I just wanted to know. He was a man and a Jew, right? At that time a man in his 30s would be married and trying to have children to carry on his line. Why didn't Jesus?
2006-12-27 09:07:35 · 25 answers · asked by Cherry 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think it makes people think that would make him not "god-like"...but what is more miraculous and truly god-like than creating life?
I believe he very possibly could have been or that he will be someday. I believe it is necessary for all who gain exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom to be married for time and all eternity.
Christ came to fulfill all law; marriage is a law of God, so therefore he would have to be married then...or at some point.
Some people think that if he was married, that would mean he - uh oh - had sex and that would make him also not god-like. Not sure why people think that. Sex is intended for good - showing love to our spouse and to create life. It is when people misuse that gift that it becomes dirty and unholy.
Anywho, I really think he was. My mother-in-law has her own theory that the wedding he attended that he turned water into wine was his own.
Who knows. I think it if truly was important that we knew, we would.
2006-12-27 09:14:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
That is not what is so upsetting. If there was any evidence that Jesus was married, that wouldn't be a problem. The reason people are upset about the Da Vinci Code is that Dan Brown presents background info (like the Priory of Sion) as fact. The plot of the novel is not a problem - it's just fiction.
It is not necessarily true that Jewish men in the first century would have been trying to start a family. The Essenes (not the guys at Qumran) did not marry, and neither did the Egyptian Therapute. Contrary to popular opinion, Jesus and his followers were residents of the heavily Hellenized Galilee, and speant most of their time in the Greek cities of the Decapolis. It was not unusual at all for a Hellenized Jew to be unmarried in his 30's, especially if he was an intenerate wisdom teacher. Remember, Scripture does not say that Jesus was a rabbi or a Pharisee. And if it was so unusual for a Pharisee to remain unmarried, then why was the Apostle Paul unmarried?
2006-12-27 09:17:38 · answer #2 · answered by NONAME 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Christian Bible replaced into written about 2 hundred years after the Jesus Crucifixion with the help of elementary human beings and much a fiction and adjustments befell to the authentic tale.It change into an effect grab interior the more youthful Church.definite Jesus replaced into Crucified yet at the same time as on the bypass much of little irregularities take position.Like after 3 days the Romans pierced the lung to work out if white liquid shaped interior the lungs,that under no circumstances befell to Jesus a sympathetic roman solder scratched him bellow the left lung.Than there replaced into His uncle than replaced into very rich(he replaced into right into a shipping organization and Jesus made many journeys to India as a cushty guy)his uncle had this fancy burial plot outfitted like you'll purchase a burial plot as we talk,besides it had a secret backdoor,that's how they were given Jesus out.He wasn't useless yet he replaced into on the point of it.He replaced into nurchered decrease back to health than He and His kin whent on a run.Mary is died in southern France and she is barried in England,Jesus ended up in what's ideal this second called Kashmier and lived to be 103 years previous.HE had a dozen little ones
2016-12-01 05:51:27 · answer #3 · answered by jaffar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus came to earth as a man to do the work of his Father. It isn't upsetting that people believe He was old enough to marry. It is upsetting that people want to change the Bible and make Jesus into something he wasn't. Jesus was on the earth and without sin. How many men (or women) today can say that? None I bet.
2006-12-27 09:16:31 · answer #4 · answered by mar 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its so upsetting because its a lie that the devil used centuries ago to confuse and lead people astray.
Satin only has a limited number of tricks and keeps recycling them generation after generation, and people keep falling for them. You would think we would learn but we dont.
Jesus was God in the form of man(virgin birth) Not born of man, and God already has children called Christians and messianic Jews. Jesus was sent to die for the sins of all man he wasn't here on a God type vacation. Satan tempted Jesus in the garden and appealed to his human desires to have the cross taken away from him but submitted to the will of the father and completed the task he was sent to do. Imagine how much harder it would have been to have a wife or a child to have to leave behind and how irresponsible that would have been of him. His needs weren't focused on his flesh but the will of the father I think that's the answer to your question.
2006-12-27 09:33:37 · answer #5 · answered by singularvision 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
it was not time for him to get married. it was the time for him to be crucified for the believers repented sins.
his mother was a jew but his father wasn't.
not every man is trying to start a family in his thirties. some are trying to build the family business so that those that come after him will have it better than the way that he found it.
why would he need to start a family when he had such a large number of brothers and sisters, already?
2006-12-27 09:28:22 · answer #6 · answered by sodajerk50 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While the thought is not repulsive, it is just blanantly untrue.
No scriptures in the new testament state that He ever married.
But further, according to Jewish Law, the sacrifice required for the remission of sin would have to be perfect and undefiled.
Were Jesus to have married, He would have been defiled with woman. (Defiled in a ritualistic sense.)
Jesus came to fulfill the Law.
2006-12-27 09:15:47 · answer #7 · answered by Bobby Jim 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's some evidence that he did just that.
Of course, every single word in the "bible" is suspect, since none of it was written when jesus was alive, none of the gospel writers ever heard him utter a single word or met him in person (yet they "quote" him freely)...so it's all just speculation.
But yes, it would have been normal for a man his age at that time in Judea to be married. Not only that, but several times he's called "rabbi" (teacher) -- and jewish law REQUIRES that a rabbi be married...he could not have had the title "rabbi" without being married :)
I suppose the idea of jesus, all sweaty-faced and moaning, having sex with his wife, just doesn't fit the image the fundies have for him. Too bad, since that's what humans do, I would think it would make him more accessible :)
2006-12-27 09:11:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Good question. If Jesus was married, then this will throw the Bible into a bad loop, so to speak. The Bible, as we know of, never mentions the fact that he's married, and that his life was a single man, dedicated to Christ. There has been many questions regarding possible hidden truths, corruption, etc. Who's to say exactly what happened.
2006-12-27 09:13:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
i personally don't find it offending or upsetting. I don't think the bible recorded everything accurately or hasn't been passed down in it's complete form. i don't think that anybody KNOWS what jesus did or didn't do sexually because we weren't really there. who knows if jesus was married. the man that wrote the bible could easily have left out a few details or changed whatever he wanted to to fit his beliefs or to suit his cause. it was 2000 years ago. history has a way of being distorded. especially with something as powerful as religion. just my opinion.
2006-12-27 09:15:56 · answer #10 · answered by jyl l 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