Biblical Proofs That Jesus Should Have Married

Journal of Unification Studies Vol. 20, 2019 - Pages 163 - 195

The notion that Jesus should have been married, as the title of this article suggests, may at first appear almost sacrilegious. This is not the intention, nor will it be the outcome, of this article.

Ironically, considering the possibility of Jesus’ marriage will in no way undermine, compromise or diminish the value of Jesus’ life, mission and sacrifice on the cross. On the contrary—and almost unbelievably—this essay will clarify and amplify the meaning of Jesus’ crucifixion.

This is not theological sensationalism. It is a serious attempt to provide a solution to one of the most challenging and pressing problems of our time. Indeed, “the most serious social problems are youth problems and family breakdown.”[1] At the heart of these concerns are our moral values which provide guidelines for proper human conduct, including sexual behavior. Marriage and family are our most fundamental, God-given, social institutions. They are absolutely indispensable for lasting peace and sustainable development.

The purpose of this writing is to strengthen the institutions of marriage and family. To do this, the focus will be to elevate the sacredness of human sexuality to the highest pinnacle of social and religious prominence. For a Christian audience, one of the most powerful ways to accomplish this is by showing that Jesus should have been married. Understanding why Jesus should have married—this point alone—will unquestionably raise the holiness and sanctity of the marital union.

If Jesus should have been married, then why is it that this subject is hardly discussed? People often think in mutually exclusive, “either-or,” scenarios. Either one or the other are possible, not both. Either Jesus should have been married, or he should have been crucified. And since so much of Christian theology centers on Jesus’ crucifixion, it means even the possibility of his marriage has been, more or less, unthinkable. Case closed. No discussion.

As a result, there has been a serious lack of biblically-based research and theological dialogue postulating his marital union. It was assumed that just considering the possibility that Jesus might have married would undermine the value of the cross and, therefore, any discussion was finished before it even began.
However, the unique spiritual perspective of Father and Mother Moon regarding Jesus’ mission is that both his marriage and his crucifixion would advance God’s providence. How is that possible? The answer to this question is the purpose of this writing.

To begin with, this essay affirms that the deepest root and very core of Christian theology is Jesus’ death on Calvary. Given the circumstances at the time, God asked Jesus to sacrifice himself on the cross. Jesus faithfully followed. On this foundation, Christianity was born. Father Moon’s teaching acknowledges the significance and value of this sacrifice explaining that, “Without the cross, Christianity would not have brought forth its illustrious history.”[2]

There are fictional works[3] and discredited extra-gospel writings[4] that have tried to suggest Jesus was married. These ideas will not be discussed here. From all accounts Jesus was not married and that is the premise of this paper.

Of course, it is not possible to go back in time and change Jesus’ marital status. Nevertheless, just knowing that Jesus should have been married, along with the theological arguments for this, will have huge ramifications for us today. It will change our attitude towards marriage. Jesus’ marital status is not value-neutral.

Moral standards inevitably emerge from a culture’s religious heritage and are the underpinning for the constitution, laws, legal codes, and social norms of that culture. In Western civilization these norms come from our Judeo-Christian traditions. The problem is this: At the very root of our Christian value system, at the very center of Christianity itself, is an unmarried man.

On the other hand, sociologists affirm that there “is a mountain of scientific evidence” in “published literature over the past few decades”[5] proving that marriage matters. This data is overwhelming and irrefutable. Their frustration is that the institutions of marriage and family are still being eroded. Underlying this problem, it appears, is the fact that there is no clear, consistent standard for marriage and sexuality in Christian theology.

In desperation, sociologists are calling on the religious leaders to join them to strengthen and preserve these vital institutions. Glen Stanton, in his book, “Why Marriage Matters” appeals to religious scholars to “work out a fuller theology of marriage.”[6]

More recently, Jordan Peterson, a Canadian clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, author of the best-selling book “12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos,” and a recent internet sensation, put it this way, “We have a lot to straighten out about sexual relationships between men and women in the modern world. They are bent and warped and demented out of shape…”[7]

In this paper, a serious exploration using extensive biblical references from Genesis to Revelations will lay the foundation upon which a strong theological argument for marriage, inclusive of Jesus’ marriage, will be constructed. In fact, it will be shown that establishing God’s lineage on earth is the alpha and omega of the Bible.

From creation, to the Fall, to the rise of Judaism, to the mission and teaching of Jesus, to the providence behind his crucifixion, to the emergence of Christianity, concluding with the Second Coming and the marriage supper of the Lamb, a common thread will emerge demonstrating that God is desperate to establish His lineage on earth and this is the axis around which God’s providence advances.

Christianity is the largest religion in the world with 2.4 billion believers, about 33 percent of religious followers.[8] It, therefore, has a big responsibility and major role to play in regards to creating universal moral standards. But the impact will extend far beyond Christendom. It can be expected that this concept of Jesus’ marriage will ultimately have inter-denominational, inter-religious, and even inter-disciplinary impact.

The scope and sequence of the arguments set forth in this article consist of five points:

  1. God’s original ideal and purpose of creation was for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to be married so they could be in God’s image and fulfill the Three Great Blessings.
  2. The Fall of man concluded with the misuse of love which resulted in establishing a lineage and culture disconnected from God, even anti-God.
  3. In Judaism, marriage is the first covenant with God thus mandating that observant Jews marry. Also, the religious writing to prohibit sex outside of marriage was Moses’ 10 Commandments. Jesus was born into this culture; it was prepared for his advent 2,000 years ago.
  4. Jesus came as the last Adam. As such, he should have fulfilled what the first Adam failed to accomplish, i.e., the Three Great Blessings and marriage is central to their fulfillment. Not surprisingly, the various dimensions of the kingdom that Jesus constantly referred to, correlate closely to these three great blessings in Genesis.
  5. The marriage supper of the Lamb is an event of cosmic consequence. Although, traditionally the bride has been seen as the church, it ultimately must be a literal wedding. God’s lineage must be planted on earth. In Revelations, once it says these are “true words of God”[9] and twice that “these words are trustworthy and true.”[10]

Marriage: The Original Ideal of Creation

When God created human beings, He already had a clear plan, a detailed blueprint, in mind. In the first book of the Bible, Gen. 1:27, it reads, “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them…” We were designed and created in the image of God. This part of the passage is frequently referred to as an essential basis for human rights.

Unfortunately, it is often dissected from the second part. The result is that human rights tend to focus on individual rights sometimes ignoring or negating the rights and social responsibilities of marriage and family.

Of equal, if not more importance, is the second part of this verse because it explains exactly what the image of the invisible God is and the reason He created us in pairs. The verse concludes, “…in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.”[11]

Two conclusions can be drawn from this verse: 1) God has both masculine and feminine attributes, and, 2) only together can man and woman be in God’s image.

The image of God: male and female

First, the divine nature of God consists of both masculine and feminine attributes. God is one. But within the divine nature of our Creator, there are both male and female qualities. Father Moon looks at the “common elements which are found universally throughout the natural world,” and observes that, “every entity possesses dual characteristics of yang (masculinity) and yin (femininity) and comes into existence only when these characteristics have formed reciprocal relationships.”[12]

Science 101 recognizes this polarity: Particles have positive and negative charges; atoms consist of protons and electrons; molecules have cations and anions; plants bear fruits and seeds when the stamen and pistil are pollinated; animals reproduce via male and female; and human beings consist of men and women.

