Hullo Forum,
A few days ago I was following the “Hebrews” thread with interest, but I think it fizzled out as the last post was a week or so ago, I can’t seem to pick up any further comments re same.
If you don’t mind I’d like to post comments on the book of Hebrews from the perspective of refuting the doctrine of OSAS - Once Saved Always Saved.
The following is extracted from an exegesis I did a little while ago because of what I perceived as error coming from a pulpit - not Anglican. :) - where it was ignored by the Pastor.
Any criticisms/comments greatly appreciated.
Brian Garling.
“Going back to the first verse of the Chapter (Heb 3:1) where it definitely states the message is directed to saved Born Again believers. e.g.
“Wherefore holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling....”.
The word holy is the same word used in reference to the Holy Spirit, and means, without doubt, sacred --Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance 40. Also the word ‘partakers’--Strong’s 3353..sharer, participant, by implication an associate fellow, partner...taken from 3348 to share or participate, by implication belong to.”
The only other occurrence in the N.T. that uses the term “holy brethren” is 1Thess 5:27.
There is a deeper inference in the book of Hebrews i.e.
If Hebrews is, in fact, directed to holy brethren, as I believe it is, then, as there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in the body of Christ (Rom10:12), Hebrews is also addressing the Church as a whole entity.
Therefore all the exhortations plus all the warnings in Hebrews are teachings directed at the Church, the body of Christ; and because we are a part of the body of Christ it behooves us to heed the book carefully.
Given the above, the context also remains through Chapters 1--13 (all chapters of Hebrews).
These Hebrews were clearly, saved, holy brethren. The first three verses are an exhortation to"go on unto perfection”, with the next three verses clearly warning of what will happen if they fall away.
In reading Heb 3:7--14, I am told that I can definetly harden my heart and depart from the living God.
Strong’s (departing)868....instigate to revolt, desist, desert, draw (fall) away, refrain, withdraw self.”
Even though I am a partaker (refer Strong’s above). Heb 3:6 is quite clear “But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end”.
I know that God will never leave me - Heb 13:5 “Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.”
However, Scripture clearly tells me I can leave Him.
Heb6:1--3 The exhortation - “Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permit.”
Heb 6: 4-8 The warning -
“For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God: But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.”
I have read, and heard from pulpits, that the word ‘tasted’, in verse 5 means that it is only refering to taste, not eating of the heavenly gift i.e. not ‘really’ saved .
Verse 4 however, again uses the word ‘partakers’ which keeps the context of ‘holy brethren’ in verse 5.
Re tasted--- Strong’s 1089---a prim verb; to taste; by impl. to eat ; fig. to experience (good or ill):-eat, taste.
To summarise the above.
If we withdraw our self by hardening our heart and rejecting the living God, after partaking of the Holy Ghost, then there is no possibility of returning to repentance because we crucify to our self the Son of God again, and put Him to an open shame.
Hebrews is perhaps the strongest exhortation, in Scripture, for the Church to go on in Christ unto perfection, in continuing, persevering faith!
In fact, Hebrews 11 as far as I can discern, speaks of righteousness/salvation via faith in God (the Lord Jesus Christ) for the Jew and non Jew more than the rest of the New Testament put together.
However, the number of exhortations in Hebrews has just as many dire warnings of not just falling away from the faith but also of wilful sinning.
Heb10:26--27 “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.”
Again, another dire warning but this time it is directed to ‘wilful sinning’, not falling away from the faith.
Vs 28-29 “Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.”
Fearsome promises from our loving God which should jolt us, the Church, out of complacency.
Another warning is in Heb10:38
“Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.”
The exhortation (again) Heb 10:39 “But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”
Please note Ch13:22 “And I beseech you, brethren, suffer the word of exhortation: for I have written a letter unto you in few words.”
The word suffer means ‘to hold oneself up against. i.e. figuratively. put up with, bear, endure, forbear, suffer.’
In other words -go on in the Lord with enduring faith, lest you fall away, as Hebrews clearly exhorts.
In conclusiion.
I would have to throw out Ch 3, Ch6, Ch2:1, Ch4 :1, Ch4 :11, Ch10:29, 35,38, Ch12:25, to maintain context in a belief of once saved always saved.
God forbid!
=============================
End of extracts.
I haven’t looked at Hebrews as a book far enough to offer anything helpful. But here is a short article on Hebrews 6:4-8. I think I know on what presuppositions the writer is basing his argument on but I’m not sure how correctly he is applying it to the Hebrews 6:4-8 text. I’ll be interested on opinions you may have on the article.
Joe the link doesn’t seem to work for me - I just get a ‘this page cannot be displayed’ message - can you double check it (maybe their server is just down).
Brian thanks for your thoughts on Hebrews - it’s good to see someone wrestling with what the bible actually says.
I would encourage you to further your exploration by investigating the rhetorical devices used by ‘Mr. Hebrews’ and how they might influence our understanding of the epistle, particularly in regard to developing doctrine from his exhortations.
The best place to go is David DeSilva’s “Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical commentary on the Epistle ‘to the Hebrews’” (Eerdmans 2000). We studied Hebrews at church last year and I found this to be more helpful than any other commmentary on the book (including Lane; Attridge; Bruce; & Ellingworth.)
His comments on 6:4-8 are the first plausible explanation I have ever read on the subject, especially as it regards integrating the ideas there into our broader theologies. His excursis on Patronage; Eternal Security; and Second Repentance (p240-244) is a goldmine of insight and common sense that finally eliminated the “Hebrews problem” (for me). Let me know if you can’t get hold of it, brother, I will gladly work something out for you. I can’t say enough how helpful it is - I may even be prepared to type it up on this forum if people are interested.
Hello Joe,
Thanks for your interest and the web address which I perused.
I’m sorry, but to be honest Joe I rejected the Calvinist TULIP theology many years ago as, in my humble opinion, it is not as per the Word of God in many areas, causing confusion with contradictions against Scripture.
Please peruse the material you recommended as there is a glaring contradictory statement within the second last para of the copyrighted 2002 material - i.e.
“It is the ever-present danger of apostasy that drives us to continually cling to Christ as the one in whom saving grace and full assurance are found”.
This “ever-present danger of apostasy” appears to go against the clear teaching of TULIP in several areas, in fact it could be used to further an argument for one being able to ‘lose his faith’, hense apostasise, and lose salvation as per Heb6:4-6.
Note the words ‘impossible’ and ‘partakers’ - the Koine Greek for these words give no doubt as to what is meant within those verses. I can’t compromise my understanding of Scripture to suit a theology, as so many are doing these days.
God bless and keep you Joe.
brian
I think your theology may have swung a bit too far the other way in reaction against calvinism. Your interpretation of Hebrews may seem correct on the face of it but I think if you dig a little deeper you will discover all is not what it seems. You need to put yourself in the author’s mindset more - and understanding ancient rhetoric is the way to do that. It is also important for understanding Paul, but in Hebrews the importance is most pronounced. More than any other biblical document, Hebrews closely adheres to more classical forms of rhetoric.
In brief, ancient Greek rhetoric has rules or principles regarding what you say to different parties in a relationship. What the writer to Hebrews says to his readers closely corresponds to the kind of things said to secular beneficiaries of generosity from others. But according to the rules, very different things would in turn be said to the benefactor - the generous person. They are encouraged to pour out their generosity again and again, in spite of inadequate responses from the beneficiary.
So Hebrews’ exhortations - what it says to the beneficiaries - are not necessarily to be hardened too quickly into doctrine, as though it removed the prerogative for continued generosity from God or declared that he will not do it. It is not the message for God, it is not the message for the person who has already fallen away, it is the message to discourage a person from falling away, because they should not presume upon repeated grace from God. God, however, can and often will continue to pour grace upon grace as he wishes.
Calvinism didn’t appear out of thin air, there is substantial biblical backing for many of its principles, though in some forms it goes too far in its use of human logic. Likewise, I think you have gone a bit far in use of human logic. Inconsistencies of human logic within revealed scripture do not indicate that one text has to be adjusted to accomodate the other. These things pertain to the mind, the omniscience, and the sovereignty of God - concepts which the laws of human logic and the facilities of the human mind are inadequate to reconstruct. It is better to hold the revealed word in tension of human logic than to subdue the Catholic epistles to Paul, or subdue Paul to the Catholic epistles, and allow the mind-boggling kaliedoscope of the revealed word to affect us as it is designed to affect us - give us assurance of our security in the kingdom because God is sustaining us, while encouraging us to press on consciously so that we will not fall away.
A warning sign on the edge of a cliff doesn’t presuppose that anyone reading it is actually in danger of stepping off the cliff, but is a helpful device for ensuring that people don’t stray. In the same way, Biblical warnings that seem to say that God’s people are in danger of losing their salvation are God’s way of working with our human nature to give effect to the secure calling that we all have in Christ. Those who are truly “in Christ” can never be lost, but part of the process by which they remain kept is that God warns against the sort of attitudes and behaviours that are not “worthy of the gospel”. Those who are Christ’s sheep, who hear His voice and follow Him, will heed such warnings and thus remain firmly in His hand - as He promised.
This doesn’t mean that some people won’t stray, often quite a long way, from a faithful walk with the Lord. But His sheep are never lost. I have a friend, who became a Christian around the same time I did in high school back in the mid-70’s. But he went way off track for many years - into drugs and other stuff. I always prayed that he would be drawn back, claiming God’s promise that He doesn’t lose anyone who is drawn to Him in the first place, and these days my friend is well and truly following the Lord again. I’m not saying that this experience proves anything one way or another, and I’m sure that others reading this are still in despair that former Christian friends have “left the fold”, but I believe the Bible assures is that true salvation is forever. The old word for it is “the perseverence of the saints” - and my friend’s life is consistent with that teaching, despite seeming to have gone so far from the faith at one stage that many would have considered him beyond hope.
I have two or three other friends who I know have accepted Christ in the past, but who are currently not walking in the faith. I pray for them, that God will work in their lives, protecting them from harm and mercifully drawing them back to His “pastures green” and “quiet waters”; that we will one day share the meal prepared in the presence of the enemies that have for now led them astray. Good Shepherd, hear us.
Some of the comments in this thread would lead me to believe that there is no point in praying for my friends like this. Sorry - that is simply not what the writer to the Hebrews is conveying.
I think it is incorrect to press too far the notion that Hebrews is only written to believers. It is a letter written to real groups of people, real churches, which includes a variety of people - some believers, some former Jews who are just hanging around with the new group, etc. IE everyone there has heard the gospel, but not all have believed it. This is the situation that has prevailed in every church in history! Just as in any church today a letter addressed to the congregation would call them “brothers in Christ” or whatever, it would also have things to say to the nominal members of that group who theologically aren’t brothers in Christ at all.
Thus, the Hebrews writer is, I think, cautioning both believers and “almost believers”. In chapter 3 there certainly seems to me to be the two groups in mind - both those who have heard AND believed, as well as those who have heard, but not yet believed.
So, I will pray for my lapsed friends, confident that our gracious God is not a fairweather saviour, but will stand by us for the rest of our lives. (In fact, if He doesn’t stand by us then there is no hope, for just as we can’t come to Him except by His grace, so we can’t remain in Him except by that same grace.) For myself, I will heed the warnings and pray that I will not lapse into unbelief. I pray that God will, as the old hymn puts it:
“guide me, call me, draw me, uphold me to the end. And then in heaven receive me, my Saviour and my friend.”
[quote author="Warren"]Thus, the Hebrews writer is, I think, cautioning both believers and “almost believers”. In chapter 3 there certainly seems to me to be the two groups in mind - both those who have heard AND believed, as well as those who have heard, but not yet believed.
