The Alleged Sons of God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Masada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Alleged Sons of God =

According to an ancient Roman policy, any able-bodied man from theconquered lands, who joined the Roman Army, would obtain authomatic citizenship. And if he was lucky enough to reach retirement age, he could choose where he would like to spend the rest of his life, and he would be granted a piece of land or farm as severance pay for his services to the Empire. Rome excluded.

When the Roman Legions arrived in the Middle East and conquered Sidon, a man called Pantera applied to join the Army and was accepted. Then, he was conscripted into the Roman Legion which got stationed in Syria. When he reached retirement age, he chose to return to Sidon and got his farm there to live for the rest of his life.

According to Josephus, in the year 4 BCE, there was a local revolt in Israel against Herod, which was threatening to depose him. Herod appealed to Rome for help and Caesar gave orders to the Legion stationed in Syria to cross over into Israel and put down the revolt.

Thousands of Roman soldiers came over and the task was quite easy. They crucified a few thousand Jews, and decided to stay for some time to make sure the discontent were subdued. In the meantime, the Roman soldiers would rape young Jewish ladies almost daily.

As it was to expect, many children were born as a result of those rapes. Since the unfortunate mothers were not to blame for promiscuity, the religious authorities forbade to ostracize them or to consider their children as mamzerim or ba$tards. But they grew up with the epithet of “sons of God.” (Lecture on the “Historical Jesus” at Stanphord University)

Since Jesus was born just about that time, I am of the opinion that it is much more prudent and less embarrassing to acknowledge that he was a biological son of Joseph’s than to run the risk that Jesus might have been one of those “sons of God.”

Now, regarding Mark 7:24, I have here with me two different Bible translations. One is the Catholic New American version of the Bible wherefrom I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would retire into a certain house and wanted no one to recognize him in there. The other translation is the King James version, wherefrom I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would enter into a certain house and would have on man know it.

Although I am not assuming anything, everyone of us has all the right in the world to speculate about such a shouting evidence, and to think that there was something fishy going on for Jesus to insist on secrecy about his being in Sidon or in that certain house. At that time Joseph had been long dead. Could it be that jesus knew about his real origins
and was interacting with his real father? Everything is possible, but if you ask me, I am still in favour that he was rather a biological son of Joseph’s. At least, Joseph’s and Mary’s names won’t be smeared by Agnostics, who are only too ready to acknowledge.l

“The Myth of the Pax Romana” by Prof. Erick Hinnerman, a German Scholar of the 19th Century.

Ben:
You guys are the ones to blame for this kind of speculations. If you had not invented the Hellenistic idea of virgin birth, nothing of the above would need to be speculated. I don’t think you will be singing the Song of Moses, after all.
So that you will decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it.
Why are you telling us all this?
He sees Catholicism as being a threat to Judaism, and he wants to discredit Catholicism so you will “decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it”.

TRANSLATION:
“decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it” = decide to stop practicing Catholicism before the world by saying that Jesus is The Messiah

He makes thread after thread that is anti-Catholic and is subtly trying to proslytize and encourage Catholics to leave by spreading doubt and convincing them that Saint Mary was raped by a roman soldier and Jesus was not really THE SON OF GOD.

I don’t know why it is not allowed to say that the “whore of Babylon” is who some anti-Catholic religions say she is (you Catholics know what I’m talking about),
BUT
it is allowed for Ben Masada to BLATANTLY DISRESPECT Saint Mary Mother of God.

I just don’t know why he is allowed to stay here.
 
Still waiting after all of these years?

I pray that you and all of your Jewish brothers and sisters will soon embrace the fact that The Christ has come. He is your salvation, just as he is my salvation. Why do you continue to resist and dispute the fulfillment of God’s promise to you, His chosen people?

I will continue to pray for you and all of the Jewish people. May God Bless you and guide you.

In Christ I pray.
I pray this too but add

I pray for all Jews to become completed Jews in Jesus Christ
 
It is appropriate to discuss the details of another person’s faith, and philisophical beliefs, it is NOT appropriate to personally attack a person because of their beliefs. If you are going to debate beliefs, please use good intellectual debate tactics.

