an odd question I have

[Torah613]

First of all, let me begin by stating that I don't want to disparage anyone's beliefs.

Ok, now to my question. Let us assume for this discussion that Jesus was a practicing Jew and 30 something when he died. History tells us that at the time the average life expectancy for someone in Jesus's socioeconomic class was somewhere around 45-50, which was quite a high average at the time.

With all of that, how is it that Jesus would not have been fulfilling the Mitzvoth by being married? It is after all the first commandment given. Just curious as to y'alls opinions is all.

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

First of all, let me begin by stating that I don't want to disparage anyone's beliefs.

Ok, now to my question. Let us assume for this discussion that Jesus was a practicing Jew and 30 something when he died. History tells us that at the time the average life expectancy for someone in Jesus's socioeconomic class was somewhere around 45-50, which was quite a high average at the time.

With all of that, how is it that Jesus would not have been fulfilling the Mitzvoth by being married? It is after all the first commandment given. Just curious as to y'alls opinions is all.

Yochanan
can ya link me? (not educated on the contents of Mitzvoth)

[Torah613]

Ok, not sure if there is a link out there, but the Mitzva (commandment) is to be fruitful and multiply. So my question remains, why wasn't he fulfilling the mitzva?

(Mitzvoth is the plural of Mitzva and means commandments--specifically the 613 commandments as outlined in the Torah)

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

Ok, not sure if there is a link out there, but the Mitzva (commandment) is to be fruitful and multiply. So my question remains, why wasn't he fulfilling the mitzva?

(Mitzvoth is the plural of Mitzva and means commandments--specifically the 613 commandments as outlined in the Torah)

Yochanan
I guess you could say that He was in a sense... (us being his kids)

in another vein you could also say that really, biblically, that's not a commandment so much as a suggestion (or everyone who could not have children would be in violation of a commandment - no?)

you could also argue that since he broke other fence laws, this one was no different. KWIM?

[Torah613]

actually no. Those who cannot have children are Anusim, or forced, and thus dispensed from the mitzva.

I'm not talking about the other Mitzvoth that he may have broken, but this one specific commandment. How is it that a nice Jewish boy didn't get married? and if he was 30 something and not married, than how come he wasn't shunned by the people?

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

actually no. Those who cannot have children are Anusim, or forced, and thus dispensed from the mitzva.

I'm not talking about the other Mitzvoth that he may have broken, but this one specific commandment. How is it that a nice Jewish boy didn't get married? and if he was 30 something and not married, than how come he wasn't shunned by the people?

Yochanan
maybe he was icky looking (sorry, I know he is plain, but for all we know he was refused - couldn't they do that if they found their prospective mate objectionable?)

and again, if one is able to be broken, why not this one as well (I understand not pursuing the argument down the other road but still feels kinda related to me)

it's never stated he didn't break the rules, just never sinned... i guess these type of laws aren't a sin to break possibly.

[Torah613]

Because his so called breaking of the other mitzvoth is in question. For instance the various times he's accused of working on the Sabbath. in some cases he wasn't halachically considedered working because he wasn't doing anyting forbidden by the 39 categories.

For instance picking grain to eat on the sabbath etc. because one is exceedingly hungry wouldn't necessarily be a violation of the sabbath. For instance if one had blood sugar problems it could have been a matter of life and death, and thus would be commanded to break the comandment in order to save life.

Now that's all I'll say on those matters because they are not relevant, having occured after he started his so called public ministry traditionally believed to be around age 30 at the time, which would have been well past the middle point of the expectad age range of the day.

Truth be told he should have been married round about age 20, as this was the traditional age at the time. its not likely that if he were put up for as a candidate for marriage he would have been refused because he was the son of a carpenter. This meant that he would also most likely have been trained as a carpenter. At the time carpenters were highly in demand and could easily obtain an extremely comfortable lifestyle roughly equivelant to today's upper middle class.

At the time, looks were not such a large concern as earning potential. After all this was a period of time when most people were impoverished.

I'm just saying looking at the historic redord that its mighty strange that he wasn't married.

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

Because his so called breaking of the other mitzvoth is in question. For instance the various times he's accused of working on the Sabbath. in some cases he wasn't halachically considedered working because he wasn't doing anyting forbidden by the 39 categories.

For instance picking grain to eat on the sabbath etc. because one is exceedingly hungry wouldn't necessarily be a violation of the sabbath. For instance if one had blood sugar problems it could have been a matter of life and death, and thus would be commanded to break the comandment in order to save life.

Now that's all I'll say on those matters because they are not relevant, having occured after he started his so called public ministry traditionally believed to be around age 30 at the time, which would have been well past the middle point of the expectad age range of the day.

Truth be told he should have been married round about age 20, as this was the traditional age at the time. its not likely that if he were put up for as a candidate for marriage he would have been refused because he was the son of a carpenter. This meant that he would also most likely have been trained as a carpenter. At the time carpenters were highly in demand and could easily obtain an extremely comfortable lifestyle roughly equivelant to today's upper middle class.

At the time, looks were not such a large concern as earning potential. After all this was a period of time when most people were impoverished.

I'm just saying looking at the historic redord that its mighty strange that he wasn't married.

Yochanan
not arguing really (just saw this was stagnating and it is an interesting concept)
just throwing things out there

anyway... truth be told I guess he could have been a good boy and done this. there isn't much about his life in his early days

[Torah613]

check out this (http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm) link particularly numbers 63 and 70, to begin with.

How could he have been accepted as messiah without keeping these commandments, and more to the point why the shocked outrage from various christians (and for this purpose including messianics) when someone suggests that he may have been married?

its like me saying I'm old order Amish and then jumping in my shinny red car to drive to the store. It just doesn't add up.

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

Kiddushin occurs when the woman accepts the money, contract or sexual relations offered by the prospective husband.
okay... someone has to accept - like I said before, it may be unlikely, but possible still
The relationship created by kiddushin can only be dissolved by death or divorce.
she could just have died
However, the spouses do not live together at the time of the kiddushin, and the mutual obligations created by the marital relationship do not take effect until the nisuin is complete.
they could not have fulfilled this part (seeing as he was wandering and didnt' say... have a home really... but this is supposition as well)

[ElsanRandiMom]

Oh. I don't get why people get all offended at Christ having a wife either... (unless you believe, like some do, that sex and procreation are a product of the fall)

I asked some girls from the WD to contribute (these are their statements not mine): For me personally, if He was the Bible would say so, number one. Number 2, IMO, He was perfect so therefore did not have the same desires as we do... face it, most of our reasons are lust, the need to be loved, financial security, ect, ect, ect. Jesus didn't have that need to be loved in an intimate way, and He loved everyone in a Godly way, not in a fleshly way.

I personally don't think he was married because he had a higher purpose, a mission, a "job to do". He didn't come to pick one woman as a partner. He came to bring all people back to God in a union beyond what is on this earth.

Perhaps if we focus on what marriage can teach us spiritually, we can see why he did not need it. Just check out all the lovely pictures of Jesus being the groom of the Body of Messiah... we are joined to him so intimately that he knows us, protects us, beings us into his father's house (family)... if he had been joined to a woman, that might not have held such powerful meaning....

[Torah613]

hmm that's an interesting point I hadn't thought of.

of course it wouldn't make sense as HaShem made Eve before the fall.

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

hmm that's an interesting point I hadn't thought of.

of course it wouldn't make sense as HaShem made Eve before the fall.

Yochanan
And why on earth would this be here if it was true (but some will defend it with all they have)
27So God created man in His own image, in the image and likeness of God He created him; male and female He created them.(E (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis;&version=45;#cen-AMP-27E))
28And God blessed them and said to them, Be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth

23Then Adam said, This [creature] is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of a man.
24Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall become united and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.(E (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=1&chapter=2&version=45#cen-AMP-55E))

[Torah613]

an interesting point I failed to make earlier. This specific commandment is given at the time of the creation of mankind.

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

an interesting point I failed to make earlier. This specific commandment is given at the time of the creation of mankind.

Yochanan
it's likely translation semantics... but isn't God said different than God commanded?

[Torah613]

it is translation semantics. As I'm sure your aware, hebrew doesn't always (or rather rarely does) translate well.

Yochanan

[Torah613]

Is noone else brave enough to respond to this thread?

Yochanan

[ElsanRandiMom]

Is noone else brave enough to respond to this thread?

Yochanan
:(

sorry you can't have a more even playing field discussion.

maybe you'll just have to settle for teaching me or debating the edits in my reasons post from the girls I know

[Torah613]

I'm enjoying our discussion, but am still curious as to the thoughts of others round these parts.

Yochanan

[ShirChadash]

Is noone else brave enough to respond to this thread?

Yochanan
I'm watching with interest, for sure.

[stone]

You will continue to stumble until you recognize that Yeshua is adonai.

He gave the commandments, they are his commandments. His kingdom is not of this world.

[ElsanRandiMom]

You will continue to stumble until you recognize that Yeshua is adonai.

He gave the commandments, they are his commandments. His kingdom is not of this world.
unfortunately this admonition does nothing to further anyone's understanding of your views

[stone]

unfortunately this admonition does nothing to further anyone's understanding of your views

opposed to what is already posted here before?

They are also not my views, this is the word of god. Have you read it?

[Torah613]

You will continue to stumble until you recognize that Yeshua is adonai.

He gave the commandments, they are his commandments. His kingdom is not of this world.
completely off topic.

do you have an answer to my question?

[stone]

I already answered it.

[stone]

First of all, let me begin by stating that I don't want to disparage anyone's beliefs.

Ok, now to my question. Let us assume for this discussion that Jesus was a practicing Jew and 30 something when he died. History tells us that at the time the average life expectancy for someone in Jesus's socioeconomic class was somewhere around 45-50, which was quite a high average at the time.

With all of that, how is it that Jesus would not have been fulfilling the Mitzvoth by being married? It is after all the first commandment given. Just curious as to y'alls opinions is all.

Yochanan

Your problem is that you do not understand that Jesus is more than a simple mortal man as you are.

[Kris10leigh]

I'll play! :wave: Just didn't see it before.

I don't see what difference it makes if Yeshua was married, one way or the other. In fact, I wouldn't at all doubt it if He was and that the church covered it up.

If He did not marry, it could have been because He was such a transient figure. What about His Disciples? Were any of them married?
</IMG>

[stone]

Yeshua was not married. He came to fulfill the prophesies laid out for the messiah.

Do you want to know what the abomination of desolation will be for the jews?

[ElsanRandiMom]

I already answered it.

Your problem is that you do not understand that Jesus is more than a simple mortal man as you are.

Yeshua was not married. He came to fulfill the prophesies laid out for the messiah.

Do you want to know what the abomination of desolation will be for the jews?
again, you have provided alot of rather meaningless blather with nothing to support it... unless you have meaninful scripture or ideas to share I'd venture to say that this is just baiting

[Torah613]

Yeshua was not married. He came to fulfill the prophesies laid out for the messiah.

Do you want to know what the abomination of desolation will be for the jews?
don't you see the error of what your saying? If he really wasn't married it would raise serious question as to his halachic status as a Jew.

I'm just stating this plain, how could Jesus have been HaMoshiach if he didn't fulfill the Mitzvoth? If your saying he was above the Mitzvoth, are you saying he wasn't human at all? (this line of reasoning doesn't make sense, as the talmud states that even HaShem donn's Tefflin)

Yochanan

[chunkofcoal]

Ok, not sure if there is a link out there, but the Mitzva (commandment) is to be fruitful and multiply. So my question remains, why wasn't he fulfilling the mitzva?

(Mitzvoth is the plural of Mitzva and means commandments--specifically the 613 commandments as outlined in the Torah)

Yochanan

I hope it's okay I post in this section. :)

But in response to your questioning, what would you say about the prophet Jeremiah?

Jer 16:1-4 The word of the LORD came also unto me, saying, (2) Thou shalt not take thee a wife, neither shalt thou have sons or daughters in this place. (3) For thus saith the LORD concerning the sons and concerning the daughters that are born in this place, and concerning their mothers that bore them, and concerning their fathers that begot them in this land; (4) They shall die of grievous deaths; they shall not be lamented; neither shall they be buried; but they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth: and they shall be consumed by the sword, and by famine; and their carcasses shall be meat for the fowls of heaven, and for the beasts of the earth.

[Lulav]

don't you see the error of what your saying? If he really wasn't married it would raise serious question as to his halachic status as a Jew.

I'm just stating this plain, how could Jesus have been HaMoshiach if he didn't fulfill the Mitzvoth? If your saying he was above the Mitzvoth, are you saying he wasn't human at all? (this line of reasoning doesn't make sense, as the talmud states that even HaShem donn's Tefflin)

YochananYou know I just don't understand that, why would Hashem need to be reminded of his own commandments? And where would he tie these?

Now I believe this happened, but only when Yeshua was on earth, but you don't beleive that, so when was this written?

[Lulav]

don't you see the error of what your saying? If he really wasn't married it would raise serious question as to his halachic status as a Jew.

I'm just stating this plain, how could Jesus have been HaMoshiach if he didn't fulfill the Mitzvoth? If your saying he was above the Mitzvoth, are you saying he wasn't human at all? (this line of reasoning doesn't make sense, as the talmud states that even HaShem donn's Tefflin)

Yochanan Joe , I have been having trouble with the site since I left last week. You ask a good question and some that really don't understand the Jews will just take this as a poke against what they believe. No, he really does not see what you are saying, but then he isn't Messianic. I am glad you were not offended. :)

This is my take on this. As you say it is the first mitzvah given, should it not be obeyed?

Two things

1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

2. He was betrothed and still is. Those who believe he was and is the promised Messiah are called his bride, but the marriage has not taken place yet. His bride is physical now, but it is really spiritual.

It is hard to explain to those who believe in him, and even harder for those who don't, so I only expect confusion from you so don't sweat it, I understand.:)

[MessianicShmuely]

There were many Righteous men and women who were celibate before the time of Christ and in the time of Y'shua to devote themselves to G-d. Y'shua tells us in Matthew 19:1-12 about marriage and in verses 10 through 12 that celibacy is a special gift for those who focused wholeheartedly on the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Apostle Shaul was also celibate. In 1st Corinthians 7:6-9, he shares that G-d had gifted him with the ability to be celibate, but if he or others ever burn with passion for a relationship with someone of the opposite sex it would be better to get married rather living in the sin of LUST AND DESIRE.

In the Tanach the Prophet Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) Adonai tells him not to marry in verse 16:2 There is no indication that all of the Tanach's Prophets were married either. There is no mention of Eliyahu(Elijah) or Yonah (Jonah) being married anywhere in Scripture.

The Essenes were celibate as well as the Therapeuticae. There is no indication in the Scriptures that Yochanan the Baptizer was married.


So to answer your question as to why Y'shua wasn't married, it was that He devoted Himself to preaching the Kingdom of Heaven. That and the fact that He is G-d. ;)

[Lulav]

And G-d is already married. ;)

[MessianicShmuely]

And G-d is already married. ;)Yes we are the Bride of Messiah :amen:

[christianmomof3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot Here is a list of all 613. I do not think that it was ever expected that everyone do all of them.

