Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
Ben Masada

But Really, Why Was Jesus Crucified?

641 posts in this topic

Ah! BTW, don't forget to ask if adoption makes of the child of a different tribe a legal member of the tribe of the adopting father. Besides, just in case you have forgotten, if Jesus was not a biological son of Joseph's, he was neither a Levite because Mary would not make him so. Therefore, according to you, he was a Jew without a tribe to be identified after. I am sorry if that makes you feel bad. The truth is that one has no choice but to lay in the bed he

has made for himself.

Ben

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.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipDate=8/19/2003

http://www.halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Pesachim.pdf

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/261,2404/Can-a-Kohen-or-Levite-get-married-to-any-Jewish-woman.html

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

Edited by Jor-el

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in Jesus' mind but in Paul's mind. Jesus never had any problem with the Pharisees, as Jesus was of the line of the Pharisees himself. Paul was the one who had a bitter grudge against the Pharisees, for having been chased away from Israel and forbidden to return under penalty of being arrested. He escaped back to Tarsus where he belonged and did not return for the next 14 years. (Acts 9:30; Gal. 2:1) To insist that Jesus was the one against the Pharisees is to admit that Jesus broke the Golden Rule of not doint unto others what we would not like they did unto us. I mean, if you read Matthew 23:13-33 about those curses addressed to the Pharisees of hypocrites and many other bad names.

Regarding Paul's taking Jesus' teachings to the non-Jews, would you please tell me when he did that? Because since his first station in Damascus and until his last one in Rome, he was concerned only to work in the synagogues of the Jews. As any one knows, synagogues were places for Jews and not Gentiles. (Acts 9:20; 28:17)

Ben

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm that would make the entire Old testament a cheap knock off of the Hellenistic mythos, my friend. It is simple.

A. Either the Jews (as per the actual examples I gave from Genesis) got their mythology from the Hellenist influences at that time as well, or

B. The Old Testament demonstrates that God did indeed appear in human form. Want me to give you a few more examples?

I can quote Genesis a little more, I can quote Exodus, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Psalms and another half dozen more. They all demonstrate the very same thing. God appearing to men, speaking to them and physically touching them. Are they all now liars too?

Make your choice... A or B.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodness, I see your confusion...

The tombstone was rolled away on the morning of the 4th day. He speant 3 complete days and nights in the tomb, fullstop.

14th Nisan, Day 0 - sundown Tuesday to sundown Wednesday - Erev Pesach (the day before the Sabbath), Preperation day, The night of the Last Supper. The day Jesus was crucified.

15th Nisan, Day 1 - sundown Wednesday to sundown Thursday - Pesach I (Passover), 1st day of Unleavened Bread.

16th Nisan, Day 2 - sundown Thursday to sundown Friday - Pesach II, 2nd day of Unleavened Bread

17th Nisan, Day 3 - sundown Friday to sundown Saturday - Pesach III, Sixth day Sabbath, 3rd day of Unleavened Bread

18th Nisan, Day 4 - Pesach IV, The day of Firstfruits, Resurrection in the early Morning. In rising from the dead, Jesus became the first-fruits of all those who die and yet will be resurrected to live forever.

People generally don't realize that Easter tradition has nothing to do with the biblical account of the Paschal week.

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

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, it was to obey the Law, as God himself intended, for Jesus to do.

Matthew 5:18

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

What he was referring to in this is quite evident, Isaiah 53. No matter how you justify it, Isaiah 53 demonstrates that you are in fact wrong. It clearly shows that the suffering servant, who is a human being, not an animal, was killed as a guilt offering. It is there in black and white. The imagery does not lie.

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

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Adam and Eve did eat the fruit of life. Doesn't that mean that they were immortal like God when they were banished? :w00t::o

No, the answer to your question is found in Psalm 82:6,7. "You are gods, all of you, children of the Most High; yet, like men, you all shall die." Indeed, man became like God when he ate of the tree of knowledge but, like man, he would have to die. That's why he could not eat of the tree of life. (Gen. 3:22)

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have a serious talk with your Rabbi on this issue...

