Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by MamaJ
Research shows he was real, reincarnated many times, lived like we all live with a family.
He just so happened to remember his purpose because he was on a mission, to free the fallen
According to your interpretation. The OT clearly states who he is, the physical manifestation of God. The reason he is the First and Last is because only One was needed, and because only One was needed it made him not just the First but the Last :shk:.edit on 19-9-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)
This is an attempt to turn Jesus into the figure of the quran, a mere prophet who married like their prophet.
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
fact: marriage is a strictly obligatory precondition for becoming a rabbi, no exceptions, period.
Further in Jewish law, the European gloss of R. Isserles on the Shulchan Arukh OH 581:1 states that only one who is married may lead the congregation in worship - note that this is the Hazzan/Shaliah Tzibbur and not the Rabbi whose function may only have been to teach.
How does that relate to Rabbis today? Most Rabbis marry. They marry for the companionship and children, but also in doing so they can better understand the dynamics of the family, which they are often called upon to counsel. Most Rabbis are fortunate enough to find an appropriate mate, even in this very complicated world. (Source, emphasis mine.)
From the description in the New Testament, Jesus was clearly a teaching Rabbi, he didn't lead a Synagogue.
The Shulchan Aruch (Hebrew: שׁוּלחָן עָרוּך, literally: "Set Table") also known as the Code of Jewish Law, is the most authoritative legal code of Judaism. It was authored in Safed, Ottoman Eyalet of Damascus, by Yosef Karo in 1563 and published in Venice two years later. Together with its commentaries, it is the most widely accepted compilation of Jewish law ever written.
the Talmud en.wikipedia.org...
Originally, Jewish scholarship was oral. Rabbis expounded and debated the law (the written law expressed in the Hebrew Bible) and discussed the Tanakh without the benefit of written works (other than the Biblical books themselves), though some may have made private notes (megillot setarim), for example of court decisions. This situation changed drastically, however,
mainly as the result of the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth and the Second Temple in the year 70 CE and the consequent upheaval of Jewish social and legal norms. As the Rabbis were required to face a new reality—mainly Judaism without a Temple (to serve as the center of teaching and study) and Judea without at least partial autonomy—there was a flurry of legal discourse and the old system of oral scholarship could not be maintained. It is during this period that Rabbinic discourse began to be recorded in writing.
The earliest recorded oral law may have been of the midrashic form, in which halakhic discussion is structured as exegetical commentary on the Pentateuch. But an alternative form, organized by subject matter instead of by biblical verse, became dominant about the year 200 CE, when Rabbi Judah haNasi redacted the Mishnah (משנה). The Oral Law was far from monolithic; rather, it varied among various schools. The most famous two were the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. In general, all valid opinions, even the non-normative ones, were recorded in the Talmud.
The oldest full manuscript of the Talmud is from 1342, known as the Munich Talmud and was purchased in a hotly contested auction from New York based Christies by Tyndale House of the UK.
Originally posted by avocadoshag
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by 11235813213455
No, symbology is fine. This was written many hundreds of years later by a sect that taught this. This is not "proof" Jesus was married, this is proof this cult believed he was. There is no new information here. It would be like me saying "proof" Jesus visited native americans and handing you a a Mormon Bible.
Exactly...or like saying "proof" that Jesus existed, and handing me a regular Bible.
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
If you've forgotten more than we know now, doesn't that mean we know more than you now? After all, what good is knowledge when it's forgotten?
Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by kurthall
There are at least 100 different Jesus's mentioned during that time period. You gotta take your pick.
Originally posted by Jordan River
I didn't know there were fake Jesus around caliming to be Yeshua the Messiah, or anointed , proof?
Originally posted by adjensen
I'll summarize my post in the (original thread) here, as well.
This "proof" is a scrap, smaller than a business card, which contains eight lines, plus three words, and the continuation of the phrase "my wife" is missing, so we have no way of knowing if it said "my wife, Mary" (cue Dan Brown) or, perhaps "my wife, the church" (cue the existing New Testament).
In addition, this is apparently a Fourth Century document, written in Coptic, which is consistent with the Gnostic texts in Nag Hammadi, and the views expressed would be consistent with those.
In short, there is nothing particularly "revealing" about this, even if it shown to be real.
Originally posted by ThinkingCap
Why would Jesus say "My wife the church" --- When he opposed organized religion?
Originally posted by CaptainBeno
reply to post by n3mesis
Ok, you have me interested now...........slightly off topic, but hey who cares, this has been posted several times.
If Jesus and Mary had a child, how come their child was nothing special? And the one after that and the one after......
or is this where you say , "why does the child have to be special?"
I just wondering that's all as if we took a look at cattle, we breed cattle to their bloodlines etc, surely there would be some "trait" that made this person special and if so why have we not heard of him/her?
So honestly it all depends what the person wants to see