Perfection

[BobRyan]

Yes, why is that? I think the unbiased objective reader knows the answer.

Well I for one would certainly "like" to think that is true!!

:applause:

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Scripture, as well as Jesus Christ, indicate that men did not come into the presence of God before the Cross.

Even as, to some, it indicates that they did.

I see more evidence to the former, rather than the latter, and thus I believe it.

I may be wrong, and I usually don't debate an issue that is as of yet unclear to me.

But as to your next statements...

1. A number of people in the OT are said to have seen God - ( I believe it is God the Son in those cases).

2. While I think it is clear that Moses, Enoch and Elijah were in heaven at the time that Christ was on earth - I do not think that any other saints were in heaven in glorified form or in any form other than as a dormant soul after death.

Daniel calls them "those that sleep in the dust" and in John 11 Christ refers to Lazarus as "asleep".

That continues to be the case today as Paul points out in 1Thess 4.

So while there was a large number raised to life in Matt 27 and taken to heaven with Christ - that is the extent of it - the rest are all still waiting.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Christ is now ministering in heaven as our High Priest according to Hebrews 7, 8, 9 and even 10.

I agree with this to the extent of Christ's Priesthood, however, whether intentional or not (I don't know), I see (have seen) an allussion that Christ's sacrificial work is ongoing, in the sense that He continually is offering His blood for the sins of man.

This He did once.

1. The idea that the High Priest in Lev 16 is suffering or in torment as he ministers in the sanctuary - is entirely missing from the text. There is not one case in all of scripture where the priest is said to suffer as part of his work in placing the blood on the horns of the altar or sprinkling the tent of meeting with it.

2. The lamb - the sin offering - the goat in the case of Lev 16 - does not "suffer" after it is sacrificed. There is no text in all of scripture that suggests such a thing.

I do not think it is a good idea to go off into such an area where there is no support at all for it from scripture.

3. Heb 10 is very explicit about a "once for all" completed sacrifice. This is in direct contrast to the texts in Hebrews that dictate an ongoing High Priestly ministry as I keep quoting those texts and pointing to those details.

Well do it some more if you think it is needed.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Christ is now ministering in heaven as our High Priest according to Hebrews 7, 8, 9 and even 10.



1. The idea that the High Priest in Lev 16 is suffering or in torment as he ministers in the sanctuary - is entirely missing from the text. There is not one case in all of scripture where the priest is said to suffer as part of his work in placing the blood on the horns of the altar or sprinkling the tent of meeting with it.

2. The lamb - the sin offering - the goat in the case of Lev 16 - does not "suffer" after it is sacrificed. There is no text in all of scripture that suggests such a thing.

I do not think it is a good idea to go off into such an area where there is no support at all for it from scripture.

3. Heb 10 is very explicit about a "once for all" completed sacrifice. This is in direct contrast to the texts in Hebrews that dictate an ongoing High Priestly ministry as I keep quoting those texts and pointing to those details.

Well do it some more if you think it is needed.

in Christ,

Bob

Hey, I thought that was my side of the debate.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

1. A number of people in the OT are said to have seen God - ( I believe it is God the Son in those cases).

This I agree with.

2. While I think it is clear that Moses, Enoch and Elijah were in heaven at the time that Christ was on earth - I do not think that any other saints were in heaven in glorified form or in any form other than as a dormant soul after death.

This...

Here is something I posted from another forum (sorry for being lazy, but its late):

Let's get to the heart of the matter.

Sleep.

A few verses emphasizing sleep, that of taking rest, compared to the euphemistic use speaking of death:

John 11:11-13 (King James Version)

11These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

12Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.

Let's run these words in order and start with sleepeth, which is:

2837. koimao koy-mah'-o from 2749; to put to sleep, i.e. (passively or reflexively) to slumber; figuratively, to decease:--(be a-, fall a-, fall on) sleep, be dead.

Because it is used interchangeably in reference to both sleep and death, context must be found to distinguish which is being referenced.

Since we are told by Jesus that He speaks of death, that should end the discussion right there.

Does it?

Didn't think so. So here is another verse with that same word:

Acts 13:36 (King James Version)

36For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:


Again, pretty clear, David's physical body rotted in the ground.

