The Wedding of Jesus

[Expat_Barbara]

Already replied to

 

[Expat_Barbara]

Actually, that post wasn’t really meant for you but Ben Masada, sorry!

Also, marriages were considered a big deal in Jewish culture, in fact, weddings at that time would last for days. Hence, my reason for stating that had the disciples and/or apostles who knew Jesus and were privy to such information, would have written this down for posterity.

As for noting that the Gospels were written by people other than the Apostles, was not Luke the companion to Paul, and did they not both know the Apostles as attested in Acts. How about Mark was he not a companion to Peter, the one mentioned in Acts. Then, of course there is John, and well we know who John is. Also, this is the first time I have heard that Matthew was written by someone other than Matthew, but make no mistake, whoever this Matthew may have been, he sure knew some of the Apostles, most likely John if we go by what you wrote.

God Bless

Perhaps I should have written that The Early Christian tradition attributes the Gospel to Matthew, one of Jesus’ disciples. Beginning in the 18th century scholars have increasingly questioned that traditional view, and today most scholars agree Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name. Most contemporary scholars describe the author as an anonymous Christian writing towards the end of the first century. According to Howard Clark Kee, it appears that Jesus’ teachings and sayings were handed down orally until they were eventually written down. This theory is partly based upon “the fact that other, later Christian writings include sayings attributed to Jesus that resemble those in the gospels, but for which there is no exact equivalent.”

Fascinating stuff though and all I know is that I am here as a child of God, created for a purpose and where I can, spread the Good News, not heresies.

Blessings…

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Jesus was an observant Jew. To recommend his mother to a male disciple is not Jewish. Therefore, it didn’t happen, because John was not at the Calvary.
The truth is that Jesus recommended his mother to his wife and vice-versa, his wife to his mother. The change of Mary Magdalene for John was invented by the Fathers of the Church with the purpose to deviate the mind of those who leave the thinking process with the Chruch.

Ben:

For someone who claims to know so much about Christ, yet knows nothing of his forthcoming in the Old Testament is beyond me.

 

[simplynoone]

Oh, Now John lies too. Mickey as you put it Mamma Mia!

Rinnie, I hope you do not mind, but perhaps I can help you out a bit here as I do not see Ben has called John a liar in the following statement:

Jesus was an observant Jew. To recommend his mother to a male disciple is not Jewish. Therefore, it didn’t happen, because John was not at the Calvary.
The truth is that Jesus recommended his mother to his wife and vice-versa, his wife to his mother. The change of Mary Magdalene for John was invented by the Fathers of the Church with the purpose to deviate the mind of those who leave the thinking process with the Chruch.

Ben:

He is saying, from his knowledge of Jewish customs, he can see that something is not right about the accounts given in the NT and not that it had anything to do with being John’s fault.

This is not far fetched considering the following:

1. The NT in its formation period was kept in the hands of those in positions of higher power and not handed out until MUCH later to the general public.
2. It is more reasonable to assume that a Jewish person who is kept in the Jewish customs would be able to detect suspicious entries into the NT’s account of Jesus, who was, after all Jewish.
3. It is not a new revelation that man lies… that the Word of God was to be sold to the Scribes (those w/ a pen in their hands ahem)… and that there was a specific plan for such an occurance laid out in the foundations of which the Church bases its claims on.

All of the above are my reasons for paying attention and since I was created with a brain that functions quite well, I do not understand why it is treated as a sin on here to actually use it. To question one’s own faith is only considered wrong if one’s faith has a reason for being questioned… that is the Nature of Reason anyway. What do you say to this?

For me, I came to the conclusion that it was not a sin since I do not trust man regardless of who it is, but rather God. I am curious to why it is treated as a gross sin to question things that are seemingly out of place and not quite right? Why are those who want to ponder these things ridiculed and insulted? Just curious.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Rinnie, I hope you do not mind, but perhaps I can help you out a bit here as I do not see Ben has called John a liar in the following statement:

He is saying, from his knowledge of Jewish customs, he can see that something is not right about the accounts given in the NT and not that it had anything to do with being John’s fault.

This is not far fetched considering the following:

1. The NT in its formation period was kept in the hands of those in positions of higher power and not handed out until MUCH later to the general public.
2. It is more reasonable to assume that a Jewish person who is kept in the Jewish customs would be able to detect suspicious entries into the NT’s account of Jesus, who was, after all Jewish.
3. It is not a new revelation that man lies… that the Word of God was to be sold to the Scribes (those w/ a pen in their hands ahem)… and that there was a specific plan for such an occurance laid out in the foundations of which the Church bases its claims on.

All of the above are my reasons for paying attention and since I was created with a brain that functions quite well, I do not understand why it is treated as a sin on here to actually use it. To question one’s own faith is only considered wrong if one’s faith has a reason for being questioned… that is the Nature of Reason anyway. What do you say to this?

For me, I came to the conclusion that it was not a sin since I do not trust man regardless of who it is, but rather God. I am curious to why it is treated as a gross sin to question things that are seemingly out of place and not quite right? Why are those who want to ponder these things ridiculed and insulted? Just curious.

Thank you Simplynoone for your clarification of my post. I found it superb.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

For someone who claims to know so much about Christ, yet knows nothing of his forthcoming in the Old Testament is beyond me.

Believe me, I have gone throughout the Tanach, once, especially looking
for Jesus. He was not there. One has to assume to find him. Since assumptions butter
no bread, I hate bread without butter.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Thank you for the welcome and yes, I am new round here.

The message is:

For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son; that whosoever believes in Him should not perish (in hell) but have everlasting life (in Heaven). – John 3:16.

Good! Now, let me translate your message into the Truth. For God so loved the world, that He promised Noah that He would never allow another catastrophic destruction. Why? Because He soon afterwards decided to send His firstborn son Israel so that through his intercession no one should perish but live his or her span of life on earth. How can I prove that God’s son sent by God is Israel? Easy! All you have to do is to read Exodus 4:22,23. Israel is My son; so let My son go, so that he may serve Me. You can also read Hosea 11:1. When Israel was a child, out of Egypt I called My son. It was with this thought in mind that Jesus himself in John 4:22 said that salvation is from the Jews.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Prove that it was invented by the Fathers of the Church? And another thing, why would Jesus hand over his mother to a Female (even if that female was married to her son). Do you believe Jesus had brothers?

Yes, I promise you that I’ll prove it to you but it won’t be for free. In exchange for my proof that the Fathers of the Chruch made that up, you need to prove to
me that Jesus was not Jewish.

If I believe Jesus had brothers? But of course, I do! James, for instance, the head of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem was his brother. But none of them was loved by Mary Magdalene
as Jesus.

 

[swariffin]

Rinnie, I hope you do not mind, but perhaps I can help you out a bit here as I do not see Ben has called John a liar in the following statement:

He is saying, from his knowledge of Jewish customs, he can see that something is not right about the accounts given in the NT and not that it had anything to do with being John’s fault.

This is not far fetched considering the following:

1. The NT in its formation period was kept in the hands of those in positions of higher power and not handed out until MUCH later to the general public.
2. It is more reasonable to assume that a Jewish person who is kept in the Jewish customs would be able to detect suspicious entries into the NT’s account of Jesus, who was, after all Jewish.
3. It is not a new revelation that man lies… that the Word of God was to be sold to the Scribes (those w/ a pen in their hands ahem)… and that there was a specific plan for such an occurance laid out in the foundations of which the Church bases its claims on.

All of the above are my reasons for paying attention and since I was created with a brain that functions quite well, I do not understand why it is treated as a sin on here to actually use it. To question one’s own faith is only considered wrong if one’s faith has a reason for being questioned… that is the Nature of Reason anyway. What do you say to this?

For me, I came to the conclusion that it was not a sin since I do not trust man regardless of who it is, but rather God. I am curious to why it is treated as a gross sin to question things that are seemingly out of place and not quite right? Why are those who want to ponder these things ridiculed and insulted? Just curious.

