Did Jesus marry and had children?

[dianaiad]

It was important that He have no descendants. Take a look at the wild beliefs of

Can you imagine people who encourage others that they have God’s authority in all things because they are descendants of Jesus? :bigyikes: Given human nature, that would authorize all sorts of abuses of power.

(Wondering of the descendants of Mohammed were worse than himself.)

Why would that be important?

His descendants, if He had any, would have been from His physical body and that of His wife. The miracles that He performed were not, I believe, inheritable; each one of His descendants would have been fully human, with their own spirits and their own problems.

…I can see where being His physical children would cause a problem for them–that’s quite a legacy to live up to and nobody actually, y’know, CAN. I see your point about them possibly taking too much power to themselves…but that didn’t stop Abraham or David from having kids.

Oh.

Wait.

I definitely see your point.

Ok. I can see why it’s a very good thing that nobody has claimed to be the child of Jesus, but…why would it have been important that He not have children? Yeah, there might have been problems, but then again there might not be. They could have been exactly the sort of people you would think Jesus would father: faithful, loving Christian types who understood that such power could be abused—and who refused to abuse it.

It could happen.

 

[dianaiad]

BECAUSE HE DIDN’T COME FOR THAT REASON NOR ANY OTHER REASON BUT TO DIE ON THE CROSS FOR YOU AND FOR ME! JESUS WAS DIVINE AND IF ANYONE KNOWS HE IS THE MESSIAH MUST STOP THINKING THESE RIDICULOUS THOUGHTS! REALLY!

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.

 

[dianaiad]

There is nothing inherently evil about sex and no Catholic here has said or implied any such thing. What I originally presented in my post makes clear that for Jesus there was no need for Him to enter into a marriage since as God Incarnate He was already intimately involved (and more fully so than is possible within any marriage) with the Bride He was forming for Himself - His Church.

And it is impossible for you to “get” as long as you hold to the gravely erroneous belief that God has a Body and a wife (wives).

Is, or is not, Jesus God?
Does, or does not, Jesus have a body?

If He does, then God does.
If He does not…then what happened to it?

 

[swariffin]

Jesus was also ‘fully man.’ Why wouldn’t He marry?

So far, all the arguments I’m getting come to…“well, He just wouldn’t!”

Which isn’t helpful.

Because He has chosen not to marry according to His own word in Mat 19:12, for theKingdom of God.

 

[swariffin]

Very good discussion, all pointing to the fact that Jesus was married. the mormon friend has good logic and support from original Jewish theology.
I see that there is no mention of any of the wives of the apostles too. It seems that the bibleNT is Male-book, nothing for the ladies (or wives) in it.

That is why we believe that Jesus is God. Jesus does not think the human way of having the necessity to get married, just to “appear” or gain other’s approval as being fully human.

The bible did imply that Peter had a wife (at least). Paul definitely was not marry either.

 

[planten]

That is why we believe that Jesus is God. Jesus does not think the human way of having the necessity to get married, just to “appear” or gain other’s approval as being fully human.

The bible did imply that Peter had a wife (at least). Paul definitely was not marry either.

** 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.**

 

[MHalsey]

** 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.**

But you also don’t believe in him as God incarnate, so your “respect” for him is far less than any Christian’s.

The idea of Jesus being married and having children (with not one shred of evidence) is simply one more way in which muslims attempt to deny the divinity of Christ.

 

[bella_mama]

Hi

I think the Mormon has mentioned things very logical.
The scribes of the NTBible wrote only a partial account of Jesus’ and Mary’s life, any body could observe it.

So dianaiad has actually put the ball in your court and would remain in your court untill you reply it with the same logic, in my opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks

I aM the next cover model for Vogue magazine! There, I said it, and now you must believe it!! Based on your posts, that should be good enough for you! Actually, since you seem to believe in just about anything…I have some wonderful magic beans that will unite you with Allah and make you all-knowing…can you pay via PayPal? I don’t accept personal checks!

 

[FCEGM]

Is, or is not, Jesus God?
Does, or does not, Jesus have a body?

If He does, then God does.
If He does not…then what happened to it?

