Hebrews 5:7-10... powerful verses that challenge many Christian doctrines

Today I'd like to go over Hebrews 5:7-10 and explore how this directly contradicts Christian doctrine about Jesus' deity and the sin sacrifice.

7During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.
8Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered
9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
10and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.
-Hebrews 5:7-10




Lets break it down and go over it in detail... and see what we find.

1. "During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission."

a) Jesus had to pray to the "One who could save him from death"... showing that only God could have saved him from death. Jesus cannot be God.

b) Jesus was seeking a way out. Recall his prayer before his capture.... "Let this cup pass from me". He did not willingly surrender to the Jews to make his so called "sacrifice".

c) Jesus was heard, meaning he was saved from death. Which basically counters the claim about Jesus being dead for 3 days for three days. It cant be said that a man was saved from death AND was dead for 3 days.


2. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.

a) Jesus had to learn obedience.
Does someone who is "fully man and fully God" need to learn obedience?

b) The promise of eternal salvation is for all who obey him...
OBEY, not just believe he died on the cross for their sins. I also don't recall Jesus teaching people that they need to believe that he died for their sins to be saved. Not even AFTER his resurrection when his followers saw him. Why is that?

c) Jesus was designated by God to be a high priest in Melchizedeks order.
Jesus was NOT God but instead was appointed by God.



3. These verses lead to the following conclusions.
a) Jesus was not divine, as he had to "learn to be obedient" and had to be "designated by God".
b) Jesus was not willing to be "sacrificed"
c) Jesus was saved from death.
d) Salvation was promised to those who obey him, not simply believe he died for their sins.
e) Hebrews 5:7-10 is NOT in harmony with Christian doctrines of Jesus divinity, his crucifixion and the need to believe in Jesus "sin sacrifice" to be saved.


Please address the verses in the OP first. No need for theology lessons and lets not change the definitions of words.

Thank you.

Jesus was designated by God to be a high priest in Melchizedeks order. Jesus was NOT God but instead was appointed by God.

If this is true then why do the Jews reject his teachings? Is it commonplace for Jews to reject their priests?

The fullness of the holy spirit made him divine.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


You can only come to these conclusions by ignoring parts of Hebrews that contradict them, and inserting your own interpretations as if they carry the same weight as the scripture itself.
For example, it never says Jesus sought to avoid death, and he may have not wanted something like being cut off from his Father in heaven.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n


a) Jesus had to pray to the "One who could save him from death"... showing that only God could have saved him from death. Jesus cannot be God.

b) Jesus was seeking a way out. Recall his prayer before his capture.... "Let this cup pass from me". He did not willingly surrender to the Jews to make his so called "sacrifice".

c) Jesus was heard, meaning he was saved from death. Which basically counters the claim about Jesus being dead for 3 days for three days. It cant be said that a man was saved from death AND was dead for 3 days.


2. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.

a) Jesus had to learn obedience.
Does someone who is "fully man and fully God" need to learn obedience?

b) The promise of eternal salvation is for all who obey him...
OBEY, not just believe he died on the cross for their sins. I also don't recall Jesus teaching people that they need to believe that he died for their sins to be saved. Not even AFTER his resurrection when his followers saw him. Why is that?

c) Jesus was designated by God to be a high priest in Melchizedeks order.
Jesus was NOT God but instead was appointed by God.

edit on 8-10-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

I think there IS a need for theology lessons here.

1. There is a need for you to uinderstand the Trinity. 3 in 1. Christ was a part of the Godhead, equal with God the Father, and The Holy Spirit. Jesus knew he was to be the sacrifice for sin from the foundations of the world. No man could have fullfilled the requirements of being spotless, thus God had to take on the flesh and remian blameless. Jesus prayed to God the Father because his flesh was becoming weak from the weight of the full wrath of God being laid on it. Wrath that should have been directed at you and I. When it says the Jesus was "heard", it does not mean that His prayer was answered the way that you have believed, that he did not die on that cross. It means that God the Father carried Him trough the agony of death and raised Him on the third day just as it is written and as was witnessed by over 500 people in the region at the time. He was delievered from death through the resurrection.


2. Jesus learned obedience by submitting to the will of the Father while He was in the flesh. It was required of Him to overcome the flesh in order to be blamelss and defeat sin on the cross. On part b of this one, I have to agree with you. We are told in Scripture that we are to pick up our cross daily and follow Him. Many professing Christians fail in this miserably. It is because of this that I believe that there are many unsaved and deceived people who sit in the pews every sunday and are in reality destined for hell. I have no way of knowing who, only God knows their hearts, but we are told that on the day of Judgement that many will say (Me paraphrasing) "Haven't we done all these things in your name?" and God will say "Depart from me you workers on iniquity, I never knew you". On C, I don't know enough to say it very plainly, maybe someone can help me out on this one. In the Bible, there are many "Types" of Christ. Adam and David are also types of Christ and display some of the characteristics of the Savior that was to come.

