The Alleged Sons of God

[Ben_Masada]

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.

Jesus was a Jewish man and you know that in your heart. And that’s why he was not son of God, because this is Greek Mythology. If Paul was not the founder of Christianity, explain Acts 11:26 to me. It’s much better than to try to raise people’s emontions against me. If I am not right about Replacement Theology, explain Galatians 4:21-31 to me. At least, you will be more scholastic that way.

 

[alan1941]

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. Excuse me Ben but could it be that He wanted to escape the crowds that had been following Him. You cleverly disguise the slander with a disclaimer, anything to escape the truth. I thought you were better than that>
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:

 

[alan1941]

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:

Could it be Ben that Jesus just wanted to get away from the crowds? You say you’re not assuming but you are implying. it seems to me and I thought you were above that.

 

[w_stewart]

**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. **

Oh well…

How about the Jewish persecution against the religious Jew named Jesus? Was this also a hellenistic innovation?

 

[Ben_Masada]

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:

Could it be Ben that Jesus just wanted to get away from the crowds? You say you’re not assuming but you are implying. it seems to me and I thought you were above that.

**Had Israel run out of a retired place for one to get away from the crowds? Why did Jesus have to go all the way to Sidon to get away from the crowds? Nice try though. At least, you are trying. **

 

[Ben_Masada]

Oh well…

How about the Jewish persecution against the religious Jew named Jesus? Was this also a hellenistic innovation?

**The Jews never persecuted Jesus. If they had done it, you would have to explain the contradiction that Jesus came to confirm the most important thing to a Jew, which is God’s Law. (Mat. 5:19) Jesus does exactly that, and in gratitude the Jews would persecute him? How can this make sense? Not to those who have a mind of their own.

There was some Jewish persecution but against Paul for preaching the apostasy in Israel that Jesus was son of God and that he had resurrected; but not against Jesus.**

 

[alan1941]

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?

C’mon Guys, Let’s be fair here. Let’s not judge Ben Masada’s motives. Honest discussion and challenges to our faith are good because they make us think and that is the purpose for this forum. Can you imagine how difficult it is for a Jew or anybody else to accept what we are asking him to accept, namely our belief in Jesus as the messiah?]

 

[w_stewart]

**The Jews never persecuted Jesus. If they had done it, you would have to explain the contradiction that Jesus came to confirm the most important thing to a Jew, which is God’s Law. (Mat. 5:19) Jesus does exactly that, and in gratitude the Jews would persecute him? How can this make sense? Not to those who have a mind of their own.

There was some Jewish persecution but against Paul for preaching the apostasy in Israel that Jesus was son of God and that he had resurrected; but not against Jesus.**

Jesus proclaimed Himself to be the Son of God thereby making Himself EQUAL to God. Because of that, Jews sought all the more to kill Him.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Jesus proclaimed Himself to be the Son of God thereby making Himself EQUAL to God. Because of that, Jews sought all the more to kill Him.

**That’s absolutely a non-Jewish statement by a Jew. Therefore, it was not true if Jesus was a religious Jew.

Stewart, understand that you can’t bake your cake and eat it too. You cannot require that Jesus was a Jew and at the same time claim that he was a Greek mythological being. We are talking about Judaism for Heaven’s sake. There is no such a thing in Judaism as a man being born of God with a woman. Why is it so hard to understand?**

 

[w_stewart]

**That’s absolutely a non-Jewish statement by a Jew. Therefore, it was not true if Jesus was a religious Jew.

Stewart, understand that you can’t bake your cake and eat it too. You cannot require that Jesus was a Jew and at the same time claim that he was a Greek mythological being. We are talking about Judaism for Heaven’s sake. There is no such a thing in Judaism as a man being born of God with a woman. Why is it so hard to understand?**

It is not so hard to understand. God is so powerful and He is not subject to Jewish belief or Judaistic faith.

Did the Jews really believe that God could not be born with a woman? Or they simply could not stomach Jesus Christ and Christianity leading them to confine the power of God to what they believe in?

 

[alan1941]

Jesus proclaimed Himself to be the Son of God thereby making Himself EQUAL to God. Because of that, Jews sought all the more to kill Him.

