Was Jesus Married? Does it Matter?

Published on February 5, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Religion

I responded in a recent blog that brought out the possibility that Jesus may have been married. While it's easy to dismiss this as just a piece of Dan Brown fiction, the fact is, there actually are texts dating back to the first century A.D. that make that claim. While these texts are not part of the canon, it DOES at least stand to reason that the folks that dismissed them from the canon may have done so with an agenda.

So, I'm conceding the possibility of that point, as I conceded years ago.

But, assuming Christ WAS married? Does it affect in any way or diminish who He was or the nature and scope of his ministry? If the belief that Christ was married does any harm to anyone or anything it is to long standing dogmatic tradition that should have been destroyed like the golden calf it is years ago.

Nowhere in scripture does it overtly state that Christ was single. Many good, solid arguments have been made by better theologians than myself as to the possibility he was married; I simply can't refute or affirm either, and believe the Bible was deliberately ambiguous on this point because it doesn't matter. If it stated Christ was forever single, many would take it as a call to celibacy ("His left sandal...it is a sign...everyone, please remove your LEFT sandal" --MP). If it stated he was married, likewise the call would be inferred, when in fact there's good evidence, even among the most hardened Calvinist, that there is no one "call" that is the same for every Christian, whether it be marriage or celibacy.

There's a phrase for the whole discussion, though...splitting hairs.

Comments

bakerstreet

on Feb 05, 2005

They never say anything about it, no. One would think that had he been married, they would have. These folks believed he was the Son of God, so the Son of the Son of God would have been worth of note. Even the wife would have been, imho. There are sources that make claims, but do they have any more credence than all the rest?

Like I said on the other blog, the early Christians weren't what we know as Christians today. There were suicide cults, pagan-hybrids, and about any wacko tangent you could think of. That's why they seemed so dangerous to the Romans. Most of them would be rejected by modern Christianity as nothing similar. No doubt there were many, many views of who Jesus was in the first few hundred years after his death.

In lieu of proof, whether the real Jesus washed out or was forgotten is a matter of faith. I can't fathom anything that could be dug up at this point that would be more substantial than what we have, especially since the provenance of such stuff is next to impossible to prove.

As to if it matters? That depends on whether your beliefs rely on it. I think if most people dug deep and thought about their doctrine, I doubt it would matter. Maybe to some it would. Given that it cannot be proven one way or the other, I'd have to say those who assume he wasn't have as much ground to stand on as anyone else, so speculation is basically needless.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!