:28, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

Our rest can take place at any time on any day.

 

[Statistikhengst]

You are aware that a "Church" is a "Congregation." Christ says that where two or three are gathered together in His name there He is on the midst of them. Also, under the New Covenant, the body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Old Covenant temple was destroyed not long after the death of Christ. So "the Church" began at the time of Christ when He gathered His sheep (believers).

It is pretty obvious to me that what [MENTION=3135]jillian[/MENTION] meant was that, during the time that Yeshuah was founding his Church, the only template that his followers, who initially were only Jews, had to follow, was the Avodath Hakodesh (the Jewish Sacred Service) and so, wherever they met, they would have considered it a "Temple".

About the 2 or more thing (in the Greek he also said 2 or more, not 2 or 3), that is ALSO based on Judaism, but scaled down. In Judaism, in order to have a group prayer service, you need a group of at least 10 (a "minyan"), but there were many parts of Judea where there were not yet enough converts to Christianity to even form a group of 10 and so Yeshuah scaled down the requirement from 10 to "2 or more". That is the only logical explanation for why he did this and it makes total sense, but that still has nothing to do with use of the term "Church" or "Temple" - at that time, certainly, new Christians in Judea used the word and thought of "Temple". Now, those who became Christians outside of Judea, for instance, in Greece, would have been free to include a new word for the building or area in which they chose to worship. The very fact that at least three apostles of Christ admonished the Churches in Greece about incorporating any pagan rites into their services tells you right there that the apostles, who themselves were first Jews (save Paul, if I remember correctly), still very much had the Avodath Hakodesh in mind when addresses such issues and they could see their new religion changing before their very eyes, due to, surprise, surprise, geography.

Not only that, the "Church" as we know it (or think that we know it) was founded ca. 200-300 years after Yeshuah himself, with the Council of Nicea, or?

So here, the two of you are arguing semantics. No need for that.

I realize that you are touching on the beliefs and practices of the Hebrew Roots/Messianic Judaism. I reject the idea that Christians are bound by the laws of the Old Covenant and believe we've been set free under the teachings of the New Covenant. We can NEVER be perfect under the Old Covenant regulations for if we even break one law we've broken them all (James chapter 2). Christ and Paul both emphasize how we are to live: avoid backbiting, lasciviousness, murder, theft while being charitable, patient, and considerate (paraphrased and abbreviated).

Christ and Paul DID enter the temples of that day but not because they were practicing Judaism. They went to spread the Gospel message. What better way to reach a lot of people than to go where they were congregated.

Romans 8:2, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death."

Galatians 6:2, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."

Galatians 5:14, "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

Matthew 7:12, "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

Romans 13:8, "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."

Throughout the New Testament we see this theme. Love fulfills the law. Abstaining from pork or resting on Saturday are not required under the New Covenant. Christ nor His Apostles ever command it.

Our rest is in Christ:

"Matthew 11:28, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

Our rest can take place at any time on any day.

If by "hebrew roots" you mean Judaism, why sure, I agree with that sentence.

As for rejecting the Tanakh, I cannot agree with you for Yeshuah himself said "I have come not to take away one whit of the law, but rather, to add to it".

"The Law" is this case is quite obviously the Old Covenant.

But I respect your opinion on this.

 

[BobPlumb]

It is pretty obvious to me that what [MENTION=3135]jillian[/MENTION] meant was that, during the time that Yeshuah was founding his Church, the only template that his followers, who initially were only Jews, had to follow, was the Avodath Hakodesh (the Jewish Sacred Service) and so, wherever they met, they would have considered it a "Temple".

About the 2 or more thing (in the Greek he also said 2 or more, not 2 or 3), that is ALSO based on Judaism, but scaled down. In Judaism, in order to have a group prayer service, you need a group of at least 10 (a "minyan"), but there were many parts of Judea where there were not yet enough converts to Christianity to even form a group of 10 and so Yeshuah scaled down the requirement from 10 to "2 or more". That is the only logical explanation for why he did this and it makes total sense, but that still has nothing to do with use of the term "Church" or "Temple" - at that time, certainly, new Christians in Judea used the word and thought of "Temple". Now, those who became Christians outside of Judea, for instance, in Greece, would have been free to include a new word for the building or area in which they chose to worship. The very fact that at least three apostles of Christ admonished the Churches in Greece about incorporating any pagan rites into their services tells you right there that the apostles, who themselves were first Jews (save Paul, if I remember correctly), still very much had the Avodath Hakodesh in mind when addresses such issues and they could see their new religion changing before their very eyes, due to, surprise, surprise, geography.

Not only that, the "Church" as we know it (or think that we know it) was founded ca. 200-300 years after Yeshuah himself, with the Council of Nicea, or?

So here, the two of you are arguing semantics. No need for that.

And likewise you are arguing samantics. There are various definitions of the word church and we are not in agreement to the definition used when referring to the church as the bride of Christ.

That being said, the main topic of this thread is that Jesus may of had a wife, and this wife was a woman, not a church using whatever definition of church we may select. I don't beleive the Christian bible that is commonly used today supports the notion that Jesus had a wife. However, other sources do support that Jesus had a wife. I don't think we currently have evidence that proves one or the other at this time.

Actually, I was just clearing up the difference between use of Church and Temple.

