Jesus Was Married

Several early LDS leaders, including Brigham Young, expressed the opinion that Jesus was married. Anti-Mormons not only reject this view, but they consider it to be evidence that those leaders were not inspired. However, a good case can be made that Christ was in fact married.
 
From an LDS perspective, it makes sense that Jesus was married. Marriage is a divine command. It is doubtful that He did not comply with it. Eternal marriage is a necessary step in a man's exaltation. The Lord fulfilled allot the other gospel laws: it is logical to believe that He fulfilled this one as well. The Savior was our example in all righteous things. Marriage sealed by the power of the priesthood, besides being a commandment, is beautiful and holy in the sight of God. Therefore, since Jesus came to be the ultimate example for us, a is reasonable to conclude that He was married.


Non-Mormon Support
The idea that Jesus was married is not unique to the Latter-day saints.  Some Bible scholars and historians have also supported this view. For example, Protestant scholar William E. Phipps wrote an entire book arguing that the Savior was married The book is entitled WAS JESUS MARRIED? In it, he presents scriptural and historical evidence that Christ was married. He also cites other scholars who believe or suspect that Jesus was married.  During a radio debate on the subject in 1981, Dr. Malachi Martin, a catholic scholar and a former member of the Vatican's Pontifical institute, conceded that there was ultimately no real theological objection to a married Jesus" (Baiqent, Leigh. and Lincoln, 17). 

A Father's Duty
Ancient Judaism identified five principal responsibilities of a father to his son, one of which was to arrange his marriage (Moore 2:127; Phipps 1973:39).  quote Phipps;  "The last of the five duties laid down for a Jewish father was that of arranging a marriage for his son. . . . Around the time when a son was physically mature his father made a betrothal agreement with the guardian of an eligible girl. To delay this more than a decade beyond puberty was forbidden, and there is no definite indication of violators in any of the sects of ancient Judaism. Hill and Shamma, two famous ancient rabbis, though differing on many points of scriptural interpretation,  were united in affirming that no righteous man can abstain from keeping God's first command, Be fruitful and multiply." (1973:44) 

It is significant that no ancient Jewish writer accused Jesus' earthly father, Joseph, of failing to fulfill his five principal duties toward his son. If Joseph had tailed in meeting anyone of those responsibilities, Jewish critics surely would have used this against both him and his son that ancient Jewish critics were silent on this point indicates that Joseph fulfilled each of the five obligations, including that of arranging his Son's marriage. 

Celibacy in Ancient Judaism
Some scholars contend that celibacy--the state of being unmarried - was not viewed negatively in ancient Judaism, In arguing for a celibate Jesus, Bible scholar Jane Schaberg writes, 
"Celibacy was unusual, but not unknown or denigrated in Judaism of the first century. witness the descriptions of the lifestyles of the people of Qumran [Essenes] and of the Therapeutac (a first-century B.C.E. [BC] Jewish monastic group in Egypt)." (47) 

However, the evidence does not seem to sustain this view. As noted, Phipps contends that 'there is no definite indication of violators [of the command to marry] in any of the sects of ancient Judaism" (1973:44). Paul Achtemeier and Lawrence Schiffman discuss the alleged celibacy of various Jewish groups, including the Essenes at Oumran and elsewhere: 

Some of sectanans of the Second Commonwealth period, including the Essenes, practiced celibacy by separating from their wives after fulfilling the commandment of procreation. White, according to many scholars, members of the Dead sea sect appear to have been celibate, they also seem to have been married, and a marriage ritual is presented in their scrolls (in Achtemeier 1985:509) 
Jewish author Trude Weiss-Rosmarin discusses Judaism's view on celibacy and marriage in both ancient and modern times: 

"To the Jew celibacy is not only unnatural but definitely contrary to the will of God Who commanded man and woman to be fruitful and multiply and Who created the earth "not a waste; He formed it to be inhabited" (Isaiah 45:l8).  Marriage. therefore, is not a necessary evil but the joyful consummation of human destiny. The Jews never doubted its legitimacy, nor, according to the Rabbis, he who is unmarried lives "without joy, without blessing, without goodness" (Yebamoth 62b) Apart man and woman are incomplete for "The human being is man and his wife." (69-70) 
One late first-century Jewish writer even compared deliberate celibacy with murder, "and he does not seem to have been alone in this attitude" (Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln 330). And, as mentioned, one of the five primary responsibilities of the ancient Jewish father to his son was to arrange for him to be married. 

