 |
|
Vol. 11 No. 8 August 2009 |
Page 6 |
|
|
Vol. 11 No. 8 August 2009 |
Page 6 |
D. Gene West
One of the great needs of man is, and always has been, to attempt to bring Divinity down to his level. We have never quite understood why so many people want to drag God and the Lord Jesus Christ down to our level rather than our attempting to rise to Theirs. Nonetheless, that seems to be the case, and though it sounds a bit pessimistic, we suppose that it always will be. While that is unfortunate, it is not shocking!
In the last thirty years or so there has been a great deal of discussion among the so-called scholars of the religious world regarding whether Jesus was heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual. That is, no doubt, because we cannot grasp the idea of living in a world where there is no sexual activity of some kind. The concept that Jesus set forth in Matthew 19 of one=s being an eunuch for the kingdom of heaven=s sake is not something that comes easily to the minds of moderns. When one adds to this the fact that there are those who are profiting immensely from Afictional@ works in which Jesus is portrayed as having been married to Mary of Magdala and producing offspring, one is impressed with the fact that men want to totally humanize our Lord. However, these are not the first, nor the only people to have had such ideas as that.
There is a rather large American cult who teaches that Jesus took a Jewish bride and that the Bible proves this to be true. When they are pressed for the Scripture in which this is stated, they refer to John 2:1-11 regarding the wedding feast in Cana of Galilee that was attended by both Jesus and His mother. We recall this event for it was the occasion on which Jesus performed His first miracle. One of the amazing things about men is their capacity to read much more into a biblical text than is found there, nevertheless, we will do a little research in the passage itself to see if this wedding feast was that of the Lord. When one turns to the text he is immediately smitten with the fact that the Bible says that both Jesus and his disciples were invited to the wedding. Common sense would dictate that a groom is not invited to his own wedding! The word used in the original language in which the New Testament was written means to call aloud, to invite. Does it seem reasonable to you, dear reader, that a man who was going to be married on a certain date and at a certain time would be called aloud, invited, to come to his own wedding? It seems rather farfetched to us. Neither Jesus nor his disciples were participants in the wedding, but had been invited to participate in the festivities of the day.
Furthermore, one can read the New Testament as carefully as it can be read from beginning to end and there is no reference to Jesus= having a wife! The New Testament mentions on several occasions other relatives of the Lord. His father is mentioned, as is his mother. His brothers are mentioned, and that by name. It is also mentioned that he had sisters, but there is no mention of Him having a wife. The Gospel records times that Jesus spent with His friends such as Lazarus, Mary and Martha, but there is no mention of a wife. While the Lord was hanging on the cross, dying for the sins of the world, He took the time to make provision for his mother by assigning her care to His beloved apostle John. However, He made absolutely no provision for a wifeCnone whatsoever! Is that not indeed very, very strange if He had one?
Jesus did not maintain a home. In Luke 9:58 it is recorded that our Lord said, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head.” Jesus had nowhere to call home! If that is the case where did this wife live? There is not one single syllable of a passage of Scripture that indicates Jesus had a wife, or was ever even involved in any way with women, except as friends! If he married a wife, why is she never named in Scripture?