ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Jesus' Personal Life

Did Jesus have any kind of a personal life such as a childhood, normal relationships, and girl friend? I do not recall any bible stories about his growing up prior to his teachings.

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Who Is Jesus Bible Quiz
 ---Dee_May on 8/8/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



cluny, D
---Eloy on 8/18/11


Eloy:

Thanks for the link. (Why do you trust this, since you don't trust uninspired dictionaries, grammars, etc.?)

Ec 1 long ago [l'olamim] acc. to (measured by) the ages, etc. (v. Hi): so also in the phr. [l'micherev] acc. to a sword's mouth, i.e. as the sword would devour, without quarter, Jos 6 + oft., (l'mi...) itself also in various fig. applications, has the force of acc. to, Gn 47, etc. (v. [peh]) and in [yesh (ein) l'el yad'cha] it is (not) acc. to the power of thy hand (v.p.43).

Similarly Dt 11 [limtar hasshamayim] after the manner of the rain of heaven, i.e. as the rain permits...


All are according to, as I said. after the manner of is similar.
---StrongAxe on 8/18/11


Mark V: "Andy, it is ok for you to add to Scripture what you desire"
This is called exegesis. and should not be confused with Revelation 22:18. everyone on christianet does it, and i have noticed you do the same, so who are you judging? let your judgement be true and not stained with self-righteousness.
PEACE LOVE and RIGHTEOUSSNES of THE LORD.
---andy3996 on 8/18/11


strongax, you continue to post falsehood. The english word "after" translated from the hebrew word "l", is not my own translation but is also found in many english Holy Bibles. And this is an accurrate translation. Please go to the Hebrew lexicon, page 516. Then click the zoom button twice so that it is enlarged twice where you can read it, and look in the 2nd column, and Read the reference after the word "Similarly":
http colon forward-slash forward-slash www dot archive dot org forward-slash stream forward-slash hebrewenglishlex00browuoft#page forward-slash 516 forward-slash mode forward-slash 1up
---Eloy on 8/18/11


Eloy:

You just cited three scriptures WHICH YOU, PERSONALLY transated "l" as "after". You are one witness, no matter how many scriptures are translated.

Note that we are not talking about many different authors (i.e. separate witnesses), but about one translator here.

Do you have anyone else, besides yourself, who translates these this way? King James uses word "after" in some of these, but in these contexts they relate to accord rather than time (for example, "I was named after my grandfather" means "I was named in accordance with my grandfather's name", not "I received my name years after my grandfather did" - EVERYONE is named after their grandfather THIS way).
---StrongAxe on 8/17/11




\\cluny, The truth you must accept first, then afterward you will be able to present that what you have accepted: for they that post falsehood do not present truth, but lie.
---Eloy on 8/16/11\\

C. S. Lewis said something similar in THE PILGRIM'S REGRESS, only in fewer words. I will quote them here.

"Oogle globble glooble globble oogle globble gloo!"

Much pithier, don't you think?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/17/11


Bless you eloy, I believe that if man could ghet back to this truth alot of problems would be solved as well.
---andy3996 on 8/17/11


Andy, it is ok for you to add to Scripture what you desire. What you do is your right. The song of Solomon is not an alligory. You want to make it one, go for it. You will be adding to Scripture what is not there, by using your own mind. I know correction is hard to take but when the Truth is presented we should not reject it. Rejection of the Truth puts us in the wrong path. A practice many do. Poems are poems, alligories are alligories, songs are songs, parables are parables, similies are smilies, types are types and so on.
---Mark_V. on 8/17/11


strongax, you asked, "Can you cite anyone else who believes 'l' means 'after' (in the sense of 'later in time'?) anywhere?"
I just cited 3 occurrences in the holy scripture which "l" clearly means "after", as "after the manner of", thus in the Song of Solomon, it was written "after the manner of Solomon" and does Not mean "to" nor "is" nor "for" nor "by" Solomon. The song speaks of Christ whom is the King of kings and also speaks of him being a shepherd, and of the expressed love between the Christian and Christ. But NonChristians may not see this in this song for their heart has no Christ in them.
---Eloy on 8/17/11


cluny, The truth you must accept first, then afterward you will be able to present that what you have accepted: for they that post falsehood do not present truth, but lie.
---Eloy on 8/16/11




