Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Part 4)

Over the past few days, we've dissected three of the four "building block" premises of The Da Vinci Code and found the supposed evidence for Jesus Christ's marriage to Mary Magdalene more than a little wanting. Before we look at the fourth and final premise, I encourage you, if you haven't already, to read the previous posts in this series:

Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Introduction)
Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Part 1)
Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Part 2)
Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Part 3)

Unlike the previous three premises, the final premise of The Da Vinci Code's Jesus-Was-Married-To-Mary-Magdalene Theory is based on a cultural assumption about Jewish life in the first century. On page 245 of The Da Vinci Code (at least on page 245 of my copy of the book), we find Teabing explaining to Sophie about the hidden M in The Last Supper (which, by the way, is one of the most way-out elements of Dan Brown's hypothesis - art critics find this assertion particularly ludicrous). Here is some of the narrative:

Sophie weighed the information. "I'll admit, the hidden M's are intriguing, although I assume nobody is claiming they are proof of Jesus' marriage to Magdalene."

"No, no," Teabing said, going to a nearby table of books. "As I said earlier, the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record."

I'll interrupt the narrative here, because I simply cannot let this statement go past without comment. "...the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record." What? Forgive me, but that statement is an outright lie and a total misrepresentation of genuine historical evidence. It's one thing to say that you believe Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. It's another to claim, completely without any backing proof whatsoever, that it is "part of the historical record" - in other words, an incontrovertible historical fact. I challenge Dan Brown to back up that statement with proof - an example from the "historical record" which shows that Jesus was indeed married at all, let alone to Mary Magdalene.

Now, continuing with the narrative...

He began pawing through his book collection. "Moreover, Jesus as a married man makes infinitely more sense than our standard biblical view of Jesus as a bachelor."

"Why?" Sophie asked.

"Because Jesus was a Jew," Langdon said, taking over while Teabing searched for his book, "and the social decorum during that time virtually forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned, and the obligation for a Jewish father was to find a suitable wife for his son. If Jesus were not married, at least one of the Bible's gospels would have mentioned it and offered some explanation for His unnatural state of bachelorhood."

Teabing uses strong words. According to him, first century Jewish culture "virtually forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried" and "celibacy was condemned." According to Teabing, if Jesus had been unmarried, this would have been nothing less than a scandal in first century Galilee, and yet 1) the Bible doesn't specifically mention Him as being unmarried and 2) the Bible doesn't provide any explanation for His "unnatural state of bacherlorhood."

Is this a valid argument? In this post, I want us to dissect this premise by addressing three sub-premises:

1. A celibate rabbi in first century Palestine would have created a scandal


2. The Bible doesn't specifically mention Jesus as being unmarried


3. The Bible doesn't provide any explanation for His celibacy

Let's look at the first sub-premise. Would a celibate rabbi indeed have been a scandal in first century Palestine? The short answer: no.

Historical research has shown that although it would have been "normal" for Jesus to have been married, it was not necessarily a problem for him not to be. And there are plenty of historical precedents to prove this.

Firstly, in the Bible there are a number of prominent characters who were unmarried, yet performed a rabbinic or prophetic role in Jewish society. One important example, contemporary with Jesus, is John the Baptist, whose life is recorded not only in the Bible but also by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus. John the Baptist was an ascetic, and this caused a definite scandal among some in Jewish society (note Luke 7:33), but it is noteworthy that that scandal did not include the fact that he was unmarried. Jesus, likewise, created plenty of scandal in his time (note Luke 7:34), but in both scandals the issue of marriage didn't appear to be a factor. Even Josephus makes no issue with the fact that John the Baptist was unmarried.

Furthermore, Jesus was still quite young. He was only 30 years of age at the time he began his messianic ministry (Luke 3:23) -- which, interestingly enough, was the age at which a priest became eligible to begin his ministry (Numbers 4:3; 1 Chronicles 23:3; ) and also the age when David became king (2 Samuel 5:4) and the age when Ezekiel began receiving his visions from God (Ezekiel 1:1) -- and, even though many Jewish men got married as young as 18, just because Jesus was unmarried at time he was 30 didn't preclude him, in the mind of his countrymen, from the possibility getting married later. In fact, postponement of marriage was permitted to students of the Torah so that they could concentrate on their studies without the distraction of marital responsibilities, so as you can see, there was no hard and steadfast rule in this matter. Even a noted rabbi, Simeon be 'Azzai, is quoted as saying:

"What shall I do [about getting married]? My soul is enamored of the Law; the population of the world can be kept up by others."

But celibacy, although not overly common in first century Jewish life, was actually more widespread than even this. There was, at the time of Jesus, a Jewish sect called the Essenes, many of whom lived in religious communes with strict membership requirements, rules, and rituals. Part of their communal discipline involved celibacy. Not only that, but the Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria, described another Jewish sect called the Therapeutae, who practised celibacy. So as you can see, Jewish culture was not monolithic, and there was enough room within Jewish theology to allow celibacy, even though it was frowned upon by mainstream Jewish thought.

We also have the words of Jesus himself, quoted in Matthew 19:10-12:

"The disciples said to him, 'If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.' Jesus replied, 'Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.'"

