I think it makes as much sense to say he was married as to say he was not, at least in terms of what evidence is offered in the Bible.
How? A married Jesus would have been...married, No? No reason not to present him as such.
A negative cannot be the proof or basis for an argument
Not according to Barack Obama.
Exactly my point, presenting him as either married or unmarried has no basis in the Bible text. Yet for centuries He has been presented as an unmarried man. The flaw is only apparent to many when the opposite stance is taken than what they have accepted as fact.