Why do all Christian& Catholic leaders freak out at the thought of Jesus being married?

Question

It is always a possibility. Many things have been eliminated from the Bible because it didn't fit in with their idea of what Jesus needed to be .And these books were all written long after Jesus lived on the earth.

It is a big deal if you want to start a religion where men are superior. You would need to say that He was not married, so that women became secondary.

This is really something. Some well thought out answer and some real ranters. I do know that that book was sold in the fiction section. I just don't understand why churches banned a movie . They haven't done that since the 50's.I din't say I believed this I just asked why do the churches get crazy. Two entirely different things.

By the way olderand wiser is because I am older and have learned to question all of the things that I once thought were true. I am no longer a sheep, I am a thinking individual who reads many things for information, not just one thing because I am told to. Sorry, everyone needs to question and come to their own conclusions. Not to parrot someone else's thoughts.

Answer 1

the idea was that Jesus died for our sins. If Jesus had desendents of any kind then he didnt truly die, that would eliminate half of the teaching that are in the bible itself. The church would hold less influence over politics etc. and might even collapse upon itself. Read The Divinci Code and reasearch "Knights Templar", the Masons, illuminati, the Council of Trent,and Opus Dei if you want to know more about why these things go on and you'll get a little history as well.

REBUTAL TO THE QUESTION BELOW.
Inregards to the question below research the Council of Trent, it decided what would be cut out or edited if you will from the bible, there is no reference because it was all cut out.

Answer 2

the Bible is our ultimate source of truth.
Things have not been removed from the Bible to fit people's desires. That's a big misconception a lot of people have. It's not historically true.
Actually the first of the four gospels written, Mark, was actually only written about 30 or 40 years after his crucifixion, meaning all the eye witnesses (whose testimonies comprised the book) were still alive. In fact, the very authors of the books knew Jesus Christ personally.
The majority of the information we have today about Alexander the Great comes from a biography that was written about 400 years after he died, and historians swear by its authenticity and integrity, regarding it as absolute historical fact. This is where the information in your high school text books comes from.
So, a 30 or 40 year gap compared with a 400 year gap is basically a news flash for that time period. And we have more surviving manuscripts from the books of the Bible than any other book in history. The evidence showing the Bible's authenticity and integrity far surpasses ANY other book in history.
I promise you, if you research this fully, this is the same conclusion you will come to. Many atheists have researched the Bible trying to disprove it and became Christians.

The information Dan Brown wrote about in The DaVinci Code is inaccurate and incorrect. A lot of it is interesting information... but in his book he does not distinguish between fact, fiction, and speculation. Be careful what you read.

Answer 3

It's a possibility. The issue surrounding the "Da Vinci Code" was more a matter of gullibility. Many people, for whatever reason, believed Dan Brown's work of fiction to be true. There are elements of truth in it: Jesus & Mary Magdalene lived, the Nicean Council did meet, but the results of those historic events (and others) were distorted into fiction. Personally, I'm a Christian & don't have an issue with it, but that's because I see it as fiction.

As far as the books being written long after Jesus lived, scholars know that the oldest versions of Scripture they found, includign those dated to the late 1st & early 2nd Centuries, were copies of the originals. So who really knows when the books were written? Three of them were written by eye-witnesses (Matthew, John & Peter, who dictated his story to Mark).

All things are possible - that is true. However, very few things are probable. Jesus being married is one of them. The only Apostle we can be sure was married is Peter because the Bible mentions his monther-in-law being sick. However, we can probably assume that some of the others were married and that their entire familes were among the thousands that followed Jesus. We just don't knpow which ones. Probably not John or James the Younger because of their respective ages.

But Jesus Himself? Doubtful at best, because marriage would have intefered with His plan, including crucifixion and resurrection. So yes, it's possible. But I think it's very improbable.

As to why the uproar, they just wanted people to know it's fiction. And in my opinion, that's a very sad commentary on our society that people are unable to differentiate between fact & fiction.

Answer 4

It's a very complicated discussion that many scholars study could study all there lives and still end up without an answers all agree with but it all boils down to this: tradition and a long history of an excepted idea being proven wrong that could create a pandora's box for the Christian belief.

