The Letter To Hebews

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 9:12b . . having obtained eternal redemption.

The Greek word translated redemption basically pertains to the action of paying a
ransom to liberate someone from captivity, consequence, or obligation.

Jesus' blood is of such a high value that God's son needed to offer himself as a
ransom for his constituents only just the one time. So for the people of God who
are under the new covenant, there is no annual day of atonement because Jesus'
blood was sufficient to clear the way for the them to associate with God
permanently instead of just once a year in the person of their high priest.

● Heb 9:13-14 . .The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on
those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to
death, so that we may serve the living God!

The Greek word translated "consciences" basically pertains to mental activity
especially as it pertains to moral perception. So we're not talking about outwardly
sinful behavior here. (cf. Rom 2:16 and Heb 4:12)

● Heb 9:15 . . For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those
who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance-- now that he has died
as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

Absolution for Old Testament sins is mentioned in Rom 3:25 and also at Isa 53:6.
For example: David orchestrated what amounted to a premeditated murder in his
affair with Uriah's wife Bathsheba. Normally that's an unpardonable sin, yet God put
it away even though the first covenant doesn't allow forgiveness for deliberate
violations. (Num 12:28-31)

The eternal inheritance, often mentioned in the Hebrews letter, refers to the pact
God made with Abraham, and to the promises God made to David, regarding
possession and occupancy of the land of Palestine, e.g. Gen 15:7-17, Gen 17:7-8,
1Chron 16:15-18, and 2Sam 7:10 which says:

"I will establish a home for my people Israel and will plant them firm, so that they
shall dwell secure and shall tremble no more. Evil men shall not oppress them any
more as in the past, ever since I appointed chieftains over my people Israel. I will
give them safety from all your enemies."

The realization of that promise would be impossible unless a means were provided
to prevent the first covenant's stipulated consequences from forcing the Jews'
eviction from their land.

The first covenant allows God to forgive, but not to forget, viz: forgiveness per the
first covenant amounts to little more than a reprieve: defined as a temporary
suspension of the execution of a sentence; especially of death.
_

 

[Eleanor]

● Heb 9:12b . . having obtained eternal redemption.

Having obtained eternal redemption (ransom from condemnation), Christ ascended into the true heavenly sanctuary.

The Greek word translated redemption basically pertains to the action of paying a
ransom to liberate someone from captivity, consequence, or obligation.
Jesus' blood is of such a high value that God's son needed to offer himself as a
ransom for his constituents only just the one time. So for the people of God who
are under the new covenant, there is no annual day of atonement because Jesus'
blood was sufficient to clear the way for them to associate with God
permanently instead of just once a year in the person of their high priest.

● Heb 9:13-14 . .The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer
sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean

The blood of goats and bulls on the Day of Atonement, and the ashes of a heifer (Nu 19)
for those who became ceremonially unclean as a result of contact with a corpse.

sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.

Because such sprinkling was only external, it could not cleanse a person from sin.

How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself

He is the eternal high priest who both offered the sacrifice and was the sacrifice himself.

unblemished to God,

Unblemished in the entirety of his being, not just externally.

cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

Completely remove the defilement of sin from within us.

The Greek word translated "consciences" basically pertains to mental activity
especially as it pertains to moral perception. So we're not talking about outwardly
sinful behavior here. (cf. Rom 2:16 and Heb 4:12)
● Heb 9:15 . . For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those
who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance

The new covenant eternal inheritance of Jer 31:31-34 (Heb 8:8-12) is the same
eternal inheritance (everlasting possession) of Ge 17:8, 48:4 promised to the patriarchs..
On the basis of Christ's atoning death, this inheritance has become real for those who are called by God (Ro 8:28).

-- now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

A ransom is the price paid for the release from bondage. Jesus gave his life to release us from
the bondage of sin and death under the Mosaic covenant due to violations of Mosaic law.

Absolution for Old Testament sins is mentioned in Rom 3:25 and also at Isa 53:6.
For example: David orchestrated what amounted to a premeditated murder in his
affair with Uriah's wife Bathsheba. Normally that's an unpardonable sin, yet God put
it away even though the first covenant doesn't allow forgiveness for deliberate
violations. (Num 12:28-31)

The Mosaic covenant temporarily covered sin, until it would be remitted in the new covenant (Ro 3:25)
by the death of Christ.

The eternal inheritance, often mentioned in the Hebrews letter, refers to the pact
God made with Abraham, and to the promises God made to David, regarding
possession and occupancy of the land of Palestine, e.g. Gen 15:7-17, Gen 17:7-8,
1Chron 16:15-18, and 2Sam 7:10 which says:

Yes, the eternal inheritance mentioned in Hebrews 11:13-16 and in Ge 17:8, 48:4 of an "everlasting possession"
is the same eternal (heavenly) inheritance of the new covenant in Jer 31:33-34 (Heb 8:8-12).
the land promise being fulfilled in both possession of the land under Joshua (Josh 21:43, 23:14),
and occupation of the land under Solomon (1 Kgs 4:21, 24-25, 5:3-4, cf 2 Sa 8:3).

The "everlasting possession" promised to the patriarchs (Ge 17:8, 48:4) was a spiritual promise,
not of earthly land, but of the heavenly land of the eternal inheritance, and Abraham understood
the promise to be spiritual (Heb 11:11, 13-16).
There is no earthly land promise remaining to Israel.
The only promise remaining to Israel is grafting back into the one olive tree of God's people,
the church, going all the way back to Abraham (Ro 11:16-22), IF they do not persist in unbelief (Ro 11:23),
which they have for over 2,000 years now.

"I will establish a home for my people Israel and will plant them firm, so that they
shall dwell secure and shall tremble no more. Evil men shall not oppress them any
more as in the past, ever since I appointed chieftains over my people Israel. I will
give them safety from all your enemies." (2Sam 7:10)
The realization of that promise would be impossible unless a means were provided to prevent
the first covenant's stipulated consequences from forcing the Jews' eviction from their land.

That promise of Canaan rest (Josh 1:13, Ex 33:14, Dt 12:9-10, 25:19) was fulfilled under Solomon (1 Kgs 5:3-4).

The first covenant allows God to forgive, but not to forget, viz: forgiveness per the
first covenant amounts to little more than a reprieve: defined as a temporary
suspension of the execution of a sentence; especially of death._

The sacrifices of the Mosaic covenant only covered sin, they did not remit sin.
The sin of God's people was not remitted until the cross (Ro 3:25) and the new covenant.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 9:16-18 . . In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one
who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes
effect while the one who made it is living. This is why even the first covenant was
not put into effect without blood.

The interesting thing about the first covenant is that it doesn't appear written like a
will. It's more like a contract; and this is probably the first time in the whole Bible
where Moses' Covenant is revealed to be a will rather than a contract. And oddly,
the will was activated not with the death of someone intelligent, but of beasts. (Ex
24:5-8)

But how can Moses' covenant be the will and testament of illiterate animals who
don't have a clue? Well, that is even more evidence that Moses' Covenant was
never intended to be the final option.

