Not By Works

[Guojing]

I agree, but I’m talking about the book of James. Who’s praying? The elders. It’s the faith of the elders that heal the sick.

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

If they refused to read Mark 16:17-18 literally, likewise they won't read James literally too.

 

[Judges1318]

If they refused to read Mark 16:17-18 literally, likewise they won't read James literally too.

You have to stop taking verses out of the context of all the verses that talk about praying for and receiving healing.

 

[Judges1318]

I do not need to...
read.....



He clearly states he is using "sanctified" to mean "set apart" as part of that community, professing (using the words) but not a genuine/justified/ believer.

If you want to contribute to the discussion you should know ahead of time that 'sanctified' does not always refer to a saved person. All genuinely saved people are sanctified, and some unbelievers are sanctified. In fact, things can be sanctified, like meat sacrificed to an idol, or a bowl used in the service of the temple. 'Sanctified' does not by definition mean 'saved'. It means 'set apart', usually 'set apart as clean'.

So mailmandan has made his argument very clear. That hasn't been the problem. And he understands the meaning of 'sanctified'. The problem is there is no such thing as a fake believing unbeliever that is sanctified (set apart as clean) for fellowship with the church. And for that reason alone Hebrews 10:29 can not be referring to a legitimately sanctified unbeliever.

But the obvious way we know the sanctified person in Hebrews 10:29 isn't referring to an unsaved person in the church is because the sanctified person being talked about is plainly defined for us right in the chapter as a saved sanctified person. But if someone is determined to make Hebrews 10 an osas passage they will have to ignore who the author himself says is the sanctified person he's talking about.

 

[Guojing]

You have to stop taking verses out of the context of all the verses that talk about praying for and receiving healing.

Mark 16:17-18 context is crystal clear to me. The 11 apostles were given signs and wonders by Jesus himself to testify to the Jews they were indeed sent by God.

Are you one of the apostles and are you preaching to the Jews now?

 

[G2RBeliever]

Ephesians 5:26 That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also we thank God without ceasing,because when ye recieved the WORD of God which ye heard of us, ye recieved it NOT as the word of men,but as it is in truth, the Word of God,which EFFECTUALLY worketh also in you that believe

1Thessalonians5:23 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.

1 Peter 1:25 But the Word of God endureth forever.........

 

[mailmandan]

"25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the It says the sanctified person is perfected for all time because sin guilt gets taken away in just one sacrifice of Jesus, not because the sanctified person can't lose the one time sacrifice that takes away sin guilt completely in one shot. This is made even more apparent when we continue reading and we see the author's warning for this very same sanctified person to not trample on and profane the sacrifice by which he was sanctified:

It says WE have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL. Sanctified ONCE FOR ALL means that the sanctified person can't lose it, hence the ONCE FOR ALL. The person in verse 29 who trampled under the foot the Son of God and regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant and insulted the Spirit of grace who was said to be sanctified or "set apart" (yet willfully sinned after receiving the knowledge of the truth - vs. 26 and drew back to perdition and did not believe to the saving of the soul in vs. 39) is not the same person who has been sanctified ONCE FOR ALL (vs. 10) and PERFECTED FOR ALL TIME (vs. 14)

"29How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" - Hebrews 10:29

Receiving the knowledge of the truth (vs. 26) does not save a person if there is no heart submission to that knowledge. The punishment will be more severe for those Hebrews who willfully rejected this knowledge and drew back to perdition with their eyes wide open instead of believing to the saving of the soul. Judas Iscariot is a good example of someone who rejected this knowledge, but was never saved.

Of course, osas doesn't allow this sanctified person trampling on Christ to be the same one who was cleansed of sin guilt and made perfect in vs. 10 & 14, so it says this sanctified person must be the fake believing, sanctified

unbeliever in the congregation.

Of course this person who was "set apart" but not saved in (vs. 29) who willfully sinned after receiving the knowledge of the truth (vs. 26) and drew back to perdition and did not believe to the saving of the soul (vs. 39) is not the same person who was cleansed of sin/sanctified/perfected once for all/for all time. (vs. 10,14) Verse 39 is your achilles heel. *But WE are not OF THOSE who draw back to perdition, but OF THOSE who believe to the saving of the soul.

Besides that interpretation so blatantly defying the context, we know from 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 6 that God has in no way shape or form cleanses (sanctifies) fake believers to be yoked with and fellowship with unbelievers.

It's actually your interpretation that blatantly defies the context, as I have shown numerous times and what does 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 6 have to do with Hebrews 10? Not everyone is as obvious about being a fake brother or sister and it may take years to expose them.

9

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister c but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.” - 1 Corinthians 5:9-13

"14Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial b ? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will live with them
and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they will be my people.” c
17Therefore,

“Come out from them
and be separate,
says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you.” - 2 Corinthians 6:14-17

Try getting back to Hebrews 10.

