The Wedding of Jesus

[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.

No one ever converts to Christianity out of conviction, but out of faith. Through conviction comes knowledge. And where faith begins, knowledge ends.

Ben:

 

[simplynoone]

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

Ben:

In light of, maybe that is what is so difficult for some to understand; what real love is.

 

[simplynoone]

S J Thaikattil;4895693:

No one ever converts to Christianity out of conviction, but out of faith. Through conviction comes knowledge. And where faith begins, knowledge ends.

Ben:

Having gone through the christian “conversion” experience many times, I can testify that it is faith spawned from either fear and/or guilt. The feeling that is felt afterward is always mistaken for love, but in reality it is relief of pressure and often a briefly lived gratefulness for that relief. Then the faith seems to most often turn into a) arrogance, b) a burden, c) falling away that results in even more guilt and fear than the first time. It becomes a vicious cycle for many that traps because to question is to lose that faith. <— should be the biggest clue, no?

 

[simplynoone]

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

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.

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?

 

[Ginger2]

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.

I must have missed something big…who has been claiming Jesus was not Jewish?

Of course Jesus was a Jew.

Jesus’ mother was Jewish. By Jewish law that makes Jesus a Jew.

Jesus’ parents took him to the temple:
Luk 2:27 … and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

Jesus taught in the temple:
Mat 26:55 …I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, …

Jesus observed Jewish holy days:
Mat 26:18 And Jesus said, … I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.

Yes, Jesus was definitely a Jew.

Jesus was not a Christian. A Christian is a follower of Christ - Jesus is the Christ.

Now that we have cleared that up, it’s your turn to prove that when Jesus said to his mother, "here is your son, he meant Mary M., a woman.

Why would Jesus insult the “his beloved wife” by** referring to her as a man**?

26 When Jesus saw his mother 11 and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son.”
27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.

Ginger

 

[Mickey]

Having gone through the christian “conversion” experience many times, I can testify that it is faith spawned from either fear and/or guilt. The feeling that is felt afterward is always mistaken for love, but in reality it is relief of pressure and often a briefly lived gratefulness for that relief. Then the faith seems to most often turn into a) arrogance, b) a burden, c) falling away that results in even more guilt and fear than the first time.

How very sad. This post breaks my heart.

 

[Ben_Masada]

I must have missed something big…who has been claiming Jesus was not Jewish?

Everyone who claims that he behaved in a non-Jewish way, or attribute to him non-Jewish behaviour.

Jesus was not a Christian. A Christian is a follower of Christ - Jesus is the Christ.

You started very well, but you had to spoil everything by saying that Jesus was Christ. Christ is the Greek word for Messiah, and Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah.

Now that we have cleared that up, it’s your turn to prove that when Jesus said to his mother, "here is your son, he meant Mary M., a woman

No, you have not cleared anything. You started on the way to clear a lot of things but you lost your way when you decided to adopt the Pauline doctrine that Jesus was the Messiah, when he never claimed to be the one…

Why would Jesus insult the “his beloved wife” by referring to her as a man?

He didn’t. His beloved disciple was Mary Magdalene, his own wife. Why would Jesus of 12 disciples separate one to name him his beloved? Jesus was a married man and not a homosexual.

The truth is that at the Calvary that evening were only the two women, Mary his mother and Mary his wife. Mark says very clearly that when Jesus was arrested and taken to trial and later to the cross, ALL his disciples forsook him and fled. Read Mark 14:50. John was added to the scene at the cross in order to temper with that dialogue between Jesus, his mother and his wife.

Besides, whoever did that had no good knowledge of being Jewish. Jesus as an observant Jew would never recommend his mother to a male disciple and vice-versa. That’s why I said at the head of this post. I’ll prove that the Fathers of the Church fabricated that idea if you prove to me that Jesus was not Jewish. Because to do that, he could not be Jewish. I have the credibility of my own religion to assert what I am saying.

26 When Jesus saw his mother 11 and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son.”
27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home .

Absolutely in contradiction with Jewish decorum. Jesus was Jewish; therefore, it didn’t happen that way. If you insist that it did happen, the Jesus you are talking about was not Jewish. Perhaps some Greek guy that Paul hired to impersonate his Christ, a Hellenistic entity he conceived in his Greek Diaspora.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

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.

