1. 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!

Featured Was Jesus really a Jewish rabbi?

Discussion in 'Interfaith Discussion' started by Harel13, Jan 8, 2021.

  1. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    In more recent times, I see more and more Christians claiming that not only was Jesus a learned scholar, but he was actually a rabbi. This is evidenced, in their view, from the fact that he's called "rabbi" by some in the NT.

    In Judaism, though, this is not a feasible view. Not because there's no such thing as a heretical rabbi - there were, unfortunately - but because becoming a rabbi in Talmudic times (when Jesus lived and certainly when the authors of the NT lived) was not quite as simple as receiving ordination from one's own rabbi (which isn't a simple process in itself) and having a shiny rabbinical degree to hang up on the wall. During those times there was something called "Smicha". This is short for "Smichat Yada'im" and refers to a special process of ordination which included at least three ordained rabbis laying their hands upon the head of the rabbi-to-be and passing on the traditional ordination of Jewish authority passed down from generation to generation in an unbroken chain, all the way back to Moshe. According to tradition, after the time of Rabbi Yehudah the Prince, the special form of Smicha was canceled and what has since been called rabbinic ordination, also referred to as "Smicha" is not the same process and this has halachic (Jewish law) ramifications to this day. I will not get into all of the fine points about Smicha here. Suffice it to say that the ancient Smicha had more authority than the one we have today and in ancient times, a distinction was made between those sages who had Smicha and those who didn't.

    Indeed, there were Talmudic sages who didn't receive Smicha and as such, were not called "rabbi" (I'm not including sages like Hillel and Shammai who as prince and head of the court respectively, of course had ordination but were not called "rabbi" for other reasons), such as Shimon ben Azai, Shimon ben Zoma, Shmuel and so forth. The Talmud is not lacking in descriptions of the greatness of these individuals, but they simply didn't qualify for Smicha, for different reasons. Eventually a new rabbinical status quo was established and sages, upon receiving the lesser Smicha, got the title "rabbi" but again, a distinction was made between the rabbis of the superior Smicha and those of the lesser.

    Now, about Jesus: We can agree that we don't know too much about Jesus. The NT's version of the story doesn't provide us with details about who taught Jesus. There's nary a rabbi in sight in the NT to offer any form of support for the man, save, perhaps, for Nicodemus, who no one knows who he was, as he's not mentioned anywhere else, at least not by that name.

    It's possible that Jesus was an autodidact. This may explain the various rulings he made on his own account, that don't quite match rulings of contemporary authorities; he may have thought that as a kind of "freelance scholar" he could do what he wished. It's also possible that he was taught by someone, but it is, in my opinion, quite telling, that this mysterious teacher is never named.

    According to some views, there are hints in the NT that Jesus didn't really know what he was talking about when he was talking about Judaism.

    And of course, we can't forget about the Temple incident, in which Jesus went full-on vigilante, causing havoc around the holiest place of the Jewish people and demanding punishment without following the proper official halachic court proceedings.

    Due to all of which I've written so far, it seems highly unlikely that Jesus was ever actually an ordained rabbi: Who was his rabbi? Who would have given him Smicha? How did all of these sages miss out on all of his "quirks"? Why would they even consider giving such a person Smicha?

    The Talmud tells us of a man usually called "Acher" - "other", a former sage named Elisha ben Avuyah. He was a great scholar until he fell and turned to Hellenism and then proceeded to do his best to convince other scholars to leave Judaism. Yet, he's mentioned as a sage in the Talmud. The Talmud isn't known for hiding away the sins, mistakes and downfalls of the sages, knowing that there's wisdom to gleaned from these events. Jesus is also mentioned in the Talmud, but not as a sage. At best, he might have been a student of Yehoshua ben Perachyah, but even that is a matter of debate. Were Jesus to have been a sage who had fallen off the path of Judaism, it does not seem to make sense that the Talmud would hide this fact from its historical notes.

    Therefore, it seems much more likely that he had never been an actual rabbinical sage to begin with. More likely, either he was self-taught or he had a teacher that was also not a rabbinical sage. But a true, ordained rabbi Jesus likely was not.

    So why was Jesus called rabbi in the NT? The most likely reason, in my view, is that "rabbi" means "master" and it was also a term that was becoming more common at the time for revered individuals. Revering their teacher, the disciples, who it seems were not too learned, chose the popular title without really understanding what it truly meant in Judaic terms, past basic Aramaic vocabulary skills.
     
