FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-07-2003, 11:29 AM   #21
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 318
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Kirby
I totally agree.

best,
Peter Kirby
If text is logically inconsistent, then one is entitled to interprete that text in a logically consistent manner. This particularly applies to the text of adjacent verses. If the text "says" it is inconsistent in its context, then it could be "saying" an editor has been at work. That editor may well have wished to convey a meaning, but he is a deceiver, and I think there were plenty of those who tampered with the NT. Thus in the context of priesthood in Heb.7:

(11)If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical PRIESTHOOD (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another PRIEST{HOOD} to come – one [in] {of} the order of MELCHIZEDEK, not [in] {of} the order of Aaron?

(12)For when there is a change OF THE PRIESTHOOD, there must also be a change of the law.

(13)[He] {Melchizedek}...

[of whom these things are said]

...belonged to a [different] {foreign?} tribe, and no-one from [that] {a foreign} tribe has ever served at the altar.

****
v. (12) is about the change of the priesthood. So v.(11) must agree.

Clearly, in v.(13), the original writer referred to Melchizedek who he had mentioned in v. (11).

My interpretation of what the text "says" is that an editor
changed priesthood to priest in v.(11) and removed Melchizedek from v.(13). The editor's intention was to prepare the ground for his completely fabricated (and partly duplicated) punch-line of v.(14) - For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and no-one from that tribe has ever served at the alter.

This is what the text SAYS to me.

Geoff
Geoff Hudson is offline  
Old 08-07-2003, 03:19 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 1,027
Default

In Hebrews 8:1-8:5,

Who is the High Priest?
What is his sacrifice?
Where does this sacrifice occur?

My answers are that the High Priest is Jesus, the sacrifice is himself, and the sacrifice occurs in heaven next to God's throne, definitely not on earth, like on a hill called Golgotha. Any other points of view?
sodium is offline  
Old 08-07-2003, 03:51 PM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,635
Default

Who is the High Priest?

Jesus.

What is his sacrifice?

Jesus.

Where does this sacrifice occur?

The death occurs on earth. The offering of the sacrifice occurs in heaven.

My answers are that the High Priest is Jesus, the sacrifice is himself, and the sacrifice occurs in heaven next to God's throne, definitely not on earth, like on a hill called Golgotha. Any other points of view?

I reduced this argument and showed that the analogy to the High Priest actually demonstrates that the author of Hebrews believed in Jesus' earthly ministry and a second coming, here:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=45180

and here:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=47767
Layman is offline  
Old 08-07-2003, 05:08 PM   #24
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 318
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by sodium
In Hebrews 8:1-8:5,

Who is the High Priest?
What is his sacrifice?
Where does this sacrifice occur?

My answers are that the High Priest is Jesus, the sacrifice is himself, and the sacrifice occurs in heaven next to God's throne, definitely not on earth, like on a hill called Golgotha. Any other points of view?
The High Priest is the Spirit. The Spirit has no need to offer sacrifices for himself like earthly priests because he is pure. The Spirit resides in the true Tabernacle which is the spirit of man. The Spirit himself is the purifier of man's spirit, so there is no sacrifice as such. The Spirit is God. Therefore he is not at God's right hand. Those whose spirit's have been purified are the ones who are made or allowed to "sit at God's right hand".

Geoff
Geoff Hudson is offline  
Old 08-08-2003, 07:59 AM   #25
CX
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portlandish
Posts: 2,829
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Kirby
I dropped the word Active on purpose. Hewett writes, "As in English, 'to be' expresses a state of being, rather than action. Hence, it has neither active nor passive voices." (New Testament Greek, p. 22)

I agree that it is not referring to a time in the past; that means that CX, Carrier, and maybe even Doherty agree on that.

best,
Peter Kirby
I'm an idiot. That's what I get for reading too fast. Further since I haven't really read Doherty's argument in depth I should probably remain silent on the matter.
CX is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:20 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.