The Wedding of Jesus

[FLCatholic]

Geez!!

I wonder, why Jesus didn’t invite anybody to His wedding??

I mean, He had many disciples, a family, a large crowd that followed Him, and yet nobody attended His wedding or heard about it??

Not even the Bible mentioned it??

How did he keep it a secret??

Ummm, now I’m starting to wonder if Jesus really existed!!

Finally, I know life is boring sometimes, but those who start topics like these have nothing better to do?

Watch TV or pick your noses, surely it’s more useful than showing your “useful knowledge” here.

 

[Valke2]

Jesus claimed to be what he was: A Jew. And you should be grateful to us the Jews that we have given you a Messiah. If it were not for us you would still be in the cave worshipping the stone and the fire, or even a block of wood in the shape of a demon.

So us Jews would be sitting in lounge chairs watching Seinfeld on our big screen tvs and our christian neighbors would be living in a cave making shadow puppets?

 

[planten]

One of the pseudopigraphia texts that implies Jesus was married, also implies that he had at least one homosexual affair. (IIRC, it was Secret Mark. (I’m aware of the issues surrounding the “discovery” of Secret Mark.))

I’ve forgotten who it was, but there is analysis of the Synoptic Gospels, the Gospel of John, and The Acts of Thomas, that concluded that the wedding at Cana was that of Jesus’ twin brother — Thomas.

jonathon

** jonathan, I am more interested in the Jesus twin brother Thomas. I had heard about it but lost it from mind completely. What do we know about that brother of Jesus? Please tell us.**

 

[PaulDupre]

Jesus claimed to be what he was: A Jew. And you should be grateful to us the Jews that we have given you a Messiah. If it were not for us you would still be in the cave worshipping the stone and the fire, or even a block of wood in the shape of a demon. If it were not for us the Jews, you would not have a Scripture to read. If it were not for us the Jews you would not know the meaning of the word Monotheism. If it were not… well, I think you must have got the idea. Therefore, stop biting the hand that feeds you.

Ben:

We Catholics are grateful. As St. Paul wrote, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God and that’s the reason we have them. And you did give us Jesus. That’s why we Catholics call the Jews “our elder brothers in the faith”.

Why the persecution complex, Ben? No one here hates Jews or hates you. In case you haven’t noticed, these days the only friends the Jews have are the Christians. If not for us, there would be no state of Israel, and the holocaust would have succeeded in destroying all European Jews.

So stop biting the hand that feeds you.

Your younger brother in the faith,
Paul

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

You might consider trying to share something that is at least somewhat related to Judaism. Also, I’ve been talking about Judaism on these boards for a few years now and I find it very easy to discuss Judaism without insulting christian beliefs in Jesus.

Thank you. Conversation ans sharing of views is what we are here for. It is Bens tone that makes me doubt that he is truly Jewish. I have read many of your post and though we do not see eye to eye on many things I have never found you to be insulting or to tell out right lies. Ben if he is Jewish could lern a great deal from you.

God Bless.

 

[LUISV]

THE WEDDING OF JESUS

Jesus was a Rabbi and here are the proofs: Matthew 23:7; John 1:38; 3:2; 20:16. The point is that a Rabbi in Israel had to be a married man. Then, according to Judaism, after the proper procedures, the Jewish prospect would undergo the ceremonial “mikveh” or immersion in waters before ordination.

After Jesus’ immersion in the Jordan River by John the Baptist, Jesus was seen during the next two days on his way to Galilee. (John 1:35,43) Then on the third day after his “mikveh” the family and friends were celebrating his wedding in Cana with Mary Magdalene.

Provacative. Thank you for the post.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes, He had parts, but He never used them in a natural marriage, because that was not His mission. His mission was not to naturally marry one lady,

God bless,

Rony

Hi

Now instead of Jesus describing his mission; our friend ronyodish ( and Paul/s ) is setting a mission for the Christian-god-Jesus, in my opinion . Is it the Christian-god-Jesus or a statue of wax? One could mould him the way one likes, in my opinion.