God bless-

Rachel
**In that case, would you be so kind as to show me where did I fail? **
 
He sees Catholicism as being a threat to Judaism, and he wants to discredit Catholicism so you will “decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it”.

TRANSLATION:
“decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it” = decide to stop practicing Catholicism before the world by saying that Jesus is The Messiah

He makes thread after thread that is anti-Catholic and is subtly trying to proslytize and encourage Catholics to leave by spreading doubt and convincing them that Saint Mary was raped by a roman soldier and Jesus was not really THE SON OF GOD.

I don’t know why it is not allowed to say that the “whore of Babylon” is who some anti-Catholic religions say she is (you Catholics know what I’m talking about),
BUT
it is allowed for Ben Masada to BLATANTLY DISRESPECT Saint Mary Mother of God.

I just don’t know why he is allowed to stay here.
**I’ll give you a hint. Could it be because I am in a non-Catholic section of the Forum? Bingo! So, as long as I don’t offend you personally, I am allowed to express my views and doubt yours. How about reviewing the Forum rules? The Moderators would be happy about it. **
 
So that you will decide to stop distorting the image of Judaism before the world by using a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it.
I lifted this off the web. The original references to “virgin” or “almah” come through your own Jewish Hebrew Scriptures, not Greek mythology.

In any case, all Christ’s first disciples were Jews to a man.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

The Protevangelium

The first hint in the Old Testament that the coming Christ would be born of a virgin occurs right at the beginning.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Genesis 3:15

This prophecy, known as the Protevangelium, comes from the most ancient oracle known to man, from the oracle that the Lord pronounced when He found our first parents, Adam and Eve, guilty of sin. The Lord is speaking to Satan, who has enticed “the woman,” Eve, into disobeying the Lord’s command against eating fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. He is saying that Satan will someday be crushed and thereby utterly defeated by the seed of the woman.

The pronoun used to designate the seed is “his” (in “his heel”). In place of “it” (in “it shall bruise”), the more accurate translation is “he” (1). Therefore, the coming conqueror must be a single man. But why is He called the seed of a woman? A child is ordinarily regarded as the seed of his father and forefathers. The striking and unnatural character of the expression “her seed” suggests that it is a uniquely fitting name for the victor over Satan. Unlike other men, He would be the seed of a woman only. He would not be a man’s seed. A virgin would conceive Him without losing her virginity.

Isaiah’s Oracle

Over seven hundred years before Jesus was born, the prophet Isaiah enlarged upon the Protevangelium.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 7:14

The name Immanuel means, “God with us.” Isaiah is appending to Genesis 3:15 the information that the virgin-born conqueror of Satan would be God Himself in the flesh.

Controversy has long raged over the word rendered “virgin” in the KJV of Isaiah 7:14.

The Meaning of Almah

The word translated “virgin” in the KJV is almah. This term in either its feminine form (almah) or masculine form (elem) occurs nine times in the Old Testament (Gen. 24:43; Ex. 2:8; 1 Sam. 17:56; 20:22; Psa. 68:25; Prov. 30:19; S. of Sol. 1:3; 6:8; Isa. 7:14). So far as we can judge from the contexts, the term never refers to a married person or even to an adult. In some instances, the term obviously refers to someone young and unmarried. For example, Moses’ sister Miriam was an almah when she hid him in the bulrushes (Ex. 2:8).

According to Alfred Edersheim, the great Jewish scholar converted to Christianity over a century ago, the Jews recognize eight stages of growth (3). He says that the word almah pertains to the sixth stage, which is between dependent childhood and independent youth (4). By its connotation of firmness and strength, the word suggests the rapid bodily growth of early adolescence (5). Thus, an almah was a girl about twelve to fourteen years old. The closest English equivalents to almah are “maiden” and “damsel” (6). “Young woman,” although passable as a translation, stretches the concept too far into adulthood.