It would be more correct to say that the Judaeans or even more properly to say the High Priests and the Sanhedrin condemned Jesus to death for fear that he would rouse the Roamns to harsh reprisals. Some of the Pharisees condemned Him for making himself equal to God

 

[w_stewart]

John 5:10-18

Now that day was a sabbath. 10So the Jews said to the man who had been cured, ‘It is the sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your mat.’ 11But he answered them, ‘The man who made me well said to me, “Take up your mat and walk.” ’ 12They asked him, ‘Who is the man who said to you, “Take it up and walk”?’ 13Now the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had disappeared in* the crowd that was there. 14Later Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, ‘See, you have been made well! Do not sin any more, so that nothing worse happens to you.’ 15The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. 16Therefore the Jews started persecuting Jesus, because he was doing such things on the sabbath. 17But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father is still working, and I also am working.’ 18For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he was not only breaking the sabbath, but was also calling God his own Father, thereby making himself equal to God.

 

[Ben_Masada]

It is not so hard to understand. God is so powerful and He is not subject to Jewish belief or Judaistic faith.

Did the Jews really believe that God could not be born with a woman? Or they simply could not stomach Jesus Christ and Christianity leading them to confine the power of God to what they believe in?

**No, you are right. God is not subject to Jewish belief, but neither is He subject to Christian faith. So, we are back to square one.

Did Christians really believe that God could be born out of a woman? Or they simple could not stomach to hold back their policy of Replacement Theology?**

 

[Ben_Masada]

John 5:10-18

Now that day was a sabbath. 10So the Jews said to the man who had been cured, ‘It is the sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your mat.’ 11But he answered them, ‘The man who made me well said to me, “Take up your mat and walk.” ’ 12They asked him, ‘Who is the man who said to you, “Take it up and walk”?’ 13Now the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had disappeared in* the crowd that was there. 14Later Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, ‘See, you have been made well! Do not sin any more, so that nothing worse happens to you.’ 15The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. 16Therefore the Jews started persecuting Jesus, because he was doing such things on the sabbath. 17But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father is still working, and I also am working.’ 18For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he was not only breaking the sabbath, but was also calling God his own Father, thereby making himself equal to God.

**Here is an evidence that the guys who wrote the gospels were not Jewish. Lack of knowledge of Jewish culture and customs. They report a cure that Jesus did on the Sabbath, in the hope to show Jesus’ disregard for that commandment.

It’s even embarrassing their show of ignorance. They didn’t know about the Jewish rulling of Pichuach Nephesh, whose fulfillment of a commandment, especially to alliviate someone’s sufferings overrules the break of another commandment. **

 

[jpaul1953]

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:

Dear Ben Masada,

So you believe the New Testament is a complete hoax from the start. So I also would say that the Jews are not in any way just of Jewish origin after your statement about Jewish rapes at the hands of the Romans, which is common knowledge to most about the rapings. You are all part Gentile as we are all part Jew, since we do believe in the Torah and that Abraham is our Father. So we are all Samaritan-like.

Well, where does that leave us now. Jesus is maybe from the bloodline of the Caesar Family. So he is maybe of Roman nobility. So he should have said to Pilate I am your King as well as the Jews literally, but was accidently past over because my mom wasn’t Roman. Or maybe she was half Roman already. So Yeshua Caesar is 75% Roman.

Let’s keep going with this, shall we? You believe the historian over the Christians belief in the mostly Jewish-written (maybe not-who really knows their real fathers) New Testament.
You believe in the Jewish writers of the Torah but not the Jewish writers of the NT.

You believe those children of the rapes were respected. Bull. They were treated like outcasts since they weren’t full Jews. Predjudice is predjudice. Don’t even think that the Jews weren’t predjudice. If it wasn’t done the way they believe correct you are not with them, no exceptions. Look at Yeshua. You, yourself, say you believe he may have kept it quiet if his mom was raped. Why, if the leaders said these women and children are not at fault. Predjudice, plain and simple!

You won’t accept our faith as truth because your’s is truth in your mind. Well, here we go 'round in circles once again.

I personally believe in Jesus more so because of a spiritual and Eucharistic connection I have with Him. I believe the way I believe more than just because of the Scriptures. I have been given the gift of a relationship with God, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through Grace responded to by my faith and works of love that the Three Persons in God ask that I do, not demand. Without my spiritual and Eucharistic connection I would not be Catholic. I would leave this Church for a much easier Christian solution… just believe upon the son and one is saved.

Have a nice day, Ben.

jpaul1953

 

[Ben_Masada]

Dear Ben Masada,

So you believe the New Testament is a complete hoax from the start. So I also would say that the Jews are not in any way just of Jewish origin after your statement about Jewish rapes at the hands of the Romans, which is common knowledge to most about the rapings. You are all part Gentile as we are all part Jew, since we do believe in the Torah and that Abraham is our Father. So we are all Samaritan-like.

