The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

[nonanomanon]

I'm not a Catholic. Why do you even bring up homosexuality. How stupid. Give references as to where you think he was married. Actually, no reply is needed to this nonsensical post. Jesus a homosexual or married, how absurd.

:rain:

Mary Magdelene as the Mother of Jesus's Baby, and Paul portraying himself as a eunuch?

ACTS 23:12 And when it was day, certain of the Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.
ACTS 23:13 And they were more than forty which had made this conspiracy.
ACTS 23:14 And they came to the chief priests and elders, and said, We have bound ourselves under a great curse, that we will eat nothing until we have slain Paul.
ACTS 23:15 Now therefore ye with the council signify to the chief captain that he bring him down unto you to morrow, as though ye would enquire something more perfectly concerning him: and we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him.
ACTS 23:16 And when Paul's sister's son heard of their lying in wait, he went and entered into the castle, and told Paul.

Paul had to discredit the Jewish account of Jesus at that time. Paul had to do this because God ordained him to serve as a "Gentile Scribe" for the unlearned apostles. The Jewish People refused to record the Gospel, because Jesus did not deliver them from the Romans, or take them to the promised land. Which the Gospel says the Jewish people are promised an inheritance "Forever after the order of Melchisedek, a Separatist Inheritance* of a new planet of their own. ................. Paul had to develop a philosophy to discredit the Jews and to unite the Church so that they would carry the Gospel instead of the Hebrews, as the gospel intended. Mary Magdelene is not named as the mother of Jesus's Baby in Acts 23:16, but this conspiracy that prompted the Jews to demand his life, since he was introducing a "New Commandment, a play on, or reference to the 40 Days in which Moses recieved the 10 Commendmants in Acts 23:13" ............. then it follows the jews were sufficiently discredited, if Paul came as a Gentile, then he could bless without the need of repentance, so the doors of sin were opened.

 

[Ben Masada]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

Peter and John were caught by surprise, most likely because Jesus was missing from the Tomb before "3 Days and Nights" had passed.

That's not true. They ALL were caught by surprise that Mary Magdalene was not making sense with her idle tale. (Luke 24:10,11)

If this is true, the Gospel records, Peter and John were ignorant, Jesus talked nothing about going to the father in less then "3 Days and Night".

Jesus never talked any thing at all about going to the Father according to Mat. 12:40. Hence Mary's ignorance about who had raised Jesus from the tomb. (John 20:15)

1. Fulfilled Prophecy - (Luke 2:43-46) Jesus comes from the Tomb before "Three Days/Nights", after the Crucifixion.

So, what prophecy was lying the one of Mat. 12:40 or that of Luke 2:43-46?

2. Unfulfilled Prophecy - MATTHEW 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

So, you have decided to go for the one of Luke 2:43-46? Too bad because, Luke 2:43-46 has nothing to do with crucifixion, death and resurrection at all.

3. Unfulfilled Prophecy - MATTHEW 26:61 And said, This [fellow] said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.

If Jesus meant by his body to be the Temple of God, are you implying that he was of a suicidal character? To destroy it with the cross and to rebuild it with the resurrection?

Unfulfilled Prophecy of the Body of Benjamin being Revealed, so that it is destroyed in "3 Days/Nights".

Where is the quote for that?

DEUTERONOMY 33:11 Bless, LORD, his substance, and accept the work of his hands: smite through the loins of them that rise against him, and of them that hate him, that they rise not again.

Nothing to do with death and resurrection.

DEUT. 33:12 [And] of Benjamin he said, The beloved of the LORD shall dwell in safety by him; [and the LORD] shall cover him all the day long, and he shall dwell between his shoulders. DEUT. 33:13 And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the LORD [be] his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath, DEUT. 33:14 And for the precious fruits [brought forth] by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon,

Those above are the blessings of Moses over the children of Israel.

c When Jesus withered the Fig Tree he said: "My Body will not produce any Fruit as an offering to God". Jesus also clearly said that he would: "Bring the Body of Benjamin ("Temple Stones"), in order to destroy it at the "3 Days of Darkness" recorded in Revelation". In Deuteronomy 33:11, Jesus says my "Body" will produce fruit when I rise again. Not his Body of Flesh, but the "Body of Benjamin" that must be destroyed, in the "3 Days of Darkness", in order to bring the blessing of Jospeh, which removes the Curse of Jacob, or simply the Curse.

The above about the fig tree was only a parable spoken by Jesus. I don't perceive any thing related to the disciple whom Jesus loved.