Jesus could assert himself for his claims and reasons; he needed no Paul/s, in my opinion; I love Jesus for his wisdom. Jesus feared nobody except GodAllahYHWH whose humble servant Jesus was, in my opinion.

Thanks

 

[ronyodish]

Jesus did not dictate any new law. His mission was to confirm, to fulfill, and to make sure we all did the same. Why don’t you read Matthew 5:17-19? Be sure to include verse 19.

Ben

I read and understand all three verses of Matt. 5:17-19. The Law of Moses was accomplished and fulfilled in the passion, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, and the descending of the Holy Spirit onto the Church. Having been fulfilled, Christians are now grafted into Christ by grace, which is called the Law of Christ.

Now we approach the Moral Law of the Mosaic Law through grace, through Christ. The Moral Law was not a mere temporary law for Israel, but being identical to the Natural Law, it is for all nations. However, circumcision and other temporary Ceremonial and Judicial laws, being temporary for Israel, are no longer necessary for Christians. For example, Baptism as an entrance into the Body of Christ fulfills circumcision as the entrance into Israel. Another example, the Eucharist as the offering of the Body and Blood of Christ fulfills the thank offerings of Israel.

To be under the Law is the same as to be under
grace.

To be under the Law of Christ is the same as to be under grace. In Rom 6:14, St. Paul is referring to the Law of Moses by the term law.

Tell this to the Judge in a Court of Law…

You are not understanding why I brought up these quotes. Gal. 2:16 has nothing to do with a Judge in a Court of Law. It is referring to eternal salvation. St. Paul is saying we are not made righteous by circumcision and other works of the Mosaic Law, rather, we are justified or made righteous (for eternal salvation) by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

John the Apostle never said that. John was a Nazarene Jew, and this is too unJewish to have been said by John. That’s most probably from Paul.

Yes, John the Apostle did say that. It is recorded in John 1:16-17. Yes, John was a Nazarene Jew, a follower of Jesus, and no it is not “unJewish” to say what he said, though of course it is not something that a Pharisaical Jew would say. John was not a Pharisee, he was a follower of Jesus who was not a Pharisee, and believed that Jesus had come to fulfill the Mosaic Law, and thereby usher in the Kingdom of God based on Grace and Truth. It is not from Paul because it written by John in the Gospel of John.

How about verses 18 and 19? You guys are so possessed by such a disonest faith, that you are afraid to read the whole thing in order not to be condemned by your own faith. You all never fail me. Let me proclaim to all other readers who happen to be honest, that when Jesus said that he came to fulfill the Law, he added in verse 19 that we all are under the same moral and spiritual obligation to do exactly the same. Therefore, don’t let your mentors hide that half of the truth, because a half truth is a complete lie.

The whole passage, all three verses, taken together, is referring to the Mosaic Law not being abolished, passed away, relaxed, until all is accomplished and fulfilled. Jesus accomplished and fulfilled the Law, and right now we are in the period of the Church, wherefore by grace, God enables us to live and teach the Moral Commandments of the Law, until the end of time when everything is consummated.

Our faith is in Jesus Christ, and it is not a dishonest faith. We are not afraid to read our own Scriptures, the written word of God, because there is nothing in our Scriptures that contradicts our Christian faith. The passage in Matthew does not contradict the Christian faith.

You are spreading a lie on this forum, by setting up our own Scriptures in opposition to our Christian faith. There is no opposition between the Bible and Christianity. As I told you, we follow the Moral Commandments, but we do so with God’s grace that we receive from the Sacraments. We obey the Moral Law in Christ. Do not spread a lie on this forum stating that Christians do not follow the moral Commandments of the Mosaic Law.

 

[ronyodish]

Continued…

What’s the difference between obeying through grace and obeying through duty as long as one obeys? It doesn’t matter to a Judge how you obey as long as you do. This of obeying through grace is a cop-out to justify the Pauline bickerings against the Law. Isaiah is only too clear when saying that if we want to get things right with God we must repent and obey, no matter how. (Isa. 1:18,19)

You can never fully obey the Commandments by duty, because when you break one commandment, you break all of them. Humanity is fallen and can never keep the Commandments, apart from God’s help. God knows this, and that’s why He offers us grace in Christ, grace that we normally receive from the Sacraments, that enables and empowers us to keep the Commandments, so long as we freely cooperate with this grace.