I like your thinking on this warren, but I’d go a step futher in your above statement.. while it is clear that the bulk of his audience is Christian Jews, it is also clear from the tone of the book that he is also writing to Jews who are in danger of turning aside from grace and moving to return to mosaic law for their salvation. I think this is particularly on view in the warning at Hebrews 10:26-31. As you point out, wether anyone actually did this, and turned aside from grace is a moot point… ‘Mr Hebrews’ wanted to make sure that we weren’t amongst those who do.
A warning sign on the edge of a cliff doesn’t presuppose that anyone reading it is actually in danger of stepping off the cliff, but is a helpful device for ensuring that people don’t stray. In the same way, Biblical warnings that seem to say that God’s people are in danger of losing their salvation are God’s way of working with our human nature to give effect to the secure calling that we all have in Christ.
Hmmm… I don’t know. If I genuinely thought no-one would be in danger of stepping off a cliff to the point I thought it wasn’t even possible to step off the cliff, I wouldn’t bother to construct a sign to warn them. I would dedicate myself to tasks with some value. Or, as in the article Joe pointed us to:
Some Reformed commentators claim the warnings found here and elsewhere are hypothetical. This reading is hardly worthy of refutation. Why would an inspired writer use such terrifying language to scare his readers into avoiding something that could never come to pass anyway? Moreover, there are enough recorded cases of actual apostasy in the pages of Scripture that we can put the hypothetical theory to bed (e.g., 1 Tim. 1:19, 20).
Also, I’m not sure I agree that God ‘works with our human nature to give effect to the secure calling that we all have in Christ’? It seems Paul thinks he works against our human nature to give effect to that secure calling. We were by nature objects of wrath, but God made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – so we are saved by grace. (Eph 2:3-5)
As far as the article Joe linked us to is concerned, I essentially agree with him on the question of the apostasy – i.e. it is possible, and it does not clash with the concept of election, even in human logic. He puts it quite neatly:
Those who fall away have no one to blame but themselves; those who persevere have no one to thank but God.
And later a valuable caution:
…the antidote to the danger of apostasy is not ever deepening self-examination, but looking away from ourselves to Christ.
Since the concept of election takes a life-in-one-frame view of a person, the total state of their life, it naturally sits on a separate paradigm to concepts of repentance, apostasy and second repentance, which are progressive states during a life.
So Warren is right when he says, “His sheep are never lost”, in the sense that God’s election will prevail in a person’s life because he is sovereign. And yet Brian says:
Scripture clearly tells me I can leave Him.
Which as a logical flip side of ‘make sure you don’t leave him’, seems sensible, and yet if you did leave him it would have taken place in a way that neither usurped his sovereignty nor thwarted his election, in the final snapshot of your life.
But if we keep pushing these two concepts down logical paths, we will find numerous problems and questions arising because they do seem to run against one another in human logic. But they obviously work in divine logic. As I said earlier, their resolution is tied in the omniscience and sovereignty of God, and the inner workings of those concepts cannot be reconstructed by human logic. We have been revealed through scripture edges of what they are, but cannot comprehend how they mesh with our finite minds.
The question of second repentance should be treated separately from the question of the possibility of apostasy.
Warren writes:
Some of the comments in this thread would lead me to believe that there is no point in praying for my friends like this. Sorry - that is simply not what the writer to the Hebrews is conveying.
I agree totally with this conclusion. But I’m not particularly convinced by the way you get there…
I think it is incorrect to press too far the notion that Hebrews is only written to believers. It is a letter written to real groups of people, real churches, which includes a variety of people - some believers, some former Jews who are just hanging around with the new group, etc. IE everyone there has heard the gospel, but not all have believed it. This is the situation that has prevailed in every church in history! Just as in any church today a letter addressed to the congregation would call them “brothers in Christ” or whatever, it would also have things to say to the nominal members of that group who theologically aren’t brothers in Christ at all.
Thus, the Hebrews writer is, I think, cautioning both believers and “almost believers”. In chapter 3 there certainly seems to me to be the two groups in mind - both those who have heard AND believed, as well as those who have heard, but not yet believed.
This hypothesis of a letter written to a congregation including people who don’t quite believe yet is very nice, but I can’t see where it is evidenced in the text. In chapter 3 (which you refer to) I can only find exhortations addressed to ‘holy brothers who share in the heavenly calling’ and who confess Jesus with the author (v1). Again, in verse 12, they are ‘brothers’, who have come to ‘share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.’
I suspect what you may be thinking of as ‘almost believers’ is a confusion of Mr Hebrews’ unrealised eschatology. He views salvation as a future event, that is, he locates salvation at the consummation of it. Paul, on the other hand, in his realised eschatology, locates salvation at conversion. This is not a contradiction, it is an expression of purpose. Paul still encourages his readers to press on, to take hold of the goal to win the prize for which God has called him heavenward in Christ Jesus, and all who are mature, he says, should take such a view of things. (Philippians 3:14-15) They should work out their salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12). So Paul still sees the same end goal as the goal. But what he speaks of as working out salvation, Mr Hebrews speaks of as pressing on towards salvation, which Christ will bring upon his return (Hebrews 9:28). Unrealised eschatology better suits the rhetorical purposes of encouraging wilful perseverance. Realised eschatology better suits the rhetorical purposes of assuring Christians of God’s faithfulness and sovereignty over their salvation – if the hand of God has guaranteed it, it is as good as done, but don’t take it for granted, live it out and strive towards it!
So I don’t think claiming an extra category of addressee really finds much support in the text, which means I think that the way Warren has arrived at his conclusion that God is not ruling out second repentance in Hebrews 6 is inadequate.
Brian Garling said:
If we withdraw our self by hardening our heart and rejecting the living God, after partaking of the Holy Ghost, then there is no possibility of returning to repentance because we crucify to our self the Son of God again, and put Him to an open shame.
And yet I still disagree with Brian in this statement. I don’t want to dull the force of Mr Hebrew’s message though – to the Christian I would say do not risk falling away, convinced if you did you could never return. But to the apostate I would say beg of God’s grace again. And to God as the benefactor, I would say to him please forgive them again. And God of his promises would, at their genuine repentance, do so. That is the way the rhetorical conventions Mr Hebrews is borrowing from work. And so that is the way I arrive at the same conclusion as Warren: that we continue to pray for the restoration of our apostate friends as long as they live, knowing that God’s grace extends far beyond that which we should consider we can presume upon.
Rowen Atkinson wrote:
..while it is clear that the bulk of his audience is Christian Jews, it is also clear from the tone of the book that he is also writing to Jews who are in danger of turning aside from grace and moving to return to mosaic law for their salvation. I think this is particularly on view in the warning at Hebrews 10:26-31.
Sorry, Rowen, I’m not sure how 10:26-31 indicates anything about the danger of returning to the Mosaic law for their salvation. Please explain if I’m missing something, I just read it as a typical Mr Hebrews comparison between the old and the new – if you rejected the law of Moses you got it in the neck, how much worse for those who trample the Son of God etc. I don’t see any indication they are moving back to the old. I think the more likely situational reconstruction is that his readers are an under-persecuted church (like us) and so therefore in danger of complacency about their salvation, rather than looking for it elsewhere.
Well, I think I’ve managed to disagree with everyone here except Joe who hasn’t actually said anything except given a link, so I’ll go to bed now without any friends! But of course I was speaking the truth in love. Or, at least, speaking in love!
Mattew Williams wrote
Quote
“And yet I still disagree with Brian in this statement. I don’t want to dull the force of Mr Hebrew’s message though – to the Christian I would say do not risk falling away, convinced if you did you could never return. But to the apostate I would say beg of God’s grace again. And to God as the benefactor, I would say to him please forgive them again. And God of his promises would, at their genuine repentance, do so.”
Sorry Matt but once again I disagree :)
Scripture is quite clear regarding “And God of His promises would, at their genuine repentance, do so”.
Please consider the following.
I agree with the point you make i.e. God WILL forgive them because of genuine repentance, mainly because of Eph 4:30 is simply a warning that we should not grieve (distress, sadden, make sorry) the Holy Spirit.
“And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.”
Yes, we are sealed by the Holy Spirit unto the day of redemption.
However this is not the whole story. Refer 1Thess 5:16-23
“Rejoice evermore. Pray without ceasing. In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you. Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil.
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
The above Vs can only be referring to saved believers because these are “Holy brethren”, the same as in Heb 3:1- and nowhere else.
Besides being able to grieve Him, we are told we can also “quench” the Holy Spirit.
Refer Vs 19. “Quench not the Spirit”.
We should take God at His Word and not attempt to get away from the clear meaning if it does not suit our theology.
For myself, it means “quench” not; maybe dampen, perhaps greatly sadden etc.
The actual meaning of quench in the greek is- Strong’s 4570 - to extinguish (lit or fig) go out, quench.
In other words, by our actions we can, using our own free will, cause ourselves to put out , and extinguish the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, exactly as warned in Heb 10:25-29.
Verse 25 sets the context - these passages are referring again to saved believers, holy brethren in other words.
“Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?”
If we, by our own free will as stated above in Heb 10:26 , sin wilfully against the crystal clear edicts of God then we are, ipso facto, rejecting the leading of the Holy Spirit which is tantamount to blasphemy.
“Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.” Luke 12:8-10 Jesus Christ speaking.
Thanks for your comments. I notice that all the quotes you have given refer to exhortations to Christians. It is appropriate that we exhort Christians to not take their salvation lightly, not to trample on Jesus Christ, not to outrage the spirit of grace. I am not proposing anything else.
But I think you are too quick to petrify rhetoric into doctrine without looking at the other side of the coin. This is God’s message for people in a particular circumstance - those who are currently Christian. That is not the same thing as saying it is God’s message for the person who is already apostate. In fact, Hebrews at times uses less strong language than apostate - ‘wilfully continue in sin’ - can a Christian not repent from a period of wilful sin? All Christians would quickly be lost. And yet the force of Hebrews is to discourage them from contemplating it - not to rely upon the assumption that they will be able to come back if they do sin. But if a person had sinned, even to the point of apostasy, then the message would be very different.
Unless we understand the rhetorical assumptions and intended addressees of the authors (which are quite accessible if we will only look as they are on very popular ancient formulas) we will in fact step outside what the bible is really saying, and discourage apostates - or indeed Christians who have fallen into sin - from approaching Christ for forgiveness once more.
So please be careful, brother, that your simplistic reading of Hebrews does not put a stumbling block in the way of a person seeking to return to the cross. Remember even when Paul handed such people ‘over to Satan’ (excommunication - 1 Corinthians 5:4-5) it was ‘so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord’.
Hi Mathew,
You wrote. “This is God’s message for people in a particular circumstance - those who are currently Christian.”
What do you mean by “currently” Christian.
Are you referring to sanctification, which refers to (present tense) our going on in Him unto perfection and maturing in Him?
Or justification (past tense) i.e. we have *been* saved by grace through faith in Him the moment we did believe?
If one is saved and is “currently” Christian, as you imply, then to be not currently a Christian *after* being saved appears to defeat your argument of once saved always saved.
Please keep it simple. :)
You also wrote, “ So please be careful, brother, that your simplistic reading of Hebrews does not put a stumbling block in the way of a person seeking to return to the cross.”
Quench and grieve have a totally different connotation.
I have already given text and meaning re *quench*, which is not referring to someone who *grieves* the Holy Spirit, because they can still repent and be forgiven as you refer to above.