"Babylon is Fallen is revealed as the Body of Benjamin", that is destroyed in 3 Days of Darkness of Revelation. ISAIAH 21:8 And he cried, A lion: My lord, I stand continually upon the watchtower in the daytime, and I am set in my ward whole nights: ISAIAH 21:9 And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, [with] a couple of horsemen. And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen; and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground.

I don't see any connection with the issue we are discussing in the thread.

The Book of Revelation does not say the "Body of Benjamin" ("Temple Stones"), that are revealed in order to be destroyed ... the gospel connects these together by saying, the Horsemen of the Lord are Fallen to divide the "daytime ... whole night", that is "3 Days of Darkness" recounted in Isiah 21:8-9 this is when Jeremiah 33:20-21 is fulfilled, when the "Key of David" (Rev. 5:5) is used to separate the "Body of Benjamin", so the Lord's Body can be Crucified to offer to the Lord, and bring the Blessing of Joseph, and complete the Unfulfilled Prophecy recounted in the New Testament of the "3 Days of Darkness".

And what does it have any thing to do with John and Peter?

Acts 28:3-8 ... The Apostle Paul baptizes in the name of the Serpent (a picture of the Holy Spirit) to perform miracles, not in the name of the Holy Ghost, this is a picture of of Paul serving as a gentile. Paul calls on the Serpent to heal a blood curse, where as Jesus called on God to heal a blood curse, Mark 5:25-29.

That's not what we are interested above with the issue about John and Peter. Why are you trying to break the thread? You could open a whole thread to discuss what you need to convey.

 

[Ben Masada]

I'm not a Catholic. Why do you even bring up homosexuality. How stupid. Give references as to where you think he was married. Actually, no reply is needed to this nonsensical post. Jesus a homosexual or married, how absurd.

I simply asked if you are implying that Jesus was a homosexual to behave the way you want us to believe: Hanging around with 12 guys and calling one of them his beloved. Your hostile reaction is rather trying to hide something for that matter. I am simply trying to enhance how serious Jesus was as a Rabbi who in the First Century needed to be married before being ordained as such. Even today it is the same here in Israel.

 

[daqq]

Wow, I am glad I bailed out of this thread . . . :rip:

:sheep:

 

[Ben Masada]

Wow, I am glad I bailed out of this thread . . . :rip:

:sheep:

Why? Perhaps your opinion could be valuable to either side or to both. Some Christians seem not to understand that I am championing the cause of Jesus who was a Jew and whose Faith was Judaism. You agree with me, don't you?

 

[daqq]

Why? Perhaps your opinion could be valuable to either side or to both. Some Christians seem not to understand that I am championing the cause of Jesus who was a Jew and whose Faith was Judaism. You agree with me, don't you?

Well, yes, I do agree with the things you have just said in this post I have quoted. However, marriage and-or homosexuality? I know you did not insinuate the one but either way both are out of the question. The name Bar-Jesus, (Aramaic, "Son of Jesus") ought to tell you that Yeshua had no children of his own. The Nazar-Essenes were completely set apart unto the Father throughout all of their upbringing and all of their lives. Do none here understand that the flesh is allegorized in the feminine gender?

John 10:14-18
14. I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
15. As the Father knows me, even so I know the Father: and I lay down my soul [psuchen - feminine gender] for the sheep.
16. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
17. Therefore does my Father love me, because I lay down my soul, [psuchen - feminine] that I might receive her [auten - feminine] again.
18. No man takes her [auten - feminine] from me, but I lay her [auten - feminine] down of myself. I have authority to lay her [auten - feminine] down, and I have authority to receive her [auten - feminine] again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

If therefore one does not rightly divide between himself and his own, (feminine) earthen vessel, the same will not understand who is "Mariam the Magdalene", or "Mariam the Yakobos", or "Mariam of Klophas", etc., etc., and on and on. It is right there in the Testimony of Yeshua if only a man would hear it:

Matthew 10:37-39
37. He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38. And he that does not take up his own stake and follow after me is not worthy of me.
39. He that finds his soul shall apollumi-destroy her: and he that apollumi-destroys his soul for my sake shall find her.