The rabbis taught that a father should betroth his daughter to his slave rather than keep her unbetrothed beyond puberty (7). A girl was normally married before she passed much beyond fourteen (8). Thus, since almah specifically denotes a girl at the stage of growth just before marriage, the term apparently came to signify “unmarried girl of marriageable age” (9). And since nearly all unmarried girls in ancient Hebrew culture were chaste, the term seems to have acquired the further meaning “virgin” (10). In some of the texts exhibiting almah, “virgin” is clearly the most appropriate translation.
 
I lifted this off the web. The original references to “virgin” or “almah” come through your own Jewish Hebrew Scriptures, not Greek mythology.

In any case, all Christ’s first disciples were Jews to a man.

And I agree with you; but they were not Christians. They were Nazarenes. Members of the Sect of the Nazarenes.

The first hint in the Old Testament that the coming Christ would be born of a virgin occurs right at the beginning. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

And then you take the liberty to assume that the text is talking about Jesus. Why, because some Gentiles wrote about it in the NT 50+ years after Jesus had been gone? Not a chance!

Genesis 3:15

This prophecy, known as the Protevangelium, comes from the most ancient oracle known to man, from the oracle that the Lord pronounced when He found our first parents, Adam and Eve, guilty of sin. The Lord is speaking to Satan, who has enticed “the woman,” Eve, into disobeying the Lord’s command against eating fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. He is saying that Satan will someday be crushed and thereby utterly defeated by the seed of the woman.

**That’s no reference to Satan. Satan does not exist. Satan is a concept to illustrate the evil inclination in man. The Genesis account of Creation is a Jewish allegory about the origin of Mankind. **

The pronoun used to designate the seed is “his” (in “his heel”). In place of “it” (in “it shall bruise”), the more accurate translation is “he” (1). Therefore, the coming conqueror must be a single man.

That’s a reference to Israel, whom the Scriptures refer to as “he.” Read Exodus 4:22,23. “Israel is My son; let My son go, so that HE may serve Me.” Satisfied now?

But why is He called the seed of a woman? A child is ordinarily regarded as the seed of his father and forefathers.

Because the woman here is also a reference to Israel if you read Amos 5:2. “The virgin Israel.” How about that?

The striking and unnatural character of the expression “her seed” suggests that it is a uniquely fitting name for the victor over Satan. Unlike other men, He would be the seed of a woman only. He would not be a man’s seed. A virgin would conceive Him without losing her virginity.

This is metaphorical of Israel, the virgin who gave birth to Judah, the child, in Isaiah 7:14,15,22; 8:8. Check it out.

Isaiah’s Oracle

Over seven hundred years before Jesus was born, the prophet Isaiah enlarged upon the Protevangelium.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

**Now, go right ahead and read Amos 5:2 to know the virgin Isaiah is talking about. That’s what is beautiful about Judaism. We don’t have to assume; everything is down by name. **

Isaiah 7:14

The name Immanuel means, “God with us.” Isaiah is appending to Genesis 3:15 the information that the virgin-born conqueror of Satan would be God Himself in the flesh.

Now, read Isaiah 8:8. Judah and Immanuel are in the same verse as one being the other. Try to read it without preconceived religious notions if you are able to.

Controversy has long raged over the word rendered “virgin” in the KJV of Isaiah 7:14.

Tell me about it!

The Meaning of Almah

The word translated “virgin” in the KJV is almah. This term in either its feminine form (almah) or masculine form (elem) occurs nine times in the Old Testament (Gen. 24:43; Ex. 2:8; 1 Sam. 17:56; 20:22; Psa. 68:25; Prov. 30:19; S. of Sol. 1:3; 6:8; Isa. 7:14). So far as we can judge from the contexts, the term never refers to a married person or even to an adult. In some instances, the term obviously refers to someone young and unmarried. For example, Moses’ sister Miriam was an almah when she hid him in the bulrushes (Ex. 2:8).

Read my thread about “Almah versus Betulah” and you see the truth.