Since everything in the universe is created in pairs, we can know that God, the invisible Creator, has dual characteristics of masculinity and femininity. This makes sense, because the unseen nature of any creator is inevitably inserted into his or her created works.

Saint Paul put it this way, “Ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature, namely, His eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.”[13] Theology affirms the dual attributes of God with the statement in Gen. 1:27 that man and woman were created in the image of God.

A second conclusion is that man and woman need each other to be in the image of God. Only together can a man and woman fully reflect the fulness of God’s dual characteristics. Herein is certainly the strongest theological justification for marriage. Mother Moon put it this way in her 1996 16-city tour in America:

We marry in order to resemble God. God exists as a being of dual characteristics. Thus, husband and wife together reflect God’s original nature.[14]

The purpose of marriage is unique to human beings because we alone are created in God’s image. His Holiness, Pope Francis, also spoke about this in 2014 at a General Audience in St. Peter’s Square.

The image of God is the married couple: the man and the woman; not only the man, not only the woman, but both of them together… When a man and a woman celebrate the Sacrament of Matrimony, God as it were ‘is mirrored’ in them… (this is) God’s design.[15]

That man and woman together are in the image of God not only provides solid theological justification for the institution of marriage itself, it also offers the most compelling rationale for conjugal love to be monogamous.

Moral and social justifications see marriage as transformational. “Paradoxically, by closing off their options… [married couples] increase the energy and attention that each devotes to the needs of their one partner, increasing the likelihood that satisfying sex will result” in what develops over time as “partner-specific skills.”[16]

A man needs a woman in order to fully be a man just as much as a woman needs a man in order to fully be a woman. This fact fundamentally changes the dynamics of the marital relationship. A man should think, ‘I need my wife more than even my own life.’ And vice-versa. When this humility is mutual, then true love and respect are created. In a relationship of this type of true love, there is no exploitation, domestic violence, sexual abuse, or infidelity.

Solving these major social problems is not a legal construct; it begins in the heart of each spouse as a fundamental change of attitude towards the purpose of marriage and the value of the opposite sex. Building God-centered marital unions is the very essence of God’s purpose of creation. Father Moon teaches,

Marriage is more than a simple coming together of a man and woman… Through marriage, a new future is created: societies are formed; nations are built… God’s world of peace is realized with married families at the center.[17]

The Three Great Blessings

For Adam and Eve to stand together in God’s image they needed to fulfill the next verse, Gen. 1:28, called the Three Great Blessings.

God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”[18]

The first blessing, “to be fruitful,” means to achieve a perfect relationship of oneness in heart with God as an individual. The second blessing, “to multiply,” means the goodness of being one with God (the first blessing), is multiplied in human relationships to create families, societies and nations of true love. The third blessing is to “have dominion,” where God’s children take ownership or stewardship over both the spiritual and physical worlds. The nucleus of the Three Great Blessings is the marriage and family of Adam and Eve.

Heavenly sex education

After creating Adam and Eve, God ultimately wanted them to get married, consummate their love and create an ideal family without ever being expelled from the garden. Preparing for a godly marriage is the reason God gave His children the do’s and don’ts of human sexuality found in the second chapter of Genesis (before the Fall).

Do not eat:

And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”[19]

Father Moon teaches that the meaning ‘do not eat’ was to not have sex at this stage of life, because they were still immature and unmarried. If they had eaten a literal fruit, Adam and Eve would have covered their mouths; instead, they covered their sexual organs. The commandment was a temporary injunction, but a very important one. It had three purposes: 1) to demonstrate faith in God, 2) to protect them during their growing period, and 3) to develop their character.

Sex is inherently good. If a man and woman are mature and married, it is holy and sacred, and should be celebrated. On the other hand, sex is also inherently wrong if that relationship is outside the marriage bonds. In this case, it would be physically, emotionally and spiritually dangerous. Even deadly.

This is not only true for our original ancestors in the garden of Eden, it is very much true today too. It is universally true. God is like any parent warning their children not to engage in sex until they are mature and married. This is not just because of the inherent risks related to pre-marital sex. More importantly, sexual self-control builds good character and is the best preparation for marriage.

Permission to eat:

At the end of the chapter, Gen. 2:24, God gives instructions about the proper foundation for engaging in sex, saying, “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.”[20] There are three parts to this verse: 1) leave his father and mother 2) cling to his wife, and 3) become one flesh. Each will be discussed separately.

1) Leave the womb of parental love

“To leave” does not mean for a child to separate from his parents and find a new place to live, although it is commonly interpreted this way. It is wrong because it implies that, when a child gets married, parents are somehow not needed or can be at arm’s length. Actually, it is just the opposite. The filial love of children for their parents should grow stronger and deeper as kids grow older. When children get married and start a family, it is best to have experienced parents and grandparents around. The ideal family environment is the 3 generation family.

Then, what does it mean to “leave”? It is a birthing process. When a baby is born it “leaves” the womb. Prior to that, the womb provides a protected environment where the fetus is nurtured, protected and prepares for life outside the womb. Once born, it is ready to take on more responsibility, the first of which is to breathe on its own.

To “leave” is also like a graduation. When a student leaves his school or college, there are still strong attachments to that alma mater, in fact, they usually grow stronger after their commencement. Like the womb, educational establishments are protected institutions that prepare students for more responsibility after they “leave” or graduate. They find a job, contribute to society, and support the community by paying taxes and raising good families.

In this Bible verse, to “leave” means to be born from the womb of your parents’ love where you graduate having learned children’s love and sibling’s love. On this foundation, the responsibility of conjugal love and parental love is built. Father Moon calls these loves the four realms of heart learned in the family.

2) Cling together in God’s image

This word “cling” conjures up grasping onto something in a life-and-death situation and never letting go, even when knuckles turn white. The word cling means to hold on for dear life. Adam was supposed to “cling” to Eve and never let go. Eve should have done the same to Adam. The theological rationale is that the union of a man and woman allows them to come together to reflect the image of God. They “cling” together to be in the image of God.

Researchers call the lack of commitment and communication that often precedes cohabiting, “sliding, not deciding.”[21] In an article in the New York Times, clinical psychologist Dr. Meg Jay puts it this way,

Moving from dating to sleeping over to sleeping over a lot to cohabitation can be a gradual slope, one not marked by rings or ceremonies or sometimes even a conversation. Couples bypass talking about why they want to live together and what it will mean.[22]

Cohabiting commitments are vague and more likely to be focused on individual happiness. The unspoken assumption is, ‘We’ll stay together as long as “we” are happy,’ but either partner can call it off. Going into any relationship with ill-defined, self-centered expectations will cause difficulties in intimacy and make the relationship weaker.

Marriage, on the other hand, is a public commitment declared with great formality before family, friends and even beseeching God’s presence and blessing. Public promises are more difficult to make and, therefore, harder to break. It is precisely because of this that marriage agreements should be public and this is one of the main differences with cohabiting arrangements. Marriage tests the unselfishness of the commitment of both parties in advance.

Traditional marriage vows seem specifically designed to check egos at the door. Couples commit to love, fidelity, honor and cherish their spouses, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, and at least until death.

