| FAQ |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
04-22-2009, 04:17 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Grace and peace Tony |
|
#2
04-23-2009, 08:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Therefore, rather than insult the intelligence of those who see problems in the text (and he is not the only one), let us answer their challenges respectfully...and maybe win over more converts to KJV Bible preservation. Shalom, Tandi Here are some of the "problems" that my friend would like to see resolved: Factual Problems: 7:27 Apparent contradiction between Hebrews and Torah on frequency of sin offering 9:4 Apparent misplacing of altar of incense 9:4 Apparent problem with manna in the ark 9:4 Apparent problem with Aaron's rod in the ark 9:19 Apparently differs with Torah on usage of goats. 9:19 Apparently differs with Torah on presence of water. 9:19 Apparently differs with Torah on scarlet wool. 9:19 Apparently differs with Torah on hyssop. 9:19 Apparently the book was not sprinkled in Torah. 9:21 Apparently a lot of things were anointed with oil and not blood. 10:11 Apparent contradiction with Torah on frequency of sin offering. Theological Difficulties to be resolved (partial list) 1:14 seems to imply angel of YHWH is not Yeshua 2:10 apparently claims Messiah had to be perfected 2:16 apparently denies Yeshua is angel of YHWH 5:8 apparently implies Messiah learned obedience by suffering 9:15 apparently confuses covenant with a will 9:23 apparently teaches sacrifices (plural) needed to cleanse heaven 10:14 apparently teaches perfection of the spirit Other problems: The Question of non-Pauline authorship The Question of absence from earliest canonical lists The Apostate Status of the proto-Catholic Church that canonized the book. |
|
#3
04-23-2009, 01:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I will prayerfully do some reading over the weekend and try to give you answers to your friend, but I warn you in all respect, that once someone questions what is Gods word and what is not, what belongs in the Bible and what does not they get answers to the questions and then move on to a whole bunch of other questions and so the perpetual questioning of Gods word.
There are many things I see in the Bible and I don't understand them, but I DONT question them, I accept that it is not the Lords will for me to see or understand at the present time.NOT one man here on this earth knows everything about the Bible I will never as a born again Child of God question Gods word, I will prayerfully and sincerely try By Gods Spirit too steer another Brother or Sister in the right direction, but my experience is that anyone who has "questions" that cause doubt, especially on the question "should the Book of Hebrews be in the Bible" (Quit with the Theology and start listening to God is my advice) Your friend, who may be a genuine sincere Christian, I do not know, but he / she is on dangerous ground trying to find errors in Gods word. Hebrews is a lovely Book full of things we may not ever understand, I certainly wouldn't like to stand before Christ and answer for questioning the validity of His words The questions your friend has are not questions from the "average Bible corrector" they are deep rooted in theology which is certainly a more dangerous kind of Bible corrector. Hebrews 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. |
|
#4
04-23-2009, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Especially as the Book of Hebrews contains Christ's priestly work typified by Old testament priesthood and description. Orthodox jews have crucified and denied their Messiah! Does you friend believe the Torah to be the word of God? Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; |
|
#5
04-23-2009, 03:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
2 Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
I agree with POTW. I myself am a simple person. It is all I can handle to study the Bible and understand it, I just don't have the time or patience to study the corrupt versions or even the history of how the KJB came to be. That said, I did read some very good books on the subject years ago that were very helpful to me. For me, I simply believed that we have a perfect and loving God who wants us to understand and know him. And so God would preserve His words for those that diligently seek him. I really do not understand some people's concept of God. Do they think that God is hiding from us? Is his word a mystery? Is it in bits and pieces here and there, or perhaps even lost through time? That does not seem like a loving God to me. To place you in a maze of confusion, with your very soul at risk. That seems like a cruel God to me. And I know we are not supposed to depend upon man's thinking, for our hearts are deceitful and wicked, but even the Lord appealed to common sense at times. Matt 7:11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Here, Jesus appeals to a person's common sense. If your earthly father loves you and is good to you, wouldn't our heavenly Father who is Holy, loving, and merciful be even more loving and kind than your earthly father? Would your earthly father hide the words of life from you? So, I do not understand these folks who do not believe God has preserved his word for us, especially after promising to do so many times in the Bible. I am not the judge, but I do not believe these folks are true believers. I think they are willingly trying to rationalize God away. It is a waste of time and energy to try to convince them, as soon as you answer one objection, they will come up with another. 1 Thess 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. Only true believers receive the Bible as it is in truth, the word of God. |
|
#6
04-23-2009, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Shalom, Tandi |
|
#7
04-23-2009, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well Tandi, I absolutely love the Book of Hebrews---I have taught that book in adult Sunday School at least once, and have seen the Holy Spirit use it many times to cut through the clutter of men's nonsense and doubt (Heb. 4:12). Of course we cannot underestimate the importance of the Torah---it's the most holy of the sacred writings in Judaism.