[MessianicShmuely]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot Here is a list of all 613. I do not think that it was ever expected that everyone do all of them.

"Teacher, which is the Greatest Mitzvah(Commandment) in the Law?" Y'shua said to him, "'You shall love the LORD your G-d with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the First and Great Mitzvah. A second likewise is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 'The whole Law and the Prophets depend on these two Mitzvot." Matthew 22:35-40

The ONLY Perfect Person was Y'shua ha Mashiach "who did not sin, "neither was deceit found in His mouth." 1st Peter 2:22

[Torah613]

Joe , I have been having trouble with the site since I left last week. You ask a good question and some that really don't understand the Jews will just take this as a poke against what they believe. No, he really does not see what you are saying, but then he isn't Messianic. I am glad you were not offended. :)

This is my take on this. As you say it is the first mitzvah given, should it not be obeyed?

Two things

1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

2. He was betrothed and still is. Those who believe he was and is the promised Messiah are called his bride, but the marriage has not taken place yet. His bride is physical now, but it is really spiritual.

It is hard to explain to those who believe in him, and even harder for those who don't, so I only expect confusion from you so don't sweat it, I understand.:)
well, how would he have determined he wasn't capable of producing children? Gone down to the local county general perhaps? Sorry I work nights so sometimes sarcasm comes a bit easily.

Yes, if a woman can't conceive she *can* be given a get, also if she burns the cookies for dinner she *can* be given a get. However she doesn't have to be given one, and truthfully I've never heard of anyone getting divorced over a burnt dessert.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe did not have children. For some the Mitzva of having children simply cannot be fulfilled. Of course these people are dispensed from the mitzva of having children, as they would be Anusim. No one would say that the Rebbe's life was without fruit, at least noone sane who's even read a cursory list of what he was about.

But marriage in Judaism is not simply for reproduction. It is also a mitzva in its own right. And there have been many barren couples who have been blessed by HaShem with children. Of course I'm sure one example pops quickly to your mind, perhaps someone who shares my first name?

Yochanan

[Torah613]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot Here is a list of all 613. I do not think that it was ever expected that everyone do all of them.
well no. Certainly a regular old Joe like me (sorry for the pun) wouldn't keep the Mitzvoth attendant upon the Kohanim. I also wouldn't keep the Mitzvoth attendent upon living in Eretz Yisrail--that is until I can make Alliya. And noone keeps the Mitzvoth concerning the temple--at least until it is rebuilt.

Regarding the others, we all reach and fall, reach and fall. But after falling we get up, dust ourselves off, straighten our Kippah and keep on going ahead. That is what Teshuvah is all about.

Yochanan

[LadyGarnetRose]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot Here is a list of all 613. I do not think that it was ever expected that everyone do all of them.
Nobody is supposed to do all of them, only the ones that apply to the person in particular.

As an example, a man does not live to the mitzvot of women and women do not live to the mitzvot of men.

[Lulav]

And there have been many barren couples who have been blessed by HaShem with children. Of course I'm sure one example pops quickly to your mind, perhaps someone who shares my first name?

Yochanan Surely, and which one? both your name and user name would fit that description.:)

[Lulav]

Originally Posted by Lulav http://www3.christianforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=45674795#post45674795)
Joe , I have been having trouble with the site since I left last week. You ask a good question and some that really don't understand the Jews will just take this as a poke against what they believe. No, he really does not see what you are saying, but then he isn't Messianic. I am glad you were not offended. :)

This is my take on this. As you say it is the first mitzvah given, should it not be obeyed?

Two things

1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

2. He was betrothed and still is. Those who believe he was and is the promised Messiah are called his bride, but the marriage has not taken place yet. His bride is physical now, but it is really spiritual.

It is hard to explain to those who believe in him, and even harder for those who don't, so I only expect confusion from you so don't sweat it, I understand.:)well, how would he have determined he wasn't capable of producing children? Gone down to the local county general perhaps? Sorry I work nights so sometimes sarcasm comes a bit easily.

Yes, if a woman can't conceive she *can* be given a get, also if she burns the cookies for dinner she *can* be given a get. However she doesn't have to be given one, and truthfully I've never heard of anyone getting divorced over a burnt dessert.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe did not have children. For some the Mitzva of having children simply cannot be fulfilled. Of course these people are dispensed from the mitzva of having children, as they would be Anusim. No one would say that the Rebbe's life was without fruit, at least noone sane who's even read a cursory list of what he was about.

But marriage in Judaism is not simply for reproduction. It is also a mitzva in its own right. And there have been many barren couples who have been blessed by HaShem with children. Of course I'm sure one example pops quickly to your mind, perhaps someone who shares my first name?

YochananI'm guessing you missed where I said there were TWO things? ;)

As far as how would he know? I'll ignore your sarcasm and just say this:

He knew that the same way he knew this:

Luke 5:22, 6:8

Matt 12:25

or even knew this John 9 ( read from beginning it shows our creator at work)

:)

[visionary]

Issiac was not found a wife until he was 40.

[ContraMundum]

Ok, not sure if there is a link out there, but the Mitzva (commandment) is to be fruitful and multiply. So my question remains, why wasn't he fulfilling the mitzva?

The answer is found in the Christian doctrine of the nature of Messiah- Him being both Divine and Human. The mitzvah to procreate cannot apply to divinity- otherwise God would be condsidered to multiply Himself- which would be against His nature as spoken of in Isaiah "before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." (Isa. 43:10)
.

[MessianicShmuely]

The answer is found in the Christian doctrine of the nature of Messiah- Him being both Divine and Human. The mitzvah to procreate cannot apply to divinity- otherwise God would be condsidered to multiply Himself- which would be against His nature as spoken of in Isaiah "before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." (Isa. 43:10)
. One passage of Scripture that comes to mind is Jeremiah 23:5-6 dealing with Messiah being 100% G-d and 100 % Man

"The days are coming," says ADONAI "when I will raise a Righteous Branch[{Natzer} where Nazerene or Notzori comes from] for David. He will reign as King and succeed, He will do what is just and right in the Land. In His days Y'hudah will be saved, Yisra'el will live in safety, and the Name given to Him will be YHWH Tzidkenu [The LORD Our Righteous]. "

According to Midrash Thillim 21:2 of this passage of Scripture "G-d Nameth also the King Messiah with His very Own Name. Rabbi Moses Alshech: Who is it, that says to Jerusalem that she shall be comforted on the ground of the admonition: Speak ye to the heart of Jerusalem (Isaiah 40:2)? Is it not YHWH Tzidkenu, that is the King Messiah? Even as it is written: ‘And this is the name whereby he shall be called: YHWH Tzidkenu,’ because of the right and the righteousness of His being". This shows that the Messiah would be BOTH G-d and man.

[Lulav]

Do you think that is what Yeshua was referring to in Revelation when he said in 3:12 He who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my G-d and he shall never leave, and I will write upon him the name of my G-d, and the name of the city of my G-d which is the New Jerusalem that comes down from heaven from My G-d, and I will write upon him my new name.................

[ShirChadash]

Joe , I have been having trouble with the site since I left last week. You ask a good question and some that really don't understand the Jews will just take this as a poke against what they believe. No, he really does not see what you are saying, but then he isn't Messianic. I am glad you were not offended. :)

This is my take on this. As you say it is the first mitzvah given, should it not be obeyed?

