Perfection

[olegig]

good morning Darrell,

We are getting spread all over the place here....so I am going to respond to but a few statements.
If there is something you feel we need to re-visit, just say so for I am not trying to avoid anything; but will admit I may have over-looked something.

Revelation 12:11 (King James Version)
11And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Again, all scripture points to the same gospel...we are not told this, but you can see how the tribulation saints are saved. Same as you and I.

The passage above indicates to me they had to endure and keep their testimony even unto death.
Do you honestly feel this is true of us today?
In this age, if one is placed under the sword, can one loose salvation if one denies Christ?
I answer no.

The addition of Jesus?

Yes, the addition of Jesus.
The flavor of the instruction of the belief system during the Trib is the same as the instructions given to the OT saint with the addition of Jesus just as the flavor of the book of Hebrews.

Revelation 19:10 (King James Version)
10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

The above passage shows the "testimony of Jesus" is the spirit of prophecy, and the prophecy of Jesus was that He would come as a King to reclaim His Kingdom.
Prophecy never pointed to a time of spiritual indwelling and spiritual relationship as we see in the Church Age.
Prophecy never pointed to a time of gathering out a group from among the gentiles to be the Bride of Christ based on belief alone.

The testimony of Jesus is that He became prefect through obedience (Heb 6) and thus He earned the right to fulfill the prophecies of a King.

I again say, there is nothing Pauline about the instructions given to those still on earth during the Trib.
Sure, everyone's salvation is totally dependant on the shed blood of Christ on the cross; but different folks are instructed to do different things to have the blood spread upon them.
The Christian today is instructed to believe plus nothing.
The Trib saint is instructed to believe and proclaim the Kingship unto death. There are some works involved for those folks and I am just glad I will not have to endure what they will.

That doesn't change the fact that they have the same gospel, and are saved like as we.

My point is that some of the virgins lost their salvation because they did not work to keep it.
Salvation for everyone is the same salvation, brought about by the same action; but some are kept saved by the actions of the indwelling Holy Spirit, while others are instructed to do things (works) to keep their salvation.

If the above is denied, then I feel the action of the Holy Spirit in our lives today is not given its full due and respect. (Perhaps a little harsh, but just my feeling.)

If this means so much to you (that Israel and the Church are so separate), perhaps you should start a thread expressing your position.

I understand, and I apologize for hi-jacking this thread.
However it is because of this separation that I see a different direction for the doctrinal messages of the book of Hebrews and can only discuss the book of Hebrews in this light.

All those present at the time would have clearly known what Peter meant when he said to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for forgiveness of sins.

IMO to give teeth to the above statement one needs to show with scripture where they knew of the mysteries revealed through Paul before Paul revealed them.

I cannot be more specific than I already have. Its fine if you want to hold to this doctrine, but you will have to do better than you have if you want to convince me of two groups of redeemed.

I have never said there were or are two groups of redeemed.
If I have, then I made bad judgment in writing and need to correct it.
Please point me to this so I can review and correct.

It was through the giving of the Comforter that they understood. This was prior to Paul's salvation.

If this is true, then one should show in scripture where they (the disciples) preached the power of the resurrection, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, or the calling out of the Body.
And one should also explain Peter's remark in 2Pet 3:15-16.
-----------------------------

As yet, I have not had the time to fully study your post #37 but let me respond to this one thing from that post.

Having a good time here. By this time on other forums my salvation would already be in question for disagreeing with someone's theology.

I might raise questions of one's theology; but for someone who is so deep into the Word, there is no question of salvation.

God bless you,,,,,later

 

[Darrell C]

Hello brother Olegig,

As we get into Hebrews, it will cover the very points you raise.

I understand what it is you are trying to convey, and to a certain extent, some of it is true.

When Messiah came to bring the gospel to the Jews, it was specifically to the Jews He came to, in order to fulfill prophecy.

Gentile inclusion was at that time still a mystery, which began to unfold in Acts (in full extent that Gentiles were saved like as the Jews), and clarified in more detail in the epistles of Paul.

When you bring up the virgins, vineyard, and other such parables, you need to keep in mind that they point to God's relationship with Israel.

The blessings of the New Covenant will affect Israel on a national basis beginning in the tribulation, and into the M.K.

For now, those who come to Christ experience these blessings, and again I point you to Ezekial 36 and John 3. The imagery is identical.

Hebrews 8-10 (and 7 as well) deals with the contrast between the two covenants, showing the new as taking the place of the old.

This is why it is important to understand this book, it will clarify that the new is in place, and has been.

Anyway, don't have much time this morning, but will try to be back later today.

Look at 8-10, this is a good place to look at to get an overview of the message of Hebrews.

God bless, brother.

 

[Darrell C]

A Great Contrast In Hebrews.

While there are many contrasts found in Hebrews, the greatest being Christ's High Priesthood (New Covenant)compared to that of the Levitical High Priest (Old Covenant), at least in my estimation.

The Levitical High Priest was probably the most important man in the lives of the nation of Israel.

The contrast between the two is one of the least taught and thought about aspects of our faith.

As we look into Hebrews, clarity is given about why the law was given, and specifically what the ceremony of tabernacle/temple worship represented.

As Christians, we need to understand the Old in order to fully appreciate the New.

Hebrews makes this easy, but it requires time spent with the Lord to take it to heart.

Keep in mind this book was written to first century Jews (Hebrews) who had entered into some form of Christianity, meaning there are different groups addressed within. It is no different than the messages brought by Pastors from the pulpit today...they assume there are those among the audience who have not yet come into relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

What is different though is this: these first century Jews had apparently been active Judaizers, hence the discourse in the doctrine of Judaism.

Okay, this will be the first real installment of this study, and it will change course a little in order to address the issue of whether the Old has been done away with, and if the New (Covenant) is in fact in place today for the believer.

Be back in a few...see you in chapter 7. I will keep commentary to a minimum.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hebrews 7
1For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

We pick back up a discussion that started in chapter 5, in which the writer breaks with the statemant that the hearers of this were "lazy in hearing" (5:11), and ignorant not only of doctrine concerning Christ and His sacrifice (and what that meant), but needed to be taught again the "first principles of the Doctrine of Christ (5:12-14). The importance of that passage unlocks the following warning.

See Genesis 14 for the first mention of Melchisadec.

I will not spend much time on Melchisadec other than to say he was a "type" of Christ, a picture of Christ that is verified here.

He was both King and Priest (of the Most High God). Not of the tribe of Levi.

2To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

The picture of "giving back to God", and supporting those who minister unto us is given before the law, even as sacrifice is. The law has many elements that are true of God's people before and after the Law was given.

3Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

I will leave my comment at this: Melchisadec arrives on the pages of history and then is gone. If his heritage had been recorded, then one might say, "Christ must come from this or that..."

He is a "figure of Christ", King of Salem (peace).

4Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

At this point we begin to see the contrast. Why is this important?

The writer must convince these first century Jews that their loyalty to Levitical practice needs to now turn to Christ.

5And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

6But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

This speaks of Melchisadec. Note carefully "the promises". This is another important issue in Hebrews. Abraham gave tithes to someone other than the Levitical Priest. The writer is establishing a precedent for offering to God through another priest.

7And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.

Abraham, by giving the tithe, acknowledged Melchisadec's superiority.

8And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

There is no written record of Melchisadec's death.

9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.

Not only did Abraham offer tithes, but the Levitical Priesthood (being in the loins of Abraham) did as well. Again, Melchisadec's priesthood is being presented as superior to Abraham, and the Levitical priesthood.

10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

11If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

We have not as yet focused on our theme of perfection, but I trust you have looked at the list of verses and thought on them. Taken by themselves, the meaning becomes pretty obvious.

Back to v.11-

If "completion" were by the Levitical priesthood, why was it necessary for another priesthood (that of Christ's).

His point is this: the priesthood of the law could not bring perfection, if it could, the bringing in of Christ's Priesthood would not have been needed.

His (Christ's) priesthood would be like the picture of Melchisadec's.

Christ is King and Priest of the Most High God, He is not a priest of the Law (as Melchisadec was not), and His Priesthood is superior to that of the Levitical priesthood.

Unlike Melchisadec, Jesus truly had no beginning of days nor end of life...true, He died on the Cross a physical death, but He "tasted death" and conquered it.

He is alive forevermore!

This is going to be a hard pill for the Judaizer to swallow.

12For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Christ's authority is superior to the Law.


I will stop ther for the time being and open this up to discussion.

I would ask you this: what is the perfection referring to in v.11?

If you have looked at the verses (I will repost them), you will probably know.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hebrews

2:10-For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect (5048) through sufferings.

5048-teleioo: from 5046; to complete, i.e. (lit.) accomplish, or (fig.) consumate (in character). Translated: consecrate, finish, fulfill, (make)perfect.

5:9-And being made perfect (5048), he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

5:14-But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age (5046), who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

5046-teleios:complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); completeness. Translated: (of) full age, man, and perfect.

6:1-Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection (5047), not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

5047-teleiotes-(the state of) completeness (ment. or mor.). Translated perfection (ness).

7:11-If therefore perfection (5050) were by the Levitical Priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisadec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

5050-teleiosis-; from 5048, (the act) completion, i.e. (of prophecy) verification, or (of expiation [to make amends for]); absolution [remission of sins].

7:19-For the law made nothing perfect (5048), but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God.

7:28-For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated (5048) for evermore.

9:9-Which was a figure for the time present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect (5048).

10:1-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 were offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect (5048).

10:14-For by one offering he hath perfected (5048) forever them that are sanctified.

11:39-And all these, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise.
40-God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (5048).

12:2-Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher (5051) of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

5051-teleiotes-from 5048; a completer, i.e. consumater: -finisher.


Please look through these and see if an evident contrast of the Old and New is made clear.

Would like to know your thoughts on these.

God bless.

Reposting for reference.

 

[olegig]

God bless you brother, we'll work this thing out.

Agreed, and if not here, then we'll work it out while setting around the Throne. :thumbsup:

In reply to the new birth, New Covenant and their correlation, follow closely.

I am not an impatient man, but I am a direct man. Many times the truth can be discerned by looking at the outcome, the final result.
example:
The question raised in other thread concerning Daniel 9. Yes, the "he" could be one or the other; but when one looks at the long range result, then one can go back and see what the "he" had to be.

I view the question of the New Covenant in the same manner. When looking at the description of the New Covenant in Jeremiah, I hardly see how that Covenant can be related to the Body of Christ today when consideration is given to Paul's description of the actions of and relation of the Body to the Lord in this present Church age.

But why do I feel this comparison "method" is appropriate??
IMO it is required because of the way prophetic scripture is written.
Prophecy is written in a manner permitting the prophecy to be fulfilled either soon or in the distant future and fulfilled in one manner or in another, all dependant upon the free choices man makes along the way.
Therefore one must go to the final result and back-trace because if one works at the beginning and goes forward, one can get caught up in any one of the different possibilities of fulfillment

But why did God do this?

IMO God did it this way so He would have no visible influence upon the decisions of the direction man would take.
In other words at the final judgement man will not be able to say: "well God I can't be guilty because I really had no choice in the matter because You had already said thus and thus would take place."

Okay, we understand this passage for the most part. There is some debate about the water and the spirit in this passage, but most accept it to mean "the washing of the water of the word", not when "water breaks"; and the reference to spirit is of course the spiritual renewing of man by both the new spirit and the indwelling presence of God.

