640 replies to this topic

[Beckys_Mom]

Ben Masada, on 12 April 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

God never showed Himself face-to-face to Moses. That expression was used by the writer to distinguish Moses from any other prophet for the fact that he was the most important prophet in the History of Israel.

  I highly doubt Moses saw  anything or even connected with God......But I understand it is only a mere belief you may hold..

Moses remains nothing more than a mere belief...myth ....But hey lets not get into that.. Derailing is not really going to help his thread...I mean this UNIQUE thread  lol

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 12 April 2012 - 08:36 PM.

[Ben Masada]

Paranoid Android, on 11 April 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

Sorry to sound blunt here, but that sounds like a giant rationalisation.  Paul, who was both a Jew and a Pharisee (despite your attempt to discredit Paul's Pharisaic status), believed Jesus to be the son of God.  Therefore according to you he cannot have been a real Jew.  Hence anything he says can now be ignored because he would not *by your own words* "vandalise" Judaism by bringing in a Greek view of a demigod (you do realise that in Christian belief, Jesus is not a demigod, but fully and 100% God).

In other words, any Jew who followed Jesus and acknowledges him as God, well they don't know what they are talking about because they stopped being Jewish.  You know, Christians look at groups like Westboro Baptist Church, and they say "well they aren't real Christians, no Christian would ever act like that".  Perhaps we Christians have the same biases towards those who claim Christianity as your Jewish view holds bias against Jews who act in ways that you would describe as "un-Jewish".  

Just a thought,

~ PA

Paul was a Hellenistic Jew by birth; the son of well-to-do Hellenistic parents. A Hellenistic Jew would never be accepted as a Pharisee. Therefore, he lied when he said he was a Pharisee. Jesus yes, he was of the line of the Pharises. He was even acknowledged as a Rabbi by the Pharisees. (John 3:1,2) When he, Paul, decided to found his Hellenistic religion, which became known as Christianity, he ceased being Jewish. (Acts 11:26) This is not being bias but commonsense.
Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 12 April 2012 - 08:16 PM.

[Ben Masada]

Jor-el, on 11 April 2012 - 07:45 PM, said:

So you are basically saying that cousins CANNOT belong to different tribes...

I must thank you for claryfying that issue... but that brings me to the actual word used which is translated cousin. The actual Greek word is συγγενής "syggenēs", it merely means kin as in kinsman or kinswoman, or we can use the word relative, a family relation. It is not "cousin". I didn't know this but I thank you for helping me find out. I was so used to hearing that they were cousins, I never figured to check...

After enquiring I found that only a minority of translations use "cousin", most use "relative. Here



Oops, you spoke too soon...

Again for the record...

Joseph, Tribe of Judah
Mary, Tribe of Judah
Jesus Tribe of Judah

Mary had a relative by the name of Elizabeth, of the tribe of Levi, they were not cousins, but were related, which means that someone of either family married into the other family. And after doing some research, I found that this actually was not rare at all.

Want to contradict me, show me the research that demonstrates that this is not so.

Nothing goes into the record without a contextual evidence; and you don't show any to justify your assertion. Joseph yes, was of the Tribe of Judah. Mary was of the Tribe of Levi. (Luke 1:5,36) Therefore, Jesus was without tribe in Israel. According to Jewish Halachah, a child cannot inherit the tribe of the mother; only of the father. Of the mother, only his Jewish identity is inherited.
Ben

[Ben Masada]

Jor-el, on 11 April 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

No I'm not Jewish, but I do have a number of Jewish friends, I have also studied Judaism intensely for many years. I'm even friends with one or two Rabbis... one of them was even a school mate of mine...

So, while I am not Jewish, I also would not say I am ignorant.

So I 'll simply quote John...

John 19:14

Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover. It was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, “Behold your King!”

But if you don't believe me... please feel free to follow the link, you will find 29 verses, most of whom refer to the events of the crucifixion, and all of whom refer directly, not to a sabbath, but the Passover, especially the night before, which is ALSO called the day of preperation as you surely should know, since it was on that day the the paschal lamb was prepared.

Blue Letter bible.

