[Hodar]

A movie based on a book that wears its heresy and blasphemy as a badge of honor.

What is the blasphemy or heresy in supposing that Jesus Christ was married? From the logical point of view, a hetero-sexual male in his late 20's and at that point in time was typically married. How does that impact his message to us? Consider this, Christ was a Jew; he was called 'Rabbi' and guess what? Rabbi's were REQUIRED to be married. Now whether he was or not, I do not know. But it isn't heresy to ponder this question.

[Lakeshark]

Not sure if considering it is heresy, but it sure makes a person look stoopid, all things considered.

sorry about that........

[RobbyS]

Guess what Jesuswas not a rabbi. He was called rabbi out of respect. Rabbinical Judaism, as we know it, was a development of the period after the destruction of the temple. As to his being married, there is no evidence that he was. Celibacy was not unknown in the Judaism of the period. For instance, does anyone claim that John the Baptist had a wife?

[Cvengr]

Actually, there is an element of heresy in the question.

Consider recent positions by homosexuals to advance alternate theologies to support their addiction to homosexuality.

One of their major tenants is that within their DNA, God has created them as homosexual so it couldn't be bad. Such a position fails to grasp the significance of the work of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.

After the fall in the Garden of Eden, every human born has had an element of sin in their genetic composition which has been passed by the male chromosome. Mary need not have been a perfect person to have conceived the Perfect Lamb, but the seed of that conception was from the Holy Spirit, which is perfect. Jesus Christ was then born, as the second Adam, perfect in body, soul and spirit. Accordingly, He was qualified to be presented as the Perfect Sacrifice to God the Father.

In the event, Jesus Christ had indeed born a son physically, then the same perfect genetic makeup would have been passed to His child. Unlike all other humans throughout the history of mankind, such a sibling could uniquely qualify as not requiring salvation, unless at another time by his own volition he sinned. It might also be advanced that his body might not die naturally, but might possibly already have eternal life as procreated from Christ.

This type of delusion might be used by a fallen angel if possessing the body of another and attempting to develop a system of false governance on the Earth.

Returning to the issue of homosexuals, no person born is void of a DNA marker making them predisposed to sin. Accordingly, submission to sin as one's false god doesn;t usher in salvation, rather the person who remains mired in their sin simply remains dead in the spirit and still lacking salvation. We are condemned before we are saved.

Advocating a genetic lineage of Christ implies a race may exist immune to His rule, which IMHO, might easily be considered as blasphemous.