Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by BurningSword »

Bgood wrote:
BurningSword wrote:Fundamentally the question is not "What proof do we have that Jesus was married ?" But rather, "where is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?”
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Celibacy can be for sake of kingdom of heaven, as did Jesus perform in his mission of that time as it was necessary not to be defiled with women and remain without that impurity, reason for saying that look to revelation. Lust overtakes a man easily once they cling to a women but such is known of God and suffered for man is fallen and even their love has lust. But even so those whom find love and cling together as one flesh if married must honor the vows lest they commit adultery.

And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

This is the revelation I speak of, Jesus fulfilled also this as did those of the 144,000 such a mystery was not necessary for all mankind to know, reason it says what it says. People are not understanding whom Jesus is I feel that is why they try to bring him down to the human understanding but whom he really is isn't understood by minds of men.

In the Bible or the BOM Is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?[/quote]

Pray about it and let Spirit of truth reveal to you why Jesus said the scripture I just posted.

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

Paul foresaw the apostasy of Christianity and warned the members of the Church concerning these events. Celibacy, among other things was a "doctrine of devils".

Now the spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. (I Tim. 4:1-3)

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

BurningSword wrote:
Bgood wrote:
BurningSword wrote:Fundamentally the question is not "What proof do we have that Jesus was married ?" But rather, "where is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?”
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Celibacy can be for sake of kingdom of heaven, as did Jesus perform in his mission of that time as it was necessary not to be defiled with women and remain without that impurity, reason for saying that look to revelation. Lust overtakes a man easily once they cling to a women but such is known of God and suffered for man is fallen and even their love has lust. But even so those whom find love and cling together as one flesh if married must honor the vows lest they commit adultery.

And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

This is the revelation I speak of, Jesus fulfilled also this as did those of the 144,000 such a mystery was not necessary for all mankind to know, reason it says what it says. People are not understanding whom Jesus is I feel that is why they try to bring him down to the human understanding but whom he really is isn't understood by minds of men.

In the Bible or the BOM Is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?
Pray about it and let Spirit of truth reveal to you why Jesus said the scripture I just posted.[/quote]



Paul foresaw the apostasy of Christianity and warned the members of the Church concerning these events. Celibacy, among other things was a "doctrine of devils".

Now the spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. (I Tim. 4:1-3)

BrotherOfMahonri
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1751

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by BrotherOfMahonri »

rewcox wrote:If Jesus was married, the Davinci Code is correct!??!

That was a good read.
Woah wait - Apostacy! The Davinci Code? This is an LDS Forum, you cannot discuss such stuff here!!! :p

You need to go tell your bishop about this good read and have your recommend denied until you repent and state is was not a good read.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=266159" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You are busted rewcox, hypocrisy is an understatement. Consider this rebuke in the spirit of righteous indignation not mocking... ( viewtopic.php?f=14&t=39387&start=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

BrotherOfMahonri wrote:
rewcox wrote:If Jesus was married, the Davinci Code is correct!??!

That was a good read.
Woah wait - Apostacy! The Davinci Code? This is an LDS Forum, you cannot discuss such stuff here!!! :p

You need to go tell your bishop about this good read and have your recommend denied until you repent and state is was not a good read.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=266159" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You are busted rewcox, hypocrisy is an understatement. Consider this rebuke in the spirit of righteous indignation not mocking... ( viewtopic.php?f=14&t=39387&start=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )
"If I may say this neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man in the Lord. (I Cor. 11:11)

When Jesus was alive, general public opinion was in error about His divine mission. Today it is in error concerning His marital status. The concept of His celibacy was promoted by celibates and became popular through the mother church of Catholicism. Celibate priests believed that unmarried men were more righteous than those who were married.

But Jesus advocated the laws of Judaism, not the alien apostate doctrines that were influencing the early Christian church. The Apostle Paul warned the Church against these influences, but their ultimate victory over true Christian doctrines is evident.

To any reader of the Bible it is obvious that God's first law to man was to be fruitful and multiply, and the first marriage of record was solemnized by God Himself. Never has He, from that day to this, promoted or advocated the laws of celibacy nor barrenness for righteous men and women. Believing that Jesus was married, according to divine law, is logical and reasonable.
Last edited by Bgood on July 16th, 2015, 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jeremy
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1776
Location: Chugiak Alaska

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Jeremy »

:ymparty: Wow Bgood and BS. Two strong opinions. I certainly align more with the one that is not BS.

While I wont claim to have received any grand personal revelation on the matter, I think it much more likely that Jesus was married apposed to celibate. I suppose he could be celibate but married, though I also think that is unlikely. This does not mean that I believe Jesus was married because it was necessary for him to become a god. As noted above, he was already a god. (Side note: so are we) Nor does it mean that I believe those who remain unmarried at death are denied the progression offered to those who were married.

I believe that marriage is NOT an experience in lust or limited to having children. It is not a sin to cleave unto another and multiply and replenish the earth. I think it is a mistake to live as if that is the case. Sex can be but is NOT a lustful act. Sex can be but is NOT an action of love. Sex is an action and much like other actions, its purity is found in the intention. Who are we to say that the action could not happen because it is not how heaven works? Are we going to sit around a table and eat fish in heaven? Does heaven work that way? If not, why did Jesus eat fish? True intention weighs heavier than actions. While we can see the actions and judge them to be bad or good based on what we THINK is the intention, we do not see the intention that motivated the action... therefore - judge not, lest ye be judged according to the same.

