Celibacy and Revelations

Hello my good people!

It's been a while since I've posted, I know... but nobody died (and if they did, I'm sorry to hear that -- I, for one, am not responsible for the medical costs), so we're OK, no "razzing" me about it!

So lately, I've been thinking this: No where, no, not one source (not even in any un-canonical gospels or, certainly not any canonical ones) does it ever state that Jesus was NOT married, NOR does it ever say that he preached celibacy, in the first place! "So, where are are we getting this celibacy in the church from?" The rest of the Bible. Shut up, a lot of other cool guys in the Old and New testament say this stuff.  But, He did, preach about love, marriage (A lot in non-canonical gospels, and some in the New Testament), so there you have it. NOW: The obvious argument, is that, just like it didn't mention Him not being married, it never mentions Him being married, either. Yeah, it sure doesn't... in Revelations, "The Wife of the Lamb" means Jerusalem... just like the Song of Songs (or Solomon) is The Holy Church (actually, I can't comment on that one. We'll just have to leave that one in there for now... who knows what that's about!). Copied from the actual Revelations:

⁷ Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.” ⁸ And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

⁹ Then he said to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!’” And he said to me, “These are the true sayings of God.” ¹⁰ And I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “See that you do not do that! I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

  
Now, do make things worse (for everyone here rolling their eyes at me, saying, "pffftttt, she can't prove notin'!" oh here you go.) here is a verse (Matthew 19:10-20) that has Jesus telling His Apostles to accept celibacy, but not necessarily that He Himself was, or that He wanted them to be:

¹¹ But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: ¹² For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

 I don't know, what do you think? Comment below! 

~~Clarabelle Elizabeth

The disciples *said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it." - See more at: http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Celibacy#sthash.fepFOfiS.dpuf

The disciples *said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it." - See more at: http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Celibacy#sthash.fepFOfiS.dpuf

Matthew 19:10-12

Matthew 19:10-1

Matthew 19:10-12

All we know is all they did...

Hello EVERYONE!

What is up with me these days? Look at this, I am still alive my followers! All hope is not lost! How long did I go without a new post...? A full week EXACTLY! Never, again. Anyhow, here I am -- just be prepared -- this post is not about a certain topic, I just wanted to share some thoughts about the matter... so ye never know what might happen, haha.
Let's open with a quote, shall we not? 

 "Every man's memory is his own private literature." -Aldous Hexley

 So, while I've been given this week of non-blogging, I've had time while working to think about this topic a whole lot, so much that I can scrounge an entire post out of it. Alright, so you know how we were talking about the Gospel JOHN a whole bunch over here and right here?  Well, as most of you reading my blog know, the Gospel of John is addressed to "the Disciple whom Jesus Loved" (go and click those links for an adventure), meaning that it was written by someone who knew, and loved, Jesus, not just some dude 300 years off - but that is what is so cool, none of them were. Historians believe that "Mark" was the earliest gospel, and that surprisingly "John" is the latest. You see, all of the Gospels *had* to of been written by people who knew Jesus, had memories with Him and of Him, but there is one thing consisting between all of them -- none of them are the same. It is bizarre, John, supposedly closest to our Lord, has been proved most historically incorrect of all four Gospels! So why did I open with that random quote? Because what I'm trying to say here is, they were (the Gospels) all written in memory. No one actually came home and wrote each evening after being with Him all day, no, once He was long in Heaven and they were all in the place they'd spend for the rest of their life, (for some that was Europe, some stayed in Israel) then and only then did they start writing!  What the heck does this have to do with Mary Magdalene? Think about it -- (on the topic we're talking... no pun intended-ish) this is why we no info on her, or her "relationship status" with the Lord. It is astonishing that they (the Apostles and Disciples who wrote "John" "Mark" "Matthew" and "Luke") remember every detail that they do (but how could they forget THAT), but certainly they wouldn't remember her and Jesus' sexual/romantic relationship, if there was one in the first place! Plus, we must remember that if there indeed was, it would not be as in the public as modern relationships nowadays are. Can everyone go recall the Samaritan woman incident over in John 4? So in this scene, Jesus is taking to a Samaritan woman, who is confused for two reasons: 1, Jews and Samaritans hated each other, and never, ever crossed paths. 2, men and women back in the day treated each other like a different species. Here, let good ol' Timothy teach ya' a good ol' lesson or two:       

" ¹¹ Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.¹² But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.¹³ For Adam was first formed, then Eve.¹⁴ And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."  

