If Jesus Was Married?

[BCSpace]

why did He place His Mother in John's care

In-law situation. Jesus' mother and his wife didn't get along.

[volgadon]

This seems extremely old when life expectancy was so short. Do you have a reference for this (excluding the trivia about Josephus)?

Life expectancy in Judaea was not that short. Anyway, I got the info from Bar-Ilan professor Adiel Schremer's "Male and Female He Created Them." It is in hebrew, so try this ne instead. http://books.google.com/books?id=-tCwHpLFKTYC&pg=PA359&dq=adiel+schremer+male+and+female&hl=en&ei=3iIaToApptmIAtigudEF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=thirty%20more%20usual%20age&f=false

[alter idem]

This seems extremely old when life expectancy was so short. Do you have a reference for this (excluding the trivia about Josephus)?

The more I think about it, the more I think waiting till 28 years old would have been a really bad idea. In Jesus' time there was disease, war, and every day back-breaking dangerous, hard work--all these things combined made for a very short and difficult life. If a man waited to marry after 28 and didn't even have children till after 40, chances are they weren't going to have children and they certainly would not be in the prime of life to care for them, teach them a trade and then have an adult child who could care for them in their old age--which was what we think of as middle age in our day.

Also, there's the biology of it that fights against waiting till an older age to marry and have children--our bodies mature young so that we can have children for many years--and can have many children over that time. In ancient times, children were the 'social security' for their parents. If you didn't have children, and lots of them, you could end up begging or living on charity if you became disabled or elderly. People did what they could to avoid that. I can't see how putting off marriage and children would be a smart way to ensure you'd be taken care of in your later years.

It seems to me that ancient societies would have died out if they did not marry early and have as many children as possible.

This just doesn't seem like it would be a smart thing to do--while I'm sure there were exceptions or extenuating circumstances or reasons, it seems that the most common choice in a world of high infant mortality, short life expectancy and strict taboos against sexual relations outside marital bonds, to marry early.

[alter idem]

Life expectancy in Judaea was not that short. Anyway, I got the info from Bar-Ilan professor Adiel Schremer's "Male and Female He Created Them." It is in hebrew, so try this ne instead. http://books.google.com/books?id=-tCwHpLFKTYC&pg=PA359&dq=adiel+schremer+male+and+female&hl=en&ei=3iIaToApptmIAtigudEF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=thirty%20more%20usual%20age&f=false

Thanks for the reference, but I don't think it was enough for me to accept the general statement you made. Also, the reference using Abraham as an example is not the best--he was definitely an exception and not during Jesus' time. Given the concerns I cited above, it seems like this could not have been common place--otherwise I think the Jewish nation would have died out.

[volgadon]

Thanks for the reference, but I don't think it was enough for me to accept the general statement you made. Also, the reference using Abraham as an example is not the best--he was definitely an exception and not during Jesus' time. Given the concerns I cited above, it seems like this could not have been common place--otherwise I think the Jewish nation would have died out.

Well, if you could provide any evidence that marriages at an earlier age were the norm for the men, feel free to do so. None of the extant sources indicate that.

As for the reference concerning Abraham, it isn't too far from Jesus' time. We are talking about the book of Jubilees.

[LeSellers]

This seems extremely old when life expectancy was so short.

This is a gross misunderstanding of the concept of "life expectancy".

The life expectancy for anyone changes constantly throughout his lifetime. Those people who are now 110 have a life expectancy of 111, and for those who do reach that age, it rises to 112. (This is grossly simplified to make it easier to type and understand. Technically, LE changes monthly or even daily for people this old.)

When we are born, we have the shortest life expectancy we will ever have. A child one day of age in Jesus' day would have had the well advertized LE of (aIr) 34~39 years. This does not mean that all people died when they reached that age. It means that, on average, a child could expect to live that long. But that includes those children who would die of disease or accident (or infanticide) before they reached the age of 5. But a child who did reach the age of five would have had a LE of 60 or so, meaning, again, that the average person could expect to live to that age. But that includes those who would die in war or in child birth, or of other diseases. By the time a person reached the age of 40 or so, he'd have a LE not too different from what we have today.

Even discounting the Moseses and Abrahams (who lived to 120 and 180), there were very old men and women in the Bible. Anna and Simeon in the Temple when Jesus was circumcised are examples.

Please do not confuse life expectancy at birth with the age adults (who would be those who married or were given in marriage) tended to die.

