Hebrew 10:26

  • Thread starter Thread starter sarahq
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sarahq

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

What does this mean???
 
By deliberately sinning you lose sanctifying grace (i.e eternal life). Without repentance (perfect contrition and/or Confession), that equals eternal hell for you. That’s what it means.
 
We have to understand all of Hebrews in light of who Paul is writing to - Jews who had accepted Christ as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy about the Messiah.

Remember always the covenant when you think of Jews in the Old Testament. Jews were covenant people, and participation in the covenant meant blessing for one who obeyed the rules and death for one who did not. Transgressing the rules of the covenant demanded death and sacrificing an animal was satisfaction for those who sinned and transgressed the rules of the covenant. That was how a Jew removed sin and became holy according to the Law of Moses - by laying his hands on an animal, transferring his sin to the animal and then sacrificing the animal.

And with this in mind, Paul argues to the Jews in Hebrews that the fact that sacrifice was ongoing was an indication of its ineffectiveness at removing sin. He goes on to argue that the fact that the High Priest had to go into the Holy of Holies, behind the curtain, to offer blood once each year, year after year, was proof that sacrifice was ineffective at removing sin.

Paul points to the fact that Jesus’ sacrifice was once as an indication of it’s effectiveness, even it’s perfection. Paul equates Jesus’ entry into Heaven and sitting at the right hand of God the Father with the High Priest’s entry behind the curtain into the Holy of Holies where God dwelt. In showing that both the High Priest of the Temple and Jesus Christ entered into the presence of God “behind the curtain”, Paul shows that Jesus too is a High Priest. He argues that Jesus’ entry into Heaven and into God’s presence was effective in the way the Levitical Priest’s entry into the Holy of Holies was not, and points to the fact that it is not ongoing but “Once for all” as an indication of it’s effectiveness.

And so Paul uses these arguments about the unending and imperfect sacrifice of the Old Covenant and the perfect and effective sacrifice of the New Covenant as a warning against sin. He is basically telling the Jews that there will only be one sacrifice - Jesus Christ - and that they had better get it right. Unlike the Old Testament where you could offer a sacrifice and have your sins removed repeatedly, that Jesus’ sacrifice was offered once, and so they had better not sin again.

Paul is a master Rabbi, a master teacher. The passage quoted is a teaching tool used by Paul for a Jewish audience. We must not take it to mean that we only get one chance in the confessional or that God will not forgive us if we sin again. Again, it was written to Jews, probably before the temple was destroyed in 70 AD and animal sacrifice stopped. But it is a stern warning about apostacy and sin. Paul uses the imagery of sacrifice as a teaching tool because the Jews would have understood that clearly.

-Tim-
 
At each Catholic mass, we make a sacrificial offering to god of the body and blood of Christ for the atonement of sins.
 
ChrAug

We do not “sacrifice” Jesus at each Mass as the dissenters claim - we (the Priest) ask God to turn the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus to receive the Eucharist- the Priest does not and neither do we ask for a sacrifice that was made once and for many that sins may be forgiven.
 
26

If we deliberately keep on sinning (keep offending God by not doing the will of the Father…which is to make ourselves perfect)

after we have received the knowledge of the truth (received the Gospel, have been baptized, confirmed, know the teachings of Christ…)

no sacrifice for sins is left, (Christ’s sacrifice for your sins is of no value…)
27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. (expect the wrath of God on the day of your judgement…confinement to eternal punishment…is not a saving fire…)

What does this mean???
 
ChrAug

We do not “sacrifice” Jesus at each Mass as the dissenters claim - we (the Priest) ask God to turn the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus to receive the Eucharist- the Priest does not and neither do we ask for a sacrifice that was made once and for many that sins may be forgiven.
From the Revised Roman Missal 2010:

Liturgy of the Eucharist

Invitation to Prayer

*Priest: “Pray my bretheren that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty father.”
People: "May the Lord accept the **sacrifice *at your hands, for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church."

shortly thereafter; From usccb.org


*Priest: “Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant; which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this in memory of me.”
*
.
 
What “sacrifice” is it since it is the Offering that is presented at the same instant as the wine and bread- is it not our sacrifice or tithe if you will rather than killing Jesus again as the dissenters do.
 
From the Revised Roman Missal 2010:

Liturgy of the Eucharist

Invitation to Prayer

Priest: "Pray my bretheren that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty father."
People: “May the Lord accept the **sacrifice **at your hands, for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.”

shortly thereafter; From usccb.org

Priest: "Take this, all of you, and drink from it: for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant; which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins
. Do this in memory of me."

.
What sacrifice is he referring to? my sacrifice and yours
 
What sacrifice is he referring to? my sacrifice and yours
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1330 The memorial of the Lord’s Passion and Resurrection.
The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church’s offering. The terms holy sacrifice of the Mass, “sacrifice of praise,” spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice are also used,[148] since it completes and surpasses all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant.

