We are now at Hebrews chapter thirteen, the last chapter. The end is in sight! In this chapter, the Hebrews are told to continue loving each other as brothers, because they might entertain angels without knowing it. They also need to remember those in prison and those being mistreated, as if it were they themselves suffering. What good will being remembered do for the people who are actually suffering?
The author goes on to say " marriage should be honored by all and the marriage bed be kept pure." That means nobody gets to have sex with a non spouse. Why? Because God hates adulterers and the sexually immoral. What is the difference between an adulterer and a sexually immoral person? I don't know, maybe they are the same thing. I was wrong when I previously wrote that Jesus said nothing about sex. He was clearly against adultery and lust.
The readers are also told not to love money. They need to be content with what they have, "because god has said I will never leave you or forsake you." (A quote from Moses to the Israelites in Deuteronomy 31:6) What good is god's invisible presence when you have no food or shelter or means to obtain it?
The Hebrews are also told to say with confidence, "The lord is my helper, I will not be afraid. What can man do to me." (Psalm 118:6-7) In case you didn't already know, man/mankind can do a lot of harm, to other people and property, in spite of a god who is supposed to be a helper. At many times, there are legitimate reason to be very afraid. It's almost like there is no god.
The readers are also told to remember their leaders who spoke the word of god to them.(Like maybe the author of this book?) The leaders are providing an example of life and faith that needs to be imitated. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever." Amen. That means every believer should be living and believing the exact same way. "Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings." Like stories about crucified and risen saviors, who became invisible heavenly high priests, and sprinkle their invisible blood, making people have eternal life?
Next, the Hebrews are to that it is good for their hearts "to be strengthened by grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them." Huh? First of All, what in tarnation is grace? How can it strengthen a heart? Second, what do ceremonial foods have to do with anything? The author appears to be sharply veering right back into his high priest and temple metaphor, or the heavenly reality of which that earthly stuff is a shadow. He speaks of people having no right to eat from the altar they minister at. Presumably he is talking about the earthly high priests.
Again, the author talks about the earthly high priest carrying the blood of animals into the holy place. He says the bodies of the animals were burned outside the city, after the sacrifice. Then the author somehow associates this with Jesus "suffering outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood." So, likewise the believers should bear the disgrace Jesus bore by being outside the city. (Presumably Jerusalem) They don't need the city, because they are looking for the enduring city that is to come. Hmm. This seems like the kind of thing outcasts might say.
I'm going to revise my ruminations and guess that this book may have been written before the fall of Jerusalem after all, in the infancy of Christianity. It definitely appears to be pre synoptic gospels, and maybe even pre Paul.
Till next time.
Thursday, May 16, 2019
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
Hebrews part seventeen
We are at Hebrews 12:14. My bible has an added heading for the coming passage, "Warning against refusing god." Uh oh. It starts by telling the reader to "Make every effort to live in peace with all men." Nothing wrong with that. The author adds, "and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the lord." A command and a threat. But what exactly is holiness? How do I know if I don't have it? The reader is also to take care not to "miss the grace of god." What exactly is the grace of god? How do I miss it? The reader is also not permitted to allow a "bitter root" to grow up and cause trouble. Um, you guessed it, what in the world is he talking about? My guess is the author expects the reader to understand because they have a similar knowledge and experience that I don't have. It's 2000 year old insider language.
In verse 16, we are given more specifics. No one is allowed to be sexually immoral, probably as defined in the Old Testament. I don't think Jesus actually said a word about sex in the gospels. Also, no one is permitted to be "godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son." That is an example of godlessness? What about his brother, who took advantage of a hungry man for personal gain? Victim blaming at its finest. Even worse, according to the author, Esau tearfully begged for his blessing back. Shame on him. Heathen.
The author goes on to tell the reader that they are so fortunate that they don't have to approach a physical burning mountain, covered with stormy dark clouds, with a loud and threatening voice issuing from it, like Moses did. That was terrifying. No, instead, they get to come to the "heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living god." (Isn't it the same terrifying god that was on Moses's mountain?) The reader also gets to come to "thousands upon thousands of heavenly angels in joyful assembly." And that's not terrifying?
The reader also comes to the "church of the first born, whose names are written in heaven." I don't think the author means literal first born children here, but metaphorical first born "children of god." They also have come to "god, the judge of all men and the spirits of righteous men made perfect." Not women. They are not made perfect. (Sarcasm) They also come to "Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood (eww) that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel." What is the reality behind all this metaphor, anyway?
You know Jesus's speaking blood? The author says it better not be disobeyed. Those of the past, who were warned on earth, did not escape when they were disobedient. (See the story of Moses and the people at the mountain.) Does the reader think he will escape a warning from heaven? Gasp! There were only earthquakes at that mountain of old. God has promised that, "once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens." This is sort of a piece of a quote from Haggai 2:6. It's context is the building of the second temple, greater than the first, a purely physical building, not some heavenly temple. The author goes on to say that the words "once more" in the Haggai quote "indicate the removing of what can be shaken--that is created things--so that what cannot be shaken may remain." How in the world did he come to that conclusion?
Chapter twelve ends by telling the readers they need to be thankful because they are getting a kingdom that can't be shaken. "So, worship god acceptably with reverence and awe, for our god is a consuming fire." Is that a physical fire or a metaphorical fire?
Till next time.
In verse 16, we are given more specifics. No one is allowed to be sexually immoral, probably as defined in the Old Testament. I don't think Jesus actually said a word about sex in the gospels. Also, no one is permitted to be "godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son." That is an example of godlessness? What about his brother, who took advantage of a hungry man for personal gain? Victim blaming at its finest. Even worse, according to the author, Esau tearfully begged for his blessing back. Shame on him. Heathen.
The author goes on to tell the reader that they are so fortunate that they don't have to approach a physical burning mountain, covered with stormy dark clouds, with a loud and threatening voice issuing from it, like Moses did. That was terrifying. No, instead, they get to come to the "heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living god." (Isn't it the same terrifying god that was on Moses's mountain?) The reader also gets to come to "thousands upon thousands of heavenly angels in joyful assembly." And that's not terrifying?
The reader also comes to the "church of the first born, whose names are written in heaven." I don't think the author means literal first born children here, but metaphorical first born "children of god." They also have come to "god, the judge of all men and the spirits of righteous men made perfect." Not women. They are not made perfect. (Sarcasm) They also come to "Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood (eww) that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel." What is the reality behind all this metaphor, anyway?
You know Jesus's speaking blood? The author says it better not be disobeyed. Those of the past, who were warned on earth, did not escape when they were disobedient. (See the story of Moses and the people at the mountain.) Does the reader think he will escape a warning from heaven? Gasp! There were only earthquakes at that mountain of old. God has promised that, "once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens." This is sort of a piece of a quote from Haggai 2:6. It's context is the building of the second temple, greater than the first, a purely physical building, not some heavenly temple. The author goes on to say that the words "once more" in the Haggai quote "indicate the removing of what can be shaken--that is created things--so that what cannot be shaken may remain." How in the world did he come to that conclusion?
Chapter twelve ends by telling the readers they need to be thankful because they are getting a kingdom that can't be shaken. "So, worship god acceptably with reverence and awe, for our god is a consuming fire." Is that a physical fire or a metaphorical fire?
Till next time.
Saturday, May 11, 2019
Hebrews part sixteen
We are currently at Hebrews 11:32. The author does some name dropping here. He says Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jepthah, David, Samuel, and the prophets, all did amazing things because of faith. We are told about some of those recorded events. Go back to the old testament and read about each of those people. They also did some horrendous things, according to the stories. In fact a couple of them were pretty horrible people. The author also clearly alludes to Daniel but does not mention his name. But none of that matters, does it, because there is no reason to believe any of it actually happened. Yet again, if any of it did happen, it clearly was not because of faith in Jesus and a far distant resurrection.
Verses 35-38 describe tortures, persecutions, mistreatments, and trials, endured for the gain of a better resurrection. Better than what? "These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised." What exactly was promised anyway? According to the author, "God planned something better for us (the Hebrews) so that only together with us would they be made perfect." Great. It took hundreds of years and immeasurable death, pain, and suffering, but God's had a plan that's coming together perfectly right now, as in 2,000 years ago. Maybe.
