A New Covenant With The House Of Israel, And With The House Of Judah

[Invicta]

The Epistle Of Paul The Apostle to the Hebrews.

 

Written from Italy to the Hebrews by Timothy.

[Genevanpreacher]

SInce I believe that God has preserved His words for us the way He wanted to in the ENGLISH KJV, ... This? -   Hebrews is one of the most difficult book in the NT to interpret.  

 

Can I ask why you have an issue with understanding the book of Hebrews?

You may not have meant it that way, but you make it sound like this book is 'hard to understand' for a child of God.

Is it possible that God would write a book 'not for our good'?

 

Having to look into what is in the Old Testament to see the meaning behind what is easily taught in the book of Hebrews is not a negative thing.

It sounds like you think it would be hard for someone 'new in the faith' to comprehend this book, to the extent that they might need you to 'translate' it for them.

 

What about the Holy Ghost, you know the Comforter? I thought we needed him after the Lord left, to learn his word.

Don't remember Jesus telling anyone that they would need a man to teach them.

 

God's word is understandable by the help of his Holy Spirit, irregardless of some's 'opinions'.

The lost cannot perceive the 'ways' of God's word, but we have the mind of Christ.

 

Just responding for those who are on here daily looking at what we are 'arguing' about, and 'wondering' how in the world they are gonna know truth from fiction.

God will lead, by his Holy Spirit, those who are his, into the perfect knowledge of his word.

Read to know, and one will find the truth of all doctrine.

Opinions don't matter, and neither do friendships.

 

It's all about what is true by God's standards, not ours.

[beameup]

Hebrews is a Pauline epistle.

Hebrews is anonomous for a very good reason - it was written by a woman.

Hebrews was written by Priscilla (of Priscilla and Aquila), a Heleinistic Jew 

and not a Palestinian Jew.  Priscilla and Aquila were well educated Jews

and accompanied Paul.  See Acts 18, Romans 16:3 and 1 Cor 16:19.

 

The identification of Paul as author is of 4th Century Catholic origin.

Much of Catholicism is within Protestantism as Replacement Theology

and all its "bedfellows" were retained by the "Reformers" and contaminate

theology.

 

"a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" 

[Genevanpreacher]

"Many people I have known...."

People I have my, some who I knew or know personally, have worked with, or are long term family friends.
Not opinion at all.
Sammi Nasser, Stanley Scyzeman, Mrs Lindsay, Enoah, along with others I have met in my travels.
My F-i-l used to be heavily involved as a tradesman in the Jewish community, and he was constantly talking about the unity of their community, even among those who were not religious" (his words).

No I don't have a study or statistical figures, but I have personal experience with non-practising Jews, in some cases several generations removed from Judaism, who are still aware of and proud of their Jewish heritage.
In some cases only just removed from Judaism, and in some cases still involved.

I have known some of these people for many years and through several different stages of life.
So I know this to be true.

 

Yes, and how many centuries does that cover exactly?

My point is you don't know any depth of the history of mankind's past to 'argue' the point. Hundreds of generations have disappeared of mankind without any hint of their past.

What makes you think Jews are any different than that?

They aren't. We are all human, and we forget.

I could use hundreds of 'examples' of humankind that cannot trace, nor remember their lineage, beyond a hundred years.

No matter the records kept, they tend to wear out and be forgotten, for lack of 'need to know'.

Yes, there may be some who do, yet the vast majority of humans just don't worry about it.

They live in the 'now', and since their families before them lived 'hard' lives, it didn't matter to them about their lineage.

I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

[Genevanpreacher]

Hebrews is anonomous for a very good reason - it was written by a woman.

Hebrews was written by Priscilla (of Priscilla and Aquila), a Heleinistic Jew 

and not a Palestinian Jew.  Priscilla and Aquila were well educated Jews

and accompanied Paul.  See Acts 18, Romans 16:3 and 1 Cor 16:19.

 

The identification of Paul as author is of 4th Century Catholic origin.

Much of Catholicism is within Protestantism as Replacement Theology

and all its "bedfellows" were retained by the "Reformers" and contaminate

theology.

 

"a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" 

 

That's funny. God used a woman to do a mans jOB?

 

Anyhoo, my Bible doesn't say it was written by Paul, and mine is a so-called Protestant Bible, before the KJV.

