Dear 'sathyasnehi,' (Part 2/2)
On Hebrews 10:26-27:
Are you the same person who writes that contextual explanations are not needed? Are you the same person that context of a verse need not be considered? Now you write, “Reason for my insisting Hebrews 10:26-27 in this discussion is , it has a direct contextual relation with verses 38, 39.” What a change? Now you want contextual explanation, because you think that is for your advantage. You should not change your argument about contextual explanation from now onwards. What a “direct contextual relation?” It is similar to your argument on the security of Lot’s salvation.
You wrote that the “adversaries” in Hebrews 10:27 are unbelievers? How did you come to this conclusion? The Greek word for ‘unbeliever’ is απιστοs (APISTOS) and that is contrast with πιστοs (PISTOS), which means ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’ However, the Greek word for “adversaries’ is υπεναντιοs (HUPENANTIOUS = opponents). This word is a compound word from υπο (HUPO = under) and εναντιο (ENANTIOS = opposite). Therefore the adversaries are those who are ‘opposing under’ or those who pretend to be believers but who oppose the faith from their undercover position. The ‘adversaries’ in Hebrews 10:27 are not believers, but who pretend to be believers and oppose the truth that is to be believed. This is what the Holy Spirit inspired the author of the epistle to write. You should not change the inspired writings.
I have to write about another Greek word that is translated as “adversary’ when it was about Satan. That word Greek word is αντιδικοs (ANTIDIKOS = opponent). This Greek word is a compound word from αντι (ANTI = opposite) and δικη (DIKE = justice or right). It is used for Satan to tell us that he is the one who opposes the justice of God.
The ‘adversaries’ in Hebrews 10:27 are those who oppose the truth about a saved person being under the care and mediation of the “Great High Priest,” who is over the house of God. The saved have the right to approach with a right heart; have the full assurance of faith; sprinkled as to a heart from wicked conscience; washed in pure water; holding fast the confession of the hope without any waver. All these are possible not because of our works, but we received it as a promise from the one who is faithful – Lord Jesus Christ. These we read in Hebrews 10:19-23. You do not think that it is that important. If you consider that they are important, then you have to abandon your falsification of truth of the eternal security of our salvation. Hebrews 10:24-25 tell us about what we should do to one another. Then in Hebrews 10:27, we read about those who are among us pretending to be believers, but they are not; they are the adversaries. To them there is the certainty of a fearful expectation of judgment. That judgment will have the high heat that will devour those adversaries. Are you one of them? If you are, now is the time for you to turn away from your folly and come to know Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Savior, Lord, and God.
On 1 Timothy 6:21:
On 1 Timothy 6:21, the Greek word translated as “professing” in KJV is επαγγελλομενοι (EPAGGELLOMENOI = asserting). With this in mind, you should consider 1Timothy 6:21, in its context. (You should remember about your contextual argument before.) Then it will become clear that the author of this epistle is writing about some who made a profession of being holders of eternal life, but began to assert that which were wrong using various methods, including false science, and erred in the faith that they claim to be holding. Timothy was asked to avoid them. You come very close to denying the hope of the eternal security of salvation, though you occasionally admit that no one will lose their salvation. Your argument on Lot is an example.
On 1Timothy 1:19-20:
You wrote, “According to you a ‘drawer back’ is an unsaved person. When you want to say that Hymenaeus and Alexander, you do not call them drawer backs. So you say that they are believers. But what Scripture says is they have rejected faith and good conscience and thus damaged the ship which is essential for their salvation. Moreover we read in verse 20 that they were blaspheming the Truth like some as we see in Acts 19:9.” Could you quote the Scriptures that tell that the two people mentioned here ‘drew back’ from faith? Have you ever thought that according to the Word of God, a blasphemy may not be a ‘drawing back,’ as you tried to convey? If you disagree, I ask you to show from the Scriptures what you say that these two individuals should be categorized as “drawers back.” If you cannot, you are trying to change the Word of God that is established in heaven. If you have any desire to follow the Scriptures, please read Matthew 12:31. You will learn from the Lord Jesus Christ.
You wrote on 28 Sep 2011, “… Believers listed in Heb 11 were maintained their faith till the end amidst many odd things. Epistle writer gives the list as an example to follow them. After reading the whole list, we could read what said in the opening of Chapter 12. We must run with endurance to keep our faith. That is a strong advice we have to follow. Only when you are finishing your race you will be a hero, otherwise you will be zero.” This was the background for my question on Her-to-Zero theory. My question on Hero-to-Zero was, “You wrote about a ‘hero to zero’ theory. Could you tell me when a person will finish his race to be a ‘hero to zero?’ Please do not overlook this question on ‘hero to zero.’” What I wrote before was that all those who are listed in Hebrews 11 are heroes of faith. In your last reply you wrote the following, “Regarding this ‘hero to zero’ theory (is it a theory?), I will give here an example of a man who started a ‘hero’ but ended as zero. You have said that all the believers whose name we read in Hebrews 11 are Heros. But have you noticed that the name of King Solomon does not appear in that long list? If you closely analyse his life history, you can find the ‘hero to zero’ matter. I will assist you in your need of understanding, if necessary.” You correctly observed that Solomon’s name was not in that list in Hebrews 11. Therefore, you should conclude that he was not mentioned in Hebrews 11 as one of the heroes of faith. One who is not mentioned as a ‘hero of faith’ cannot be force-fitted to become a ‘zero of faith,’ as you did. Therefore, your example is not an appropriate one to establish your ‘hero-to-zero’ theory. It appears that your attempt is to establish your pet theory by comparing apples and oranges, and conclude that an apple is not an orange. We know that.
