A holy object is not eternally holy, it can be contaminated and made unclean.
If one raises objections or principles that cannot be crossed above scripture or the basics of the faith, then conversation becomes not possible.
A priest entered the Holy of Holys after purification but could always be contaminated by touching a dead person, by doing or saying the wrong things in the wrong way. Holiness was not guaranteed or continuous.
As this principle is clear in scripture, upon what foundation do you have to say Gods people cannot be rejected?
Israel was rejected, many people who were regarded as holy were judged and died.
Hearing these kind of responses is like holding up a bucket full of holes and saying it holds water, while clearly not.
There must be some point to this, other than just putting some kind of response, but for what end?
Save face, create an impression of an answer.
28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
29 How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?
Heb 10:28-29
I suppose this mountain of faith, loyalty to a position of security on a once off transaction is the impossible hurdle to cross. The reason the new testament is full of examples of why this is not true, is because people love the idea of a ticket of security, no matter what insanity they later commit. In a sense the cross is this place if we dwell there and go back to love and Gods heart, because then we are safe, wrapped in Him. But a disconnected event in time, is just a passing fad, a fling that has no significance, an aberration of the mind when someone was feeling weak.
