ill take you up on it Alan, what the hell
Originally Posted by AlanC
Well, that's a hypothetical that I can't answer, really. There is no particular issue with Jesus being unmarried and childless. That's simply what the Bible records to be the case. The necessary ingredients are Jesus' sinlessness, death, burial and resurrection.
so to my original hypothetical, Ill chalk you up as a 'sort of no' then - it is less important to you whether Christ was married to Mary Magdalene or anyone else. It is basically irrelevant to a belief in His divinity - and central to your teachings in your clergy is his sinless life, death and resurrection.
However, as He had a specific mission that required itinerant preaching, death and ultimately ascension in his early to mid-30s it would have been impractical, and irresponsible, for Him to have been a husband and father.
well yeah, but that is true of lots of people though.
Lump him in with a travelling salesman (nothing like a bit of heresy for heresies sake when Im chatting with a Minister
To take it back to Davinci Code, Brown's book has Mary Magdelene pregnant at the time of Christ's death - his blood in her chalice etc - so following his storyline, Christ wasnt actually a father at the time of his death. However point taken, it would have been irresponsible of Him to have impregnated her knowing that his death was looming.
Maybe the pill let her down, happens to the best of us
Of course the flip side is that it would have been highly highly irregular for a 30-something Jewish man in that time to have been unmarried, but then, no one ever accused Christ of being 'regular'
I don't know why everyone is so desperate for Jesus to have been married. There have been a lot of people in history who weren't married and didn't have children.
No, Im certainly not desperate for Christ to have been married, Im just kinda curious whether it actually really matters or not. I guess to generations of vow-of-celibacy-priests, who took the vow to emulate Christ's own celibacy, then it may well be a sore point, but otherwise, I not so sure its important at all.
I dont regard the book as anything other than a very entertaining read, but it certainly has some interesting thoughtstarters in it, so read the above as Matt-is-interested-in-the-topic rather than 'Matt thinks Brown wrote a textbook'