Andy, A-men. The problem sinners have with the Bible is they take it as any other book by man, and do not comprehend that it is God's word and God's book to mankind and not another man's word nor man's book to mankind. Therefore their thinking is vain when they try to understand God's word with their worldly minds which are completely devoid of God.
---Eloy on 8/16/11


To the Christian, the Holy Bible which contains God's words, is very very very very very precious to us. But to the NonChristian, the Holy Bible which contains God's words, is thought of as merely another nonrelative and noneffective and insignificant book which should be discerned with anybodies misappropriated whims and private interpretations however they debaucher.
---Eloy on 8/16/11


\\God allowed these human words and feelings for us to learn a lesson.
---andy3996 on 8/16/11\\

As Henrietta Mears said, the Bible is not always God's words.

Sometimes it's God's records of people's words and actions.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/16/11


andy3996:

Actually, whenever Satan speaks, he speaks in half-truths. For example, in the Garden of Eden, the serpent said they would be like God, knowing good and evil - which was technically true (i.e. they DID come to know good and evil, and, in that one way, became similar to God). However he conveniently left out the consequences of doing so.

Nobody will believe something that is totally untrue. The easiest (and most seductive) lies to believe are the ones that are almost true, but false in only one small and easy-to-conceal point.

In the same way, nobody will drink poison if it tastes like poison. They will only drink it if it tastes like something else that is normally healthy.
---StrongAxe on 8/16/11


Strongax,
Anybody can pen an author to any book and declare it was sent from God.I am grateful this this book is left without a human author.
You decide if it is from God.That is what reading makes us do.
Your quote-Gal.1.8-any other gospel be accursed..The UB teaches no other gospel(the gospel of Jesus) but does illuminate and magnify it.
I add.Deut.4.2 do not add or take away,
Deut.12.32-do not add or take away.
Also Jesus said -Mt.5.17-19-I come to fulfill(illuminate the law and the prophets.
Then what is the Nt attatched to the OT -Jesus gave a new commandment-Jo.13.34 a new commandment I(Jesus) give you.
Your statements are invalid.
---earl on 8/16/11


\\cluny, I have politely asked you to not address me until you are ready to accept the truth. Capisce?
---Eloy on 8/16/1\\

I DO accept truth, eloy, and that's why I'm trying to present it to you!

Besides, who are you to tell me what to do on these blogs?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/16/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


MarkV your joking arent you?
even wherever the bible shows the words of the devil (as in Genesis, Job and the four gospels) we all know that God has put this inside for us to learn spiritual lessons. even when Elijah said i'm finished, God allowed these human words and feelings for us to learn a lesson.
---andy3996 on 8/16/11


By the way nothing Satan ever said is true, the only thing that is true about Satans word in the bible is that he was lying
---andy3996 on 8/16/11


andy, Scripture does have a divine purpose. But when the writer or satan speak, it is not always true. When the serpent spoke to Eve, he was deceiving her. Some major heresies of church history have been supported by exegesis that failed to maintain the difference between a discriptive passage and a prescriptive passage. Example, a major teaching of the allegory of Christ as the vine in (John 15) is that we derive the power to live spiritual lives from Christ, not from ourselves. Yet one group (later branded heretics) declared that since Christ is the vine, and vines are part of the created order, it follows that Christ is part of the created order. The Pelagians of the early fifth century did the same with the story of the prodical son.
---Mark_V. on 8/16/11


Eloy:

I have been translating Hebrew for many years too. In Isaiah 11:3, the word 'l' (translated 'after') does NOT mean 'later in time'. The King James English writers wrote 'after the sight of his eyes' which means 'according to the sight of his eyes'. NIV translates it as 'with the eyes'. A similar idiom is used several times in Genesis using the prefix 'm' (i.e. short for 'min' which means 'from') to translate animals 'after his kind', which NIV also translates as 'according to'.

