Who was sawn in two?

[NathanH83]

This is similar to the what did Jesus write in the sand question.

How is that similar?

When Hebrews 11:33 says that some by faith shut the mouths of lions, is it unimportant to know what story that’s a reference to? Then why is it unimportant to know who was sawn in two? Justin Martyr thought it was important, if you had read his quote that I posted.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

How is that similar?

When Hebrews 11:33 says that some by faith shut the mouths of lions, is it unimportant to know what story that’s a reference to? Then why is it unimportant to know who was sawn in two? Justin Martyr thought it was important, if you had read his quote that I posted.

What is inportant is the fact that people were sawn in half for their fatih, not specifically who was sawn in half. Jesus writing in the sand is more puzzling actually, so not similar. Yet if we needed to know what he wrote, it would have been given to us. But if the Jews want to discredit that anyone was sawn in two, I don't see an issue. It is written, therefore it happened.

 

[Lamb]

The author of Hebrews didn’t know who he was talking about?

The names were unimportant to list.

 

[NathanH83]

The names were unimportant to list.

Unimportant? Or he just didn’t have time for it in his letter? He didn’t mention Elijah or Elisha by name in Hebrews. Doesn’t mean they’re not important.

 

[NathanH83]

What is inportant is the fact that people were sawn in half for their fatih, not specifically who was sawn in half. Jesus writing in the sand is more puzzling actually, so not similar. Yet if we needed to know what he wrote, it would have been given to us. But if the Jews want to discredit that anyone was sawn in two, I don't see an issue. It is written, therefore it happened.

Justin Martyr says that it’s important to know that Isaiah was sawn in two. He says the account of Isaiah being martyred was deleted from the text by the Jews. He says they removed it because of its prophetic significance as to how it points to Christ.

 

[NathanH83]

The names were unimportant to list.

What authority do you have to tell me it’s not important? Justin Martyr said it’s important because of its prophetic significance in how it points to Christ. Who should I believe? You, or Justin Martyr?

Whenever someone says to me that something isn’t important, that alone is enough to cause me to suspect that it probably is important.

 

[Josiah]

The author of Hebrews didn’t know who he was talking about?

Are you the author of Hebrews? Is it likely any one of the 7.7 billion people on the planet today the author of Hebrew?

Did said author tell you?




.




.

 

[Lamb]

What authority do you have to tell me it’s not important? Justin Martyr said it’s important because of its prophetic significance in how it points to Christ. Who should I believe? You, or Justin Martyr?

Whenever someone says to me that something isn’t important, that alone is enough to cause me to suspect that it probably is important.

I answered your question. The author chose to not list the names because it was not important to list them. It has nothing to do with me.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Justin Martyr says that it’s important to know that Isaiah was sawn in two. He says the account of Isaiah being martyred was deleted from the text by the Jews. He says they removed it because of its prophetic significance as to how it points to Christ.

Can you explain how the alleged sawing in half of Isaiah has prophetic significance pointing to Christ? If the Jews indeed removed that, they did not achive much because the Old Testament is abundant in prophecies of Christ.

 

[NathanH83]

Can you explain how the alleged sawing in half of Isaiah has prophetic significance pointing to Christ? If the Jews indeed removed that, they did not achive much because the Old Testament is abundant in prophecies of Christ.

Justin Martyr DID explain it. If you read my post, then you wouldn’t be asking that.

 

[NathanH83]

I answered your question. The author chose to not list the names because it was not important to list them. It has nothing to do with me.

When did the author of Hebrews say it’s not important? I don’t remember him saying that. I remember him saying “time would fail me to mention them all”.

Sounds to me like he just didn’t want to take the time to literally list everything. He didn’t mention Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego by name, although he alluded to them. Doesn’t mean they’re not important.

 

[Josiah]

Justin Martyr DID explain it.

Nathan,


Ah, so you accept what Justin Martyr says.... he is your inerrant authority as you keep referring us to what this individual man believed. Okay. Got it.

Here's what he said about Communion:

"...so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word is transmuted and is the very flesh and blood of that Jesus" (§66).

You insist that we all swallow whole whatever this man believes and says. But do you?




.