According to Alfred Edersheim, the great Jewish scholar converted to Christianity over a century ago, the Jews recognize eight stages of growth (3). He says that the word almah pertains to the sixth stage, which is between dependent childhood and independent youth (4). By its connotation of firmness and strength, the word suggests the rapid bodily growth of early adolescence (5). Thus, an almah was a girl about twelve to fourteen years old. The closest English equivalents to almah are “maiden” and “damsel” (6). “Young woman,” although passable as a translation, stretches the concept too far into adulthood.

These are speculations without any meaning to me.

The rabbis taught that a father should betroth his daughter to his slave rather than keep her unbetrothed beyond puberty (7). A girl was normally married before she passed much beyond fourteen (8). Thus, since almah specifically denotes a girl at the stage of growth just before marriage, the term apparently came to signify “unmarried girl of marriageable age” (9). And since nearly all unmarried girls in ancient Hebrew culture were chaste, the term seems to have acquired the further meaning “virgin” (10). In some of the texts exhibiting almah, “virgin” is clearly the most appropriate translation.

I do recommend you to read the thread “Almah versus Betulah.” Almah is a young woman, she could be called a virgin albeit not necessarily a physical virgin, who would be Betulah.
 
You guys are the ones to blame for this kind of speculations. If you had not invented the Hellenistic idea of virgin birth, nothing of the above would need to be speculated. I don’t think you will be singing the Song of Moses, after all.
After so many posts all you can come up with is conspiracy theories. No wonder you ignored my posts last time because I was quoting valid sources while you disort them with your man-made opinions. It looks like us, the true and fullfilled Jews will be sining the Song of Moses after all.

Praise to Jesus Christ, the Lord of Israel.
 
After so many posts all you can come up with is conspiracy theories. No wonder you ignored my posts last time because I was quoting valid sources while you disort them with your man-made opinions. It looks like us, the true and fullfilled Jews will be sining the Song of Moses after all.

Praise to Jesus Christ, the Lord of Israel.
**Bring me Biblical sources up for discussion, and I’ll tell you how valid is your understanding of them. Don’t bring me the opinions of another man, because that’s exactly what they are: Just the opinions of another man, who probably know less than you and me.

There are no true or fulfilled Jews but the Jews who remain loyal to Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus. **
 
**Bring me Biblical sources up for discussion, and I’ll tell you how valid is your understanding of them. Don’t bring me the opinions of another man, because that’s exactly what they are: Just the opinions of another man, who probably know less than you and me.

**
You mean like Erick Hinnerman, the author of The Myth of the Pax Romana?
 
**Bring me Biblical sources up for discussion, and I’ll tell you how valid is your understanding of them. Don’t bring me the opinions of another man, because that’s exactly what they are: Just the opinions of another man, who probably know less than you and me.

There are no true or fulfilled Jews but the Jews who remain loyal to Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus. **
I wasn`t bringing you opinions of opinions of another man…I gave you links to encylopedias and what they state about Saint Paul. I basically gave you historical information while you were debating the contrast belief which holds no water. It was your opinion and people that think like you verses fact.
 
You mean like Erick Hinnerman, the author of The Myth of the Pax Romana?
Bingo! That’s also what I mean. The ones you guys demand that I bring, and those you quote by way of links on line. So, stick to the Scriptures. We will discuss them. If they make sense, I’ll be big enough to acknowledge them; if they make no sense, I’ll be bigger to tell you why.
 
Bingo! That’s also what I mean. The ones you guys demand that I bring, and those you quote by way of links on line. So, stick to the Scriptures. We will discuss them. If they make sense, I’ll be big enough to acknowledge them; if they make no sense, I’ll be bigger to tell you why.
Well you remember back then when you suck with the Saint Paul conspiracy theory? I mentioned you about Saint Stephen and you responded your thoughts on why that never could have happened. Then I responded with a logical comment stating how it could have happened. I never got your reply.
 
