Melchisedec king of Salem

[PaladinValer]

Book of Jashar is an Apocryphal book that is not included in any bible I have seen or own.

Thus extra biblical...

No, it isn't Apocryphal; it is lost at best. The only "books" of it we have today are fakes.

 

[Tiredknight]

Getting close to ad homs here...



Sorry, but Zedek is the name of a Caananite deity



This also is false.

I would encourage you to actually do a little research on Caananite religion. El Elyon is consistently listed in the names of deities those people worshiped.



It also refers, and originally referred to, the chief deity of the Caananites.



The etymology suggests otherwise.



I am right, and again, I highly suggest you do research in Caananite religion.

No thanks I will stick with what the bible actually says...

 

[PaladinValer]

No thanks I will stick with what the bible actually says...

It isn't a valid interpretation if it ignores proven etymology. Reading is interpretation, and if we don't have the right etymology, our interpretations are wrong.

The same goes when we ignore facts of the local peoples mentioned in the Holy Writ. Ignoring the fact that El, El Elyon, and Zedek are Caananite deities does lead to bad interpretations because without such knowledge, we are missing out on what the Holy Bible is trying to say.

So what is being said above is not "what the Bible actually says" but "what I think the Bible says and I don't need to have any background knowledge".

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Joshua is not typically held for writing Judges... Samuel is... You might want to take an Old testament survey class. It might help you...

.

I did not say Joshua wrote Judges -Duh!

I said the histories continued to be written and included, for the reading of those who study to learn the doings of the fathers and God's work in their lives.
I do not agree with you about the present 1 and 2 Chronicles, for in 2nd Ezra -in the Eastern Orthodox Bible, and others- the Manuscripts were lost when the temple was destroyed and rewritten miraculously, in a certain number of days....and no doubt many were rediscovered later.
Personally, I think Chronicles was a rewritten Kings, and it has some garbled accounts, but not many, like making Moses' adoptive mother, Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, a mother to a line in Judah in 1 Chronicles 4...

But that is just my own observation, and you can take it or leave it.
Otherwise: Jasher is true history and Enoch is true prophecy, and if you want to know who Melchi/king Zedek/Righteousness was, then read the true history.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I feel this does not make sense. I have some issues with what your saying. You are first saying it is a "Catholic Letter' but it is not. It is not a universal.

The non-Pauline epistles, such as James, Jude, 1 Peter (et al) are known as the Catholic Epistles or General Epistles ("general" is a fair translation of the Greek kathalikos, with "catholic" being a direct transliteration).

Hebrews is an odd duck, in that it has at times been attributed to St. Paul, and at times attributed to someone else--either by name or to an anonymous author. Hebrews is almost certainly not Pauline, it doesn't fit Paul's style, unlike every other Pauline text the author does not mention himself as Paul (etc). Who wrote Hebrews is anybody's guess, names that have been guessed include the apostles, St. Apollos or St. Barnabas; but that's just conjecture.

Hebrews probably should be considered among the General Epistles, because it's not a Pauline Epistle; but otherwise it tends to stand on its own in a rather nebulous place due to the controversy surrounding its anonymous author.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[yeshuasavedme]

what people choose to believe now a days simply mystifies me. No wonder the church is failing... People will put trust in liars and non existent books instead of the word of God.

Why don't you go buy the Book of Jashar. Go ahead go find any translated book, directly translated from the original.

I will wait...

You are most ill informed of the history of the Word of God, and what was and is included in many collections of books =Bible; held sacred through out the history of the world and of Israel and of the early Church and of present Church groups worldwide, who worship Jesus Christ as God come in flesh and as our Redeemer.
You need to go learn the history of the ancient patriarchs and of Israel's history and Church history and learn about the lack of consensus among the different groups on what they do hold -and have held- as sacred writings.

 

[TheWiseMan]

You are most ill informed of the history of the Word of God

Aren't you being a wee bit overboard on this?

 

[Keachian]

You are most ill informed of the history of the Word of God, and what was and is included in many collections of books =Bible; held sacred through out the history of the world and of Israel and of the early Church and of present Church groups worldwide, who worship Jesus Christ as God come in flesh and as our Redeemer.
You need to go learn the history of the ancient patriarchs and of Israel's history and Church history and learn about the lack of consensus among the different groups on what they do hold -and have held- as sacred writings.

I see no reason to, nor have any inclination to accept Jasher and Enoch as theopneustos, nor have I any reason to see them as held so at any point in time during the history of the People of God.

 

[TheWiseMan]

I see no reason to, nor have any inclination to accept Jasher and Enoch as theopneustos, nor have I any reason to see them as held so at any point in time during the history of the People of God.

You must really get to know them. That may well change your mind.

 

[ViaCrucis]

At the very least Enoch has pedigree. It's old. There exists no known copies of Jasher that have survived to the modern period, everything out there claiming to be Jasher is a known fake.

I don't embrace Enoch as Scripture for the same reason I don't embrace the Assumption of Moses, the Testament of the Patriarchs, or the Book of Jubilees. However the reason I don't embrace Jasher as Scripture is the same reason I don't embrace the Gospel of Secret Mark or the DaVinci Code--they are modern ficitions.