A Revealing Silence
The New Testament does not explicitly take a position on Jesus' marital status There is no statement therein to the effect that He was married, and there is no statement to the effect that He was not. This silence in itself suggests that He was married In the Palestinian Jewish culture of Christ's day, marriage was the norm, and celibacy was viewed as unusual, if not wrong. After discussing this fact, non-Mormon scholar Charles Davis observes the following:  "Granted the cultural background as witnessed is highly improbable that Jesus was not married well before the beginning of his public ministry. If he had insisted on celibacy, it would have created a stir, a reaction which would have left some trace, so, the lack of mention of Jesus' marriage in the Gospels is a strong argument not against but for the hypothesis of marriage, because any practice or advocacy of voluntary celibacy would in the Jewish context ofthe time have been so unusual as to have attracted much attention and comment (In Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln 331) 
Phipps agrees: 

"According to Semitic tradition it was as obligatory for a father to find a wife for his son as to teach him and circumcise him. Hence, even if there were no reference in the Gospels to Jesus' circumcision, it would be wrong to conclude that his father neglected or rejected that duty. Just as the Koran does not mention circumcision and takes the obligation of marriage for granted, so the Gospels do not mention the circumcision or marriage of most of the men who are discussed in it. This is due to the fat that those social institutions were practiced in a thorough-going manner in the Semitic culture. Deviations from normative behavior are more likely to be remembered and thus lodged in oral and written traditions, so it makes sense to assume that Jesus and his apostles were all circumcised and married." (1973:44-45) 

Non-Mormon scholars Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln likewise concur: 
"If Jesus was not married, this fact would have been glaringly conspicuous. It would have drawn attention to itself and been used to characterize and identify him It would have set him apart, in some significant sense, from his contemporaries. If this were the case, surely at least one of the Gospel accounts would make some mention of so marked a deviation from custom? If Jesus were indeed as celibate as later tradition claims, it is extraordinary that there is no reference to any such celibacy. The absence of any such reference strongly suggests that Jesus, as far as the question of celibacy was concerned, conformed to the conventions of his time and culture-suggests, in short, that he was married. (331) 

Jesus as a Rabbi or Teacher
There Is no doubt that Christ presented Himself as an inspired religious teacher. As such, He would have been expected to be married. According to an ancient Jewish text, the Mishnah, an unmarried man "may not be a teacher (KIDDUSHIM 4,13; Phil (1973:45). Phipps has more to say on this point: 
"After a Jewish man became adept at Torah instruction, skilled at a craft, and successfully married, he was, according to the SAYINGS OF THE FATHERS! "fit at thirty for authority." If he desired to instruct others the last qualification [i.e., marriage was stressed. . . . In a recent study, shalom Ben-Chorin of Jerusalem argues that Jesus married because an unmarried teacher was unimaginable in the culture in which he participated. We know nothing about the wives of Hillel, Shammai .  and
many other notable men of that era and culture, Ben-Chorin admits, but had they been unmarried, surely their opponents would have pointed to their violation of sacred duty as a basis for criticism." (1973:45) 

The Wedding at Cana
Several early Mormon leaders suggested that the wedding at Cana was Christ's own wedding A number of non-Mormon scholars have studied the wedding account as it is recorded in John 2:1-12and have reached the same conclusion. For example, Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln say, "In the Fourth Gospel there is an episode related to a marriage that may, in fact, have been Jesus' own" (331). 

