Bobzammel

One of the downfalls of the New Testament is it's tendency to qoute, out-of-context, certain passages of the OT. Take for example many of the prophecies of Jesus. However it seems that this is also done in the anonymous epistle to the Hebrews, as well.
Many of the passages in the passage are fond of qouting the Psalms, as well as some of the other books. Here's a few qoutes:


Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?

----------------------
This refers to King David. There are many references to sons of God outside of Jesus--mainly identified as Angels, the people of Israel, or particualar kings.

will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
-----------------------------------------
This is actually a reference to King Solomon, David's heir. Did Jesus build a temple(Unless you consider it a spiritual temple) and commit inequity?

And let all the angels of God worship him.
---------------------------------
The passage is a reference to God himself, not a messiah. Also the Masoretic text says Gods, not Angels--an interesting note of potential polytheism.


Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
---------------------------
This actually is referring to weather in the original passages. Not sure where Angels came from.

But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
------------------------
Once again, this is talking about God. Why would God worship himself?

But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
----------------------
He didn't say it to Angels. He didn't say it to Jesus. He said it to David!


What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him?
Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands.
Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
-------------------------------
This is once again, not a reference to Jesus. It is a reference to mankind.(Also Angels is "Gods" in the original Hebrew). Man is given this dominion in Genesis.


I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.
----------------
From David's song of deliverance, Psalm 22, which is often seen as a prophecy of the crucifixion. However the original Hebrew text does not support this psalm as depicting crucifixion, but of a man being attacked by wild animals.

Behold I and the children which God hath given me.
-----------------
This is Isiah, whose child Immanuel/Marshalhashbaz was born as a sign. This is stated later in context.


Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
---------------------
Melshidek was a priest-king who hang around with Abraham and apparentally ruled Jerusalem before David did. However it is more than likely that this psalm states that David himself was a king similar to Melchisec--a priest who was also a king, since David performed many religious services.

Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
-----------------
This is apparentally some myth-it's not to be found anywhere in the bible. Probably cause Mel lacked a genalogy or something, some thought he lived forever. If so, where is he now?

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
-------------
A misqoute of Jerimiah 31:32-God did not disregard them.

Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
-----------
Jesus never said this in the Gospels--it's the psalmist again. The main reason God was upset with the sacrifices was probably because the Hebrews thought it was more of a chore rather than an act of love and obedience. This is supported by the final chapters of Isiah. Also there is no mention in the Psalm of "A body being prepared"

Waning Moon Conrad

That's one of the things that annoys me about Christians. My favourite example is the bit in Isaiah about how art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer son of the morning?

If you read the entire chapter, including the bit about thou shalt take up this simile against the King of Babylon it's clear that this bit in Isaiah is about politics and the fall of a Babylonian king and that Lucifer (Light Bringer as we all know) is a reference to the stature and grandeur of the king.

Cobble that together with a snake in the garden of Eden and an angel who functions as a Crown Prosecutor (or District Attorney if you're American) in the Book of Job and suddenly there's a devil to frighten people with.

They're excellent at interpreting Judaism in terms of Christianity but not so good at interpreting Christianity in terms of Judaism.

Amos? Where are you? I want your opinion on this!

Amos

I never read Isaiah but Lucifer is the angel of light and called "son of the morning" because he cannot sustain illumination through the night. Go to Gen.1/2 and see where on the seventh day evening did not follow the day (by inference) and then go to Rev.22:5 where "the night shall be no more." These two compliment each other and indicate that when we have come full circle on the seventh day, and are illuminated by the celestial light, that darknes wil be no more (ever again). This means that life with internal illumination is possible and that we can blend with the celestial sea (the sea was no longer, Rev.21:1, Atlantis dissolved into the sea, anatta and nairatmaya as no self/no soul are expresssions of this). The celestial sea is our subconscious mind and we are our conscious mind.

The "angel of light" appears after a premature rebirth but must be renewed each morning because darkness returns each night. This was the problem for the children of Israel who were born of God (as is indicated by their title) but failed to mature and become fully one with God and therefore died as child of God after having wandered for 40 years instead of 40 nights.

So the angel of light is an immitator of the celestial light and is ours when are reborn from carnal desire as opposed to reborn from God (Jn.1:13).

Edited because my grandson posted before I was ready.

To be reborn from canal desire is to have awakened this spiritual insight from where comes the paradox "sinful yet saved." Many Christians will argue that their spiritual eyes were opened and that the bible became alive to them, etc. Luther was one of those and so are many (or all) sola scriptura 'small c' christians.

The difference between these is made very clear in Rev.13, where one beast (animal man) came from the sea and the other from the earth. The first beast will become a full fledged Christian and will leave religion behind as if it was a means to the end, while the second beast will become the Jesus worshipper we all know so well. He will burn daily scriptures to replenish this fading light and will have no rest by day or by night.

Notice that the beast is the animal man when "beyond theology" and therefore was reborn out of the subconscious mind (the sea) or nearly beyond theology in the second beast and therefore came from the [old] earth (conscious mind). That is, if rebirth is desired it is a rational event and therefore comes from the earth.

The first one will have "met God face to face" in the Beatific vision while the other will just have seen a glimpse of God as in "I've seen the light" (noone shall see the face of God and live).

We can also say that a premature rebirth will yield the scorpion instead of the fish and there are many other expression for this in the bible.

I think Luther complained that Catholics "removed the eggs from hatching boxes" but the fact was that Luther wanted to open these eggs before the newborn eagle had 'wings' and therefore would never soar like an eagle. The Church knew the difference because nealy half of Europe was soaring in those days, which was, after all, the height of Catholicism in Europe.

[ December 24, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>