IMO there is another choice in the meaning of being "born of water", it is somewhat involved and takes a bit of time to develop so I will not go into it all here in depth.

It has to do with passages that deal with the flesh, bone, and blood.
We see 1Cor 15:50 mentions "flesh and blood" and we see in Luke 24:39 Jesus mentions "flesh and bone",,also Adam said of Eve in Gen 2:23 that she is "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh".
The important thing in the above is the combinations for there is something bad about the blood of man after the Fall.
Jesus was born with the blood of God, not man's blood. (Acts 20:28)

Why did Adam not mention blood?? What was in Adam's body before the Fall, was it the same sinful blood that is in our body?
What is so important about the blood and the distinction between the blood of Christ and the sorry state of the blood of man which is transferred from one man to the next generation?
What is the significance of circumcision which is the shedding of blood at the very point of the transference from one man to the next?

IMO all the above questions have to do with the relationship between bad blood, good blood, and water and being born of water has much more Biblical significance than physical birth or being washed in the water of the word.

There is only one New Covenant.
If it is not for us today, then these blessings are not for us today.

Again, I cannot accept this for many reasons stated above and for the fact Paul places the Body under the New Testament, not a New Covenant.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Brother Olegig!

Hope all is well down south, and that this day finds you blessed of the Lord.

You say many things I agree with my friend (and a few I don't).

One thing, it is apparent to me that some scripture is better understood when going back to clarify meaning.

I will just respond to a few things, as I need to spend time with my wife today, though I could do this all day and never tire of it.

As we go through Hebrews (generically speaking of reading the book, not necessarily this study...which seems to not be of interest to anyone), it is easier to understand some passages by understanding passages in later chapters.

Such as, if you understand 10:26 in context, you will better be able to understand 6:1-6.

Concerning the New Covenant and its present-day effectiveness (or the lack thereof), many do not think this applies to the church, and is for Israel only. I do not ridicule their (or your) position, this is something I believe God teaches a heart, like He does concerning eternal security.

We need not debate this, nor let it be a reason for the breaking of fellowship (or, let it cause bad feelings between us).

Fellowship with true brothers is something I consider valuable.

Now, I will goad you into this study...and pull you off of the rabbit trails we have been exploring.

Have you looked at the study verses, and have you come to a conclusion on perfection yet?

God bless, brother.

 

[olegig]

Hope all is well down south, and that this day finds you blessed of the Lord.

Thank you, and yes all is well. We are just getting over the last snow storm with another on the way.
I feed my cattle double today in case the weather is bad tomorrow and I do want to be able to attend church services.

You say many things I agree with my friend (and a few I don't).

I got a chuckle here....I feel if we would but stay in the Pauline epistles, we would have very little disagreement about anything. (And IMO that's where it really counts.)

One thing, it is apparent to me that some scripture is better understood when going back to clarify meaning.

By all means for no scripture is of private interpretation.

As we go through Hebrews (generically speaking of reading the book, not necessarily this study...which seems to not be of interest to anyone), it is easier to understand some passages by understanding passages in later chapters.

I can tell you have spent a great amount of time and effort in the study and I do wish to give it the same due respect, so please, give me time.

Concerning the New Covenant and its present-day effectiveness (or the lack thereof), many do not think this applies to the church, and is for Israel only. I do not ridicule their (or your) position, this is something I believe God teaches a heart, like He does concerning eternal security.

I hope here you are not saying that given enough time you are sure the Holy Spirit will reveal to me the same interpretation that you have.

We need not debate this, nor let it be a reason for the breaking of fellowship (or, let it cause bad feelings between us).

Let me assure you that for me bad feelings never come from another's position for they only come from the attitude and presentation of said position.

I would say, in all kindness, I feel you are forcing the New Covenant application thing just a bit in order to back up your position surrounding the passage dealing with the new birth and Nicodemus.

I will also say that I will always take a literal reading of scripture whether I understand it or not over what I might wish it to say or feel it should have said.

