Letting Go
“Take courage, My son, your sins are forgiven.” Matthew 9:2
Are Forgiven – Are the gospel stories so familiar that you no longer pay attention to the small details? It is unfortunately true for many Christians. We learned the stories in Sunday school. We have the images locked away in our minds. As a result, we don’t recognize the unusual characteristics of many of these events. One of those unusual characteristics occurs in this story of the paralyzed man. The incident is recorded in Mark and Luke with much more detail (like lowering the man through the roof). But the truly unusual element shows up right here, in Yeshua’s declaration. Let’s take a closer look.
The Greek word aphiemi describes the action of dismissing, of letting go or escaping. It is also used for abandoning and forsaking and leaving alone. To forgive is to dismiss or let go of the resulting guilt. In this verse, the verb is third person, plural, present passive. It is better translated “Your sins are being forgiven.” Yeshua proclaims that this man’s sins are forgiven at the same moment the words are uttered. Of course, the religious authorities object since this is an action only God can perform. We recognize this conflict. But there is a more subtle issue here that might elude us. Did you notice that there is no atonement required for forgiving these sins?
Most of our theological understanding about forgiveness requires atonement. In Judaism we look toward the sacrifices. In Christian thinking, we look toward the crucifixion. But here Yeshua forgives without any such requirement. This isn’t the only time atonement seems to be missing (consider the thief on the cross). Does this raise some question about the required connection between forgiveness and atonement? Perhaps our understanding of forgiveness is too constrained by theological requirements. Perhaps forgiveness has elements we can’t easily absorb.
When Yeshua forgives this man, he proclaims that he has the authority to do so. He takes on the performative function of God. We read this as evidence of His divinity. But perhaps we need to read it as more than that. Perhaps we need to see that God can forgive from grace alone. This paralyzed man does not ask for forgiveness. He does not repent. All he does is demonstrate faith – a reliance on Yeshua’s ability. He simply acts in a way that exhibits his commitment. This challenges our view of the necessary sacrifice of Yeshua for the forgiveness of sin. Perhaps we need to rethink the doctrine so that it incorporates the ability of God to forgive simply because He chooses to. Perhaps forgiveness isn’t quite as cut-and-dried as we thought. Perhaps there is a lot more going on here than our feeble attempts to define forgiveness.
Are you ready to think bigger?
Topical Index: forgive, aphiemi, dismiss, atonement, Matthew 9:2
“Did you notice that there is no atonement required for forgiving these sins?”
Skip, No atonement required by whom? By the man? By Yeshua Himself? Since the man could not make his own atonement, then Yeshua had no need to ask him to do it. If atonement by Yeshua himself was not necessary, then why the Crucifixion, Resurrections, etc.? And since Yeshua’s atonement is past, present and future, it is not necessary for Yeshua to bring in the topic of the atonement at this time. Heb. 9:22 “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” And isn’t this what Torah teaches in the sacrifice of the scapegoat?
Heb. 9:22 “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.”
Really?
“If My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”
Really!
Does “turn from their wicked ways” mean turning to Torah, all of it, including the atonement practices?
“Does “turn from their wicked ways” mean turning to Torah, all of it, including the atonement practices?”
No. [As Skip so regularly says: “context, context, context…”] God’s words here are an answer to the list of specific “wicked ways” that Solomon prayed about in Ch6.
“context, context, context…”
And what “context” were those “wicked ways” to he any meaning to Israelites if it were not “wicked” in relation to Torah?
Ian – of course, it is in relation to Torah… everything is… but Judaism is about detail.
Rather than me keep failing to explain the differences between the mindsets, can we take this in another direction… can we look at the detail? Can you show me where you think that the Jews of Solomon’s time had failed to seek atonement? Second: can you show us where, in the ‘Old Testament’ that God said or implied: “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins”?
Ian
You have made the difference in mindsets very clear: conclusion or process.
