Rejecting Hebrews?

Chokmah:

It is not hard to believe Malki-tzdedk was Shem. I think the author of Hebrews went to far in saying what he did.

This is from Monnte Judah's lastest Yavoh at his website:


"Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, "This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you." And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. HEB 9:18-22

The writer of Hebrews takes his readers back to the formation of the covenant that God made with Moses and the children of Israel at Mt Sinai involving cutting and blood . His description sounds authoritative and precisely detailed. But it is not accurate when compared to the Scriptures he seems to be referring to. And more confusion is created in the minds of those who would take the time to review the facts.

Actually, there are two events being spoken of here, not one as the writer is suggesting. The first event was when Moses came down from the mountain, recounting the Torah. The second was approximately a year later, after the tabernacle was set up at its inauguration. Setting aside the fact that these were two different events, even though they are improperly combined by the writer, lets examine his argument. It leads to a powerful conclusion about the Messiah.

The writer says that Moses used the blood of calves and goats. He used water, scarlet wool, and hyssop. He sprinkled the book and the people. He goes on to say that Moses also sprinkled the tabernacle and its vessels with blood. He says that this was all done according to the Law. Let’s examine what the Law really says. (We are about to compare one deck of cards to another like in our introductory paradigm illustration.)

Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice, and said, "All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do!" And Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord. Then he arose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain with twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the sons of Israel, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls as peace offerings to the Lord. And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and the other half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, "All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!" So Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, "Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words." EXO 24:3-8

The writer of Hebrews has made a much bigger mistake here than the placement of the altar of incense in the Holy of Holies we described earlier. Moses did not use the blood of goats; he used only the blood of bulls (calves). Moses did not use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop. Moses did not sprinkle the book; he read the book to the people and he sprinkled the altar and then he sprinkled the people.

Was the writer of Hebrews intentionally misleading his readers or was he just very confused about that Law. Or could it be that someone has tampered with this text, adding things for effect? If he was just confused and has made an unintentional mistake, then he has compromised his own testimony of promoting the superiority of the Messiah. By the way, Judaizers already know about these mistakes and use the book of Hebrews as one of their best evidences to disparage the entire New Testament.

The writer also wrote that Moses also sprinkled with blood the tabernacle when it was established. So he makes another mistake.

On the first day of the first month you shall set up the tabernacle of the tent of meeting. And you shall place the ark of the testimony there, and you shall screen the ark with the veil. And you shall bring in the table and arrange what belongs on it; and you shall bring in the lampstand and mount its lamps. Moreover, you shall set the gold altar of incense before the ark of the testimony, and set up the veil for the doorway to the tabernacle. And you shall set the altar of burnt offering in front of the doorway of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting. And you shall set the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar, and put water in it. And you shall set up the court all around and hang up the veil for the gateway of the court. Then you shall take the anointing oil and anoint the tabernacle and all that is in it, and shall consecrate it and all its furnishings; and it shall be holy. And you shall anoint the altar of burnt offering and all its utensils, and consecrate the altar; and the altar shall be most holy. And you shall anoint the laver and its stand, and consecrate it. EXO 40:2-11

Moses did not use blood to sprinkle the tabernacle and its vessels. He used anointing oil and he anointed them. He didn’t use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop either.

Why was the writer of Hebrews completely mistaken about these two events. Why are these other elements added to his argument for the superiority of Yeshua as Messiah? Has someone tampered with the original writing? It appears that the writer is confused about the cleansing ceremonies in the Law and with the cleansing power of Yeshua’s blood for our sins (1 John 1:7). It looks like he disregarded the elementary teachings and instruction of washings (Heb 6:1-2) too early. It seems he thought Moses was washing and cleansing the book, the people, and the tabernacle as he wrote further in the next verse.

Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. HEB 9:23

Based on this error concerning the prior acts of Moses, the writer boldly pronounced that Yeshua took His own blood to the temple in heaven apparently for the purpose of cleansing. I agree that Yeshua’s blood is an atonement for sins. But on what basis and with the support of what other witnesses could the writer possibly conclude that Yeshua had to go to the temple in heaven to cleanse the temple? There is no basis for this conclusion and no other Scripture supports it.

