Was Jesus Married? It's either yes or no.

[roger1440]

line 1: ... not [to] me. My mother gave me life ...
line 2: ... The disciples said to Jesus, ...
line 3: ... deny. Mary is (not?) worthy of it. ...
line 4: ... Jesus said to them, "My wife ...
line 5: ... she is able to be my disciple ...
line 6: ... Let wicked people swell up ...
line 7: ... As for me, I am with her in order to ...
line 8: ... an image ...

For the verso:

line 1: ... my moth[er] ...
line 2: ... three ...
line 3: ... ....
line 4: ... forth ...
lines 5 & 6: illegible ink traces

Text of the Gospel Of Jesus's Wife.

Now that we know you can copy and paste, where do we go from here?

 

[George-ananda]

Was Jesus Married? It's either yes or no.

I think Jewish customs at the time were pretty clear about who was married and who was not. It would seem odd to me that if Jesus was married that that would not have been noted by the chroniclers. That said, I have heard some arguments that he was married to Mary Magdalene but I doubt it. How is that for neither yes nor no .

 

[blue taylor]

Was Jesus Married? It's either yes or no.

I think Jewish customs at the time were pretty clear about who was married and who was not. It would seem odd to me that if Jesus was married that that would not have been noted by the chroniclers. That said, I have heard some arguments that he was married to Mary Magdalene but I doubt it. How is that for neither yes nor no .

I don't think Jesus followed Jewish customs very faithfully. After all, he preached a different belief.

 

[George-ananda]

I don't think Jesus followed Jewish customs very faithfully. After all, he preached a different belief.

I see Him more as a Jewish reformer, but I don't think He challenged the institution of marriage.

 

[Muffled]

I believe He was not married.

 

[rusra02]

John 2:2 reports; "And on the third day a marriage feast took place in Caʹna of Galʹi·lee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the marriage feast." Obviously, Jesus was not the bridegroom.

 

[blue taylor]

John 2:2 reports; "And on the third day a marriage feast took place in Caʹna of Galʹi·lee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the marriage feast." Obviously, Jesus was not the bridegroom.

I guess he was no groom at that wedding anyway.

 

[Nefelie]

John 2:2 reports; "And on the third day a marriage feast took place in Caʹna of Galʹi·lee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the marriage feast." Obviously, Jesus was not the bridegroom.

I’m not so sure about that.

Continuing the passage we read:

And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
[Jh 2:3-5]​

First - Why would a guest care what happens with the wine and if there is enough or not.

Second (and more important) - Why would the servants take orders from a guest and his mother?



...BTW, isn't the verse 2:4 really strange?

Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.​

Isn’t that the weirdest answer to a simple observation like “they have no wine”?...

.

 

[Katzpur]

I’m not so sure about that.

Continuing the passage we read:

And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
[Jh 2:3-5]​

First - Why would a guest care what happens with the wine and if there is enough or not.

Second (and more important) - Why would the servants take orders from a guest and his mother?



...BTW, isn't the verse 2:4 really strange?

Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.​

Isn’t that the weirdest answer to a simple observation like “they have no wine”?...

.

Yeah, interesting! I'd never really given those points much thought.

 

[Palehorse]

The sad truth is that government documents, whatever documents the Roman Empire might have kept. . .

Look, from Babylon to Medo- Persia to the Greek Empire to the Roman to Papal Rome, and when Greeks took over Egypt. Many documents and books get salvaged from war, and most don't

Greeks did not destroy everything in the Egyptian library at Alexandria, but translated what they wanted into Greek.

When the Roman Empire declined, the Irish copied most of the Greek and Latin classics.

There is a document claiming to be written by Pontius Pilate. They say it is fake. But I'd like to read it.

Some royal dude in Europe claims his genealogy goes back to Mary Magdalena. Jesus was a good man, maybe he owned up to the baby. But Mary is believed to have been a prostitute. Her baby could have been by any man. No proof Jesus was the father.

Hey, let's find the body of Jesus and do a DNA test on the Jerry Springer show. Want to?

I have a better idea. Lets scrape some DNA off the shroud of Turin and then lets compare that DNA to all the felons in the entire country.


Why Pass This Law?
States have been collecting DNA from convicted felons for over two decades, and it’s helped solve thousands of crimes. But, we can do more. By passing arrestee DNA legislation, law enforcement officials can catch criminals sooner, prevent crimes, save more lives and use DNA to its full potential. Collected at the same time as fingerprints, DNA testing only requires a simple cheek swab upon arrest. That’s why Congress and over half the states have already passed laws for DNA Arrestee Testing.

Arrestee testing will help your state to:

• Catch repeat offenders sooner
• Prevent violent crimes
• Exonerate the innocent
• Protect civil liberties
• Reduce criminal justice costs
• Reduce bias
• Find Jesus
  
  
  
  

 

[rusra02]

I’m not so sure about that.

Continuing the passage we read:

And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
[Jh 2:3-5]​

First - Why would a guest care what happens with the wine and if there is enough or not.

Second (and more important) - Why would the servants take orders from a guest and his mother?



...BTW, isn't the verse 2:4 really strange?

Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.​

Isn’t that the weirdest answer to a simple observation like “they have no wine”?...

.

 

[rusra02]

I’m not so sure about that.

Continuing the passage we read:

And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
[Jh 2:3-5]​

First - Why would a guest care what happens with the wine and if there is enough or not.

Second (and more important) - Why would the servants take orders from a guest and his mother?



