Absolutely, unequivocally YES! Christians *prefer* to remain *ignorant* about this -- for reasons already disclosed in some of the 17 answers so far.
How do we know *Biblically* that they were married?
Mainly because Paul was advocating *not* marrying in I Corinthians chapter 7. Paul *only* presents *himself* as an example of *not* marrying. Paul was an *excellent* debater. He would *never* have *missed* the Best Example of All for *not* marrying -- which would've been Jesus, *if* Jesus had never married. Since Paul did *not* use Jesus as the Best Example to be emulating, we can accurately deduce that Jesus *was* married -- and Paul *knew* it. He couldn't *lie* about it -- because the living disciples knew he was married to Mary Magdalene, too. So since Jesus's marriage would have *nullified* what he was advocating, he chose *not* to mention it.
The second reason we can know *absolutely* that Jesus *was* married to Mary Magdalene is because *she* was involved in cleaning his dead body of the sweat, blood, feces and urine that come about in the dying process. To do this his body had to be *naked*. Now Jewish religious law absolutely *forbade* anyone cleaning the body of a deceased man *except* his *wife* -- or close female relatives like his mother or sister(s or cousin(s. No not-married-to-him woman disciple would've been permitted to *do* this, no matter *how* much she loved her teacher (unless she was a close relative -- which there is *no* indication that Mary Magdalene *was*).
The fact that the resurrected Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene *first* (as recorded in *two* of the gospels -- the other two *contradict* that and indicate that he appeared to *Peter* first) does not *prove* she was his wife -- but it strongly points in that direction.
The fact that Mary Magdalene was there on the scene of Jesus's crucifixion (with his mother) *also* strongly points to her being his *wife*.
Some have pointed out that it is the *bridegroom's* responsibility to provide the wine at his wedding. Since Jesus's *mother* came to Jesus at the Wedding at Cana, informing him that there wasn't enough wine -- this *heavily* implies that the Wedding at Cana was *his* wedding.
The main reason mention of their marriage would have been *intentionally* excluded from the gospels would be because it was best to keep it secret for the sake of the very *life* (or lives) of Yeshua's child (or children). We already know, from the Flight to Egypt that it was a Roman intent to *murder* the young Jesus. We know that some of Julius Caesar's and Cleopatra's children were murdered -- to prevent the possibility of them creating civil war, mustering an army with their claims to be a sequel to Caesar. Jesus was crowned "King of the Jews" so the same circumstance could result. Any of his children could possibly raise a *rebellion* against the Romans, claiming that he or she was the rightful ruler of Israel -- reason enough for that child to be *murdered* by the Romans as a way forestalling another rebellion. *This* is why it would *not* have been mentioned in the Gospels, since Jesus's child (or children) would most likely have *still* been *alive* when the gospels were written (and, by that point in time, possible grandchildren and even great-grandchildren too).
The New Testament doesn't *begin* to record all of Jesus's life. We have the birth stories... the flight to Egypt... the story of him amazing the elders at the Temple with his wisdom and knowledge when he was 12 years old -- and then it skips ahead to when he began his public ministry at age 30. So across a lifetime of (supposedly) 33 years we're getting incidents from about 5 *years* of it -- and that's *all*! What happened during those *other* 28 years -- ie: MOST of his life? Especially what happened between the ages of about 18 to 30? -- which is when Jewish men *married* -- especially *Rabbis* who were *expected* to marry. Obviously he married and fathered a child (or children) before he turned 30, before his public ministry *began*.
Those who *understand* the New Testament more *deeply* don't *doubt* his marriage to Mary Magdalene. Those who understand more superficially claim he *wasn't* married. Those who *want* to believe he wasn't married (because of a false theology they cling to) form their rationalizations for advocating that.
Certainly it was no "sin" to have married and had children as one respondee claimed. Being married and fathering children did not, in *any* way, nullify Christ's *purity* -- and it is *blasphemous* of Father *God* -- Who supposedly *instituted* marriage and said to "Be fruitful and multiply" to claim that it *is* a "sin". If marriage and having children is a "sin" then God is the Greatest Sinner of All to have said, "Be fruitful and multiply." He was teaching *everyone* to be *sinning*, eh?! (Somebody might find she is *consumed* in a ball of fire for *that* kind of blasphemy... if she doesn't *seriously* REPENT of having written so!)
The *fact* is -- Jesus *was* married... and was married to Mary Magdalene. If you *ever* contact the *real* Jesus Christ (there certainly *are* false spirits claiming to *be* him) he'll tell you that not only did he marry her back then but that he is married to her *still*. And he'll tell you that that marriage is *not* going to go away.
The false beliefs of Christians, no matter *what* their rationale, do *not* have the power to *nullify* the marriage that Jesus Christ, himself *chose*. As a matter of fact, *every* Christian who calls Jesus a "sinner" if he married and had sex with his wife to father children have *lied* about Christ, and, in a sense have not only blasphemed the Father, but have *also* blasphemed the Son in saying he "sinned" in a matter were there *was* no sin, in reality.
Christians are generally against the marriage of Yeshua and Miriam because *they* want to be Jesus's "brides" in "the marriage of the Lamb" -- as mentioned in "Revelation". There's a rather problematical issue involved in this since it's recorded that Jesus taught that there is *no* marriage in Heaven -- yet all these Christians are expecting *to* be married to Jesus in Heaven! If Jesus genuinely *taught* that, it *is* possible we have a translation issue involved here. Did he mean that all marriages *cease* and are canceled out in Heaven... or did he mean that there is no *further* marrying in Heaven, but eternal marriage vows taken on Earth *continue* in Heaven?
Unfortunately it appears that *jealousy* is one of the reasons many women are opposed to the idea of Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene -- instead of (in the future, supposedly) to *them*. But, finally, whatever one's expectations, based upon the claims of someone *other* than Jesus, the Groom has to *consent* to taking anyone as his *Bride*.
Jesus *chose* to *eternally* marry Mary Magdalene almost 2,000 years ago -- *long* before anyone on Earth currently was even *born* into *this* life. No matter what Christians *choose* to believe (finally, very frequently, for their *own* selfish reasons -- if you probe-in deeply) their beliefs do *not* cancel that *eternal* marriage. Contact the *authentic* living spirit of Mary Magdalene, and *she* will verify this, too.
At whatever point Christians are going to be faced with the FACT of that Divine Marriage that Jesus, himself, *chose* to make *before* he even *began* his public ministry (for most probably his Bride will be by his *side* if & when they *ever* meet him) -- and Christians are just going to have to *deal* with that.
And if they prefer to *reject* their Christ because he's *already* married... well, they're *all* free to turn their backs on him & renounce him!