Here you go again with a judge, and court language. I’m referring to your standing before God, not a human judge. I’m referring to eternal salvation. You can not please God and enter heaven through your duty of following the Commandments, apart from God’s help and grace, because you will fall short and will never completely keep the Commandments. Only God can help us enter heaven, you can not do it on your own, no matter how many times you follow the Commandments because inevitably you will break one, and when you break one, you break the whole Law.

Obeying through grace is not a cop-out, because it is an honest acknowledgement that we are all sinners, in need of God’s grace and mercy. Only those who humbly approach God and ask for His grace and mercy to lift them up will be given the grace to follow Him, and the grace to keep the Commandments, and the grace to live out the spiritual and corporal good works of mercy. Those who arrogantly think they can approach and please God on their own, by listing how many works of the Law they’ve kept, without acknowledging themselves as sinners and in need of God’s help and grace, are sorely mistaken. St. Paul didn’t bicker against the Law, he was refuting those who think they can keep the Law without God’s grace offered through faith in Jesus Christ.

And Isaiah is right, we must repent and obey, so that God would blot out our sins and replace them with holiness, purity, and goodness. By grace and faith in Jesus Christ, God will blot out our sins and make us new creatures, holy and without blemish.

Eternal salvation from what, from the consequences of breaking the Law? But of course! What’s the difference?

Following civil laws is good for an ordering of society, like traffic laws and other civil laws. Following these laws is not what gets me into heaven (eternal salvation). I get into heaven when God graces me, meaning, God lives within me, which I normally first receive in Baptism. So long as I go through life, without committing a serious deadly sin in which I intend to expel God from my soul, and so die in this state of Divine and Holy grace, then I make it to heaven.

If I expel God from my soul through a deadly sin, then so long as I repent, confess my sin, and reconcile with God, God will again dwell within me. A serious deadly sin would be for example, adultery, or some other serious breaking of the Moral Law, to which I am fully knowledgeable of what I’m doing, and fully consenting to commit this sin.

 

[ronyodish]

Continued…

After Paul’s change of mind on the Road to Damascus when he decided to change his policy against the Nazarenes from persecuting them physically to joining them in order to fight them from within, he went to Damascus and stayed for three years disturbing the Nazarene Synagogues. Then, he went up to Jerusalem to try to join the Sect, but for two reasons the disciples rejected his application: First, because of his history of persecutor of Nazarenes. Second, because James, the chairman of the Sect in Jerusalem thought he was either lying or crazy because the disciples knew that Jesus had not gone to Damascus. But because of Barnabas, an old friend of Paul’s, put in a word for him at least on a trial basis, Paul was allowed Barnabas’ request but, within 15 days only preaching throughout Jerusalem that Jesus was the Messiah, son of God, and that he had resurrected, the local Jews were on an uproar to kill him because he was preaching heresy in Jerusalem of all places. Before he could have been killed, the Nazarenes got him down to Ceasarea, and from there they shipped him back to Tarsus where he belonged. However, Paul was carrying within him the germ of his decision to fight the Nazarenes from within. And unfortunately, the truth is that he succeeded.

Paul did not join Christianity in order to fight the Nazarenes from within. Paul joined Christianity because Christ appeared to him and converted him. He did not on his own change his mind, he was faced with the Lord, and the Lord Jesus turned his life around.

When Paul was converted, he went on to preach the Good News of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews that were congregating in Synagogues, and some Jews were being converted by God’s grace, and others arrogantly refused the grace of God, some of them, even plotted to kill him as we read: “When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night, to kill him; but his disciples took him by night and let him down over the wall, lowering him in a basket” (Acts 9:23-25). Paul was preaching the Truth to the Jews, but the Jews, blinded by their sins, were convinced that Jesus as the Resurrected Messiah and Son of God was heresy. Their blindness to the Truth fumed their hatred for Paul and Jesus even more, and so desired to kill him, not knowing, that the power of Jesus works trough the suffering and persecution of His people.

