LOVE OF RECENTLY MARRIED PEOPLE

One day, Jesus was paying a visit to his most dearly-more-than-a-cousin, John the Immerser, over the other side of the Jordan. Perhaps, it had been a long time since they had seen each other last. (John 10:40)

Soon enough, while he was enjoying the company of his dearly host, a messenger from Bethany had arrived with the message that Lazarus was so sick that he was approaching his last hour. Jesus waved the urgency, discarded the messenser, and stayed for another two days.

Before Jesus started stinking like a fish, he gathered his disciples and headed towards Bethany. There is a saying in Hebrew that, "OreChim ve dagim masriChim aharei shelosha yamim." In English it won't sound so funny but it goes thus, "Guests and fish start stinking after three days." Then, he headed towards Bethany.

At the sight of Bethany, but still a few yards away, Martha, in tears, was running to meet Jesus, as she informed him that Lazarus had been buried already for four days. Somehow, Jesus waved her excitement away as if he had not listened to her, and aked, "Where is Mary?"

Martha got the message and ran back to the house to inform Mary that Jesus had arrived and was asking for her. This, promptly arose, and still in tears, went to meet him. As Jesus realized that Mary was crying, a strong disturbance occurred in the deepest of his emotions, and he also joined her in her predicament with likewise a tearful face.

Conclusion: a) At the news that Lazarus was at his final hour, Jesus discarded the messenger and the message for at least another two days. b) At meeting a crying Martha with the message that Lazarus was already buried, he asked for Mary. c) Mary didn't even have to speak, but the sight of a tearful face in his beloved,it was enough to extract from the depth of his heart such a disturbed emotion that caused Jesus to melt all down in tears. That could not be anything else but love of the kind of recently married people. That's an extra evidence that they were married to each other. (John 11:1-38)

Ben

Ben I have found on the net that there is book called gospel of Philips which says that Jesus used to kiss Mary frequently. Some people say he kissed her on the mouth.

1 man is prone to lust. It's a human character. Chances are that Jesus loved mary, but God knows whether he was married or not

2 there are some ancient writing that are never included in the bible. Gospel of Barnabas, Gospel of Philips, etc are one of them. God knows the truth

Abdul, according to the gospel of Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus is said to have come not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it down to the letter. It means he came with the mission to fulfill ALL the commandments.

It happens that the first commandment ever given by the Lord
was to marry, to grow and to multiply. That's in Genesis 1:28. If Jesus did not marry, he failed on his mission on earth. That's just another evidence that Jesus was a married man. Since there is no other woman in the NT that he
loved and was deeply loved by, he was married to Mary Magdalene.

Yes, I was listening to the History channer the other day, when I happened to watch some Theologians witnessing that, indeed, Jesus used to kiss Mary Magdalene on the mouth.
Ben

Ben, don't forget that there is a religion named Islam that acknowledges Jesus. According to Quran, And The Gospel of Barnabas and some verses of OT itself, Jesus was not crucified. Don't know if u believe this or not, but if you believe u may have the scope to think that Jesus will marry after his second advent . I cannot say firmly whether he fulfilled the mosaic law in his first chapter of life.

If u are a follow-what-masters-say-christian, you may not believe it(that jesus was not crucified). But the true information is with God only.

Thanks

IMHO, Jesus was crucified, but he must have survived the cross. According to Josephus, the Romans crucified thousands
of Jews in the First Century. Jesus was not the only one. And that it was not uncommon for crucifieds to linger on their crosses for up to three or four days passing out and back till death would eventually catch up with them. Jesus was taken off his cross only after a few hours. It is strongly probable that he survived the cross.

When Joseph of Arimathea requested of Pilate to remove Jesus from the cross and to bury him, Pilate was deeply surprised that Jesus should have died so soon. That's in Mark 15:44.

When Joseph took Jesus off the cross, he must have realized that he was still alive and, not to call unnecessary attention, he laid Jesus for an hour or two in his walk-in tomb while he went for his men to help him remove Jesus into a safer place where he could take care of Jesus' wounds with the help of Nicodemus, who had come with about 100 pounds of medication for that matter. That's in John 19:39.

The true information is in the Gospels themselves. Unless, by saying that it is with God only, you mean that nobody can know. All we have to do is to put two plus two together to find four... or 22.

Ben

Ben, does plus mean add mathematically or just put side by side. . ?

Ok whatever be it, Jesus never died on the cross, God took him up to the heaven. . .