Two things

1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

2. He was betrothed and still is. Those who believe he was and is the promised Messiah are called his bride, but the marriage has not taken place yet. His bride is physical now, but it is really spiritual.

It is hard to explain to those who believe in him, and even harder for those who don't, so I only expect confusion from you so don't sweat it, I understand.:)



1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

Shalom Lulav
As a former passionate Roman Catholic, "Protestant", and later Messianic believer, I have more than a modicum of experience in Christian doctrine and dogma from various positions along the spectrum, yet this is the first I have ever, ever heard or seen anyone argue this particular tack.

It occurs to me that if one chooses to believe that Jesus is fully human, and fully divine (which is Christianity's normative position) and if Jesus is indeed god come down to earth to live a human experience, and to walk in all manners as a man -- tempted and overcoming temptation to die sinless, and the other various points one might make -- then one cannot also legitimately argue that Jesus, as the true messiah of Judaism, didn't need to obey a basic mitzvah encumbent upon both males and females (marry, and reproduce if one is able) because he was not the child of two humans. I would assert that you can not legitimately have it both ways.

Christianity teaches unquestioningly that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine, experiencing everything a human would, weaknesses, anger, etc -- except sin -- while on earth in the flesh. Therefore, as a fully-human male Jew, in order to be messiah he was indeed required to obey all of the mitzvot encumbent upon males. Perhaps he did. Perhaps he did not.

But I dare say, there would seem to be more room in the Christian scripture for Jesus to have been married (Jesus's adult years about which the writings are silent, and possibly more insinuations upon which someone could base speculations on his being married), than there is behind the argument that he knew he couldn't reproduce and therefore he was exempt from the mitzvah to marry. No?

Shalom, I hope this comes through, makes sense and is not offensive... I have tried to post it several times and by now I am just too pressed for time to proofread again or re-phrase.

[Lulav]

Shalom Lulav
As a former passionate Roman Catholic, "Protestant", and later Messianic believer, I have more than a modicum of experience in Christian doctrine and dogma from various positions along the spectrum, yet this is the first I have ever, ever heard or seen anyone argue this particular tack.

It occurs to me that if one chooses to believe that Jesus is fully human, and fully divine (which is Christianity's normative position) and if Jesus is indeed god come down to earth to live a human experience, and to walk in all manners as a man -- tempted and overcoming temptation to die sinless, and the other various points one might make -- then one cannot also legitimately argue that Jesus, as the true messiah of Judaism, didn't need to obey a basic mitzvah encumbent upon both males and females (marry, and reproduce if one is able) because he was not the child of two humans. I would assert that you can not legitimately have it both ways.

Christianity teaches unquestioningly that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine, experiencing everything a human would, weaknesses, anger, etc -- except sin -- while on earth in the flesh. Therefore, as a fully-human male Jew, in order to be messiah he was indeed required to obey all of the mitzvot encumbent upon males. Perhaps he did. Perhaps he did not.

But I dare say, there would seem to be more room in the Christian scripture for Jesus to have been married (Jesus's adult years about which the writings are silent, and possibly more insinuations upon which someone could base speculations on his being married), than there is behind the argument that he knew he couldn't reproduce and therefore he was exempt from the mitzvah to marry. No?

Shalom, I hope this comes through, makes sense and is not offensive... I have tried to post it several times and by now I am just too pressed for time to proofread again or re-phrase.Shalom Shir, I see what you are saying. I too was having some trouble and frusteration when I finally was able to get in and post to this. As I prefaced my comments with:

This is my take on this shows that this is not any Christian/Messianic taught doctrine, but is, my musing on it. I was just surmissing, forgetting that this is a debate forum, instead of a Q & A amoung family. I will try and remember that in the future. :)

But if pushed , instead of throwing things out there that flit through my mind I will just say that I do stand by #2, which seems to be being ignored in lue of the 1st.

He was betrothed and still is. There is plenty of scripture to back that up, but as far as how Christians see it? that is a whole other ball game. ;)

[ChazakEmunah]

You will continue to stumble until you recognize that Yeshua is adonai.

He gave the commandments, they are his commandments. His kingdom is not of this world.

completely off topic.

do you have an answer to my question?
It's called a re-direct. It's a tactic many use when they don't have an answer.

What happened to you Stone? You used to be a nice guy.

[ChazakEmunah]

Do you want to know what the abomination of desolation will be for the jews?
That really has nothing to do with this thread. Please try to keep the discussion on topic.

[ChazakEmunah]

Oh and ya'll already know my whole take on the Je*us thing so I won't bother getting into the mix with my opinion. I just thought this might be an interesting thread to watch. Have fun! I'll be enjoying the show. :)

[ShirChadash]

As I prefaced my comments with:

shows that this is not any Christian/Messianic taught doctrine, but is, my musing on it. I was just surmissing, forgetting that this is a debate forum, instead of a Q & A amoung family. I will try and remember that in the future. :)

But if pushed , instead of throwing things out there that flit through my mind I will just say that I do stand by #2, which seems to be being ignored in lue of the 1st.

He was betrothed and still is. There is plenty of scripture to back that up, but as far as how Christians see it? that is a whole other ball game. ;)

Okay, gotcha.


But if pushed , instead of throwing things out there that flit through my mind I will just say that I do stand by #2, which seems to be being ignored in lue of the 1st.

He was betrothed and still is. There is plenty of scripture to back that up, but as far as how Christians see it? that is a whole other ball game. ;)

I really didn't ignore your second point in lieu of your first. I read it, and I understand it, of course. I didn't speak, personally, to the second point because we know that a betrothal is not a marriage -- even Mary was said in the Christian writings to have conceived out of wedlock, though she was betrothed at the time to Joseph. So as I see it, this is just another, "oh but he will fulfill it all when he comes, watch and see" point. As such, it has yet to come to pass and since it is based upon your future hope for the fulfillment of mainly writings I no longer ratify, nothing can be done on my part but understand where you are coming from, and watch and see.

Have a good night, Lulav (well, it's night here anyway :) ).

[Lulav]

Right, a betrothal is not a marriage, yet it does not leave one free to marry another. :)

You have a good night as well.:)

[ContraMundum]

Right, a betrothal is not a marriage, yet it does not leave one free to marry another. :)

Indeed! It is considered equal in many respects to marriage (Dt 22:22-24).

[ShirChadash]

Right, a betrothal is not a marriage, yet it does not leave one free to marry another. :)

You have a good night as well.:)
Betrothal doesn't fulfill a mitzvah, not even the command to go, cleave to one another and reproduce if possible, last I checked ;) ^_^

[Torah613]

I'm guessing you missed where I said there were TWO things? ;)

As far as how would he know? I'll ignore your sarcasm and just say this:

He knew that the same way he knew this:

Luke 5:22, 6:8

Matt 12:25

or even knew this John 9 ( read from beginning it shows our creator at work)

:)
could you expound further? I don't own a copy of the NT.

As an aside married couples still must *ahem* *cough uncomfortably* fulfill the mitzvah *coughs uncomfortably again* even after the wife has passed child bearing years.

Yochanan

[Torah613]

Shalom Shir, I see what you are saying. I too was having some trouble and frusteration when I finally was able to get in and post to this. As I prefaced my comments with:

shows that this is not any Christian/Messianic taught doctrine, but is, my musing on it. I was just surmissing, forgetting that this is a debate forum, instead of a Q & A amoung family. I will try and remember that in the future. :)

But if pushed , instead of throwing things out there that flit through my mind I will just say that I do stand by #2, which seems to be being ignored in lue of the 1st.