So, Paul went up to Jerusalem to join the Christians but they were afraid of him, not knowing for sure that Christ had converted him. Barnabas brought him to the Apostles and explained everything to them, and they accepted him as a new brother in Christ. They accepted the fact that Jesus appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus, all of them, including James, because they knew that the resurrected Christ had appeared to other people in the past and can appear to anyone at any time. Acts 9:28 tells us the following about Paul being accepted with the Apostles: “So he went in and out among them at Jerusalem”, that is, he became one of them, going in with them and out with them. They accepted him as one among them.

There was a group, typically known as the Judaizers, who believed that a Gentile must be circumcised in his foreskin, and keep other Ceremonial laws, in order to become a Christian. Paul was arguing against this group. Eventually, at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15, it was declared by Peter and the Apostles that “we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will” (Acts 15:11), a reference to both the Jewish Apostles and the Gentile believers. Paul did not have a problem with the Nazarene Judaic Christians, rather, his problem was with an extreme subset of this group, the Judaizers. Fortunately, the truth that Paul and the Apostles proclaimed to the Gentiles succeeded. The Nazarenes agreed that the Gentiles did not have to undergo foreskin circumcision in order to be accepted into the New Chosen People of God, a decision that was welcomed by the Gentiles.

Paul was in full communion with James. James (bishop of Jerusalem), and all the Apostles, did not think that Paul was lying or crazy, and in fact saw him as a beloved brother in the Lord. We read in Acts 15 a letter that was sent by the Apostles, including James among them, referring to Barnabas and Paul as beloved, and as ones risking their lives for Jesus: “it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15:25-26).

 

[ronyodish]

Continued…

God’s will was that we act upon our freewill and not behave like robots. To expect that God give us the push to go for Him, is no different from being robots.

True, God’s will is that we act upon our free will and not behave like robots. It is not true that God giving us the push to go for Him is no different from being robots. A robot has no free will; it is programmed to do what the programmer has decided. Our relationship to God is different from that of a robot and programmer. When God gives us the push, it is like the analogy of a proposal of marriage from a man to a woman. The man initiates, and the woman decides. God initiates by sending out His grace to a human, His invitation to a human, and the human decides to whether or not to accept the relationship with God.

Once he accepts the invitation, then God will come into this human’s soul and dwell within him. This is normally done in Baptism (though God is not bound by His Sacraments), where the Holy Spirit is poured out into the soul of the one being baptized, along with the virtues of Faith, Hope, and Love, whereby the person is now able to live out his life in a holy service to God. So long as He freely continues to co-operate with God in his soul, and does not expel Him through a deadly sin, then that man is promised eternal life when he naturally dies.

This paragraph contradicts the previous one. I agree with this and reject the first one.

No it does not contradict the previous one. The previous one is referring to adults coming to faith in Jesus Christ. This one is referring to infant Baptism, whereby their parents accept Christianity on their behalf, and the Holy Spirit is then infused into the infant, in fact, the whole Trinity dwells in the infant. When the child grows up and reaches an age of reasoning between right and wrong, he then makes the daily choice to either continue his walk with God who has dwelt and continues to dwell within Him, or freely choose to expel God from His soul by committing a deadly sin.

 

[ronyodish]

Continued…

And who is responsible for the change? Besides, Simeon was Jewish, since what is recorded in Luke about him is not Jewish, it didn’t happen. That’s part of the 80 percent of Church interpolations.

God is responsible, as a plan from the beginning, to expand His glory to all people, through a series of covenants. In the fullness of time, He came in the Person of Jesus Christ for a new and everlasting covenant, to bring to fulfillment His glory to all the nations. His covenants with people started with Adam and Eve, a couple of people, then to Noah, a family of people, then to Abraham, a tribe of people, then to Moses, a nation of people, then to David, a kingdom of people, and finally to Jesus Christ, a universal people. God was generating a Chosen People, all along; to bring His light and glory to all people, and this was fulfilled in Christ.

