ReligionDiscuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.
So then you agree that the closest we have for Mary is that she was cousins to a Levite, making her a Levite until she married Joseph.
No, I do not agree with what you say, "...until she married Joseph." If she was indeed a Levite, which the text implies, she never ceased being a Levite even after she married Joseph. She had her Levitical inheritance from her father, and she never lost it till death, even after she married Joseph. That's according to Judaism. She was Jewish.
Quote:
But Joseph was not the father of Jesus. The Law would have prevented him entrance into the synagogue had Joseph or Mary reported him as a bastard, as far as the authorities could tell.
The only thing probable to have happened is that, that part of the Law was waved due to the fact that thousands of children had been born as a result of Roman soldiers' raping of young Jewish ladies in the First Century. I have all in my thread on "The Alleged Sons of God."
Quote:
It makes sense that his followers would say he was from Judah. They did not iniially know that Mary was pregnant before she met Joseph.
So, she was, wasn't she? Now, by who, is the issue we must research because it couldn't be by God, because she was not Greek.
Quote:
Even when the followers realized that Jesus was technically not from Judah, they would not have raised the issue nor corrected the people who assumed he was the natural son of Joseph. The gospel records the testimony of the people, who at that time, understood Jesus to be born legitimately.
The gospels written by Hellenists. Greeks whose myth of the demigod was according to their Literature.
Quote:
The one thing we are certain of is that the genealogies in Matt 1 and Luk 3 are different and suggest that the New Testament hints to us that what I argue here could be correcrt and yet not conflict with the testimony.
Right. But it rather suggests that the Hellenists who wrote those texts did neither know of each other's existence nor much knowledge of Jewish culture.
Quote:
Again, the situation is that in both cases, the vagueness of the lineage of Elijah and Jesus is uncertain but the laim that they were both Levites did arise in each incidence.
Nevertheless, none was a Levite. Neither Elijah nor Jesus. Joseph was from the Tribe of Judah and adoption does not guarantee Tribal affiliation.
Quote:
was an Act-of-Godoccuring in the womb of Mary,
What god, Zeus? If Jesus was a Greek man, yes, I would agree with you. As a Jew, definitely not.
I am startled! You, a "Messianic Jew," agree that, since Jesus' genealogy is listed at the beginning of the NT, he was indeed a biological son of Joseph's! That's a trend hard to get used to. It means that Jesus was not the son of God but of Joseph's. Is that as I understand from your words? If it is, congratulations. You have solved a lot of Theological problems. How does that go with the rest of Christianity?
Ben
It doesn't.
Religious people tend to stick to their guns, whether it be Evolution Vs their fundamental Creationism, or Jesus as the son of David.
However, the reason for the listing of the genealogy, IMHO, was to bring to our attention that Jesus had been revealingthe secrets of the kohanim.
Jesus was showing the apostles the secret doctrines of Israel by which the Torah had once been codified into a system that used the hands as the mnemonic tool for an oral language that retained all the facts and the order of presentation without scrolls since in the desert scrolls were difficult to come by and illiteracy high.
On the hands, the priest would denote the cues they woukd need for a "reading" by ten men who practiced this art:
Together these 10 men would present chapters after chapters we now read.
This art of the Kohanim still exists in its last vistages in the Hand Blessing we see in the synagogue today.
A second and third kohan would complete the who of Matt 1, by displaying the other two sets of 14 names.
I believe this was done not by Jesus, of ciurse, but as expressed as an example by the apostles who told the story after the crucifixion.
The last set made YOU point, that Joseph was NOT his father:
What god, Zeus? If Jesus was a Greek man, yes, I would agree with you. As a Jew, definitely not.
Ben
The Act-of-God occurred when a mutation in the womb produced Jesus was the first born next evolution of modern man, one we will all become or experience the second death of Extinction of the species now called Modern Homo sapiens.
We have seen the trend towards more and more of these next sons-of-god in the conversion of pagan Rome during the 1000 year reign of Jesus during the Age of Monasticism.
People like Sister Teresa and even Ghandi are spring up as America saw in the self sacrifice of Rev Martin Luther king.