First off all, every human (excluding Jesus...like he never farted or had to go to the bathroom) on Earth according to all Christians are believed to possess sin. Therefore, something like the actions of having sex is considered a sin even when married because sex is meant for procreation---yet the catholics take it farther by stating that sex even for procreation is a sin--why do you think the pope and the priests aren't married besides the real reason that there gay?

BY JESUS BEING MARRIED LOWERS THE BELIEF THAT HE IS A SUPREME BEING ASSUMING HE IS THE SON OF GOD...THE THOUGHT THAT EVEN THE SON OF GOD HAS HIS NEEDS DESTROYS THE IDEA THAT JESUS ULTIMATELY IS GOD (remember the trinity...that jesus is God too!!!) SO BY HIM BEING MARRIED MAKES HIM AN ORDINARY MAN RATHER THEN A GOD

hope this helps

Answer 5

>>>Why do all Christian& Catholic leaders freak out at the thought of Jesus being married?<<<

They're not "freaking out" at this thought. They just don't believe it to be true, that's all.

They have a right to hold their own opinions about it, and to express it without accusations that they are "freaking out."

>>>It is always a possibility.<<<

Neither the Bible, nor any other ancient that speaks of Jesus' life, ever mentions anything about Him having a wife or kids.

Possibility? A very remote one, at best.

>>>Many things have been eliminated from the Bible because it didn't fit in with their idea of what Jesus needed to be <<<

Many things? Like what?

Answer 6

Its funny that the people who say that they don't "freak out" because it's "all lies and none of it could be proven true" ARE freaking out, because they aren't even considering the possibility that it's true and dismissing it outright. Once again, Dan Brown's book is a work of fiction, in that none of his characters exist. But it is all based on real things. All those lost books from the bible are real, like the Gnostic Gospels. After 2000 years, history gets muddied, and things could be easily lost in time. There isn't any way to "prove" that the Gnostic Gospels are true lost chapters of the Bible, but there also isn't a way to "prove" they weren't either.

I think they freak out because their whole belief system is based on Jesus' godhood. Gods are perfect. And if Jesus was not a God, and was a man--not only a man but a married man--then the whole "dying on the cross for our sins" becomes moot, and thus there is no sure ticket to heaven for these guys.

Answer 7

He more than lilkely was married. He taught in the synagogue and to do that you ahd to be married.
I think it has to do with the fact that when stated it is generally stated in a sexual way. Almost a mockery. It is not what is being said as much as how it is being said.
I am a Christian and I have come to believe that he may well have been married. I don't know either way. I do know that he was teaching in the synagogues at an early age and they let him by with it even though he inflamed the rabbis of the time. So he quite possibly could have been single through his ministry and still allowed to teach. Nonone will ever know the comlete story on that. So why be mad about it?

Answer 8

I think they are freaked out about a book and a movie that truly does not have any real facts to back them up. If you are the leader in your church preaching the gospel the best way you know how, and most of what you have is your faith and the bible to back up what you preach, wouldn't you defend it?

Do you actually believe the embellishments made to sell that book and movie? I guess that is how Hollywood and the Media have become so successful, people believe them so easily.

Answer 9

We dont freak out, there is no historical evidence that he was married. NOne. Not one archive in Greek, roman, hebrew recorded text. The Bible itself that these two faiths are founded upon does not record any involvement with a women whatsoever. And there are four different accounts of His life in it. Most assume he "could have been" from a painting that a man painted almost fifteen hundred years after the life of Christ, and that painting was by a man who loathed the faith's of christians and catholics. Was often understood that he intentionally acted in manners/works to offend the church. Those are facts.

Answer 10

Actually, that's not entirely correct. The books that were not included in the Bible, were not included because the authorship was unknown, and because the year the scripture was written could not be pinned down.
The "gospels" that were not included were written too long after Christ's ascension to be used. The others were written within one generation of Christ's ascension, in most cases by people who were there when it happened.
The reason anyone would get upset by the concept of Christ being married is because it was NOT Biblical. You would think that of the Apostles that were present, that one of them would have known about the relationship and written about it.
As it stands, they did not. And who cares if he got married or not? I sure don't, it doesn't change who he was.