Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
-
- Posts: 18922
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
And the original understanding was likely that Melchizedek was king of Sodom as well.
“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
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
Probably true.Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:56 am And the original understanding was likely that Melchizedek was king of Sodom as well.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
-
- Posts: 18922
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
What drives me crazy about Giuseppe is not that he believes that some Christians thought this or that about Jesus but that everyone of his beliefs (I prefer to call them 'wishes' because they aren't even as developed as a formal belief) happens to dovetail with the oldest Christian beliefs. Yes some Christians thought that Jesus was an alien. The idea of Jesus being an alien is very strong in early and modern Christianity
But the thought that I was just assume that all my beliefs happened to match perfectly with the origins of Christianity is simply madness. You can almost excuse 'normative' scholars for this assumption because they were indoctrinated since birth in this idiocy. But in Giuseppe's case he is constantly initiating and reinitiating himself into a ludicrious mystery religion of his own concoction. He is engaged in a voluntary abuse of reason and logic for no apparent purpose other than for personal enjoyment.
But the thought that I was just assume that all my beliefs happened to match perfectly with the origins of Christianity is simply madness. You can almost excuse 'normative' scholars for this assumption because they were indoctrinated since birth in this idiocy. But in Giuseppe's case he is constantly initiating and reinitiating himself into a ludicrious mystery religion of his own concoction. He is engaged in a voluntary abuse of reason and logic for no apparent purpose other than for personal enjoyment.
“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
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
There are two ways to have been on earth:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:49 amWhat I am saying is that the epistle lays out no rule that a priest of the order of Melchizedek can never have been on earth. If that were the rule, then Melchizedek himself is disqualified.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:44 amIf it is for that reason, then also Jesus appeared more times in the history to meet the biblical personage x.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:36 am You are misinterpreting Hebrews 8.4. Melchizedek was on earth when Abraham paid him tribute.
- to have an entire life from Birth to Death.
- to appear before someone.
I fear (for sake of discussion) that you will continue to confuse the two ways of existence. To confuse existence with appearance. (And note that I am assuming a real historical archangelic Melkizedek in the mind of the author of Hebrews).
Hebrews 8:4 says that a similar high priest was never on earth, meaning: he was never born on this earth, hence he didn't come from any tribe. He came uniquely from heaven. And to heaven he ascended.
it is not fine insofar you don't realize how Melkizedek came on earth: during a mere appearance, and coming from any tribe. From neither Levi nor Judah.Melchizedek was on earth, but he came before Aaron, so that is fine.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
What does any of this have to do with the epistle to the Hebrews? Everything I have stated I can defend straight from the text. But you are off in fantasyland, making up rules that the author has clearly never heard of.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:33 amThere are two ways to have been on earth:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:49 amWhat I am saying is that the epistle lays out no rule that a priest of the order of Melchizedek can never have been on earth. If that were the rule, then Melchizedek himself is disqualified.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:44 amIf it is for that reason, then also Jesus appeared more times in the history to meet the biblical personage x.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 9:36 am You are misinterpreting Hebrews 8.4. Melchizedek was on earth when Abraham paid him tribute.
- to have an entire life from Birth to Death.
Melkizedek satisfied the second way to have been on earth, when he appeared before Abraham. In a manner similar to Jesus's way when he gave the eucharist for Paul (I hope that you realize that the episode is an appearance of Jesus, not a fact among many facts of an entire life on earth). During an apparition. Melkizedek didn't have an entire life from Birth to Death. Being without Birth, he could only appear on this earth, he couldn't life really on this earth.
- to appear before someone.
I fear (for sake of discussion) that you will continue to confuse the two ways of existence. To confuse existence with appearance. (And note that I am assuming a real historical archangelic Melkizedek in the mind of the author of Hebrews).
That is not what Hebrews 8.4 says.Hebrews 8:4 says that a similar high priest was never on earth, meaning: he was never born on this earth, hence he didn't come from any tribe. He came uniquely from heaven. And to heaven he ascended.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
You have asked before where it is written that a high priest of the example of Melkizedek couldn't come from Judah.
The answer is: precisely where it is said that Melkizedek couldn't be never born. Where he is said to be without genealogy. A Melkisedechian Jesus is by definition a not-davidic Jesus.
The answer is: precisely where it is said that Melkizedek couldn't be never born. Where he is said to be without genealogy. A Melkisedechian Jesus is by definition a not-davidic Jesus.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
Which means: nowhere. Nowhere does Hebrews state that Melchizedek could not be born. (Whether he was born or not is a different question.)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
no, in a precise point Hebrews states that Melchizedek was never born:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:55 amWhich means: nowhere. Nowhere does Hebrews state that Melchizedek could not be born. (Whether he was born or not is a different question.)
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
(7:3)
Only who has father and mother can be born. Only who has an earthly ancestry can be born. Only who lived really on this earth can be born.
The birth was for the ancient people synonymous of historical reality for us.
Last edited by Giuseppe on Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
This is not disagreeing with what I said. It is misunderstanding what I said. And it is exhausting trying to keep up with the depths of the misunderstanding.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:58 amno, in a precise point Hebrews states that Melchizedek was never born:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:55 amWhich means: nowhere. Nowhere does Hebrews state that Melchizedek could not be born. (Whether he was born or not is a different question.)
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
(7:3)
Only who has father and mother can be born.
We are done here. You have the epistle; do with it as you will.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Hebrews 7:14 versus Hebrews 7:3: one of them is an interpolation
Oh, and incidentally, the Greek words for "fatherless" and "motherless" are also used for orphans who have very clearly undergone a human birth. But nuance is not your thing.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