I'm not Mormon, but I do know that if you took speculation from the ministers and laypeople of any church and compared them against their official church doctrine it would be easy to find discrepancies.
IF Jesus were married why does the Bible refer to the Church as His bride? and speak of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb? There’s no way Jesus would be anything but pure for His spotless bride.
‘Course if a person is Mormon, maybe having two wives isn’t a problem.
Brother Bills was correct. The belief that Jesus was married is an opinion, not an official doctrine of the Church. That is to say, has not been presented by the First Presidency as a revelation to the Church, nor has it been accepted as such by the Church. It is not taught in our official Sunday School manuals. Members are not expected to believe it.
Although the idea that Jesus might have been married does not bother me in the slightest, I remain unconvinced by the arguments I have heard. The evidence presented in the Bible is circumstantial at best, and I know of no latter-day revelation on the subject. If the Lord has not chosen to reveal the truth of the matter, it must not be important to know at this time.
Such a disclaimer once again exposes the duplicity of the LDS Church.
Only to those who are already convinced that the LDS Church is duplicitous.
I thought he was gay? /heavy sarc. The liberals believe that and the mormans believe he is married. Well I would bet that both questions are wrong. We will only find out once we are off this Earth and in Heaven.
***”I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children” (Journal of Discourses 2:210).
On October 6, 1854, ... it is common in this day, the women, even as Sarah, called their husbands Lord; the word Lord is tantamount to husband in some languages, master, lord, husband, are about synonymous... When Mary of old came to the sepulchre on the first day of the week, instead of finding Jesus she saw two angels in white, ‘And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou?’ She said unto them,’ Because they have taken away my Lord,’ or husband,***
Does this mean that Jesus was also married to Thomas?
Jhn 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Hey, just asking!
Jesus Was Married = Not LDS doctrine There fixed the title.
I guess to reach "exultation" maybe (rolling eyes), But to reach "Exaltation" he would not have to be. In LDS Doctrine one does not have to be married to reach the Celestial Kingdom.
Mormonism Research Ministry
AKA, Making a profit at lying about Mormon Doctrines.
From their website...
Supporting MRM through your financial giving, Like all ministries, MRM depends heavily on financial support. Checks Credit Cards PayPal Estate Planning/ Life Insurance
In 1865, a majority of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church officially condemned some of Pratt's doctrinal declarations contained in The Seer:
"The Seer contain doctrines which we cannot sanction, and which we have felt impressed to disown, so that the Saints who now live, and who may live hereafter, may not be misled by our silence, or be left to misinterpret it. Where these objectionable works, or parts of works, are bound in volumes, or otherwise, they should be cut out and destroyed."[2]
This is NOT LDS doctrine why did you post it like that?
You are using quotes from Dan Brown’s fictional novel (emphasis on fictional)
A speculation in pondering or a discourse or an opinion is NOT doctrine it was never canonized.
Have you read the site this comes from? Its an anti-Mormon hit site. Its not really any better or worse than if it were anti-semitic.
On the other hand it is helpful in the sense that it may the source or indirect source of of many of the anti-Mormon talking points we’ve been seeing.
We ought to at least label it as an attack site, though since the name is misleading.
Want to know what LDS doctrine is? Then look in our scriptures. The scriptures are the standard that define what is and what is not doctrine, anything spoken of that is not in our scriptures is the speculation of the authors.
Accusing the church of being deceptive in stating it isn’t doctrine ignores that the evidence they present is all from non-doctrinal sources, they haven’t proven the premise of the accusation.
Nowhere do our scriptures say that Christ was married, it is not the doctrine of the church. It is an opinion that some have, nothing more. At most you can say that many Mormons wouldn’t bat an eye if something was revealed or discovered later on saying Christ was married.
I’m fascinated by how some Christians find the idea horrifying though. So what if Christ married? There is nothing dishonorable about it, marriage was instituted by God and if Christ was married that would only underscore the sacredness and sanctity of marriage. The way some Christians find the idea so revolting seems to me an expression of an unhealthy attitude towards sexuality.
Since you posted this thread, is there some obscure reason why you are not dealing with these Mormonism fallacies (like the insult of why wouldn’t Jesus be married to one or more women while he was on earth) as they arise in offense to the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
As soon as you introduce mormonism into a discussion
of Christ, you lose all credibility.
Orson Pratt mentioned in the article, was brother to Parley P Pratt, Romney’s great great grandad. Parley and Orson were both Apostles. Parley was bowie knifed and shot by an irate husband for stealing his woman and kids to make her the 10th out of 12 wives. Eventually, Bishop Romney will be up to his ears explaining polygamy etc.
If a person honestly has a question about Jesus Christ, they might begin by simple reading His Word. Nowhere is Scripture are such notions implied nor suggested, but their contrary is probably supported by multiple doctrines.
Such suggestions about Jesus Christ having wives and fathered biological offspring make about as much sense as an egotisical wife claiming her husband is having affairs when they are working and sleeping 24/7 trying to pay bills. If one simply read Scripture, one would be hard pressed to find enough time in the life of Jesus Christ to have had a wife and children, let alone abiding to the many responsibilities of an immediate family, not to mention missing the entire point of the Incarnation.
The entire affair, IMHO, is simply an obfuscation by those who lack the patience to read Scripture, or humility to learn from Him how to have a relationship with God through faith in Christ. They seek to encourage believers to disprove negatives, while they lack the patience to hear the Truth.
Shouldn’t the title be “How much in child support was Jesus hit up for?”
Jesus clearly did not believe in plural marriage. His discourses on adultery and marriage say so, and in particular, his point premised on Adam & Eve was that these two united into one flesh.
Paul’s requirement that leaders of the church have no more than one wife derives from this teaching. Christianity is unique in its high regard for women.
The bible also demonstrates the damage of polygamy in every instance in which it is depicted in the bible.
No, he wasn’t.
But if they had a BB to back it up; then it was straight from God's mouth!