Two points:

1. God is One Immortal Being of Three Divine Persons (the Most Holy Trinity) Who is Pure Spirit.
2. One of the Divine Persons (God the Son) is now eternally united to a human soul, the Man Jesus Christ - Who is fully God and fully Man. In His glorified Body He is eternally united to and in the glory of Heaven which is the Presence of God. With Christ Jesus, the Person of God the Son is united to a Human Soul, but that Human Soul is not necessary for the existence of God the Son. But in His immense condescension He took upon Himself a Human Body and Soul - but that does not change or limit the Person Who has united Himself to the Human Soul of Jesus - and thus God has no Bride but the Church Christ Jesus brings into union with Himself and in Himself will present to the Father at the End.

Again, that Jesus has no wife cannot be understood by one who thinks that God (most particularly as you would understand it, the Father) is such a being who requires a body and a wife/wives to bear spirit-children to be incarnated in order to reach god-hood.

 

[planten]

But you also don’t believe in him as God incarnate, so your “respect” for him is far less than any Christian’s.

**I said that I love and respect jesus and his mother. So that is it. It is not necessary to believe that he is a God. I can still respect him as not being a god, as I respect all other prophets of God. i.e. Abraham, Moses and many others. jesus was even less important than Moses a.s. jesus was a sub-ordinate to Moses, last Israeli prophet. There were many others before him.

The Jews did not even accept him as a righteous man. Did not accept him as a prophet too. The people for whom Jesus came, they did not accept him as any good man. But you are all trying that Muslims should accept Jesus as a God. That is surprising.

Somebody asked “How much?”. the reply was “Too much.”**

The idea of Jesus being married and having children (with not one shred of evidence) is simply one more way in which muslims attempt to deny the divinity of Christ.

How could Jesus be less divine if he had a son? Does your Father God become less divine because He has a son? A physical son (Jesus)?

 

[MHalsey]

I said that I love and respect jesus and his mother. So that is it. It is not necessary to believe that he is a God. I can still respect him as not being a god, as I respect all other prophets of God. i.e. Abraham, Moses and many others. jesus was even less important than Moses a.s. jesus was a sub-ordinate to Moses, last Israeli prophet. There were many others before him.

This is a typical response from a muslim, and I expected it. But your saying it does not make it true.

** The Jews did not even accept him as a righteous man. Did not accept him as a prophet too. The people for whom Jesus came, they did not accept him as any good man. But you are all trying that Muslims should accept Jesus as a God. That is surprising.

Somebody asked “How much?”. the reply was “Too much.”**

Actually, the correct reply is, “*this *much.” Then he spread out his hands and died.

Also - The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.

How could Jesus be less divine if he had a son? Does your Father God become less divine because He has a son? A physical son (Jesus)?

That’s not the issue. The issue is that you must believe he married and had children. You need it to be true to devalue the spiritual marriage response another member posted earlier. Also, as another muslim said, to be fully a man he must have had children. If he was not fully a man to you, he could not be a “prophet” in islam. We have no such problems in Christianity.

 

[dianaiad]

Because He has chosen not to marry according to His own word in Mat 19:12, for theKingdom of God.

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!

 

[dianaiad]

Two points:

1. God is One Immortal Being of Three Divine Persons (the Most Holy Trinity) Who is Pure Spirit.
2. One of the Divine Persons (God the Son) is now eternally united to a human soul, the Man Jesus Christ - Who is fully God and fully Man. In His glorified Body He is eternally united to and in the glory of Heaven which is the Presence of God. With Christ Jesus, the Person of God the Son is united to a Human Soul, but that Human Soul is not necessary for the existence of God the Son. But in His immense condescension He took upon Himself a Human Body and Soul - but that does not change or limit the Person Who has united Himself to the Human Soul of Jesus -

Ok, I may not agree with this position, or at least with all the language used to describe it, but I understand it. What I do NOT understand is how that logically results in this:

and thus God has no Bride but the Church Christ Jesus brings into union with Himself and in Himself will present to the Father at the End.

You lost me utterly at ‘and thus.’ He may well not NEED a wife, but that doesn’t mean He didn’t have one! After all, by your own words He took upon Himself the full mortality of human life, with everything that comes with that.

Again, that Jesus has no wife cannot be understood by one who thinks that God (most particularly as you would understand it, the Father) is such a being who requires a body and a wife/wives to bear spirit-children to be incarnated in order to reach god-hood.

Strawman noted.

I repeat; I don’t know if He had a wife or not. The point is, it doesn’t matter to me either way.

