Paul didn't write Hebrews

[Grailhunter]

Grailhununter, for what it’s worth, when you post everything in bold font, I find it really annoying, and just pass on to the next post instead of reading anything you have posted.

Hey, sorry, probably going to get more of it. Not as bad as capitols and red letters. You have my ok not to read anything I post.

 

[Stan B]

Again you keep defining your own bubble. If your bubble saved you, that is really all that matters. God bless and carry on smartly. My issue is when you start talking about scholars and study and biblical translations, because it does not take much study to know that you are wrong. God did not not give us our gray hair to be closed minded, or stop learning. Then again belief is a right, believe what you want. But quit pushing your beliefs on the scholars, they do not agree with you.

I am not pushing anything on anyone. You are the one who is doing that! And if I ever find an admonition in Scripture telling me to embrace the Gospel according to Grailhunter, then it is time for me to look for a new Bible!

 

[GodsGrace]

GodsGrace says>> "Only the most extreme scientists do not agree that a fetus is a living being."

So, you are saying that you derive your theology from scientists, rather than Scripture??

The Bible says “The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Genesis 2:7). Adam did not become a living being until then.

Now, how could God breathe into the nostrils of that semi-formed fetus submerged in the amniotic sac when it doesn't have nostrils?? Even if it did have nostrils, it would drown before it ever had a chance of being born.

This concept is reiterated by Job:

“The Spirit of God has made me,
And the BREATH of the Almighty gives me life." Job 33:44

"For as long as life is in me,
And the breath of God is in my nostrils" Job 27

A fetus does not become a living being until God breathes its nostrils, the breath of life, and having nostrils would seem to be a prerequisite for that to happen.

Do you disagree with what God has said?

I disagree with what you say.
I've never heard a Christian person say anything so wrong as you are right now.

What God says is this:

THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

Life is in an embryo from the moment of conception.
It's up to God to decide if that embryo goes to term or not.

When God worked in Genesis, He did something very important which you seem to have missed.

Genesis 1:22
Genesis 1:28
Genesis 1:29
Genesis 1:30
Genesis 2:7
Genesis 2:21

Genesis 1:22 and Genesis 1:28

God said to be fruitful and multiply.
God gave to the plants the ABILITY to multiply.
He gave to animals the ability to reproduce themselves.
He gave HUMANS the ability to multiply themselves.

God set the world in motion and the laws of nature in motion...
and today we live by those laws.

God breathed life into man ONE TIME in Genesis when man was created so that he would not be dead dirt from the ground.

We're alive now...we reproduce ourselves now...we follow the laws of nature now when a baby is formed by us, humans.

All of nature reproduces itself....This is the will of God...He is not required to make every little seed germinate...He embedded this information into a kernel...

He is not required to imbed a sperm into an ovum...this information is already present and acts in the laws God set up.

Notice that in Genesis 1:29 God says that He has given man every fruit bearing seed.
Does man not also have a fruit bearing seed to reproduce himself?


Genesis 2:7 and Genesis 2:21

In Genesis 2:7 God formed man out of dust from the ground and breathed life into him.
Does God have to do this for every human that is born?
NO. He did this one time to GIVE MAN LIFE.
We now have life and must only perpetuate it.
Is a person born alive?
Yes.
Is he not human because he may or may not be breathing?
IF HE DOES NOT BREATH....He is still a human being...
one that HAS DIED...not one that never lived - because in the womb his heart was beating and there was life because there was movement.

Adam had blood flowing through him after God breathed life into him.
THE LIFE IS IN THE BLOOD.
Genesis 4:11-12
Leviticus 17:13-14


As a Christian person that represents the word of God,
it would behoove you and those that come into contact with
you to study this and come to understand the word of God.
THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

 

[GodsGrace]

I am not pushing anything on anyone. You are the one who is doing that! And if I ever find an admonition in Scripture telling me to embrace the Gospel according to Grailhunter, then it is time for me to look for a new Bible!

Some Christian knowledge is not a matter of opinion.
We know how the bible was put together..
We know how it was written....
it's not a matter for debate.

Just as abortion being murder is not a matter for debate.
Just as @Grailhunter does not write the bible
YOU also do not write the bible.

HE is stating facts...
YOU are stating your opinion - which is incorrect BTW.

 

[farouk]

Well marks,
There's some things I'm not sure about...
There's some things I'm sure about...

They are called The Early Church Fathers....abbreviated ECFs.

A writer could be anyone...
A father is the head of something....
the one who is responsible...
the one who teaches those that know less...
the one who keeps the group together...

If you're a father...you'll know what I mean.

And if you think they miss the point of scripture....what can I say.
Find me something an ECF said that misses the scripture.

I haven't yet.

The term 'fathers' occurs in John's First Epistle. Unless they were actually led by the Holy Spirit to pen a book of Scripture, their writings or pronouncements are not authoritative in the sense that Scripture - the Word of God - is authoritative.

 

[marks]

Now, how could God breathe into the nostrils of that semi-formed fetus submerged in the amniotic sac when it doesn't have nostrils?? Even if it did have nostrils, it would drown before it ever had a chance of being born.

There is an underlaying assumption here that all men receive life in the same method that the first man received his life.

But we do not believe that either Adam or Eve were born from an human mother, therefore, God didn't in fact duplicate either the first man, or the first woman in how He made them. And He didn't even repeat the method with Eve.

I see a fundamental difference here.

