• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

101G

Well-Known Member
No. They actually don't seem to have the same source. Especially the Book of John. Paul's writing is deeply flawed.
personal opinion? ...... lol
I understand your words perfectly. But they are not backed up with facts. I have read Paul's attempt to transfer the priesthood away from the Levites, it's one of the weakest, dumbest things I've ever read.
well God agree that you're IGNORANT, because he made a NEW COVENANT. Jeremiah 31:31 "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:" Jeremiah 31:32 "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:"

Hebrews 7:11 "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?" Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." Hebrews 7:13 "For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar." Hebrews 7:14 "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. "Hebrews 7:15 "And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest," Hebrews 7:16 "Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life." Hebrews 7:17 "For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec." Hebrews 7:18 "For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof." Hebrews 7:19 "For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God." Hebrews 7:20 "And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:" Hebrews 7:21 "(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)" Hebrews 7:22 "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." Hebrews 7:23 "And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:" Hebrews 7:24 "But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood." Hebrews 7:25 "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." Hebrews 7:26 "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;" Hebrews 7:27 "Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself." Hebrews 7:28 "For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore."

101G.
 

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
personal opinion? ...... lol
Your love and devotion for NT scripture is personal opinion.

Here I'll show you where Paul is clearly flawed.

Galatians 3:13:

13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Thats only true if the one on the tree remains there over night.

Deuteronomy 12:23:

His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
How long did Jesus stay on the cross? If it was overnight, then Paul gets to be right, but the Gospels are wrong and ... AND Jesus would not be a proper pascal lamb. See below:

Exodus 12:10

And ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire.
So there you have it. Paul is deeply flawed. Not my opinion, it's strictly scripture. Jesus does NOT replace the curse of the law like Paul claims unless the Gospels are wrong and the Jesus was a failed offering. But since Paul only quotes the tiny-bit of the scripture and ignores the rest ( boy that sounds like YOU ), a person can be easily fooled if they don't read the original text themself.
 
Last edited:

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
well God agree that you're IGNORANT, because he made a NEW COVENANT. Jeremiah 31:31 "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:" Jeremiah 31:32 "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:"
As usual you ignore the parts that refute your theology. Keep reading... The Jewish people might break their part of the covenant, but God maintains the original covenant. The new covenant ( which hasn't happened yet ) does not replace the old one. Paul claims the original covenant is obsolete, you claim the original is obsolete. But scripture proves you wrong.

Jeremiah 31:37:

Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.
There you have it. God will remain commited to the Jewish people forever regardless of what we do. The original covenant is forever unless someone can measure the heavens of course.
 
Last edited:

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
Hebrews 7:11 "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?" Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." Hebrews 7:13 "For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar." Hebrews 7:14 "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. "Hebrews 7:15 "And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest," Hebrews 7:16 "Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life." Hebrews 7:17 "For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec." Hebrews 7:18 "For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof." Hebrews 7:19 "For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God." Hebrews 7:20 "And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:" Hebrews 7:21 "(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)" Hebrews 7:22 "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." Hebrews 7:23 "And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:" Hebrews 7:24 "But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood." Hebrews 7:25 "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." Hebrews 7:26 "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;" Hebrews 7:27 "Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself." Hebrews 7:28 "For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore."
Hee-hee, you skipped the part where he claims Malchi-tzedek MUST be immortal. Good for you.

Starting at the beginning, the premise is false:

"If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?"

Abraham was ordained as a priest by Malchi-tzedek *BEFORE* the levites were inducted as priests. Paul claims that it happened after? That's FALSE. Paul is lying to you.

For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

It didn't change. False again.

For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar."

Wishful thinking. He desires that the priesthood be transferred, but that doesn't make it true.

"For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood"

Correct. Jesus isn't a priest.

"And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, "Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life."

here Paul is claiming that Malchi-tzedek is immortal. A totally false assertion. Let's see, that's 3 false statements. Paul is doing horrible.

"For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec."