3) Become one flesh

The commandment in Gen. 2:17, ‘do not eat,’ is clearly temporary. Sex is prohibited while Adam and Eve are in their growing period, while they are immature and unmarried. Clearly, the two should not remain separate, because after they are mature and married Adam and Eve are instructed to “become one flesh.”[23]

In love, new life is conceived and along with this a lineage is created. Becoming one flesh allows a couple to join together to more completely reflect the image of their Creator. Under these conditions, sex becomes a great blessing from God allowing the couple to become co-creators, or parents.

This is biblical sex in the garden. It consists of four parts: 1) abstinence during their growing period (“do not eat”), 2) living with and honoring their parents while learning children’s love and sibling’s love, 3) making a public commitment to cling to your spouse (marriage), and on this foundation, enjoying the blessings and fruit of becoming one flesh and one with God.

The Fall: Four Loves Lost

The family is the school of love. As mentioned, there are four loves or realms of heart that should be learned and experienced in the family: children’s love, sibling love, conjugal love and parental love. The great tragedy is that in the garden of Eden, due to the Fall, all four loves were lost.

Children’s love: lost

First, Adam and Eve should have honored God as their Father. How would they have shown filial piety towards Him? God’s first commandment was for Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:17). After receiving this instruction from God, how did Adam respond? What did he say? Nothing! There was no, ‘Thank you.’ There was no inquiry as to, ‘Why not?’ Nor was there any question as to what it really meant. There was simply no communication.

God invested everything for the sake of His children: He made them in His image, breathed His spirit into them, gave them the Three Great Blessings, asked them to take lordship over all things (including angels), gave them all kinds of food to eat, created a beautiful garden for them to live in, created Adam and Eve to be partners, asked them to name all the animals (i.e., be good stewards), then gave His commandment to protect them, and later taught them the importance of marriage and family. Amazingly, there were no words of gratitude recorded in the Bible.

Adam’s lack of any response created four problems: 1) the meaning of the commandment was not clarified, 2) the power of the commandment was weakened and faded over time, 3) the lines of communication between God and His children never matured, and 4) no filial relationship developed. This was the beginning of the Fall. Children’s love was lost.

Sibling love: lost

Brother and sister love is much more than shared DNA or a common address. When children are connected to the love of their parents, they become siblings in the truest sense.

Eve had questions about the commandment. That’s okay. The source of information, however, will be skewed based on who gives the answer. Who should Eve have asked? It should have been her elder brother, Adam, or even better she should have asked God. He was the author of the commandment.

But who did she ask? She asked the serpent about the meaning of God’s commandment and got the wrong answer. God’s commandment is clear, ‘Do not eat. If you eat, you will surely die.’ The serpent’s advice was exactly opposite, ‘It’s okay to eat. You will not die.’ The two answers could not be more different. They were 180 degrees apart.

Eve, therefore, had to choose to believe and follow either God’s commandment or the advice of the serpent. Eve made a bad choice and chose to follow the serpent’s advice. She put her trust and confidence in the serpent more than her elder brother, Adam, or God. Sibling love was lost.

Conjugal love: lost

The process of the Fall was that the serpent tempted Eve and she ate the fruit. Then Eve tempted Adam and he ate. As explained above, to eat the fruit means to have a premature sexual relationship. So, who was the serpent?

Exposing the identity of the serpent is important. First, he was “more crafty than any of the wild animals,”[24] meaning that the serpent was more than just a clever animal. The serpent:

  • talked to our first human ancestors
  • knew God’s Will
  • caused the Fall
  • lived in heaven[25]
  • has dominated people ever since
  • is called the “ruler” and “god” of this world[26]

This is compelling evidence that the serpent was a spiritual being. The only such beings were angels, who were originally created for a good purpose. To state the conclusion, it means that when the archangel tempted Eve to eat, they had a spiritual sexual relationship. Then, Eve tempted Adam to eat, and they had an illicit relationship that was both physical and spiritual.

After eating the fruit, our first human ancestors did not cover their hands, because they took it from a tree, and did not cover their mouths, because they ate an edible part of some plant. After falling, they covered their sexual organs because this was the part of the body they misused.

The misuse of conjugal love came on the foundation of losing children’s love, i.e., filial piety towards God, and sibling love between Adam and Eve. Both of these loves were lost prior to the misuse of conjugal love.

As a result, Satan became the first owner of human sexual love and the sacredness of conjugal love was lost. This situation pained God in the deepest imaginable way. Just after the Fall, the Bible describes how deeply saddened God was.

The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.[27]

After understanding the heart of God at the time of the Fall, Father Moon made this comparison,

God can be compared with a father who labors and sweats throughout his life to accumulate assets for his children, only to have a thief steal everything in the night. No one is aware of the grief-stricken heart of God.[28]

True, God-centered conjugal love was lost.

Parental love: lost

Without the Fall, there would have been only one lineage which would have connected us to God. Instead, as a consequence of the Fall, a second lineage which was never intended was created. Through the Fall, Satan planted his spiritual lineage on earth. This is clear, because after the Fall God told the serpent, “And I will put enmity (hatred) between you (Satan) and the woman (Eve), and between your seed (evil) and her seed (good).”[29] (parentheses added). The New International Version translates “seed” as “offspring.”

The original seed or lineage of God never bore fruit. Contrary to this, Satan’s “seed” or “offspring” were conceived and planted on earth. These two seeds or lineages, God’s and Satan’s, are at war with each other because they are irreconcilable: one is good and the other evil. Precisely because the Fall gave birth to Satan’s lineage, he is called the “god” and “ruler” of this world.[30] Parental love was lost.


If the four family loves had been realized in the first family at the beginning of human history, we would be living in an ideal world today. During her 1993 world tour, Mother Moon put it this way:

Adam and Eve should have related directly with God by developing in themselves the four types of love: child’s love, brother-sister love, conjugal love and parental love… By establishing ideal, unbreakable families that fulfill the vertical and horizontal unity between parents and children, brothers and sisters, and husbands and wives, we will finally build the eternal basis for God’s kingdom on earth as well as in heaven.[31]

Adam was symbolized as the tree of life and Eve as the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The serpent told Eve that after eating the fruit, “you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”[32] But she should have known good and evil before eating. To fulfill her role as the tree of knowledge, Eve should have the knowledge of all four loves:

  1. Children’s Love: she should have known who her father, God, was.
  2. Sibling Love: she should have trusted her elder brother, Adam, more than the archangel.
  3. Conjugal Love: she should have known who her rightful husband, Adam, would be.
  4. Parental Love: she should have conceived God’s children and lineage on earth.

During the Fall of our first human ancestors all four loves were lost. The magnitude of the mistake in the garden of Eden was enormous. In her invitational address at the United Nations headquarters in New York, Mother Moon described the catastrophe this way:

If you read the Bible carefully, you will see that the Fall involved the loss of Adam’s entire family. First, the position of parents was lost through the Fall of Adam and Eve. Second, the position of children was lost as Cain murdered Abel. God’s blueprint for an ideal family and world perfection was lost.[33]

However difficult and disheartening the situation was, God cannot give up. He is absolute. If human beings, God’s children, were left in this fallen situation dominated by Satan, then God would be a failure. Therefore, He initiated the providence of salvation. The goal is to reclaim His children, the institution of marriage, as well as His lineage and sovereignty.

