• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

resurrection

S-word

Well-Known Member
Then we are left with a discrepancy. Berachiach Ben Yisrael suggest that this "beloved disciple" could have been the son of Mary (his mother). This is plausible. The brother could have lived by and took the mother to his home to spare her the sight of her other son on the cross. Verse 26 and 27 does seem to be Yeshua saying to his mother that the disciple is her son then he turns to the disciple and says this is your mother then the disciple within the hour, while Yeshua was still alive on the cross, takes his mother to his home and then some time after that Yeshua receives something to drink then he's dead (appeared to be).
We must also realize which book of the NT we're getting this information from. It is the later of the four gospels. It has information in it that was not present in the previous ones. In this one "beloved disciple" is mentioned where as the others are silent on this charachter. The spear poking in Yeshua's side is not mentioned in the others. What has happened is that these "different" versions have been mingled into one story.

It's always been and interesting story to me. My position is far different than others when examining the events. I think, just by observing the text, that the biblical Yeshua was in the crowd of people but they didn't know he was there until he greeted them. They thought they were seeing a spirit because their understanding of resurrection was that it is to be a spiritual event. Yeshua informs them he was no spirit and invites them to feel his hands and his feet to show he was no spirit. This is pretty much what (HE) said. I find it interesting he could conquer death but not hunger. He asks them if there is any food there and they gave him broiled fish and a piece of honeycomb and he ate it. I think the rumors of his death had been exaggerated and since these disciples weren't there they heard the rumors and believed he was.

We know near to nothing of Joseph the older of Mary's other two biological sons, except that he was the older brother of James the younger of Mary's three biological sons, and is believed to be the son and namesake of his Father Joseph the son of Jacob, a descendant of Solomon, as distinct from Joseph the son of Heli, who is the biological father of Jesus and a descendant of Nathan the priest, who was a son of Uriah and Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel the son of Obed-Edom a desendant of Moses the Levite through his second wife, who was Jephunneh the mother of Caleb and the daughter of Hobab, one of the two fathers in law of Moses.

If as suggested by Berachiach Ben Yisrael,that James the younger of the three sons of mary, who was the biological son of Alpheaus who is also called 'Cleophas,' which is an abbriveation of Cleopatros the masculine of Cleopatra, and Cleophas, who was also the father of Simeon who succeeded to the episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision after the death of James his half brother, who died at the hands of the same Saduccee sect that had Jame's full brother Jesus, murdered.

And as Cleophas was the husband of Mary at the time of the crucifiction, and there is no mention of the death of Joseph the step Father of Jesus, I tend to believe that the woman who was accused of having been caught in the very act of adultry by those Jewish authorities who were always searching for ways to trap Jesus with his own words and accuse him, was in fact, the mother of Jesus who had married Cleophas while her original husband Joseph, who it would seem had divorced Mary, was still alive thereby making her an adultress according to the new teaching of Jesus, that if a person remarried while their original spouce was still alive, they were then guilty of commiting adultry.

But back to the question in hand, if we were to believe that James the younger was the beloved disciple of his brother Jesus, then we're still stuck with the same problem, as it would appear that James, as with all the sons of the family of Mary and Cleophas, all lived up in Galilee, that is, apart from Joseph the brother of Jesus and James the younger, who could have been the Joseph from Arimathea, who laid the body of Jesus in his own family tomb which had never been used.

And it could be argued of course that John, who Jesus had surnamed 'Son of Thunder,' is one and the Same as John who was surnamed 'Mark,' which name means 'Hammer' and that Mary the mother of John who is surnamed Mark, whose brother or half brother is Joseph the Levite from Cyprus who was surnamed 'Barnabus,' is actually Mary the mother of Jesus, who, for the sake of her son Jesus, who told her to go and sin no more, stopped living with her legal husband 'Cleophas' and his sons. We know that Barnabus took his half sister Mary and John surnamed Mark, with him into the land of Pamphilia, and that the graves of Mary and John can still be visited in the town of Epheaus, to this very day.
 
Last edited:

Berachiah Ben Yisrael

Active Member
apart from Joseph the brother of Jesus and James the younger, who could have been the Joseph from Arimathea, who laid Jesus in his own family tomb which had never been used.

