The Missing Passover

[Ben_Masada]

Jesus was a Jewish, and there must be a record among the Jews about marriages. You must be in the better position to dig Jewish record for Jesus’ marriage. Most of us don’t read nor speak Hebrew. So, you are in the best position to dig for any record from Jewish source saying that Jesus was married. If you are certain of your position, you should be able to dig for one.

**Do you know something? I would happily do that if ir were not for the fact that the Romans destroyed all Jewish documents all the way from the Galilee down to Jerusalem in angry revenge for the legions they lost at the hands of the Jews. But to tell you the truth, I would not need to do that. Why? Only to prove to Catholics? Obvious evidences in the NT are enough.

Ben**

 

[Ben_Masada]

Jesus was a Pharisee? You must have quoted your Miznah rather than the bible, Ben.

**Where does it say in the NT that Jesus was an Essene? Nowhere. But it’s written that they had Pharisees in the Sect of Nazarenes, who were Jesus’ followers.

Ben: **

 

[kalt]

**They didn’t. To heal someone on the Sabbath is a more important commandment than to keep the Sabbath. Besides, one does not break the Sabbath for healing on this day. Even religious Jews are allowed to work in hospitals on the Sabbath under the Jewish law of “Pikuach Nephesh.” Perhaps, the Gentiles disciples of Paul who wrote the gospels did not know about this nuances of Jewish practices, and fabricated an accusation against the Jewish leaders.

Ben: **

You’ve never read the NT have you?

 

[kalt]

**Do you know something? I would happily do that if ir were not for the fact that the Romans destroyed all Jewish documents all the way from the Galilee down to Jerusalem in angry revenge for the legions they lost at the hands of the Jews. But to tell you the truth, I would not need to do that. Why? Only to prove to Catholics? Obvious evidences in the NT are enough.

Ben**

So where is that list of “evidences”?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Can you give us a list of both, then? A list of the evidence that he was married, followed by a list of evidence that he wasn’t/

**You are the one who should provide me a list of evidences that Jesus was NOT married. If you read my thread about the Wedding of Jesus more carefully, my reasons for being he married are specified in there.

Ben: **

 

[kalt]

Jesus was a Jewish, and there must be a record among the Jews about marriages. You must be in the better position to dig Jewish record for Jesus’ marriage. Most of us don’t read nor speak Hebrew. So, you are in the best position to dig for any record from Jewish source saying that Jesus was married. If you are certain of your position, you should be able to dig for one.

As Catholics know, there is no surety of Christ’s marital status. You are the one who thinks he knows.

Jesus’ marital status is not an article of faith.

I have to ask all of you–the Christians who insist he wasn’t married and Jews who insist he was - what difference it makes?

Catholics look at the scant evidence and admit that it looks like Jesus probably wasn’t married.

Why do you need a definite answer?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;5055759:

Ben, where is the evidence that Jesus was married? You say you can assure me - then show me. I asked you what evidence you gathered and you answer by saying that there are evidences that he was married. What evidences?

:angel1:

Read the thread. The evidences are there.

 

[kalt]

**Do you know something? I would happily do that if ir were not for the fact that the Romans destroyed all Jewish documents all the way from the Galilee down to Jerusalem in angry revenge for the legions they lost at the hands of the Jews. But to tell you the truth, I would not need to do that. Why? Only to prove to Catholics? Obvious evidences in the NT are enough.

Ben**

Wait. The Romans destroyed ALL Jewish documents, but you know this history.

Wow! you are some kind of prophet.

 

[kalt]

**You are the one who should provide me a list of evidences that Jesus was NOT married. If you read my thread about the Wedding of Jesus more carefully, my reasons for being he married are specified in there.

Ben: **

Actually, I don’t have definitive proof that Jesus was or wasn’t married, because the proof doesn’t exist.

You have said that you have definitive proof, but you have failed to provide the list.

You are making the claim, so in good debate form, it is you who is obligated to provide the proof to support that claim.