That it is a line in the sand for you is obvious–so the equally obvious question is this: what if it turns out that He did have a wife? What would that do to your faith in Him?

 

[FCEGM]

. . .

You lost me utterly at ‘and thus.’ He may well not NEED a wife, but that doesn’t mean He didn’t have one! After all, by your own words He took upon Himself the full mortality of human life, with everything that comes with that.

Because He is One Person Who Is God (not a Person Who is God and another Person who is Man) and that One Person has all within Himself that gives meaning to human marriage; thus He will not enter into a marriage to one - or more - wives beyond the marriage He established with His One Wife, His Church, which is His Body. IOW, HE is the Source for all that human marriage is to be, and being the Source, it would by a countersign of that had He entered into a human marriage.

Strawman noted.

Not a strawman, but a fact that makes your comprehension presently impossible.

That it is a line in the sand for you is obvious

Not just for me, but for every Christian with a true sense of the Faith.

so the equally obvious question is this: what if it turns out that He did have a wife? What would that do to your faith in Him?

It will not turn out that the Lord had a wife - anymore than it will turn out that He did not rise from the dead.

 

[Jay53]

. If he was not fully a man to you, he could not be a “prophet” in islam. We have no such problems in Christianity.

Is THAT what this whole “real man” thing is about!? :newidea: I’ve been trying to figure out why this keeps being bantered about: that to be 100% man you have to marry and have kids. This then implies that most, if not all, Muslims believe this and that they need to in order to keep Jesus as a prophet. Although I did point out in another thread that John the Baptist didn’t marry and have kids and I believe he’s considered a prophet in Islam. Do you have any reference for this? Thanks.

 

[planten]

Is THAT what this whole “real man” thing is about!? :newidea: I’ve been trying to figure out why this keeps being bantered about: that to be 100% man you have to marry and have kids. This then implies that most, if not all, Muslims believe this and that they need to in order to keep Jesus as a prophet. Although I did point out in another thread that John the Baptist didn’t marry and have kids and I believe he’s considered a prophet in Islam. Do you have any reference for this? Thanks.

**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.**

 

[Jay53]

** 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.**

No offense, but this is one of the most ridiculous assertions I have seen!!

I want to know WHY? Why does a man have to marry and have children to prove his “manhood”? Why can’t a man choose not to marry or have children? What if he doesn’t like children? What if he never meets a woman he wants to spend his life with? Should he just pick a random woman and marry her just so he can have sex and procreate. I’m sorry, but this is a very narrow view of what it means to be a man. Who actually came up with this idea? Is this in the Quran or Hadiths?

 

[jeanne71350]

Hi

I understand from: translate.google.com/translat…ir%26 hl%3Den

TombOfJesus.com / Welcome

La teoria sostenuta in questo sito web continua così: dopo essere sopravvissuto alla crocifissione, Gesù Cristo arrivò in Kashmir, dove rimase per il resto della sua vita.

The theory supported in this web site continues: after surviving the crucifixion, Jesus Christ came to Kashmir, where he remained for the rest of his life.

Lì prese parte alla vita delle tribù israelite della zona, continuando a pregare.

There he took part in the life of the Israelite tribe of the area and continued to pray.

Il libro Negaristan-i-Kashmir dice che egli poi sposò una donna di nome Marian, che gli diede dei figli.

The book Negaristan-i-Kashmir said that he (Jesus) later married a woman named Marian, who gave him their children.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I love Jesus and Mary.

Thanks

That is from the fictional novel The DaVinci code by Dan Brown. It’s just a story, it’s not to be believed true.

 

[MHalsey]

Is THAT what this whole “real man” thing is about!? :newidea: I’ve been trying to figure out why this keeps being bantered about: that to be 100% man you have to marry and have kids. This then implies that most, if not all, Muslims believe this and that they need to in order to keep Jesus as a prophet. Although I did point out in another thread that John the Baptist didn’t marry and have kids and I believe he’s considered a prophet in Islam. Do you have any reference for this? Thanks.

As you see from Planten’s response above, it is what they believe. I simply deduced this from the posts on this thread. This is why Paar, Amy, Planten and the rest MUST believe Jesus married and had kids because if he didn’t, then he couldn’t be a “prophet” for them. the fact that there is not one shred of evidence makes no difference. And why should it? After all, there is no evidence (even circumstantial) muhammed spoke with an angel either, yet they believe it.

 

[William_M]

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?

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?