In this instance, Paul says "testament" not "covenant"; therefore I will seek to find the interpretation based on this.

Fellowship with true brothers is something I consider valuable.

Its always enjoyable to talk about the things of the heavens when one knows we are on common ground.

Now, I will goad you into this study...and pull you off of the rabbit trails we have been exploring.

Have you looked at the study verses, and have you come to a conclusion on perfection yet?

Again, give me time.....

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Brother Olegig!

So you have cattle?

This may sound strange, but the cow is one of my favorite creatures. We have cattle farms in my area, and I love to see them. One of my favorite things to see is a calf running and frolicking in a pasture. I think it is because cows are so calm and collected that I like them so much.

Concerning the question of Testament versus Covenant, I would urge you to check the original words used: they are the same word.

Also, in Hebrews, it is clear that the Covenant of Law is contrasted with the New Covenant.


Chapter 8

6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:


13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Chapter 9

1Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

15And 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.

16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

19For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

20Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.


You can see that the Testament here is speaking about the Mosaic Covenant, not the collective scripture we call the New Testament today.

Just take a look at it, brother.

And I agree, this is something that takes time, so, there is no rush.

Gotta go, hope you have a blessed service today,

God bless.

 

[olegig]

So you have cattle?

This may sound strange, but the cow is one of my favorite creatures. We have cattle farms in my area, and I love to see them. One of my favorite things to see is a calf running and frolicking in a pasture. I think it is because cows are so calm and collected that I like them so much.

Doesn't seem strange to me because I like them also, its how I make my living. :thumbsup:
But I no longer have cows and calves, got out of that business several years ago.
Now I only own "stocker" cattle. These are weaned calves weighing around 400lbs which I keep until they are ready to go to the feedlot weighing around 800lbs, then I sell them.

Concerning the question of Testament versus Covenant, I would urge you to check the original words used: they are the same word.

Here, my friend, I would urge you to stick with the Bible as it is written.

I do not believe in "spiritual revelation" as meaning a revelation given that is not Biblical or one that is "post" Biblical; but I do believe in the further revelation of what the Bible does say.

I compare Bible study to that of mathematics in that one must first learn 3 ten's added together equals thirty before one can comprehend that 3 times 10 equals thirty as well.

IMO Bible study is the same because as we go along God says such-and-such, and then builds on it.
However if one does not accept what God said and changes the "such-and-such" to what they feel God really meant; then God says fine, if you wish to go in your own direction, you are free to do so; but it will not lead in the direction I pointed.

Also, in Hebrews, it is clear that the Covenant of Law is contrasted with the New Covenant.

Agreed, but to me it is also clear, based on what I have said in previous post, that the New Covenant is yet instigated.

Chapter 8

6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:


13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Chapter 9

1Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

15And 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.

16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

19For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

20Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.


You can see that the Testament here is speaking about the Mosaic Covenant, not the collective scripture we call the New Testament today.

I agree the OT, which was the Mosaic, is dead and gone; but I do not as yet see the New Covenant of Heb 8 instigated because of the language used by the Holy Spirit in Paul's writings.

Gotta go, hope you have a blessed service today,

me too.......

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hello brother Olegig,

Okay, only have a few minutes, so I'll post a few verses.

15And 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.

16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.


The translators of the KJV saw the signifigance of the blood that ratified the two Covenants, and make the point that neither were dedicated without blood.

Christ's blood for the New, animal blood for the Old: the contrast is that Christ's is better.

See also:

1 Corinthians 11-

24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25After 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.

26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Have to go, but look also in the gospels concerning His blood, which ratified the New Covenant. The Covenant in Hebrews is likened to a will which is valid after the "death of the testator".

Matthew 26:26-28 (King James Version)

26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mark 14:22-24 (King James Version)

22And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.

23And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.

24And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many


His blood was shed to bring in the New Testament.

God bless.