● Heb 9:19-22 . .When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all
the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and
branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. He said, "This is the
blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep." In the same way,
he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its
ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood,
and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

● Heb 9:23 . . It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be
purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better
sacrifices than these.

It would be insulting indeed to put the heavenly tabernacle on the same level as
the earthly one because God Himself in person inhabits the one in heaven. If the
true tabernacle is immeasurably holier than its copy on the ground, then it has to
require something of much higher value than a critter's blood to dedicate it and
keep it sanitized.

● Heb 9:24-26 . . For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a
copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's
presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the
high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own.
Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world.
But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by
the sacrifice of himself.

If Jesus was going to offer himself for sin only that one time, rather than year by
year, then his death had to cover everything the first time from first to last.

In contrast, Yom Kippur never gets out ahead of the people's sins; it's always
catching up instead of getting out ahead; whereas Christ's crucifixion not only
caught up with his people's sins (e.g. David) but also anticipated the sins that the
Jews are presently committing and have yet to commit.

● Heb 9:27 . . Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment

Now, the proper judgment for Adam's sin is just simply for everybody to get old
and die. But what about a proper judgment for his posterity's sins? Those have to
be brought up for judgment too and that is where Isa 53:4-8 becomes so
important.

● Heb 9:28 . . so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people;
and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those
who are waiting for him.

Jews back in Jesus' day were anticipating Messiah to restore Israel's strength, and
to begin liberating them from foreign domination. Many of them were not expecting
him to be put to death by a foreign power so it's not difficult to understand why a
large percentage of the Jews back then didn't accept Jesus' claims.

These days a number of Jews are better informed, and they rest assured that Jesus
will return, set up the kingdom, and finally get around to the salvation that their
ancestors expected of him the first time.
_

 

[Eleanor]

● Heb 9:16-18 . . In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one
who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes
effect while the one who made it is living.

The Greek word for covenant is translated "will" in vv. 16-17. Heb 9:16-17 in the Greek reads:
(16) "For where (there is) a covenant, there is necessity to be offered the death of the (one) making covenant;
(17) for a covenant over dead (bodies) is firm, since never has it strength when the one making covenant lives."
God used the above conventional covenant process in the covenant of the land promise with Abraham (Ge 15:9-21),
where God passed between the pieces of dead animals to ratify the covenant. The practice signified a self-
maledictory oath: "May it so be done to me if I do not keep my oath and pledge." (See Jer 34:18-19).

I suspect the Greek language of Heb 9:16-17 caused the translators to use the word "will" instead of covenant,
since covenants were not ratified by the death of the one making the covenant, but by the death of animals,
signifying the death of the covenant breaker.
So the word "will" is used here in the sense of a last will and testament wherein beneficiaries have no claim
on the benefits assigned to them until the testator dies. And since Christ's death has been duly attested,
"the promised eternal inheritance" (v.15) is available to his beneficiaries.

This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood.

And the text now returns to the concept of covenant instead of will.
Without blood means without death; i.e., the death of the calves from which Moses took blood to seal the covenant.

The interesting thing about the first covenant is that it doesn't appear written like a
will. It's more like a contract; and this is probably the first time in the whole Bible
where Moses' Covenant is revealed to be a will rather than a contract.

Actually, it's just a translation. The Greek word used is "covenant."
The concept of will is introduced to explain the necessity of death for the promised eternal inheritance of the covenant
to be available to Christ's beneficiaries.

And oddly, the will was activated not with the death of someone intelligent, but of beasts. (Ex 24:5-8)
But how can Moses' covenant be the will and testament of illiterate animals who don't have a clue?

The issue is blood, which means death. The beneficiaries of the will have no claim on the benefits assigned
to them until the testator dies.

Well, that is even more evidence that Moses' Covenant was never intended to be the final option.

The Mosaic covenant was a temporary addition (Gal 3:19) to the Abrahamic covenant.

● Heb 9:19-22 . .When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all
the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and
branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. He said, "This is the
blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep."

See this in Ex 24:4-8.

In the same way,he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its
ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood,
and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

For example, see Lev 8:10, 19, 30.

● Heb 9:23 . . It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things

See Heb 8:5.

to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Whereas it was necessary for the copies of the things in heaven to be purified with animal sacrifices, it was necessary
that the heavenly things themselves should be purified with better sacrifices than bulls and goats, that the heavenly
things of salvation be ratified with observance and consecration; i.e., the blood of Christ.

It would be insulting indeed to put the heavenly tabernacle on the same level as
the earthly one because God Himself in person inhabits the one in heaven. If the
true tabernacle is immeasurably holier than its copy on the ground, then it has to
require something of much higher value than a critter's blood to dedicate it and
keep it sanitized.

● Heb 9:24-26 . . For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a
copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence.

See Heb 7:25; 1 Jn 2:1.

Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the
high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own.
Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world.
But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by
the sacrifice of himself.

His coming has ushered in the great Messianic era inaugurated by the incarnation, toward which
all history has moved (Ac 2:17, 1 Tim 4:1, 1 Jn 2:18, 1 Pe 1:20).
This is the last earthly age, of which the church is the end. The next age is eternity.

If Jesus was going to offer himself for sin only that one time, rather than year by
year, then his death had to cover everything the first time from first to last.
In contrast, Yom Kippur never gets out ahead of the people's sins; it's always
catching up instead of getting out ahead; whereas Christ's crucifixion not only
caught up with his people's sins (e.g. David) but also anticipated the sins that the
Jews are presently committing and have yet to commit.

No sin of any unbeliever is forgiven after his death. That is contra-gospel (Jn 3:18).

● Heb 9:27 . . Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment

Now, the proper judgment for Adam's sin is just simply for everybody to get old and die. But what about a proper judgment
for his posterity's sins? Those have to be brought up for judgment too and that is where Isa 53:4-8 becomes so important.
● Heb 9:28 . . so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people;
and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

This has eschatological consequences.
So there will be no appearing of Christ prior to his coming in judgment. For just as men die once and then face judgment,
so Christ appears once to die and once to judge (and not in between), at which judgment he will "bring salvation."
So Jesus brings salvation when he appears, and in 1 Pe 1:5, 13, Jesus brings salvation when he is revealed.
Therefore, his appearing and his revealing are the same thing; i.e., his coming in judgment (2 Th 1:6-10),
and not two separate events. Therefore, there can be no appearing for the rapture separate from his revealing
at the judgment, because they are one and the same event, as Paul teaches in 2 Th 1:6-10, 2:1-8.