He was betrothed and still is. There is plenty of scripture to back that up, but as far as how Christians see it? that is a whole other ball game. ;)
it was not my intention to debate the issue, yet I placed it in this forum because it is a rather, shall we say thorny, topic of discussion to many people.

Yochanan

[Torah613]

Okay, gotcha.



I really didn't ignore your second point in lieu of your first. I read it, and I understand it, of course. I didn't speak, personally, to the second point because we know that a betrothal is not a marriage -- even Mary was said in the Christian writings to have conceived out of wedlock, though she was betrothed at the time to Joseph. So as I see it, this is just another, "oh but he will fulfill it all when he comes, watch and see" point. As such, it has yet to come to pass and since it is based upon your future hope for the fulfillment of mainly writings I no longer ratify, nothing can be done on my part but understand where you are coming from, and watch and see.

Have a good night, Lulav (well, it's night here anyway :) ).
that is my take as well. There is plenty of christian scriptures to prooftext such a betrothal, but I'm not familiar with christian scriptures really nor am I a believer in the same. So I kinda ignored point 2 in lieu of 1 as point 2 does not answer my question, as a betrothal a. would not fulfill the mitzvah and b. is unproovable, without first accepting the authority of the NT and by extension christian theology.

AT 2008 roughly, don't you think its time for the old chap to either use his/her services or release the retainer on the caterer? sorry just kidding.

Yochanan

[Lulav]

When did HaShem marry Israel?

[ContraMundum]

This whole discussion brings to mind Jer. 3.

[ContraMundum]

I really think the point is this: if we are discussing Yeshua's life we have to refer to the NT, no? After all- it's the only decent source about Him. The NT says He was no mere mortal, but rather was Divine. Divinity doesn't procreate itself. To my mind that would mean that the original question is already answered in the doctrine of the Divine nature.

Just my two cents.

[visionary]

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

[Lulav]

I really think the point is this: if we are discussing Yeshua's life we have to refer to the NT, no? After all- it's the only decent source about Him. The NT says He was no mere mortal, but rather was Divine. Divinity doesn't procreate itself. To my mind that would mean that the original question is already answered in the doctrine of the Divine nature.

Just my two cents. The Torah and prophets and the other books of the tenack are all full of him, you just need to know where to look. :)

[Torah613]

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
but if he "took on the seed of avraham" why didn't he get married and keep the Mitzvoth?

I'm not trying to desparage y'alls beliefs, simply to understand.

Yochanan

[visionary]

He is like Issaic waiting until His Father goes and brings Him His Bride... Issaic had to wait until he was 40.

[ContraMundum]

The Torah and prophets and the other books of the tenack are all full of him, you just need to know where to look. :)

Indeed.

[ContraMundum]

but if he "took on the seed of avraham" why didn't he get married and keep the Mitzvoth?

I'm not trying to desparage y'alls beliefs, simply to understand.

Yochanan

For a start, Heb. 2:16 reads literally in the Greek "For indeed He does not take hold of angels, but He takes hold of the seed of Abraham."

The more precise rendering is that "take hold of" means "to help".

So, the ESV is very good on this when it translates that verse: "For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham."

This of course blends rather nicely with Isa 41:8: "But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; 9 you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off"; "

So really, that verse speaks more about Divine assistance than human nature (although scripture is clear about Him taking on human nature in many places). This would add to the context of the preceeding verse Heb 2:15. In the whole context of the passage, it means Yeshua is helping Abraham's seed by taking on human form.

Also- Abraham was not His father, ("...before Abraham was, I am") Abraham was Mary's father. God doesn't create other Gods. If Yeshua had a child, then this principle would have been violated. In other words, Yeshua is the promised Messianic seed of both Adam and Abraham, but He is Divine- something neither Abraham or Adam could produce. So, Yeshua took on human form (the nature of Adam) to help Abraham's seed (Israel) and thus the whole of humanity.

Secondly, (and really irrelevant) for us mere mortals, I don't think it could be proven that it is necessary to have children to be in God's favor and a good Jew. Not every mitzvah can ever be fulfilled by one person alone. While we know it is a command to have children, we also know many good Jews cannot. Therefore, not having children could not be regarded as sinful.

The point of objection hinted at in this line of questioning is that if Yeshua didn't have children, He could not have fulfilled the Torah. The answer we would raise is that because He is divine, he cannot have mere human offspring, therefore, He has other children- children of God. Because He is God, His bride is not a human woman, but His Bride is His people. His people are the children of God. This is seen through the whole of scripture, but is emphasised in John 1:12 "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God"

[Lulav]

but if he "took on the seed of avraham" why didn't he get married and keep the Mitzvoth?

I'm not trying to desparage y'alls beliefs, simply to understand.

YochananSetting aside that he was betrothed, he knew he was born for a specific purpose and that purpose would include death, wherein he knew he would not be around to support his family. Also his ministry required him to travel alot and this may have also been a consideration. We see at the tree/cross that his famila obligatoins regarding his mother, are turned over to John . It is one thing to know know you will die early so marry and may not produce children, and have your widow marry your brother, but it is another thing to know that you will die and to marry anyway.

I think this verse in Isaiah may help to explain that .


53:8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Now I realize that this chapter of Isaiah has many, many translations, and each one, sad to say, is biased, but I read this part that I highlighted as a nod to who would carry on his name? as in progeny? He would have no genealogical heirs because he was cut off from the living.

I do understand that I believe this whole chapter in Isaiah speaks of Yeshua and Rabbinical Jews do not. But I challenge anyone here to read it for yourself, and then decide. Torah was made to be interpreted by the Priests/Rabbis but prophetic books were the Word Of HaShem to be given to all the people. Let him speak to you about what it means.

[stone]

again, you have provided alot of rather meaningless blather with nothing to support it... unless you have meaninful scripture or ideas to share I'd venture to say that this is just baiting

Where would you like to begin?

[stone]

don't you see the error of what your saying? If he really wasn't married it would raise serious question as to his halachic status as a Jew.

I'm just stating this plain, how could Jesus have been HaMoshiach if he didn't fulfill the Mitzvoth? If your saying he was above the Mitzvoth, are you saying he wasn't human at all? (this line of reasoning doesn't make sense, as the talmud states that even HaShem donn's Tefflin)

Yochanan


The talmud is a work of the hand of man, not god.

[stone]

Joe , I have been having trouble with the site since I left last week. You ask a good question and some that really don't understand the Jews will just take this as a poke against what they believe. No, he really does not see what you are saying, but then he isn't Messianic. I am glad you were not offended. :)

This is my take on this. As you say it is the first mitzvah given, should it not be obeyed?

Two things

1. Yeshua, as we believe, did not have two human parents so his genetics may not have been capable of reproduction, and knowing this is it not then obligatory not to marry? I am not clear on the halacha on that so maybe help out? I know if a woman can't conceive she can be given a get.

2. He was betrothed and still is. Those who believe he was and is the promised Messiah are called his bride, but the marriage has not taken place yet. His bride is physical now, but it is really spiritual.

It is hard to explain to those who believe in him, and even harder for those who don't, so I only expect confusion from you so don't sweat it, I understand.:)


Jesus is the father.

hey, one more thing, why do you say i am not messianic?

[stone]

well, how would he have determined he wasn't capable of producing children? Gone down to the local county general perhaps? Sorry I work nights so sometimes sarcasm comes a bit easily.

Yes, if a woman can't conceive she *can* be given a get, also if she burns the cookies for dinner she *can* be given a get. However she doesn't have to be given one, and truthfully I've never heard of anyone getting divorced over a burnt dessert.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe did not have children. For some the Mitzva of having children simply cannot be fulfilled. Of course these people are dispensed from the mitzva of having children, as they would be Anusim. No one would say that the Rebbe's life was without fruit, at least noone sane who's even read a cursory list of what he was about.

