Jesus' coming Kingdom on land.

[Ronda]

9 minutes ago, John81 said:

I find it interesting that for centuries it was accepted that Paul was the author of Hebrews but once some modernists "scholars" began questioning that many jumped on that bandwagon. It's especially interesting that many who reject the modernist methods, motives and declarations on virtually every point nevertheless accept their meandering views on the authorship of Hebrews.

One thing that is fun, at least to me, is to listen or read old sermons (even a few new ones) from Baptist pastors preaching boldly that Paul is the author of Hebrews and why that's so clear.

As to point #2: Amen!

Which centuries are you talking about? The dark ages? Martin Luther (1483-1586) was a key figure in the protestant movement, and had that not happened, much of the world would likely be under the false religion of the Catholic "faith".  Luther was of the firm belief that Paul did not write Hebrews, and his lifespan is not within recent years. Of course the centuries prior to that the Catholic church was in control, and who would dare speak out in disagreement?  Also I wonder why Paul signed his epistles, but for this particular letter... he somehow "forgot"? I find that strange.

[John81]

I was speaking especially of the centuries between the time of the Apostles and the actual establishment of the RCC with power. Even after that, it wasn't until latter when a real push came underway to reject Paul as the author.

[beameup]

One thing I noticed about "Hebrews" is that it is a very excellently written work (even with no knowledge of Greek, this is apparent).  My conclusion is that the first 12 chapters form a "sermon" - the last chapter being "added on", and not nearly as eloquent.  It is clear to me that this work was recopied and distributed to the target audiences: synagogues; and that it was to be read aloud in the assembly (ekklesia).  With this in mind, it is my personal conjecture that this Epistle (sermon) will be of great value to those born-again Jews during the Tribulation. 

Peter did not possess these high literary skills, that is clear (perhaps Apollos or Priscilla were eloquent in Koine Greek).  The contents of "Hebrews" would not be "confusing" or difficult to understand for any Jew... the sermon titled  "Hebrews" would be crystal-clear to "Hebrews".

Edited December 21, 2015 by beameup

[LindaR]

I believe that the apostle Paul is the author of the epistle to the Hebrews based on 2 Peter 3:15:

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

____________________

Excerpts from “The Interpretation of the English Bible” by B. H. Carroll – (15-17) The Book of Hebrews –Author’s Introduction, Part 2

The case of Paul may be briefly stated thus:

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE

The external evidence is cumulative and threefold: scriptural, documentary, and traditional.

Scriptural. The first scriptural evidence is derived from 2 Peter 3:15: “And account that the long suffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according unto the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you.” If this testimony be relevant it is decisive. The argument for its application to the case is substantially this:

1,  Peter wrote his first letter to elect Jews of the dispersion in five provinces of Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1).

2.  His second letter was to the same people (2 Peter 3:1).

3.  In this second letter he says, “Our beloved brother Paul hath written to you.”

4.  The particular topic discussed by Peter,  concerning which he alleges agreement with Paul, is the emphatic topic in our letter to the Hebrews, namely, the long suffering of our Lord in delaying his advent, which delay was tempting them to apostatize.

5.  Peter distinguishes this letter of Paul to the Hebrews from all his other letters.

6.  The most probable date of Peter’s second letter allows ample time for his knowledge of the letter to the Hebrews. Indeed, Peter’s letter shows evident acquaintance with the group of Paul’s letters written during his first Roman imprisonment, and designedly supplements Paul’s great argument against the Gnostics.

7.  If our letter to the Hebrews be not the one which Peter attributed to Paul, then Paul’s letter is lost. The only escape from this argument would be proof that Peter himself never wrote the second letter attributed to him, but this would be only a nominal escape, since somebody wrote that letter and the direct testimony as to Paul writing to the Hebrews remains. Whatever may be the merits of this argument as to Peter’s testimony, it is certain that Peter never said, “Our beloved brother Barnabas, or Apollos, or Clement, or Luke, hath written unto you.”

 

 

 

 

[Genevanpreacher]

20 hours ago, John81 said:

I find it interesting that for centuries it was accepted that Paul was the author of Hebrews but once some modernists "scholars" began questioning that many jumped on that bandwagon. It's especially interesting that many who reject the modernist methods, motives and declarations on virtually every point nevertheless accept their meandering views on the authorship of Hebrews.

One thing that is fun, at least to me, is to listen or read old sermons (even a few new ones) from Baptist pastors preaching boldly that Paul is the author of Hebrews and why that's so clear.

As to point #2: Amen!

