• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did Jesus Get Married & Have Kids?

Dragonfly

Dragonfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
31,319
Reaction score
19,849
Location
East Coast - USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Jesus: Married...with children? (Opinion) - CNN.com

(CNN) -- The question of whether or not Jesus had a wife is back again.

This week two authors came out with a book about a newly translated ancient text -- a "Lost Gospel," as the book calls it. The text has been in the possession of the British Library since 1847 but only in recent years attracted scholars' attention. It suggests that Jesus was not only married but had two children, and that Mary Magdalene -- long viewed as a close friend of Jesus -- was indeed the Virgin Mary.
Click to expand...

Did Jesus marry and have kids?

Which would suggest a possible direct blood line to "god" wouldn't it?
 
I sure hope so. Btw how many lost books of the bible are there? I mean really.
 
Paleocon said:
I fixed the link label.
Click to expand...

Is it so incredibly outrageous to think that Jesus may have had a relationship with someone that was intimate in nature?

You know, according to the Christian ideology, he is just as much HUMAN as he is divine.

The bible focuses a lot more on his teaching rather than his personal life anyway.

Jesus lived for over 2 decades, there is a lot that the bible doesn't cover when it comes to the guy's personal life.
 
Luftwaffe said:
Is it so incredibly outrageous to think that Jesus may have had a relationship with someone that was intimate in nature?

You know, according to the Christian ideology, he is just as much HUMAN as he is divine.

The bible focuses a lot more on his teaching rather than his personal life anyway.

Jesus lived for over 2 decades, there is a lot that the bible doesn't cover when it comes to the guy's personal life.
Click to expand...

It's outrageous because it's false. Jesus was celibate.
 
Jaygodmedia said:
I sure hope so. Btw how many lost books of the bible are there? I mean really.
Click to expand...
Well, they're not really lost books. Early Christians produced tens, probably hundreds of conflicting Gospels and sacred writings. Their beliefs were spectacularly diverse and huge percentages of the population challenged what it even meant to be "Christian" at the time. It wasn't until the 4th Century did some authority get together and, I would emphasis, rather arbitrarily decided what was legit and what wasn't.

Edit: Here's some http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha#Gospels
 
Last edited:
A young Jewish man in first-century Palestine was practically required to marry and have children. There were a few celibate ones, but that was very unusual. (And there's nothing written to indicate that Jesus was one of these.)

Some theologians theorize that Mary Magdalene may have been Jesus' wife.
 
Dragonfly said:
Jesus: Married...with children? (Opinion) - CNN.com



Did Jesus marry and have kids?

Which would suggest a possible direct blood line to "god" wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

It's hard to say, since there is really no way to know, but I'd be surprised if he did. Historically, highly religious figures remain a little on the ascetic side of things, and tend to remain true to a "higher" cause, so to speak.

As for the "bloodline" issue, I don't take that concept literally, and consider myself as much of God, as any other individual, highly evolved or not.
 
Raise your hand if you've read the book or seen the film The Last Temptation of Christ.

The Apostle Peter was married and probably Matthew, Andrew, Bartholomew, and Judas. Maybe Phillip too. Anyway, I think if Jesus had been married, this would have been known and referenced.
 
ludin said:
this was part of a gnostic writing called the book of mary. it has been debunked by almost every theological scholar out there as having 0 reliability.
why these people are bringing it up again is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Because many people don't want to believe that a human could be so evolved- it makes the rest of us look bad in comparison.
I personally aspire to get there at some far distant point in the future. I have a longgggggg way to go.
 
lizzie said:
Because many people don't want to believe that a human could be so evolved- it makes the rest of us look bad in comparison.
I personally aspire to get there at some far distant point in the future. I have a longgggggg way to go.
Click to expand...

or just more spiritually minded. had Christ gotten married and had a kid then He would not have been able to fulfill the reason that He was there.
He would have had an obligation to His family to stay alive and provide for them.

Also He traveled a lot and was dependent on His followers to provide for Him and His disciples so we know that He did not have a job after He was 30.
Again this would have been a huge issue if He was married and had kids.

There is no indication anywhere other than in gnostic writings which have already been deemed unreliable that He had any kids or was married.
 
ludin said:
this was part of a gnostic writing called the book of mary. it has been debunked by almost every theological scholar out there as having 0 reliability.
why these people are bringing it up again is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Theological scholars might "debunk" it because admitting it might be true sure opens up a major can of worms now don't it?
 
Most of those who are most ready to embrace this unsupported assertion are probably those most disinclined to believe Jesus was the Messiah and Redeemer anyway, so....
 
Goshin said:
Most of those who are most ready to embrace this unsupported assertion are probably those most disinclined to believe Jesus was the Messiah and Redeemer anyway, so....
Click to expand...

I don't see a connection. If God wanted his son to have the full range of human experiences during his life on earth, why wouldn't Jesus have been married and fathered children?
 
Well, if we're talking about this from the academic perspective of Jesus as a historical figure, there's a number of problems.