    #1 Harel13, Jan 8, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 6
    • Like Like x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. Sirona

    Sirona Hindu Wannabe

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    957
    Ratings:
    +792
    Religion:
    Hinduism
    I am speaking generally here, but as for religious leaders, there seem to be two types: on the one hand, the "establishment", the "hierarchy", those with the titles received though an authorized procedure; and on the other hand, the charismatic types, who may or may not know the scriptures overly well, but have the potential to communicate them to the general public, and to gather followers though this process. Once a charismatic leader has captured the hearts of his followers, they may call him their "Lord", "master" etc. quite naturally because they love him so much. It doesn't necessarily involve trickery from the leader's part, although there are undoubtedly always charlatans who adorn themselves with titles they have not earned.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  3. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    Yes, the latter (being a charismatic though not quite learned person with a following) is what I think Jesus was. Last year I first heard of a notion that is slowly becoming more popular among the more liberal of Orthodox Jews, which is the idea of "reclaiming the Jewish Jesus", for he was supposedly a learned Jewish scholar. I played around with the idea for awhile, but ultimately, I remained skeptical of the plausibility of this.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,589
    Ratings:
    +10,684
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Yes I think that's probably right. I've always understood he was called "rabbi" by his followers because he was their teacher, their authority, i.e. he was a rabbi to them, not because he had been formally appointed as such by the Jewish hierarchy.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  5. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    6,475
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    Religion:
    none
    It was speculated that Jesus was one of or was taught by the Essenes. Are their records included in modern lists of ancient rabbis?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    I didn't know this. Interesting. That may explain some things. As to your question, no, not that I know of. Likewise ignored are figures considered noteworthy nowadays, such as Josephus and, as I thought until recently, Philo (about Philo, recently I read an essay that suggests that he may have been hidden inside a certain midrash).
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  7. oldbadger

    oldbadger Skanky Old Mongrel!

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2012
    Messages:
    19,676
    Ratings:
    +6,713
    Religion:
    deist
    Hi.... :)

    No! Never!
    We do have a good wedge of info which does give us (HJ students) a reasonable outline of who and what Jesus was, but he was not a rabbi.!!

    I my opinion Jesus was a Galilean peasant in the Handworker group of folks, there being about 5 different classes of peasant back then. There was no middle class.

    IMO Jesus was a Handworker, probably in Wood, Stone and Bone but not in casting or foundry work or some mention would certainly have been made about that kind of work. He surely had great abilities as a healer and speaker. He certainly thought that the Temple and Priesthood was greedy, hypocritical and corrupt.

    And he joined the campaign that the Baptist was running to offer cleansing, redemption and feel-good factor (for nothing) to Northern peasants who were bringing their savings to Jerusalem and the Temple to get fleeced. They probably did give tips to the disciples who dunked them but that's the world going round, No?
     
    • Useful Useful x 3
  8. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    16,450
    Ratings:
    +3,796
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    When in his short life was he supposed to have had time to study to be an official Rabbi?
    I would have thought his ideas and claims, made him to be no more than a rebel in official eyes.
    when you look at the social status of those calling him "Rabbi", and almost total opposition by Authority.
    It would take a massive step in the imagination to suppose he was accepted as one by the "Temple"

    Of course Rabbinical Judaism did not start till 6th century CE. long After the fall of the second temple.

    To be called Rabbi during the Temple period had far lower status.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    6,475
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    Religion:
    none
    "He relates the same information concerning piety, celibacy, the absence of personal property and of money, the belief in communality, and commitment to a strict observance of Sabbath. He further adds that the Essenes ritually immersed in water every morning, ate together after prayer, devoted themselves to charity and benevolence," - Essenes - Wikipedia
    Check, check, check, check, one fail, one unknown and check and check.
    (Though there are questions if Jesus was married.)
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    You'd be surprised at the ages of some rabbis of millennia past and when they received ordination. Past 13, manhood in Judaism, age has nothing to do with it.
    I assume you're referring to the priesthood. I wasn't talking about the priesthood. But there are those who like to imagine that he was of the students of Hillel, what was known as "Beit Hillel", the house of Hillel. I find this highly doubtful.
    I don't know what you mean by any of this.
    Than what?
     