Matthew 16:21-26
21. From that time forth began Yeshua to show unto his talmidim how that he must go unto Yerushalaim, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22. Then Petros took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Far be it from you, Master: this shall not be unto you!
23. But he turned, and said unto Petros, Get you behind me, Satan, you are an offense unto me; for you savor not the things that be of Elohim, but those that be of man.
24. Then said Yeshua unto his talmidim, If any will come after me, let him utterly forsake himself, and take up his own stake, and follow me.
25. For whosoever will save his soul shall apollumi-destroy her: and whosoever will apollumi-destroy his soul for my sake shall find her.
26. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and forfeit his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

:sheep:

 

[Ben Masada]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

Well, yes, I do agree with the things you have just said in this post I have quoted. However, marriage and-or homosexuality? I know you did not insinuate the one but either way both are out of the question. The name Bar-Jesus, (Aramaic, "Son of Jesus") ought to tell you that Yeshua had no children of his own. The Nazar-Essenes were completely set apart unto the Father throughout all of their upbringing and all of their lives. Do none here understand that the flesh is allegorized in the feminine gender?

Who implied any thing about Jesus having had children? I didn't. But to get married was a commandment according to Gen. 2:24 and, Jesus said that he came to fulfill ALL the Law and the Prophets down to the letter, even the dot of the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19) To be true to his words he was supposed to get married and be of one flesh with his wife, whether children would be born or not out of the union. To be ordained as a Rabbi, he did not have to have children but he had to be a married man. Paul himself knew about that law. (I Tim. 3:2)

John 10:14-18 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knows me, even so I know the Father: and I lay down my soul for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Believe me, a wife could have helped Jesus do that job much more easily.

17. Therefore does my Father love me, because I lay down my soul, that I might receive again. No man takes her from me, but I lay her down of myself. I have authority to lay her down, and I have authority to receive again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

That was not true of Jesus. In the Gethsemane he prayed three times asking the Lord not to allow him to die on the cross. This is no willingness to lay it down himself.

If therefore one does not rightly divide between himself and his own, (feminine) earthen vessel, the same will not understand who is "Mariam the Magdalene", or "Mariam the Yakobos", or "Mariam of Klophas", etc., etc., and on and on. It is right there in the Testimony of Yeshua if only a man would hear it:

This has nothing to do with the disciple whom Jesus loved aka Mary Magdalene.

Matthew 10:37-39 He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

That's not Jewish because the love of God is translated by loving our neighbor, especially our own family.

And he that does not take up his own stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. He that finds his soul shall destroy her: and he that destroys his soul for my sake shall find her.

That's not Jewish but Christian masochism.

Matthew 16:21-26 From that time forth began Yeshua to show unto his talmidim how that he must go unto Yerushalaim, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

That's not Jewish but Pauline demonstration of his grudge against the Jewish authorities.

Then Petros took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Far be it from you, Master: this shall not be unto you! But he turned, and said unto Petros, Get you behind me, Satan, you are an offense unto me; for you savor not the things that be of Elohim, but those that be of man.

This is neither Jewish nor makes any sense. In Peter, Satan was trying to save Jesus from being arrested. In Judas, Satan was rushing the death of Jesus. Was Satan divided against himself? Better forget the whole thing altogether.

Then said Yeshua unto his talmidim, If any will come after me, let him utterly forsake himself, and take up his own stake, and follow me.

Not Jewish. Perhaps this contributed for Jesus not to be welcomed as the Messiah.

For whosoever will save his soul shall destroy her: and whosoever will destroy his soul for my sake shall find her. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and forfeit his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Not Jewish at all. We don't have a soul. We are souls. According to Gen. 2:7, when the Lord formed man from the dust of the earth, He breathed in his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul. To become is to be and not to have. A soul is only the combination of the body with the breath of life. That combination is over with death.

 

[Caino]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

As far as I am concerned, John neither wrote the books attributed to him in the NT nor was he the disciple whom Jesus loved. First, if you read Acts 4:13, Luke reports about John and Peter as unlearnt and ignorant men. As you must know, I hope, illiterate people cannot write books. And second, it does not fit to a Jew of the "size" of Jesus in the First Century to hang around with 12 guys while calling one of them the disciple whom he loved. Even to mention the possibility if it had been true, would be embarrassing even to consider.

Why would John be mentioned as the disciple whom Jesus loved and not Peter who loved Jesus more than all the others? (John 21:15) For three times Jesus tested Peter as if he didn't care if the others did not love him too; even John. (John 21:16,17)

If you ask me, yes, there was a disciple whom Jesus really loved and whose love was honorable to be mentioned. That disciple was Mary Magdalene whom Jesus loved and for whom Jesus left his father and mother to cling to as a husband does to his wife and to become with her of one flesh. (Gen. 2:24) It is only obvious that Mary Magdalene followed Jesus many times to deserve that title of the disciple whom Jesus loved. And Mary Magdalene was with Jesus to the last moment of his life. (John 19:25,26)

John was a little conceited and wrote about himself in that way, sort of like the redacted history of the Israelites written in Babylon wherein they wrote about themselves as Gods "chosen people" while recasting their entire history. It's a human thing called pride.

 

[nonanomanon]

That's not true. They ALL were caught by surprise that Mary Magdalene was not making sense with her idle tale. (Luke 24:10,11)
..............................................................
Jesus never talked any thing at all about going to the Father according to Mat. 12:40. Hence Mary's ignorance about who had raised Jesus from the tomb. (John 20:15)

The romans had a custom of making their helmets shine, to the point of being blinding ......................... John 8:5-9, Moses was commanded to "smote the rock", and Moses took the "bones of joseph" ............. Joseph comes to redeem humanity and to give the blessing .............. so what did Jesus draw in the sand ................... the Romans saw something in the sand also, and from that point forward they made a covenant to give Jesus a "Rolling Stone" on his tomb. ................. when Mary Magdelene saw the Tomb was empty, perhaps she was said it was empty because the "Temple Stone, or the Body of Benjamin, or the Rock of Joseph" was absent from the tomb. .............. or perhaps she went on to believe that the Romans would be baptized in the name of Joseph, because of the "Rolling Stone", the Angel had sat on when he told Mary Magdelene, that Jesus was not here, as the angel touched and moved the stone. ................. there was a division between the church and the apostles after the death of jesus because of the over zealous nature of the church that continued after the death of judas, unfortunately.

So, what prophecy was lying the one of Mat. 12:40 or that of Luke 2:43-46?

Jesus rose out of the tomb before "3 Days were Finished", and there was no "Body of Benjamin or Rock of Joseph (Temple Stones) revealed. Further more, Jesus did appear in the Temple on the "3rd Day", when he went into the Church to show "Thomas" his body had been resurrected ............. before that time Jesus was trolling about, talking to the believers, so it appeared he had left the tomb on the "3rd Day", to the Church, because they were not going to listen, because of their sin (John 20:19 and John 20:27). The Prophecy of Luke 2:43-46 was fulfilled, the Prophecies about Jesus being in the earth for 3 Days like Jonah were not fulfilled.

If Jesus meant by his body to be the Temple of God, are you implying that he was of a suicidal character? To destroy it with the cross and to rebuild it with the resurrection?

?
1. Seventy Souls out of Jacob (Ex 1:5) = Jacob Wrestled with God (Jacob as a Son of Man)
2. Seventy Angels are Slain (Dan 9:24) = God looses mankind's sin increasingly to the end
3. Joseph is the Seventy Angel that is slain (Luke 3, counting backwards, beginning with God) = Joseph reigns for 150 days as the Antichrist, and when that is over, the universe is over
4. Jesus and Joseph are compared together (Luke 3:23)

Jesus revealed what happens when the 150 Days of Star Wormwood in Revelation begins, Jesus as the "Body of Benjamin" must be removed in the "3 Days of Darkness" .......... so that the Tribe of Joseph can be established as the Seventieth, of Jacob, of Daniel ...................... AT SOME POINT THE: 70th Son of Man from Egypt will equal the 70th Generation of Luke that produces Joseph. (Daniel is counting Angels Heaven side, Christ is the 70th Angel or the Lamb that is slain, in order to allow the 70th Son of Man from Egypt to reign under Joseph, and in order to allow the 70th Generation of Luke under Joseph to take place). (70 Angels of Daniel, 70 Sons of Man from Egypt of Jacob, and 70 Generations of Luke ending with Joseph, are not equal at the moment, and they are not counting the same things, but when the 150 days of Star Wormwood Begins, they will all be equal .............. Jesus acted this out with the crucifixion, but Jesus is not the Antichrist, or the 70th Son of Man, and Jesus will not be in the flesh with the 70 Generation at the end of time during the 150 days of Star Wormwood).

Where is the quote for that?

"The Body of Benjamin must be revealed before the 3 Days of Darkness when it is to be destroyed" ................ Yes it was revealed today. There will be 39 days left after today, to the "3 Days of Darkness" .......................... Judges 20, counts the "First Day, Second Day, and Third Day", but reveals the 144,000 of Benjamin relative to these "3 Days of Darkness" ................ it has been revealed today on the "seventeenth day of the seventh month".