"I firmly believe that there will take place a revival of the dead at a time which will please the Creator, blessed be His name."

Saadia also, in his "Emunot we-De'ot" (following Sanh. x. 1), declared the belief in resurrection to be fundamental.

Ḥasdai Crescas, on the other hand, declared it to be a specific doctrine of Judaism, but not one of the fundamental teachings, which view is taken also by Joseph Albo in his "'Iḳḳarim" (i., iv. 35-41, xxiii.).

The chief difficulty, as pointed out by the latter author, is to find out what the resurrection belief actually implied or comprised, since the ancient rabbis themselves differed as to whether resurrection was to be universal, or the privilege of the Jewish people only, or of the righteous only.

This again depends on the question whether it was to form part of the Messianic redemption of Israel, or whether it was to usher in the last judgment.

Saadia sees in the belief in resurrection a national hope, and endeavors to reconcile it with reason by comparing it with other miraculous events in nature and history recorded in the Bible. Maimonides and Albo in their commentary on Sanh. x. 1, Ḳimḥi in his commentary on Ps. i. 5, Isaac Aboab in his "Menorat ha-Ma'or" (iii. 4, 1), and Baḥya ben Asher in his commentary on Gen. xxiii. extend resurrection to the righteous only.

On the other hand, Isaac Abravanel in his "Ma'yene Yeshu'ah" (ii. 9) concedes it to all Israel; Manasseh ben Israel, in his "Nishmat Ḥayyim" (i. 2, 8), and others, to all men.

Maimonides, however (see his commentary, l.c., and "Yad," Teshubah, viii.), took the resurrection figuratively, and substituted for it immortality of the soul, as he stated at length in his "Ma'amar Teḥiyyat ha-Metim"; Judah ha-Levi also, in his "Cuzari," took resurrection figuratively (i. 115, iii. 20-21).

See: The Jewish Encyclopedia

What I see above is the classical, Sadducee vs Pharisee argument..., jeez I thought that was over and done with 2000 years ago. It seems not. Either way The site clearly defined what it meant by bodily resurrection, there was no error. It was a Jewish site. So what we have here my friend is a difference of opinion, you saying one thing, other Jews saying another.

Jesus demonstrated on which side of the argument he was on...

If you can quote any thing in the Tanach about bodily resurrection, you have won me as a Christian. About Maimonides, you must read his "The Guide

for the Perplexed." He did not believe even in the eternity of the universe, let alone in the immortality of man. And about the other Jewish wisemen, none believed in bodily resurrection.

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man... I go no further... please go back to the drawing board and study a little more on this... preperation day is the 14th of Nisan, it has always been so... man check a jewish calendar, if you don't believe me...

Nowhere does it state it was a friday... the Sabbath referred to here is the "Passover" itself, which everybody knows is on 15th Nisan.

John 19:31

Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.

What is this special Sabbath?

It was Passover. Jesus did not die on Passover, he was taken down from the cross on the eve of Passover, which started at sundown on the day he died... It was NOT a normal sabbath, which is why people think he died on a Friday...

Again, what day is called the first day of the week? Sunday, right? Right. Now, read Matthew 28:1. "After that Sabbath, as the first day of the week

was dawning..." You don't have to take my word for it. Take the word of the first gospel, then. Sometimes I think you don't believe your own NT.

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers 12:6

4 At once the Lord said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, “Come out to the Tent of Meeting, all three of you.” So the three of them came out. 5 Then the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance to the Tent and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When both of them stepped forward, 6 he said, “Listen to my words:

“When a prophet of the Lord is among you, I reveal myself to him in visions, I speak to him in dreams.

7 But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house.

8 With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the Lord.

Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”

How interesting, you only quoted part of it, forgetting what God himself says of Moses, which when we add it to the 3 other examples I gave earlier, you don't have you a leg to stand on. It is quite clear that among the people of Israel at that time, when Moses led them it was true, God only showed himself face to face to Moses (and it isn't metaphorical), what you neglect to state is that He did so to others many times as well. God uses dreams and visions to talk to his prophets, but God is not limited to dreams and visions, after all, he IS God.

