CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
If this turns out to be real, not only does it indicate the Jesus may have been a real person, but that he also had a wife! This would mean that he's not divine, and that he was only a preacher and a human like everyone else.
I did not read the article, because I do not believe that one article could possibly contradict the entire Bible. As a Christian, I strongly believe that Jesus never had a wife, because his purpose was not to start a strong relationship with some woman, but to save all of us. He did not have time for such "human" distractions.
It's written evidence of Jesus himself telling people that he had a wife, Mary Magdalene.
This ancient document has been confirmed to be real, and thus, you must now either choose to believe in a false image of Jesus, an idea of a man who never was, or you must conform to the evidence, and of course, you may still worship this man if you wish, but when Jesus himself, in this article talks about his wife, then it would be wise to accept this, or you may be worshiping the wrong god.
I believe in what the Bible says, and the Bible says nothing about Jesus being married. Furthermore, the translation could have not been accurate, or when Jesus said "wife", he could have meant something else. I, being Christina, find it hard to believe a papyrus fragment over the Bible.
The Bible is composed of papyrus fragments... Do you think it just came in a book?
How do you think the Bible was formed? It wasn't just a book the entire time. People had to translate it from ancient pieces of papyrus into Greek, into Latin, and finally into English and other languages. This is the closest to an original fragment that exists.
I guess it really comes down to willful ignorance and deceit, as sooo many atheists on here have been saying, it's accepting the truth for what it is.
It's up to you to believe, but really, you christians have always preferred lies to truth, from Galileo's Earth around the Sun idea to evolution, to holy wars and prophecies to oppressing people.
If you can't handle direct evidence, then you're just being silly.
It's not about not being able to handle direct evidence, because in my opinion, that's a piece of evidence that contradicts larger "evidence" (the Bible). I understand that most people don't count the Bible as evidence, but I do.
You can't say that we prefer lies, because there is no evidence saying that what you believe is the truth. I don't even really understand how whether or not Jesus had a wife is important. It won't change what he did for us, it's just a random (still debatable) theory.
This is the sort of thing the Bible is composed of.
The Bible isn't just "THE BOOK". It's composed of letters from John, Matthew, Luke and the other disciples. Haven't you ever read the Bible? It wasn't just handed down from heaven. The Torah was said to be, but the New Testament was written by real people, then edited again and again and again.
This is the sort of document, that if the Council of Nicaea had access to, would have been included in the Bible.
You are looking at what should have been in the Bible, in other words. If this is not legitimate, then neither is anything else in the Bible.
Of course, I am atheist. What you Christians decide to put into your Bible is up to you, along with whatever superstitions you accept or reject.
Some Christians drink blood and eat human flesh, others speak in tongues, some go door to door trying to convert people, and others just believe in Creationism and try to undermine the scientific process by claiming something as truth, despite zero evidence.
It is all crazy to me.
-
Also, it does matter, because if Jesus had a wife, then he was a man of the flesh. You know how Catholic priests must remain celibate? It's only to try to emulate Jesus. A lot of sexual purity is based on the idea that sex is for procreation only, and because Jesus withheld, so should all followers. However, this means Jesus is not pure, and that he did succumb to the flesh, and did not bring forth children, thus pointing to the idea that Jesus was the sort of person who hung out with prostitutes, had sex with them, called himself a god, and then got killed for it. It's all crazy to me.
Clearly you didn't read the article because it says right in the article that He was married to the Christian faith not to a woman. Here is the thing from the article that you said in the link.
Scroll down until you go down to update and there it will tell you that Jesus didn't have a wife and it has meaning.
Read before you post something.
UPDATE: 4:28 p.m. -- Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.
Perhaps YOU did not read the article, because it says THIS: "but in the context where he's talking about 'my mother' and 'my wife' and talking about 'my disciple,' the one thing you would not say is that the church would be 'my disciple.'"
He is talking about Mary Magdalene, not the church, as we can see from context.
I did clearly read it but they don't know for sure that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. Also Jesus never had a wife because if He did then they would have recorded it in the Bible but they didn't so that means He doesn't have a wife.
Jesus could have said He was her disciple and what does a disciple mean?
Disciple means one of the 12 personal followers of Christ.
b.
one of the 70 followers sent forth by Christ. Luke 10:1.
c.
any other professed follower of Christ in His lifetime.
2.
any follower of Christ.
3.
( initial capital letter ) a member of the Disciples of Christ.
4.
a person who is a pupil or an adherent of the doctrines of another; follower: a disciple of Freud.
Those are all definitions of a disciple and a disciple doesn't mean automatically that Mary is Jesus's wife.