It was the utter simplicity of the Bible (’The just shall live by faith’) that, finally, woke Luther to the heretical church of Rome, and prompted him to nail his 95 theses to the church door. It certainly was not any deep and meaningful theology with bells and whistles attached. It was a pity Luther carried some Roman baggage with him, but it started the Protestant reformation ball rolling.
Calvin also carried baggage from Rome, Augustine etc, and had his own mini inquisition via the Geneva experiment, did he not?
Refer “What love is this? - Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God” Dave Hunt 2002 Loyal publishing inc ISBN:1-929125-30-5, for a definitive work on Calvinism, over 400 pages, and a simple work backed by impeccable documentation - a must read for Calvinists and non Calvinists alike.
In theses days of ecumenical chaos, and every wind of doctrine being promulgated within the professing church, perhaps the simplicity of the following Scripture may illuminate some areas.
“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the *simplicity* that is in Christ.* 2Cor11:3
Perhaps Vs 3 may actually be referring to the remarks, re chaos and every wind of doctrine, as mentioned above?
I believe Vs 4 is even more interesting, particularly in these days.
“For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.”
Just because a man of the cloth preaches ‘Jesus’, there is no guarantee he refers to the Biblical Jesus, as there has always been false pastors, ministers, and prophets.
These days there is the Jesus of prosperity gospel, the Jesus of name it and claim it gospel, a socialist Jesus, country music Jesus, Jesus of the New Age, Esoteric Jesus of Theosophy and spiritualism etc, a Jesus of liberal theology and a ritualistic Jesus of Sacramentalism, none of which are the REAL Jesus of the Bible.
Perhaps the most dangerous Jesus, is the Jesus of ecumenism, whereby even non believers can be saved.
As we are vectoring away from the main thread subject I’ll finish up my part in this thread leaving a few simple verses to ponder on. Time is important and I need to update my own book.
Thank you Mathew, and others, it has been interesting to say the least.
In His service.
brian
1 Cor 15:1-2
“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
“By which also ye are saved, IF ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
Here Paul says that the Corinthians “received” the gospel, and were “standing” by the gospel. Yet, their salvation is clearly linked to perseverance. What does it mean to “keep in memory” the gospel? The Gospel is all about coming to God by faith. It is clear that the ones Paul refers to were saved. Notice that he is not warning them of their NEED to be saved, but of their need to PERSEVERE. It is not that they need something more than they have. It is that they need to remain and continue in what they already have. Otherwise, their “believing” [faith] will have been in vain. The only way their believing can be in vain, after once having been saved, is if they are lost.
Col 1:21-23
“And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:
IF ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;”
We are reconciled to God through Christ’s death so that we will be presented sinless. But, again, that little word “if” messes up the verse!
There is a condition attached.
In order for the above to be true, we must “continue in the faith,” and not be “moved away from the hope of the gospel.” The Gospel, and faith, are linked to much more than just an initial salvation experience, where we received the gift of the Holy Spirit. Faith in the sacrificial atonement is our means of “standing” or “continuing.” And, this is a requirement if we ultimately expect to be presented before the Father with our sins forgiven, and covered by the blood of the Lamb. Scipture refers to “continuing” as Sanctification.
Sin can be very attractive. Satan dresses up sin and uses it as bait to seduce those who had once escaped its power. That’s why Paul told us to put on the whole armor of God so we will not be caught in the “wiles of the Devil,” Eph. 6:11. The word “wiles” means trickery. Satan entices Christians to fall into sin. If they become entangled in that sin and allow it to go on, over time they will build up a resistance to the convicting voice of the Spirit. This is the hardening of the heart that leads to unbelief, and departing from God. It is not the sin itself that causes someone to fall away, but the unbelief that results from the hardening process. That’s why we find repeated warnings in Hebrews to maintain the faith we had at first. And, that requires treating sin as a possibly fatal disease.
Heb 2:1-3
Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
“Neglect” is treating something that is precious, casually. It is carelessness. Unfortunately, this is the state of many Christians today. Yet, they think they are in no danger.
1 Pet 5:8-9
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.”
This warning is NOT to the unsaved. It was written by Peter to the ELDERS of the churches. It is the job of the leaders of the Church to be watchmen for Christ’s flock. But, alas, many are more interested in building their own kingdoms.
Ministers, elders, etc. have the responsibility to guard the sheep from the roaring lion. How? Warn them. Preach against sin. And, tell them the truth about where continued rebellion leads. For those entangled in sin already, follow James’ advice.
James 5:19-20
“Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.”
There are several passages in the Bible that warn of the consequences IF we depart from God. Some of these warnings come in the form of conditional assurances. They say that Christians will ultimately be partakers in our inheritance “IF” we continue or persevere in faith until the end.
Rom 11:20-22 “Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, IF thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also *shalt* be cut off.”
The *goodness* that God extends toward believers is conditional upon their *continuing IN* Him. If not, they will be cut off in the same manner as the natural seed of Abraham. Notice in verse 20 that our perseverance is tied to “faith.” What was it that caused God to cut off the Jews who rejected Christ? Verse 20 says that it was because of unbelief. And, Paul makes the point that we stand by faith. So, in verse 22, “continuing in His goodness” is synonymous with persevering in faith, and not succumbing to unbelief..
fin
Hi Brian, Looks like I have some clarifying to do! Grab a coffee before working your way through this one :-) Ok, let’s go.
Brian wrote:
You wrote. “This is God’s message for people in a particular circumstance - those who are currently Christian.”
What do you mean by “currently” Christian.
Are you referring to sanctification, which refers to (present tense) our going on in Him unto perfection and maturing in Him?
Or justification (past tense) i.e. we have *been* saved by grace through faith in Him the moment we did believe?
By “currently” Christian, I mean “Holy Brothers, who share in the heavenly calling”. (3:1) I mean “we who have believed” (4:3) I mean those who have shown love to God by helping his people. (6:10) I mean those who already profess the faith Mr Hebrews wants them to hold unswervingly to (10:23). I mean those who have ‘received the light” (10:32). I mean those for whom Jesus is the ‘author and perfector of their faith’ (12:2). I mean those whom God is treating as his sons (12:2).