Adam was formed from dirt, and God breathed into his nostrils, and that dirt form came alive, became a living being.

An unborn baby is not a dirt formation, it's a moving, eating, reacting, responding creature which is thinking, forming memories, exhibiting personality, and individuality.

Are you sure God doesn't see this little wiggly mini-human as an actual living person?

Much love!

 

[Waiting on him]

There is an underlaying assumption here that all men receive life in the same method that the first man received his life.

But we do not believe that either Adam or Eve were born from an human mother, therefore, God didn't in fact duplicate either the first man, or the first woman in how He made them. And He didn't even repeat the method with Eve.

I see a fundamental difference here.

Adam was formed from dirt, and God breathed into his nostrils, and that dirt form came alive, became a living being.

An unborn baby is not a dirt formation, it's a moving, eating, reacting, responding creature which is thinking, forming memories, exhibiting personality, and individuality.

Are you sure God doesn't see this little wiggly mini-human as an actual living person?

Much love!

If we could help the women and men doing this too see.

 

[GodsGrace]

Correct. That was about 200 BC, and primarily for Hellenistic Jews. There is a legend attached to the origin. However it is a corrupted translation of the Tanakh, and has numerous apocryphal books included. Some claim that the apostles used this translation because some of the verses correspond (which is to be expected). However many verses are directly from the Hebrew. See The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah by Alfred Edersheim.

Thanks for confirming.
I have the Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah but I read it many many years ago.
It's a wonderful book and maybe I should read it again.

This is also for @Grailhunter
Was Hebrews written in Greek ORIGINALLY or was it written with a Greek style?
I can't remember and Stan B brought this up.

 

[GodsGrace]

The term 'fathers' occurs in John's First Epistle. Unless they were actually led by the Holy Spirit to pen a book of Scripture, their writings or pronouncements are not authoritative in the sense that Scripture - the Word of God - is authoritative.

Of course you're right.
Nothing trumps the N.T. or what Jesus stated.

But was Calvin led by the Holy Spirit?
He penned a lot of stuff that this theology goes by.
His writings are referred to more than the bible,,,although this is
starting to change.

Are you aware that it was the Early Church Fathers that put together the N.T.?
I'd say that if a person learned from the Apostles,,,surely the Holy Spirit was present and in agreement.

 

[farouk]

Of course you're right.
Nothing trumps the N.T. or what Jesus stated.

But was Calvin led by the Holy Spirit?
He penned a lot of stuff that this theology goes by.
His writings are referred to more than the bible,,,although this is
starting to change.

Are you aware that it was the Early Church Fathers that put together the N.T.?
I'd say that if a person learned from the Apostles,,,surely the Holy Spirit was present and in agreement.

Actually, apart from the Acts of the Apostles, the New Testament books were penned by Apostles.

 

[Grailhunter]

I am not pushing anything on anyone. You are the one who is doing that! And if I ever find an admonition in Scripture telling me to embrace the Gospel according to Grailhunter, then it is time for me to look for a new Bible!

lol Hey I thought you were going to stop reading my posts! Old man go study....and I will too.

 

[farouk]

Thanks for confirming.
I have the Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah but I read it many many years ago.
It's a wonderful book and maybe I should read it again.

This is also for @Grailhunter
Was Hebrews written in Greek ORIGINALLY or was it written with a Greek style?
I can't remember and Stan B brought this up.

Edersheim also wrote a book on Jewish life, which is very informative.

 

[Grailhunter]

Actually, apart from the Acts of the Apostles, the New Testament books were penned by Apostles.

Did you word that correctly?

 

[Stan B]

Once upon a time it was 'legal' to sacrifice children to Molech too...

Men 'legalizing' murder does not change it from still being murder.

When did a woman being 'with child' morph into being 'with fetus'? When people wanted to justify murdering their children.

 

[GodsGrace]

Actually, apart from the Acts of the Apostles, the New Testament books were penned by Apostles.

Right.
I meant that the N.T. was canonized and put together as a whole book by these men that were called the Early Church Fathers.
(not that they wrote it)

 

[Grailhunter]

Edersheim also wrote a book on Jewish life, which is very informative.

Very simply all of the New Testament books were written in Koine Greek. No exceptions.
Then we know that St. Jerome translated from Greek to Latin...end of the 4th century, but was scriptures translated to other languages earlier.
Any takers on that question?

 

[farouk]

Right.
I meant that the N.T. was canonized and put together as a whole book by these men that were called the Early Church Fathers.
(not that they wrote it)

The canon actual lies in the authorship, rather than in the "ecclessiatical authorities" supposedly conferring authenticity on it that it did not have before.

 

[GodsGrace]

The canon actual lies in the authorship, rather than in the "ecclessiatical authorities" supposedly conferring authenticity on it that it did not have before.

Hmmm.
I'm not sure what you mean F.
Canon was decided in about the year 300 when it was decided which books should go into the N.T.
Could you study up on this some more?

You could start with this:

Development of the Christian biblical canon - Wikipedia

 

[farouk]

Hmmm.
I'm not sure what you mean F.
Canon was decided in about the year 300 when it was decided which books should go into the N.T.
Could you study up on this some more?

You could start with this:

Development of the Christian biblical canon - Wikipedia

The church of Rome does like to hold that the Bible is by courtesy of itself; but actually the authority of a Bible book comes from its Spirit-inspired, authorship.

 

[rockytopva]

This verse proves to me Hebrews was written by Paul... Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you. - Hebrews 13:23