Jesus wife fragment is a fake (page 38)

And yet, when you were still 'thinking', when you were unsure of faith (an agnostic), you did not have a problem with it then. It was not 'dangerous' then. You had no problem at all... then. (And of course i was referring to you.)

EXACTLY! now you're getting it tec....we don't recognise things as dangerous when we are still thinking they could be normal. I no longer think that way....I have woken up to this 'belief' business. And the people who push it like dealers to the addicted, searching for their next fix.

It's delusion and wishfull thinking at best, and mental illness at worst. The problem is, how do you know who you are selling this idea to? And how do you know who's life you might ruin with all this voice hearing stuff? You don't, but you push it anyway as if it is something everyone should aspire to.

Oh and by the way, just to clarify your misunderstanding of what I thought was acceptable. I was never comfortable with all this hearing stuff...I just didn't know why.

myelaine

dear Tammy...

does the saying "My sheep hear My voice" have to mean hear an audible voice?...it can very well be an expression meaning, My sheep will know whether what other people speak is coming from My heart...(1 thess 1:1-9)

that is what discerning "spirits" is about...that is how I know that AGuest doesn't speak for the Son sent by the Father...I don't hear His voice when she speaks...

I also know that God wouldn't use the same means to speak to people as the demons must use. We are warned against listening to deceptive spirits. even a nice demon is a deceptive demon if he causes you to listen to him over a real live person. that's one reason why the canon was formed...we know that the Holy Spirit led real live people to testify about Jesus Christ and to live their life to glorify God in Jesus Christ(1 thess 1:1-9)...it wasn't just left up to anyone to hear a spirit and pass it on. there are too many spirits with many different voices who are all too willing to talk to humans.

btw...do you know what will happen to you if you deny your lord?...

love michelle

NewChapter

do you know what will happen to you if you deny your lord?...

What will happen?

myelaine

dear NewChapter...

I don't know what will happen to her but she says she wont deny him OR that he talks to her...I was wondering if she was afraid of something happening or if anything at all would happen if she denied him.

love michelle

NewChapter

I get it now.

sammielee24

Is anyone here really, really that naive to believe that even IF the fragment was real; even IF there were other fragments or writings that speak of the wife of Jesus - that you would ever be told the truth????? That would see the power of the Vatican dissolve - it would throw much of the world into chaos because religion is one way to keep people under control - the illusion must remain.

There is some religious television show that comes on in the morning and as I was working, I could hear the people discussing this very briefly, and I mean briefly, in the group so that tells me that the 'flock' have been questioning and it must be shut down. The answer that the pastor gave with absolute surety was that EVEN if this was what Jesus had said - EVEN if Jesus had mentioned the word 'wife' - we should understand that it WOULD NOT have meant 'wife' as you understand it today, but rather our interpretation would be incorrect and we must rely on the interpretation of our pastors as we follow our bible and not our own. He shut down the discussion and topic immediately after and waved it away.

No matter what happens, no matter if you could find the bones of Jesus and match it up to a million people and their DNA, you would be told that the bones were not his because he could not have married and most certainly not have been part of any procreation.

sammieswife

NewChapter

What a sad commentary. To say that one little fact could throw the world into chaos is one of two things. A profound lack of faith in humans, or a stunning statement of the imbalance of believers. I think it is a bit of both and more. We see that when presented with a fact that goes against their belief, some believers are likely to just dismiss it. We see that happening here all the time. If they DO accept the fact, then those are ones able to shape and mold their faith like jello. It won't matter. They will simply rearrange, as they always do, and make it fit. But then there are those that will fall to pieces. This is a direct attack at the heart of their theology. I don't see the anger directed at their church, but at those that would dare to muddy the water with facts. I can hear the cries of persecution now.

It's not a new idea that Jesus had a wife. It's been a theory and the focus of fiction. So the notion is at least bouncing around in our collective conscience. I don't think that the Catholic church is powerful enough to suppress anything like that. That's a bit too conspiracy for me. Yet it would be an interesting watch if it had turned out to be real. It doesn't matter either way to me, which is nice. And there are more of us everyday, so maybe the world won't be plunged into chaos. LOL

myelaine

dear Tammy...

I've been thinking about the things you say in order to better understand where your coming from. I have to say that as much as I understand your idea of love for loves sake or "the law of love" as you call it...it is a naive and childish (not childlike) theology. Yes, I know you don't like "theology" but anyone who tries to understand the relationship of God to man is practicing theology...that includes you.

perhaps it is because you don't like "theology" and are unwilling to look into the deeper things of God that what is your theology is severely lacking internal consistancy. the one you say is your lord seems to be inconsistant in his values in that for one person(AGuest) he makes it quite clear that his real name must be sanctified with the exclusion of all others but for another person(you) it isn't so important at all. His personality is inconsistant in that, though the Son makes it quite clear in the scriptures that He was sent to save...your lord has made it clear to you that anyone's righteousness is enough to save them...as long as they live "the law of love".

Aside from the fact that your "law of love" seems to be able to replace the purpose of righteousness in Jesus Christ for salvation...there is no distinction made as to whether it is love borne of the Holy Spirit or love born of the fallen flesh. You see, the love that Jesus was talking about was love that is born in the believer of the Holy Spirit and flows upwards and outwards...if someone doesn't believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit then how can the love of God...that perfect uniting love born of the Holy Spirit be in him?...how can A&E "fallen love" save them?

I think that your "law of love" devalues the nature of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ which is inconsistant with the love of the Father towards Him.

would you consider the possiblility that you might need to fine tune your law of love to better reflect the purpose of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit ?...or perhaps you would consider stating the truth about the fact that your law of love in no way amends or replaces the need for salvation in Jesus Christ alone. Can you be forthright about that without fear of sounding judgemental? at this point your theological construction implies that your interpretation of the law of love is enough.

love michelle

myelaine

Jesus concluded, "Not my will Father but yours". So, though He may have been tempted to marry like other men He put off desires of the flesh being well aware of what was going to happen to Him and why.

He was sent to do the will of the Father, that is, to bring forth spiritual children into the kingdom. He is betrothed to the church and the children of the kingdom are born of the Holy Spirit. That was accomplished in His earthly ministry and still is the will of the Father.

love michelle

Jesus wife fragment is a fake

Share this