Discussion Hebrew Roots; error or something else?

[SpiritPsalmist]

There are many people in the world who think that Hebrew was spoken by Adam and hi wife Eve; it is part of a mythology created to glorify fleshly Israel and the HRM is only the most recent manifestation of it. There are many other worldly views being privately brought into the christian community and pastors, teachers, and those in the pews need to speak against these things. This thread may help a little in that task, By the way, thank you for your posts because they are often very succinct and very telling refutations of the errors that some want to propagate.

I didn't say anything about Adam and Eve. Do you think they spoke Latin? LOL

 

[MoreCoffee]

Here is the Hebrews ref in full context:
...
Hebrews 9:1-22 ...
...

I have several bibles at hand and I read Hebrews from chapter one verse one to chapter thirteen verse twenty five more than once in the past few days. I am sure that one of my earlier posts quoted chapter nine almost in full. You are welcome to reply to it.

Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
(Hebrews 9:6-10 KJV)​

​

The time of reformation came (Heb 8:8-12). Christ brought the reformation and ended the regulations about foods and drinks, and he ended the carnal ordinances which were imposed on the people until he came (see above quote from Hebrews 9). And now the faithful people of God have a better covenant that is not like the old one which was fleshly.

But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
(Hebrews 9:11-14 KJV)​

​

With one offering - which was his body and blood shed for the remission of the sins of many - Christ Jesus has made the faithful pure (Heb 10:14). The old feasts and their rituals have no more place (Col 2:11-17) in the faith of God's chosen people who are chosen by the election of grace to faith in Jesus Christ the Lord (Rom 11:5,6). Thus when anybody comes and tells the faithful "look, you ought to follow this way and observe these days and refrain from these foods" the faithful know it is a lie.

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
(Hebrews 9:15-22 KJV)​

​

There is no returning to the old ways and the old days - be they feasts or new moons or sabbaths - because the old covenant is vanished. It is hidden in Christ and only those who are in him receive the promises.

It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
(Hebrews 9:23-28 KJV)​

​

There is only the covenant in Christ now. No other name is given to humankind by which we are to be saved than the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12). So do not listen to those who disregard his name and substitute one that was recently invented and do not follow their teaching which would have you celebrate passover and tabernacles along with Yom Kippur and the other feasts. Don't revive the carnal ordinances which were unable to help anybody. No more dietary and ritual cleanliness is available. That covenant is ended. It is abrogated.

I know that the quotes seem long and some may skip over them and think to reply without having read them and considered the teaching of the apostles but it is only to your own harm if you skip over and reply without considering the matter.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Citations cannot be snippets. If the one who reads them checks what is said they have to do so by opening a bible and reading it. They would be very lazy to restrict their reading to the verses mentioned alone. Every Christian knows, or ought to know, that the holy scriptures are to be read with reverence and studied carefully. One can hardly fulfil that duty by skipping around reading this verse and that without paying proper attention to the surrounding passage.

PS; I cited the verses I did not include quotes from the bible. Citations are not quotations.

Snippet: a small piece snipped off; a small bit, scrap, or fragment: an anthology of snippets.

I consider pieces of citations to be snippets. If you want to correct me on that, oh well.

Otherwise, you are correct that it is lazy for people to not check it out in full.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...
I consider pieces ...

Let's return to the thread's theme please.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

I have several bibles at hand and I read Hebrews from chapter one verse one to chapter thirteen verse twenty five more than once in the past few days. I am sure that one of my earlier posts quoted chapter nine almost in full. You are welcome to reply to it.

​

I disagree with your commentary.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I disagree with your commentary.

Yes, that is obvious.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Yes, that is obvious.

LOL

 

[Frogster]

Let's return to the thread's theme please.

You are not posting 'snippets". Your posts are fine, I enjoy them.

 

[MoreCoffee]

A number of the HRM leaders/preachers claim that "Jesus" is a pagan name. And some insist that a sacred name (by which they evidently mean Yeshua) must be used. There are in the ranks of the HRM those who teach that Rabbinic Jews ought not to be evangelised by Christians because they are apparently already chosen by God for salvation. With beliefs like that in the movement one hopes those errors are refuted in sermons and writing by those in the movement who reject those teachings.

 

[Frogster]

A number of the HRM leaders/preachers claim that "Jesus" is a pagan name. And some insist that a sacred name (by which they evidently mean Yeshua) must be used. There are in the ranks of the HRM those who teach that Rabbinic Jews ought not to be evangelised by Christians because they are apparently already chosen by God for salvation. With beliefs like that in the movement one hopes those errors are refuted in sermons and writing by those in the movement who reject those teachings.

The Yeshua word is a power word, a clique word, an elitism code word. The odd thing is, gentiles are being subordinated, made to feel like second class people in this movement, not all, but me plenty are. There is a show on TV, where the host says believes that Jesus hears us better if we speak Hebrew. They try to also make like Paul made talits, not tents.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

A number of the HRM leaders/preachers claim that "Jesus" is a pagan name. And some insist that a sacred name (by which they evidently mean Yeshua) must be used. There are in the ranks of the HRM those who teach that Rabbinic Jews ought not to be evangelised by Christians because they are apparently already chosen by God for salvation. With beliefs like that in the movement one hopes those errors are refuted in sermons and writing by those in the movement who reject those teachings.