I do know how to debate. Stop telling me what to do. Let me be me and you be you. I don't need another person to think for me.
Yes I understand that it just showed up but didn't you see what I wrote about the definition of disciple? Clearly you didn't read my argument and avoided it and started talking about some Jesus's wife when I gave a definition of disciple.
Its typical all atheists do this sidestep the issue they always do that.
You are simply wrong. Please admit it. You can't contradict DIRECT proof this time. It's right in front of you.
Why would I admit I am wrong when I explained the definition of a disciple because it said in their that Mary was Jesus's disciple but no you didn't read it.
If you deny it, then you are denying Jesus himself, TRUTH itself, and that for sure will send you to hell, if such a horrid place exists.
I am not denying everything Jesus said no. I am only denying this part because I don't believe that Jesus actually had a wife.
It's not even belief, even I am now forced to admit that Jesus was a real person.
Nothing before had convinced me, not the shroud of Turin, not the Dead Sea Scrolls, nothing.
But this has changed my mind. I have to accept that Jesus was a real person.
You must also accept that Jesus had a wife. This is proof he had a wife. You can't deny this, unless you don't care about proof or evidence or what Jesus actually said.
Jesus clearly said in this newly discovered document that he had a wife. Unless Jesus is lying, I am pretty sure that means Jesus had a wife, no matter what you believe.
Oh but hey now that you believe in jesus you have to wonder why he didnt just say he was lying about being the son of god when he was being tortured on the cross, maybe you should reinstate your spiritual beliefs ^_^
He knew that if he died, if he was a sacrifice, he could change the world far more effectively than shying away and denying it all. That would ruin his message.
If he showed confidence in dying, then others would likely try to follow his message, fully thinking that he's a righteous god who knows he would go to heaven.
You really think that a person like Jesus who formed a cult like that, then called himself a god would oppose dying? He had a message he wanted people to obey, and knew that he had to die for the message to really become popular.
He already had a double planned, to show him alive "after death". Or perhaps Pilate let him go. If you read the Bible, it sounds like Pilate reaalllyyyy didn't want to kill Jesus at all, and perhaps it was all a trick.
Also, you are a fiend and a crook to say "believe.", in my case.
You know that I am skeptical and do not simply "believe" in things. I require evidence that I can rely on.
I am no fool to believe anything I hear, as you are. When there is physical evidence in front of me, then I need no belief.
That is the difference between knowledge and belief.
It's not even written in the language that Jesus would have known, so I suppose this is as good as me writing, "And lo and behold, The LORD Jesus Christ sat upon a large goat and commenced to defile it's virginity."
Not that I think prostitution is bad or wrong. I think it's a bit dirty, but it should be legal for sure. There's no logical reason to criminalize such a harmless act.
"Mary Magdalene (original Greek Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή),or Mary of Magdala, was one of Jesus' most celebrated disciples, and the most important female disciple in the movement of Jesus".
Mary was already regarded as a female disciple as well. A disciple and wife of Jesus.
Jesus could not have been the messiah.
It's simply impossible.
But this is what we've ALL been saying for ages on here, yet you keep fighting. It's good to fight, but this time we have for sure evidence that you're simply wrong. To debate this is just... silly.
Mary Magdalene (original Greek Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή),or Mary of Magdala, was one of Jesus' most celebrated disciples, and the most important female disciple in the movement of Jesus".
I knew that.
Mary was already regarded as a female disciple as well. A disciple and wife of Jesus.
Yes a disciple what does a disciple mean? A disciple mean a follower of Christ it didn't say wife of Christ now did it?
Jesus could not have been the messiah.
He is the Messiah because He fulfilled the prophecies over 30+ prophecies and the only prophecies He hasn't was the His coming which is coming soon.
But this is what we've ALL been saying for ages on here, yet you keep fighting. It's good to fight, but this time we have for sure evidence that you're simply wrong. To debate this is just... silly.
Well you can ask God when your face to face with Him if He really did have a wife which I will ask Him that.
Jews are still Jews because they still think that God hasn't came but if you went to Israel and said that Jesus already came they would call that blasphemy and probably stone you because you were insulting the Messiah.
Yes Jesus was a Jews but He taught a new teaching for everyone to follow,
Fine go ahead and believe God isn't real the ball's in your court and its your choice.
Magic? You mean witchcraft and sorcery? Jesus never did that in fact Jesus used the power through the Holy Spirit to heal people because of course He is God and can created the human body because He made us and could come up a disease that is incurable to human drugs if He really wanted to.
Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding, according to myth.