The comment on the title page to Hebrews in my Geneva Bible originally printed in 1560 -

Forasmuch as divers, both of the Greek writers and Latins witness, that the writer of this Epistle for just causes would not have his name known, it were curiosity of our part to labour much therein. For seeing the Spirit of God is the author thereof, it diminisheth nothing the authority, although we know not with what pen he wrote it. Whether it were Paul (as it is not like) or Luke, or Barnabas, or Clement, or some other, his chief purpose is to persuade unto the Hebrews (whereby he principally meaneth them that abode at Jerusalem, and under them all the rest of the Jews) that Christ Jesus was not only the redeemer, but also that at his coming all ceremonies must have an end: forasmuch as his doctrine was the conclusion of all the prophecies, and therefore not only Moses was inferior to him, but also the Angels: for they all were servants, and he the Lord, but so Lord, that he hath also taken our flesh, and is made our brother to assure us of our salvation through himself: for he is that eternal Priest, whereof all the Levitical Priests were but shadows, and therefore at his coming they ought to cease, and all sacrifices for sin to be abolished, as he proveth from the seventh chapter verse 11, unto the 12 chapter verse 18. Also he was that Prophet of whom all the Prophets in time past witnessed, as is declared from the 12 chapter, verse 18, to the twenty fifth verse of the same chapter: yea, and is the King to whom all things are subject, as appeareth from that verse 25, to the beginning of the last chapter. Wherefore according to the examples of the old fathers we must constantly believe in him, that being sanctified by his justice, taught by his wisdom, and governed by his power, we may steadfastly, and courageously persevere even to the end in hope of that joy that is set before our eyes, occupying ourselves in Christian exercises that we may both be thankful to God, and dutiful to our neighbour.

[Ronda]

I have my own conclusions why I believe Paul did not write Hebrews.  I will give my reasons, but after I do, I want to share a personal testimony specifically about the book of Hebrews which has changed my life, and changed my walk with the Lord in dramatic fashion, and brought me closer into a personal relationship with the Lord, as well as gave me a more fervent desire to study, grow, and fellowship with others. I apologize (ahead of time) for the length.

Reasons  (I believe) Paul did not write Hebrews:

1. 2 Thes 3:17 "17 The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle: so I write."
    Paul himself tells us he signs every epistle he writes. Hebrews is not signed by Paul.
2. The style of writing in Hebrews is distinctly different with it's use of well-refined classical Greek.
3. It does not include the personal identification commonly found in Paul's epistles.
4. You put forth 2 Pet 3:15 as a "proof text" for Hebrews, but Peter could very well have been alluding to what Paul said in Galatians, specifically to his Jewish listeners, that they should rely fully on the sufficiency of Christ and the dangers of their desire to return (in part) to Judaism. 
    Paul had "called out" Peter on this very theme in Galatians 2:14
    "14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"
    So my opinion is that it's quite possible that Peter was referring to the book of Galatians when Peter (in 2 Pet 3) speaks of the wisdom pertaining to salvation that Paul had written unto them in Galatians.
    In 1 Peter 1, the areas noted are places in proximity to Galatia, so we can see how easily the book of Galatians could well be the letter Peter was referring to in 2 Pet. 3:15
5. Paul always refers to his firsthand revelation received from Christ (eg. Gal. 1:11-12)
    and the writer of Hebrews places himself among the second-generation Christians to whom the message of Christ was confirmed by eyewitnesses of Jesus' ministry. 
    Hebrews 2:3 "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;"
6. In Paul's signed epistles, he quotes the the original Hebrew text (masoretic) or paraphrases it. 
    But all of the quotes in Hebrews are taken out of the Greek Old Testament(septuagint), which is inconsistent with Paul's usage in all of his signed letters/epistles. 
7. In all 13 epistles (Romans through Philemon) the first word is "Paul". Yet that's not the case in Hebrews.

8. Eternal Security and Grace by faith, (without works being a contingency for salvation) are taught by Paul in his epistles. I will show examples (below) of where this is not always the case in Hebrews.
9.  Great assurance of salvation comes to us by Paul stating in several places:
     (Col.1:12; Rom.8:15-17; 1Cor.3:22,23; Gal.3:26; and others),
    that we have already been made partakers of Christ by the Father and the Spirit. 
    But there is a HUGE "IF" in Heb. 3:14 concerning how these people become partakers of Christ.
    Could the same messenger from God have written these things? It seems somewhat contradictory in nature.
Hebrews 3:14 "For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;"
    So here (as in other places in Hebrews) we see an "enduring to the end" theme.
    *also in Hebrews 4:1; 6:4-6; and 10:26,27

                                                            PERSONAL TESTIMONY in regard to HEBREWS:

I have to confess here, the first time I read... I mean REALLY read and considered the words in Hebrews 6:4-6, it was one of those "OH NO" moments... I had quite a time of it. 
I dived right back in trying to figure out if I had read it right! I kept going through Hebrews and got to Hebrews 10:26 and had another "OH NO" moment!