But, I’m having trouble following you. When I asked for chapter and verse on another occasion, didn’t you suggested this method was illegitimate? A methodological difference means agreement will be difficult, if not impossible. Perhaps this question helps clarify this point.
How do we know that the mindsets you refer to are the correct ones and the ones people ought to have?
The word “sins” does not appear in Heb 9:22 in the Greek text, nor does the word “forgiveness”. To wit:
καὶ σχεδὸν ἐν αἵματι πάντα καθαρίζεται κατὰ τὸν νόμον καὶ χωρὶς αἱματεκχυσίας οὐ γίνεται ἄφεσις
“And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. ”
This is speaking of cleansing, sanctification and remission of the penalty which, I propose, is different to forgiveness (but you don’t have to agree with me 🙂 ).
The entire book of Hebrews, and especially chapters 7-9, are written about the Temple service on Yom Kippur. If we don’t properly understand the Temple service (esp. that of the High Priest) on Yom Kippur we will completely misunderstand what the Letter to the Hebrew Believers is explaining to them (yes, them, not us – it wasn’t written to us, unless we happen to be first century Hebrew believers living in or near Israel during the great siege of Jerusalem and seeing the pending destruction of the second temple).
Rodney
I’m sorry. I used the translation “The Complete Jewish Bible” when I quoted from Heb.9:22. Shows you just can’t trust translators to get it right.
But I did not get the point you were trying to make? Was there something in the use of “forgiveness” rather than “remission” than changes the meaning?
“…since this is an action only God can perform…”
Hi Skip – I’m not sure about this statement. I agree that it is true that only God can deal with our transgressions, but ‘sin’ is not in the same league as ‘transgression’. We are all able to forgive sin – check out Matthew Ch18 v21 for instance.
Also you have in John 20:22,23, where Jesus breathes on the disciples to receive the Holy Spirit and says to them ” if you forgive the sins of anyone, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of anyone, they are retained.
My perception of forgiving without repentance from a person means God/Jesus can see directly into our hearts & He knows if they are repentant or not & that is why He does what He does & only He can do such as He does – thank God He is that Great & Awesome – for the soldier on the field or the thief on the cross or the dying atheist on the bed of death.
I am VERY thankful that God forgives MY sin, and Jesus is the pattern by which I am to forgive the sins that others have committed against me. I can’t comprehend God’s ability to do this, but I can act in this way towards those who have offended me–IF I avail myself of His power, grace and love to do so. That is the place of freedom and letting go!
Thank You CYndee,
I wrote my very first blog ever on this last 9/6 on Skips post, “Reassessment” which in my mind is directly connected to todays posting.
“Did you notice that there is no atonement required for forgiving these sins?”
Has anyone noticed that David didn’t offer any sacrifice for his sins with Bathsheba?
2Sa. 12:13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
It’s not that there is no REQUIREMENT for sacrafice, there IS NO sacrifice for blatant sin. We are left to fall helplessly on the grace and mercy of YHVH!
No time today to comment on this. Maybe later.
In John 1:29 He is referred to as the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world, and in Rev.13:8 it says He was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world.
Kay, I absolutely agree. He is the same yesterday, today and forever!
Hmmmm…this forgiveness solely through grace sounds a bit like divine election? The Sovereign having mercy on whosoever He will…do tell. It also appears Yeshua was moved to compassion when He saw the faith of those bringing the sick one to the throne of grace.
–In Judaism we look toward the sacrifices. In Christian thinking, we look toward the crucifixion.–
This bothers me all over. I have often wondered (because I was not “brought up” in the Jewish culture) what do the “modern day” Jews believe concerning “atonement?” As you mentioned here Skip “in Judaism “we” (who is we?) look toward the sacrifices. Who is we? and what sacrifices are we looking toward? Sacrifices yet to be? What sacrifices are we referring to here? I’m confused.
