It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
What makes you think that Paul wrote Hebrews, another tradition?
He was talking to Jewish Christians.
The custom among many nations and peoples is that a testament or will and testament..a promise/ a covenant can be changed many times...but the one which goes into effect is the Last Will and Testament. The Last Promise. The Last Covenant.
That isn't how Paul puts it. The writer of Hebrews uses an analogy of a will to make the point that Jesus had to die for it to go into effect.
The event which makes a Will and Testament go into effect..a Last Will and Testament is the death of the Testator.
And it is obvious that no one died for the Olde Testament.
Which should tell you that Hebrews was using an incomplete analogy to refer to just one aspect of the situation that now exists with the old covenant being obsolete.
You are repeating a circular argument.
Wow!! I can make this point about the RCC and the conditions there under Divine Right of Kings and that reading the Word was discouraged except amongst trained clergy..not the people per se. It was often read in Latin..not the language of the people.
King James was the virtual Pope of the Church of England, just under the term, King.
He made a version of the Bible to be read in the church that he was the Pope over.
So what you seem to be doing is using logic to come to the conclusion that Jesus is actually God, meaning the same person as who Jesus calls his father.
Wow!! That is obvious in John beginning at the first chapter and for us or we as it states... to behold His Glory.
And we are taught that His Glory He would not share with another. So from where or whom does He get His Glory?? Which we behold??
What would have been the purpose of the writer of the Gospel of John in making this description, if you theory is correct, that this was actually talking about Jesus, rather than what it says, which is the Logos?
It does say concerning when or before the Child was born...."that holy thing which is born of thee."
But by the time He is born..He has a name...Jesus. And a title..The Christ. For He shall save His people.
And this is further clarified for us...in the Book of John...under the Word...In the Beginning was the Word...etc etc...and goes on to bring it down to the Word which dwelt amongst us and we beheld His Glory.
It should be obvious that this is metaphorical language being used, such as when it says, "In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."
This is not an analogy or symbolic...or representative of ..but actual...physical.
"The Word" is not a "name" of God, like you imagine, but is an aspect of God, which is "with" God, in a metaphorical sense. It is what makes things happen, such as creation in Genesis, that all these things come about because God said so.
That much is clear and the author here is talking about God from the Beginning...from the Word..unto Jesus and His glory which was beheld when He dwelt with them.
You keep mentioning your theory on the names of God but you never actually demonstrate how it exits in the text.
Wow!! Notice Faith is spelled with a capital letter here....to differentiate it from faith. Faith is one of His names...I am using Faith to mean and indicate Him in this case...not Greek..but Him.
No. It might help your case if you could actually point this out in the text rather than your general impression on the meaning of the Bible.
Hmmm so this is not clear In the Olde Testament ..that there would be a redeemer ...and that the Olde Testament would be replaced with a New Testament....a new covenant with people who were not His people???
Not really.
A foreshadow...of things to come. This did not happen and was not foretold??? Wow!!
Paul does not mention a new covenant.
And Paul was wrong in the New Testament when he stated that the Olde Testament ...of Hagar with her son Ishmael...Mt Siani was in bondage with her children. And that the New Testament was free and the mother of us all...by Sarah and her child Isaac.
Of something, just not what you think it is.
This is a foreshadow...from the Olde Testament unto the New Testament. I know this because...
This is what I find to be more annoying to me than anything else a poster might say in response to my comments on Bible verses, that I don't talk like a cult leader, as if everything I say is coming straight from God. I think it is ridiculous as an argument, and shows a shallowness and an easy slipping into character attack.
Wow!!! Probably?????? This is not authorative...probably??..to speak with authority..this is speculation. Prime mover?? Wow!!
Here for prime mover ...I can say.."May the Force be with you!!"
Please speak with authority here. What you are quoting here is Philosophies of men...mans wisdom and knowledge..not what God teaches and His Wisdom...Wisdom..also one of His Names. Wow!!
All you would have to do is read any commentary on the Gospel of John.
If I want this kind of thing, Prime mover, I go to a Bible college or seminary.
Or you could read what Philo the Jew (alternatively, Philo of Alexandria, a contemporary of Jesus) and what he said about the Logos.
IF I want prime mover ...I read Charles Darwin..or Richard Dawkins...or quantum Physics..Mechanics..et al.
Even though it was written thousands of years ago in another language and in another culture, you don't think that this is a matter to take into consideration?
I'll stick with the Word...Thanks...I'll stick with God...me and my house.
Yes, it might help if you were to familiarize yourself with some history of the period.
You know...now that I think about it in that context...that is also what makes the Qumran findings very interesting.
What was learned from those tablets and scrolls about those times ...historically..the people..customs/traditions etc.
There is no literal "god of this world".
We are told to do this to note which things are of God or which things are of this world and the god of this world. Including the version of the Word.
You have a lot of beliefs that no one could possibly arrive at on their own, which just happen to be available in the different cults, so I assume that you are accepting the traditions of men to be the prism that you see everything through, that it has to fit that tradition.
Oh...goodness..no. For starters...I try to look at things through the prism of Truth..not of truth. Memorizing ...goodness me. Memorizing...Wow!!
This does not indicate a power to interpret the Bible.
there is no such instruction for a Believer..to celebrate a birthday.
It says, "Our brother, Timothy".
..I know what it says at the end of Hebrews...
The original Christians were Jews, so there was no shortage of Christians with knowledge of the Old Testament.
Paul is the perfect man to teach and to Hebrews though he is considered the apostle to the Gentiles. Paul would naturally know much Olde Testament. And Hebrews uses a lot of Olde Testamet references.