Sound like a harsh way to put it?

That's the point. Even in our time, we have euphemisms for "kicking the bucket".

Still a little crude? I agree...which is why I usually use the term "passed away" when I reference death.

Sounds a little better than, "bought the farm".

Next word, same verse, translated "out of sleep":

1852. exupnizo ex-oop-nid'-zo from 1853; to waken:--awake out of sleep.

Lazarus sleeps, I will wake him up, the Lord says. No mystery.


In v. 12 we have the same word translated sleepeth:

2837. koimao koy-mah'-o from 2749; to put to sleep, i.e. (passively or reflexively) to slumber; figuratively, to decease:--(be a-, fall a-, fall on) sleep, be dead.

And our last word is this (v. 13):

5258. hupnos hoop'-nos from an obsolete primary (perhaps akin to 5259 through the idea of subsilience); sleep, i.e. (figuratively) spiritual torpor:--sleep.

What does all of this tell us?

Unless kept in context, not much.

Can this be any clearer?

13Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.

Seems there is still confusion 2000 years later what our Lord meant.

How can that be missed? We have the Lord using the word sleep euphemistically of death.

Soul sleep?

Jesus, in a "state of hibernation?"

Psalm 121:4 (King James Version)

4Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.


Since it is acceptable to be so loose in interpretation, how about this one?

But then, that will probably spark yet another thread, "Who is the keeper of Israel?"

And why not fall into the error of the new ager, and say no-one really sleeps, its right here:

Isaiah 5:27 (King James Version)

27None shall be weary nor stumble among them; none shall slumber nor sleep; neither shall the girdle of their loins be loosed, nor the latchet of their shoes be broken:

Feel tired? You can't be, scripture says no-one will be.

Soul sleep is for the wishful thinker.

There is a price to pay for sin.

You will be awake when it is exacted.

But there is One who will take your place, and take that punishment on Himself.

In fact, He already did.

And He will hear you if you call on His name.

His name is Jesus, and He shall neither slumber nor sleep.

You have His word.

Daniel calls them "those that sleep in the dust" and in John 11 Christ refers to Lazarus as "asleep".


That continues to be the case today as Paul points out in 1Thess 4.

Sleep is a euphemism for death, no more.

The above scripture is good evidence for that.

When Elijah and Moses (you know, the ones who were called up from Sheol to meet the Lord on the mount , where the Lord was transfigured [He being the only one alive]) appeared on the mount, they were not sleeping.

Nor was Samuel, if it were really him that was called up.

Was David, when he said he would "go to the child", stating he would go and be "asleep" with the child?

I don't think so.

It was death that separated them, and it would be death that reunited them.

So while there was a large number raised to life in Matt 27 and taken to heaven with Christ - that is the extent of it - the rest are all still waiting.

in Christ,

Bob

Those who were raised, like Lazarus, I believe were raised physically.

They appeared to many in the holy city, Jerusalem, not heaven.

Thats it for now Bob, its late.

Be back with the next installment of perfection, maybe tomorrow.

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Hey, I thought that was my side of the debate.

God bless.

We cannot differ on everything. :laugh:

 

[BobRyan]

1. A number of people in the OT are said to have seen God - ( I believe it is God the Son in those cases).

2. While I think it is clear that Moses, Enoch and Elijah were in heaven at the time that Christ was on earth - I do not think that any other saints were in heaven in glorified form or in any form other than as a dormant soul after death.

Daniel calls them "those that sleep in the dust" and in John 11 Christ refers to Lazarus as "asleep".

That continues to be the case today as Paul points out in 1Thess 4.

So while there was a large number raised to life in Matt 27 and taken to heaven with Christ - that is the extent of it - the rest are all still waiting.

Let's get to the heart of the matter.

Sleep.

A few verses emphasizing sleep, that of taking rest, compared to the euphemistic use speaking of death:

John 11:11-13 (King James Version)

11These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

12Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.

..

Since we are told by Jesus that He speaks of death, that should end the discussion right there.

Does it?

Yes it does.

Jesus describes the state of death - as a dormant state of sleep.

So also does Paul in 1Cor 15, 1Cor 11 and 1Thess 4.