Can you cite anyone else who believes 'l' means 'after' (in the sense of 'later in time'?) anywhere?
---StrongAxe on 8/16/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


MarkV, i am aware that men held a pen and wrote, but it seems to me that you're not aware that nothing in scripture is there without divine purpose. EVERYTHING in scripture is there BECAUSE IT IS GOD who commanded it to be, therfore the bible is not from men, but from GOD. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"Timothy 3:16
---andy3996 on 8/16/11


strongax, you are incorrect in posting that, "a leading "l" always means "to", never "after". For I have been translating hebrew and greek for many many many years, and "l" means after in SongOfSol.1:1, just as it also does in Deuteronomy 11:11- eng: "...after the rain" < heb: "...l mtr". And also in Isaiah 11:3- eng: "...after the sight...after the hearing" < heb: "...l mrah...l mshma".
---Eloy on 8/16/11


earl:

That is the thing. A book's provenance is key. If written by someone (i.e. apostle or prophet) to whom authority has been given by God directly or indirectly, it can be trusted. Otherwise, how can we know to trust it? True, any book can be verified by seeing if agrees with other sources, but then we're just as well relying solely on those other sources themselves.

If it disagrees with the Bible, Paul said this:

Galatians 1:8
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."
---StrongAxe on 8/16/11


cluny, I have politely asked you to not address me until you are ready to accept the truth. Capisce?
---Eloy on 8/16/11


Send a Free Religious Ecard


The Magi in Mt.2:11 came from from Persia offering, in Greek: "Chryson"- amber, Ur of the Chaldees offering "olibanum"- libani, and Arabia offering "smyrnan"- sweet myrrh. These three gifts were sweet odors to honor the heavenly Triune King. Amber represents holy, libani represents power, and sweet myrrh for healing. This specialty was also typified by the Midianites in Joseph's day, as foreshadowed in Genesis 37:25, being in hebrew: "Nakath"- precious treasure of resin, "tsery"- balm, and "lot"- myrrh.
---Eloy on 8/16/11


The Magi in Mt.2:11 came from Persia offering, in Greek: "Chryson"- amber, Ur of the Chaldees offering "olibanum"- libani, and Arabia offering "smyrnan"- sweet myrrh. These three gifts were sweet odors to honor the heavenly Triune King. Amber represents holy, libani represents power, and sweet myrrh for healing. This specialty was also typified by the Midianites in Joseph's day, as foreshadowed in Genesis 37:25, being in hebrew: "Nakath"- precious treasure of resin, "tsery"- balm, and "lot"- myrrh.
---Eloy on 8/16/11


andy, again let me correct you. The writer of the books of Scripture are not God. That Scripture is inspired is true. But what the writers wrote also included what they felt. Descriptive passages relate what was said or what happened at a particular time. What God says, is true, what man says, may or may not be true, What satan say, usually mixes truth and lies. Yet the whole of Scripture is inspired. God worked through the personalities of the biblical writers in such a way that, without suspending their personal styles of expression or freedom, what they produced was literally "God-breathed" ( 2 Tim. 3:16) The emphasis of the text is that Scripture itself, not the writers only was Inspired. (All Scripture is inspired by God).
---Mark_V. on 8/16/11


People..do you not recognize the time? It is almost over with regard to earth as we know it. Jesus is at the "door". Why do you argue, banter and bate your brothers? Do you not see the simplicity of it all. We must love God and love one another. Love is the big key. The rest is irrelevant.
---jody on 8/15/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


Strongax,
You decide what is best for your conscious.
The story is there,all of it .
No one on this earth claims authorship.Ask around.Will the author of this book please come foward and announce yourself for Strongax and others to clarify why you have not claimed authorship for the last 50 + years?
---earl on 8/15/11


Eloy:

I agree Isaiah 53 plainly refers to Jesus. However, not ALL Old Testament scriptures do.

Hebrew writing is ambiguous - most vowels are not written. Readers are expected to know them from context. For example, MLK is "melech" (King), or "malach" (ruled). English is similarly ambiguous. For example, "read" (present tense) and "read" (past tense) have different meaning and pronunciations.