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?

Simplynoone, I have taken upon myself never to draw a comment on anyone’s post that agrees with my views. But this one of yours, I can’t let it go without at least a word. Superb!

 

[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.

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?

We know nothing about Ben other than the fact that he says he is Jewish. As for listening to him, what credentials does he bring so we may know that he knows what he’s talking about, thus far, he has shown his propensity to believe in conspiracy theories. Oh, and Simplynoone, I would advise you, that many a person has had the chance to hear Ben, if anything his answers confirm more and more the faith I have in Jesus.

By the way, are you some sort of tag team that you should defend him. I sense trolling.

 

[simplynoone]

We know nothing about Ben other than the fact that he says he is Jewish. As for listening to him, what credentials does he bring so we may know that he knows what he’s talking about, thus far, he has shown his propensity to believe in conspiracy theories. Oh, and Simplynoone, I would advise you, that many a person has had the chance to hear Ben, if anything his answers confirm more and more the faith I have in Jesus.

By the way, are you some sort of tag team that you should defend him. I sense trolling.

What you quoted was a reply I made in regards to the following comment made to me.

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

Non-Catholic Religions Forum Thread Definitions (?):

1. Trolling - Having actual knowledge about the Scriptures; any non-catholic friends posting to each other; Thinking for oneself
2. Tag Team - Anyone who posts to each other who are non-catholic
3. Arrogance - Showing that you have actually read the Scriptures to think for oneself if it is the truth you have rather than waiting to be told by a church
4. Insults - A non-catholic, after being harrassed (sorry, err… lovingly insulted, laughed at, talked down to), who dares to question the insults
5. Loving - Anything that comes from a Catholic
6. Advising - what a Catholic can do to a non-catholic, who better not return it.

By the way, what are you advising me on? That is not a complete thought as you have advised me in nothing there.

I know him by what he speaks of since I actually read AND absorb the front of the book that you base your faith on. By the way, no one seems to have the courage to post up here exactly who it is that God declares to be His son in Hosea 11:1. It is a personal quest of mine since it seems to be too difficult for everyone around here to carry out. Care to share God’s declared son as it is written out and sealed with Malachi 3:6 (the LORD does not change) ?

 

[planten]

**The subject of Jesus Wedding is still being discussed. How many weddings are there?. I believe the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magd is still unconfirmed. What about any marriage prior to the Jesus age of 20?. Had there been a marriage too? Because the 30 years of the life of Jesus are purposely hidden, kept secret. Nobody knows about the 30 years of the christians god’s life on earth.

Then when Jesus departed from the area and went to Kashmere, he lived a happy life there and there are good reports that he got married there and had children. That is nobody’s business. The Catholics should not enter that era. **

 

[Expat_Barbara]

**The subject of Jesus Wedding is still being discussed. How many weddings are there?. I believe the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magd is still unconfirmed. What about any marriage prior to the Jesus age of 20?. Had there been a marriage too? Because the 30 years of the life of Jesus are purposely hidden, kept secret. Nobody knows about the 30 years of the christians god’s life on earth.

Then when Jesus departed from the area and went to Kashmere, he lived a happy life there and there are good reports that he got married there and had children. That is nobody’s business. The Catholics should not enter that era. **

So Catholics are barred from having an opinion in this era (or area)???

 

[Ginger2]

He didn’t. His beloved disciple was Mary Magdalene, his own wife. Why would Jesus of 12 disciples separate one to name him his beloved? Jesus was a married man and not a homosexual.

Not all love is of a sexual nature. We loved our children. We love our parents. we love our brothers and sisters. we love our friends…that **does not ** we are having sex with them.
Jhn 11:5 Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.
Ben Masada;4896356:

The truth is that at the Calvary that evening were only the two women, Mary his mother and Mary his wife. Mark says very clearly that when Jesus was arrested and taken to trial and later to the cross, …

Wrong again.
Luk 23:27 And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him.
Jhn 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the [wife] of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When you are wrong so many times why should anyone take your word without evidence? This says three women were there, it does not say no one else was there.

Besides, whoever did that had no good knowledge of being Jewish. Jesus as an observant Jew would never recommend his mother to a male disciple and vice-versa. That’s why I said at the head of this post. I’ll prove that the Fathers of the Church fabricated that idea if you prove to me that Jesus was not Jewish. Because to do that, he could not be Jewish. I have the credibility of my own religion to assert what I am saying.

