Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you know John wrote last, because the gospels are in that order?...And how do you know Paul wrote Hebrews?...
Most scholars believe that John was the final gospel to be written, By whom is hotly debated. And as for Hebrews, despite the title given to it by the KJV, those scholars who believe it to be a work of Paul are in a minority. This is not something that only happened recently; Origen also had his doubts.
Didn't Paul write Hebrews?______ What does Paul call Jesus at Hebrews 2:6 ?__________
Hebrews does not call Jesus the Son of Man in the sense it is intended in the Gospels, where it is a reference to Daniel 7. Hebrews is saying that Jesus became a human being (son of man as used in the OT). Mankind was made “a little lower than the angels”, but they have fallen from that high position. Jesus became human (“made lower than the angels for a little while”) but by suffering death he was raised up again so that all may be raised up again. In the Gospels the Son of Man trope references the heavenly Jesus who will return in the clouds to judge. In Hebrews the phrase ‘son of man’ references the earthly human Jesus before he dies. Opposite images.
Quote:
Hebrews 2
5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:
“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”
In putting everything under them, God left nothing that is not subject to them. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them. 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
Most scholars believe that John was the final gospel to be written, By whom is hotly debated. And as for Hebrews, despite the title given to it by the KJV, those scholars who believe it to be a work of Paul are in a minority. This is not something that only happened recently; Origen also had his doubts.
As for John, some say it is the same John that wrote the letters and revelation, so might be that they are his last penmanship, unless we are strictly speaking about the gospel accounts...
And, yes, that is why I said that, it has been said that Hebrews is written in a different style than the other Pauline letters attributed to him...I think many would attribute Hebrews to Paul because of the Rabbinic-like style, but of course, that would be wrong, he may have not been the only Pharisee-turned-Christian out there writing letters to the church...
What is there not to have an issue about? Paul undermined everything Jesus accomplished. He put the legalism of the Pharisees back in place, just under a different name.
Actually Paul did not put legalism back into place, how could he otherwise be accused of preaching against the Law?...And it was Yeshua that stated that the Law would never pass away until heaven and earth did...
As for John, some say it is the same John that wrote the letters and revelation, so might be that they are his last penmanship, unless we are strictly speaking about the gospel accounts...
And, yes, that is why I said that, it has been said that Hebrews is written in a different style than the other Pauline letters attributed to him...I think many would attribute Hebrews to Paul because of the Rabbinic-like style, but of course, that would be wrong, he may have not been the only Pharisee-turned-Christian out there writing letters to the church...
It's surprising that it could be the same John that wrote Revelation as if it were he, why didn't he write about the Olivet discourse, he being interested in the topic and one of the few eye witnesses?
It's surprising that it could be the same John that wrote Revelation as if it were he, why didn't he write about the Olivet discourse, he being interested in the topic and one of the few eye witnesses?
It is said that there were three different Johns (feeling like a hooker, now) that wrote during that time, John of the Gospel Account, John the Presbyter, possibly wrote the Letters of John and John the Revelator that wrote Revelation...However, John of the Gospel Account could not have been its author...Actually, I just looked and I do not see evidence of who wrote the three Johannine Letters either...
It is said that there were three different Johns (feeling like a hooker, now) that wrote during that time, John of the Gospel Account, John the Presbyter, possibly wrote the Letters of John and John the Revelator that wrote Revelation...However, John of the Gospel Account could not have been its author...Actually, I just looked and I do not see evidence of who wrote the three Johannine Letters either...
Agreed. It seems very unlikely that the unnamed 'disciple that Jesus loved', the putative author of the Gospel of John, is the same person as the self-named John of Patmos who wrote Revelation. The Gospel of John has no noticeable interest in apocalyptic matters whereas Revelation is all about that. The (anonymous) 'John(s?)' who wrote the Epistles of John does not sound at all like either of the first two.
Agreed. It seems very unlikely that the unnamed 'disciple that Jesus loved', the putative author of the Gospel of John, is the same person as the self-named John of Patmos who wrote Revelation. The Gospel of John has no noticeable interest in apocalyptic matters whereas Revelation is all about that. The (anonymous) 'John(s?)' who wrote the Epistles of John does not sound at all like either of the first two.
I believe that the writer of the Gospel attributed to John is contained within John itself...
Jesus said the title son of man many times but Paul never said it. How can Paul be a genuine apostle when he never abided in the words of Jesus? How did he continue in His word?
Remember, just as in the days of Noah so will it be at the coming of the son of man.
They all laughed at Noah, thinking they had no worries.
The son of man is lord of the Sabbath who comes eating and drinking in the name of the Lord and glorifying Him.
The son of man will come at a time you least expect.
That's because Paul was called by Christ AFTER He ascended. Paul followed Christ, not according to the flesh but according to the spirit.
2Co_5:16 So that we, from now on, are acquainted with no one according to flesh. Yet even if we have known Christ according to flesh, nevertheless now we know Him so no longer."
Jesus Christ according to the flesh was to be followed by the circumcision Jewish believers.
Christ Jesus, according to the spirit is to be followed by the uncircumcision believers of the nations.
Peter, in his second epistle noted Paul and that there would be those twisting what he wrote 2 Peter 3:15,16).
If Peter thought Paul was wrong he would have surely said something in Acts. Even in Galatians 2 he vouchsafed Paul's apostleship.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
