The Birth Of Jesus

[CrimsonKairos]

Whatever guys, whatever. I really don't care one way or the other. I'm simply saying that based on my studies of Judaism, its history, the temple in Israel, etc..., it is unlikely that a woman would live in the temple. When I say in the temple, I don't mean a stable or adjoining building, but in the temple itself (such as it was after Herod's renovation).

[Maureen]

According to the Jospel of James Zacharias was the high priest at the temple.

But Zacharias was only related to Mary through Elizabeth, they were obviously from different tribes.

M.

[Ray]

Maybe Mary went to visit her uncle in the temple, while he was living there to serve his course.

Or maybe Mary never did live in the temple in Jerusalem, even though someone once said she lived in a temple.

As Traveler suggested, they may have been referring to another "building" and they called that building a temple... maybe because it really was another temple... or maybe they just "called" it a temple.

All I am saying is that we don't know all the details, or at least it appears that we don't, so how can we make an analysis of probabilities when we don't even know what was possible?

At this point, why not just say that it is possible?

I'm thinking that maybe I should start a thread on HOPE, and how it can lead us to FAITH.

And yes, I do know the greatest gift from God is CHARITY, but HOPE and FAITH are also important.

And I try to keep that in mind when I think of anything and I'm sharing my thoughts with other people.

To say... that is impossible... sometimes only means that some people can't think of how that is really possible.

And if ever in doubt, I ask God.

And if God doesn't tell me... it doesn't mean God doesn't know... it may be that I just need to keep asking.

... and keep thinking while I keep listening for His assurance.

[Maureen]

At this point, why not just say that it is possible?

Yes, why not? Just like it would be possible for a non-LDS person to participate in a LDS Temple endowment session.

M.

[Ray]

<div class='quotemain'>

At this point, why not just say that it is possible?

Yes, why not? Just like it would be possible for a non-LDS person to participate in a LDS Temple endowment session.

M.

Apples and oranges.

Mary was a member of the "church" that was allowed to enter the temple in Jerusalem. And she could also participate in most of the ordinances, she just couldn't offer the sacrifices like the "priesthood".

[CrimsonKairos]

Ray, what ordinances could Mary participate in?

[Ray]

Ray, what ordinances could Mary participate in?

The ones where the priests offered sacrifices, and then passed out the food for consumption.

The ones that were usually accompanied by feasts and festivals as they expressed their appreciation for the food... er, I mean, the Lord.

Perhaps it would help if you described all the ordinances while mentioning what was usually involved.

To say she participated in the ordinances at the temple simply means she was a participant at the ordinances the priests performed at the temple.

Are you saying you don't agree with that, Crimson?

[CrimsonKairos]

Ray, I don't consider eating the remnants of a priestly sacrifice to be "participating in the ordinance."

Perhaps those who run the laundry at full-size temples are participating in the endowment? Or those who vacuum the celestial room?

For all I know you're probably going to say yes.

[Ray]

Let me try to make myself perfectly clear.

I think

women who ate the food sacrificed for ordinances at the temple back then

participated just as much as

women who ate and eat the food sacrificed for Sacrament meetings today

if they did so while thinking what they should have been thinking while participating in those ordinances.

... and that is just one of the ways they participated.

They also could have participated in many other ways that I am not thinking of right now.

Clear enough?

Do you really not agree with me, Crimson?

Either way, I would still like to know you... and be the best friend to you I can be.

[CrimsonKairos]

I think women who ate the food sacrificed during ordinances at the temple participated just as much as women who ate and eat the food sacrificed during ordinances in our chapels today if they did so while thinking what they should have been thinking while they participated in those ordinances.

There's a big difference in the ordinances, Ray. The sacrifices of the Old Testament were almost always about the blood of the animal being sacrificed. I've never read any part of the Old Testament where Jehovah says that forgiveness of sins is not available to men or women unless they eat the meat of the sacrificed animals.

The Lord's Supper as administered in the LDS Church today does link forgiveness to partaking of the bread and water...a renewal of our baptism as it were.

Please find me an Old Testament passage that indicates women (or men) could not be forgiven unless they partook of the sacrificial animal's remains. If you look closely, most of the time the left over meat was given to the priests as their "pay" or inheritance, since Levi as a tribe received no land of inheritance per se when the promised land was parceled out. They received some cities, but no geographical square mileage to speak of.

Please point me to the specific sacrifice you are talking about where the women got the left over meat. I don't recall that one off the top of my head.

