The Wedding of Jesus

[simplynoone]

Yes, it’s like each side is speaking a different language.

I hope you don’t find anything that I’ve said to be insulting. It’s simple logic. You DO, as you have said, believe in an objective truth, of which you are the possessor, no?

Then you can’t with any sort of honesty claim that it’s ‘fine’ for others to believe what, according to your knowledge (since you’ve claimed it as such, and as such every bit as certain as your knowledge that 2+2=5 and that fire burns, and not as faith) are fallacies, errors and/or outright lies.

You wouldn’t say that it was fine for someone to believe that 2+2 = 5, or that fire doesn’t burn, or similar facts. Your ‘knowledge’ about God, similarly, imposes on you the obligation not just to share it but to make sure everyone believes the same, because it’s truth and we know what problems come about when people take error for truth, don’t we!

It certainly is not making you all conform to my persperctive, or even trying to get you all conform to the Tanakh that is what I care about. It is watching others of completely different ideals take bits and pieces to support something that cheapens the true Beauty in there and then discarding the rest of it… “Here, take the left overs that we don’t need.” It is not OLD to me… those are promises to me in a physical expression of Love called the Tanakh that you all are picking off of and throwing in my face; and it hurts to see it happening. All of it is important to me and I can’t help but wonder if you do not want to accept it as it is declared now, why can’t you just leave it intact to those who it does belong to… which is not just the Jewish; but to Gentiles who hear the Word spoken in there
as well. It is not a free for all rummage sale… it is the Word of God. I guess you could say it is like watching the one that you love having to endure what is written in Isaiah 53… scratch… that is 100% exactly what it feels like.

And for that reason… as I stated, I do not wish to continue to take part in this. I wanted to respond out of courtesy and perhaps maybe leave you with something to consider.

~ Katie

 

[LilyM]

It certainly is not making you all conform to my persperctive, or even trying to get you all conform to the Tanakh that is what I care about. It is watching others of completely different ideals take bits and pieces to support something that cheapens the true Beauty in there and then discarding the rest of it… “Here, take the left overs that we don’t need.” It is not OLD to me… those are promises to me in a physical expression of Love called the Tanakh that you all are picking off of and throwing in my face; and it hurts to see it happening. All of it is important to me and I can’t help but wonder if you do not want to accept it as it is declared now, why can’t you just leave it intact to those who it does belong to… which is not just the Jewish; but to Gentiles who hear the Word spoken in there
as well. It is not a free for all rummage sale… it is the Word of God. I guess you could say it is like watching the one that you love having to endure what is written in Isaiah 53… scratch… that is 100% exactly what it feels like.

And for that reason… as I stated, I do not wish to continue to take part in this. I wanted to respond out of courtesy and perhaps maybe leave you with something to consider.

~ Katie

I can see where you’re coming from. But the Tanakh doesn’t belong to you alone any more, nor even to the Jews alone. We Christians DO hear the Word of God spoken in it, loud and clear, but we ALSO hear it, even louder and clearer, in the Gospels and the words of Paul and the other Apostles, Acts and Revelations.

You can’t get a more beautiful and powerful physical expression of love than the Incarnation and Passion of the God-Man Jesus - the loudest and clearest preaching of the Word of God, made more manifest in a single deed than any amount of words could hope to do. And as prophesied in Isaiah 53, had you the eyes to see it.

And from our point of view, as beautiful and blessed as the Tanakh is, it’s just incomplete without it. Like a pregnancy without the joyous birth that brings it to completion and fulfilment, that gives it purpose and reason.

 

[simplynoone]

Too Late… I logged out and thought Isaiah 53 was not a chapter to express with given well… point seen… so, Lamentations 3 (and I know this will be misconstrued probably, but given that the Son of Man was not Jesus, I am claiming at least this one for the Son of Man as Isaiah 53 is another that no longer is seen in its true Light).

