FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-23-2004, 11:26 AM   #1
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

If Jesus were truly a Jewish man, he would have been commanded to get married and have children

The idea that sex was "dirty" and celibacy preferred has been traced to the Hellenistic elements that fed into to Christianity by Uta Ranke-Heinmann in Eunuchs for the Kingdom of God (now out of print - some excerpts are online here - obviously scanned in and unedited).
Quote:
New Testament Misconceptions: Virgin Birth, Celibacy, Remarriage after Divorce

Foremost among the immediate influences on the development of the Christian sexual ethic were Judaism and Gnosticism: Judaism as we have encountered it in Philo of Alexandria, a contemporary of the early Christians; and Gnosticism in so far as it espoused the ideal of celibacy and proclaimed the superiority of the unmarried over the married state. Although the Christians resisted the influx of Gnostic pessimism and regarded the Gnostics as their chief opponents during the early centuries AD, it was from those opponents that they borrowed the idealisation of virginity, which was thought to be nearer to God than its contrary condition, and which even, though only to a minor extent, infiltrated the New Testament. Thus we find the Revelation of St John referring to 'the hundred and forty and four thousand' that sang 'a new song before the throne': 'These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb withersoever he goeth.' Here in the New Testament, Gnosis triumphed over the Jewish legacy of the Old. The Old Testament never talks in such terms. Although Revelation goes on to cite Isaiah 53: 9 'And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault' the relevant Old Testament passage makes no mention of virgins. Elsewhere in the New Testament, however, Gnosticism and its hostility toward marriage and sex are rejected. I Timothy 4: 2-3 warns against those who speak 'lies in hypocrisy' and forbid marriage, a passage which Luther levelled at the papacy in 'To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation' (1520): 'It occurred to the See of Rome, of its own iniquity, to forbid the priesthood to marry. That was commanded of the Devil, as St Paul proclaims in I Timothy 4: "There shall come teachers bringing devilish doctrines and forbidding marriage." This resulted in much distress and was the reason why the Greek Church cut itself off. I recommend that each man be left free to decide whether to marry or no.' Luther's 'On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church of God' (1520) states: 'I see that Paul commands that "the bishop shall be the husband of one wife...... Perish then those accursed man-made ordinances that seem to have crept into the church only to augment the dire peril, sin and evil thereof! Why should I be deprived of my freedom by someone else's ignorance or superstition?' ('Reformation Writings of Martin Luther', 1, pp. 302, 304). Finally, in the 'Schmalkaldic Articles' of 1537 he says:
They had no right whatever to forbid marriage and burden the divine estate of the priesthood with an insistence on permanent celibacy. By so doing they acted like foul, tyrannical, anti-Christian scoundrels and provided the occasion for all manner of terrifying, atrocious and numberless sins of impurity, in which they are still embroiled today. We and they are as little empowered to make male of female or female of male as they have been to part those creatures of God or to forbid them to live together in honourable matrimony. Wherefore we shall neither consent to their evil celibacy nor tolerate it, but desire to know marriage as untrammelled as God ordained and instituted it. For St Paul, in I Tim iv, calls this a devilish doctrine.
Toto is offline  
Old 12-23-2004, 05:42 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: home
Posts: 3,715
Default

Not only that, but particularly among scholars early marriage was strongly recommended. IIRC Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah was considered especially pure because he married at 14, rather than 16 which was the recommended age for scholars. The rationale was that a married young man wouldn't be spending too much time fantasizing about women. Commoners married at a later age - 18-20 was recommended, but I would guess people waited for when they acquired a trade.
Anat is offline  
Old 12-25-2004, 07:16 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Everywhere I go. Yes, even there.
Posts: 607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto
If Jesus were truly a Jewish man, he would have been commanded to get married and have children
This is interesting. Do we have any records of Jewish men from that period not getting married until at least their mid-thirties?

If so, then Jesus might not have stuck out like a sore thumb in Judea, as this thread seems to indicate he must have (assuming he existed as portrayed). I am wondering whether we really need to drag in Greek influence to explain Jesus' alleged celibacy.

Perhaps I can answer my own question, though, at least as far as scripture supplies answers: John the Baptist was not married, as far as I know. Paul also was not married (and taught that it was better for a man not to marry - though I suspect he had been more shaped by Greek influence than Jesus would have been), and IIRC we have no specific mention in the NT of families for most of the disciples. In fact, Jesus is portrayed as recommending that his followers give up ordinary family life and obligations, in favor of a more "spiritual family" arrangement based on obedience to (his version of) God's will.

