Posted on 09/12/2014 6:28:11 PM PDT by matthewrobertolson
Not what i found, and while to never marry in a normal lifespan would be the most unusual, staying single till approx. 33 is certainly not excluded.
Excursus: Unmarried Jewish Men in the Time of Jesus
Two prominent Jewish writers from the first-century A.D., Philo and Josephus, mention that some Jewish men in the time of Jesus were single by choice. Philo, a contemporary of Jesus, was a Jewish philosopher who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, and who wrote many volumes in the first half of the century. Josephus was a Jewish historian who wrote near the end of the century. Both Philo and Josephus mention that the Essenes, a group of apocalyptic Jews who eagerly awaited God’s intervention in history, did not marry by choice. Here are excerpts from their writings:
Philo, Hypothetica 11.14-17
Again, perceiving with more than ordinary acuteness and accuracy, what is alone or at least above all other things calculated to dissolve such associations, they repudiate marriage; and at the same time they practise continence in an eminent degree; for no one of the Essenes ever marries a wife . . . . This now is the enviable system of life of these Essenes, so that not only private individuals but even mighty kings, admiring the men, venerate their sect, and increase their dignity and majesty in a still higher degree by their approbation and by the honours which they confer on them.
Josephus, Jewish War, 2.8.2
These Essenes reject pleasures as an evil, but esteem continence, and the conquest over our passions, to be virtue. They neglect wedlock, but choose out other persons’ children, while they are pliable, and fit for learning, and esteem them to be of their kindred, and form them according to their own manners. They do not absolutely deny the fitness of marriage, and the succession of mankind thereby continued; but they guard against the lascivious behavior of women, and are persuaded that none of them preserve their fidelity to one man.
Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.5
It also deserves our admiration, how much [the Essenes] exceed all other men that addict themselves to virtue, and this in righteousness; and indeed to such a degree, that as it hath never appeared among any other men, neither Greeks nor barbarians, no, not for a little time, so hath it endured a long while among them. This is demonstrated by that institution of theirs, which will not suffer any thing to hinder them from having all things in common; so that a rich man enjoys no more of his own wealth than he who hath nothing at all. There are about four thousand men that live in this way, and neither marry wives, nor are desirous to keep servants; as thinking the latter tempts men to be unjust, and the former gives the handle to domestic quarrels; but as they live by themselves, they minister one to another.
There can be no doubt that many Essenes (scholars say that some might have been married) chose to be unmarried. According to Philo and Josephus, they did so because they thought that women had a negative impact on men. There’s no reason to believe that Jesus shared this perspective. But He did join the Essenes in accepting an apocalyptic worldview that anticipated the coming of God’s kingdom. This, as we’ll see tomorrow, helps to explain Jesus’s unusual attitude toward singleness and marriage.
Both Philo and Josephus attest to the fact that Essene men remained single in the time of Jesus. But, one might argue, this kind of behavior was common only on the outskirts of Jewish society. Mainline Jews, if you will, would have looked down upon Essene celibacy.
Yet, this argument ignores the plain evidence from both Philo and Josephus. Notice, these authors don’t only mention the Essene practice of being unmarried, they praise it!
So, in light of what we find in these first-century Jewish writers, it makes no sense to claim, as does Langdon, that “the social decorum during that time virtually forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned . . . .” In fact, we have solid evidence that some Jewish men chose to remain unmarried, and that leading Jewish thinkers praised them for this choice. More .
Have a God night.
Jesus wasn’t an Essene. Furthermore, his mission didn’t separate him from common, general human life, but engaged it.
You may believe as you like, but there’s nothing wrong with Jesus Christ being married. In many ways it affirms marriage and contrasts it with secular marriage which the state controls.
My experience is that the vast majority of Christians practice a form of Christianity unbounded by the Scriptures, but bounded by tradition and what they want to believe. They then read into the scriptures what they want.
For instance, what did the ark look like?
Good night to you, FRiend.