Restoring A Culture of Sexual Purity

The earliest and perhaps purest instruction in written religious tenets stating unequivocally that sex be exclusive to marriage is found in the Ten Commandments of Moses. In fact, this subject of sexual exclusivity is covered twice. The seventh commandment says, “You shall not commit adultery.”[34] The tenth commandment reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife…”[35] In other words, Jews are directed to practice sexual fidelity, both in governing their actions and their desires.

Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated conservative speaker and writer, an Orthodox Jew, and founder of PragerU, sees the sexual exclusivity within the bonds of marriage in Judaism as having a profound impact on the development of Western civilization and human history.

When Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah's prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible. Societies that did not place boundaries around sexuality were stymied in their development. The subsequent dominance of the Western world can largely be attributed to the sexual revolution initiated by Judaism and later carried forward by Christianity.[36]

Marriage is a dominant theme in Judaism, overwhelmingly so. To be specific:

  • God’s blessings to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Gen. 1:28) are taken as divine commands in Judaism. They are God’s covenant with the Jewish people. Marriage with this view in mind is seen as a mitzvah, literally a commandment or duty, incumbent upon every adult, male Jew and children are an expected product of the union.
  • The Talmud stipulates that a husband’s refraining from sexual relations with his wife may be taken by her as grounds for a divorce (Ketubot 6:7).
  • A single man who is past 20 years of age can be compelled by a rabbinic court to marry (though it makes exceptions for students).[37]

Jesus was born a Jew. Perhaps, the strongest monotheistic culture that honors marriage and family is Judaism. It is, therefore, unconceivable that when the messiah comes to Israel, he should remain celibate. Jesus’ marriage was a central part of his mission. From this perspective, let’s review the life, mission and teaching of our Lord and Savior.

The Mission of the Last Adam

If Jesus had a mission statement, it would be what the angel told Joseph just prior to Jesus’ birth. The angel told Joseph that he should not abandon Mary because the child she was carrying was conceived by the Holy Spirit. In addition, the angel gave the child’s gender, name and mission. Jesus’ mission was to “save his people from their sins.”[38]

The word “sins” is plural. It not only refers to a large number of sins that need to be forgiven, but also that Jesus should forgive all types of sin. There are four kinds of sin: individual sin, collective sin, inherited sin and the original sin.[39] Three biblical stories show that Jesus had the ability to forgive the first three sins.

The first example is the sinful woman who came to the house of the Pharisee where Jesus was. She had an alabaster jar of perfume, stood behind him, cried, and her tears fell on his feet. She then wiped his feet with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them.[40] After some discussion, Jesus turned to the woman and said, “Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much.”[41] This was individual sin, and Jesus could forgive this type of sin.

Next, Jesus’ first words on the cross were of compassion and clemency. He asked forgiveness for those who crucified him, saying, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”[42] This was collective sin, and Jesus could forgive this type of sin too.

Finally, Jesus forgave and healed a paralyzed man. In Capernaum, the crowds were so large that a paralyzed man carried on a stretcher by four men could not make his way to Jesus. They went to the roof, removed part of it and lowered the paralytic down in front of Jesus. “When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, ‘Son, your sins are forgiven.’”[43]

Some in the crowd questioned in their hearts Jesus’ authority to forgive sins. Our Lord perceived this and said to those who silently questioned him, “But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.”[44] Jesus then healed the paralyzed man, who miraculously rose up and walked away. Jesus also healed a man who was born blind.[45] So obviously, Jesus could solve inherited sins.

The one sin Jesus did not forgive was the original sin. This is the sin of our first human ancestors in the garden of Eden, and it remains unsolved. The original sin involved two people and was sexual in nature. This sin resulted in the creation of Satan’s lineage (Satan’s seed).[46] To solve this sin, Jesus must create a God-centered lineage on earth. But he cannot do this all my himself. To solve the original sin, Jesus would have to get married.

The obvious next question is, “Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus should have been married?”

The Garden and the Kingdom

If marriage was such a central part of Jesus’ mission, then he should have talked about it, many times. He did. In fact, he talked about it from the beginning to the end of his ministry. However, it is important to understand that Jesus could not talk about it directly. The Bible tells us,

All this Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable. This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet: “I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world.”[47]

So, when Jesus spoke about his marriage there were two conditions: 1) it would have to be in parables, meaning he could not talk about it directly, and 2) he would have to use a parable hidden from the foundation of the world.

What parable did Jesus use most often? The most frequently used parable in his ministry was that of a kingdom. Theologians acknowledge that during his three years of public ministry “Jesus speaks frequently of God’s kingdom.”[48] But they are uncertain as to its exact meaning because, “Within the New Testament, nowhere does Jesus appear to clearly define the concept [of kingdom].”[49]

To begin to unlock the meaning of the kingdom, it is essential to understand that Jesus’ was given the title of the last Adam.[50] Since the first Adam failed his responsibility to realize the Three Great Blessings (Gen. 1:28), then it stands to reason that the last Adam, Jesus, should fulfill what the first Adam did not do.

The elements of the Three Great Blessings in the Garden closely parallel the various ways Jesus used the word “kingdom” in his parables. In essence, the garden of Eden and the kingdom of God are equivalents. This correlation becomes more profound because due to the Fall, we were separated from God and fell into ignorance. We have been spiritually blind to the things “hidden since the foundation of the world.”

Thus, the kingdom which Jesus referred to repeatedly is directly related to the Three Great Blessings in Gen. 1:28. When these two concepts are correlated with each other, this will become very clear.

1. To be fruitful = The kingdom within

The first blessing, to be fruitful, means to reach individual perfection by uniting our mind and body, thus becoming one with God. Several meanings of kingdom in Jesus’ parables have attributes of a personal relationship with God.

For example, in the Beatitudes, Jesus says of those who are “poor in spirit”[51] and “persecuted for righteousness’ sake”[52] that theirs is the kingdom of heaven. This kingdom comes from the inner quality and strength of character to digest difficulties and suffering with gratitude. Similarly, Jesus said we had to “become like little children”[53] to enter God’s kingdom, i.e., humble, trusting and pure in heart.

When asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus told them the “kingdom of God is not something that can be observed… because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”[54] The King James Version translates it, “the kingdom of God is within you.”

Jesus also told us, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,”[55] an obvious reference to our personal relationship with God. He also told us how to be perfect. “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”[56] Selfishness, arrogance and conceit are enemies of individual perfection. These references to kingdom undoubtedly refer to a personal relationship with God and parallel the first blessing, “be fruitful.”

2. To multiply = A marriage and kingdom that grows

Next, upon reaching individual perfection, Adam and Eve should have been blessed in marriage by God, fully reflecting His image. The loving relationships in this first family would have expanded into a tribe, society, nation and world, all centered on God. This would have fulfilled the second blessing, to multiply.

Twice, Jesus used the parable of a kingdom to refer to a marriage. The first when he said, “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son.”[57] Later in the same gospel, he maintained that the kingdom of heaven could be compared to “ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom.”[58]

Jesus also compared the kingdom to the joy of finding a treasure hidden in a field,[59] the fine pearls of a merchant,[60] a net full of fish,[61] and the treasures of a house owner.[62] In other words, the kingdom is something precious and wonderful and bountiful and abundantly joyful—like the various relationships of love experienced in a God-centered family.

