WHAT IS MEANT IN HEBREWS SAYING THERE IS NO MORE SACRIFICE FOR SINS?

[Doug]

Where does it say this in scripture? It is sheer folly to think Jesus wouldn't give them commands relevant to the present age.

It dosent say this in scripture it is only my commentary to consider the kingdom was at hand and if fulfilled it would be in the present however the kingdom was postponed by the dispensation of grace

 

[Doug]

Peter's message was redemption through the blood of Jesus just as Paul's was:

1 Pe 1:18-19
8 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Now you are going to another verse other than what you cited before from Galatians and Ephesians Here Peter does preach the blood of Christ, but it was not preached for anyone else, but only for the remission of sins committed by Israel under the first testament (Hebrews 9:15)

 

[Doug]

Paul did as well. It's part of the gospel:

Ac 28:31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

Acts is not comprehensive it is about the transition between the church headed by Peter and the body of Christ All that Paul said isnt recorded in Acts Paul preached the heavenly kingdom I wouldnt put to much weight on Acts for doctrine we should look to what Paul wrote in his epistles to gain understanding

 

[ProverbsInPink]

Proverbs
I read the article you posted.
I don't seem to be able to find any mention of the Temple being a part of the New Covenant.
If it's not too much to ask...
could you copy and paste where it states this?
Thanks.


Here's the link you posted:

Home - Evangelical Theological Society

Welcome The Evangelical Theological Society is a professional academic society of biblical and theological scholars, pastors, and students. We serve Jesus Christ and his church by fostering conservative, biblical scholarship. We seek to accomplish this goal through our Annual Meeting, regional...

etsjets.org

Against many traditional understandings of Hebrews 7–10 like this, my proposed article will offer an exposition of this passage from a more originalist perspective. First, the proposed article would survey Jewish literature like Targum Jonathan on Ezekiel 43:10–11, the Temple Scroll (11Q19), 1 Enoch 90, Wisdom of Solomon 9:8, 4 Ezra 10:25–27, and 2 Baruch 6:3–9 to determine whether the author of Hebrews, as a Messianic follower of the Messiah in the first century, had Ezekiel’s temple in mind when he wrote of “the throne of the majesty in the heavens . . . the true tabernacle” (Heb 8:1–2). Second, if the author of Hebrews did have Ezekiel’s temple in mind in Hebrews 7–10, then the proposed article will attempt to demonstrate that this passage is much more “pro-nomian” than traditionally understood, as would be expected for the Jewish sensibilities of the earliest disciples of the Messiah. Third, the article will attempt to show that Hebrews 7–10 is not arguing to abrogate the entire Mosaic law for its original recipients but is explaining how the permanent abrogation of the original Yom Kippur rite of Leviticus 16 in Ezekiel’s temple aligns with the person and work of the Messiah. Fourth, the proposed article will attempt to prove that although Hebrews 7–10 is heavily critical of the Aaronic priesthood, it does not in fact call for its permanent abrogation, in contradiction to Ezekiel’s temple, but merely argues for the legitimacy and superiority of the Messiah’s non-Aaronic high-priestly ministry in the future Messianic kingdom.

 

[Doug]

Yes, before he was converted. After conversion he joined them in the temple vows:

Ac 21:23-24
Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

Paul did this so as not to give offence to the Jews who kept the law especially since they accused him of teaching not to keep the law

You say Pul persecuted the body of Christ before conversion where does scripture talk about the body of Christ before Acts 9 and Paul's conversion the body of Christ reveals inheritance in the heavenly places where does Peter teach this to the church

 

[David in NJ]

Paul did this so as not to give offence to the Jews who kept the law especially since they accused him of teaching not to keep the law

You say Pul persecuted the body of Christ before conversion where does scripture talk about the body of Christ before Acts 9 and Paul's conversion the body of Christ reveals inheritance in the heavenly places where does Peter teach this to the church

Doug,
JESUS said to Saul: "Saul Saul, why are you persecuting ME(Body of Christ)"

You are trapped in the lies of "dispensationalism" and the LORD will leave you there unless you turn to HIM.
Dispensationlists are modern day Saul's that attack the Truth and twist it.


Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

3As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”

 

[shepherdsword]

Acts is not comprehensive it is about the transition between the church headed by Peter and the body of Christ All that Paul said isnt recorded in Acts Paul preached the heavenly kingdom I wouldnt put to much weight on Acts for doctrine what did Paul write in his epistles to gain understanding

Acts is about the acts of the apostles after Christ's resurrection. Peter was never the head of any church as we see James presiding over the apostolic council in Acts 15. However, he did admit that Paul's revelation was hard to understand thus proving he was not the head of the church:

2 Pe 3:15-16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Here Paul rebukes Peter.

Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

So much for Peter being the head of the church

 

[Muna]

Doug,
JESUS said to Saul: "Saul Saul, why are you persecuting ME(Body of Christ)"

You are trapped in the lies of "dispensationalism" and the LORD will leave you there unless you turn to HIM.
Dispensationlists are modern day Saul's that attack the Truth and twist it.


Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

3As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”

True Jesus also said,

Matt 45:40 Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

 

[shepherdsword]

Paul did this so as not to give offence to the Jews who kept the law especially since they accused him of teaching not to keep the law

You say Pul persecuted the body of Christ before conversion where does scripture talk about the body of Christ before Acts 9

An argument from silence is a fallacy of logic. The church existed before Acts 9. What Paul did later was show by revelation that it was also the body of Christ.

and Paul's conversion the body of Christ reveals inheritance in the heavenly places where does Peter teach this to the church

Peter didn't have to teach it for it to be a reality. Once again you are arguing from silence. A fallacy.

 

[GodsGrace]

I get the idea he is subscribing to the ultra-dispensationists teachings of men like Les Feldick. They teach that there are two different gospels and two different churches. One is the "gospel of the kingdom" given strictly to Jews during Jesus' earthly ministry and the other is the "gospel of grace" given to the gentiles. The entire concept is built on a logical fallacy. They believe that since the gospel of the kingdom didn't mention the crucifixion and resurrection it cannot be the same as the gospel of grace.

Don't know anything about dispensationalism.
Mainline Christianity is so wonderful !

Yes sir. There is only one church and one teaching and Jesus and Paul stated that we are to be united.
Jesus sent out the Apostles to teach all nations.
He did NOT state which gospel since there is only one.

Jesus taught BOTH the Kingdom of God on earth - which would be the teachings of Jesus as to how to live so that others
can also benefit and to create a better world. This was definitely His intention.
And
He taught that we are to follow Him and trust IN HIM.

So we have both the Kingdom and grace.
To be taught to ALL NATIONS.


John 17:20-21
20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message,
21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.


1 Corinthians 1:10
10 I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought.

 

[GodsGrace]

No I wasnt talking about there being a building I say there are three churches in scripture

I dont know if you saw this post so here it is if you are interested

ARE THEIR TWO CHURCHES OR JUST ONE?

Oh.

So what I'd need to know is HOW Peter and Paul are disagreeing...
IF this is what you're saying.


Jesus taught what Paul taught.
Paul taught what Peter taught.
All the Apostles taugth the same.

Paul made this very clear:

1 Corinthians 3:3-4
3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
4 For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?

Paul was telling the Corinthians that there is to be no division among them.

 

[GodsGrace]

Against many traditional understandings of Hebrews 7–10 like this, my proposed article will offer an exposition of this passage from a more originalist perspective. First, the proposed article would survey Jewish literature like Targum Jonathan on Ezekiel 43:10–11, the Temple Scroll (11Q19), 1 Enoch 90, Wisdom of Solomon 9:8, 4 Ezra 10:25–27, and 2 Baruch 6:3–9 to determine whether the author of Hebrews, as a Messianic follower of the Messiah in the first century, had Ezekiel’s temple in mind when he wrote of “the throne of the majesty in the heavens . . . the true tabernacle” (Heb 8:1–2). Second, if the author of Hebrews did have Ezekiel’s temple in mind in Hebrews 7–10, then the proposed article will attempt to demonstrate that this passage is much more “pro-nomian” than traditionally understood, as would be expected for the Jewish sensibilities of the earliest disciples of the Messiah. Third, the article will attempt to show that Hebrews 7–10 is not arguing to abrogate the entire Mosaic law for its original recipients but is explaining how the permanent abrogation of the original Yom Kippur rite of Leviticus 16 in Ezekiel’s temple aligns with the person and work of the Messiah. Fourth, the proposed article will attempt to prove that although Hebrews 7–10 is heavily critical of the Aaronic priesthood, it does not in fact call for its permanent abrogation, in contradiction to Ezekiel’s temple, but merely argues for the legitimacy and superiority of the Messiah’s non-Aaronic high-priestly ministry in the future Messianic kingdom.

Proverbs,,,you're just repeating what is written in the article.

I wanted a specific sentence that states that the Temple must be rebuilt in order to accomodate the New Covenant.

No temple is necessary in the New Covenant.

WE are the new temple.
The temple has become spiritual.
No more sacrifices will be necessary - ever.