Why not Joseph from Arimathea then?

And really why is it that it matters where they lived at the time? When Yahshua said "Behold your Mother" it states that from that hour he took her unto his house. Well what if this didn't mean that he physically took her at that time but rather accounted for her as to be one of his own household?
 

S-word

Well-Known Member
Why not Joseph from Arimathea then?

And really why is it that it matters where they lived at the time? When Yahshua said "Behold your Mother" it states that from that hour he took her unto his house. Well what if this didn't mean that he physically took her at that time but rather accounted for her as to be one of his own household?


Nah mate, it couldn't have been Joseph of Arimathea, who was the beloved disciple of Jesus, cos, although he was a follower of Jesus as were thousands, he wern't even a disciple of Jesus, let alone his beloved disciple. And I totally agree with you, that the statement, which reads, 'from that hour he took her unto his house,' didn't mean that he physically took her at that time, but rather accounted for her as to be one of his own household.
 

Berachiah Ben Yisrael

Active Member
Nah mate, it couldn't have been Joseph of Arimathea, who was the beloved disciple of Jesus, cos, although he was a follower of Jesus as were thousands, he wern't even a disciple of Jesus, let alone his beloved disciple. And I totally agree with you, that the statement, which reads, 'from that hour he took her unto his house,' didn't mean that he physically took her at that time, but rather accounted for her as to be one of his own household.

I only stated this because of the possibility of him being the older brother of Yahshua. I guess since you agree with the last part then we might could revisit the idea of Yacob the younger.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Just to get back to the original point of the thread, I don't personally think that Jesus' physical body was resurrected at all. It was His spirit that was captive in His body during life on Earth that was let free from it's cage with the key of death, and could then take on any form it wanted, anywhere it wanted. Just an opinion but I think that it makes sense. Also with Moses and Jesus clothes going all white and stuff, perhaps it was something God did for the sake of the people and their faith.

In truth the only evidence that He resurrected the body was the fact that the body was no longer in the grave. Of course we do have the words of Jesus saying "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again", and John went on to say that He was speaking of His body.

This is shapeshifting and something that is surely within God's power. That is why He can take the same body and make it unrecognizable. Just because God can fudge around with the resurrected body doesn't mean that it isn't a legitimate resurrection any more than God's ability to fudge around with the conception of Jesus doesn't mean that Jesus isn't human in form.
 

S-word

Well-Known Member
I only stated this because of the possibility of him being the older brother of Yahshua. I guess since you agree with the last part then we might could revisit the idea of Yacob the younger.

If you mean that 'Jacob' is another form of the name 'James,' who was the younger of Mary's three biological sons, then by all means let us revisit the idea. Do you wish to start a new thread, or should we continue in the 'resurrection?'
 
Last edited:

Berachiah Ben Yisrael

Active Member
If you mean that 'Jacob' is another form of the name 'James,' who was the younger of Mary's three biological sons, then by all means let us revisit the idea. Do you wish to start a new thread, or should we continue in the 'resurrection?'

Rather james is a graecized Jacobus or the origional Hebrew "Yacob".

Do you see this actually needing its own thread? Is there enough to add?
 

starlite

Texasgirl
Why not Joseph from Arimathea then?

And really why is it that it matters where they lived at the time? When Yahshua said "Behold your Mother" it states that from that hour he took her unto his house. Well what if this didn't mean that he physically took her at that time but rather accounted for her as to be one of his own household?

Joseph of Arimathea

A wealthy man from the Judean city of Arimathea and a reputable member of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Although a good and righteous man who was waiting for God’s Kingdom, Joseph, because of his fear of unbelieving Jews, did not openly identify himself as a disciple of Jesus Christ. However, he did not vote in support of the Sanhedrin’s unjust action against Christ Jesus. Later, he courageously asked Pilate for Jesus’ body and, along with Nicodemus, prepared it for burial and then placed it in a new rock-cut tomb. This tomb was situated in a garden near the place of impalement and belonged to Joseph of Arimathea.
 