That's magic. That's not useful, that's not healing. That's magic for fun and getting people drunk at a party.
Why can't you admit you're wrong? Why do you even try to defend it so much? You're obviously wrong and you're only being emotional about it because you're brainwashed and indoctrinated by your Christian family.
If you cared about the truth, you wouldn't be so adamant, even in the face of direct evidence proving you wrong.
Before any man can say that there is no God he must analyze all the matter in the universe, he must be must track down all forces, mechanical, electrical, vital, mental and spiritual- he most hold converse with all spirits and understand them thoroughly; he must be at all points in space at every moment lest God somewhere and somehow elude his notice. He must be omnipotent, omnipresent, and eternal, in fact he must himself be God before he can dogmatically affirm that there is no God.
I don't think that Mackindale is asserting as fact that god does not exist. In all seriousness, it's the equivalent of saying that fairies do not exist.
I can't put words in his mouth, but what I believe he is saying is that the chances of god or fairies existing is so infinitesimally small that it's not even worth entertaining the possibility.
I have yet to find any evidence that would imply god's existence, and there's quite a bit of evidence suggesting he does not exist.
Ya, I've been into devil worshipping lately, you know...the usual. Satan let me borrow this power in exchange for my soul and some change in my pocket...
Before you claim there is a god, you need to have solid evidence for it.
There is no evidence for unicorns, thus I do not believe in unicorns. My lack of belief extends far enough to say without much doubt "Unicorns do not exist."
Same with your god.
It's the same fairy tale nonsense. Lol, I can't believe you take it so seriously. Do you really think you'll be immortal after you die?
Before any man can say that there is no God he must analyze all the matter in the universe, he must be must track down all forces, mechanical, electrical, vital, mental and spiritual- he most hold converse with all spirits and understand them thoroughly; he must be at all points in space at every moment lest God somewhere and somehow elude his notice. He must be omnipotent, omnipresent, and eternal, in fact he must himself be God before he can dogmatically affirm that there is no God.
What site did you copy and paste that argument from?
Not many would try to dispute such a tough bit of evidence, but you certainly tried. That is courage.
Sadly, it is wrong. This evidence is too powerful to ignore. Jesus was a man of the flesh, like all others, and the messiah could not have married a human woman.
There are a hundred new theories thought up every year on the subject of Jesus being real or not, every one of them as ridiculous as the last, and all of them un-provable. So I'll take this with a handful of salt.
Huh... Interesting. Perhaps this'll be actual proof for the atheistic position. Although, I doubt many Christians will EVER accept this to be true... even if evidence is found.
Although, I remain doubtful until the document gets verified.
This piece has been known by King, the translator for awhile, but once translated, she didn't think it was legitimate until after she had talked to several other people in the field.
This is certainly legitimate. It's ancient, written in the language, and has dialogue from Jesus speaking about his human wife, as the context specifies.
Jesus always claimed to be a man, correct? Although, he was believed to be the Son of God, the trinity and all that, however, he was fully a man, and not just claiming to be fully a god. So, he could have still been their messiah and was a man.
No, that was Buddha. Some regard Buddha as a god, or at least a VERY holy and sacred person worthy of worship, but Buddha, or Siddhartha was only a man, and only ever asked to be called a man and nothing more. Perhaps a wise man, but that is not so great as wishing to have people follow your path, and thus go to heaven.
Buddha was humble and wise, and said wise words, but Jesus was not so humble. Wise, perhaps, but as for actually being a god, he was crucified for his blasphemy. If he rose up, great, but we now know that going up leads to outer space, not heaven, so the tale of "physical ascension" is likely not true, for it's a bit silly. People can't fly, especially dead people. Only in stories, perhaps where they wish to bring a person to life to establish a religion, but don't want to keep writing it.
It's a great "cliff hanger" or something, isn't it? He comes back, but disappears right after. Very suspicious.
I know for a fact some christians view Jesus as being godlike, just as some buddhists view buddha as being godlike. Their stories and their philosophies are very similar in my opinion. Jesus was born from a virgin, so was Siddhartha. Jesus healed people, so did Siddhartha. Jesus claimed enlightenment, as did Siddhartha.
Perhaps some tales, but no, he was born as the son of a rich prince in a castle. He had lots of money and goods, a perfect and secure life, but upon going out one day and seeing the poor without anything, he changed his life and left the castle.
Not a virgin birth.
Siddhartha also never healed people, except for enlightenment and perhaps some fables. I don't think any serious buddhist claims that Siddhartha was anything but a wise man.
Where are you getting your information? Buddhism is not a supernatural religion, for the most part.
