B
Bill_Pick
Guest
My dad said a long time ago you can not argue with ignorance but O BEN just keeps bashing Christians,lets all just pray for him.
- Status
D
Deum_quaerens
Guest
“And the third day, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother of Jesus was there. And Jesus also was invited …” (John ii, 1–2)
Gosh, that’s nice, Jesus was invited to His own wedding!
“Have we not power to carry about a sister, a wife, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” (I Corinthians ix, 5)
If Jesus had been married, St Paul would surely have referred to Him in order to justify that a disciple of the Lord may be married.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
You are being too hypothetical.
Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 have nothing to do with crucifixion. You are again assuming things that are not there. A Gentile cannot tell a Jew how to interpret his Scriptures.
You continue showing ignorance of History. The British didn’t have to give anything up. The Land of Israel did not belong to England. The British were also occupiers. They had to leave because the Almighty had decided that the time had arrived for us to return. That’s all.
You err for literal interpretation of the Scriptures. The king reigning from the lineage of David is the House of Jacob, called by the new name of Israel from the stock of Judah, according to Isaiah 48:1. Judah, who is Messiah ben David is the king over the Land of Israel.
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
I understand how hard is for Gentiles to see logic in Jewish things. I’ll explain again to you after several times I have done to others here. When the editor translated this part of the gospel, they did not find important to distinguish between the word to invite and to call. In a Jewish wedding, according to a certain tradition, the Bridegroom must be “called” to take his Bride. That’s a word almost like “invited.” Invited were the other guests and the disciples. Jesus was “called.” Now, for Jesus’ mother to be said that “she was there” is to indicate that she was in charge of the celebrations because
the mother of the Bride had probably passed away.
No, he was not. He was “called” to take his Bride.
Paul was upset that he had chosen to remain unmarried.
Not necessarily.
Ben:
D
Deum_quaerens
Guest
He most certainly would have, since that alone would have been sufficient to put an end to the contention.
R
rinnie
Guest
Ben again, it is not the Jewish Faith we have a problem with. The Jewish Faith is the OT and part of Our Faith. IT is you and the way you see the OT and the NT that we have trouble with. You have no authority, none, zero. 0.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Ben Masada;4910003:
The mother of Jesus had nothing to say to no host. She was the host herself.
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Nevertheless, you can’t help picking up my spicy posts. You know that there is nothing better around.
Ben:
R
rinnie
Guest
Valke2;4910466:
Then who was the headwaiter. According to scripture the headwaiter is who managed the banquet.The mother of Jesus had nothing to say to no host. She was the host herself.
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
If a Jew has no authority on Jewish things who does, you, a Gentile? You must be kidding!
Ben:
R
rinnie
Guest
Spicy, You call what you do spicy ben. Telling un-truths about the OT and The NT spicy. Wow!Nevertheless, you can’t help picking up my spicy posts. You know that there is nothing better around.
Ben:
R
rinnie
Guest
No Ben its GOD. God has authority over all of us. And it is God who became Man to teach us the right way. It was God who let us the Church and Teachers. Not you Ben. As you have showed. NUMEROUS TIMES.If a Jew has no authority on Jewish things who does, you, a Gentile? You must be kidding!
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Are you kidding! Paul did not enjoy that credibility. He was the worst troublemaker of the First Century.
Ben:
G
Ginger2
Guest
First, I would like to make clear, I do have respect for the Jews. It is the Hebrew God I worship - the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I am thankful for God who would adopt me as His own.
Second, I think it is a little too easy to be rude and disrespectful in cyberspace. Now before anyone jumps on me saying I should “tell it to Ben”, you should remember as Christians we are to treat others with respect, despite how they treat us.
With that said, I will address my final comments to Ben.
Second, I think it is a little too easy to be rude and disrespectful in cyberspace. Now before anyone jumps on me saying I should “tell it to Ben”, you should remember as Christians we are to treat others with respect, despite how they treat us.
With that said, I will address my final comments to Ben.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Ben Masada;4911153:
The headwaiter was more than that. His function included security. He didn’t have to be of the family of either Groom or Bride. He was someone hired for that role.Then who was the headwaiter. According to scripture the headwaiter is who managed the banquet.
But the host was usually the mother of the Bride. In the case of Jesus, his mother had to perform that function because as I said, Mary’s mother must have passed away.
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
First, I would like to make clear, I do have respect for the Jews. It is the Hebrew God I worship - the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I am thankful for God who would adopt me as His own.
Second, I think it is a little too easy to be rude and disrespectful in cyberspace. Now before anyone jumps on me saying I should “tell it to Ben”, you should remember as Christians we are to treat others with respect, despite how they treat us.
With that said, I will address my final comments to Ben.
Ben Masada;4911106:
I acknowledge the bridegroom is called to take his bride, but the verse reads as follows:
John 2:2 Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding.
Jesus is included with a group invited to the wedding. He is not singled out as one called.
Ginger
But then later, in the course of the celebrations, he was “called” to take his Bride. The writer of the fourth gospel ignores this because he was a Gentile with too poor knowledge of things Jewish. That’s all.
BTW Ginger2, I appreciate your words of wisdom in the introduction of this post of yours. Such words are too rare around here.
Ben:
C
carmalina
Guest
Is this a a group of scholars haggling over details? No. Ben is not qualified to judge the past, based on the method he has priviledged (that of scientificity and fact) any more than any one of us. We give opinions. What reason do we have for doing this. To convince? To criticize? To humiliate? To find common ground? I ask Ben, for what purpose does he haggle over points of history of which he is not an expert in a Catholic forum?
If you are investigating how to convert or if to convert to Catholicism, or if you are investigating whether Catholicism is ‘right’ or not for you, there might be better ways to do it?
If you are investigating how to convert or if to convert to Catholicism, or if you are investigating whether Catholicism is ‘right’ or not for you, there might be better ways to do it?
E
East_Anglican
Guest
Such gnostic notions that are being sugested here were outragous in the third century and they still are today.
It’s always some hidden knowledge that isn’t knowledge at all.
Enough!
It’s always some hidden knowledge that isn’t knowledge at all.
Enough!
O
OneTrueCathApos
Guest
And if a Christian has no authority on the New Testament who does, you? a non-Christian? You must be kidding!If a Jew has no authority on Jewish things who does, you, a Gentile? You must be kidding!
Ben:
G
Ginger2
Guest
Please cite the verses to support your claim. I’m a Christian Protestant and need to see the Scripture to absolutely accept it as fact. Otherwise it is either mere opinion or simply not true.But then later, in the course of the celebrations, he was “called” to take his Bride. The writer of the fourth gospel ignores this because he was a Gentile with too poor knowledge of things Jewish. That’s all.
Ben:
Don’t feel singled out. The Catholics suffer this same trouble with me.
Ginger
- Status