We are now in chapter twelve. I managed to escape faith in god. What about you? The author continues on by claiming all the aforementioned characters as witnesses to god's plan. That should be enough, he says, to make the readers throw off whatever is holding them back and run the race with perseverance. The goal: Jesus, "the author and perfecter of our faith." He was so looking forward to the pleasure of perfecting their faith that he endured the shame and pain of the cross. What's six hours in trade for an eternity at the right hand of god? When the reader gets tired and loses heart, he can think about Jesus, who also endured opposition from sinful men. So waht if their pain lasts years instead of hours.
Now the Hebrews writer gets deadly serious. The readers haven't yet laid their blood on the line for Jesus. What's up with that? They've also forgotten Proverbs 3:11-12, which addresses them as sons (them as in the readers, or the Hebrews of all time?). It says, " My son, do not make light of the lord's discipline and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, because the lord disciplines those he loves." Oh, but the author of Hebrews does not stop there. He adds one more bit that isn't in the Psalm, as though it is actually part of it. "And he punishes everyone he accepts as a son." My study bible states that the word punish here means "to whip." This is corporal punishment, from god, and is evidence that the Hebrew writer made stuff up to influence his readers into believing that hardships endured were a direct proof of god's love for them. He is prepping them for martyrdom.
The author continues on in this vein, declaring that god is treating them as his sons by disciplining them, because aren't all sons disciplined. Obviously the Hebrew writer must have been, because, according to him, discipline makes you a true son, not an illegitimate one. (We all know illegitimate children never get disciplined). What?! The author says we respect our human fathers for disciplining us. Maybe he did, but it is clear that is not universal. Nevertheless, to the author, that is proof we should obey "the father of our spirits" even more "and live!" (The implication being that we won't get eternal life if we don't.) Supposedly, just like our fathers, god disciplines us because he thinks it is for our own good. (I think a father's harsh discipline is usually for the father's own good.) We think discipline is painful when it is happening, but the author wants us to see the long term benefits. "It produces a harvest of righteousness and peace." For whom?
Verse twelve calls the readers weaklings with feeble arms and weak knees who need to walk on straight paths so they will be healed. This makes no sense in the surrounding context. However it appears to partly be a reference to Isaiah 35:3, which is part of an admonition to "be strong, do not fear; your god will come...with vengeance, with divine retribution...to save you." Now that makes more sense. Why didn't the author quote the whole passage? Maybe he didn't want to give them false hope. Instead he combined a small bit of it with another small bit from Proverbs 4:26 and made nonsense. Till next time.
Till next time
Verses 35-38 describe tortures, persecutions, mistreatments, and trials, endured for the gain of a better resurrection. Better than what? "These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised." What exactly was promised anyway? According to the author, "God planned something better for us (the Hebrews) so that only together with us would they be made perfect." Great. It took hundreds of years and immeasurable death, pain, and suffering, but God's had a plan that's coming together perfectly right now, as in 2,000 years ago. Maybe.
We are now in chapter twelve. I managed to escape faith in god. What about you? The author continues on by claiming all the aforementioned characters as witnesses to god's plan. That should be enough, he says, to make the readers throw off whatever is holding them back and run the race with perseverance. The goal: Jesus, "the author and perfecter of our faith." He was so looking forward to the pleasure of perfecting their faith that he endured the shame and pain of the cross. What's six hours in trade for an eternity at the right hand of god? When the reader gets tired and loses heart, he can think about Jesus, who also endured opposition from sinful men. So waht if their pain lasts years instead of hours.
Now the Hebrews writer gets deadly serious. The readers haven't yet laid their blood on the line for Jesus. What's up with that? They've also forgotten Proverbs 3:11-12, which addresses them as sons (them as in the readers, or the Hebrews of all time?). It says, " My son, do not make light of the lord's discipline and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, because the lord disciplines those he loves." Oh, but the author of Hebrews does not stop there. He adds one more bit that isn't in the Psalm, as though it is actually part of it. "And he punishes everyone he accepts as a son." My study bible states that the word punish here means "to whip." This is corporal punishment, from god, and is evidence that the Hebrew writer made stuff up to influence his readers into believing that hardships endured were a direct proof of god's love for them. He is prepping them for martyrdom.