This is a mistranslation. "After the order" is not correct. "According to" is what it says in greek. And if you go back to the original hebrew "order" should be "decree" or "word". after the order makes it sound like "similitude". But that's FALSE. 4 false statements by Paul. Now he's misquoting scripture, not just omitting words like in galatians.

Screenshot_20221230_163648.jpg


"For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God."

Maybe human perfection wasn't intended nor needed, God already has that in the angels... but I digress.

"And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:"

Ah! a true statement. Notice Paul admits that Jesus was never actually ordained as priest. That's why he's going through all these false mental gymnastics to try to fit a square shaped Jesus into a round priestly role. It doesn't fit. It's a flawed argument from beginning to end.

"(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec"

Said King David about Abraham. Not Jesus.

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof."

No, there wasn't. The priesthood is given by YHVH to Aaron's sons as a "statute forever" Exodus 29:28. Paul is lying to you. Or perhaps his source is not YHVH.

וְהָיָה לְאַֽהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו לְחָק־עוֹלָם מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי תְרוּמָה הוּא וּתְרוּמָה יִהְיֶה מֵאֵת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל מִזִּבְחֵי שַׁלְמֵיהֶם תְּרֽוּמָתָם לַֽיהֹוָֽה׃

And it shall be Aaron’s and his sons’ by a statute forever from the people of Israel; for it is an offering; and it shall be an offering from the people of Israel of the sacrifice of their peace offerings, their offering to the Lord.
By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." "And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:""But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood."

This is Paul's opinion, but it's all based on false statements and a false premise.

Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." Hebrews 7:26 "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;" Hebrews 7:27 "Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself." Hebrews 7:28 "For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore."

And this is just a false conclusion based on the false statements above it.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
My God are you listing to yourself...... "Given to", common sense suggest they are not eternal. LISTEN: THERE IS ONLY ONE WHO IS ETERNAL, AND WE IN HIM ARE, or WILL BE ETERNAL, because of him.

put your thinking cap on.... ok.

101G.
Excuse me, I'm really not going to argue with you. However, eternal does not always mean without beginning. Will be eternal does not mean "we" have no beginning. Sorry you don't see or understand that.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Your love and devotion for NT scripture is personal opinion.

Here I'll show you where Paul is clearly flawed.

Galatians 3:13:

13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Thats only true if the one on the tree remains there over night.

Deuteronomy 12:23:

His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
How long did Jesus stay on the cross? If it was overnight, then Paul gets to be right, but the Gospels are wrong and ... AND Jesus would not be a proper pascal lamb. See below:

Exodus 12:10

And ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire.
So there you have it. Paul is deeply flawed. Not my opinion, it's strictly scripture. Jesus does NOT replace the curse of the law like Paul claims unless the Gospels are wrong and the Jesus was a failed offering. But since Paul only quotes the tiny-bit of the scripture and ignores the rest ( boy that sounds like YOU ), a person can be easily fooled if they don't read the original text themself.
ERROR, he was not a sinner, but took our sin so we may be free. " His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God). he became curse for u and I and all of us. he took our place voluntary. and God removed sin from the LAND in one day, which u nor I could do.

so, you can save those crocodile tears for someone else. the Lord Jesus Christ mission was to come and die, (the first death/flesh), to remove sin. but now he LIVE, and dies no more. isn't God Good

see dybmh, u have no clue who the Christ is, God's OWN "ARM", God himself in flesh, scripture, Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me."

now read Isaiah chapter 53 and know who is God's OWN ARM.... :eek: YIKES!

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
As usual you ignore the parts that refute your theology.
what is my theology? answer.
The Jewish people might break their part of the covenant, but God maintains the original covenant. The new covenant ( which hasn't happened yet ) does not replace the old one.
it replaces the old one, that's why it's new......lol, lol, lol. when did the New Testament/covenant come in effect? Hebrews 9:15 "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Hebrews 9:16 "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator." Hebrews 9:17 "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."

this is 2 simple not to understand.
Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.
INGORANCE, Listen, the Lord Jesus died for the sins of the WORLD, not just for the JEWISH PEOPLE, they have to come God just like everyone else. Joel 2:32 "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call."
delivered here is rescue, or escape..... "SALVATION".