Lehi

[Calm]

This paper suggests that it is possible that even as much as half of those born in ancient Judea (by extrapolating from preindustrialized Europe) did not achieve adulthood which would greatly raise the life expectancy rate of those who did:

http://faculty.biu.a...ilm/infant.html

Edited July 11, 2011 by calmoriah

[inquiringmind]

Actually, Jewish men in the Second Temple era tended to get married at 28 and later, nor was it unusual for a man in his 40 to still be childless. Josephus was 36 when his eldest child was born.

Josephus was thirty six when his first child was born?

That's interesting.

Thank you.

[volgadon]

Josephus was thirty six when his first child was born?

That's interesting.

Thank you.

Yes, and he married at 30.

[alter idem]

Yes, and he married at 30.

This is true, but if you look at his life, I'm not sure it's a good idea to use him as a standard of what other Jews in Jesus' day may have done.

Josephus was born in 37 AD into a wealthy aristocratic family and if married at age 30, that would mean 67 AD.

He was involved in the Jewish Wars of that time. This from his life:

After the Jewish garrison of Yodfat fell under siege, the Romans invaded, killing thousands; the survivors committed suicide. According to Josephus, however, in circumstances that are somewhat unclear, Josephus found himself trapped in a cave with forty of his companions in July 67. The Romans (commanded by Flavius Vespasian and his son Titus, both subsequently Roman emperors) asked him to surrender once they discovered where he was, but his companions refused to allow this. He therefore suggested a method of collective suicide: they drew lots and killed each other, one by one, counting to every third person. The sole survivor of this process was Josephus (this method as a mathematical problem is referred to as the Josephus problem, or Roman Roulette[14]) who then surrendered to the Roman forces and became a prisoner. In 69 Josephus was released,[15] and according to Josephus's own account, he appears to have played a role as a negotiator with the defenders during the Siege of Jerusalem in 70.

Right here, we see that he was not like the other jews--not making the choice the others made--but choosing to live and aligning himself with his enemies, even gaining roman citizenship.

Then this:

In 70 during the Roman Siege of Jerusalem, the first wife of Josephus perished together with his parents. Sometime after, Vespasian arranged for him to marry a captured Jewish woman and ultimately she left him. About 71, Josephus married an Alexandrian Jewish woman as his third wife. By his Alexandrian wife, Josephus had three sons whom only Flavius Hyrcanus, survived childhood. Josephus had an unhappy marriage with her and later divorced his third wife. At around 75, he married as his fourth wife a Greek Jewish woman from Crete who was a member of a distinguished family. With his Cretan wife he had a happy married life. His last wife bore him two sons Flavius Justus and Flavius Simonides Agrippa.

Josephus's life story remains ambiguous. For his critics, he never satisfactorily explained his actions during the Jewish war — why he failed to commit suicide in Galilee, and why, after his capture, he accepted the patronage of Romans.

You mentioned that he didn't have children till age 36-if you look at his marital situation, clearly this was not a choice, but because of circumstances. His first wife died, and his second wife left him so it's not surprising that he wouldn't have children right away.

IMO, he's more an exception than an example for the average believing Jew of Jesus' time.

Info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus

Well, if you could provide any evidence that marriages at an earlier age were the norm for the men, feel free to do so. None of the extant sources indicate that.

As for the reference concerning Abraham, it isn't too far from Jesus' time. We are talking about the book of Jubilees.

alter idem

I'll look around and see what I can find, thanks.

[alter idem]

Well, if you could provide any evidence that marriages at an earlier age were the norm for the men, feel free to do so. None of the extant sources indicate that.

As for the reference concerning Abraham, it isn't too far from Jesus' time. We are talking about the book of Jubilees.

Okay, I've found some references and I seriously question your position which was:

Actually, Jewish men in the Second Temple era tended to get married at 28 and later, nor was it unusual for a man in his 40 to still be childless. Josephus was 36 when his eldest child was born.

From the book "Everyday Life in Bible Times" by the National Geographic Society

Regarding the marriage customs of Jews in Bible times;

Boys marry at 18; girls when they reach puberty, officially at twelve and a half. Usually they marry within the clan. pg. 305

It also mentions that a father taught his son his trade. One Rabbi said--"He who does not teach his son a trade brings him up to be a robber." "The son learns at his father's side. When the father grows old, he will depend on the son to clothe him and take him by the hand when he goes out." As I mentioned, children were a person's 'social security'--it would be foolish for people in general to put off marriage till they were reaching the end of the prime years of health and childbearing and rearing.

And from another book, "The Ten Commandments" by William Barclay:

http://www.keithhunt.com/Mariage1.html

JEWISH MARRIAGE IN THE FIRST CENTURY A.-D.

....Not only must a man marry, but he must marry YOUNG.