Enoch is apocryphal. Jasher is a fraud.

Big difference.

Now hold on a moment, I suddenly discovered the original Hebrew copy of the Book of Ido the Seer, and I'm in the process of *cough* translating it *cough*. I also have a couple of golden plates in my back yard.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Keachian]

Now hold on a moment, I suddenly discovered the original Hebrew copy of the Book of Ido the Seer, and I'm in the process of *cough* translating it *cough*. I also have a couple of golden plates in my back yard.

Golden plates are all well and good, but nothing beats direct revelation from God even in contradiction to known history.

 

[YeShallTread]

Golden plates are all well and good, but nothing beats direct revelation from God even in contradiction to known history.

Contradiction to "known history," isn't the same as the historical account given in the Holy word of God.

When a "new" revelation or a book is found that nullifies or changes His Holy Word then....should you listen to it?

Mark 13:22-23 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
​

All things He told us are written. New revelations, deeper spiritual understanding, of what is written are given us by the Holy Spirit but the nexus never alters.

We have to remember the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Within it's knowledge will always be some truth but.......therein lies it's seduction.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Aren't you being a wee bit overboard on this?

Perhaps but you need to do some history studies on these things.

 

[Tiredknight]

Contradiction to "known history," isn't the same as the historical account given in the Holy word of God.

When a "new" revelation or a book is found that nullifies or changes His Holy Word then....should you listen to it?

Mark 13:22-23 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
​

All things He told us are written. New revelations, deeper spiritual understanding, of what is written are given us by the Holy Spirit but the nexus never alters.

We have to remember the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Within it's knowledge will always be some truth but.......therein lies it's seduction.

I do not think you know what your talking about.

The whole point of the Gospel of Luke is that it correlates with known history. Known history backs up scripture. But all the worlds history is not dictated by the bible. The bible also does not contradict Known history. It just doesn't...

 

[Tiredknight]

And to the person saying the Mel was a cannanite deity worshiper. You are wrong.

the verse genesis 14:18 states he was the Priest of the Most High. Which in the hebrew is Elyown, which translates to God.

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

get your translation right.

Also King of Salem refers to Jerusalem.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H8004&t=KJV

 

[yeshuasavedme]

I see no reason to, nor have any inclination to accept Jasher and Enoch as theopneustos, nor have I any reason to see them as held so at any point in time during the history of the People of God.

Your eyes are closed to the facts that are recorded in history. Why? -I do not know: maybe it would upset your whole framework of personal belief based on partial and incomplete understanding of God's One plan from the beginning, and how He works, to discover that you are missing the foundational revelation and history of God's plan and work.
Jesus and His disciples were well aware of both works, but also, there was in His day -and in ours- the book written during the dispersion that was a total denial of that plan, and which presented the Law as the "Be All End All", and which contradicted those things written in the Torah, Enoch, and in Jasher, and mixed the false with some of the facts, making itself seem credible.

Jesus did not come teaching that the Jews had it all wrong, by that contradicting book, but just taught Truth as it is written in Enoch and the Torah and the other prophets, and true history as it is written in from Genesis on, and in Yasher/Jasher. He waited until after His resurrection to begin separating His Apostles and Disciples from that false work so deeply embedded in their hearts at that time; and one remarkable incident was Peter's vision of the unclean meats let down in the sheet, which was the LORD Jesus' manner of teaching Peter that he was believing a false teaching inserted into his heart by that one book, which book specifically and falsely states exactly what Peter told the Household of Cornelius, but Jesus showed Peter differently.

 

[Tiredknight]

AND Melchisedek Means "My king is righteousness".

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

Now stop spreading lies...

 

[Tiredknight]

AND Jerusalem means "Teachings/foundations of peace".

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

Stop being ignorant and actually learn what the words men.

 

[PaladinValer]

And to the person saying the Mel was a cannanite deity worshiper. You are wrong.

Sorry; the ancient record shows I am correct. Both El and Elyon were deities worshiped by the ancient Caananites. The names were later taken over by the Hebrews and attributed to the only true God.

Channeling the three monkies that hear, see, and speak no evil doesn't work.

El (deity) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Canaanite religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Furthermore, you could at least write my SN instead of "the person". A little dismissive. It takes just a few seconds, and if you forgot, a quick scroll.

 

[Tiredknight]

Sorry; the ancient record shows I am correct. Both El and Elyon were deities worshiped by the ancient Caananites. The names were later taken over by the Hebrews and attributed to the only true God.

Channeling the three monkies that hear, see, and speak no evil doesn't work.

El (deity) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Canaanite religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Furthermore, you could at least write my SN instead of "the person". A little dismissive. It takes just a few seconds, and if you forgot, a quick scroll.

Your Little Wikipedia Nonesense does not change what the words mean.. your wrong.

And Man Wikipedia as a source to translate the bible what a sorry sad way to try and prove a false thought.

That is like using star wars to explain your religion. Oh wait... they did that, Scientology.