If you are sure that Ben really well versed in Jewish 1st century culture, and no change of such culture to the 21st century.

 

[swariffin]

Now, you can say that again, because I agree with you 101 percent. Jews are very rational. God knows what He does. He would not waste His time with people who can’t think.

The Bridegroom invited himself to his own wedding party?? Oh I just realize Jewish rational.

 

[swariffin]

You either ignore your own NT or you honestly do not know much about it. When you say that Christians started with Jesus, you are creating a new contradiction in the NT. It’s very clear in Acts 11:26 that Christians started with Paul in Antioch, about 30 years after Jesus had been gone.

And when you say there was no Sect of Nazarenes, I can see how much you are familiar with your own NT. Perhaps you have chosen to let the Church guide what you should read or not. Open your NT and read Acts 24:5. What Sect of Nazarenes is Luke talking about in this quotation? Are you surprised now about the Sect of the Nazarenes? Now, have mercy of yourself and open your eyes to the truth.

Ben;

Great, then you can show me your proof of the Sect of Nazarenes. So far the only thing I see is your opinion only. Act 24:5 was the word of Felix, the Roman who ruled in Caesarea. That was not the opinion of the Jewish at that time. Perhaps you are arguing that Felix was a Jew, are you not?

 

[swariffin]

swariffin;4889903:

Ben Masada;4886254:

rinnie;4886108:

You ask so many times because you either forget or are not following the thread, because I have explained to you about this question already. Yes, the doctors and nurses serve their patients during Sabbaths. Wht’s the problem? This work on the Sabbath falls within the classification of “Pichuach Nephesh.” That’s what we call in Hebrew when a commandment is allowed to be broken for the fulfilment of a greater commandment. To help or to serve the sick is a greater commandment than to keep the Sabbath holy. Unless it’s not necessary.

Ben:

Good, then there is a progress in the Jewish community. In Mat 12:10 Jesus challenged the Jews whether or not one can cure others during Sabbath. If your Pichuach Nephesh has existed during Jesus time, surely Matthew would not wrote Chapter 12:9-15.

It can only happen because healing people was forbidden during Sabbath during Jesus’ time, for the sake of going to pray in the sinagoge. That was the Thorah that Jesus and Paul was against. Surely your tradition has changed from year 30’s to year 2009. Who knows, you will accept Jesus completely 100% by year 4.000 AD.

 

[swariffin]

Rinnie, your question only tells me that you are beyond repair. Where is the grave of Abraham? Where is the grave of Moses? Where is the grave of David? Where is the grave of the Prophets? Did you get the point? I hope so.

Ben:

Surely Abraham, Moses, David had their graves. It is just a matter of time Archeology will find them. Surely the earth and even the land of Judea is limited. But, if you are looking for the grave of Jesus, you will never find Jesus’ grave neither in earth nor in universe.

BTW, if you ask Paarsurrey, he will show you an old grave in Khashmir, India. Whether it is correct or not, at least 170 million Ahmadis will say so.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4891462:

swariffin;4889903:

Ben Masada;4886254:

Good, then there is a progress in the Jewish community. In Mat 12:10 Jesus challenged the Jews whether or not one can cure others during Sabbath. If your Pichuach Nephesh has existed during Jesus time, surely Matthew would not wrote Chapter 12:9-15.

It can only happen because healing people was forbidden during Sabbath during Jesus’ time, for the sake of going to pray in the sinagoge. That was the Thorah that Jesus and Paul was against. Surely your tradition has changed from year 30’s to year 2009. Who knows, you will accept Jesus completely 100% by year 4.000 AD.

The guy who wrote the first gospel, he did it 50+ years after Jesus had been going. Before you ask me where I got my sources. I tell you, from the preface to that gospel by the Catholic Church. Get the Saint Joseph’s edition of the Catholic New American Bible and you will see that Bishops and not lay people, wrote about the dates of the books of the NT.

