1 Corinthians 7:1-5
1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.
4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Kinda upsets the applecart that Catholicism has created by it's non-biblical picture it paint's of Mary: the mother of Jesus.
Mormonic placemarker
1 Corinthians 7:32-33 provides warrant against the idea that the Lord had to be some sort of extreme ascetic to remain celibate, while it is contrary to the manner of Scriptural revelation, which is careful and comprehensive enough to mention the Lord having brother and sisters, and women who provided for the mission, and of His care for His mother, and of the apostles having wives, and the 2 exception to that, but never mentions a wife of the Lord, even when the context would warrant it.
Such as,
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? (Matthew 13:55)
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? (1 Corinthians 9:5)
Moreover, the description of His life is that of a single person, whose material needs and for company are met by others such as the apostles, Mary, Martha and Lazarus, who are specifically mentioned as being loved by Him, but nowhere do we see even any intimation of this invisible wife.
The premise is that being a single prophet and informal rabbi was such a novel or radical thing that explicit mention of it must be expected, and i would agree if it were, except that it need not explicitly stated, but can be implicitly conveyed, and which it is, even though i do not see the celibate status of either John the Baptist or the Lord, both of whom the magisterium considered itinerant preachers, and thus more like the Essenes, as being either a novel or radical thing.
Kinda upsets the applecart that Catholicism has created by it's non-biblical picture it paint's of Mary: the mother of Jesus.
By subscribing to a Mormonic or Catholic idea that a universe of spiritual knowledge outside Scripture exists today about Christ and the people of God, such a thing as the Lord being married can be considered tenable. And the basic deification of Mary be made doctrine or sanctioned. As well as such cardinal events as the Lord bodily appearing in America or the bodily assumption of Mary and her enthronement,