Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Wedding of Jesus


Ben Masada

Recommended Posts

"What I do believe is that there is indeed a better covenant, one that goes beyond the Law of the Mosaic Covenant. It goes beyond the Mosaic Covenant because indeed, the Mosaic covenant was completely fulfilled by Jesus Christ alone." *This is akin to what Paul said in Galatians to cast out the Sinaitic Covenant because Israel could not inherit the Kingdom of God in the same level with Christians. (Gal.4:30)*

Hi Ben,

The text does not say that Israel cannot inherit the Kingdom of God in the same level with Christians, it says that people, refusing the new covenant are blinded by tradition instead of looking to God. That is after all what held many Jews back from recognizing the Messiah when he was among them. Those who hold that their traditions have as much authority as the word of God itself. And those traditions abound, not only in Judaism but in much of Christianity itself.

Just as today you in Israel, divide the population into two segments, the Jews and the Israelis, and one can be an Israeli without being a Jew, because Jews are a special breed apart. So does Paul divide Judaism into two parts, those who welcome the New Covenant and the Messiah and those who cannot accept the New Covenant because tradition and their pet interpretation of the Law is more valuable than the evidence before them.

So if you somehow feel left out here, it is not because you are Jewish.

"Jesus by fulfilling the Mosaic Covenant where no-one else could, provided the basis for a New Covenant, that was superior to the Mosaic Covenant." *If the Christian covenant was superior to the Mosaic Covenant the election of the Jews was no longer relevant.*

Superior but not separate. There is a clear distinction here. All those who willingly traverse to the New Covenant do not lose anything and those that remain behind continue to practice the Old Covenant and will continue to do so until God decides otherwise. They have an important part to play in the foundation of the Millennium reign of the Messiah.

"The New Covenant is a new relationship between God and all humans (not just Israel) mediated by Jesus. This New Covenant states that "Israel" is primarily a spiritual nation composed of Jews who claim Jesus as their Messiah, as well as Gentile believers who through the New Covenant have been grafted into the promises made to Israel. So the blood line becomes redundant, it is the spiritual Israel that we all belong to, if we accept Jesus as the Messiah and his blood spilled on the cross seals this covenant." *When you imply that only the Jews who claim Jesus as their Messiah are part of the spiritual nation under the new covenant it is understood that the God has condemned the rest of the People.*

No not condemned, God has not abandoned them, their existence is part of Gods plan and God will use them yet to further that plan. That means that they will indeed see those promises made to them by God bear fruit.

"A New Covenant also means a new Priesthood and High Priest, as you said, and we believers in Jesus the Messiah, are those priests and the High Priest is none other than Jesus Christ himself." *A new Priesthood and High Priest is the role of the Church. And the believers in Jesus as the Messiah have replaced the nation of Israel.*

Actually no, if one pays careful attention to the bible, the Jews will be uniquely positioned as the priesthood within the Millennial reign of the Messiah. The priesthood referred to by the church only assumes what has already been given to Israel as promise. Thus we are all priests and Kings with the Messiah, because that is what the New covenant gives us all, but we are not a formal priesthood, which is a position that will be taken uniquely by the Jewish people.

So, you do admit that actually there was a replacement. I mean not really but as Christianity is concerned.

Actually, that eldest son is a metaphor for yourself... Who does this little upstart think he is, coming here and replacing me?

We the gentiles are adopted members of the family, we may have the same rights as any other son of that family, but we are adopted, not born into the family. we could not replace you even if we wanted to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ben,

The text does not say that Israel cannot inherit the Kingdom of God in the same level with Christians, it says that people, refusing the new covenant are blinded by tradition instead of looking to God. That is after all what held many Jews back from recognizing the Messiah when he was among them. Those who hold that their traditions have as much authority as the word of God itself. And those traditions abound, not only in Judaism but in much of Christianity itself.