In other passages, the kingdom refers to something that is organic and social in nature, which grows or expands. The kingdom is like a grain of mustard seed,[63] or good seed in a field,[64] or leaven hidden in flour.[65] Adam and Eve should have been trees producing good seeds in God’s garden which would have multiplied and grown from a family to a tribe, society, and nation ultimately becoming God’s kingdom.

Clearly, these elements of a kingdom in Jesus’ teachings parallel the concepts of the second blessing, “to multiply.”

3. To have dominion = A kingdom on earth and in heaven

To “have dominion,” the third blessing, means to be responsible stewards or take ownership of creation both in the physical world and in the spiritual world. By having God live within us individually (the first blessing) and in human relationships (the second blessing), God’s sovereignty would be established (the third blessing).

At the beginning of the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructed us to pray, “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”[66] In other cases, the kingdom Jesus spoke of took on a similar meaning of God’s sovereignty, when he said his “kingdom is not of this world”[67] and he would “cast out demons, then the kingdom of God [would] come.”[68] He also talked about a “kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”[69]

These passages accurately describe the third blessing of God’s sovereignty on earth and in heaven. Obviously, these concepts of a kingdom have elements corresponding to the third blessing, to have dominion.

When Jesus spoke about various aspects of the kingdom, as he did from the beginning to the end of his ministry, he did so in the position of the last Adam. This is why the multiple dimensions of kingdom correlate to the Three Great Blessings (Gen. 1:28). At the center of these blessings is the marriage of our first human ancestors. Therefore, when Jesus spoke about the kingdom, he was speaking of his own marriage, using a parable hidden from the foundation of the world.


To build a kingdom three external conditions are needed: people, land and sovereignty. At the beginning of human history these were: Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden, and God’s commandment ‘do not eat,’ respectively. In the history of restoration, this external foundation consisted of the Jewish people, Israel, and the authority of the Torah.

But, once the external foundation is established, an internal element is needed. The internal dimensions to a kingdom consist of a king, a queen, and a royal lineage. A culture of marriage and a God-centered lineage are essential.

Yes, Jesus talked about the crucifixion (this will be discussed in detail later), but he also talked a lot about marriage. In fact, Jesus made the strongest theological argument for marriage when he linked Gen. 1:27 with Gen. 2:24, saying,

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ (Gen. 1:27) and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh? So, they are no longer two, but one flesh (Gen. 2:24). Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”[70] (Bible references added)

When God created Adam, He specifically indicated that it was not good for Adam to be alone.[71] Naturally, if it was not good that the first Adam be alone, it stands to reason that it would not be good for the last Adam, Jesus, to be alone. Since Jesus was the last Adam, shouldn’t there have been a “last Eve”?

Then why didn’t Jesus get married?

In order for Jesus to get married, he would first have to inherit the external foundation God prepared for him. This foundation was the providential history of the Jewish people. The key to this transition was for John the Baptist to acknowledge his role as Elijah. The prophet Malachi prophesied that Elijah would return prior to the coming messiah and “He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents.”[72]

Twice Jesus said: “John the Baptist is Elijah.”[73]

John denied it, saying: “I am not Elijah.”[74]

The sequence is vitally important, First, the return of Elijah and then, second, the messiah. This means that without Elijah, there can be no messiah. So, if John denied he was Elijah, how can the Jewish people believe in Jesus? More importantly, how can John honestly believe Jesus was the messiah without Elijah’s return?

Sadly, John failed his mission. Father Moon explained it this way, “John’s ignorance of God’s providence, which led him to insist that he was not Elijah, became the principal reason why the Jewish people could not believe in Jesus.”[75] This was also the primary reason Jesus could not get married.

Yes, John initially testified to Jesus as the Lamb of God and Son of God. He also saw the spirit descend on Jesus, but even in these testimonies there were sown serious seeds of doubt. Looking more closely at John’s initial testimony of Jesus we see serious problems. John testified:[76]

Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. (John 1:29)

I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. (John 1:32)

And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God. (John 1:34)

Now, look what John said immediately after the first two declarations and what he failed to do after the third proclamation. The original testimony will be repeated for clarity:

  • “Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29)  “I myself did not know him.” (John 1:31)
  • “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him,” (John 1:32)  “I myself did not know him.” (John 1:33)
  • “And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God” (John 1:34)  John never followed Jesus, although a few of John’s disciples did. (John 1:35-38)

Not only did John deny that he was Elijah, he never served or followed Jesus. And later in his life, John demonstrated their disunity by saying that Jesus should increase and that he would decrease,[77] i.e., that they should divide and go in separate directions. Looking more closely at the relationship between Jesus and John, there were tensions, rivalry and even public arguments between their disciples.[78]

Three years later, when John was in prison, he asked an utterly insulting question which revealed the judgemental heart of John towards Jesus that likely plagued their entire relationship:

When John, who was in prison, heard about the deeds of the Messiah, he sent his disciples to ask him [Jesus], “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?”[79]

John completely changed his attitude and testimony towards Jesus. At the beginning, John testified to Jesus as the Lamb of God and the Son of God.[80] Three years later, he asked, Are you really the messiah? Shall we look for another?

John should have believed, attended and served Jesus with his full heart and unhesitant devotion. He should have become Jesus’ chief disciple and accepted his role as Elijah. If this had happened, then the Jewish leaders and people would have accepted Jesus as the messiah. Even more important, John’s complete unity with Jesus would have bequeathed the Old Testament foundation to Jesus and provided the foundation for his marriage. In her 1993 world tour, Mother Moon explained it like this way,

Unity (between John and Jesus which never materialized) would have laid the foundation for the Marriage of the Lamb. Jesus would have stood as the True Father of humanity and his bride would have stood as the True Mother of humanity.[81] (parentheses added)

The Purpose and Value of Jesus’ Crucifixion

The purpose of the providential history of Judaism was to establish the conditions for the birth of a sinless man, Jesus. On this foundation, Jesus’ conception and birth were beyond the accusations of Satan. Once born, however, the first step in Jesus’ public ministry would require that he be recognized and accepted by his people.

If he was not accepted, then Satan would have the right to claim this entire 4,000-year providence. Satan’s accusation before God would go something like this: “Your people, Your chosen people, that You worked so hard to prepare, to whom You sent Your son, have now rejected him. They are not doing Your will. They are doing my will. Because of that, I can claim these people, their history, and I can even claim the condition You set for Jesus to be born sinless. I can claim the entire providential history of restoration.” God could not disagree.

In this scenario, there are two tragedies. One is the rejection of Jesus by his people caused by John’s failure, thus making Jesus’ mission and marriage impossible. The second tragedy is that the entire 4,000-year providence of restoration would be lost to Satan. Within that history were the family- and national-level providences which established the foundation for the messiah, i.e., set the condition for Jesus to be born untainted by sin and fallen nature.

By rejecting Jesus, even the condition that allowed for him to be born free from Satan’s accusation could be lost. This would mean God’s entire providence would come to a dead end, and thus, Christianity would have never emerged, the Holy Spirit would not have descended to earth to work permanently, there would be no Second Coming, and the original sin would remain unsolved. Undoubtedly, the second tragedy would be infinitely greater. It would be a catastrophe of cosmic proportions.

A necessary offering

To avoid the second tragedy, God needed to make an extraordinary sacrifice, a condition of greater indemnity. That condition, that sacrifice, was Jesus going the way of the cross. Only he could make this offering. Jesus’ crucifixion would thwart Satan’s claim and prevent this second tragedy, the greater tragedy, from happening.

