Comments on: Any Jewish historian/cultural experts? http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:15:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Michelle R http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts/comment-page-1#comment-3023 Michelle R Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:00:59 +0000 http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts#comment-3023 I am not too familiar with the Christian Bible, so I can only go from what you wrote and my knowledge of Judaism. All Jewish men are obligated to fulfill the commandment of "pru urvu" - be fruitful and multiply. So while all Jewish men do not get married - not all are lucky enough to find a wife - all are obligated to try, and not allowed to remain single if they are able to get married. It would be practically unheard-of for a rabbi to be unmarried. Not only because they would be flaunting one of the commandments, but because the role of a rabbi is to adjudicate in matters of Jewish law, and many of those matters can involve family relations. An unmarried man would not be considered qualified to judge in those situations. Having said all that, there were no rabbis in the time of the Temples. It was a job/role that did not come about until many years later, after the Temple was destroyed. So anyone who claims that Jesus - or anyone else alive during his time - was a rabbi, is misinformed. The word "rabbi" means teacher, and perhaps that's what the Christian account means. But it would not be the same role performed by rabbis today - and wouldn't let Jesus off the hook if he actively chose to be a bachelor, which would be going directly against Jewish law. As far as women calling their husbands "master," that's a cultural thing and I don't think we have enough information to know whether that blanket statement is true. There just aren't that many surviving texts from the time period, and those we have rarely quote the words of women. <br><b>References : </b><br>I'm an Orthodox Jew I am not too familiar with the Christian Bible, so I can only go from what you wrote and my knowledge of Judaism. All Jewish men are obligated to fulfill the commandment of "pru urvu" – be fruitful and multiply. So while all Jewish men do not get married – not all are lucky enough to find a wife – all are obligated to try, and not allowed to remain single if they are able to get married. It would be virtually unheard-of for a rabbi to be unmarried. Not only because they would be flaunting one of the commandments, but because the role of a rabbi is to adjudicate in matters of Jewish law, and many of those matters can involve family relations. An unmarried man would not be considered qualified to judge in those situations.

Having said all that, there were no rabbis in the time of the Temples. It was a job/role that did not come about until many years shortly, after the Temple was ruined. So anyone who claims that Jesus – or anyone else alive during his time – was a rabbi, is misinformed. The word "rabbi" means teacher, and perhaps that’s what the Christian tab means. But it would not be the same role performed by rabbis today – and wouldn’t let Jesus off the hook if he actively chose to be a bachelor, which would be going directly against Jewish law.

As far as women calling their husbands "master," that’s a cultural thing and I don’t reckon we have enough information to know whether that blanket statement is right. There just aren’t that many surviving texts from the time period, and those we have seldom quote the words of women.

References :
I’m an Orthodox Jew

]]> By: The Freys http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts/comment-page-1#comment-3022 The Freys Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:24:59 +0000 http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts#comment-3022 I agree with Problem JPS. also.....read this in context: 2:9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, "Water that was made wine" IF THE GOVERNOR CALLED THE BRIDGROOM....that indicates it was someone other than Jesus. and ,,,,,2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days. If HE (Jesus) WENT TO CAPERNUM after that, with his 'mother' 'brethren' and deciples....why didn't he take his wife? It was customary for a bridegroom to stay with a bride after the wedding.<br><b>References : </b><br>You also need to read about Biblical Wedding Customs.....the wedding was usually at the home of the Groom, and this was clearly in someone elses home. That blog is simply someone's inaccurate opinion....here's what history says: http://www.bibleistrue.com/qna/qna22.htm I agree with Problem JPS. also…..read this in context:

2:9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, "Water that was made wine"

IF THE GOVERNOR CALLED THE BRIDGROOM….that indicates it was someone other than Jesus.

and ,,,,,2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days.

If HE (Jesus) WENT TO CAPERNUM after that, with his ‘mother’ ‘brethren’ and deciples….why didn’t he take his wife? It was customary for a bridegroom to stay with a bride after the wedding.
References :
You also need to read about Biblical Wedding Customs…..the wedding was usually at the home of the Groom, and this was clearly in someone elses home.

That blog is simply someone’s inaccurate opinion….here’s what history says: http://www.bibleistrue.com/qna/qna22.htm

]]> By: jimmeisnerjr http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts/comment-page-1#comment-3021 jimmeisnerjr Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:12:59 +0000 http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts#comment-3021 It doesn't accurately reflect the Bible. This is wrong "At this event Jesus was in charge of the wine." The whole interpretation of John 2 is wrong. The assumption concerning Jesus' associations is wrong . . . Everything you've quoted is wrong, and just a lazy reading of the Bible. It's all wrong. All factually inaccurate, and just wrong. it's that simple. <br><b>References : </b><br> It doesn’t accurately reflect the Bible.

This is incorrect "At this event Jesus was in charge of the wine."

The whole interpretation of John 2 is incorrect.

The assumption concerning Jesus’ associations is incorrect . . .

Everything you’ve quoted is incorrect, and just a bone idle reading of the Bible.

It’s all incorrect. All factually inaccurate, and just incorrect. it’s that simple.

References :

]]> By: PROBLEM JPAS http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts/comment-page-1#comment-3020 PROBLEM JPAS Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:00:59 +0000 http://www.jewishfamilyservice.net/jewish-blog/any-jewish-historiancultural-experts#comment-3020 IF it was Jesus' wedding, why would He have said "what does this have to do with me?" when His mom said fix the wine. The Essenes, like John the Baptist lived a celibate life. Why would Jesus ask for His mother to be cared for as He was on the cross and not mention His wife?<br><b>References : </b><br> IF it was Jesus’ wedding, why would He have said "what does this have to do with me?" when His mom said fix the wine. The Essenes, like John the Baptist lived a celibate life. Why would Jesus question for His mother to be cared for as He was on the cross and not mention His wife?
References :

]]>