Hebrews Study
- Thread starter oldhermit
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Well, I could be wrong about this but I do not think this verb example represents much of an argument for a male author. That would be like saying it was written by a woman because ἐπιλείψει - "will fail" is feminine. The better argument would come from chapter 13:22, "But I urge you, brethren, bear with this word (or this word of mine) of exhortation..." The definite article here is masculine gender. Had it referred to a woman it would have used the feminine article ἡ.
P
Can we actually turn this into a commentary as well? I'm busy with a lot of different things this week and I'm already thinking that I'm going to have to drop out of this study because I'm going to fall way behind if things continue at the current speed. I don't want to slow the rest of you down, but I would like to see some more time given for comments so that we can put some meat on the bones, so to speak. In other words, an outline is great, but I'd really like to see some more time given to discuss what is being outlined. There have already been several things which have been a part of the outline that I'd either like to comment on or inquire about, but I simply haven't had the time to keep up. Can a certain timeframe be allotted after each outline post for commentary and questions? I hope so.
Btw and please excuse me if this has already been mentioned and I missed it, there is great significance to the fact that the author is making contrasts between Jesus and the angels in the opening two chapters of this epistle. Scripture informs us that angels were directly involved in the giving of the Old Covenant at Mt. Sinai, so the author's desire is to prove, from Old Testament scriptures which his or her Hebrew audience would have been familiar with, that Jesus is superior to the angels. If Christ's superiority to the angels can be proven, then this is one way in which the New Covenant instituted by Christ can be proven to be superior to the Old Covenant. Here are three instances in scripture where angels are directly linked to the giving of the Old Covenant:
Acts chapter 7 verses 51 thru 53
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
Galatians chapter 3 verse 19
Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Hebrews chapter 2 verse 2
For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
Can we pause to seek to determine where in the Old Testament it shows that angels were directly involved in the giving of the law or the Old Covenant at Mt. Sinai?
Btw and please excuse me if this has already been mentioned and I missed it, there is great significance to the fact that the author is making contrasts between Jesus and the angels in the opening two chapters of this epistle. Scripture informs us that angels were directly involved in the giving of the Old Covenant at Mt. Sinai, so the author's desire is to prove, from Old Testament scriptures which his or her Hebrew audience would have been familiar with, that Jesus is superior to the angels. If Christ's superiority to the angels can be proven, then this is one way in which the New Covenant instituted by Christ can be proven to be superior to the Old Covenant. Here are three instances in scripture where angels are directly linked to the giving of the Old Covenant:
Acts chapter 7 verses 51 thru 53
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
Galatians chapter 3 verse 19
Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Hebrews chapter 2 verse 2
For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
Can we pause to seek to determine where in the Old Testament it shows that angels were directly involved in the giving of the law or the Old Covenant at Mt. Sinai?
To be honest I have not spent a lot of time looking into this but it is a good question. Just off hand I cannot think of many examples in Hebrews where the gender of the author is definitively implied. The author refers to himself often in the first person 'I' but this can indicate either gender. But, like I said I have not given much thought to this. It just never really occurred to me. I will give some time to this and see what I can find.
Again....your material needs improvement...
Why don't you lexically define the term χαρακτηρ (btw...the original lacked your diacritics) for the reader....so that they can become cognizant that this term is used only ONCE in the entirety of the NT...and imparts something more than just being a copy.
I've had too many people attempt to make The Son a lesser-god because they preferred to define the term with a modern dictionary!
Again...proving the first rule of exegesis.
Why don't you lexically define the term χαρακτηρ (btw...the original lacked your diacritics) for the reader....so that they can become cognizant that this term is used only ONCE in the entirety of the NT...and imparts something more than just being a copy.
I've had too many people attempt to make The Son a lesser-god because they preferred to define the term with a modern dictionary!
Again...proving the first rule of exegesis.
A
I have been catching up on this teaching and discussion. I have had to look up five words before this post, (everything from Onto...something another which is a thingy in philosophy to who Edgar was to what DSS means.) I do not mind looking stuff up. I did figure out what everything meant until now. It drives me nuts(ier) when I know I can't.
BDF - Bible Discussion forum. BDG?
BDF - Bible Discussion forum. BDG?
A
Angel question:
Several times in the OT, the word "angel" is used, but my Dead Guys tell me it was God. (One of the three people who supped with Abraham was God and the one who damaged Jacob's hip was God.) I don't see it, but I figure my Dead Guys studied this stuff, and I'm merely reading what they learned, so, okay, that works for me. But did the Hebrews understand the difference so they got the double-wow with how Jesus compares to angels?
Because wow! And wow! On where Jesus fits, even compared to angels.
Several times in the OT, the word "angel" is used, but my Dead Guys tell me it was God. (One of the three people who supped with Abraham was God and the one who damaged Jacob's hip was God.) I don't see it, but I figure my Dead Guys studied this stuff, and I'm merely reading what they learned, so, okay, that works for me. But did the Hebrews understand the difference so they got the double-wow with how Jesus compares to angels?
Because wow! And wow! On where Jesus fits, even compared to angels.
The Hebrew word Malach tends to be translated as angel rather consistently; but it really means messenger.
In the NT, Jesus is called the Word of God; but Expression of God often fits better.
We are told later in Hebrews that NO MAN has seen the Father at any time. This means that in all Scriptural occasions when God has appeared to men: God walking in the garden with Adam, God appearing multiple times to Abraham, Jacob wrestling with God, etc.----God appeared in the form of the pre-incarnate Jesus.
At such times Jesus is referred to as Malach Elohiym, 'the Angel (messenger) of God'. Perhaps because the Hebrew Language lacks a better way to express the concept.
In the NT, Jesus is called the Word of God; but Expression of God often fits better.
We are told later in Hebrews that NO MAN has seen the Father at any time. This means that in all Scriptural occasions when God has appeared to men: God walking in the garden with Adam, God appearing multiple times to Abraham, Jacob wrestling with God, etc.----God appeared in the form of the pre-incarnate Jesus.
At such times Jesus is referred to as Malach Elohiym, 'the Angel (messenger) of God'. Perhaps because the Hebrew Language lacks a better way to express the concept.
Well, let's think about what all that is involved in the idea of begotten as it applies to the human experience. This involves conception, gestation, and birth. All of this is measured according to a specified time element of nine months as a general rule. Every human being who has ever existed began to exist at the point of conception. Before that time that individual did not exist. As the word defines the relationship between Jesus and the Father begotten cannot be applied to his incarnation. Unlike the rest of humanity, Jesus has always existed. The virgin birth was not the beginning of his existence. Becoming human was simply a transformation of the form of one who already existed. While he is regarded as Mary's begotten as this defines his relationship to his mother he was not called begotten by the Father until his resurrection according to Peter's revelation of Ps 2 in Acts 13.