To: MEG33
Actually, there is some support for the marriage of Jesus in the Bible. The supporters of the idea have long pointed to the marriage in Cana of Galilee at which Jesus is believed to have turned water into wine. The critical passages are in John 2:1-12.
The suggestion is that the wedding was Jesus' because his mother was there and appears to be responsible for providing the wine. She gives directions to the servants to do what Jesus tells them. She would have been in charge at her son's wedding and would have given directions to servants.
But the strongest suggestion that Jesus was the bridegroom at the wedding is here:
"They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, 'Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.'
To: StupidQuestions
Ooh! you are so going to get flamed!
53 posted on
11/01/2003 8:57:09 AM PST by
Oztrich Boy
(You realize, of course, this means war?" B Bunny)
To: StupidQuestions
As the bridegroom isn't named ,one of Jesus's brothers could be the bridegroom.
59 posted on
11/01/2003 9:11:10 AM PST by
MEG33
To: StupidQuestions
If Christ were married at some time in his life, I could not fault that. Christ became man, and one of the purposes of doing so was to humble himself and experience the joys and pains of the human experience. Inorder for him to take our sins away from us, he needed to understand the many emotions of mortals. How better to understand a woman than to live with her as man and wife? How better to understand human love than to give birth to a child? How much greater was his sacrifice as he looked upon his wife and child in his earthly dying moment? The thought only makes me love Jesus more and realize what he gave up for me.
60 posted on
11/01/2003 9:14:14 AM PST by
Toespi
To: StupidQuestions
Jesus was at the wedding, but he was a guest, not the bridegroom. Here's the source:
John 2
1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. [NIV]
To: StupidQuestions
LMAO
110 posted on
11/01/2003 12:51:20 PM PST by
Catholicguy
(MT1618 Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud)
To: StupidQuestions
The critical passages are in John 2:1-12. The suggestion is that the wedding was Jesus' because his mother was there and appears to be responsible for providing the wine. She gives directions to the servants to do what Jesus tells them. She would have been in charge at her son's wedding and would have given directions to servants. But the strongest suggestion that Jesus was the bridegroom at the wedding is here: "They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, 'Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.' Not in the weensiest bit convincing.
a) Jesus was both God AND man.
b) "Onanism" was a sin, and Jesus wouldn't have practised it...and that would have been about the only birth control method then.
c) Therefore, if Jesus married, he'd also very likely have had children...natural processes being what they are (there's that God AND man bit again)
d) If you are physically born of God, then what does that make you?
e) He was NOT "just like other men" going down to the office for a day's work and coming back to kick his feet up on the couch.
from the text you seem to forget that Mary (his mother) said "look, THEY have no more wine." Not "WE have no more wine." (it's quite likely that the wedding party were related to Mary... and she said this out of sympathy.)
And given this wedding was in Cana...didn't customs back then dictate that the wedding be held on the GROOM'S home turf? Jesus's home turf at the time was Nazareth....I could be mistaken on this last point, but I believe I am correct.
And forgive me, but wouldn't a male have been "in charge" of overseeing such a feast at that time...and not Mary?
All this "Jesus was married" hoo-ha is simply to bring Him down to mere mortal.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson