Spiritual Truth and Doctrine II: The Meaning of Reconciliation

[Aaron]

I have always taken it to be that only those that believe will be saved. As we see in the next verse those that do not believe are condemned because of that decision.

No, they're condemned because of their sins.

Colossians 3:5-7 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

 

[Darrell C]

I read your comments and I have wonder if you are replying to a different thread. Some of the conclusions you come to are just not in what I posted. You are letting your OSAS ideas dictate what you see when you read a post. You may think that your view is correct and that is OK. But my views are based on what I see in the bible. You disagree, that's OK. I really do not need you to show me the way, thanks anyway.

No, I am in the right thread, and we are talking about Reconciliation, which is salvation.

That I am dealing with the topic of loss of salvation is critical to your position: you have taught that men are saved but will not receive eternal salvation until they make it to Heaven.

But you have also taught that men receive eternal salvation by believing.

And you have taught, when that apparent conflict arose in your teaching, that men receive eternal salvation but lose it if they do not continue "to eat the flesh and drink the blood" of Christ.

While I do not myself use the derisive term "OSAS," what it stands for is simply a basic principle of salvation, and understanding that might help you to reconcile (pun intended) the conflict in your teachings.

So once again, please explain the meaning of the following verse:


Hebrews 10:14 King James Version

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


If you are going to teach loss of salvation in a Baptist community, you are going to need to be able to support it. I have already said you will not be able to do that, and if you would just understand this one verse you would know why you can in fact trust Christ for your eternal welfare.

Please, this is nothing you need to get hostile about, I completely understand why people might embrace the doctrine of salvation lost/withdrawn. But I think you owe it to yourself to look at it a little more closely than you have. A collection of proof-texts is not a good way to build Soteriology. And I am challenging you to challenge your own doctrine, and I promise you, if you do, you will not regret it. We must first challenge ourselves before we presume to challenge others.

So, please, just explain Hebrews 10:14.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

No, they're condemned because of their sins.

Colossians 3:5-7 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

They are condemned because they rejected the will of God presented to them by God. That is why every man in Biblical History will be condemned.

We will not find a single man or woman in the Bible who, being condemned, did not first receive God's will. We don't have to condemn the concept of man making a decision if we understand that the ability to respond to His divine will is given to men when the revelation is given. The Jews were charged by Stephen of resisting the Holy Ghost Who spoke through the Prophets. God is the source of the ability man is conceived and born lacking.

The opposite of HIs enlightening is His blinding. Israel has been blinded, and that is because God has done it. Unbelievers in the Tribulation will be given strong delusion that they might believe the lie.

Another aspect that should be considered is the progression of revelation. Sometimes God will give revelation but not understanding. This is true in regards to the Gospel of Christ: men were told about the Messiah, but men were given understanding until the Comforter began to reveal Who Christ was and what He came to do, and how that relates to us.

It's okay to leave the decision we see demanded by God where it is. Men are called to believe, and they are held accountable for unbelief. It is only when an inherent ability is ascribed to men (Free Will as it is taught these days) that we see error.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Read my posts. I do not have the time nor the desire to plow this field with you again. You think that a select few were saved at the cross but that is not what the bible says but your calvinism requires it. So you stick with your calvinism and I will stick with the bible.

Silverhair, are you saying all men were saved by the Cross?


God bless.

 

[Silverhair]

Let's talk about these words for a while, then.

"Might be saved," is one word, and it doesn't mean there is uncertainty. The phrase is used in Mark 5:23, where the ruler says to Jesus, Come and lay thy hands on her that she may be healed.

There was no doubt that if Christ laid His hands on her, she would be healed.

NIV He pleaded earnestly with him, "My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live."​

And also in 1 Corinthians 5:5, where Paul instructs them to deliver an immoral man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved .

There is no doubt, that if one's carnal nature is destroyed in this life, his spirit will be saved in the Day of the Lord.

NLT Then you must throw this man out and hand him over to Satan so that his sinful nature will be destroyed and he himself will be saved on the day the Lord returns.​

And so John 3:17, NIV For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

NLT God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.

CSB For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

There is no doubt, that if God sends His Son into the world, that it will be saved.

We've already talked about how the term 'world' was used by Christ and His Apostles.



Now this is not to say the 'might be saved' is a wrong translation. It's saying that 'might be saved' is a certainty. Now our usage of the single term 'might' has changed, but it still retains it's certain sense: If your wife ever said, "Come move this transmission so I can take a bath," you might be a redneck.

For us to understand what the phrase "might be saved" means in Jon 3:17 we need to look at the context. The Son came to save the people of the world. Does that mean all will be saved, NO. That is why "might be saved" is in the subjective mood in the Greek, the mood of possibility and potentiality. And we see the condition for their salvation in the next verse, faith. Those that believe are saved those that do not are condemned.

So while it is true that the Son came so that the whole world might be saved and His death provided the means for that salvation, it is only those that freely trust in the Son that will be saved.

Having said what I just did, this comment of yours "There is no doubt, that if God sends His Son into the world, that it will be saved." gave me pause. If I take your comment at face valve then you are promoting universalism.

Note what you said "if God sends His Son into the world" which He did. Then without any qualifier you add "that it will be saved." The word IT is inclusive of the whole world {all of mankind}. For you to avoid universalism you need the qualifier "those that believe" as in "that those that believe will be saved"

Now I do not think you are a universalist but words and context do matter would you not agree?

 

[Silverhair]

Silverhair, are you saying all men were saved by the Cross?


God bless.

No that is Aaron who is saying that. I have said the death of the Son covered the sin debt of mankind. We are saved by God because of our trust/faith in the risen Son, Eph 2:8 & Rom 6:23 make this clear.

 

[Silverhair]

No, they're condemned because of their sins.

Colossians 3:5-7 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

Joh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Do you not trust what the bible, in this case Christ Jesus, says? Man sins but it is the fact that they do not trust in, believe in, have faith in the risen Son that condemns them.

 

[Darrell C]

No that is Aaron who is saying that. I have said the death of the Son covered the sin debt of mankind. We are saved by God because of our trust/faith in the risen Son, Eph 2:8 & Rom 6:23 make this clear.

Could you tell me what Hebrews 10:14 means, please?


Hebrews 10:14 King James Version

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


God bless.

 

[Silverhair]

No, I am in the right thread, and we are talking about Reconciliation, which is salvation.

That I am dealing with the topic of loss of salvation is critical to your position: you have taught that men are saved but will not receive eternal salvation until they make it to Heaven.

But you have also taught that men receive eternal salvation by believing.

And you have taught, when that apparent conflict arose in your teaching, that men receive eternal salvation but lose it if they do not continue "to eat the flesh and drink the blood" of Christ.

While I do not myself use the derisive term "OSAS," what it stands for is simply a basic principle of salvation, and understanding that might help you to reconcile (pun intended) the conflict in your teachings.

So once again, please explain the meaning of the following verse:


Hebrews 10:14 King James Version

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


If you are going to teach loss of salvation in a Baptist community, you are going to need to be able to support it. I have already said you will not be able to do that, and if you would just understand this one verse you would know why you can in fact trust Christ for your eternal welfare.

Please, this is nothing you need to get hostile about, I completely understand why people might embrace the doctrine of salvation lost/withdrawn. But I think you owe it to yourself to look at it a little more closely than you have. A collection of proof-texts is not a good way to build Soteriology. And I am challenging you to challenge your own doctrine, and I promise you, if you do, you will not regret it. We must first challenge ourselves before we presume to challenge others.

So, please, just explain Hebrews 10:14.


God bless.

You seem to have missed the mark with what I have said. You want to hold to the view that man can not be lost and I hold to the idea that man can turn away from the Son and reject Him. You say I should not build my Soteriology on proof texts,and I agree. That is why I do not do that. While you point to Heb 10:14 as a proof you want to overlook Heb 6:4-6.

I am not using these verses as a proof text, I am just pointing out the logic. If one does not continue to trust in the Son then why would they 1} partake of the body or the blood 2} why would they want to be in heaven with the Son 3} why would a loving God want to force them to be there with Him?

Those that are "in Christ" are sanctified because they are "in Christ" but if you are no longer in Christ are you still sanctified? You say yes I say no. Do we grow in sanctification as long as we are in Christ. Actually, from what I have seen in my life I would say some do and some not so much.