For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. HEB 9:24-26

History tells us that Yeshua came approximately 4,000 years after creation. A Biblical age is considered to 2,000 years. Since the days of Yeshua, we have seen approximately 2,000 more years. Yeshua’s sacrifice for sin was not the consummation of the ages. We are witnesses of another full age after Yeshua’s work of redemption. The writer of Hebrews was at least one full age (2,000 years) off of the mark declaring the consummation of the ages. Besides, the prophets of Israel, the Messiah Himself, and the Apostles all taught that the consummation of ages comes with the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord has not happened yet. Paul even addressed that point (2 Thess 2:1-2). The writer of Hebrews made another Biblical blunder."

bump

The Hebrews madness continues. Next they will be attempting to eliminate Galatians. The arguments presented are weak at best.

In eliminating one you succeed in eliminating all. If the book of Hebrews is bunk, what does that say for the rest of 'Scripture'? That the cannon is heretical? That the Word of God has 'error'? Is the Bible the Word of God? This is what I would come away with from the argument made here.

In their desire to prove the writter of Hebrews in error he has proved the inability for scripture to be the final authority. And even MJ's state the bible as the Word of God in most statements of faith.

I think someone is shooting his foot to save his face. I think Monte is pulling the fringes of his garment and is unraveling it all. Splitting hairs and winding up a baldhead. Bitting the hand that feeds him........

shimshon said:

In eliminating one you succeed in eliminating all. If the book of Hebrews is bunk, what does that say for the rest of 'Scripture'? That the cannon is heretical? That the Word of God has 'error'? Is the Bible the Word of God? This is what I would come away with from the argument made here.

In their desire to prove the writter of Hebrews in error he has proved the inability for scripture to be the final authority. And even MJ's state the bible as the Word of God in most statements of faith.

I think someone is shooting his foot to save his face. I think Monte is pulling the fringes of his garment and is unraveling it all. Splitting hairs and winding up a baldhead. Bitting the hand that feeds him........

Click to expand...

Monte Judah is not the only one. There are more jumping on the band wagon, even though all of their "revelations" and so called "errors" have been debunked.

errr..

lol, i was thinking that i was bumping a thread that would have some good feedback on the contents of the book of hebrews, i was looking at some of the postings within the thread and completely disregarded the title in the op. oops.

I'm still looking for a good Hebrews post, i'm in June and can't find an obvious thread that had been started, maybe we should start one.

Once again, Monte Judah has never said the book of Hebrews should be thrown out. I don't get that from what he's written~ I get that there are Problems with the letter, not that it's all wrong. But who am I? whatever...

Yovel said:

This is from Monnte Judah's lastest Yavoh at his website:


His description sounds authoritative and precisely detailed. But it is not accurate when compared to the Scriptures he seems to be referring to. And more confusion is created in the minds of those who would take the time to review the facts.

This implies that he 'sounds' truthful but 'it is not accurate'. In short,
"the book of Hebrews is 'not accurate'.

Actually, there are two events being spoken of here, not one as the writer is suggesting.

The writer is 'suggesting error' (lies).

they are improperly combined by the writer,

The writer is in error, or presenting falsehood, lies.

The writer of Hebrews has made a much bigger mistake here

his own words.


than the placement of the altar of incense in the Holy of Holies we described earlier. Moses did not use the blood of goats; he used only the blood of bulls (calves). Moses did not use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop. Moses did not sprinkle the book; he read the book to the people and he sprinkled the altar and then he sprinkled the people.

Was the writer of Hebrews intentionally misleading his readers or was he just very confused about that Law.

Or could it be that someone has tampered with this text, adding things for effect?

If he was just confused and has made an unintentional mistake, then he has compromised his own testimony of promoting the superiority of the Messiah. By the way, Judaizers already know about these mistakes and use the book of Hebrews as one of their best evidences to disparage the entire New Testament.

The suggestion here is anyone who opposes his 'suggestions' are judaizers?

The writer also wrote that Moses also sprinkled with blood the tabernacle when it was established. So he makes another mistake.

Moses did not use blood to sprinkle the tabernacle and its vessels. He used anointing oil and he anointed them. He didn’t use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop either.