I accepted Christ as my Lord and savior when I was young. Later, during my mid-teen years into early adulthood, I cannot say I led an exemplary life. 
Thankfully, the Holy Spirit led me back to the right ways. 
I'm not going to get specific, but I would consider it backsliding, and why I consider it thus, is that I returned repenting to the Lord, truly sorrowful for grieiving Him and grieving the Holy Spirit.

And before I get a finger poked into my face with "we know them by their fruits" or some other such verse, let me say that anyone who says they HAVE lived their entire (since salvation) life with Jesus as the main focus, and not a thought of vanity or pride for themselves is a liar.
And if any of you HAVE lived exemplary lives throughout (from the moment you accepted Christ until the present day) I saw "WONDERFUL!" 
I'm sure you will hear "well done, my good and faithful servant" when you meet the Lord. (Then again many lead outwardly appearing lives which are inwardly contrary to the outward appearance... I know MANY professing Christians who have this characteristic lifestyle: putting TV, sports, hobbies, and worldly things above the Lord and above reading/studying His word and/or serving Him).

But back to Hebrews... I admit the first time I really grasped what it said... word for word... I shut the bible that day and didn't pick it back up for at least a week!
I prayed and worried and prayed and worried some more. I was probably 19 or 20 when this happened.

Hebrews 6:4 "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,"
    5 "And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,"
    6 "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

Hebrews 10:26 "For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins"

I had NEVER heard a sermon on these verses prior to that time (like I said I was a young adult then), and I was thinking how completely backwards it was to all the scripture I had read and memorized before that time.
I was wondering how could it be in the same book? How could it apply to the age of grace? WHY hadn't I heard a sermon on it? Why hadn't my parents warned me?
I was sweating shocked and confused, thinking... these verses say that since I've willfully sinned (after accepting salvation) that I can LOSE my salvation! 
That flew directly in the face of all I'd heard (both in sermons and at home), all I'd read in the bible myself (up until then), and it flew directly in the face of "saved by grace" and "eternal security" taught throughout ALL the previous NT books!

I was young and immature in my walk with the Lord at the time, but I have to say it threw me for a loop for a good while.
I've (later since that time period) heard countless sermons and read commentaries about these very verses from inumerable Baptist preachers (some IFB, some southern Baptist).
I heard many many different viewpoints. But he biggest "excuse" made I heard was this:
"Well, those people, the author was referring to, were never saved to begin with"

I can't count how many times I heard that.
But what does the text actually SAY???

They were:
1. enlightened
2. tasted of the heavenly gift
3. MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST
4. tasted of the good word of God
5. (tasted also) of the powers of the world to come

Does THAT sound like someone who was "never saved to start with"???
I might have been able to swallow that theory if they had only been "enlightened" and "tasted"
BUT....................
MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY GHOST???

So I went on to Hebrews 10:26 "For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins"

In all of those verses, it showed (to me) that it clearly wasn't talking about "eternal security" that ALL of the previous books of the NT HAD.
I went into a depression the depths of which I can't fully describe. 
I was pretty sure I was then damned. I didn't turn my back on God then, though, even though I actually thought it was useless now that I had  backslidden, I was pretty sure (according to those verses) that I was damned.
I did put down the bible for a week or so... I was despondent!
After wallowing for a week or so in utter despair, I decided what I'd read just HAD to be explained elsewhere in the bible, so I picked the bible back up and kept reading and poring over the NEXT books of the bible. Well that made things even more confusing!
As you know, next, after Hebrews, is James and Peter. That only confused me worse!
It seemed to me that Hebrews, James, and Peter completely contradicted Romans through Philemon.
And if you don't see the complete conflict and seeming contradictions in those sets of epistles (Romans through Philemon v/s Hewbrew, James, and Peter) then you're not really comprehending and studying, but merely reading.