One thing (as a Christian) I am clear on. Y’shua is the Perfect Lamb of G-d that has shed His own blood for my soul. I believe in His atoning, propitiating, supernatural, sin-covering, sin-cleasing blood- shed for me at a place called Calvary. I believe three days later, the same ONE who gave His life for me, was released from His tomb and walked out of the grave in glorious resurrection power and authority. This was the death of death. HaSatan was defeated on the day. The grave was defeated on that day. Y’shau was the conqueror the Jews had long awaited, only His victory was quite different than what was expected.
And when I read these words today, it is as if G-d is speaking directly to me. A very encouraging word from the word. My sins are forgiven. Past, present, future- “Paid in Full”.
Now to those who just can’t see how I can “sin all I want”, let be comfort your hearts about this. Are you listening? I do not want to sin. (need to hear this again?- I will gladly confess- I do not want to sin. Sin is stupid. Sin is dumb. Sin is insane. I don’t want any part of it. I hate sin! (I really do!)- Sin is what nailed my Savior to a tree! Y’shua suffered because of sin. And now I should want to sin? I hate to be blunt, – but are you nuts? No, no and no. I’m changed my friends. I am different. Something (or Someone) has got a hold on me and is not letting go, but getting stronger every day. lol!- I’m gonna do the best I know how to co-operate with His agenda. To do His will. If I do this, (and by G-d’s grace I will), a change will take place. G-d will be pleased and I will be blessed. G-d is making every bit of this to happen. It is rather amazing, but I like it!- Living this way is fun! -“Whatever He says to you- do it”-
I have often wondered (because I was not “brought up” in the Jewish culture) what do the “modern day” Jews believe concerning “atonement?”
Hi Carl,
According to the Doctrine of Man in the Talmud: Repentance is the ultimate means of cleansing man from sin; but the repentence must be proved sincere.
Although I tend not to think in these terms, when I read the Doctrine of Man it is identical to what I was taught by the Nuns in the Catholic Church as a child.
Michael, I do not wish to appear blunt my dear brother, but it is Truth I am after. Even to mention the Doctrine of Man, or Mr. So and So, or Mr. Who’s who leaves a bad taste in my mouth. “Opinions and theories abound. Pilate asked one of the best questions ever asked- “what is truth?” YHWH has a tremendous sense of humor- “Truth” was standing directly in front of Pilate, yet he was blind to it- just as we all are until we come to the place of repentance, realization and recognition- He is the Christ, the Son of the Living G-d- He is G-d the now living Son. YHWH is Y’shua and Y’shua is YHWH. He is Hashem. He is El Gibbor, He is “Pele-yoez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom.”
“Judaism is about detail.” (Thank you Ian and Tara) It is all about the details. Life IS in the details. Let us look then at just a few. Notice please, as brother Skip has pointed out for us- this “name” pele-yoez-el” does not contain commas. For the sake of clarity, I will call them “Greek separators”– lol!
Yes, as Greeks (and as men) we all love our compartmentalization. We (especially menfolk) love to compartmentalize our life. We have our work life, home life, church life, etc. (Did you notice the details?) Commas. Greek separators-lol! Now if all of life was sacred- and it is -let us then return to “pele-yoez-el”
Details? Yes! Instead of Greek separators (commas) we have (in wonderful Hebrew thought- the “dash”)
There is no separation between pele yoez el gibbor Abi ad sar shalom. This is His name. This is Hashem. But my friends, this is only a part of His name. We (mortals) would run out of breath before we said His name. His full name. Perhaps for now we are better off to say Elohim or YHWH. The name of G-d is sacred. This is why I (personally) have taken to spelling God- “G-d.” In recognition of the holiness of His name. Y’shua taught this also as in what we now refer to as “the Lord’s prayer.”
