• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Debunking Unconditional Eternal Security: Hebrews 10:39

Status
Not open for further replies.

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Because I'm not guilty of the future sins I have yet to commit. Why would I need the blood to cover 'uncommitted sins'?

They have to be covered once they are committed, don't they? Will any sin either past or future go unnoticed by God, and considered not a matter related to the Atonement?

Have to get going, have a great day.


God bless.
 

utilyan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You are a Father of a Child who you Love and Resolved in every way to protect and to give everything that's yours. You resolve never to abandon him ever, no matter what wickedness he does in your eyes your child is elected, saved.

He now become a depressed alcoholic drunk throwing away his will. The problem isn't he broke rule 13 or law #1. The problem isn't well you get your keys taken away for this.

The problem is in the SIN itself. The suffering you put yourself through.

You are a son of God? That means no sin is ever going to slide. How could it? God loves you!


Listen to you guys its like if your child jumps in a pool that says "NO SWIMMING". So you find your child scream and choking gurgling for help inside the pool. You don't pull him out, because the one thing on your mind is......The rules say "NO SWIMMING" there is a ,100$ fine for it, Its a good thing Jesus Christ has paid that off! He gurgle and gasps for air, don't worry son, Jesus is going to pay the FINE!

YOUR SON IS STILL DROWNING!

Every time you sin you are still drowning!
 

vooks

Active Member
You are a Father of a Child who you Love and Resolved in every way to protect and to give everything that's yours. You resolve never to abandon him ever, no matter what wickedness he does in your eyes your child is elected, saved.

He now become a depressed alcoholic drunk throwing away his will. The problem isn't he broke rule 13 or law #1. The problem isn't well you get your keys taken away for this.

The problem is in the SIN itself. The suffering you put yourself through.

You are a son of God? That means no sin is ever going to slide. How could it? God loves you!


Listen to you guys its like if your child jumps in a pool that says "NO SWIMMING". So you find your child scream and choking gurgling for help inside the pool. You don't pull him out, because the one thing on your mind is......The rules say "NO SWIMMING" there is a ,100$ fine for it, Its a good thing Jesus Christ has paid that off! He gurgle and gasps for air, don't worry son, Jesus is going to pay the FINE!

YOUR SON IS STILL DROWNING!

Every time you sin you are still drowning!
Your relationship with God is conditional to your faith while yours with your kids is unconditional
 

JohnDeereFan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I would prefer to believe in Unconditional Eternal Security. And I have no idea why anyone would not want to believe it. Once I put saving faith in Jesus Christ, nothing can change my eternal destiny. I can return to a life of wickedness,die in unrepentance,and I will still be saved in the end

I didn't really bother to read beyond this point. If you truly believe a regenerated, born again, crucified with Christ and raised to new life in Him believer can "return to a life of wickedness and unrepentance", then you're too ignorant of the most elementary tenets of Christianity to waste my time with.

But, for the edification (I hope) of those following along, here's something I posted elsewhere:

Since our salvation was not initiated by us, was not bought by us, and is not held by us, how can it be ours to lose?

Rather than ask if man can lose his salvation, you should be asking if Christ is able to lose any the Father has given Him or is unable to keep us from falling.

You seem to misunderstand the Biblical doctrine of eternal security.

You talk about the Biblical doctrine of eternal security as if it's something we earn after salvation by proving ourselves worthy.

That's not the case at all. We're not saved by our own righteousness, but by Christ's righteousness, and our salvation is not kept by our faithfulness, but by Christ's faithfulness and ability to keep that which the Father has given Him.

If one is born again, then his salvation is secure in Christ's hands.

I would encourage you to think long and hard about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment. If we could really lose our salvation, then Hebrews 6:4-6 says that if we ever sin after being saved, we'll be lost forever with no way back, because the Lord would have to be crucified all over again to retrieve us. That means that it would only take one sin to fall away.

To deny the Biblical doctrine of eternal security, you must believe that, if one sin before we're saved was enough to condemn us, one sin after we're saved is enough to condemn us, as well. Doesn't this make the New Covenant worse than the Old? Under the Old Covenant, the Israelites were condemned for their actions, but we'd be condemned for our thoughts.

Under the Old Covenant, under the law, the Israelites couldn't murder. We can't even be angry. They couldn't commit adultery. We can't even have a lustful thought. If you're right, then we lose our salvation by doing less in following the law than the Israelites did under the law!

Is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ? Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning? Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?

But, back to your question, there are a host of verses that support the Biblical doctrine of eternal security.

Let's start with the most obvious:

John 6:35-40 says 35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

So, here we have three promises:

a) That Jesus will not lose those the Father has given Him.

b) That Jesus will not cast out any who come to Him

That precludes both the sinner losing his salvation and Jesus taking his salvation away. So what means is left to lose salvation?

c) That God has already promised they would be raised on the last day.

Does God now break His promises?

And that's only the beginning. There is plenty of evidence for the Biblical doctrine of eternal security after that. For instance...

Romans 8:29-30 says that God predestined those whom He foreknew to be conformed to the image of Christ. If we can lose our salvation and, thus, our conformity to the image of Christ, then does this mean that God's foreknowledge is wrong? That's open theism, which has historically been condemned as heresy by the Church.

Jude 24 says that Christ is able to keep us from falling? If we can lose our salvation, does this mean that Christ is able to keep us from falling, but is merely unwilling? How is that consistent with the Biblical description of Christ?


Colossians 3:1-4 says that if we have been saved, we will appear with Christ in glory? It doesn't say "you might appear with Christ in glory, if you don't lose your salvation". It says "you will appear with Christ in glory". Done deal.

Philippians 1:6 says that if Christ has begun a good work in us, that He will finish it. How does He keep that promise to finish the good work He began in you, if you can lose your salvation?

1 Peter 1:23 tells us that when we are born again, we are born of incorruptible seed? If we can lose our salvation, then this seed is corruptible and that promise is not true.

Like Colossians 3:1-4, 1 John 3:2 says that we are sons of God now and that when Christ appears, we will be like Him. There is no qualifier. There is no "...if we don't lose our salvation". And if we're sons of God, when has God ever disowned a son?

Titus 1:2 says that God has promised us eternal life and that He never breaks a promise.

In John 10:27-29, Jesus promises us that He has given us eternal life, that we will never perish, and that we are not only in His hands, but in the Father's hands. How is Jesus' promise in John 10:27-28 consistent with the idea that we can lose our salvation? Is Jesus really incompetent to keep those whom the Father has given Him?

John 5:24 says that if we are saved, we will not come into condemnation but will have eternal life? How can Jesus promise that we will not come into condemnation if He knows we can lose our salvation?

Romans 11:6 tells us that salvation is not by works. If we cannot be saved by works, then how can we lose our salvation by works? Furthermore, why isn't keeping our salvation a work?

John 14:16-17 tells us that when we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells us forever. How can the Holy Spirit indwell in us forever if we lose our salvation? Since when does the Holy Spirit dwell in the unsaved?

Ephesians 1:13, 4:30 tells us that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. If we lose our salvation, then how can we still claim to be sealed?

1 Peter 1:4 says that our salvation is "imperishable, undefiled, and unfading". If our salvation is imperishable, how can we lose it? If our salvation is promised by God to be undefiled, how can we defile it?

It's been my experience that where you find a denial of the Biblical doctrine of Eternal Security, just scratch the surface and you'll find a belief in works-righteousness.

Again, I ask, is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ? Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning? Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?
 

vooks

Active Member
So you are saying that those sins are covered also? And again, we are talking about your future sins.


God bless.
Just to be sure we are on the same page, what do you mean by 'covered'?

No mishmash of scriptures, just a simple definition. Lately dithering makes me drowsy
 

vooks

Active Member
I didn't really bother to read beyond this point. If you truly believe a regenerated, born again, crucified with Christ and raised to new life in Him believer can "return to a life of wickedness and unrepentance", then you're too ignorant of the most elementary tenets of Christianity to waste my time with.
So in your educated,Elect,Sanctified and enlightened opinion, what is the purpose of the apostasy warnings, and to whom are they addressed?
(a) Believers
(b) apostates themselves
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Just to be sure we are on the same page, what do you mean by 'covered'?

No mishmash of scriptures, just a simple definition. Lately dithering makes me drowsy

As we have discussed, the context of Hebrews 9-10 centers on the focal issue of remission of sins.

By covered, I am taking about the same thing we have been discussing all along, that is, they are "covered" by the Work of Christ, meaning they are forgiven based on His Death in our stead.

So the question posed to you at this time is/was "Were the sins that you have not committed yet also been forgiven at this time, more specifically, when you were saved?"


God bless.
 

vooks

Active Member
As we have discussed, the context of Hebrews 9-10 centers on the focal issue of remission of sins.

By covered, I am taking about the same thing we have been discussing all along, that is, they are "covered" by the Work of Christ, meaning they are forgiven based on His Death in our stead.
Ok

So the question posed to you at this time is/was "Were the sins that you have not committed yet also been forgiven at this time, more specifically, when you were saved?"
God bless.
They are forgiven AS you sin,repent and pray for forgiveness, and not BEFORE you committed them.

An example would suffice.
1. I received Christ on 12/31/2015.
2. All my sins right up to 12/31/2015 are forgiven and cast into the sea of forgetfulness. If I sinned on 01/01/2016, I'd need to repent and pray for forgiveness for this particular sin and not the ones before it
3. Both the sins right up to 12/31/2015 and the subsequent ones are ALL covered by the blood of Jesus Christ
 
Last edited:

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Ok


They are forgiven AS you sin,repent and pray for forgiveness, and not BEFORE you committed them.

An example would suffice.
1. I received Christ on 12/31/2015.
2. All my sins right up to 12/31/2015 are forgiven and cast into the sea of forgetfulness. If I sinned on 01/01/2016, I'd need to repent and pray for forgiveness for this particular sin and not the ones before it
3. Both the sins right up to 12/31/2015 and the subsequent ones are ALL covered by the blood of Jesus Christ

And what is the basis for you being forgiven those future sins? You say the Blood of Christ, right?

I agree, that is the only means of forgiveness.

And that is what the Writer means when he states...


Hebrews 10:14

King James Version (KJV)




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


Now, what we do when we try to make the sin in view in Hebrews 10:26 refer to individual sins, is we negate what he says here, and what you say.

You are assuming that the sin you commit in the future differs from the sin of those who tread underfoot the Son of God, Count His Sacrifice unholy, and resist the Holy Spirit.

What you are assuming is...that can't happen to you.

Now how bad does one have to sin in order to be worthy of death? Could you answer that for me?

Also, I would be curious if you would share with me what denomination you were saved under.


God bless.
 

vooks

Active Member
And what is the basis for you being forgiven those future sins? You say the Blood of Christ, right?

I agree, that is the only means of forgiveness.

And that is what the Writer means when he states...
Hebrews 10:14
Ok
Now, what we do when we try to make the sin in view in Hebrews 10:26 refer to individual sins, is we negate what he says here, and what you say.
You are slowly losing it, 'individual' sins?

How many types of sins does your theology conjure up? List them with a brief description of each type, with examples

Thank you

God bless
You are assuming that the sin you commit in the future differs from the sin of those who tread underfoot the Son of God, Count His Sacrifice unholy, and resist the Holy Spirit.
The subject sin is apostasy

What you are assuming is...that can't happen to you.
I may be an apostate tomorrow @Darrell C, who knows?

Now how bad does one have to sin in order to be worthy of death? Could you answer that for me?
As unrepentant as you can get. All sins lead to death. The subject sin here is apostasy; brazen rebellion against the very blood that sanctified you

Also, I would be curious if you would share with me what denomination you were saved under.


God bless.
I don't have any denominational markers, but you can call me a former Presbyterian dispensational pre-trib Pentecostal. I pick what I like and what I find scriptural,from the various strands of Christianity, and discard garbage with utter contempt.
 
Last edited:

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You are slowly losing it, 'individual' sins?

How many types of sins does your theology conjure up? List them with a brief description of each type, with examples

Thank you

God bless

A list is not necessary, we simply understand that anything in opposition to the will of God is sin.

But you are missing the point. You use the word Apostasy, now, let's examine what Scripture actually teaches about apostasy.