But the Bible is more than Judaism. The basic concept here is this; our Holy Bible is not just another book. It's not just another religious book, or collection of writings. It's different from every other book in existence, and superior because it is the complete revelation of God's love and His plan for our salvation. So I think the reason people question something like this is a basic lack of understanding of what we have in our current King James Bible. I appreciate that you describe your friend as a "true and faithful believer," but I think we can all agree that anyone (Pope or pauper) who questions the validity of entire passages and books of the Bible would have to be placed in the category of "doubter." Let's face it---there is no shortage of doubters when it comes to the Bible and its contents, even in the halls of many Christian universities. Many of these doubters are all fine citizens, well-educated, well paid and highly intelligent. But all of their doubts together won't add up to a pile of beans when the world is on fire. I would encourage you to order the commentary by Dr. Ruckman on this blessed book of the New Testament so you can help this gentleman and perhaps win him away from his doubt. Your friend needs to understand there are no factual errors in Hebrews, and there is no need reconcile it with other scriptures. The Torah is not our final authority, and if you we going to throw out Hebrews we might as well throw out the entire Bible. |
|
#8
04-24-2009, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I too love the Book of Hebrews. I plan to order Peter Ruckman's commentary. I am sure I will glean much, even if I do not agree completely with everything he says.
I did find some online resources in defense of the book of Hebrews that were helpful and resolved some of the difficulties. I look forward to whatever answers some of you bring forth after studying these questions. I am comfortable with not having all the answers to every Bible perplexity. Each time through the Bible I pick up another nugget that I had not seen before. My friend has also seen other passages of Scripture that were perplexing resolve....such as the difficulties with Passion Chronology. So we keep prayerfully searching and seeking....and we shall find. May truth prevail over tradition! Too nice a day to be online. I'm going back outside in the sunshine. Shalom, Tandi |
|
#9
04-25-2009, 10:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
"Some have challenged the Book of Hebrews as containing factual errors. Has this topic been dealt with here? Could you direct me to the discussion or other resources in defense of the Epistle to the Hebrews?" There is a rule of English grammar known as the Antithecal Proposition. This is a foundation tenet for Deductive Reasoning and also a platform for what is known as Occam's Razor. You make the request for discussion or resources that you can use "in defense" of Hebrews. All things being equal, we must deduce you are saying that the sum total of these "factual error" allegations constitutes an attack. and that is the foundation I spoke from. One thing I have noticed in your replies to me is that you read assumptions into what I say when I reply to you. Our road to friendship and fellowship will be paved on the simple stones of you just taking me at face value without any ambiguities of ulterior motives. I'm trying to help. A demonstration of an Antithecal Proposition is the correct interpretation of the passage below, the understanding given by the Holy Spirit: 2Ti 2:22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. What specifically, are these "youthful lusts"? Paul does not say specifically, however he does give the antithesis, the opposite of these "lusts" as the cure, neutralization, the negation of these sinful conditions, and we can say with confidence that these "youthful lusts" are: 1. Unrighteousness-righteousness 2. Unfaithfulness-faith 3. Selfishness-charity 4. Disorder-peace 5. These conditions arise out of an impure heart, while fleeing them will ensure a purity of heart. As I said, you mentioned you needed a defense, I deduced you were faced with an attack. I'm not going to address the specific OT precepts related to Hebrews that you've delineated for three reasons: Others have expressed a desire to work on the questions for you, I do not wish to step on their toes. Secondly after examining your friend's objections and "problems" I can see no objections or problems, and certainly it is not within my intellectual capacity to solve problems I cannot see. Thirdly, I am a dispensationalist, and as noted in your other relies to me, dispensationalism is a dirty word with you. I can offer you no "solution" or indeed purpose for the book of Hebrews as these solutions are arrived at by right division that Paul defines in Ephesians 3("times past", "but now", "ages to come"). All Scripture is profitable for doctrine and Hebrews, like Leviticus and James, are written "for" me but not "to" me. Hebrews is Paul's letter to HEBREWS, time period is the onset of the Great Tribulation. Hebrews is rich in doctrine, unfortunately for many, Hebrews is not doctrinally applicable to the Body of Christ in the present age of Grace. There is no present "priesthood of believers", the "priesthood" is the 144,000 in Revelation. I can find nothing in Paul's teachings that I am a priest of anything. I am not a priest, I am part of the Great High Priest's Body. There are people in Hebrews who fall away and cannot be renewed unto repentence, this contradicts Paul's quite clear statement on our Eternal Security in Romans 8. It's unfortunate that my replies are distasteful due to my dispensational insistence on right division, but that's the only way I know to reply to you, or anyone. I will reply to the three "problems" that actually form the foundation of your friend's questioning the Scriptures, based on internal evidence of the Scriptures: Question 1- Paul was the author of Hebrews: Philippians 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. Galatians 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. II Timothy 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. Philemon 1:1 Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer, Heb 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you. The solution to the authorship of Hebrews by Paul is that he was the only apostle qualified to write it. Barnabas, Apollos, or any other of the apostles and disciples, who Hebrews is attributed to, were great and mighty witnesses for the Lord Jesus Christ. None of them had the necessary knowledge and experience in Jewish Law and history, coupled with the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ as the centerpiece of the Old Testament and the similitude of, that the apostle Paul had. The mentioning of Timothy(a similitude of the present Body of Christ:Jewish mother, Gentile father) is revealing, as revealing as the mystery of the present Body, where Jews and Gentiles would be equal was given to Paul and no one else before Paul. There are much Church "Fathers" speculation on the authorship of Hebrews. If the Church "Father" Pentium speculates that Platypus, brother-in-law of Apollos, authored Hebrews, we can be safe in discarding it and accepting the iron arrows of Scripture that points to Paul as the author. Question 2-. Absence From “Earliest” Canonical Lists- Firstly, these “lists” are not canonical, as the people who refused to accept Hebrews as canonical were not the ones who decided the New Testament Canon, that will be discussed on Question 3, but any “list” that Hebrews is missing from, the reasons are given below: Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. You mentioned previously that you are ex-Catholic. You should see in the above verses why these passages from Hebrews would want any Catholic “father” to not include it, as these verses throw the Catholic “Mass” , Christ’s daily and continuous sacrifice, into the realm of heresy. The “Mass”, as you know better than the rest of us, is the center of Roman Catholicism. There is no Roman Catholicism without the “Mass”. Question 3- The proto-Catholic Church did not decide the Canon of the New Testament- De 17:18 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: Ac 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: Ro 3: 1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. This proto-Catholic Church(the “fathers”), as you describe it, did not have the authority to decide anything. The OT canon was in the custody of the Levites, the NT canon was decided by one of the Twelve Apostles, in this case the most notable and best candidate was the apostle John, who was the last surviving of the Twelve. I am not trying to bulldoze you with information, Italics, underlinings, and capitalizations are merely for emphasis and not flames. I am merely being thorough. I hope, as Peter says above, that to the glory of God through Jesus Christ this helps you. Grace and peace Tony |
|
#10
04-25-2009, 06:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello Tony,
I was not addressing you in particular, or anyone in particular. There were a collage of words like ignorant, ungrounded, dangerous, not true believer, from multiple posts that might have triggered my slightly caustic tone in defense of my friend. These words do not describe him. He is not the first scholar to question the canonicity of Hebrews. It was one of the last books to be accepted, and there were controversies about it in the time of the Reformation as well. I do not judge anyone's motives and hope my motives are not judged either. I am just trying to get some information to clear up the questions. Your dispensationalist view of this Book would actually be helpful to me....as the main problem my friend has with Hebrews is how it is generally understood to negate Torah and declare it superseded or obsolete. I do not read it that way at all, not in the King James Version, but I see mistranslation in the Alexandrian versions, resulting in antinomianism. I believe Hebrews will be vindicated in the KJV when these issues are resolved. At least I hope so. You said: Quote:
I am open to hearing your point of view, Tony, and do not find it "distasteful" though I disagree with doctrine that negates the commandments of God. I am willing to look at perspectives different than my own, however. The comments you have made about the priesthood, etc. lend considerable weight to the belief held by many (most?) that Paul could not have written this. It does not sound like him at all, except possibly chapter 13. I used to think maybe Aquila and Priscilla wrote it together under Paul's supervision. It sounds like a sermon more than an epistle. If Priscilla was involved, it would explain why the author is not named. So how did the Book of Hebrews make canonicity when the authorship is unknown and is someone who did not have first hand knowledge of hearing Jesus directly(ch. 2:3)? Paul heard Him on the Damascus road. Also, I have heard that the many OT Scriptures quoted are all from the (supposed) LXX. That is troubling. Is it possible that there was a Hebrew original and that this was translated into Greek by a somewhat Gnostic early church father, or tampered with by the proto-Catholic church? Yes, it seems to refute the Catholic mass, but they must have an answer to that...and I'm sure they like the verse about "obey them that have the rule over you," i.e., bishops. The Book of Hebrews exudes Divine Inspiration....I just wonder if it has been tampered with in a few places. The Book of Revelation warns against such tampering with the Scriptures....so it must have been going on, as we see in the pseudepigraphical letters, etc. Another question is where is the Epistle from Laodicea that Paul mentions in Colossians 4:16? There are supposed to be 14 Pauline epistles according to early lists....could this have been one of them....and Hebrews was substituted for some reason? I am just thinking out loud here....I hope I won't be banished for voicing these thoughts as I struggle with this. I brought it up on this forum for the very reason that I expect people here will be able to resolve my concerns. You said: Quote:
I have not fully digested all that you have written, Tony, but I appreciate the time and effort you have put into your response and I will prayerfully consider all that you have written, as well as contributions by others on this topic. Shalom, Tandi |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