Jews back in Jesus' day were anticipating Messiah to restore Israel's strength, and to begin liberating them from
foreign domination. Many of them were not expecting him to be put to death by a foreign power so it's not difficult to understand
why a large percentage of the Jews back then didn't accept Jesus' claims.
These days a number of Jews are better informed, and they rest assured that Jesus will return, set up the kingdom,

However, NT teaching of Heb 9:28, which is authoritative to the church, does not allow for any further temporal
events when Jesus comes in judgment. Time is over, and that's when eternity for all mankind begins.

and finally get around to the salvation that their ancestors expected of him the first time.
_

Expected of him? He failed to bring salvation! It's Jesus' fault that unbelieving Jews are condemned?

Are you serious?

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:1 . .The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming-- not the
realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated
endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.

A shadow doesn't offer much detail-- just a silhouette, i.e. a dark shape of
something without telling too much about its structure, it's texture, its color, or its
dimensions. Shadows aren't reflections, rather, they're just a trace of things much
more complex in their true form.

The entire Aaronic priesthood, and its Qorbanot system, is a figure of speech-- a
sort of metaphor, and as such can never effectively remove the real guilt of real
sin, nor give worshippers a person-to-person audience with the real God.

And a big problem with the Law is that it gives Jews absolutely nothing good to look
forward to; just an uneasy dread of retribution because the Aaronic system lacks a
means of making Jews permanently, and irrevocably, reconciled to God, i.e. Aaron's
priesthood cannot assure his people's safety.

● Heb 10:2 . . If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the
worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt
guilty for their sins.

It's very difficult to stifle the guilt associated with one's sins; so it's likely that the
felt guilt in the passage above pertains to the dread of retribution, i.e. the anxiety that
fugitives experience when they're running from the law and knowing full well that
they deserve to be apprehended and punished.

● Heb 10:3-4 . . But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is
impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

In other words: Yom Kippur isn't a sort of New Year's celebration wherein folks are
encouraged to forget the past and look forward to the future. No, the ritual's
purpose is to remind the people that their past will one day confront them-- which
helps to explain why no one is allowed to be cheerful on that day. (Lev 23:27-29)

In contrast; the terms of the new covenant allows sinners to put it all behind them.

"For I will forgive their iniquities, and remember their sins no more." (Jer 31:34b)

● Heb 10:5-6 . .Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and
offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings
and sin offerings you were not satisfied.

* The New Testament's version of Psalm 40 doesn't exactly match its counterpart in
modern Tanakhs-- but follows a minor variation of the Septuagint.

Unfortunately, the Hebrew texts that were used to create the Septuagint no longer
exist. The oldest Hebrew bible in existence today is relatively recent--
approximately the ninth century AD, and itself is not a copy of the originals, but of
a formal rabbinical revision of the Hebrew bible that was made sometime in the
second century AD. So it's hard to know for certain what Psalm 40:7-8 is really
supposed to say. A footnote in the 1985 JPS Tanakh says that the exact meaning of
the Hebrew is uncertain.

● Heb 10:7 . .Then I said, 'Here I am-- it is written about me in the scroll-- I have
come to do your will, O God.

Precisely which scroll referenced is unclear. Most synagogues have at least a Torah
scroll; but one in Jesus' home town of Nazareth had an Isaiah scroll too. A passage
Jesus chose to read was audibly fulfilled that very day; viz: he actually quoted his
own future testimony recorded approximately 700 years before he arrived (Luke
4:16-21).

Anyway; 10:7 is probably looking at words that were predicted to be spoken, and were
in fact eventually spoken in real time as a current event.
_

 

[Eleanor]

● Heb 10:1 . .The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming-- not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.

"The law," together with the Levitical priesthood to which it was closely linked under the Mosaic system.

A shadow doesn't offer much detail-- just a silhouette, i.e. a dark shape of something without telling too much about its structure, it's texture, its color, or its dimensions. Shadows aren't reflections, rather, they're just a trace of things much more complex in their true form.
The entire Aaronic priesthood, and its Qorbanot system, is a figure of speech-- a sort of metaphor,

The priesthood and sacrifices were not figures of speech or metaphors, they were patterns, for the actual priesthood and sacrifice that would mediate and remove sin and guilt. Being only patterns, they were repeated year after year, their very repetition bearing testimony that the perfect, sin-removing sacrifice had not yet been offered.

and as such can never effectively remove the real guilt of real sin, nor give worshippers a person-to-person audience with the real God.
And a big problem with the Law is that it gives Jews absolutely nothing good to look forward to; just an uneasy dread of retribution because the Aaronic system lacks a means of making Jews permanently, and irrevocably, reconciled to God, i.e. Aaron's priesthood cannot assure his people's safety.

● Heb 10:2 . . If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins.

It's very difficult to stifle the guilt associated with one's sins; so it's likely that the felt guilt in the passage above pertains to the dread of retribution, i.e. the anxiety that fugitives experience when they're running from the law and knowing full well that they deserve to be apprehended and punished.

● Heb 10:3-4 . . But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is
impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

An animal cannot possibly be a completely adequate substitute for a human being, who is made in God's image.

In other words: Yom Kippur isn't a sort of New Year's celebration wherein folks are encouraged to forget the past and look forward to the future. No, the ritual's purpose is to remind the people that their past will one day confront them-- which helps to explain why no one is allowed to be cheerful on that day. (Lev 23:27-29) In contrast; the terms of the new covenant allows sinners to put it all behind them.
"For I will forgive their iniquities, and remember their sins no more." (Jer 31:34b)

● Heb 10:5-6 . .Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased.

There were five types of offerings prescribed by the Mosaic law (Lev 1-7), of which these were two.
God was not pleased with these offerings which were only preparatory and temporary, looking forward to the one perfect and final offering--that of the incarnate Son of God.

* The New Testament's version of Psalm 40 doesn't exactly match its counterpart in modern Tanakhs-- but follows a minor variation of the Septuagint. Unfortunately, the Hebrew texts that were used to create the Septuagint no longerexist. The oldest Hebrew bible in existence today is relatively recent--approximately the ninth century AD, and itself is not a copy of the originals, but of a formal rabbinical revision of the Hebrew bible that was made sometime in the second century AD. So it's hard to know for certain what Psalm 40:7-8 is really supposed to say. A footnote in the 1985 JPS Tanakh says that the exact meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.

Which is irrelevant to Hebrews' use of the passage as stated, for that is the meaning the penman meant to convey; i.e., Christ's obedient submission to the Father in coming to earth.

● Heb 10:7 . .Then I said, 'Here I am-- it is written about me in the scroll-- I have come to do your will, O God.

The will of the Father was the Son's consuming concern (Lk 22:42, Jn 4:34).
The Mosaic sacrifices are replaced by the submissive obedience to the will of God.