A marriage between equals is a beautiful thing to be apart of and to assume that we as mortals understand what that means in the heavens is like my 4 year old telling me that 1 minus 2 is impossible. With such a limited perspective I would not expect that 4 year old to understand but I would hope they would be willing to receive further light and knowledge before proclaiming "Behold, I tell you it is not the way of heaven". Perhaps it is not the heaven they know. If that is the case, I am sorry for the joy they could be missing. As for me, I know a heaven where uniting in love is not a sin.

BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by BurningSword »

Bgood wrote:
BurningSword wrote:
Bgood wrote:
BurningSword wrote:Fundamentally the question is not "What proof do we have that Jesus was married ?" But rather, "where is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?”
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Celibacy can be for sake of kingdom of heaven, as did Jesus perform in his mission of that time as it was necessary not to be defiled with women and remain without that impurity, reason for saying that look to revelation. Lust overtakes a man easily once they cling to a women but such is known of God and suffered for man is fallen and even their love has lust. But even so those whom find love and cling together as one flesh if married must honor the vows lest they commit adultery.

And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

This is the revelation I speak of, Jesus fulfilled also this as did those of the 144,000 such a mystery was not necessary for all mankind to know, reason it says what it says. People are not understanding whom Jesus is I feel that is why they try to bring him down to the human understanding but whom he really is isn't understood by minds of men.

In the Bible or the BOM Is there any proof that celibacy was a doctrinal law of God?
Pray about it and let Spirit of truth reveal to you why Jesus said the scripture I just posted.


Paul foresaw the apostasy of Christianity and warned the members of the Church concerning these events. Celibacy, among other things was a "doctrine of devils".

Now the spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. (I Tim. 4:1-3)[/quote]

It would be wise of you not to judge, labelling things apostasy is not wise if you truly don't know. But I can say this what I have spoken I do know not from reading anything upon the world of man, but given to me to know by the real Spirit of truth.

deep water
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2056

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by deep water »

I do not know as I have never thought the point important enough to search out, but I do believe BurningSwords words. When Jesus was on the cross he gave earthly care of his mother to one of his Disciples. I would think that at the same moment he would have given earthly care of his wife and family to someone, if he would have had them.
I also had to chuckle at BOMs quip.
Christ knew his mission and preformed his mission. I do believe Christ had a wife and family in another time, of his existence, for he is just doing what he has seen his father do.

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

deep water wrote:I do not know as I have never thought the point important enough to search out, but I do believe BurningSwords words. When Jesus was on the cross he gave earthly care of his mother to one of his Disciples. I would think that at the same moment he would have given earthly care of his wife and family to someone, if he would have had them.
I also had to chuckle at BOMs quip.
Christ knew his mission and preformed his mission. I do believe Christ had a wife and family in another time, of his existence, for he is just doing what he has seen his father do.

"In the restoration of the new and everlasting covenant of marriage the Lord said that "no one can reject this covenant" and then be permitted to "receive a fullness of my glory." Instead they would "remain separately and singly to all eternity." He then justified His servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, in having many bound in heaven. The wives of these ancient prophets would then be restored to them in heaven because of their obedience and faithfulness. And, if God's servants are faithful in honoring the commandments and laws of the new and everlasting covenant, they are promised even "a hundred fold." This is no less than the promise that Jesus made to Peter and the Apostles when He said that if they should sacrifice a wife or anything else for the sake of the Gospel, that He would bless them with a hundred more. (Mark 10:29-30)

If then, these faithful prophets and apostles shall come forth in the resurrection with their wives, is it reasonable that Jesus should be left "separately and singly forever and ever?" Was the love and affection which Mary, Martha, and the others had for Jesus meant to be ended at death? Did Jesus honor all of the laws and all of the ordinances with the exception of this new and everlasting covenant? Jesus was not an exception to any of the eternal laws of heaven; and to become a God, He like all others must honor and obey that everlasting covenant of marriage.
Last edited by Bgood on July 16th, 2015, 1:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

Luke, gives increased insight to these women's identity. The nature of the situation indicates that they were wives.

"And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. Now upon the first day of the week very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold two men stood by them in shining garments; and as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen; remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. And they remembered his words, and returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. (Luke 23:55-56; 24:1-11)

Now then, according to Jewish traditional laws, only members of the immediate family are permitted to attend to the body and enter into the sepulchre of the deceased. All of these women had to be the mother, sisters and wives of Jesus!

deep water
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2056

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by deep water »

I have also seen where Christ defined his Gospel in 3 Nephi ch 11. And then added that if anyone adds to this Gospel or takes away from this gospel of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, know that it is not of Him. This teaching is found in the New Testament and other places in the BOM and the D&C. So someone can take something out of scripture and wrest it to their own understanding, but their understanding is only correct if it is gods understanding also. If you have went to god and learned from God through revelation, then I will have more respect for your interpretation and your understanding would have more impact upon me. But thanks for bringing forth your understanding, so I can ponder upon your words.