Why was the writer of Hebrews completely mistaken


The writer of Hebrews made another Biblical blunder."

Click to expand...

I don't have to go through the end of even this post to see that this writer has suggested that the book of hebrews is in error. The writer was completely mistaken, misleading, or tampered with the text.

Sorry Jgonz, it's what I take away from this peice.

the writer of Hebrews completely mistaken

Click to expand...

And if one book of the Word of God is completely mistaken, what about the rest? It's a logical deduction to me. If one book is in err, then the whole cannon is in question. And if that is the case...what exactly is the 'Word of God'? Is not scripture good for all things? But if part of scripture is not 'good' but in err?

You can't point out the poision and then deny the whole jar is not tainted by it.

A little leaven destroys the whole bunch. Or do we make a mitzvah out of seperating the leaven from the matzah?

The fact remains that there has been controversy over the book of Hebrews for Centuries, Monte (or whoever else questions it) have the right to their own opinions. Maybe we can chalk a few things up to mistranslation, but there are some other things in there that make me go "huh?" and don't make sense~ especially from a Hebraic perspective (which I am Admittedly still learning how to do). At any rate. I would hope that this subject makes people study more and not just pick a side of the fence to throw things from.

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Recently, some of the teachers in the Messianic movement have stated that the Book of Hebrews is errant, and therefore, should be disregarded. One of the errors pointed to as being reason to disregard the Book as Scripture, is based on the fact that in most modern translations, there is a discrepancy in relation to the placement of the Altar of Incense.

Here are a few Modern versions, showing how they render this:

Hebrews 9:4 :

NASB
having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant;

NIV
which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant.[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, Times]ESV[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron's staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant.

Message
In it were placed the gold incense altar and the gold-covered ark of the covenant containing the gold urn of manna, Aaron's rod that budded, the covenant tablets,

Complete Jewish Bible
which had the golden altar for burning incense and the Ark of the Covenant, entirely covered with gold. In the Ark were the gold jar containing the man, Aharon's rod that sprouted and the stone Tablets of the Covenant;

The translations quoted above, only represent a cross section of the Modern Versions that render the passage as altar of incense.

Here is what one of the teachers stated in his article:

The writer states that the golden altar of incense was stationed with the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies. This is incorrect. The Altar of Incense was in the Holy Place with the Menorah and Table of Shewbread. A teacher making that mistake today would be considered incompetent to the task of teaching the Bible. Why do I bring these particular mistakes up? Because these obvious errors are immediately following the statement that the New has made the Old obsolete. Hebrews 8:13 is immediately followed by Hebrews 9:1-5. When the Biblical text was originally written, chapters and verses were put in the Scripture later for referencing purposes by Bible scholars. The separation of these verses are artificial.

First of all, it is important to note that the KJVrenders the passage as this:

Hebrews 9:4Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein [was] the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]The NKJV translates this as golden censer also.

This is in agreement with

Leviticus 16:12
And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring [it] within the vail:

When I pointed this out to another one of the teachers, this was his response:

BUT, if you must justify your argument by English translations - NASB,
ASV, RSV, NET, NIV, NLT, all agree it is the ALTAR being spoken about...

He was correct in his assertion that most of the modern translations, did in fact, render it as altar of incense. There were, however, a few other points that he had overlooked, that needed to be examined and addressed, because Young's Literal Translation also rendered the phrase in question as golden censer:

4 having a golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid all round about with gold, in which [is] the golden pot having the manna, and the rod of Aaron that budded, and the tables of the covenant,

Additionally, it is important to note, that not only does the KJV, NKJV, and the YLT render it as golden censer, but all of the Reformation translations render the phrase in question as golden censer, instead of the incorrect (according to Leviticus 16) altar of incense:

Hebrews 9:4

Bishops Bible translated 1568 c.e.(43 years before KJV)
Which had the golden senser, and the arke of the couenaunt ouerlaide rounde about with golde, wherin was the golden pot hauyng Manna, and Aarons rodde that had budded, and the tables of the couenaunt:

Geneva Bible printed 1560 c.e. (51 years before the KJV)
Which had the golden censer, and the Ark of the Testament overlaid round about with gold, wherein the golden pot, which had Manna, was, and Aaron's rod that had budded, and the tables of the Testament.