Precisely which scroll referenced is unclear. Most synagogues have at least a Torah scroll; but one in Jesus' home town of Nazareth had an Isaiah scroll too. A passage Jesus chose to read was audibly fulfilled that very day; viz: he actually quoted his own future testimony recorded approximately 700 years before he arrived (Luke 4:16-21).
Anyway; 10:7 is probably looking at words that were predicted to be spoken, and were in fact eventually spoken in real time as a current event._

Spoken in the next verse of the psalm (Ps 40:8): "I desire to do your will, O my God."
And it is by his love of God's will that we are sanctified (Heb 10:9-10).

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:8 . . First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin
offerings you did not desire, nor were you satisfied with them" (although the law
required them to be made).

Aaron's system wasn't a Jewish invention. It was God-given; and God demanded it
to be practiced. But even though the sacrifices were mandated by God, He was
never really content with them at all; nor did He even want them in the first place.
(Jer 7:21-26)

● Heb 10:9-10 . .Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets
aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy
through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

"the first" refers to Moses' covenant. That covenant didn't really go away when
God established the second one. It's still very much in force for those who choose
to remain under its jurisdiction. But God isn't happy with that covenant because it's
much too easy for the Jews to dishonor their commitments; and it forces God to
punish them, which is something He doesn't really enjoy doing. (Ex 18:30-32)

"once for all" means that redeemed Jews of every era have been permanently
reconciled to God by a singular, one-time sacrifice; in contrast to the many, many
offerings required by Moses' Law on Yom Kippur that can neither permanently
reconcile the Jews to God, nor even atone for all categories of sin.

● Heb 10:11-14 . . Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious
duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away
sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down
at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his
footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are
being made holy.

Please don't miss that phrase: "by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those
who are being made holy." Jesus' death completely atoned for every sin that
beneficiaries of the new covenant are ever going to commit for the rest of their
lives. If that were not true, then it would be necessary for him to die over and over
again for each new sin-- just like the Levitical priests offering the same sacrifices
year after year. But that is not going to happen because Jesus only offered himself
just that once; and it was good enough.

● Heb 10:15-18 . .The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says: "This
is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my
laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds." Then he adds: "Their sins
and lawless acts I will remember no more." And where these have been forgiven,
there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

In criminal justice systems, there's an item of record called an indictment; roughly
defined as a formal written statement framed by a prosecuting authority and found
by a jury (such as a grand jury) charging a person with an offense. The indictment
process is a common feature under the terms and conditions of the first covenant
because it doesn't allow God to forget. (Ex 34:6-7 & Nahum 1:3)

In other words; Yom Kippur, though a day of cleansing, is also a day for the Jews to
remember that the full satisfaction of justice for their sins is pending, hanging over
their heads like a guillotine.
_

 

[Eleanor]

● Heb 10:8 . . First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you satisfied with them"

(although the law required them to be made).
Aaron's system wasn't a Jewish invention. It was God-given; and God demanded it to be practiced. But even though the sacrifices were mandated by God, He was really content with them at all; nor did He even want them in the first place.(Jer 7:21-26)

Taken out of context, which context is not difficult to see. In context, what God didn't want was sacrifices from disobedient and hypocritical hearts.

● Heb 10:9-10 . .Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Ps 40:8: "I desire to do your will, O my God." And it is by his love of God's will that we are sanctified.
Christ's perfect sacrifice, offered in complete submission, supersedes and therefore replaces all previous sacrifices. We have been made holy (justified), set aside in consecration to God, and are now experiencing the process of continuing sanctification ("being made holy," v.14).

"the first" refers to Moses' covenant. That covenant didn't really go away when God established the second one. It's still very much in force for those who choose to remain under its jurisdiction.

That is contrary to authoritative NT apostolic teaching that the Mosaic covenant is obsolete (Heb 8:13), and that its ceremonial laws have been abolished (Eph 2:15).
On what authority do you "overturn" the teaching of Jesus' apostles with your personal interpretation of prophetic riddles not spoken clearly (Nu 12:8)?
God does not have two opposing covenants, one by law and one by grace, in effect at the same time. God does not have two peoples, one under law and the other under grace. You are either in the new covenant of God's people through faith in and trust on Jesus Christ for the remission of your sin, or you are in no covenant at all and without hope. That is an invention of your contra-NT eschatology which tramples under the NT word of God.

But God isn't happy with that covenant because it's much too easy for the Jews to dishonor their commitments; and it forces God to
punish them, which is something He doesn't really enjoy doing. (Ex 18:30-32)

The problem with the sacrifices of the Mosaic covenant is that they were being offered with disobedient and hypocritical hearts.

"once for all" means that redeemed Jews of every era have been permanently reconciled to God by a singular, one-time sacrifice; in contrast to the many, many offerings required by Moses' Law on Yom Kippur that can neither permanently reconcile the Jews to God, nor even atone for all categories of sin.

● Heb 10:11-14 . . Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

The Levitical priest always stood because his work was never finished. But our high priest's work is forever finished.

Please don't miss that phrase: "by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." Jesus' death completely atoned for every sin that beneficiaries of the new covenant are ever going to commit for the rest of their lives. If that were not true, then it would be necessary for him to die over and over again for each new sin-- just like the Levitical priests offering the same sacrifices year after year. But that is not going to happen because Jesus only offered himself just that once; and it was good enough.

● Heb 10:15-18 . .The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says: "This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds." Then he adds: "Their sins
and lawless acts I will remember no more." And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

The two verses are from the new covenant promise of Jer 31:33-34, which guarantees that the sins will be effectively and completely forgiven (v.17), with the result that no additional sacrifice for sins will be needed (v.18).

In criminal justice systems, there's an item of record called an indictment; roughly defined as a formal written statement framed by a prosecuting authority and found by a jury (such as a grand jury) charging a person with an offense. The indictment process is a common feature under the terms and conditions of the first covenant because it doesn't allow God to forget. (Ex 34:6-7 & Nahum 1:3).
In other words; Yom Kippur, though a day of cleansing, is also a day for the Jews to remember that the full satisfaction of justice for their sins is pending, hanging over their heads like a guillotine._

 

[Eleanor]

NOTE:

1) Post #16 (Heb 2:16) is a removal of my post #16 (Heb 2:10),

2) moving it out of sequence to post #17 and

3) replacing it with a revision of your former post #17 (Heb 2:16), and

4) my former post#17 (Heb 2:16) has been deleted.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:19a . .Therefore, brothers,

This letter is addressed to Hebrews; so "brothers" indicates the author was
addressing Jews-- and identifying himself as a Jew --in that verse.

● Heb 10:19b-20 . . since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the
blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is,
his body,

It's a "living" way because it's perpetual; i.e. having no defined limits.

● Heb 10:21-22a . . and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us
draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts
sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience

The Greek word translated "sincere" basically means truthful, i.e. the you that you
really are plus the way that you really are both in your thoughts and in your
feelings.

A guilty conscience is a deceitful conscience; and its deceit may, or may not, be
readily apparent to its host.