Bgood said; Now then, according to Jewish traditional laws, only members of the immediate family are permitted to attend to the body and enter into the sepulchre of the deceased. All of these women had to be the mother, sisters and wives of Jesus!

No where does it say all that went to the sepulchre, were there to enter and attend to the body. I can easily see others accompanying the family members in support. Today, do not many unrelated people attend funeral and burial services for the deceased.
Would members of the fairer sex want to stay behind with a room full of despondent men?

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

deep water wrote:I have also seen where Christ defined his Gospel in 3 Nephi ch 11. And then added that if anyone adds to this Gospel or takes away from this gospel of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, know that it is not of Him. This teaching is found in the New Testament and other places in the BOM and the D&C. So someone can take something out of scripture and wrest it to their own understanding, but their understanding is only correct if it is gods understanding also. If you have went to god and learned from God through revelation, then I will have more respect for your interpretation and your understanding would have more impact upon me. But thanks for bringing forth your understanding, so I can ponder upon your words.

Bgood said; Now then, according to Jewish traditional laws, only members of the immediate family are permitted to attend to the body and enter into the sepulchre of the deceased. All of these women had to be the mother, sisters and wives of Jesus!

No where does it say all that went to the sepulchre, were there to enter and attend to the body. I can easily see others accompanying the family members in support. Today, do not many unrelated people attend funeral and burial services for the deceased.
Would members of the fairer sex want to stay behind with a room full of despondent men?



Four Statements on the Marital and Parental Status of the Son of God

Apostle Orson Hyde?s address during a general conference is the highest authoritative teaching on the marriage and fatherhood of Jesus Christ, but it is not the earliest statement on this doctrine. The earliest known official remark by an LDS authority on the marital status of the Son of God was by Jedediah M. Grant (appointed to the Seventy in 1845). On August 7, 1853, Grant addressed the Saints in the Tabernacle in Great Salt Lake City. Grant, a polygamist himself, taught that the chief reason for the persecution of Christ was his polygamy. He asserted this on the basis, in part, of Celsus? remarks about the many wives of Jesus Christ. Grant lectured,


The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were ?Mormons.?[15]

Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh. He said,

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.[16]

Hyde rebutted the objections of non-Mormons by claiming that the plural marriage of Jesus Christ to several women and his sexual function in natural fatherhood did not undermine his holiness, or purity. He taught that Jesus Christ was merely fulfilling all righteousness by obeying the fundamental commandment to be fruitful and multiply. The Son, according to Hyde, was merely following the practice of his own Father who physically sired him with Mary. The Apostle said,


All that I have to say in reply to that charge is this--they worship a Savior that is too pure and holy to fulfil the commands of his Father. I worship one that is just pure and holy enough ?to fulfil all righteousness;? not only the righteous law of baptism, but the still more righteous and important law ?to multiply and replenish the earth.? Startle not at this! for even the Father himself honored that law by coming down to Mary, without a natural body, and begetting a son; and if Jesus begat children, he only ?did that which he had seen his Father do.?[17]

Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh. He defended this teaching by posing the inappropriate nature of Christ?s relationship with Mary and Martha if they had not been married. He argued,

It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it.[18]

According to Hyde, to reject the marriage and fatherhood of Christ would be to charge the Son with sin or neglect of the Father?s command to multiply. He said,


Was it God?s commandment to man, in the beginning, to multiply and replenish the earth? None can deny this, neither that it was a righteous command; for upon an obedience to this, depended the perpetuity of our race. Did Christ come to destroy the law or the Prophets, or to fulfil them? He came to fulfil. Did he multiply, and did he see his seed? Did he honour his Father?s law by complying with it, or did he not? Others may do as they like, but I will not charge our Saviour with neglect or transgression in this or any other duty.[19]

Another founding member of the Twelve and polygamist, Apostle Orson Pratt, taught the plural marriage of the Son of God. In his work entitled, The Seer, Pratt argued along the same lines as Hyde for the plural marriage of the Son on the basis of the resurrection appearance of the Son to one of his wives, Mary Magdalene. Pratt wrote,


Next let us inquire whether there are any intimations in the Scriptures concerning the wives of Jesus. . . . In order to become the Father of Spirits, or, as Isaiah says, ?The Everlasting Father,? it is necessary that He should have one or more wives by whom He could multiply His seed, not for any limited period of time, but forever and ever. . . . One thing is certain: that there were several holy women who greatly loved Jesus--such as Mary, and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them and associated with them much; and when He arose from the dead, instead of first showing Himself to His chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them--namely, Mary Magdalene. Now, it would be very natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends.[20]

Apostle Pratt also offered a unique argument for the marriage of the Son from the Psalms. He taught that Jesus must have been married in order to fulfill the Messianic Psalm 45: 8-10.[21] The Apostle wrote,

If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were his wives. Indeed, the Psalmist David prophesies in particular concerning the Wives of the Son of God. . . . ?Kings? daughters were among thine honorable WIVES: upon thy right hand did stand the QUEEN in a vesture of gold of Ophir.?[22]

After an extensive argument in The Seer, Apostle Orson Pratt concluded that both the Father and the Son had multiple wives. He wrote,

We have now clearly shown that God the Father had a plurality of wives, one or more being in eternity, by whom He begat our spirits, as well as the spirit of Jesus His First Born, and another being upon the earth by whom He begat the tabernacle of Jesus, as His Only Begotten in this world. We have also proved most clearly that the Son followed the example of his Father, and became the great Bridegroom to whom kings? daughters and many honorable Wives were to be married.[23]

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by Elizabeth »

@};- :-BD (*)
Bgood wrote: ... Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh... Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh.