If this were true, there would be no difference between the Mosaic and the New Covenant.
The one major difference is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit....
The absence of sacrifice since Jesus was the LAST sacrifice and no more will be necessary.

The Temple was necessary to make sacrifices...
it will no longer be needed under the New Covenant.


Hebrews 10:10-14
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily * ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.
14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.



Hebrews 9:24-26
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

 

[Doug]

Doug,
JESUS said to Saul: "Saul Saul, why are you persecuting ME(Body of Christ)"

You are trapped in the lies of "dispensationalism" and the LORD will leave you there unless you turn to HIM.
Dispensationlists are modern day Saul's that attack the Truth and twist it.


Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

3As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”

The church in Jerusalem headed by Peter is also in Christ. To say it is the body of Christ is without support. Only Paul spaks about it's members being in his body Paul wasnt converted until Acts9 so the body couldnt have been operating before that

 

[Doug]

Acts is about the acts of the apostles after Christ's resurrection. Peter was never the head of any church as we see James presiding over the apostolic council in Acts 15. However, he did admit that Paul's revelation was hard to understand thus proving he was not the head of the church:

2 Pe 3:15-16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Here Paul rebukes Peter.

Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

So much for Peter being the head of the church

The church before the body of Christ isnt really given a name to identify it easily when writing. Its called the church in Jereusalem the little flock the church of God who would know what is being referred to? I decided to identify by using the term the church headed by Peter to be easily recognized and distinguished
Peter was prominent throughout the gospels and Acts..........he did most of the preaching

 

[David in NJ]

The church in Jerusalem headed by Peter is also in Christ. To say it is the body of Christ is without support. Only Paul spaks about it's members being in his body Paul wasnt converted until Acts9 so the body couldnt have been operating before that

Why do you reject the words of Christ = "Saul Saul, why do you persecute ME"

@Truly also SEES this = Matt 45:40 Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me.

FYI = To deny Christ's words is the sin of unbelief

 

[Doug]

An argument from silence is a fallacy of logic. The church existed before Acts 9. What Paul did later was show by revelation that it was also the body of Christ.


Peter didn't have to teach it for it to be a reality. Once again you are arguing from silence. A fallacy.

May I say that you are saying an argument of silence is a fallacy of logic while arguing from silence

It's ok for you to argue from silence when you say Peter didn't have to teach the church members that they were the body for them, and us, to know it.

If you are going to claim there is just one church and that's the body of Christ, you have to have some scripture from Jesus or the twelve saying it. Paul does teach and say that it's members are the body of Christ. If something isn't said, how can we know of it?

 

[David in NJ]

Proverbs,,,you're just repeating what is written in the article.

I wanted a specific sentence that states that the Temple must be rebuilt in order to accomodate the New Covenant.

No temple is necessary in the New Covenant.

WE are the new temple.
The temple has become spiritual.
No more sacrifices will be necessary - ever.

If this were true, there would be no difference between the Mosaic and the New Covenant.
The one major difference is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit....
The absence of sacrifice since Jesus was the LAST sacrifice and no more will be necessary.

The Temple was necessary to make sacrifices...
it will no longer be needed under the New Covenant.


Hebrews 10:10-14
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily * ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.
14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.



Hebrews 9:24-26
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

No man-made temple on earth is necessary.

As you stated, Christ is the Temple of God and we are Living Stones built unto God in Christ = the Temple of God

1Therefore, laying aside all malice, all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and all evil speaking, 2as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow [a]thereby, 3if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
4Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

 

[Behold]

I can appreciate your argument

I dont see the body of Christ being formed before Acts 9

Paul's verse says that "if you have not the Spirit of God (in you) then you are none of Gods". (Romans 8)

So, The 3000 that were born again in Acts 2.........are the "body of Christ", as they received God's Spirit.
Before this, you have 11 apostles who received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22, who became a part of the Body of Christ.

 

[shepherdsword]

The church before the body of Christ isnt really given a name to identify it easily when writing. Its called the church in Jereusalem the little flock the church of God who would know what is being referred to? I decided to identify by using the term the church headed by Peter to be easily recognized and distinguished
Peter was prominent throughout the gospels and Acts..........he did most of the preaching

Yet we see James that headed the apostolic council:

Ac 15:13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:

 

[Doug]

So what I'd need to know is HOW Peter and Paul are disagreeing...
IF this is what you're saying.


Jesus taught what Paul taught.
Paul taught what Peter taught.
All the Apostles taugth the same.

Peter and Paul didnt disagree they both were sent by Christ and had different ministries and preached and taught differently

Here is my post to explain the differences

SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PETER AND PAUL​