"The human heart is most deceitful and desperately wicked. Who really knows how
bad it is? But I know! I, The Lord, search all hearts and examine secret motives.
(Jer 17:9-10)

● Heb 10:22b . . and having our bodies washed with pure water.

That likely pertains to a peculiar kind of hygiene, e.g. John 15:3 which says:

"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you."

The sprinkling of the conscience, and the washing of the body, are one-time
incidents never to be repeated; in contrast to the first covenant's requirement to
bathe and sprinkle the people over and over again ad infinitum.
_

 

[Eleanor]

● Heb 10:19a . .Therefore, brothers,

Here is the introduction to the fifth warning to these new Hebrew converts to believe and obey their new high priest, and not to lapse back into Judaism.

This letter is addressed to Hebrews; so "brothers" indicates the author was addressing Jews-- and identifying himself as a Jew --in that verse.

● Heb 10:19b-20 . . since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus,

The way to the sanctuary of God's presence was closed to the people under the Mosaic covenant because the blood of animal sacrifices could never completely atone for their sins. Now, however, believers can come to the throne of grace since the perfect priest has offered the perfect sacrifice, atoning for sin once for all.

by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body,

When Jesus died, the curtain separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place was "torn in two from top to bottom" (Mk 15:38).
The curtain symbolizes the body of Christ in terms of suffering. Like the curtain, his body was torn to open the way into the divine presence.

It's a "living" way because it's perpetual; i.e. having no defined limits.

● Heb 10:21-22a . . and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience

Five exhortations spring from Jesus' provision for our reconciliation to his Father:
1) "Let us draw near to God" where four conditions are given for "drawing near to God:"
a) a sincere heart - undivided allegiance in the inner being,
b) full assurance of faith - faith that knows no hesitation in trusting in and following Christ,
c) heart sprinkled. . .from a guilty conscience - total freedom from a sense of guilt, a freedom based on the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ, and (con't) in the next section.

The Greek word translated "sincere" basically means truthful, i.e. the you that you really are plus the way that you really are both in your thoughts and in your feelings.
A guilty conscience is a deceitful conscience; and its deceit may, or may not, be readily apparent to its host.
"The human heart is most deceitful and desperately wicked. Who really knows how bad it is? But I know! I, The Lord, search all hearts and examine secret motives. (Jer 17:9-10)

● Heb 10:22b . . and having our bodies washed with pure water.

d) bodies washed with pure water - not an external ceremony such as baptism but a figure for inner cleansing, of which the washing of the priests under the old covenant was a symbol (Ex 30:19-21; Lev 8:6; see also Eze 36:25, where a similar expression is used figuratively for the cleansing resulting from the new covenant.)

That likely pertains to a peculiar kind of hygiene, e.g. John 15:3 which says:
"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you."

Yes, not an external cleansing but an internal cleansing, as was symbolized in the washing of the priests under the old covenant.

The sprinkling of the conscience, and the washing of the body, are one-time incidents never to be repeated; in contrast to the first covenant's requirement to bathe and sprinkle the people over and over again ad infinitum._

NOTE:

1) Post #16 (Heb 2:16) is a removal of my post #16 (Heb 2:10),

2) moving it out of sequence to post #17,

3) replacing my post #16 with a revision of your former post #17 (Heb 2:16), and

4) deleting my former post #17 (Heb 2:16).

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:23a . . Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess,

The Jews have been promised a theocratic kingdom headed by a man who will
liberate them from foreign domination and from fear of war, plus allow them to own
private property, and ensure them plenty of peace, prosperity, justice, health, and
long life: none of which the people of God have thus far managed to secure
permanently but expect to under Messiah's administration.

● Heb 10:23b . . . for He who promised is faithful.

In other words: they mustn't lose confidence that the kingdom is coming because
there remains a rest for the people of God that they would've obtained already had
Moses' people entered the land of milk and honey when God wanted them to.

● Heb 10:24 . . And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love
and good deeds.

Man is a species of life that is quite naturally, and comfortably, inclined to provoke
and annoy each other and bring out the worst in their fellow men. It is God's
expectations that His people make an effort to do just the opposite; viz: bring out
the best in each other.

Good deeds speaks of one's actions, i.e. their conduct. For example: courtesy,
scruples, honesty, charity, kindness, tolerance, non violence, tact, deference,
generosity, graciousness, law abiding, an honest day's work for an honest day's
pay, helpful, modesty, sincere promises, decency, loyalty, manners, benevolent,
compliant with superiors, self controlled, speech that's treads lightly on peoples
nerves, patient, and calm, etc.

● Heb 10:25 . . Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of
doing, but let us encourage one another-- and all the more as you see the Day
approaching.

I'm pretty sure that pertains to synagogues, i.e. houses of worship where pious
Jews meet once a week, usually on Saturdays; which for them is the routine
Sabbath. The percentage of Jews attending synagogue on a regular basis is quite a
bit less than those who don't.

Synagogues also serve as yeshivas-- the equivalent of catechism --where Jews
study a variety of sacred literature; most especially the Tanach, wherein are located
the God-given prophecies relative to the approaching theocratic kingdom. It would
be a very good use of their study time for poorly trained Jews to review those
prophecies and also to become associated with other Jews who believe in them.
_

 

[Eleanor]

CORRECTION:

1) Post #16 (Heb 2:16) is a removal of my post #16 (Heb 2:10) (making only one post on 7/16/23),

2) moving it out of sequence to post #17 on 7/17/23,

3) replacing my post #16 (of 7/16/23) with a revision of your former post #17 (Heb 2:16) on 7/17/23,

4) deleting my former post #18 (Heb 2:16) of 7/18/23, and

5) replacing it with your former post #19 (Heb 3:1-2) of 7/18/23.

● Heb 10:23a . . Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess

The Jews have been promised a theocratic kingdom headed by a man who will liberate them from foreign domination and from fear of war, plus allow them to own private property, and ensure them plenty of peace, prosperity, justice, health, and long life: none of which the people of God have thus far managed to secure permanently but expect to under Messiah's administration.

NT gospel Paul is not speaking of OT earthly things to these Christian Jews. The issue of this letter is apostasy. Some of them were tempted to give up the struggle and turn back to Judaism. He is exhorting them to hold on, without doubt or hesitation, to their hope of being God's house, if they hold on to their courage and that hope (Heb 3:6, 6:18-20).

● Heb 10:23b . . . for He who promised is faithful.

And his faithfulness to them should encourage them to be faithful to him, to not apostasize, and to depend upon his promises.