 

[percho]

Okay, only have a few minutes, so I'll post a few verses.

15And 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.

16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

18Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.


The translators of the KJV saw the signifigance of the blood that ratified the two Covenants, and make the point that neither were dedicated without blood.

Christ's blood for the New, animal blood for the Old: the contrast is that Christ's is better.

See also:

1 Corinthians 11-

24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25After 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.

26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Have to go, but look also in the gospels concerning His blood, which ratified the New Covenant. The Covenant in Hebrews is likened to a will which is valid after the "death of the testator".

Matthew 26:26-28 (King James Version)

26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mark 14:22-24 (King James Version)

22And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.

23And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.

24And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many


His blood was shed to bring in the New Testament.

God bless.

I am way behind on this thread and haven't read it all but will however I just wanted to ask what is "the promise of eternal inheritance"? How do those that are called know that they have this? I think that this has something to do with being made perfect.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Percho,

I am way behind on this thread and haven't read it all but will however I just wanted to ask what is "the promise of eternal inheritance"? How do those that are called know that they have this? I think that this has something to do with being made perfect.

Actually, if you ask me, you are way ahead of the game with your response.

Welcome to this thread.

We haven't actually gotten started on the issue of perfection yet, so don't worry about being behind.

I have posted the verses that I think are all that pertain to perfection in Hebrews, and a reading of those verses should bring one to an understanding that something special is being said by the writer (and the Author).

The purpose of this thread is to look into perfection as found in Hebrews, specifically, and to determine what this perfection is.

The nation of Israel was promised "rest" by God, which has a threefold unveiling.

1-The promised temporal rest: entrance to Canaan. This still has a deeper fulfillment in the Millennial Kingdom.

2-Spiritual rest: resting from works to be in relationship with God.

3-The most important rest: actual entrance to Heaven and being in the presence of God.

Hebrews shows us the contrast between the shadow and type of "the earthly" and "the heavenly."

The saints before the Cross looked forward in time to the receiving of the inheritance, which is evidenced by the fact that in David's time, it was as of yet unfulfilled.

As we go through Hebrews and study perfection, we can determine whether this rest is for us today; in other words, if we (you and I today) have entered into that rest promised by God, then it will settle some things in our hearts concerning salvation.

I will repost the verses for you, Percho, and ask that you study them both separately and in each passage.

Again, welcome aboard.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Reposting Key Verses of this thread.

Hebrews

2:10-For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect (5048) through sufferings.

5048-teleioo: from 5046; to complete, i.e. (lit.) accomplish, or (fig.) consumate (in character). Translated: consecrate, finish, fulfill, (make)perfect.

5:9-And being made perfect (5048), he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

5:14-But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age (5046), who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

5046-teleios:complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); completeness. Translated: (of) full age, man, and perfect.

6:1-Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection (5047), not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

5047-teleiotes-(the state of) completeness (ment. or mor.). Translated perfection (ness).

7:11-If therefore perfection (5050) were by the Levitical Priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisadec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

5050-teleiosis-; from 5048, (the act) completion, i.e. (of prophecy) verification, or (of expiation [to make amends for]); absolution [remission of sins].

7:19-For the law made nothing perfect (5048), but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God.

7:28-For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated (5048) for evermore.

9:9-Which was a figure for the time present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect (5048).

10:1-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 were offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect (5048).

10:14-For by one offering he hath perfected (5048) forever them that are sanctified.

11:39-And all these, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise.
40-God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (5048).

12:2-Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher (5051) of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

5051-teleiotes-from 5048; a completer, i.e. consumater: -finisher.


Please look through these and see if an evident contrast of the Old and New is made clear.

Would like to know your thoughts on these.

God bless.

Reposting Key Verses for this thread.

 

[percho]

In the repost of key verses I note Heb 2:10 and 5:9 pertain to The Christ and the others to others. Is this the same perfect/complete? In what manner did Christ have to be made perfect/complete?

