The Meaning of Body Resurrection

[Ben Masada]

The point still stands: I doubt that modern Judaism spends very much energy concerning itself with the historical Jesus. I know more than several, and none -- repeat -- none of them care at all about Jesus.

In that 2000 years, I would wager that Judaism has changed a lot more than you give it credit for. It is fundamentally different. Judaism is based upon a covenantal relationship with God which, prior to 70, required sacrifice. Now it does not. That does represent a fundamental shift in the paradigm -- regardless of how many centuries of history are represented by pre-70 Judaism. (BTW, Xy is older than modern Judaism, and Judaism likely bases some of its religious ceremonies on Xian ceremonies.)

Nonetheless, I do understand the dynamics of religious evolution. None of that has any bearing on the story in question. Xy represents a radical departure from Temple Judaism, which was why the synagogues ousted the early Christians from fellowship. Jesus very well could have let a woman touch him. Or the story could be completely made up -- I'd have to exegete the passage in question. In any case, there's no real reason to believe that Jesus was married. Nor is there any real reason to think that, if he were, it would have been to Mary M.

That's not the historical Jesus per se that I use my time to discuss the matter, but the effort to undo the distorted image of Judaism the NT
projects with room for Greek Mythology.

You wager that Judaism in 2,000 years has changed more than I give it credit for? You only confirm my view that at Jesus' time it was much more rigorous.

If you assert that there was no real reason for Jesus to have been married. Do you have a real reason for Jesus NOT to have been married?

 

[Ben Masada]

I

Therefore, for Jesus to be of the Tribe of Judah or line of David, he had to be a biological son of Joseph.

Which Joseph are you referring to?Joseph the son of Jacob the son of Matthan, the son of Eleazar, etc, etc; who are the descendants of Solomon from the tribe of Judah, as recorded in the gospel of Matthew; or Joseph the son of Heli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, etc, etc, who, as recorded in the gospel of Luke, are the descendants of Nathan the Levite who is the son of David, through his adoption and his marriage to David’s daughter.

Zechariah 12: 12; “And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; (This included the family of Solomon, and the families of all the biological sons of David, which does not include the family descended through Nathan as we continue) the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; etc.

And just as a point of interest, David has no full brothers, as his six half brothers that were sired by Jesse were born from a different mother than David. For the mother of David had previously birthed three children to King Nahash, who were Abigail and Zeruiah the older half sisters of David, and Shobi the 8th son of Jesse who is not recorded in his list of descendants.

Apparently you erroneously believe that the genealogy recorded in Matthew is that of the father of Jesus. But that is the genealogy of the Joseph who married Mary, which he did when he consummated that union after she had birthed her first born son Jesus, for Luke reveals that they were not married when this Joseph took the heavily pregnant Mary to Bethlehem where Jesus was born: Luke 2: 5; Mary the espoused wife, his fiancée, his betrothed, depending on which translation that you care to read, but all reveal that the marriage had not been consummated.

Your belief that the Joseph recorded in the genealogy in Matthew is the biological father of Jesus, is but a figment of your own imaginations and you deny the words of the Lord; although that Joseph was the biological father of the second of the three biological sons of Mary, who was his name sake "Joseph", her third son, was James the younger of the three and the first to sit on the Episcopal Throne of the church of the circumcision, and he was sired by Alpheaus who is also called “Cleophas” which is an abbreviation of ‘Cleopatros’ the masculine form of Cleopatra.

“First the Jew then the Greek.” ... “With his own body he tore the curtain between the Jews and the Gentiles.”

"When the required number of Jews and gentiles are gathered at the second more glorious temple of God which is the brilliant light body of Elijah the Jewish saviour who comes to prepare the way and bring into sublection all the nations that are attacking Jerusalem in preparation for the one thousand years of the peaceful rule of the risen body of Christ who will take the thrones that have been prepared for them.

It is then that the spirit of god's only begotten prophet will descend through time and enter the first temple where he shall be treated with outrage and hung upon a tree. And when the veil of that temple is torn, the spirit of the Lord shall be poured forth as fire upon the Gentiles."

If from this theory of the two Josephs, you mean that Jesus was a biological son of either, I see room to agree with you. But I doubt if this is what you mean. If you insist that Jesus was begotten of God Himself, then yes, you are wasting your time because there is no such a thing as Greek Mythology in Judaism.

 

[S-word]

If from this theory of the two Josephs, you mean that Jesus was a biological son of either, I see room to agree with you. But I doubt if this is what you mean. If you insist that Jesus was begotten of God Himself, then yes, you are wasting your time because there is no such a thing as Greek Mythology in Judaism.

No mate, I’m not so naive as to believe that a woman can conceive without the introduction of male semen into her uterus.--- Isaac was a prototype of Jesus, and both were born of parents who had been sired by the one father, but by two different mothers, both Sarah and Mary were told by angels that they would conceive and bear a son, both sons were born of God’s promise according to the working of God’s spirit and both were offered up as a sacrifice by their fathers on Mt Moriah .