In other words: they mustn't lose confidence that the kingdom is coming

Jesus said the everlasting kingdom (Lk 1:33) is here now (Lk 11:20, Mt 12:28), that it is not earthly, of this world (Jn 18:36), that it is of the spiritual world, invisible and within (Lk 17:20-21) the hearts where he reigns and rules. There is no other kingdom than this everlasting kingdom.

because there remains a rest for the people of God

That remaining rest for the people of God is salvation rest in Jesus Christ, where we rest from our own works to save and in his work which saves.

that they would've obtained already had Moses' people entered the land of milk and honey when God wanted them to.
● Heb 10:24 . . And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds.
Man is a species of life that is quite naturally, and comfortably, inclined to provoke and annoy each other and bring out the worst in their fellow men. It is God's expectations that His people make an effort to do just the opposite; viz: bring out the best in each other.
Good deeds speaks of one's actions, i.e. their conduct. For example: courtesy, scruples, honesty, charity, kindness, tolerance, non violence, tact, deference, generosity, graciousness, law abiding, an honest day's work for an honest day's
pay, helpful, modesty, sincere promises, decency, loyalty, manners, benevolent, compliant with superiors, self controlled, speech that's treads lightly on peoples nerves, patient, and calm, etc.

● Heb 10:25 . . Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another-- and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

Keeping in mind, Paul is addressing Christians here who were Jews.They are not to desert or abandon their meeting together with other Christians weekly to receive gospel teaching and to break the bread of the Lord's Supper, as they see the Day of the Lord's return approaching.

I'm pretty sure that pertains to synagogues, i.e. houses of worship where pious Jews meet once a week, usually on Saturdays; which for them is the routine Sabbath. The percentage of Jews attending synagogue on a regular basis is quite a bit less than those who don't.
Synagogues also serve as yeshivas-- the equivalent of catechism --where Jews study a variety of sacred literature; most especially the Tanach, wherein are located the God-given prophecies relative to the approaching theocratic kingdom. It would be a very good use of their study time for poorly trained Jews to review those prophecies and also to become associated with other Jews who believe in them.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
Throughout the first ten chapters of the letter to Hebrews, the Jewish author
steadily builds a case for the unquestionable superiority of the new covenant,
coupled with Jesus' Melchizedek-style priesthood and his personal sacrifice. This
next reference to Moses' Law is the coup de grâce that drives in the final coffin nail
on Jews who are relying upon the first covenant to earn themselves a share in
Abraham's promises.

● Heb 10:26-27 . . If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the
knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of
judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

It should go without saying that in a letter written to the author's fellow Jews, a
"knowledge of the truth" would imply instruction in Moses' Law, which was
considered truth for a good many years before the New Testament came along.

It's very easy, for Gentiles untrained in Old Testament Jewish law, to err by
assuming the author meant there is no forgiveness of any kind for premeditated
sins. But that's a limitation of the old covenant which doesn't apply to the new.
(Acts 13:38-40)

There are many crimes for which Moses Law permits neither ransom nor pardon;
but the author didn't name those because not everybody commits them. However,
everybody does eventually commit the kind of sin that he did name: premeditated
sins. The Levitical system has absolutely no atonements in its catalogue for sins in
that category.

● Num 15:30-31 . . But the person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly
reviles the Lord; that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he
has spurned the word of the Lord and violated His commandment, that person shall
be cut off-- he bears his guilt.

Also:

● Deut 27:26 . . Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by
carrying them out.

David committed premeditated adultery and murder, knowing full well that the law
of Moses stipulates the death penalty for both offenses (Ex 21:12-14, Lev 20:10).
If, as some insist, there is no forgiveness of any kind for deliberate sin, then David
would've been permanently cut off from God. But we know he wasn't because his
actions with Bathsheba and her husband were passed over, so to speak. (2Sam
12:13)

If there were no absolution whatsoever for intentional sins-- either under the old or
the new covenant --then just what advantage (if any) would Christianity have over
Judaism, and what advantage would the new covenant have over the old one if
neither Christianity nor Judaism offered absolution for intentional sins? There would
be no advantage whatsoever; and the Gospel wouldn't be good news, but rather,
bad news-- in point of fact, Christianity would be so redundant as to not even be
worth the bother.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 3:1-2 …Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your
thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess. He was faithful to
the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in all God's house.

* That's a shout-out from Num 12:5-7

Jesus claimed to be 100% faithful.

● John 8:29 . . He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I
do always those things that please Him.

Personally I would hesitate to give Moses a 10.0 because of that one act of his that
cost him a home in the promised land. (Num 20:12)

Jesus-- a.k.a. Y'shua --is an apostle per Heb 1:1-2 wherein is stated: In the past
God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various
ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us, by His son. The "heavenly calling"
then, pertains to the gospel per Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Judaism's high priesthood began with Aaron, of the tribe of Levi. Herein we'll be
examining Jesus, of the tribe of Judah; therefore: Jewish partakers of the gospel
should not be thinking of themselves as Orthodox-- they've become what's known
today as Messianic because a change of priesthood requires a change of ideology;
and the change is pretty significant because it pertains to the atonement systems
represented by the two priests.

This is now the second time in the letter to Hebrews that Jesus is referred to as a
high priest. The first was 2:17. The office of the high priest is extremely important
because they act as mediators between God and His people. In the old days, the
patriarchs acted as priests for their own clans up until the official Aaronic priesthood
was established. Aaron's priests aren't perfect however because they don't have a
permanent one-on-one access to God. In point of fact, they were allowed in the
inner sanctum beyond the veil but once a year, and that was only a ritual access to
God; i.e. He wasn't actually in there.

However-- and this needs to be emphasized --neither Moses nor Jesus appointed
themselves to shepherd God's people, nor was their appointments by a committee
or a church board. Each was hand-picked and appointed by God himself personally.

The Greek word translated house pertains to both a dwelling and to those who
dwell there, i.e. the family circle; for example Luke 11:17.

* As a people, the Jews are situated as God's firstborn son. (Ex 4:522-23)

● Heb 3:3-4 …Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor than Moses, just as
the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself. For every house is
built by someone, but God is the builder of everything.

We pointed out in the first chapter that the Son, as God's voice, created everything
related to the cosmos; which would of course include creating Moses: obviously
then he can't possibly be equal to Jesus any more than shingle nails can compare to
the roofers who hammer them in. The difference in status is beyond measure.
_

 

[Eleanor]

Throughout the first ten chapters of the letter to Hebrews, the Jewish author steadily builds a case for the unquestionable superiority of the new covenant, coupled with Jesus' Melchizedek-style priesthood and his personal sacrifice.

It is not a "Melchizedek style" priesthood, it is the Melchizedek priesthood.

This next reference to Moses' Law is the coup de grâce that drives in the final coffin nail on Jews who are relying upon the first covenant to earn themselves a share in Abraham's promises.

Heb 10:26-27 is not about the Mosaic law.
It is part of Heb 10:26-31, which is the fifth of five warnings in Hebrews to some persons (v.25) deserting the Christian assembly.