  11. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    Many sages also worked as craftsmen and traders. Hillel, prior to becoming prince of Judea, sold firewood. Rabbi Yehoshua sold coal. Rabbi Yitzchak Napacha was a smith. And so forth. So while Jesus's trade shows he was of lower class, it's not conclusive evidence to his not being a rabbi. It wasn't like knighthood, which was reserved only for the noblemen.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    6,326
    Ratings:
    +4,102
    Religion:
    Jewish
    I'm curious why you believe this.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Vouthon

    Vouthon Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,728
    Ratings:
    +4,198
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    A nicely worded and informative OP @Harel13

    I agree with your contention here, that Jesus could not have undergone any 'formal' rabbinic training or resulting 'ordination' i.e. through something akin to "Smichat Yada'im".

    We cannot otherwise hope to understand the statement made in Luke 4:20-22, in the scene where Jesus unfurls the scroll of Isaiah in his hometown of Nazareth's synagogue: "And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. Then he began to say to them, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his mouth. They said, “Is not this Joseph’s son?

    Presumably, had he been the recipient of an illustrious education and ordained formally by other 'rabbis', his local synagogue congregation would not have been 'amazed' at his apparent wisdom and the graciousness of his speech, for what seems to have surprised them is that a man whom they had known growing up in the community as 'Joseph's son' (one would suppose that he followed the carpentry or tekton trade like his father, a lower middleclass profession) was now speaking like an authoritative teacher without the 'qualification' so to speak.

    The primary model for discipleship in the gospels comes from Jesus’ use of the Elijah/Elisha typology and this is dependent upon his 'charismatic' persona, as you say. We can deduce that Jesus must have been a mighty fine and quite silver-tongued orator, for the Gospel of Mark notes: "And when the chief priests and the scribes heard it, they kept looking for a way to kill him; for they were afraid of him, because the whole crowd was spellbound by his teaching" (Mark 11:18).


    The historical Jesus scholar E.P. Meier has opined that:


    "It is unlikely that Galilean Jews of the countryside had the learning or the leisure necessary to study, debate, and practice the niceties of observance developed in the halaka of the three rival groups centered in the south...

    In imitation of Elijah, Jesus undertook an itinerant ministry, largely (not entirely) in northern Israel...

    As the prophet of this kingdom, it was Jesus’ task to prophesy this world-changing advent of God and to begin the preparation of Israel by calling it to repentance, baptism, and a renewal of moral life within a loving, compassionate society
    " (618).

    Meier, furthermore, notes that Jesus: "was of a family reputed to be descended from King David; that he spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, but little or no Greek or Latin; that he was literate, but not highly educated; that his family belonged to the lower middle class; that he was unmarried; and that he was a “layman”".

    He goes on to highlight the rather weighty difference between a two-century long movement of formal, programmatic Rabbinic sages and a ministry of Jesus lasting only three years; between a Judean religious establishment governed by a priestly Sadducaic aristocracy and concerned with structures and "a Jewish layman from Nazareth" with "no professional education as a scribe or student of the Law" (523).

    In this respect, Meier casts Jesus’ approach to the Torah as having been "grounded in his prophetic-charismatic authority" (525).

    Thus, Jesus would probably be cast as some kind of 'liberal-humanistic' adherent of Judaism if transposed into our modern terms (despite his strictness in certain areas, such as on divorce which he opposed unilaterally): he wasn't terribly strict on purity rules and on what he saw as minor points of the Torah characteristic of the Qumran community but "instead affirmed the Law as expression of God’s will, interpreting it liberally". Meier illustrates this with Jesus’ laxity towards sabbath law and his approach to food mitzvah.

    For that reason, I must strongly disagree with those suggesting that Jesus was "Essene". In fact, he was the antithesis of a Qumranite sectarian in his lifestyle. Their predominant focus was on correct calendars, distrust of outsiders, and establishing firm hierarchy, which is quite the opposite of Jesus's teaching.
     