I mean those whom the author is confident will not be of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved. (10:39).
And I reject both of your options, for several reasons:
[list]1. Justification is a Pauline concept, which does not appear in Hebrews.
2. Hebrews does not speak of sanctification as a process but simply meaning ‘holy’ or ‘set apart’. The author of Hebrews invariably views sanctification as past tense: 2:11; 10:10; 10:14; 10:29. His readers are ‘sanctified’ already.
3. You have associated ‘justification (past tense)’ with being saved in past tense. Hebrews does not speak of salvation in past tense, always in future tense. Salvation, in Mr Hebrews’ expression, comes when Christ returns (9:28).[/list:u]
Brian wrote:
If one is saved and is “currently” Christian, as you imply, then to be not currently a Christian *after* being saved appears to defeat your argument of once saved always saved.
Please keep it simple. :)
No, because this again confuses the categories of salvation. I will repeat because it is vital to understanding him: Mr Hebrews does not see salvation as something present. So he would not say someone is ‘saved’. He would say some people ‘are to inherit salvation’ (1:14). He say Christ is coming a second time “to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (9:28). He would not say to another Christian, ‘you are saved’.
So firstly, it doesn’t defeat the argument of once saved always saved, because I am not speaking in that category when I speak of apostasy. Secondly, I did not argue that a person currently Christian will always remain a Christian in any of the above posts. In fact, I said:
As far as the article Joe linked us to is concerned, I essentially agree with him on the question of the apostasy – i.e. it is possible, and it does not clash with the concept of election, even in human logic.
I say this because the concept of election and the concept of perseverance rest on two different paradigms – election takes a whole view of a life in one frame. Questions of sanctification, wilfully continuing in sin after embracing the Christian life, and second repentance, rest on a paradigm that involves a timeline-dissection of a life.
I don’t have a problem with any of the texts you list at the bottom of your post. Of course they speak of the Christian need to persevere, to stand firm, to hold firmly to the faith, the underlying assumption being if they don’t, they may be lost.
Paul, you see, speaks of salvation in three different ways depending upon his purpose.
1. Paul often speaks of salvation as a past event (Rom 8:24; Eph 2:5; Eph 2:8; Titus 3:5). It is guaranteed by the cross and the sovereign hand of God. This way of speaking about it helps his readers take comfort in the soveriegn grace of God at work in their lives.
2. He also speaks of it as a present process, anticipating a future consummation: 1 Cor 1:18; 2 Cor 2:15 speak of ‘being saved’. Incidentally, he also speaks of ‘those who are perishing’ (& cf 2 Thes 2:10). They are still two sharp categories of person even now. They perceive the same aroma (Christ) in different ways depending upon their category.
3. And he also speaks of it as plain future, also tied up with the return of Christ (cf Heb 9:28): Rom 13:11 says that ‘salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers’; and in 1 Cor 5 he hopes that the apostate’s spirit may be ‘saved on the day of the Lord’. This shows that Paul still understands that salvation comes with Christ, just like Mr Hebrews.
But in other places he has brought forward the tense because he also understands that the sovereignty of God transcends time, so that we were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world (past); now have redemption and forgiveness according to his grace (present); and have the Holy Spirit as a pledge of our inheritance toward redemption (future). (Eph 1:3-14). The tenses are confused by the omniscience and sovereignty of God, and any attempt to fuse them does not do justice to either the scripture nor the unfathomable depths of the mind of God.
Brian wrote:
You also wrote, “ So please be careful, brother, that your simplistic reading of Hebrews does not put a stumbling block in the way of a person seeking to return to the cross.”
Quench and grieve have a totally different connotation.
I have already given text and meaning re *quench*, which is not referring to someone who *grieves* the Holy Spirit, because they can still repent and be forgiven as you refer to above.
Sorry, brother, but I don’t understand how your comments about “Quench” and “grieve” relate to my plea to you not to obstruct people’s repentance.
In any case, I think you have misappropriated the context of the word “Quench” (which you take in the earlier post from 1 Thessalonians 5:19). The context of exhortations will help us (v16-22)
Rejoice always,
Pray without ceasing,
Give thanks in all circumstances;
For this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.
Do not quench the Spirit.
Do not despise the words of prophets,
But test everything;
Hold fast to what is good;
Abstain from every form of evil.
These exhortations clearly fall into two groups. (And there is another group before them, but this makes the point.) Do not “quench” the spirit is tied to the idea of not despising the words of prophets – that is, despising the words of prophets is how you would quench the Spirit. The ‘vast majority of commentators’ (according to Malherbe, Anchor Bible Commentary, 2000) think ‘Paul has in mind the charismata, the gifts of the Spirit’, though they disagree on whether it is limited to prophecy specifically or should view the gifts more generally.
So when you say:
In other words, by our actions we can, using our own free will, cause ourselves to put out , and extinguish the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, exactly as warned in Heb 10:25-29.
…I think you have not only imported a Pauline concept from Thessalonians (with the very un-Pauline concept of ‘free will’ added in surreptitiously) into Hebrews which would have questionable relevance in any case, but have interpreted the Pauline idea in a way foreign to its context in the first place. In other words, your interpretation of ‘quench’ that equates it to ‘extinguish(ing) the indwelling of the Holy Spirit’ does not seem a viable interpretation of 1 Thes 5, and even if it were there is no reason to believe it is ‘exactly as warned in Heb 10’, since Hebrews 10 does not use language of ‘quenching’ in relation to the Holy Spirit. It uses language of ‘insulting’ (NIV, JBP, Lane, Attridge, DeSilva) or ‘outraging’ (RSV, ESV, NRSV, Bruce) or both (Amplified & Living) the Spirit. And that is the product of ‘wilfully continuing in sin’, which is seen as equivalent to ‘spurning the Son of God’.