So here is another verse with that same word:

Acts 13:36 (King James Version)

36For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:


Again, pretty clear, David's physical body rotted in the ground.

Indeed. His soul is in a dormant state of sleep. But his flesh is not "asleep" nor "dormant" rather his flesh is being literally destroyed - reduced to ashes - complete corruption.

For your BODY to sleep - is to remain in it's current form - only dormant. That is the sleep our body gets every day.

But for our BODY to "die" and to "decay" is not to sleep - but to be utterly destroyed.

In Matt 10:28 we have this
28And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

There is no text that says the body is asleep in death. All texts say it is the saints that are asleep in death.

Lazarus sleeps, I will wake him up, the Lord says. No mystery.

Indeed it is "Lazarus" the person -- I will wake "him" (the person) that is asleep. Christ does not say "our friend Lazarus' body sleeps - I go that I may wake IT".

Psalm 121:4 (King James Version)

4Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.

A good example of a text that is not talking about death.

And why not fall into the error of the new ager, and say no-one really sleeps, its right here:

Isaiah 5:27 (King James Version)

27None shall be weary nor stumble among them; none shall slumber nor sleep; neither shall the girdle of their loins be loosed, nor the latchet of their shoes be broken:

A good example of yet another text where the context does not speak of death.

Sleep is a euphemism for death, no more.

The above scripture is good evidence for that.

Since Paul continues to use the term sleep for the death of the saints in 1Cor 15, and 1Thess 4 and 1Cor 11 it is difficult to claim it is not used that way after John 11.

When Elijah and Moses (you know, the ones who were called up from Sheol to meet the Lord on the mount

Elijah never died according to scripture - he was taken directly to heaven.

There is no "Elijah called up from Sheol" in all of scripture.

And Jude references the book the "Assumption of Moses" as if the facts in that book are reliable - if that is true - then Moses was raised bodily and taken to heaven long before Matt 17.

, where the Lord was transfigured [He being the only one alive]) appeared on the mount, they were not sleeping.

True - they were not sleep, nor does the Bible say they were "not alive" nor even "taken from sheol".

Nor was Samuel, if it were really him that was called up.

The witch (the servant of Satan) claimed the power to bring the dead up for people to speak with them - even having power over the saints of God that had fallen asleep in Christ. But God tells us not to believe the servants of satan when they claim this power. Is 8:19-20 specifically tells us not to consult the dead on behalf of the living.

In that case they are called "the dead".

Was David, when he said he would "go to the child", stating he would go and be "asleep" with the child?

I don't think so.

Since his child had died - the context is death. thus David also refers to that state as "sleep".

Those who were raised, like Lazarus, I believe were raised physically.

That is true of those raised before Matt 27 - as Lazarus was. And would apply to everyone but Moses in that case.

But in Matt 27 - these are raised bodily (as was Jesus) and given glorified forms (as 1Cor 15 also states about the resurrection) - and this is what Paul means when he says that Christ took with him to heaven "a host of captives".

They appeared to many in the holy city, Jerusalem, not heaven.

So also the risen Christ.

=====================================

The point of all this is simply that the Gospel was "real" in the OT.


In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Of course the ultimate proof of my point (aside from 1Thess4, 1Cor 15, 1Cor 11) is in Matt 22 where Christ "proves the future resurrection" based on the validity and reality of the soul-is-dormant soul sleep argument.

In the dormant state of the soul at the time the body is decaying back to dust -- the soul is not conscious of anything - it does not worship God - it has no hate, no zeal, not even memory is active in that state. It does not record the passing of time nor does it engage in any kind of relationship to God.

Thus Christ affirms the point "God is not the God of the dead" in his argument for the resurrection.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

Of course the ultimate proof of my point (aside from 1Thess4, 1Cor 15, 1Cor 11) is in Matt 22 where Christ "proves the future resurrection" based on the validity and reality of the soul-is-dormant soul sleep argument.

In the dormant state of the soul at the time the body is decaying back to dust -- the soul is not conscious of anything - it does not worship God - it has no hate, no zeal, not even memory is active in that state. It does not record the passing of time nor does it engage in any kind of relationship to God.