I am in no way obligated to provide proof that disproves your point, as if my not disproving your point proves your point.

You’ve implied that you have a PhD level understanding of Judaism and Christianity. I haven’t seen evidence of that yet.

In fact, I’ve seen some pretty bad writing on your part. IMO, you are making false claims about your expertise.

FWIW, I know quite a few competant Jews, and not one of them makes the mistakes you make. And not one of them claims to have a PhD-level theological background.

 

[kalt]

wolfgang;5064411:

Read the thread. The evidences are there.

Again, you refuse to support your argument.

Are you here to debate, or do you think that you are a wonderfully persuasive writer and that we will just accept whatever you say without proof.

Provide the argument or concede the point.

Edit -

Sorry about that. Your post echoed Ben’s, and I thought I was repsonding to another of his refusals to support his argument.

Edited again.

This was a forum glitch. It looks like that was Wolfgang’s post, but it was Ben’s.

 

[ralphinal]

Our friend Ben tells us that Jesus HAD to be married because he was an observant Jew of that era. History tells us that the Essenes were observant Jews of that era who were celebate. Even if Jesus was not an Essene, ben’s assertion is still wrong because history shows us celebate men who were observant Jews.

Ben tells us that the Passover could not be celebrated when the Gosples say it was. History tells us that the Essenes used a different calendar. Even if Jesus was not an Essene, ben’s position is wrong because History shows us observant Jews who celebrated the Passover before the other sects.

Now, who is correct, ben or history?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Our friend Ben tells us that Jesus HAD to be married because he was an observant Jew of that era. History tells us that the Essenes were observant Jews of that era who were celebate. Even if Jesus was not an Essene, ben’s assertion is still wrong because history shows us celebate men who were observant Jews.

Ben tells us that the Passover could not be celebrated when the Gosples say it was. History tells us that the Essenes used a different calendar. Even if Jesus was not an Essene, ben’s position is wrong because History shows us observant Jews who celebrated the Passover before the other sects.

Now, who is correct, ben or history?

**It was a nice try to play the wise guy, but it won’t work, and
I’ll tell you why. First, let’s start with the marriage issue. Not all Essenes took the vow of celibacy. The Essenses who would not get married were but a fringe of the society. Is it okay to say that observant Catholics do not get married, since observant Catholics, like priests and nuns have taken the vow of celibacy? I didn’t think so. Jesus was never referred to as an Essene and many times as a Rabbi, which was a class of professional who were required to be married to officiate as such. (John 3:2)

Now, let’s go for the Passover. Jewish festivals follow the Jewish custom of the lunar calendar. The lunar month is shorter than the solar month. That’s why the month of Adar must be added to make up for the difference. If the Essenes used the solar calendar and not the regular lunar calendar, the passover for them would fall after the regular 14th of Nisan according to the lunar calendar and never before. Therefore, even if Jesus had decided to observer the Passover Feast before the 14th of Nisan, he would be wrong in two counts. First, that according to Judaism, there is a provision for some people who couldn’t celebrate the Passover on the 14th of Nisan, to celebrate it later. But never before. And second, for Jesus to celebrate the Passover according to the solar calendar, he would have to do it after the 14th of Nisan, according to the Essene calendar, for being the solar month longer.

Sorry Ralphinal for having rained on your enthusiastic parade.

Ben: **

 

[Ben_Masada]

Actually, I don’t have definitive proof that Jesus was or wasn’t married, because the proof doesn’t exist.

You have said that you have definitive proof, but you have failed to provide the list.

You are making the claim, so in good debate form, it is you who is obligated to provide the proof to support that claim.

I am in no way obligated to provide proof that disproves your point, as if my not disproving your point proves your point.

You’ve implied that you have a PhD level understanding of Judaism and Christianity. I haven’t seen evidence of that yet.

In fact, I’ve seen some pretty bad writing on your part. IMO, you are making false claims about your expertise.

