The Wedding of Jesus

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4905093:
Ben,

I see you are not on here to have questioned answere but to spread the hate that is in your heart. Weither you like it or not Christ is God in flesh and you will bow down to him one day wiether it is in this life or after your death! The reading of gosple in GREEK do not support your claims. Yes you can interpret allot of things if you would like, but that there is more than enough to feel confident in our beliefs. I could manipulate scripture from Moses too but I was raised to be better than that. Jesus is God and I am confident that I will not convince you otherwise but I am confidence that you will bow in shame and repentance on judgement day when you see your creator Christ come to judge you. You are revealing that you have hate by your persecution of Christians. For you to claim that Christ was married is as dumb and idiotic to me as it would for you if I would have calimed that the holacaust never happened! It only shows blind ignorance. I will pray that you will find the truth so that you may live a more honorable life through Christ our Lord!

Let’s do this: You pick up your own NT and quote to me a sentence, just one, stating that Jesus was not married and you have made a Catholic out of me. But don’t keep saying that I am spreading hatred for speaking the truth. This won’t help neither you nor myself.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

First, Jesus was spreading the Good News of the Kingdom of God only after his baptism and the 40 days in the desert. So the wedding at Cana had to happen after the 40 days. No problem there. It isn’t said that it was his first opportunity of preaching, but that he performed his first sign.
As for breaking the commandment to grow and to multiply, what makes you say that he broke the commandment? There are many ways to “grow and multiply”! Even bachelors, by teaching, can actually “multiply”. They pass their knowledge on to others, who are, so to speak, their “little children”…

Do you know what’s the big problem here? You are speaking as a Gentile about a Gentile called Jesus. Guess what? I am sorry to tell you: You are wrong.
Jesus was an Orthodox practicing Jew. He knew very well about the Jewish terminology about the commandment to get married and father children. You cannot rewrite Jewish behave even if you were a Rabbi. Imagine being yourself a Gentile.

I am sorry to get you guys so trapped in contradictions. This happened because of your attempts to temper with Judaism. We Jews usually leave all of you guys alone, and never mess with the way you believe; but you are trying to bring Hellenistic linnovations into Judaism. It’s only natural that a Jew somewhere will take upon himself to defend his faith. Believe me, if Jesus was not a Jewish man but, let’s say, Greek, we would not be having this conversation.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

From what I can see reading the OP, Ben Masada seems to have forgotten a few things about Mary Magdalene and Mary Martha’s sister: even though a number of commentators believe believe that they both are the same person, there is no proof of it without the shadow of a doubt.
Also, as for Jesus being the bridegroom at Cana, forget it! The text says that Jesus and his disciples were “invited” to the wedding! Moreover, it calls Jesus by name, but when the master of the feast tasted the wine, he told, says the text, to the “bridegroom”. The text also says that no one but the servants (other than Jesus, of course) knew where the wine came from, so I am afraid Ben Masada’s OP is pointless!

Not so fast my friend! You say that "There is no proof without a shadow of a doubt that Mary Magdalene and Mary the sister of Martha were the same person. Well, let’s take a look at the text, starting with John 12. Read verse 1. We understand that Jesus was in Bethany with Lazarus, Martha and Mary. That is, in their own house.

Now, read verse 2. They made him a supper. They who? Martha and Mary, of course! Where? In their home, of course! It culdn’t be in the restaurant. Who was serving? Martha.
Where was Lazarus? Sitting at the table with Jesus and his disciples.

Now, read verse 3. Then, Mary took a very expensive perfume and anointed Jesus’ feet with it. As you can see, the anointing of Jesus with that costly perfume was performed at the house of Lazarus, Martha and Mary her sister. Are you still with me so far?

Now, let’s ask Luke what he has to say about this. Take a look at Luke 7:37,38. It says in there that a woman, “who was a sinner” came in with an alabaster of perfume and started anointing Jesus’ feet. The expression, “who was a sinner,” means, who was a prostitute.
Now, I ask you, was this another Mary or the same Mary, the sister of Martha? If you insist that they were not the same Mary, that’s the second woman to do that to Jesus.