Thus Christ affirms the point "God is not the God of the dead" in his argument for the resurrection.


in Christ,

Bob

You know you have a great Avatar Bob!
( Computers. a graphical image that represents a person, as on the Internet).

Nice spin job on that last post. BTW, It matters not to me if I lay dormant or not. It's not worth arguing over, not to me anyways. EGW pushed the dormant thing, didn't she?

:wavey:

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

Of course the ultimate proof of my point (aside from 1Thess4, 1Cor 15, 1Cor 11) is in Matt 22 where Christ "proves the future resurrection" based on the validity and reality of the soul-is-dormant soul sleep argument.

In the dormant state of the soul at the time the body is decaying back to dust -- the soul is not conscious of anything - it does not worship God - it has no hate, no zeal, not even memory is active in that state. It does not record the passing of time nor does it engage in any kind of relationship to God.

Thus Christ affirms the point "God is not the God of the dead" in his argument for the resurrection.


in Christ,

Bob

Would you be referring to the fictional story of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection (at all)?

Here is an excerpt:

Matthew 22

29Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

30For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

31But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

32I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

So this would mean that all of the Angels are sleeping, right?

And, if those who "sleep" are unconscious when they die, and are annihilated at the judgment, then, why did Jesus waste so much time speaking about those who would be engaged in "weeping and gnashing of teeth?"


Matthew 25:46 (King James Version)

46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Everlasting and eternal are this:

166. aionios ahee-o'-nee-os from 165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):--eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

Punishment is this:

2851. kolasis kol'-as-is from 2849; penal infliction:--punishment, torment.

If Jesus had meant this was not literal, we would have had a..."Eternal punishment is like unto..."


Now, if soul sleep were true, then it would stand to reason that those who go into eternal punishment would not be given the reprieve of unconsciousness, would they?

Why did Jesus tell the story of the Rich man and Lazarus (which in no parable was any given a name) if it was not to illustrate what happened to the righteous and the wicked?

Why give the illustration of the wicked in gehenna, where there worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched?

Mark 9

43And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

44Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

45And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

46Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

47And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:

48Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Now some would take the meaning of this teaching to be not literal.

Plucking out the right eye would leave one left for the purpose of evil, right?

So, this is hyperbole used for the purpose of instructon.

Is the instruction literal?

The punishment?

Why not?

And of course, one of the most difficult passages to explain away:

2 Corinthians 5


1For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.

4For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

5Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.

6Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

7(For we walk by faith, not by sight

8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

Maybe Paul was just a wee bit overconfident.

I share that confidence with Him.

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Of course the ultimate proof of my point (aside from 1Thess4, 1Cor 15, 1Cor 11) is in Matt 22 where Christ "proves the future resurrection" based on the validity and reality of the soul-is-dormant soul sleep argument.

In the dormant state of the soul at the time the body is decaying back to dust -- the soul is not conscious of anything - it does not worship God - it has no hate, no zeal, not even memory is active in that state. It does not record the passing of time nor does it engage in any kind of relationship to God.

Thus Christ affirms the point "God is not the God of the dead" in his argument for the resurrection.

Would you be referring to the fictional story of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection (at all)?

Here is an excerpt:

Matthew 22

29Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

So this would mean that all of the Angels are sleeping, right?

How in the world is it that the "angels are sleeping" gets tossed in??

I find your logic illusive at that point.

Oh no wait! I see - you are changing the text to say "but BEFORE the resurrection... they are like the angels".

However changing the text is not allowed.


In that text Christ argues to 3 key points of fact - so compelling that the Sadducees are "seen" to be "put to silence". Christ's argument "For the resurrection" in that text is innescapable.

Surely we have Christians today that can follow his argument as carefully as did his opponants.

And, if those who "sleep" are unconscious when they die, and are annihilated at the judgment, then, why did Jesus waste so much time speaking about those who would be engaged in "weeping and gnashing of teeth?"

1. At the judgment - the wicked are raised to life and tormented with fire and brimstone - until as Christ said in Matt 10:28 they are destroyed "both body and soul".

2. Christ argues that when God spoke these words to Moses - Abraham was dead - and Christ also argues that God is "Not the God of the dead" (TWO points that Christ's apponants would have no choice but to agree with) - thus Christ implies that the only solution for God's statement to Moses - is that there MUST be a future resurrection.

Since the rest of your argument ignores the discussion in Matt 22 and the condition of the dead - in a dormant state - I will respond to your argument in a dedicated post on that topic.



in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I created a dedicated thread for this next point - but will add this short exchange here since you have brought the subject of the 2nd death up on this thread as well.

Matthew 25:46 (King James Version)

46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Everlasting and eternal are this:

166. aionios ahee-o'-nee-os from 165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):--eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

Punishment is this:

2851. kolasis kol'-as-is from 2849; penal infliction:--punishment, torment.

If Jesus had meant this was not literal, we would have had a..."Eternal punishment is like unto..."

All this is the same as we find it in Jude 7 where we are told that Sodom and Gomorrah are examples of "undergoing the punishment of eternal fire". - 2 Peter 2:14 states clear that it "Reduced them to ashes".

It is the very aspect of "eternal fire" that fits Christ's "destroy BOTH body AND soul" argument in Matt 10:28 - but refutes the "immortal sin and rebllion" notion of the "unnending life in the lake of fire" traditions.

Now, if soul sleep were true, then it would stand to reason that those who go into eternal punishment would not be given the reprieve of unconsciousness, would they?

Why did Jesus tell the story of the Rich man and Lazarus (which in no parable was any given a name) if it was not to illustrate what happened to the righteous and the wicked?

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus - Christ states that the moral of the parable is "that if they do not listen to MOSES neither will they listen though one rises from the Dead (Christ)".

This lesson many wish to ignore and instead they focus on the parable details that are not doctrine -

1. Praying to the dead - Abraham is "prayed to" - instead of God.
2. Decisions rendered by the dead - Abraham gives his judgment - not God.
3. The dead in charge of the dead - all the saints are in Abraham's lap
4. The dead wicked and the dead righteous are in their respective places talking to each other WITH physical bodies (Dip his finger in water and touch the tip of my tounge).

Many Bible scholars that ALSO believe in the unnending torment in hell traditions - quickly distance themselves from the idea that this is a historic account rather than a parable - because the incidentals here only work as a parable.

Why give the illustration of the wicked in gehenna, where there worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched?

Mark 9

43And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

44Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

45And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

46Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

1. IT is not a lesson about "immortal worms".

2. It is not a lesson about immortal souls - as none are mentioned here.

Fire that is "not quenched" has never meant "fuel that is immortal" - in any context in which it is used - no not even once.

3. In John 11 and in Ezek 18 God makes the point that the wicked die - but the righteous do not. But we know that BOTH the wicked and the righteous suffer the first death and the Bible says they are in a state of sleep - (dormant soul) until the resurrections. Thus the 2nd death is significantly worse than the first death - so much so that God does not consider the first death - to BE death.

And of course, one of the most difficult passages to explain away:

2 Corinthians 5


1For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.

4For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

5Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.

6Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

7(For we walk by faith, not by sight

8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

Maybe Paul was just a wee bit overconfident.

Paul argues THREE states of man in 2Cor 5.

1. Clothed in this decaying tent (Alive in our earthly bodies)
2. Naked (having no body at all) - the soul in a dormant state. (body without the spirit is dead)
3. Clothed in the immortal heavenly body.

A. Paul does NOT argue that the wicked get an immortal heavenly body.
B. Paul does NOT argue that you get TWO immortal bodies - one when you die and another when you are resurrected. He argues that you get only ONE.
C. Paul had already made the point in 1Cor 15:54 that AT the resurrection "DEATH is swallowed up in victory". Thus his reference in 2Cor 5 "Death is swallowed up by life". And in 2Cor 4:14 Paul has already provided an explicit focus on when the "goog things" happen to the saints - telling us that it is at the resurrection.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

I will see you in the other thread concerning the dead.

And now, back on topic.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hello to All,

Our next look at the theme of perfection in Hebrews will, by some, not even be necessary.

By looking at the simplicity of this theme, most of you have seen what it means for us as believers.

