Jesus married -- any evidence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter meteoric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The principle argument for Jesus being unmarried is the argument from silence: Scripture does not record that he was married, hence he was not.

A more powerful argument is that, given the time and the culture, it would be more worthy of mention if he did *not *marry. Hence, we conclude from silence that he did marry.

A Jewish father is responsible to his son for four things:
1 To have him circumcised.
2 To teach him Torah.
3 To provide him with a trade.
4 To find him a wife.

Joseph would have been negligent in the extreme to omit the last item. Hence it is more likely than not that Jesus was married.

The only person in the new testament for which we have any information regarding celibate status is Saul of Tarsus (Paul) who tells us that he is unmarried.

You asked for “evidence” to support the argument that he was married. Those are the best that we can do.

Reb Levi
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
The closest evidence (which is not too great) is this fourth-century papyrus fragment:
Click to expand...
Eye of the Tiber made a funny post on this one, worth sharing.
Rome, Italy––In what many were touting “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife,” the recently discovered, 4th century papyrus found by a historian at Harvard Divinity School seemed to shed light on an age old debate on whether Jesus ever married. The papyrus, no larger than a business card, contains the phrase, “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife…’”
Click to expand...
But it is now being reported that a second, smaller piece of papyrus has been unearthed not far from the first.
Click to expand...
The words, in small and fading black letters, seem a continuation from the first fragment, and contain the phrase, “…is the Church. Case closed.”
Click to expand...
No word yet if any more of the papyrus exists, but researchers at the university say they are hopeful.
Click to expand...
For those who don’t know the website, this is not a real news article 😉
 
drafdog said:
Hence it is more likely than not that Jesus was married.
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t.

The principal argument is not from silence; rather, it is theological and eschatological, and it is rooted on Scripture, consistent with Tradition, and present in mystical private revelations.

And the Forerunner, too, was unmarried - although by your argument, it is more likely than not that he, too, was married.
 
how would it make sense for him to marry, knowing He came to die?

That would have been an extremely unloving thing to do–even today widows are not exactly treated well in Middle eastern culture.

He gave His mother to John to care for-- if He had a wife, why would He not have given her to John as well?
 
MarcoPolo said:
The entire metaphor in the NT of Jesus being married to his bride the Church would seem somewhat nonsensical if he were married, especially for someone who encouraged those able to accept a call to celibacy to accept it.
Click to expand...
👍 EXCELLENT!!
 
To expand on this point of yours, R_C:

And St. Paul teaches on Matrimony: “A wife is not the master of her own body, but her husband is; in the same way a husband is not the master of his own body, but his wife is.”

Jesus himself says in Matt 6:24, “No one canserve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other.”

While he’s talking about God and money, the same lesson applies to other “masters.” He could not possibly have been married to one woman and still given himself completely to mankind, and to his Father’s will, as he clearly did.
 
seagal said:
Also exactly what we would expect if there was a coverup :hmmm:
Click to expand...
That would be called conspiracy theory. If we start with conspiracy theory, there would be no end to it, because there is a theory about practically anything.
 
Augie70 said:
To expand on this point of yours, R_C:

And St. Paul teaches on Matrimony: “A wife is not the master of her own body, but her husband is; in the same way a husband is not the master of his own body, but his wife is.”

Jesus himself says in Matt 6:24, “No one canserve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other.”
Click to expand...
Not to argue that Jesus was married, but I don’t think we can take this as a proof text that he wasn’t. If it was, no one could be married and serve God. (Hmmm that explains a lot…)

Also, the argument that Jesus wouldn’t get married because he knew he was going to die- everyone is going to die. So no one should get married. (Hmmm, that explains even more … 😉

Tom A.
Arguing seriously with tongue in cheek.
 
meteoric said:
Not to argue that Jesus was married, but I don’t think we can take this as a proof text that he wasn’t. If it was, no one could be married and serve God. (Hmmm that explains a lot…)

Also, the argument that Jesus wouldn’t get married because he knew he was going to die- everyone is going to die. So no one should get married. (Hmmm, that explains even more … 😉

Tom A.
Arguing seriously with tongue in cheek.
Click to expand...
Actually, you miss the point (tongue in cheek notwithstanding). OUR brides are our brides-- HIS bride is the Church. So to be Christ-like, we need to serve our spouse, which is serving God. Likewise with Christ, who serves his spouse-- the Church. If I took TWO wives, I would have the problem of sometimes playing favorites, or putting one before the other (as well as myriad other problems… one wife is plenty for anybody!).

I guess after all the textual references in the world, it comes down to one thing: To not understand why Jesus could not have been married, one would need to have no understanding of why he came in the first place, or his relationship to the Church.

We don’t have any “proof” that he is God made man, either. But to see Him as anything more than a highly influential historical figure, certain things need to be accepted on faith.
 
gntlmnr said:
That would be called conspiracy theory. If we start with conspiracy theory, there would be no end to it, because there is a theory about practically anything.
Click to expand...
I was being sarcastic and making a [small] joke, echoing some atheists’ argument against the existence of God. 🤷
 
seagal said:
I was being sarcastic and making a [small] joke, echoing some atheists’ argument against the existence of God. 🤷
Click to expand...
Thank you for clarifying.

Aren’t Atheists fun and extremely logical? lol

I have debated with some of them online, and they have perfected the art of twisting things around and around.
 
gntlmnr said:
Thank you for clarifying.

Aren’t Atheists fun and extremely logical? lol

I have debated with some of them online, and they have perfected the art of twisting things around and around.
Click to expand...
You got that right!
 
Rabbis in New Testament times had to be 30 years old and married. Jesus was referred to as Rabbi numerous times in the New Testament. Hence it would not be difficult to believe that he was married. That being said, we don’t know if he was or was not, and it doesn’t matter is he was or not. He either was or was not. What ever else is said is pure speculation.
 
Karalosi said:
Rabbis in New Testament times had to be 30 years old and married. Jesus was referred to as Rabbi numerous times in the New Testament. Hence it would not be difficult to believe that he was married. That being said, we don’t know if he was or was not, and it doesn’t matter is he was or not. He either was or was not. What ever else is said is pure speculation.
Click to expand...
What you say is true, and it is significant that Jesus began his ministry, according to Luke, at “about 30 years of age.” But it is also worth pointing out that throughout the time he was called “Rabbi” by his followers, he was guilty of what were considered unspeakable heresies under Jewish law. If forgiving sins by his own authority or claiming to be the Messiah didn’t preclude his followers from referring to him as “Rabbi,” I would think the rules governing Rabbinical marriage to have that much less application. Clearly the honorific was not applied to him in the strictest sense, so much so that it scarcely deserves mention.
 
“Christ is married, but to Holy Church, who is His body and of whom He is Head.”

I know of no fault to that statement.

Let me add this thought also. Here’s a quote from my rosary instruction guide.

“Come Holy Spirit, come by means of the powerful intercession of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, your well-beloved Spouse.”

God knows all. I’m sure on earth He knew Mary would be Queen of Heaven, and possibly was “already” while on earth? I don’t think “time” as we know it, is the same in heaven. Heaven could very well be outside of “time” altogether.
 
MACADAMIANUTS said:
God knows all. I’m sure on earth He knew Mary would be Queen of Heaven, and possibly was “already” while on earth? I don’t think “time” as we know it, is the same in heaven. Heaven could very well be outside of “time” altogether.
Click to expand...
As Tom A. always says, “Time is a local condition.” *

Tom A.
  • "As Jack Burton always says, ‘Who the heck is Tom A.?’ " - Jack Burton
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top