Was Jesus Married?

[CrimsonKairos]

Here's a post I added to an earlier thread on this same topic.

************************************[Earlier Post]**************************************

I'm not 100% certain that Jesus never married during mortality, but I don't believe he did marry. The scriptural basis for my opinion? A combination, really.

Isaiah 53:8, 10

8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

I read the phrase "Who shall declare his generation" to mean "who shall continue his lineage? who will be his children, for he had none before he died." Also, the phrase about Jesus "seeing his seed" after he has made his soul an offering for sin (i.e. atoning) meshes perfectly with the NT and BoM, as below.

Romans 8:14-15

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

We know we are the spirit children of Heavenly Father. He cannot be the one who is adopting us as his children. Who is doing the adopting? Jesus is.

Mosiah 5:1-2, 6-7

1 And now, it came to pass that when king Benjamin had thus spoken to his people, he sent among them, desiring to know of his people if they believed the words which he had spoken unto them.

2 And they all cried with one voice, saying: Yea, we believe all the words which thou hast spoken unto us; and also, we know of their surety and truth, because of the Spirit of the Lord Omnipotent, which has wrought a mighty change in us, or in our hearts, that we have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually.

6 And now, these are the words which king Benjamin desired of them; and therefore he said unto them: Ye have spoken the words that I desired; and the covenant which ye have made is a righteous covenant.

7 And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.

These verses echo Romans 8 in that those who are led by the Spirit of God; those who are converted by the Spirit; those who experience a mighty change of heart and are spiritually reborn...these are they who become the children of Christ.

Jesus becomes their father through adoption in a symbolic sense.

All this echoes Isaiah 53 which teaches that Jesus had no natural children before he died (the "who shall declare his generation/he was cut off out of the land of the living") but that Christ would "see his seed" after offering his soul for our sins. It is because of the atonement that we can be spiritually reborn and saved from death and hell...it is because of the atonement and spiritual rebirth that Jesus becomes our figurative father and we, his figurative children.

Since the scriptures speak figuratively of Jesus as a bridegroom and a father, I take all this symbolism to mean:

(1) Jesus had no natural children; converted and saved souls are his "children" and he is the "father" of their salvation;

(2) Jesus had no wife during mortality; the converted souls who comprise his church are his "bride" and he "marries" them through the gospel covenants/ordinances.

The "Christ was the perfect example so he would have been married" argument doesn't hold water in my opinion. First, Christ's mission was to enable us to be saved and exalted; he didn't need to be married during mortality to accomplish that; second, if it was so important for Christ to be an example to us of being married, why don't the scriptures (ancient or modern) explicitly state that he was married? Not even the D&C states he was married (other than the figurative language involving Christ and his church of course).

These are my reasons for believing that Jesus was not married and had no children in this life. Perhaps the scripture passages I've shared merely mean that Jesus had no children, but could have been married. I don't believe so, but that's my opinion and I don't expect anyone to take my word for it in absence of explicit scriptural clarifications about whether Jesus was married or not.

NOTE: A previous post asked when Jews in Christ's day usually married. I provide the answer by quoting from McConkie's excellent Messiah Series. The excerpt below comes from The Mortal Messiah, Book One, page 223:

Men married at sixteen or seventeen years of age, almost never later than twenty; and women at a somewhat younger age, often when not older than fourteen. These ages applied to all, Joseph and Mary included.

There is a footnote at the end of the above passage, which I reproduce here:

4 The common concept--shown in pictures and dramatized in fictional renditions of what fertile minds assume may have happened in the lives of members of the Holy Family--that Joseph was an old man when he took Mary as his bride is patently false. This traditional notion arises from two things: (1) The fact that Joseph apparently had died by the time of the crucifixion; at least on that occasion our Lord asked the Beloved Disciple to care for Mary, which John thereafter did. (John 19:25-27). (2) False traditions which maintain that Mary was a virgin forever, had no sexual association with Joseph, and bore him no children. The only logical circumstances under which Joseph could have been substantially older than Mary would have been one in which he was taking her as a second wife after the death of a previous spouse, or one in which he and Mary were entering into a polygamous marriage. As Edersheim says: "Polygamy....undoubtedly was in force at the time of our Lord." (Alfred Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services As They Were at the Time of Jesus Christ). There is no reason to believe that either of these conditions prevailed, and we are left to conclude that Joseph was certainly not older than twenty years when he took Mary as his wife, and she was at least fourteen, perhaps fifteen or sixteen.