But I certainly respect your view.

Resect is good. I respect your view also.

 

[Statistikhengst]

And likewise you are arguing samantics. There are various definitions of the word church and we are not in agreement to the definition used when referring to the church as the bride of Christ.

That being said, the main topic of this thread is that Jesus may of had a wife, and this wife was a woman, not a church using whatever definition of church we may select. I don't beleive the Christian bible that is commonly used today supports the notion that Jesus had a wife. However, other sources do support that Jesus had a wife. I don't think we currently have evidence that proves one or the other at this time.

Actually, I was just clearing up the difference between use of Church and Temple.

But I certainly respect your view.

Resect is good. I respect your view also.

 

[GISMYS]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!

 

[Statistikhengst]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!

Oh, go stuff it where the sun doesn't shine, you twerp. No one believes your schtick here. NO ONE.

 

[DriftingSand]

again... there WAS NO CHURCH. there was a TEMPLE

You are aware that a "Church" is a "Congregation." Christ says that where two or three are gathered together in His name there He is on the midst of them. Also, under the New Covenant, the body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Old Covenant temple was destroyed not long after the death of Christ. So "the Church" began at the time of Christ when He gathered His sheep (believers).

You are stretching your argument, which tumbles. There was no Church, only congregations.

Strong's Greek: Church/Ekklesia #1577
1577. ekklesia ek-klay-see'-ah from a compound of 1537 and a derivative of 2564; a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):--assembly, church.

Strong's Greek Lexicon Search Results

 

[GISMYS]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!

Oh, go stuff it where the sun doesn't shine, you twerp. No one believes your schtick here. NO ONE.

PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you???

 

[mudwhistle]

Grüß Gott

 

[Statistikhengst]

Grüß Gott

Grüß Gott, alle miteinander!!!

 

[Statistikhengst]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!

Oh, go stuff it where the sun doesn't shine, you twerp. No one believes your schtick here. NO ONE.

PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you???

You need more exclamation marks and more caps in all of that, I think. Maybe after your lobotomy?

 

[GISMYS]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!
PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you??? JESUS SAYS TO BELIEVERS= If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.…John 15:18-19

 

[DriftingSand]

again... there WAS NO CHURCH. there was a TEMPLE

You are aware that a "Church" is a "Congregation." Christ says that where two or three are gathered together in His name there He is on the midst of them. Also, under the New Covenant, the body of the believer is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Old Covenant temple was destroyed not long after the death of Christ. So "the Church" began at the time of Christ when He gathered His sheep (believers).

You are stretching your argument, which tumbles. There was no Church, only congregations.

P.S. Read Revelation chapter 2 for more information about the "Churches" (plural).

Revelation 2 KJV - Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus - Bible Gateway

Matthew 18:17, "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."

Ephesians 5:27, "That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."

Philemon 1:2, "And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:"

These verses indicate that a "church" was both collective (meaning all believers in Christ, universally) as well as local (meaning individual gatherings of local believers).

 

[Statistikhengst]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!
PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you??? JESUS SAYS TO BELIEVERS= If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.…John 15:18-19

More caps, many, many more caps. And as many exclamation points as you can squeese in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And boldeds, yes, boldeds often help. If you increase the font size, that also assists your batshit crazy.



Carry on.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I want to make sure that I understand your reasoning. Since the bible is silent on whether or not Jesus was married, then, you consider this is evidence that he was NOT? Do you realize just how lame that argument is? I mean, Jesus talked about how the children should come unto him, so doesn't that imply that he had children?

I'll go even further. I am silent on whether or not I am married. So, Am I?

I want to make sure that I understand your reasoning. Since the Bible is silent on whether or not Jesus was a heroin addict then you consider this evidence that He was NOT? Do you realize just how lame that sort of reasoning is?

See ... I can do it to.

Jesus calls his followers sheep but that doesn't mean that they are so your argument that He uses the term "children" to represent His followers doesn't mean that He literally fathered them. Using that logic would mean that His "wife" gave birth to everyone on planet earth who believes in Him! Don't be so silly.

No, sir. The fact that the bible is silent as to whether Jesus was heroine addict is evidence of absolutely nothing, which is, of course, my point, exactly. Silence on anything does not even imply anything. You are silent as to whether or not you are typing your messages from Folsom prison, which means that I have absolutely no idea whether you are, or are not.

 

[GISMYS]

YES!!! YOU GOT MY MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR!!! ==BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!
PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you??? JESUS SAYS TO BELIEVERS= If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.…John 15:18-19

 

[DriftingSand]

BEWARE!!! REPEATING BLASPHEMOUS LIED FROM THE pit of hell is NOT a smart thing to do,best you count the cost!
PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! = A SIGN OF GUILT AND SHAME!!! and you??? JESUS SAYS TO BELIEVERS= If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.…John 15:18-19

Brother. When Christ was confronted with naysayers He handled things with a sense of self-control and even-handedness.

He later told His disciples that if folks weren't willing to hear His message that they were to kick the dust from their shoes and move on.

One thing I've learned over the years is that I can't bludgeon folks into believing what I believe. The parable of the seed sower suggests that we plant and allow the Holy Spirit to water. It's the best we can do. Becoming too emotional over these discussions serves little purpose and will likely be an exercise in futility.