I have heard the argument that Heb 6:4-6 does not say that those that fall away did not really believe. For that to be true you have to give new meanings to the words in the verses. One has to read into the text what they want to find.

A person that truly believes will be saved those that do not will be lost.

 

[Silverhair]

Could you tell me what Hebrews 10:14 means, please?


Hebrews 10:14 King James Version

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


God bless.

Those that are in Christ are sanctified those that are not, are not sanctified. The qualifier has always been "in Christ". In order to be in Christ one has to believe/trust in Him for their salvation.

 

[Darrell C]

You seem to have missed the mark with what I have said. You want to hold to the view that man can not be lost

Silverhair, I have already made a clear statement that I do not believe in universal salvation. I do not even view the Atonement as applicable to the lost. It is only when men are saved that the Atonement is beneficial to them.

I have also made my views clear that all men are dead. Without life. And that only Christ is the remedy for the natural condition.

and I hold to the idea that man can turn away from the Son and reject Him.

Man is already separated from Christ. Only within the ministry of the Comforter can natural man respond to the Gospel, because it is only at that time that the Gospel is made understandable to him.

Most men will reject Christ, just as most men rejected God's will in the Old Testament.

You say I should not build my Soteriology on proof texts,and I agree. That is why I do not do that. While you point to Heb 10:14 as a proof you want to overlook Heb 6:4-6.

I point to Hebrews as a beginning to the discussion. This is after you have presented your passage. I addressed your passage, yet you addressed no text I supplied.

As I said, you would ignore what I present and go to the next proof text. That is what you're doing. No address of the fact that your passage is dealing with false teachers, not born-again Christians.

Now, before I finish addressing these comments, will you please explain Hebrews 10:14?


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I am not using these verses as a proof text, I am just pointing out the logic. If one does not continue to trust in the Son then why would they 1} partake of the body or the blood

There is absolutely no logic to be found in pitting Scripture against Scripture.

What you are teaching is not logical, it defies logic.

Logic states that if Scripture teaches that salvation is not of man's works, and that it is a gift, to teach that what deeds you perform impacts that gift is illogical.

You are placing an ongoing procedure to what is an event. Drinking His blood and partaking of His flesh is metaphorical for believing itself, not the daily conversation of the believer.

You are buying into a Catholic understanding of Communion.

When a man eats and drinks he receives life. This is the event of salvation. Because until he eats and drinks he has no life. The fathers in the wilderness (including Moses) diod not believe on Christ as is commanded by Christ. Neither did the disciples. Not until Pentecost.

It is when they believed that they received life, and this eternal. It is because they were redeemed and brought into eternal union with God.

Exactly what type of Baptist Church do you attend that teaches this?

2} why would they want to be in heaven with the Son

Why would someone grieving over their dead son want to be in Heaven if he blamed GOd for his son's death? Are you saying that men have the power to cancel GOd's indwelling presence despite His statement He would never leave nor forsake us, but he can't fall into a grief so strong he would curse God?

3} why would a loving God want to force them to be there with Him?

Why did God "force" Jonah into preaching to Nineveh? Why did God "force" Paul to stop murdering Christians?

It isn't a matter of forcing someone, it is a matter of an event in our lives. You have been given numerous passages that show that salvation is something that takes place in a moment in time. What one does after they have been saved is a different context from the issue of salvation itself. When you are saved you are placed in Christ. You are suggesting that you have the power to step out of Christ and to expel the Spirit of God out of you.

Those that are "in Christ" are sanctified because they are "in Christ" but if you are no longer in Christ are you still sanctified?

Yes.


Hebrews 10:10 King James Version

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.



Hebrews 10 is misinterpreted by the L.O.S.T. because they yank their proof-texts out of the context of the Book and Chapter.

This is speaking of our positional sanctification, not our progressive sanctification.

But you are going to have to understand the entire chapter, and it is quite obvious you aren't. I don't say that to be mean, brother, I say that because it is obvious.

If you understood v.1 of chapter ten you would understand v.10, and you would understand v.14 (see the pattern that's developing? lol).

Who's will is said to sanctify us here once for all?

And who's will are you seeking to teach as more powerful than the will of God?


