Evidence That Jesus Was Married (2)

B

Ben Hur

Guest
EVIDENCE THAT JESUS WAS MARRIED (2)

This is about the Wedding at Cana. Matthew says that after Jesus was baptized, he came directly out of the water and was led into the desert where he fasted 40 days and 40 nights. (Mat. 3:16; 4:1)

Mark says that immediately, on coming out of the water, the Spirit sent him out toward the desert where he stayed 40 days. (Mark 1:10,12)

Luke says that, full of the Holy Spirit, Jesus returned from the Jordan and was conducted by the Spirit into the desert for 40 days. (Luke 4:1,2)

John says the next day after Jesus was baptized, John the Baptist watched Jesus walk by and recommended two of his disciples to follow him. (John 1:35)

On the third day after Jesus' baptism obviously, Jesus and his disciples, as well as his mother Mary were in a wedding at Cana. (John 2:1)

At a certain point of the celebrations, they ran out of wine and Jesus' mother immediately reported the incident to Jesus. Why Jesus and not the groom? According to a certain tradition the groom was the one in charge to provide the wine. I got married in Israel and was reminded of that tradition myself.

Mary could not think of a miracle because that would be the first of Jesus' signs. (John 2:11) The logic is that Mary reported the lack of wine to Jesus because Jesus was the groom and she needed to spare him the embarrassment. The waiters knew what Jesus had done. The one in charge called on Jesus aka the groom to congratulate him for the later wine which proved to be better than the first one when the normal procedure was the opposite. (John 2:9,10)

Now, if after the above evidence the wedding at Cana was not Jesus', how to explain his being in the desert fasting and being tempted to change stone into bread, according to the prior three gospels and now John reports him feasting in cana while being tempted to turn water into wine?

If what happened in Cana was indeed Jesus' wedding, he was married and the issue is over; if not, we have got either to get rid of the first three gospels or the fourth one because, Jesus was not fasting in the desert but feasting in Cana. Then, we have in our hands an ugly contradiction to solve.
 
Sheena said:
So what if he were married? Are you against marriage?
Click to expand...

No, I so love married life that I have been married twice. And if, for some reason, God forbid, I lose my second wife, I might very well go for a third one.

The issue about Jesus being married or not is that the NT claims he was a Jew who came to fulfill all the commandments and, by doing so, the Law has become obsolete. (Mat. 5:17-19; Ephe. 2:15) This is Replacement Theology which I am contesting.
 
God initiated all religions, and all religions have become changed by people. Do you think God cares anything about laws or rituals of any religions? Do you think God would prefer one group of people over another?

May I suggest focusing on the essence of all religions, rather than nitpicking every passage of a holy book to find anything you can denigrate a religion with.


What resonates within you about his teaching?
 
The importance of something isn't always relevant, everyone here should discuss whatever they feel like. What is being discussed here is

Ben Hur said:
The issue about Jesus being married or not is that the NT claims he was a Jew who came to fulfill all the commandments and, by doing so, the Law has become obsolete. (Mat. 5:17-19; Ephe. 2:15) This is Replacement Theology which I am contesting.
Click to expand...
 
I think he probably was married. I think it wasn't a big deal at the time, so it wasn't mentioned.

To me it is a Buddhist response to the contemplation of the hereafter....there are so many things that affect my life right now to contemplate....this is not one of them.

Not to stop discussion....but again....what does it have to do with the interpretaions of his teachings whether he was married or not?
 
Sheena said:
God initiated all religions, and all religions have become changed by people. Do you think God cares anything about laws or rituals of any religions? Do you think God would prefer one group of people over another?

May I suggest focusing on the essence of all religions, rather than nitpicking every passage of a holy book to find anything you can denigrate a religion with.


What resonates within you about his teaching?
Click to expand...

God did not initiate a single religion. It is all man's doing. Interesting that, within the same paragraph, you claim that God initiated all religions and then ask if He cares anything about religions. Is this the nitpicking of picking up people's contradictions that you don't like about me? Sorry if I am that fast to detect the holes of fallacious statements.

No, I dont think God prefers any group of a people over another. Hence, I don't claim that He has chosen us but that we have chosen Him.