These are not people like thos of the past generations, but new creatures in God, (by which I mean the almighty Reality to whom we all must finally bow).
After I had brought the Mishna (where Tarfon made my point clear), and told you that the 5th cup dilemma had been mentioned back that far, then you did announce the truth that Tarfon also mentioned this cup.
Yes you did.
I had told you that your claim that the Talmud was the first mention of the 5th cup was therefore wrong.
Quote me where I claim that the talmud is the first mention.
I am startled! You, a "Messianic Jew," agree that, since Jesus' genealogy is listed at the beginning of the NT, he was indeed a biological son of Joseph's! That's a trend hard to get used to. It means that Jesus was not the son of God but of Joseph's. Is that as I understand from your words? If it is, congratulations. You have solved a lot of Theological problems. How does that go with the rest of Christianity?
Ben
I am not clear on the context of your last question, but, yes, it solves all of the theological problems, except the gentile deviations of Paul.
There really is no point to the first chapter of the NT if Jesus was not the son of Joseph.
Religious people tend to stick to their guns, whether it be Evolution Vs their fundamental Creationism, or Jesus as the son of David.
However, the reason for the listing of the genealogy, IMHO, was to bring to our attention that Jesus had been revealingthe secrets of the kohanim.
Jesus was showing the apostles the secret doctrines of Israel by which the Torah had once been codified into a system that used the hands as the mnemonic tool for an oral language that retained all the facts and the order of presentation without scrolls since in the desert scrolls were difficult to come by and illiteracy high.
On the hands, the priest would denote the cues they woukd need for a "reading" by ten men who practiced this art:
Together these 10 men would present chapters after chapters we now read.
This art of the Kohanim still exists in its last vistages in the Hand Blessing we see in the synagogue today.
A second and third kohan would complete the who of Matt 1, by displaying the other two sets of 14 names.
I believe this was done not by Jesus, of ciurse, but as expressed as an example by the apostles who told the story after the crucifixion.
The last set made YOU point, that Joseph was NOT his father:
Aside from photoshopping a single image from a 17th century manuscript, what evidence do you have for these claims?
The first thing we must understand here at the Cuckoo's nest is that the gentiles don't understand. It seems that God has made gentiles so that they cannot see/understand/hear rabbis. Gentiles in general have an innate blindness toward rabbis.
When/where ever there is blindness in the scriptures Christians should become suspicious. Take for instance the Cuckoo Bird's "conversion" so called. You remember. Saul of Tarsus was out hunting Christians and he meets Our Lord. The normal course of events are-
1 The unbeliever is blind
2 The unbeliever meets Jesus
3 The unbeliever becomes a believer
4 The unbeliever who is now a believer is healed by Jesus
5 The new believer is told to go seek out other believers who will help them
Did I forget to mention that Saul/Paul was a big time rabbi?
Aside from photoshopping a single image from a 17th century manuscript, what evidence do you have for these claims?
Well put.
This connection between Matt 1 and the one ancient record that has come down as a drawing (easily found in the Jewish Encyclopedia) is merely a Hypothesis with out the discovery of more supporting evidence which should be there if the hypothesis has enough validity to be a Theological Theory.
I compliment you for having seriously searched the scriptures and for what is, clearly, a deep knowledge of the Bible.
I also acknowledge your obvious love for Jesus and the wisdom that lead you to MJ.
Though we may still differ on the rather inconsequential point of who The Christ actually was, it is insignificant in regard to the meaning and general theme of His message.
I see no harm to Christians who understand scripture to infer Jesus was the messiah, even the messiah ben David, as long as they worship the Lord of Truth.
And, it is in the name of Truth that I research this use of the hands as a mnemonic by which men, long before 900BC, i. e.; the canonization of the Torah, finally set all down in written words.
But even there, evidence of some other method than written Torah seems supportive for my suggestion of the hands.
In the days in Sinai, some other means of reading out the words of the Torah must have existed.
Even the four major sources used to canonize the Torah suggests that slightly different wording for idea existed, implying, perhaps, a little variation in the Art of Players who used only cues to remind them of their lines in full.
Then there is the repetitive use of number sets, over and over again.
Those mysterious numbers have failed all explanations for 3000 years, beyond the noting that seven, in particular, is the favored number of God.
As long inferred, in guesses about the Secret Knowledge of Israel, not far behind are the number twelve and three, however:
Luke 11:52 Woe to you, lawyers (experts in the Mosaic Law)! For you have taken away the key to knowledge (of Torah, and reduced the Art of the Kohanim to a mere vestige of its former glory, using the written words to usurp the very power if the presentation); you did not go in yourselves (to examine the deeper meaning of this use of the hands), and you hindered and prevented (the ancient Aaronic priesthood), those who were entering.
Did I forget to mention that Saul/Paul was a big time rabbi?
Hmmmm..
But was he a Cohan, a son in the line of Aaron, the actual priests who were commanded to stand before the Lord forever...
... or had he been one of those who usurped that power, reduced the Art of the Kohanim to a single Hand Blessing service???
What difference does it make as they are all dead? But since you have asked-
At the beginning of Saul/Paul's career he was directly employed by Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest.
The Temple hierarchy listed above authorized Saul/Paul to go arrest as many Christians as he could find. Those Christians who resisted were to be killed on the spot.
Well put.
This connection between Matt 1 and the one ancient record that has come down as a drawing (easily found in the Jewish Encyclopedia) is merely a Hypothesis with out the discovery of more supporting evidence which should be there if the hypothesis has enough validity to be a Theological Theory.
I compliment you for having seriously searched the scriptures and for what is, clearly, a deep knowledge of the Bible.
I also acknowledge your obvious love for Jesus and the wisdom that lead you to MJ.
Though we may still differ on the rather inconsequential point of who The Christ actually was, it is insignificant in regard to the meaning and general theme of His message.
I see no harm to Christians who understand scripture to infer Jesus was the messiah, even the messiah ben David, as long as they worship the Lord of Truth.
And, it is in the name of Truth that I research this use of the hands as a mnemonic by which men, long before 900BC, i. e.; the canonization of the Torah, finally set all down in written words.
But even there, evidence of some other method than written Torah seems supportive for my suggestion of the hands.
In the days in Sinai, some other means of reading out the words of the Torah must have existed.
Even the four major sources used to canonize the Torah suggests that slightly different wording for idea existed, implying, perhaps, a little variation in the Art of Players who used only cues to remind them of their lines in full.
So you have no sources, no evidence for your claims.
Just an assumption that some "other method" existed and so it seems supportive of sign language.
So you have no sources, no evidence for your claims.
Just an assumption that some "other method" existed and so it seems supportive of sign language.
Maybe you've never heard of the Oral Law?
The Oral Law now means basically the 3000 years of sermons and commentary about the Bible and Judaism, in general.
It is my argument that the Oral Language originally referred to telling the Bible by means of a memory technique.
The use of marking the hands allowed the Kohanim to train a priesthood of men, each an expert in his own oral delivery of the Torah, which he kept straight by marking his hands with encoded hints, facts, and data.
My evidence for this is:
1) The Kohans still demonstrate the use of their hands even today in what they call the Hand Blessing.
2) Sketchs of this technique (which was always held secret) were published 4 hundred years ago, and can be seen in the jewish Encylopedia.
3) The support that the hands were indeed mark is more important that even the spread of the fingers which present the Seven Double digits which were the basis in the 12th century for the concepts raised back up by the Kabbalahists:
Rome was completely justified in the beheading of the Cuckoo Bird Rabbi. As a matter of fact, if Rome did not behead the Cuckoo Bird Rabbi then Rome would also be guilty.
It is my argument that the Oral Language originally referred to telling the Bible by means of a memory technique.
The use of marking the hands allowed the Kohanim to train a priesthood of men, each an expert in his own oral delivery of the Torah, which he kept straight by marking his hands with encoded hints, facts, and data.
My evidence for this is:
1) The Kohans still demonstrate the use of their hands even today in what they call the Hand Blessing.
2) Sketchs of this technique (which was always held secret) were published 4 hundred years ago, and can be seen in the jewish Encylopedia.
