Why is marriage so important if Jesus didn't get married

[zil]

7 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This won't help anyone seeking understanding (at least points A-F)

Wait! I'm confused.  I thought there were only points A - E...

[Traveler]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This won't help anyone seeking understanding (at least points A-F) because they're all speculative. The only answer to any of them is that we do not know. And that is good enough. If we needed to know, it would be revealed. We do not need to know, and speculation on the matter is, at best, useless, and and at worse, harmful.

 

Is this "good enough" actually doctrine?  Or are you speculating? 

 

The Traveler

[Edspringer]

On 10/06/2016 at 4:07 PM, anatess2 said:

Are you trying to say here that you believe Christ was married to Mary Magdalene?

I distinctly remember (I tried to search lds.org but I couldn't find it)... but back when the book DaVinci Code by Dan Brown came out and caused a great controversy, one of the apostles declared that we don't know if Jesus was married or not but we know that Jesus is not married to and had children by Mary Magdalene.

Does anybody here recall this?  Did I understand this correctly?

Well, what I'm doing is just putting some scripture into discussion.

If this episode of scripture isn't referring to something happening to husband and wife, we should look for something that proves otherwise.

My mind is open. I'd love to know what apostle's declaration this is.

 

[LeSellers]

5 minutes ago, Edspringer said:

My mind is open. I'd love to know what apostle's declaration this is.

Parley P. Pratt said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalen and Martha (Lazarus' sister).

He was wrong on a number of things, but he was far more often correct than not. On this evidence alone, I'd give it greater than a 75% chance of being accurate.

Lehi

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Parley P. Pratt said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalen and Martha (Lazarus' sister).

He was wrong on a number of things, but he was far more often correct than not. On this evidence alone, I'd give it greater than a 75% chance of being accurate.

Lehi

Citation?

[The Folk Prophet]

On 6/13/2016 at 9:32 AM, zil said:

Wait! I'm confused.  I thought there were only points A - E...

F. It doesn't matter and we've been specifically counseled to not involve ourselves too deeply in these unknowable matters.

 

 

 

[LeSellers]

19 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Citation?

Long, long, long time ago: it was my senior class Seminary teacher who showed us this passage.

Here's something similar (Parley's brother, Orson [The Seer, p.159]):

Quote

One thing is certain, that there were several holy women that greatly loved Jesus — such as Mary, and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them, and associated with them much; and when He arose from the dead, instead of showing Himself to His chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them — namely, Mary Magdalene. Now it would be natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends. If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were His wives”

Lehi

[The Folk Prophet]

3 hours ago, zomarah said:

It's possible we may need to know, but nobody has asked yet. I find that often God's impartation of knowledge is contingent upon our asking for it. I don't think it's safe to say that everything we have now is all we need, simply by virtue of it being what we have now. Sure that may be a comforting notion, but it doesn't seem to fit God's pattern of revealing things only after first being asked.

What I mean is. Yes, I agree, we only have speculation. But I don't agree that it is not important for us to know, simply because we don't know it.

This reasoning seems nonsensical to me and I believe will lead to nothing but looking beyond the mark and to getting involved in pet theories that do nothing to bolster true testimony in what does, actually, matter.

We know what matters. It has been revealed to us.

Moreover, how can anyone think that the latter-day prophets, humbly seeking the will of the Lord in those things we need in these times to guide us safely back to Him will have been denied said knowledge? In other words, how can anyone think that we haven't asked? If you want to respond that this specific question has not been asked, I say phooey on that thinking. That's not the way the seeking of knowledge from God works. We do not guess at the questions. We simply humbly and sincerely ask for the needed knowledge and He generously provides. The idea that He won't reveal something "needed" to us until we guess the right question is just silly to me.

[The Folk Prophet]

43 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Parley P. Pratt said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalen and Martha (Lazarus' sister).

He was wrong on a number of things, but he was far more often correct than not. On this evidence alone, I'd give it greater than a 75% chance of being accurate.

Lehi

That's not the way math works.

[LeSellers]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

That's not the way math works.

Sorry, I should be clear: I believe that Pratt (and Hyde, and Woodruff) were correct, and it is my opinion that the odds of their being correct is >75%.

Your mileage may vary.

Lehi

[The Folk Prophet]

2 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Sorry, I should be clear: I believe that Pratt (and Hyde, and Woodruff) were correct, and it is my opinion that the odds of their being correct is >75%.

Your mileage may vary.

Lehi

But that presumption is mathematically wrong (though you are certainly free to the opinion). The odds of their being correct on this matter isn't confirmed by the amount of times they were correct on other matters or annulled by the amount of times they were wrong. Those matters do not play into the potential correctness of this issue at all.

[LeSellers]

6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

But that presumption is mathematically wrong (though you are certainly free to the opinion). The odds of their being correct on this matter isn't confirmed by the amount of times they were correct on other matters or annulled by the amount of times they were wrong. Those matters do not play into the potential correctness of this issue at all.

My opinion is not based on mathematics, statistics, or arithmetic.

Lehi

[The Folk Prophet]

15 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

My opinion is not based on mathematics, statistics, or arithmetic.

Lehi

Sure. But my refuting your opinion is.

[Just_A_Guy]

I've hidden a few problematic posts, and would like to take this opportunity to offer a friendly moderatorial (is that a word?) reminder to all parties to at least try to avoid bickering. 

Edited June 14, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[anatess2]

On 6/13/2016 at 3:56 PM, zomarah said:

So all those incidents of the Lord revealing something only after a question has been asked are just silly? See section 89 (Word of Wisdom), and numerous other sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. Yes, there are times when God will give us information, just look at Paul, etc. So it seems to go both ways. You are, of course, at liberty to utilize whatever information you wish. For me, I cannot trust that I have all the information simply because that is the only information at present.

As for whether or not the leaders of the Church have asked about Christ having a wife I presume not, because no revelation has been published concerning that information. Even a revelation stating that that information is not necessary at this time would be enough to know the question had been asked.

zomarah, the Lord only reveals what He WISHES to reveal.  We can ask.  It doesn't mean He will always answer with the information we desire.  And if He wills that the time is right to reveal certain truths, He reveals such truths to His prophets whether they ask or not.  This is evident all over the scriptures old, new, and latter day.  I'm sure you understand this concept as it is the exact same concept with Prayer.

The doctrine of Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families have been revealed.  Joseph Smith didn't have to ask.  He was TOLD.  It was a critical restoration of the gospel of the fullness of times to restore the spirit of Elijah back on earth.   And it wasn't just a matter of telling.  He was commanded to act on certain things he was very very scared to do to fulfill the restoration of this very important principle.  It didn't come as one big reveal like a Fixer Upper show.  Rather, it came in steps that took years to complete.  If God wanted to reveal if Jesus has an eternal companion, this would have been the time for it.  He didn't.  Therefore, we don't have that revelation today.

 

Edited June 14, 2016 by anatess2

[pam]

Personally, I believe Jesus was married during his mortality on earth.

[LeSellers]

20 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The doctrine of Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families have been revealed.  Joseph Smith didn't have to ask.

Yes, actually, he did have to ask.

Section 132 came about, as did so many others, during the translation of the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph questioned the many wives of Solomon and David and so many of the other ancient prophets and leaders. God revealed that their marriages were not only sanctioned but were part of a much more beautiful plan of eternal families than anyone had imagined prior to that point. It came with a catch, however. Plural Marriage, being the topic of the question, was also revealed as part of that plan, and Joseph was required to live it.

I do not recall a single revelation God gave to Joseph of any other prophet that was not part of the answer to a query on the part of the prophet. Oft-times, fer shure, the answer went well beyond the limits of the question, but that does not negate this point.

:Lehi

Edited June 15, 2016 by LeSellers

[anatess2]

8 hours ago, LeSellers said:

Yes, actuially, he did have to ask.

Section 132 came about, as did so many others, during the translation of the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph questioned the many wives of Solomon and David and so many of the other ancient prophets and leaders. God revealed that their marriages were not only sanctioned but were part of a much more beautiful plan of eternal families than anyone had imagined prior to that point. It came with a catch, however. Plural Marriage, being the topic of the question, was also revealed as part of that plan, and Joseph was required to live it.

I do not recall a single revelation God gave to Joseph of any other prophet that was not part of the answer to a query on the part of the prophet. Oft-times, fer shure, the answer went well beyond the limits of the question, but that does not negate this point.

:Lehi

For sure, revelation comes when people are ready to hear it.  I just don't think that the prophet has to inquire for the revelation to be given.  I may be wrong on this but my take on it is that the conditions must be ripe for the revelation and then the revelation is given to the prophets.  Yes, a sign of the ripening may come in the form of inquiry, I just don't think it has to be in the form of an inquiry by the prophet.

So Moses and the burning bush... what was the question?

Peter's revelation... Jesus asked him the question.

Paul's revelation... what was his question?

Mary's revelation... seems like the angel appeared and revealed to her stuff so she asked many questions.

Joseph the carpenter's revelation... in a dream.

 

[Guest]

13 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The doctrine of Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families have been revealed.  Joseph Smith didn't have to ask.  He was TOLD.  

As I recall, Joseph did ask.  And it was in relation to a family member dying.  The full revelations on sealing and eternal marriage and plural marriage were revealed later.  But the principle was known early on.

[The Folk Prophet]

9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

For sure, revelation comes when people are ready to hear it. 

This doesn't seem accurate to me. It depends on who you mean by "people" I suppose, but were the Israelites ready to hear the revelations giving by Moses before being given the lesser law and made to wander in the desert for 40 years. Were the Ammonihahites ready to hear the revelations declared by and Angel to Alma and Amulek? Etc?

I don't know why we feel the need to put conditions on the Lord's ability to communicate to His children. If He wants us to know something, we'll know it. Period.

Obviously He uses patterns and conditions sometimes -- these are likely for our learning and humility, etc... But to presume that therefore the Lord can't do otherwise strikes me as mistaken.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

As I recall, Joseph did ask.  And it was in relation to a family member dying.  The full revelations on sealing and eternal marriage and plural marriage were revealed later.  But the principle was known early on.

Yes, yes... Ripening.  There has to have been a ripening.  Revelation doesn't just come in a WHAM with people not ready for it.  Line upon line, precept upon precept.

What I understood zomorah's statement to be was... the prophets did not ask "Did Jesus get married in his mortal ministry?" that's why they weren't given the revelation.  I do not subscribe to the thought that you have to ask the question to be given an answer.  Rather, I believe in the ripening... therefore, as Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families were in the process of getting restored, then it would have been also ripe for THAT revelation of Jesus' marriage to be restored.  Joseph wouldn't have to ask "Is Jesus married?"

Make sense?

[Edspringer]

7 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

For sure, revelation comes when people are ready to hear it.  I just don't think that the prophet has to inquire for the revelation to be given.  I may be wrong on this but my take on it is that the conditions must be ripe for the revelation and then the revelation is given to the prophets.  Yes, a sign of the ripening may come in the form of inquiry, I just don't think it has to be in the form of an inquiry by the prophet.

So Moses and the burning bush... what was the question?

Peter's revelation... Jesus asked him the question.

Paul's revelation... what was his question?

Mary's revelation... seems like the angel appeared and revealed to her stuff so she asked many questions.

Joseph the carpenter's revelation... in a dream.

 

I think LeSellers is right and you are right, too!

What I think you might be missing on your point is that in all examples you gave the revelation was that of a calling, essentially.

Indeed, revelation comes when the Lord wants, and when men and women are prepared to receive it.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

As I recall, Joseph did ask.  And it was in relation to a family member dying.  The full revelations on sealing and eternal marriage and plural marriage were revealed later.  But the principle was known early on.

Yes, yes... Ripening.  There has to have been a ripening.  Revelation doesn't just come in a WHAM with people not ready for it.  Line upon line, precept upon precept.

What I understood zomorah's statement to be was... the prophets did not ask "Did Jesus get married in his mortal ministry?" that's why they weren't given the revelation.  I do not subscribe to the thought that you have to ask the question to be given an answer.  Rather, I believe in the ripening... therefore, as Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families were in the process of getting restored, then it would have been also ripe for THAT revelation of Jesus' marriage to be restored.  Joseph wouldn't have to ask "Is Jesus married?"

Make sense?

[Edspringer]

7 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

For sure, revelation comes when people are ready to hear it.  I just don't think that the prophet has to inquire for the revelation to be given.  I may be wrong on this but my take on it is that the conditions must be ripe for the revelation and then the revelation is given to the prophets.  Yes, a sign of the ripening may come in the form of inquiry, I just don't think it has to be in the form of an inquiry by the prophet.

So Moses and the burning bush... what was the question?

Peter's revelation... Jesus asked him the question.

Paul's revelation... what was his question?

Mary's revelation... seems like the angel appeared and revealed to her stuff so she asked many questions.

Joseph the carpenter's revelation... in a dream.

 

I think LeSellers is right and you are right, too!

What I think you might be missing on your point is that in all examples you gave the revelation was that of a calling, essentially.

Indeed, revelation comes when the Lord wants, and when men and women are prepared to receive it.

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This doesn't seem accurate to me. It depends on who you mean by "people" I suppose, but were the Israelites ready to hear the revelations giving by Moses before being given the lesser law and made to wander in the desert for 40 years. Were the Ammonihahites ready to hear the revelations declared by and Angel to Alma and Amulek? Etc?

I don't know why we feel the need to put conditions on the Lord's ability to communicate to His children. If He wants us to know something, we'll know it. Period.

Obviously He uses patterns and conditions sometimes -- these are likely for our learning and humility, etc... But to presume that therefore the Lord can't do otherwise strikes me as mistaken.

I don't know why you would think that we are putting conditions on the Lord's abilities.  The Lord puts conditions on his abilities.  That's what covenants are all about.  Nobody has ever said the Lord CAN'T do X.  Rather, it is always, the Lord WON'T do X.  Different connotations.

Were the Israelites ripe?  Yes.  Their bondage needed to end at that specific point in time that they may bring about the works of the Lord.  Of course, Moses did not think he was ready or the people were ready and all that stuff.  God believed otherwise.

And so on and so forth...

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by anatess2