Continued...

 

[Aaron]

Those that are in Christ are sanctified those that are not, are not sanctified. The qualifier has always been "in Christ". In order to be in Christ one has to believe/trust in Him for their salvation.

The blood of the covenant is what sanctifies us. Hebrews 10:29

The New Testament is the New Testament of His Blood, not His life.

Mat 26:28 KJV - For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Mar 14:24 KJV - And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
Luk 22:20 KJV - Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
1Co 11:25 KJV - After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
Heb 9:18, 20 KJV - Whereupon neither the first [testament] was dedicated without blood. ... Saying, This [is] the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

The Blood is death. He is the Lamb that was slain. In Heaven it is said, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.

His endless life is what gives efficacy to His death.

His death redeems. His death reconciles.

What's the greater miracle? That He who cannot die, died? Or that He who cannot die lives?

His death is His identity in Heaven, as He still bears the marks in His hands and side.

His death is what saves us.

His death is how we identify with Him.

His death is what we show over and over and over and over again in the Supper.

Reconciliation IS Salvation.

 

[Darrell C]

You say yes I say no.

Doesn't matter what either of us say, it only matters what Scripture states.

Do we grow in sanctification as long as we are in Christ.

I agree, in progressive sanctification, we grow from ignorant babies to mature believers.

That doesn't change the fact that His death sanctifies us once for all. That is positional sanctification, and if you confuse the two you are going to end up teaching error.

Let's take a look at some ignorant babies that is part of the context of Hebrews 6:4-6 (which you attribute to referring to born-again believers:


Hebrews 5:10-6:6 King James Version

10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.


His charge is that they are ignorant of the first principles of the Word of God. Keep in mind that this is spoken to Hebrew People in regards to the Hebrew Scriptures, the Old Testament.

The first (archē) principles (stoicheion) of the Word of God is something they are ignorant of, right? They need to be taught the ABCs of the first principles, right? Keep that in mind as we go.

Now, look at the link for "of full age." It translates the word teleios. That word means complete. Brought to its end. Not lacking anything to further complete it.

Now look at the command to these ignorant babes:



Hebrews 6:1-6 King James Version

1 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,

2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.


Therefore leaving the "first" (archē) let us go on unto perfection (teleiotēs).

So a few things to consider:

1. He is rebuking those who do not even understand the first principles of the Hebrew Scriptures, hence to make them people who understand that which is complete in regards to the Doctrine of Christ is a mistake. They are in need of being taught the ABCs of Christ found in the Old Testament. Your teaching makes them knowledgable about Christ Himself.

2. They are told not to lay again the first principles, and he lists them. The point is that he is calling his Jewish brethren to progress from the ABCs and to live according to that which is complete in Christ, as opposed to their traditional heritage that in under Law.

3. If they are ignorant of what the Old Testament taught about Christ, how can you impose an understanding of the Gospel in them? The Writer doesn't, but charges them with not even knowing the ABCs, lol.

Now, where in this...


3 And this will we do, if God permit.


...do we see men deciding they are going to progress to perfection?

We don't. Salvation is according to God's will, not man's (John 1:13).


4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,


These are characteristics of those who have been ministered to and through by God. The filling of the Spirit for ministries such as Prophet, Priest, King, and Warrior are seen throughout the Old Testament.

Furthermore, it is the very giving of the First Principles of the Doctrine of Christ to the Hebrew People through the Hebrew Scriptures that we see that men were enlightened, tasted of the Heavenly Gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost.

Why would you think this would be exclusive to born-again believers?

Did not those who fell under Christ's ministry taste of the Good Word of God? Taste of the world/age to come? Was not the Kingdom upon them as it is now?


6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.


Now, how exactly could one "crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh?

By offering up Christ in the figure of animal sacrifice, or in other words, by not progressing to perfection. By laying again the foundation of worship that is not complete.

Nothing in this about Christians, and it is in fact impossible for Christians to crucify unto themselves Christ again, because they are not going to offer up animal sacrifice.

I don't expect you to accept this, but I do challenge you to consider it.



7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:

8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.

9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.