3) The support that the hands were indeed mark is more important that even the spread of the fingers which present the Seven Double digits which were the basis in the 12th century for the concepts raised back up by the Kabbalahists:
1) The shin formation currently used in the hand blessing by some is a current practice. It is possible that it derives from 18th century kabbalah, but it has only recently been adopted as part of the hand blessing. So it isn't evidence for your claim.
2) There aren't sketches of a mnemonic technique passed down from the time before the written law. There is one sketch, in the Shefar Tal written by Shabetai Sheftel ben Akiva ha-Levi, of the shin formation in which 28 letters are shown. This is simple numerology.
There is no secret mnemonic technique. A hand contains 14 joints. The numerological number for the Hebrew word for "hand" is 14.
2 hands, then = 28, which also represents a divine name, the 4 letters of the tetragammaton, which uses 28 letters when spelled out fully in Hebrew.
We're not even looking at chairomancy in the illustration. What we are looking at is a magic square. It is a mathematical problem, in which it shows the result at the bottom (YHVH). The letters on the picture, also, are a dead giveaway that you have altered the image, since when you flip the image, the letters are then upside down.
There is nothing in the Shafa Tal that suggests the hands are a mnemonic device, so the illustration is not evidence for your claim, either.
3) I can't understand what you are saying here, aside from that it appears you are just making more unsubstantiated claims.
Rome was completely justified in the beheading of the Cuckoo Bird Rabbi. As a matter of fact, if Rome did not behead the Cuckoo Bird Rabbi then Rome would also be guilty.
I agree.
The whole espisode was about in·ter·nec·ine war.
The pagans had every reason to kill those first 144,000 monks who opposed the sexually promiscuous culture that had been for centuries teaching the younger generations to behave in ways that finally brought the hoards of Attila the Hun to the gates of Rome.
And the people who could see this truth were against the pagans, christians, that sexual immorality converts a once strong patriarchy into a weak, spoiled, irresponsible nation of girlie-men and gays and harlots trading their sexual favors with men who are greedy and against one another.
Truth was the weapon of the early Christians, and beheading the weapon of the pagans.
These martyrs, like Paul, stood their ground the whole of the Roman Empire came crashing down:
Rev. 6:12 And I beheld, (in the days of Theodocius, who established the Holy Roman, Catholic, Apostolic Church), when he, (the Lamb of the tribe of Judah, the off-spring of the root of David;[Rev 5:5]), had opened the sixth seal (of scripture), and, lo, there was a great (sociological) earthquaqe (of institutionalized religious change); and the Sun (Signs of Astrology) became (as) black as (the) sackcloth of (a nun's) hair, and the moon became as blood (of Christ, to determine the very day of the Christian Passover).
Rev. 6:13 And the stars' (i.e.; the twelve constellations of Sun Signs) of heaven fell (from popular grace) unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, (ruined), when she is (destructively) shaken of a mighty wind.
Rev. 6:14 And (Astrology) departed (from popular practice) as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every (Pagan religion and secret society) were moved out of their places.
Rev. 6:15 And (1) the kings of the earth, (POLITICIANS), and (2) the great men, (STATESMEN), and (3) the rich men, (ECONOMIC BARONS), and (4) the chief captains, (PRIESTHOODS), and (5) the mighty men, (MILITARY LEADERS), and (6) every bondman, (CRAFTSMAN), and (7) every free man, (PEASANT), hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks (of the pagan temples);
Rev. 6:16 And said to the mountains (of the previous social institutions) and rocks (of cultural norms), Fall on us, (help!), and hide us from the face (of Papal judgment) of Universal Catholicism), him that sitteth on the throne (Theodocius, who established Christian Rome) and from the (words of) wrath of the lamb, (the Word of the New Testament):
Rev. 6:17 For the great day of his wrath, (the one thousand year reign predicted), is come; and who, (what other God or religion), shall be able to stand (during these Dark Ages)?
Note, Catholic Encyclopedia:
With the overthrow of the old Roman Empire and the victory of
Christianity, astrology lost its importance in the centers of Christian civilization in the West. The last known astrologer of the old world was Johannes Laurentius (sometimes called Lydus) of Philadelphia in Lydia, who lived A.D. 490-565.
June 25th, 2012, 01:50 PM
Linear Mode
