Did Jesus marry and had children?

[swariffin]

All prophets are men. None of them is god. The problem of 100% Man is separate from being a prophet. The problem of 100 % man can only be proved if one marries and has children. If one does not marry and does not have children then something may be lacking in his manhood.

Does manhood in your society considered as half human and half animal? losing all “his” rights to be regarded as human?

Now about jesus being god. I say that if Jesus can be god then any one can be a god. The Hindus have idols as their gods.

If you say man can become God, then you are contradictory. God can became man and man CANNOT become God. Jesus the son of Mary is God because it is God’s intention at the first place to send His Word to become man. A man named “Jesus” as Jesus was a common name in His time, can never be God.

A human being (Jesus) who never directly said (In direct speech) that he is god, the same person is found praying, the same person dies too according to christians… How it is that the christians have a god who prays or needs to pray. Then he dies. Does any god die too.

The man incarnated from the Word of God can die as He is 100% man (well not 100%, because the man incarnated from the word of God cannot make any sin). But, the Word of God cannot die, as God cannot die. Too bad, Muhammad’s false theology make your mind screwed-up to Muhammadism. And Muhammad think like human, act like human and bring the humanly messages.

If jesus does not marry and have children then he is niether 100% man nor any percent god. But he can be a prophet.

Who is more favorable to God, God’s prophet or the ordinary man named planten, paarsurrey, swariffin, muslimwoman, sisteramy or any body else? If you say that a man who does not marry and has children lack the manhood, such man can be a prophet, will you accept a ladyboy prophet?

But please let me point out that in the Quran, there is a verse which clearly says that God (Allah) gave prophets families and children. I hope that includes Jesus too.

The way I read your posting, Quran did not say that Jesus raised a family to me.

WE Muslims have no problem in Jesus being married and having children. We have no problem if Mary, the mother, had other (More) children after giving birth to Jesus. Our respect for Mary and Jesus will not diminish.

You said in the first quotation in this posting that a man who has no children lack the manhood.

 

[MHalsey]

Ideal men, albeit not all real men, do marry and have children. So, why would not Jesus marry?

I have always thought that the fact that the New Testament does not mention Jesus being married was the best evidence that he was not married. However, a post in this thread states that the NT does not mention the wives of any of the apostles. If that is so, then it seems to suggest that the lack of mention of Jesus’ marriage is not, after all, significant. Is the post correct? Are none of the apostles’ wives mentioned in the NT?

With the exception of Peter, whose MIL is mentioned, why is it that no mention of a wife and family is proof that they were married. Why is there an assumption that they were married? Think of it this way, when Jesus calls James and John, it is told they were working with their father. Immediately they left him and followed Jesus. If they were married, why mention they left their father, but not their wives or families? Same goes for the others. Phillip and Andrew were followers of John the Baptist. A strange occupation for a married man, don’t you think? Shouldn’t their responsibility be providing for their family, not following after the Baptist?

Also, “many plain and precious things” were taken from the Bible, 1 Nephi 13:26-29, so maybe there was some deliberate effort to delete mention of Jesus’ marriage and maybe the apostles’ marriages too. “Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors” in the Bible. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith pp. 338-39. Why would knowledge of Jesus’ marriage be disregarded or even suppressed? And why the same as to the apostles?

I have always been attracted by the theory that the wedding at Cana was Jesus’ own and that Mary and Martha were his brides. Jesus would have loved and known the love of his wives and children before his death. Marriage allows one to feel love that cannot be experienced in any other way. Perhaps that is why it is essential to the greatest spiritual growth. Why would that be denied Jesus?

Theories are not evidence or proof. And a theory based on conjecture is the worst kind. But as with the muslims, the mormon must also believe that Jesus was married, otherwise, the importance placed on marriage in the mormon faith is diminished.

 

[Bill_Pick]

**All prophets are men. None of them is god. The problem of 100% Man is separate from being a prophet. The problem of 100 % man can only be proved if one marries and has children. If one does not marry and does not have children then something may be lacking in his manhood.

Now about jesus being god. I say that if Jesus can be god then any one can be a god. The Hindus have idols as their gods. A human being (Jesus) who never directly said (In direct speech) that he is god, the same person is found praying, the same person dies too according to christians… How it is that the christians have a god who prays or needs to pray. Then he dies. Does any god die too.

If jesus does not marry and have children then he is niether 100% man nor any percent god. But he can be a prophet.

But please let me point out that in the Quran, there is a verse which clearly says that God (Allah) gave prophets families and children. I hope that includes Jesus too.

WE Muslims have no problem in Jesus being married and having children. We have no problem if Mary, the mother, had other (More) children after giving birth to Jesus. Our respect for Mary and Jesus will not diminish.**

So Paul was not 100% man

 

[MHalsey]

So Paul was not 100% man

muslims hate Paul because they believe he corrupted Jesus’ message, so they would probably agree with that statement.

 

[swariffin]

** swariffin, I am in favor of Jesus (Your God) to have children and to reproduce more children. I see no harm in that while he was here on earth as a 100% perfect man. My respect for him will not decrease if he was married and had children. I feel that he must have children.