Eighteen was a age for marriage, and to remain unmarried after

twenty was a sin. "Up to the age of twenty the Holy One, blessed

be he, watches for a man to marry, and curses him if he fails to

do so by then" (Kiddushin 29).

Eric Heaton points out in "Life in Old Testament Times" (p. 70)

that it has been reckoned that on the average a man could expect

to be a father at nineteen, a grandfather at thirty-eight, and a

great-grandfather at fifty-seven. So binding was the obligation

of marriage that a man might even sell a scroll of the law to

raise money in order to marry (Megillah 27 a).

A few surprises in what we have been given by William Barclay.

Marriage in the Jewish community at the time of Jesus, was a

marriage when very young. Mary the mother of Jesus was probably a

young teenager when she married Joseph, and he was probably under

the age of twenty.

Also, the reference you linked to support your position cited the Essenes, but I question the wisdom of making generalizations about Jewish society in Jesus' time from the practices of the Essenes, who were a small, communal religious sect, outside the mainstream of Judaism. And while it is true that many Essenes did not marry, I must point out that some did.

From the book, "Between the Testaments" by Kent Brown and Richard Holzapfel

Regarding the Essenes;

..it appears that most remained unmarried. But Josephus informs us that, besides the main group who lived celibate lives, some married and lived in towns and villages scattered through the countryside. pg. 199

[David T]

I think it's generally a given that John the Baptist wasn't married. At least, I don't often see this as a topic of discussion, mainly based on his stated wilderness lifestyle. The Lukan infancy narrative suggests that John was only slightly older than Jesus. Would anyone argue that?

Edited July 11, 2011 by nackhadlow

[bluebell]

I don't buy the "Half Human/Half Immortal" aspect of Jesus, any more or beyond than that any of us have immortal spirits, and mortal bodies, and that makes us half human, half immortal. I believe that Jesus was fully human, and had no genetic 'advantages' over any of us.

So you don't believe that Jesus was God's only begotten in the flesh or that He was conceived via any supernatural means (such as through the Holy Ghost) but that Joseph was his biological father?

Just wanting to make sure i'm understanding you right.

[David T]

So you don't believe that Jesus was God's only begotten in the flesh or that He was conceived via any supernatural means (such as through the Holy Ghost) but that Joseph was his biological father?

Just wanting to make sure i'm understanding you right.

I personally am currently of the thinking (definitely subject to change) that the 'only begotten in the flesh' qualifier is what is referred to as a literary "retcon", that the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke are two completely different contradictory stories that come from questionable sources (where would they have learned that info? And if the same source, why the massive contradictions? And the Isaiah prooftext used , in its original context, has nothing to do with a future event concerning someone who hasn't had sex - apart from those stand alone infancy narratives, this concept is never mentioned again anywhere in the NT), and that Mark presents in his Gospel the earliest Christian understanding of how Jesus was the Son of God.

For Mark, Jesus was Adopted at his Baptism.

For Matthew and Luke, it was literal sonship.

For John, it was because of his eternal divine nature as the logos.

I don't think the Gospel or Plan of Salvation loses anything at all if it turns out Jesus was not a genetic demigod. In fact, I think much is actually gained.

And neither of those options require that Joseph was the biological father.

Edited July 11, 2011 by nackhadlow

[bluebell]

I personally am currently of the thinking that the 'only begotten in the flesh' qualifier is what is referred to as a "retcon", that the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke are two completely different contradictory stories that come from questionable sources (where would they have learned that info? And if the same source, why the massive contradictions? And the Isaiah prooftext used , in its original context, has nothing to do with a future event concerning someone who hasn't had sex), and that Mark presents in his Gospel the earliest Christian understanding of how Jesus was the Son of God.

For Mark, Jesus was Adopted at his Baptism.

For Matthew and Luke, it was literal sonship.

For John, it was because of his eternal divine nature as the logos.

I don't think the Gospel or Plan of Salvation loses anything at all if it turns out Jesus was not a genetic demigod. In fact, I think much is actually gained.

And neither of those options require that Joseph was the biological father.

Interesting. Thanks for clarifying.

[volgadon]

Right here, we see that he was not like the other jews--not making the choice the others made--but choosing to live and aligning himself with his enemies, even gaining roman citizenship.

Do you mean like Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakay, leader of the Jamnieh academy and founder of Rabbinic Judaism?

[alter idem]

Do you mean like Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakay, leader of the Jamnieh academy and founder of Rabbinic Judaism?

Seems you're trying to change the subject ....which was the normal age of marriage for a young Jewish man in Jesus' time.