Jesus was ensuring his widowed mother would be cared for.
If Mary had no other children there would be no to care for her once Jesus died. Jesus was doing what God commanded by ensuring his mother would be cared for according to God’s law.

Absolutely in contradiction with Jewish decorum. Jesus was Jewish; therefore, it didn’t happen that way. If you insist that it did happen, the Jesus you are talking about was not Jewish. Perhaps some Greek guy that Paul hired to impersonate his Christ, a Hellenistic entity he conceived in his Greek Diaspora.

Ben:

Please see: Matthew 15:1-6 & John 5:14-30

Jesus knew God’s law and also knew Jews transgressed the law with their customs.

Ginger

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

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:

you need not warn me sir, perhaps it is you that need the warning.
There is Isaiah 53 with it’s minute description of the Suffering Servant who was despised and rejected, afflicted with pain and stripes, by whose “Stripes we are healed.” He then dies, is buried, yet is revived and suffers all this “For the affliction of my (Isaiah the Prophets) people.” All this can be best applied to one person only Yeshua of Nazareth. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 98) teaches that this chapter refers to Messiah. The Targum of Jonathan begins the passage with the words Ha Yatslakh Avdee Mashikka, “Behold my servant the Messiah shall prosper”…common sense says it must refer to Jesus.

 

[simplynoone]

John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the [wife] of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

When you are wrong so many times why should anyone take your word without evidence? This says three women were there, it does not say no one else was there.

Odd, so many Mary’s close to Jesus… even his own mother Mary had a sister named Mary. By the way, I know that Julius Caesar had two sisters of the same name; his namesake and son married hellenestic cleopatra and together they had a son whose mythological attributions, endorsed by his mother (whose husband, the namesake Julius Caesar left her a widow… at which she said she was a virgin upon conception) were eerily similar to the ones surrounding Jesus. Also interesting about it is the Paul connection to them. One of Paul’s constant companions was Gaius… a name constantly used throughout Caesar bloodline (including the first one I mentioned) … and they were associated w/ family and friends in Asia as was Paul. Interesting no?

So, really, it is a favor to you all that Jesus is being given back his Jewish life with his Jewish customs during that time period. All it takes is a little effort in research to see it indeed would have been considered a transgression of the first divine commandment in the Jewish culture to not be married and particularly being a rabbi who was traveling, extremely rare (pretty much… non existent) considering his age and having constant companionship with her. So either he is married, not according to Ben… but to the customs of the Jewish people and his given position as a rabbi on the go w/ female companions, etc, and the all the strangeness surrounding it (insertions and/or denials) belongs to anyone of hellenistic mythologies; OR Jesus was a fabrication altogether OR we can start drawing up more connections (and funny how all roads lead back to Rome ) . It is part of using the Nature of Reason that if Jesus existed as a Jew, than Mary Magdalene was is his wife. There can be no other way.

So… many… Mary’s, no? Definition of the name is quite telling in my opinion.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Odd, so many Mary’s close to Jesus… even his own mother Mary had a sister named Mary. By the way, I know that Julius Caesar had two sisters of the same name; his namesake and son married hellenestic cleopatra and together they had a son whose mythological attributions, endorsed by his mother (whose husband, thenamesake Julius Caesar left her a widow… at which she said she was a virgin upon conception) were eerily similar to the ones surrounding Jesus. Also interesting about it is the Paul connection to them. One of Paul’s constant companions was Gaius… a name of the Caesar constantly used throughout Caesar bloodline (including the first one I mentioned) … and they were associated w/ family and friends in Asia as was Paul. Interesting no?

So, really, it is a favor to you all that Jesus is being given back his Jewish life with his Jewish customs during that time period. All it takes is a little effort in research to see it indeed would have been considered a transgression of the first divine commandment in the Jewish culture to not be married and particularly being a rabbi who was traveling, extremely rare (pretty much… non existent) considering his age and having constant companionship with her. So either he is married, not according to Ben… but to the customs of the Jewish people and his given position as a rabbi on the go w/ female companions, etc, and the all the strangeness surrounding it (insertions and/or denials) belongs to anyone of hellenistic mythologies; OR Jesus was a fabrication altogether OR we can start drawing up more connections (and funny how all roads lead back to Rome ) . It is part of using the Nature of Reason that if Jesus existed as a Jew, than Mary Magdalene was is his wife. There can be no other way.