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by Bgood »

Elizabeth wrote:@};- :-BD (*)
Bgood wrote: ... Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh... Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh.
Marital and Parental Status of the Son of God

Apostle Orson Hyde (1835) delivered an address at the October general conference of the Church in 1854 during his term as President of the Quorum of the Twelve. Taking Luke 16:15 for his text, Apostle Hyde set out to speak on the topic of marriage relations. In doing so, he also affirmed the superiority of modern revelation to the Bible in this context. Hyde said,

The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. . . . The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago.[9]

Apostle Hyde was a polygamist who taught that Jesus was married to Mary on the basis of the evidence of John 20:8-18.[10] The conversation between the resurrected Son and Mary outside the tomb, according to Hyde, was a conversation like that between a husband and a wife. Hyde pointed to Mary?s use of the term ?Lord? as evidence of their marriage--a common title for husbands. Apostle Hyde said,


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, ?and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.? Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife. Where will you find a family so nearly allied by the ties of common religion? ?Well,? you say, ?that appears rather plausible, but I want a little more evidence, I want you to find where it says the Savior was actually married.?[11]


The Apostle pointed to the marriage ceremony at Cana (John 2:1-12) as evidence that ?the Savior was actually married.? He implied that the marriage of the Savior was a fact partially concealed by translators and councils. He said,

Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to t e [sic] world, but the thing is there; it is told; Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do.[12]

Apostle Hyde explicitly asserted that the bridegroom at the wedding of Cana was Jesus Himself in no uncertain terms. According to Hyde, it was necessary for Jesus to marry so he could father children and see them before his death. He remarked,

Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified.[13]

Hyde also argued that the Son had children in the flesh on the basis of Isaiah 53:10, which reads, ?he shall see his seed.? According to the Apostle, the Son could only see his seed if he had children, which he did. Apostle Hyde remarked, ?I shall say here, that before the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours; he saw his seed, and immediately afterwards he was cut off from the earth; but who shall declare his generation?? But, what became of the natural offspring of the Son of God? Hyde claimed,


They had no father to hold them in honorable remembrance; they passed into the shades of obscurity, never to be exposed to mortal eye as the seed of the blessed one. For no doubt had they been exposed to the eye of the world, those infants might have shared the same fate as the children of Jerusalem in the days of Herod, when all the children were ordered to be slain under such an age, with the hopes of slaying the infant Savior. They might have suffered by the hand of the assassin, as the sons of many kings have done who were heirs apparent to the thrones of their fathers.[14]

User avatar
rewcox
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5873

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by rewcox »

Bgood wrote:
Elizabeth wrote:@};- :-BD (*)
Bgood wrote: ... Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh... Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh.
Marital and Parental Status of the Son of God

Apostle Orson Hyde (1835) delivered an address at the October general conference of the Church in 1854 during his term as President of the Quorum of the Twelve. Taking Luke 16:15 for his text, Apostle Hyde set out to speak on the topic of marriage relations. In doing so, he also affirmed the superiority of modern revelation to the Bible in this context. Hyde said,

The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. . . . The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago.[9]

Apostle Hyde was a polygamist who taught that Jesus was married to Mary on the basis of the evidence of John 20:8-18.[10] The conversation between the resurrected Son and Mary outside the tomb, according to Hyde, was a conversation like that between a husband and a wife. Hyde pointed to Mary?s use of the term ?Lord? as evidence of their marriage--a common title for husbands. Apostle Hyde said,


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, ?and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.? Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife. Where will you find a family so nearly allied by the ties of common religion? ?Well,? you say, ?that appears rather plausible, but I want a little more evidence, I want you to find where it says the Savior was actually married.?[11]


The Apostle pointed to the marriage ceremony at Cana (John 2:1-12) as evidence that ?the Savior was actually married.? He implied that the marriage of the Savior was a fact partially concealed by translators and councils. He said,

Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to t e [sic] world, but the thing is there; it is told; Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do.[12]

Apostle Hyde explicitly asserted that the bridegroom at the wedding of Cana was Jesus Himself in no uncertain terms. According to Hyde, it was necessary for Jesus to marry so he could father children and see them before his death. He remarked,

Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified.[13]

Hyde also argued that the Son had children in the flesh on the basis of Isaiah 53:10, which reads, ?he shall see his seed.? According to the Apostle, the Son could only see his seed if he had children, which he did. Apostle Hyde remarked, ?I shall say here, that before the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours; he saw his seed, and immediately afterwards he was cut off from the earth; but who shall declare his generation?? But, what became of the natural offspring of the Son of God? Hyde claimed,


They had no father to hold them in honorable remembrance; they passed into the shades of obscurity, never to be exposed to mortal eye as the seed of the blessed one. For no doubt had they been exposed to the eye of the world, those infants might have shared the same fate as the children of Jerusalem in the days of Herod, when all the children were ordered to be slain under such an age, with the hopes of slaying the infant Savior. They might have suffered by the hand of the assassin, as the sons of many kings have done who were heirs apparent to the thrones of their fathers.[14]
This is new stuff to me. It wouldn't surprise me at all that He was married.