...and that is just one of the ways they participated. They also could have participated in many other ways that I am not thinking of right now. Clear enough?

As clear as mud. First you say women participated by eating meat; then you say that is just one way they participate; then you say you don't know how else they participated but they could have; then you ask if you're being clear?

Sorry friend, I'm lost. A good starting point would be for you to give chapter and verse from the OT showing where women were giving sacrificial remnants. Then we can go from there in our discussion.

Do you really not agree with me, Crimson?

Not yet. I haven't seen sciptural evidence to back up your assertion that women "could have participated in many other ways."

Either way, I would still like to know you... and be the best friend I can be.

Likewise. That's a given. If I disagree with you that doesn't mean I think you're a heel or an idiot. If I thought you were stupid I wouldn't bother dialoguing with you.

[Ray]

Okay, Crimson. I understand now. You're under the impression that all of that food that was sacrificed was eaten by the priests, and their families. Or maybe they sold it to other families. Or maybe they invited others over for dinner.

And you also don't seem to believe that when they offered those sacrifices they were supposed to be thinking of our Savior.

I have a different impression, from all I have read, but I'm not going to quote chapter and verse.

You're a resourceful person and can do your own homework. I was simply sharing what I do believe.

And yes, I have also been reading the scriptures, and other books written by prophets.

Maybe if I recollected, by chapter and verse, I would try to help you out like you're asking.

As it is right now it is not my responsibility to try to teach you where you can find true knowledge.

And even if I showed you where you can read what I know, it wouldn't make you believe what you read.

I have learned, by experience, it is better for you if you search for the true knowledge that is out there.

... that is available from all prophets of God.

Okay?

We simply are not "one" on this issue.

[CrimsonKairos]

Ray, if you have no idea what chapter and verse to point to just say so.

Don't give me this "You're a smart boy look for yourself." And don't give me this, "Even if you read it you wouldn't believe it" crap either. That's garbage and you know it. I wouldn't have asked for a reference if I wasn't going to consider it.

Someone who makes an assertion has the responsibility to back it up...that is, if they want that assertion to be considered. You made an assertion; you didn't provide supporting scriptural evidence; hence, I'm not considering said assertion seriously.

Here's an example of backing up assertions. I said priests got the left-overs as sort of a perpetual pseudo-inheritance (until Christ made animal sacrifice unnecessary of course).

Lev. 5:13

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/5/13#13 (in this case, if the sacrifice was grain, the priest got left-over flour instead of meat)

Lev. 7:9

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/7/9#9

Lev. 22:11, 13

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/22/11,13#11 (this scripture shows that the priest's family could indeed eat the left-over meat from sacrifices...but it is more of a provision for providing food for his family, not an ordinance for forgiveness of sins or anything like that. Specifically, no man or woman could eat the left-over meat unless they were in the priest's immediate family, so women didn't go to the temple for free lunches...only a few got the meat and they were family.)

[Ray]

Ray, if you have no idea what chapter and verse to point to just say so.

Telling me how to respond to you now, are you? So what happens if I don't respond that way?

I am free to say whatever I want to say to you. I don't have to say what you want me to say.

What makes you think that I have to respond to you in the way that you think I should respond?

Did you have your pants on backwards when you said that?

Don't give me this "You're a smart boy look for yourself." And don't give me this, "Even if you read it you wouldn't believe it" crap either. That's garbage and you know it. I wouldn't have asked for a reference if I wasn't going to consider it.

I was simply trying to tell you that I'm not responsible for providing any other words for you to read.

I will tell you what I believe, and I will put it in writing.

If that's not good enough, you can read some more words.

You can compare what I say to what is written in the scriptures... and I think that would be noble, indeed.

But please don't jump on my case... at any time... ever... even when you'd like me to provide some other words.

It is not my responsibility to try to make you believe me. I am simply sharing what I, personally, believe.

Someone who makes an assertion has the responsibility to back it up...that is, if they want that assertion to be considered.

Oh, really? They have that responsiblility, do they? The responsibility?

You think it is my job to try to get you to consider what I tell you that I know or believe?

I won't ask why you believe that... you can believe what you want.

I'm simply sharing what I know and believe.

You made an assertion; you didn't provide supporting scriptural evidence; hence, I'm not considering said assertion seriously.

Heh, okay. And you think this affects me? How?

You can do what you want with whatever I tell you. It's not my job to try to make you believe me.

Here's an example of backing up assertions. I said priests got the left-overs as sort of a perpetual pseudo-inheritance (until Christ made animal sacrifice unnecessary of course).