Matthew speaks of the third one in Matthew 26:6-12. And Mark speaks of the fourth one in Mark 14:3-8. Were all those women different women anointing Jesus with a costly perfume and being criticized by the disciples? Are you going to give in to the truth now that
all those Mary’s were one and the same or make of Jesus a Don Juan?

Sorry Lapel, but the shalow of a doubt has passed from the text to find a place only in your mind, which is all clouded by faith. But I’ll pray for you from Yerushalaim. Perhaps even from the Wailing Wall. I am going there today.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

I am still waiting for your evidence…

Can you please reference the Scriptures that say a teacher must be married?

Priests were required to be married, Lev 21:13

But where does the law command teachers to take a wife?

Ginger

Thank you Ginger for reminding me of Leviticus 21:13, which requires of Priests to be married. Now, would you please take a look at Exodus 19:6? Speaking of Israel, that’s what it says in there: "And you shall be to Me a Kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel. Is that the evidence you were still waiting for? Jesus was one of the children of Israel. Therefore,
no reason for having remained a single man. Now, good luck my friend!

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4905338:

Who was your Messiah in 1948? Or, in what form the Messiah came? Also, who was the Elijah in accordance with Malacci?

Surely you are not saying the British is God, since the British was the one responsible for forming the state of Israel in 1947.

I am sorry to have to say that you show ignorance not only of the Scriptures but also of History. The opposite is true. The British did all they could to prevent the rise of the modern State of Israel in 1948. We had to expell them from the Land of Israel to be able to proclaim our State, even by the use of terrorism.

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.

No, my argument is not only the fact that John was a Jew. It’s also in the Scripture. Read Mark 14:50. Mark says that when Jesus was arrested, ALL his disciples forsook him and fled. John was one of Jesus’ disciples. Therefore, he was not there before the cross. So, Jesus’ beloved disciple was Mary Magdalene, who was there until the last moment when Jesus was taken into the tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.

Ben:

 

[Ginger2]

Ben:

No, my argument is not only the fact that John was a Jew. It’s also in the Scripture. Read Mark 14:50. Mark says that when Jesus was arrested, ALL his disciples forsook him and fled. John was one of Jesus’ disciples. Therefore, he was not there before the cross. So, Jesus’ beloved disciple was Mary Magdalene, who was there until the last moment when Jesus was taken into the tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.

Ben:

Mar 14:53 **And they led Jesus away to the high priest: **and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
Mar 14:54 **** And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Mar 14:53 **And they led Jesus away to the high priest: **and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
Mar 14:54 **** And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire.

It means congratulations are in order to you for having just uncovered another contradiction in the NT.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4905210:

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.

For you it’s Israel because that is your interpretation of what you think Isaiah is telling you. How is it that you can accuse one person of assuming whilst you ‘know’? And arrogant with it!!!

No, that’s not true. There is no arrogance here. When I say that you assume, it’s because you are absolutely unable to show me the name of Jesus as the Messiah in Isaiah. And when I say I am not assuming, it’s because I can and am able to show you the name of Israel as the Messiah in Isaiah. Does it make sense?

Ben:

 

[Ginger2]

It means congratulations are in order to you for having just uncovered another contradiction in the NT.

Ben:

I figured you would say that.

But it’s not a contradict as they all deserted Jesus for fear of being arrested themselves. But, as shown with Peter here, they followed and watched from a “safe” distance to see what would happen. When someone recognized Peter, he denied knowing Jesus.

Ginger

BTW, Thanks again for the info! You were very helpful and I appreciate it.

 

[Ben_Masada]

No problem there. It isn’t said that it was his first opportunity of preaching, but that he performed his first sign…

 

[Ben_Masada]

I figured you would say that.

But it’s not a contradict as they all deserted Jesus for fear of being arrested themselves. But, as shown with Peter here, they followed and watched from a “safe” distance to see what would happen. When someone recognized Peter, he denied knowing Jesus.

Ginger

BTW, Thanks again for the info! You were very helpful and I appreciate it.

Now, the congratulations are two times over because you did get off the hook with a very logical explanation. You are right. There was no contradiction.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

jake23;4907670:

For Ben I quote Jake:

“You are revealing that you have hate by your persecution of Christians”

Stop this cop-out! You know very well that I don’t hate anybody. You are using this recourse, because psychologically anyone with the least of commonsense can see that you are backed into a corner begging me to let you off the hook. You are behaving like a little puppy showing his fangs for fear.