The author continues on in this vein, declaring that god is treating them as his sons by disciplining them, because aren't all sons disciplined. Obviously the Hebrew writer must have been, because, according to him, discipline makes you a true son, not an illegitimate one. (We all know illegitimate children never get disciplined). What?! The author says we respect our human fathers for disciplining us. Maybe he did, but it is clear that is not universal. Nevertheless, to the author, that is proof we should obey "the father of our spirits" even more "and live!" (The implication being that we won't get eternal life if we don't.) Supposedly, just like our fathers, god disciplines us because he thinks it is for our own good. (I think a father's harsh discipline is usually for the father's own good.) We think discipline is painful when it is happening, but the author wants us to see the long term benefits. "It produces a harvest of righteousness and peace." For whom?
Verse twelve calls the readers weaklings with feeble arms and weak knees who need to walk on straight paths so they will be healed. This makes no sense in the surrounding context. However it appears to partly be a reference to Isaiah 35:3, which is part of an admonition to "be strong, do not fear; your god will come...with vengeance, with divine retribution...to save you." Now that makes more sense. Why didn't the author quote the whole passage? Maybe he didn't want to give them false hope. Instead he combined a small bit of it with another small bit from Proverbs 4:26 and made nonsense. Till next time.
Till next time
Wednesday, May 8, 2019
Hebrews part fifteen
We are now at Hebrews 11:17. It's time to read more about Abraham's faith. Abraham's faith was so great that he offered his son Isaac as a sacrifice when god tested him. God was being a sadistic bastard. He had previously told Abraham that the promise of numerous offspring would be fulfilled through Isaac. The Hebrews author claims Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac because he "reasoned" that god could raise the dead. Baloney. The author of Hebrews is trying to use the old testament story to prove that belief in resurrection has always been part of Hebrew beliefs. There is actually no indication in most of the old testament that anyone of the ancient Abrahamic tradition believed in a resurrection of the dead. Sheol was the fate of every dead person. The author of Hebrews goes on to say that "figuratively speaking, he (Abraham) did receive Isaac back from the dead." Just so you know, figurative speech doesn't have any more substance than faith.
Next, the author says, that by faith Isaac blessed Jacob's and Esau's future. In other words, he said magical words at them that were supposed to have some mystical power over their lives. By faith, Jacob also "blessed" Joseph's sons. By faith, Joseph spoke of the exodus from egypt and what he wanted done with his bones. Joseph did speak of the Israelites leaving Egypt, going to the promised land, and taking his bones with them, in Genesis 50, but there were no other specifics. We are not going to go into the fact that none of the stuff we are reading about actually happened. So, it doesn't matter what these supposed patriarchs supposedly said or did and why they did it. It's the same as if we would take the Iliad and the Odyssey seriously.
The author goes on to say, "by faith Moses's parents hid him for three months after he was born because they saw that he was no ordinary child, and they were afraid of the king's edict." Any parent worth being called a parent would try to do anything they could to save their child from death. Faith has nothing to do with it.
We are also told that "by faith, Moses refused to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter. He chose to be mistreated along with the people of god rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time." Again, this never actually happened, but let's look at what Exodus says. Did Moses refuse to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter? Nope, can't find that. Did Moses choose to be mistreated along with the people of god? Nope, can't find that either. In fact, Exodus 2:11 says Moses went out and watched his people doing hard labor.
In Hebrews 11:26, the author says, Moses "regarded disgrace for the sake of christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt because he was looking ahead to his reward." This is blatant nonsense. Go back and read Exodus 2. Moses killed a man and became a fugitive, eventually going incognito as a shepherd. He had no eternal reward in mind only saving his own skin. Moses had no christ in mind.
Next, the author says, "By faith (Moses) left Egypt, not fearing the king's anger, because he saw him who is invisible." At least that part is true to the Exodus story. The reader is also told,"By faith (Moses) kept the passover and the sprinkling of the blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel." That also happened in the story. Plus, Moses never pleaded on behalf of all the innocent children that would die that night. Nice guy.