[LeSellers]

Seems you're trying to change the subject ....which was the normal age of marriage for a young Jewish man in Jesus' time.

As in any culture, it would depend on a lot of things, not just age.

One would be how "eligible" (meaning wealthy) the young man was. Joseph, Jesus' adoptive father, was in the high tech industry of their age. He was probably fairly well off. (not everyone could afford a donkey, for instance, nor could just anyone take off for a year or so (to Egypt), then go back home and pick up where he left off. Another would be the availability of suitable mates. We have no way to gauge how many girls in Nazareth were born three or four years after He was in Bethlehem.

We can reasonably assume that He would have married earlier than the norm, if for no other reason than that He had another mission to take care of once He was qualified (by age, i.e., 30 years old).

Lehi

[bluebell]

Could a man in Jesus's day be considered a Rabbi if he wasn't married? I've always heard that such a thing would be extremely rare but i have no idea if that is true or not.

[volgadon]

Seems you're trying to change the subject ....which was the normal age of marriage for a young Jewish man in Jesus' time.

No, actually I'm not. You were trying to dismiss my concrete example as irrelevant by pointing out Josephus' politics, as if that made him an anomaly in Judaism. If early marriage was the norm, why didn't he marry much earlier than he did?

[volgadon]

Could a man in Jesus's day be considered a Rabbi if he wasn't married? I've always heard that such a thing would be extremely rare but i have no idea if that is true or not.

The office of rabbi didn't exist yet. The title was an honorific.

[volgadon]

From the book "Everyday Life in Bible Times" by the National Geographic Society

Regarding the marriage customs of Jews in Bible times;

I don't have that book. What references does it give and what period and place is it refering to?

And from another book, "The Ten Commandments" by William Barclay:

http://www.keithhunt.com/Mariage1.html

One of the sources quoted is from the Babylonian Talmud, t. Kiddushin 29b. The statement foloows a story in which the 3rd c. Aabylonian Amora R. Huna has R. Hamnuna, a promising young scholar, introduced to him. The former flies into a rage upon discovering that the latter is unmarried. A statement is then cited about God blasting the bones of those unmarried by the age of 20, and is attributed to the academy of R. Ishmael, a Tanna from Palestine. Laying aside the fact that this tradition is absent from the Palestinian Talmud and also from midrashic collections, Babylonian Jews tended to marry at a younger age than their Judaean counterparts. at any rate, Huna's concern is not with posterity, but with scholars having pure thoughts during their studies.

[bluebell]

The office of rabbi didn't exist yet. The title was an honorific.

I do realize that.

But the 'rumor' is that it would have been very rare for someone to have been referred to as a Rabbi if they were not married. Is there any truth to that story?

[alter idem]

No, actually I'm not. You were trying to dismiss my concrete example as irrelevant by pointing out Josephus' politics, as if that made him an anomaly in Judaism.

IMO, while your example was 'concrete', it was also anecdotal and not useful in making generalizations about the community at large. Bringing up Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai, had nothing to do with the discussion of the average age of marriage for jewish men is Jesus' time and was irrelevant.

If early marriage was the norm, why didn't he marry much earlier than he did?

Because he was not 'the norm'. There are always exceptions and he was one. But it is not a good idea to make judgments from studying exceptions.

I don't have that book. What references does it give and what period and place is it refering to?

The part I quoted was from a chapter titled 'The World of Jesus' by Roland de Vaux. The section was in reference to the Marriage at Cana, so it was the time period we are discussing. The book was compiled by the National Geographic Society and published in 1967.

One of the sources quoted is from the Babylonian Talmud, t. Kiddushin 29b. The statement foloows a story in which the 3rd c. Aabylonian Amora R. Huna has R. Hamnuna, a promising young scholar, introduced to him. The former flies into a rage upon discovering that the latter is unmarried. A statement is then cited about God blasting the bones of those unmarried by the age of 20, and is attributed to the academy of R. Ishmael, a Tanna from Palestine. Laying aside the fact that this tradition is absent from the Palestinian Talmud and also from midrashic collections, Babylonian Jews tended to marry at a younger age than their Judaean counterparts. at any rate, Huna's concern is not with posterity, but with scholars having pure thoughts during their studies.

This is true, but as I've pointed out, the evidence supports the belief that it was more common for Jews in Jesus day and in Palestine to marry younger than what you've suggested--though there certainly were exceptions. If you don't wish to believe it, you have that choice.

[alter idem]

I do realize that.

But the 'rumor' is that it would have been very rare for someone to have been referred to as a Rabbi if they were not married. Is there any truth to that story?

I have heard this a number of times and while looking for information on marriage age, came across it mentioned as well.