However, Jesus’ death could not be an ordinary passing into the spiritual world. He not only had to die, but had to willingly die. And not only die willingly, but to offer to die voluntarily, to do so without hesitation, to die in the cruelest manner possible, to die without any resentment, and even to die forgiving those who crucified him. This ransom alone, which only Jesus could make, could protect the foundation of God’s providence and thereby allow it to continue.

Jesus did it. By his own volition, he freely and willingly offered to go the way of the cross. This sacrifice stands as the greatest testimony of his love for God, his Father. This is clearly evident from the following Bible verse.

The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life… No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord… This command I received from my Father.[82]

Echoing this, Father Moon taught, “After Jesus realized that the people’s disbelief was unalterable, he chose the path of the cross…”[83] There is a clear causal relationship between the disbelief of the Jewish people, due to John’s failure, and Jesus having to go the way of the cross. Although absolutely necessary to prevent an even greater tragedy from occurring, the way of the cross was nonetheless a secondary alternative.

Father Moon said that Jesus was a pure offering on the cross that Satan could not touch. “If he had complained and lamented on the cross, God would have lost the position to claim Jesus; Satan would have claimed him instead.”[84]

The Kingdom and the Cross

At play throughout Jesus’ ministry are two scenarios: the kingdom and the cross. Examining the usage of these two words shows a very significant dynamic between these two polar opposites. The word “kingdom” appears 149 times throughout the New Testament. It is used 113 times in the Gospels, from the very beginning to the end of Jesus' ministry.

In contrast, the word “cross” appears only 32 times in the New Testament, dominantly towards the end of Jesus’ ministry. Nearly half of these citations, 15, are in the letters, well after the crucifixion had already taken place. The word “kingdom” appears nearly five times more often than the word “cross.”

At the beginning of his ministry, Jesus declared, “the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”[85] At the end of his ministry Jesus lamented saying, “woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men.”[86] If the cross was absolutely predestined as the only way to save us from our sins, then how can Jesus declare the kingdom is at hand when the cross is three years away? And how can he say the kingdom is shut just prior to his crucifixion?

One way for the kingdom to be “at hand” at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry—without being crucified—is to understand that the kingdom refers to Jesus’ marriage. On the other hand, at the end of Jesus’ ministry when the cross was imminent, the kingdom was “shut,” because Jesus could not marry and thus could not solve original sin. At this point, the cross became necessary to allow God’s providence to continue, but still, Jesus’ marriage remains a central part of the Second Coming (the marriage supper of the Lamb).

Thus, Jesus clearly talks about two possibilities, the kingdom and the cross. The kingdom, however, is overwhelmingly the dominant message in Jesus’ ministry, and it is also 180-degree opposite to the cross. The difference is: getting married or being crucified. How could Jesus bridge this colossal divide willingly, without being bitter?

Bridging the impossible divide

Throughout his public ministry Jesus preached the kingdom. Yet, our Lord willingly chose the cross when it became necessary. The choice was not simply cross or no cross; it was the glory of God’s kingdom vs. the agony of an excruciating death. Facing this dichotomy, that Jesus chose the cross defies human logic or thought. What was in Jesus’ heart, mind and character to allow him to bridge two diametrically contrasting possibilities and embrace unimaginable suffering without resentment? Jesus was a Jew.

Jews have a covenantal relationship with God. It is a powerful bond. It’s in their family, their education, their culture, and it’s part of their history. They feel God deeply in their soul. This is the most powerful testimony to Jesus’ Jewish heritage. On the foundation of Judaism, he developed a strong, loving relationship with God, so that, when Jesus heard the voice of God he never doubted and immediately obeyed.

Some Christian theologians have thought that Jesus’ crucifixion was pre-ordained. The problem with this is two-fold. If the cross was pre-ordained by God, that would mean that God also pre-ordained the Fall. The inevitable conclusion is that God is both good and evil. Rev. and Mrs. Moon, as have all world-level monotheistic religions, categorically deny this and acknowledge that God is only good.

Also, if the cross was destined from the beginning, then Jesus’ suffering becomes almost robotic and loses its deep inner meaning and value. Jesus voluntary decision to go the way of the cross, as an agent of free-will, adds infinite value to Jesus’ character and the meaning of the cross. It was an act of the highest heroism. The cross stands as the gold standard for agape.

A bride prepared

Confidently, we can be assured that there must have been a bride prepared for Jesus 2,000 years ago. We know this because:

  • God is unchanging and eternal, as are His principles, and everything is created in pairs.
  • Man and woman together were created in the image of God. (Gen. 1:27)
  • Marriage and family are essential for fulfilling the Three Great Blessings. (Gen. 1:28)
  • For Adam to be without his partner was “not good” (Gen. 2:18); it’s actually unprincipled. Likewise, since Jesus was the “last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45), there should have been a “last Eve.”
  • God wanted Adam and Eve to remain abstinent during their growing period (Gen. 2:17) as the best preparation for marriage- and family-building. (Gen. 2:24)
  • The Fall involved the misuse of sexual love, eating the forbidden fruit (Gen. 3:6), and the creation of a fallen lineage (Gen. 3:15) allowing Satan to be the “god” and “ruler” of this world. (2 Cor. 4:4, and John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11)
  • Judaism was the cultural foundation God prepared for the messiah and was infused with strong traditions of marriage and family as covenantal relationships with God.
  • At the Second Coming, the “marriage of the Lamb” is the most novel, dominant event at the conclusion of human history and is the precursor for the realization of heaven on earth. Alpha and Omega, Genesis and Revelations, are both marriage-centric.

Jesus should have married; it was not a choice. A bride must have been made ready. Unfortunately, even though the bride of Jesus was prepared, the wedding never happened. Before being married, Jesus must be accepted by his people and stand on the national foundation God had prepared. That, of course, never happened.

A new covenant

If Jesus could have married 2,000 years ago, he would have been able to complete God’s providence by establishing a God-centered lineage. This would have been the basis for solving the original sin. Then, there would be no need for the cross or the Second Coming.

On the other hand, if Jesus were rejected, thus preventing him from being married, and did not go the way of the cross, then everything would have come to naught. In this case, without the cross, Christianity would have never appeared.

Jesus’ crucifixion protected the 4,000-year foundation for the messiah and allowed God’s providence to continue. Christianity grew into a worldwide religion and within this new providence was the foundation for the bride of the Lamb.

One of the most famous Bible verses for Christians is John 3:16, which attests to Jesus’ sacrifice being God’s will and that its purpose was to open a world-level providence. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

Although God’s providence had only reached up to the family and the national level at the time of Jesus’ birth, God gave his only son and Jesus obediently followed, thereby making a condition to protect the 4,000-year foundation of the Old Testament age and open the world-level providence centered on Christianity. Father Moon explained it this way,

It is written in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” It is not written that God gave His only Son because He loved America or a particular denomination. God gave His Son for the sake of the world.[87]

The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus opened a new dispensation, the New Testament Age. At the last supper, Jesus indicated that his crucifixion would open this new providence or what he called a “new covenant.” Jesus told his disciples, “This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”[88] This was a path of greater indemnity and only the blood of Jesus on the cross, without any complaint or resentment, could fulfill this condition. It allowed God’s providence of salvation, centering on Christianity, to continue.