There are indeed elements in the wedding account that suggest it was the saviors wedding For instance, scholars have noted that Mary behaved as if she was the hostess. Also, the tact that Mary asked Christ to replenish the wine indicates He was responsible for the catering, which in turn suggests He was the bridegroom Furthermore, after the "governor of the feast" tasted the replenished wine, he addressed "the BRIDEGROOM" saying, "THOU has kept the good wine until now" (John 2:9-10). Since Jesus had just replenished the wine, the obvious and logical implication
is that He was the one being spoken to and hence the bridegroom.  Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln observe, 'These [the governor's] words clearly seem to be addressed to Jesus" (332-333). 
Was Mary Magdalene Jesus' Wife?

A number of early Mormon leaders entertained the idea that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife. Several non-Mormon scholars have likewise suggested that Christ and Mary were married. Before discussing this matter further, mention should be made of the erroneous tradition that Mary was a prostitute This tradition was introduced long after the New Testament was written, and there is not the slightest bit of evidence in the Gospels to support it. No credible modern New Testament scholar believes that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, or that she should be identified with the sinful woman in Luke 7.  N. Lee smith of the University of Utah succinctly discusses some of the New Testament indications that Mary was Jesus' wife: 

"When Mary Magdalene recognized Jesus after his resurrection, she said "Rabboni," an Aramaic term sometimes reserved for one's husband (John 20:4-18) 
The constant traveling of Mary with him, her vigil at the cross and presence when he was taken down, her coming to anoint his body with spices, his tender appearance first to her after the resurrection . . and her central role in thefollowing events, all suggest that Mary was his wife." 
Conclusion

While the Bible does not explicitly teach that Christ was married, it does provide a great deal of circumstantial evidence to this effect. It is not credible to reject the prophetic calling of Brigham Young and other many LDS lenders simply because they believed Jesus was married.  
Enoch Mea-Arbaim-Arbaa ben Eloheim 

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Phipps, William E. THE SEXUALITY OF JESUS. San Francisco:
Hammer & Row Publishers, 1973 
WAS JESUS MARRIED? San Francisco: Harper & Row,
Publishers, 1970. 
Smith, N. Lee Letter to the editor on the Issue of Jesus'
marital status- BIBLE REVIEW, February 1993. 46A7 
Weiss-Rosmarin, Tmd. JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY: New York: 
Jonathan David Publishers, 1987. 
Ogden Kraut. Jesus Was Married. [Sandy, Utah: Pioneer Press. 
1969.80 pps] 
William E. Phipps. Was Jesus Married?; The Distortion of 
Sexuality in the Christian Tradition.
New York: Harper & Row. 1970.239


FOOTNOTES AND REFERENCES
Teachings on Jesus being married as taught by some of the early 
LDS leaders But aster as I know they have not been accepted as 
correct doctrine by the Church. All of these men were either Prophets
or Apostles. This is just a selection. There are hundreds more. 
Well, maybe not hundreds. 
These references have been taken from the 1967 version of
The Journal of Discourses.  This is the earliest version I
Could get my hands on.  I noticed in another reference from
Earlier versions of the JD that the dates to some of these
References were changed in later versions, so if dates were
Changed perhaps other things were changed also. 
Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, Orson Hyne, October 6, 1854 
How was it with Mary and Martha, and other women that followed him?  In
old times, and 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.  In England
we frequently hear the wife say, "Where is my master?"  She does not
mean a tyrant, but as Sarah called her husband Lord, she designates hers
by the word master.  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." 

Have you ever read your Bibles?  I must confess I have not read it for
some time, but looked more to Him who rules on high, and to those who
hold the words of life in the inspiration of the Holy Ghost; I look to
them more frequently than to it.  I have once memorized the Bible, and
when any one quoted one verse, I could quote the next.  I have memorized
it in English, German, and Hebrew, still I do not profess to be very
familiar with it now, yet the sentiments and spirit of it are in my
heart, and will be as long as I live, and still remain when I am gone to
another sphere.  When does it say the Savior was married?  I believe I
will read it for your accommodation, or you might not believe my words
were I to say that there is indeed such a Scripture. 

