So WHAT is the big deal if Jesus were married? [View all]

[mntleo2]

Last edited Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

I post this here because something tells me that if I were to post it in the "religion" section of DU, I would get bombarded, lol. I think it is more likely to have a much more enlightening and lively yet respectful discussion here.

So Harvard is going to release a book somewhat supporting an indication that Jesus was married. I know, I know we have almost 2000 years of tradition that Jesus was not married. But now questions has been thrown into the mix with a tiny paprys being studied at Harvard University where Jesus is referring to a woman (most likely Mary Magdellan) as "his wife" (link below).

Frankly it makes far more sense to me that Jesus would be married. As a Rabbi, it was expected to be married as was proper in his time. Also it is quite clear the Peter, the first pope (well not officially a "pope" since the church had not yet been officially established, but he was the leader of the sect that was forming) was married. To me, being a married man actually makes Jesus far more credible and well, ...he becomes much more accessible.

I was raised as a child in "the good ol' time religion" of Christianity, but I have studied with some very credible people around biblical history. It began when as a young woman I read the Bible cover to cover. It took me almost 5 years because I kept coming across cryptic scripture that led me to study biblical history in an attempt to enlighten it, referring to whatever credible information I could.

For instance, I found and read Wooley's notes on his digging up of UR (where Abraham grew up). I forget his first name but Wooley was one of the first "methodical" archaeologists and the notes were from around the 1920s still in my county library today. It was fascinating to me because his notes indicated that Ur seemed to have kind of "neighborhoods" where followers of different cults resided. The "one God" neighborhood was full of fetishes of kitchen gods, fertility gods, etc. So it appeared to me that Abraham was not so purely "monotheistic" as was supposed. But I digress ...

Then I studied with and questioned at length one of my ministers who was a former priest who had spent 20 years in Israel as an archeologist. He informed me that there is *no* archeological indications that David or Solomon existed, which was a theological shock, lol.

I studied in the Greek with a Greek Orthodox friend who translated the old Greek to English with the help of her Orthodox priest. THAT was more than enlightening to me, because it showed Jesus to be a man who could be called an "old soul" in my later spiritual studies. My faith was particularly challenged when we came across the scripture, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Light..." which most Christians use as "proof" Jesus was saying he was the Messiah. But in the Greek it says, "I am revealing to you the Way and the Truth and the Light..." In other words Jesus was *not* saying he was the Messiah at all, he was saying he was a messenger. This stunned both my Greek friend and me (my friend was translating but she said it was like reading old English so she struggled almost as much as me, lol). So we went to our respective ministers (mine being the former archeologist) and they both confirmed it was indeed what we had read.

I studied for awhile with a Doctorate of Hebrew, a former Orthodox Jew who had lived in Israel as a translator of ancient texts because he could read ancient Aramaic and Hebrew like you and I read English. He was also a linguist and could trace language, so he was a big help when it came to stuff I wondered about because I could not trust the translations. I figured and he confirmed that most Greek Christian New Testament texts are translated originally from Aramaic and most likely Hebrew, particularly if the scribe and story teller were Jewish. I questioned him on what things could mean. For instance I read in John, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God ..." I wondered what the HELL does this mean? If it was first translated from the Aramaic or Hebrew, then what and why was John using the word "Word" as a figure of speech for Jesus? My friend helped me out by tracing that word "Word" through the English, then the Greek, then the Aramaic and Hebrew and it means "first breath". That is the "first breath" a baby takes when they are born, which it was believed was drawing the soul into the body and giving them life. This "first breath" is the "spark of God " we all possess.

So much for the dummass and WRONG "a cell is a person" theory. LOL!

It went even further when I met some East Indian Christians whose own church they say was established by the Apostle Thomas. They not only believe in reincarnation as is traditional with their Hindu brethren, but they say that during Jesus' "lost years" he came to India and studied with the learned Yogis who recognized him as a "great soul" (mahatma) and that he had also studied as a child when he was in Egypt, tutored by the old priests of that culture.

I am not saying I have any corner market on my historical aspect of Jesus since my studies were undisciplined and "wild". I followed tracks that were not traditional, not at all like the education that scholars at places such as Harvard have had. It was always on my own without the benefit of any formal collegiate training, something for which I have a great respect. I have tried to predominantly follow things from "traditional" scholars even though there have been lots of "nontraditional" stuff thrown in. Like when I read Elaine Pagel's The Gnostic Gospels from the Princeton theological School where she described early church priests who were both female and male depending on a lottery that was held every year, which was fascinating and very thought provoking.

Still it is fascinating to me that this marriage stuff is being even discussed at this high of a level as the Harvard Divinity School. They say this paprys is most likely not a fake (though that is still up for discussion).

At any rate, from what I can see, I like that Jesus could have been married. So what? That is what I say ...

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/The-Inside-Story-of-the-Controversial-New-Text-About-Jesus-170177076.html