I asked you to start another thread, because you were mixing apostasy and blasphemy and confounding them to be the same. They are not. This is another attempt in the line of comparing apples and oranges. The Scripture is clear on that and you take the verses out-of-context. I am really fascinated with your ability to confound apostasy, blasphemy, drawing-back, and top-it-off with PINMAATRAM (= back only). You do all these even without the knowledge about their differences.
On Habakkuk and Ezekiel:
It is interesting to know that my self-appointed Malayalam teacher with PINMAATRAM (back only) is standing ready to feed me from Habakkuk on PINMAATRAM (back only). What is PINMAATRAM (back only)? I asked this before, but you just overlooked it. Your excuse about not knowing the verse from Habakkuk is mute, because that is the verse that is quoted in Hebrews 9:38-39 and you are trying to distort what is taught in Hebrews. My question was why you are using Ezekiel 18, where there is no mention of “faith.” If you are what you try to claim to be, then you would have referred to Habakkuk and not to Ezekiel. After that, you have a made-up word PINMAATRAM (back only). That is what is wrong.
Oh! My self-appointed Malayalam teacher! How wrong are you in your exposition of Ezekiel 18:24-25? This is what you wrote, “A person once decided to live by faith can reverse that decision. When Scripture says ‘But the just shall live by his faith,’ you must understand that it is an expectation from God about a Just and that Just should not go an Unjust as we see in Ezekiel. Try to understand Scripture more practically than theoretically.” In Ezekiel no one could read the expression, “But the just shall live by faith.” We read that in Habakkuk. Is that the reason why you did not quote the verses from Habakkuk? Let me quote Ezekiel 18:24-25, “And when the righteous turns from his righteousness and practices what is wrong, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked does, shall he live? None of his righteous acts which he has done shall be remembered; in his unfaithfulness which he has wrought, and in his sin which he has sinned, in them shall he die. And you say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear then, house of Israel. Is not my way equal? Are not your ways unequal?” We read about ‘righteousness’ and not ‘faith’ in these verses. Lord Jesus Christ said that He did not come to call righteous (Matthew 9:13). We read in 2 Peter 2:9, “The Lord Knows how to deliver the godly out of trials, and to keep the unjust to the day of judgment to be punished.” Delivering out of trials is not salvation in Christ. It is an escape from a situation in which men placed themselves. Habakkuk told us about faith and its role in the life of a just man for his salvation. Ezekiel tells us that a righteous need not be a saved person, but who lives by doing right and if he goes back and do that which is evil, then all the right things he did before will not be counted in favor of him. Ezekiel told us that doing right will not save any and it has nothing to do with salvation. Rather than jumping from one verse to another at the fancy of your mind, you should take time to read and study them in context.
Thank you for clarifying about your statement, “Not only in verse 39.” In the middle of Habakkuk when you wrote about verse 39, it was confusing. Contrary to your idea, I do not have to clarify your statements. Once again thank you for clarifying your statement.
On the Book of Nehemiah 9:33, 37:
In your recent reply to my question on Nehemiah 9:33, 37, your explanation was, “Mr.Koshy, I am not speaking here about the Salvation of either the Levites or the Israelites. Here I am comparing Godly Levites including themselves with while crying for the sins and wickedness of their own people, with Hebrew author including himself with the believers not only while encouraging as in verse 39,but also when he warns the same believers against willful sinning as in verse 26, 27.” You said that the godly Levites need not be saved, but they are just godly or righteous. These godly people identified with the rest of the children of Israel, because the godly were also children of Israel. They not only identified with the children of Israel, but also cried to God for forgiveness of the sin of the children of Israel. Did you read the pronouns “us,” “we,” and “our” in those verses? Did you read the pronoun “they” or “them” in those verses? Now let us look into Hebrews 9:38-39. Do we read about “we” in verse 39? Do we read about “them” in verse 39? What is the difference between these pronouns? Do the pronouns “we” and “them” stand for the same group of people or two contrasting groups? As you are my self-appointed Malayalam teacher with PINMAATRAM (back only), what about this verse in Malayalam? While waiting for you to search and report from Malayalam translation, let me tell you that the pronouns “we” and “them” stand for two different and distinct groups of people. Your effort to make Apostle Paul to be with the ‘drawers back’ failed miserably, as soon as your fingers did the walking over the keys.
Let me remind you that Nehemiah was one of the children of Israel and he was praying to Jehovah as a child of Israel? The godly people of the children of Israel always confessed before Jehovah that the sins of their fathers were their sins also and they asked for forgiveness. It has nothing to do with others who were with Nehemiah. They all came to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple, and they prayed together the same prayer.
On Eternal Security of the Eternal Salvation:
You wrote, “Can you tell me how your pet doctrine, ES has a best support in Old Testament?” Why do I have to provide support from the Old Testament, when there is the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament? Please answer. You should know that the eternal security of the eternal salvation is taught by Lord Jesus Christ. It is not a pet doctrine. It is a scriptural doctrine that was taught by the Son. One who makes a scriptural doctrine a ‘pet doctrine’ is the one who does not have any fear of God. The eternal security of the eternal salvation is a doctrine that was taught by the Son, when He came to save sinners and not the righteous. He even taught the eternal security of His eternal salvation, when He was on the cross dying in my place. If you are interested, I could tell you about it. I have repeatedly offered this, free of charge. My eternally secured salvation is also free to me from God, through the Son, by the works of the Holy Spirit. All you have to do is to ask for it, but you have to ask. You cannot attain it by works when the Son is judging the nations, at a future date. You have to come with Him, when He sets His feet on Mount Olive to rescue Israel and judge the nations.
By introducing various unrelated subjects, you tried to clutter this discussion on verses from Hebrews 10. The verses you brought into this discussion do not support your theories. On the other hand, they contradict your assertions. Lord Jesus Christ taught the eternal security of salvation that He provides.