Hebrew to English transliteration adds vowels to remove this ambiguity. And a leading "l" always means "to", never "after". "after" is indicated by "asher" (ASR).
---StrongAxe on 8/15/11


strongax, Reread my post, I posted that Old Testament scriptures indeed profess Christ, which sinners deny. period. And since the specific scripture about Christ is denied by the reader, they have to substitute some other subject besides Christ to the scripture. Another famous scripture detailing Christ is the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53, which plainly refers to Jesus, but because sinners refuse him they will deny this fact.
---Eloy on 8/15/11


arent the urantia books not something like the narnia chronicles, or the LORD of the rings, but with that difference that some shrewd bussinesmen make fortunes out of it as selling as a form of pseudoreligion?
---andy3996 on 8/15/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


strongax,

you also added vowels to the hebrew letters in order to form other words not in the original hebrew as "le" which is wrong, it needs to remain "l" which in hebrew acurrately means "after", because in this song detailing Christ, the King of kings and the Good Shepherd, there is no indication to Solomon whom was notoriously well known for being granted the great wisdom of God in order to judge God's people.
---Eloy on 8/15/11


\\strongax, when adding any words which change the meaning of the word of God, it is wrong. \\

But you do that all the time, eloy.

For example, you say that the Magi brought the baby Jesus amber, whereas the Greek says "chryse", which means "gold".

\\I have already proven how the Song of Solomon is NOT about Solomon, but IS about Christ, \\

You haven't proven any such thing, though I know you want credit for it.

Glory to Jesus Christ.
---Cluny on 8/15/11


so does that mean christ just locked himself in the house & just studied his faith or did he help joseph in their daily living? did he have any friends?
this question asks the 'missing years' of christ - maybe from age 12 - 33.
---mike on 8/15/11


strongax, when adding any words which change the meaning of the word of God, it is wrong. I have already proven how the Song of Solomon is NOT about Solomon, but IS about Christ, therefore by wrongly adding the word [is], even in brackets you mislead the reader away from the truth, and there are many such places where the early translators have wrongly "added" words which they may have thought was aiding the reader, but in fact they have changed the word of God. I recall in the gospel how God referred to satan, but by changing the verse the translators proposed that the verse referred to Christ instead, which mistranslation plainly disses Christ's full deity.
---Eloy on 8/15/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


earl:

What makes you think that the accounts in the Urantia book are in any way genuine? Where did the information come from? Certainly not from eyewitnesses, since it was written thousands of years after the events themselves.
---StrongAxe on 8/14/11


Jesus's personal life.
There is extensive material in book form from infancy onward.
The problem is that Christianity regards this book ,The Urantia Book, as decieving from a deciever in the shadows- a devilish work.Many people have toured this book regarding Jesus and his life and found great satisfaction and never looked back and went on to bare the fruits of the spirit.
---earl on 8/14/11


Eloy:

Sure, the old testament scriptures testify about Jesus - as an entire body of work, but not EVERY SINGLE VERSE in EVERY SINGLE BOOK does so. Some actually speak about other things.
---StrongAxe on 8/14/11


Mark two questions mark the difference between your vieuw and mine.
1 who's the author
2 what did he want to convey.

if one takes Solomon as the author, then the idea that he was just writing a song for a freshly conquered girlsheart is very good and acceptable.
if however one believes that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"Timothy 3:16
then my approach of scripture is logically more correct, it is a matter of heart, and everyone has the feedom to reject SONGS as inspired by GOD, nevertheless, everyone also will face God one day as well.
---andy3996 on 8/14/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


Andy, NonChristians commonly do not accept that the Old Testament scriptures do describe Christ, for they are spiritually dead and accept lie and darkness in the place of truth and light. Christ says, and also proves, "Search you all the scriptures, because in them think eternal life you all have: but they are they which testify about me. I am The Truth and Light to the world. Everyone that is of the truth hears my voice: But they say, "What is Truth? Away with, away with, crucify him, instead give to us Barabbas. And from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over the whole land."
---Eloy on 8/14/11


Eloy:

I wrote words not in Hebrew [in square brackets], just as the King James version wrote such words in italics for grammatical constructions that require words in English but not in Hebrew. Common examples are to be, of in the construct state, and articles.

In English, "Give me the book", means "Give the book [to] me". "to" is not written, but it is implied by the position of "me".

