Who was sawn in two?

[Lamb]

The author of Hebrews clearly expected his audience to know who shut the mouths of lions, who quenched the flames of fire, and who the women were that received their dead raised to life. We know who they are, because they’re in our Old Testament. The author of Hebrews mentions them expecting his audience to know what he’s talking about.

I’m not “getting into his head” or reading his mind or doing ESPN or anything.

I’m just using common sense.

The author purposely did not name names and it could be because there were too many to list. He chose to say "others" instead of naming names. That's the answer to your question. Even thought there are historical records that name a couple people who were sawn in two, it was possibly not all of the "others" that the author of Hebrews had in mind when he made his list.

 

[NathanH83]

The author purposely did not name names and it could be because there were too many to list. He chose to say "others" instead of naming names. That's the answer to your question. Even thought there are historical records that name a couple people who were sawn in two, it was possibly not all of the "others" that the author of Hebrews had in mind when he made his list.

Or the author of Hebrews is bearing witness that the Apocryphal work of the Martyrdom of Isaiah was a part of their Bible at that time. Justin Martyr bears witness that the Jews deleted it. Why should that option not be considered?

 

[Josiah]

Or the author of Hebrews is bearing witness that the Apocryphal work of the Martyrdom of Isaiah was a part of their Bible at that time.

I've always imagined that's your remarkable theory, but as has been proven by you yourself, you have NOTHING to substantiate it.

Justin Martyr bears witness that the Jews deleted it. Why should that option not be considered?

It does seem that this individual - whose faith, belief and opinions you reject - had that OPINION, and that he offers NOTHING to substantiate it. Doesn't even attempt to, as you've documented. But quoting the entirely, wholly unsubstantiated theory of one person (who's views you don't necessarily accept as true or even worthy of consideration) shows nothing. You know that. We all do.




.

 

[Lamb]

Or the author of Hebrews is bearing witness that the Apocryphal work of the Martyrdom of Isaiah was a part of their Bible at that time. Justin Martyr bears witness that the Jews deleted it. Why should that option not be considered?

Does the apocrypha list ALL the names of those sawn in two, or the other things that happened to the "others" listed in Hebrews? No is the correct answer.

 

[NathanH83]

Does the apocrypha list ALL the names of those sawn in two, or the other things that happened to the "others" listed in Hebrews? No is the correct answer.

Does the Old Testament list all those who shut the mouths of lions?

I don’t see your point.

 

[NathanH83]

I've always imagined that's your remarkable theory, but as has been proven by you yourself, you have NOTHING to substantiate it.





It does seem that this individual - whose faith, belief and opinions you reject - had that OPINION, and that he offers NOTHING to substantiate it. Doesn't even attempt to, as you've documented. But quoting the entirely, wholly unsubstantiated theory of one person (who's views you don't necessarily accept as true or even worthy of consideration) shows nothing. You know that. We all do.




.

Why shouldn’t it be considered?

 

[NewCreation435]

Because the Bible Matters.

No question about that, but if it doesn't specifically say then apparently the Spirit didn't think we needed to know specifics about that.

 

[NathanH83]

No question about that, but if it doesn't specifically say then apparently the Spirit didn't think we needed to know specifics about that.

That’s an assumption on your part. Couldn’t someone also make the assumption that if it’s going to tell us that someone was sawn in two, then the Spirit is expecting us to know who it was that was sawn in two?

After all, look at the context. It says that some shut the mouths of lions. Don’t you think that the Holy Spirit expects us to already be familiar with a story about someone shutting the mouths of lions by faith? It doesn’t just leave us wondering. It expects us to know about a story of someone thrown into a lions’ den, doesn’t it?

God is not the author of confusion.

Why would the Holy Spirit want to confuse us by mentioning the fact that someone in the Old Testament was sawn in two, without leaving us with a slightest clue who it’s talking about, all while insinuating that it’s somewhere in Biblical history?

Why insinuate that this is Biblical history when we can’t find it anywhere in Biblical history? That’s confusing.

 

[Lamb]

That’s an assumption on your part. Couldn’t someone also make the assumption that if it’s going to tell us that someone was sawn in two, then the Spirit is expecting us to know who it was that was sawn in two?

After all, look at the context. It says that some shut the mouths of lions. Don’t you think that the Holy Spirit expects us to already be familiar with a story about someone shutting the mouths of lions by faith? It doesn’t just leave us wondering. It expects us to know about a story of someone thrown into a lions’ den, doesn’t it?

God is not the author of confusion.

Why would the Holy Spirit want to confuse us by mentioning the fact that someone in the Old Testament was sawn in two, without leaving us with a slightest clue who it’s talking about, all while insinuating that it’s somewhere in Biblical history?

Why insinuate that this is Biblical history when we can’t find it anywhere in Biblical history? That’s confusing.

Do we also need to know all the names of those who crossed the red sea?

It's not confusing as you insist. Maybe you're making confusion for yourself on insisting that you need to know every detail that the Lord hasn't given you. There might not be just one or two names. There may be dozens or hundreds. What's truly relevant is they were faithful to the Lord.

 

[NewCreation435]

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.

So Justin Martyr who lived hundreds of years afterward is an authority for you? He wasn't an eyewitness.

 

[NathanH83]

Do we also need to know all the names of those who crossed the red sea?

It's not confusing as you insist. Maybe you're making confusion for yourself on insisting that you need to know every detail that the Lord hasn't given you. There might not be just one or two names. There may be dozens or hundreds. What's truly relevant is they were faithful to the Lord.

The Bible tells us the story of the people who crossed the Red Sea. We know at least some of their names.

Where’s they story in the Old Testament where at least 1 person was sawn in two?

 

[NathanH83]

So Justin Martyr who lived hundreds of years afterward is an authority for you? He wasn't an eyewitness.

He was a Christian the 2nd century. He seems to be insinuating that the Martyrdom of Isaiah was in his Bible, as well as the Bible of other Christians, and that he believes that the Jews deleted it out of their copies.

I think that should at least be taken seriously.