Miles Coverdale Bible 1535 c.e.(76 years before KJV)
which had the golden censor, and the Arke of the Testament ouerlayed rounde aboute with golde, wherin was the golden pot with Manna, and Aarons rodd that florished, and the tables of the Testament:

Tyndale New Testamant 1525 (86 years before KJV)
which had the golden senser and the arcke of the testamet overlayde round about with golde wherin was the golden pot with manna and Aarons rodde that spronge and the tables of the testament.

Wycliffe Bible translated 1384 c.e.(216 years before KJV)
hauynge a goldun cenrer, and the arke of the testament, keuered aboute on ech side with gold, in which was a pot of gold hauynge manna, and the yerde of Aaron that florischide, and the tablis of the testament;

If we review the Latin Vulgate translated by Jerome 385 c.e. from the ancient Greek and Old Latin manuscripts (translated 1200 years before the KJV) we also find the same rendering:

aureum habens turibulum et arcam testamenti circumtectam ex omni parte auro in qua urna aurea habens manna et virga Aaron quae fronduerat et tabulae testamenti

aurarius -a -um [golden , of gold] aurum : gold.
turibulum -i n. [a censer for burning incense]

Here is the Douay Rheims[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]Catholic English translation of the Vulgate:

Having a golden censer and the ark of the testament covered about on every part with gold, in which was a golden pot that had manna and the rod of Aaron that had blossomed and the tables of the testament.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Additional translations that use [/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]golden censer[/font][font=Times New Roman, serif] :[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Mace New Testament (published in 1729), Wesley's New Testament (published in 1755), Noah Webster Bible (published in 1833), Weymouth New Testament (published in 1886), Darby's English Translation (published in 1890), Bible in Basic English (published in 1949).[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]

The reason that I am demonstrating this in such a exhaustive manner, is because when I brought up the KJV as being rendered correctly, one teacher accused the translators of intentionally changing it from Altar of incense to Golden censer, which he said was not the correct translation according to the Greek. With the above plethora of translations that were done before the KJV translators were even born, this clearly demonstrates otherwise in reference to his allegation of intentional tampering. (see Greek explanation at bottom)
[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]
Since some of the people who are teaching that the book of Hebrews is not valid, claim to be Aramaic Primacists, let's review how some translations of the Aramaic Peshitta render this verse:

Hebrews 9:4
Aramaic Peshitta (Murdock) published 1851
And there were in it the golden censer and the ark of the covenant, which was all over laid with gold; and in it were the golden urn which contained the manna and the rod of Aaron which sprouted, and the tables of the covenant;

Aramaic Peshitta (Etheridge) published late 1840's
But the interior tabernacle, that was within the second veil, was called the Holy of Holies: in it were the incense-vessel of gold, and the ark of the covenant, which was altogether covered with gold; and within it were the golden urn, in which was the manna, and the rod of Aharun that budded, and the tablets of the covenant:

Aramaic Peshitta (Lamsa) published 1933
03 But the inner tabernacle, which is within the veil of the second door, was called the Holy of Holies.
04 And there was in it the golden censer and the ark of the covenant all over laid with gold, and in it were the golden pot containing the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tablets of the covenant;

The fact that they would say that the KJV was intentionally altered, in light of the fact that the Aramaic Peshitta translations render it as golden censer also, then creates a little problem for their theory of the Aramaic Peshitta being the “original” Bible if their own statement of alteration holds true.

[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Greek explanation (referenced above):
One person told me that the KJV translators knew that the word was altar, but intentionally changed it to censer to make it conform with the English translation of Leviticus. Let's take a look at this false assumption, because there is a more specific Greek word that can be used for altar, which is translated as altar all twenty three times that it appears in the New Testament text.