Again, in view are not individual sins, or specific sins, in regards to salvation, because Christ covered all sins imaginable in the Cross. But in view, our rejecters have rejected that which can bring remission of sins.

I am not saying individual sins don't matter, because we see a principle set forth in Scripture that all sin will be judged, and there will be varying degrees of punishment. But, again, in view when we speak about remission of sin, it is a matter of first the penalty for sin being paid and secondly it refers to the person, rather than the individual sins that person has committed. Those who commit heinous sin will be saved the same way as those who have committed lesser sins. It might be likened to Marine Boot Camp. One might go through boot camp up until the day before it's over, and if they wash out, they are not then called Marines. They just didn't get to the point where they became Marines.

Same thing with these who reject Christ, His Sacrifice, the Covenant, and the Holy Spirit. They have assembled with the brethren, yet forsake. And in ight of the context, which I have reiterated numerous times, in view is remission of sins through sacrifice. The Writer makes it clear that the sacrifices they once offered can no longer be offered, that is why there remains no more sacrifice for sins.


The subject sin is apostasy

I would agree, but, where you err is to make those who are apostate...born again believers.

They are not for the simple fact that they have rejected that through which they can be saved. They reject that forgiveness Hebrews 10:14 speaks of as being complete and forever.

You create a paradox, making remission of sins both for ever and not for ever. Complete and incomplete.

And you have no Scriptural basis for that, because Hebrews is quite clear in distinguishing that which is complete/perfect (the sacrifices of the Law) with that One Sacrifice which brings complete remission of sins, past, present, and future. Salvation is eternal, not simply a process of a clean slate and religious works. One is either saved, or he is not.


Continued...
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I may be an apostate tomorrow @Darrell C, who knows?

We can know, Vooks.

Can you tell me why you think you are saved? Do you know that you have become a born again believer?

How are men saved, Vooks?


As unrepentant as you can get. All sins lead to death. The subject sin here is apostasy; brazen rebellion against the very blood that sanctified you

No, Vooks, all sin does not lead to death when we are speaking in a salvific context.

For the believer, the same penalty remains, "The wages of sin is death," but, for the believer, that death as a result of sin is physical, not eternal.

Again, you misunderstand sanctification, just as you wrest the use of apostasy to suit the doctrine you wish to teach.

You are not understanding that sanctification brings about a position of for ever forgiven, that is a basic principle of the Promise of God under New Covenant conditions. Scripture peaks of both positional as well as progressive sanctification. Christ was sanctified by God. Christ sanctified Himself through His Death. The sanctified believer is set apart from the world, just as Christ's Sacrifice is set apart from the sacrifices of the Law...that is the entire thrust of Hebrews 10.


I don't have any denominational markers, but you can call me a former Presbyterian dispensational pre-trib Pentecostal. I pick what I like and what I find scriptural,from the various strands of Christianity, and discard garbage with utter contempt.

You speak the truth, because you do indeed cherry-pick Scripture, holding in contempt anything you don't want to believe.

Because you demand Scripture conform to your own desired beliefs, you are blind to what Scripture states. You can no more understand Apostasy than you can Sanctification, because you simply don't want to.

Now, since an attempt to help you understand the contrast between believers and unbelievers, sacrifice of the Law and the Sacrifice of Christ, the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant have been unsuccessful, I suggest we take another approach, as I said, let's look at what Scripture teaches about Apostasy (contrasted with the preconceived notions you have about it which are likely a result to that which you have been exposed to as you sat under teaching wherever it is you were saved).

You say believers can become apostate, so...produce the Scripture that teaches this.