So… many… Mary’s, no?

:yawn:

 

[simplynoone]

:yawn:

No doubt why so many choose a church that tells them what to believe and how *not * to think, no?

edited for insertion of reality

 

[swariffin]

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:

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?

What did Paul was preaching all around the cities surrounding the Mediteranean seas? His own teaching in contradiction with Jesus? Why did he came to Peter, and Peter accepted him. Why would Peter accepted him if he disagree with Paul’s teaching?

 

[swariffin]

swariffin;4895443:

Ben Masada;4891462:

swariffin;4889903:

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:

If you said the gospel was written at 50+ AD, you are correct. If you said the gospel was written 50+ years after the Jesus was cricified, you are wrong. That means the gospel was written in years 83+ AD. You are way too far off.

 

[swariffin]

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.

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?

Oh dear, please don’t get me wrong. I do enjoy having a discussion with Ben and you. To me you are giving something though idea to consider and give me tough time for defend my idea. I think this is an interesting but a live discussion.

For somebody from 21st century does not mean he/she was well versed with his/her own culture back from the 1st century culture, am I correct? Surely I can ask Ben’s thinking about his own culture from the 1st century, can I? Do you think asking means not considering? I have no problem listening to his viewpoints too. Believe me, I find his viewpoints are somehow new and never been discussed before.

Surely live cannot exist without knowledge. I agree with you 1000% on this. You are also correct that my religion is based on the Judaism too. What I am questioning from Ben is whether the law of God you said are pasted in the first half of my bible, indeed the same law of God the Jewish practice during the 1st century.

Even a Jewish prophet named Isaiah mentioned in Isaiah 29:13 “Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:” That makes me wonder whether the Jews were observing the Thorah or not? To me, a “violation” of the real Thorah had happened far away before Jesus’ time.

Forget about faith in a moment. Now, I would like to see the fact in history myself. By mentioning this, I do not mean to be antisemitic (Hey I do believe that the Jews entitled for their homeland, and no one can take it from them). I see the their temple was destroyed in 70AD, and never been built again until now. Prior to 1947, there was no nation named Israel, and I can understand why the Jew could not been able to rebuilt their temple. However, there were Jews and many of them were rich. From 1947 till 1960’s Israel was strong enough, and was that strong to beat Egypt in Yom Kippur war within 6 days. (Nice coincidence as God rest on the 7th day). You see? 6 days to win a war. That was wonderful.

From 1960’s to now, the Jews are becoming stronger both economically and militarily to protect themselves. I am really wonder why the Jew do not rebuilt their temple. Surely 1939 years is a very long time to wait. David build the tent for worshipping God. Salomon built the first temple, and later after the exile from Babylon, the temple was rebuilt again. It was destroyed by Roman in 70AD. My sincere question is why the Jews do not rebuilt their temple today? If I were asked my opinion, I would surely agree to it. They have the right to rebuilt their temple.

Surely you may not believe in Jesus. But, I see a record saying that Jesus were criticizing the practices of the Jews during his time, which Jesus claim were not the real Thorah. I do believe that the one so-called “Salvation” was meant for the Jews first. But, there is a record (Mat 21:43) saying “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”

I see another fact in the modern time, in a figure of Mother Theresa from Calcutta. She was not a Jew (not an Indian too), but widely accepted to be able of showing love toward others.I also see the figure of Karol Wojtilla, a Polish who defeated communism in Poland. The fall of communism echoed to East German, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia too. Even the famous USSR was broken down. All was done without any bullet fired. CIA, MOSSAD and whatever intelligence service had tried to defeat communism without result.

When I compare the record I see from Isaiah, and about Jesus to the facts I see, and to the historical fact about the Jews, I begin to think that there must be something wrong about their previous practices, to the point that I think they may have violated the law of God intended for them. To me, I do not despise the Jews for that conclusion. I am glad to hear from Ben, that they are changing. Forget about Jesus, Paul and Christianity. I do believe that they have the right to exist and live peacefully. And as the OT bible stories said, if we are abide in God, we shall be prosper. If we are far away from God, we shall suffer.