Greek for 2379 thusiasterion {thoo-see-as-tay'-ree-on}
TDNT ReferenceRoot Word TDNT - 3:180,342 from a derivative of 2378 Part of Speech n n
1) the altar for slaying and burning of victims used of
a) the altar of whole burnt offerings which stood in the court of the priests in the temple at Jerusalem
b) the altar of incense which stood in the sanctuary or the Holy Place
c)any other altar

Here is the Greek word that is found in Hebrews 9:4. It is translated as golden censer the one time that it appears in the New testament text:

Greek for 2369 thumiasterion {thoo-mee-as-tay'-ree-on}
from a derivative of 2370 Part of Speech n n
1) a utensil for fumigating or burning incense
2)an altar of incense

Let's take a look at some of the words related to the above word used in Hebrews:

Greek for 2368 thumiama {thoo-mee'-am-ah}
from 2370 Part of Speech n n Outline of Biblical Usage
1)an aromatic substance burnt, incense
The above word is translated as incense four times, and as odor twice[/font],

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Greek for 2370 thumiao {thoo-mee-ah'-o}
from a derivative of 2380 (in the sense of smoking) Part of Speech v
1)to burn incense
The above word is translated as burn incense the one time that it appears in the Greek text. [/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Since the book of Hebrews was originally authored in Greek, I decided to review some other Greek writings from the era that might have information concerning the Greek word in question. I reviewed the Greek LXX, and found that the same word that is translated as censer in Hebrews 9:4, can be found in the Septuagint in the following verses:[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Ezekiel 8:11[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]2 Chronicles 26:19[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]In both passages, the Greek word thumiasterion (G2369) is used as censer. Thumiasterion is used as the equivalent for the Hebrew miqtereth (H4730) in both passages. What is really of interest, is that 2 Chronicles 26:19 differentiates between the censer and the incense altar or mizbach (H4196) by using the Greek word thusiasterion (G2379) for altar.

Here is how the KJV translated the Hebrew:[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]2 Chronicles 26 [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]19 Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the LORD, from beside the incense altar.[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Ezekiel 8 [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]11And there stood before them seventy men of the ancients of the house of Israel, and in the midst of them stood Jaazaniah the son of Shaphan, with every man his censer in his hand; and a thick cloud of incense went up.[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Now the LXX:[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]2 Chronicles 26 [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]19 And Ozias was angry, and in his hand [was] the censer to burn incense in the temple: and when he was angry with the priests, then the leprosy rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the Lord, over the altar of incense. [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Here is the Greek:[/font]



[font=Arial, sans-serif]19 kai eyumwyh oziav kai en th ceiri autou to yumiathrion tou yumiasai en tw naw kai en tw yumwyhnai auton prov touv iereiv kai h lepra aneteilen en tw metwpw autou enantion twn ierewn en oikw kuriou epanw tou yusiasthriou twn yumiamatwn[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Ezekiel 8[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]11 And seventy men of the elders of the house of Israel, and Jechonias the son of Saphan stood in their presence in the midst of them, and each one held his censer in his hand; and the smoke of the incense went up. [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Here is the Greek:[/font]

[font=Arial, sans-serif]11 kai ebdomhkonta andrev ek twn presbuterwn oikou israhl kai iezoniav o tou safan en mesw autwn eisthkei pro proswpou autwn kai ekastov yumiathrion autou eicen en th ceiri kai h atmiv tou yumiamatov anebainen[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]I also decided to reference the first century writings of Flavius Josephus. Here is an excerpt from one such writing:[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Against Apion book 2[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Lastly, it is not so much as lawful to carry any vessel into the holy house; nor is there any thing therein, but the altar [of incense], the table [of shew-bread], the censer, and the candlestick, which are all written in the law;[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]This particular writing by Josephus, who was a chronicler for the Roman empire was available in Latin. Here is the Latin text below.[/font]

[font=Arial, sans-serif]denique[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]nec[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif] uas [/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]aliquod[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]portari[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]licet[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]in[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]templum[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif], [/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]sed[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]erant[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]in[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]eo[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]solummodo[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]posita[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]altare[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]mensa[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]turibulum[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]candelabrum[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif], [/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]quae[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]omnia[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]et[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]in[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]lege[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]conscripta[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]sunt[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif].[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]It is interesting to note, that Josephus was a Jew familiar with temple service,[/font][font=Times New Roman, serif]and originally wrote this in the first century. When translated to Latin, they chose the Latin word[/font][font=Arial, sans-serif] turibulum [/font][font=Times New Roman, serif]to represent censer. It is the same word that is used in the Latin Vulgate which was translated from ancient Latin and Greek texts in 385 ce. Its definition is an incense-pan, incense-burner, censer. If you go to Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short, [/font][font=Times New Roman, serif]A Latin Dictionary, you will find that the equivalent word in Greek is thumiaterion, [/font][font=Times New Roman, serif]which is the same Greek word that is used in Hebrews 9:4 to describe the censer.[/font]