Does this mean Jesus had to marry by twenty just because it was the social norm at that time? No. If he did marry, it is likely that he would have married by the time he was twenty, but again, I don't believe he ever married during mortality.

[Outshined]

Here is a better question.

Is it critical to our salvation to know if Christ was married? Why speculate?

While I agree that it is a logical conclusion I do not find scripture or doctrine being taught that says it is so. True there are quotes by authorities but they are entitled to their opinions just as we are.

Ben Raines

I agree, Ben.

[Nate]

I agree, Ben.

Well I for one have enjoyed the discussion and have found the material quite informational. I'm glad it was not discussed because its

Is it critical to our salvation to know if Christ was married? Why speculate?

but that people had constructive comments with references.

I thought this was the whole purpose for the forum, not to speculate but discuss. If people are citing references and putting educated comments based upon whats been reveled, have we not been enlightened?

[Rosewood]

I found this the other day while I was researching a Church approved site if anyone is interested.

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Was_Jesu...rist_married%3F

[ldsgal6]

In my opinion, there's no compelling evidence within the text to suggest it was Jesus' marriage. So his mother was involved in providing refreshments, and Jesus was helping...heaven forbid that they were just helping a friend or family member with their wedding day!

Regardless of what " conclustion" I got from that verse, Jesus was still and will always be obedient to all the commandments including the one about eternal marriage and family. Period.

<div class='quotemain'>

In my opinion, there's no compelling evidence within the text to suggest it was Jesus' marriage. So his mother was involved in providing refreshments, and Jesus was helping...heaven forbid that they were just helping a friend or family member with their wedding day!

Regardless of what " conclustion" I got from that verse, Jesus was still and will always be obedient to all the commandments including the one about eternal marriage and family. Period.

:)

[CrimsonKairos]

Why did Jesus have to be married in this life? He could've been married before his birth, or after his resurrection.

[Princess3dward]

It is kind of funny.

We have a book written dedicated to his life,

and Jesus being married, you would think that it is such a big deal.

You know, someone being married to the son of God and all...

You would think that we would know.

[Nate]

Just like we know of a heavenly mother?

Sorry, I just don't agree with that one.

[MaidservantX]

Slightly different angle: if it wasn't written down in the scripture (that Jesus was married), as far as apostles recording their experiences, it is just as plausible that they wouldn't have particularly mentioned it precisely because it was unremarkable that he was married. I think I already made this point, but I'll make it again: we have to remember that we can even ask this question or are entertaining the possibility that Jesus (Yeshua, Joshua) would even be SINGLE is through the lense of the sensibilities of the Nicene Creed as they were creating their god. There was a theological vested interest at that time for a celibate deity. To me, the fact that Jesus was married (during mortality) is not a question of doctrine. President Gordon B. Hinckley is married, but that is not a doctrinal tenet. He's just married! And obviously his wife does not co-lead the church, although she is a companion (when she was living, I know she passed) in many ways in his travel, in example, in teaching. We did look to her with honor.

Priesthood leadership requires (?) marriage. This is no different than to be the Priesthood head of the entire universe.

And, as far as we know, marriage is a fleshly, earthly ordinance and covenant (that's when it needs to be intiated, I mean; it lasts eternally). Even though we are told we will all have chances to marry in the future, how and when this will need to take place isn't explained. We do have an example in Adam and Eve of their marriage before mortality (but in flesh?), so I'm not saying I know everything about this.

[CrimsonKairos]

The difference is, God didn't command us to "have" a heavenly mother. God did command His children to marry and multiply. To compare knowledge of a heavenly mother to knowledge of Jesus being married or not is apples vs. oranges. One is a doctrine, the other a commandment.