In view is the provision of God, just as it is in John 15 in the True Vine, and Romans 11 (the Tree). All of the earth receives rain, and it is how that provision is received that determines the outcome. In view is not good Christian bad Christian, lol, but believer and unbeliever.

It is the unbeliever that falls away. It is the fruit that determines that.

The Writer is confident his brethren will respond unto salvation, rather than being burned up.

This passage deserves quite a bit more time, but this may be my last day for a while, so I wanted to present at least a brief intro to the fuller context. Again, it is pretty obvious when anyone tries to use these passages in Hebrews to teach loss of salvation that they are woefully unfamiliar with the Book as a whole. The theme of perfection runs through the entire book, and the fact is that our faith is not dependent solely on us. He is the Author and Perfecter (Finisher) of our faith, not we ourselves.

Hebrews 10:14, when understood in its fuller context (that of the Chapter and that of the Book) is the clearest and most irrefutable statement of Eternal Security found in all of Scripture.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Actually, from what I have seen in my life I would say some do and some not so much.

So you have made yourself judge over those who are saved?

We all grow at different rates. I suggest that those engaged in doctrinal discussion and debate grow at an accelerated rate that exceeds the typical 1-3 times a week "Bible Student." And that is how it is for most, their Bibles are opened only at their church, and they are not studying for themselves, but are being told what it is Scripture teaches. That is why most are indoctrinated into error.

They simply will not get off their duffs and study for themselves. That is the rebuke of the writer of Hebrews. Lack of study develops babies that choke on the meat.

I have heard the argument that Heb 6:4-6 does not say that those that fall away did not really believe.

I never said they didn't believe, I said they are not born again.

Devils believe, my friend, and tremble. But they aren't saved.

That is why they will be more severely punished, because they chose to reject:


Hebrews 10:26-29 King James Version

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?


You have been taught this is referring to believers falling away. Nothing of the sort is in the text. It would in fact contradict what he teaches us in Hebrews 10:1-25.

Who will be judged more severely? Those who trod underfoot the Son of God, reject the New Covenant, reject the Blood (death) whereby Christ was sanctified, call His death an unholy thing, and reject the ministry of the Comforter (that is how God saves, by the way).

More severely than who? Glad you asked: more severely than those that rejected God's will under the Law.

Just as Peter compares false prophets with false teachers, and they are the ones being spoken of there, even so the Writer compares rejecters of the Old (First) Covenant with the rejecters of the New Covenant.

It's there for you to see, Silverhair. It is not a proof-text for loss of salvation, it is a warning to those who reject Christ. If you reject Christ there is...

...no more sacrifice for sin.

See how simple that is? The willful sin is rejecting the only sacrifice that can save you. If you reject that there is no other sacrifice you can turn to. If you offer up sacrifice according to the Law you crucify in figure/shadow/antitype/parable Christ again. And this to yourself, meaning it is personal sin.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

For that to be true you have to give new meanings to the words in the verses. One has to read into the text what they want to find.

No, not new meaning, just the meaning that was given in the first place.

You are simply bringing these passages out of the context they are found. When you include that context you can no longer remain in the position you are holding to now.

He has just made the very same statement in this same chapter:


Hebrews 10:15-18 King James Version

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.



Hebrews 10:26 King James Version

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,


The first is positive, meaning when one is saved by that offering, there is no more offering for sin.

The second is negative: if we reject the Son of God, His death, His Covenant, and the Spirit of Grace ... there is no more an offering of sin beyond that.

Note that remission of sins is the promise of the New Covenant as seen in v.16-17. When one is brought into the New Covenant they are forgiven on an eternal basis. There is no more offering for sin. This is God's will, not man's.

A person that truly believes will be saved those that do not will be lost.

And that is what it is saying.

But you are making those ignorant even of the ABCs of the Old Testament (who did not have the Mystery of the Gospel revealed to them) somehow born-again believers.

And you are making those who reject the more complete knowledge of the Doctrine of Christ born-again believers. In Chapter Ten, yes, they have received the knowledge of Christ through the ministry of the Spirit of Grace (the Comforter), but they reject it. That is why they will be punished more severely than those that rejected Moses' Law.