(Jesus Christ did not reveal the "Body of Benjamin", "Rock of Joseph", or the "Temple Stones, UFOs", all being the same reference because the supernatural body only takes one expression in our environment, relatively speaking. If the tomb of Jesus Christ was empty, then, the "Heart of the Earth, was not revealed in 3 Days", as the New Testament Commands ............. this will be done in approximately 39 more days, which are the 40 days of the "Flood Rain of Noah", or the repentance of 40 days (rev. 12:15-17) at the end of time, before the this is done on the "3 Days of Darkness" ............. this is soon to be done).

(A number of cameras and video recording devices were there, if the small display of benjamin was not enough, only genetic dan is lunatic enough to use force to further validate the conclusion, but I didn't see them do much of anything ................. it is a good thing if Judah's Inheritances is given to the USA only and they are the only benefactor, this is a result of faith, and a conviction of sin, this is the gospel's intended result ............. in parenthesis, nightly walks next week to mop up the leftovers ........... the tsunami is to be done, but this depends on the level of force, so this depends on you, on what you need to do, to have these things done to you)

 

[daqq]

Who implied any thing about Jesus having had children? I didn't. But to get married was a commandment according to Gen. 2:24 and, Jesus said that he came to fulfill ALL the Law and the Prophets down to the letter, even the dot of the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19) To be true to his words he was supposed to get married and be of one flesh with his wife, whether children would be born or not out of the union. To be ordained as a Rabbi, he did not have to have children but he had to be a married man. Paul himself knew about that law. (I Tim. 3:2)


Believe me, a wife could have helped Jesus do that job much more easily.


That was not true of Jesus. In the Gethsemane he prayed three times asking the Lord not to allow him to die on the cross. This is no willingness to lay it down himself.


This has nothing to do with the disciple whom Jesus loved aka Mary Magdalene.


That's not Jewish because the love of God is translated by loving our neighbor, especially our own family.


That's not Jewish but Christian masochism.


That's not Jewish but Pauline demonstration of his grudge against the Jewish authorities.


This is neither Jewish nor makes any sense. In Peter, Satan was trying to save Jesus from being arrested. In Judas, Satan was rushing the death of Jesus. Was Satan divided against himself? Better forget the whole thing altogether.


Not Jewish. Perhaps this contributed for Jesus not to be welcomed as the Messiah.


Not Jewish at all. We don't have a soul. We are souls. According to Gen. 2:7, when the Lord formed man from the dust of the earth, He breathed in his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul. To become is to be and not to have. A soul is only the combination of the body with the breath of life. That combination is over with death.

Saying "that's not Jewish" to everything just shows why this will not work. I say Yeshua has been given the right to decide who and what is Jewish while you say that your Rabbi's and Sages are the ones who have that right. And, yes, I do agree with you, of course, that the first man became a living soul and therefore man is a living soul. But that is to say only a living soul until one intentionally and willfully eats from sour grapes. After that you are a dead man walking and your teeth are set one edge, and no more can you blame the first man Adam for every one dies for his own sins. Essentially I know I have the quickening agent and that is the last Adam who was made a quickening Spirit. You apparently put your trust in Rabbi's and Sages to quicken your soul into spirit? I don't want to put words into your mouth so my question is sincere. Anyway I do not need your Rabbi's and Sages to tell me who and what a Jew is and if these things be as they be then neither do you need me here. You already have in the writings everything that I would argue from this point on; it comes down strictly to a question of leadership, and the Testimony of Yeshua is my Rabbi-Teacher unlocking Torah.

:sheep:

 

[Ben Masada]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

John was a little conceited and wrote about himself in that way, sort of like the redacted history of the Israelites written in Babylon wherein they wrote about themselves as Gods "chosen people" while recasting their entire history. It's a human thing called pride.

No, John the apostle never wrote any thing in the NT. All the gospels were written by Hellenists former disciples of Paul.

 

[Bright Raven]

No, John the apostle never wrote any thing in the NT. All the gospels were written by Hellenists former disciples of Paul.

:chuckle: Get serious. Read some biblical history

 

[Ben Masada]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

deleted for repetition.