People claim that Jesus, being the best example, would have married since we are to marry and since all exalted beings are or will be married. Fine. Whether the apostles thought it remarkable or not that Jesus was married (if he was) is irrelevant. If it's part of Christ's being a perfect example of righteousness, they would've recorded it. If he was married and they left it out, that'd kinda' defeat the purpose of the example, yes?

I believe marriages can and will take place after the resurrection but BEFORE our assignment to a kingdom of glory. Once we receive our inheritance, so to speak, marriages will not take place. Why? Either we'll be in the lower two kingdoms and unable to progress (or become "worthy" of eternal marriage by that point), or we'll be in the lower two-thirds of the celestial kingdom in a similar situation (no progress beyond our single status), or we'll be in the top degree of the top kingdom and already married.

But the scriptures do not say that marriages cannot take place between our resurrection and judgment. In fact, there's no explanation of how long we'll spend in a "heavenly foyer" until we're called to the Judgment Bar. I think alot will be happening before the Judgment.

But, these are just my opinions. I have no scriptures to back up my views. I do think they are logical, but then again I'm entirely open to the fact that I might be 100% wrong. :) My point is, I think Jesus could easily have married after his resurrection (after his mission was complete, that which he had been anointed to do, namely, save the repentant through his life, death, resurrection and ascension).

[Nate]

If one goes upon logic then this is my take.

Christ is our brother (Eldest) and other than being the Christ (no i'm not downplaying his role) he is under the same commandments as us.

You could reference the essential role of marriage in other threads but I state that a sealing is required to obtain celestial glory.

Jesus was the God of the old Test. and so by being the author of OT Law.

He was aware by the end of his mortal life of all the nessesary covenants required to teach his people.

Our hheavenlyFather was a man before in another Eon is you will who one would assume took a wife and progressed the same way that is promised to us if we are ffaithful

WHY would Jesus ddenyhimself

1. Joys of mmarriage

2. Essential requirement for salvation that he taught and will continue to teach till now.

3. What he saw his father do (married for eternity with a woman)

YES I aacknowledgethat you could speculate that marriage could happen either in the Millenium or what not, i'm just saying why not when he was on earth.

Its hard to say "if it was the case it would of been written" cause there is nooriginall document to reference, just copies rewritten many times and changed. The church takes no official position if he was nor if hewasn'tt. Maybe tosacrede or as a whole how many testimonys would it shakebecauses of the opposition it would cause? Idon'tt know but it in my mind logically makes sense.

[CrimsonKairos]

Sure, your views do have logical aspects to them. As I said, I could be completely wrong.

If we're going on first principles, and what we know from the gospel, consider this:

The only souls who will be exalted and become gods (notice the little "g") are those who are sealed together in marriage by the authority of the priesthood. That's what D&C 132 says. Of course, they must be obedient and all the other good stuff. But they have to be married to become gods.

Well wait a second. Jesus was a God in the premortal life. If he has to be subject to the same commandments we do (and I agree he does), then he would have to have been married in the premortal life.

If he didn't have to be married to be a God, then there is a different set of rules for him than for us, and if that's the case, then he didn't have to get married during his mortal life as we do. If there are no different rules for him than us, then he must have been married in the premortal life, and hence there's no need for him to get married during his mortal life.

Thoughts?

[ldsgal6]

If anyone is interested LDS lightplanet has some views on the subject. Go to www.lightplanet.com and put "was jesus married" (without quotes) in the search engine for Lightplanet. Click on the first one.

As for the question could Jesus have been married in the pre-existence I speculate that it could have happened. He was a God in the pre-existence and in order to become one you need to be married. Jesus was spiritually far more advanced then the average joe so he would have been spiritually, mentally, emotionally prepared for marriage long before coming to earth. Another thought, men on earth can and have been sealed to more than one wife for example, man and wife get sealed and wife dies. Man remarries and gets sealed to a second wife. So why wouldn't Jesus get married for a second time? Or what about men who get married and sealed for "time and eternity" and when widowed remarry for time only? Who is to say that not only did Jesus marry but had more than one wife? Marry one in the pre-existence to fullfill the Celetsial Laws and marry again on earth to fulfill the earthly laws as well as the Jewish laws for men at

that time. He would have to marry in order to be taken seriously as a teacher.