[font=Times New Roman, serif]Here is the link so that you may view this page:[/font]


[font=Arial, sans-serif]http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%2348270[/font]




It is also interesting to note, that while translating the Latin Vulgate, Jerome was consistent in the word that he chose for censer, turibulum , whether translating from the Hebrew, or the Greek. Here are some TeNaKh verses where he chose the same word for censer.


Leviticus, chapter 10, verse 1 Leviticus, chapter 16, verse 12

Numbers, chapter 16, verse 6

Numbers, chapter 16, verse 17

Numbers, chapter 16, verse 37

Numbers, chapter 16, verse 39

Numbers, chapter 16, verse 46

1 Kings, chapter 7, verse 50

2 Kings, chapter 12, verse 13

2 Kings, chapter 25, verse 15

Ezekiel, chapter 8, verse 11

2 Chronicles, chapter 4, verse 22

2 Chronicles, chapter 26, verse 19


And also including in the NT...

Hebrews, chapter 9, verse 4


[font=Times New Roman, Times]As we can see from the many witnesses listed above, we can determine the reliability of the word that is used in Hebrews 9:4, and be certain that the rendering of censer, is in fact accurate.[/font]

Heb 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
Heb 9:2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
Heb 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the holiest of all;
Heb 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

Okay, where is the goden altar of incense?

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Here is a comparison between the Tenach and the New Testament that should be of interest:[/font]


The Contents of the Ark


First the Torah:


Exodus 16
32 And Moses said, This is the thing which YHWH has commanded, Fill an omer from it, to keep for your generations, so that they may see the bread which I caused you to eat in the wilderness, as I brought you out from the land of Egypt.
33 And Moses said to Aaron, Take one pitcher, and put there the fullness of an omer of manna, and lay it up before YHWH, to keep for your generations.
34 Even as YHWH commanded Moses, Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to keep it.


Numbers 17
9 And Moses brought out all the rods from before YHWH to all the sons of Israel. And they looked, and each one took his rod.
10 And YHWH said to Moses, Put back the rod of Aaron, before the testimony, to be kept as a token to the sons of rebellion. And you shall end their murmurings off Me; and they shall not die.

Now the Prophets:

1 Kings 8
9 Nothing was in the ark, only the two tables of stone which Moses put there in Horeb, when YHWH cut a covenant with the sons of Israel as they went out of the land of Egypt.

Now the New Testament:

Hebrews 9
4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein [was] the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;



[font=Times New Roman, Times]So which one should we remove from the cannon? The first three passages do not list all of the articles in the Ark of the Covenant. 1 Kings states that there was ONLY the tables. Hebrews 9:4 is the passage that list all of the contents of the Ark correctly. This is an example of how any argument based on a minor point can be taken to an extreme. Rabbinic sources also place the rod of Aaron inside the Ark.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Here is an inventory of the furniture that is found in the sanctuary in Heaven:

Revelation 1:13 candlestick (menorah/lampstand)
Revelation 8:3,5 Altar of Incense/Golden censer (notice how the altar is before the throne (Holy of Holies)
Revelation 11:19 Ark of the covenant

What is missing:

The table of shewbread
Brazen altar
Brass laver


[font=Times New Roman, Times]Can we then be sure of the inspiration of this book? These are some of the MAJOR pieces of furniture. If this was given to John by Jesus, as most theologians believe, surely Jesus would know the pattern. This is another example of how any argument based on a minor point can be taken to an extreme, in an attempt to question the authority of the Word of God.[/font]





[/font]

those are good points you bring up

Here is an inventory of the furniture that is found in the sanctuary in Heaven:

Revelation 1:13 candlestick (menorah/lampstand)
Revelation 8:3,5 Altar of Incense/Golden censer (notice how the altar is before the throne (Holy of Holies)
Revelation 11:19 Ark of the covenant

What is missing:

The table of shewbread
Brazen altar
Brass laver

Click to expand...