The Jews practiced plural marriage, so I'm not sure that would be a reason to kill him.

BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by BurningSword »

Bgood wrote:
Elizabeth wrote:@};- :-BD (*)
Bgood wrote: ... Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh... Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh.
Marital and Parental Status of the Son of God

Apostle Orson Hyde (1835) delivered an address at the October general conference of the Church in 1854 during his term as President of the Quorum of the Twelve. Taking Luke 16:15 for his text, Apostle Hyde set out to speak on the topic of marriage relations. In doing so, he also affirmed the superiority of modern revelation to the Bible in this context. Hyde said,

The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. . . . The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago.[9]

Apostle Hyde was a polygamist who taught that Jesus was married to Mary on the basis of the evidence of John 20:8-18.[10] The conversation between the resurrected Son and Mary outside the tomb, according to Hyde, was a conversation like that between a husband and a wife. Hyde pointed to Mary?s use of the term ?Lord? as evidence of their marriage--a common title for husbands. Apostle Hyde said,


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, ?and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.? Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife. Where will you find a family so nearly allied by the ties of common religion? ?Well,? you say, ?that appears rather plausible, but I want a little more evidence, I want you to find where it says the Savior was actually married.?[11]


The Apostle pointed to the marriage ceremony at Cana (John 2:1-12) as evidence that ?the Savior was actually married.? He implied that the marriage of the Savior was a fact partially concealed by translators and councils. He said,

Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to t e [sic] world, but the thing is there; it is told; Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do.[12]

Apostle Hyde explicitly asserted that the bridegroom at the wedding of Cana was Jesus Himself in no uncertain terms. According to Hyde, it was necessary for Jesus to marry so he could father children and see them before his death. He remarked,

Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified.[13]

Hyde also argued that the Son had children in the flesh on the basis of Isaiah 53:10, which reads, ?he shall see his seed.? According to the Apostle, the Son could only see his seed if he had children, which he did. Apostle Hyde remarked, ?I shall say here, that before the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours; he saw his seed, and immediately afterwards he was cut off from the earth; but who shall declare his generation?? But, what became of the natural offspring of the Son of God? Hyde claimed,


They had no father to hold them in honorable remembrance; they passed into the shades of obscurity, never to be exposed to mortal eye as the seed of the blessed one. For no doubt had they been exposed to the eye of the world, those infants might have shared the same fate as the children of Jerusalem in the days of Herod, when all the children were ordered to be slain under such an age, with the hopes of slaying the infant Savior. They might have suffered by the hand of the assassin, as the sons of many kings have done who were heirs apparent to the thrones of their fathers.[14]
I declare now through the authority granted to me from the Father from Kingdom of God that Jesus Christ did not perform in life as those of ways of men, nor did he take upon him a wife nor did he engage in what mankind calls Sexual desires, nor did he have any children. For if you had of had the Spirit of truth in you these things I say would not be needed to be said and you would not need to ask me what Authority I have or what source my words come from, but so ye may know in which authority now speaks in a future behold my voice shall shake the earth in it appointed day and the prophecy that I have given unto this very forum will be fulfilled.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Jesus is the Eternal Father whom will adopt mankind and through Him shall mankind become Children unto God, for his Father is as Him and they are the same even so identical. And the Seed in which it speaks of is the truth that Jesus delivered unto the world for it is said, a seed was sent upon world that those in darkness might receive light the Word of God, so it is from that seed cometh many other seeds and they be called brethen. And the Seed that it speaks of is speaking of the disciples and their work in the Gospel. And prolonging of days is speaking about the resurrection of Christ and the prospering in his hand is speaking of the Millennial kingdom to come, for the pleasure of God is the happiness and salvation of souls and so it is through Christ was it obtained.

I say again that the leadership of the church should not be looked upon as they can not error, that they know everything and that they are always speaking for God, they have their own thoughts as well and even Joseph Smith mentioned this. Learn to discern through the spirit of truth that you do not error in understanding the WORD, and can truly discern by spirit all things and be not mislead by darkness.

User avatar
rewcox
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5873

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by rewcox »

BurningSword wrote:I declare now through the authority granted to me from the Father from Kingdom of God that Jesus Christ did not perform in life as those of ways of men, nor did he take upon him a wife nor did he engage in what mankind calls Sexual desires, nor did he have any children. For if you had of had the Spirit of truth in you these things I say would not be needed to be said and you would not need to ask me what Authority I have or what source my words come from, but so ye may know in which authority now speaks in a future behold my voice shall shake the earth in it appointed day and the prophecy that I have given unto this very forum will be fulfilled.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Jesus is the Eternal Father whom will adopt mankind and through Him shall mankind become Children unto God, for his Father is as Him and they are the same even so identical. And the Seed in which it speaks of is the truth that Jesus delivered unto the world for it is said, a seed was sent upon world that those in darkness might receive light the Word of God, so it is from that seed cometh many other seeds and they be called brethen. And the Seed that it speaks of is speaking of the disciples and their work in the Gospel. And prolonging of days is speaking about the resurrection of Christ and the prospering in his hand is speaking of the Millennial kingdom to come, for the pleasure of God is the happiness and salvation of souls and sot it is through Christ was it obtained.