The text does say exactly as I have reproduced it. The problem is that your Christian pre-conceived notions won't allow you to see the obvious. What you are doing is observing Paul's words in 2 Cor.5:7 that Christians must walk by faith and not by sight. This time I am not going to ask you to read a book by Spinoza but a text in your own NT. That's in Galatians 4:21-31. Especially verse 30 says "To cast out the Sinaitic Covenant and the Jews because they cannot be heirs with the followers of Paul." That's for lack of a better word, Replacement Theology.

Just as today you in Israel, divide the population into two segments, the Jews and the Israelis, and one can be an Israeli without being a Jew, because Jews are a special breed apart. So does Paul divide Judaism into two parts, those who welcome the New Covenant and the Messiah and those who cannot accept the New Covenant because tradition and their pet interpretation of the Law is more valuable than the evidence before them.

Please, give me an example of "our pet interpretation of the Law".

So if you somehow feel left out here, it is not because you are Jewish
.

I know. We must quit being Jewish in order to be grafted in. That's Replacement Theology but alas! How can the colors of the rainbow be explained to the blind?

Superior but not separate. There is a clear distinction here. All those who willingly traverse to the New Covenant do not lose anything and those that remain behind continue to practice the Old Covenant and will continue to do so until God decides otherwise. They have an important part to play in the foundation of the Millennium reign of the Messiah.

"Superior" and to pass over to the Christian new covenant one must believe as a Christian does or he will lose his Jewish identity. That's Replacement Theology.

Actually no, if one pays careful attention to the bible, the Jews will be uniquely positioned as the priesthood within the Millennial reign of the Messiah. The priesthood referred to by the church only assumes what has already been given to Israel as promise. Thus we are all priests and Kings with the Messiah, because that is what the New covenant gives us all, but we are not a formal priesthood, which is a position that will be taken uniquely by the Jewish people.

Yes, the Millennial reign of the Messiah but the Messiah according to Habakkuk 3:13. "The Lord comes forth to save His People; to save His anointed one." The Anointed

One in terms of the People is a reference to Israel as the Messiah. When the Church assumes what has be given to Israel, that's Replacement Theology.

We the gentiles are adopted members of the family, we may have the same rights as any other son of that family, but we are adopted, not born into the family. we could not replace you even if we wanted to.

I perfectly agree with you that Gentiles will have the same rights as any other son of God's People but only through conversion to Judaism according to Isaiah 56:1-8. They will have even a name better than sons and daughters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure (read, 100% certain) that the actual comment was that he didn't come to change the law but to "fulfil" the Law. In some ways I suppose there is an element of "adding", but it is not always so, and a corruption of the Bible to suggest otherwise.

Interestingly enough, Paul called the Law good?

If the Law was good, why did Jesus, whom fulfilled it, die? Its because the sins of the world were laid on Him and the goodness of the Law condemned those sins.

So the Law was fulfilled in Christ. Deuteronomy 28:1-14 pretty much puts the Abrahamic promises on condition of obeying the Law. So, only those that obeyed the Mosaic Law after it was handed down could enter into Abraham's inheritance, also called the kingdom of God. As the author of Hebrews stated, the Promise was originally obtained by faith (demonstrated through the mutilation of the flesh by circumcision of all males on the 8th day.)

Now it was Jesus' flesh that was mutilated and bore the curse of the Law (Deut. 28:15-68 ) so that all that had faith in Him would partake of Him. If they share in His body and blood, they share in His circumcision, life, death, and resurrection.)

Thus, as Galatians 3:13-14 points out, the Gentiles are includes in the Abrahamic promises, the kingdom of God by faith in Jesus Christ. This interpretation seems to be the most consistent I've seen yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark 16 -9 Now when [Jesus] was risen early the first [day] of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. luke 11-20 Jesus spoke of casting out devils. And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered. But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast [them] out? therefore shall they be your judges. But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. (Mary Magdalene must have had many overafflictions for Jesus to have cast out seven.)

The reference to the "Seven devils" that Jesus is reported to have cast out of Mary Magdalene is to point metaphorically to the struggle that took Jesus to make Mary abandon her style of life in Magdala and to convert herself to a more decent way to live her life. The reward ended up in her marriage with Jesus. Mary Magdalene used to be a famous courtesan with an international business to serve patrons from abroad who would come to Israel or happened to pass by. Magdala was a fish sea-port in the Northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Mary Magdalene lived two kinds of life. This at her business in Magdala and her private life in Bethany as the sister of Martha and Lazarus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reference to the "Seven devils" that Jesus is reported to have cast out of Mary Magdalene is to point metaphorically to the struggle that took Jesus to make Mary abandon her style of life in Magdala and to convert herself to a more decent way to live her life. The reward ended up in her marriage with Jesus. Mary Magdalene used to be a famous courtesan with an international business to serve patrons from abroad who would come to Israel or happened to pass by. Magdala was a fish sea-port in the Northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Mary Magdalene lived two kinds of life. This at her business in Magdala and her private life in Bethany as the sister of Martha and Lazarus.

You got your information from where exactly? This seems a bit farfetched. Poetic license and all, you cannot for the life of you prove this in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The text does say exactly as I have reproduced it. The problem is that your Christian pre-conceived notions won't allow you to see the obvious. What you are doing is observing Paul's words in 2 Cor.5:7 that Christians must walk by faith and not by sight. This time I am not going to ask you to read a book by Spinoza but a text in your own NT. That's in Galatians 4:21-31. Especially verse 30 says "To cast out the Sinaitic Covenant and the Jews because they cannot be heirs with the followers of Paul." That's for lack of a better word, Replacement Theology.

Please, give me an example of "our pet interpretation of the Law".

I know. We must quit being Jewish in order to be grafted in. That's Replacement Theology but alas! How can the colors of the rainbow be explained to the blind?

"Superior" and to pass over to the Christian new covenant one must believe as a Christian does or he will lose his Jewish identity. That's Replacement Theology.

Yes, the Millennial reign of the Messiah but the Messiah according to Habakkuk 3:13. "The Lord comes forth to save His People; to save His anointed one." The Anointed

One in terms of the People is a reference to Israel as the Messiah. When the Church assumes what has be given to Israel, that's Replacement Theology.

I perfectly agree with you that Gentiles will have the same rights as any other son of God's People but only through conversion to Judaism according to Isaiah 56:1-8. They will have even a name better than sons and daughters.

No Ben it does not. Spin it however you want, you are incorrect. The time now is not the time of Judaism, it is the time of the gentiles. Your path has been put on hold, not superseded. Your time will restart soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got your information from where exactly? This seems a bit farfetched. Poetic license and all, you cannot for the life of you prove this in any way.

You are right. I could even be assassinated by some fundamentalist Christian if I tried to prove this version beyond the NT evidences about Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Can you prove that Jesus was NOT married? Is there anywhere in the NT a statement to the effect that Jesus was NOT married? If you can find it I'll retract from everything I have stated so far. By the way, in a face-to-face debate I used the NT to prove that Jesus had been born out of an illegitimate birth and I was literally almost murdered. To this day I still check around for inquisitors.

Edited by Ben Masada
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Ben it does not. Spin it however you want, you are incorrect. The time now is not the time of Judaism, it is the time of the gentiles. Your path has been put on hold, not superseded. Your time will restart soon enough.

Jorel, do you remember when I said that a Christian preacher cannot open his or her mouth to teach and he or she will be teaching Replacement Theology? Thank you for confirming my words. You just typed for less than a minute to write this post above and nothing came out but Replacement Theology. "The time for Judaism is over" in other words, it has been replaced by the Gentiles. "Your path has been put on hold." How is this different from being replaced? "Your time will restart soon enough" perhaps when you accept Jesus as your savior. He, he, he, he.... That was funny!

Edited by Ben Masada
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jorel, do you remember when I said that a Christian preacher cannot open his or her mouth to teach and he or she will be teaching Replacement Theology? Thank you for confirming my words. You just typed for less than a minute to write this post above and nothing came out but Replacement Theology. "The time for Judaism is over" in other words, it has been replaced by the Gentiles. "Your path has been put on hold." How is this different from being replaced? "Your time will restart soon enough" perhaps when you accept Jesus as your savior. He, he, he, he.... That was funny!