Let us try to correct some things here. I do believe the NT to be a complete hoax, because it plagiarizes from our Scriptures and uses religious Jews to distort the image of Judaism with Hellenistic innovations. And to claim Abraham as you father you must first convert to Judaism. Your lineage passes over Abraham in the direction of Noah.

Well, where does that leave us now. Jesus is maybe from the bloodline of the Caesar Family. So he is maybe of Roman nobility. So he should have said to Pilate I am your King as well as the Jews literally, but was accidently past over because my mom wasn’t Roman. Or maybe she was half Roman already. So Yeshua Caesar is 75% Roman.

Jesus could never be from the bloodline of Caesar because according to Prof. Erick Hinnerman, in his “Myth of the Pax Romana” the soldier who raped Mary wasn’t even a Roman but a Sydonian.

Let’s keep going with this, shall we? You believe the historian over the Christians belief in the mostly Jewish-written (maybe not-who really knows their real fathers) New Testament.
You believe in the Jewish writers of the Torah but not the Jewish writers of the NT.

The writers of the Torah were Jewish. The writers of the NT were Hellenistic Gentiles. That’s quite different.

You believe those children of the rapes were respected. Bull. They were treated like outcasts since they weren’t full Jews. Predjudice is predjudice. Don’t even think that the Jews weren’t predjudice.

I never for a second believed that those children were respected. They were mentally tortured by peer pressure, because of their special treatment of sons of God.

If it wasn’t done the way they believe correct you are not with them, no exceptions. Look at Yeshua. You, yourself, say you believe he may have kept it quiet if his mom was raped. Why, if the leaders said these women and children are not at fault. Predjudice, plain and simple!

What could Jesus do but to keep quiet? It was not his fault that his mother was raped. I mean, if that was true. Personally, I don’t believe it. I’d rather believe that he was a biological son of Joseph. I mention the case just for the coincidence.

I personally believe in Jesus more so because of a spiritual and Eucharistic connection I have with Him. I believe the way I believe more than just because of the Scriptures. I have been given the gift of a relationship with God, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through Grace responded to by my faith and works of love that the Three Persons in God ask that I do, not demand. Without my spiritual and Eucharistic connection I would not be Catholic. I would leave this Church for a much easier Christian solution… just believe upon the son and one is saved.

You could have said all the above in one word: Faith. You believe in Jesus by faith. Faith requires no evidence, considering that it is based on suppositions.

 

[alan1941]

Did Christians really believe that God could be born out of a woman? Or they simple could not stomach to hold back their policy of Replacement Theology?

Actually it was Jewish fishermen who first believed, like it or not.

 

[jpaul1953]

jpaul1953;5550715:

Dear Ben Masada,

So you believe the New Testament is a complete hoax from the start. So I also would say that the Jews are not in any way just of Jewish origin after your statement about Jewish rapes at the hands of the Romans, which is common knowledge to most about the rapings. You are all part Gentile as we are all part Jew, since we do believe in the Torah and that Abraham is our Father. So we are all Samaritan-like.

Let us try to correct some things here. I do believe the NT to be a complete hoax, because it plagiarizes from our Scriptures and uses religious Jews to distort the image of Judaism with Hellenistic innovations. And to claim Abraham as you father you must first convert to Judaism. Your lineage passes over Abraham in the direction of Noah.

Well, where does that leave us now. Jesus is maybe from the bloodline of the Caesar Family. So he is maybe of Roman nobility. So he should have said to Pilate I am your King as well as the Jews literally, but was accidently past over because my mom wasn’t Roman. Or maybe she was half Roman already. So Yeshua Caesar is 75% Roman.

Jesus could never be from the bloodline of Caesar because according to Prof. Erick Hinnerman, in his “Myth of the Pax Romana” the soldier who raped Mary wasn’t even a Roman but a Sydonian.

Let’s keep going with this, shall we? You believe the historian over the Christians belief in the mostly Jewish-written (maybe not-who really knows their real fathers) New Testament.
You believe in the Jewish writers of the Torah but not the Jewish writers of the NT.

The writers of the Torah were Jewish. The writers of the NT were Hellenistic Gentiles. That’s quite different.

You believe those children of the rapes were respected. Bull. They were treated like outcasts since they weren’t full Jews. Predjudice is predjudice. Don’t even think that the Jews weren’t predjudice.

