Cheap Grace

[Lulav]

We are to walk in holiness, but's it's Jesus's sacrifice that makes people holy once and for all. (Hebrews 10:10) Holiness isn't determined by how a person walks in the flesh. Hebrews 10:14 states, "for by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy". So people are perfected entirely by what Jesus accomplished on the cross. It's a done deal. All that's left is time before all enemies are a footstool for his feet. Romans 16:20 states, "the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet". That's the Gospel that needs to be trusted in and believed for salvation.

Hi Viren, cute Neuf!

I will have to politely disagree with you here. Holiness is determined by how you live your life

'those who are being made holy'

Not quite a done deal, at least not on our part.

How else can you walk in holiness if you aren't walking his walk, doing things the way he did them?

 

[Viren]

Hi Viren, cute Neuf!

I will have to politely disagree with you here. Holiness is determined by how you live your life

'those who are being made holy'

Not quite a done deal, at least not on our part.

How else can you walk in holiness if you aren't walking his walk, doing things the way he did them?

Thanks, it's my dream dog.

Hebrews 10:10 is pretty clear.

Hebrews 10:10 "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the of Jesus Christ once for all."

 

[Meowzltov]

Can you elaborate on that? Thanks!

-

I'm not sure what there is to elaborate on. Repentance is an act of free will, but includes help from God's grace.

 

[Frogster]

Hi Viren, cute Neuf!

I will have to politely disagree with you here. Holiness is determined by how you live your life

'those who are being made holy'

Not quite a done deal, at least not on our part.

How else can you walk in holiness if you aren't walking his walk, doing things the way he did them?

"Being" made holy is not in the original language in Heb 10:14. The verse also says perfected forever, so that would also eliminate the 'being' made holy since one is already perfected forever, as 10:10 also shows/proves. So the original language, and the wordage confirms, that the "being" is not needed. Plus it also goes against the once for all doctrine of Hebrews, compared to the temporal year after year 10:1, day after day 10:11 of the old repetitive old abolished cov.


Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

 

[Frogster]

Thanks, it's my dream dog.

Hebrews 10:10 is pretty clear.

Hebrews 10:10 "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the of Jesus Christ once for all."

exactly!

 

[Rajni]

Hebrews 10:10 "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the of Jesus Christ once for all."

I backtracked to Hebrews 10:9 and noticed just whose will it is
by which one's holiness has been made: The Lord's will!

We may be free to make some choices in this realm, but
I'm persuaded that our oneness with the Divine is a non-
negotiable (like many other, far less critical things, incidentally).

-

 

[Lulav]

"Being" made holy is not in the original language in Heb 10:14. The verse also says perfected forever, so that would also eliminate the 'being' made holy since one is already perfected forever, as 10:10 also shows/proves. So the original language, and the wordage confirms, that the "being" is not needed. Plus it also goes against the once for all doctrine of Hebrews, compared to the temporal year after year 10:1, day after day 10:11 of the old repetitive old abolished cov.


Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

There is no abolished Covenant. I will not try to discuss the linguistics involved as it would cause too much confusion, suffice it to say
The letter to the Hebrews was written to Jewish Christians in Palestine. We know this because those who received the letter were very familiar with the temple and its sacrifices. They were also well acquainted with the (OT) Scriptures. The title "To the Hebrews" has been the title of the letter from the very earliest times. The term "Hebrews" was used to describe only the people of Israel who lived in Palestine. Everywhere else in the first century, they were called "Jews." Hebrews reflects the situation faced by the Jewish Christians in Palestine in the ten year period before the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

 

[Frogster]

There is no abolished Covenant. I will not try to discuss the linguistics involved as it would cause too much confusion, suffice it to say
The letter to the Hebrews was written to Jewish Christians in Palestine. We know this because those who received the letter were very familiar with the temple and its sacrifices. They were also well acquainted with the (OT) Scriptures. The title "To the Hebrews" has been the title of the letter from the very earliest times. The term "Hebrews" was used to describe only the people of Israel who lived in Palestine. Everywhere else in the first century, they were called "Jews." Hebrews reflects the situation faced by the Jewish Christians in Palestine in the ten year period before the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

hebrews says there is an abolished cov.It was the will of the Father as said by chaela.