Hebrew "asher" (A SH R) (Strong's 834) means "that" or "which". "le" (L), short for "el", means "to". Neither means "after" - that would be the "achar" (A CH R) (Strong's 310), which is not present here.
---StrongAxe on 8/14/11


Andy, here is what an alligory is, An alligory is an extended metaphor.
It can be understood as an extended metaphor: the comparison is unexpressed, and the subject and the thing compared are intermingled. In the Songs of Solomon the subject (which you purpose) is Jesus, is not mentioned in the Song. Allegories intermingle the story and its application so that an allegory carries its own interpretation within itself. Just check the alligory in Ps. 80:8-16, You will find that the subject is mentioned in (v. 14) the subject and the comparison (v. 12) are intermingled together.
Another alligory is found in discussing Christ as the True Vine (John 15:1-17). The vine as a symbol for Christ. The Father symbolizesed as the vine-dresser.
---Mark_V. on 8/14/11


strongax, you write wrong hebrew, and you have also added words that are not in the original Hebrew which you copied from an inacurrate english translation. Correctly, SongOfSol.1:1 is transliterated, eng: "song them songs that after solomon" < heb: "shyr h shyrim ashr l shlmh".
---Eloy on 8/14/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


Eloy:

The Hebrew of Song of Songs 1:1 is shir hashirism asher lesholomoh.

Literally, [the] song of the songs that [is] to Solomon. There is no after here. That would be Hebrew acher, not asher.

Hebrew does not have a verb to have. To indicate possession, you cannot say He has a song. Instead, you say a song is to him.

Idiomatically: The song of songs, which is Solomon's

Similarly, 2:16 dodi li va'ani lo haroeh bashoshanim, literally beloved of me [is] to me and I to him the [one] [who] [is] pasturing in the lilies, or idomatically My beloved is mine, and I am his: he feedeth among the lilies.
---StrongAxe on 8/13/11


good point eloy,
Mark "the songs of SOLOMON are a marriage song, not an engagementsong.
the sulamite is the bride,
not a girlfriend
---andy3996 on 8/13/11


strongax, The title comes from SongOfSol.1:1, lit.Hb: "The song of songs that after Solomon." This means that the song is after the manner of Solomon, it does not mean that the song is about Solomon, nor does it mean that Solomon is the author of the song. For I already pointed out that the song of Solomon is proven not to be about Solomon, but about the love relationship between Christ and the Christian, or the Church which is his bride and himself. Neither has Solomon penned the book because it is in the 3rd person when referencing Christ- SongOfSol.1:12+ 2:4-6.
---Eloy on 8/13/11


STRONGAXE regardless of WHY Isaiah 53 was written, it WAS written as a prophecy of a coming savior, first and foremost. Most of the Old Testament and New Testament are either history or practical instruction, and sometimes poetry. To take such history and instructions and poetry and INSIST their primary purpose is something else entirely is to read too much beetween the lines.
Psalms isNOT profetical?song of Moses is not Prophetical?
if only some are prophetical how to determine which to anul, which to deny, which to accept? Accept in your heart that since God is HE who WAS, IS AND WILL BE, also his words are HISTORICAL, TEACHING, and PROPHECY at the same time.
PS i did like the first part of your answer.
---andy3996 on 8/13/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Andy, I believe Strongaxe is correct. What happens when someone uses alligories where there is no need to, they change the meaning the author wanted to convey to the reader (us). If someone take liberty to do that, they could change all the meanins of Scripture. Early church practices did that because they proclaimed only they could interpret the Word of God, and came out with so many different meanings, and by doing that new traditions came to the Church. No where in the Songs of Solomon is the intention that it was talking about Jesus Christ having a girl friend, that is just nonesense to even mention that.
---Mark_V. on 8/13/11


andy3996:

You said: example what caused the great messianic prophecy of isaiah 53? a historical situation and a spiritual intervention.

Yes, but regardless of WHY Isaiah 53 was written, it WAS written as a prophecy of a coming savior, first and foremost. Most of the Old Testament and New Testament are either history or practical instruction, and sometimes poetry. To take such history and instructions and poetry and INSIST their primary purpose is something else entirely is to read too much beetween the lines.
---StrongAxe on 8/12/11


Jesus was a man not a monk.

Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and with people Luke 2:52
---willa5568 on 8/12/11


Strongaxe, recognising that every biblebook has spiritual, historical and revelationary power
I DID USE AND not OR. some people tend to argue about which one is which, i dod not do this
the historical, spiritual, and revelationary aspects work hand in hand.
example what caused the great messianic prophecy of isaiah 53? a historical situation and a spiritual intervention.
---andy3996 on 8/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


andy3996:

How does one know which books write about what? Generally, one takes the Bible at face value - it says what it means, unless it's clear such an interpretation is nonsense. Were Adam and Eve literal people? or just spiritual symbols?