Not true. Simeon ben Azzai was a celibate rabbi who was not an Essene. Furthermore, he was tolerated as celibate because there were notable exceptions to the rabbinic understanding of the need to be married. If one was devoted to the law in a unique way, or a prophetic figure, like John the Baptist, Jeremiah, etc., the sense of requirement did not apply. This would certainly extend to Jesus, Who established a reputation as a child prodigy of the law, based on His remarkable demonstration in the Temple as a twelve year old boy.
So maybe the dog didn't bark because there really was nothing to bark at. Just sayin ...
Firstly, I agree with you 1010RD, that were he to be married, I think it would cause him to be more... human - After all, He was tempted with everything we are tempted with... I don't see how that can be without the strains of marriage and child rearing - Probably the single most constant temptation toward many things in men - So I get where you are coming from.
You may believe as you like, but there’s nothing wrong with Jesus Christ being married. [...]
But there is - My foremost complaint is how that affects the betrothal contract He has with his Bride - While it is possible for a man to have two wives, and while one can argue that His death caused any marriage He had here to be terminated, it still impacts the whole idea of the ONE 'woman' he loves, and your proposal turns all of that betrothal stuff right on it's head. That betrothal is our contract with Him!
Secondly, all things being equal, a married man will no doubt produce offspring - This is a can of worms that comes right out of the DaVinci Code - what a mess if there is a bloodline heir! But we need not worry about all that, because the Bible says He was cut off - That is a particular thing, meaning no blood heir - His line is ended.
But that too suggests He was *not* married, as his brother would be obliged to take His wife and continue His heirs. Some form of the kinsman-redeemer would be enacted upon His bloodline and that bloodline would have continued in all likelihood.
And lastly, as a matter of form, it is an argument from silence - A position that I am usually loathe to take. There is no legitimate evidence that He had a wife, something the Bible would no doubt declare. But it does not. There is nothing, except one pseudo-documentary gnostic strain which one must read with a suspension of disbelief in order to give it any credence at all, not to mention any authority.
So with those points to offer, I would be hard pressed to accept that he took a wife here. While I suppose it is possible, it is not without catastrophic consequences.
I always wondered if L. Ron Hubbard started as a Mormon! However, I admire anyone who could go to Utah and make it pay off!
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Something so extraordinary as a "wife" of Jesus would certainly have merited attention rather than complete silence.
This is true but don’t expect Mormons to tell you the truth, it is embarrassing and goes against their propaganda. They even did temple work for him a few years ago.
http://mainstreetplaza.com/2010/06/07/to-jesus-and-mary-now-mormon-and-married-mazel-tov/
"Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, the 'grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was because He had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed Him.' After Jesus went from the stage of action, the Apostles followed the example of their master. . . The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, casing his crucifixion, was evidently based on polygamy,. . .a belief in the doctrine of plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus, and his followers. We might almost think they were 'Mormons' " (Journal of Discourses, Vol 1. ppl 345-346)
Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde made these statements: "It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; . . .no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the least of it."
"I will venture to say that if Jesus Christ were now to pass thought the most pious countries in Christendom with a train of women, such as used to follow him, . . .he would be mobbed, tarred, and feathered, and rode, not on as ass, but on a rail."
"At this doctrine the long-faced hypocrite and the sanctimonious bigot will probably cry, blasphemy! . . . Object not, therefore, too strongly against the marriage of Christ." (All the above statements: Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 259-260)
"When Mary of old came to the sepulcher. . .she saw two angels in white. and they said unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She said unto them, Because they have take away my Lord, OR HUSBAND, and I know not where they have laid him." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, page 210)
In 1853 the following appeared in the Mormon church paper, the Millennial Star: ". . .we apprehend that even greater troubles than these may arise before mankind learn all the particulars of Christ's incarnation-how and by whom he was begotten; the character of the relationships formed by the act; the number of wives and children he had. . ." (The Millennial Star, Vol 15, page 825)
Statement by Brigham Young, second prophet of the LDS church:
"The Scripture says that He, the Lord, came walking in the Temple, with "HIS TRAIN; I do not know who they were, unless his wives and children;" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13. page 309)
The Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt:
"...it will be seen that the GREAT MESSIAH who was the founder of the Christian religion, WAS A POLYGAMIST, . . .the MESSIAH chose. . .by marrying honorable wives himself, show to all future generations that HE approbated the plurality of wives under the Christian dispensation, as well as under the dispensation in which His polygamist ancestors lived. . . .We have now clearly shown that God the Father had a plurality of wives. . ." (The Seer, page 172)
Pasted from
Mormon Doctrine and Married Jesus
The Davinci Code says Jesus was married. Mormon doctrine teaches that Jesus Christ was married also, but there's more...
Start by reading Mormon scripture D&C 113:1-6. According to the chapter heading, this Q&A revelation session was conducted by the Prophet Joseph Smith himself. 1. Who is the Stem of Jesse spoken of in the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th verses of the 11th chapter of Isaiah?
2. Verily thus saith the Lord: It is Christ.
3. What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse?
4. Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power.
5. What is the root of Jesse spoken of in the 10th verse of the 11th chapter?
6. Behold, thus saith the Lord, it is a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood, and the keys of the kingdom, for an ensign, and for the gathering of my people in the last days. (See also D&C 110:16. In fact, most of D&C 110.)
If you look at verse 6, it goes all the way to the point of implying that Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith himself was a direct descendant of Jesus.
Not only does Mormon scripture assert that Jesus had descendants, he had at least two wives.
This is taught in LDS Seminary and Institute, that Jesus was married. Jesus had to follow all of the commandments in order to fulfil all righteousness (Matt 3:15). In other words, since Jesus commanded Joseph Smith that none can enter into heaven unless they enter into the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage (D&C 132), then, of course, Jesus must have also been married.
In addition to LDS scripture, the Mormon Church has officially explained this doctrine:
"The Scripture says that He, the Lord, came walking in the Temple, with His train; I do not know who they were, unless His wives and children."
- The Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses Vol. 13, p.309
"There are those in this audience who are descendants of the Lord's Twelve Apostles-and, shall I say it, yes, descendants of the Savior himself! His seed is represented in the body of these men."
- LDS First Presidency Memeber and Apostle George Q. Cannon, Solemn Assembly in the Salt Lake Temple, July 2, 1899, Meeting Notes Utah State Historical Society, p. 376. "Are you ever going to be prepared to see God, Jesus Christ, His angels, or comprehend His servants, unless you take a faithful and prayerful course? Did you actually know Joseph Smith? No. Do you know brother Brigham? No. Do you know brother Heber? No, you do not. Do you know the Twelve? You do not, if you did, you would begin to know God, and learn that those men who are chosen to direct and counsel you are near kindred to God and to Jesus Christ, for the keys, power, and authority of the kingdom of God are in that lineage. I speak of these things with a view to arouse your feelings and your faithfulness towards God the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ, that you may pray and be humble, and penitent."
- The Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p.248
"Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to the world, but the thing is there; it is told; Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do."
"Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We [The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints] say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified. "Has he indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken upon himself the seed of Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear his name on the earth?" No. But when the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the Savior's in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is the chosen of God, the seed of the blessed, that shall be gathered. I do not despise to be called a son of Abraham, if he had a dozen wives; or to be called a brother, a son, a child of the Savior, if he had Mary, and Martha, and several others, as wives; and though he did cast seven devils out of one of them, it is all the same to me."
"Before the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours; he saw his seed, and immediately afterwards he was cut off from the earth; but who shall declare his generation? They had no father to hold them in honorable remembrance; they passed into the shades of obscurity, never to be exposed to mortal eye as the seed of the blessed one. For no doubt had they been exposed to the eye of the world, those infants might have shared the same fate as the children of Jerusalem in the days of Herod, when all the children were ordered to be slain under such an age, with the hopes of slaying the infant Savior. They might have suffered by the hand of the assassin, as the sons of many kings have done who were heirs apparent to the thrones of their fathers." - The Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, 26 vols., 2:, p. 82, 83
"Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do. Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified." - The Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 82
"Sunday I Attended the Sabbath School Conference .... Joseph F. Smith spoke one hour & 25 minutes. He spoke upon the Marriage in Cana at Galilee. He taught Jesus was the Bridgegroom and Mary & Martha the brides. He also refered to Luke 10 ch. 38 to 42 verse, Also John 11 ch. 2 & 5 vers John 12 Ch 3d vers, John 20 8 to 18. Joseph Smith spoke upon these passages to show that Mary & Martha manifested much Closer relationship than merely a believer which looks consister. He did not think that Jesus who decended through Poligamous families from Abraham down & who fulfilled all the Law even baptism by immersion would have lived and died without being married."
- The Prophet Wilford Woodruff wrote in his journal on July 22, 1883
"I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children. All that I have to say in reply to that charge is this--they worship a Savior that is too pure and holy to fulfil the commands of his Father. I worship one that is just pure and holy enough 'to fulfil all righteousness;' not only the righteous law of baptism, but the still more righteous and important law 'to multiply and replenish the earth.' Startle not at this! for even the Father himself honored that law by coming down to Mary, without a natural body, and begetting a son; and if Jesus begat children, he only 'did that which he had seen his Father do.'"
- The Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 210
"It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cans of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it." - The Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p. 259
"Heber taught, as did a few other Mormons of his day, that Christ was married—indeed that Christ was married to both Mary and Martha and that the famous wedding of Cana was in reality Christ's own wedding. In his own mind Heber was not only a follower of Christ, but a literal descendant. In his last public sermon, two months before his death, he said, "You do not know who Heber C. Kimball is, or you would do better."If one can accept the possibility of Christ's marriage, then such a descent is possible."
- Biography of Apostle Heber C. Kimball, p. 275 "We are not informed at what time Jesus was to be married to this kin's daughter or to any of the rest of His wives. But from what John the Baptist says, He may have been married to some of them previous to that prophets martyrdom: The passage is as follows; 'He that hath the Bride is the Bridegroom: but the friend of the Bridegroom, which standeth and heareth Him, rejoiceth greatly because of the Bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.' (John 3: 29, 30.) And again, 'Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the Bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the Bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.' (Mathew 9: 15.) John represents Jesus as already in the possession of the Bride; while the Saviour confirms what John says, by calling Himself 'the Bridegroom,' and the disciples 'the children of the Bridechamber,' but who the Bride was neither of them informs us. Whether Jesus had married any of His wives at that time or not, it is very evident that there will be a marriage of the Son of God at the time of His second coming: for Jesus said, 'The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.'"
-The Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, Vol.1, No.11, p. 169-p. "Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, the 'grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was because He had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed Him.' After Jesus went from the stage of action, the Apostles followed the example of their master. . . The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, casing his crucifixion, was evidently based on polygamy,. . .a belief in the doctrine of plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus, and his followers. We might almost think they were 'Mormons.'"
- The Apostle Jedediah M. Grant, Second Counselor to Brigham Young in the First Presidency, Journal of Discourses, Vol 1. ppl 345-346
Pasted from
//The belief that Christ was married has never been official Church doctrine. It is neither sanctioned nor taught by the Church. While it is true that a few Church leaders in the mid-1800s expressed their opinions on the matter, it was not then, and is not now, Church doctrine.” //
That is a lie as my quotes above prove. It is LDS doctrine and commonly taught among other LDS.
//What I find interesting is that people find the notion so strange that he might have been married, as if contact with a wife is somehow defiling.//
Strawman. That isn’t the issue. The objection to Christ being married isn’t that marriage or sex is a sin but that it would have been selfish for him to leave a wife and children which would have been a sin.
Mormons used to behead people too and Smith claimed to be a second Mohammed, that it would be Joseph Smith or the sword.
I’ll let Els play and give the quote.
Post of the thread.
//For a Jewish Rabbi not to be married would be a serious fault and unheard of in rabbinical tradition. //
Wrong again. Do your research, that did not come about until AFTER the destruction and the diaspora, about 100AD.
Your argument is invalid. Rabbis were not expected or required to be married at the time of Christ.
Smith started out as a protestant and used the KJV for portions of the BOM: http://infidels.org/library/modern/curt_heuvel/bom_bible.html
I work with a devout Mormon - he does not claim Jesus was married and said those who do are mistaken. Every religion has its black sheep/nuts/fringe “representatives”, even the Catholic Church. Yet, we constantly jump on Mormons - perhaps it’s some of that self-hatred coming out for those who claimed (and still claim) that Mitt was every bit as bad as Obama - when you have that sort of crap to clean up from your “thinking”, you will resort to any avenue to distract from your foibles (the last not aimed at you - enough here will feel the slap).
Rather, to make Christ married, based on what you assume Jews would find to be untenable, is to go beyond what Scripture states and to be bound by tradition.
Your objection is not based upon what Scripture reveals but upon the limited knowledge we have of 1st century Jewish rabbis, and the tradition that developed later.
It is exceedingly obvious that Christ was not married, as what is untenable is that the Holy Spirit kept this marriage invisible, while revealing far less notable acquaintances and details of His life, as well as those of others. To make His wife as a non-person would also be contrary to how the Lord treated others, and taught us how to do the same. But perhaps you do believe in invisible wives.
More on "For a Jewish Rabbi not to be married would be a serious fault and unheard of in rabbinical tradition."
Philo describes another Jewish sect of both men and women--the Therapeutae --who were celibate in their studies and pursuit of wisdom and the holy life (De Vita Contemplativa 68f).
3. But the dominant class of individuals who were 'allowed' or 'expected' to be celibate were prophetic figures, throughout Jewish history:
"But the Essenes, Qumran, and the Therapeutae were not the only examples of Jewish religious celibates who were considered in a reverent light around the time of Jesus. The OT was not lacking in at least one celibate religious figure, and later interpretation of the OT added some others. The one case from the OT is the tragic prophet Jeremiah. Far from being some positive religious commitment, celibacy was for Jeremiah a tragic personal sign, a lived-out prophetic symbol of the destruction of life that awaited the sinful people of Judah (Jer 16:1-4)." We have, then, at least one example of an OT prophet for whom celibacy was not a minor matter, an optional life style. It was, by the order of Yahweh, a very literal and painful "embodiment" of Jeremiah's prophetic message of judgment, pronouncing imminent doom as punishment for the apostasy of God's people." [MJ:1.339]
"More well-known, though still exceptional, would have been the undoubted celibacy of wilderness prophets like Banus (Josephus Life 2.11) and John the Baptist." [DictNTB, s.v. "marriage"]
"We should not be completely surprised that another fiery prophet of judgment around the time of Jesus also seems to have been celibate, namely, John the Baptist. Granted, our sources do not speak explicitly of John's celibacy; as usual, we are left with arguments from indirection and inference. But, even apart from Luke's picture of the boy John being raised in the wilderness until the time he began his ministry (at Qumran?),"' the mere fact that this ascetic prophet feeding on locusts and wild honey roamed up and down the Jordan Valley and the Judean wilderness, apparently with no fixed abode as he proclaimed a radical message of imminent judgment on Israel, makes it probable that John was a celibate (Mark 1:4-8).... It may be no accident that Mark closes the story of John's execution by Antipas with the words: ". . . his [John's] disciples came and took his corpse and laid it in a tomb" (6:29). Without intending to reflect on the fact directly, Mark may be in effect seconding what Luke implies: there was no wife, children, or other family around John to see to one of the most sacred obligations incumbent on family members in Judaism: arranging for and participating in the obsequies of a husband or parent. In his radical itinerant prophetic ministry, John may have consciously been imitating Elijah, an OT itinerant prophet of judgment, who not only was interpreted as an eschatological figure in later Judaism (as early as Malachi and Ben Sira) but was also interpreted as a celibate by various patristic writers (e.g., Ambrose and Jerome). [MJ:1.339f]
4. Although the Rabbinic writers stressed the importance of marriage for procreation, it is noteworthy that this prophetic ideal of celibacy still showed up in the rabbinics:
"Judaism saw nothing wrong in portraying as celibate the great primordial prophet, seer, and lawgiver Moses (though only after the Lord had begun to speak to him). We see this interpretation already beginning to develop in Philo in the 1st century A.D. What is more surprising is that this idea is also reflected in various rabbinic passages. The gist of the tradition is an a fortiori argument. If the Israelites at Sinai had to abstain from women temporarily to prepare for God's brief, once-and- for-all address to them, how much more should Moses be permanently chaste, since God spoke regularly to him (see, e.g., b. Yabb. 87a). The same tradition, but from the viewpoint of the deprived wife, is related in the Sipre on Numbers 12.1 (99). Since the rabbis in general were unsympathetic--not to say hostile--to religious celibacy, the survival of this Moses tradition even in later rabbinic writings argues that the tradition was long-lived and widespread by the time of the rabbis. We should note once again the typology seen in Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and the recycled Moses figure: the prophet who directly receives divine revelation that is to be communicated to his beloved yet sinful people Israel finds his whole life radically altered by his prophetic vocation. This alteration, this being set apart by and for God's Word, is embodied graphically in the rare, awesome, and--for many Jews--terrible vocation of celibacy....While accepting the idea of an ancient figure like Moses as celibate (at least during his ministry to Israel), the rabbis did not as a general rule allow celibacy among their rabbinic colleagues and disciples. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (end of 1st century A.D.) is said to have equated a man's refusal to procreate offspring with murder. One rare exception, according to the same rabbinic passage, was Rabbi Simeon ben Azzai (a younger contemporary of Eliezer ben Hyrcanus), who paradoxically recommended marriage and procreation, though he himself remained unmarried. When accused of not practicing what he preached, he replied: "My soul is in love with the Torah. The world can be carried on by others" (b. Yeham. 63b).65
"That such a 'deviant' tradition could be enshrined in the Babylonian Talmud may suggest that celibacy, though frowned upon by the rabbis, was not totally stamped out in Judaism during the centuries immediately following the Baptist and Jesus. More to the point, though ben Azzai is hardly a Jeremiah or a Baptist, his rationale for celibacy is at root similar to that of the more overtly prophetic figures: an all- consuming commitment to God's word in one's whole life precludes the usual path of marriage and child-rearing. In view of this "marginal" tradition in early Judaism, it is hardly surprising that the Jewish scholar Geza Vermes has no difficulty in seeing Jesus as celibate and explaining his unusual state by his prophetic call and the reception of the Spirit." [MJ:1.340f]
- http://christianthinktank.com/singlejesus.html; References http://christianthinktank.com/bookabs.html#MJ
So according to your logic those who are nominally Catholic and leave Catholicism to become a believer in Manichaeism (or Marcionism or others) are still Catholic? Are you really trying to find some way of making Mormons into Protestants, consistent with how you would define a Catholic?
and used the KJV for portions of the BOM
Which is far closer to the Catholic DRB than the NIV, but anyway, according to your logic the KJV must distinctively teach Mormonism, or when the devil quotes Scripture (because he knows where the power is) then Scripture is impunged by his misuse of it?
Many protestants and prots refuse to acknowledge the roots of Mormonism in protestant ism due to "bizarre" beliefs. How do you think you all appear to the only real Christians (Catholics) with your bizarre denials of basic Catholic doctrines.
From where we sit you all are on the exact same level.
Heresy is heresy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.