Where did I use the word "over", speed reading is a fast way to get into an accident! :-*

My specific word was "put on hold", interrupted, pause... you get the idea, that is not now or ever will be equivalent to "over."

There goes your theory again out the window for a nice holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right. I could even be assassinated by some fundamentalist Christian if I tried to prove this version beyond the NT evidences about Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Can you prove that Jesus was NOT married? Is there anywhere in the NT a statement to the effect that Jesus was NOT married? If you can find it I'll retract from everything I have stated so far. By the way, in a face-to-face debate I used the NT to prove that Jesus had been born out of an illegitimate birth and I was literally almost murdered. To this day I still check around for inquisitors.

I can believe that... sorry about that stupidity on the part of some Christians. And I am a fundamentalist too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did I use the word "over", speed reading is a fast way to get into an accident! :-*

My specific word was "put on hold", interrupted, pause... you get the idea, that is not now or ever will be equivalent to "over."

There goes your theory again out the window for a nice holiday.

"The time now is not for Judaism." How is that different from "Judaism is over?" That's a problem with the members of the literal interpretation club. They can't think beyond the letter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can believe that... sorry about that stupidity on the part of some Christians. And I am a fundamentalist too.

I know but continents separate us from each other. Just kidding! I know you are a nice guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The time now is not for Judaism." How is that different from "Judaism is over?" That's a problem with the members of the literal interpretation club. They can't think beyond the letter.

Simple, and it isn't semantics.

Mankind, all of it, even before Israel existed, once worshipped the Lord. Over time mankind became corrupt and drifted away from the Lords worship and preferred to worship other things. God gave mankind over to their own desires and placed mankind under the authority of the Divine Council of God, those we call the other gods are mere servants of the almighty. Since mankind didn't want anything to do with God, he placed the gods (the sons of God) in direct authority over mankind and reserved for himself a single man from which a nation would be built. The nation of Israel. They would be his own, his special people.

But God has not forgotten the nations... In Gods plan for mankind, of which Israel plays a central part, God allotted a specific time for Israel which would bring to fruition part of his plan. The plan is not over but it was put on hold for a time which will eventually come to an end, at which point Israel will take center stage again. That putting on hold as I call it, is referred to as the "Dispensation of the Gentiles" also known as "The Dispensation of the Grace of God", a specific time allotted to the gentile world.

The church takes center stage in this period but the church will also cease to exist when this period ends.

All this is based on a specific interpretation of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9.

I am a proponent of what is called Dispensationalism which states that God has given specific time periods for certain events to happen all of which are part of a greater overall plan culminating in the Messiah ruling the world in peace from Israel in a period called the Millennial reign of the Messiah or the Messianic Age.

"Six eons for going in and coming out, for war and peace. The seventh eon is entirely Shabbat and rest for life everlasting"

Purely on informational note, there are 7 dispensations in Gods plan for mankind, these are:

Innocence (Genesis 1:1–3:7), conscience (Genesis 3:8–8:22), human government (Genesis 9:1–11:32), promise (Genesis 12:1Exodus 19:25), law (Exodus 20:1Acts 2:4), grace (Acts 2:4Revelation 20:3), and the millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6).

Even further, all these are in fact part of one overall dispensation, called the dispensation of mankind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know but continents separate us from each other. Just kidding! I know you are a nice guy.

We are simply on opposite ends of the Mediterranean... :tu: not at all far as crow flies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple, and it isn't semantics.

Mankind, all of it, even before Israel existed, once worshipped the Lord. Over time mankind became corrupt and drifted away from the Lords worship and preferred to worship other things. God gave mankind over to their own desires and placed mankind under the authority of the Divine Council of God, those we call the other gods are mere servants of the almighty. Since mankind didn't want anything to do with God, he placed the gods (the sons of God) in direct authority over mankind and reserved for himself a single man from which a nation would be built. The nation of Israel. They would be his own, his special people.

