Replies

This paper will argue that Heb. 1:8 should be interpreted as a royal account that religiously delineates the kingly status of the risen and exalted Christ without attributing to him, full Deity. We will therefore begin by outlining the structure of Heb. 1:1-8 and discussing verse by verse how each unit of the text contributes to understanding Heb. 1:8

LOL O.K. And, after you are done trying to overthrow 2000 years of Christian Teaching, undertake a scientifc explanation that water really has only 1.3784 atoms of oxygen.

You'll be happy to know that verse 4 was seized upon by the Arians; ancient heretics. If we are going to have heresies, can't we at least have new ones?

I suggest this poor fellow get over himself and return to the Catholic Church and its exegesis which has sole authority to explicate the meaning of the New Testament - which, after all, only seems fair as she wrote it etc.

This method of exegesis sets out to disprove rudimentary Christian understanding. I guess some find that "fascinating."

To me, it would be like some scholar setting out to "prove" that adultery had nothing to do with "The Scarlet Letter," while ignoring the still living Nathaniel Hawthorne. The author of this unfortunate piece tries something similar - he tries to "teach" us about Hebrews while the TEACHING Church is still alive.

There are 5 doctrinal sections in Hebrews that are generally sectioned this way; Christ's pre-existence, his divine condition and his activity as Creator (1:1-4) Christ's superiority over angels (1:2 - 2:18) His superiority over Moses (3:1 - 4:13) Christ's priesthood is on a level higher than the Levitical priesthood (4:14 - 7:28) Christ's sacrifice is greater than all the sacrifices of the Old Law (8:1 - 10:18) The Navarre Bible notes that many modern scholars divides Hebrews into these five parts - some take other approaches - but no Christian scholars say that Jesus is not God. If one desires an excellent and reliable exegesis of the New Testament, one can buy The Navarre Bible collection and avoid what was posted here.

Why sup from the brackish swamp of error and confusion when one can drink the limpid waters of truth?