Today, the paschal lamb is not served anymore, that ended with the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem. Only a few minority groups still practice this tradition. You should recognize it by its traditional Jewish name... Korban Pesach.

As you should know, this was traditionally served on the eve of the Passover, or Erev Pesach.

Korban Pesach:
Becoming a People

Each year, Jews make feverish and intensive preparations for the Passover holiday with the Seder as its centerpiece. However, we are still missing the true centerpiece of the Passover table: namely the Paschal Offering, or Korban Pesach.

Korban Pesach is a Biblical commandment of the highest order, with the command repeated and amplified to us in three different places: Exodus 12, 3-12, Numbers 9, 1-13 and Deuteronomy 16.

Just as circumcision, the first commandment imposed on an individual Jew, our forefather Abraham brought us into the covenant as individuals, the commandment of Korban Pesach, the first commandment imposed on the Jewish People as a collective--obligating men, women and even children--brings us into the covenant as a People.

Korban Pesach

You cannot compare what you have studied of Judaism to what a Jew who has not only studied a lot of his Faith, he has been born as such. If you indeed
have Rabbis as friends of yours, you should check with them about our debate and start believing what I am saying.
Ben

[Ben Masada]

Jor-el, on 11 April 2012 - 09:02 PM, said:

I would like to apologise for this extra post, but I couldn't edit my earlier one to add the relvant links that demonstrate that a Levite can marry a Jewish person from another Tribe... a Bat Kohen (a daughter of a priest, a Levite) can marry a Yisrael (a jewish man of another tribe beside Levi) but it is to be done with care and consideration, otherwise the marriage will be problematic.

The same can be applied in reverse, a Kohen (priest, A Levite) can marry a Bat Yisrael (a jewish woman of another tribe beside Levi), although there are certain restrictions in place.

http://www.dailyhala...pDate=8/19/2003
http://www.halakhah....ed/Pesachim.pdf
http://www.askmoses....wish-woman.html

This demonstrates what we already know, Mary and Elizabeth, although related did not HAVE TO belong to the same tribe...

Finally, I agree with you on something. Indeed, any one was allowed to marry anybody else within or without his or her original Tribe. In the case of a woman, she would never inherit the tribal affiliation of her husband. She would remain of the tribe of her father till death. Even married to Joseph, Mary never became of the tribe of Judah. She remained a Levite till death. Jesus could not become a Levite. A Judahite yes, if he was a biological son of Joseph's.
Ben

[Ben Masada]

Mr Walker, on 11 April 2012 - 11:31 PM, said:

During pauls life time, and  as evidenced by his letters, the early christian church spread out into many centres and established many churches across the middle east. These people were not all jews. I doubt that many of them were. It is evident from pauls writings (As you allude to yourself) that he had a differnt intended audience to christ.And jesus, in his own words, did admonish and criticise the scribes and pharisees of the day. Sometimes in allegory and parable sometimes more directly. He did overturn the money lenders table which had been established with the consent of the church authorities.

One can give legitimate criticism to aothers and remain true to the golden rule. I expect others to give me constructive and legitimate criticism and i will do to them as iexpect them to do to me. I even expect some people to get angry at me. I think it took a lot to drive christ to anger, or perhaps he was never angry, just making a point more forcefully. But christ did not see jusdaism of the day with the same eyes as the jews of the day did, otherwise we would have no story at all.

All the members of Paul's churches were taken from the Nazarene synagogues. BTW, it was a Pauline policy to invade the Jewish synagogues and overturn
them into Christian churches. Since his first ones in Damascus till his last station in Rome. In Rome, he could not do that because he remained under house arrest for the two years that was in Rome. But he would invite the Jewish leaders to come to listen to his gospel. (Acts 28:17)
Ben

[Ben Masada]

Beckys_Mom, on 12 April 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:

I highly doubt Moses saw  anything or even connected with God......But I understand it is only a mere belief you may hold..

Moses remains nothing more than a mere belief...myth ....But hey lets not get into that.. Derailing is not really going to help his thread...I mean this UNIQUE thread  lol

Did you know that Socrates was a myth? There is no Archeological proof that he ever existed. Nevertheless, a lot was written by Plato about him as if he, Plato had actually been his disciple. But I do agree with you that Moses never
saw anything of God, but in dreams and visions. As you know, any thing is possible to see in a dream.
Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 12 April 2012 - 08:49 PM.

[Beckys_Mom]

Ben Masada, on 12 April 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

disciple. But I do agree with you that Moses never
saw anything of God, but in dreams and visions. As you know, any thing is possible to see in a dream.
Ben

Yea and we can RELY on a mere  dream  lol....Ben....stop right there...  Taking ones word for it is not something I do easy.. you do...I see that.. But come on a dream??   Oh  it was a dream then it MUST be true ?

Sigh...  I have heard it all now Dreams   are proof  lol

[Jor-el]

Ben Masada, on 12 April 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

Both, A and B. Regarding A, go right ahead and quote some Greek Mythology which became part of Judaism. You can pick up any book. It does not have to be only the book of Genesis. I'll be more than glad to let you know where your mistake is. And for B, the point is that you must not understand metaphorical language. Literal interpretation only brings contradictions into the Tanach.

Jorel, I think I have said here that in a dream God can appear in any form whatsoever. Numbers 12:6 is very clear that's the only way God lets Himself be known to man. Personally, as a man stands before another, never. You are welcome to show me an example.
Ben

Bollywocks, Ben... and I'm being kind here...

How interesting, metaphorical language saves the Jewish interpretation of the Tanach, the literal rendering however confirms the christian viewpoint without justifying any of it... I wonder who could be wrong here.

Numbers 12:6 says no such thing... unless you are purposefully trying to obfuscate the obvious... God was speaking directly to Aaron and Miriam for speaking badly of Moses, they weren't having a dream or a vision. They were all three standing before God who was within the pillar of cloud. At this very moment, neither Aaron nor Miriam were having a vision of any kind... the whole camp of Israel could see the pillar. All three could hear God who was right in front of them.

And yet you claim that He only appeared to Moses who was special... so Abraham wasn't even more special?, how about Jacob, for whom the entire nation is named.. Israel? These weren't special to God?

You are so taking things out of context that it is blatantly obvious to everyone who reads this. I understand why you are doing it, it just doesn't make you right.

[Arbitran]

Jor-el, on 12 April 2012 - 09:32 PM, said:

Bollywocks, Ben... and I'm being kind here...

How interesting, metaphorical language saves the Jewish interpretation of the Tanach, the literal rendering however confirms the christian viewpoint without justifying any of it... I wonder who could be wrong here.

Numbers 12:6 says no such thing... unless you are purposefully trying to obfuscate the obvious... God was speaking directly to Aaron and Miriam for speaking badly of Moses, they weren't having a dream or a vision. They were all three standing before God who was within the pillar of cloud. At this very moment, neither Aaron nor Miriam were having a vision of any kind... the whole camp of Israel could see the pillar. All three could hear God who was right in front of them.

And yet you claim that He only appeared to Moses who was special... so Abraham wasn't even more special?, how about Jacob, for whom the entire nation is named.. Israel? These weren't special to God?

You are so taking things out of context that it is blatantly obvious to everyone who reads this. I understand why you are doing it, it just doesn't make you right.

Strange, I was always under the impression that "No man hath seen God at any time"...

[Tiggs]

Arbitran, on 12 April 2012 - 09:35 PM, said:

Strange, I was always under the impression that "No man hath seen God at any time"...

No man has seen God's true form. Theophany - the appearance of God in an alternate physical form (from burning bush to human) - occurs a few times within the Old Testament.

[Arbitran]

Tiggs, on 12 April 2012 - 10:10 PM, said:

No man has seen God's true form. Theophany - the appearance of God in an alternate physical form (from burning bush to human) - occurs a few times within the Old Testament.

Point taken.

Don't forget the New Testament! That's the big one! He's supposed to have appeared in the form of his own son! How impressive is that (he also essentially commits suicide: it was God's will that God's Son, who was actually God, die).

I've never quite understood why an allegedly perfect being couldn't just forgive people--and instead had to commit suicide to forgive people (but only the people that actually believe he committed suicide).

Edited by Arbitran, 12 April 2012 - 10:20 PM.

[Jor-el]

Ben Masada, on 12 April 2012 - 06:58 PM, said:

No, perhaps you do not believe your own NT. According to Matthew 28:1, "after the Sabbath, AS THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK was dawning, Mary Magdalene came with the other Mary to see the sepulcher" and the tomb was empty.

Tell me Jorel, what is the name for the first day of the week? Sunday, right? Right. So, Matthew was referring to Saturday as the next day after the day of preparation, which was Friday. (Mat. 57:62) That's the day Jesus was crucified. And mind you something else. "...as the first day of the week was dawning." It means that it was not yet Sunday. It was dawning. It means it was approaching Sunday; just before sun rising. In Hebrew, we say "lifnot boker". Not yet morning. Still night.

Besides, this story is full of holes. If the stone was still in place, the Roman soldiers had to be there watching to avoid the approaching of any suspect with the intension to open the tomb. Didn't the women know about that? What were they doing at the tomb area at that time of the night? Well, if you asked them, they would say that they had seen no soldiers at the tomb.  How do you explain that? Where did Matthew find them to set there to watch the tomb?
Ben

When exactly does Sunday start according to the Jewish calendar?

It starts at sundown on Saturday...

Being Jewish and all you should know this... As it stands, History is quite evident on this issue, even if you personally don't practice it nowadays.

The 1st day of the week is Sunday, but let me tell you something you evidently didn't know when you quoted Matthew 28:1. The word Sabbbath in the text is plural!!!

The correct translation of the text is the following:

Matthew 28:1  

After the Sabbaths [plural], when it was growing light on the "first of Sabbaths" [day one of the week], Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to view the grave.

So how many Sabbaths are you counting?

I count two, the reference is to the Passover and to the weekly sabbath. Thus the 1st day after the sabbaths can only be the 1st day of the week or Sunday, as we generally call it. As I said, Sunday would have started at 6 PM on Saturday according to how the hebrews reckoned their days...

Edited by Jor-el, 12 April 2012 - 10:22 PM.

[Arbitran]

Jor-el, on 12 April 2012 - 10:21 PM, said:

When exactly does Sunday start according to the Jewish calendar?

It starts at sundown on Saturday...

Being Jewish and all you should know this... As it stands, History is quite evident on this issue, even if you personally don't practice it nowadays.

The 1st day of the week is Sunday, but let me tell you something you evidently didn't know when you quoted Matthew 28:1. The word Sabbbath in the text is plural!!!

The correct translation of the text is the following:

Matthew 28:1  

After the Sabbaths [plural], when it was growing light on the "first of Sabbaths" [day one of the week], Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to view the grave.

So how many Sabbaths are you counting?

I count two, the reference is to the Passover and to the weekly sabbath. Thus the 1st day after the sabbaths can only be the 1st day of the week or Sunday, as we generally call it. As I said, Sunday would have started at 6 PM on Saturday according to how the hebrews reckoned their days...

In any case, it's clear that Jesus wasn't dead for a full three days: despite the text claiming it. Even working with the Jewish calendar, as I think everyone here is, Jesus could only have been dead about two days, maximum; based on the descriptions in the text.

[Jor-el]

Ben Masada, on 12 April 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

What Law do you think Jesus was talking about? If you don't know, it is because you did not read the next two verses: 18 and 19. BTW, Christians usually hide them. They like only verse 17. What Jesus meant by coming to fulfill the Law was a confirmation of the responsibility upon all his fellow Jews. That we all are supposed to do the same. Go back and read those two verses left out. But first, please, tell me what Law was Jesus talking about. Thank you.
Ben

He was talking of the moral law, and to exemplify his point, the rest of the chapter deals with such examples of moral law. The moral law trumps the ceremonial laws and are superior. As such Jesus demonstrates the superiority of the moral law by going beyond what the ceremonioal law asks of us.

21“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder,a and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brotherb will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Now you tell me why you refuse to touch on what I stated regarding Isaiah 53 demonstrating beyond doubt that a human figure, becomes a guilt offering?