Should we go to towns of Israel and preach the Gospel to the jews?

[Ogner]

3 hours ago, Ezra said:

True enough.  My point was that if a letter was addressed to Hebrew Christians as "to the Hebrews", then *Hebrew Christians* is the proper designation for those who have believed on the Lord Jesus Christ.

Epistle to the Hebrews, Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, Thessalonians... It's conditional name of books in the New Testament. 

Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, [...] for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

[Ogner]

2 hours ago, Your closest friendnt said:

What was the writer's concept what he use the word " Hebrew".

 

The author of this book did not use the word "Hebrew" or name "Epistle to the Hebrews". Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 240 AD) first used this name. And the name has been used among Christians since the 2th century, though it did not become official until the last half of the IVth century.

[Ogner]

4 hours ago, Your closest friendnt said:

Hello Ogner, I find your posts extraordinary, and with deep insite.

I don't want to say that I disagree, and I could have said that, if I had polirize my self and I had sided with someone else opinion, which I respect and is my guide and my light in my journey here on earth.

But the clarity of a message is proven not by siding with some authority without having first put to the test the stand of that authority.

Your suggestion above it does relate even to what is happening today. Jewish families trying to win back members of their families who have left Judaism and some times are successful and that same need also was prevelant during that time and it is still very much prevelant today.

If you had leaved that time, and not just that time, and had family members accepting Jesus as the Messiah, and you are not a believer your self and you took your religion in the most sacret way, what would you do when a member of your family not only left the traditional faith in your household , and not only he did not go away as the lost sheep of your family, but it remained in the household and percistantly try to persuade other members of the family to discent and follow the new way.

Yes It is one of the most likely reasons why the author wrote this guidance, and that does not mean that this was the only reason, because he is addressing many others.

But I agree with the notion that the Jewish believers who have read and understood this letter can be rooted in the faith and may withstand the persistent  counter attracts of the enemies of the Gospel, and when they are equipt with the proper foundation of the Gospel, those attracts may have a very possitive effect, they may be the reason to increased the faith and the strength of the believer.

God bless

 

Jesus warned about this!

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."
(Mt.10:34-36)

[FresnoJoe]

1 hour ago, Ogner said:

Jesus warned about this!

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." (Matther 10:34-36)

A Beloved Jew

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. Romans 1:16

And His Brother, The Mighty Christ

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Matthew 5:9

[Your closest friendnt]

2 hours ago, Ogner said:

Epistle to the Hebrews, Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, Thessalonians... It's conditional name of books in the New Testament. 

Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, [...] for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Hello Ogner, I would like to know how can you ever say that, in my opinion, for there Greeks and there Jews, and the Greeks are not Jews and the Jews are not Greeks, and Jesus Christ can not mix them up, for he knows how to tell the difference. And he speaks both languages, and he does not speak Greek to the Jews, or the other way around.

[Ezra]

4 hours ago, Your closest friendnt said:

What was the writer's concept what he use the word " Hebrew".

This is a very good question. To answer it let's take it a step at a time:

1. In the Received Text of the New Testament the epistle to the Hebrews is headed by η προς Εβραίους επιστολή Παύλου (The Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews). There are many who dispute Paul's authorship, but as far as I'm concerned there could be no other writer closely connected with Timothy (Heb 12:23).

2. Paul was the writer but the Holy Spirit was the Author. So it is the Holy Spirit who chose to address "the Hebrews" or "the Hebrew Christians" rather than "the Jews" or "the Jewish Christians". There was a very good reason for this designation.

3. The Hebrew Christians were assumed to be from the twelve tribes of Israel, as James plainly states in James 1:1 (also according to Divine inspiration).

4. The Hebrew Christians would trace their lineage back through Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham to Eber (hence Hebrew), and Shem the son of Noah (hence Semite). Therefore they are both Hebrews and Semites, although today we refer to them generally as Jews.

5. The term "Jew" (from Yehudi) came into use only after the Babylonian captivity, and would apply strictly to those from Judea (the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Levi, and the Nethinims) which returned with Ezra after the Babylonian captivity.

6. God in His Divine wisdom chose to address the descendants of Jacob as Hebrews rather than Jews, because what He had to say about the New Covenant in the book of Hebrews was to all twelve tribes. Therefore Christians should consider them as "Hebrew Christians" (as opposed to Gentile Christians).

[Ezra]

2 hours ago, Ogner said:

The author of this book did not use the word "Hebrew" or name "Epistle to the Hebrews". Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 240 AD) first used this name. And the name has been used among Christians since the 2th century, though it did not become official until the last half of the IVth century.

This is false and misleading information. There is no one who disputes that this epistle is addressed to the Hebrews (headed by "To the Hebrews") and was written between 64 and 68 AD. The authorship is disputed but not the ones to whom it is addressed. The Received Text shows the heading as the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews (supported by Jerome and Augustine in the 4th century).

CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP.--CLEMENT OF ROME, at the end of the first century (A.D), copiously uses it, adopting its words just as he does those of the other books of the New Testament; not indeed giving to either the term "Scripture," which he reserves for the Old Testament (the canon of the New Testament not yet having been formally established), but certainly not ranking it below the other New Testament acknowledged Epistles. As our Epistle claims authority on the part of the writer, CLEMENT'S adoption of extracts from it is virtually sanctioning its authority, and this in the apostolic age. JUSTIN MARTYR quotes it as divinely authoritative, to establish the titles "apostle," as well as "angel," as applied to the Son of God. (From Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown).

[Ezra]

3 hours ago, Ogner said:

Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, [...] for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

This is true, but has nothing to do with why a specific letter was addressed to Hebrew Christians. You seem to be trying to deny the existence of a portion of Scripture addressed specifically to Hebrews. The issue was the conflict of trying to be a Hebrew and a Christian at the same time.

[Ogner]

9 hours ago, Ezra said:

This is false and misleading information. There is no one who disputes that this epistle is addressed to the Hebrews (headed by "To the Hebrews") and was written between 64 and 68 AD. The authorship is disputed but not the ones to whom it is addressed. The Received Text shows the heading as the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews (supported by Jerome and Augustine in the 4th century).

CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP.--CLEMENT OF ROME, at the end of the first century (A.D), copiously uses it, adopting its words just as he does those of the other books of the New Testament; not indeed giving to either the term "Scripture," which he reserves for the Old Testament (the canon of the New Testament not yet having been formally established), but certainly not ranking it below the other New Testament acknowledged Epistles. As our Epistle claims authority on the part of the writer, CLEMENT'S adoption of extracts from it is virtually sanctioning its authority, and this in the apostolic age. JUSTIN MARTYR quotes it as divinely authoritative, to establish the titles "apostle," as well as "angel," as applied to the Son of God. (From Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown).

I didn't say that I disputes that this epistle is addressed to the Hebrews. You don't understand correctly and misleading information. 
I meant what I said.
 

[Ogner]

10 hours ago, Ezra said:

This is true, but has nothing to do with why a specific letter was addressed to Hebrew Christians. You seem to be trying to deny the existence of a portion of Scripture addressed specifically to Hebrews. The issue was the conflict of trying to be a Hebrew and a Christian at the same time.

The Gospel addressed specifically to Hebrews first and also to everyone else. 

But Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, [...] for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Because Jn.1:11-13, "He came to his own, and his own received him not.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.".