● Heb 10:26-27 . . If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Heb 10:26 begins with "for," connecting back to v. 25, regarding some who had given up meeting regularly with the assembly.
The sin referred to in v.26 is apostasy (v.29, 6:4-8). The OT background is Nu 15:27-31 where there was no sacrifice for intentional sin, they died in their sin under judgment of raging fire (2 Th 1:6-9) as an enemy of God.

It should go without saying that in a letter written to the author's fellow Jews, a "knowledge of the truth" would imply instruction in Moses' Law, which was considered truth for a good many years before the New Testament came along.

Actually, what "should go without saying" is that, this being a letter from a NT Christian to NT Christians, the "knowledge of the truth" referred to is not the Mosaic law, but knowledge of Christ's sacrifice for sin.The Law of Moses is presented simply as a gauge for the severity of the judgment for returning to Judaism and rejecting Christ, their only and only sacrifice for sin; for there is no other.

It's very easy, for Gentiles untrained in Old Testament Jewish law, to err by assuming the author meant there is no forgiveness of any kind for premeditated sins.

Seems it's even easier for Jews untrained in New Testament apostolic teaching to err by assuming the author here meant sinning against the Mosaic law, however, which curse NT believers are not under, for they are under grace (Ro 6:14, 3:24).

But that's a limitation of the old covenant which doesn't apply to the new.(Acts 13:38-40)

The reason "no forgiveness" is on the table is because no forgiveness is what apostasy would mean for these Hebrew Christians.

There are many crimes for which Moses Law permits neither ransom nor pardon; but the author didn't name those because not everybody commits them.

The author didn't mention them individually, because they are all mentioned by definition: "intentional sin."

However, everybody does eventually commit the kind of sin that he did name: premeditated sins. The Levitical system has absolutely no atonements in its catalogue for sins in that category.

Num 15:30-31 . . But the person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly reviles the Lord; that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has spurned the word of the Lord and violated His commandment, that person shall be cut off-- he bears his guilt.

And the corresponding unforgivable sin in the NT is apostasy, about which these new Hebrew Christians were being warned for the fifth time in this letter.

Also: Deut 27:26 . . Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out.

However, Heb 10:26-27 is not a warning regarding the Mosaic law. It is a warning regarding apostasy from Jesus Christ.

David committed premeditated adultery and murder, knowing full well that the law of Moses stipulates the death penalty for both offenses (Ex 21:12-14, Lev 20:10). If, as some insist, there is no forgiveness of any kind for deliberate sin, then David would've been permanently cut off from God. But we know he wasn't because his actions with Bathsheba and her husband were passed over, so to speak. (2 Sam 12:13)
If there were no absolution whatsoever for intentional sins-- either under the old or the new covenant --then just what advantage (if any) would Christianity have over Judaism,

It's not about "advantage," it's about God's purpose in Christ.

and what advantage would the new covenant have over the old one if neither Christianity nor Judaism offered absolution for intentional sins?

There is no advantage of the new covenant over the old one when it comes to rejection of Jesus Christ, which is what apostasy is.

There would be no advantage whatsoever; and the Gospel wouldn't be good news, but rather, bad news-- in point of fact, Christianity would be so redundant as to not even be worth the bother.

The gospel is not good news to Christ-rejectors, which these Hebrew Christians were in danger of becoming by apostasy.

 

[Eleanor]

See post #19 for response to following:

[my post #18 (Heb 2:16) of 7/18/23 being deleted and replaced with your former post #19 (Heb 3:1-2) of 7/18/23]

.
● Heb 3:1-2 …Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your
thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess. He was faithful to
the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in all God's house.

* That's a shout-out from Num 12:5-7

Jesus claimed to be 100% faithful.

● John 8:29 . . He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I
do always those things that please Him.

Personally I would hesitate to give Moses a 10.0 because of that one act of his that
cost him a home in the promised land. (Num 20:12)

Jesus-- a.k.a. Y'shua --is an apostle per Heb 1:1-2 wherein is stated: In the past
God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various
ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us, by His son. The "heavenly calling"
then, pertains to the gospel per Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Judaism's high priesthood began with Aaron, of the tribe of Levi. Herein we'll be
examining Jesus, of the tribe of Judah; therefore: Jewish partakers of the gospel
should not be thinking of themselves as Orthodox-- they've become what's known
today as Messianic because a change of priesthood requires a change of ideology;
and the change is pretty significant because it pertains to the atonement systems
represented by the two priests.

This is now the second time in the letter to Hebrews that Jesus is referred to as a
high priest. The first was 2:17. The office of the high priest is extremely important
because they act as mediators between God and His people. In the old days, the
patriarchs acted as priests for their own clans up until the official Aaronic priesthood
was established. Aaron's priests aren't perfect however because they don't have a
permanent one-on-one access to God. In point of fact, they were allowed in the
inner sanctum beyond the veil but once a year, and that was only a ritual access to
God; i.e. He wasn't actually in there.

However-- and this needs to be emphasized --neither Moses nor Jesus appointed
themselves to shepherd God's people, nor was their appointments by a committee
or a church board. Each was hand-picked and appointed by God himself personally.

The Greek word translated house pertains to both a dwelling and to those who
dwell there, i.e. the family circle; for example Luke 11:17.

* As a people, the Jews are situated as God's firstborn son. (Ex 4:522-23)

● Heb 3:3-4 …Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor than Moses, just as
the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself. For every house is
built by someone, but God is the builder of everything.

We pointed out in the first chapter that the Son, as God's voice, created everything
related to the cosmos; which would of course include creating Moses: obviously
then he can't possibly be equal to Jesus any more than shingle nails can compare to
the roofers who hammer them in. The difference in status is beyond measure.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:28-29 . . Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on
the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a
man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who
has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and
who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

The Greek word translated "sanctify" simply means to set something aside
specifically for God's use; viz: to consecrate. The life's blood of a beast sanctified
Aaron for priesthood duty under the terms and conditions of the first covenant (Lev
8:22-24). In contrast, Jesus was consecrated with his own life's blood.

Some feel that a Christian who sins willfully is trampling God's son under foot and
treating his blood as an unholy thing. No. That verse does not target Christians. It
targets Jews who hear the gospel and snort at it. Num 12:28-31 isn't a Christian
law; it's a Jewish law.

Hebrews 10:29 depicts a sin against love; a sin against the spirit of charity, against
kindness and good will-- a sin, not just against the milk of human kindness, but
against the milk of Divine kindness.

God subjected His own next of kin-- His one and only begotten son --to brutality,
beatings, whipping, ostracizing, indignity, humiliation, insults, and painful, lingering
death in order to ransom Jesus' countrymen from the wrath of God. Jews who blow
off that degree of kindness and generosity not only deserve to go to Hell, but Hell is
actually too good for them.

Today, God is offering Abraham's posterity a totally free, no strings attached,
redemption package for no other reason than that He is kind hearted and unselfish.
He has proven good intentions by the humiliation of His heir apparent for an
historically unthankful, stiff-necked people.