Jesus was born of the flesh as all are born, but born of the spirit when he rose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord that descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the voice from heaven was heard to say, "You are my beloved in whom I am Pleased, this day I have begotten you, see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

Unlike the Hebrew language that has a specific term for virgin "Bethulah," which Isaiah does not use in his famous prophecy, but instead uses the Hebrew word "Almah," which means (Concealment--unmarried female) the Greek language had no specific word for unmarried female, and Matthew, in his attempt to translate into Greek the famous prophecy of Isaiah, that an unmarried female would conceive and bear a son etc; was forced to use the Greek word 'parthenos' which carries the basic meaning of unmarried girl and denotes virgin only by implication , and Isaiah and Matthew were in no way implying any such thing.

Luke reveals that Mary who had never known a man sexually, was told by Gabriel the angel of the Greeks, (Michael being the angel of the Israelites,) that she was going to conceive and bear a son, and when she went to the gathering of the family members of Elizabeth who had gone to rejoice with her, owing to her pregnancy in her old age, and there she apparently met for the first time, the biological father of Jesus to whom she was spiritually attracted, as he had been sired by the same father as she, and the act of conception was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits who had overshadowed them. I doubt very much that Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who had been sired by Heli the father of Mary, or Mary herself, realised at that time they were related.


Hebrew 5: 7-14; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Even though he was an Israelite and therefore, A son of God, (Psalms 82: 6, In speaking to the Israelites the Lord had said, “You are gods.” I said, “All of you are sons of the Most High.” He learnt to be obedient to our indwelling Father through suffering, and when he was made perfect, and the Lord could then reveal himself to us through his obedient servant who had learnt to do and say only that which he was commanded by the Lord, and be the fulfilment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18: 18, the one who the Lord would choose from among the Israelites and send him to speak in his name and do and say only that which he was commanded.

After he had been brought to perfection through his sufferings, God then declared him to be high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek the King and high priest of Salem, (King=Judah, priest=Levi). Jesus did not take that honour upon himself, Instead, after he had been brought to perfection, God made him high priest with these words as he rose from the baptismal waters, see Hebrew 5: 5; “Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee.”

Acts 3: 13; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus.

Acts 17: 31; “For He (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,) has fixed a day (The day of the Lord which is the seventh period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam had eaten from the tree of the knowledge of what is good and bad and had died in that day at the age of 930) in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.

Isaiah 42: 1; =Matthew 12: 18; The Lord says, “Here is my servant, whom I strengthen—the one I have chosen, with whom I am pleased. I have filled him with my spirit, and he will bring justice to every nation.”

Peter, James and John who had just awoken from a deep sleep and had seen Moses and Elijah speaking with Jesus, and while still trying to focus their sleepy minds, they heard a voice from heaven say, “This is my Son, whom I have chosen—listen to him.” No mate, one who believes the words of the Lord cannot be deceived by the disciples of the anti-christ, who John warned were already in the world in his day and who refused to acknowledge that Jesus had come as a human being and had spread that false teaching throughout the entire earth. See 1st John 4: 1-3; and 2nd John verse 7.

The word “Virgin” in relation to the conception of Jesus does not appear in the bible until the fourth century A. D., when Jerome compiled the Latin version, wherein, Matthew’s Greek translation of Isaiah’s prophecy, "that an unmarried woman would conceive and bear a son," was changed and the Greek word “Parthenos,” was erroneously and perhaps deliberately, translated as “Virgin.”

 

[Ben Masada]

Isaac was a prototype of Jesus, and both were born of parents who had been sired by the one father, but by two different mothers, both Sarah and Mary were told by angels that they would conceive and bear a son, both sons were born of God’s promise according to the working of God’s spirit and both were offered up as a sacrifice by their fathers on Mt Moriah .

Isaac was a prototype of the People of Israel. Isaac was sired by Abraham and Jesus was sired by Joseph. And I do not recall to have ever read that an angel told Sara that she would conceive and bear a son.

Jesus was born of the flesh as all are born, but born of the spirit when he rose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord that descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the voice from heaven was heard to say, "You are my beloved in whom I am Pleased, this day I have begotten you, see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.


This is NT rhetoric. God said the same thing about Israel. "Israel is My son; let My son go, so that he may serve Me." (Exo. 4:22,23)

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

A talk like that sounds in the ears of Jews as Greek Mythology. Since Jesus was a religious Jews, it's not true.

Unlike the Hebrew language that has a specific term for virgin "Bethulah," which Isaiah does not use in his famous prophecy, but instead uses the Hebrew word "Almah," which means (Concealment--unmarried female) the Greek language had no specific word for unmarried female, and Matthew, in his attempt to translate into Greek the famous prophecy of Isaiah, that an unmarried female would conceive and bear a son etc; was forced to use the Greek word 'parthenos' which carries the basic meaning of unmarried girl and denotes virgin only by implication , and Isaiah and Matthew were in no way implying any such thing.

