You can be absolutely confident that what was written in the Bible about Jesus is accurate, and its accuracy has been confirmed by scholars (both Christian and non-Christian) repeatedly over the centuries.
After all, who had a stronger desire to preserve and pass along accurately the message of Jesus than the first Christians? They believed He alone was the Son of God, sent from heaven to save us from our sins. They also believed nothing was more important than obeying His command to "go and make disciples of all nations ... teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20). What possible motive could they have had to change Jesus' message or suppress the facts about His life? The only logical answer is: none.
Instead, they diligently wrote down the record of Jesus' life and teachings (under the guidance of the Holy Spirit). Luke, for example, began his Gospel by assuring his readers that he had taken pains to be sure it was accurate: "I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning" (Luke 1:3).
Don't let anything shake your confidence in what God has given us in His Word, the Bible. Most of all, don't let anything shake your confidence in Jesus Christ, who alone came down from heaven to save us from our sins.
there isn't one shred of evidence—not one—to support this idea. The book you were reading is fiction—and that's exactly what this idea is: fiction.
Nowhere in the Bible (or in any other Christian writing after Jesus' ministry) is there any hint at all that Jesus was married. For example, His closest relatives and disciples came together at the cross as He was dying—but no wife is mentioned, as she would have been if He had been married. Jesus' sole concern then was for the welfare of His mother (see John 19:26-27).
This isn't to say that Jesus disapproved of marriage—not at all. In fact, His first miracle took place at a wedding, to which He had been invited with His mother and some of His disciples (see John 2:1-11). God gave marriage to us, and Jesus spoke often about the joys and responsibilities of marriage. Most of the earliest disciples were married, including Peter (whose mother-in-law was healed by Jesus—Mark 1:30).
Jesus came into the world for one reason: to die for our sins on the cross. Don't be misled by myths that might turn you away from that great truth. Instead, make sure of your commitment to Him, for "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree (cross), so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness" (1 Peter 2:24).
2006-10-15 01:13:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Wow - that 'believer' guy is soooo creepy. Does he not realise that the gosspels were written well after the event? Does he not know that other sauces were seen as suspect, or inconvenient, and ignored? Do you remember the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls? When did you see a translation?
Jesus existed - but was not divine. He happened conveniently to fit the hugely popular traditions associated with the God Apollo. Even the images are identical of those for the Great Apollo. Where is the description of the physical appearance of Jesus in the bible?
2006-10-15 01:22:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by lykovetos 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Do a kin tree. in case you probably did a tree from say, Genghis Khan on down, he could have actually tens of millions of descendants by utilising now, and probable very few of them look Mongolian. The ancestry is so diluted after 1000 years, that in spite of having Genghis Khan as (one among many, many) progenitors, the blood of the super Khan would not quite direction by using absolutely everyone's veins. ok, now double that situation and picture how negligible the bloodlines count form for after 2 thousand years.
2016-11-23 12:43:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by comeau 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hello montanasa... :)
I just watched the History channel last week (not a Christian Show)..it was a 2 hour show, about following all the leads to see if they could trace a bloodline of Jesus through these leads..but it came out that No..it was a DNA test that was done on a decedant that pointed to Mary Magdalene..
Jesus did not have a blood line..this is just a false accusation againt the Lord once again.. :(
http://www.history.com/search.do?searchText=Holy+Grail&targetDB=THC_TVLISTINGS_V2
In Jesus Most Precious Name..
With Love..In Christ.. :)
2006-10-15 01:13:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by EyeLovesJesus 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
there are none
there is no proof of any of his descendants. all we hav is assumptions and questions. take a look at the replies of people who think Jesus had descendants. Except for the da vinci code(fiction) all they do is ask Questions. asking questions and not giving a documented evidence is a fallacy called appeal to ignorance. we dont know the answer ro their question, does this mean they are right?
if ppl allege tht jesus had children, then the burden of proof is on them
2006-10-15 01:08:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by tariq 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I was a few months ago having a conversation with one of the guys that work for my company, we were working together and got on to the subject of family trees. I explained how I had a very varied and colourful history (call me a mongral if you please) and then he out of no-where explained that someone inthe 16th Centuary, who was Irish and dabbled in geneology and translated some bible into something; heres the crunch point he said that he was related to this person whom in turn is decendant of (in his words) 'yours truly born on the 25th December 2000years ago'. Obviously after such a remark I just nodded my head, took a large draw on my cigarette and sat back in the chair to contemplate what he just said.
Fruitloop!
2006-10-15 01:14:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by A_Geologist 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
No I do not believe that. I do believe that the blood line from Mary has continued through the brothers and sisters of Christ.
2006-10-15 01:07:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Miss Vicki 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
If this was so plausable why has it taken 2000 years to dream it up. Jesus said the TRUTH will set you free. Stop following fiction.
2006-10-15 01:17:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by oldguy63 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
anything is possible but highly in probable as the DA Vinci Code is a fictional book and the other book " Holy Blood - Holy Grail " can be considered suspect.
2006-10-15 01:09:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Marvin R 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I think its alot more likely than a large amount of people will even entertain.
but one way or another there are definitely descendants of David and Solomon.
2006-10-15 01:10:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