Jesus had a daugther!
-
Please explain your definition of the term "rational"Originally posted by Gablurr:That doesn't make it 'rational'. It is still a faith based believe. -
Who knows - maybe she was a real hottie, ya know!?Originally posted by laurence82:he is right
you are supposed to quote verses or something to back up, and whats with the infatuation with mary magadelene?
Just kidding...okay, maybe that's in bad taste...lol -
Before i say this...Let me say that I am not backing up the companion-wife-whatever argument. Just joining in when I agree or disagree on specific points.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:the word "companion" doesn't just means wife.
same like clothes doesn't just means T shirts.
zzz
Also....originally jesus never said "I am God"... the original word was light... -
Maybe the original poster does and maybe they don't. But I have to say - I read the book and definitely don't think it's "crappy." It's damned good book - or else we wouldnt be having this thread! lolOriginally posted by the Bear:lemme guess... you read the crappy fiction entitled "The Da Vinci Code" and believed every single word in it, even when it is classified as Fiction
Anyway, I like the fact that it does open some doors to questioning. It opened my eyes to symbolism and "hidden" things
-
Jesus was never intimate with a woman....he tried but whenever he touched their gash it would heal and close up.
-
KopiKia,
Which Bible in this world, did you read that Jesus Christ had a daughter?
Are you so apt in starting controversial discussions? -
MODERATORS:
This topic is very close to being Blasphemous!
Close it. Such a statement is an insult to Chirsitian faith. -
Is she chio?
-
so what if jesus had a daughter, does that make any difference or matter? he could have cousins, brothers, nephews and all it still wouldnt change anything.
-
Where in Cyber-heck are you mods?
Can't you see this is a bad topic??? -
I think the mods are on their off day...it's SundayOriginally posted by ShutterBug:Where in Cyber-heck are you mods?
Can't you see this is a bad topic??? -
The Da Vinci Code page 342Originally posted by ShutterBug:KopiKia,
Which Bible in this world, did you read that Jesus Christ had a daughter?
Are you so apt in starting controversial discussions?
'According to the Priory,' Teabing continued,'Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the time of the crucifixion. For the safety of Christ's unborn child, she had no choice but to flee the Holy Land. With the help of Jesus' trusted uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, Mary Magdalene secretly traveled to France, then known as Gaul. There she found safe refuge in the Jewish community. It was here in France that she gave birth to a daughter. Her name was Sarah.' -
Jesus having a kid???? Not recorded anywhere.....
Priory of Sion??? darn fiction...... Dan Brown trying to sell crappy books.
Is Jesus married to Mary Magdalene???? Not recorded, but He was, does it matter? He ate food, drank wine, go fishing, go toilet..... so what if he was married? But still.... not recorded.
100% God 100% man.... why not? There's a huge poster on the Siemens building along Kallang Bahru/PIE that states their phone as 100% phone 100% camera..... all it means is that for this definition to be true, the object in question has to have all the necessary feature to function as defined. -
Originally posted by KopiKia:
You point of reference is a WORK OF FICTION?????
The Da Vinci Code page 342
'According to the Priory,' Teabing continued,'Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the time of the crucifixion. For the safety of Christ's unborn child, she had no choice but to flee the Holy Land. With the help of Jesus' trusted uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, Mary Magdalene secretly traveled to France, then known as Gaul. There she found safe refuge in the Jewish community. It was here in France that she gave birth to a [b]daughter. Her name was Sarah.'[/b]
In a recent documentary, I think, shown on the National Geographic channel, various secular scholars and non-Christian historians debunked the entire theory given by Dan Brown..... -
Bro, if I wanted to start a blasphemy, I wouldn't start this topic under Chit Chat... relak lar brudderOriginally posted by ShutterBug:MODERATORS:
This topic is very close to being Blasphemous!
Close it. Such a statement is an insult to Chirsitian faith.
-
I saw this Dan Brown guy on TV last week or so, he was talking about and from the Da Vinci code.
I think he's just desperately trying to make a living, that's all.
But religion, is a mighty sensitive subject to try and suggest contradictory things that aren't quite factual.
