Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Wedding of Jesus


  • Please log in to reply
208 replies to this topic

#31    nothinglizx2

nothinglizx2

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 116 posts
  • Joined:15 Apr 2006

Posted 30 April 2013 - 09:30 PM

There's not much investigating to do, if Je'sus had married her, first he wouldn't have told her not to touch him because he had not yet ascended unto the Father.
Second, if he had married her, there wouldn't have been any need for us.  Everything would have ended there.  Anyone left alive would have just been children of the field and sinners.  Remember that after he left things got real ugly.  Why didn't spiritually he take her with him.

If you go back to Genesis 2:2 - 2:3

You will see it is a prophecy of Jesus becoming the LORD of the Sabbath and sanctified.

Then comes the man and the woman.

But what is needed to understand is that man came first and then later the woman.

Jesus was created by God in the Holy spirit and came from the womb of Mary.
He lived to verify the Father and to teach us about what it takes to be at one with the Father.
His wife would certainly live a life would verify the Husband and the Father like no other has.

But she is a secret.  You won't know it's her until she is upon you.

She will endure a great sadness and a life of travailing.
But when she finally blooms she will be something not seen since Yeshua  (Je'-sus)

One thing you have to remember about finding out about her is that you have to look deep into prophecy and what looks like regular stories to find her.
She would have been obscure so as to surprise the people.  Jesus happened upon everyone the same way.  He wasn't what they expected, but what they needed.


#32    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,463 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 30 April 2013 - 10:19 PM

View PostParanoid Android, on 30 April 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

Well, Jor-El, I must admit I admire your tenacity.  I gave up on discussion with Mr Masada a long long time ago.  I'm enjoying reading your posts, but don't expect anything to change.  Like you, I have no problem with a married Jesus.  I don't think the Bible supports it either way, certainly it doesn't say he was NOT married, but whether he was or not does not affect his standing in the Christian trinity. I don't think the early church fathers would have had a need to "hide" a marriage, even if he was.  Even if Jesus had children, they are not divine, only Jesus was divine.  The church fathers knew this just as obviously as we do today.  Jesus was not a demigod (half man, half god) the way Hercules (and other demigods) was, so any children he had wouldn't be part-divine.

Nah, I enjoy my debates with him, I've said this a few times, I'm not here to convince anybody, I doubt that is actually possible, but there are thousands of visitors to our pages seeking clarity and direction, and the essence of my debates is with them always on my mind.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#33    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,463 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 30 April 2013 - 10:43 PM

View PostBen Masada, on 30 April 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:

And of course you want me to take your word for it. where does it say that he was NOT married? Nowhere. Do you want me to repeat why? I am not going to do it because I don't want you to quit on me in this thread too. But, take a look at 2 Kings 23:31. "Hamutal the mother of Jehoahaz was daughter of Jeremiah."

Of course not, I wouldn't dream of you taking my word...

But then again, the bible is pretty clear on that bit of data, I should know, I'm named after him.

Jeremiah 16:1-4

1Then the word of the Lord came to me: 2You must not marry and have sons or daughters in this place.” 3For this is what the Lord says about the sons and daughters born in this land and about the women who are their mothers and the men who are their fathers: 4“They will die of deadly diseases. They will not be mourned or buried but will be like dung lying on the ground. They will perish by sword and famine, and their dead bodies will become food for the birds and the wild animals.”

The truth is he never married at all.

As for Hamutal, she was not the daughter of Jeremiah. The Jeremiah that is referenced in 2 Kings 23:31 was a different man called Jeremiah of Libnah.

Just for the record and so that we know this is the truth, Jehoahaz was born in 633/632 B.C. while Jeremiah the prophet was only called to the ministry in 626 B.C. (6 years later), while he was yet a teenager. So the logical question is... How can a teenager have a daughter who was Jehoahaz's mother and wife of Josiah the king of Israel? Did he father her at age 2 or something?

That doesn't even include the little fact that Jeremiah was born in Anathoth not Libnah, thus if anything, his name would be Jeremiah of Anathoth.

Edited by Jor-el, 30 April 2013 - 10:50 PM.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#34    Paranoid Android

Paranoid Android

    ????????

  • 24,840 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • Paranoid Android... No power in the verse can stop me...

Posted 01 May 2013 - 08:07 AM

View PostJor-el, on 30 April 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:

Nah, I enjoy my debates with him, I've said this a few times, I'm not here to convince anybody, I doubt that is actually possible, but there are thousands of visitors to our pages seeking clarity and direction, and the essence of my debates is with them always on my mind.
Fair pull, I see that side of things, and in many ways I do the same.  But I just get frustrated sometimes when we go around in never-ending circles, especially with someone who arbitrarily accepts the New Testament based on his beliefs.  If it agrees with him then he uses it, if it doesn't then it's an interpolation, that kind of cripples one side of discussion if we don't even need to entertain what the text says because it disagrees with us.

But that's just me :)

Posted Image

My blog is now taking a new direction.  Dedicated to my father who was a great inspiration in my life, I wish to honour his memory (RIP, dad) by sharing with the world what he had always kept to himself.  More details, http://www.unexplain...showentry=27811

#35    brave_new_world

brave_new_world

    Peasant love child

  • Member
  • 6,842 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western Australia

  • My men like satyrs grazing on the lawns, shall with their goat-feet dance the antic hay. --Marlowe

Posted 01 May 2013 - 11:48 AM

View PostParanoid Android, on 01 May 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

Fair pull, I see that side of things, and in many ways I do the same.  But I just get frustrated sometimes when we go around in never-ending circles, especially with someone who arbitrarily accepts the New Testament based on his beliefs.  If it agrees with him then he uses it, if it doesn't then it's an interpolation, that kind of cripples one side of discussion if we don't even need to entertain what the text says because it disagrees with us.

But that's just me :)

Hey Paranoid Android, remember me?? Long time no see huh?? Good to see you still here.

Posted Image
The man of science is a poor philosopher.
---Albert Einstein

<a href="http://funkyflea.deviantart.com" target="_blank">http://funkyflea.deviantart.com


#36    Jor-el

Jor-el

    Knight of the Most High God

  • Member
  • 7,463 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal

  • We are the sum of all that is, and has been. We will be the sum of our choices.

Posted 01 May 2013 - 05:33 PM

View PostParanoid Android, on 01 May 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

Fair pull, I see that side of things, and in many ways I do the same.  But I just get frustrated sometimes when we go around in never-ending circles, especially with someone who arbitrarily accepts the New Testament based on his beliefs.  If it agrees with him then he uses it, if it doesn't then it's an interpolation, that kind of cripples one side of discussion if we don't even need to entertain what the text says because it disagrees with us.

But that's just me :)

Ah but Ben is a special case, I'm intrigued by some of his perspectives and how they reflect a part modern day jewish culture and its interpretation of scripture.

Posted Image


"Man is not the centre. God does not exist for the sake of man. Man does not exist for his own sake."

-C. S. Lewis


#37    Paranoid Android

Paranoid Android

    ????????

  • 24,840 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • Paranoid Android... No power in the verse can stop me...

Posted 02 May 2013 - 05:08 AM

View Postbrave_new_world, on 01 May 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

Hey Paranoid Android, remember me?? Long time no see huh?? Good to see you still here.
Hey BNW, wow it has been a long time.  Didn't realise how long.


View PostJor-el, on 01 May 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

Ah but Ben is a special case, I'm intrigued by some of his perspectives and how they reflect a part modern day jewish culture and its interpretation of scripture.
Well in any case, I'm enjoying reading your posts :tu:

Posted Image

My blog is now taking a new direction.  Dedicated to my father who was a great inspiration in my life, I wish to honour his memory (RIP, dad) by sharing with the world what he had always kept to himself.  More details, http://www.unexplain...showentry=27811

#38    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,515 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 02 May 2013 - 08:47 PM

View Postnothinglizx2, on 30 April 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

There's not much investigating to do, if Je'sus had married her, first he wouldn't have told her not to touch him because he had not yet ascended unto the Father.
Second, if he had married her, there wouldn't have been any need for us.  Everything would have ended there.  Anyone left alive would have just been children of the field and sinners.  Remember that after he left things got real ugly.  Why didn't spiritually he take her with him.

If you go back to Genesis 2:2 - 2:3

You will see it is a prophecy of Jesus becoming the LORD of the Sabbath and sanctified.

Then comes the man and the woman.

But what is needed to understand is that man came first and then later the woman.

Jesus was created by God in the Holy spirit and came from the womb of Mary. He lived to verify the Father and to teach us about what it takes to be at one with the Father. His wife would certainly live a life would verify the Husband and the Father like no other has.

But she is a secret.  You won't know it's her until she is upon you.