And this about the Mass and the Offertory, from EWN:

**359. Who is the principal priest in every Mass? **
The principal priest in every Mass is Jesus Christ, who offers to His heavenly Father, through the ministry of His ordained priest, His body and blood which were sacrificed on the cross.
(a) The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross. It is now in the New Law, the sacrifice that is acceptable to God.
**360. Why is the Mass the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross? **
The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross because in the Mass the victim is the same, and the principal priest is the same, Jesus Christ.
(a) Christ, though invisible, is the principal minister, offering Himself in the Mass. The priest is the visible and secondary minister, offering Christ in the Mass.
(b) The most important part of the Mass is the Consecration. In the Consecration bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ who then is really present on the altar. Through the priest He offers Himself to God in commemoration of His death on the cross.
(c) The other most important parts of the Mass are the Offertory and the Communion. In the Offertory the priest offers to God the bread and wine that will be changed into the body and blood of Christ. In the Communion the priest and the people receive the body and blood of Our Lord under the appearances of bread and wine.

The red part is what 'my sacrifice and yours" is.
 
Paul is a master Rabbi, a master teacher. The passage quoted is a teaching tool used by Paul for a Jewish audience. We must not take it to mean that we only get one chance in the confessional or that God will not forgive us if we sin again. Again, it was written to Jews, probably before the temple was destroyed in 70 AD and animal sacrifice stopped. But it is a stern warning about apostacy and sin. Paul uses the imagery of sacrifice as a teaching tool because the Jews would have understood that clearly.

-Tim-
Thank you Tim!!! This is exactly what I was worried about.

God bless!
 
Thank you Tim!!! This is exactly what I was worried about.

God bless!
What’s really interesting is to see how Paul uses the customs, language and circumstances of his audience as opportunities to teach.

***Although I am free in regard to all, I have made myself a slave to all so as to win over as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew *to win over Jews; to those under the law I became like one under the law—though I myself am not under the law—to win over those under the law. To those outside the law I became like one outside the law—though I am not outside God’s law but within the law of Christ—to win over those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, to win over the weak. I have become all things to all, to save at least some.All this I do for the sake of the gospel, so that I too may have a share in it. (1 Corinthians 9:19-23)

It is fascinating to see this in action. Paul meets each audience right where they are, becoming part of that audience and teaching from the perspective of that audience. A perfect example is his letter to the Phillipians.

Phillipi was a city named after Phillip the Great, father of Alexander the Great. Both were great military leaders, and the city was named after the elder because it was basically a Roman military retirement community. The people there, many of whom had a career in the Roman military, carried the skills and virtues they leaned in the Roman army into their civilian lives. They were orderly, loyal, obedient, fearless in the face of obstacles, worked as a team for the common good and endured hardship when it was for a worthy cause.

The Christians in the city of Phillipi Christianized these virtues, and Paul loved them. Paul visited Phillipi on all three of his missionary journeys. Knowing the military background, see if these passages don’t make sense:

…you who are all partners with me in grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. (Phillipians 1:7)

My eager expectation and hope is that I shall not be put to shame in any way, but that with all boldness, now as always, Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death. (Phillipians 1:20)


***Only, conduct yourselves in a way worthy *of the gospel of Christ, so that, whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear news of you, that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind struggling together for the faith of the gospel, not intimidated in any way by your opponents. This is proof to them of destruction, but of your salvation. And this is God’s doing. (Phillipians 1:27-28)

Paul speaks in military language here. He speak of a partnership of defense. He speaks of boldness in battle, stating that it does not matter if he lives or dies as long as the goal is accomplished, that of spreading the Gospel. Paul tells them to stand firm, to struggle together, to have one purpose and one mind, and not to be intimidated by opponents.Again, this is clear military language, something that those in a Roman military community would have understood and took to readily. These passages are only the first chapter! It goes on from there.

Paul does become all things to all people. He even tries to become a Greek, and begins speaking to the Greeks as if he was a philosopher in Acts 17. The Greeks loved to debate and hear of new ideas and such…

***They took him and led him to the Areopagus and said, “May we learn what this new teaching is that you speak of? For you bring some strange notions to our ears; we should like to know what these things mean.” Now all the Athenians as well as the foreigners residing there used their time for nothing else but telling or hearing something new. Then Paul stood up at the Areopagus and said: “You Athenians, I see that in every respect you are very religious.” *(Acts 17:19-22)

Paul goes on to talk about God saying, 'In him we live and move and have our being," (cf Acts 17:28). They listen to him, hear what he has to say, but then he blows it.

When they heard about resurrection of the dead, some began to scoff, but others said, “We should like to hear you on this some other time.” (Acts 17:32)

Paul took it too far. The Greeks were interested in what he had to say but he started talking about the ressurection of the dead and they were not ready for that. They were listening to what he had to say but when he talked about rising from the dead the Greeks were like, “Rising from the dead, huh? Yea… Catch ya tomorrow dude!” and they left. They thought he was crazy. I find this part of the story hilarious. The Greeks were like, “We’re out of here!”