~ Katie

 

[LilyM]

Too Late… I logged out and thought Isaiah 53 was not a chapter to express with given well… point seen… so, Lamentations 3 (and I know this will be misconstrued probably, but given that the Son of Man was not Jesus, I am claiming at least this one for the Son of Man as Isaiah 53 is another that no longer is seen in its true Light).

~ Katie

Misconstrued? Only in that the sense that the ones who ‘walk in darkness rather than light’ are not the ones you think they are. Rather Christ was, as Simeon called Him, THE ‘light to the Gentiles’, and His followers, as He says, the ‘light of the world’.

The passages of the Tanakh that Christians treasure (which is every blessed word of them) are indeed misconstrued - by Jews and Muslims. In much the same way as someone misconstrues who sees a woman go through all the signs and stages of pregnancy (don’t know why that metaphor is on my mind tonight, but it’s quite apt) without relating those signs and stages to the birth which follows. The sad thing is to see such a person even claiming even after the birth that the pregnancy signs and symptoms are meaningful on their own, and do not find their true meaning and significance in the child who is the end result.

 

[rinnie]

:

That’s silly - you and all record of your existence can be destroyed (and therefore all claim for and belief in your existence, once all those who remember you have died). Doesn’t mean it’s untrue that you existed.

You are quite correct lily. And what we run into today is Bens teachings. Now thats what never existed I do hope he has figured out that no one takes him seriously by now. The only thing that should be before all of his posts and his friends here is warning: FOR AMUSEMENT ONLY. :yup:

Because after reading what he writes, you will be amused, abused, and definitely left Confused. But its a good lesson for all of us. And there is always something good that comes out of something bad. The bad is how he has twisted our scripture. The good is how many people here do know the bible and what it means.

If anything it should make us all thank God on Sunday when we go to Church, have that freedom to go to Church and receive our Blessed Lord in Communion how lucky we are.

And thank God that we have leaders and teachers to show us and guide us into the truth like the Pope and Bishops. Because all kidding aside we could be just like Ben and company. Its sad to say this, but sometimes when I read what they write, I think could they really believe what they are writing. Mostly I think no. but then sometimes I wonder.

Either way it makes me so gratefull for our Church and our great leaders to guide us to the truth. It can only and will only be found through the Church. Keep your faith guys, hold on to it, and cherish it, Let People like ben and co. call it blind, whatever. But we know with faith comes love with love come God. God Bless you all!

 

[Expat_Barbara]

:

You are quite correct lily. And what we run into today is Bens teachings. Now thats what never existed I do hope he has figured out that no one takes him seriously by now. The only thing that should be before all of his posts and his friends here is warning: FOR AMUSEMENT ONLY. :yup:

Because after reading what he writes, you will be amused, abused, and definitely left Confused. But its a good lesson for all of us. And there is always something good that comes out of something bad. The bad is how he has twisted our scripture. The good is how many people here do know the bible and what it means.

If anything it should make us all thank God on Sunday when we go to Church, have that freedom to go to Church and receive our Blessed Lord in Communion how lucky we are.

And thank God that we have leaders and teachers to show us and guide us into the truth like the Pope and Bishops. Because all kidding aside we could be just like Ben and company. Its sad to say this, but sometimes when I read what they write, I think could they really believe what they are writing. Mostly I think no. but then sometimes I wonder.

Either way it makes me so gratefull for our Church and our great leaders to guide us to the truth. It can only and will only be found through the Church. Keep your faith guys, hold on to it, and cherish it, Let People like ben and co. call it blind, whatever. But we know with faith comes love with love come God. God Bless you all!

AMEN TO THAT!!!

 

[Ginger2]

And Jesus loved Mary Magdalene too. It’s the suspiction that makes the brow rise. Why don’t accept the thing as simply natural?

Of course, Jesus loved her,** too**. But there is no evidence to suggest they were married. Why jump to a baseless conclusion? We have shown clearly the evidence you have provided denies your assertions.

But John was not there. It won’t help to try to fix the contradiction.