Ben,

I think you're missing the significance of the miracles Jesus performed up to this point - and their increasing complexity. This visit to Mary, Martha, and the tomb of Lazarus was the greatest miracle He'd perfomed to this point - raising the dead.

His reason for awaiting four days passage ensured Lazarus's body had been prepared properly for burial. The amount of materials represent the mumification process of setting the body aside permanently. When He called Lazarus from the tomb, there was not doubt in the minds of the witnesses present that He brought Lazarus' soul back from heaven to re-animate the body. The body cannot live without the spirit within - it's the spark of life God places in it.

Why you think this Mary character is of particular emotional attachment for Him, I'm not sure you see the subtlty in it.

1) This Mary was the one who sat at his feet (in focused concentration at what He was telling the disciples). She showed an attachment to Him which the disciples weren't showing. Any teacher will play to the audience which is most receptive. But, don't confuse empathy with humanistic love.

2) Jesus never claimed that He came to exercise every tittle of the Hebrew Law. But, He abided by that portion which directly impacted His activities. And, He encouraged all who listened to Him to keep the remainder as He was doing His part. What He DID claim was that He was fulfilling the prophesies of a Messiah predicted by all of the major Old Testament prophets - coming to save His people (that's ALL people, not just Jews). It's also written about Him (both Old and New Testaments) that He was an individual with no tangible legacy to follow Him. He was a loner in humankind. He was born OF a woman (a virgin) and died childless. His major purpose was to fulfill the atonement of sin for ALL mankind. He was the unblemished sacrificial lamb - a LAMB, not old enough to breed and, not having done so.

3) Jesus came to the Jews first, to prompt them to fulfill the second portion of the command God gave them when He instituted the Hebrew nation. In return for His favor on their faithful following, they were to be a nation of priests - teaching the rest of the world about God. They've failed to carry out the second part - evangelize. When He was rejected by the priestly leadership, then He sent His twelve (Hebrew) disciples out to tell the world about His sacrificial death and resurrection.

Jesus was a Jewish man, and Jews do not believe in heaven as a place to go to. It means that either we are not talking about a Jewish man called Jesus, or the hellenistic
guys who wrote the gospels were Greeks and not Jewish.
Ben

Yoda, Jesus was a Jewish man. Jews do not believe in bodily resurrection. It would be working against the Tanach itself to contradict it when it says that once dead, one is never supposed to return. (Job 10:21; 2 Sam. 12:23))

The bringing back of Lazarus was either a parable or Luke wrote it to interpolate his own hellenistic doctrine.

God did not put the soul in man. The Torah says that when man was formed of the dust of the earth, God breathed into it the breath of life and man BECAME a living soul. Therefore, soul is not something we have but what we are.(Gen. 2:7)

1) I believe that Jesus was married to Marry. Evidences abound.

2) Jesus did claim to have come to exercise every law down to the letter, even down to the dot of the letter. Read Mat.
5:17-19; especially verse 19.

I do not believe Jesus was the Messiah. There is a consensus
that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah. I subscribe myself to that consensus. If you read Isaiah 41:8,9 and 44:1,2,21, Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name. Then, the Messiah cannot be an individual. The individual is born, lives his span of life, and eventually dies. Are we to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not. The Messiah cannot die. He is supposed to remain as a people before the Lord forever, according to Jeremiah 31:35-37.

3) According to whom Jesus came to the Jews FIRST, to Paul?
In Mat. we have that he came for the Jews only, and he even forbade his disciples to take the gospel to the Gentiles. (Mat. 10:5,6)

What do you mean by "The Jews have failed to evangelize?"
In the First Century, the Jews were very strong in the evangelization of the Gentiles. They had to stop because the Church, soon after it became the official religion of the Roman Empire, decreed death to the Jews who were involved in proselytizing Gentiles. It doesn't mean we have failed. Just as a result of my work, I have brought to Judaism nine precious souls.
Ben

Ben007Masada wrote: "What do you mean by 'The Jews have failed to evangelize?' In the First Century, the Jews were very strong in the evangelization of the Gentiles."

And, the previous 2500 years, when Abraham was initially charged with the task? (Isaiah 42:5-8)

They had to wait until Jesus came to remind them?

Ben007Masada wrote: "Yoda, Jesus was a Jewish man. Jews do not believe in bodily resurrection. It would be working against the Tanach itself to contradict it when it says that once dead, one is never supposed to return. (Job 10:21; 2 Sam. 12:23)) The bringing back of Lazarus was either a parable or Luke wrote it to interpolate his own hellenistic doctrine."

See Isaiah 26:19.

Also, although Sadducees may not have believed in an afterlife, the Pharisees did. Saul, later Paul, was a Pharisee. Paul persecuted the converts perpetuated by Jesus' teachings - Stephan in particular, watching as he was stoned to death. On the road to Damascus he had an experience which he describes in detail. He even mentions that his companions heard the voice speaking (although they did not see the vision).

If Jesus was solely a man, then what you say might be considered contradictory (as you claim). However, Jesus (Himself) declared that He was the Son of God. (John 1:33-35, 1:48-50; John 12:44-50; Matt 14:33) If God is the one speaking, then I suggest that He has the authority to expand His interests further than the Hebrew nation, doesn’t He?

Ben007Masada wrote: "According to whom Jesus came to the Jews FIRST, to Paul? In Mat. we have that he came for the Jews only, and he even forbade his disciples to take the gospel to the Gentiles. (Mat. 10:5,6)"

Try Matt 12:18-21 - quoting Isaiah as part of the passage.

And, yet, those who believed in Him, and who He said He was, would not be ignored. (Matt 15:21-28)

In the year 310 ACE, Christianity was adopted by Rome to be the religion of the Empire by Emperor Constantine. One of the first decrees edicted by the Church was to sentence to death any Jew caught in the process to proselytize Gentiles.
That's the reason why our leaders prohibited proselytism of Gentiles to this very day.

As a matter of fact, many Gentiles converted to Judaism by means of Abrham, and that was normal for the Jews to proselytize until the Church stopped them in the 4th Century.

Jesus did not remind any Jew to keep on the evangelization of Gentiles. He rather prohibited his disciples to take the gospel to the Gentiles. See Matthew 10:5,6.
Ben

Isaiah 26:19 is a reference to the metaphorical resurrection
of Jews in exile, as it is better explained in Ezekiel 37:12.

But see Isaiah 53:8,9 first. Exile for the Jewish People is compared to being cut off from the land of the living, which
is the Land of Israel, and graves being assigned to them in the Diaspora, among the Gentiles. When the exile is over, the Lord opens those graves and brings us back to the Land of Israel, as indeed, it is what has happened every time we are in exile, and the exile is over. Now, you can see Ezekiel 37:12.

Neither the Sadducees nor the Pharisees believed in bodily resurrection. They followed the same concept of Ezekiel 37:12.

Paul was never a Pharisee. Paul was the son of well-to-do Hellenistic parents from Tarsus in the Cilicia, a Greek city, famous for the Platonic University founded by Plato. The Sect of the Pharisees would never accept a Hellenistic Jew to join the Sect. As today, it is not that easy for someone to join the Freemason society, the same was then to join the Sect of the Pharisees. Paul's word was not worthy believing. He would say any thing and be any thing according to the circumstances: A Jew among the Jews, a Gentile among the Gentiles, a Roman among the Romans, a Greek among the Greeks, a Farisee among the Farisees, any thing among all things.

Jesus was a Jewish man. A Jew would never declare that he was a son of God, let alone God Himself. Only Hellenists would be able of such a heresy. Jesus' Faith was Judaism and, there is no such a thing in Judaism as the Hellenistic myth of the demigod, which is the son of a god with an earthly woman.
Ben

Matthew 12:18-21 and 15:21-28 have absolutely nothing to do with Matthew 10:5,6. Therefore, a non-sequitur to the issue under discussion. Sorry!
Ben

Ben007Masada wrote: "In the year 310 ACE, Christianity was adopted by Rome to be the religion of the Empire by Emperor Constantine. One of the first decrees edicted by the Church was to sentence to death any Jew caught in the process to proselytize Gentiles."

In 310 AD, Christianity (Catholicism) was institutionalized by a pagan Roman Caesar at the behest of his queen. Constantine used it as a mechanism for government of the western portion of the surviving Roman Empire. I believe that, at that invocation, the leadership of the Catholic church saw corruption creeping into the church. The "way to get ahead" was to climb the church leadership ladder. This corruption persisted until the Reformation, when Protestant denominations sought to distance themselves from it.

If Jewish evangelism was as widespread as you say, then where is the documentation of this in the Gentile community?

First of all, I see no difference between the corruption of the Catholic Church and Protestantism. In some protestant countries, we see the same kind of corruption that to creep into a protestant branch is a good way to get ahead in life as a famous and successful person. Henry Kinssiger was a Jewish person that used that road to climb politically. It seems to me that he would not have become an American Secretary of State if he had remained Jewish. The same happened to Madeleine Obrian. As you can see, there was not much of a difference with the Reformation by Martin Luther.