So I take it you don't believe the KJV?

Are you saying that the KJV teaches the so-called 'replacement theology'? My aren't you bold.

[John81]

There is no way to broad brush how many Jews do or don't remember their heritage.

 

During the Third Reich many Jews knew they were Jews yet there were also a number of "Germans" who were surprised to find out they were actually Jewish. This wasn't/isn't unique, as the same is true in many other countries.

 

One of the things many find interesting about checking into their ancestry is finding out their heritage. It's fairly common to hear folks talk about how they didn't know they were Jewish, Germanic, Indian or whatever.

 

Yes, some non-religious Jews still identify themselves as Jews. Others know they have Jewish ancestry but don't consider themselves to be Jews, and still others no longer even know of their Jewish ancestry.

[DaveW]

The Epistle Of Paul The Apostle to the Hebrews.

Written from Italy to the Hebrews by Timothy.

You do know that title is not inspired right?

[DaveW]

Yes, and how many centuries does that cover exactly?
My point is you don't know any depth of the history of mankind's past to 'argue' the point. Hundreds of generations have disappeared of mankind without any hint of their past.
What makes you think Jews are any different than that?
They aren't. We are all human, and we forget.
I could use hundreds of 'examples' of humankind that cannot trace, nor remember their lineage, beyond a hundred years.
No matter the records kept, they tend to wear out and be forgotten, for lack of 'need to know'.
Yes, there may be some who do, yet the vast majority of humans just don't worry about it.
They live in the 'now', and since their families before them lived 'hard' lives, it didn't matter to them about their lineage.
I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

In other words, it matters not what proof I present, it would not be good enough for you.......

Good way to discuss something.

[John81]

I get the point you are trying to make Dave, but anecdotal evidence is circumstantial at best, not proof.

[DaveW]

Hebrews is anonomous for a very good reason - it was written by a woman.
Hebrews was written by Priscilla (of Priscilla and Aquila), a Heleinistic Jew
and not a Palestinian Jew. Priscilla and Aquila were well educated Jews
and accompanied Paul. See Acts 18, Romans 16:3 and 1 Cor 16:19.

The identification of Paul as author is of 4th Century Catholic origin.
Much of Catholicism is within Protestantism as Replacement Theology
and all its "bedfellows" were retained by the "Reformers" and contaminate
theology.

"a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump"

I am gonna have to ask you to substantiate that claim.

The author is not identified.

The speculation that Paul wrote it comes not from some 4th century dude, but from comparing the phrasing and terms used, and from the knowledge displayed suiting a professor of Judaism - therefore Paul is the most likely candidate.
But it is not stated.

I personally think it was Paul.

The likelihood of it being a woman is extremely low considering it was written primarily to Jews, and hence would not be accepted by Jewish people as having any authority.
I understand you saying that is why it is anonymous, but then how can you prove your argument?

[beameup]

I am gonna have to ask you to substantiate that claim.

The author is not identified.

 

Priscilla AND Aquila (wife and husband) INSTRUCTED Apollos (in other words they were teachers) AND they traveled with Paul extensively. 

The authorship of Hebrews is generally attributed to Apollos, HOWEVER, if so, Apollos would have attached HIS NAME to the document. 

A woman author would not have garnered "respect" in the Jewish community.  The document stands on its own merits.

 

Acts 18:24-26  And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

[Genevanpreacher]

In other words, it matters not what proof I present, it would not be good enough for you.......

Good way to discuss something.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean to infer that I was discussing with you.

I thought you were making 'points' to prove something you say was a 'fact'.

 

You did say, "Not speculation - fact."

[DaveW]

Because if you know something to be true you know it to be a fact.

I know these people personally. They are not practising Judaism. In two cases not for several generations. In one I am not aware of the duration.
Covenant or said something about a few generations.

My experience with the issue disproves his speculation.

[DaveW]

Priscilla AND Aquila (wife and husband) INSTRUCTED Apollos (in other words they were teachers) AND they traveled with Paul extensively.
The authorship of Hebrews is generally attributed to Apollos, HOWEVER, if so, Apollos would have attached HIS NAME to the document.
A woman author would not have garnered "respect" in the Jewish community. The document stands on its own merits.


