Mary Magdalene and Christ

[Guest]

It is my personal opinion that Jesus was married. I am also somewhat of the mind that he had children. 99% of the reason I believe this to be the case is because of my own experience of being married and raising children. I find being married and a parent the most divine and like G-d of all my experiences. I find the logic odd that assumes G-d (Jesus) would avoid the very institution and relationships that defines G-d as our Father.

I understand this position.

I tend to believe differently - that it was not necessary for righteousness for Jesus to have married and born children in his mortal ministry on earth ... 100% simply for the reason that Jesus was already God.

[char713]

I believe that He was married. I do not believe that He had children though. The role of father is of course, extremely important, but His mortal ministry was not for himself, or even for his mortal family, at least not in the way the rest of us are expected to live. Fatherhood requires things that require at least a slight disruption in what was His complete role and mission. Besides, those children would have grown up without their father physically present on Earth. Of course, if any one is capable of that unique type of distance parenting, it would be a Deity, but I just don't think it happened. I am not trying to be irreverant here in any way. 

 

Besides, if earthly parenthood is in any way a necessity for exaltation or Godhood or our eternal progression, then a whole bunch of us who are childless by circumstance would be pretty much screwed. 

[Traveler]

I understand this position.

I tend to believe differently - that it was not necessary for righteousness for Jesus to have married and born children in his mortal ministry on earth ... 100% simply for the reason that Jesus was already God.

 

He was not Celestial - and Celestial law require the New and Everlasting Covenant - including marriage.  Last time I checked there were no exceptions.  It is my understanding that the foundations of  Celestial kingdom is the new and ever lasting covenant of marriage.  I would suggest - If you are temple worthy - and I have no reason to think otherwise - that you take the opportunity to do marriage sealing for the dead and listen very carefully to what is said in the sealing.

[Guest]

He was not Celestial - and Celestial law require the New and Everlasting Covenant - including marriage. Last time I checked there were no exceptions. It is my understanding that the foundations of Celestial kingdom is the new and ever lasting covenant of marriage. I would suggest - If you are temple worthy - and I have no reason to think otherwise - that you take the opportunity to do marriage sealing for the dead and listen very carefully to what is said in the sealing.

Earth is not for him to attain Celestial glory... It is for US. Yes, he has an eternal family. It doesn't have to be on this earth during his mortal ministry.

[Average Joe]

Earth is not for him to attain Celestial glory... It is for US. Yes, he has an eternal family. It doesn't have to be on this earth during his mortal ministry.

 

On earth Jesus had to strive to remain sinless for us and himself right up through his death on the cross, for he was also working out his own salvation - else why was he tempted? Paul says he was "was in all points tempted  like as we are, yet without sin." It would be hard to be tempted in all points if marital infidelity wasn't included.

[Just_A_Guy]

Anatess, I presume you're referring to the concept of "multiple mortal probations"?

 

Heber C. Kimball had an interesting take on it:

 

We have come here to become inured to work-to build temples, and improve upon the elements that God has placed around us, that we may become more skillful tomorrow, through the experience of to-day. What I do not to-day, when the sun goes down, I lay down to sleep, which is typical of death; and in the morning I rise and commence my work where I left it yesterday. That course is typical of the probations we take. But suppose that I do not improve my time to-day, I wake up to-morrow and find myself in the rear; and then, if I do not improve upon that day, and again lay down to sleep, on awaking, I find myself still in the rear. This day’s work is typical of this probation, and the sleep of every night is typical of death, and rising in the morning is typical of the resurrection. They are days labours, and it is for us to be faithful to-day, tomorrow, and every day. (Journal of Discourses 4:329)

 

And:

 

"Joseph always told us that we would have to pass by sentinels that are placed between us and our Father and God. Then, of course, we are conducted along from this probation to other probations, or from one dispensation to another, by those who conducted those dispensations  (JD 6:63)

 

That said:  I don't think it's official LDS doctrine--even as it pertains specifically to Jesus' life.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

That said:  I don't think it's official LDS doctrine--even as it pertains specifically to Jesus' life.

Which is par for the course in this thread because the topic itself has no doctrinal answer.

The extrapolation I am working out of is that Jesus is a person in the Godhead before he was tasked with creation. This earth is not a mortal test for him for his progression in the same manner as our progression because he is not on the same progression "level" as ours in the same manner that Heavenly Father's progression is not in the same level as ours. Therefore, we cannot assign the same covenant requirements to Christ on his mortal ministry on earth as our covenant requirements for exaltation. Jesus Christ was baptized to fulfill righteousness as an example for US to follow as the requirement for SALVATION and not as a requirement for HIS salvation. Every other ordinance after that is for our exaltation... things that Jesus Christ did not provide a clear example of in scripture - not even in the Book of Mormon or revealed in the D&C. Therefore, as Jesus is already a person in the Godhead before the earth is formed, I extrapolate that his eternal companion/s would be in the same revered position as Heavenly Mother's... someone who is not talked about in scripture.

[Just_A_Guy]

Certainly an interesting line of reasoning, though I confess I'm unconvinced.  Will have to chew on it for a while. 

 

Also, I think we had a thread in the last month about whether baptism is a requirement for salvation or for exaltation.  I was of the former persuasion; but as I recall some pretty convincing authority was produced to the contrary--indicating that baptism is not required for salvation in the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdoms; only the Celestial.

[Guest]

Certainly an interesting line of reasoning, though I confess I'm unconvinced.  Will have to chew on it for a while. 

 

Also, I think we had a thread in the last month about whether baptism is a requirement for salvation or for exaltation.  I was of the former persuasion; but as I recall some pretty convincing authority was produced to the contrary--indicating that baptism is not required for salvation in the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdoms; only the Celestial.

I don't believe that it is not required for Terrestrial nor Telestial. I believe that the promise of temple work in the millennium will include baptism for ALL people. As the veil is lifted in the Spirit World, we will have full knowledge that Jesus is the Christ, therefore, rejecting baptism at that point is a rejection of Christ with full knowledge... outer darkness. That's my take on that one.