But marriage in Judaism is not simply for reproduction. It is also a mitzva in its own right. And there have been many barren couples who have been blessed by HaShem with children. Of course I'm sure one example pops quickly to your mind, perhaps someone who shares my first name?

Yochanan

Isaac?

Samson?

[stone]

I'm guessing you missed where I said there were TWO things? ;)

As far as how would he know? I'll ignore your sarcasm and just say this:

He knew that the same way he knew this:

Luke 5:22, 6:8

Matt 12:25

or even knew this John 9 ( read from beginning it shows our creator at work)

:)


lol, you think that i do not know torah?:thumbsup:

[stone]

Shalom Lulav
As a former passionate Roman Catholic, "Protestant", and later Messianic believer, I have more than a modicum of experience in Christian doctrine and dogma from various positions along the spectrum, yet this is the first I have ever, ever heard or seen anyone argue this particular tack.

It occurs to me that if one chooses to believe that Jesus is fully human, and fully divine (which is Christianity's normative position) and if Jesus is indeed god come down to earth to live a human experience, and to walk in all manners as a man -- tempted and overcoming temptation to die sinless, and the other various points one might make -- then one cannot also legitimately argue that Jesus, as the true messiah of Judaism, didn't need to obey a basic mitzvah encumbent upon both males and females (marry, and reproduce if one is able) because he was not the child of two humans. I would assert that you can not legitimately have it both ways.

Christianity teaches unquestioningly that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine, experiencing everything a human would, weaknesses, anger, etc -- except sin -- while on earth in the flesh. Therefore, as a fully-human male Jew, in order to be messiah he was indeed required to obey all of the mitzvot encumbent upon males. Perhaps he did. Perhaps he did not.

But I dare say, there would seem to be more room in the Christian scripture for Jesus to have been married (Jesus's adult years about which the writings are silent, and possibly more insinuations upon which someone could base speculations on his being married), than there is behind the argument that he knew he couldn't reproduce and therefore he was exempt from the mitzvah to marry. No?

Shalom, I hope this comes through, makes sense and is not offensive... I have tried to post it several times and by now I am just too pressed for time to proofread again or re-phrase.


news flash

jesus lives!

[stone]

It's called a re-direct. It's a tactic many use when they don't have an answer.

What happened to you Stone? You used to be a nice guy.


I am a nice guy.

Re-direct? is that another term for derail? please explain...

[stone]

That really has nothing to do with this thread. Please try to keep the discussion on topic.

Exodus 32:15-20 15 And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. 16 And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. 17 And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp. 18 And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear. 19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. 20 And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.

[stone]

Okay, gotcha.



I really didn't ignore your second point in lieu of your first. I read it, and I understand it, of course. I didn't speak, personally, to the second point because we know that a betrothal is not a marriage -- even Mary was said in the Christian writings to have conceived out of wedlock, though she was betrothed at the time to Joseph. So as I see it, this is just another, "oh but he will fulfill it all when he comes, watch and see" point. As such, it has yet to come to pass and since it is based upon your future hope for the fulfillment of mainly writings I no longer ratify, nothing can be done on my part but understand where you are coming from, and watch and see.

Have a good night, Lulav (well, it's night here anyway :) ).

Not all that he did was written.

[stone]

Betrothal doesn't fulfill a mitzvah, not even the command to go, cleave to one another and reproduce if possible, last I checked ;) ^_^


Maybe your having a hard time digesting the fact that Jesus is still alive?

[stone]

The Torah and prophets and the other books of the tenack are all full of him, you just need to know where to look. :)

He's not talking about prophesies of old, he's speaking of the writings of him as he walked upon the earth with men.

[stone]

but if he "took on the seed of avraham" why didn't he get married and keep the Mitzvoth?

I'm not trying to desparage y'alls beliefs, simply to understand.

Yochanan


see above

[Torah613]

The talmud is a work of the hand of man, not god.
blasphemy!

I understand your position on this one, but one could just as easily say the same thing about the many traditions assosciated wtih the papacy.

As a more-or-less Orthodox Jew, I of course raise serious objection to that. But of course the nature of the Torah is not the subject of debate here.

Yochanan

[Torah613]

Isaac?

Samson?
Yitzhack did have children.

As a messianic, I was making a play on words and refferring to Yochanan (John) the baptist. nto that I'm necessarily admitting such a man existed, or denying his existance for that matter.

Yochanan

[Torah613]

news flash

jesus lives!
he does? that's not news to me. He even bagged my groceries once (I remember because he lined my reusable bags with plastic ones. Oh the horror!).

Yochanan

[Torah613]

Maybe your having a hard time digesting the fact that Jesus is still alive?
I might as well ask you that maybe your having a hardtime digesting the fact that HaMoshiach has not come yet. Have you ever heard of reason? logic? using gray matter? having inteligent discussion?

Yochanan

[HaReb]

than there is behind the argument that he knew he couldn't reproduce and therefore he was exempt from the mitzvah to marry. No?



There is a line of thought that says Y'shua could not reproduce children and it is tied up with a throw back to the sons of gods who populated the earth. The thinking goes along the lines that Y'shua never willingly accepted the title Son of G_d, in order to avoid the accusation that he was saying he was one of these sons, returning to earth. By the same token he could not reproduce or the same charge would have been levelled at him. Until he arrived no one had claimed to be a son of god since way back in history - and then there were many of them. Now, here was a man for whom the claim was being made. Y'shua had to make sure his ministry was not destroyed by this sort of mis-understanding. His only concession, arguably, was to say that the G_d they worshipped was his Father, a particular God, not just any one of the gods, and a G_d that did not want to work as the others had, but to offer love and grace. This, the argument goes, is the root of the Jehovah's Witnesses - that Y'shua was A G_d, not THE G_D - he was one of many who came to earth. The charge against Y'shua was, in part, his claim to be the Son of G_d, seated at the right hand of the Father.

[Torah613]

There is a line of thought that says Y'shua could not reproduce children and it is tied up with a throw back to the sons of gods who populated the earth. The thinking goes along the lines that Y'shua never willingly accepted the title Son of G_d in order to avoid the accusation that he was saying he was one of these sons, returning to earth. By the same token he could not reproduce or the same charge would have been levelled at him. Until he arrived no one had claimed to be one of the sons of gods - now here was a man for whom the claim was being made!
It is a Mitzvah to get married whether or nto one can have children.

Yochanan

[HaReb]

I didn't mention marriage but -- are you saying that the author of the Word doesn't know what he wrote and, more importantly, what it should mean, according to Him? After all, he made a number of halachic decisions which were based on wrong understandings of the then known Scriptures eg - it is written that... but I tell you... - why should this be exempt?

[ElsanRandiMom]

Where would you like to begin?
anywhere but at the point which you started

[stone]

anywhere but at the point which you started


Romans 11:1-32

1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:

10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.

15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.

17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

[ElsanRandiMom]

this supports him not being married or exempts him from marriage how?

[stone]

That isn't where i had started, which is what your words were.

On the issue of him not being married;

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

1:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
1:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

1:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

[ElsanRandiMom]

and you're still quoting scripture without explaining how you feel it refutes or supports the question

[stone]

My feelings have no value or direction to the word of god. I am only a man. What do my feelings have to do with the will of god? What is written is gods word.

Jesus was not sent into the earth to live a life of a man.

Do you know that Jesus is Adonai?

[ElsanRandiMom]

My feelings have no value or direction to the word of god. I am only a man. What do my feelings have to do with the will of god? What is written is gods word.

Jesus was not sent into the earth to live a life of a man.

Do you know that Jesus is Adonai?
unfortunately unless you take every word and stroke literally there is room for interpretation of the bible. (hence discussion and different denominations and how church practices - yes even Catholic church practices- have changed over the years)
thus, your interpretation differs from others. if you do not share, you're just wasting your time posting passages. we all know (or at least for the most part the posters here feel) that Yeshua is the Messiah.

[stone]

Do you know who i am?

Do you know that i am responsible for this debate sub-forum being created?

Do you know that i offered Visionary her mod job here?

Do you know that i know the messianic judaism doctrine's forward's and backward's, regarding non-trinitarian messianics and trinitarian messianics?

I know too much to fall for what you are implying.

You give the impression that Jesus is not Adonai. That means you have the wrong faith icon. You should have the non-trinitarian messianic icon. fyi

and just for your lack of information, i am torah observant. :thumbsup:

[ElsanRandiMom]

Do you know who i am?

Do you know that i am responsible for this debate sub-forum being created?

Do you know that i offered Visionary her mod job here?

Do you know that i know the messianic judaism doctrine's forward's and backward's, regarding non-trinitarian messianics and trinitarian messianics?

I know too much to fall for what you are implying.

You give the impression that Jesus is not Adonai. That means you have the wrong faith icon. You should have the non-trinitarian messianic icon. fyi

and just for your lack of information, i am torah observant. :thumbsup:
you are just losing it dude

i'm not implying any of the above, and i'm not even messianic. GMAB

i am asking you a simple question and you are not answering it, just throwing out scripture. all i wanted was a direct answer instead of regurgitated doctrine.

thanks.

[stone]

Your using diversive tactics. try again.

I answered all your questions. I even left more information than what you requested, just in case you feel more comfortable debating an issue within the scripture i posted.

No, i'm not losing anything here. Do you know how to debate? Debate is not made by feelings, but facts.

[ElsanRandiMom]

again, it's like the argument "is the sky blue". it depends on your level of understanding, where you are, and whether or not you're color blind.

you're just reading WAY more into these posts than is there.... being suspicious is fine, but when it interferes with normal conversation it's gone a bit far

[stone]

A debate forum is not the place for conversation. A debate forum is a place for debate.

If you can understand that Jesus is the father, then you will understand why he never married.

If you don't believe that jesus is the father, then your doctrine, if you are a messianic at all, falls into non-trinitarian messianic judaism.

So which is it that you are? This must be established before a successful debate can get off the ground.

[ChazakEmunah]

The talmud is a work of the hand of man, not god.
Ya know.... I could say the same thing about your NT.

[ElsanRandiMom]

I am not any denomination. I abhor being labeled something that is the organized religion (which is rubbish if you ask me). sorry. I am Christian. I follow Christ who I feel is Yeshua the Messiah. I believe the statements made in the bible that allude to the trinity... though I'm not sure current religion understands or represents is properly. Regardless about whether or not I feel the Son, Father and Spirit are one we can assume you do. As such, why does being the Father exclude Christ from marriage? and why would Jesus keep all other Jewish law BUT this one? what would be the point?

[stone]

Ya know.... I could say the same thing about your NT.

The only difference is that i did not go into a Judaism forum teaching this.

[stone]

I am not any denomination. I abhor being labeled something that is the organized religion (which is rubbish if you ask me). sorry. I am Christian. I follow Christ who I feel is Yeshua the Messiah. I believe the statements made in the bible that allude to the trinity... though I'm not sure current religion understands or represents is properly. Regardless about whether or not I feel the Son, Father and Spirit are one we can assume you do. As such, why does being the Father exclude Christ from marriage? and why would Jesus keep all other Jewish law BUT this one? what would be the point?


do you understand that he is alive in heaven at the right side of the father?

Jesus is not dead. He is still alive and is doing works of the father today and will return to the earth soon and when he does he will judge the quick and the dead for the sake of rightousness.

[ElsanRandiMom]

just answer the questions instead of dancing around please

it's easy

you can say... question one: no, because i believe...

[stone]

he is still alive, you can't judge a man for not performing a mikvah when that man continues to live.

[ChazakEmunah]

I am a nice guy.
Sheesh, coulda fooled me. You've gotten all venomous towards Jews. Now if you consider that nice... then I don't know what to tell ya.


Re-direct? is that another term for derail? please explain...
Re-direct. It's when someone tries to change the subject rather than answer the question posed to them.

[ElsanRandiMom]

he is still alive, you can't judge a man for not performing a mikvah when that man continues to live.
why? if this is a time oriented mikva then it's fair to say he's gone LONG beyond it if he is still alive.

[stone]

Where do you find a venomous post?

I speak only the truth. If i have spoken a lie then tell me where this lie is?

[stone]

why? if this is a time oriented mikva then it's fair to say he's gone LONG beyond it if he is still alive.

That is an opinion.

[ChazakEmunah]

The only difference is that i did not go into a Judaism forum teaching this.
True, but you have to know that anytime anything about Judaism is being discussed the Talmud is going to come up. It's a core part of Judaism.

[ElsanRandiMom]

That is an opinion.
i'm talking about by jewish tradition, not my opinion. (personally I have no dog in this fight as I am not jewish or messianic... I just want to hear your opinion as it appeared before that you were just baiting people in this area - but I could be wrong... )

[stone]

You do realize that you are in a christian sub-forum right? This is not Judaism 101.

[stone]

i'm talking about by jewish tradition, not my opinion. (personally I have no dog in this fight as I am not jewish or messianic... I just want to hear your opinion as it appeared before that you were just baiting people in this area - but I could be wrong... )

I created this area. I don't bait. I will confront you straight up, nothing hidden here.

[ElsanRandiMom]

I created this area. I don't bait. I will confront you straight up, nothing hidden here.
I wish you'd answer an individual question..

anyway, why do I care what area you created? why is that a big deal for you?

[stone]

You speak to me as if i'm not a part of this forum. I've been a messianic for the last two years. The last year i spent as moderator over this forum. Just don't speak to me as if i'm an intruder to messianic judaism, i am not.

[ElsanRandiMom]

You speak to me as if i'm not a part of this forum. I've been a messianic for the last two years. The last year i spent as moderator over this forum. Just don't speak to me as if i'm an intruder to messianic judaism, i am not.
no. I am speaking to you as someone who comes in and gives answers to questions that appear judgemental and curt. I dont' care if it was someone who pitched a tent here. there's no reason to be that way among people who would be kind to you in a heartbeat. I don't care if you're the owner of the site in disguise. You don't present yourself well and you appear to be judgemental. Whether you are or not is beside the point, because that's how you come across.

[ChazakEmunah]

Where do you find a venomous post?

I speak only the truth. If i have spoken a lie then tell me where this lie is?
I didn't accuse you of lying... only that you've been coming across as overly harsh towards Jews...

[ChazakEmunah]

You do realize that you are in a christian sub-forum right? This is not Judaism 101.
I do think people tend to forget that at times...

[stone]

no. I am speaking to you as someone who comes in and gives answers to questions that appear judgemental and curt. I dont' care if it was someone who pitched a tent here. there's no reason to be that way among people who would be kind to you in a heartbeat. I don't care if you're the owner of the site in disguise. You don't present yourself well and you appear to be judgemental. Whether you are or not is beside the point, because that's how you come across.

and now you make false accusations against me? Where am i judgemental?

[stone]

I didn't accuse you of lying... only that you've been coming across as overly harsh towards Jews...

how so?

[ElsanRandiMom]

and now you make false accusations against me? Where am i judgemental?
I said you APPEAR judgemental.

[stone]

to appear to be judgemental i would have to display some characteristic displaying a judgemental character. Where have i displayed any judgemental characteristics?

[ElsanRandiMom]

You will continue to stumble until you recognize that Yeshua is adonai.

He gave the commandments, they are his commandments. His kingdom is not of this world.

Your problem is that you do not understand that Jesus is more than a simple mortal man as you are.

Yeshua was not married. He came to fulfill the prophesies laid out for the messiah.

Do you want to know what the abomination of desolation will be for the jews?
just off page 3

[stone]

Are you offended by what is written in the scriptures?

Would you like for me to provide scripture for everything you just quoted from me?

[ElsanRandiMom]

Are you offended by what is written in the scriptures?

Would you like for me to provide scripture for everything you just quoted from me?
Often, when someone has a problem with another person, they tell them so by using a "you-statement," for example, "you didn't finish the financial report on time!" While that statement may be true, by phrasing it that way, the listener is likely to get defensive, and begin to argue.

the things that were posted are full of you statements and are thus perceived as hostile and accusatory.

[HaReb]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch....

[ElsanRandiMom]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch....
Jesus was still in a state of angst as to whether or not he was ever, will ever or should ever be married.

sorry for the derail Joseph

[ContraMundum]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch....

...tension mounts...and rides away.

[HaReb]

Must have been on Yesha'yahu's horse, Isme :D

[Torah613]

Oy I'm so done with this thread. Try to ask a simple question and get straight forward answers, and then get attacked like this is kristalnaught. Someone call me when y'all grow up.

Yochanan

[Lulav]

Jesus is the father.

hey, one more thing, why do you say i am not messianic? I have never, ever in my life believed otherwise, can you say the same?

lol, you think that i do not know torah?:thumbsup: You only prove it by your writings. See below

news flash

jesus lives! Is this your best debating tactic? Slap them in the face? Tell me where are u instructed to act in this manner? 'Preach the gospel with as much sarcasm as you can muster101'?

Originally Posted by Lulav
The Torah and prophets and the other books of the tenack are all full of him, you just need to know where to look.
He's not talking about prophesies of old, he's speaking of the writings of him as he walked upon the earth with men. And you claim to know Torah? He walked the earth since with Adam and Eve. He is all throughout the Torah, the Gospel can be told without using any of the so called New Testement, that is if you know it and know where to look. If you don't believe that then you will have to argue with Jesus yourself ( Luke 23:25-27) as he could do it .:)

My feelings have no value or direction to the word of god. I am only a man. What do my feelings have to do with the will of god? What is written is gods word.

Jesus was not sent into the earth to live a life of a man.

Do you know that Jesus is Adonai? If you are in a debate you should state why you believe what you have quoted,as backing up your position, but you haven't given any position, just throw out words, then accusations and venom to only one end, see below. Also if you don't believe that Yeshua came to live the life of a man you have just changed the word of G-d that says he did and why he did it. He had to live as a man and die as a man, for what the first man Adam did. By that little statement of yours you changed the whole gospel.

Do you know who i am?

Do you know that i am responsible for this debate sub-forum being created?

Do you know that i offered Visionary her mod job here?

Do you know that i know the messianic judaism doctrine's forward's and backward's, regarding non-trinitarian messianics and trinitarian messianics?

I know too much to fall for what you are implying.

You give the impression that Jesus is not Adonai. That means you have the wrong faith icon. You should have the non-trinitarian messianic icon. fyi

and just for your lack of information, i am torah observant. This debate forum is for non Messianics to debate our beliefs so of course there will be those not bearing a torah scroll in here. :doh:Attacking them because they don't have it is off topic and baiting and a bunch of other distracting tactics. may I suggest you read Proverbs 16:18 and take it to heart.

Your using diversive tactics. try again.

I answered all your questions. I even left more information than what you requested, just in case you feel more comfortable debating an issue within the scripture i posted.

No, i'm not losing anything here. Do you know how to debate? Debate is not made by feelings, but facts. if debate is not about feelings explain your pride-filled previous post quoted here.

A debate forum is not the place for conversation. A debate forum is a place for debate.

If you can understand that Jesus is the father, then you will understand why he never married.

If you don't believe that jesus is the father, then your doctrine, if you are a messianic at all, falls into non-trinitarian messianic judaism.

So which is it that you are? This must be established before a successful debate can get off the ground.this forum was functioning fine with nice conversation and no accusations until you showed up to disrupt things, this isn't GT, but you are making it like it is and pushing away those that need to be here. Beating someone over the head because they don't have a certain understanding yet, is nothing more than politics, not to get someone to see what's right, just to see what you say is right, big difference.
do you understand that he is alive in heaven at the right side of the father?

Jesus is not dead. He is still alive and is doing works of the father today and will return to the earth soon and when he does he will judge the quick and the dead for the sake of rightousness.Accusations, accusations, is this the way to lead anyone to belief in Messiah? Or to push them away? I think it is the latter and self serving as well as not serving the true master.

he is still alive, you can't judge a man for not performing a mikvah when that man continues to live. For someone who brags so much about how they 'know Torah' you sure have made it easy to others to see you don't. Having children is a mitzvah, a 'commandment' a mikvah is a gathering of waters to immerse in for sinful behavior among other things.

Physician dunk thyself?

Where do you find a venomous post?

I speak only the truth. If i have spoken a lie then tell me where this lie is? Not what you speak but the manner in which you speak it. I would explain but I think it would be a waste of time, considering all these posts and all these people telling you the same thing and you just don't get it.

True, but you have to know that anytime anything about Judaism is being discussed the Talmud is going to come up. It's a core part of Judaism. This is true but as you said previously he has a hate for Jews that is spilling out and just being seen by many, I saw this awhile ago, it isn't reserved for non believing Jews in Messiah only, but also for those like me who do, but still are Jewish.

You do realize that you are in a christian sub-forum right? This is not Judaism 101.

I created this area. I don't bait. I will confront you straight up, nothing hidden here. you Created? Oy, Isaiah 14

You speak to me as if i'm not a part of this forum. I've been a messianic for the last two years. The last year i spent as moderator over this forum. Just don't speak to me as if i'm an intruder to messianic judaism, i am not.Where in the rules does it say that anyone gets special preference? If you serve the true G-d then you know that you are a servant. If you were a mod here, again a servant. The only one that should be high and lifted up is Yeshua! And there , as you have accused in other threads, been those who have been Messianic in these forums longer than you have and then left to another denomination, just as you have.

to appear to be judgemental i would have to display some characteristic displaying a judgemental character. Where have i displayed any judgemental characteristics?If you can't see it by your previous posts in this thread then no one can point them out to you.

Oy I'm so done with this thread. Try to ask a simple question and get straight forward answers, and then get attacked like this is kristalnaught. Someone call me when y'all grow up.

Yochanan Yes, the one has done his job, :sigh: sorry about that Joe, I know your question was innocent enough, but others like to superimposed their hatred of certain people onto everything and it doesn't matter who gets hurt. Go rest.

Disclaimer: I apologize right now if any of my words seem too harsh. I have a terrible habit of taking on the attitude of the person I am speaking to, in real life it comes out in taking on their accent. You should see me when I go down south, I can't imagine what it would be like to go to England!

[insaneinthebrain]

Jesus is the father.

Father as in person #1 of the Trinity, or am I misreading you?

[visionary]

closing thread for cool down period.