 

[Ben Masada]

Saying "that's not Jewish" to everything just shows why this will not work. I say Yeshua has been given the right to decide who and what is Jewish while you say that your Rabbi's and Sages are the ones who have that right. And, yes, I do agree with you, of course, that the first man became a living soul and therefore man is a living soul. But that is to say only a living soul until one intentionally and willfully eats from sour grapes. After that you are a dead man walking and your teeth are set one edge, and no more can you blame the first man Adam for every one dies for his own sins. Essentially I know I have the quickening agent and that is the last Adam who was made a quickening Spirit. You apparently put your trust in Rabbi's and Sages to quicken your soul into spirit? I don't want to put words into your mouth so my question is sincere. Anyway I do not need your Rabbi's and Sages to tell me who and what a Jew is and if these things be as they be then neither do you need me here. You already have in the writings everything that I would argue from this point on; it comes down strictly to a question of leadership, and the Testimony of Yeshua is my Rabbi-Teacher unlocking Torah.

:sheep:

If I agree with every thing Christians say here in this forum as being Jewish, I might as well lose my Jewish identity altogether. So, when I say that this or that is not Jewish and you are interested further, ask why and I'll explain to you why.

 

[Ben Masada]

:chuckle: Get serious. Read some biblical history

Oh! I thought you had decided to ignore me. Welcome back anyway. If you are interested in the truth we have a lot to say to each other. I am serious. What part of History you would like to talk about?

 

[daqq]

If I agree with every thing Christians say here in this forum as being Jewish, I might as well lose my Jewish identity altogether. So, when I say that this or that is not Jewish and you are interested further, ask why and I'll explain to you why.

Okay, for example, in one of your previous posts to me herein you say that "to get married was a commandment according to Genesis 2:24". Can you post written evidence from your sources to back up what you have stated as fact? For what you say does not compute and rather seems nothing more than a bold unfounded statement simply designed to support your paradigm:

Who implied any thing about Jesus having had children? I didn't. But to get married was a commandment according to Gen. 2:24

Unless you can show me from the writings why what you say is fact then I say that you would have been better off to simply listen to Rashi and go no further:

Rashi
one flesh: The fetus is formed by them both, and there [in the child] their flesh becomes one. — [from Sanh. 58a]
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm#showrashi=true

For what Rashi says here is truly true! :chuckle:

:sheep:

 

[Ben Masada]

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

Okay, for example, in one of your previous posts to me herein you say that "to get married was a commandment according to Genesis 2:24". Can you post written evidence from your sources to back up what you have stated as fact? For what you say does not compute and rather seems nothing more than a bold unfounded statement simply designed to support your paradigm:

Unless you can show me from the writings why what you say is fact then I say that you would have been better off to simply listen to Rashi and go no further:

For what Rashi says here is truly true! :chuckle:

:sheep:

You must know that what identifies the commandments in the Decalogue is the characteristic of "Thou shall or thou shall not" if you read Gen. 2:24 it goes thus: "Therefore, shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cling to his wife and they both shall be of one flesh. That's a commandment upon not only the Jews but upon all Mankind. Now, when Jesus declared that he had come to fulfill all the laws down to the letter as we have in Mat. 5:17-19, he would have contradicted himself to live all his life as a single man.

 

[daqq]

You must know that what identifies the commandments in the Decalogue is the characteristic of "Thou shall or thou shall not" if you read Gen. 2:24 it goes thus: "Therefore, shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cling to his wife and they both shall be of one flesh. That's a commandment upon not only the Jews but upon all Mankind. Now, when Jesus declared that he had come to fulfill all the laws down to the letter as we have in Mat. 5:17-19, he would have contradicted himself to live all his life as a single man.

I know how your reading of it goes and I know what your point was, which is why I brought it up; you are insinuating that Yeshua is somehow disqualified to be a Rabbi if he was not married, and I see now that you have insinuated that sentiment again so I need not quote the entirety of your previous post on that matter. However you have still not shown me any writings outside of your own words that teach what you are asserting. Every man is not commanded to get married. Marriage is ordained of God but that does not require every man to get married before he can teach. It may well have been customary but what you have tried to assert was not the teaching in first century Judaism, (unless you can come up with some sources). As I said, I have my sources in the Apostolic writings, and even Paul having been a Pharisee of Pharisees, fully trained up in Torah, makes no mention of what you have asserted. And even if you can come up with something from Talmud those are compiled after the time of Yeshua.

 

[Stripe]

“Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.”
John‬ 11:5‬ NKJV‬‬
http://bible.com/114/jhn.11.5.nkjv

 

[Bright Raven]

Oh! I thought you had decided to ignore me. Welcome back anyway. If you are interested in the truth we have a lot to say to each other. I am serious. What part of History you would like to talk about?

0-100 AD. And the Gospels were written when?