I am not the one here who denigrates religions but the one whose religion has been denigrated by claimers that we have lost our place because our laws have been abolished according to the NT. (Heb. 7:12:22)

Now, with regards to your question above at the end of the post, if you can be more specific, I could have a more sure reply to give you. Whose teachings, Jesus', Paul's, whose?
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
The importance of something isn't always relevant, everyone here should discuss whatever they feel like. What is being discussed here is
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that most Christians don't like the idea to think that Jesus could have been a married man. They seem not to understand that a marriage at that time, and perhaps even today, only enhances one's credibility.
 
wil said:
I think he probably was married. I think it wasn't a big deal at the time, so it wasn't mentioned.

To me it is a Buddhist response to the contemplation of the hereafter....there are so many things that affect my life right now to contemplate....this is not one of them.

Not to stop discussion....but again....what does it have to do with the interpretaions of his teachings whether he was married or not?
Click to expand...

The point is that Paul and the writers of the gospels claim that he came to fulfill all the Jewish laws and by doing so, the laws have no more reason to exist. IOW, they have been abolished. (Ephe. 2:15) This is Replacement
Theology and, for a Jew it is very relevant. As a result of this tactic, many Jews who do not know any better have been lost to Judaism through conversions to Christianity. So, if Jesus came to fulfill all the Jewish laws, he must have fulfilled also the commandment to get married, grow and multiply. Besides, he is claimed to have been a Rabbi and a Teacher. At that time, one could not be one without being married. (I Tim. 3:2)
 
What percentage of Jews have switched to Christianity, and what percentage of them have switched because they thought Jesus wasn't married?

If you are a Jew, I'd suggest you promote your own religion by the tennants and benefits of your own religion. It is never a good idea to base your beliefs on putting other beliefs down.
 
Ben Hur said:
God did not initiate a single religion. It is all man's doing. Interesting that, within the same paragraph, you claim that God initiated all religions and then ask if He cares anything about religions. Is this the nitpicking of picking up people's contradictions that you don't like about me? Sorry if I am that fast to detect the holes of fallacious statements.
Click to expand...

Ben, I do not know anything about you at all, so I cannot determine whether I like you or not. In fact, this is the only thread that I read anything you’ve written that I can remember, so I don’t even know you through your writings except for this one.

If you could have a new perspective about God – God of all dimensions and universes beyond the physical universe, then you’d be able to better understand what I mean. God is God of all beings in all worlds in the physical universe, in all universes, and in all dimensions. Within the physical realm alone, there are intelligent beings who are very much different from human beings: their appearances, emphases in life, focuses of their activities, perspectives about themselves and others, ways of thinking, ways of communicating, philosophies, cultures, levels of technological advancement, social structures,…..

In this unimaginably vast universe (even if you consider just the physical universe) replete with countless races of every level of development and advancement, there are worlds in which native races practice some form of religions, others where religions seem completely absent, and every stage in between. Even among those who practice some form of religions or are aware of God, the way they practice, their doctrine, laws, rituals, etc., are vastly different from one another. Yet, what draws them to God is the spiritual part of them, the Gift of God, within themselves. No matter what our bodies or surface minds are preoccupied with, this deeper spiritual intelligence of ours continues to draw us back to God. Some are more aware of it, and others don’t seem to be yet. This Deeper Intelligence is the part of us that has never left God. This part of us, the essence of all religions, is the part of us that is holy, permanent, and constant. It is this part of us that yearns to return to God: God’s attraction, if you will. So, all religions are initiated by God. However, religions have become changed by the desires of individuals, a group of people, or institutions with means and motives to gain power over others. Some religions have become altered even drastically.

So, considering all of the above, are the rituals, laws, and doctrines of any religions important? Not to God. Those are not the essence of any religions, but merely structures and forms that people have created around religions. To emphasize them would more than likely draw them away from God, than near God.

Ben Hur said:
No, I dont think God prefers any group of a people over another. Hence, I don't claim that He has chosen us but that we have chosen Him.
Click to expand...
I'm going to interpret the phrase “choosing God” to mean that you have chosen to follow God’s Will. Then as you mentioned, you’d, indeed, understand that God would not prefer one group of people over another or even one race in the universe over another.

We (you and I and everyone else) live in a state of separation and we’re all on our journey back to God.

Ben Hur said:
I am not the one here who denigrates religions but the one whose religion has been denigrated by claimers that we have lost our place because our laws have been abolished according to the NT. (Heb. 7:12:22)
Click to expand...
If everyone would stop attempting to argue over whose religions are more correct or more “pleasing” to God, and focus and follow what they know deep within themselves, then the attempt to denigrate or defend any religions, or elevate any religions among others as more superior would cease.

Ben Hur said:
Now, with regards to your question above at the end of the post, if you can be more specific, I could have a more sure reply to give you. Whose teachings, Jesus', Paul's, whose?
Click to expand...
I meant Jesus’ teachings since you were speaking of the possibility that Jesus might have been married, but really any teachings that resonate deep within all of us because of their true wisdom.
 
Hi Brethren,

Jesus being the Second Adam, could not create generation against the First Adam. So, He was not married otherwise there would have been his Tomb like Abraham.

Even the Second anointed Christ Nanak Dev Ji's body disappeared as they do not want people to worship their tombs as these Christians of the Book worship the Icons that Christ Paul condemned.

Spiritually blind cannot know this subject and Beware of the Kashmiri Emperors of Darkness who even claim the grave of Jesus. They are the greatest hypocrites who killed the Last Christ on earth in the name of Satguru Tegh Bahadur Ji and to-day, they are reaping the reward of their own hypocrisy. They will suffer most and they produce the Greatest Al-Djmar Al-Aksas.

Ben Hur said:
EVIDENCE THAT JESUS WAS MARRIED (2)

This is about the Wedding at Cana. Matthew says that after Jesus was baptized, he came directly out of the water and was led into the desert where he fasted 40 days and 40 nights. (Mat. 3:16; 4:1)

Mark says that immediately, on coming out of the water, the Spirit sent him out toward the desert where he stayed 40 days. (Mark 1:10,12)

Luke says that, full of the Holy Spirit, Jesus returned from the Jordan and was conducted by the Spirit into the desert for 40 days. (Luke 4:1,2)

John says the next day after Jesus was baptized, John the Baptist watched Jesus walk by and recommended two of his disciples to follow him. (John 1:35)

On the third day after Jesus' baptism obviously, Jesus and his disciples, as well as his mother Mary were in a wedding at Cana. (John 2:1)

At a certain point of the celebrations, they ran out of wine and Jesus' mother immediately reported the incident to Jesus. Why Jesus and not the groom? According to a certain tradition the groom was the one in charge to provide the wine. I got married in Israel and was reminded of that tradition myself.

Mary could not think of a miracle because that would be the first of Jesus' signs. (John 2:11) The logic is that Mary reported the lack of wine to Jesus because Jesus was the groom and she needed to spare him the embarrassment. The waiters knew what Jesus had done. The one in charge called on Jesus aka the groom to congratulate him for the later wine which proved to be better than the first one when the normal procedure was the opposite. (John 2:9,10)

Now, if after the above evidence the wedding at Cana was not Jesus', how to explain his being in the desert fasting and being tempted to change stone into bread, according to the prior three gospels and now John reports him feasting in cana while being tempted to turn water into wine?

If what happened in Cana was indeed Jesus' wedding, he was married and the issue is over; if not, we have got either to get rid of the first three gospels or the fourth one because, Jesus was not fasting in the desert but feasting in Cana. Then, we have in our hands an ugly contradiction to solve.
Click to expand...
 
wil said:
What percentage of Jews have switched to Christianity, and what percentage of them have switched because they thought Jesus wasn't married?

If you are a Jew, I'd suggest you promote your own religion by the tennants and benefits of your own religion. It is never a good idea to base your beliefs on putting other beliefs down.
Click to expand...

What a terrible judgment this of yours! So, to try to explain by the evidences that Jesus was a married man one is putting Christianity down? Tell me, what is your answer to this question? Was Jesus a Jewish man or a Gentile? Assuming that your answer is that he was a Jewish man, I am rather upgrading the Christian religion by putting together the evidences that Jesus was a married man. If this is beyond the shadow of a doubt, it will only enhance Jesus' credibility as a Teacher and a Rabbi. Why not as a man, period? Why wouldn't I ask such a question about Paul? Because Paul was a Hellenist Jew to whom married life meant nothing. That's why he never married and as he said himself, he preferred to live the life of a single man. (I Cor. 7:8,27)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top