Are we still paying attention to the details? (good..) Let us start then with “Our Father.” Now isn’t this a strange happening. The Master/Teacher is instructing His students to say “our Father.” We haven’t stepped two words into this prayer and already there is a problem. – “Our Father?” – This is a word of relationship -is it not? This word Father- is there a need to write paragraphs or books about this? Yes, -how do you feel about calling YHWH or Hashem- “Father” and not only “Father” but “our Father?” We are tripped up already- “unless.” “Beloved, now we are children of G-d, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.” (1 John 3.2) Details, anyone? “Now” are “we” the children of G-d- (but wait!-there’s more!!-lol!!!)
Y’shua is the great Unifier and He is the great Divider. He is the Creator and Sustainer of all life. By Him were the worlds created and He existed long before the world had its beginning. What else can I do but “bow the knee?” His confession was “I AM” My confession is “He IS”. It is time for all of us to give unto the LORD (yes, all caps- YHWH-the LORD-He is G-d) the glory due His name. The glory due unto Hashem. There is a NAME which is above every name. -Do you know this NAME? Study the details. Put this NAME under a microscope. Examine Him thoroughly. My confession is this- “I find no fault in Him.” He is the Perfect Lamb of G-d. And this Perfect Lamb of G-d is also the Lion of the tribe of Judah. Time once again for me to “bow the knee.” The LORD- He is G-d.
“Even to mention the Doctrine of Man, or Mr. So and So, or Mr. Who’s who leaves a bad taste in my mouth.”
Hi Carl,
That’s very funny Carl, because if I were to employ a biblical metaphor related to the lips.
I would say that the Doctor of Man leaves a rather sweet taste in my mouth 🙂
“The poetic (and biblical) view of the mouth and lips is almost entirely romantic and idealized — ‘… the lips of a strange woman drop as a honeycomb, and her mouth is smoother than oil …’” (Proverbs)
In any case, it seems to me that from an academic perspective, the Talmud seems to show how Jewish ideas became Christianized, and in that way it seems very illuminating to me.
Hi Skip, If I were a new comer, today’s Today’s Word would be extremely confusing and I would be left wondering who is this Skip guy anyhow???? But then as a daily reader for the past three years, I am always stretched to look to God’s Word, setting aside old thought patterns if need be, to see the whole picture. When I first started studying my Jewish roots I battled with many of the “new” ideas that were being presented to me. I pleaded with God to show me from His Word what all this talk about Israel, the Feasts, and the LAW was all about. I kept asking Him, “what is the big deal anyhow?” After months of searching, I believed Him to answer me by reminding me ….. “I AM.” “I AM the big deal Linda, I AM.” Since then, the Lord has revealed Himself over and over again through His Word and other reading materials, one of my favorites being Ann Sprangler’s book “Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus.” I joined my husband in worshiping Yeshua and with one heart we look forward to the Sabbath where we sit back and worship the Lord, reading and sharing from the Parsha readings. We look forward to all the Feasts and practice them together. BUT to hear from today’s reading the suggestion that “one could receive forgiveness without the atonement” just doesn’t spell out correctly! Of course God is able to forgive how ever He wishes, after all, and again I repeat, He is the Great I AM, but by everything I have studied in scripture, it seems that He choose to do it through the beauty of the atonement which He orchestrated through the death, burial and resurrection of His Son. In Him, Linda K. Morales Bayamon, Puerto Rico
“All he does is demonstrate faith – a reliance on Yeshua’s ability.”
Isn’t this true…I mean, doesn’t it all depend on Him? Of course, in the Presence of Yeshua, we see that this man is currently beholding the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, and who also demonstrates the power of God for forgiveness. He was, as Abraham, Moses, Job, David and all the other great Hall of Faithers who looked FORWARD to the promise of redemption full and complete though all they had was faith. I think Skip is making this observation that there has always been a sacrifice…atonement before the Father as Kay so wonderfully stated in her post.
In John 1:29 He is referred to as the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world, and in Rev.13:8 it says He was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world. (Kay’s post)
This would validate Skip’s statement:
“Yeshua proclaims that this man’s sins are forgiven at the same moment the words are uttered.”, since atonement had already occurred in eternity.