I say again that the leadership of the church should not be looked upon as they can not error, that they know everything and that they are always speaking for God, they have their own thoughts as well and even Joseph Smith mentioned this. Learn to discern through the spirit of truth that you do not error in understanding the WORD, and can truly discern by spirit all things and be not mislead by darkness.
Well BS, we don't know where the authority you claim came from. I did watch Sliders, maybe you were shifted to our world by mistake.

In our world, we know that Christ went from grace to grace, and line to line. It would make sense that He was married, so He would understand marriage.

In our world He was baptized. We also know that He created millions of worlds.

I haven't figured out which one you are from.

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Elizabeth »

:)

BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by BurningSword »

rewcox wrote:
BurningSword wrote:I declare now through the authority granted to me from the Father from Kingdom of God that Jesus Christ did not perform in life as those of ways of men, nor did he take upon him a wife nor did he engage in what mankind calls Sexual desires, nor did he have any children. For if you had of had the Spirit of truth in you these things I say would not be needed to be said and you would not need to ask me what Authority I have or what source my words come from, but so ye may know in which authority now speaks in a future behold my voice shall shake the earth in it appointed day and the prophecy that I have given unto this very forum will be fulfilled.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Jesus is the Eternal Father whom will adopt mankind and through Him shall mankind become Children unto God, for his Father is as Him and they are the same even so identical. And the Seed in which it speaks of is the truth that Jesus delivered unto the world for it is said, a seed was sent upon world that those in darkness might receive light the Word of God, so it is from that seed cometh many other seeds and they be called brethen. And the Seed that it speaks of is speaking of the disciples and their work in the Gospel. And prolonging of days is speaking about the resurrection of Christ and the prospering in his hand is speaking of the Millennial kingdom to come, for the pleasure of God is the happiness and salvation of souls and sot it is through Christ was it obtained.

I say again that the leadership of the church should not be looked upon as they can not error, that they know everything and that they are always speaking for God, they have their own thoughts as well and even Joseph Smith mentioned this. Learn to discern through the spirit of truth that you do not error in understanding the WORD, and can truly discern by spirit all things and be not mislead by darkness.
Well BS, we don't know where the authority you claim came from. I did watch Sliders, maybe you were shifted to our world by mistake.

In our world, we know that Christ went from grace to grace, and line to line. It would make sense that He was married, so He would understand marriage.

In our world He was baptized. We also know that He created millions of worlds.

I haven't figured out which one you are from.
Millions does not come close to what has been created.

The only marriage of Christ in the bible that is mentioned is in Revelations.

6And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

7Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. 8And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

9And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. 10And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Now if this scripture means that Jesus marriage is something all redeemed will be present for has not even been revealed to me, as not all mystery's are permitted for me to even know at this time. But certain ones have been aloud for me to know for what I will do in this timeline is of great importance even so finishing a circle. It does refer to Jesus as the bridegroom suggesting he is not yet married but is to be married if that be the case or it could simply be symbolic as much bible is, in time that will be answered may you be worthy to be present at the Chapel.

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by Elizabeth »

That is why we are fortunate to have further Scriptures to complement, support, and expand on Biblical Scripture.

BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by BurningSword »

Elizabeth wrote:That is why we are fortunate to have further Scriptures to complement, support, and expand on Biblical Scripture.
Only if properly understood through the spirit of truth, many do error in understandings and this is why Christianity has fallen into apostasy and LDS may be most correct but even Joseph smith said himself they are not perfect, but can also error even warned about falling away and becoming too comfortable in Zion and it was with great reason.

BurningSword
captain of 100
Posts: 340

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by BurningSword »

I ask this the founder of church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints he whom performed miracles and did great things, that few have since done did he ever declare himself that Jesus had a wife, made love to her had children as normal men? If he did not question why for perhaps he knows that Jesus is a bridegroom not yet married but shall be and all redeemed are invited to the wedding supper, as such it would be fulfilled then if required even so. And who is to say sex is even part of Heaven for was it not said by Eve because "If had we not transgressed we would never be with child". If Eden was a higher state and transgression occurred that children may be born is it truly a higher state to produce children by sexual intercourse or could their be a higher mystery to how spirits really come forth into existence from the pool of eternal intelligence. Mans ways are not Gods ways but man provides a vessel for a soul to experience life to learn the knowledge of good and evil and make their choices through the freewill agency they have been given, this does not mean it is the same for how God brings life into intelligences giving them spirit.

It has been said children of men are born in sin, why was the Only Begotten Son of God born by manifestation in spirit within the womb of a pure hearted women named Mary, from moment you are born you are in sin, innocence does not mean you are not born of sin. If you had no sin you would not die for one without sin can not die even so Son of God had to take upon him all sin that he might descended below all, for if he had not he could not enter Death but because he having no sin was taken by Death into Hades it had no true claim to him so after reaching it bottom he ascended through it all and this is why it is said 'The Son of man has descended below them all, are thou greater than He' People have no idea what that statement actually means for it hasn't been properly revealed the sacrifice that atonement actually was. Jesus is called a man of sorrows for a reason, if people think atonement was the crucifixion they are mislead, it was part of it but it was not entirety of it all the book of the world could not contain everything that the Son of God, your Lord and your God did for you.