Had I been going to a GOOD IFB church which taught more than "watered down milk", I would have been taught the difference between the writers, the books, and most importantly, the AUDIENCE the "books" were written to.
Thankfully in my younger years (birth through pre-teen years) we had lived nearby an IFB church which DID teach spiritual "meat" sermons. I had been blessed to get a good solid foundation (but never got to Hebrews that young). That pastor also happened to be my uncle.  
However, when we moved (my Dad got a job in a different area), we started attending what I now consider to be a horrible IFB church, of the weakest watered down milk variety. One of their "sermons" was never longer than 5-7 minutes, EVER, and even that was riddled with anecdotal "stories", and the rest of the "service" was music, taking up an offering, reading a lengthy prayer list, and more music. NEVER even heard an altar call for salvation at that church!!!
So I wasn't going to ask that "pastor" for his take on Hebrews (I doubt he could have even FOUND Hebrews).

What I did was call my uncle, the IFB pastor whom I'd heard during my childhood.
It wasn't just Hebrews I had concerns about, there were other, seemingly contradictory verses.
He explained to me "rightly dividing", and how (as I've stated before) in each dispensation God deals with the respective people groups in a different ways than previous (or future) dispensations.
Up until that point (I was likely 19 or 20 years old at the time) I hadn't even realized that Paul had written Romans through Philemon (even though each of those books starts out with the word "Paul").
I had read and studied the bible as though it was ALL written TO me.
THAT is where the BIG FAT ERROR comes in.
ALL of the bible is written FOR me to learn from and to gather a better understanding, but it isn't ALL written TO me.
Once I started figuring out WHO each book and/or epistle was written TO, it made perfect sense!
Like a jigsaw puzzle that I had erroneously tried to make the pieces "fit" (by not recognizing who each epistle was written to), the jigsaw puzzle now started clicking together perfectly, once I divided that simple way, noting whom each epistle was written TO.
There were no longer any contradictions... there was now perfect harmony.
I truly can't tell you how big a difference this has made in my walk and desire to ever delve deeper into God's word. It was a HUGE turning point.

Ever since that time, I have understood so much more than I ever could have before. It's been a few decades of time now, I'm in my late 40's, but I can say I have an even stronger desire to be close to the Lord, to continually live pleasing to Him and bible study is now, and has been, a joy (whereas in my late teen years it seemed to be a "chore", or even boring!)
I'm not patting myself on the back, God gave me this desire, God gave me every nugget of truth in His word. He gave me the Holy Spirit who leads and guides and gives me the strong desire to stay in the word of God and to live by the word of God... the word applicable to THIS current dispensation, the age of grace.

That's my testimony on how I went from being a luke-warm believer into being on fire, with a passion for the Lord.
It started with my misunderstanding Hebrews. So I will conclude this by saying the importance of knowing that Hebrews was written TO Hebrews has been paramount in my understanding the rest of scripture. It all started with that.
Laugh, mock, sneer, tell me some condescending one-liner after I poured out my testimony.
It's all good... I can take it. Because that doesn't move me. I know what the power of the word of God can do in my own life. 

Might I make one humble suggestion? Try it! (for even one week) studying in this manner... paying attention to WHOM each epistle is written, and see for yourself where once you saw contradictions, now you'll see perfect harmony.
God is not the author of confusion. So if you are reading conflict and contradiction... could be your reading something meant for another dispensation. Because I am now 100% sure in eternal security and being saved by grace, by faith in what Jesus did on the cross... no works added! 

One last thing here...Before I bow out of this conversation... I've taken up a LOT of space on this topic thread which was originally "Jesus' coming Kingdom on Land", and this entire post may seem to have nothing to do with the topic. However, I believe that if you divide by dispensations, you will clearly see the proof of the factual evidence that the millennial kingdom is, in fact, going to be on this earth. If you don't divide by dispensations, you will never, ever "see it". Now that I've poured my heart out, and taken up gobs of space, I am going to bow out of this conversation. (Cheers, applause, and tomato throwing--by some) as I exit. lol.   I hope the topic now returns to the original "Jesus' coming Kingdom on land", and I apologize to "Mountain Christian" for having taken up such space. God bless!

Edited December 22, 2015 by Ronda
spelling

[Alan]

On ‎2015‎年‎12‎月‎18‎日 at 9:38 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So, do you actually want me to respond?  Or, do you just want me to agree with you, regardless of my response?

Brethren,

The purpose of this thread was originally to discuss, 'Jesus coming on Land.' Now, it is a discussion of who is the author of Hebrews, eternal security, and dispensations.

Pastor Markle,

I do hope that once you conclude your discussion on, 'Jesus coming on Land' you will put your study (minus the side issues and  impertinent comments from the detractors), on this thread or in another location. If the moderators allow you to put the study in a PDF format I would (and I am sure some of the other brethren), appreciate it.

Alan

 

Edited December 22, 2015 by Alan
grammer