Lev. 5:13

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/5/13#13 (in this case, if the sacrifice was grain, the priest got left-over flour instead of meat)

Lev. 7:9

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/7/9#9

Lev. 22:11, 13

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/22/11,13#11 (this scripture shows that the priest's family could indeed eat the left-over meat from sacrifices...but it is more of a provision for providing food for his family, not an ordinance for forgiveness of sins or anything like that. Specifically, no man or woman could eat the left-over meat unless they were in the priest's immediate family, so women didn't go to the temple for free lunches...only a few got the meat and they were family.)

Okay. I feel generous. I will give you some more words you can read.

I suggest that you read our (LDS) Bible Dictionary, and look up the words "Feasts" and "Sacrifices".

And if that's not enough to help or make you believe me...

... you know what?

... you can believe what you want to believe.

[Jason]

So this question about Mary living in the Temple is easily understood if you look at history.

The only women who lived in the Temple were the prostitutes. They had sex with the men as representations of the goddesses. The Hebrew goddess was Asherah. She was the wife of El (and later Yahweh-El). The women would have sex, especially with strangers visiting the temple, not as themselves but as the goddess whom they represented.

So Mary may have been a virgin in one sense, but she conceived a "divine child" because she got pregnant in the Temple representing Asherah.

That's how she got pregnant. That's how she could still make the claim of being a virgin (assuming it does men one who has not had sex rather than a young woman).

And that was the way it was all over the ancient world, not just in Jerusalem.

One author describes it very nicely:

The second part of the ruling of the Council [of Jerusalem] dealt with the fact that many of the Gentile Christian believers were continuing to participate in the pagan temple rituals. This fact was shocking to the Jewish Christians who abhorred the fact that many of the Gentile Christians were continuing to go to the Pagan Temples and have sexual intercourse with the temple prostitutes and partake in the rituals of these temples which included eating in these temples the sacrifices and food offerings made to the gods. These offerings were usually strangled and their blood was eaten in worship of these deities. Thus the apostles warned the Gentile Christians to cease these abhorrent practices which were so shocking to the Jewish Christians. Paul, in his epistle to the Corinthian believers (I Cor 6:9ff), rebukes those Gentile Christians who saw nothing wrong with having sex with the temple prostitutes since they believed that sin was merely a matter of the "spirit" and not a matter of the "body". Thus they ignorantly believed that fornication with a temple prostitute did not constitute sin.

http://www.presenttruthmag.com/Judgment/87.html

Now you know. Have a nice day.

[Ray]

... psst

... hey, Jason

... take a look, or another look, at LionHeart's thread... the one on the birth of our Savior.

He suggested that Mary was dedicated and raised in the temple, much like Samuel was, long, long ago.

And I, personally, believe that that story is true, because I believe I received God's assurance on that.

... not that you can't have your own ideas, Jason.

... but you might like to keep thinking a little longer.

Your "there you go" comment reminded me of "My Big Fat Greek Wedding", and, while humorous, that's not what I, personally, believe.

:)

[CrimsonKairos]

Telling me how to respond to you now, are you?

Telling you how a rational person would respond when asked why they believe what they do in regards to the gospel; they'd provide scriptures. I wonder if you'd have ever joined the Church if the missionaries teaching you just said, "Jesus visited the Nephites. It's true. Just grab the Book of Mormon and look through till you find it. Oh, and there's this cool promise about how to know if the Book of Mormon is true...but again, we won't tell you where it is or how to know if its true. You can find it yourself."

Did you have your pants on backwards when you said that?

How did you know?

You can compare what I say to what is written in the scriptures... and I think that would be noble, indeed.

Ummmm, I'd absolutely LOVE to Ray, but when you don't give me scriptures to compare your words to, I'm kinda' unable to do that, yes?

But please don't jump on my case... at any time... ever... even when you'd like me to provide some other words.

I'll call you out on the carpet whenever you say something stupid. Don't tell me I won't believe something even if I read it...that was crap and don't play the victim when I tell you so.

It is not my responsibility to try to make you believe me.

And when did I say you had to try to make me believe you? Providing someone with evidence doesn't mean you're trying to prove your case...merely that you're trying to show it's reasonable.

You think it is my job to try to get you to consider what I tell you that I know or believe?

Stop being ridiculous. Yes, when you tell someone you believe something and they ask why, a reasonable, rational, mature person points to what supports their belief. Again, if you didn't have scriptural backing for your theory, you should've just said so.

I suggest that you read our (LDS) Bible Dictionary, and look up the words "Feasts" and "Sacrifices".

There, thank you, that's what I'm talking about. Was that so hard?

p.s. If you don't have evidence at hand when I ask you why you believe something, it's entirely acceptable to say, "Gee, I don't know right now. Give me a day or two and I'll get back to you." I promise I won't think anything fishy is going on.

[Ray]

If you don't have evidence at hand when I ask you why you believe something, it's entirely acceptable to say, "Gee, I don't know right now. Give me a day or two and I'll get back to you." I promise I won't think anything fishy is going on.

Entirely acceptable to say something like that? Acceptable to who?

Not me.

I told you what I thought was acceptable, Crimson.

And I'm not open to your suggestions on this issue.

I do know what I believe and I do have some evidence for all the things that I know and believe.

If you want other references, you can search for yourself.

I'll simply tell you what I know and believe.

And on the few occasions when I help with your research, please continue to keep searching for yourself.

I'm sure that most prophets want you to learn from God, yourself.

... instead of simply believing what they have to tell you.

[CrimsonKairos]

I can't continue this discussion anymore.

My head has exploded.

Your illogical excuses, inability to stay on topic, and backpedaling have caused my brain to melt.

Enough with the sanctimonious crap Ray...we all know...we all know...that you know only God can teach us truth. Stop, stop, stop putting that line in every post, it gets ridiculously old real fast. Enough already. Enough.

If you can't find something else to say, don't say anything at all. We've heard it a thousand times. Come up with something new to add.

p.s. I'm really pissed off today because of something, but even if I weren't I'd still say the same stuff. I'm not going to apologize, nor give excuses, nor anything other than what I've typed. I know there are at least a dozen other people who've been thinking the same thing for a loooooooooooooooong time now.

[Jason]

Ck,

Don't you know that Ray is a source of authority? And Im not going to give you a reason or make you believe that. But I know it's true.

[Ray]

I think I like you better when you don't talk to me, Crimson.

But alas, what can I do?

Just do me a favor from now on, okay?

Please don't speak to me any more about this issue.

... the issue of Faith, and how I (and I believe everyone) should learn truth directly from God.

... and please don't make any more snide remarks about me or my beliefs on this issue either.

Thank you very much. I'd appreciate that.

Ck,

Don't you know that Ray is a source of authority? And Im not going to give you a reason or make you believe that. But I know it's true.

Heh, whatever.

You guys must really, really like me.

Huh?

:)

[CrimsonKairos]

Hahahah Jason, classic. I needed a good laugh, thanks.

[Ray]

Hahahah Jason, classic. I needed a good laugh, thanks.

You liked that, did you?

I thought you would.

I just hope you have learned enough to know that when you ask me for some evidence, I'm likely to come back with the idea that you (and everyone else) should go to God directly for your answers.

... instead of asking me why I believe what I believe...

... about anything...

... fill in the blank.

I thought that by now you might know me enough to know I would come back with that kind of answer.

It was you who asked me for evidence, remember.

I was simply telling you what I believe.

I might give you some other person's testimony on occasions, but don't count on that, or expect it, from me.

*** Please file this away for future reference *** whereever it might help you remember ***

[Jason]

Let's just be grateful Ray's not in charge of of the Space Program or finding the cure for AIDS.

:)

[CrimsonKairos]

Or the missionary program, seriously.

Consider your notice filed away, Ray. I won't ask you anymore why you believe what you believe. Fair enough.

[Ray]

If I was in charge of the Space Program, or finding the cure for AIDS, or the missionary program in the Church, I would ask the Lord what He wanted me to know, and do, and then use that as He wants me to use that.

I'll try to get more specific.

If I was in charge of the missionary program, I would try to teach the missionaries that they should be teaching what they know... and how they and other people can know how to know... that God taught them.

And if they wanted to know why, I would say something like:

because they... and we, and everybody else... should ask God.

I would not try to teach them that they should memorize the standard works so they can show others what those books have written in them. Words are just words... with no power at all. The power comes from a testimony from God.

If a person doesn't have that, they have nothing. I don't care what anyone says... if I don't know God inspired them. And to know that He did, I ask God.

I will tell you what I know, and how I know it is true. And if you want me to tell you why, I will tell you.

I know what I know by asking God to assure me, and when He gives His assurance... I know it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I could talk about Faith every day... all the time... and still some people wouldn't know what I'm saying.

Or some people would think I've said everything... repeatedly... and still not really know what I'm saying.

Oh, well. We have the power to believe what we want to believe.