God bless.
 

vooks

Active Member
A list is not necessary, we simply understand that anything in opposition to the will of God is sin.
You got something right for the first time. Clap for yourself
But you are missing the point. You use the word Apostasy, now, let's examine what Scripture actually teaches about apostasy.
Yes, let's do it. Waiting...tic toc
Again, in view are not individual sins, or specific sins, in regards to salvation, because Christ covered all sins imaginable in the Cross. But in view, our rejecters have rejected that which can bring remission of sins.
But you'd go on and argue that the rejecters' sin is no different from my other sins. Not only are you tying yourself in theological knots,,you can't tell a a lie with a straight face
I am not saying individual sins don't matter, because we see a principle set forth in Scripture that all sin will be judged, and there will be varying degrees of punishment. But, again, in view when we speak about remission of sin, it is a matter of first the penalty for sin being paid and secondly it refers to the person, rather than the individual sins that person has committed.
Confusion galore. So we start with the penalty, then the person. Pretty dumb if you ask me for exactly what suffers the penalty? Is it not the sinner?
Those who commit heinous sin will be saved the same way as those who have committed lesser sins. It might be likened to Marine Boot Camp. One might go through boot camp up until the day before it's over, and if they wash out, they are not then called Marines. They just didn't get to the point where they became Marines.
Irrelevant. @Darrell C, when you give illustrations, try and pretend to demonstrate their applicability.
Same thing with these who reject Christ, His Sacrifice, the Covenant, and the Holy Spirit. They have assembled with the brethren, yet forsake.
In other words, they ar in EVERY way imaginable as yourself @Darrell C. The difference between an apostate or 'rejecter' and yourself is they have renounced their faith already whereas for you, we can't be too sure that you won't in future.
And in ight of the context, which I have reiterated numerous times, in view is remission of sins through sacrifice. The Writer makes it clear that the sacrifices they once offered can no longer be offered, that is why there remains no more sacrifice for sins.
Nope, the only sacrifice available for their sins @Darrell C , the blood of Jesus which they just trod is unavailable. 'If we willfully sin'...WE means the Writer and his Christian subjects. He should have used THEY. 'If THEY willfully....'
I would agree, but, where you err is to make those who are apostate...born again believers.
I don't make them anything. ...'if WE...?'...it is Holy Spirit not me. If you can discard a subset of Chriatian beliefs @Darrell C,why not ALL of them?
They are not for the simple fact that they have rejected that through which they can be saved. They reject that forgiveness Hebrews 10:14 speaks of as being complete and forever.
Once again you miss a simple point. Why would Holy Spirit warn believers against an impossible outcome?
Even with the forgiveness complete and forever' , one needs to keep their faith! A meaningless exhortation if that faith can't be lost
You create a paradox, making remission of sins both for ever and not for ever. Complete and incomplete.
The paradox is a figment of your imagination. Whatever 'complete and forever ' means, faith can be lost
Hebrews 10:35 (KJV)
Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward

And you have no Scriptural basis for that, because Hebrews is quite clear in distinguishing that which is complete/perfect (the sacrifices of the Law) with that One Sacrifice which brings complete remission of sins, past, present, and future. Salvation is eternal, not simply a process of a clean slate and religious works. One is either saved, or he is not.


Continued...
The believers with 'complete and perfect remission' are warned against losing their faith
 

vooks

Active Member
We can know, Vooks.
Can you apostasize @Darrell C?
Is it possible for you to abandon your beliefs that make you saved?
Can you tell me why you think you are saved? Do you know that you have become a born again believer?
I believed in Jesus,I confessed Him, I'm born again
How are men saved, Vooks?
Believe and accept Jesus Christ, confess Him, you are born again.

