[annalex]

Indeed we should consult, without necessarily following, the Jews for their understanding of the Old Testament, albeit Christian typology of the Old Testament would not be accessible to them. However, Hebrews, that you quoted, is New Testament.

[safisoft]

However, Hebrews, that you quoted, is New Testament

In my Bible classes I like to tell my students that Jews can understand themselves without the church, but the church (in its broadest sense) cannot understand itself without the Jews. 1/3 of the 'New Testament' is a quote or direct allusion to the TaNaKh. The Bible of Peter and Paul was the TaNaKh.

It is a very poor exegete who starts with the 'new' to understand the 'old'. It is a very poor historian who attempts to understand history through the glasses of the present, and in defense of a person or an institution.

Having read your home page, I can see quite well that if society develops as you desire, people like yourself will hunt down people like me. See you later, Mr. Aristocrat, sir.

[safisoft]

Indeed we should consult, without necessarily following, the Jews for their understanding of the Old Testament, albeit Christian typology of the Old Testament would not be accessible to them.

The Sages of Israel know far more about Messiah than you can imagine. The Talmud and Midrash Rabbah (and Zohar) have a depth of understanding of Messiah that would shock the average Christian. Where do you think you got some of it?