It is a comparison of false prophets and false teachers, and rejecters of the Covenant of Law (the First Covenant and Moses' Law as the Writer terms it) with rejecters of the New Covenant.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Those that are in Christ are sanctified those that are not, are not sanctified. The qualifier has always been "in Christ". In order to be in Christ one has to believe/trust in Him for their salvation.

Okay, I will give up on you explaining this verse. I think this is going to be my last day for a while (I just spend too much time when I do come here), so I will just point out some obvious truths about Hebrews 10, and I am going to the Word do the speaking:


Hebrews 10 King James Version

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:


I will just point out "make perfect" in v.1. It too is speaking of completion (perfection), and what it is saying is the Law only held a shadow of the True, just as we see in ch.9, and it could not make perfect those who worshiped. The context is specific to remission of sins through sacrifice. So the point is that the sacrifices of the Law could not make those who offered up animal sacrifice complete in regards to remission of sins.


10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


We are sanctified by His offering (as opposed to the offerings of the Law) once for all. Positional Sanctification.

Those who have been sanctified (set apart by God, made Holy (declared righteous)) have been made complete in regards to remission of sins forever.


He reiterates this truth again:


17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.


18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.


So, my friend, if in fact, a Christian did turn from God in anger, grief, et cetera, the simple fact is that this sin is forgiven in the Offering of Christ.

But I am persuaded better things than this of those who are in God's hands, and will not fall into the hands of an angry God. He promised to establish a New Covenant, and that He would forgive sin forever. He has done that in Christ.

Now I know what's going on in those little grey cells under that silver lining, lol: you are again thinking of another proof-text to throw at me. Can I just suggest that if you expand the context you will find the same issues we have found with these proof-texts? And that will be ascribing regeneration to those who are in fact unbelievers? Look at chapter 3. Unbelievers who rebelled against God's revelation and will. Find a passage where we can see it is a born-again believer that is unbelieving, and ask yourself how he can be a believer if he doesn't believe?

I would also mention that the Law did not sanctify on an eternal basis, as Christ's Sacrifice does:


Hebrews 9:12-15 King James Version

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


I am going to try to make this my last post for a while, so understand these are presented for your benefit, and given in hopes that you will simply give them some consideration. I can no more change your mind than I can change the tires on a snowmobile. Even if I could change it, someone could come around and change it back. We are reliant on the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, to give us understanding of His Word, and it is just my belief that He will do that if we are not slothful, but diligent that by reason of use we can come to understand why the Gospel is in fact good news for sinful men like yourself and I.

I do not now, nor ever will, question your salvation. I believe you are a brother in Christ and that one day we will meet in Heaven, or the clouds should we be fortunate enough to be raptured.

I am quite sure that at that time I will have enough grace not to say "I told you so!"




God bless.

 

[Silverhair]

Silverhair, I have already made a clear statement that I do not believe in universal salvation. I do not even view the Atonement as applicable to the lost. It is only when men are saved that the Atonement is beneficial to them.

I have also made my views clear that all men are dead. Without life. And that only Christ is the remedy for the natural condition.




Man is already separated from Christ. Only within the ministry of the Comforter can natural man respond to the Gospel, because it is only at that time that the Gospel is made understandable to him.

Most men will reject Christ, just as most men rejected God's will in the Old Testament.




I point to Hebrews as a beginning to the discussion. This is after you have presented your passage. I addressed your passage, yet you addressed no text I supplied.

As I said, you would ignore what I present and go to the next proof text. That is what you're doing. No address of the fact that your passage is dealing with false teachers, not born-again Christians.

Now, before I finish addressing these comments, will you please explain Hebrews 10:14?


Continued...

I responded to Heb 10:14 but I see you did not like what I said.

I am just pointing out the logic. If one does not continue to trust in the Son then why would they 1} partake of the body or the blood 2} why would they want to be in heaven with the Son 3} why would a loving God want to force them to be there with Him?

 

[Silverhair]

Okay, I will give up on you explaining this verse. I think this is going to be my last day for a while (I just spend too much time when I do come here), so I will just point out some obvious truths about Hebrews 10, and I am going to the Word do the speaking:


Hebrews 10 King James Version

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:


I will just point out "make perfect" in v.1. It too is speaking of completion (perfection), and what it is saying is the Law only held a shadow of the True, just as we see in ch.9, and it could not make perfect those who worshiped. The context is specific to remission of sins through sacrifice. So the point is that the sacrifices of the Law could not make those who offered up animal sacrifice complete in regards to remission of sins.


