Adding "not" in Hebrews 6:1

[PacMan]

PacMan,

Hi again. You wrote:

I think you missed something. Hebrews 6:1 is not referring to the two love commands as the "principles," but is referring to certain elementary or introductory aspects of the Christian faith. And the point that Hebrews 5:11-6:3 is making is not that we need to mature beyond love or beyond perfection (!), but that spiritually dull believers who have not yet mastered (in terms of their education or instruction) the elementary principles need to do so and move on (in their education, not move on in the sense of moving away from) to more advanced matters.

" Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, "

So Paul is basically saying we should not necessarily leave those principles, but get on with perfection; and stop wasting time on stuff we already know about or have already performed/demonstrated? Right?

PacMan

[Rob Bowman]

Bob,

You wrote:

Sorry Rob,

It appears to me that I have grossly misstated your position on midrash. I must be getting forgetful in my old age.

Bob

No worries. I make my share of mistakes.

[PacMan]

Bump.

[Rob Bowman]

PacMan,

You wrote:

" Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, "

So Paul is basically saying we should not necessarily leave those principles, but get on with perfection; and stop wasting time on stuff we already know about or have already performed/demonstrated? Right?

You seem to be trying to reword Hebrews 6:1 so that Joseph Smith's revision becomes defensible. Hence your paraphrase "we should not necessarily leave those principles" appears to be intended to approximate Joseph's rendition with its inclusion of the word not. This won't work. One must distinguish the following two statements (I use "abandon" in order to make the point unambiguous):

"Paul is not saying we should abandon those principles..."

"Paul is saying we should not abandon those principles..."

The first statement is correct. The second is not. Paul is not addressing the issue of whether we should abandon the principles. It doesn't come up.

[Vance]

There is a subtle difference.

"Paul is not saying we should abandon those principles..."

But the KJV gives the impression that that is exactly what the author of Hebrews IS saying, that we should abandon those principles.

"Paul is saying we should not abandon those principles..."

But the KJV gives the impression opposite to that, that we should abandon those principles.

The JST corrects this false impression. That we should NOT abandon those principles.

[mfbukowski]

I think if you understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, this is all a non-problem.

We have the "law of the gospel" and then we have a higher law as well- "on to perfection". (temple context here)

One could very well speak to a class in the following manner: "OK class, now let's leave the discussion of "the law of the gospel", and now go on to talk about "perfection". (ie: Consecration etc.)

On the other hand, the same teacher might say,"Ok class, now remembering that we are bound by all these covenants of the law of the gospel, let's now go on and discuss the higher covenants which lead to perfection".

One could say it either way but it amounts to the same thing. This is just quibbling about the phraseology of the way the sentence is put together. Paul was emphasizing one interpretation, Joseph another.

It's nothing at all.

[Rob Bowman]

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

This is just quibbling about the phraseology of the way the sentence is put together. Paul was emphasizing one interpretation, Joseph another. It's nothing at all.

Joseph didn't think so. He didn't think he was merely putting some emphasis in a different place than the author of Hebrews. He thought he was correcting a significant contradiction in the Bible.

[Vance]

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

Joseph didn't think so. He didn't think he was merely putting some emphasis in a different place than the author of Hebrews. He thought he was correcting a significant contradiction in the Bible.

In the KJV Bible, Yes.