Some more things that supposedly happened by faith: the people walked through the Red Sea on dry land, the walls of Jericho fell, Rahab welcomed spies and was not killed. These are all stories that most likely never happened, so faith had nothing to do with them. Besides, if faith was a factor, it wasn't faith in Jesus or a resurrection, was it?
Till next time.
Next, the author says, that by faith Isaac blessed Jacob's and Esau's future. In other words, he said magical words at them that were supposed to have some mystical power over their lives. By faith, Jacob also "blessed" Joseph's sons. By faith, Joseph spoke of the exodus from egypt and what he wanted done with his bones. Joseph did speak of the Israelites leaving Egypt, going to the promised land, and taking his bones with them, in Genesis 50, but there were no other specifics. We are not going to go into the fact that none of the stuff we are reading about actually happened. So, it doesn't matter what these supposed patriarchs supposedly said or did and why they did it. It's the same as if we would take the Iliad and the Odyssey seriously.
The author goes on to say, "by faith Moses's parents hid him for three months after he was born because they saw that he was no ordinary child, and they were afraid of the king's edict." Any parent worth being called a parent would try to do anything they could to save their child from death. Faith has nothing to do with it.
We are also told that "by faith, Moses refused to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter. He chose to be mistreated along with the people of god rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time." Again, this never actually happened, but let's look at what Exodus says. Did Moses refuse to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter? Nope, can't find that. Did Moses choose to be mistreated along with the people of god? Nope, can't find that either. In fact, Exodus 2:11 says Moses went out and watched his people doing hard labor.
In Hebrews 11:26, the author says, Moses "regarded disgrace for the sake of christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt because he was looking ahead to his reward." This is blatant nonsense. Go back and read Exodus 2. Moses killed a man and became a fugitive, eventually going incognito as a shepherd. He had no eternal reward in mind only saving his own skin. Moses had no christ in mind.
Next, the author says, "By faith (Moses) left Egypt, not fearing the king's anger, because he saw him who is invisible." At least that part is true to the Exodus story. The reader is also told,"By faith (Moses) kept the passover and the sprinkling of the blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel." That also happened in the story. Plus, Moses never pleaded on behalf of all the innocent children that would die that night. Nice guy.
Some more things that supposedly happened by faith: the people walked through the Red Sea on dry land, the walls of Jericho fell, Rahab welcomed spies and was not killed. These are all stories that most likely never happened, so faith had nothing to do with them. Besides, if faith was a factor, it wasn't faith in Jesus or a resurrection, was it?
Till next time.
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Hebrews part fourteen
We are now at Hebrews chapter eleven, verse 4. Will the famous faith chapter convince us to have faith in Jesus our heavenly high priest? We shall see. The reader is now going to be told about various old testament characters who had faith. First up is Abel. According to the author, faith made Able give a better sacrifice than Cain did. What was different about Abel's sacrifice? It was a Blood sacrifice. The Hebrews author has already told us blood needs to be shed for god to keep his promises. Cain didn't get the blood sacrifice thing so he offered grain. God liked Abel's sacrifice better. As we all know, Cain killed Abel. Now Abel is dead. (Genesis 4)However, according to Hebrews, Abel still speaks by faith. I can't hear him. Can you?
The next faithful person mentioned is Enoch. Enoch didn't die. The old testament tells us god took him away. (Genesis 5) Enoch pleased god because he had faith. "Without faith it is impossible to please god....Anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." You gotta believe, or you get nutthin'. And sometimes you get nothing even when you believe.
Next up: Noah. He built the ark by faith when he was warned about the future flood. By faith he saved his family and condemned the rest of the world. That way he became one of the heirs of righteousness. Great job Noah! It's so righteous to watch everyone die while you float away to safety.
Abraham is fourth on the faithful list. Abraham went to a far away land because a voice in his head told him that the land would eventually be his. He believed it. Abraham lived in the foreign land. So did his son Isaac and grandson Jacob. They were also supposed to be heirs of the promise that had been given to Abraham. I don't remember if they heard the voice in their heads too. Abraham's faith made him believe the voice in his head when it told him he would have descendants that were as numerous as stars or grains of sand. Even though his wife was barren and Abraham was no spring chicken, his faith in the voice enabled him to become a father. Is that how babies are made, through faith?