Have the called received "the promise" of eternal inheritance? If so how do they know?

I think this has something to do with my ? about Christ.

 

[dcorbett]

My second wife rejected me when she realized that I wasn't perfect like she was. :laugh: Surprisingly, there are actually people in this world who do think they are without any faults.

One of the ladies I sing with at church was a child of a Nazarene Pastor. Her sister is still Nazarene, and when they talk about living the Christian life, her sister insists she never sins! My friend has laughed and told her 'That's impossible" but her sister insists she is "sanctified" and does not sin, because one cannot sin and be sanctified, according to the Nazarenes.

Hmmmm........I always thought sanctification was an ongoing process. :tongue3:

 

[Darrell C]

Hi dcorbett,

One of the ladies I sing with at church was a child of a Nazarene Pastor. Her sister is still Nazarene, and when they talk about living the Christian life, her sister insists she never sins! My friend has laughed and told her 'That's impossible" but her sister insists she is "sanctified" and does not sin, because one cannot sin and be sanctified, according to the Nazarenes.

Hmmmm........I always thought sanctification was an ongoing process. :tongue3:

And you are 100% right in this.

This is what we can learn from Hebrews:

There is a difference between our standing before God and the daily sanctification process.

While we are Justified in Christ, and are therefore not under condemnation, this is not to say we "let go and let God."

Neither does perfection speak of a temporal sinlessness as your friend's sister supposes.

We are being conformed to the image of Christ in this life, but are still awaiting the redemption of our bodies.

I will try to build on this in my reply to Percho.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Percho,

In the repost of key verses I note Heb 2:10 and 5:9 pertain to The Christ and the others to others. Is this the same perfect/complete? In what manner did Christ have to be made perfect/complete?

Have the called received "the promise" of eternal inheritance? If so how do they know?

I think this has something to do with my ? about Christ.

Another great observation (and question).

While it will take time spent with the Lord in the study of Hebrews to really grasp the blessing it gives to the beleiver concerning Christ's role as Savior, one can glean its truth easier by having a few things pointed out.

The completion speaks of salvation, and how it is accomplished:

In Christ-He was not made complete in the sense that He was lacking in any way to be Savior, but, by accomplishing the prophesied sacrifice for sin, salvation (the way of) was made complete.

Probably the easiest way to understand this would be to look at those of faith before the Cross.

While they were declared just and righteous (i.e.,chapter 11), their salvation was not complete because the One Sacrifice that God would accept had not been accomplished yet.

Another passage we will look at deals with this:

Hebrews 10
1For 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.

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

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

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

The law (Levitical system) could not take away sins.

It was just a type or shadow of the true, which was the One Sacrifice of Christ which could take away sins.

Now we balance the taking away of sins with our daily lives...I don't know about you, but I have not achieved a state of sinlessness yet, and do not expect to until my body has been redeemed.

Nevertheless, Christ's sacrifice takes away sins.

This is why in the New Covenant, God can say,

Hebrews 8-

6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Now, to respond to the first part of your reply (sometimes I'm backwards), you have again rightfully observed that perfection/completion is ascribed both to Christ and to believers.

Note another one of our key verses:

11:39-And all these, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise.
40-God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (5048).

Those referenced here could not be made complete (in their salvation) until the death of Jesus. They are without doubt those before the Cross.

I view all of the Covenants as working toward the same goal: the reconciliation of man to God. None of the Covenants work against God's ultimate goal of Man's salvation, and all will be fulfilled in the eternal state.

What Hebrews is teaching us (and specifically, first century Jews for whom turning from Judaism to Christ would have been difficult on a number of points) is that the New Covenant is ratified with a better sacrifice than that of the Covenant of Law (Christ's complete [never to be repeated] sacrifice as opposed to the daily, continual sacrifices of the law, which could not take away sins).

But this is just one point of contrast found in Hebrews (though I think the most important for the believer to understand.

