E-Mail 'Was Jesus Christ Married? A Look at the Bible Facts' To A Friend

by Jack Wellman · Print Print · Email Email

Email a copy of 'Was Jesus Christ Married? A Look at the Bible Facts' to a friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...


Share this post:  |  |  |  | Twitter
Jack H June 20, 2014 at 2:05 am

Hello, Pastor! 😀 Sigh, truly that myth of Jesus Christ being married is the most atrocious failure ever, below some other things. Speaking of which, there is another issue that I bring before you, namely Proverbs 26:4-5:
Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest you be like him yourself.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own eyes.
As you can see, these verses are supporting different things. If this is a moral lesson, then… the mixed messages… what am I supposed to do? Can you explain why these appear to contradict? Thanks, Jack h 😀

Jack Wellman June 20, 2014 at 8:14 am

Thank you Jack. This is a good question but since we know that God does not contradict Himself, even if I were not able to explain it we must know that God’s mind I always much higher and greater and we cannot always comprehend the infinite because we are finite. My take on this is, that we are to fit our remarks to the man, and address them to his conscience, so as may best end the debate.

Verse 4. The cause assigned for forbidding to answer, therefore, plainly insinuates that the defender of religion should not imitate the insulter of it in his modes of disputation, which may be comprised in sophistry, buffoonery, and scurrility.

Verse 5. The cause assigned for directing to answer, as plainly intimates that the sage should address himself to confute the fool upon his own false principles, by showing that they lead to conclusions very wide from, very opposite to, those impieties he would deduce from them. If any thing can allay the fool’s vanity, and prevent his being wise in his own conceit, it must be the dishonor of having his own principles turned against himself, and shown to be destructive of his own conclusions.

Does this help my friend?

Jack H June 20, 2014 at 9:59 am

Yes, indeed it does. The context makes more sense now. But why couldn’t Solomon explain it in a clearer manner, instead of lazily using just a positive and negative, which people will take to mean that it contradicts?

Jack H June 20, 2014 at 3:46 pm

Ignore the above comment, it’s the anger talking

Jack Wellman June 20, 2014 at 6:04 pm

Okay Jack….thank you.

Bender June 23, 2014 at 10:34 am

The problem is not with Solomon or with any of the original authors of scripture (most especially the primary Author) — none of whom wrote in English — but with the subsequent translators.

That said, this is not a translation, but an interpretation that would follow from a better translation into English–
Do not respond to a fool’s foolishness in such a way that you make a fool of yourself (such as by giving credence to his irrationality). Rather, respond to a fool’s foolishness in a way that disabuses him of any claim to wisdom and instead demonstrates that he is a fool.

Fr. John W. Morris June 23, 2014 at 9:09 pm

The Eastern Church has never taught that St. Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. That is an idea that was later taught by the Roman Catholic Church. It is not a part of the teaching of the ancient Apostolic Church.

Jack Wellman June 24, 2014 at 2:59 pm

Thank you so much sir. I agree that there is zero evidence that Mary Magdalene was ever a prostitute and this article never stated this as true so the Eastern Church having never taught that St. Mary was a prostitute I agree. Why do you say that sir? I never said that in this article. What are you responding to Mr. Morris? Mary Magdalene was one of the staunchest supporters of Christ while here on earth.

DocReits June 26, 2014 at 9:47 am

Thank you Pastor Jack for a great article,

Your point about the disciple John being absent from Leonardo’s painting, if indeed the person in the picture is Mary Magdalene is a good one.

Blessings,

DocReits

Jack Wellman June 26, 2014 at 10:41 am

Thanks brother…you are always so encouraging. How discouraging that so many have disparaged the Great Name of Jesus Christ just to sell books! I would not want to be them on the day of His coming and impending judgment, right (Rev 20:11-15)? I would much rather be you or me!

Ricky October 5, 2020 at 9:54 am

I’m new to this, so please excuse me if I’m lacking in any way. Reading the New Testament John 19:19, the last paragraph:
“Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

– this the key part –

When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing near by, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple “Here is your mother.”

Surely this is only possible through the marriage of Jesus and the disciple Mary – making his mother Mary Magdalene’s mother-in-law?’

Jack Wellman October 5, 2020 at 11:06 am

No, this is false teaching Ricky. Jesus looked at John after saying and said,”Behold your mother” meaning he is to take care of her as Jesus would if He were to remain on earth. He was not referring to Mary and Jesus never married. He had no children and never married. You will not find Jesus’ being married anywhere in Scripture. This is heresy and propgated by Satan. Jesus tenderly provides for his mother at His death. It is probable that Joseph, her husband, was long since dead, and that her son Jesus had supported her. Now that He was dying what would become of her? He saw her standing by and knew her cares and griefs, and He saw John standing not far off. So, He established a new relationship between His beloved mother and His beloved disciple. He said to her, “Woman, behold your son, for whom, from now on, you must have a motherly affection,” and to John, “Behold you mother, to whom you must pay a sonly duty.” And so from that hour, that hour never to be forgotten, that disciple took her to his own home.

Notice the care Christ took of His dear mother. He was not so much taken up with a sense of His sufferings as to forget His friends, all whose concerns He bore. His mother, perhaps, was so taken up with his sufferings that she didn’t think of what would become of her, but He did. He had no other way to provide for His mother than by His interest in a friend, which he does here.

He calls her woman, not mother, because now her son is her Savior. He directs her to look upon John as her son: “Behold him as thy son, who stands there by you, and be as a mother to him.”

This was an honor put upon John, and a testimony both to his prudence and to his fidelity. If He who knows all things had not known that John loved Him, He would not have made him Mary’s guardian. It is a great honor to be employed for Christ and to be entrusted with any of His interest in the world.

It was also a great responsibility for John, but he cheerfully accepted it and took her to his own home, not objecting the trouble nor expense, nor his obligations to his own family, nor the ill-will he might contract by it. According to Nicephoras’s Ecclesiastical History (book 2, chapter 3), Mary, Jesus’ mother, lived with John at Jerusalem eleven years and then died.





Previous post:

Next post: