Sola Scriptura and OSAS...again

You're still ignoring the context of my point.

Again, the point is that the sacrifices of the Law could not make complete those who either offered them or those who they were offered for, but the Sacrifice of Christ make those sanctified in completion in regards to remission of sins forever.

The fact that not everyone will be saved by that Sacrifice is not relevant to the context of Hebrews 9 or 10, it is a contrast of what the Law did (and didn't do) and what Christ has done.


God bless.

 

Correct. And what we have to understand is that the sacrifices of the Law, and those that went before (sacrifice began in the Garden, and is seen practiced by Abel, Noah, Abraham, Job, and Jacob, before the Law was established), did bring about atonement and remission of sins, but...

...not in an eternal context.

Only Christ did that, and it was not applied until He actually did it:


Hebrews 9:12-15
King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


I think the primary problem is that your doctrine demands equating those things which are distinct, such as in the case of the use of the term "glory," and you are not giving attention to what Chapter 10 is actually stating. Just read Chs. 9-10, and see the clarification the Writer gives as to the temporal and earthly nature of the Law and those practices associated with it.

Here is an example of the Sacrifice of Christ distinguished from all other sacrifice:


Hebrews 12:24
King James Version (KJV)

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


This is one of the few times I know of when the Writer steps outside of an exclusively Hebrew context, where he makes it clear that Christ's death is better than those prior. I view this as looking at Abel's sacrifice...


Genesis 4
King James Version (KJV)

3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.

4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:


...not his death. This is, I believe, in order to show Christ's Sacrifice as superior to all sacrifice, going back to the very beginning of man's existence.

Again, this...


Hebrews 10:14
King James Version (KJV)

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


...is the most indisputable statement of Eternal Security in all of Scripture. That is my opinion of course, but no-one can deny what it states.

Ignore it, as you have done, but deny it...no.




God bless.

 

On the contrary, I see nothing that states "Elijah never died."

No man went to Heaven prior to the Cross. How then was Elijah in Heaven?

His spirit, yes. This is the same principle as Christ teaching Abraham was still "alive," lol.

Where is your Scripture that states "Elijah never died?"

Note the footnote:


Luke 9:29-31
New American Standard Bible (NASB)

29 And while He was praying, the appearance of His face became different, and His clothing became white and [a]gleaming. 30 And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah, 31 who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.
Footnotes:

Luke 9:29 Lit flashing like lightning
Luke 9:31 Or splendor


Come on Bob, present some Scripture, I can't keep repeating the same points for you to address. Someone is going to accuse me of spamming...




God bless.

 

And that is in the Bible...where?

All I see is a reference of a dispute over the body, not the person...of Moses.

He died.


God bless.

 

Here...


Luke 24:36-39
King James Version (KJV)

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


...the disciples are still unbelieving in His Resurrection. Christ affirms man's two-part make-up, body and spirit, and comforts them that He is not a spirit...and still dead. It is not "Christ arguing in favor of bodily resurrection," it is arguing that He has risen from the dead.

See the disciples unbelief rebuked by Christ here...


Mark 16:9-14
King James Version (KJV)

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.


Many understood and believed the resurrection of the dead as taught in the Old Testament. Those who did not, namely the Sadducees (the original annihilationists)...

...stood out.

Great, but as I keep requesting, where is your Scripture? Where does it say that "Elijah never died?"

And Not sure how you get I "do not agree with the bodily resurrection of Christ and the saints." I spend quite a bit of time dealing with that issue, lol. It's just when it happens that we are disagree about.

Only Christ has been glorified at this point, and the Church is the next to be glorified in the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

Then the Two Witnesses, then the Tribulation martyrs, then the believing of the Millennial Kingdom.

Seems pretty simple if we maintain a proper timeline.

Gotta go, but enjoying it.


God bless.

 

Here is what I said:

This is in response to...

I did not say "Christ tells us nothing about the bodily resurrected form of Christ."

Address what I did say, please. The context has Christ showing the disciples...He is not still dead, but risen from the Grave as He said He would.

He is not "arguing in favor of bodily resurrection," which would only be relevant if those addressed were Sadducees.

And as I said, the disciples were believers of the resurrection of the dead, they simply didn't believe Christ had risen from the dead. They had, as many people do, a view that there would be one general resurrection of the dead. That men would be glorified when resurrected was...

...still Mystery. That had not been revealed to them yet, and would not be until Paul revealed it to men.

Yes, that is what I said. Because that is what it is. And keep in mind it is to address your view that glorification was taking place prior to the Cross. not addressing resurrection in general.. The point was specific, and you have left the field.

Please bring the ball back.

Also something I did not say, nor imply.

That Christ's glorification is spiritual is a given.


God bless.

 

That is not what I was asking for a location in the Bible, lol.

Actually I did not, and I still haven't received an answer to my question.

What I want to know the location in Scripture for is this:

Again, where is "...the bodily assumption of Moses into heaven" found in Scripture.

I do not view apocryphal books as Scripture, nor any writing that is outside of the 66 Book Canon. While I can understand why some people might give them credibility, what I also see is that those who do almost always teach doctrines that conflict with Scripture.

Just as the doctrine that glorification was taking place before the Cross, Resurrection, Return of Christ to Heaven, Reconciliation, Eternal Redemption, and...

...the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

If God meant for us to know what happened to Moses body after he died...He would have let us know.

It is probably a matter of the Angel taking the carcass of Moses so Israel would not create a shrine and start worshiping Moses.

And...?

Well, being so close to California we would expect them to embrace heretical views.

Great, but I don't have to "think" that Paul taught that Christ was the Firstborn and firstfruits from the Dead. I can know, because it is taught in Scripture, and we don't have to throw speculation into our understanding, which makes one without understanding...because they are guessing, or hoping what they believe is true.

The sequential context is very clear:


1 Corinthians 15:22-23
King James Version (KJV)

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.


All means all. And they must be in Christ to be made alive. The Son of God came from Heaven to bestow Life, and it was not bestowed before men began being reconciled to God on an eternal basis. No man was indwelt eternally by God prior to Pentecost.

Guesswork. We know when Holy Scripture was written, and can trust it, and can make it part of a sound Theology.

Right, not a seance, because God is the God of the living, and that is the context of Moses' and Elijah's state on the Mount. They are dead physically, but alive because their spirits still exist. No discussion that God is involved in is a seance, because He is the God of the living.


God bless.