What you haven't done, mailman, is prove the existence of a sanctified unbeliever made clean by God and approved for fellowship with the church--one that doesn't violate the conditions above--to which the author of Hebrews is addressing his warning.

I actually have proved the existence of an unbeliever who was said to be sanctified or "set apart" but is not saved in Hebrews 10. Such a person willfully sinned after receiving the knowledge of the truth/trampled under foot the Son of God/regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant/insulted the Spirit of grace/drew back to perdition and did not believe to the saving of the soul. *That is not descriptive of those who are born of God. (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 John 3:9)

You can't use the unbelieving spouse made clean for contact by the believing spouse. That person is declared clean for contact by the believer in his household. They can't fellowship with and be yoked with the church either.

In 1 Corinthians 7:14, Paul used the word "sanctified" to specifically refer to an unbeliever who are "sanctified" or "set apart" by their believing spouse. (And by this Paul does not mean that they were saved). A non-Christian can be "set apart" from other non-Christians without experiencing salvation as Paul explained, so your argument is moot. 1 Corinthians 6:11 says not to associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister, but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. Well, not everyone who claims to be a brother or sister (but isn't) doesn't make it so obvious and can continue in what appears to be genuine fellowship for years with genuine believers without being spotted. Judas Iscariot continued with Jesus and the other 11 disciples for 3 years and looked like the real deal, but was eventually exposed as an unbelieving, unclean devil who betrayed Jesus. (John 6:64-71; 13:10-11)

Prove to me that the sanctified person in Hebrews 10:29 is a sanctified fake believer for whom 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 6 does not apply. That's what you have not done yet.

I already have proved that the sanctified person in Hebrews 10:29 is a "set apart" unbeliever and no matter how many times I do prove it, you will continue to tell me that I'm yet to prove it to you because you just don't have eyes to see or ears to hear.

'Sanctified' is a word that you need to let the context dictate it's usage. The word literally means "set apart" and it can apply (and often does) to true believers, but can also apply to objects, places and even people that are not saved. If the word "sanctified" was to be given a broad brushed definition of "saved," then you would have to say that the seventh day was saved (Genesis 2:3), the tabernacle was saved (Exodus 29:43), Moses saved the people after coming down off the mountain (Exodus 19:14), the priests and the Levites saved themselves (1 Chronicles 15:14), the Father saved the Son (John 10:36), the Son saved Himself (John 17:19) the believing spouse saved the unbelieving spouse (2 Corinthians 7:14) and other things that do not line up with scripture. It's time for you to set aside your biased agenda and openly and honestly, consider the truth.

 

[EleventhHour]

If you want to contribute to the discussion you should know ahead of time that 'sanctified' does not always refer to a saved person. All genuinely saved people are sanctified, and some unbelievers are sanctified. In fact, things can be sanctified, like meat sacrificed to an idol, or a bowl used in the service of the temple. 'Sanctified' does not by definition mean 'saved'. It means 'set apart', usually 'set apart as clean'.

So mailmandan has made his argument very clear. That hasn't been the problem. And he understands the meaning of 'sanctified'. The problem is there is no such thing as a fake believing unbeliever that is sanctified (set apart as clean) for fellowship with the church. And for that reason alone Hebrews 10:29 can not be referring to a legitimately sanctified unbeliever.

But the obvious way we know the sanctified person in Hebrews 10:29 isn't referring to an unsaved person in the church is because the sanctified person being talked about is plainly defined for us right in the chapter as a saved sanctified person. But if someone is determined to make Hebrews 10 an osas passage they will have to ignore who the author himself says is the sanctified person he's talking about.

The issue is not the disagreement on the meaning of the word "sanctified" in context, but YOUR misrepresentation of @mailmandan words.

 

[EleventhHour]

You're getting real close to me considering you an unbeliever.
I've done a lot of witnessing to unbelievers and you act just like them.
You really do.

Excellent, this even received a "friendly"

My action is I stand firmly against your false doctrine.

Conditional security is a lie from hell.... it stands in direct opposition to the full complete work of Christ Jesus and His promises.

 

[Judges1318]

My action is I stand firmly against your false doctrine.

It's how you stand that shows you to be a believer or not.
You keep stooping lower and lower to maintain your sense of superiority and not be wrong.
That's the trait of the narcissist.

 

[Judges1318]

Conditional security is a lie from hell....

These are lies from hell?

"stand firm in the faith - 1 Corinthians 16:13

"building yourselves up in your most holy faith" - Jude 1:20

"holding on to faith" - 1 Timothy 1:19

"hold firmly to the faith we profess" - Hebrews 4:14

"Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess" - Hebrews 10:23

"And now, dear children, continue in him" - 1 John 2:28

"As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you." - 1 John 2:24

The lie from hell is works are the condition to earn salvation.
Your believing through God's gift of faith is actually the very way you secure salvation, but you are calling that a lie from hell.

