A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Ben,
So, Bernard, on your view, a great deal of what we think of as Pauline theology actually came from Apollos, right? The one who had personally seen the Lord (1 Corinthians 9.1) really learned a lot from one who had heard at second hand (Hebrews 2.3-4), right? I find that to be a fascinating idea. Is it correct? I have no clue yet. But it is fascinating.
YES, YES, YES for your first sentence. But I do not think Paul had "seen" the Lord or had revelations from above. It was Paul's invention (or trick if you prefer) in order to buttress his badly needed credentials as an (avant garde) apostle.
What Apollos learned second hand had little importance, except that Jesus was reported talking about salvation and of course existed on earth and was crucified. The rest is Apollos' invention, some of it inspired by Philo of Alexandria's writings, most of it backed up by LXX extracts taken out of context.

Of course, all of that is explained on my website, mostly in http://historical-jesus.info/hjes3x.html

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:YES, YES, YES for your first sentence. But I do not think Paul had "seen" the Lord or had revelations from above. It was Paul's invention (or trick if you prefer) in order to buttress his badly needed credentials as an (avant garde) apostle.
Fair enough, but I was not offering my own assessment of the situation; I was paraphrasing the words of each man: Paul claims to have seen the Lord, while Apollos admits to having heard at one remove... yet the latter became the teacher, as it were, of the former. Just noting the irony.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Secret Alias »

I took you on that and prove you wrong, according to the same examples.
So you proved me wrong? About what? That you had a simple-minded understanding of things? No you did not prove me wrong. You just won't accept that you have a simple-minded understanding of things. That may have something to do with being simple-minded.

And what's with this:
YES, YES, YES for your first sentence.
Do you recognized how simplistic your participation at this forum is? Let me summarize it for you, Bernard:

1. You believe you have all the answers.
2. Those answers are all assembled at your website.
3. Your task at the forum is not to participate or get new ideas but to get people to 'understand' you (i.e. that you have all the answers) and to do this you direct people to your website.

How can you possibly have all the answers when you demonstrate time and again that you have no understanding of Greek? As I have said before you can't be an atheist because you believe in miracles - your own miraculous powers of understanding Greek texts from English translations.

You are even more thick-headed than Pete Brown and almost as delusional. If either of you had any human companionship to speak of I doubt we'd have seen either of you participating at this forum. But then again I bet anyone who'd want to date you would have to prove their unconditional devotion to your website.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
ficino
Posts: 745
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by ficino »

DCHindley wrote:
Ben C. Smith wrote:
If I were writing the epistle, I do not think I would have worded Hebrews 10.1-3 the way it is worded if I were aware that the temple had been destroyed and that the official cultus was effectively at an end.

Ben.
IMHO, Hebrews is an attempt to systematize and "explain" some of the high Christology found in Paul's letters. In the letters, the Christology is not very coherently presented, almost like comments and introjections(sp?) where the commentator did not fully agree with what he found in his/her source. It was this kind of disjointedness in Paul's letters that the author of 2 Peter found so confusing. Hebrews, which I understand is written in better than average Greek, seems to me to be a later composition intended to provide arguments to tie it all together, as if he were Paul explaining himself. For the sake of verisimilitude, the author would write it as if the temple still stood, which it very likely did in the time usually associated with Paul (as in Acts).

DCH
I can't refute either of these, though David comes sort of kind of close to imputing dishonesty to the writer.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Secret Alias wrote:You are even more thick-headed than Pete Brown and almost as delusional. If either of you had any human companionship to speak of I doubt we'd have seen either of you participating at this forum. But then again I bet anyone who'd want to date you would have to prove their unconditional devotion to your website.
Wow. I was hoping we could make this personal somehow....
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by DCHindley »

ficino wrote:
DCHindley wrote:
Ben C. Smith wrote:
If I were writing the epistle, I do not think I would have worded Hebrews 10.1-3 the way it is worded if I were aware that the temple had been destroyed and that the official cultus was effectively at an end.

Ben.
IMHO, Hebrews is an attempt to systematize and "explain" some of the high Christology found in Paul's letters. In the letters, the Christology is not very coherently presented, almost like comments and introjections(sp?) where the commentator did not fully agree with what he found in his/her source. It was this kind of disjointedness in Paul's letters that the author of 2 Peter found so confusing. Hebrews, which I understand is written in better than average Greek, seems to me to be a later composition intended to provide arguments to tie it all together, as if he were Paul explaining himself. For the sake of verisimilitude, the author would write it as if the temple still stood, which it very likely did in the time usually associated with Paul (as in Acts).

DCH
I can't refute either of these, though David comes sort of kind of close to imputing dishonesty to the writer.
Oh, I wouldn't call the author "dishonest," anymore than those commonly thought to have authored the so called deuteron-canonical Pauline letters were "dishonest". The latter authors, who most today do not think were Paul at all, claimed to be Paul himself. People prefer to diffuse that fact by suggesting that they were members of Paul's "school" and only wanted to "glorify" him (or some such mumbo jumbo).