Very good questions!

~OkieDokie

It would be wise to read all of Hebrews 5 before taking 3 verses out of context to make your point. Also cross referencing is helpful in determining a passage that might be confusing. The OP may also wish to read the first four books of the New Testament and discover where Jesus clearly stated who he was and his purpose.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Today I'd like to go over Hebrews 5:7-10 and explore how this directly contradicts Christian doctrine about Jesus' deity and the sin sacrifice.

Actually, you've picked pretty much the worst book in the New Testament to try and make your point from. Hebrews is the book (likely written by Barnabas,) that endeavours to explain Christ's new covenant, framed within Judaism. The passage that you've cited here is in regards to Christ's incarnation, and how he submitted himself to be the suffering servant of Isaiah, spoken of in terms that the Jews of the time would understand. Put back into context, this doesn't contradict Christ's deity, but testifies to it.

Originally posted by pstrron
It would be wise to read all of Hebrews 5 before taking 3 verses out of context to make your point. Also cross referencing is helpful in determining a passage that might be confusing. The OP may also wish to read the first four books of the New Testament and discover where Jesus clearly stated who he was and his purpose.

Correct. There is a big difference of hearing his words and then hearing another ones words about himself.

reply to post by jmdewey60

You can only come to these conclusions by ignoring parts of Hebrews that contradict them

Then it only means there are contradictions within the bible.

Please address the part about Jesus praying to "the One who could save him from death" and then having those prayers "answered".

reply to post by OkieDokie

I think there IS a need for theology lessons here.

From what I've experienced. "theology lessons" from Christians on subjects like these usually end up in a displays of mental acrobatics and scripture twisting. Their intention is to somehow arrive at the conclusion that they want. No thanks.

What usually happens is that the verses in question are ignored and the Christians respond by citing a bunch of unrelated verses, that too out of context. The verses in question(Hebrews 5:7-10) are rather direct, and it would be good if Christians can address them directly.

It means that God the Father carried Him trough the agony of death and raised Him on the third day just as it is written and as was witnessed by over 500 people in the region at the time.

The verses I quoted suggest that Jesus was praying to be saved from death... and that his prayers were "answered".

How can Jesus be saved from death and be dead for 3 days?

Jesus learned obedience by submitting to the will of the Father while He was in the flesh. It was required of Him to overcome the flesh in order to be blamelss and defeat sin on the cross.

I agree on the first part of this statement. But going back to my earlier point, if Jesus had to "learn" obedience, then he wasn't exactly God, was he? Or for that matter, "fully man and fully God" as is taught by Christians.

reply to post by adjensen

Actually, you've picked pretty much the worst book in the New Testament to try and make your point from. Hebrews is the book (likely written by Barnabas,) that endeavours to explain Christ's new covenant, framed within Judaism.

From what I see, Hebrews is biblical Canon. I've seen other Christians quote from Hebrews to make a point.

Once again, its proven to me that even Christians cant agree among themselves.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by adjensen

 

Actually, you've picked pretty much the worst book in the New Testament to try and make your point from. Hebrews is the book (likely written by Barnabas,) that endeavours to explain Christ's new covenant, framed within Judaism.

From what I see, Hebrews is biblical Canon. I've seen other Christians quote from Hebrews to make a point.

Once again, its proven to me that even Christians cant agree among themselves.

No, it's the worst book because it's a Jewish Christian text, based on Judaic theology, which you have said yourself you don't understand.

It's somewhat akin to a non-physicist grabbing three lines from Feynman's QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter and claiming to have found evidence that refutes Quantum Mechanics.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


I notice a lot of posters are saying that this scripture is taken out of context and needs to be cross referenced to other writing for it to make sense. To me, that just shows how convoluted Christianity has become since the actual life and teaching of Jesus himself.

My first take on this piece of scripture is the confirmation of fact that Jesus, did indeed, teach mysticism. So I did a little research into what others have to say on this subject.