Sorry if I offended anyone, but I'm a woman here, so it's all cool. So my point is, that imagine you're John- for a small part of a random Tuesday, Mary Magdalene gos and "excuses" herself to be with Jesus for a little while instead of talking to you like normal. By dinner that night you don't remember that. And certainly you don't 30 years later when you're writing the Story of Christ down! See what I mean? Unless it was Magdalene herself writing a gospel herself, we do not expect any of the apostles/disciples to remember anything about their relationship! *deep breathes* Well, I had to put that out there. Alright! It's Monday! Time for some MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL! 

Thank you for reading! I hope you enjoyed, and see you next post. Feel free to email or comment about anything that you read here today. Thank you! 

  ~~Clarabelle

Jesus as an Essene... is this further proof of Mary Magdalene?

Hello followers!

What is up? Or, what's shakin'? (Only kidding) So, today I was watching a video about the Essenes called, "Mysteries of the Essenes - Tedd Nottinham". He had some great points, I do suggest it to those of you who have a very open mind, and some time! It totals to around 50 minutes in length, but I found that the beginning half was the best part anyway.  Before I start this post, I'll just give those of you not familiar with the "Essenes" a quick over-view of them (for the people who already know a fair amount about them, you can skip this):

The Essenes are a Jewish sect originating from long before Jesus, 

spectating it's origin may have been Enoch. They were known for there healing 

powers, they could do miraculous things! They practiced Gnosism, 

(silent "g", pronounced "Nosism") 

a religion rare but still alive (heck, I'm Gnostic!) believing in four Gods,

appose to just One, such as in Judaism. 

They lived in Qumran, Mt. Carmel, and the City of Salt. 

They wore white, and astoundingly were WAY ahead of their time, they were the 

first and only for quite some time to demise against slavery of any kind,

no matter what race. They also held equality to men and woman very importantly,

and yet no other religious groups or sects did this. 

They had no rules of marrige, not even to the Rabbis. You married if you 

wished, and some thought very highly of marriage and children, 

while others thought of it as dirty. 

So that is the basics! Alright, let's move on.

Flavius Josephus was a first century historian, politician and solider. He lived with the Essenes for three years (though he was not one himself) and wrote about them constantly. But, before we go and study them, let's first ponder this: Some historians have come to the conclusion that there actually was no real town called "Nazareth", and that the closest thing to Nazareth was a group of Essenes called the "Nazarenes". Suspisously, the Essenes took it upon themselves to prepare for the birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ (or, as the Gnostics refer to Him by His Hebrew Yeshua or even Jeshua), they predicted this amazing event 103 years before it actually happened. They helped Mother Mary and prepared a place for her, so obviously she, and He, were familiar with these people. John the Baptist has also been long debated by scholars to be an Essene, most of whom agree and recognize that he was. So, it does beg the question whether Jesus was an Essene or not. Alright, so now, despite the evidence, let's go into a fantasy void where He was! OK? There yet? Great. Let's begin! 

    

 The Essenes

 Some things Flavius Josephus had written had contradicted each other. Some verses he states that the Essenes only used marriage for reproduction, and the other it was the meaning of life itself! So we have truly no idea what the Essenes real say on marriage may have been! Josephus records "The Essenes consider that everybody who does not marry, hereby affects the propagation and destination of mankind, as men would soon cease to exist otherwise." They believed you should marry, "not from lust, but to fulfill the command of Jehovah, 'Be fruitful, increase and fill the earth'." If this statement is true, and if Jesus really was an Essene, ... would He be instantly married? Moreover, did the Essenes, when they were preparing the way for Christ, did they expect the Messiah to be married Himself? Even if He didn't marry, if He ignored the "law" or social norm as He most certainly has before, ("The purpose of the law is to bind the demiurgos and archons and to destroy the hold of the devil, not to bind the soul of the human one."), would He of been thought to? I just don't know if we'll ever know. 

So go check out Mr. Nottinham! Surely, he will make you think more on this subject (if I have not already killed you with suspense). Well, with that I say goodnight, I wish you all the best! Please feel free to share your thoughts, via email or comments as always!
  ~~Clarabelle