 

[Judges1318]

The issue is not the disagreement on the meaning of the word "sanctified" in context, but YOUR misrepresentation of @mailmandan words.

Like I say, you have very poor comprehension skills.
Or you haven't been reading our posts.
Which is it?

 

[Judges1318]

Mark 16:17-18 context is crystal clear to me. The 11 apostles were given signs and wonders by Jesus himself to testify to the Jews they were indeed sent by God.

The book of Acts shows it was not limited to the 11 Apostles.

 

[Judges1318]

Sanctified ONCE FOR ALL means that the sanctified person can't lose it, hence the ONCE FOR ALL.

Show me where the passage says 'once for all' means the person can't lose it, and I will show you where it says 'once for all' means Christ does not need to be re-sacrificed.

You're making the mistake of saying since Christ's ministry does not run out and need to be performed over again (like animal sacrifices) that has to equate to it always being applied to a person. But even you know that the reason the Sacrifice is always applied to a person is because of the continued belief in the Sacrifice of the person, not that the Sacrifice does not run out.

 

[mailmandan]

Show me where the passage says 'once for all' means the person can't lose it, and I will show you where it says 'once for all' means Christ does not need to be re-sacrificed.

You're making the mistake of saying since Christ's ministry does not run out and need to be performed over again (like animal sacrifices) that has to equate to it always being applied to a person. But even you know that the reason the Sacrifice is always applied to a person is because of the continued belief in the Sacrifice of the person, not that the Sacrifice does not run out.

Show me where the passage says “once for all’ means you can lose it, which is the opposite of once for all.

Also show me where “perfected for all time those who are sanctified” in Hebrews 10:14 means not for all time.

 

[Micaiah-imla]

The 11 apostles were given signs and wonders by Jesus himself to testify to the Jews they were indeed sent by God.

Not to the Jews only, but:

Matthew 28:19
[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

 

[Micaiah-imla]

Sanctified' is a word that you need to let the context dictate it's usage

Hebrews 10:29
[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?

The context here is a saved person. Unless you are suggesting being sanctified by the blood dose not save. Is that what you are suggesting?

 

[Micaiah-imla]

Conditional security is a lie from hell.

Quite the opposite; it’s the truth from heaven.

 

[Judges1318]

Show me where the passage says “once for all’ means you can lose it, which is the opposite of once for all.

'Once for all' doesn't mean you can lost it.
That's not the argument.
The argument is it doesn't mean you can't lose it, as you are insisting.

Here is where we know 'once for all' (Christ doesn't have to be re-sacrificed) does not mean you can't lose it:

" 26For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. 28Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" - Hebrews 10:26-29

You can't just decide to change the saved sanctified person in the chapter to an unsaved sanctified believer because it doesn't line up with your osas beliefs. That's unreasonable, even dishonest.

Just ask yourself, "why can't you just let the passage say what it says. Why do you find it necessary to redefine vs. 29 when nothing in the passage does that?" Obviously, it's because your osas beliefs won't allow you to let the context itself define who it is. Think about it. Osas has to jump in and make sure the reader doesn't think it's the sanctified believer the author has been talking about all along.

Also show me where “perfected for all time those who are sanctified” in Hebrews 10:14 means not for all time.

It does mean 'for all time'.
The sanctification that you get from Christ's sacrifice IS for all time.
The text says that means you don't have to re-sacrifice Christ to remain sanctified.
It does not say you can't lose it. You are adding that.
Your possession of the never failing Sacrifice is conditioned on your continued belief in the one Sacrifice that never ends.

"36For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised." - Hebrews 10:36

 

[Judges1318]

'Sanctified' is a word that you need to let the context dictate it's usage.

Exactly!
Vs. 10 and 14 tell us the sanctified person is a saved person.
But by vs. 29 with no explanation, the sanctified person suddenly becomes a sanctified unbeliever in osas doctrine.
The explanation osas offers is 'it has to be an unsaved sanctified person, or else it's saying a saved sanctified person loses his salvation, and we know that can't be, because osas is true'.
It's the famous circular reasoning of the osas argument.

 

[Judges1318]

@mailmandan,

Do you tell your customers that a forever stamp means it can never be removed from the envelope?
Isn't it rather that 'forever' means it's value for delivering a letter lasts forever as long as it applied to and remains on the envelope?

In the same way, Christ's 'forever' sacrifice has value in delivering a person to the kingdom of God as long as the forever sacrifice remains affixed to the person. Hebrews 10 explains the forever value of Christ, not that the forever value of Christ will be forever applied to a person.

I think I know where you're going next.
I'm ready.