    #13 Vouthon, Jan 8, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  14. Harel13

    Harel13 Nin-Jew Master
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2019
    Messages:
    5,946
    Ratings:
    +5,974
    Religion:
    Orthodox Judaism
    Maybe he was an Essene who went rogue? :D
    While @Heyo's suggestion is new to me, I'm still sticking for the moment with the two options I presented in my OP. There's a third option not mentioned there, because it's not directly related to the main subject of the OP and because I'm still mulling it over. Maybe I'll make a thread on that someday. :)
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
  15. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    You could always try looking at earlier cognates to the word " rabbi " that might help clear up it's connotations
     
  16. Vouthon

    Vouthon Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,728
    Ratings:
    +4,198
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    I do get the sense that he was perceived as a "bit of a (lovable) rogue" by his contemporaries :p


    The Son of Man (Jesus) has come eating and drinking; and you say, ‘Behold, a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners

    (Luke 7:34)

    When Jesus is brought before Pilate, the accusation in Luke's gospel has two distinct elements, whereas there are four in an early variant Luke 23:2 preserved by the church father St. Epiphanius in his Panarion and this one makes Jesus seem a bit more "roguish" again:



    "We found this man inciting our people to a revolt, forbidding to give tribute [to Caesar] and saying that he himself is Christ a king, leading astray the women and children [καὶ ἀποστρέφοντα τὰς γυναῖκας καὶ τὰ τέκνα]. He is inflaming the people with his teaching all over Judea; it has come all the way from Galilee, where he started, down to here, and he has turned our children and wives away from us, for they are not bathed as we are, nor do they purify themselves.".


    It would appear from this 'variant' to the text, that Jesus's valuation of the relative (as he saw it) unimportance of regular female ritual impurity from an issuance of menstrual blood - as taught in the synoptic passage involving the woman with the twelve-year haemorrhage (awotch!) - may have been understood by some of his opponents as having been applied more widely and indiscriminately, thus generating the memory of this early tradition where a sort of 'subversive' Jesus leads the nation's women astray from the authority of their husbands/fathers, such that their infuriated husbands/fathers came to publicly denounce Jesus and demand that he be executed :D

    His reputation was that of a man who kept the close company of undesirables in his society, though I'm sure he would have responded to this criticism by saying that he was reaching out to them for the purpose of moral reformation.

    As E.P. Meier explained in his book series, The Marginal Jew how:


    "...His teaching evinced a style and content that did not jibe with the views and practices of the major Jewish religious groups of his day...

    By the time he died, Jesus had managed to make himself appear obnoxious, dangerous, or suspicious to everyone, from pious Pharisees through political high priests to an ever vigilant Pilate. One reason Jesus met a swift and brutal end is simple: he alienated so many individuals and groups in Palestine that, when the final clash came in Jerusalem in 30 AD, he had very few people, especially people of influence, on his side.


    The political marginality of this layman from the Galilean countryside with disturbing doctrines and claims was because he was dangerously anti-establishment and lacked a proper base in the capital..."(Powell, 130-133)


    The Essenes, on the other hand, were much stricter then the Rabbis when it came to holiness. If we can take the sectarian texts of Qumran as being indicative of a roughly Essenic approach to Judaism, there was certainly many points of contact theologically with the early Jewish Christianity but in terms of lifestyle, I honestly think you couldn't get two more opposing "sects" of Second Temple Judaism.

    Saul M. Olyan, Professor of Judaic Studies at Brown University, explain in his study, The Exegetical Dimensions of Restrictions on the Blind and Lame in Texts from Qumran:


    "Several Qumran texts exclude the blind and the lame from the vicinity of the deity or that of his angelic servants."


    Essenes - Wikipedia


    Purity and cleanliness was considered so important to the Essenes that they would refrain from defecation on the Sabbath.[50]

    By contrast, Jesus took a decidedly un-Essene approach:


    "Go out quickly into the streets and alleys of the town and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame."

    (Luke 14:21)

    As the scholar John P. Meier explains:


    https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V30N04_13.pdf


    Jesus instead emphasized the joyful message that the eschatological banquet was at hand, a banquet anticipated in the meals he shared with the religiously marginalized. No doubt this offended those who identified the renewal of Israel with stringent observance of the laws of ritual purity.


    [​IMG]


    You've piqued my interest Harel and I now need to know :D I look forward to this thread when you get around to it.
     