Each of the faithful people mentioned are said to have remained faithful till they died. (Let that be a lesson to you.) They never actually got what the voice in their heads promised them. They just "saw and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted they were aliens and strangers on earth." Except, the Old testament never says that those faithful people saw and welcomed a promise from a distance. And the only time any of them said they were aliens and strangers was in Genesis 23:4, when Abraham told the Hittites that he was a stranger among them.
Even though those people never said those things, the Hebrews author says that people who do say those things are "looking for a country of their own." (Or one that they can take away from someone else?) Otherwise, they would have taken the opportunity to return to the country they had left. He must be talking just about Abraham, because this doesn't apply to all the others. The author goes on to say "They (Who's they?) were looking for a better country-- a heavenly one." Of course they were. That's why they never actually mentioned it. Must have slipped their minds.Nevertheless, that''s why god has prepared a (heavenly) city for them. Lucky dogs.
Till next time.
The next faithful person mentioned is Enoch. Enoch didn't die. The old testament tells us god took him away. (Genesis 5) Enoch pleased god because he had faith. "Without faith it is impossible to please god....Anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." You gotta believe, or you get nutthin'. And sometimes you get nothing even when you believe.
Next up: Noah. He built the ark by faith when he was warned about the future flood. By faith he saved his family and condemned the rest of the world. That way he became one of the heirs of righteousness. Great job Noah! It's so righteous to watch everyone die while you float away to safety.
Abraham is fourth on the faithful list. Abraham went to a far away land because a voice in his head told him that the land would eventually be his. He believed it. Abraham lived in the foreign land. So did his son Isaac and grandson Jacob. They were also supposed to be heirs of the promise that had been given to Abraham. I don't remember if they heard the voice in their heads too. Abraham's faith made him believe the voice in his head when it told him he would have descendants that were as numerous as stars or grains of sand. Even though his wife was barren and Abraham was no spring chicken, his faith in the voice enabled him to become a father. Is that how babies are made, through faith?
Each of the faithful people mentioned are said to have remained faithful till they died. (Let that be a lesson to you.) They never actually got what the voice in their heads promised them. They just "saw and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted they were aliens and strangers on earth." Except, the Old testament never says that those faithful people saw and welcomed a promise from a distance. And the only time any of them said they were aliens and strangers was in Genesis 23:4, when Abraham told the Hittites that he was a stranger among them.
Even though those people never said those things, the Hebrews author says that people who do say those things are "looking for a country of their own." (Or one that they can take away from someone else?) Otherwise, they would have taken the opportunity to return to the country they had left. He must be talking just about Abraham, because this doesn't apply to all the others. The author goes on to say "They (Who's they?) were looking for a better country-- a heavenly one." Of course they were. That's why they never actually mentioned it. Must have slipped their minds.Nevertheless, that''s why god has prepared a (heavenly) city for them. Lucky dogs.
Till next time.
Sunday, May 5, 2019
Hebrews part thirteen
We are now at Hebrews 10:32. The author is reminding the readers of earlier days when they had "received the light" and stood their ground "in a great contest in the face of suffering." They were publicly insulted and persecuted, and supported others who were similarly treated. They sympathized with those in prison and "joyfully accepted the confiscation of their property." (What do you want to bet they weren't as joyful as the author makes out.) They did all this because they had "better and lasting possessions." You know, those perfect heavenly things of which earthly things are only a shadow: shadow furniture, shadow clothes, shadow food.
The readers need to remember their perseverance in doing the will of god will be richly rewarded, after they are dead, or maybe even sooner. After all, Habbakuk 2:3-4 says, "He who is coming will come and not delay. But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him."
As usual there is a problem with the author quoting the passage from Habakkuk. It's not a person, but a thing, that will come without delay, specifically a revelation about "the end." Also, the author left out a couple of words and phrases that don't fit his narrative. He also completely makes up that bit at the end about not pleasing god if you shrink back. It's not in Habbakuk. That doesn't stop him from making it important though. He goes on to say, "We are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed but of those who believe and are saved." He's got that kind of backward, hasn't he? The believers often ended up being destroyed. Those who recanted were saved. At least in this shadow world.