The value of Jesus’ crucifixion was tremendous. The cross of Calvary:

  • protected the 4,000-year history of God’s providence of restoration,
  • opened a “New Covenant” or world-level providence.
  • gave birth to Christianity,
  • allowed the Holy Spirit to come down from heaven,
  • prepared the foundation for the Second Coming,
  • laid the foundation for the Bride of the Lamb to be born,
  • created the condition for the marriage supper of the Lamb,
  • allowed for God’s lineage to be established on earth,
  • brought an end to the lineage of Satan, and
  • forgave the original sin.

Father Moon taught, “Through the cross, Jesus instantly surpassed the standard of sacrifice and devotion that the countless patriots and saints who came before him established,”[89] and thus, God’s providence continued in preparation for the Second Coming.

The Marriage of the Lamb: Alpha and Omega

The ultimate purpose of the cross was so that Jesus could fulfill his original mission, which was, to “save his people from their sins.”[90] Earlier it was explained that Jesus could forgive three kinds of sin while he was alive on earth. Before shedding his blood on the cross, he forgave individual sin, collective sin and inherited sin. However, he could not forgive the original sin. What precisely is the original sin?

Original sin, also called ancestral sin, is a Christian belief in the state of sin in which humanity has existed since the Fall of man, stemming from Adam and Eve's rebellion in Eden, namely the sin of disobedience in consuming the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.[91]

We now know that eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an illicit, unprincipled, premature sexual relationship. This sin was originally between two beings, Eve and the archangel. Even though no children were conceived in this spiritual Fall, it created Satan’s seed or lineage on earth which stood in enmity to the original good seed of Eve if she had taken Adam as her rightful husband.

Jesus, though perfected as an individual and one with God, cannot solve the original sin by himself. In order to solve this original sin, Jesus must create a heavenly lineage. In order to create a heavenly lineage, Jesus must marry. In order to marry, Jesus must be accepted by his people. John’s failure blocked this providence.

Because Jesus was not accepted, he could not marry. Because he could not marry, he could not create a heavenly lineage. Because he could not create a heavenly lineage, he could not solve the original sin during his lifetime. Because he could not solve the original sin 2,000 years ago, he must return and get married. This is the mission of Christianity. The central providence at the time of the Second Coming is for Christ to return and for the marriage of the Lamb to take place on earth.

The Marriage of the Lamb

Jesus’ mission is to save us from our sins[92] —all our sins! As mentioned before, without getting married, he cannot solve original sin. But doesn’t the “bride of the Lamb” mentioned in Revelation represent the church?

Christian theologians have rightly taught that, “in Ephesians 5:22-33, Paul compares the union of husband and wife to that of Christ and the church.”[93] The historical consensus, therefore, has been that the bride is the church. Prior to the Second Coming, this is correct. The church is in the position of the bride to Christ representing more the spiritual tradition or lineage of Christianity.

However, the church “is never explicitly called 'the bride of Christ’ in the New Testament.”[94] Ultimately, the bride must be a substantial person. In order to solve the sinful lineage originated at the Fall of our first human ancestors, a physical lineage on earth is absolutely needed. Therefore, when the Second Coming occurs, the marriage supper of the Lamb mentioned in Revelation will be an actual wedding. It cannot remain just spiritual or symbolic forever. There are several reasons for this:

  1. The absolute, unchanging principle of God is that only together can man and woman be in His image.
  2. Since the marriage of the first Adam and Eve is not a symbolic event, neither will be the marriage of the last Adam and his bride.
  3. The original sin took place on earth, it must be eradicated on earth; this will be done through the Lamb and his bride getting married and creating God’s lineage on earth.
  4. The Bible itself explicitly says this event is true, i.e., not symbolic, three times!

When the marriage of the Lamb is introduced in Revelation 19, it reads,

For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready.[95]

Then the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!” And he added, “These are the true words of God.”[96]

Look closely at the last sentence. It seems that this is much more than just an afterthought. It’s something the angel wanted to underscore. It’s as if he is saying, ‘Oh, and take note, these words are true and they are from God.’ Many verses in the Bible are in parables. But the ultimate meaning of the marriage of the Lamb is not a parable. It could not be clearer.

Two chapters later, in chapter 21, it also teaches that this event is not symbolic. This time, however, it is not the angel speaking, it is our Lord Jesus Christ, the one “seated on the throne.” He said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”[97]

A third time the Bible says that the words related to the marriage of the Lamb and his bride are more than a metaphor is in Revelations 22, the final chapter of the Bible:

The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.”[98]

The bride of the Lamb must come in reality, and she must marry the returning Lord. Only then, can God’s providence of salvation be complete. This is because the original ideal of God in the garden of Eden was for a man and woman to perfect themselves, cling to each other, and conceive God’s lineage on earth. This verse, Gen. 2:24, is repeated three times in the New Testament: Matt. 19:5, Mark 10:7-8, and Eph. 5:31. God’s will must be done here on earth!

The Bride of the Lamb, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem

Revelation 21 portrays a glorious panorama, one of the most magnificent events in providential history. It is the concluding event in the Bible and the turning point of history from one dominated by evil, to a history of eternal goodness. This eschatological event is centered on the Christ’s return, the coming of the bride of the Lamb, and their marriage.

Here the bride of the Lamb is called the Holy City and the New Jerusalem. Her coming is an awe-inspiring phenomenon of earthly beauty and heavenly glory. The grandeur and significance of the advent of the bride is depicted as: the passing of the old world and coming of a new heaven and earth; descending from heaven and dwelling on earth; as, a place of no more tears and no more death, where the water of life to be given freely; it’s the Alpha and Omega, the event allowing us to be God’s children; she is a city made of very precious jewels, with 12 gates made of pearls, the foundation is made of precious stones and the walls of jasper; it will be as clear as crystal, made of pure gold, and as transparent as glass; there is no need for temples, no need for the sun or moon, because God Almighty reigns; before her kings will walk by her splendor, the gates that never close, there will be no night or darkness, and nothing impure will enter.[99]


There is one ubiquitous and universal theme running throughout the entire Bible, from Genesis to Revelations. It is the absolute importance of a God-centered marriage and lineage. Proving that Jesus should have been married, using the Bible, is key. God’s indefatigable resolve to accomplish this can be seen throughout all 66 books:

  • In the ideal of creation—man and woman coming together in the image of God;
  • In protecting Adam and Eve during their growing period— “do not eat” —and in preparing them for marriage where they become one flesh;
  • In the Fall of our first ancestors—where marital love was defiled and Satan’s lineage created;
  • In raising up the Jewish culture—where marriage is their first covenant with God and Moses’ 10 Commandments are the first religious doctrines specifically prohibiting extra-marital sex;
  • In Jesus mission 2,000 years ago—where as the last Adam Jesus used various parables of the kingdom that exactly parallel the Three Great Blessings in Gen. 1:28;
  • In Jesus’ crucifixion—which protected providential history so that the Holy Spirit could descend to earth, Christianity could be born and expand to the world level to prepare for the Lamb and his Bride; and finally,
  • In the marriage of the Lamb described at the time of the Second Coming in all its glory and power—basically the conclusion of the Bible and providential history.
    It is not an exaggeration to say that everything in the Bible relates to the importance of establishing God’s lineage on earth. Everything! It is alpha and omega, literally!

Over the last few years since the passing of her husband, Rev. Dr. Sun Myung Moon in 2012, Mother Moon has embarked on a non-stop global speaking tour. In her late 70’s, she has repeatedly traveled to Africa, Asia, Europe, North and South America, Japan and Korea. She has shared with audiences around the world her mission and the title which heaven has chosen for her.

The first woman who completes Eve’s original mission could have many titles: restored Eve, the true tree of knowledge of good and evil, the bride of Jesus, the last Eve, the substantial Holy Spirit, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, the bride of the Lamb, and True Mother. The designation Mother Moon is most comfortable with, is not listed above. But it is a title she has shared with presidents, prime ministers, members of parliaments, religious leaders from all faith traditions, scholars, business moguls and students.

The title bequeathed from heaven and which she prefers is the Only-Begotten Daughter of God.[100] This is how she was raised, it is how she lived her adolescent life, it has been at the heart of attending her husband for 52 years before his passing, it is how she raised her children, and is how she carries on her mission today.

Through knowing that Jesus should have married, that it was vital to fulfilling his mission, and will marry at the Second Advent, then we can more fully understand, appreciate and support the incredible mission that Dr. Hak Ja Han Moon carries. The messiah is the begotten son of God.[101] When he marries, then his wife becomes, defacto, the begotten daughter of God.

These words are trustworthy and true!


[1] Cheon Seong Gyeong, 3rd printing English, Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, p. 418.

[2] Exposition of the Divine Principle: Diagramed Lecture Manuel for Three Hour Lecture, House of Unification for World Peace, HSA-UWC, pg. 79.

[3] The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown, 2003, which was made into a movie in 2006.

[4] A now discredited fragment of papyrus that initially purported to be a fourth-century gospel writing that contained the phrase "Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …'

[5] Glenn T. Stanton, Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Postmodern Society (1997), p. 173.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Jordan Peterson, “‘It’s a baby’: Jordan Peterson Destroys Abortion Argument with Facts” (video). Retrieved Feb. 23, 2019.

[8] “List of religious populations,” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 08:49, March 19, 2019.

[9] Rev. 19:9, NIV.

[10] Rev. 21:5 and 22:6, NIV.

[11] Gen. 1:27, NIV.

[12] Exposition of the Divine Principle (New York: Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, 1996), p. 30.

[13] Rom. 1:20, RSV.

[14] Hak Ja Han Moon, “Blessing, Marriage and Eternal Life,” April 1-16, 1996, 16-city North American tour.

[15] Pope Francis: “The Image of God is the Married Couple: The Man and the Woman” at a General Audience in St. Peter’s Square, Apr. 2, 2014. article/michael-w-chapman/pope-francis-image-god-married-couple-man-and-woman.

[16] L. Waite and M. Gallagher, The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. New York, NY: Doubleday, 2000), p. 88.

[17] Sun Myung Moon, As a Peace-Loving Global Citizen (The Washington Times Foundation, 2009), pg. 207.

[18] Gen. 1:28, RSV

[19] Gen. 2:16-17, NIV

[20] NRSV

[21] Meg Jay, “The Downside of Cohabiting before Marriage,” The New York Times, April 14, 2012.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Gen. 2:24.

[24] Gen. 3:1, NIV

[25] Rev. 12:9

[26] John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11 and 2 Cor. 4:4, respectively

[27] Gen. 6:5-6, RSV

[28] Cheon Seong Gyeong, p. 1373

[29] Gen. 3:15, RSV

[30] 2 Cor. 4:4, and John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11

[31] Hak Ja Han Moon, “True Parents and the Completed Testament Age,” Delhi, India, Dec. 20, 1993, p. 11

[32] Gen. 3:4, NIV

[33] Hak Ja Han Moon, “God, Women and World Peace,” United Nations Headquarters, New York, Sept. 7, 1993, in Pyeong Hwa Gyeong (Family Federation for World Peace and Unification), p. 932

[34] Exodus 20:14, Deuteronomy 5:18

[35] Exodus 20:17, Deuteronomy 5:21

[36] “Judaism’s Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality.”

[37] “Why Celibacy Is Not a Jewish Value,” My Jewish Learning, https://www. Retrieved March 27, 2019

[38] Matt. 1:21, NIV

[39] Exposition of the Divine Principle, p. 73

[40] Luke 7:37-38

[41] Luke 7:47, RSV

[42] Luke 23:34, NIV

[43] Mark 2:5, NIV

[44] Mark 2:10, NIV

[45] John 9:1-34.

[46] Gen. 3:15

[47] Matt. 13:34-35, RSV

[48] George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), p. 45, referred to in “Kingship and kingdom of God,” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Kingship_and_kingdom_of_God&oldid=867929741. Retrieved February 20, 2019

[49] Ibid.

[50] 1 Cor. 15:45, NIV, RSV, KJV

[51] Matt. 5:3, NIV

[52] Matt. 5:10, RSV

[53] Matt. 18:3, NIV

[54] Luke 17:20-21, NIV

[55] Matt. 5:48

[56] Matt. 19:21

[57] Matt. 22:2, NIV

[58] Matt. 25:1. RSV

[59] Matt. 13:44

[60] Matt. 13:45

[61] Matt, 13:47

[62] Matt. 13:52

[63] Mark 4:30

[64] Matt. 13:24

[65] Matt. 13:33

[66] Matt. 6:9-10, NIV

[67] John 18:36, RSV, NIV

[68] Matt. 12:28, RSV

[69] Matt. 25:34, RSV

[70] Matt. 19:4-6, NIV

[71] Gen. 2:18, NRSV

[72] Malachi 4:6, NIV

[73] Matt. 11:13-14 and Matt. 17:12-13

[74] John 1:21

[75] Exposition of the Divine Principle, p. 112

[76] All verses quoted in the next two paragraphs are from the RSV

[77] John 3:29-30, RSV

[78] John 3:25-26, NIV

[79] Matt. 11:2-3, NIV

[80] John 1:29-34

[81] Hak Ja Han Moon, “True Parents and the Completed Age,” New Delhi, India, Dec. 20, 1993, p. 7

[82] John 10:17-18, NIV

[83] Exposition of the Divine Principle, p. 121

[84] Cheon Seong Gyeong, p. 345

[85] Matt. 3:2, RSV

[86] Matt. 23:13, RSV

[87] Cheon Seong Gyeong, p. 840

[88] Matt. 26:28; Luke 22:20, NIV. The word “new” is found in Luke and in some ms of Matthew

[89] Cheon Seong Gyeong, p. 855

[90] Matt. 1:21, NIV

[91] “Original sin,” in Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. index.php?title=Original_sin&oldid=894719572. Retrieved May 3, 2019

[92] Matt. 1:21, NIV

[93] Carolyn Osiek, “The Bride of Christ: a problematic wedding - Ephesians 5:22-33.” Biblical Theology Bulletin, Spring, 2002, cited in “Bride of Christ,” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 897264902. Retrieved 01:10, July 9, 2019

[94] Ibid.

[95] Rev. 19:6, NIV

[96] Rev. 19:9, NIV

[97] Rev. 21:5, NIV

[98] Rev. 22:6, NIV

[99] Rev. 21:1-27, NIV

[100] Only” means “unquestionably the best: peerless,” as defined by Merriam-Webster's Unabridged Dictionary. Retrieved July 29, 2019

[101] John 3:16