Berachiah Ben Yisrael

Active Member
Joseph of Arimathea

A wealthy man from the Judean city of Arimathea and a reputable member of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Although a good and righteous man who was waiting for God’s Kingdom, Joseph, because of his fear of unbelieving Jews, did not openly identify himself as a disciple of Jesus Christ. However, he did not vote in support of the Sanhedrin’s unjust action against Christ Jesus. Later, he courageously asked Pilate for Jesus’ body and, along with Nicodemus, prepared it for burial and then placed it in a new rock-cut tomb. This tomb was situated in a garden near the place of impalement and belonged to Joseph of Arimathea.

Thanks starlite but me and S-word are just kicking around some ideas that may not sit with the rest of the beliefs out there.
 

S-word

Well-Known Member
Joseph of Arimathea
A wealthy man from the Judean city of Arimathea and a reputable member of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Although a good and righteous man who was waiting for God’s Kingdom, Joseph, because of his fear of unbelieving Jews, did not openly identify himself as a disciple of Jesus Christ. However, he did not vote in support of the Sanhedrin’s unjust action against Christ Jesus. Later, he courageously asked Pilate for Jesus’ body and, along with Nicodemus, prepared it for burial and then placed it in a new rock-cut tomb. This tomb was situated in a garden near the place of impalement and belonged to Joseph of Arimathea.

Anyone who has learnt the teachings of Jesus and believed in them, can be called a disciple, which would include even yourself I suppose, but as Joseph of Aramathea kept as a secrect, and did not confess his belief in the teachings that were spoken by the Lord through his obedient servant Jesus, I am convinced that neither he nor any of the thousands upon thousands of disciples which are not counted among the twelve selected by the Lord for his chosen heir, could possibly be the beloved disciple of Jesus.

As to the fact that it was our saviour who rose Jesus from death and will raise us also, who chose the 12 disciples for Jesus, read, John 17: 6--12.
 

starlite

Texasgirl
Anyone who has learnt the teachings of Jesus and believed in them, can be called a disciple, which would include even yourself I suppose, but as Joseph of Aramathea kept as a secrect, and did not confess his belief in the teachings that were spoken by the Lord through his obedient servant Jesus, I am convinced that neither he nor any of the thousands upon thousands of disciples which are not counted among the twelve selected by the Lord for his chosen heir, could possibly be the beloved disciple of Jesus.

As to the fact that it was our saviour who rose Jesus from death and will raise us also, who chose the 12 disciples for Jesus, read, John 17: 6--12.

Perhaps I'm confused when you speak of the beloved disciple of Jesus....are you not referring to John who was among the favored, preferred few? Jesus even put him in a class by himself by bestowing special affection upon him; so much so that John repeatedly refers to himself as the disciple Jesus loved. John occupied the bosom position of his Master at that last passover together and to him Jesus commended his mother the following afternoon.
 

S-word

Well-Known Member
Perhaps I'm confused when you speak of the beloved disciple of Jesus....are you not referring to John who was among the favored, preferred few? Jesus even put him in a class by himself by bestowing special affection upon him; so much so that John repeatedly refers to himself as the disciple Jesus loved. John occupied the bosom position of his Master at that last passover together and to him Jesus commended his mother the following afternoon.

I am convinced that John was the young disciple who ran away naked after his linen robe was torn, when the temple guards tried to arrest him with Jesus, and that John whom Jesus had surnamed 'Son of Thunder' and John who was surnamed 'Mark,' which means "Hammer,' are one and the same person, and Mary the mother of Jesus is one and the same as Mary the half sister of Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who was surnamed Barnabus, and who was the mother of John who was surnamed 'Hammer.' The graves of Mary and John who travelled to the land of Pamphillia with Joseph the Levite, can still be visited in the town of Ephesus to this day.


Although I have no recollection of ever having read in the Bible, where the name 'John' is directly associated with 'the beloved disciple,' or where the beloved disciple is actually identified as John the son of Zebadee, perhaps you may help me in this regard, John 21: 20-24, will be the closest confirmation that I beleive that you will find, thank you starlite.
 
Last edited:

emiliano

Well-Known Member
Could somebody explain to me why the physical body of Jesus was resurected when it was not nessessary ?

I read an explanation that went on the lines that it was necessary for two reasons, one was the way Jesus died was a great offence to Jews (hang from a tree ) and two, to confirm to his disciple that He had the power to do what He promised them. Joh 6:51 I am the Living Bread which came down from Heaven. If anyone eats of this Bread, he shall live forever. And truly the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, I am the Resurrection and the Life! He who believes in Me, though he die, yet he shall live.
Joh 10:18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down from Myself. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it again. I have received this commandment from My Father.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
The resurrection of Jesus cannot be proven historically. If you would like to debate this go to my: is the bible inerrant debate.
Why would someone who doesn't believe that Jesus was resurrected call himself a Christian? I'm not saying you're not a Christian. I'm on the receiving end on that claim often enough to know how it feels. But seriously, if Jesus wasn't resurrected, what point was there to His suffering?
 

starlite

Texasgirl
I am convinced that John was the young disciple who ran away naked after his linen robe was torn, when the temple guards tried to arrest him with Jesus, and that John whom Jesus had surnamed 'Son of Thunder' and John who was surnamed 'Mark,' which means "Hammer,' are one and the same person, and Mary the mother of Jesus is one and the same as Mary the half sister of Joseph the Levite from Cyprus, who was surnamed Barnabus, and who was the mother of John who was surnamed 'Hammer.' The graves of Mary and John who travelled to the land of Pamphillia with Joseph the Levite, can still be visited in the town of Ephesus to this day.


Although I have no recollection of ever having read in the Bible, where the name 'John' is directly associated with 'the beloved disciple,' or where the beloved disciple is actually identified as John the son of Zebadee, perhaps you may help me in this regard, John 21: 20-24, will be the closest confirmation that I beleive that you will find, thank you starlite.

S-word...I have this concerning the disciple who fled naked and will send more on the beloved one as time permits. I've been busy with grandkids.

John 18:15 mentions a disciple known to the high priest. Is this the same disciple who earlier fled “naked,” as reported at Mark 14:51, 52? No, it seems that the person known to the high priest was the apostle John, whereas it was the disciple Mark who fled “naked.” Taking these accounts in time sequence, we start at the garden of Gethsemane. The apostles reacted in fear when Jesus Christ was arrested. “They all abandoned him and fled.” The very next verse in Mark’s account draws a contrast: “But a certain young man wearing a fine linen garment over his naked body began to follow him nearby; and they tried to seize him, but he left his linen garment behind and got away naked.”—Mark 14:50-52.

Thus, the initial response of the 11 apostles is contrasted with that of this unnamed disciple, so it is logical to conclude that he was not one of the apostles. This incident is recorded only in the Gospel written by the early disciple John Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. Hence, there is reason to hold that Mark was the “certain young man” who began to follow the arrested Jesus but who fled without his covering garment when the mob tried to apprehend him too.—Acts 4:36; 12:12, 25; Colossians 4:10.
 
Why would someone who doesn't believe that Jesus was resurrected call himself a Christian? I'm not saying you're not a Christian. I'm on the receiving end on that claim often enough to know how it feels. But seriously, if Jesus wasn't resurrected, what point was there to His suffering?
This is my FAITH.:shout
 

S-word

Well-Known Member
This is my FAITH.:shout

I Corinthians 15: 14, "If Christ has not been raised from death, we have nothing to preach and you have nothing to believe. more than that, we are shown to be lying about God, because we said that he raised Christ from death. For if the dead are not raised, then neither has Christ been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is a delusion and you are still lost in your sins.

The faith of a Christian, rests entirely on the resurrection, For 'The Son of Man,' the spirit that develops in the body of Mankind, came down into his dead past to pay the death penality of the body in which He developed, in which he had gained all the knowledge, wisdom and insight needed by the Heir to the throne of the Most High.

If you are saying that you do not believe that Christ was raised from death, you are calling the disciples liers, and if you do not believe in the resurrection of the dead, then eat, drink and be Merry mate, do what ever your heart desires, for tomorrow you will enter the grave, from which you will never rise.
 
Last edited:
Top