We are now in chapter eleven, the most famous chapter of this book. It is all about faith. The author has been leading us to this point so that he can make the case for faith. He believes that if you haven't got faith, you haven't got anything. He defines faith as: "Being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." That's the NIV version. You may be more familiar with the KJV, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." The NIV version sounds almost like a definition of extreme optimism. The KJV version sounds delusional. What do tangible thing do you actually have when you have faith? No-thing! There is no substance to faith, so it can't be actual evidence of the invisible.
This author is playing fast and loose with reality. He's making bald assertions that make no sense. He's basically saying that having faith in something is what makes it true. People have faith in all kinds of things. Is all faith in unseen things equal evidence for those things' existence? The author continues to play on the theme of faith and the unseen by telling the reader that it is by faith that they "understand the universe was made at god's command (nothing but faith), so that what us seen was not made out of what was visible." Don't tell me...God made something out of nothing! How clever of him to do just what christians claim can't be done. God himself doesn't have substance. So, if we don't have faith in this assertion, how was the universe made? Good question. We've got top minds working on it. In the meantime, you can get the general idea from here. You might also try reading A Universe From Nothing? by Sean Carrol.
Till next time.
The readers need to remember their perseverance in doing the will of god will be richly rewarded, after they are dead, or maybe even sooner. After all, Habbakuk 2:3-4 says, "He who is coming will come and not delay. But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him."
As usual there is a problem with the author quoting the passage from Habakkuk. It's not a person, but a thing, that will come without delay, specifically a revelation about "the end." Also, the author left out a couple of words and phrases that don't fit his narrative. He also completely makes up that bit at the end about not pleasing god if you shrink back. It's not in Habbakuk. That doesn't stop him from making it important though. He goes on to say, "We are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed but of those who believe and are saved." He's got that kind of backward, hasn't he? The believers often ended up being destroyed. Those who recanted were saved. At least in this shadow world.
We are now in chapter eleven, the most famous chapter of this book. It is all about faith. The author has been leading us to this point so that he can make the case for faith. He believes that if you haven't got faith, you haven't got anything. He defines faith as: "Being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." That's the NIV version. You may be more familiar with the KJV, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." The NIV version sounds almost like a definition of extreme optimism. The KJV version sounds delusional. What do tangible thing do you actually have when you have faith? No-thing! There is no substance to faith, so it can't be actual evidence of the invisible.
This author is playing fast and loose with reality. He's making bald assertions that make no sense. He's basically saying that having faith in something is what makes it true. People have faith in all kinds of things. Is all faith in unseen things equal evidence for those things' existence? The author continues to play on the theme of faith and the unseen by telling the reader that it is by faith that they "understand the universe was made at god's command (nothing but faith), so that what us seen was not made out of what was visible." Don't tell me...God made something out of nothing! How clever of him to do just what christians claim can't be done. God himself doesn't have substance. So, if we don't have faith in this assertion, how was the universe made? Good question. We've got top minds working on it. In the meantime, you can get the general idea from here. You might also try reading A Universe From Nothing? by Sean Carrol.
Till next time.
Friday, May 3, 2019
Hebrews part twelve
We are at Hebrews chapter ten. The Hebrews are told, "The law is only a shadow of things that are coming-- not the realities themselves." Here we go again with earthly things being shadows of perfect heavenly things. Again the author goes over the previous necessity of regular earthly sacrifices and how they were a shadow of christ's single sacrifice of himself.
In fact, the author claims christ said, "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. (Even though you mandated them.) Then I said, 'Here I am-- it is written about me in the scroll--I have come to do your will o god.'"
But Jesus never actually said that. Whoever wrote Psalm 40:6-8 did. My bible says it is a Psalm of David. Again, is the author of Hebrews suggesting Jesus is a reincarnation of David? Also, the author of Hebrews left out a few parts of the original Psalm. There it claims god pierced the speaker's ears. Ear piercing was a sign that you were someone's slave. In this case David would be claiming to be god's slave. That's not in the letter to the Hebrews. Another thing: in verse eight of that Psalm, the writer says to god, "your law is in my heart." He looks on the law as the will of god, not a shadow of a greater reality. Nowhere in the Psalm is it said that the speaker (Jesus or David?) will be literally sacrificing his own body. That is the personal interpretation of the Hebrews writer.
