Orangeslice13, a blessing to those around him…..Again

It’s really not that humorous.
John calls Messiah as the “word”. To the 1st 2nd century believers (I did a very in depth study on this) they would understand that John is calling Messiah the “word of G-d” or more specifically the physical representation of Torah. Psalms says that G-ds “Word” is established in Heaven and is unchanged, unchanging and unchangeable. Messiah makes a direct statement in agreement with this fact.

Paul says the “word/law/Torah” is holy righteous and good.
Hebrews says it’s been set aside weak and worthless. Hebrews is on the verge of blasphemy as written
 
Wow.
That reads way more snarky than I ever intended.
Didn’t mean it that way
Yea and I was gonna respond in kind and decided not to. Glad I didn't.

I'll be honest though. I know we're supposed to test the spirits and confirm what we're taught and all, but it seems like you want Hebrews to be the "crap" you say it is. I mean, I don't see it as "mental gymnastics to make it fit" and although you say we're not arguing, I definitely feel like I'm defending Hebrews, a book of the Bible that you've decided is crap an uninspired.

Dont misunderstand that as butthurt Lol, Im just letting you know where I'm at mentally on this. This is more important and more serious than anything else obviously, this ain't an "Ask Behr or Slice about the OZ" thread.

That said, I'm absolutely fine with continuing, but I'm gonna ease up a little the rest of the night. I've got other things to do that I can do along with this, but need some attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigO95
It’s really not that humorous.
John calls Messiah as the “word”. To the 1st 2nd century believers (I did a very in depth study on this) they would understand that John is calling Messiah the “word of G-d” or more specifically the physical representation of Torah. Psalms says that G-ds “Word” is established in Heaven and is unchanged, unchanging and unchangeable. Messiah makes a direct statement in agreement with this fact.

Paul says the “word/law/Torah” is holy righteous and good.
Hebrews says it’s been set aside weak and worthless. Hebrews is on the verge of blasphemy as written

The mental gymnastics part was. And I agree with the verse. I didn't see an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigO95
Yea and I was gonna respond in kind and decided not to. Glad I didn't.

I'll be honest though. I know we're supposed to test the spirits and confirm what we're taught and all, but it seems like you want Hebrews to be the "crap" you say it is. I mean, I don't see it as "mental gymnastics to make it fit" and although you say we're not arguing, I definitely feel like I'm defending Hebrews, a book of the Bible that you've decided is crap an uninspired.

Dont misunderstand that as butthurt Lol, Im just letting you know where I'm at mentally on this. This is more important and more serious than anything else obviously, this ain't an "Ask Behr or Slice about the OZ" thread.

That said, I'm absolutely fine with continuing, but I'm gonna ease up a little the rest of the night. I've got other things to do that I can do along with this, but need some attention.



My attitude is to defend the word of G-d. If it passed the test I’d defend it. I did for a long time till it became obvious that I was making it fit. I now equate Hebrews to the level of Maccabees or the Talmud. Hebrews like those others isn’t scripture in my mind. I have no “want” one way or the other. If you like we can discuss why the Apocalypse of Peter should have been included.
 
Romans 8:3-14
Galatians 4:3-9
Acts 13:39
Galatians 2:15-16
Hebrews 5:6

I've not read any commentary on this since earlier. Ive gone strictly by the book, literally. I looked at the original verses Hebrews 7:18-19 in my KJV reference. It took me to Galatians 4:9 and I read further but 14 was a good place to stop, and Romans 8:3 and I read further and 9 was a good place to stop. etc....I actually read the NASB version, just used the KJV for reference. FYI.

The laws were weakened and useless like our gun laws because people don't obey them. Bad example? Meh, you get it. "We" weren't getting closer to God like he wanted, that is why we're all here, for him.

God brings brings Jesus to fulfill his law. Not change it, but to help us understand why there were laws and how to make them work for us to get closer to him. Its all about him. And theres John 16:6 and 7. 7 is well, another conversation.

Thats my "readers digest" version of my understanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigO95
My attitude is to defend the word of G-d. If it passed the test I’d defend it. I did for a long time till it became obvious that I was making it fit. I now equate Hebrews to the level of Maccabees or the Talmud. Hebrews like those others isn’t scripture in my mind. I have no “want” one way or the other. If you like we can discuss why the Apocalypse of Peter should have been included.
I was typing the post above I guess while you posted this. Yea, it took more than 15 minutes.
 
If you like we can discuss why the Apocalypse of Peter should have been included.

I'm gonna stick with Hebrews and finish it.

But, I'd be interested in what you have on the Apocalypse of Peter. Ive only read bits of it that I thought might be interesting, but I don't know enough about it to discuss it.
 
Romans 8:3-14
Galatians 4:3-9
Acts 13:39
Galatians 2:15-16
Hebrews 5:6

I've not read any commentary on this since earlier. Ive gone strictly by the book, literally. I looked at the original verses Hebrews 7:18-19 in my KJV reference. It took me to Galatians 4:9 and I read further but 14 was a good place to stop, and Romans 8:3 and I read further and 9 was a good place to stop. etc....I actually read the NASB version, just used the KJV for reference. FYI.

The laws were weakened and useless like our gun laws because people don't obey them. Bad example? Meh, you get it. "We" weren't getting closer to God like he wanted, that is why we're all here, for him.

God brings brings Jesus to fulfill his law. Not change it, but to help us understand why there were laws and how to make them work for us to get closer to him. Its all about him. And theres John 16:6 and 7. 7 is well, another conversation.

Thats my "readers digest" version of my understanding.

ok so I spent a huge amount of time on this and I stand with my original assessment. The rest of scripture puts the faults of failure with us. Hebrews Is at odds with the rest of scripture.
 
ok so I spent a huge amount of time on this and I stand with my original assessment. The rest of scripture puts the faults of failure with us. Hebrews Is at odds with the rest of scripture.
I figured you would and that's fine, I stand by mine. We agree the failure is with us, we disagree Hebrews contradicts that, in fact I still stand by that it enforces the rest.

nothing has been set aside.

I still disagree here too. I've been asked to teach the Sunday School lesson next week and its on Matthew 15:1-20, I agreed because of how it ties in to our discussion and I have a bunch of notes already.haha.. If you feel like it, read 15:1-20 with the "setting aside" in mind and see if you see anything.

But, I'm good with us disagreeing, again, I appreciate your perspective.

If you feel like telling me the other errors or where its wrong Id like to check them out just to see myself.

I also have enjoyed comparing the NASB and ESV to the KJV. Im still partial to my KJV but I really like the other two as well.
 
Food for thought.
Psalms 119 is a declaration of the Word of G-d and what it means. Vs 89 says that it’s forever and established in Heaven.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigO95
Mathew 15 is where the teachers accused Messiah of breaking “tradition of the elders”. Notice he’s not being accused of breaking the law. It’s here that Messiah teaches Torah to the teachers. Messiah establishes the law here.
It’s interesting that translators added to this scripture things that are not there.
 
1 John 3 clearly defines sin as lawlessness or violations of the law.
If you believe the definition of sin has changed from what was established in heaven then you’ve been lied too.

There is no condemnation for violating the law for those in Union with Messiah (Romans 8:1) but the definition of sin remains (Romans ch 7)
 
A warning from Messiah for anyone teaching.

18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not [h]the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches [i]others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever [j]keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
 
If you’re going to cover Mathew 15 you should probably go over Mark 7 for context. It’s a good 2nd prospective on that story.

Later if you want you can look into the things in both Mathew 15 and Mark 7 that don’t exist in the earlier copies of scripture.
 
My last thought for today then I’m out.

if you’re seeking G-d the you join Him and his ways. He doesn’t conform to us.

Shalom y’all
 
Let me give you an example.
Romans 10:4 says
4 For Christ is the [a]end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

notice the footnote.
A) Romans 10:4 Or goal

The word translated in that verse as “end” is translated as “goal” everywhere else it’s used in scripture.
That simple change makes a huge difference in the meaning.
Slice, what manuscripts in the Hebrew and Greek do you consider to be the final authority and why do you pick those? Just curious?!?!
 
Meh
Spellin is overrated.

And Angles (my phone defaults to that. Could be my occupation. I’m not wasting time changing it back) absolutely deliver messages from G-d. There are too many examples to list. But that’s not the implication of Hebrews. The Word of G-d (instruction/Torah/prophecy) isn’t and has never been spoken/delivered by Angels (if I capitalize it seems to help) the Angles role there is to Ordain not originate.
How can you possibly make such a statement? When the angel appears to Mary, it was a message from God, thus God's word. When the angel appears to the old testament characters they are bringing a message from God thus you should clearly rethink that argument.
 
very good
I agree completely with the mild exception that Romans is correct that we are weak and Hebrews is wrong calling the law useless. My bias is I read as written without having to twist to fit. If someone only had Hebrews to read then they’d get it wrong.
And 2nd Jesus alters nothing in the law. The Pharacees had it wrong adding their tradition to interpret as they wanted instead of as it is plainly written. Jesus/Yeshua correction to their errors doesn’t alter G-ds forever commandments.

My standards for interpretation are actually based on the actions of Messiah that you alluded too.

Good stuff.
I’m enjoying this very much but feel compelled to say as many times as necessary (for anyone joining in and reading along in the middle of this conversation). I’m sharing my beliefs as I see them and why. If you disagree I’m completely ok with it and it won’t hurt my feelings to hear what you believe and why.
I would say that the law is useless to make one righteous, would you not agree with that?
 
I think on the "weak and uselessness" its because the Pharisees treated some of the laws as more and less significant than others, which made it "weak and useless" as a whole in God's eye. I think That's where the "not change one letter or stroke" comes from.
I believe that the all the New testament including Hebrews reveals the spirit of the law and reveals more about our Lord and savior as well. It's a theme through the whole Bible that God continues to reveal more of himself to man. Now we have a complete revelation of all that we need to do the work of God and get to heaven. It's simply found in the Bible.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top