Now, please note that this question is not about factual or non factual basis of the book's contents. Instead, this is about the assertion that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, and that they had a baby together.
Why is this such a horrible idea? Seriously now, why couldn't Jesus have been a husband and a father and still been the great teacher and Savior that He was?
Please think about this before answering. Thanks.
2007-03-08 12:05:27 · 20 answers · asked by I'm Still Here 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It isn't a horrible idea at all - nor is it as far-fetched as some people would like to believe.
But some people don't like to think outside the box, it might destroy their carefully constructed little worlds. I say be open-minded........does it really make a difference in the long run anyway? It wouldn't affect His teachings or the Greatest Sacrifice ever made.
2007-03-08 12:17:45 · answer #1 · answered by Freedspirit 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In the Old Testament, all of the sacrifices, or sin offerings had to be from an unblemished, clean, pure lamb, a virgin if you will. The sin offering was done on a yearly basis as it was necessary for the shedding of it's blood to forgive sin. In the New Tetament, God Himself came to this economy through the Virgin Birth to redeem mankind of it's sin. He was called Jesus Christ which means Anointed Savior. He was born, lived for 30+ years, was sacrificed on Calvary and rose again after three days to show us that He conquered death and hell. Had he married and fathered children, His sacrifice would have been null and void. The producers of that movie and the author of The Da Vinci Code don't exactly come out and say that what they have are facts. What they do is allude to something and our minds will automatically take it one step further and say that this is what they mean. Neat trick, huh?
2007-03-08 13:02:25 · answer #2 · answered by michael m 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OOh I love hypothetical Da Vinci questions.
I dont beleive that the question is hypothetical.
I do beleive that it is fact, that what Dan Brown proposes did actually happen.
I agree with you saying that it is quite possible that Jesus was married, given the culture of the times where it a rabbi had to be married, and the importance of Mary amongst the disciples.
The only reason the catholic church denies it, is because they hate women. Why do you think they insist their priests be celibate (considering all the perversion that the church is trying to hide) and why are there NO women priests, or deacons or teachers?
It is NOT human nature to be celibate - unless it is of your OWN volition (choice). Being a priest means you are forced to be celibate.
2007-03-08 13:28:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe he could have been a woman and done those things, too, but he wasn't.
He might have been a space alien and done those things, too, but he wasn't.
Your point is we should change the story little by little just because why not? Please think about what an utter load of manure the Da Vinci Code is and think how through the ages so many people have tried to derail Christianity with such assertions before you take this question seriously.
2007-03-08 12:14:01 · answer #4 · answered by kscottmccormick 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Christians cannot withstand the idea that Jesus
was a total person and had sex.
For some reason Christianity looks at sex as the gravest sin after murder. It is even embarassing to think that a married Jesus had sex with his wife. Blasfemy!
That's the way they are. Sex is a terrible thing.
Unacceptable! You can only have sex for procreation.That might be one of the reasons why women cannot be a meaningful part of the Church because they represent sin.
The Muslims think in a very similar way.
Aren't they just wonderful?
2007-03-08 12:19:21 · answer #5 · answered by Dr. Sabetudo 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It goes against everything the Bible teaches. It could very well be true, who knows. Not many of us were around at the time, so no one can really answer this question for sure. Hypothetical or not, I have no problem with this idea. Most pastors, reverends etc are happily married with kids and still can be great teachers, so why not Jesus?
2007-03-08 12:12:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
What...? Jesus was married and had a kid....whoa.
News to me.. perhaps i should read more than one book in my life, and get different perspectives and ideas.
Not a horrible idea, infact that would make me think more of him as a loving husband and father. Much better role model than a wild bachelor who goes off somewhere random for 40 days and leaves his responsibilities behind, then returns and is constantly linked to free flowing red wine (that, yah.. he made from water... yuh-huh).
2007-03-08 12:44:10 · answer #7 · answered by nnjamerson 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am an atheist, but I don't think Jesus being married or having a child would be a big problem. It isn't as if being a father would make Jesus any less of a role model.
2007-03-08 12:11:16 · answer #8 · answered by Greenio 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it is very possible, I also think his personal life was his own business and that is why nothing was mentioned about it and along with the Catholic church being determined to not let anyone know, we may never know for sure.
It makes no difference to me one way or the other, There is a God and Jesus is his only begotten Son, Our Saviour.
2007-03-08 12:12:07 · answer #9 · answered by Angelz 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because in order to qualify for a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins He had to be a pure, spotless lamb (of God)
Just like any man wants to marry a virgin. She is clean and has no threat of disease, etc. He couldn't have been a spotless sacrifice if He was married. The Bible even says that his bones were not broken, saying that if they would've been he would have been blemished and a cripple. He had to be perfect to qualify for the ultimate sacrifice for mankind and to try to suggest that he was unclean or blemished would not make him worthy to be the Savior.
2007-03-08 12:14:50 · answer #10 · answered by Miss Momma 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