The Brass articles were in the outer court and not in the actual sanctuary.

From what I understand from hebrews is that those things in the sanctuary are symbolic of what happens in the heavenly courts and those things in the outer court are what happens here on earth. Think about it for the most part.... the Passover... outer court... Pentecost... outer court... Yom Kippur... holy of holies... Since the feast are symbolic prophecies they also tell us place for the events by whether in they are in the temple or in the outer court or on the street(wilderness) in a booth as Succoth is.

baraqemet said:

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Here is a comparison between the Tenach and the New Testament that should be of interest:[/font]


The Contents of the Ark


First the Torah:


Exodus 16
32 And Moses said, This is the thing which YHWH has commanded, Fill an omer from it, to keep for your generations, so that they may see the bread which I caused you to eat in the wilderness, as I brought you out from the land of Egypt.
33 And Moses said to Aaron, Take one pitcher, and put there the fullness of an omer of manna, and lay it up before YHWH, to keep for your generations.
34 Even as YHWH commanded Moses, Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to keep it.


Numbers 17
9 And Moses brought out all the rods from before YHWH to all the sons of Israel. And they looked, and each one took his rod.
10 And YHWH said to Moses, Put back the rod of Aaron, before the testimony, to be kept as a token to the sons of rebellion. And you shall end their murmurings off Me; and they shall not die.

Now the Prophets:

1 Kings 8
9 Nothing was in the ark, only the two tables of stone which Moses put there in Horeb, when YHWH cut a covenant with the sons of Israel as they went out of the land of Egypt.

Now the New Testament:

Hebrews 9
4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein [was] the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;



[font=Times New Roman, Times]So which one should we remove from the cannon? The first three passages do not list all of the articles in the Ark of the Covenant. 1 Kings states that there was ONLY the tables. Hebrews 9:4 is the passage that list all of the contents of the Ark correctly. This is an example of how any argument based on a minor point can be taken to an extreme. Rabbinic sources also place the rod of Aaron inside the Ark.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Here is an inventory of the furniture that is found in the sanctuary in Heaven:

Revelation 1:13 candlestick (menorah/lampstand)
Revelation 8:3,5 Altar of Incense/Golden censer (notice how the altar is before the throne (Holy of Holies)
Revelation 11:19 Ark of the covenant

What is missing:

The table of shewbread
Brazen altar
Brass laver


[font=Times New Roman, Times]Can we then be sure of the inspiration of this book? These are some of the MAJOR pieces of furniture. If this was given to John by Jesus, as most theologians believe, surely Jesus would know the pattern. This is another example of how any argument based on a minor point can be taken to an extreme, in an attempt to question the authority of the Word of God.[/font]





[/font]

Click to expand...

I guess you mean Revelations. In the first place John wasn't trying to let people know What the temple in heaven looked like. Rev 1:13 Was a revelation of Yeshua on the Isle of Patmos. The Seven Menorahs had to do with Yeshua telling John to worn the 7 Asian churches. So Rev 1:13 is taken out of context.

You have taken Rev 8:3,5 out of context too. Rev 8:1-5, is about breaking the 7th seal. The angel taking the golden censor is just part of the seal being broken. Again, John was not trying to show anything about the heavenly temple.

Rev 11:15-19 has to do with the blowing of the seventh trumpet. Verse 19, Then the temple of G-d was opened in heaven, and the ark of His covenant was seen in His temple. And there were lightnings, noieses and thundering, an earthquake and great hail.

1Sa 5:2 And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon. This was most likely why only the two tables of stone were left in the ark of the covenant.

If this is so then why does the writer of hebrews talk about other things in the Ark of the covenant knowing that they were not there at the time of his writing?

You have taken Rev 8:3,5 out of context too. Rev 8:1-5, is about breaking the 7th seal. The angel taking the golden censor is just part of the seal being broken. Again, John was not trying to show anything about the heavenly temple.

Click to expand...

Come up hither... yes that is exactly what John is trying to show... the activities of the heavenly sancutary and it's relationship to the events here on earth.