Don't tell it, "it's not in the bible".... cats aren't mentioned in the bible and they exist, computers aren't mentioned in the bible, and you are using one to read this question. So why cannot other things that aren't mentioned in the bible exist?
2007-11-13 06:57:26 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Vince: sounds very reasonable...
2007-11-13 07:07:01 · update #1
carl: you are so sure... so I guess cats, and anything else not mentioned in the bible, are just a physical manifestation of the devil...
2007-11-13 07:08:07 · update #2
solarius: reasonable answer. excess dogma isn't very good... to some it's a huge issue, it shouldn't be... but it opens the door to some other interesting theories...
2007-11-13 07:10:04 · update #3
sugarbabe: also a reasonable thought on the other side.
2007-11-13 07:11:27 · update #4
Jesus was on the highest level of spirituality and loved everyone equally. He had no need for companionship as He was as one with God.
2007-11-13 07:08:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm a Christian, and it wouldn't matter to me if Jesus had been married or had children. True, the Bible didn't mention a love interest or children, but as you say, it doesn't mention a lot of things. To me, I never understood the big deal about it. So what if Jesus had been a family man? Doesn't matter to me. Doesn't alter the message. Theologically, I suppose it could be said that if He loved all mankind and came to redeem them equally, then it would be wrong of Him to show love and favoritism toward anyone (such as a wife), but that's blown out of the water, too. He clearly did have favorite people that He surrounded himself with (i.e., the Disciples). To me, it's a huge non-issue.
2007-11-13 07:05:24 · answer #2 · answered by solarius 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It seems to me that it wouldn't be the right thing to do-he knew what was going to happen in Jerusalem, and to leave his wife and kids to fend for themselves just doesn't seem like something a loving, compassionate person would do.
2007-11-13 07:06:01 · answer #3 · answered by sugarbabe 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he had, had. They probably would have crucified his family
too.
Seems to me there are certainly too many editors of the Bible.
2007-11-13 11:11:42 · answer #4 · answered by jenny 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
actually for him to have earned the title "rabbi" he would have had to have been married. Most likely the wedding at Cana was his own. xians ignore these facts and just claim the he wasn't married without any supporting reasons. It basically is just offensive to them so they ignore the facts.
2007-11-13 07:03:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because he didn't, but you can make-believe if you want, that doesn't change facts. It doesn't have anything to do with cats or anything- if He really had don't you think we would know? or did we have to wait 2000 years till Dan Brown told us so?
2007-11-13 07:05:22 · answer #6 · answered by carl 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
he could've but that wasn't the plan God made for him.
2007-11-13 07:01:25 · answer #7 · answered by Audrinalynn 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