God chooses to move in the fullness of time so WE can see what He is up to. I guess this is somewhat a progressive revelation ideal, but we can get so caught up in things like, time, law, semantics,…etc.
It is all very interesting and in the final analysis, isn’t it by FAITH, through FAITH that the Scriptures teach us we have any promise from God? After all, He is the Author and the Finisher of it, YES! Heb 12:2
No amount of good works/sacrifice/offerings are worthy of honor to YHWH unless is it sincere (Michael”s post). Yeshua is aware of our sincerity.
Help us, O LORD to be sincere as we look to You for every need. We are all on the journey to meet with you, day by day, moment by moment. You have promised to give us the desires of our hearts. Transform those desires to please You alone. We seek you and only you. Bless us with your Holy Presence. Amen.
“It is all very interesting and in the final analysis, isn’t it by FAITH, through FAITH that the Scriptures teach us we have any promise from God?”
Hi Mary,
Just my 2 cents on this topic.
If you were to tell me that FAITH is the “key” word for you, I would say “more power to you.”
But I tend to think in terms of trust rather than faith; I trust people or God or I don’t.
More importantly, in Wiki Answers I found the following information regarding your “YES! Heb 12:2.”
After querying Wiki, I’m not sure if Hebrews 12.2 is authentic.
Answer:
“The Book of Hebrews, or more formally the Epistle to the Hebrews, was attributed to the apostle Paul in the second century, and because of that attribution was included in the New Testament. However, the theology and style are entirely different from those of Paul. The book merely has a few verses added to the end, in order to provide support for the attribution to Paul.
In fact, we do not know who really wrote Hebrews, but it is believed to date from around the middle of the first century.”
My Jerusalem Bible says something to that effect as well.
I can understand your wanting to use the word trust. It sounds like a more solid word and I do not think it has not been as abused in the church world as faith has been. “Living by faith, faith-healer, be faithful(keep your attendance record), measure of faith, etc. But in terms of scriptural faith, we see a gift that has been initiated by the LORD (the giver of every good and perfect gift) and yet it is left up to us to use what He has given. This faith is what Yeshua looks for as we obey Him (“…Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” Luke 18:8)
it is what He saw when He healed Matt 9:22, Matt 15:28, it is what keeps us in perseverance mode when it looks like all hell is breaking loose Luke 18:8, 1Peter 5:9, 1John 5:4. We trust that YHWH has called us to serve and worship Him and He has given us the faith to trust Him to show us the way, the manner that pleases Him. Faith, like skeletal muscle is developed through use. Faith is action, a work of His Spirit that is provided for us by our Father. I see trust as an element of faith. We cannot worship YHWH without either.
As far as the authenticity of Heb 12:2, I trust YHWH’s authority in my life to attribute all my faith to Him. I won’t base my life on the one verse but the totality of His Word…”the full counsel” as one dear Sister and I discussed recently.
“Keep the faith”, Michael…thanks for the 2 cents, it’s priceless actually! Blessings!
Bereshis |7| And Yitzchak spoke unto Avraham his father, and said, Avi (My father): and he said, Hineini, beni (Here am I, my son). And he said, Hinei, the eish (fire) and the wood: but where is the seh (lamb) for a burnt offering? [YESHAYAH 53:7] |8| And Avraham said, My son, G-d will provide Himself a seh (lamb) for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
Did G-d provide the Lamb?
|10| And Avraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. |11| And the Malach Hashem called unto him out of Shomayim, and said, Avraham, Avraham: and he said, Hineini. |12| And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the young man, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest G-d, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine ben yachid from Me. |13| And Avraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and hinei behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Avraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son. [YESHAYAH 53:8] |14| And Avraham called the name of that place Hashem Yireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of Hashem it shall be provided. |15| And the Malach Hashem called unto Avraham out of Shomayim the second time, |16| And said, By Myself have I sworn, saith Hashem, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine ben yachid: |17| That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy zera as the stars of the skies, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy zera shall possess the gate of his enemies; |18| And in thy zera shall kol goyei ha’aretz be blessed; because thou hast obeyed My voice.
