If Jesus was called RABBI, that means he was married, right?

^^ Sorry, that doesn't look like a reliable source to me for serious theology.

The burden of proof is those who say he was not married. is that what you are saying? or are you just gargling? Theology is about discussion. you want proof? it's right there in the bible. Jesus was called Rabbi. Rabbi's have to be married. therefore, Jesus was married. it is a simple philosophical point.

"Unmarried men in Jewish custom were considered a curse to Jewish society". www.grailchurch.org they had to get married by the age of 16. this was an arranged marriage. there are 18 years of Jesus' life that remain missing. His parents were careful in obeying the laws of their people. The burden of proof is with those who do not believe that he was married. there is clear evidence that he was indeed married, and had children.

You know, I am not at all opposed to the idea of Jesus being married. In fact, I would think it the ultimate love story if Jesus himself fell and love and had children. But I just don't see it. As I stated in an earlier post, I see the Bible as a historical record. I can't help but think that if Jesus was married, it would have been recorded. And if he were married to Mary Magdeline, the Gospel of Mary would have stated it or somehow referred to it. THe only possible reference to the relationship between Mary and Jesus could be found in the Gospel of Philip, in which the disciples question why Jesus spends so much time with Mary and kisses her on the mouth. THe answer is something about roaming around in the darkness until the light is shown. It also mentions Mary being Jesus' companion, but a portion of the text is lost. Earlychristianwritings.com is an excellent reference, and one of the only places to find the "Lost Gospels." Another thing that needs to be remembered is that Jesus and his family spent a number of years living in Egypt. Of course, their Jewish tradition did not die during their time away from their home country, but it could be said that the ability for Joseph to find Hebrew wives for his sons was not available during that time. THere are a number of possibilities, but unfortunately, a large portion of writings were destroyed by the "church" in an attempt to hide things which they found unappealing or unflattering. The writings of the Gnostics are excellent examples of this. Although some scholars believe that the gnostic writers were infact the beginnings of Christianity. This is of course up to each individual to decide, whether your motives are for faith or historical fact.

This is an excellent response by the way, very thoughtful, and informative! I am quite impressed by your knowledge and openness, and of course I will be checking out that link for further studies into this information. Thank you so much for taking the time to read over this post with your information, *****!

And,as a rabbi, he is not restricted to being abstinent as in some religions, and he is able to marry, and experience all the ups and downs of marriage as well, which are not common in other traditions. James had even said that not all of who Jesus was, was recorded. obviously, the 18 years he had missing from the bible may have led to him having a normal life to fulfill his mission of acsention as he did after the cross.(in Christianity) however, I must ask, why would all of this information change how we believe anyways?

There are certain religious and non religious affiliations who do believe indeed that he was married. One of the groups I have found, I am unsure of their religious affiliation, but they claim to have the lineage charted back. a religious group called the Mormons believe that Jesus indeed had children, and three wives. So, this is not a new idea, these are just two of many out there I have looked into. I do appreciate your input though, very much so! I have a pretty good clue now, that Jesus was indeed Jewish, and he did not start the Christian religion. That is a completely secular branch, and I know that does offened some, it really shouldn't, I am merely seeking what I believe to be true, from history. The only question remains, is that he was teaching at a very young age. so this would mean in fact, that he didn't spend all of his time, working per say.Since he was a frequent visitor to the temple? thank you for your comment, by the way! I appreciate the time you spent in this discussion.

no. Jesus Christ was first, a Jew. hence the term, king of the Jews, that is recognized by Christians. Rabbi does mean teacher, but in Jewish tradition, you had to be married for this rank.

What is your source for this?

Hey, thank you! I think the proof is in the pudding. All things will be revealed in time!