At least, you are a little better than the adepts of "Betulah".

Luke reveals that Mary who had never known a man sexually, was told by Gabriel the angel of the Greeks, (Michael being the angel of the Israelites,) that she was going to conceive and bear a son, and when she went to the gathering of the family members of Elizabeth who had gone to rejoice with her, owing to her pregnancy in her old age, and there she apparently met for the first time, the biological father of Jesus to whom she was spiritually attracted, as he had been sired by the same father as she, and the act of conception was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits who had overshadowed them. I doubt very much that Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who had been sired by Heli the father of Mary, or Mary herself, realised at that time they were related.

You are either Gnostic or a follower of Mysticism. I am not an adept of any.

Hebrew 5: 7-14; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Even though he was an Israelite and therefore, A son of God, (Psalms 82: 6, In speaking to the Israelites the Lord had said, “You are gods.” I said, “All of you are sons of the Most High.” He learnt to be obedient to our indwelling Father through suffering, and when he was made perfect, and the Lord could then reveal himself to us through his obedient servant who had learnt to do and say only that which he was commanded by the Lord, and be the fulfilment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18: 18, the one who the Lord would choose from among the Israelites and send him to speak in his name and do and say only that which he was commanded.

The prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:18 found fulfilment in Joshua and not Jesus. Theis wa a Jewish prophecy, which must be linterpreted Jewishly and not according to the tenets of Christianity.

After he had been brought to perfection through his sufferings, God then declared him to be high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek the King and high priest of Salem, (King=Judah, priest=Levi). Jesus did not take that honour upon himself, Instead, after he had been brought to perfection, God made him high priest with these words as he rose from the baptismal waters, see Hebrew 5: 5; “Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee.”

The only reference to God's son is in Exodus 4:22,23, when He says that Israel is His son.

Acts 3: 13; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus.

That's not what Isaiah says in 44:23. He says that Israel is what God uses to glorify Himself in the world.

Acts 17: 31; “For He (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,) has fixed a day (The day of the Lord which is the seventh period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam had eaten from the tree of the knowledge of what is good and bad and had died in that day at the age of 930) in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.

God Himself would never cause a contradiction to His own Word. Resurrection is a contradiction to the Scriptures.

Isaiah 42: 1; =Matthew 12: 18; The Lord says, “Here is my servant, whom I strengthen—the one I have chosen, with whom I am pleased. I have filled him with my spirit, and he will bring justice to every nation.”

Great! Now, read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4. Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, so that you won't have to assume that he was Jesus.

 

[S-word]

Isaac was a prototype of Jesus, and both were born of parents who had been sired by the one father, but by two different mothers, both Sarah and Mary were told by angels that they would conceive and bear a son, both sons were born of God’s promise according to the working of God’s spirit and both were offered up as a sacrifice by their fathers on Mt Moriah .

Isaac was a prototype of the People of Israel. Isaac was sired by Abraham and Jesus was sired by Joseph. And I do not recall to have ever read that an angel told Sara that she would conceive and bear a son.

Jesus was born of the flesh as all are born, but born of the spirit when he rose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord that descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the voice from heaven was heard to say, "You are my beloved in whom I am Pleased, this day I have begotten you, see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.


This is NT rhetoric. God said the same thing about Israel. "Israel is My son; let My son go, so that he may serve Me." (Exo. 4:22,23)

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

A talk like that sounds in the ears of Jews as Greek Mythology. Since Jesus was a religious Jews, it's not true.

Unlike the Hebrew language that has a specific term for virgin "Bethulah," which Isaiah does not use in his famous prophecy, but instead uses the Hebrew word "Almah," which means (Concealment--unmarried female) the Greek language had no specific word for unmarried female, and Matthew, in his attempt to translate into Greek the famous prophecy of Isaiah, that an unmarried female would conceive and bear a son etc; was forced to use the Greek word 'parthenos' which carries the basic meaning of unmarried girl and denotes virgin only by implication , and Isaiah and Matthew were in no way implying any such thing.

At least, you are a little better than the adepts of "Betulah".

Luke reveals that Mary who had never known a man sexually, was told by Gabriel the angel of the Greeks, (Michael being the angel of the Israelites,) that she was going to conceive and bear a son, and when she went to the gathering of the family members of Elizabeth who had gone to rejoice with her, owing to her pregnancy in her old age, and there she apparently met for the first time, the biological father of Jesus to whom she was spiritually attracted, as he had been sired by the same father as she, and the act of conception was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits who had overshadowed them. I doubt very much that Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who had been sired by Heli the father of Mary, or Mary herself, realised at that time they were related.

You are either Gnostic or a follower of Mysticism. I am not an adept of any.

Hebrew 5: 7-14; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Even though he was an Israelite and therefore, A son of God, (Psalms 82: 6, In speaking to the Israelites the Lord had said, “You are gods.” I said, “All of you are sons of the Most High.” He learnt to be obedient to our indwelling Father through suffering, and when he was made perfect, and the Lord could then reveal himself to us through his obedient servant who had learnt to do and say only that which he was commanded by the Lord, and be the fulfilment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18: 18, the one who the Lord would choose from among the Israelites and send him to speak in his name and do and say only that which he was commanded.

The prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:18 found fulfilment in Joshua and not Jesus. Theis wa a Jewish prophecy, which must be linterpreted Jewishly and not according to the tenets of Christianity.

After he had been brought to perfection through his sufferings, God then declared him to be high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek the King and high priest of Salem, (King=Judah, priest=Levi). Jesus did not take that honour upon himself, Instead, after he had been brought to perfection, God made him high priest with these words as he rose from the baptismal waters, see Hebrew 5: 5; “Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee.”

The only reference to God's son is in Exodus 4:22,23, when He says that Israel is His son.

Acts 3: 13; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus.

That's not what Isaiah says in 44:23. He says that Israel is what God uses to glorify Himself in the world.

Acts 17: 31; “For He (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,) has fixed a day (The day of the Lord which is the seventh period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam had eaten from the tree of the knowledge of what is good and bad and had died in that day at the age of 930) in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.

God Himself would never cause a contradiction to His own Word. Resurrection is a contradiction to the Scriptures.

Isaiah 42: 1; =Matthew 12: 18; The Lord says, “Here is my servant, whom I strengthen—the one I have chosen, with whom I am pleased. I have filled him with my spirit, and he will bring justice to every nation.”

Great! Now, read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4. Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, so that you won't have to assume that he was Jesus.

Be back in a week or so's time Ben old mate, and we'll debate this a little bit more. By the way, you should read genesis 18 where Jehovah appears to Abraham in the form of three men and tells Sarah that she is going to conceive and bear a child etc.

 

[smitten508]

I understand your contention with Paul, however I will need to see some proof of such things as him making the WHOLE thing up about Jesus and His issue with the religious leaders of the day. I really don't have a "romantic" view of the history of my religion, I DO however have common sense and a study of history. And for Jews not looking forward to a messiah, didn't the sameritan woman at the well say that the people did indeed await the Christ, or messiah? When Jesus told her that he could give her living water, that she may not thirst again? I know sameritans were not "Jew" by name, but a mixed breed of Jew and gentile which kept their Jewish faith but weren't allowed to worship with the pure Jew...

 

[S-word]

S-word;1535627]Isaac was a prototype of Jesus, and both were born of parents who had been sired by the one father, but by two different mothers, both Sarah and Mary were told by angels that they would conceive and bear a son, both sons were born of God’s promise according to the working of God’s spirit and both were offered up as a sacrifice by their fathers on Mt Moriah .

Isaac was a prototype of the People of Israel. Isaac was sired by Abraham (From his half sister Sarah who was also sired by Abraham’s father“Terah”.) and Jesus was sired by Joseph (the Levite who was sired by Heli who is also the father of Mary who had no sexual relations with the other Joseph who is recorded in Matthew until the biological son of Joseph the Levite was born. The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Matthew, which, by the way was not the genealogy of Jesus, for his genealogy is recorded in Luke 3: 23, But that other Joseph who was the step father of Jesus, was the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah and he was the biological father of the second of Marys three biological sons. Didn’t you read my other posts mate)?

And I do not recall to have ever read that an angel told Sara that she would conceive and bear a son.(Gabriel was the agent of the Lord who appeared to Mary, and the agents of the Lord who blinded the eyes of the Homosexuals who wanted a piece of them in the city of Sodom, and who called down fire from the Lord which destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, were the same agents of the Lord who told the aged Sarah that she would conceive and bear a son.)

Jesus was born of the flesh as all are born, but born of the spirit when he rose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord that descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the voice from heaven was heard to say, "You are my beloved in whom I am Pleased, this day I have begotten you, see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.

This is NT rhetoric. God said the same thing about Israel. "Israel is My son; let My son go, so that he may serve Me." (Exo. 4:22,23) Correct Ben, The Lord God did say that there also.

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

A talk like that sounds in the ears of Jews as Greek Mythology. Since Jesus was a religious Jews, it's not true. Jesus was a religious Jew whose father was Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, whose half sister was Mary the adopted mother of John who had been surnamed “Mark,” which name means “Hammer” and who can be identified with John who Jesus had surnamed ‘Son of Thunder’. Joseph, the Levite from Cyprus who was surnamed “Barnabus.’ took Mary and his sisters adopted son John into the Land of Pamphylia, where the grave sites of Mary and John can still be visited today.

Unlike the Hebrew language that has a specific term for virgin "Bethulah," which Isaiah does not use in his famous prophecy, but instead uses the Hebrew word "Almah," which means (Concealment--unmarried female) the Greek language had no specific word for unmarried female, and Matthew, in his attempt to translate into Greek the famous prophecy of Isaiah, that an unmarried female would conceive and bear a son etc; was forced to use the Greek word 'parthenos' which carries the basic meaning of unmarried girl and denotes virgin only by implication , and Isaiah and Matthew were in no way implying any such thing.

At least, you are a little better than the adepts of "Betulah". Why, thank you Ben.

Luke reveals that Mary who had never known a man sexually, was told by Gabriel the angel of the Greeks, (Michael being the angel of the Israelites,) that she was going to conceive and bear a son, and when she went to the gathering of the family members of Elizabeth who had gone to rejoice with her, owing to her pregnancy in her old age, and there she apparently met for the first time, the biological father of Jesus to whom she was spiritually attracted, as he had been sired by the same father as she, and the act of conception was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits who had overshadowed them. I doubt very much that Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who had been sired by Heli the father of Mary, or Mary herself, realised at that time they were related.

You are either Gnostic or a follower of Mysticism. I am not an adept of any.

Nah mate, I’m simply one who believes in the Old Testament and the New, in which the old is fulfilled.

 

[S-word]

Hebrew 5: 7-14; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Even though he was an Israelite and therefore, A son of God, (Psalms 82: 6, In speaking to the Israelites the Lord had said, “You are gods.” I said, “All of you are sons of the Most High.” He learnt to be obedient to our indwelling Father through suffering, and when he was made perfect, and the Lord could then reveal himself to us through his obedient servant who had learnt to do and say only that which he was commanded by the Lord, and be the fulfilment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18: 18, the one who the Lord would choose from among the Israelites and send him to speak in his name and do and say only that which he was commanded.

The prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:18 found fulfilment in Joshua and not Jesus. Theis wa a Jewish prophecy, which must be linterpreted Jewishly and not according to the tenets of Christianity.

Yes I realise that; and it was a Jew by the name of Peter who, in Acts 2: 22, had this to say in relation to the Greek=Jew Jesus , who would have received most of his religious training in Sepphorus that magnificent Hellenistic city in which district so many families lost their lives in 4 B.C., when Jesus was about two years old and in which year Herod died after a failed suicide attempt ... ‘For Moses said, “The Lord your God will send you a prophet, just as he sent me, and he will be one of your own people. You are to obey everything he tells you to do. Anyone who does not obey that prophet shall be separated from God’s people and destroyed.______ And so God chose his servant and sent him to you Jews first, etc. Wasn’t it a terrible thing that the Romans done to the Jews who had rejected God’s salvation?


After he had been brought to perfection through his sufferings, God then declared him to be high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek the King and high priest of Salem, (King=Judah, priest=Levi). Jesus did not take that honour upon himself, Instead, after he had been brought to perfection, God made him high priest with these words as he rose from the baptismal waters, see Hebrew 5: 5; “Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee.”

The only reference to God's son is in Exodus 4:22,23, when He says that Israel is His son.. Yes, I will talk to you some more on that subject in a later post as this one is getting too long.

Acts 3: 13; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus.

That's not what Isaiah says in 44:23. He says that Israel is what God uses to glorify Himself in the world. Yea,I know. God has glorified himself many times as he himself says just after Phillip from Bethsaida, the son of Herod and the young Jewess ‘Cleopatra,’ told Jesus that some Greeks were seeking an audience with him, Jesus was troubled knowing then that his hour was nigh, and he said, “Father, bring glory to your name.” Then a voice spoke from heaven, “I have brought glory to it and I will do so again.”

Acts 17: 31; “For He (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,) has fixed a day (The day of the Lord which is the seventh period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam had eaten from the tree of the knowledge of what is good and bad and had died in that day at the age of 930) in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.

God Himself would never cause a contradiction to His own Word. Resurrection is a contradiction to the Scriptures. Not at all Ben, not at all, long before the days of Jesus, the Pharisees believed in the resurrection, and life after death.

Isaiah 42: 1; =Matthew 12: 18; The Lord says, “Here is my servant, whom I strengthen—the one I have chosen, with whom I am pleased. I have filled him with my spirit, and he will bring justice to every nation.”

Great! Now, read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4. Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, so that you won't have to assume that he was Jesus.[/quote]
Now read Matthew 12: 17-18; Jesus did all this to make come true what God had said through the prophet Isaiah: “Here is my servant, whom I have chosen, the one I love with whom I am well pleased. I will fill him with my spirit etc.”

 

[Ben Masada]

Be back in a week or so's time Ben old mate, and we'll debate this a little bit more. By the way, you should read genesis 18 where Jehovah appears to Abraham in the form of three men and tells Sarah that she is going to conceive and bear a child etc.

That was a vision of Abraham. And in the vision, the "angels" never addressed Sara. The whole talk was between them and Abraham. Anyways, have a nice break, and while you are at it, read Genesis 18.

 

[Ben Masada]

I understand your contention with Paul, however I will need to see some proof of such things as him making the WHOLE thing up about Jesus and His issue with the religious leaders of the day. I really don't have a "romantic" view of the history of my religion, I DO however have common sense and a study of history. And for Jews not looking forward to a messiah, didn't the sameritan woman at the well say that the people did indeed await the Christ, or messiah? When Jesus told her that he could give her living water, that she may not thirst again? I know sameritans were not "Jew" by name, but a mixed breed of Jew and gentile which kept their Jewish faith but weren't allowed to worship with the pure Jew...

The Samaritan woman was neither Jewish nor a mixed breed of Jew and Gentile. There is no such a thing as half-Jew or Jewish mixed breed. One is either a Jew or he is no Jew at all. The Samaritans were Gentiles moved in by the Assyrians to replace the Ten Tribes, that had been exiled for good.

Now, what the Samaritan woman told Jesus about the people awaiting the Christ or Messiah was a very badly planned interpolation, because only 30 years later, Paul would come up with the idea in Antioch, where the disciples were first called Christians, due to his having spent a whole year there preaching that Jesus was Christ.

 

[Ben Masada]

S-word;1535627]Isaac was a prototype of Jesus, and both were born of parents who had been sired by the one father, but by two different mothers, both Sarah and Mary were told by angels that they would conceive and bear a son, both sons were born of God’s promise according to the working of God’s spirit and both were offered up as a sacrifice by their fathers on Mt Moriah .

Isaac was a prototype of the People of Israel. Isaac was sired by Abraham (From his half sister Sarah who was also sired by Abraham’s father“Terah”.) and Jesus was sired by Joseph (the Levite who was sired by Heli who is also the father of Mary who had no sexual relations with the other Joseph who is recorded in Matthew until the biological son of Joseph the Levite was born. The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Matthew, which, by the way was not the genealogy of Jesus, for his genealogy is recorded in Luke 3: 23, But that other Joseph who was the step father of Jesus, was the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah and he was the biological father of the second of Marys three biological sons. Didn’t you read my other posts mate)?

How about the Jesus whose genealogy Matthey claims to be tracing? Is he a different Jesus from the one traced by Luke? This is getting curious.

And I do not recall to have ever read that an angel told Sara that she would conceive and bear a son.(Gabriel was the agent of the Lord who appeared to Mary, and the agents of the Lord who blinded the eyes of the Homosexuals who wanted a piece of them in the city of Sodom, and who called down fire from the Lord which destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, were the same agents of the Lord who told the aged Sarah that she would conceive and bear a son.)

What Abraham had that day was a vision. And the "angels" had no talk with Sara, but with Abraham only.

Jesus was born of the flesh as all are born, but born of the spirit when he rose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord that descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the voice from heaven was heard to say, "You are my beloved in whom I am Pleased, this day I have begotten you, see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.

This is NT rhetoric. God said the same thing about Israel. "Israel is My son; let My son go, so that he may serve Me." (Exo. 4:22,23) Correct Ben, The Lord God did say that there also.

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

A talk like that sounds in the ears of Jews as Greek Mythology. Since Jesus was a religious Jews, it's not true. Jesus was a religious Jew whose father was Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, whose half sister was Mary the adopted mother of John who had been surnamed “Mark,” which name means “Hammer” and who can be identified with John who Jesus had surnamed ‘Son of Thunder’. Joseph, the Levite from Cyprus who was surnamed “Barnabus.’ took Mary and his sisters adopted son John into the Land of Pamphylia, where the grave sites of Mary and John can still be visited today.

And the Jesus of Matthew, who is he?

Unlike the Hebrew language that has a specific term for virgin "Bethulah," which Isaiah does not use in his famous prophecy, but instead uses the Hebrew word "Almah," which means (Concealment--unmarried female) the Greek language had no specific word for unmarried female, and Matthew, in his attempt to translate into Greek the famous prophecy of Isaiah, that an unmarried female would conceive and bear a son etc; was forced to use the Greek word 'parthenos' which carries the basic meaning of unmarried girl and denotes virgin only by implication , and Isaiah and Matthew were in no way implying any such thing.

At least, you are a little better than the adepts of "Betulah". Why, thank you Ben.

Luke reveals that Mary who had never known a man sexually, was told by Gabriel the angel of the Greeks, (Michael being the angel of the Israelites,) that she was going to conceive and bear a son, and when she went to the gathering of the family members of Elizabeth who had gone to rejoice with her, owing to her pregnancy in her old age, and there she apparently met for the first time, the biological father of Jesus to whom she was spiritually attracted, as he had been sired by the same father as she, and the act of conception was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits who had overshadowed them. I doubt very much that Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who had been sired by Heli the father of Mary, or Mary herself, realised at that time they were related.