 

[NathanH83]

Are you the author of Hebrews? Is it likely any one of the 7.7 billion people on the planet today the author of Hebrew?

Did said author tell you?




.




.

I’m asking. I guess you didn’t see the question mark.

You said that nobody knows. So I’m asking. Did the author of Hebrews know who was sawn in two? Did the author of Hebrews know who he was talking about?

 

[NathanH83]

Nathan,


Ah, so you accept what Justin Martyr says.... he is your inerrant authority as you keep referring us to what this individual man believed. Okay. Got it.

Here's what he said about Communion:

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the very flesh and blood of that Jesus" (§66).

You insist that we all swallow whole whatever this man believes and says. But do you?




.

Stop changing the subject. This thread isn’t about communion.

 

[Josiah]

This thread isn’t about communion.

Nathan,


Your apologetic is that we all must swallow what one man believed about this: Justin Martyr. So you made HIM and our mandated docilic submission to his views as the issue.

But I think it LIKELY you don't do what you insist we do. You quite freely just blow off whatever he believes if it's not what you believe... so that YOUR opinion is what matters to you, not Justin Martyr. Do you swallow his views on Communion? I doubt it, so why insist we all swallow his views on this? You don't accept him as an authority, why insist that we do what you don't?




.

 

[NathanH83]

Nathan,


Your apologetic is that we all must swallow what one man believed about this: Justin Martyr. So you made HIM and our mandated docilic submission to his views as the issue.

But I think it LIKELY you don't do what you insist we do. You quite freely just blow off whatever he believes if it's not what you believe... so that YOUR opinion is what matters to you, not Justin Martyr. Do you swallow his views on Communion? I doubt it, so why insist we all swallow his views on this? You don't accept him as an authority, why insist that we do what you don't?




.

Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen and maybe a few others said that they believed that the man who was sawn in two was Isaiah. They reference the apocryphal work of the Martyrdom of Isaiah. That’s what this thread is about. Do you think it was someone else that was sawn in two? What are your thoughts?

Discuss.

 

[Andrew]

Nathan,


Ah, so you accept what Justin Martyr says.... he is your inerrant authority as you keep referring us to what this individual man believed. Okay. Got it.

Here's what he said about Communion:

"...so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word is transmuted and is the very flesh and blood of that Jesus" (§66).

You insist that we all swallow whole whatever this man believes and says. But do you?




.

Wow, entirely different topic and regardless if find communion foolish or not he is merely saying that it has "been taught".

Were all early Church fathers garbage to you?
I mean you criticize just about everyone of them, in fairness im sure you have disagreed with Luther on somethings too..

Anyway, different topic, I just find it odd

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Justin Martyr DID explain it. If you read my post, then you wouldn’t be asking that.

But his explanation makes no sense to me:

"...about the death of Isaiah, whom you sawed asunder with a wooden saw. And this was a mysterious type of Christ being about to cut your nation in two, and to raise those worthy of the honor to the everlasting kingdom along with the holy patriarchs and prophets;"

What is a mysterious type of Christ about to cut a nation in two? And why is it so important? The Bible already discusses the cutting off of the Jews and raising up a people to take their place in God's Kingdom.

 

[NathanH83]

But his explanation makes no sense to me:

"...about the death of Isaiah, whom you sawed asunder with a wooden saw. And this was a mysterious type of Christ being about to cut your nation in two, and to raise those worthy of the honor to the everlasting kingdom along with the holy patriarchs and prophets;"

What is a mysterious type of Christ about to cut a nation in two? And why is it so important? The Bible already discusses the cutting off of the Jews and raising up a people to take their place in God's Kingdom.

I can kind of see what Justin is talking about, some Jews believed in Jesus, and other did not. And it brought a lot of division among the Jewish nation.

“Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’
Matthew 10:34-36 - Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 10:34-36 - New King James Version

 

[Lamb]

When did the author of Hebrews say it’s not important? I don’t remember him saying that. I remember him saying “time would fail me to mention them all”.

Sounds to me like he just didn’t want to take the time to literally list everything. He didn’t mention Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego by name, although he alluded to them. Doesn’t mean they’re not important.

When? When he didn't list the names. If you look at the "context" surrounding you'll notice that at times he mentioned names so those people were of great importance.