Which leaves your position confusing indeed, because you accept above that a person who ‘grieves’ the Holy Spirit can still repent and be forgiven.
The word ‘grieves’ you have taken from Ephesians 4:30. Yet there the concept of ‘grieving’ the Holy Spirit is in the context of sinning (4:25-5:2). Ironically, that would make it a far better parallel to Hebrews 10 (since the ‘insult’ to the Holy Spirit there is to ‘wilfully continue in sin’) than 1 Thessalonians 5 - if indeed you were going to import anything (a questionable process anyway).
Then you have rejected that a person who ‘quenches’ the Holy Spirit can repent, although there is no indication in 1 Thessalonians that a person who does that is actually compromising their salvation in the first place.
I’m sorry, brother, it just doesn’t work.
Brian wrote:
It was the utter simplicity of the Bible (’The just shall live by faith’) that, finally, woke Luther to the heretical church of Rome, and prompted him to nail his 95 theses to the church door. It certainly was not any deep and meaningful theology with bells and whistles attached. It was a pity Luther carried some Roman baggage with him, but it started the Protestant reformation ball rolling.
That’s true. He got the ball rolling. He put scripture back on the agenda. And the basic message of scripture, the good news about Jesus Christ, is so simple and clear that even a child could understand it.
But neither Luther nor any other reformer suddenly got it all right. Biblical studies are complex. Theology is complex. Theology is (literally) the ‘knowledge of God’. It is an endless pursuit and one impossible to complete. But we pursue it anyway, because knowing more and more about God is one vital part of deepening a relationship with Him. We will never fully comprehend God, nor his ways, because he is infinite and we are finite; he is omniscient and we have scientific limitations. His foolishness is greater than the greatest human wisdom. So we seek to know him as he has bothered to reveal himself in the scriptures, striving to apprehend what his inspired authors were saying - and what they weren’t saying. That’s why we have to be so careful not to take quick and lazy readings of texts, solidify our doctrine and be on our way. The word of God deserves greater care than that. Wouldn’t you agree?
Hi Matthew,
We certainly do seem to have opposing views, don’t we?
I thought I had reached an impasse, until the reason for the confusion was discerned.
In one word - Calvinism.
We have a major problem, in that, TULIP has us, as believers, separated via an infinite gulf.
Whichever way we look at it there are only 3 logical conclusions.
1. You are correct.
2. I am correct.
3. We are both wrong.
By the Word of God, we both can not be correct. Scripture does not permit compromise, especially on vital doctrines, such as salvation.
Even Calvinists of high esteem have hit brick walls, so I’m not alone in the chaos of Calvin’s compromises.
E.g. the venerable Baptist preacher and staunch Calvinist, Charles Haddon Spurgeon emphatically proclaimed that no intelligent Christian could dismiss the doctrines of Calvin.
“I do not ask whether you believe Calvinism. It is possible you may not. But I believe you will before you enter heaven. I am persuaded that as God may have washed your hearts, He will wash your brains before you enter heaven.” - Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Autobiography of Charles H Spurgeon (American Baptist Society, n.d.), 1:92.
If Calvinism is just another name for Christianity, would that mean, non Calvinists are not Christian? It did a few centuries ago during Calvin’s mini inquisition.
Evidently Spurgeon may have had some cerebral spring cleaning done from time to time. One wonders how strong Spurgeon was in the doctrine of separation from error?
Spurgeon wrote re Calvinism’s teaching that Regeneration came before faith in Christ, through hearing the Gospel.
“If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to Him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate. Am I only to preach faith to those who have it? Absurd, indeed! Is not this waiting till the man is cured and then bring him the medicine? This is preaching Christ to the righteous and not to sinners.” -
C H Spurgeon, “The Warrant of Faith” (Pilgrim Publications, 1978, 3. One-Sermon booklet from 63-volume set.
Calvinist theology does not allow for faith in Jesus Christ as being the only means of salvation. Believing the Gospel is regarded as merely being the means of proving oneself to be among the ‘elect’ and being regenerated by God to have enough faith to believe. This is gross error, the Bible always puts faith before salvation, “saved through faith” Eph 2:8. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” Acts 16:14, etc.
You wrote. “And the basic message of scripture, the good news about Jesus Christ, is so simple and clear that even a child could understand it.”
What a pity adult ‘experts’ have such a problem with it.
Matthew, I had almost finished a reply to you when I came across an interesting conundrum you posed for me, so I decided to start over again.
You make reference to the timing of salvation several times in your last post.
You wrote- Re “categories of salvation”.
“Mr. Hebrews would not see salvation as something present. So he would not say someone is ‘saved’. He would say some people ‘are to inherit salvation’ (1:14). He says Christ is coming a second time ‘to save those who are eagerly waiting for him’ (9:28). He would not say to another Christian, ‘you are saved’.”
You also wrote. “I say this because the concept of election and the concept of perseverance rest on two different paradigms.”
No, you have absolutely no need to split scripture into ‘categories of salvation’, nor introduce ‘two different paradigms’, because you will surely introduce error. One has only to look at salvation scriptures, in an holistic and harmonious sense, to be able to discern the bigger picture without introducing more confusing error.
One paradigm of yours i.e. Mr. Hebrews, would have me wait until Christ returns before I am saved, which poses the ridiculous question - What happened to the millions who have died in the Lord before He returns? :)
I do not understand why you appear to be driving a wedge between Pauline ‘ideas’, a Pauline ‘concept’, and the author of Hebrews, or Mr. Hebrews as you call him?
This smacks of “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided?.”
Why do you attempt to divide the written Word when, clearly, Scripture tells us that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? None more than another, which means ‘Pauline’ ideas are God’s ideas and Mr. Hebrews writing, is also God’s revelation?
Main point:- I agree, there is no Pauline concept in Hebrews, as it is all God’s work via Mr.Hebrews, conversely, there is no Mr. Hebrews in Paul’s writing/teaching, as that is all God’s doing also. Therefore the Bible is one harmonious revelation because it is all God breathed.
You wrote: “...Hebrews does not speak of sanctification as a process but simply meaning ‘holy’ or set apart’ The author of Hebrews invariably views sanctification as past tense.” So what?
Of course Hebrews can view *sanctification* as past tense. In justification we are declared righteous in order that, in sanctification, we may grow in maturity.
In other words - Justification is what God does *for* us, while sanctification is what God does *in* us via the leading of the Holy Spirit.
You wrote. “I will repeat because it is vital to understand him....” [meaning Mr Hebrews].
The word sanctification, biblically, is used in past, present or future tense, depending on context - the fact that Hebrews uses past tense is no big deal. It is not proof of anything in particular, other than what God meant it to be. What is the *vital* point you are trying to make?
Sanctification is also *instantaneous*.
Note in the following sanctified comes before justified.
“Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” 1Cor 6:10-11. These at Corinth are *saved* washed, sanctified, and justified, like myself, the moment we did believe.
I reject totally the calvinist teaching of *regeneration before salvation*.
Again “By the which will we *are* sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Heb 10:10
Sanctification is also Progressive.
However, sanctification differs from justification, in that, justification although instantaneous on believing, has no ongoing progression. Whereas, sanctification is a process, which, also is instantaneous, but carries through to a completion.
Justification is static whilst sanctification is dynamic.
E.g. “But *grow* in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever.” 2Peter 3:18
“But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image *from glory to glory*, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. 2Cor 3:18
“And the Lord *make you to increase and abound* in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:” 1Thess 3:12......"Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.” 1Thess 1:4
“Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, “perfecting holiness” in the fear of God.” 2Cor 7:1.
Note *perfecting holiness* not perfected.
Complete and Final Sanctification.
“And the very God of peace *sanctify* you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 1Thess5:23 - “wholly” here means:-Strong’s 3651. - ‘complete to the end i.e. absolutely perfect’ - in every part, body soul and spirit.
We are not yet perfect, however, we are *still* saved by being justified/sanctified in Him.
“Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” Phil 3:12-14.
Christ is the living Word, so what about the written Word?
Words have meaning Matthew, so how about we trust *inspired* words for awhile in an attempt to get a clearer picture?
Even though I have many hard times rightly dividing the Word of truth, I believe implicitly in the Word, both written (Bible) and living (Jesus Christ).
You wrote - “And I reject both your opinions, for several reasons: 1. Justification is a Pauline concept, which does not appear in Hebrews.”
No Matthew. There is much said about Justification in Hebrews, one whole chapter in fact.
Refer Hebrews Chap 11 - it is speaking of O.T. saints as being made *righteous* through faith, Chap11 also reveals just how immaculately consistent is God’s working, and unchanging plan of salvation.
Were they saved by keeping the Law, doing works, or by faith?
“By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the *righteousness* which is by faith”.
Nothing has changed from then (OT) up to now, personal salvation has always been by grace through faith, as the whole chapter reminds us time and again, both for Jew and gentile (Rahab the harlot etc.).
Note well the word righteousness in Verse - Strong’s 1343, dikaiosune from 1342, *justification*:- righteousness.
Also note the word justification elsewhere in Scripture - Strong’s 1342, dikaios:- innocent, holy, just, *righteous*.
They are synonymous.
When we are *justified*:- Our sins are forgiven, also guilt and punishment are forgiven.
Acts 13:38-39. “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him *all that believe* are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.” We are *saved*
Rom.8:1. “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. God then sees the believer as without sin and guilt in Christ. We are *saved*
Rom.8:33-34. “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us” Christ is our salvation and our intercessor before the Father. We are *saved*.
We are justified by faith alone, not the works of the Law, “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Rom 3:20.
We are justified and saved the moment we believe in Him.
If I had put my sincere faith in Jesus Christ for my eternal salvation yesterday, yet was struck down dead today, would I be saved?
Of course I would, same as the thief on the cross with the Lord.
Or, would I need a little ‘extra’ help to get over the hump, similar to praying for the dead as Mormans do, or by re sacrificing the Lord in Roman Catholic mass. I think not. “It is finished”.
You wrote: “You have associated ‘justification’ (past tense) with being saved in past tense. Hebrews does not speak of salvation in past tense, always in future tense. Salvation, in Mr. Hebrews’ expression, comes when Christ returns.” Again I say - so what?
Please refer to first ‘so what’ above. Is the Pauline concept of Justification different from the that in Hebrews?
No, it is one harmonious teaching, ever bringing together the pieces of God’s jigsaw.
You wrote:-”.....I don’t understand, how your comments about “Quench” and “Grieve” relate to my plea to you not to obstruct people’s repentance.”
No where have I obstructed peoples repentance - don’t put words in my processor.
I repeat, again, *words have meaning* - you need to apply the meaning to the scripture and keep the context consistent.
Quench = extinguish.
Grieve = sadden.
There is a difference
Impossible = impossible.
Wilfully sin = wilfully sin.
I take it that God means what He says.
In His service
brian
The opinions expressed in this forum belong to the individual posting the message and may not represent the view of the Sydney Diocese of the Anglican Church. Click here to read the Posting Policy.
Everyone is welcome on our forums, but please keep comments on-topic and civil. Any flaming or general nastiness will be deleted. No unsolicited advertising is allowed. All comments, suggestions, bug reports, etc. related to the forums should be directed to Robert Moller. Click here to read our complete Posting Policy.
Pastor Mark Driscoll talks to Anglican Media about Jesus, Australia, life and ministry and answers questions from sydneyanglicans.net readers.
Get the latest Sydney stories, Culture and Indepth on your mobile device. Visit sydang.mobi