1 John 2:1 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:" 1 John 2:2 "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

so bottom line, it makes no different if you're Jewish or Gentile according to flesh, if you don't come to JESUS, you are not saved.

101G
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Hee-hee, you skipped the part where he claims Malchi-tzedek MUST be immortal. Good for you.
another ERROR on your Part. keep on listing to men lies. without mother or father simply means there is no record of his parenthood.

now for IMMORTAL there is only ONE who IMMORTAL, scripture, 1 Timothy 6:14 "That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:" 1 Timothy 6:15 "Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;" 1 Timothy 6:16 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."
and you do know what "ONLY" means right? and no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively.

learn to believe God instead of IGNORANT DUMB NATURAL/FLESHLY men/ ..... my God no wonder so many are lost.

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Excuse me, I'm really not going to argue with you. However, eternal does not always mean without beginning. Will be eternal does not mean "we" have no beginning. Sorry you don't see or understand that.
Last time I'm going to say this. ETERNAL has no beginning, only what's Created has a beginning and or an end.

101G.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Last time I'm going to say this. ETERNAL has no beginning, only what's Created has a beginning and or an end.

101G.
"And this is what he promised us—eternal life."
So I'll say this again -- since Jesus said those following Him would have ETERNAL LIFE, i guess you think these had no beginning?
1 John 2:25 "And this is what he promised us--eternal life." So you might think they were always alive without beginning? -- :)
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Last time I'm going to say this. ETERNAL has no beginning, only what's Created has a beginning and or an end.

101G.
Here's another one -- in the "Old Testament."
"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt."
Some will awake to EVERLASTING LIFE -- do you think it means they always had everlasting life?
(Daniel 12:2)
Maybe you do -- :) believe it means those asleep always had everlasting or eternal life, without beginning...is that right about your belief about eternal or everlasting?
 

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
ERROR, he was not a sinner, but took our sin so we may be free. " His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God). he became curse for u and I and all of us. he took our place voluntary. and God removed sin from the LAND in one day, which u nor I could do.
I didn't say he sinned. Sin isn't the issue. The problem is Paul needs Jesus' death on the cross to be a curse to effect a loophole in the law. But Paul ignores or omits the condition that makes a corpse hung on a tree a curse. It needs to be left up over night. If the Gospels are correct, then Paul's assertion is false and his deperate attempt to find a loophole is a fail.

This means that Paul is not an accurate source for biblical truth. At best he is bringing flawed commentary. And at worst he is leading people astray. This is one example how Paul's writing is flawed.

so, you can save those crocodile tears for someone else. the Lord Jesus Christ mission was to come and die, (the first death/flesh), to remove sin. but now he LIVE, and dies no more. isn't God Good

It's a great theory, but not something which is included in the Hebrew bible.

see dybmh, u have no clue who the Christ is, God's OWN "ARM", God himself in flesh, scripture, Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me."

If that's how you choose to imagine God, I have no problem with that.

now read Isaiah chapter 53 and know who is God's OWN ARM.... :eek: YIKES!
Isaiah 53 says the suffering servant would be silent. Jesus cried out: "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me" The let out a loud cry just before he dies. So, regardless of how a person understands that chapter, it CANNOT be about Jesus. Unless of course the gospels are wrong.
 

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
what is my theology? answer.
  • God is a coventional unity constructed of at least two parts, a literal father and a literal son, "persons" who share the same essence and will
  • The son is the creator in Gen 1
  • The new covenant in Jeremiah replaces the old covenant
  • The son comes to earth in the flesh and leads a sinless life
  • The son is required for salvation
  • All of this is supported by the Hebrew bible which has the same source and theology as the Christian bible
Hopefully I did OK, didn't miss anything. And please correct me if I'm wrong on this.
it replaces the old one, that's why it's new
This is similar to your other weak claims, that having a soul defines a person, that being a "he" defines a person. Now you're saying that new always replaces old. That's not true. I bought a new car, but I kept the old truck. I bought a new house, but kept the old one and rent it out. I renewed my vows to my wife, but I still keep the old vows.

when did the New Testament/covenant come in effect? Hebrews 9:15 "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Hebrews 9:16 "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator." Hebrews 9:17 "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."

this is 2 simple not to understand.