The average Jew today isn't declining Jesus because they aren't convinced. No,
they're declining him because they're obstinate. Thus, no matter how much
evidence you might produce, nor how reasonable your argument, nor how often
you threaten them, nor how severely you might punish them-- even to the extreme
of another terrible Holocaust --they won't give in.

It is an unthinkable slap in the face to demean, and to disregard, such a heroic act
of charity and good will. And if Jews were punished for violating Moses' laws, and
for ignoring the voices of their prophets; shouldn't something much worse be done
to them for snorting at the suffering of Almighty God's very heir apparent?

● Heb 10:30a . . For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"

Of all the peoples on this planet, Jews should know better than anyone that
Abraham's God is no one to trifle with.

● Heb 10:30b . . and again, "The Lord will judge his people."

There is a day coming when every Jew, from every corner of the globe, will be
rounded up and taken to one place for a special evaluation. The outcome of that
evaluation will determine which of the living Diaspora will be allowed to share in
Abraham's blessings. (Ezk 20:33-44)

● Heb 10:31 . . It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Heb 10:32-36 . . Remember those earlier days after you had received the light,
when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. Sometimes
you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side
by side with those who were so treated.

. . .You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of
your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting
possessions. So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded. You
need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive
what he has promised.

As it has been for many centuries; it is still very, very difficult for modern Jews to
be faithful, especially in Islamic countries. But think about it-- is there any earthly
persecution and/or hardship that can honestly compare to the permanent loss of a
share in Abraham's blessings?

● Heb 10:38-39 . . Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my
soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto
perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

"the just shall live by faith" is an excerpt from Habakkuk 2:4 whereby the Jews
were encouraged to retain their confidence in God even when their situation
appears hopeless for now. This world is passing; and all its brutish governments are
passing with it.

● Habakkuk 3:16-19 . .When I heard, my belly trembled; my lips quivered at the
voice: rottenness entered into my bones, and I trembled in myself, that I might
rest in the day of trouble: when he cometh up unto the people, he will invade them
with his troops.

. . . Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the
labor of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut
off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: Yet I will rejoice in The
Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation. The Lord God is my strength, and he will
make my feet like hinds' feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places.
_

 

[Eleanor]

Your post on Heb 2:16 has been revised, and substituted for my former post #16 on Heb 2:10, while
my post (formerly #18) in response to yours on Heb 2:16 has been deleted and replaced with yours on Heb 3:12,
all accomplished with some shuffling around of my former post #16 (Heb 2:10), making it out of sequence,
and leaving no response from me to Heb 2:16.

● Heb 10:28-29 . . Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

See Dt 17:2-7.
Heb 10:28-29 is part of the fifth of five warnings in this letter to some (v.25) Hebrew Christians who were considering deserting the Christian assembly, where the apostasy of these Hebrew Christians is presented as the grave sin that it is, meriting the grave punishment that it will receive.

How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

As the blood with which Moses sprinkled the people in ratification of the Mosaic Covenent (Ex 24:8), so is the blood of Christ (9:20, 13:20, Mt 26:28, Mk 14:24) the Son of God, in ratifying the New Covenant.

The Greek word translated "sanctify" simply means to set something aside specifically for God's use; viz: to consecrate.

Actually, "sanctify" (hagiazo)means "to set apart, from sin and to God." It's about holiness.
While "consecrate" (teleioo) is "to dedicate." It's about use.

Therefore, your statement above would mean "blood of the covenant which consecrated him to holiness" (sanctification).
Actually, that is not what the blood of the covenant did. As the divine Son of God, Jesus was holy before he shed the blood of the covenant.

The life's blood of a beast sanctified Aaron for priesthood duty under the terms and conditions of the first covenant (Lev 8:22-24). In contrast, Jesus was consecrated with his own life's blood.

That would mean that animal blood set apart Aaron for holiness, while Jesus' blood dedicated him for atonement.
Again, Jesus' blood neither "consecrated him to holiness," nor dedicated him for the atonement,
As the divine Son of God, Jesus' was holy (sanctified), and his blood was the atonement.

Some feel that a Christian who sins willfully is trampling God's son under foot and treating his blood as an unholy thing. No. That verse does not target Christians. It targets Jews who hear the gospel and snort at it. Num 12:28-31 isn't a Christian law; it's a Jewish law.
Hebrews 10:29 depicts a sin against love; a sin against the spirit of charity, against kindness and good will-- a sin, not just against the milk of human kindness, but against the milk of Divine kindness.

The text does not frame it in terms of a sin against love and kindness, but in terms of trashing the costly ransom that bought them, of trampling the Son of God underfoot, of treating the blood of covenant as an unholy thing, the very blood that bought and sanctified them, and of insulting the Spirit of grace.

God subjected His own next of kin-- His one and only begotten son --to brutality, beatings, whipping, ostracizing, indignity, humiliation, insults, and painful, lingering death in order to ransom Jesus' countrymen from the wrath of God.

Actually, Jesus' death was to ransom from the wrath of God all mankind who believed in and trusted on him for the remission of their sin.

Jews who blow off that degree of kindness and generosity not only deserve to go to Hell, but Hell is actually too good for them.

Today, God is offering Abraham's posterity a totally free, no strings attached, redemption package for no other reason than that He is kind hearted and unselfish.

Actually, God is doing so for the sake of his own purposes.

He has proven good intentions by the humiliation of His heir apparent for an historically unthankful, stiff-necked people.
The average Jew today isn't declining Jesus because they aren't convinced. No, they're declining him because they're obstinate. Thus, no matter how much evidence you might produce, nor how reasonable your argument, nor how often you threaten them, nor how severely you might punish them-- even to the extreme of another terrible Holocaust --they won't give in.

Which actually is the state of all those who reject Christ, not just the Jews.

It is an unthinkable slap in the face to demean, and to disregard, such a heroic act of charity and good will.

"Charity and good will" is a rather diminishing description of Jesus' act of redemption, as it also would be of a soldier's term in battle.
It is more fittingly called "the act of sacrificing one's own life."

And if Jews were punished for violating Moses' laws, and for ignoring the voices of their prophets; shouldn't something much worse be done to them for snorting at the suffering of Almighty God's very heir apparent?

Not just to them, but to all who do so.

● Heb 10:30a . . For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"

Of all the peoples on this planet, Jews should know better than anyone that Abraham's God is no one to trifle with.

● Heb 10:30b . . and again, "The Lord will judge his people."

There is a day coming when every Jew, from every corner of the globe, will be rounded up and taken to one place for a special evaluation. The outcome of that evaluation will determine which of the living Diaspora will be allowed to share in Abraham's blessings. (Ezk 20:33-44)

That interpretation of a prophetic riddle not spoken clearly (Nu 12:8) is in contradiction of NT apostolic teaching auhoritative to the church.

● It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

"For our God is a consuming fire." (Dt 4:24)

There goes the "God is love" hermeneutic.