But God has not forgotten the nations... In Gods plan for mankind, of which Israel plays a central part, God allotted a specific time for Israel which would bring to fruition part of his plan. The plan is not over but it was put on hold for a time which will eventually come to an end, at which point Israel will take center stage again. That putting on hold as I call it, is referred to as the "Dispensation of the Gentiles" also known as "The Dispensation of the Grace of God", a specific time allotted to the gentile world.

The church takes center stage in this period but the church will also cease to exist when this period ends.

All this is based on a specific interpretation of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9.

I am a proponent of what is called Dispensationalism which states that God has given specific time periods for certain events to happen all of which are part of a greater overall plan culminating in the Messiah ruling the world in peace from Israel in a period called the Millennial reign of the Messiah or the Messianic Age.

"Six eons for going in and coming out, for war and peace. The seventh eon is entirely Shabbat and rest for life everlasting"

Purely on informational note, there are 7 dispensations in Gods plan for mankind, these are:

Innocence (Genesis 1:1–3:7), conscience (Genesis 3:8–8:22), human government (Genesis 9:1–11:32), promise (Genesis 12:1Exodus 19:25), law (Exodus 20:1Acts 2:4), grace (Acts 2:4Revelation 20:3), and the millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6).

Even further, all these are in fact part of one overall dispensation, called the dispensation of mankind.

Jorel, you have all the right in the world to name me a paranoid as Replacement Theology is concerned but I must say what I have to: Any Christian attempt at interpreting anything rooted in the Jewish Scriptures is an act of Replacement Theology and I'll keep this "psychic" condition until the Tanach stop being claimed by Christians as an explanation for their existence. Yes, Mankind used to worship gods but not the Lord before Israel existed. Abraham was the first real Monotheistic "Jew". Then the Flood had to be decreed because Mankind did not know the Lord. No wonder, Israel did not exist yet. Had Israel been around it would not have happened.

Edited by Ben Masada
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are simply on opposite ends of the Mediterranean... :tu: not at all far as crow flies...

Oh yes! Portugal. Not that far. I had not observed well. I thought you were somewhere in America. I lived some years in Brazil and learned a lot of Portuguese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jorel, you have all the right in the world to name me a paranoid as Replacement Theology is concerned but I must say what I have to: Any Christian attempt at interpreting anything rooted in the Jewish Scriptures is an act of Replacement Theology and I'll keep this "psychic" condition until the Tanach stop being claimed by Christians as an explanation for their existence. Yes, Mankind used to worship gods but not the Lord before Israel existed. Abraham was the first real Monotheistic "Jew". Then the Flood had to be decreed because Mankind did not know the Lord. No wonder, Israel did not exist yet. Had Israel been around it would not have happened.

Well let me enlighten you to an aspect of the Tanach you may never have considered...

Deuternomy 32:8-9

8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,

when he divided mankind,

he fixed the borders of the peoples

according to the number of the sons of God.

9 But the Lord's portion is his people,

Jacob his allotted heritage.

The table of nations describes 70 nations that were created after the flood, before the division all of humanity was united under a single nation. The nations were created at the time of the tower of Babel, when human government was under the Kingship of one man, Nimrod, better known in myth as Osiris.

All these people, Ben, were descendants of one specific family, a family of believers, whose patriarch is very well known. His name was Noah.

As mankind one again increased in number they once again started turning away from the worship of God. The verse above is the result, where God turned away from mankind once again, but instead of destroying them as he did the 1st time, he gave them over to their own desires, to worship other Gods and anything under the sun, but for God himself.

The beings he gave the nations to are called gods, but the bible clearly identifies these beings as "sons of God", members of the Divine Council of God himself.

Thus contrary to what we keep hearing, there was never a move from polytheism to monotheism from anybody in the ancient world, not even from the ancient Isrealites. As I'm sure you know, this is exactly what is taught in nearly all the universities of the world today.

What is actually correct is a move away from Monotheism to Polytheism, with only one single nation later keeping the faith, which would be Israel, after it was created, again from one single man, Abraham.

So the ancient world was once monotheistic, but due to peoples faithlessness, we find polytheism coming into existence.

As the verses clearly state it was God himself who then gave the nations over to the sons of God, the ancient gods of the world, known as the gods of polytheism.

Never for once believe that these beings never existed, that the nations worshipped a lie. God himself is clear on this in a number of passages, but the determining factor is in fact one of his names or titles if you will, El Elyon, the "God most high". In other words the Leader, the ruler of all gods...

Deuteronomy 10:17

"For the LORD your God [is] God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible God, who is not partial and takes no bribe."

Genesis 14:22

But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the LORD, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth,

These gods as we call them were members of the Divine Council and God found that having put power in their hands, they to became degenerate and evil administrators of humanity.

This can be found in Psalm 82, which clearly shows the judgment God rendered on them for their faithlessness.

Psalm 82 (A Psalm of Asaph.)

1 God has taken his place in the divine council;

in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:

2 "How long will you judge unjustly

and show partiality to the wicked?

Selah

3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;

maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.

4 Rescue the weak and the needy;

deliver them from the hand of the wicked."

5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,

they walk about in darkness;

all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 I said, "You are gods,

sons of the Most High, all of you;

7 nevertheless, like men you shall die,

and fall like any prince."

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;

for you shall inherit all the nations!

And there it is, the reason for the dispensation of the gentiles... God has given the gentiles a time to redeem themselves, before Israel once again takes the center stage.

Call it replacement theology if you want, and if it so pleases you, but remember it is merely a temporary replacement, if that. The destinies are different, the rules are different and above all the responsibilities are different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes! Portugal. Not that far. I had not observed well. I thought you were somewhere in America. I lived some years in Brazil and learned a lot of Portuguese.

Então que a Paz do Senhor esteja contigo... :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let me enlighten you to an aspect of the Tanach you may never have considered...

Deuternomy 32:8-9

8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,

when he divided mankind,

he fixed the borders of the peoples

according to the number of the sons of God.

9 But the Lord's portion is his people,

Jacob his allotted heritage.

The table of nations describes 70 nations that were created after the flood, before the division all of humanity was united under a single nation. The nations were created at the time of the tower of Babel, when human government was under the Kingship of one man, Nimrod, better known in myth as Osiris.

All these people, Ben, were descendants of one specific family, a family of believers, whose patriarch is very well known. His name was Noah.

As mankind one again increased in number they once again started turning away from the worship of God. The verse above is the result, where God turned away from mankind once again, but instead of destroying them as he did the 1st time, he gave them over to their own desires, to worship other Gods and anything under the sun, but for God himself.

The beings he gave the nations to are called gods, but the bible clearly identifies these beings as "sons of God", members of the Divine Council of God himself.

Thus contrary to what we keep hearing, there was never a move from polytheism to monotheism from anybody in the ancient world, not even from the ancient Isrealites. As I'm sure you know, this is exactly what is taught in nearly all the universities of the world today.

What is actually correct is a move away from Monotheism to Polytheism, with only one single nation later keeping the faith, which would be Israel, after it was created, again from one single man, Abraham.

So the ancient world was once monotheistic, but due to peoples faithlessness, we find polytheism coming into existence.

As the verses clearly state it was God himself who then gave the nations over to the sons of God, the ancient gods of the world, known as the gods of polytheism.

Never for once believe that these beings never existed, that the nations worshipped a lie. God himself is clear on this in a number of passages, but the determining factor is in fact one of his names or titles if you will, El Elyon, the "God most high". In other words the Leader, the ruler of all gods...

Deuteronomy 10:17

"For the LORD your God [is] God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible God, who is not partial and takes no bribe."

Genesis 14:22

But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the LORD, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth,

These gods as we call them were members of the Divine Council and God found that having put power in their hands, they to became degenerate and evil administrators of humanity.

This can be found in Psalm 82, which clearly shows the judgment God rendered on them for their faithlessness.

Psalm 82 (A Psalm of Asaph.)

1 God has taken his place in the divine council;

in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:

2 "How long will you judge unjustly

and show partiality to the wicked?

Selah

3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;

maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.

4 Rescue the weak and the needy;

deliver them from the hand of the wicked."

5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,

they walk about in darkness;

all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 I said, "You are gods,

sons of the Most High, all of you;

7 nevertheless, like men you shall die,

and fall like any prince."

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;

for you shall inherit all the nations!

And there it is, the reason for the dispensation of the gentiles... God has given the gentiles a time to redeem themselves, before Israel once again takes the center stage.

Call it replacement theology if you want, and if it so pleases you, but remember it is merely a temporary replacement, if that. The destinies are different, the rules are different and above all the responsibilities are different.

When I was reading this post of yours, I had one only thought in mind. Where were you? What were you doing among the atheists? Now, you should visit them with this message and restore more of the same kind that you are now. Those of us who did not come from them can't hold our grounds too long to prove our point when we visit them. You should act as our ambassador to save them instead of wasting your time with us. I meant by this a compliment to your spiritual stamina.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Então que a Paz do Senhor esteja contigo... :tu:

Obrigado. O mesmo eu desejo para ti e os teus com a graca de Deus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben---- Mary of Magdala ("Magdalene," Luke 8:2; 24:10, et.al.) is not the same person as Mary (of Bethany), sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 11, etc.) any more than Mary--Jesus' mother, or Mary the wife of Clopas (John 19:25) are the same individual. They are all distinct persons.

The female sinner who anointed either Jesus' feet (Luke 7:37) or head (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3) is never identified in the gospels (or any other scripture) as Mary Magdalene. Later traditions stretched an unbiblical and ahistorical connection. The anointing itself was common courtesy, though usually done with water, not expensive perfumed ointment. In any case, it was not some sort of erotic foot fetish foreplay performed by a lubed-up reformed Semitic streetwalker.

Jesus did visit Bethany, but frequented Capernaum much more often. If any town served as JC's "base of operations," or 'home,' it was the Galilean fishing village of Capernaum.

Methinks that you've digested a bit too much Dan Brown 'Da Vinci-code' gibberish.

All is not lost, however! Perhaps you could spin a good yarn about how the flying locusts of Revelation 9:3, 7-10 actually represent state-of-the-art Apache or Hind attack helicopters unleashed in the Middle East during the upcoming Armageddon?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was reading this post of yours, I had one only thought in mind. Where were you? What were you doing among the atheists? Now, you should visit them with this message and restore more of the same kind that you are now. Those of us who did not come from them can't hold our grounds too long to prove our point when we visit them. You should act as our ambassador to save them instead of wasting your time with us. I meant by this a compliment to your spiritual stamina.

Estou lisonjeado...

I'm flattered Ben, you have done me good. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben---- Mary of Magdala ("Magdalene," Luke 8:2; 24:10, et.al.) is not the same person as Mary (of Bethany), sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 11, etc.) any more than Mary--Jesus' mother, or Mary the wife of Clopas (John 19:25) are the same individual. They are all distinct persons.

The female sinner who anointed either Jesus' feet (Luke 7:37) or head (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3) is never identified in the gospels (or any other scripture) as Mary Magdalene. Later traditions stretched an unbiblical and ahistorical connection. The anointing itself was common courtesy, though usually done with water, not expensive perfumed ointment. In any case, it was not some sort of erotic foot fetish foreplay performed by a lubed-up reformed Semitic streetwalker.

Jesus did visit Bethany, but frequented Capernaum much more often. If any town served as JC's "base of operations," or 'home,' it was the Galilean fishing village of Capernaum.

Methinks that you've digested a bit too much Dan Brown 'Da Vinci-code' gibberish.

All is not lost, however! Perhaps you could spin a good yarn about how the flying locusts of Revelation 9:3, 7-10 actually represent state-of-the-art Apache or Hind attack helicopters unleashed in the Middle East during the upcoming Armageddon?

I am ready to adopt what you say above about the Mary's not being one and the same. But I need something back from you: To agree that Jesus was a Greek guy living in Israel at the time and not a Jewish man. Can you afford that? Otherwise, I cannot admit that being Jesus a loyal religious Jew could have acted like a "Casanova." I am Jewish and I am familiar with the tradition that a woman who is not the wife of a religious man cannot even address him in public; let alone anoint his feet with perfume and even kiss them in public. All the 4 gospels report the anointing of Jesus by 4 different women. It didn't happened. If they were not one and the same woman, the gospels are in big trouble with contradicting interpolations. How do you choose an accommodation to prevent contradictions or a NT crowded with contradictions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's great if this is actual physical evidence of Yeshua existence !!! I don't care if he was married or not ,or if he had many wives , though I don't think he would of had many wives.

I know that some people say the tomb is a hoax while others say that the names were very, very common amongst his time.

Just wondering though , the writing don't actually read as "Jesus" right ? Does it read as his actual name , which was Yeshua or Yehoshua?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let me enlighten you to an aspect of the Tanach you may never have considered...

Deuternomy 32:8-9

8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,

when he divided mankind,

he fixed the borders of the peoples

according to the number of the sons of God.

9 But the Lord's portion is his people,

Jacob his allotted heritage.

The table of nations describes 70 nations that were created after the flood, before the division all of humanity was united under a single nation. The nations were created at the time of the tower of Babel, when human government was under the Kingship of one man, Nimrod, better known in myth as Osiris.

All these people, Ben, were descendants of one specific family, a family of believers, whose patriarch is very well known. His name was Noah.

As mankind one again increased in number they once again started turning away from the worship of God. The verse above is the result, where God turned away from mankind once again, but instead of destroying them as he did the 1st time, he gave them over to their own desires, to worship other Gods and anything under the sun, but for God himself.

The beings he gave the nations to are called gods, but the bible clearly identifies these beings as "sons of God", members of the Divine Council of God himself.

Thus contrary to what we keep hearing, there was never a move from polytheism to monotheism from anybody in the ancient world, not even from the ancient Isrealites. As I'm sure you know, this is exactly what is taught in nearly all the universities of the world today.

What is actually correct is a move away from Monotheism to Polytheism, with only one single nation later keeping the faith, which would be Israel, after it was created, again from one single man, Abraham.

So the ancient world was once monotheistic, but due to peoples faithlessness, we find polytheism coming into existence.

As the verses clearly state it was God himself who then gave the nations over to the sons of God, the ancient gods of the world, known as the gods of polytheism.

Never for once believe that these beings never existed, that the nations worshipped a lie. God himself is clear on this in a number of passages, but the determining factor is in fact one of his names or titles if you will, El Elyon, the "God most high". In other words the Leader, the ruler of all gods...

Deuteronomy 10:17

"For the LORD your God [is] God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible God, who is not partial and takes no bribe."

Genesis 14:22

But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the LORD, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth,

These gods as we call them were members of the Divine Council and God found that having put power in their hands, they to became degenerate and evil administrators of humanity.

This can be found in Psalm 82, which clearly shows the judgment God rendered on them for their faithlessness.

Psalm 82 (A Psalm of Asaph.)

1 God has taken his place in the divine council;

in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:

2 "How long will you judge unjustly

and show partiality to the wicked?

Selah

3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;

maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.

4 Rescue the weak and the needy;

deliver them from the hand of the wicked."

5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,

they walk about in darkness;

all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 I said, "You are gods,

sons of the Most High, all of you;

7 nevertheless, like men you shall die,

and fall like any prince."

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;

for you shall inherit all the nations!

And there it is, the reason for the dispensation of the gentiles... God has given the gentiles a time to redeem themselves, before Israel once again takes the center stage.

Call it replacement theology if you want, and if it so pleases you, but remember it is merely a temporary replacement, if that. The destinies are different, the rules are different and above all the responsibilities are different.

Interesting! I'll have to look into that. Especially the reason for the dispensation of the Gentiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.