Yes, what was recorded in Luke about Simeon did in fact happen, since Luke is divinely inspired Scripture. Further, we have a specific mentioning of Simeon being inspired by the Spirit in Luke 2:27. Simeon was Jewish and what is recorded in Luke is not opposed to the Judaism of that time, since the Jews were expecting the Messiah to come and be the instrument of glory and light to Israel and the Gentiles.

The Lord says in Isaiah: “I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6). In other words, Israel was to bring the light and glory of God to the Gentiles so that salvation will reach the ends of the Earth. This was fulfilled by an Israelite from Israel, the Messiah, the son of David, anointed by the Holy Spirit, Jesus the Lord, who brought about the light of God to the nations and glory to His people.

Everything in the New Testament, in addition to the Old Testament, is divinely inspired. The Church, that is, the Apostles, wrote under the inspiration of God’s Spirit. The Scriptures are both human, taking into account the various styles of writing, and likewise divine, meaning, divinely inspired by God and therefore inerrant.

Proof that this didn’t happen is that the disciples never told a soul in Jerusalem. Otherwise, the local Jews would not have got upset when Paul appeared 30 years later with those news.

Yes, this in fact did happen. We see in chapter 2 of Luke when the Holy Spirit descended on the Apostles, and Peter began to teach the Holy Faith to the people: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words” (Acts 2:14). We read at the end of this chapter the following: “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved” (Acts 2:47).

Of course, not all the Jews converted. Some remained obstinate in their sins and refused God’s grace for conversion to Christianity. We read in chapter 4 the following: “the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sad’ducees came upon them, annoyed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. And they arrested them and put them in custody until the morrow, for it was already evening” (Acts 4:1-3). The Apostles suffered at the hand of the Jewish authorities, but nonetheless, “many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to about five thousand” (Acts 4:4).

It is no surprising then that when Paul became a Christian, and began to preach, he also was met with vicious persecution from the Jews, plotting to kill him for teaching the truth about Jesus Christ.

You err for not knowing the Scriptures. Isaiah had already declared that Israel was Divinily given as light unto the
nations. (Isa. 42:6)

You err for refusing the grace of God, and faith in Jesus Christ. I am already aware that Israel was to be a light unto the nations, that is exactly what Jesus Christ has done through His body the Church, the New Israel, the New People of God. This is how the plan of God was to unfold for all the nations, the Israel of the OT was fulfilled by the New Israel, the Holy Church of God.

God bless,

Rony

 

[ronyodish]

Now instead of Jesus describing his mission; our friend ronyodish ( and Paul/s ) is setting a mission for the Christian-god-Jesus, in my opinion . Is it the Christian-god-Jesus or a statue of wax? One could mould him the way one likes, in my opinion.

Jesus could assert himself for his claims and reasons; he needed no Paul/s, in my opinion; I love Jesus for his wisdom. Jesus feared nobody except GodAllahYHWH whose humble servant Jesus was, in my opinion.

paarsurrey,

Jesus describes His mission through the written word of God (Holy Scripture), and through the oral word of God (Holy Tradition). Now, the Church is the Body of Jesus, and the Church tells us what Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition means, so that we can know for sure the mission of Jesus. In other words, the Church of Jesus is there to help us know without confusion the mission of Jesus present in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition.

I, as a Catholic Christian, am only allowed to teach about Jesus what has been handed down to me by the Church in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. You, my friend, are an outsider, and you do not have the authority from Jesus to teach about Jesus. Therefore, the followers of Jesus (the Christians, not Ahmadi Muslims) must be very careful from those who teach wrong things about Jesus such Ben Masada, and you my friend.

No one has the authority to mold Jesus the way one likes. The fullness of Jesus and His mission is only known through His written and oral word as presented to us by His Church, His people. All the Apostles, including Paul, are members of His Church, and their successors (bishops) are members of His Church, and those who cling to the bishops, such as us lay people, are members of the Church. Peter and the Apostles, and their successors have the authority to tell us the fullness of the mission of Jesus.