Even if you could prove this, it doesn’t change the fact that you are wrong about Mary M. The disciple who refers to himself as the one “Jesus loved” is a man - not a woman. Therefore it is not Mary M.

Probably …

“probably” is the reason you continue to run in circles. Show us evidence from the Scriptures. Telling us Jesus refers to a woman as “he” or “him” is not going to convince anyone.

Ginger

 

[josie_L]

I am sure that Ben is more knowledgable in the Jewish ways than we all are considering that he is ahem Jewish; and then what makes his views really worth listening to is that he is willing to even consider Jesus, and even more that he is willing to consider it with us. Jesus was Jewish and considering that most Jewish won’t give you the time of day, you are blessed to be able to ask questions and learn from someone who is JEWISH. Are you that opposed to discussing; especially when it is their Scriptures that you base your belief off of ?

Knowledge for applying or Faith that just accepts… honestly, which has brought us further? How do you think we have come this far in even the last 100 years… by faith? Was it faith that brought about all the conveniences that you enjoy today? Do you think Thomas Edison said “I have faith that I will have an improved version of the lightbulb to offer to the world.” & poof… there it was? Or Edwin Hubble: “I have faith that one day I will fly out into the universe and discover what it is out there.” & poof… a big hand whisked him into space? It should give you cause to wonder why you would feel opposed to sincerely considering another view point… especially one so vital to your faith.

So Ben’s viewpoint, is especially vital to my faith, because he happens to be Jewish, and therefore we have to assume that Ben knows all things Jewish, without of course, any other Jew contradicting him. That’s a lot of power Ben has over interpreting Scripture Jewish or otherwise.

****I have no problem listening to his viewpoints and I value them since it is the Word of God that was given to the world through the Jewish ****that I subscribe to. Funny that no one takes time to really consider what it means by “… and the world knew him not” when speaking of the Word. I mean, everyone knows about Jesus, right?

I think you need to reread your post. My response to you was perfectly valid considering what you wrote here.

 

[carmalina]

Ben has also written a post about how Jesus was never pierced because that would be a Jewish, not Roman, custom.

I am not here to comment on Ben’s beliefs or findings. I only wish to comment that these posts seem to have only one purpose: to sow doubt in Christians, to dilute Catholic church teachings. Someone will say: but! I only wish to discover and bring all to the truth. I wish to reveal the facts.

Ben, discuss your doubts in both yourself and in your relation with God with a priest. Seek one out on this forum.

Facts are stubborn things. You have presented no facts, and if I may humbly offer it, I admit that because I live in Faith, I don’t live in facts either.

What you have offered are opinions, human opinions, void of fact or proof. Why bring in the word ‘proof’? Because it seems to be your milieu, the ‘way’ in which you are telling your stories. You want to correct the facts of the Bible. You want to set some record straight.

Those of faith have long known that we cannot prove anything, and that, neither can you. But we are not suffering from scepticism.

A good philosopher to read on this score is Jacobi. He describes well the enlightenment dilemma between fact and faith in the 1800s, a dilemma to which Kant, Hegel and others responded as they could, and the same dilemma left for them by Descartes.

Kant discovered that reason had no way to prove it’s principles, to link itself with experience or reality, though he continued to try fiercely all his life. If faith had no leg to stand on, neither did reason. Hegel continued to try to link God with material existence, to give a proof. He succumbed to pantheism as the only way to do so.

It was Jacobi who saw the truth. That reason, no more or less than religious faith, is a leap of judgment, an act of faith. And no one has been able to refute him. Even modern philosophers, even as they proclaim their faith in unreason realize that unreason, faith, reason are all simply singular relations that cannot be universalized.

But the enlightenment, the scientific reason, goes on. It believes itself to be a priest of truth. Every ‘science’ is now imbued with this ‘method’, this geometricity whereby in facts, in empirical truth, a dogma of truth can be raised, a scientificity given to experience and facts.

So the old boring saw about the facts of Christianity and whether they can be substantiated is truly, truly boring and passe. Outdated, even.

Cling to your facts but facts will not bring the comfort of faith. The reason is that facts are a kind of faith, securalized and denuded of love.

There is something beyond the mundane checkbook, the balancing of details to arrive at a truth. We do that because we have to. We balance our checkbooks. But God exceeds such mundane earthly necessity. The necessity of God is beyond fact. Let us not limit our experience of God to finite facts.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Oh! Wonderful! You must believe that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is indeed the Messiah. But let me tell you a prophetic story. I agree with you. Isaiah is indeed speaking about the Messiah, but the collective Messiah and not an individual. If you read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4 you will see that Isaiah identifies that Servant with Isarael by name, so that no one needs to assume. To attribute it to Jesus, you have to assume, and assumptions butter no bread; and I hate bread without butter. Just kidding!

Yes, the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98) teaches that this chapter refers to Messiah, but not according to your Messiah, but the Jewish Messiah, who is Israel, the Jewish People. Also the Targum of Jonathan also attributes the words Ha Yatslakh Avdee Mashikka, but that’s the Jewish Messiah Israel. To understand what they say above, you must have some initiation in the concept of Messiah ben Joseph versus Messiah ben David. Why don’t you read my thread on that? It could help you.

Ben:

There is also Daniel 9:26
Isaiah 7:14
Isaiah 9:6
Psalm 2, 2:17
Zachariah 12:10
You Ben, should be convinced that He IS the Messiah because of the transformation in the personalities of His followers. Who could transform Simon Bar Yonah, the fisherman on the shores of Galilee, to become the leader of the Messianic Jews in Israel and abroad, and finallly to be acknowledged the first Bishop and highest Authority next to Jesus, by millions of people of the whole world?
What about Saul of Tarsus, convinced that he, with the letters he had from the High Priest, would completely knock out all belief in Jesus? He met the risen Yeshua on the road from Jerusalem to Damascus (Acts 9), and from a persecutor of the Gospel he became a proclaimer of the Good News. He himself was greatly persecuted by unbelieving people everywhere until he finally died a martyr’s death at the hands of the Romans in the time of Nero.,

 

[jake23]

Ben
God is a teacher among many other things and he is never said to be married. The only writings that imply that christ was married are from gnostic writings which have been proven to be false writing of the 5th century. Christ is to be married but it is to All of gods children as a whole. Christ is not limited to Jewish law because he is God himself in flesh. Christ also worked on the sabath doing miracles and thats against jewish law. He also ate with sinners which was a sin, even though we are all sinners. Mary did love christ verry much and I believe christ had love for mary. It was important when god came down to be in flesh to feel temptations as man did, the only difference is that Christ is god and did not give in to those temptations. God is not limited to jewish law! Jews are special but are human just like the rest of us and we are all creations of Christ. The Jewish poeple where the chosen poeple for only one thing and that is Christ to be born a Jew. After that Jews as individual are obsalite. Jews are now apart and equal with all races which are all brothers and sister. There is nothing in the gosples that suggest in anyway that Christ was married, but he will be married one day to you and me as a whole through the church, the catholic church to be exact. God Bless!

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben

God is a teacher among many other things and he is never said to be married.

 

[Ben_Masada]

There is also Daniel 9:26

Listen to this and tell me if it makes sense. The headquarters of the Nazarenes followers of Jesus was in Jerusalem. Paul goes to Jerusalem for letters from the High Priest to arrest the followers of Jesus in Damascus. Two contradictions which make the alleged fact a fiasco: First, why get letters to arrest the followers of Jesus in Damascus when the most part of them were in Jerusalem, where Paul went for letters? The second fiasco is, Israel had no jurisdition in Damascus, a different Country, to send an envoy to arrest citizens of another place. Besides, Israel was not even an independent Country. It sounds like a joke, don’t you think so?

Ben: :

 

[Ben_Masada]

Of course, Jesus loved her, too. But there is no evidence to suggest they were married. Why jump to a baseless conclusion? We have shown clearly the evidence you have provided denies your assertions.

 

[swariffin]

swariffin;4900020:

Ben Masada;95660:

swariffin;4895443:

And you are contradicting your own Church. Read the prefaces to the gospels in the New American version of the Bible, Saint Joseph’s edition, sponsored by the Bishops’ Committee of the Confraternity of christian Doctrine.

Ben:

Do you believe a word of a person or a collective word of scientists working in the field? You should go the dating of the original text in greek. The gospel were not written in English, you know.

 

[swariffin]

swariffin;4900009:

My apology. You are correct. Now my question is. Why do you think Tertulus mentioned the sect of Nazarene? What is the sect of Nazarene? Precisely the follower of Jesus, correct? In your last posting you mentioned that Paul was not accepted into the sect of Nazarene. What sect of Nazarene do you have in mind if it is not the follower of Jesus?

Christian = follower of Christ/Jesus, Sect of Nazarene = followers of Jesus. So, you are talking about the same people.

Yes, Paul was preaching his own gospel, and he declares that he did not receive it from any man. And that includes the Apostles of Jesus. (Gal. 1:11,12) He goes on by saying that he had not sought human advisers, or even by going up to the Apostles in Jerusalem. (Gal. 1:16,17) It means that what he used to preach had nothing to do with the Apostles of Jesus. Therefore, in contradiction to Jesus himself.

Please show me any teaching of Paul in contradiction to the teaching of Jesus.

He came to see Peter because he knew that Peter had been the one assigned to work with the Gentiles, and he was having some plans about it. (Acts 15:7) There is nothing written that Peter accepted him. Peter could not accept anyone who wished to join. That was a prerogative of James, Jesus’ brother and the head of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem. And James did accept him on a trial basis but after 15 days he was expelled out of Israel back to Tarsus where he belonged. (Acts 9:30)

Ben:

Please show me a list of required items for any body would like to join the sect of Nazarene, such as 15 days trial period, etc. Since you claim that they were still Jewish, you should have a record showing so. You are really clever of inventing story, Ben.

 

[swariffin]

Ginger2;4898609:

But John was not there. It won’t help to try to fix the contradiction.

Ben:

Your argument that John was not there only by the fact that John was a Jew. And a generalization of yours that a Jew would never wrote things like the gospel of John. That is a very weak basis. I am an Indonesian, and that does not mean that I go with the rest of the Indonesians who condemn Israel for the attack of Gaza. John was indeed a Jew, that does mean that John would follow every single thing that a Jewish nicknamed Ben Masada would say.

 

[swariffin]

OneTrueCathApos;4903075:

It says the Messiah. It doesn’t say Jesus. For you is Jesus because you assume it to be. For me it’s Israel because Isaiah tells me so.

Now, read Amos 5:2. This Prophet says that the virgin of Isaiah 7:14 is Israel. And he says it by name. To say that she was the mother of Jesus you have to assume. And Biblical things don’t go by assumptions.

To understand about that child or son who was born, you have to go back to Isaiah 7:14,15,22 and 8:8. The son who was born of the virgin Israel was Judah. How? Read verse 15. Butter and honey shall he eat. Now, read verse 22. Butter and honey shall be the food of everyone who remained in the Land. Who remained in the Land after Israel was removed by the Assyrians? Judah remained in the Land. Therefore, Judah is that child who shall live out of butter and honey. Now, read Isaiah 8:8. The prophet in this verse calls Judah Immanuel. The Land of Israel belonged only to the Jews now. And Isaiah says, “… of thy Land O Immanuel.”

Psalm 2:17 does not exist. Perhaps you mean Psalm 2:2. This passage goes togehter with John 4:22 when Jesus said that salvation is from the Jews. The nations rage and the peoples imagine a vain thing when they take counsel together to break assunder the cords that connect them to the Jews. A vain thing because they do not understand what they are doing. (Psalm 2:1,2) They do not understand that their salvation depends on the existence of Israel. And about “against his anointed,” the Psalmist is taking about the anointed People of Israel if you read Habakkuk 3:13 where it says that the People is the anointed of God.