But if he had children out of wedlock ( without marriage ) then it would be highly objectionable.**

You may have your own thought about Jesus, and He will not curse you for sure. I will not blame you either. But, if you present your view about Jesus in this forum, I will present mine.

 

[swariffin]

Now that’s the first time someone has come up with actual scripture on this. Thank you.

I see where He is talking about how some men might refuse to marry for the sake of the Kingdom of God…and this reference confirms the culture of the time, which allowed 'scholars of the Law" to put off being married. He did not, however, say that HE was single, and He was talking to a bunch of very married men–and giving them “what for” about divorce.

Still, it’s certainly one point on the side of “He may not have been.”

Thanks again for the scripture reference!

For sure Jesus will do anything as He had said before. Jesus always “work” for the Kingdom of God, as He travelled during His service in this world.

Nice to know a mormon. I have visited the Mormon temple in the Salt Lake City, Utah. I like the Mormon tabernacle choir, and have some of their releases.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

If that’s the only reason He came, why did He spend so much time teaching everybody, first? Why, after He was crucified, did He rise again, and continue teaching?

I’m not saying that His Sacrifice wasn’t important, though I do believe that it is His sacrifice followed by His resurrection that encompasses the whole of the redemption.

What I am saying is that He spent three decades upon the earth before He began His public ministry, then another three years teaching. If the ONLY thing He came for was to die, why stick around all those years first?

I think He had a great deal to accomplish, all culminating in His death and resurrection.

Because he had to be born first…

 

[WAYNE_LEYDS]

Laugh Out Loud!!! Well Lets Say You Are Correct… Lets Assume Jesus Did Marry And Have Kids.questioin:did He Do This After Death?if So Then He Must Have Been Divine! How Many Married People Do You Know Or Heard Of That Had Kids And Got Married After Death?unless He Is Divine And Did Indeed Rise! This Ofcourse Would Make Him God.
Or Did He Get Married And Have Kids Then Die?this Would Then Mean That He Was Infact(and Still Is) A Man!!!so Which Is It God Or Man?and If He Did Rise Then Have Kids That Would Make Him Human And Divine!!! We As Catholics Believe He Is Trully Human And Trully Man!!!your Question Is Actually Irrelevant.so What If He Had Kids? Or Got Maried?that Proves Yes He Was A Man.but You Also Agreed That He Died& Rose.which Means You Believe He Is God.if You Say You Believe This Then Come Be Baptised In The Name Of The Father,son And Holy Spirit! This Is His Personal Desire. That Every Knee Shall Bow And Every Tongue Should Proffess That He Is The Christ!

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by planten:
swariffin, I am in favor of Jesus (Your God) to have children and to reproduce more children. I see no harm in that while he was here on earth as a 100% perfect man. My respect for him will not decrease if he was married and had children. I feel that he must have children.

But if he had children out of wedlock ( without marriage ) then it would be highly objectionable.

You may have your own thought about Jesus, and He will not curse you for sure. I will not blame you either. But, if you present your view about Jesus in this forum, I will present mine.

Hi brother swariffin

You are most welcome to present your views; most freely and with sound arguments.

Thanks

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by **planten: **
All prophets are men. None of them is god. The problem of 100% Man is separate from being a prophet. The problem of 100 % man can only be proved if one marries and has children. If one does not marry and does not have children then something may be lacking in his manhood.

Now about jesus being god. I say that if Jesus can be god then any one can be a god. The Hindus have idols as their gods. A human being (Jesus) who never directly said (In direct speech) that he is god, the same person is found praying, the same person dies too according to christians… How it is that the christians have a god who prays or needs to pray. Then he dies. Does any god die too.

If jesus does not marry and have children then he is niether 100% man nor any percent god. But he can be a prophet.

But please let me point out that in the Quran, there is a verse which clearly says that God (Allah) gave prophets families and children. I hope that includes Jesus too.

WE Muslims have no problem in Jesus being married and having children. We have no problem if Mary, the mother, had other (More) children after giving birth to Jesus. Our respect for Mary and Jesus will not diminish.

So Paul was not 100% man

Hi

Paul is a non-entity before Jesus. If Paul was a man or not a man; he was not a Messenger of God Allah YHWH. And you know that Paul was killed , perhaps, to fullfill the commandments of Deuteronomy for the untrue prophests.

I don’t want to start Paul bashing; I will only defend Jesus against Paul’s strange ideas.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

Thanks

 

[paarsurrey]

For sure Jesus will do anything as He had said before. Jesus always “work” for the Kingdom of God, as He travelled during His service in this world.

Hi

Yes, one of the journyey of Jesus , when he survived a cursed death on Cross, was to India and neighboring countries to spread the Message from God Allah YHWH among the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel; and they listened to him and accepted the Message.

Jesus could assert himself for his claims and reasons; he needed no Paul/s, in my opinion; I love Jesus for his wisdom. Jesus feared nobody except GodAllahYHWH whose humble servant Jesus was, in my opinion.

Thanks