[CrimsonKairos]

He would have to marry in order to be taken seriously as a teacher.

I continue to reject this notion which seems so prevalent among LDS members.

If Jesus wasn't married when he began preaching, the scribes, rabbis and other Jewish "authorities" might not have taken him seriously. But Jesus didn't care about placating the authorities. He picked corn on the sabbath (to their chagrin), etc...

The New Testament records that the people were amazed at his teachings because he taught "as one having authority from God, and not as having authority from the scribes." (JST Matt. 7:29)

As for your other points about Jesus marrying multiple times (some in the premortal world, some in the mortal world), it's entirely possible. It'll be interesting to find out someday. I really think that if the Lord was married, and wanted us to know about it, he would've revealed it to his Church in the D&C.

[Dr T]

People were even astonished by his teaching as a child and he was not married.

[CrimsonKairos]

Good point Dr. T.

[ldsgal6]

[

If Jesus wasn't married when he began preaching, the scribes, rabbis and other Jewish "authorities" might not have taken him seriously. But Jesus didn't care about placating the authorities.

Even if it wasn't for this reason i still feel that he would have fullfilled his Jewish obligations.

[CrimsonKairos]

You're entitled to your opinion, certainly.

[ldsgal6]

People were even astonished by his teaching as a child and he was not married.

I'm refering to His teaching as "Rabbi" and not to his teaching outside of the temple on the steps. And the people were astonished of his wisdom. In order to be able to teach inside the temple he would have to have reached a certain age and be married or he would not be accepted. You couldn't even reach the scrolls until a certain age, let alone be a Rabbi.

[ldsgal6]

You're entitled to your opinion, certainly.

Oh Whew! You had me scared there! Ok, seriouly though and I know it's just my humble feelings, but I truly believe that Jesus would have obeyed the Jewish Traditions of the day and that he would also fullfill all the requirments of his Father. Now I don't know if it was in the pre-existence or on earth or when he returned but I do beleive He fullfilled " all the laws and the prophets". Every law. But bear in mind that he lived a higher law then the people so when the people accused Him of Sabbot breaking, he was not in error (how could He be?) he was living and teaching a higher level of law. But I'm my opinion, and it's just that ... opinion, Jesus did not escape any laws thus becoming our perfect judge.

[CrimsonKairos]

I think Jesus picked corn on the sabbath because as you said, it wasn't breaking the sabbath. It was breaking a man-made law created as the "hedge" around the law, a law of man and not of God. Similarly, the "requirement" to be married before functioning as an authorized rabbi was a man-made regulation, not a law of God. Nowhere in the Old Testament is there the requirement that priests be married.

So Jesus could have been married, but if he was I doubt it was to "fulfill" the pharisaic cultural norms then present in Jewish life.

[church girl]

I think it would have been very irresponsible of Jesus to marry and have children knowing he was going to killed soon. Wasn't polygamy illeagle in His time?

Polygamy was not only legal in the time that Jesus of Nazereth was upon the earth, but a requirement for a Rabbi, and the scriptures show that he was a Rabbi.

Celestialgirl, what makes Ogden Kraut an authority? Wasn't he a polygamist?

Ogden Kraut simply compiled references pertinent to the Saviors marital status, no one claimed he was an authority. Also, doesn't Mormonism claim all truth no matter where it is found?

[Dr T]

Polygamy was not only legal in the time that Jesus of Nazereth was upon the earth, but a requirement for a Rabbi,...

Church girl can you show me how you came to that conclusion?

Thank you,

Dr. T

[church girl]

Dr. T

That conclusion came from my study of the jewish culture, laws, and customs of that era. It might take me a while to show resources as it was several years ago. It's not hard at all to prove, just takes time.

[Dr T]

Hmm. I know I still new at this and I know that it was practiced but being a requirement for a rabbi is not consistent with my knowledge. Can you dig up those resources please? Also, while you're looking, make sure it is not one author who may have had a bias toward polygamy or a sect. Make sure it is consistent across other authors of that time.

Thank you,

Dr. T