10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


We are sanctified by His offering (as opposed to the offerings of the Law) once for all. Positional Sanctification.

Those who have been sanctified (set apart by God, made Holy (declared righteous)) have been made complete in regards to remission of sins forever.


He reiterates this truth again:


17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.


18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.


So, my friend, if in fact, a Christian did turn from God in anger, grief, et cetera, the simple fact is that this sin is forgiven in the Offering of Christ.

But I am persuaded better things than this of those who are in God's hands, and will not fall into the hands of an angry God. He promised to establish a New Covenant, and that He would forgive sin forever. He has done that in Christ.

Now I know what's going on in those little grey cells under that silver lining, lol: you are again thinking of another proof-text to throw at me. Can I just suggest that if you expand the context you will find the same issues we have found with these proof-texts? And that will be ascribing regeneration to those who are in fact unbelievers? Look at chapter 3. Unbelievers who rebelled against God's revelation and will. Find a passage where we can see it is a born-again believer that is unbelieving, and ask yourself how he can be a believer if he doesn't believe?

I would also mention that the Law did not sanctify on an eternal basis, as Christ's Sacrifice does:


Hebrews 9:12-15 King James Version

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


I am going to try to make this my last post for a while, so understand these are presented for your benefit, and given in hopes that you will simply give them some consideration. I can no more change your mind than I can change the tires on a snowmobile. Even if I could change it, someone could come around and change it back. We are reliant on the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, to give us understanding of His Word, and it is just my belief that He will do that if we are not slothful, but diligent that by reason of use we can come to understand why the Gospel is in fact good news for sinful men like yourself and I.

I do not now, nor ever will, question your salvation. I believe you are a brother in Christ and that one day we will meet in Heaven, or the clouds should we be fortunate enough to be raptured.

I am quite sure that at that time I will have enough grace not to say "I told you so!"




God bless.

As I have said before and now say again.

I am just pointing out the logic. If one does not continue to trust in the Son then why would they 1} partake of the body or the blood 2} why would they want to be in heaven with the Son 3} why would a loving God want to force them to be there with Him?

Those that are in Christ are sanctified those that are not, are not sanctified. The qualifier has always been "in Christ". In order to be in Christ one has to believe/trust in Him for their salvation.

 

[Silverhair]

The blood of the covenant is what sanctifies us. Hebrews 10:29

The New Testament is the New Testament of His Blood, not His life.

Mat 26:28 KJV - For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Mar 14:24 KJV - And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
Luk 22:20 KJV - Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
1Co 11:25 KJV - After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
Heb 9:18, 20 KJV - Whereupon neither the first [testament] was dedicated without blood. ... Saying, This [is] the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

The Blood is death. He is the Lamb that was slain. In Heaven it is said, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.

His endless life is what gives efficacy to His death.

His death redeems. His death reconciles.

What's the greater miracle? That He who cannot die, died? Or that He who cannot die lives?

His death is His identity in Heaven, as He still bears the marks in His hands and side.

His death is what saves us.

His death is how we identify with Him.

His death is what we show over and over and over and over again in the Supper.

Reconciliation IS Salvation.

For some reason you seem to think that I do not believe that the death of the Son was sufficient to cover all the sin of mankind. l have said many times that His death does that, did you miss that point?

Where we disagree is when I say and as the bible also says, that we are saved by His life whereas you say it was by His death.

From Gods' perspective He is at peace with man through the death of His Son,
Col 1:20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
but from the perspective of man we are reconciled to God through our faith in the risen Son.
2Co_5:20 as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God.

And you keep saying that it was His death that saves while the bible says it is His life. You want to trust in a dead man and I trust in the risen Christ.

1Co_15:13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised;
1Co_15:14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
1Co_15:15 Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised.
1Co_15:16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised;
1Co_15:17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This is what you keep denying. Faith in the risen Christ Jesus saves, how can you not see this? You want people saved before they believe and that is not biblical. Your calvinist theology is what requires man to be saved at the cross, but it is not biblical and thus you are wrong.