But what we get from it is that Paul learned how to evangelize. He learned to “Become all things to all people” and to not take it too far. He leaned how to meet people right where they were, to speak to Jews as a Jew, to Romans as Romans, to Greeks as Greeks and to soldiers as a fellow soldier.

That’s why we have to always look at the audience to which Paul was writing, and know the context, who they were and how they lived and some of the background. That’s part of the literal sense of scripture. We have to get the literal sense of scripture first - what do the words on the page say - and part of getting the literal sense of scripture is knowing the context. Then we can go on the spiritual sense of scripture.

-Tim-
 
Here is St. Thomas Aquinas’ explanation
He says, therefore: For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin. This is explained in two ways: in one way according to a Gloss, which seems to make a distinction between willing sinners and sinning voluntarily, so that the willing sinner is one who is led by passion to consent to sin, about which he did not think beforehand; but the one who sins voluntarily does so from certain malice, because his will is so prone to sin that he yields at once: ‘They are all turned to their own course, as a horse rushing to battle’ (Jer. 8:6), and does not repent afterwards: ‘They are glad when they have done evil’ (Pr. 2:14). Therefore, they sin deliberately, i.e., continue in the will to sin. And he continues exaggeratingly, after receiving the knowledge of the truth: ‘It is better for them not to have known the way of justice, than after they have known it, to turn back’ (2 Pt 2:21), ‘there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins’, i.e., the sacrifice which Christ offered for the remission of sins does not profit them, because those who repent have their sins forgiven: ‘This is the blood of the new testament, which will be shed for you’ (Mt. 25:28), i.e., efficaciously, but of the wicked it is said: ‘I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength without cause and in vain’ (Is. 41:11); ‘The founder has melted in vain, for their wicked deeds are not consumed’ (Jer. 6:29).
But it is better to say, in keeping with the Apostle’s aim, that according to Augustine, free will has many states: because in the state outside of grace, before that state is repaired by grace, it is not in our power to sin and not to sin mortally: and this, because of the preconceived end and the habit inclining. This is true for a long time, but if one acts from premeditation, he can avoid this sin or that for a while. But after man has been repaired by grace, it is entirely within his power to avoid mortal sin and even venial sin in particular, but not altogether in general; and this is due to the help of sanctifying grace. Therefore, he says, for if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, i.e., after receiving grace, by which the knowledge of sin is possessed: because before the knowledge of sin, our sin is not imputed to us. But afterwards, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, because before the reparation, which was accomplished by Christ, that sacrifice which was awaited was left, but now His death is no longer awaited; so, too, after baptism, no further baptism is awaited.
 
for if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin.
I dont know how to reconcile this with the knowledge that we celebrate Eucharist as a sacrifice during present day Catholic mass.
 
I dont know how to reconcile this with the knowledge that we celebrate Eucharist as a sacrifice during present day Catholic mass.
Thanks Tantum for the info.

ChrAug- Your not alone. Sounds like re-sacrificing to me.
 
26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

What does this mean???
exactly what it says
if we know the truth, keep on sinning in spite of that knowledge, we have rejected the saving help of Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf so it cannot avail us, so our only expectation is judgment and hellfire.
 
I dont know how to reconcile this with the knowledge that we celebrate Eucharist as a sacrifice during present day Catholic mass.
Thanks Tantum for the info.

ChrAug- Your not alone. Sounds like re-sacrificing to me.
The problem is you are seeing God as limited to time, just as we are limited to time. God is outside of time. The sacrifice at mass is not a new sacrifice. Neither is the host simply a piece of bread. We are transported through time, or rather we are outside of time because we are in the presence of God. When the priest is standing at the altar, we are not just at that altar but at the Heavenly altar in the Revelation of John. The person standing at the altar is the priest, but the person doing the sacrifice at the altar is Christ.

The sacrifice we are being made present to is not a new one, not a re-sacrifice but the one single sacrifice at Calvary. We are uniting ‘our sacrifice’, that is our lives, our tithe, our bread and wine, our very hearts; to the one true sacrifice of Christ. We are being united with Christ that the oblation may be made pure, that we may offer up the one sacrifice that will continue throughout all time, the one that has been since the beginning before the world began, and will continue till the world ends… because it’s outside of time.
 
The problem is you are seeing God as limited to time, just as we are limited to time. God is outside of time. The sacrifice at mass is not a new sacrifice. Neither is the host simply a piece of bread. We are transported through time, or rather we are outside of time because we are in the presence of God. When the priest is standing at the altar, we are not just at that altar but at the Heavenly altar in the Revelation of John. The person standing at the altar is the priest, but the person doing the sacrifice at the altar is Christ.

Yes I heard Scott Hahn reference to Revelation, in my Catholic Bible it makes no reference that revelation has anything to do with the Mass. I will agree the sacrifice at the Mass is not a new sacrifice, but they sure make it sound like a re-sacrifice.

. And I will agree that we take Jesus spiritually at Mass, yes physically we go up and receive him (his spriit for renewal of our spirit).
 
My Catholic bible doesn’t specifically mention the trinity in the original text either, that doesn’t mean the text doesn’t imply the connection.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top