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.
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!
Very interesting and I'd not considered that. Isn't the bridegroom/bride analogy simply figurative just as the slavery or prisoner analogy often made in the NT? A man can be married to his work (but that may kill his real marriage as you have stated), but Christ as the Jehovah of the OT is God and nothing is beyond 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.
Potentially and as an aside I find the DaVinci Code despicable garbage. Its purpose is to undermine Christ and to insult the Catholic Church. I'm not aware of the verse you refer to indicating that Jesus' line is cut off. Take a look at Isaiah 53:10 where it states emphatically that "[Jesus]shall see his seed" is that to be figurative or literal?
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.
On this point I am not clear as to what you are getting at.
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.
Here I agree with you that an argument from silence isn't a strong argument. At the same time there would be a lot of reasons for God to hide the bloodline of Jesus Christ.
My point is that His being married or even being a father doesn't change one bit his divinity or his mission. Interesting discussion and thanks.