User avatar
Bryan LJ
captain of 100
Posts: 145
Location: Northern Utah
Contact:

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bryan LJ »

If I can show that Christ had children does that put it to rest that He was married? There are prophecies in the Old Testament that are not completely fulfilled yet. Let's look at this prophecy in Isaiah 11:

1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

Joseph identifies who these people are in Doctrine and Covenants 113:

1 Who is the Stem of Jesse spoken of in the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th verses of the 11th chapter of Isaiah?

2 Verily thus saith the Lord: It is Christ.

3 What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse?

4 Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power.


Ok, according to Joseph this "Rod of Jesse " that should come" will have much power. Joseph says that he "should come of the Stem of Jesse" and Isaiah says he is simply "out of the Stem of Jesse" which "Stem" Joseph identifies as Christ. So in other words his lineage was declared. He comes forth out of the Stem of Jesse which is Christ. In other words he has the blood of Jesus running through his veins. So yeah, Jesus had children. Did He live in sin or was He married? I would say married.

Also, most are familiar with the account where Jesus says to Mary after the resurrection, "Touch me not, I have not yet ascended to my Father." Check out the JST version of John 20:

17 Jesus saith unto her, Hold me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father;

In my opinion that is a big change in words. "Hold me not" instead of "touch me not" basically implies that she was probably already touching Him and He is basically saying, "Let go of Me. I need to go. I need to go report to the Father," In modern day English.

User avatar
slimjamm
captain of 100
Posts: 365

Re: Jesus Married to Mary

Post by slimjamm »

BurningSword wrote:
Bgood wrote:
Elizabeth wrote:@};- :-BD (*)
Bgood wrote: ... Apostle Orson Hyde repeated his propositions about the marital and parental status of the Son of God in a sermon in the Tabernacle on March 18, 1855. Hyde reasserted that Jesus Christ was the husband of the wedding at Cana, that Mary and Martha, among others, were his wives, and that the Son of God sired children in the flesh... Apostle Hyde addressed the Saints in Great Salt Lake City on December 21, 1856 on a variety of subjects including polygamy, and the marriage and fatherhood of Christ. During his defense of polygamy he affirmed his consistent teaching that the Son was married to Mary and Martha and fathered children in the flesh.
Marital and Parental Status of the Son of God

Apostle Orson Hyde (1835) delivered an address at the October general conference of the Church in 1854 during his term as President of the Quorum of the Twelve. Taking Luke 16:15 for his text, Apostle Hyde set out to speak on the topic of marriage relations. In doing so, he also affirmed the superiority of modern revelation to the Bible in this context. Hyde said,

The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. . . . The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago.[9]

Apostle Hyde was a polygamist who taught that Jesus was married to Mary on the basis of the evidence of John 20:8-18.[10] The conversation between the resurrected Son and Mary outside the tomb, according to Hyde, was a conversation like that between a husband and a wife. Hyde pointed to Mary?s use of the term ?Lord? as evidence of their marriage--a common title for husbands. Apostle Hyde said,


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, ?and I know not where they have laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.? Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife. Where will you find a family so nearly allied by the ties of common religion? ?Well,? you say, ?that appears rather plausible, but I want a little more evidence, I want you to find where it says the Savior was actually married.?[11]


The Apostle pointed to the marriage ceremony at Cana (John 2:1-12) as evidence that ?the Savior was actually married.? He implied that the marriage of the Savior was a fact partially concealed by translators and councils. He said,

Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to t e [sic] world, but the thing is there; it is told; Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do.[12]

Apostle Hyde explicitly asserted that the bridegroom at the wedding of Cana was Jesus Himself in no uncertain terms. According to Hyde, it was necessary for Jesus to marry so he could father children and see them before his death. He remarked,

Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified.[13]

Hyde also argued that the Son had children in the flesh on the basis of Isaiah 53:10, which reads, ?he shall see his seed.? According to the Apostle, the Son could only see his seed if he had children, which he did. Apostle Hyde remarked, ?I shall say here, that before the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours; he saw his seed, and immediately afterwards he was cut off from the earth; but who shall declare his generation?? But, what became of the natural offspring of the Son of God? Hyde claimed,


