How do you handle Hebrews 7:25

[TheEditor]

@Homer,

Thanks!

@Robby,

I think I understood Doug's question, but I just disagree with the premise. I suppose viewing it in the way Doug couched it would dovetail nicely with the idea of an eternity of humans being born and being in need of an intercessor. It would also harmonize with the thought that we might need interceding in Heaven, should one choose to go down that path of thought. However, in either case, I think this is reading more into the passage than is warranted. A person can choose to highlight certain points in an analogy, without that analogy being followed all the way out. Many commentators for instance, fall into the trap of trying to figure out every feature of Jesus' parables, so that the main point is lost. In this case, I see the comparison between Jesus' role as High Priest versus the Levitcal priesthood as focusing on the superiority of Jesus' priesthood--that's all. I do not see the need to extrapolate from this passage that Jesus will continue to function as a priest into perpetuity.

As a side note, I could suggest that in one sense the priesthood continues forever, and that is that since he is High Priest of the New Covenant, and since the purpose of the New Covenant is to take out a people for God's name to be part of Abraham's seed, then the effects of the New Covenant extend forever, and so the priesthood would continue forever.

Regards, Brenden.

[dwilkins]

I agree that people try to make too much out of every detail of a parable. But, this isn't a parable. And, it seems to me that a core piece of the argument is the essential function of a priest. It pretty clearly says that the function of intercession continues (not that he himself continues due to his inherent eternal nature). The question remains: Why would Christ need to always live to intercede?

Doug

[robbyyoung]

The question remains: Why would Christ need to always live to intercede?

Hi Doug,

To answer your question, looking at (YLT), I perceive the conext to denote for the sake of those on earth, coming to salvation.

whence also he is able to save to the very end, those coming through him unto God -- ever living to make intercession for them.

The individuals mentioned here are coming, contrasted to those, by inferrence, who have already arrived, transcending the very end (a different group of individuals altogether). Therefore, He ever lives so that intercession can be made for those still in the process of coming to salvation.

Your thoughts?

[TheEditor]

Hi Doug,

I don't know. I suppose one could read it that way, but I don't see why. He saves to the uttermost (completely) and is there to make intersession continually for those that draw near to God, since he ever lives. The readers of the epistle could be heartened by the fact that their high priest would never die, unlike the Levitical priests. If I were to say, "The difference between plastic and rubber is that plastic can barely stretch and rubber can stretch 25 feet", I suppose the hearer could ask "Why would you ever need it to stretch 25 feet?" But it would miss the point.

I'm not sure why the writer of Hebrews would throw in an assumed idea without explaining what it means. Shouldn't the audience have been practically helped in some way by it? What do you think it means? Do you think as Robby suggested earlier that we will need intercession in Heaven? I am curious.

Regards, Brenden.

[dwilkins]

I think it's possible that Robby is correct about ongoing forgiveness of sins for new converts into the indefinite future. However, I think another intriguing possibility (that is not necessarily contradictory) is that it has to do with ongoing forgiveness of sins of people on earth via process familiar to them under a regular priestly role. One of the problems with regular atonement theory is that it turns the cross into an instantaneous transaction that is absolutely complete and can't be undone. So, in Reformed PSA you have limited atonement in order to keep people who don't believe from having their sins forgiven. In OSAS PSA via Dallas Theological Seminary and Liberty University (and possibly Moody) all sins of all people are forgiven. In order to keep from being universalist, they say that good works don't result in adequate righteousness, and thus final condemnation comes from failure to attain the righteousness of God. This allows them to have universal atonement, but limited salvation. However, the logical result of this is that people who are saved at one point remain saved no matter what sins they commit since all people have all of their sins forgiven, and a single application of the righteousness of God to our account is adequate to attain salvation.

What I think might be behind the idea of continually living to apply intercession for sin is a more dynamic system for forgiving sin then regular PSA. It's possible that what is meant is that on the cross Jesus won the right to forgive whatever sins he wants, as opposed to de facto forgiveness of sins outside of time. In this system, he can forgive sin as a thinking priest going forward indefinitely, but the transaction is never described outside of time, so the imagery has Jesus deciding in each moment which sins he chooses to forgive. This would allow for eternal security if your definition of the attribute of God is that he's absolutely forgiving. But, it would allow for conditional security if you think that he might change his mind depending on our actions. It could also accommodate perseverance of the saints under TULIP for the same reasons.

I'm not proposing this as a mature thought, just something I've been considering lately.

Doug

[robbyyoung]

I think another intriguing possibility (that is not necessarily contradictory) is that it has to do with ongoing forgiveness of sins of people on earth via process familiar to them under a regular priestly role.

Hi Doug,

Christ role as intercessor and mediator should transcend christianity, don't you think? Pre and Post 70 A.D., many have been judged by God all over the globe without any knowledge of christianity, as per Romans 2:14-16. The significance of 70 A.D. was to end that Old Covenant, finally judging and rewarding those under that covenant to once and for all establish a New Covenant, spiritual in its essence. Nothing has changed for the gentile nations who are being judged as per Romans 2:14-16, for there are still people in the world who have never heard of christianity, living and dying daily and judged by God accordingly. The 1st Century was unique in many ways, the true gentiles (unaffiliated with Israel and Judah) was extremely blessed to be grafted in and given a crash course concerning God's relationship with them, and consequently lived to see it's end and a new beginning.

All these different theories about atonement must account for how God have always judged the world divorced from any knowledge of the Hebrew God, for nothing has really changed for those ignorant of the God of the bible. What are your thoughts concerning this?

God Bless.

[dwilkins]

Most of the world is being re-evangelized for the second or third time. Immediately after the generation of the Apostles Christianity spread very rapidly. By about 300AD it was in Ireland, the Caspian sea region, the tip of Africa and India, and the east coast of China. It was driven out of these areas more than once in the last 2,000 years, only to return. So, I reject the basic perspective that says there are large swaths of the world that have never been evangelized, though for individual people in some of them that might be true.

But, that doesn't solve the problem for the individual in each of these areas. Clearly, there are individuals who die never having been evangelized. I think the presents a major problem for the eternal conscious torment scheme of "hell". In my mind, annihilation solves this problem. People are punished for violating their own consciences, but that's it. Restorationist Universalism, where people are punished for what they've done until they repent at which point they enter heaven, would do so as well, though I'm not persuaded by this position. It seems to me that the crisis in this situation is in personal eschatology (your view on "hell"), not in how atonement works.

Doug

[steve7150]

Most of the world is being re-evangelized for the second or third time. Immediately after the generation of the Apostles Christianity spread very rapidly. By about 300AD it was in Ireland, the Caspian sea region, the tip of Africa and India, and the east coast of China. It was driven out of these areas more than once in the last 2,000 years, only to return. So, I reject the basic perspective that says there are large swaths of the world that have never been evangelized, though for individual people in some of them that might be true.






I think it s/b considered that at Jesus time the population of the world may have been 100 million and by 300AD perhaps 200 million. Today it's 7 billion and projected toward 10 billion , so it terms of numbers of people in totality only a very tiny percentage were evangelized by 300AD. Also without mass media even if it were in various regions of the world , what proportion of the actual population really heard the gospel? Also much more people have lived after 1600AD then before and that was just the infancy of mass communication with the printing press being invented with movable type.
When i think of the world i think of the population and of the geographic areas both.

[robbyyoung]

Christ role as intercessor and mediator should transcend christianity, don't you think? Pre and Post 70 A.D., many have been judged by God all over the globe without any knowledge of christianity, as per Romans 2:14-16. The significance of 70 A.D. was to end that Old Covenant, finally judging and rewarding those under that covenant to once and for all establish a New Covenant, spiritual in its essence. Nothing has changed for the gentile nations who are being judged as per Romans 2:14-16, for there are still people in the world who have never heard of christianity, living and dying daily and judged by God accordingly. The 1st Century was unique in many ways, the true gentiles (unaffiliated with Israel and Judah) was extremely blessed to be grafted in and given a crash course concerning God's relationship with them, and consequently lived to see it's end and a new beginning.

All these different theories about atonement must account for how God have always judged the world divorced from any knowledge of the Hebrew God, for nothing has really changed for those ignorant of the God of the bible. What are your thoughts concerning this?

It seems to me that the crisis in this situation is in personal eschatology (your view on "hell"), not in how atonement works.

Hi Doug, thanks for your reply but I was really trying to focus on the power of the "atonement", as it pertains to ALL OTHERS outside Judaism & Christianity, without a personal knowledge of the God of the bible, and this, since the beginning of mankind. The atonement, in lieu of God simply destroying everyone who didn't get the opportunity to know of Him, is far reaching, for Yeshua was the lamb slain before the foundation of the world, and Romans 2:14:16 accounts for their acceptance by God, don't you think? So my inquiry is to what changed for this class of individuals? It seems to me, nothing. Therefore, 70 A.D. was primarily God settling His dealings with Israel & Judah, as a blessed few 'true gentiles' experienced this consummation. God's Kingdom is now above all spiritual dominion without being contested. The influence of His Word was left behind to fill the earth, however, God's judgments remain constant towards humanity, for both the knowledgeable and unknowledgeable of the God of the bible. I believe this to be a great comfort, for God have all along been merciful and just to those whose heart is set against evil. The Christian must respond to the accusations made against our faith about those who never heard of OUR God, and how they are judged. I think Rom 2 helps us give a reasonable answer.

God Bless.

[dwilkins]

I don't think the work of the cross has any meaning to people who don't embrace it. Believers of all generations benefit from it. If Eternal Conscious Torment is true, this means the vast majority of people living in the ancient world will be in the Lake of Fire forever. Theoretically, this proportion would change over time, but there will always be unbelievers in significant numbers, so those modern and future unbelievers will likewise burn permanently. If Annihilation is true, this means that all unbelievers regardless of the era will be punished commensurate with their decisions during their lives to violate their consciences before being snuffed out. If Restorationist Universalism is true then in the afterlife all unbelievers will be punished until they repent, at which point they are restored to relationship with God. I can't speak for other schemes of personal eschatology that I'm not familiar with, but I don't see the atonement or intercession by Christ applying to anyone who doesn't repent towards him, personally.

Doug