I never for a second believed that those children were respected. They were mentally tortured by peer pressure, because of their special treatment of sons of God.

If it wasn’t done the way they believe correct you are not with them, no exceptions. Look at Yeshua. You, yourself, say you believe he may have kept it quiet if his mom was raped. Why, if the leaders said these women and children are not at fault. Predjudice, plain and simple!

What could Jesus do but to keep quiet? It was not his fault that his mother was raped. I mean, if that was true. Personally, I don’t believe it. I’d rather believe that he was a biological son of Joseph. I mention the case just for the coincidence.

I personally believe in Jesus more so because of a spiritual and Eucharistic connection I have with Him. I believe the way I believe more than just because of the Scriptures. I have been given the gift of a relationship with God, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through Grace responded to by my faith and works of love that the Three Persons in God ask that I do, not demand. Without my spiritual and Eucharistic connection I would not be Catholic. I would leave this Church for a much easier Christian solution… just believe upon the son and one is saved.

You could have said all the above in one word: Faith. You believe in Jesus by faith. Faith requires no evidence, considering that it is based on suppositions.

Dear Ben,

You are a real character… The nerve of you to think that your belief system is crack-proof. What it appears to be is hate-filled. Do you have anger issues? Oops, I better not set you off. With the attitude you have no wonder many Gentiles believe the Jews to be arrogant to the fullest extent. I am glad I know so many Orthodox Jews in Brooklyn to know that you are in the minority. They may keep to themselves, but in conversation they are wonderfully kind people. I give two thumbs up to my friends in Brooklyn.

It’s not by FAITH that I believe. It is by the GRACE of God given to me freely contingent upon the level of humility I am at. The key word is humility. And, as you can see, I can’t explain GRACE in one word because I thought I might help you attain a higher level of love with the Almighty, Who is so merciful to those who humbly ask. The Almighty is also All-Loving.

It is funny though. The Almighty had a very personal relationship with so many infamous Jews. Do you not desire the same. It is deeper than just following the law. I love the Almighty and I want to do what He would have me do. Yes, I mess up. Yes, I go to confession about it. I feel clean again. Reborn every time I make a good Confession. I try again to obey Him the way I believe He would have me be.

‘Too many words, too little said’ will be your response.

May God bless you, Ben Masada

jpaul1953

I guess your Scriptures are different than our English translation that says that Abram, now Abraham, would be the father of many nations, including Arabs. Last account I had was most Arabs were not of the Jewish faith

 

[w_stewart]

No, you are right. God is not subject to Jewish belief, but neither is He subject to Christian faith. So, we are back to square one.

I don’t think so.

Did Christians really believe that God could be born out of a woman? Or they simple could not stomach to hold back their policy of Replacement Theology?

Well, based on your answer above, God by His omnipotence, could be born of a woman. As you said, he is not subject to Jewish belief.

 

[w_stewart]

**Here is an evidence that the guys who wrote the gospels were not Jewish. Lack of knowledge of Jewish culture and customs. They report a cure that Jesus did on the Sabbath, in the hope to show Jesus’ disregard for that commandment.

It’s even embarrassing their show of ignorance. They didn’t know about the Jewish rulling of Pichuach Nephesh, whose fulfillment of a commandment, especially to alliviate someone’s sufferings overrules the break of another commandment. **

The Jews were not honest as they were so envious about Jesus’ growing popularity. So what can you expect from them? They would use every opportunity to pin Jesus down.

In fact, it was not the first time the Jews rebuked Jesus for Sabbath law violation.

Matthew 12

1 At that time Jesus went through the corn on the sabbath: and his disciples being hungry, began to pluck the ears, and to eat. 2 And the Pharisees seeing them, said to him: Behold thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days. 3 But he said to them: Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and they that were with him: 4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the loaves of proposition, which it was not lawful for him to eat, nor for them that were with him, but for the priests only? 5 Or have ye not read in the law, that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple break the sabbath, and are without blame?

…

10 And behold there was a man who had a withered hand, and they asked him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

11 But he said to them: What man shall there be among you, that hath one sheep: and if the same fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not take hold on it and lift it up? 12 How much better is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do a good deed on the sabbath days. 13 Then he saith to the man: Stretch forth thy hand; and he stretched it forth, and it was restored to health even as the other. 14 And the Pharisees going out made a consultation against him, how they might destroy him. 15 But Jesus knowing it, retired from thence: and many followed him, and he healed them all.

And yes, the apostles knew very much the Pikuach Nephesh ruling as indicated by the bolded, underlined passage above.