How about you? What makes you imagine you are saved?
No, Vooks, all sin does not lead to death when we are speaking in a salvific context.
All sins lead to death. Please give me a list of those which don't
For the believer, the same penalty remains, "The wages of sin is death," but, for the believer, that death as a result of sin is physical, not eternal.
Super stupid @Darrell C,
The believer dies physically, the satanist dies physically,the unborn die physically yet they had never committed no sin....unless you are into Original Sin nonsense. See how silly that sounds?
Again, you misunderstand sanctification, just as you wrest the use of apostasy to suit the doctrine you wish to teach.
Yes,I misunderstand. You corrected me. It means being made holy just as Jesus badly needed his own blood to make him holy
You are not understanding that sanctification brings about a position of for ever forgiven, that is a basic principle of the Promise of God under New Covenant conditions.
You are not understanding that the sanctified are warned against losing their faith
Scripture peaks of both positional as well as progressive sanctification. Christ was sanctified by God. Christ sanctified Himself through His Death.
Which scriptures?
Wild baseless claims.
The sanctified believer is set apart from the world, just as Christ's Sacrifice is set apart from the sacrifices of the Law...that is the entire thrust of Hebrews 10.
Wild claims and more importantly,baseless. The sacrifice set itself apart by the very sacrifice? Jesus was sanctified by the blood of the covenant? From what? So had he not died he would have remained UNSANCTIFIED?
You speak the truth, because you do indeed cherry-pick Scripture, holding in contempt anything you don't want to believe.
Yet you can't refute a single thing I have said.
Because you demand Scripture conform to your own desired beliefs, you are blind to what Scripture states. You can no more understand Apostasy than you can Sanctification, because you simply don't want to.
You are a pro at heresies
1. Pre-trib madness
2. Jesus cleansing himself with his own blood
3. OSAS
Change your diet
Now, since an attempt to help you understand the contrast between believers and unbelievers, sacrifice of the Law and the Sacrifice of Christ, the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant have been unsuccessful, I suggest we take another approach, as I said, let's look at what Scripture teaches about Apostasy (contrasted with the preconceived notions you have about it which are likely a result to that which you have been exposed to as you sat under teaching wherever it is you were saved).
Let me help you. I'm a satanist,my saved, never saved.
You say believers can become apostate, so...produce the Scripture that teaches this.


God bless.
Hebrews 10 teaches EXACTLY that. What else do you need?
A man sanctified by the blood faces judgement and indignation. If you need more proof please ask for it
 

Darrell C

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
2. Jesus cleansing himself with his own blood

This is your understanding of the passage, Vooks, not mine.

I do affirm the other two, they are simply Biblical Truths. But don't ascribe your error, in particular error you refuse to admit to, lol.

You continue to speak out of both sides of your monitor, amigo. And you refuse to acknowledge your ignorance concerning sanctification.

So here are two questions that illustrate your improper understanding:

1. Did God sanctify Christ.

2. Did Christ Sanctify Himself?


I hate to have to keep going over the same ground, but until you acknowledge a better understanding of sanctification, as well as admit to the limited understanding you have, we will go in circles.

But that's okay.

Now, in this thread I will seek to maintain focus on the two above questions.

In the other thread I am going to maintain focus on Apostasy. Both are terms you don't understand, and when you see you have no basis to maintain the definitions you impose into Scripture, hopefully this will help you to understand that your doctrine stands in direct conflict with what Scripture actually says.

Again, have a great day, and Lord willing I will see you at the mext appointed time.


God bless.
 

vooks

Active Member
This is your understanding of the passage, Vooks, not mine.

I do affirm the other two, they are simply Biblical Truths. But don't ascribe your error, in particular error you refuse to admit to, lol.

You continue to speak out of both sides of your monitor, amigo. And you refuse to acknowledge your ignorance concerning sanctification.

So here are two questions that illustrate your improper understanding:

1. Did God sanctify Christ.

2. Did Christ Sanctify Himself?


I hate to have to keep going over the same ground, but until you acknowledge a better understanding of sanctification, as well as admit to the limited understanding you have, we will go in circles.

But that's okay.

Now, in this thread I will seek to maintain focus on the two above questions.

In the other thread I am going to maintain focus on Apostasy. Both are terms you don't understand, and when you see you have no basis to maintain the definitions you impose into Scripture, hopefully this will help you to understand that your doctrine stands in direct conflict with what Scripture actually says.

Again, have a great day, and Lord willing I will see you at the mext appointed time.


God bless.

sanctification according to you is being made holy. Being holy is being set apart. Jesus was sanctified by his own blood, but he was not made holy. Sheer inconsistent lunacy.

Jesus was sanctified
Jesus sanctified himself.

But this is not in contention. We are debating the madness of claiming that Jesus was sanctified BY his own blood.

You will need to give scriptural basis for this(which you can't in 100 consecutive eternities)

You will also need to explain exactly what Jesus was sanctified or made holy from by his own blood. You compound he lunacy by claiming it is the sacrifices of the law.

It is true Christ's sacrifice is different from the animal sacrifices. But we are not debating this, we are examining the claim that his sacrifice set him apart. What was his state with regard to the sacrifices of the law BEFORE his death set him apart?

Nonsense on stilts
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top