She will endure a great sadness and a life of travailing. But when she finally blooms she will be something not seen since Yeshua  (Je'-sus)

One thing you have to remember about finding out about her is that you have to look deep into prophecy and what looks like regular stories to find her.
She would have been obscure so as to surprise the people.  Jesus happened upon everyone the same way.  He wasn't what they expected, but what they needed.

What did they need a savior? Did Jesus save them or anyone else? Things became rather worse with the coming of Jesus than before he was born. Indeed he could have been everything but what the people expected and did not become what the people needed.

So, if Jesus had married Mary Magdalene he would not have told her not to touch him! "Ox2" for haven's sake Jesus had just come out of a crucifixion and he was probably all plastered to suffer any further pain as a result of a passionate hug of his wife. Then again, I see in the emotional eruption of Mary to embrace him an evidence of how much she missed him as to blind herself of what he had gone through.

Edited by Ben Masada, 02 May 2013 - 08:48 PM.


#39    GoSC

GoSC

    HOSEA 1:10; 2:23

  • Member
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silver Mountain

Posted 03 May 2013 - 05:06 AM

Nowhere in the New Testament does it ever suggest or even hint that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute neither does it ever suggest that Jesus was married.

Look to your own scriptures, ben masada, Leviticus 21:13-14.

Jesus divorced Israel (see Romans 7:2-6) and the church is His bride (see Ephesians 5:31-32).

"I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in its own times he shall show, WHO IS THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTE, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power eternal. Amen" (I Tim 6:13-16).

#40    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,515 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 03 May 2013 - 09:17 PM

View PostB Jenkins, on 03 May 2013 - 05:06 AM, said:

Nowhere in the New Testament does it ever suggest or even hint that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute neither does it ever suggest that Jesus was married.

Look to your own scriptures, ben masada, Leviticus 21:13-14.

Jesus divorced Israel (see Romans 7:2-6) and the church is His bride (see Ephesians 5:31-32).

Does it anywhere in the NT suggest or even hint that Jesus was not married? If you find it for me you have won a Jew to Christianity.

Now that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute take a look at Luke 7:37. "Then a woman known in the town to be a sinner learned that Jesus was dining in the Pharisee's home, brought in a vase of perfumed oil and would anoint Jesus' feet and kiss them..." A woman known in town as a sinner is the best description of a prostitute. Pope Gregory the Great was of the same opinion and declared it so. But at that time she was no longer a prostitute because she was already married to Jesus. That's why she took the freedom to do her anointing of Jesus in public. If this woman was not Mary Magdalene who followed Jesus up to the last moments of Jesus in the cross, Jesus was not what he claimed to be. He becomes rather a "Casanova-like" man and not an Orthodox Jew who could not even be approached by a woman to address herself to him. Let alone if you take the cases reported by the four gospels as four different cases. All the gospels will lose all the credibility they need as legitimate literature.


#41    Paranoid Android

Paranoid Android

    ????????

  • 24,840 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • Paranoid Android... No power in the verse can stop me...

Posted 04 May 2013 - 12:34 AM

View PostBen Masada, on 03 May 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

Does it anywhere in the NT suggest or even hint that Jesus was not married? If you find it for me you have won a Jew to Christianity.

Now that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute take a look at Luke 7:37. "Then a woman known in the town to be a sinner learned that Jesus was dining in the Pharisee's home, brought in a vase of perfumed oil and would anoint Jesus' feet and kiss them..." A woman known in town as a sinner is the best description of a prostitute. Pope Gregory the Great was of the same opinion and declared it so. But at that time she was no longer a prostitute because she was already married to Jesus. That's why she took the freedom to do her anointing of Jesus in public. If this woman was not Mary Magdalene who followed Jesus up to the last moments of Jesus in the cross, Jesus was not what he claimed to be. He becomes rather a "Casanova-like" man and not an Orthodox Jew who could not even be approached by a woman to address herself to him. Let alone if you take the cases reported by the four gospels as four different cases. All the gospels will lose all the credibility they need as legitimate literature.
And where is the proof that the "woman known in the tow as a sinner" was Mary Magdalene?  Mary Magdalene doesn't turn up until chapter 8, so you need to do a bit of interpolating to link her to the woman in chapter 7.  Some traditions have linked the two, but it is by no means universal, and as I'm sure you know, tradition is by no means gospel (no pun intended).

Edited by Paranoid Android, 04 May 2013 - 12:38 AM.

Posted Image

My blog is now taking a new direction.  Dedicated to my father who was a great inspiration in my life, I wish to honour his memory (RIP, dad) by sharing with the world what he had always kept to himself.  More details, http://www.unexplain...showentry=27811

#42    GoSC

GoSC

    HOSEA 1:10; 2:23

  • Member
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silver Mountain

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:39 AM

View PostBen Masada, on 03 May 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

Does it anywhere in the NT suggest or even hint that Jesus was not married? If you find it for me you have won a Jew to Christianity.

Now that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute take a look at Luke 7:37. "Then a woman known in the town to be a sinner learned that Jesus was dining in the Pharisee's home, brought in a vase of perfumed oil and would anoint Jesus' feet and kiss them..." A woman known in town as a sinner is the best description of a prostitute. Pope Gregory the Great was of the same opinion and declared it so. But at that time she was no longer a prostitute because she was already married to Jesus. That's why she took the freedom to do her anointing of Jesus in public. If this woman was not Mary Magdalene who followed Jesus up to the last moments of Jesus in the cross, Jesus was not what he claimed to be. He becomes rather a "Casanova-like" man and not an Orthodox Jew who could not even be approached by a woman to address herself to him. Let alone if you take the cases reported by the four gospels as four different cases. All the gospels will lose all the credibility they need as legitimate literature.

First of all, that woman wasn't specifically called a prostitute but an immoral woman. Second of all, Christians consider Jesus to be the High Priest and without sin. Thus, why I pointed out this important piece of Scripture to you:

13 He shall take a wife in her virginity. 14 A widow, or a divorced woman, or one who is profaned by harlotry, these he may not take; but rather he is to marry a virgin of his own people, Leviticus 21:13-14

This marriage of Jesus is just Da Vinci code baloney, pure speculation and media sensationalism, or is thi belief of yours taught in the Jewish Talmud?

"I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in its own times he shall show, WHO IS THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTE, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power eternal. Amen" (I Tim 6:13-16).

#43    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,143 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 04 May 2013 - 09:15 AM

The four gospels are basicly the same story of Jesus , so which one would  the women Mary Magdalene at the cross likey be?

Matthew 15-39 And he sent away the multitude, and took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala.

Mary Magdalene comes down to Galilee with Jesus

Mark- Mary Magdalene- the one Jesus saved fron the seven demons

Luke -Mary Magdalene the one Jesus saved from the seven demons.

So which women would she likey be in the order of  John?

John-

The wedding.

Women at the well

The women Jesus saves from stoning


#44    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,143 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 05 May 2013 - 09:45 AM

A virgin women had to stay in her father`s house until she was married, so if Jesus married a women in Cana the bride`s family would have to have been from there. Mary  Magdalene was from Magdala.

Edited by docyabut2, 05 May 2013 - 09:51 AM.


#45    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,515 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 06 May 2013 - 07:32 PM

View PostParanoid Android, on 04 May 2013 - 12:34 AM, said:

And where is the proof that the "woman known in the tow as a sinner" was Mary Magdalene?  Mary Magdalene doesn't turn up until chapter 8, so you need to do a bit of interpolating to link her to the woman in chapter 7.  Some traditions have linked the two, but it is by no means universal, and as I'm sure you know, tradition is by no means gospel (no pun intended).

Proof is not the word here but evidence. No one can provide proofs of anything in the Bible but evidences. First and foremost Jesus was a religious Jew. No woman could approach him in public to talk or ask for help. If she needed any, Jewish tradition would dictate that she was to make her request known from a few yards away and not touch or kiss him if she was not his wife. That woman was his wife not only for having breaking those cultural rules but also because the woman who did that work on Jesus is identified in John 11:1,2 as being Mary the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Now, two reasons why she was the same woman who is mentioned by Luke in 7:37 are: She could not have done so in public. And the second reason is that Mary of Betahany (sister of Martha) had two places to attend to: Her home in Bethany and her working place in Magdala. This was a busy city in the Northeast of the sea of Galilee famous for its fishing port. There Mary was a famous Courtesan and had her business to attend to. Probably that's where Jesus met her during his visits throughout Galilee. Only after they got married Bethany became a resting station for Jesus' missionary trips to and from other regions throughout Israel. Now, why "Magdalene"? Because as a result of her business in Magada the name stuck to her but as long as she was in her main home house in Bethany the business name was avoided for definitely obvious reasons.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users