Bereshis 22:7-18
Michael, I have twenty more necessary & valubale things to do, but just glanced at the comments, and could not resist writing a reply to what you posted at 1:47. The NIV Study Bible on the book of Hebrews is very good, and I have studied it many times. Just briefly from it, ” Author: The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. Though for some 1,200 years the book was commonly called “The Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews,” there was no agreement in the earliest centuries regarding its authorship. Since the Reformation it has been widely recognized that Paul could not have been the writer. There is no disharmony between the teaching of Hebrews and that of Paul’s letters, but the specific emphases and writing styles are markedly different.———- examples given—–gives one of the earliest authorship is found in Tertullian’s De Pudicitia, 20 ( 200), in which he quotes from “an epistle to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas.” — & backs that up nicely—
“The other leading candidate for authorship is Apollos, whose name was frist suggested by Martin Luther and who is favored by many scholars today.” and backs that up with some items.
Then the- DATE: ” Hebrews must have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70 because: (l) had it been written after this date, the author surely would have mentioned the temple’s destruction and the end of the Jewish sacrificial system; and (2) the author consistently uses the Greek present tense when speaking of the temple and the priestly activities connecectwe with it. ( gives many references in Hebrews.)
And much more on Recipients, Theme, Outline.
AND NOW ALONG WITH SOME OF THE above SCHOLARLY INFORMATION—- THAT MANY WILL DEBATE OVER, AND OVER, may I write one humble person’s opinion? It is of my dear precious father who was denied a formal education because he was born in 1901 to a poor family with 11 children, and a father that died a horrible death early. Yet, my father so loved to study the Bible; the only version he saw until he was in his 60’s, was the KJV, he considered the old covenant and new covenant THE BIBLE. He spent his few hours a week studing his Bible, when not doing hard manual labor, or being engaged with his children in homework, playing games with them etc. His comment on who wrote the book of Hebrews, during the debates he heard in the Baptist Church, the one that gave him Life, in every sense of the word, was always his precious sweet response, “Well, if the Apostle Paul did not write it, I do not know anyone else that could have!” Then he would enumerate Paul’s love & later life for Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit. Even as a child, and understood nothing of the discussion, I loved to hear him speak on the Bible. So even today when he is gone from this earth ( he actually lived 99 years & 8 months), and I read a discussion on the book of Hebrews, I recall my father’s statement on it, in his strong clear deep voice. Thank you for reading this. L.B.
“MANY WILL DEBATE OVER”
Hi LaVaye-Ed,
Always good to hear from you and I really enjoyed the story about your father!
For me it is a purely “academic question,” but academic questions are often fun to debate.
The first time I read the Bible, my reaction to Paul was very negative because he seemed so odd.
At least, relative to my reading of the Old Testament, Mark, and Matthew.
When I read Paul I said to myself, on the one hand we have the Hebrew worldview.
And, on the other hand, we have the Catholic wordview (in Paul).
Many years later, when I shared my views with Skip, Skip assured me that Paul was not Catholic.
But if we look at Hebrews 9:1-11, Christ has come as the “High Priest,” and the Holy Place.
Well, to me the Holy Place looks a lot more like the Catholic church than a Protestant congregation.
And in Hebrews 9:15, we are told that Christ “brings a new covenant, as the mediator.”
We see Yeshua as the Man in the Middle.
A Middle Man who as come to cancel the sins of the Old covenant.
Well, to me the Holy Place looks a lot more like the Catholic church than a Protestant congregation.
Hey Michael,
That entire passage of Hebrews is set in the context of the Jewish temple. As we keep telling each other on this blog, Catholic or Protestant, both are Greek.
The book to the Hebrews was written to the Hebrews who knew nothing of our modern practices. They would have envisioned their Temple.
Hebrews is a tricky book. Most of us don’t understand the Temple and the priesthood well enough to be able to understand what the author is conveying to that congregation.
Shalom
“That entire passage of Hebrews is set in the context of the Jewish temple. As we keep telling each other on this blog, Catholic or Protestant, both are Greek.”
Hi Pam,
I understand, my point was that we have three things today:
1. Jews
2. Catholics
3. Protestants
In the Old Testament, Mark, and Matthew we have Jews and Jesus, who was a Jew.
So when I read the Bible for the first time, I finished the OT, Matthew, and Mark.
And I said to myself: “what the heck is going on?”
I have read the story from beginning to end, with two views of the end and no sign.
No sign whatsoever as far as I could tell of any Christianity.
Neither Catholicism nor Protestantism.
All we have are Jews and Judaism.
Until you get to Paul who was trying to bridge the gap between the Jews and the gentiles.
At that point I said to myself: “okay, Paul is how they turned Judaism and Jesus into Christianity.”
And when I read Hebrews, with Jesus as the Mediator and High Priest.
And Paul talking about the evils of the flesh, it all seems very Catholic to me.
Michael,
The Catholic church borrowed a fair bit of their liturgy and practice from the Jewish temple service, but then mixed it with Mithraism to create the Catholic or “universal” church. This is typical of Ephraim (a term used in the Prophets as synonymous with dispersed Israel, since Ephraim was the tribe that led the northern 10 tribes in rebellion resulting in the split between Judah and Israel) – mixing the Holy with the profane.
The role of the earthly High Priest as a mediator was established from the inception of the Tabernacle service with Aaron as High Priest.
Adam (the “first Adam”) was created to be the High Priest of YHVH on earth, after the order of Melchizedek (the Melech Tzadik, the righteous king or king of righteousness). That priesthood was passed down through the line of Seth eventually to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
I believe that YHVH’s original plan was that from Jacob it should have been passed to all the first-born of Israel (“I will make of you a kingdom of priests”), however because of their sin (in the “Golden Calf incident”) they were disqualified and so the priesthood was given to Levi (who stood up for righteousness against their brethren) and the High Priesthood to the family line of Aaron. The covenant with Levi is an everlasting covenant (Jer 33:17-18) but the High Priesthood was restored from the order of Aaron to the order of Melchizedek when the “last Adam”, Yeshua, redeemed it. This High Priesthood is an eternal one – Yeshua now serves as High Priest in the heavenly Tabernacle before the throne of YHVH. This is the premise upon which the letter to the Hebrews is written.
Michael
You read Matthew AND Mark, and no mention of Christ at all??
And is it possible that, like many of the Christians, you’ve misread Paul, who rather than creating Christianity, was confirming the Tanakh?
Hi Rodney and Ian,
Thanks for your responses!
Just to put some things in context.
The first time I read the Bible I had very little knowledge of Jewish history and culture.
But I had some knowledge and experience with Catholicism and Protestantism.
When I read Mark, I thought Jesus was very clear about who he was.
Jesus called himself the Son of Man, or the Son of God, or Christ, the Messiah.
But I don’t think Jesus ever called himself a “mediator” or a “priest.”
In fact, the priests are typically hypocrites and Jesus does not tend to like them.
When Jesus was crucified, “the chief priests and the scribes mocked him.” Mark 15:31
Regarding Paul, I did not mean to say he created Christianity.
The early “Christians” were followers of Paul, but Paul was a Jewish theologian IMO.
I would agree with Rodney that the Catholic church:
“borrowed their liturgy and practice from the Jewish temple service.”
Michael
Then I wonder what Paul was talking about in Galatians when he was arguing about the “law” being given 430 years after the promise, and therefore does not anul the promise?
That seems to be a Jewish Theology argument. 🙂