Hebrews 10:9
then he added, ‘See, I have come to do your will.’ He abolishes the first in order to establish the second.

 

[Meowzltov]

hebrews says there is an abolished cov.

Hebrews is referring to the sin offerings. Not to keeping the rest of the law.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Hebrews is referring to the sin offerings. Not to keeping the rest of the law.

If so, do you believe that the writer of Hebrews had it in mind that the church ought to keep all of the Sabbath laws and the various feast laws too? How about the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee?

 

[Meowzltov]

If so, do you believe that the writer of Hebrews had it in mind that the church ought to keep all of the Sabbath laws and the various feast laws too? How about the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee?

No, not the Gentile believers, only the Jewish believers.

 

[bbbbbbb]

No, not the Gentile believers, only the Jewish believers.

Well, I certainly pity the Jews for Jesus today as it is utterly impossible for them to keep these laws. They must be under the eternal wrath of God as a result.

 

[Meowzltov]

Well, I certainly pity the Jews for Jesus today as it is utterly impossible for them to keep these laws. They must be under the eternal wrath of God as a result.

Don't be silly. First off, we are to keep only the ones that apply to us, the ones we CAN keep. Second, if we fail, we repent and return to the way. It has always been so.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Don't be silly. First off, we are to keep only the ones that apply to us, the ones we CAN keep. Second, if we fail, we repent and return to the way. It has always been so.

I am not being silly. I am merely responding to your statement that Gentiles are not required to obey the laws regarding the Sabbaths and feasts of Jehovah, but Jews are. I am not referring to us, but to Jews because you singled them out in particular. My point is that if Jews who believe in Jesus Christ as their Messiah today cannot obey these laws, they are, of all Christians, most to be pitied.

 

[Meowzltov]

My point is that if Jews who believe in Jesus Christ as their Messiah today cannot obey these laws, they are, of all Christians, most to be pitied.

You originally stated that we couldn't keep the laws and my reply was to that. I stand by that reply. I don't need your pity, and neither do my fellow Jews. We are doing just fine, thank you very much.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Hebrews is referring to the sin offerings. Not to keeping the rest of the law.

If so, do you believe that the writer of Hebrews had it in mind that the church ought to keep all of the Sabbath laws and the various feast laws too? How about the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee?

No, not the Gentile believers, only the Jewish believers.

You originally stated that we couldn't keep the laws and my reply was to that. I stand by that reply. I don't need your pity, and neither do my fellow Jews. We are doing just fine, thank you very much.

How can you be doing just fine in God's sight if you believe that only the Jewish believers such as yourself are required by God to keep all of the Sabbath laws and various feast laws? Maybe you think you are doing just fine, but when was the last time you kept any of these laws as God gave them through Moses to Israel?

 

[listed]

Hi Viren, cute Neuf!

I will have to politely disagree with you here. Holiness is determined by how you live your life

'those who are being made holy'

Not quite a done deal, at least not on our part.

How else can you walk in holiness if you aren't walking his walk, doing things the way he did them?

No. Holy means set aside for a specific use. Holiness is not measured by our actions.

 

[listed]

There is no abolished Covenant. I will not try to discuss the linguistics involved as it would cause too much confusion, suffice it to say
The letter to the Hebrews was written to Jewish Christians in Palestine. We know this because those who received the letter were very familiar with the temple and its sacrifices. They were also well acquainted with the (OT) Scriptures. The title "To the Hebrews" has been the title of the letter from the very earliest times. The term "Hebrews" was used to describe only the people of Israel who lived in Palestine. Everywhere else in the first century, they were called "Jews." Hebrews reflects the situation faced by the Jewish Christians in Palestine in the ten year period before the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Read the prophets. They say there will be a new covenant and Jesus said that New Covenant is now in effect. It is recorded 3 times in the Gospels.

 

[listed]

Hebrews is referring to the sin offerings. Not to keeping the rest of the law.

No way is Hebrews only referring to part of the Old Covenant.

 

[listed]

Don't be silly. First off, we are to keep only the ones that apply to us, the ones we CAN keep. Second, if we fail, we repent and return to the way. It has always been so.

Why do you not keep them if it is possible? Yes I am talking specifically about the 4th.