@gotquestions Laughable “Answer” to the “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife”

I was researching something else when I came across this gem from the people at Got Questions. Before I continue, let me state that this “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife” fragment is, more than likely, a Gnostic text. My concerns are with the theology of the author of the “answer.”

The question:

Was Jesus Christ married? Did Jesus have a wife?

And the answer:

The recent discovery and translation of the fourth-century “Jesus’ wife papyrus” has reopened the discussion as to whether Jesus had a wife / was married. The “Jesus’ wife papyus” says, “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …'” This discovery is interesting in that it is the first Gnostic writing to explicitly state that Jesus had a wife. While a couple of the Gnostic gospels mention Jesus having a close relationship with Mary Magdalene, none of them specifically state that Jesus was married to her or to anyone else. Ultimately, it does not matter what the “Jesus’ wife papyrus” or Gnostic gospels say. They have no authority. They have all been proven to be forgeries invented to create a Gnostic view of Jesus.

No complaints here. In fact, I actually agree with everything written. But then, we move on to this piece:

If Jesus had been married, the Bible would have told us so, or there would be some unambiguous statement to that fact. Scripture would not be completely silent on such an important issue. The Bible mentions Jesus’ mother, adoptive father, half-brothers, and half-sisters. Why would it neglect to mention the fact that Jesus had a wife? Those who believe/teach that Jesus was married are doing so in an attempt to “humanize” Him, to make Him more ordinary, more like everyone else. People simply do not want to believe that Jesus was God in the flesh (John 1:1,1410:30). So, they invent and believe myths about Jesus being married, having children, and being an ordinary human being. (Emphasis mine)

Really? The Bible would have told us that Jesus was married? That’s a copout answer if I’ve ever heard one. You know what else the Bible is silent on regarding Christ? Whether or not Jesus took a leak or dropped a deuce somewhere. With Jesus being truly human, he would have had to take the occasional break to relieve natural bodily functions. And if statement like this offend you, tough. Bad theology offends me, and this second paragraph in the “answer” is ripe with bad theology. Just because the Bible is silent on something, doesn’t mean that it the silence is necessarily the answer.

To counter the author’s question, “Why would it neglect to mention the fact that Jesus had a wife?” I would offer this: Does Jesus being married or not change the redemptive act of the cross? The answer is no, and the author of this craptastic answer knows the reason, because he answers the question. The Bible is concerned with matters of salvation. I would offer that whether or not Jesus is married falls under adiaphorameaning it’s non-essential to matters of salvation.

A secondary question would be, “Could Jesus Christ have been married?” There is nothing sinful about being married. There is nothing sinful about having sexual relations in marriage. So, yes, Jesus could have been married and still be the sinless Lamb of God and Savior of the world.

Even if Jesus was married, the cross would still matter. Maybe that’s why the Bible is silent on it, genius, because it doesn’t matter one damn bit.

The author of this answer needs to tread carefully with this crass response that, “Those who believe/teach that Jesus was married are doing so in an attempt to ‘humanize’ Him, to make Him more ordinary, more like everyone else.” In my opinion, the author is treading very close to monophysitism. Also, if I remember my early Christian controversies correctly, Gnosticism was docetic, meaning Gnostics held that Christ’s humanity was an illusion. So why would a Gnostic text seek to lift up Christ’s humanity? So the author is jumping shark with his uniformed response.

Any attempt to downplay either the humanity or divinity of Christ needs to be pointed out for the bad theology that it is. In fact, the author trades one heresy for another. Nice to see that Got Questions supports heretics writing their answers!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s