Eloy:

Please show me exactly which words I dissed, and how. If you're talking about me saying that Jesus often spoke in metaphor and/or symbolically rather, he did so frequently, and it is easy to show. For example:

John 11:26
"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?"

If LITERALLY true, why are there Christian cemetaries? It would mean there were NO real Christians before 1900 or so, not even the Apostles.
---StrongAxe on 8/12/11


strongax, as long as you continue to diss his word you can hardly accept anything from God. Consider leaving your vain darkness and join the only good side, turn and come live with Christ.
---Eloy on 8/12/11


Strongaxe, first you said
"Where did you ever get the idea that it was about Jesus?
UPON WHICH I RESPONDED
the book is a mystical allegory of the reuniting of the church with Christ.and has great prophetic value.
THEN YOU SAID
"There is nothing wrong with taking some aspects of the archetypical love Solomon writes about, and noting the similarities between it and the relationship of Christ and his Bride. But that doesn't mean it is NECESSARILY about Jesus".

recognising that every biblebook has spiritual, historical and revelationary power, one comes to recognise that indeed Lovesong sings about Jesus and the church in its revelationary context...and that is all of songs.
---andy3996 on 8/12/11


andy3996:

There is nothing wrong with taking some aspects of the archetypical love Solomon writes about, and noting the similarities between it and the relationship of Christ and his Bride. But that doesn't mean it is NECESSARILY about Jesus.


Eloy:

Are you not familiar with poetry? Poetry often uses metaphor and non-literal symbology. Jesus did too (He is the Vine, but did anyone squeeze grapes from him, or make furniture from his wood? No - because he is not LITERALLY a vine).

Solomon was shepherd over his nation. Kings are often adorned with jewels and gold. Ivory and marble could mean blemish-free white skin (also mentioned in SS 5:10). In contrast, Jesus's feet are not white, they are as fine brass (Rev. 1:15)
---StrongAxe on 8/12/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


andy, A-men. None are so blind as those whom will not see. The worldly see by worldly eyes and thereby inaccurately comprehend with a carnal mind: but the Christian sees with the eye of Christ and thereby rightly knows with the regenerate mind from Christ.
---Eloy on 8/11/11


Strongaxe, I completely agree with you. Eloy used the alligorical method to interpret the Songs of Solomon. When in fact the Songs of Solomon are historical facts. And should be interpret in the normal historical sense, understanding the frequent use of poetic imagery to depict reality. To do so understands that Solomon recounts his own days of courtship, the early days of his first marriage, followed by the maturing of this royal couple through the good and bad days of life. The Song of Solomon expands on the ancient marriage instructions of Gen. 2:24, thus providing spiritual music for a life time of marital harmony. Yet no where are we told that Solomon could see ahead that Jesus was going to have a girl friend. Clearly nonesense.
---Mark_V. on 8/11/11


strongax, more falsehood? Please do not ask of me until you desire to receive the truth. We Christians from Christ know full well that the Song of Solomon is not about King Solomon, because the person in the passage is a shepherd, and King Solomon was not a shepherd, but Christ was. Also, the person is described as deity, "His hands gold set with the beryl: his belly bright ivory overlaid sapphires. His legs pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold: his countenance as Lebanon, excellent as the cedars." SoS.5:14-15. This is clearly none other than Christ Almighty.
---Eloy on 8/10/11


strongaxe, where did you ever ghet the idea that a bible book has no spiritual context whatsoever? the book is a mystical allegory of the reuniting of the church with Christ.and has great prophetic value.
---andy3996 on 8/10/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Eloy:

The Song of Solomon is about Solomon, and one woman he was in love with (we know he had a thousand of them). Where did you ever get the idea that it was about Jesus?
---StrongAxe on 8/10/11


Leslie, Read my post.

I was supporting you.

step out of your own ego and show me where i said that i believe in gnosticism.

As usual, you have proven indeed.
---aka on 8/9/11


Did Jesus have any kind of a personal life ... normal relationships...

It depends on what you mean by normal relationships. Normal for the times. As Cluny pointed out, there was a separation of the genders.