Those who are not baptized into the Church of Jesus, do not have the authority to teach about Jesus and His mission. This means that you my friend do not have the authority to tell people about the mission of Jesus because you are not a member of His Church, and therefore, have a mixture of true and false ideas about Jesus. You do not have the authority to mold Jesus like how you want to. You must accept as fully true only those teachings which come from the Body of Jesus, the Scripture and Tradition of the Church, and not from outsiders, because outsiders do not truly know Jesus nor do they have a relationship with Jesus.

From now on, you should respect Christianity and learn from Christians, and accept what the Holy Catholic Church teaches about Jesus. You should stop following other voices, and learn to follow Jesus from the People of Jesus. Ahmadi Islam is not the People of Jesus, and you will not get the fullness of Jesus from this sect. Only when you learn to accept Jesus in His Holy Church will you begin to know truly the life and mission of Jesus.

God bless,

Rony

 

[ronyodish]

Everyone,

Due to my large amount of university studies, I will not be able to respond back on this forum for a while, since this is taking away some of my study time, but perhaps I will be back during the summer time for more postings. If any Catholic wants to take over in responding to the errors of the non-Christians here, go ahead, and may God bless your efforts.

God bless everyone,

Rony

 

[WarriorAngel]

** jonathan, I am more interested in the Jesus twin brother Thomas. I had heard about it but lost it from mind completely. What do we know about that brother of Jesus? Please tell us.**

Did you mean…?

John 11
16 Thomas therefore, who is called Didymus, said to his fellow disciples: Let us also go, that we may die with him.

John 20
24 Now Thomas, one of the twelve, who is called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

There is little known about Thomas.
Except he was called twin in Aramaic - Didymus. Possibly because he looked like Jesus. But since he was at the same age as John - its not possible he was indeed a twin to the Lord.

He was named Judas Thomas, so the fact he carried the name Judas along with St Jude and Judas Iscariot - they simply called him ‘twin’ aka Thomas. So to remove his first name to lessen the confusion…adding twin because he had similar facial to Jesus…and or because his name is the same as the other Apostles.

The act of Thomas is considered gnostic. Written many years after his death. [Perhaps even the next century]

 

[jblake]

S J Thaikattil;:

Now you are even one better. Jesus marrying His mother!

There is an Australian academic that claims that Paul married the second daughter of Jesus. Now merge that with the claim of a different academic that Jesus and Paul were the same person.

Both academics claim to use the NT as their major (?sole) source of data, to support their theory!

jonathon

 

[Ben_Masada]

You might consider trying to share something that is at least somewhat related to Judaism. Also, I’ve been talking about Judaism on these boards for a few years now and I find it very easy to disucss judaism without insulting christian beliefs in Jesus.

Myself, insulting! You don’t know the meaning of the word insult. No one has been more insulted here in this forum than myself for daring to defend the Faith of Jesus, which was Judaism.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Continued…

You err for refusing the grace of God, and faith in Jesus Christ. I am already aware that Israel was to be a light unto the nations, that is exactly what Jesus Christ has done through His body the Church, the New Israel, the New People of God. This is how the plan of God was to unfold for all the nations, the Israel of the OT was fulfilled by the New Israel, the Holy Church of God.

God bless,

Rony

Isaiah meant the collective Israel, and not one on an individual basis. Why do you have to adulterate the Scriptures?

Ben:

 

[jblake]

adrift;:

There is also 1 Corinthians Chapter 9

For those that like proof texting, that is probably the strongest evidence to support the hypothesis that Jesus was not married. Had Jesus been married, the phrase would have been “and the Lord”, rather than “and the brothers of the Lord”.

jonathon

 

[Ben_Masada]

Continued…

Paul did not join Christianity in order to fight the Nazarenes from within. Paul joined Christianity because Christ appeared to him and converted him. He did not on his own change his mind, he was faced with the Lord, and the Lord Jesus turned his life around.

If Christians did not start with Paul as the founder of Christianity, congratulations! You have just uncovered another contradiction in the NT.

Ben: