Claim. Had Jesus, as a man bearing God’s love, life, and lineage, met a wife and borne children, the direct-lineage kingship would have begun in his family and expanded to cosmic kingship — making Christianity, the Vatican, and even democracy unnecessary.
Elaboration. This is one of SMM’s sharpest counterfactuals about the Christian dispensation. Jesus “is a man” who “received God’s love, God’s life and God’s lineage”; had he met a woman, formed a couple, and borne children, “new children of God’s direct lineage would have been born on this earth” (1.4. A parent-centered ideology). From that family a true royal kingship would have grown outward — family → tribe → nation → world → cosmos — and “there would be no need for any Christian denominations or ministers. The Vatican would not be needed. Democracy would not be needed.”
The argument treats the entire Christian institutional history as a substitute providence necessitated by Jesus’s failure to marry. Democracy, in this frame, is also a fallback structure (the “brotherhood ideology”) that would have been unnecessary under direct-lineage cosmic kingship. The claim has bite because it locates the unfinished portion of the messianic mission precisely in physical marriage and lineage, not in atonement-doctrine refinements.
Evangelical critique typically engages here on (a) whether Jesus’s celibacy was a deficiency or a vocational sign, (b) whether NT eschatology supports a literal direct-lineage cosmic kingship, and (c) whether the Vatican/denominational existence is best explained as substitute providence. SMM’s view is that head-wing thought = parent-centered horizontal ideology + God-centered vertical ideology, joined to produce humans with the “dual structure” of internal (vertical) and external (horizontal) self. The Jesus-celibacy claim is the load-bearing historical argument for why a third messiah is required. Worth a thread once a counter atomic exists.