Our next verse is:


Hebrews 10:14 (King James Version)

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


Perfected is:

5048. teleioo tel-i-o'-o from 5046; to complete, i.e. (literally) accomplish, or (figuratively) consummate (in character):--consecrate, finish, fulfil, make) perfect.

Can it be questioned that this is speaking about the work of God in our lives, rather than our work for God?

We can know without doubt Who the He is that perfects.

It is our High Priest, Jesus Christ.


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

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

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

13From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Do you see the sufficiency of the one sacrifice of Christ?


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


By the one offering of Christ, we are made holy (sanctified) once for all.

It should be noted for some, that the italicized "for all" is an insertion by the KJV translators.

Once is:


2178. ephapax ef-ap'-ax from 1909 and 530; upon one occasion (only):--(at) once (for all).

It should also be noted for some, that the words that I have emboldened in the Strong's definition above are not part of the definition, they are the words that ephapax have been translated into in the KJV.

So we see that the integrity of the translation is trustworthy, and we see that we are told that those who are sanctified are sanctified once for all.

Do you see the significance of that?

This is done by the "which will" found in our preceding verses (I am using the NKJV which shows Old Testament quotation):

Christ’s Death Fulfills God’s Will

5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:


“ Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.

6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You had no pleasure.

7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—
In the volume of the book it is written of Me—
To do Your will, O God.’”[a]

8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them ” (which are offered according to the law),

9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will,O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

(emphasis mine)

He also said, "not my will, but thine be done."

It was the will of God to prepare a body for the Saviour, that He might offer that body in sacrifice for the sins of the world.

All scripture points to Jesus Christ.

We see we are sanctified by the offering (which is His death in our place) of Jesus Christ once for all.


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

The work of salvation, was accomplished on the Cross.

God was satisfied with His one sacrifice sins, forever.

How is one sanctified?

By the death of Jesus Christ.

How is one perfected?

By the death of Jesus Christ.

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

What the law could not do, and still, can not do, is to make them that come unto Him perfect.

But by the offering up of Himself, the offering that was the will of God, Jesus, our Great High Priest, can.

Not only is our salvation complete in Him, it is made complete...forever.

This is why we can trust Him.

Look not to another, there is only one name given among men whereby we must be saved.

Not...can be saved.

But must be saved.

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Hebrews 10:14 (King James Version)

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

Perfected is:

5048. teleioo tel-i-o'-o from 5046; to complete, i.e. (literally) accomplish, or (figuratively) consummate (in character):--consecrate, finish, fulfil, make) perfect.

Can it be questioned that this is speaking about the work of God in our lives, rather than our work for God?

We can know without doubt Who the He is that perfects.

It is our High Priest, Jesus Christ.


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

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

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

13From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Do you see the sufficiency of the one sacrifice of Christ?


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


By the one offering of Christ, we are made holy (sanctified) once for all.

1. The offering of Christ's body was "once for all"
2. We are sanctified at the time we are justified - when we accept salvation. This happens all through time as it turns out.
3. But in Hebrews Paul does not speak of sanctification as something that happens before you are born - or that you do not pursue as a Christian.

Hebrews 12
1 Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,
2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
3 For consider Him who has endured such hostility by sinners against Himself, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.
4 You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood in your striving against sin;

5 and you have forgotten the exhortation which is addressed to you as sons, "" MY SON, DO NOT REGARD LIGHTLY THE DISCIPLINE OF THE LORD, NOR FAINT WHEN YOU ARE REPROVED BY HIM;
6 FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES, AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES.''
7 It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline?
8 But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
9 Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness.
11 All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.

12 Therefore, strengthen the hands that are weak and the knees that are feeble,
13 and make straight paths for your feet, so that the limb which is lame may not be put out of joint, but rather be healed.

14 Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

1. The offering of Christ's body was "once for all"
2. We are sanctified at the time we are justified - when we accept salvation. This happens all through time as it turns out.
3. But in Hebrews Paul does not speak of sanctification as something that happens before you are born - or that you do not pursue as a Christian.

I know you were trying to make a point here...but it escapes me.

I never said I was very smart.

Points 1 and 2, I agree, if you mean by, "all through time..." that sanctification, which occurs at salvation in respect to a believer being set apart unto God, by God, is also an ongoing process.

Point 3...well...