...BTW, isn't the verse 2:4 really strange?

Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.​

Isn’t that the weirdest answer to a simple observation like “they have no wine”?...

.

As is true today, it is common for friends of the bride and bridegroom to share in caring for the needs and comforts of those invited. Apparently Mary did this, and would be given authority to direct servants. And as is also true today, to run out of food or drink for guests would have been a source of embarrassment, even shame for the newlyweds. When Mary approached her son about the matter, perhaps expecting him to use his God-given power, he gently reproved her. As the Christ or anointed One, he was not under her authority. She humbly did not pursue the matter further with Jesus, instead telling the servants to follow Jesus instructions. Jesus showed his concern for others and also demonstrated his God-given power as the Christ by turning about 100 gallons of water into the finest wine.

 

[rrosskopf]

There are several questions that need to be asked here... first of all Jesus wasn't known at this time for miracles, so why did his mother assume he was responsible for the wine? Was he the groom? Secondly, why wasn't he at the wedding feast? He said it wasn't his time? Was he still on his honeymoon? Wedding feasts were typically held after the honeymoon started. The bride and groom would have a special room at the groom's father's house. Did the master of the banquet question the servants as to whence the wine came? The suggestion that the servants knew from whence the wine came implies that they told him; his very next move is to ask the groom (the source of the wine?) why he saved his best for last. The translation is somewhat fuzzy, leaving room for doubt, but it does make one wonder.

 

[Cerebralfire]

The new testiment states: "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion."
Jesus was not a carnal minded person and stated: "The prince of this world cometh, and has nothing in me". and another statement: "Which of you convineth me of sin?".
So there was no, and is no lust in Jesus, and to further the issue of marrage states (concerning the kingdom of God): "In the kingdom of heaven, they neither marry, nor are given in marrage".
Remembering also in the Lords prayer: " Let it be on Earth as it is in Heaven". So to answer the topic in terms of physical marrage ......... no.

 

[Nefelie]

As is true today, it is common for friends of the bride and bridegroom to share in caring for the needs and comforts of those invited.

In how many weddings have you been where the guests gave orders to the caterers or the waiters? Because I’ve never seen this happening. The only people that are entitle to give orders besides the bride and groom, are the mothers and fathers of the wedded couple. Maybe the siblings too, but that’s it.

When Mary approached her son about the matter, perhaps expecting him to use his God-given power, he gently reproved her.

“Gently”? You call this “gently”:

Woman, what have I to do with thee?​

Because this is really offensive in my point of view. Who talks to his mother like that?!

She humbly did not pursue the matter further with Jesus, instead telling the servants to follow Jesus instructions.

Why? What did she think he can do about it?

Do not forget that this (the turning of water into wine) was his first miracle. He never before shown any such powers. How did Mary know that he could do something like that?

Jesus showed his concern for others and also demonstrated his God-given power as the Christ by turning about 100 gallons of water into the finest wine.

Shown to whom? No one noticed the miracle exempt the servants, remember?

~~~

Welcome to RF Cerebralfire

The new testiment states: "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion."

That was Paul, not Jesus.

Jesus was not a carnal minded person and stated: "The prince of this world cometh, and has nothing in me". and another statement: "Which of you convineth me of sin?".

Since when is being married a sin?

So there was no, and is no lust in Jesus, and to further the issue of marrage states (concerning the kingdom of God): "In the kingdom of heaven, they neither marry, nor are given in marrage".

Please be careful in quoting the verses correctly and also remember to mention the verse:

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
[Mt. 22:30]​

So, this is about after the resurrection. Has nothing to do with this life time of the life after.

Remembering also in the Lords prayer: "Let it be on Earth as it is in Heaven".

What does that have to do with marriage?

.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

But you said it was a poor translation (Living Bible BTW). Do I need to come to you from now on to determine which translations in which languages maintain divine inerrancy? And how do you know which? And how do I know to believe you instead of Joe Blow who says different than you.



So God allows "really poor" translations? But one mistranslation could mislead millions to eternal hellfire



Exactly. In fact, one could even say divinely inspired.



Well as you know, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
Jesus said to judge not lest you be judged. But then in the next sentence warns us not to cast our pearls before swine. True enough, but how do we know who the swine are unless we make judgements?

Neither the accuracy of a translation, nor the misunderstand or interpretation of anything in the Bible, will make the slightest difference to God's grace or our imortal future.

 

[Cerebralfire]

That was Paul, not Jesus

Read it again, I didn't say it was Jesus that said that, note the opening statement:
"The new testiment states:"

 

[blue taylor]

"In the kingdom of heaven, they neither marry, nor are given in marrage".

Mormons would beg to differ there.

 

[Cerebralfire]

Since when is being married a sin?

What do you call marrage? a bit of paper with signatures? a vow of monogamy to another? The only known justification for sex is for purpose of children (If based on necessity-under population).
Marrage in this life is primarily based on lust, remember what original sin is. At what point did lust become a good thing in the eyes of God? This is why (in part) satan has deceived the whole world: if we really want to know our maker, we have be like him.
We ask: Why did God create man; but if God were to ask us the same question, what can we say? The children are the marrage (The two fleshes shall become one), but the world has been over populated for generations, if then God is strict, and we bring children into this world based on vanity (Sin), how then is worldly marrage not sin?

 

[Cerebralfire]

Mormons would beg to differ there.

No doubt, but they can argue that one with God.