"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts

Creative Minority Reader

Just in Time for Easter: Proof that Jesus was Married


Hey, you know I was thinking that it was almost Easter and there hasn't been some shocking new revelation that Jesus wasn't real or he was real but was actually just a plumber from Poughkeepsie (which oddly enough was the name of a small town in Israel.) ((Not really))

So a new study has come out saying that the proof that Jesus had a wife is kinda' old. Yeah, that's actually what the study said. A piece a parchment supposedly says "Jesus said to them my wife." That's old news. But the new news is that the parchment is really old.

Some are calling it the "Gospel of Jesus' Wife." And by "some" I mean people who don't actually believe in the actual gospels.

In 2012, the discovery of a tattered papyrus fragment rocked the biblical studies community after some alleged its text proved that Jesus was married.

Now tests show the fragment is not only likely legit — it's also superold.

The controversial fragment known as the "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" dates to between the sixth and ninth centuries, and could possibly date back as early as the second to fourth centuries, according to a newly published study in the Harvard Theological Review.

The fragment, which contains the words, "Jesus said to them, my wife," first came to light several years ago. Harvard University Divinity Professor Karen L. King, who announced the fragment's existence at a conference in 2012, was quick to point out that the fragment does not prove that Jesus had a wife.

"The main topic of the fragment is to affirm that women who are mothers and wives can be disciples of Jesus — a topic that was hotly debated in early Christianity as celibate virginity increasingly became highly valued," King said in a statement...

Not everyone agrees that the document is legitimate. Brown University professor Leo Depuydt wrote a rebuttal to the findings in which he calls out "gross grammatical errors." He said the fragment is so clearly a phony that it "seems ripe for a Monty Python sketch."

In an interview with the Boston Globe, King said, “I’m basically hoping that we can move past the issue of forgery to questions about the significance of this fragment for the history of Christianity, for thinking about questions like, ‘Why does Jesus being married, or not, even matter? Why is it that people had such an incredible reaction to this?’ "
Isn't it funny how she wants to move beyond the forgery questions and move on to the topic of women priests and priests getting married. Hmmm.


Your Ad Here


Patrick Archbold said...

If someone said that someone else told him that some scholar said that he heard about a really old piece of papyrus that someone said proves that Jesus was a transgender Babylonian hairdresser and part-time priestess and singer-songwriter, well, hey, that's good enough for me, yup.

Patrick Archbold said...

Eighth century? Are they serious? That's what this is about?

Patrick Archbold said...

Mack, your killin' me!

Hahahaaah! ;)

Patrick Archbold said...

THAT IS SHOCKING!!! but look right there in the next line up... Is there any clearer proof that anyone could need? Wait... singer songwriter? hmmm my sources say those were separate guilds in Babylon and there is no way He could be both... must just be a typo... Let's just forget that and get back to the real meaning of that revelation... that all hairdressers should be canonized at death... right?

Patrick Archbold said...

Boy, they just never give up, do they? Wouldn't it be better if they just came out and said, "We believe you Christians are a bunch of dupes and believing in Jesus is exactly the same as believing in Batman, Spider-Man and, uh, like, Santa Claus or something." Seriously, that's what they really mean, isn't it? Very consistent with their timing, though.

Post a Comment