NOGO

NOGO:
If Jesus' death and resurrection is the culmination of salvation history
THEN
it does not make sense for the author of Hebrews to say that Jesus could have sacrificed himself every year from the start of history BUT prefered to do it once at the culmination of salvation history.

Layman:
Ummm, this actually counts against you very strongly. The uniqueness of Christ' one time death shows why it is the culmination of salvation history.


You obviously missed the point.
Your faith prevents you from seeing even the most simple and obvious logical arguements.

This reminds me of a comedian who joked that Jesus should not have been born on Christmas day because people are just too busy shopping and partying etc. He should have been born in July when people have time to celebrate his birthday adequately.

Let me take you by the hand and walk you through this.

Time of Jesus' death and resurrection = time of the culmination of salvation history

Hebrews 9 calls it the "comsummation of the ages"
Therefore

time of Jesus' death and resurrection = time of the culmination of salvation history = consummation of the ages

This is your claim.

So we substitute ...

26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the time of Jesus' death and resurrection He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

If you don't see it now, you're on your own.

One last thing

Layman:
Afterall, sinning was still happening after Jesus' ONCE death.

Not for the community of believers. Have you not read Romans 6,7 and 8

Romans 6:
18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness

22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life.

Romans 7:3-4

3 So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

Romans 8
1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.

Ted Hoffman

I think he has seen it.
Phew!

Layman

Completely untrue.

Gratuitous insulting humor doesn't help you make your point.

You can try.

Okay.

I get it, but you haven't even tried to explain your point.

Consumation of the ages does not equal end of the world. If it had, then the world would have ended 30-40 years prior to this author's writing.

Ah, so sad. This actually proves my point. Jesus' death covered all sin, past and present. It did not, therefore, have to happen at the end of the world.

Thank you.

Layman

As you have seen -- despite claiming there was no such comparison -- that Hebrews again and again and again compares Jesus' office and actions to the temple cult's High Priest?

If you guys are this hard up for this topic, why not start yet another thread on it?

wordsmyth

I don't want to derail the discussion by going off topic, but was there supposed to be some significance to the timing of Jesus' death?

If yes, then what was the significance of Jesus dying at that specific time?

If no, then could the Genesis flood have been prevented if Jesus had simply been sacrificed before that event to absolve the sins of all those who died during that event?

Ted Hoffman

And what would this thread be for?

Layman

I thought it was clear. This thread was started to discuss: "Doherty's Dubious Interpretation of Hebrews 9:27-28."

Your initial post was on topic, though horribly mistaken in claiming that the author of Hebrews did not compare Jesus to the temple cult's high priest.

NOGO

If you do get it then you know that "comsummation of the ages" does not mean "culmination of salvation history". It is rather a term like the one in Matthew 24:3, Mt 13:39-40, Mt 13:49

The world did not end because Christianity is untrue. That is why Hebews 9:26 deals a fatal blow.

Yes, so sad. Romans 6,7 and 8 does not say that Jesus' sacrifice covers future sins but that is what you wish to believe. So sad.
It says that Christians are no longer under the law of sins which is a totally different thing.

I never claimed that Jesus' sacrifice had to happen at the end of the world. My point is that Hebrews 9:26 makes such a claim.

Let us close this for now. I will start a new thread.

Cheers.

Ted Hoffman

The argument is they interpreted from certain preconceptions that you too cling to dearly.

Insisting that "I'm afraid that is as general and unspecified as Doherty's initial statement." Is like saying that "he used an analogy for the unspecified purpose of explaining".
If someone is talking about a certain thing and he uses an analogy, its supposed to be congruent.

It remains congruent to you and your like-minded translators because you have a bias. Doherty's paradigm is different.

Context Layman, context.
Doherty says the parallel that the author would be drawing with the analogy is lost.
Its simplistic to look us a word then say that it what it means without examining the context and wider message in the NT. Especially considering other arguments Doherty makes as far as christ-logos christ-man is concerned.

Are you reading the original greek manuscript or a translated/ interpreted one?
Remember, the fact that its in greek does not mean its original - ie no textual emendations by the transcribers to fit the passages to their paradigms.
We must start there.

About the high priests and consummation of ages:
NOGO said:
If you cant see the point, I am very sorry.

And you are drawing an analogy from a huge, nebulous chunk of Hebrews (which is not stated explicitly by the author - hence you are assuming), while Doherty does from a few CONSECUTIVE verses.
One is contrived, while one is not. You decide.

Layman

Really? Says who? When do you think Matthew was written?

You are missing the point. Hebrews was written between 30-40 years after Jesus' death and reported resurrection. Obviously the author did not mean that the world had ended 30-40 years earlier when Jesus died.


Well, assuming (which is all you did) that it is a totally different thing really does not change the analysis. Either way the point remains that Jesus' death did not have to happen at the end of the world to cover all those sins.

Your point is wrong.