With so many NT characters going unmarried, was there maybe a general exemption to the married-with-children rule for Jewish religious zealots, prophets and reformers? (Elijah springs to mind here as the archetype of the unmarried but devout servant of God.) Or perhaps these reformers just boldly asserted their lifestyle choice in the face of public scrutiny. I'd love to know which, or see if there's another explanation.

But again I don't know that it's necessary to draw on Greek influence to explain Jesus' unmarried state in predominantly married Judea. Such influence would introduce other problems: Wouldn't a Greek-leaning Jesus be unappealing to the traditional Jewish peasant culture that supposedly followed him in large numbers? Among other things, wasn't Jesus, like John the Baptist and the Essenes, allegedly trying to reform Judaism of the impurities introduced by Greek-friendly scribes and pharisees? Wasn't that part of his initial appeal?
David Bowden is offline  
Old 12-25-2004, 10:36 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: home
Posts: 3,715
Default

David, what would you consider Greek influence on the Pharisees? I thought the Pharisee movement was derived from the Hassidim, the original objectors to Helenist culture? If anything, the greatest foreign influence on their theology was the belief in the afterlife, which isn't something I can see early Christianity objecting to.
Anat is offline  
Old 12-26-2004, 12:37 AM   #5
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bowden
...

Paul also was not married (and taught that it was better for a man not to marry - though I suspect he had been more shaped by Greek influence than Jesus would have been), and IIRC we have no specific mention in the NT of families for most of the disciples. . . .
That's not so clear. Paul never explicity mentions a wife, but it is not clear that he is unmarried.

Matt. 8: 14 refers to Peter's "wife's mother."

1 Cor 9:5 states:

Quote:
Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas[Peter]?
which implies (if Peter does = Cephas) that Peter was not only married, but took his wife along when he preached, and that this was a common practice for apostles and "the Lord's brothers".

Quote:
. . . Wouldn't a Greek-leaning Jesus be unappealing to the traditional Jewish peasant culture that supposedly followed him in large numbers?
There is no evidence that Jesus had a big following among the traditional Jewish peasant culture. Parts of the Gospels speak about large crowds, but Acts 1:15 states that there were only about 120 believers after his death.

Quote:
Among other things, wasn't Jesus, like John the Baptist and the Essenes, allegedly trying to reform Judaism of the impurities introduced by Greek-friendly scribes and pharisees? Wasn't that part of his initial appeal?
I've never heard this theory. I think that the impurities that concerned the reformers were more connected with the temptations of political power, greed, etc.
Toto is offline  
Old 12-26-2004, 10:10 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 80
Default

Weren't many of the essenes celibate? There was a documentary on CNN a few days ago about the life of Jesus and one biblical historian (forget her name) said it was not unusual at all to find unmarried jews at the time.

I read an article somewhere that there were two types of essenses, the monkish celibate types, and the married "lay" types. The celibates were considered the most holy and pious and were the leaders.
Mosor is offline  
Old 12-26-2004, 02:52 PM   #7
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London
Posts: 237
Default

Quote:
To find out whether Jesus married or not, we are limited to the historical sources at hand. These are the Qur’an and the books of the New Testament. ...

The main goals are to prove the truth of the revelation and prophethood, to admonish, and to clarify the unity of the divine messages. Details given are restricted to those serving these goals. Advice and exhortation are woven into the stories. The stories of prophets Abraham, Joseph, Moses, and Jesus are given relatively more detail in the Qur’an. Although the Qur’an states that prophets do marry and have children:
*{And certainly We sent messengers before you and gave them wives and children, and it is not in (the power of) an messenger to bring a sign except by Allah's permission; for every term there is an appointment.}* (Ar-Ra`d 13:38)

Yet, there is no mention whatsoever of the marriage or a wife of Jesus.

...

Copyright © 1999-2004 Islam Online
http://www.islamonline.net/askabouti...uestionID=8836

Cut and paste reduced to comply with copyright laws - please consult the link.
Muan is offline  
Old 12-26-2004, 07:42 PM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosor
Weren't many of the essenes celibate? There was a documentary on CNN a few days ago about the life of Jesus and one biblical historian (forget her name) said it was not unusual at all to find unmarried jews at the time.
Thats the standard christian argument. They claimed that Judaism in Jesus' time was very diverse and the rabbi role was not yet well defined. Furthermore, famous characters like John the baptist and Paul of Tarsus were unmarried teachers.
Answerer is offline  
Old 12-27-2004, 04:40 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the 10th planet
Posts: 5,065
Default

“famous characters like John the baptist and Paul of Tarsus were unmarried teachers�

It’s probably true that John the Baptist was unmarried but I remember reading references to Paul’s wife being active in the early church, especially during the times Paul was in the pokey.
Marduk is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:08 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.