Actually, I see very much that sanctification, per the foreknowledge of God, does happen before birth.

Kind of like, the saints pre-Cross.

They were justified before the Cross...and saved in that sense.

But, their salvation had not been made complete until after the Cross.

They were not made complete...without us.

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

you are justified the moment you are saved - born-again. But you "pursue sanctification" according to Heb 12 all of your life you engage in it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

Bob, your words mean nothing. What you are really saying is that you are sanctified (set apart) when you are born again and you continue purusing sanctification all your life in hope for justification before God at the judgement.

You have no Biblical concept of justification "before God" as carefully defined by Paul in Romans 3:24-5:2. Your defined justification is conditioned upon personal faithfulness whereas Paul's is conditioned upon faith in the promise of God as expressed in the gospel. Yours is inclusive of personal performance but Paul's is totally exclusive of personal performance

you are justified the moment you are saved - born-again. But you "pursue sanctification" according to Heb 12 all of your life you engage in it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

Bob, your words mean nothing. What you are really saying is that you are sanctified (set apart) when you are born again and you continue purusing sanctification all your life in hope for justification before God at the judgement.

You have no Biblical concept of justification "before God" as carefully defined by Paul in Romans 3:24-5:2. Your defined justification is conditioned upon personal faithfulness whereas Paul's is conditioned upon faith in the promise of God as expressed in the gospel. Yours is inclusive of personal performance but Paul's is totally exclusive of personal performance

Exactly :thumbsup:

The SDA does not understand regeneration. It is nothing more than a technicality within the keeping of the law of Moses.

It goes like this;

One is commanded to keep the Law but the law cannot save. Thus the Law only condemns. Points to Christ and grace.

One therefore must be born again, receive grace.

Then one must continue striving to keep the Law else that very Law will condemn them just the same as it did prior to regeneration.

Thus, regeneration is only a tool to help one keep the Law that they "might not" be condemned.

No understanding of grace, regeneration or the function of the Law.

 

[BobRyan]

you are justified the moment you are saved - born-again. But you "pursue sanctification" according to Heb 12 all of your life you engage in it.

Bob, your words mean nothing. What you are really saying is that you are sanctified (set apart) when you are born again and you continue purusing sanctification all your life in hope for justification before God at the judgement.

You have the desire to continually "circle back" to the issue of the lost who needs to be born again each time the subject of "perseverance of the saints" comes up and some Bible writers mentions the saints who "persevere in doing good" Rom 2:7.

But Paul has addressed that problem in Heb 6:1 "Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ let us press on to maturity not laying again a foundation of repentance..."

The very thing you hope to continually circle back to - Paul says that we need to take the "next step" and look at perseverance of the saints -

(The next topic that comes up in Heb 6 - as it turns out).

You have no Biblical concept of justification "before God" as carefully defined by Paul in Romans 3:24-5:2.

Wrong again.

The concept of Justification where the lost becomes saved as we find it in both Romans 3 and in Romans 5:1 is clear. The bad tree becomes the good tree. The Lost becomes saved - is covered by the blood of Christ, born again and has the New Covenant Gospel promise of the Law written on the heart and mind (See Heb 8). This is not by works of the law - but rather by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-10).

As Christ said "By their fruits you shall know them" Matt 7.

As Paul insists "WE must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ".

As Paul explains in Rom 2:6-12 that future judgment does in fact involve justification. Peter says "Judgment begins with the house of God" and in Dan 7:22 "Judgment is passed in favor of the saints"

But where you fall down is vs 10 - each time the walk of faith is mentioned and then Paul says something about the "WILL BE JUSTIFIED" aspect of the Gospel - you want to immediately "circle back to the case of the lost".

Matt 18 - provides the exampel of forgiveness revoked.

Gal 5:4 the warning about "Fallen from Grace" and "Severed from Christ".

Romans 11 the warning to the saved - gentiles "you STAND only by your faith" and are told "you should FEAR for if He did not spare them neither will He spare you".

Just when OSAS wanted to say "You have NOTHING to fear IF you are standing by faith - because He will not cut you off no matter what you choose to do later on".

The OSAS argument "needs" to flatly contradict scripture.

in Christ,

Bob