It is not difficult for me to acknowledge I am a sinner, who has no hope of offering a sacrifice that will be acceptable to God.

Jesus did that.

Concerning the "eternal promise".

It is God's oath and promise that are immutable (Heb. 17, 18).

In Heb. 9:15,

15And 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.

we see that it is the death of Christ which redeems the sin of those under the first Covenant (first because it is the Old and New covenants contrasted here, the first covenant was actually the Noahic).

We are told He is the mediator of the New Covenant (and a thorough reading will show that is is the Covenants contrasted, not to be confused with "testaments" as in the collective books we read today), not that He "will one day be the mediator."

The promise of eternal inheritance is salvation in full, at which point we will be bodily redeemed.

But as far as our standing before God, we have been set apart by Christ's ONE sacrifice, and made perfect forever.

This why Jesus is likened to a fore-runner...we are tied to Him in salvation like the nautical term presents.

Also, we have the "down-payment", the earnest of the Spirit.

But as far as how one can know, I think scripture tells us.

Can you sin without conscience?

Does sin cause you grief?

Are your daily actions performed with God's will in mind: meaning, are the things you do affected by what yu know God would and wouldn't approve of?

Do you recognize that Christ died the death that you would have to die if you did not trust that Christ did die in your place?

My friend, if you were not indwelt by the Spirit of God, chances are you would not even ask the question.

The unsaved have no conscience concerning sin because they are self-righteous.

Those who are indwelt by the Spirit of God recognize the fact that they are sinners, and are concerned for both their eternal state, and also, the state of their temporal lives before a Holy God, who gave Himself that we might have life.

Hope that helps, didn't mean to get so long-winded (or, long fingered),

God bless.

 

[percho]

Darrell C

Did not quote because would make reply to long. I disagree about the perfect/complete of Christ. The text speaks of Christ, verse 2:10 the captain
is being made perfect, in 5:9 his being made perfect brought about salvation.

Correct the called know because they have the Holy Spirit of promise.

That promise being eternal inheritance = eternal life.

When and from whom did we get the Holy Spirit of promise?

I know I do not make things to clear but trust me I'm trying. Everything I
have posted has something to do what Bro Olegig has posted and promise to Abraham
and also to some things you posted from Ezek.

 

[Darrell C]

hello Percho,

Thank you for your reply,

If you could, please clarify what you disagree with.

I'm assuming it is that the perfection/completion of Christ in these 2 verses are not speaking about the same thing.

All I can say is that the first speaks of His being made complete through suffering...and I do not limit this to the physical abuse He underwent going to the Cross, but include and hold his death as the surpassing factor.

His death was a necessity in order for His work to be finished. Had He survived the Cross, and only been "bruised" and "bled", atonement would not have been accomplished.

In our second verse, it states He is/has been made complete.

I see these as speaking of the same thing.

Concerning the Spirit of Promise, this is a discussion which takes us away from the focus of this study, but it does apply in this way:

We know that born-again believers receive the indwelling Holy Spirit, and this was promised by God in Ezekial 36:27 (I know some disagree, and thats okay, I'm not here to force my theology on anyone, merely present it) and also in John 14:15-26. (c.f. Gal 3:14; *Luke 24:49; Acts 2:33 [note the promised Spirit is after His ascension]; Eph. 1:13; Is. 32:15, 44:3,

And I will post this one for good measure and consideration:

Isaiah 59:20-21 (King James Version)

20And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.

21As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.

Notice the covenant mentioned here is for those who are redeemed: we know it was for the Jews and Gentiles in Christ's first appearance (the Spirit was given), it will also be fulfilled in the Day of the Lord, at the Second Coming of Christ, when Israel will be restored in full.

As far as when we received the Spirit of Promise, I would say Pentecost (me personally, about February of 95).

Hope that helps, and thank you for not reposting, and just saying what you are thinking, this will help to make the thread easier tofollow.

God bless.