They were Christians. That is accepted by all New Testament scholars.
Wow...that is not my point. My point is Jewish Christians or not..they would know more Olde Testament than those not brought up in the OLde Testament..non Jews.
But Hebrews mentions none of that, so you are taking an analogy that the writer was making about one aspect of this new situation, after Jesus, and misapplying it to make what it is talking about mean something else.
Paul does indeed say that...but that is not the point I was making in the quote. The point known my most peoples is that a person can change their will many times as they live..or liveth..but the testament which goes into effect is the last will written...the last will and testament. I put that in their for clarity and background.
The death of the testator is what makes a will go into effect. But before one dies..one can make as many wills and testaments as one likes..changing them as one likes..the one which goes into effect is the last one when one dies. One's last will and testament. This we have from the Olde Testament unto the New Testament.
That's not what I said.
I do not get it that the Olde Testament is obsolete. From whence do you arrive at that conclusion??
That is in the past tense, if you were looking at where it says "schoolmaster" in the New Testament. It was the schoolmaster before the gospel came.
We are to know the Olde Testament...as our schoolmaster. This alone does not make the Olde Testament Obsolete.
Hmm.
For we are to know why ...when and where...the reasons for things to be as they are today..the very patterns of the Olde Testament unto the New Testament.
You are not getting past what you were already indoctrinated into by your cult.
I am connecting dots..into a pattern. Not quoting Greek or Greek Experts.
English translations were being made and it was eventually realized by the rulers that they could not stop it, so they co-opted it to turn it into a tool to support the existing power structure.
No Pope capable of thinking would ever do this to the line of kings or the feudal power structure...by writing such an Bible..for the ordinary folk. The RCC indeed had this one figured out.
originally posted by: Jim Scott
Beware of the Bible translations since the King James Version. These false texts have taken out scriptural truths. There is a lot of information about this on the internet, so no need repeating it all here. Here's a good starting place: www.bibleprobe.com...
People who dismiss the KJV Bible version have no clue as to how perfect it was done, or the extremely highly qualified and numerous scholars used. For example, one was fluent in 15 languages, as well as a specialist in the original languages of the Bible. The only translation you can trust in English is the KJV. I do not mean the New KJV, or any other version of the KJV.
II Samuel 21;19
King James Bible
And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
KJV Luke 11:2-4
2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
3 Give us day by day our daily bread.
4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.
NIV Luke 11:2-4
Father,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come.
3
Give us each day our daily bread.
4
Forgive us our sins,
for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.[c]
And lead us not into temptation.[d]’
It says so in the original NIV edition because it is not in the Hebrew or the LXX texts.
In the Newer versions of the NIV they have had to change it to what is in the KJV..that the brother of Golliath was killed. In the older versions like mine it still reads..killed Goliath.
It isn't a matter of "side by side" with what I was talking about in John 1, but that it is a series of uses of the word, logos.
Verses putting different verses side by side for demonstration and observation.
. . . the question of when the author of this Gospel believed the incarnation had taken place.
Scholars as different as Reginald Fuller, Charles Talbert and Frances Watson have all suggested that, whereas the classic canonical reading understands the decisive moment to be Jesus’ conception, in the context of the Gospel of John, it is more natural to understand the decisive moment to have been at Jesus’ baptism.
This was a common interpretation among early Christians (although rejected by developing orthodoxy, it was maintained in the Jewish-Christian Pseudo-Clementine literature, which regularly uses Johannine language in reference to Jesus). But more importantly than that, in the context of Jewish and developing Christian thought in the time when this Gospel was written, concepts like Word, Wisdom and Spirit were not clearly distinguished, and so many readers would have found “the Word became flesh” (John 1:14) a natural equivalent to what we are told slightly later, namely that the Spirit descended and remained on him (John 1:32).
www.patheos.com...
Oh...goodness..no. For starters...I try to look at things through the prism of Truth..not of truth. Memorizing ...goodness me. Memorizing...Wow!!
You have a lot of beliefs that no one could possibly arrive at on their own, which just happen to be available in the different cults, so I assume that you are accepting the traditions of men to be the prism that you see everything through, that it has to fit that tradition.
There is no literal "god of this world".
That was a metaphorical device used by Paul to refer to the outdated ideas of God's nature, from before Jesus came to give us better information on the subject.
13 Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small.
14 Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small.
15 But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
So because you see the word, "God", on a coin that you think is not worth, melted down, the equal of its face value, you think that is proof that there is a literal evil god who rules the world?
And the coins say on them "In God We Trust." Give me the name of the god of unjust weights and measures.
This is real..
originally posted by: orangetom1999
This is one of the reasons..among others..that people do not understand that Jesus is God...who became fles and dwelt among us. The versions do not read the same..and this is deliberately done to bring confusion.
Thanks,
Orangetom
So because you see the word, "God", on a coin that you think is not worth, melted down, the equal of its face value, you think that is proof that there is a literal evil god who rules the world?
It has no bearing on the Truth" which version of the "bible" is the most accurate.The bible is formulated into the doctrines of man in the same fashion as the Talmud
That means if you pay for a pound of flour, you get a pound, not 15 ounces with a scale that says a pound.
There is a Biblical reason for having a system of Just weights and measures in coinage.
Since that is a subject for conspiracy theory groups, rather that a normal church service.
There are to my limited knowledge only a handful of ministers in this nation who even teach this knowledge...
So have you asked your employer to start paying you in grain and chickens?
So are we continuing to trade my verses versus your verses??? or can you show how the Bible effects us out here daily for our use and knowledge??