Paul is a fail. He isn't speaking word of God truth. I've shown you multiple places where his commentary is false. I notice you can't refute what I said, so you change the subject. That concedes the point.
INGORANCE, Listen, the Lord Jesus died for the sins of the WORLD, not just for the JEWISH PEOPLE, they have to come God just like everyone else.
This is a strawman argument. No one has claimed that.

Joel 2:32 "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call."
delivered here is rescue, or escape..... "SALVATION".

Joel gives a perscription to the Jewish people, and it isn't salvation, it's repentence and return. That's a bit different than salvation through faith in Jesus. Joel 2:12-13.
1 John 2:1 "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:" 1 John 2:2 "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."
Christian scripture is a new religion. Good for you.
so bottom line, it makes no different if you're Jewish or Gentile according to flesh, if you don't come to JESUS, you are not saved.
No, that's just opinion, Hebrew scripture says differently.
 

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
another ERROR on your Part. keep on listing to men lies. without mother or father simply means there is no record of his parenthood.
Here's what he says:

"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."

Nor end of life? Like unto the Son of God? = Paul says Malchi-tzedek is immortal. This matches the later verse claiming "similitude". But I completely understand your desire to distance yourself from this nonsense.

now for IMMORTAL there is only ONE who IMMORTAL, scripture, 1 Timothy 6:14 "That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:" 1 Timothy 6:15 "Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;" 1 Timothy 6:16 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."
and you do know what "ONLY" means right? and no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively.
So Timothy contradicts Hebrews? Got it! :thumbsup:
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
another ERROR on your Part. keep on listing to men lies. without mother or father simply means there is no record of his parenthood.


101G.
I agree. Why in the world would anyone assume that just because someone's ancestry is not mentioned, that they have no father or mother. I mean, it really makes no rational sense. There are lots and lots of people in history that we do not know who their father or mother was -- it doesn't mean they have no father or mother.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
"And this is what he promised us—eternal life."
So I'll say this again -- since Jesus said those following Him would have ETERNAL LIFE, i guess you think these had no beginning?
1 John 2:25 "And this is what he promised us--eternal life." So you might think they were always alive without beginning? -- :)
GINOLJC, to all,
ARE you thinking? did you not ..... HEAR? .... what is created has a beginning.... hello. my God.....

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Here's another one -- in the "Old Testament."
"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt."
Some will awake to EVERLASTING LIFE -- do you think it means they always had everlasting life?
(Daniel 12:2)
Maybe you do -- :) believe it means those asleep always had everlasting or eternal life, without beginning...is that right about your belief about eternal or everlasting?
see, above post.

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
I didn't say he sinned. Sin isn't the issue. The problem is Paul needs Jesus' death on the cross to be a curse to effect a loophole in the law. But Paul ignores or omits the condition that makes a corpse hung on a tree a curse. It needs to be left up over night. If the Gospels are correct, then Paul's assertion is false and his deperate attempt to find a loophole is a fail.

This means that Paul is not an accurate source for biblical truth. At best he is bringing flawed commentary. And at worst he is leading people astray. This is one example how Paul's writing is flawed.
nothing to the LESS, the whole purpose was to show that he became a curse for us. so did the Lord Jesus hang on a tree? answer, yes. did he become a curse for us? answer yes. so what's the problem?
It's a great theory, but not something which is included in the Hebrew bible
but didn't you just argue about him being hanged on a tree. that's hypocrisy.
speaking of hanging on a tree. was it not God who was on that tree, stab or pierced?
Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

101G.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

101G.
so you don't know the difference between elai and alai, or between singular and plural. Instead you rely on a bad translation. Not unexpected. Feel free to claim that the Hebrew is wrong and the translation is right. That's always amusing.
 
Top