I do not know why people have so much trouble with the idea of Jesus being married. Is he not often spoken of as the bridegroom and we are the bride? I suppose the trouble comes from having a set idea of Jesus, a form to which he must adhere. He must not venture outside the box in which we have placed him. I do not know if Jesus was married or not. We know very little about his personal life. But if he was, so what? Is the discomfort felt with the idea because marriage (and sexuality) are thought of as sin?
Some who love and appreciate Jesus seem to have their own idea of purity to which Jesus must adhere. He was often bumping into this with his disciples who wanted him to be a certain way.
If Jesus, as many believe and I am no exception, was a representation of the Divine, of God, on earth, are folk saying that the Creator of all life is asexual? That makes no sense to me. So I do not get alarmed if Jesus was married. Nor if he peed and pooped or belched and farted. It just makes me closer to him and him to me.
I deeply understand that folk who worship Jesus worship him as a spiritual being, as THE spiritual being, as one of unvarnished purity and perfection. But I go along with Meister Eckhart here: "If you want the kernel, you have to break the shell" and "Therefore I pray God that he may quit me of god."
Some who love and appreciate Jesus seem to have their own idea of purity to which Jesus must adhere. He was often bumping into this with his disciples who wanted him to be a certain way.
If Jesus, as many believe and I am no exception, was a representation of the Divine, of God, on earth, are folk saying that the Creator of all life is asexual? That makes no sense to me. So I do not get alarmed if Jesus was married. Nor if he peed and pooped or belched and farted. It just makes me closer to him and him to me.
I deeply understand that folk who worship Jesus worship him as a spiritual being, as THE spiritual being, as one of unvarnished purity and perfection. But I go along with Meister Eckhart here: "If you want the kernel, you have to break the shell" and "Therefore I pray God that he may quit me of god."
Jesus was put into human form and so if He was married, that is great...if He wasn't..that is great also.....the point being...if He was and it's not in the biblical records, that doesn't mean it's not true, that may possible mean it's irrevalent to what we need to know about Him.
ReplyDeleteGreat teachings and truths always are corrupted the longer humans handle the information. Perhaps it was the leaders of the 300 AD church that decided Jesus had to be asexual? He was often called Rabbi in the Christian scriptures, so that infers he must have been a married Jew to interact with children (contrary to the practices of today's catholic church). I thought the point was to experience everything that being fully human involved and at the same time embody the Spirit of God. So if that meant that he had all the same bodily functions and needs as us (including sex with his wife), who cares? People get so hung up on dogma and doctrine that they cannot tolerate anything outside their little Jesus box. Sad.
ReplyDeleteThis speaks to the issue of the "thought helmets" ('head moats') you've discussed--especially those bearing the phrase, "one size fits all."
ReplyDeleteMust Jesus stay in his Jesus box? Only until you've sufficiently wound (or perhaps unwound) the box:
http://johncokeefe.com/2010/08/25/jesus-in-the-box/
--Gary
While the image of Jesus being God-as-man is part of Christian belief, there seems to be tremendous limits placed on the "man" side of that equation, as if, somehow, Jesus truly being human negates his divinity.
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered, what if it was accepted that Jesus was the child of an unwed mother rather than Him being conceived in Mary's womb without her knowing a man? How would that change the way we see the Christ? It should not at all. He was still Christ.
But how would that change the way we judge others? It would be a huge step in revising the constant drama of defining how we are all separate. Instead, it may allow us a little more latitude in understanding how we are all more alike if Jesus began his life as just another kid born of parents who weren't married, but became the Christ all the same.
If Jesus accomplished that from such humble beginnings, than could not the rest of us become the Christ too.
Of course, that would eliminate the power of the Church to control us, so no, we cannot become the Christ. To suggest such is blasphemy. There is only one Christ, and to disagree means burning in hell forever, right? Nice way to control minds. Pathetic, however, if the goal is to open us to the world Christ knew and tried to help others understand.
Pursuing the world Christ Jesus knew allows us to realize that "heaven" is around us all the time, not some place we go after we are dead. If heaven is now, then we would dedicate ourselves to living as Christ now; opening to Being as its own reward, not as something we only deserve after we have ceased living.
Be... Who we truly are... Open...
If the core of most religions are to be believed, everything is spiritual. Human beings are spiritual beings. The only difference is that some people like Jesus realize this fact completely while the rest of us really don't believe it. It's hard for most people to disbelieve two thousand years of orthodoxy and find their own understanding of what being human and divine really is.
ReplyDelete