Jesus speaks here of those who have "renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven." This expression is very much the key to understanding the concept of celibacy in Jesus' day. There is no question that marriage and family were important institutions in first century Jewish culture. But like in any culture, there were also exceptions. And these exceptions related to Jewish "eschatology" (or, simply put, their understanding of "the end times" or what, today, we might call "the end of the world").

Paul made the very same point when he spoke of marriage, divorce and celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7. When Paul explained that "those who marry will face many troubles in this life" (1 Corinthians 7:28), he wasn't referring to ordinary troubles of life, but the troubles that will arise because of the persecution that he knew they would need to face in the near future. It was Paul's "eschatology" that informed his teaching on marriage and celibacy, for he goes on to say in 1 Corinthians 7:29-31:

"What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away."

That phrase, "For this world in its present form is passing away," is the key to understanding the motivation behind celibacy, both in Jesus' day and in the time of the early Church. Some critics have claimed that the Pauline teaching on celibacy was non-Jewish in origin, but in fact it was very Jewish in its eschatalogical context, with strong precedence, for example, in Essene thinking. And as Paul goes on to explain in 1 Corinthians 7:32-35, his reason for encouraging celibacy was not because it was somehow purer or more holy than a non-celibate lifestyle (which is what was taught by the Roman Church much later), but so that a disciple of Jesus might be "free from concern" and " live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord." Celibacy was not for its own sake, but so that a person could focus more on the priorities of the kingdom of God. This was what Jesus was referring to when he said that some have "renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven."

So, in this context, it is entirely permissible, in a Jewish cultural context, for a man like Jesus to either postpone or renounce marriage for eschatological reasons. And although the Rabbis later prohibited celibacy -- Rabbi Eliezer, for example, proclaimed: "Whoever does not engage in procreation is like someone who spills blood" -- these rigid guidelines were codified only after the fall of Jerusalem, well after the time of Jesus.

What we've looked at so far are the reasons that would allow Jesus to be celibate without stirring too much fuss. But what is even more important than this is the reason why Jesus would be celibate. Some scholars have rejected the celibacy of Jesus because they see this as an intrusion of Gentile (and later Church) thinking into pristine Jewish thought. After all, the Roman Church later taught that all sexual activity is a venal sin, and for this reason Jesus (and later Mary, his mother) could not have tainted themselves through sexual activity. But is this what celibacy meant in Jesus' mind (or in Paul's mind, for that matter)? I disagree very strongly.

The elevation of celibacy to a purer, more holy state is very much a product of later Roman theology, not of biblical teaching. Jesus taught that marriage was ordained by God, and early Christian teaching, reflecting the same Jewish theology, taught that, when undefiled by adultery or sexual immorality, the marriage bed is pure (Hebrews 13:4). Even Paul, by inference, taught that the married state, like its spiritual counterpart, was "holy and blameless" (Ephesians 5:25-33). So if Jesus didn't view sexual activity as innately "unholy" or "impure", and if Jewish culture strongly encouraged marriage, why would He choose to be celibate? Why, as even some Christians have asked, is it wrong to even think that Jesus might have been married.

The answer is that Jesus was already betrothed! He already saw himself in marriage covenant (note that in biblical times, betrothal wasn't just the precursor to marriage but was viewed as just as binding as marriage). Take a look at Jesus' own words in Mark 2:19-20:

"Jesus answered, 'How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast.'"

Even John the Baptist spoke of Jesus in similar terminology. In John 3:27-30, he says:

"A man can receive only what is given him from heaven. You yourselves can testify that I said, I am not the Christ but am sent ahead of him. The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegrooms voice. That joy is mine, and it is now complete. He must become greater; I must become less."

If Jesus is called "the bridegroom", who is He the bridegroom of? Who is the bride who "belongs" to Him? The bride, in John's thinking, is Israel. As Messiah, Jesus was the bridegroom of God's covenant people! This is why Jesus was unmarried: because He was betrothed to the people of God as their Messiah!

Paul takes up this same betrothal theme in 2 Corinthians 11:2-4:

"I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached...you put up with it easily enough."

The Jesus that Paul preached was a Jesus betrothed to the people of God, and this, by its very nature, precludes His marriage to any other woman -- whether Mary Magdalene or otherwise. The whole theology of Jesus as the Bridegroom would unravel if Jesus had, in fact, already been married. The nature of the covenant God has made with us, through Jesus, is described as being like a marriage covenant. And upon Jesus' return, the actual wedding itself will take place, as described in Revelation 19:6-8:

"Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: 'Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear.' (Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)"

The Bible rings with the theme of Jesus' marriage to the Church (read again Ephesians 5:25-33). And so it is for this reason that I completely reject the possibility that Jesus was married, not because I see a married Jesus as somehow impure or less holy, but because a natural marriage would destroy the whole purpose for His coming to the earth. And this is why I view the claims of Dan Brown, and others, that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene not just as unjustified, but as an affront to everything that Jesus stands for. Jesus is my Bridegroom, and I am part of His Bride.

Next: Seek the Truth - Exposing the Da Vinci Hoax (Conclusion)