You are either Gnostic or a follower of Mysticism. I am not an adept of any.

Nah mate, I’m simply one who believes in the Old Testament and the New, in which the old is fulfilled.

How about Matthew 5:19? It says in there that whoever breaks one of the least of the commandments, and teaches men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. In that case, what Jesus fulfilled was for all of us to do the same. Nothing was abolished. Agree with me?

 

[Ben Masada]

Yes I realise that; and it was a Jew by the name of Peter who, in Acts 2: 22, had this to say in relation to the Greek=Jew Jesus , who would have received most of his religious training in Sepphorus that magnificent Hellenistic city in which district so many families lost their lives in 4 B.C., when Jesus was about two years old and in which year Herod died after a failed suicide attempt ... ‘For Moses said, “The Lord your God will send you a prophet, just as he sent me, and he will be one of your own people. You are to obey everything he tells you to do. Anyone who does not obey that prophet shall be separated from God’s people and destroyed.______ And so God chose his servant and sent him to you Jews first, etc. Wasn’t it a terrible thing that the Romans done to the Jews who had rejected God’s salvation?

When was the word "only" replaced by "first?" In Matthew 15:24 I read that Jesus' mission was for the Jews only and not first. I am reading from the New American version of the Bible.

God Himself would never cause a contradiction to His own Word. Resurrection is a contradiction to the Scriptures.

Not at all Ben, not at all, long before the days of Jesus, the Pharisees believed in the resurrection, and life after death.

The resurrection the Pharisees believed in was according to Ezekiel 37:12. Resurrection from the graves of the Nations, where the Jews would be in exile, and return to the Land of the Living, which is the Land of Israel, according to Isaiah 53:8.

Great! Now, read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4. Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, so that you won't have to assume that he was Jesus.

Now read Matthew 12: 17-18; Jesus did all this to make come true what God had said through the prophet Isaiah: “Here is my servant, whom I have chosen, the one I love with whom I am well pleased. I will fill him with my spirit etc.”

To write about an alleged fact about Jesus 50+ years after Jesus had been gone is plagiarism.

 

[S-word]

How about the Jesus whose genealogy Matthey claims to be tracing? Is he a different Jesus from the one traced by Luke? This is getting curious.

The genealogy in Matthew is not that of Jesus and no where is it claimed to be. It is the genealogy of Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, who is the step father of Jesus who consummated his union with Mary after she had given birth to the first of her three biological sons, and that was Jesus who was sired by Joseph the son of Heli from the tribe of Levi. You'll have to smarten your act up a bit Ben.


What Abraham had that day was a vision. And the "angels" had no talk with Sara, but with Abraham only.

Genesis 18; The Lord (Jehovah) appeared to Abraham at the sacred tree of Mamre, and Abraham invited his vision of the three men to sit beneath the tree while he prepared food and drink for them, which invitation his vision accepted. Sarah then took the best of her flour and baked bread for Abrahams vision, while he hurried to the herd and picked out a calf which was tender and fat, and gave it to his servant who hurried to get it ready for Abraham's vision.

Abraham then brought the bread, some cream and milk, with the meat, and set the refreshments before the three men of his vision. There under the tree Abraham served his vision of three men himself, and his vision ate and drank that which Abraham had prepared for them.

When Sarah had laughed after hearing the Lord Jehovah say through one of the men, that she wold become pregnant, and after denying to the Lord that she had laughed. the Lord then said to Sarah through one of his agents, "I will return in 9 month time and you will bear a son etc.
Yep Ben, Abraham's vision was very good, He saw the three agents of the Lord who ate the food prepared by him, and who told Sarah to her face that she would conceive and bear a son.

This is NT rhetoric. God said the same thing about Israel. "Israel is My son; let My son go, so that he may serve Me." (Exo. 4:22,23)

Yes Ben, we know that. Unlike some other people we can read the words of the Bible.

The author of the gospel of Mark, who is believed to have been Mark the son of Peter, and the gospel according to the words of John the beloved disciple of Jesus, begin their account of the life of the chosen heir to the throne of Godhead, at the Baptism and spiritual birth of Jesus, and ignore his physical birth as totally irrelevant.

A talk like that sounds in the ears of Jews as Greek Mythology. Since Jesus was a religious Jews, it's not true. Jesus was, as was his disciples and all who accepted him, a religious Jew whose father was Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, whose half sister was Mary the adopted mother of John who had been surnamed “Mark,” which name means “Hammer” and who can be identified with John who Jesus had surnamed ‘Son of Thunder’. Joseph, the Levite from Cyprus who was surnamed “Barnabus.’ took Mary and his sisters adopted son John into the Land of Pamphylia, where the grave sites of Mary and John can still be visited today.

And the Jesus of Matthew, who is he?

He was the child that was born in Bethlehem of Judea, to the young parthenos or unmarried female as the term parthenos is rightfully translated. If you are suggesting that the genealogy of Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah has anything to do with the genetic line of Jesus apart from the fact that as Israelites, they were both descendants of Isaac, and as members of the post flood body of man they were descened from Noah, and as members of the human race, descendants of Adam, then you're sadly mistaken old mate.

For that Joseph had no sexual relations with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus whose genetic ine is recorded in Luke 3: 23, and Jesus is the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli from the tribe of Levi.


At least, you are a little better than the adepts of "Betulah". Why, thank you Ben.


You are either Gnostic or a follower of Mysticism. I am not an adept of any.

Nah mate, I’m simply one who believes in the Old Testament and the New, in which the old is fulfilled.

How about Matthew 5:19? It says in there that whoever breaks one of the least of the commandments, and teaches men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. In that case, what Jesus fulfilled was for all of us to do the same. Nothing was abolished. Agree with me?

Yes and every person who has ever lived and will ever live has or will break the commandments, he also said that John was the greaest man ever conceived by a woman, yet He who is the least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than John. If I were to be considered greater than John the Baptist and the least in the Kingdom of heaven, I'd be happy with that.

For I tell you now that you can lie there is a time to steal
There is a time to disobey there is a time to kill.
There is a work that must be done upon the Sabbath day
No one who understands the Lord would teach another way

For the Lord God judges not, on what you do
The heart and soul of man, he searches through
The reasons why, the deeds of man are done
This is what my Lord God judges on.

 

[Ben Masada]

Yes and every person who has ever lived and will ever live has or will break the commandments, he also said that John was the greaest man ever conceived by a woman, yet He who is the least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than John. If I were to be considered greater than John the Baptist and the least in the Kingdom of heaven, I'd be happy with that.

For I tell you now that you can lie there is a time to steal
There is a time to disobey there is a time to kill.
There is a work that must be done upon the Sabbath day
No one who understands the Lord would teach another way

For the Lord God judges not, on what you do
The heart and soul of man, he searches through
The reasons why, the deeds of man are done
This is what my Lord God judges on.

I believe that God judges man through the law of cause and effect. We break the Law, we suffer the consequences.

 

[smitten508]

You stating that one is either Jewish or not, I was referring to lineage, not culture. Maybe I am wrong, but that's what my studies had shown... Are you honestly saying that the NT scripture that describes Jesus as Christ, son of YHWH is false, while the NT scripture you use is valid? Because I would like to know how you come up with that logically... And not the Jesus was a Jew so He COULDN'T have arguement, because it just doesn't fly with me. Just as my parents, just because arguement never worked. I need some historical documentation please.

 

[Ben Masada]

You stating that one is either Jewish or not, I was referring to lineage, not culture. Maybe I am wrong, but that's what my studies had shown... Are you honestly saying that the NT scripture that describes Jesus as Christ, son of YHWH is false, while the NT scripture you use is valid? Because I would like to know how you come up with that logically... And not the Jesus was a Jew so He COULDN'T have arguement, because it just doesn't fly with me. Just as my parents, just because arguement never worked. I need some historical documentation please.

Smitten, don't make too big a deal out of this. It does not have to fly with you. There is a much easier way to solve the whole issue: We simply are not talking about the same person. It's like the saying that goes: You cannot bake your cake and eat it too. You cannot have Jesus, the religious Jew with a dress of Hellenism or Greek Mythology because there is no such a thing in Judaism. Give up the idea that the Jesus you want was a religious Jew or a Rabbi, and I will be out of the debate. Simply the Jesus of the NT must have been a Greek man, whom Paul wanted to connect with Jewish roots. That's as simple as that.

 

[sojourner]

Give up the idea that the Jesus you want was a religious Jew or a Rabbi, and I will be out of the debate. Simply the Jesus of the NT must have been a Greek man, whom Paul wanted to connect with Jewish roots. That's as simple as that.

'Bye. Don't hurt yourself rushing away.

 

[Ben Masada]

'Bye. Don't hurt yourself rushing away.

Does this mean you have given up your claim that Jesus was Jewish? I'll be checking around if you get back to your claim.

 

[sojourner]

Does this mean you have given up your claim that Jesus was Jewish? I'll be checking around if you get back to your claim.

No, I'm giving up on your claim that

Jesus of the NT must have been a Greek man, whom Paul wanted to connect with Jewish roots.

 

[Thief]

Thief here....
Through out all of this no one seems to have noticed how Jesus appeared to His fellow countrymen...
When approached, and questions asked....He was addressed as Rabbi.
Would any Jew of His time do so...if Jesus wasn't Jewish?

Masada!!!!....Having made so many declarations as you have....
I strongly suspect you will lay in your grave and rot.
If there is no resurrection....then your fate is sealed.
And your opinion will mean little to other debaters.
I also suspect your prophets rot as well.
Why should anyone give audience to a man who follows dead prophets?
Is not God...a God of the living?
If there is no life after this...there is little cause to look up.