They had no father to hold them in honorable remembrance; they passed into the shades of obscurity, never to be exposed to mortal eye as the seed of the blessed one. For no doubt had they been exposed to the eye of the world, those infants might have shared the same fate as the children of Jerusalem in the days of Herod, when all the children were ordered to be slain under such an age, with the hopes of slaying the infant Savior. They might have suffered by the hand of the assassin, as the sons of many kings have done who were heirs apparent to the thrones of their fathers.[14]
I declare now through the authority granted to me from the Father from Kingdom of God that Jesus Christ did not perform in life as those of ways of men, nor did he take upon him a wife nor did he engage in what mankind calls Sexual desires, nor did he have any children. For if you had of had the Spirit of truth in you these things I say would not be needed to be said and you would not need to ask me what Authority I have or what source my words come from, but so ye may know in which authority now speaks in a future behold my voice shall shake the earth in it appointed day and the prophecy that I have given unto this very forum will be fulfilled.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Jesus is the Eternal Father whom will adopt mankind and through Him shall mankind become Children unto God, for his Father is as Him and they are the same even so identical. And the Seed in which it speaks of is the truth that Jesus delivered unto the world for it is said, a seed was sent upon world that those in darkness might receive light the Word of God, so it is from that seed cometh many other seeds and they be called brethen. And the Seed that it speaks of is speaking of the disciples and their work in the Gospel. And prolonging of days is speaking about the resurrection of Christ and the prospering in his hand is speaking of the Millennial kingdom to come, for the pleasure of God is the happiness and salvation of souls and so it is through Christ was it obtained.

I say again that the leadership of the church should not be looked upon as they can not error, that they know everything and that they are always speaking for God, they have their own thoughts as well and even Joseph Smith mentioned this. Learn to discern through the spirit of truth that you do not error in understanding the WORD, and can truly discern by spirit all things and be not mislead by darkness.
So you're saying Christ ignored or just neglected the first commandment given? To multiply and replenish the earth. Our whole lives are patterned (or should be) after that great grand progenitor, Adam or Michael, the Ancient of Days. Even Christ claims, he only did what the Father taught him.

Bgood
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1534

Re: Jesus Married to Mary Magdalene

Post by Bgood »

Bryan LJ wrote:If I can show that Christ had children does that put it to rest that He was married? There are prophecies in the Old Testament that are not completely fulfilled yet. Let's look at this prophecy in Isaiah 11:

1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

Joseph identifies who these people are in Doctrine and Covenants 113:

1 Who is the Stem of Jesse spoken of in the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th verses of the 11th chapter of Isaiah?

2 Verily thus saith the Lord: It is Christ.

3 What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse?

4 Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power.


Ok, according to Joseph this "Rod of Jesse " that should come" will have much power. Joseph says that he "should come of the Stem of Jesse" and Isaiah says he is simply "out of the Stem of Jesse" which "Stem" Joseph identifies as Christ. So in other words his lineage was declared. He comes forth out of the Stem of Jesse which is Christ. In other words he has the blood of Jesus running through his veins. So yeah, Jesus had children. Did He live in sin or was He married? I would say married.

Also, most are familiar with the account where Jesus says to Mary after the resurrection, "Touch me not, I have not yet ascended to my Father." Check out the JST version of John 20:

17 Jesus saith unto her, Hold me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father;

In my opinion that is a big change in words. "Hold me not" instead of "touch me not" basically implies that she was probably already touching Him and He is basically saying, "Let go of Me. I need to go. I need to go report to the Father," In modern day English.

"
Thing to remember is that the Bible we have was filtered through the early Catholic church, and thanks to Augustus celibacy was considered superior over the congress of man and woman and matrimony. Any text that would explicitly describe Jesus' matrimonial relationship with a woman or women would be excluded from the canonized texts we now have as a matter of course. Such texts do exist. Moreover, ancient Jewish/Israelite culture did not look upon celibacy favorably - quite the opposite. Men and women were expected to marry and have children. Marriage was ordained of God and is godly.

That's not to say that the scriptures we do have don't have very tantalizing evidence of Jesus' matrimonial status to two women. The first is here:

Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus' feet, and heard his word. But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me. Luke 10:38-40.

We have to put aside modern social customs and look at these verses in terms of ancient Jewish culture. What happens in these verses is that two sisters had a disagreement which was brought before a male for arbitration. The one who resolves an issue between women in a private home would be the father... or husband. That is key. It would not have been proper for anyone else to intervene in an intra-familial squabble. These verses are a very strong indicator of Jesus' relationship with Mary and Martha. They came to him because he was the man in charge - he was their husband.

Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. John 11:5

What's interesting about this verse is the Greek word used for love. The Greeks had 4 words for love, each referring to a different type of love. There is eros, which is erotic/passionate love. Storge, which is a love to describe parents feeling for their children. Philia, which applies more to friendship and general close associations. And then there is Agape (ἀγάπη), which is a much deeper love, and is often used in ancient texts to describes the feelings between man and wife. This verse uses Agape. This is not in and of itself complete proof since there are variance in how these words are used, but is a fairly decent indicator of His relationship with Mary and Martha.

Lastly, we have a scene after the resurrection:

Jesus saith unto [Mary], Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say Master. Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father, but go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20: 15-17

Firstly, it was common in that day for a woman to greet her husband with the term 'master'. Secondly, she made some kind of move to embrace him. For a married woman to touch a man who was not her husband in public (or anywhere else for that matter) was scandalous. That she attempted to touch him immediately after she realized who He was indicates a very instinctive reaction, as a joyful wife might react to being reunited with her beloved husband after a time of separation.

One last point to make that should be obvious to all endowed members is that a man's priesthood is not complete without a proper union with a woman. Godhood is man and woman. It's interesting to note that Jesus' ministry starts with a miracle performed at a wedding. Jesus said he did all things that the Father had done, and the Father is not alone (or childless).

Post Reply