A fact, must be solid enough to cast a shadow. -
Guys guys guys, I didn't make a claim that Jesus had a daughter. I simply titled my topic "Jesus had a daughter" so that people would be interested to click on it to read on. My opening reply was "Can anyone confirm on that?" It was a question, not an answer. I was just inviting people to come in and have a casual chat thats all, you guys so serious for wat? And yes, I got this idea from the book The Da Vinci Code, but that really made me wonder if he really had a daughter? Don't you guys think that it could be a possibility? I am not trying to proof anything, but just want to have a nice clean unbiased chat on this topic
-
'Morning Coffeekid.....Originally posted by KopiKia:Guys guys guys, I didn't make a claim that Jesus had a daughter. I simply titled my topic "Jesus had a daughter" so that people would be interested to click on it to read on. My opening reply was "Can anyone confirm on that?" It was a question, not an answer. I was just inviting people to come in and have a casual chat thats all, you guys so serious for wat? And yes, I got this idea from the book The Da Vinci Code, but that really made me wonder if he really had a daughter? Don't you guys think that it could be a possibility? I am not trying to proof anything, but just want to have a nice clean unbiased chat on this topic
I guess the answer to your question is: there is always the possibility because that would not even conflict with the purpose of Jesus' being born, but there is no evidence.
Da Vinci code is NOT the book to use for this discussion. It is full of easily-proven factual errors. -
Ok i understand you for once.
But still, this topic is as sensitive as asking if your mother had someone else before you. No offence intended towards you, just an illustration to show how sensitive this topic of Religion actually is. -
Actually uhh....
IF Jesus really have a wife and/or children
I find it just makes him a more endearing personality
more 'human' and at the same time, being able to rise above his humanity
to be godlike.
Except of course well... we'll never know for sure, will we?
Anyway using solely the bible without referencing to historic times/customs is really kind of one sided since the bible IS edited (as mentioned previously by some other poster) and translated (unless of course you are studying hebrew and greek) and meanings do get lost in translations.
Anyway having wife and children doesnt make anyone less worth worshipping
cos of what he has done. (refer to Buddha.) -
Oh man... this is going to drag on to eternity.....
-
heehee.. don't blame me. I just jumped into the fray. Jumping out ASAP!!!!
-
Another point to add is that the bible is like a history book, and history books are like one-sided story, written by winners.Originally posted by ShrodingersCat:Anyway using solely the bible without referencing to historic times/customs is really kind of one sided since the bible IS edited (as mentioned previously by some other poster) and translated (unless of course you are studying hebrew and greek) and meanings do get lost in translations.
Anyway having wife and children doesnt make anyone less worth worshipping
cos of what he has done. (refer to Buddha.) -
The nature of history is that it is necessarily biased. Most human beings suffer from the limitation of being able to experience only what they themselves feel.
However, to say that history books are entirely inaccurate is unfair. Which is why you need cross referencing and constant questioning ba. -
o please when I said that maybe I should state something clearer here I should said "he was human" and now he is god.Jesus came down and suffer for our sins as human and return to kingdom of heaven after he did and became god.Originally posted by Gablurr:That in itself is one of the many fatal contridictions that I've gradually realised and eventually rejected when I was a Christian Theistic believer. Although it was hard having to give up all that emotional security, especially after years of indoctrination.
It has to be either he is fully human or fully god. Since one of the attribute assigned to 'human' is mortality, whereas God is immortal. However if he is mortal, he can NOT be God, that which is immortal. If Jesus was immortal, his sacrifice would thus be meaningless. Since I believe in the rational concept of "non-contradiction", hence I could not believe in the notion of Trinity. If not then ANYTHING would thus be just as 'justisfible' without the laws of non-contradiction, and the world would then most certainly be a much sillier place than it is already. Also since the laws of sins were supposely dictated by God, I don't see why he need to sacrifice himself to himself for the very purpose of circumventing that rule which he himselve made in the first place. But I still remain a Theist; or at the very least agnostic, and have learnt to accept that my believe is irrational. That's what faith is all about anyway.
I don't wish to butcher the most valuable discovery ever made by mankind (which is, logic and scientific reasoning); like what those unethical Intelligent Design people are doing right now in the US. Fundamentalists always give religion a bad name.
Also, if anyone wishes to discuss religion, please try to be respectful towards the other person's personal believes. Present your reasons and arguments, not innane insults that is not even worthy of a 5 year old. Thanks.