Then,Jewish evangelism was so prolific in the First Century that throughout Asia Minor the Sect of the Nazarenes had a synagogue with Gentiles almost everywhere. So much so that, Paul would hardly need to start a Christian church from scratch. He would invade the Nazarene synagogues with his peculiar gospel and overturn them into Christian churches. The NT is the best record about that as a fact.

Ben

Ben007Masada wrote: "God did not put the soul in man. The Torah says that when man was formed of the dust of the earth, God breathed into it the breath of life and man BECAME a living soul. Therefore, soul is not something we have but what we are.(Gen. 2:7)"

Let me ensure I have this straight:
(1) God was still in the sixth (and last) day of creation when He made Man (=mankind) in the form of Adam.
(2) God breathed into Adam's nostrils from His own Eternal being. [Note that since God is not a physical captive of this universe, then He is not constrained by the need to "breathe" air in order to sustain Himself nor to start another breathing.] He placed in Adam something not "of God" but "by God".

This sounds like a creative act to me - and one which distinguished Man from every other creature on Earth. No other statement about creation indicates that God "breathed" into the other creatures (in the first few days of creation). Man's mind was part of the dust He formed. The "breath" was separate. Man's mind and soul are unique.

Ben007Masada wrote: "Paul was never a Pharisee. Paul was the son of well-to-do Hellenistic parents from Tarsus in the Cilicia, a Greek city, famous for the Platonic University founded by Plato. The Sect of the Pharisees would never accept a Hellenistic Jew to join the Sect. As today, it is not that easy for someone to join the Freemason society, the same was then to join the Sect of the Pharisees. Paul's word was not worthy believing."

Although a practicing Jew lives in another country than Israel (Judah), does that make him Gentile? If not, then I invite your attention to Acts 9, where Luke is recording Paul's activities..."Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem."

It's my understanding that a letter of Marque (authorization from the Sanhedrin) was only issued to a Pharisee to arrest and bring into custody those sought by the Chief Priest, because of the authority the bearer wielded.

If living in another country than Israel (Judah) makes him Gentile, then no Jew is truly Jew because of the exiles each portion of the Jewish nation took (10 tribes to Assyria and Judah/Levi to Babylon, and ultimately the diaspora).

Yoda, I think all your confusion is based on your sense of literal interpretation. Do you think that God formed man from the clay of the earth like a potter handles the clay into the form of what he has in mind? The account of creation of man in Genesis is an allegory to be interpreted metaphorically. To go literal with the creation account of Genesis, you will succeed only to cause atheists to laugh at you. The Genesis allegory of creation is only the Jewish method to explain the presence of man on earth. There is nothing literal about it.

What separates the creation of man from that of the irrational animals is that we have been granted with Divine attributes which the animals do not have. As for instance, Reason, Intellect, Judgment, Intuition, etc. We have the ability to understand concepts which is denied the animals.

Ben

No, Yoda, a Jew, outside Israel, practicing Judaism or not,
he is not a Gentile. The only way for a Jew to become a Gentile is by rejecting Judaism and converting to another religion.

Regarding Acts 9:1,2, focus on the text that says, Paul went to arrest the followers of "The New Way" in the synagogues of the Jews. And by disciples of the Lord, the reference was to the Nazarenes, which was the most recent Jewish Sect of Judaim in the First Century. They were not Christians. These started with Paul in the city of Antioch about five years later when Paul spent a whole year in the synagogue of the Nazarenes of Antioch teaching that Jesus was Christ. Read Acts 11:26.

Now, to work for the High Priest it does not mean that Paul was a Pharisee. Absolutely not. He was simply a Temple policement doing a dirty job for the Sadducees. Then, the case could even not having been true at all because, if the Sanhedrin could not pass a sentence in Israel because of the Romans how could they send someone into another country to cause havoc? Think! It could have been an forgery to enhance Paul's conversion which was not a conversion but a change of strategy to join the Sect of the Nazarenes and fight it from within, since fighting from outside, it would only make the Sect grow larger. (Acts 9:26,27,30)

Regarding the Ten ancient Tribes that got lost into Assyria, yes, after about 130 years, they had lost their identity as the People of Israel; except for those who joined Judah in the South during the moratorium of 130 years between their exodus and that of Judah later to Babylon. It is calculated that about two thirds of the Levites and a few thousands from the other Tribes had escaped to join Judah and be exiled later for 70 years to Babylon. When they returned, all were simply members of the Jewish People. Therefore, no Jew in the Diaspora, who has not converted into another religion, has lost his or her Jewish identity.

Ben