Ben: Jesus was a Jew. Didn’t His own stone Him and kill Him? Didn’t they demand the release of Barabbas? Didn’t they kill him?

You don’t have to tell me that Jesus was a Jew. I know it even better than
you do. If you are sure he was a Jew, why do you keep inventing non-Jewish things about him? Then, when you say that his own stoned him and killed him, you show off either ignorance of history or a potential for antisemitic accusations. Everyone knows that the Romans killed Jesus, not the Jews. In fact, Pope John 23rd asked publicly from the Jewish People forgiveness for this antisemitic false accusation going on for almost two thousand years. But I guess you don’t believe what your Pope says.

Why is there such hate in you towards those who are not of your faith? I believe that none of us has the right to decry any religion/belief in a bid to promote our own.

See? You are back in your cop-out for fear to be persuaded by a Jew. What’s the big deal? Why such a pride that you can’t learn from a Jew? If you believe in the Scriptures, Isaiah says in 2:2,3 that when Gentiles whant instruction in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. Read this quotation to see if it’s not true.

Ben:

 

[Bill_Pick]

Hi

Thank you for this wonderful post.

Regards

PARR YOU AND BEN Tell some very good fairty Tales did you hear the one about The Three Little Pigs

Once upon a time there were three little pigs and the time came for them to leave home and seek their fortunes.

Before they left, their mother told them " Whatever you do , do it the best that you can because that’s the way to get along in the world.

 

[East_Anglican]

I am sorry to have to say that you show ignorance not only of the Scriptures but also of History.

If the scriptures clearly said that the Messiah would die on a cross, you would not believe it.

Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 spell it out loud and clear but you won’t believe it.

The British did all they could to prevent the rise of the modern State of Israel in 1948.

But eventually we gave in to a bunch of terrorists

We had to expell them from the Land of Israel to be able to proclaim our State, even by the use of terrorism.

Wow!

An honest Zionist!



Now where is the king reigning from Davids throne?

 

[rinnie]

swariffin;4905301:

No, my argument is not only the fact that John was a Jew. It’s also in the Scripture. Read Mark 14:50. Mark says that when Jesus was arrested, ALL his disciples forsook him and fled. John was one of Jesus’ disciples. Therefore, he was not there before the cross. So, Jesus’ beloved disciple was Mary Magdalene, who was there until the last moment when Jesus was taken into the tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.

Ben:

Oh its that time again to show how Ben in in Benland again. Tell me Ben, How could Peter have denied Jesus if he was not there to even do it. This should be good. But before you answer how about this?

Simon Peter and ANOTHER DISCIPLE FOLLOWED Jesus. Now the OTHER DISCIPLE was KNOWN to the high Priest,and he entered the courtyard of the Highpriest with JESUS.

Now your turn, Are you telling Lies? Story’s, What exactly are you doing. You have the right to defend yourself. Please do so.

 

[Valke2]

Lapell;4907596:

Let’s assume Jesus was not the Bridegroom. As you say above, he performed his first sign. Therefore, Mary his mother had no reason at all to expect of Jesus a miracle. So, why didn’t she go to the Bridegroom to report the complain of the guests about the lack of wine? The responsibility for the wine was the Bridegroom’s and not Jesus’. I’ll tell you why: She did go to the Bridegroom. That’s why everyone got good wine at the end.

Ben:

Maybe it was impolite to tell the host that his fare was sub par

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Expat Barbara;4906457:

Ben Masada;4905210:

And he thinks somehow we won’t notice it.

PEOPLE, THESE ARE NOT MY QUOTES, THEY ARE BEN MASADA’S!!

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Ben, enough already. Your constant denial and rejection of Christ is appalling. And Jesus Christ IS God.

 

[rinnie]

Ben, enough already. Your constant denial and rejection of Christ is appalling. And Jesus Christ IS God.

You just never know what the boy wonder will be up to next. You gotta just take it for what it is I guess. Fantasy. Make believe, the new book make believe in the land of ben!