Also, a girlfriend would have been a foreign concpt to anyone then. Marriages were arranged.

And as francis pointed out, Jesus' family was invited to a wedding, and Jesus had dinner with friends and a few religious leaders.

When He was 12, his family went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover.

Very normal indeed, for the time. Our version of "normal" is not the same as His normal would have been
---James_L on 8/9/11


I did, and i think it is a questionthat undermines the bible itself. that is why first i didn't desire to answerr.
---andy3996 on 8/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


some people seem to NOT understand the question.
---mike on 8/9/11


Good question.
Jesus was with his disciples 3 1/2 years, yet only about 90 days are recorded.
the bible says that.

John 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
So the people knew him before he was " the Messiah." So he must have had some form of social life. His family of course wa sinvited to a wedding so they must have been known
---francis on 8/9/11


The Bible says of Jesus: "Note, you fair, my love: note, you fair you doves' eyes. Note, you handsome, my beloved, yea, pleasant: also our bed is green. The beams of our house cedar, our rafters of fir. He will feed his flock like a shepherd: he will gather the lambs with arms, and carry in his bosom, will lead greatly those that are with young. And leaving behind that Nazareth, he came along, set house in Capernaum, that beside the sea in borders of Zebulon and Naphthalim. Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him." Song of Sol.1:15-17+ Is.40:11+ Mt.4:13+ Mk.6:3.
---Eloy on 8/9/11


Hi, Dee May (c: In the Gospel of Luke, we have this about Jesus > "And the Child grew and became strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him." (Luke 2:40) We see how Jesus became able, as a twelve year old, to handle the religious experts in dialogue about the Holy Scriptures > Luke 2:41-50. "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men." (Luke 2:52) What matters most is how He was becoming as a person. But did Jesus have a girlfriend? I think of Mary who "sat at Jesus' feet and heard His word." (Luke 10:38-42) She seems like she understood Jesus so He could have a special relationship with her.
---Bill_willa6989 on 8/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


\\As usual you both are believing and speaking LIES. The Da Vinci Code and other gnostic gospels have been PROVEN FALSE.\\

Did I ever say I believed in them, Leslie?

Please show me where I did.

Until you can, we know who is REALLY speaking lies. And it's not me.

Or are you saying that Jesus really DID have a girl friend?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/9/11


Cluny and aka - As usual you both are believing and speaking LIES. The Da Vinci Code and other gnostic gospels have been PROVEN FALSE.
---Leslie on 8/9/11


"Did Jesus have any kind of a personal life such as a childhood, normal relationships, and girl friend?"
Of course he had a childhood. And as a child He " grew and became strong, filled with wisdom, and the favor of God was upon him." Luke 2:40 RSV.
As far as His personal life, as He said to his parents when they went in search of Him, " "Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business?" Luke 2:49 NKJV. Which probably would have excluded a "girlfriend":o)
He also had a normal childhood relationship with His parents, normal at least for an obedient child willing to submit under parental control. Luke 2:51
---joseph on 8/9/11


//why are you dragging the Da Vinci code into the conversation? The original poster didn't mention it. Why did you?//

cluny, you too are well aware that most questions posted here are springboards into some agenda. e.g. all your responses to mima's questions

Leslie knows where this one is going even if you don't.

why? this is the usual way to start talking about gnostic gospels like the gospel of thomas, The Gospel of Truth, and many more.
---aka on 8/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


Yes, Jesus tended sheep and loved a dark-skinned girl (though some people believe this girl to be the church, which is the bride of Christ), and he also had a house in Capernaum- Song of Sol.1:6-8, 13-17+ Is.40:11. And Jesus also did carpentry- Mk.6:3.
---Eloy on 8/9/11


Probably the first thirty years of the earthly life of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ were totally unremarkable, at least to outsiders.

As far as His having a girl friend, you are projecting 20-21st century American manners on 1st century Palestinian Jews. Sexes were kept separated as much as possible, except in the family. Women were even separated from men in the synagogue and Temple. Hasidic Jews still follow these customs.

Leslie, why are you dragging the Da Vinci code into the conversation? The original poster didn't mention it. Why did you?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/8/11


NO!!!!!!!!!!
---John on 8/8/11


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.