The author of Hebrews doesn't directly claim to be Paul, but does end his "epistle" with Pauline-like words:
Heb 13:18-25 18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things. 19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. 20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 22 I appeal to you, brethren, bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly. 23 You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon. 24 Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. 25 Grace be with all of you. Amen.
What is that, other than an attempt to sound like a Pauline letter such as have come down to us?

The theological statements are rather developed, far more so than the Christological statements in the "other" Pauline letters. In fact, they show that a great deal of thought has been expended to develop them.

DCH
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

DCHindley wrote:
I can't refute either of these, though David comes sort of kind of close to imputing dishonesty to the writer.
Oh, I wouldn't call the author "dishonest," anymore than those commonly thought to have authored the so called deuteron-canonical Pauline letters were "dishonest".
I would call all of this dishonest, at least to some extent.
The latter authors, who most today do not think were Paul at all, claimed to be Paul himself. People prefer to diffuse that fact by suggesting that they were members of Paul's "school" and only wanted to "glorify" him (or some such mumbo jumbo).
Yes, it is a kind of mumbo jumbo; I say it is mumbo jumbo designed to avoid calling such authors dishonest.
The author of Hebrews doesn't directly claim to be Paul, but does end his "epistle" with Pauline-like words:
Heb 13:18-25 18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things. 19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. 20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 22 I appeal to you, brethren, bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly. 23 You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon. 24 Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. 25 Grace be with all of you. Amen.
What is that, other than an attempt to sound like a Pauline letter such as have come down to us?
If you are right, then what is that, indeed, if not an attempt to make the reader think something that is not true? What is that, in other words, if not dishonest in some way?

I see no reason to shrink back from clear, plain language. To pretend to someone you are not (like pseudo-Paul) or that you are writing at a time you are not (on your view of the epistle to the Hebrews) is dishonest.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8035
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by Peter Kirby »

DCHindley wrote:The author of Hebrews doesn't directly claim to be Paul, but does end his "epistle" with Pauline-like words:
Heb 13:18-25 18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things. 19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. 20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 22 I appeal to you, brethren, bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly. 23 You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon. 24 Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. 25 Grace be with all of you. Amen.
What is that, other than an attempt to sound like a Pauline letter such as have come down to us?
... since you asked.

This is not the only option. It is quite possible to read this as an original ending and an appended ending.

'Original' Ending (ex hypothesi)
Heb 13:18-21 18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things. 19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. 20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
'Appended' Ending (ex hypothesi)
Heb 13:22-25 22 I appeal to you, brethren, bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly. 23 You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon. 24 Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. 25 Grace be with all of you. Amen.
Ex hypothesi, the person who 'appended' the second ending was making "an attempt to sound like a Pauline letter such as have come down to us," while the person who wrote the 'original' ending cannot be assumed to have any such aims.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by DCHindley »

Peter Kirby wrote:... since you [Mr. Hindley] asked.

This is not the only option. It is quite possible to read this as an original ending and an appended ending.

'Original' Ending (ex hypothesi)
Heb 13:18-21 18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things. 19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. 20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
'Appended' Ending (ex hypothesi)
Heb 13:22-25 22 I appeal to you, brethren, bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly. 23 You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon. 24 Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. 25 Grace be with all of you. Amen.
Ex hypothesi, the person who 'appended' the second ending was making "an attempt to sound like a Pauline letter such as have come down to us," while the person who wrote the 'original' ending cannot be assumed to have any such aims.
As Muskie Muskrat of the old "Deputy Dawg" cartoon used to muse, usually at something concocted by highly imaginative Moley Mole, "It's possi-bule ... it's possi-bule." (Thas how dey tawked, really)

DCH
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: A lengthy note on Hebrews 7.14 (sprung from Judah).

Post by DCHindley »

Ben C. Smith wrote:If you are right, [Mr. Hindley,] then what is that, indeed, if not an attempt to make the reader think something that is not true? What is that, in other words, if not dishonest in some way?

I see no reason to shrink back from clear, plain language. To pretend to someone you are not (like pseudo-Paul) or that you are writing at a time you are not (on your view of the epistle to the Hebrews) is dishonest.
As mentioned, someone went through a lot of effort to think out the theology of the epistle to the Hebrews, and it is highly sophisticated thinking. It is the equivalent of Calvin's Institutions for Pauline literature. "I've got it all figured out! Paul MUST have meant this ..." It is an explanation for the facts ("facts" being the scattered and incoherent Christological statements in the Pauline letters).

Hell, the author of Jubilees re-wrote the entire Pentateuch, and spoke as if he were Moses receiving dictation from God hisseff (sorry, still thinking of Deputy Dawg's drawl). I doubt the author(s) of Jubilees meant to deceive, but intended to improve upon the original(s). They may well have felt inspired to do so.

DCH
Post Reply