Acts 18:24-26 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

Thank you for your explanation.
It is no more reliable than various other speculations, but as much a possibility as others.

The (earthly) author is not able to be deduced with certainty.

[Steve Schwenke]

This Jewish genealogy bit is pretty stupid in my opinion.  It is a smokescreen to cover the tracks of bad theology designed to get people confused and OBsessed over genealogies that may or may not be proven. 

 

oh, wait...

 

Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and GENEALOGIES....

 

Why does Paul give us this instruction?  Because in the end it becomes a matter of speculation. 

 

The Book of Hebrews

I never said that I had prOBlems understanding it, but then again, Genevan can't understand why Peter would say that Paul's letters were hard to understand....so apparently this is again a novice who is oversimplifying things to the point that he has erased all of the "prOBlem passages." 

The doctrinal prOBlem passages contained in the book of Hebrews are well documented everywhere.  Hebrews 6:1-6 has been giving fundamentalist "scholars" fits for decades.  That is just one example.  Sure - everybody has their own pet answer for all of these prOBlem passages, but the fact is that Hebrews presents more difficulties than any of the other Pauline epistles.  Anybody who has done intensive study of the NT knows that. 

 

Invicta

yes the title in many KJV editions says it was Paul who wrote it, but not all editions carry that title.  As DaveW said, the title is not inspired - the text of Scripture is.  And again, this only demonstrates the difficulties the book presents, as we are not even 100% sure that Paul wrote it.  I personally think he did - but very early.  And the title says it all - If Paul did write it (and I think he did), he did not write it to any local church, or the pastor of a local church, as all of his other epistles are.  He wrote it to the Hebrews.

Further, when I said "Pauline Epistles" I defined that as Romans-Philemon, so your point is moot anyway.

 

But all of this is digression from the main point.  We somehow got derailed from the main topic by this smokescreen about Jewish ancestry.  You see, we are not discussing the text of Scripture anymore, just wasting time trying to determine who is a "real" Jew and who is not.

 

The text of Scripture in the OT, when dealing with covenant God made with Israel is explicitly clear.  It deals with a physical seed that is innumerable dwelling in the land God promised to Abraham, Isaac, and JacOB, being ruled over by David, and the Messiah who comes from David's line, who we know to be Jesus CHrist.

 

Covenanter says all of the promises made to OT Israel have been fulfilled in Christ, and that we - the church - are somehow recipients of these promises.  This denies the plain wording of the passages that have been listed.   So he (and others) do 3 things - they shove as much as they can into the past, even though they have to deny the literal wording of the passages, and then what they can't explain they allegorize away.  Finally, instead of believing the plain statements of Rev. 20 (a physical kingdom on this present earth ruled over by Jesus Christ), they shove the Kingdom Age out into the Eternal age as described in Rev. 21-22.  Thus, they take part of the OT covenants with Israel, and apply them to the church, and they take some of the OT covenants with Israel and shove them into the eternal age. 

 

I have attempted to demonstrate that they end up ignoring, twisting, and perverting Scripture in order to get this all to work.  If a person just reads the Scriptures as they are, they could never come up with some of the stuff that these guys are promoting - like the absurd interpretation of Luke 21:20 being the Roman armies.  NOBody would get that interpretation in a 1,000 years just by reading the Bible.  That interpretation comes from man trying to read history back into the Bible.  It certainly has no SOUND Biblical support at all.  Of course, he is quick to condemn us for using "outside sources" for dating, as if he does not use any "outside sources" for his information.  (Who is he trying to kid anyway?)

 

Covenanter says the New Covenant is completely fulfilled in Christ, and cites Hebrews 8:10-12 as proof.  But he completely ignores the fact that part of that covenant was that nOBody would be allowed to teach about the Lord anymore, because that knowledge would already be present with them.  I listed the verses earlier, but here they are again - Zech. 13:1-6, Jer. 32:36-44, Jer. 31:31-34 and other similar passages.  These passages are clearly not speaking of the Eternal Age (Rev. 21-22), but something that will happen on THIS earth, before it is destroyed.  He just can't seem to grasp that there is a chronological order to the events listed in Rev. 19 (2nd coming of Christ), Rev. 20 (the 1,000 year reign of Christ on this earth), then Rev. 21-22 (the New Heaven, New Earth, and New Jerusalem).