Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: PetroniusMaximus
Interestingly, there seems to be some sort of translational problem here.
And every priest indeed standeth daily ministering and often offering the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, From henceforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool. For by one oblation he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Douay-Rheims Heb 10:11-14)
But this man offering one sacrifice for sins, for evermore sitteth in the right half of God the Father [for evermore sitteth on the right half of God the Father]; (Wycliffe New Testament Heb 10:12)

"offering" is also the reading of the Vulgate, but the Nova Vulgata has "having offered".

14 posted on 07/17/2004 6:47:55 AM PDT by gbcdoj (No one doubts ... that the holy and most blessed Peter ... lives in his successors, and judges.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: gbcdoj

***Interestingly, there seems to be some sort of translational problem here***

Is it a translation problem or a theologically driven translation problem?


"When he had offered" (prosenegkaß). Second aorist active participle (with first aorist ending -aß in place of -on) of prosperw, single act in contrast to present participle prosperwn above.

"One sacrifice" (mian qusian). This the main point. The one sacrifice does the work that the many failed to do. One wonders how priests who claim that the "mass" is the sacrifice of Christ's body repeated explain this verse. For ever (eiß to dihnekeß). Can be construed either with mian qusian or with ekaqisen (sat down.)

-Robertson's Word Pictures

" he mass, which professes to be the frequent repetition of one and the same sacrifice of Christ's body, is hence disproved. For not only is Christ's body one, but also His offering is one, and that inseparable from His suffering (Hebrews 9:26). The mass would be much the same as the Jewish sacrifices which Paul sets aside as abrogated, for they were anticipations of the one sacrifice, just as Rome makes masses continuations of it, in opposition to Paul's argument. A repetition would imply that the former once-for-all offering of the one sacrifice was imperfect, and so would be dishonoring to it (Hebrews 10:2,18). Hebrews 10:14, on the contrary, says, "He hath PERFECTED FOR EVER them that are sanctified." If Christ offered Himself at the last supper, then He offered Himself again on the cross, and there would be two offerings; but Paul says there was only one, once for all."

-Jamieson, Fausset, Brown


21 posted on 07/17/2004 10:06:56 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson