tama, and that is during israelites time,
But the bible says these are a shadows of thngs to come because the fulfilment is the body of Christ. Col 2:16,17, Heb. 10:1
And it doesnt mean kasama ang 7th day sabbath jan, because in verse 9 and 10 of Heb chap 4, the 7th day sabbath was stil there and not abolished.
Ikaw why are u not keeping the sabbath, dont u knw God gave this to you for your own behalf?
Mali ang pagkakintindi mo nyo sa verse. Ito ipaliwanag ko sa iyo para makita mo ang buong paksa ng Hebrews.
the book of Hebrew is basically a commentary of the Old Testament, chapter 4 focused on the Sabbath or the "rest", which is the type of Christ in the New Testament, the believers' rest.
Acts 7:45 (KJV) "Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;"
Hebrews 4:8 (KJV) "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day."
Looking at the context of these two verses, it is easily seen that they are referring to when Joshua was leading the Israelites into the promised land. So why does the KJV have "Jesus" in these two verses while the other translations have "Joshua"? Try to read the NIV or RSV or any version of this verse for you to see what I mean.
A look at the underlying Greek in these verses shows that "Iesous" is the name under discussion here. Everywhere else in the NT, it is translated correctly as "Jesus", because that's who it is referring to. However, in these two verses (Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8), the name is the same, but referring to Joshua of the Old Testament, not Jesus of the New.
The answer lies in the fact that the name "Joshua" in Hebrew ("Yahowshuwa" , Strong's #3091) is the same name as "Jesus" in Greek ("Iesous" , Strongs #2424).
The problem is that these two names are NOT equivalent in English. In Hebrew, there is one name "Yahowshuwa", and in Greek there is one name "Iesous". In English, we have two names, "Joshua" and "Jesus", so when the translators see "Iesous" in the Greek, they must choose which English name to use, since it can either mean "Jesus" or "Joshua". Context is the key, and the correct choice for Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 is "Joshua".
It's similar to the following silly example. Suppose we want to translate the sentences "Look at the elephant's long trunk. He uses it to spray water on himself." into another language. We do fine up to the word "trunk", because in English this single word can mean (among many other things) "an elephant's nose" or "a large case". In the language we want to translate this sentence into, suppose there are two entirely different words, one meaning "an elephant's nose", and the other meaning "a large case." Of course, the correct word to use in the translation, because of context, would be the one meaning "an elephant's nose", and it would be a translation error to instead use the word that means "a large case". The exact same thing is happening here when translating the Greek "Iesous" into English. In Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8, the Greek name "Iesous" should be translated as "Joshua", not "Jesus".
Critics claim that the KJV, by merely transliterating the name, misleads readers into thinking that these verses about Joshua the son of Nun are about Jesus Christ. However, one must wonder why English readers should be misled by something that did not mislead Greek readers, for the Greek does not differentiate the two. Rather, it would be more helpful for an English reader to learn that “Jesus” was a typical Hebrew name, and that the identity of any “Jesus” must be determined by context. In 2007, a documentary titled The Lost Tomb of Jesus tried to create a sensation by revealing the discovery of a “tomb of Jesus.” The documentary exploited the English public’s ignorance of the fact that “Jesus” was a typical name in first century Judea. On another note, Jesus the son of Nun of the Old Testament was a "type" of Jesus the son of God of the New Testament. Whereas the mortal Jesus led the Israelites to physical rest, the divine Jesus led man to spiritual rest. God may have purposely given the same name to both men in order that we see that one is the type of the other. This truth is apparent in the KJV.
Kung babasahin mo ang buong chapter four, makikita mo na ang lahat ng mga ginagawa ng Israel, are just type/symbol/representation of the coming which Christ. The fulfillment or the realization of the Old, is Christ of the New Testament.
Hebrews 4:8 (KJV) "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day."
Sa tagalog Bible, mapapansin mo na Josue ang nakalagay, signifying that Joshua of the Old is the type of Jesus in the New.
Re-analyzing the verse, " "For if Jesus had given them rest, " kung totoo pang kapahingaan at final na ang Sabbath, "then would he not afterward have spoken of another day." Another day... this is the day of your Salvation (2 cor.6:2). The real rest of all who accept Christ.
Thanks.
magulo ba bro?