In the Letter to the Hebrews, the author affirms that Jesus' high priesthood is according to the order of Melchizedek, which means that it is more ancient and superior to the Levitical high priesthood, founded on Aaron, the brother of Moses. The implication of Jesus' superior priesthood for his Jewish readership is that Jesus is a better means of salvation than the Temple cult, which, in the author's view, is now superceded. In order to understand it fully, the author's arguments about Jesus as High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek must be interpreted in light of second-Temple theological reflection on the figure of Melchizedek, with which the readers of the letter no doubt were familiar. It seems that the author makes use of his readers' views about Melchizedek not only in order to refute their belief in the permanence of the Levitical priesthood but possibly also to correct those same views about Melchizedek.

www.abu.nb.ca...

Okay!

In my opinion, this explains how and why Jesus seemingly rebelled against the "law." He was applying the original law. Just as I have suspected all along, Jesus taught from the original Torah, which had been corrupted, over time, by the Levitical priesthood, through the lineage of Aaron.

This explains his self proclaimed mission of fulfilling the law and reestablishing the original covenant, given to Abraham and then to Moses, who never realized the promise land. It can be assumed that Aaron and the Israelites, also did not realize the true "promise land."

It is my belief that Jesus foresaw the soon to be Jewish Wars, and presented a path of least resistance for the Hebrew people to avoid the atrocity.

(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)

As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

This is exactly the way the Romans treated the Hebrews. The tables were turned, and their perceived mandate, as God's chosen people, was backfiring on them, due to their false "god" of pride and arrogance. This is what Jesus rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducee for, but they could not see it. They didn't get it. They were looking for a warrior messiah, who would defeat the Romans in battle.

But, Jesus was teaching of a greater "promise land" that that to be conquered or that which lay withing the walls and borders of any Roman territory.

My 2 cents.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Then it only means there are contradictions within the bible.

Not necessarily. I could be you are just not interpreting it correctly. And what I meant was not the Bible in general, but the book of Hebrews itself that speaks against your conclusions.

Please address the part about Jesus praying to "the One who could save him from death" and then having those prayers "answered".

Jesus was saved from death, if you understand death as a thing, rather than a particular state at a given moment.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by adjensen

 

Actually, you've picked pretty much the worst book in the New Testament to try and make your point from. Hebrews is the book (likely written by Barnabas,) that endeavours to explain Christ's new covenant, framed within Judaism.

From what I see, Hebrews is biblical Canon. I've seen other Christians quote from Hebrews to make a point.

Once again, its proven to me that even Christians cant agree among themselves.

Context. Hebrews wasn't written to gentiles, it was wirtten to hebrews. Thats why it's called "hebrews". Now other books like Galatians, Corinthians, Ephesians etc. were written to specific churches in whom you would see both jewish and gentile christians members of after the merge began.

It's plainly obvious that Jesus was mortal turned divine. I don't understand why "christians" feel the need to make the situation more complicated and less redeeming than it really is.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Hebrews wasn't written to gentiles, it was wirtten to hebrews. Thats why it's called "hebrews". Now other books like Galatians, Corinthians, Ephesians etc. were written to specific churches in whom you would see both jewish and gentile christians members of after the merge began.

reply to post by adjensen

No, it's the worst book because it's a Jewish Christian text, based on Judaic theology, which you have said yourself you don't understand.

1. I thought "truths" about Jesus divinity and his crucifixion are universal for BOTH gentiles and Hebrews.
Hebrews 5:7-10 clearly depicts Jesus as not divine and having been saved from death, among other things.

I'm getting the message that whoever Hebrews was written for, are to understand Jesus as not divine and as having been saved from death, at least based on Hebrews 5:7-10

Imagine I write a book where in one chapter a character is killed.... and then later on you read that he was actually saved.... and then later you read he was killed again. Then when you point out the contradiction, I tell you that the chapter was written for somebody else.

2. If the book was written for Hebrews, does it mean that they also dont need to believe that he died on the cross for their sins.... but rather OBEY Jesus.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Not necessarily. I could be you are just not interpreting it correctly. And what I meant was not the Bible in general, but the book of Hebrews itself that speaks against your conclusions.

.
Then that is a problem for christians because it only means there is a contradiction. I'm just interpreting the words the way it appears in Hebrews

Imagine I write a book where in one chapter a character is killed.... and then later on you read that he was actually saved.... and then later you read he was killed again. And then when you point out the contradiction, I tell you the rest of the book speaks against your conclusions'. It doesn't change the fact that there is a mistake on my part, does it.

Jesus was saved from death, if you understand death as a thing, rather than a particular state at a given moment.

The verse also says that Jesus prayed to the One who could save him from death, and that he was heard.
It cant be that he was both "saved from death" and dead for 3 days.