Well you remember back then when you suck with the Saint Paul conspiracy theory? I mentioned you about Saint Stephen and you responded your thoughts on why that never could have happened. Then I responded with a logical comment stating how it could have happened. I never got your reply.
Mention the post or rewrite it. I still have another life to live besides a full-time job which takes about 10 hours of my day outside home. And for having missed your post, I think I can make it up with an apology. Consider it asked.
 
Mention the post or rewrite it. I still have another life to live besides a full-time job which takes about 10 hours of my day outside home. And for having missed your post, I think I can make it up with an apology. Consider it asked.
Fair enough.
 
He makes thread after thread that is anti-Catholic and is subtly trying to proslytize and encourage Catholics to leave by spreading doubt and convincing them that Saint Mary was raped by a roman soldier and Jesus was not really THE SON OF GOD.

it is allowed for Ben Masada to BLATANTLY DISRESPECT Saint Mary Mother of God.

I just don’t know why he is allowed to stay here.
**Congratulations for your dirty politics. You are trying to get me banned but I think the moderators are much more intelligent that you make them to be.

Regarding the Agnostic spreading around that Mary was raped by a Roman soldier, we have only Christians to blame it for, because of their doctrine to deny that Joseph was his biological father. You can’t imagine the disservice you are causing to Jesus’ family by spreading the nonsense that he didn’t have a human father. At least, wake up to the reality that we are talking about a Jew and Judaism and not Greek Mythology.

I am sure I respect Mary in a much high level than you do. At least I don’t deny her normal relationship with Joseph, just like any other normal family in Israel. And I am allowed to stay here because this is a section for non-Catholics. This attitude of yours only makes everyone see that you feel threatened by me. Drop Jesus as a Jew by making him a Greek
and I’ll leave this forum immediately.**
 
Ben Masada is simply repeating the acts of the Pharisees and the rest of the Jews in Jesus’ time. The Pharisees could not accept that Jesus gained many followers considering his stature as opposed to the self-righteous Jewish people. Because of their INTENSE ENVY on Jesus, they fabricated stories against him to the point of sending him to death.

Ben Masada is doing that here. Because of his intense hatred against Christianity, he manufactures all possible lies about Jesus and the Church.

If the powerful Roman Empire FAILED to destroy the Church, how could a certain Ben Masada destroy it?🤷
 
**Bring me Biblical sources up for discussion, and I’ll tell you how valid is your understanding of them. Don’t bring me the opinions of another man, because that’s exactly what they are: Just the opinions of another man, who probably know less than you and me.

There are no true or fulfilled Jews but the Jews who remain loyal to Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus. **
This is part of the problem. Ben has a God complex. He places himself above all of mankind and he places himself as God’s equal. Note the words of this poor demented soul:

“Bring my Biblical sources up for discussion, and I’ll tell you how valid is your understanding of them”

Read Ben’s other posts, he thinks that Christ was a Jew, not the Son of God. That Paul is evil and is the actual originator of Christianity. He thinks that Christianity is one big conspiracy theory called “replacement theology” and that if you even think about disagreeing with him you are an anti-semite at best and probably a closet nazi.
 
Bingo! That’s also what I mean. The ones you guys demand that I bring, and those you quote by way of links on line. So, stick to the Scriptures. We will discuss them. If they make sense, I’ll be big enough to acknowledge them; if they make no sense, I’ll be bigger to tell you why.
Again, Ben is the sole interpreter of Scripture. Ben, I pray for you. Take your meds, those voices aren’t real.
 
Ben Masada is simply repeating the acts of the Pharisees and the rest of the Jews in Jesus’ time. The Pharisees could not accept that Jesus gained many followers considering his stature as opposed to the self-righteous Jewish people. Because of their INTENSE ENVY on Jesus, they fabricated stories against him to the point of sending him to death.

Ben Masada is doing that here. Because of his intense hatred against Christianity, he manufactures all possible lies about Jesus and the Church.

If the powerful Roman Empire FAILED to destroy the Church, how could a certain Ben Masada destroy it?🤷
**I have no intention to destroy or to fight against anything. My mission is to defend Judaism from the distortion Christians do to it as they use a religious Jew to insert Hellenistic innovations into it. **
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top