One is that the source of information for this is no better than the traditionally accepted sources implying he was celibate. These are all supposedly post-humous and second-hand accounts that give heavily conflicting stories. The collection of works that we know from the bible is simply what was decided upon for political reasons -- we don't have a reason to weigh one or the other more heavily. So really, all this is showing is that there are sharp contradictions in early Christian writing as pertains to Jesus' life. Well, we've known that for a long time. That doesn't answer whose account we should take.

And given the issue above, we first have to come to a conclusion about whether historical Jesus as a single entity ever actually lived in the first place. That still hasn't been settled, and the academic opinion is getting more and more fragmented as more of this research is being done by people who aren't personally invested in the answer. So without an consensus on that, talking about whether or not he had a family is a little bit cart-before-horse.
 
Dragonfly said:
Theological scholars might "debunk" it because admitting it might be true sure opens up a major can of worms now don't it?
Click to expand...

Or because it is what it is and it is complete bunk with 0 supporting evidence. which is what most of the gnostic writings turned out to be.
same with the book of Thomas and the book of judas.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, if we're talking about this from the academic perspective of Jesus as a historical figure, there's a number of problems.

One is that the source of information for this is no better than the traditionally accepted sources implying he was celibate. These are all supposedly post-humous and second-hand accounts that give heavily conflicting stories. The collection of works that we know from the bible is simply what was decided upon for political reasons -- we don't have a reason to weigh one or the other more heavily. So really, all this is showing is that there are sharp contradictions in early Christian writing as pertains to Jesus' life. Well, we've known that for a long time. That doesn't answer whose account we should take.

And given the issue above, we first have to come to a conclusion about whether historical Jesus as a single entity ever actually lived in the first place. That still hasn't been settled, and the academic opinion is getting more and more fragmented as more of this research is being done by people who aren't personally invested in the answer. So without an consensus on that, talking about whether or not he had a family is a little bit cart-before-horse.
Click to expand...

this is summed up in 1 statement really: IE I have no clue how the bible was put together or the process that was used to write books into cannon.
 
ludin said:
Or because it is what it is and it is complete bunk with 0 supporting evidence. which is what most of the gnostic writings turned out to be.
same with the book of Thomas and the book of judas.
Click to expand...

Some would say there's very little in the bible that CAN be supported by "evidence".

There's a reason it's called "faith" and not something else.
 
ludin said:
this was part of a gnostic writing called the book of mary. it has been debunked by almost every theological scholar out there as having 0 reliability.
why these people are bringing it up again is beyond me.
Click to expand...

They're just trying to manufacture doubt where there is none, as usual. :roll:
 
Dragonfly said:
Some would say there's very little in the bible that CAN be supported by "evidence".

There's a reason it's called "faith" and not something else.
Click to expand...

then you have not done a lot of research in bible theology or biblical archeology.
the books that were entered into cannon was not done so lightly or just at a whim.

there was much debate and discussion over which books would be canonized.
 
Dragonfly said:
Jesus: Married...with children? (Opinion) - CNN.com

Did Jesus marry and have kids?

Which would suggest a possible direct blood line to "god" wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

While I would never assert that he was, there is no real reason to assume he wasn't. Part of the point of Jesus' existence was for him to have experience all the aspects of being human. This, along with not committing any sins, is what was supposed to make him the perfect sacrifice. He could have been married and had kids without having committed any sin. Why were they not mentioned? Either the church leaders who decided what was to be and not be in the bible felt it didn't jive with what they wanted, or maybe he also experienced the loss of spouse and child(ren).

As to the blood line, Jesus was pure human, physically. Any "powers" he had were due purely to either the spirit within the body, or Jesus asking and God doing. So the offspring would be pure unpowered humans, special only because of their heritage.

Paleocon said:
It's outrageous because it's false. Jesus was celibate.
Click to expand...

The bible contains nothing to indicate this. A lack of mention of any sexual activity is not an automatic indication of the lack of it. Even if it was as far as the reported period, there is that whole period unreported between the temple incident and getting baptized. What toys and/or games did Jesus play when he was a child? None since it wasn't mentioned in the bible. The bible doesn't mention his voice cracking as a teenager so it must not ever have happened.

DifferentDrummr said:
Some theologians theorize that Mary Magdalene may have been Jesus' wife.
Click to expand...

Somehow I doubt it, otherwise, she would have been edited out. I would be more willing to bet that any mention was wiped altogether. Besides if the article is correct, then Magdalene would have been Jesus' mom.

ludin said:
He would have had an obligation to His family to stay alive and provide for them.

Also He traveled a lot and was dependent on His followers to provide for Him and His disciples so we know that He did not have a job after He was 30.
Again this would have been a huge issue if He was married and had kids.
Click to expand...

As noted, that would only apply if they were still alive. If he had lost them then he had no reason to settle down.

Gathomas88 said:
They're just trying to manufacture doubt where there is none, as usual. :roll:
Click to expand...

Doubt about what though? Ultimately, Jesus being celibate or not does nothing to affect his status as the perfect sinless sacrifice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom