[Dog Gone]

I'm not familiar with the book, and I doubt I ever will be. Everyone who loved Jesus felt utterly abandoned when he willingly died and I'm not sure a wife would have felt worse than, say, Peter.

Had Jesus been married, I'm sure much could have been made of how he also served as a role model in that regard. However, I suspect the reason that Jesus did not get married is that it would have created an enormous problem if he and his wife had produced children.

The theological consequences of that would have been interesting, but at some point any descendants would probably have been hunted down and killed.

[dangus]

>> I'm not familiar with the book, and I doubt I ever will be. Everyone who loved Jesus felt utterly abandoned when he willingly died and I'm not sure a wife would have felt worse than, say, Peter.

Except that he is responsible to his wife, as they share one flesh.

>>Had Jesus been married, I'm sure much could have been made of how he also served as a role model in that regard.

Except he didn't and so there is no history of him as such a role model. So we countinue to look to St. Joseph as a model.

[NeoCaveman]

The theological consequences of that would have been interesting, but at some point any descendants would probably have been hunted down and killed.

This is an interesting hypothetical. I don't believe in any of this gnostic garbage because it was condemned by the early Church but it is interesting.

If Jesus had had a son. I imagine he would have been named the head of the Church and not Peter. Surely the son of the King of Kings would be well, the King. As heredity would trump all. We'd have quite a diffrent religion with a leader based on a particular bloodline, weird.