The author goes on to say that after the christ made his one time sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of god. Again we are told about enemies becoming (Jesus or David's?) footstools. Again we are told that the holy spirit spoke in Jeremiah 31:33-34, when god says he will put his law in the Jews' hearts and minds, and forget their sins. Since they are forgiven, "there is no longer any need for sacrifice for sin."
So, now the brothers (Jews) get to enter the most holy place (the heavenly temple) by the blood of Jesus. Yay? Jesus's body has become the new living curtain into the holy place. Eww. The hearts of the faithful have been sprinkled (with Jesus's blood) to cleanse them from a guilty conscience. Is that invisible/metaphorical sprinkled blood? The author also mentions having their bodies washed with pure water. That seems to be a reference to actual water and bodies, so he must be referring to baptism. I think.
Next the readers are told to hold on to their faith, because of what they've been promised. They also need to "spur one another on to love and good deeds." (I'm sure it's figurative, but "spurring" sounds painful.) They also need to keep meeting together, even more as "the day" approaches. That day hasn't arrived yet, over 1,500 years later.
Also, no more sinning. (Define sin) If the readers keep sinning, jesus's sacrifice for sins will get used up and run out. That would make them enemies of god who will eventually be consumed by raging fire. After all, the law of Moses contained the death penalty, without mercy for sinners. How much worse should it be for those who "trample the son of god under foot?" This trampling of Jesus is obviously figurative, will the burning of sinners be as well? Sinners are treating the blood of the new covenant as unholy and insulting the spirit of grace. For shame! Uh, oh, don't forget, vengeance is god's and he will repay. "It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the lord." But don't worry, be happy.
Till next time.
In fact, the author claims christ said, "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. (Even though you mandated them.) Then I said, 'Here I am-- it is written about me in the scroll--I have come to do your will o god.'"
But Jesus never actually said that. Whoever wrote Psalm 40:6-8 did. My bible says it is a Psalm of David. Again, is the author of Hebrews suggesting Jesus is a reincarnation of David? Also, the author of Hebrews left out a few parts of the original Psalm. There it claims god pierced the speaker's ears. Ear piercing was a sign that you were someone's slave. In this case David would be claiming to be god's slave. That's not in the letter to the Hebrews. Another thing: in verse eight of that Psalm, the writer says to god, "your law is in my heart." He looks on the law as the will of god, not a shadow of a greater reality. Nowhere in the Psalm is it said that the speaker (Jesus or David?) will be literally sacrificing his own body. That is the personal interpretation of the Hebrews writer.
The author goes on to say that after the christ made his one time sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of god. Again we are told about enemies becoming (Jesus or David's?) footstools. Again we are told that the holy spirit spoke in Jeremiah 31:33-34, when god says he will put his law in the Jews' hearts and minds, and forget their sins. Since they are forgiven, "there is no longer any need for sacrifice for sin."
So, now the brothers (Jews) get to enter the most holy place (the heavenly temple) by the blood of Jesus. Yay? Jesus's body has become the new living curtain into the holy place. Eww. The hearts of the faithful have been sprinkled (with Jesus's blood) to cleanse them from a guilty conscience. Is that invisible/metaphorical sprinkled blood? The author also mentions having their bodies washed with pure water. That seems to be a reference to actual water and bodies, so he must be referring to baptism. I think.
Next the readers are told to hold on to their faith, because of what they've been promised. They also need to "spur one another on to love and good deeds." (I'm sure it's figurative, but "spurring" sounds painful.) They also need to keep meeting together, even more as "the day" approaches. That day hasn't arrived yet, over 1,500 years later.
Also, no more sinning. (Define sin) If the readers keep sinning, jesus's sacrifice for sins will get used up and run out. That would make them enemies of god who will eventually be consumed by raging fire. After all, the law of Moses contained the death penalty, without mercy for sinners. How much worse should it be for those who "trample the son of god under foot?" This trampling of Jesus is obviously figurative, will the burning of sinners be as well? Sinners are treating the blood of the new covenant as unholy and insulting the spirit of grace. For shame! Uh, oh, don't forget, vengeance is god's and he will repay. "It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the lord." But don't worry, be happy.
Till next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)