    #16 Vouthon, Jan 8, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  17. Estro Felino

    Estro Felino Believer in free will
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Messages:
    13,607
    Ratings:
    +4,966
    Religion:
    Pelagianism
    M. Biglino, Italian author and philologist said both John the Baptist and Jesus were Zealots. When John died, Jesus took his place.
    Of course this is just a theory.:)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    6,475
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    Religion:
    none
    In an age when 90% worked as farmers, most of them as farm hands, being a craftsman was at least upper middle class.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. pearl

    pearl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    5,371
    Ratings:
    +2,542
    Religion:
    Catholic
    I have always understood that 'rabbi' when applied to Jesus simply meant 'teacher'. We know virtually nothing of Jesus' life from the canonical NT between the age of 12 or so until his baptism by John other than 'he grew in wisdom and stature'. Titles most often ascribed to Jesus are prophet, sage, holy man etc., not including post resurrection titles.
     
  20. Vouthon

    Vouthon Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,728
    Ratings:
    +4,198
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    Indeed, though the consensus amongst scholars seems to be that Jesus had likely been raised within the 'lower middle-class' of Judea. Some do interpret tekton differently, granted, and place him in a slightly higher social status (but definitely 'middle').

    He wasn't a 'peasant' though, rather I think this mistaken attribution seems to have arisen from the fact that he emphatically advocated the cause of the 'oppressed' poor and religiously marginalized classes of society (plus he came from a sort of 'non-entity' little town that had a poor reputation):



    Does Jesus Plus Paul Equal Marx Plus Lenin?: Redirecting the Historical Jesus - Oxford Scholarship


    The Jesus tradition did not just emerge spontaneously. In fact, we only need to cover some of the key points from the socio-historical work on first-century Galilee to begin to understand why the movement emerged when and where it did.

    By the time the Jesus tradition was developing, Galilee had witnessed the building and rebuilding of the key urban centres, Tiberias and Sepphoris, with significant socio-economic consequences. Further south in Judea, the Jerusalem Temple had become an extensive building project.

    Such urbanization can extract surplus from the countryside and is a key feature of the kinds of commercializing activity that John Kautsky believes underlay peasant unrest and the emergence of millenarian or utopian groups in aristocratic or agrarian empires, with calls for change ranging from the reactionary to the revolutionary.80


    In terms of the context of the earliest Palestinian tradition, the rebuilding of Sepphoris and the building of Tiberias, or, further south, the major extension of the Jerusalem Temple, we can at least suggest that the socio-economic situation would have been significantly changed and not everyone would have perceived social and cultural changes in traditional lifestyle for the better, as the Gospel tradition and its intense interest in issues of rich and poor (see chapters 3 and 4) may well attest.

    And, of course, not only did early first-century Galilee witness some significant socio-economic changes but also Palestine of the first-century witnessed some monumental changes, culminating in the two major revolts against Rome. From this, to at least some degree, emerge Christianity and the consolidation of Judaism among the rabbis. These developments should not simply be restricted to the revolts themselves but were part of the thinking that emerged from a series of significant socio-political changes intersecting with specific cultural traditions already present in first-century Palestine...

    What we have seen throughout is how people in and around the Jesus movement interacted with the social upheavals of Galilee and Judea, as well as the Roman empire more broadly. The earliest Palestinian tradition pitted the kingdom of God against Rome, attacked wealth and privilege, supported the poorest members of society, and saw Jesus as an agent of the kingdom in both present and future.

    So, the image has entered popular consciousness of a 'poor man' Christ but this doesn't really cohere with the Jesus of the gospels, who is continually attending 'banquets' with Pharisees and the like i.e. "While he was speaking, a Pharisee invited him to dine with him; so he went in and took his place at the table" (Luke 11:37).

    Albeit, the "ideal" lifestyle promoted by Jesus himself in the Synoptics - unvarnished by the exigencies of later periods - consisted of a simple itinerant (wandering) existence and the complete renunciation of all personal possessions, in favour of a common purse with his band of followers. This is inimical to the condition and mores of a "householder", which is why the New Testament also tells us that he had a mass of "sympathizers" who patronized him while remaining in a domestic life.

    So, whilst Jesus himself was not of 'peasant' social class or graces (so to speak) himself, he did adopt a very frugal itinerant lifestyle that saw him depend upon the resources of wealthy householders in his movement, such as Mary Magdalene and Joanna (wife the Tetrarch of Galilee's own steward Chuza):


    "Soon afterwards he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their resources." (Luke 8:1-3)​
     
    #20 Vouthon, Jan 8, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...