FWIW, I know quite a few competant Jews, and not one of them makes the mistakes you make. And not one of them claims to have a PhD-level theological background.

**Very good! I am ready to drop my claim that Jesus was a married man. But then again, you are going to drop the claim that Jesus was a Rabbi, and
a religious Jew. And that he ever declared to have come to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.
And therefore, that he was sinless. Are you ready for that? I promise that if I don’t read anymore about those claims, I’ll never bring up again that he was married.

Ben: **

 

[Ben_Masada]

Wait. The Romans destroyed ALL Jewish documents, but you know this history.

Wow! you are some kind of prophet.

**It’s easy when one can think. All we need is how bad the NT tried to hide the truth, before the evidences of Jewish customs. A Prophet? Well, it depends on what you understand what being a Prophet is. We are a prophetical People.

Ben: **

 

[kalt]

**Very good! I am ready to drop my claim that Jesus was a married man. But then again, you are going to drop the claim that Jesus was a Rabbi, and
a religious Jew. And that he ever declared to have come to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.
And therefore, that he was sinless. Are you ready for that? I promise that if I don’t read anymore about those claims, I’ll never bring up again that he was married.

Ben: **

And yet again you refuse to provide these definitive “evidences”.

I think the rest of the forum and I agree that you have, with your non-answers, conceded your point.

Debate point closed.

 

[kalt]

**It’s easy when one can think. All we need is how bad the NT tried to hide the truth, before the evidences of Jewish customs. A Prophet? Well, it depends on what you understand what being a Prophet is. We are a prophetical People.

Ben: **

And one more time you refuse to provide the “evidences”, and instead sidestep the question.

“All” of the documents were destroyed by Romans, and yet you know the history.

If you choose to keep posting, you will be posting to an audience of one–yourself.

With your non-answers you have conceded this point.

You apparently believe that we will accept your point without proof, and that we’ll accept your explanations of Judaism, though you have been proven wrong several times here.

Again, debate point closed.

 

[Ben_Masada]

And one more time you refuse to provide the “evidences”, and instead sidestep the question.

“All” of the documents were destroyed by Romans, and yet you know the history.

If you choose to keep posting, you will be posting to an audience of one–yourself.

With your non-answers you have conceded this point.

You apparently believe that we will accept your point without proof, and that we’ll accept your explanations of Judaism, though you have been proven wrong several times here.

Again, debate point closed.

**What would be the use to provide you with any more proofs?
Your blinders are to tight, and the Church won’t release the strings.

Ben: **

 

[Ben_Masada]

And yet again you refuse to provide these definitive “evidences”.

I think the rest of the forum and I agree that you have, with your non-answers, conceded your point.

Debate point closed.

**The subject is about the the Missing Passover. Why do you have to stick a subject that doesn’t have anything to do with the issue at hand?

Ben: **

 

[wmscott]

What many are forgetting is that Christ was the Pascal Lamb during that particular Passover. Dying on the cross he was the sacrifice required for Passover. He was the Pascal Lamb, he did not miss it, and he was it. The last supper was where he instituted the Eucharist and the priesthood because he knew he was to be sacrificed the next day as the Pascal Lamb. newadvent.org/cathen/08755a.htm

 

[Ben_Masada]

As Catholics know, there is no surety of Christ’s marital status. You are the one who thinks he knows.

Jesus’ marital status is not an article of faith.

I have to ask all of you–the Christians who insist he wasn’t married and Jews who insist he was - what difference it makes?

Catholics look at the scant evidence and admit that it looks like Jesus probably wasn’t married.

Why do you need a definite answer?

**Kalt, can’t you see you are exposing yourself to ridicule? Everyone can see that you are gasping for air. You are so stunny that you can’t even see that the thread is not about the Wedding of Jesus but about the Missing Passover. I am sorry, but you are behaving like the fly which has been caught in a spider’s web. You should take it easy because the more you struggle the worse it becomes for you.

Ben: **