Zechariah here is talking about the House of David which is the same as the House of Judah. That’s after the 70 years exile in Babylon, when the Jews returned to start anew. They were very happy in Jerusalem. Then, they were taken by the spirit of supplications and looked back on the memory of Israel, the Ten Tribes, who was Messiah ben Joseph, and understood that they (the Jews) were back because Israel had died in their place. Then they mourned for him whom they had pierced with their sins.

Transformations in personality say nothing about being Messiah or not. Such transformations occur everywhere even when Christians convert to Judaism. And Peter never became a Bishop. Peter was a Nazarene. You must be confusing him with Paul.

Listen to this and tell me if it makes sense. The headquarters of the Nazarenes followers of Jesus was in Jerusalem. Paul goes to Jerusalem for letters from the High Priest to arrest the followers of Jesus in Damascus. Two contradictions which make the alleged fact a fiasco: First, why get letters to arrest the followers of Jesus in Damascus when the most part of them were in Jerusalem, where Paul went for letters? The second fiasco is, Israel had no jurisdition in Damascus, a different Country, to send an envoy to arrest citizens of another place. Besides, Israel was not even an independent Country. It sounds like a joke, don’t you think so?

Ben: :

The Messiah we believe is Jesus, who was preceded by the coming of Elijah (Mat 11:14) in accordance with Malacci 4:5. Surely you don’t believe Jesus is Ha Massiah because next thing you will argue that Matthew was a Jew, and would not wrote things like Mat 11:14.

In that case, I would sincerely leave to you to wait the second coming of Elijah while you are praying facing the wall of weeping. My advice to you, go ahead and rebuild your temple. It would be nicer for you guys to wait for Ha Massiah while congregating inside a temple. Remember, David build a tent for worship, So did Salomon, So did (I forget the name, but I will come back to it later) it was rebuilt again after the exile, but destroyed again in 70AD. It should be Ben Masada then to rebuild the temple again. 1939 years is a very long time to wait.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4905210:

The Messiah we believe is Jesus, who was preceded by the coming of Elijah (Mat 11:14) in accordance with Malacci 4:5. Surely you don’t believe Jesus is Ha Massiah because next thing you will argue that Matthew was a Jew, and would not wrote things like Mat 11:14.

In that case, I would sincerely leave to you to wait the second coming of Elijah while you are praying facing the wall of weeping. My advice to you, go ahead and rebuild your temple. It would be nicer for you guys to wait for Ha Massiah while congregating inside a temple. Remember, David build a tent for worship, So did Salomon, So did (I forget the name, but I will come back to it later) it was rebuilt again after the exile, but destroyed again in 70AD. It should be Ben Masada then to rebuild the temple again. 1939 years is a very long time to wait.

Don’t worry Swariffin, we don’t need to wait for the Messiah in order to rebuild our Temple. The Messiah is back since 1948. It’s all a matter of time and you will see our Temple rebuilt. The time that is taking so long is that this time we have returned too political. I mean, too afraid of Politicians. But that’s okay, the case is closed with you and I rest my case. Good luck for you too.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4900503:

Your argument that John was not there only by the fact that John was a Jew. And a generalization of yours that a Jew would never wrote things like the gospel of John. That is a very weak basis. I am an Indonesian, and that does not mean that I go with the rest of the Indonesians who condemn Israel for the attack of Gaza. John was indeed a Jew, that does mean that John would follow every single thing that a Jewish nicknamed Ben Masada would say.

Now, you wanna get into Politics, be my guest. Israel is not to blame for one single attack to Gaza. When Israel decides to fight back it’s because we can’t stand the daily cassam missiles they keep throwing into Israel every single day. We are too lenient. I wish to see this happening in America or even in your Indonesia and stand aside to see how you guys would react. It’s easy to blame the Jews for everything.

Ben: