Was jesus married


Jeries
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 9/27/2018 at 2:57 PM, Jeries said:

Was jesus married. 

Sure he was. Otherwise he hadn't had the standing in a Jewish community those days 2000 years ago.

Edited by OnePassenger
grammar; plusquamperfect instead of simple past conditional
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, OnePassenger said:

Sure he was. Otherwise he hadn't had the standing in a Jewish community those days 2000 years ago.

I would add a thought - Paul, under inspiration of G-d stated - "To him that knows to do good and do it not, to him it is sin."  We are also told in scripture that Marriage is ordained of G-d.  We are also instructed that it is not good for man (any individual male or female) to be alone.  

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

Now that's a clever response. Let me get this straight, 

My unwillingness to questionably accept the unsubstantiable bit of trivia posited by someone on the Internet means I am either not Mormon, or insufficiently reflective with my faith.

Let me reiterate my stance: with regard to the question of whether Jesus of Nazareth was married, we have insufficient evidence to definitively support a claim toward either the affirmative or the negative. Any claims toward a definitive answer require supposition and assumptions that expose the claim to plausible criticisms and scrutiny.

With that in mind, if the only reason I don't accept your conclusion as definitive is because I haven't pondered the same scriptures to the same extrapolations that you have, then I will have to point out that this exactly bolsters my stance.

QED :)

You don’t seem to be following me. I clearly said there are two possibilities, not one.

What I’m saying is since all the ordinances of the gospel, most especially eternal marriage, are required of each of us in order to obtain the fulness of exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom, that means if Christ somehow managed to obtain the fulness of celestial exaltation without having to obey the law eternal marriage prior to his resurrection, it indicates one of most essential ordinances of the gospel is not required for him. Pure and simple logic.

Because Doctrine and Covenants 138 makes it crystal clear NO ONE can obtain the fulness of celestial glory without first obeying the law of eternal marriage, it can only mean if the Lord was not married for time and all eternity prior to his resurrection that he is exempt from one of the most important laws and ordinances of his own gospel. If the laws and ordinances of the gospel are as essential and immutable as we’re taught they are, then there is no third possibly. We don’t need evidence to know that if Christ obtained the fulness of exaltation without having to obey his own commandment to submit to the law of eternal marriage, it can only mean some of the laws of and ordinances of his gospel are not required of him. 

Edited by Jersey Boy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jersey Boy said:

You don’t seem to be following me. I clearly said there are two possibilities, not one.

What I’m saying is since all the ordinances of the gospel, most especially eternal marriage, are required of each of us in order to obtain the fulness of exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom, that means if Christ somehow managed to obtain the fulness of celestial exaltation without having to obey the law eternal marriage prior to his resurrection it indicates one of most essential ordinances of the gospel is not required for him. Pure and simple logic.

Because Doctrine and Covenants 138 makes it crystal clear NO ONE can obtain the fulness of celestial glory without first obeying the law of eternal marriage, it can only mean if Christ was not married for time and all eternity prior to his resurrection, then he is exempt from one of the most important laws and ordinances of his own gospel. If the laws and ordinances of the gospel are as essential and immutable as we’re taught they are, then there is no third possibly. We don’t need evidence to know that if Christ obtained the fulness of exaltation without him having to obey his own commandment to obey the law of eternal marriage, it can only mean some of the laws of and ordinances of his gospel are not required of him. 

Jersey Boy, Jesus could not have created the earth unless He was already God.  He doesn't need to obtain the fulness of celestial glory because HE ALREADY DID SO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OnePassenger said:

Sure he was. Otherwise he hadn't had the standing in a Jewish community those days 2000 years ago.

Paul openly opined on how nice it would be for no one to marry and to commit themselves to God, as he had. And he had plenty of standing in the Jewish community when he was known as Saul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jersey Boy said:

Then why does Paul tell us he LEARNED obedience by the things which he suffered and that he finally became perfect?

You still assume that every commandment given to people in the last dispensation applies equally to every dispensation. That is not an assumption that bears scrutiny well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MarginOfError said:

You still assume that every commandment given to people in the last dispensation applies equally to every dispensation. That is not an assumption that bears scrutiny well.

Eternal Marriage is an eternal principle and would therefore apply to all dispensations in the same manner as Baptism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2018 at 7:21 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

I had never thought about this before, but I was recently reading in the OT where God flat-out told one of the OT prophets—I think it was Jeremiah—**not** to get married, due to the demands of his ministry and Jerusalem’s impending destruction (also:  as a symbol for the people).  

So, while I’ve traditionally speculated that Jesus was probably married for the reasons @LePeel gives; we do have scriptural precedent to the contrary.  (And of course, we have Paul advocating the single life as well.). 

I wonder if God was telling him what He tells a lot of young men today. Don't get married, go on a mission.  But that doesn't mean to never get married.  Just that you have things to do first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, goor_de said:

That was his first sign that Jesus did was his first miracle.:excl:
Maria could not know that
Maria was asking for a miracle?:confused:

Hi sorry, I read your post several times but I don't understand what you're saying. Can you please rephrase? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Hi sorry, I read your post several times but I don't understand what you're saying. Can you please rephrase? Thanks.

sorry.
John said that was the first miracle Jesus did
maria did not know at the time that jesus is doing wonders
Maria could not know that
Maria said to Jesus, you have no more wine.
she did not say more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, goor_de said:

sorry.
John said that was the first miracle Jesus did
maria did not know at the time that jesus is doing wonders
Maria could not know that
Maria said to Jesus, you have no more wine.
she did not say more

Hi, are you saying that Mary didn't know Jesus could perform miracles? If that was the case, why did she tell Jesus "They have no more wine" and then tell the servants "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it." ?

John didn't say it was the first miracle, he said this "beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee".

Edited by Suzie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Jersey Boy, Jesus could not have created the earth unless He was already God.  He doesn't need to obtain the fulness of celestial glory because HE ALREADY DID SO.

I am interested in why you believe this to be so.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Hi, are you saying that Mary didn't know Jesus could perform miracles? If that was the case, why did she tell Jesus "They have no more wine" and then tell the servants "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it." ?

John didn't say it was the first miracle, he said this "beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee".

According to Jewish tradition it was the responsibility of the groom to provide the wine at the wedding fest.  One may ask why Jesus was involved in the wine running out in the first place.  

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Suzie said:

Hi, are you saying that Mary didn't know Jesus could perform miracles? If that was the case, why did she tell Jesus "They have no more wine" and then tell the servants "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it." ?

John didn't say it was the first miracle, he said this "beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee".

let me think
Maria said it Jesus because he was the groom
Maria said that to the master butler that Jesus should take seriously.
Turning water into wine was something new for the master butcher.
I think that was it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Traveler said:

According to Jewish tradition it was the responsibility of the groom to provide the wine at the wedding fest.  One may ask why Jesus was involved in the wine running out in the first place. 

Well, the guests had drunk it all. t0307.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, goor_de said:

let me think
Maria said it Jesus because he was the groom
Maria said that to the master butler that Jesus should take seriously.
Turning water into wine was something new for the master butcher.
I think that was it

Your words are a greater miracle than Jesus' transformation of water into wine... Who was the groom, by the way...?

Edited by OnePassenger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OnePassenger said:

Your words are a greater miracle than Jesus' transformation of water into wine... Who was the groom, by the way...?

jesus

10 And saith unto him, Everyone gives first the good wine, and, when they are drunk, the lesser wine; but you have withheld the good wine until now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OnePassenger said:

Your words are a greater mystery than Jesus' transformation of water into wine... Who was the groom, by the way...?

It is not explained in any version of ancient text - which copies were made a few hundred years later (when there could have been incentive to change that, if it was in the original scripture.  Isaiah prophesied that ordinances would be change - I speculate that marriage is an ordinance.  Or perhaps the groom was not specified because any good Jew would have known and it would have been redundant. 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

How come Jesus was asked why he saved the new wine for last?

There was only water in the amphoras before, but they thought it was wine. They couldn't understand Jesus had transformed the water into wine only just.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share