I reject those teachings. I have heard about Jesus being a pagan name and while it does sound similar to the pagan god being referred to I'm not convinced. No, I've not heard that Yeshua is the supposed sacred name but I have heard that Yahwea is. I'm not convinced of that one either. I have heard Jewish musicians use that term in their songs though. I believe that Rabbinic Jews do need to be evangelized. They need to hear that Jesus/Yeshua is the Messiah and took the place of The High Priest who never sleeps nor slumbers and He's sitting on the right hand of the Father, making intercession for us 24/7, as the writer of Hebrews testified. I have personally never heard these things taught by any of the Hebrew Roots Ministries that I listen to. We can't judge all HR people by the mistakes of others....just like we would not say that all Baptists are like the Westboro Baptists

 

[MoreCoffee]

A number of the HRM leaders/preachers claim that "Jesus" is a pagan name. And some insist that a sacred name (by which they evidently mean Yeshua) must be used. There are in the ranks of the HRM those who teach that Rabbinic Jews ought not to be evangelised by Christians because they are apparently already chosen by God for salvation. With beliefs like that in the movement one hopes those errors are refuted in sermons and writing by those in the movement who reject those teachings.

I reject those teachings. ...

Excellent. So why are you in the HRM?

 

[Messy]

just like we would not say that all Baptists are like the Westboro Baptists

LOL

 

[Messy]

do you mean the ministry of death and condemnation on stones?


2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

Yes how is that nailed to the cross those two tablets of stone? You can't nail stone to a cross.

If He blotted out His own law then He can't condemn the unrepentant mocker and murderer next to Him on the cross. If that law is now gone then what is testifying against that man that he's a sinner? Where's the rules to judge him with?
The law is still here. If I open my Bible I can still read it. It isn't blotted out. Maybe the tablets of stone are even still in the Ark somewhere.
After Jesus died the law of sin and death was still in Paul's flesh.

The law is spiritual, you can't just kill that.
Romans 8
For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

That law of sin and death in his members sounds more like a rule, a natural law: I have to sin, I can't obey God. Flesh can't please God.

I think here's that written thing testifying against us that had to be blotted out:

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.

 

[MoreCoffee]

do you mean the ministry of death and condemnation on stones?

2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.​

Yes how is that nailed to the cross those two tablets of stone? You can't nail stone to a cross.
...

So your post is asking how the ministration of death and the ministration of condemnation written on stone can be nailed to the cross because it is stone?

 

[Messy]

So your post is asking how the ministration of death and the ministration of condemnation written on stone can be nailed to the cross because it is stone?

Yes that too, sorry I tend to visualise things and take it literal and then it makes no sense. Moses threw them on the ground so they broke but he couldn't red rid of the law that way. It's spiritual.
The 10 commandments still count otherwise all killers that keep rejecting Jesus have nothing to be judged by if there is no law anymore.
And you can't say that only counts for those who accept His offer because if you do and keep living in wilfull sin Paul says you won't inherit the Kingdom.

And we still have some written law that we have to obey.
Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood.

 

[Messy]

To me Hebrew roots is when I have no clue anymore I just ask DrBrown, lol.
http://www.protorah.com/did-god-do-away-with-the-law-in-romans/

 

[MoreCoffee]

Yes that too, sorry I tend to visualise things and take it literal and then it makes no sense. Moses threw them on the ground so they broke but he couldn't get rid of the law that way. It's spiritual.

The 10 commandments still count otherwise all killers that keep rejecting Jesus have nothing to be judged by if there is no law any more.

And you can't say that only counts for those who accept His offer because if you do and keep living in wilfull sin Paul says you won't inherit the Kingdom.

And we still have some written law that we have to obey.
Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood.

In one of my earlier posts I said:

The laws in the old covenant are good; nobody should say otherwise yet to return to them as a religious observance and as an obligation is to return to carnal ordinances about food and drink and days and feasts which cannot cleans one's conscience or make one good or make one pleasing to God. Without faith it is impossible to please God. And returning to the law as the way of life is to abandon the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord is himself the way that leads to eternal life.​

So I do not get why your posts keep implying that nailing the law to the cross somehow means that it is bad and that Christians will be running riot in debauchery and immorality because they are nailed to the cross.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To me Hebrew roots is when I have no clue anymore I just ask DrBrown, lol.

I don't think going to Dr Brown will do any good.

 

[Messy]

I don't think going to Dr Brown will do any good.

He knows more than I do and I haven't seen much christian teachers who could explain from the Old Testament the Trinity to rabbi's.


For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

The key thing is the word telos (τέλος). Aside from the fact that it’s ludicrous to think that Paul would contradict himself within the very same letter of careful teaching to the Romans, we have to ask and what is that word telos mean?Telos can mean ‘end’, and telos can also mean ‘goal’.

We get the word telos in telescope and things like that. So what Paul is saying is not that Christ, the messiah, is the end of the law for everyone who believes, so once what you believe in him that terminates the law. No, rather the Messiah is the goal to which the torah is pointing so that everyone who believes in and can be justified.

He’s really saying the same thing in both of those places. By rightly understanding the role of the Torah, and by rightly understanding what the Torah teaches us about faith (being that it establishes the Torah), we see that the Messiah is ultimately the goal to which the Torah is pointing us. Once we take telos and instead of translating it ‘end’ we translate it with ‘goal’, the objection disappears.