We will turn over to the account of the marriage in Cana of Galilee, and
the mother of Jesus was there.  Yes, and somebody else too.  You will
find it in the 2nd chapter of John's Gospel; remember it and read it
when you gohome.  "And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of
Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: and both Jesus was called,
and his disciples, to the marriage.  And when they wanted wine, the
mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.  Jesus saith unto
her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.  His
mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 
And there were set there six water pots of stone, after the manner of
the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. 
Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water pots with water.  And they filled
them up to the brim.  And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear
unto the governor of the feast.  And they bare it.  When the ruler of
the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence
it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of
the feast called the bridegroom, and saith unto him"--that is, the ruler
of the feast saith unto the bridegroom, "Every man at the beginning doth
set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is
worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." 
Gentlemen, that is as plain as the translators, or different councils
over this Scripture, dare allow it to go to the 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. 

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.  "Has he indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken
upon himself the seed of Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear
his name on the earth?"  No.  But when the secret is fully out, the seed
of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has
not the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle
of the Savior's in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will
be left out and not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is
the chosen of God, the seed of the blessed, that shall be gathered.  I
do not despise to be called a son of Abraham, if he had a dozen wives;
or to be called a brother, a son, a child of the Savior, if he had Mary,
and Martha, and several others, as wives; and though he did cast seven
devils out of one of them, it is all the same to me. 

Well, then, he shall see his seed, and who shall declare his generation,
for he was cut off from the earth?  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?  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. 
Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, Pg.210, Orson Hyde, March 18, 1855 
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. 
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." 

Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, Pg.259, Orson Hyde 
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. 
I will venture to say that if Jesus Christ were now to pass through the
most pious countries in Christendom with a train of women,. such as used
to follow him, fondling about him, combing his hair, anointing him with
precious ointment, washing his feet with tears, and wiping them with the
hair of their heads and unmarried, or even married, he would be mobbed,
tarred, and feathered, and rode, not on an ass, but on a rail.  What did
the old Prophet mean when he said (speaking of Christ), "He shall see
his seed, prolong his days, &c."  Did Jesus consider it necessary to
fulfil every righteous command or requirement of his Father?  He most
certainly did.  This he witnessed by submitting to baptism under the
hands of John.  "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness," said
he.  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 honor his Father's law by complying with
it, or did he not? Others may do as they like, but I will not charge our
Savior with neglect or transgression in this or any other duty. 
At this doctrine the long-faced hypocrite and the sanctimonious bigot
will probably cry, blasphemy!  Horrid perversion of God's word!  Wicked
wretch!  He is not fit to live! &c., &c.  But the wise and reflecting
will consider, read, and pray.  If God be not our Father, grandfather,
or great grandfather, or some kind of a father in reality, in deed and
in truth, why are we taught to say, "Our Father who art in heaven?"  How
much so ever [sic] of holy horror of this doctrine may excite in persons
not impregnated with the blood of Christ, and whose minds are
consequently dark and benighted, it may excite still more when they are
told that if none of the natural blood of Christ flows in their veins,
they are not the chosen or elect of God.  Object not, therefore, too
strongly against the marriage of Christ, but remember that in the last
days, secret and hidden things must come to light, and that your life
also (which is the blood) is hid with Christ in God. 
Journal of Discourses, Vol.1, Pg.18O, Parly P. Pratt, January 30, 1853 
Hence the gathering of the Saints; the organization of the kingdom of
God, religiously and politically, if you will; the revelation of the law
of God, and the new and everlasting covenant made to Abraham of old and
his seed, which has never been altered by the Lord, only lost to the
people.  Paul said that the law given upon Mount Sinai, four hundred and
thirty years after that covenant was made, might not disannul it.  Jesus
Christ was that man spoken of when God said, "In thee and in thy seed
shall all nations of the earth be blessed."  Thus, Paul and Jesus, in so
many words, confirmed the covenant made with Abraham, that neither the
law of Moses nor Jesus Christ ever disannulled. 
What was it?  A great many things, but the principal thing was, "I will
greatly multiply thy seed;" in short, a law was given him by which he
and his posterity should be regulated and governed, with regard to
matrimony and posterity. 

Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, Pg. 301, Brigham Young, June 3,1855 
If we will improve, be faithful and diligent in all the blessings
bestowed upon us, we then have the principle of increase, and this is
the great blessing given to man, and was the promise which Abraham
received at the hands of the Lord.  Abraham was fearful he would not
increase and multiply his posterity on the earth, though he might
increase in power, wisdom, and knowledge himself; and reflected, "I have
no children, or even prospect of them, to rise up and bless me, or to
honor and revere my name in coming generations."  The Lord, however,
gave him this promise, "You have been faithful, and gained wisdom and
knowledge in every blessing I have bestowed upon you; and now I will
give you a promise that you shall yet have a posterity, and it shall
multiply upon the face of the earth, and finally, the end of the number
thereof no man can tell, for your seed shall be as numerous as the sands
upon the sea shore, or the stars in the firmament, and to their increase
there shall be no end."  The same blessing was promised to the Lord
Jesus Christ.  It was the privilege of Abraham to receive knowledge,
wisdom, and understanding, but this did not satisfy him, he wanted to
see his children multiply.  When Abraham has passed a certain ordeal and
proved himself faithful, he will receive honor, power, glory, and
exaltation, which he is made as capable of attaining in the future as
those were who acted previous to his day.  Were not this the case, the
intelligence, the power of the mind, the spirit that is placed in the
body, and all that pertain to life in this stage of action, or prior to
our coming into the world, are not made honorable; and if they are not
honored by the creature, by the principle that is placed in him, that
organization is liable to decompose.  Can you understand this?  For
instance, let a man or woman who has received much of the power of God,
visions and revelations, turn away from the holy commandments of the
Lord, and it seems that their senses are taken from them, their
understanding and judgment in righteousness are taken away, they go
into darkness, and become like a blind person who gropes by the wall. 
Many of you witness this almost daily.  Such will continue to go on the
retrograde path until they are decomposed; while those who are faithful
will continue to increase, and this is the great blessing the Lord has
given to, or placed within the reach of, the children of man, even to be
capable of receiving eternal lives. 
Rudger Clawson. A Ministry of Meetings: 
The Apostolic Diaries of Rudger Clawson 
Edited by Stan Larson. 

Salt lake City: Signature Books. 1993. Sunday July 2, 1899. p.70. 
At about 5 o'clock meeting was resumed in the Celestial and 
Terrestrial Rooms. Instructive remarks were made by the following
brethren upon the law of tithing: Leroi Snow, Apostle George Teasdale
and Pres. Jos. F. Smith. The latter, in speaking of tithing, said, the
books should record not only what we do, but what we ought to have done
and did not do. A man is in a poor business as president or bishop of a
ward who says to the people, do as you ought to do, not as I do. The
poor of a ward-widows and orphans-all should pay their tithing. Pres.
Smith was followed by Apostles Smith and Lyman, who also dwelt upon the
law of tithing. 

Pres. George Q. Cannon also spoke upon the law of tithing. Among other
things he said, "There are those in this audience who are descendants of
the old 12 Apostles and, shall I say it, yes, descendants of the Savior
himself. His seed is represented in this body of men." 
Pres. Snow made closing remarks. Said he hoped the brethren would take
the spirit of these meetings home with them and impart the same to the
people. A resolution to the effect that the brethren present would
accept the law of tithing, obey it themselves, and teach it to the
people was adopted by a rising vote with uplifted hands. Pres. Snow then
led in the Sacred Shout, and the meeting came to a close. After the
meeting Bp. Carl Jensen, Chas. Kelly, and myself went down to one of the
restaurants on Main St. and took supper, after which the brethren took
train for their homes. 

NOTES:  Why at this meeting were they asking for uplift of hands to vote
Upon the law of tithing, was this made into law after the death of
Joseph Smith?