For example, after Moses died, He appeared to Joshua...

Ok... :innocent: , now all you have to do is back that up with evidence from the text... I doubt I'll get it.

We can throw suppositions into the air, hoping that they land right side up, unfortunately this one doesn't, no matter how many times you try. The text is clear and plain that this was happening, it was not a dream , much less a vision.

We have counless passages in the bible where dreams are evident. This is because it clearly states that this was a dream... the same thing also happens with visions as well, it clearly states that there is an altered state of reality present and on the actual individual. Do you want me to give you clear examples of both?

How about Isaiah 1?

Isaiah 1:1-3

1 The vision concerning Judah and Jerusalem that Isaiah son of Amoz saw during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

2 Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth!

For the Lord has spoken:

“I reared children and brought them up,

but they have rebelled against me.

3 The ox knows his master,

the donkey his owner’s manger,

but Israel does not know,

my people do not understand.”

1 Kings 3:5

At Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon during the night in a dream, and God said, "Ask for whatever you want me to give you."

God speaks to us in visions and dreams, but to those who are critically important to Gods plans for mankind, he goes much further. He appears to them , he interacts with them, he directs them and he makes covenants with them.

The bible is plain and direct, we don't have to invent to anything to justify what is written there, and what is written there is that God in the form of his "Word", literally appeared to men.

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. God is not like a man to have a face to show. God has no form at all. (Deut. 4:15-20) God is Spirit as Jesus himself said so. (John 4:24) At least, believe what he said. A spirit is incorporeal. (

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My parents are not Jewish, but they do follow the Old Testament customs and festivals (I'm a protestant and don't follow the same Jewish festivals that they do). And correct me if I'm wrong but Passover was just celebrated this year on Wednesday. Currently we're in the Feast of Unleavened Bread and they are eating their Matzos (well, they don't have any Matzos this year, but they aren't eating anything with leaven in it). In the year Jesus died, if the Passover was on Thursday, then Thursday would have been a High Sabbath. If Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and put into the tomb before sundown on Wednesday night, then three days and three nights later is Saturday night. Then on Sunday morning Mary and such go down to the tomb but it's empty - because he resurrected the night before.

There is no textual evidence in the Bible to corroborate that Jesus was crucified on Friday. This is a pagan tradition adopted by the church.

Sorry to butt into your discussion with Jor-el, I just thought I'd add my thoughts on this as someone who grew up observing Jewish festivals and therefore have some kind of idea as to what Judaism entails. Just because you are a Jew does not mean you are the be-all-end-all of Jewish knowledge. As I said, I'm a protestant Christian, and I have been for the past 12 of my 32 years on earth, but I am not an expert in all things Christian, and though I do think I have a significant knowledge of Christianity I am not perfect and even non-Christians teach me a thing or two from time to time. Just because you are a Jew does not mean you know all there is to know about Judaism. Consider it ironic that even though you aren't a Christian you feel justified in telling Christians they don't know their own scriptures and then quote the gospels to back your position (if I were vindictive, I'd quote your exact words with minor modification and say "You are debating with a Christian and pretending to teach Christianity to the Christians").

Just an observation, all the best, Ben :tu:

~ Regards, PA

You state above: "THERE IS NO CONTEXTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE BIBLE TO CORROBORATE THAT JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED ON FRIDAY." Well, I'll take you on that one. Let me ask you a question. What do you call the first day of the week? Did I hear SUNDAY? I didn't hear you! Louder, please! S U N D A Y!!! Good. Sunday is the first day of the week. Now, would you please read with me what is written in Matthew 28:1? "After that Shabbat, as the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK, (Sunday) was dawning..." If you believe in the gospel of Matthew, can you deny that this is a contextual evidence that Jesus was crucified on that Friday and laid in the tomb just before that shabbat? I believe there is no other option.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipDate=8/19/2003

http://www.halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Pesachim.pdf

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/261,2404/Can-a-Kohen-or-Levite-get-married-to-any-Jewish-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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 w00t.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.