I hope now, you can use your mind without trusting only in what the Church says.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Great, then you can show me your proof of the Sect of Nazarenes. So far the only thing I see is your opinion only. Act 24:5 was the word of Felix, the Roman who ruled in Caesarea. That was not the opinion of the Jewish at that time. Perhaps you are arguing that Felix was a Jew, are you not?

You are so beyond repair that your eyes cannot be open even to what is written. Go back to Acts 24:5 and see that’s not Feliz speaking but Tertulus, the Jewish Lawyer whom Ananias, the High Priest had hired to condemn Paul. I don’t even know why I am wasting my time with you.

Ben:

 

[simplynoone]

If I believe Jesus had brothers? But of course, I do! James, for instance, the head of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem was his brother. But none of them was loved by Mary Magdalene as Jesus.

Ben, in regard to the question in which you are answering in this reply, this last part struck me. Is there a reason that you worded it that way?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben, in regard to the question in which you are answering in this reply, this last part struck me. Is there a reason that you worded it that way?

No, no special reason. I am just sure that Jesus and Mary Magdalene loved each other as real lovers do. That’s all.

Ben:

 

[S_J_Thaikattil]

Gabriel of 12;4881777:

To begin with, let me remind you that this of the forum is a non-Catholic section. If you as a Catholic can’t handle
the truth, I think you must be the one who should not continue here. Then, to burn one alive because he attacks the Church with arguments is no reason for such a cruelty.

Now, about who is here to correct misgivings, let me ask you a question. Do you believe Jesus was Jewish? I am sure you do. Therefore, if I am interpreting Jesus according to being Jewish, I think the misgivings are yours and not mine.

Ben:

Ben, many Jews in Jesus’ time and in the early days of Christianity converted to Christianity, out of conviction. You yourself mentioned the large group of Jesus for Jews and Messianic Jews. So your Jewish interpretation, which rejects Jesus as Messiah, is just one more Jewish interpretation that rejects Jesus as Messiah.

Have you tried to find the writings of Pinchas Lapide, the Jew, who has done New Testament studies? The writings of St Edith Stein, a Jewess who converted to Catholicism? She converted to Catholicism out of conviction. In her case it was the Sabbath Laws followed by her boy friend, an observant Orthodox Jew, which finally clinched the decision which had been building up over time, since she delved deeper and deeper into philosophy.

Btw, I heard of a Catholic from Minnesota who converted to Judaism in 2001. But he mentioned his parents were not really practicing Catholics.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4881795:

Ben, many Jews in Jesus’ time and in the early days of Christianity converted to Christianity, out of conviction. You yourself mentioned the large group of Jesus for Jews and Messianic Jews. So your Jewish interpretation, which rejects Jesus as Messiah, is just one more Jewish interpretation that rejects Jesus as Messiah.

Have you tried to find the writings of Pinchas Lapide, the Jew, who has done New Testament studies? The writings of St Edith Stein, a Jewess who converted to Catholicism? She converted to Catholicism out of conviction. In her case it was the Sabbath Laws followed by her boy friend, an observant Orthodox Jew, which finally clinched the decision which had been building up over time, since she delved deeper and deeper into philosophy.

Btw, I heard of a Catholic from Minnesota who converted to Judaism in 2001. But he mentioned his parents were not really practicing Catholics.

Yes, I have read about borth of them. About Pinchas Lapide, it’s just the opinion of another man. About Edith Stein, there was no conviction in there. Her reason to desert Judaism was the poorest. In fact, both of them are under the same classification of Hosea 4:6. “My People perish for lack of knowledge.”

I am very firendly with a former successful Seventh-Day Adventist Pastor, who converted to Judaism. Today, the souls he used convert yearly into his former Church, he is doing the same now into Judaism, because of his charismatic personality and knowledge of the Scriptures. So, what are you talking about Jews who become Catholic or join other Christian denominations? It means only lack of knowledge.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

For someone who claims to know so much about Christ, yet knows nothing of his forthcoming in the Old Testament is beyond me.

Really! Tell me about his forthcoming into the Tanach. But I warn you: Without assumptions. Because so far, to find Jesus in the Tanach, one needs to assume.

Ben: