Hebrews and Warnings

In preaching through Hebrews I am constantly confronted (Chapters 2,3,6 & 10) with the idea that these Jewish believers are actually true “brethren” and not just some folks pretending to be Christians. These are actual members of the household. Thus, this makes Hebrews’ warning much more severe and real. The warnings are not merely empty threats.

About Uri Brito

I am the Pastor of Providence Church (CREC) in Pensacola, Fl.
This entry was posted in Hebrews, Theological Thoughts. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Hebrews and Warnings

  1. J.Kru says:

    You’ll have to clarify “true ‘bretheren’ “. Is there a difference between them and someone who has truly repented and is indwelt by Holy Spirit?

  2. Uri Brito says:

    It appears to me that the Bible does not make explicitly clear how the Spirit works in those who will apostatize and those who will persevere, except to say that he perseveres those who will not apostatize 🙂

    My point is that Hebrews 6 does not identify possible covenant members, but true brethren, true covenant members who once were united to the vine, but now have been cut off.

    Your pastor (Rayburn) would not agree with that, but our conclusions are basically the same: that greater punishment is given to those who fall away. See his studies on Hebrews.

  3. J.Kru says:

    I don’t know what he would say, but I try not to channel him.

    I would say that we have the freedom to recognize a disparity between what actually IS and what we say is true. We don’t have the list of the elect, we have a list of those who are a part of the visible church.

    We know that if we were to bring the entire visible church together for a conference, there would be some people who would be at the conference who would not actually be in the heavenly kingdom. They are not elect, but they are a part of the visible church. It seems that if you were to ask Paul (or whoever) if every single set of ears who was to hear his letter was a part of the eternal, eschatalogical church, he would say no. But it’s a possibility, and since we don’t know the future, we can refer to the church as “God’s people.”

    My own point – and again, I don’ t know what Rob’s point might be – is that it is at least wise to take pains to explain how we can affirm perseverance of the saints and at the same time affirm that people destined for heaven and people destined for hell are regarded by God without distinction. Or if it really is a mystery, then to tag it as such.

  4. Uri Brito says:

    Fully agree, Jerrid.
    This is the main point: they are God’s people. They are elect into a present covenant, call it the historical covenant or something else. But this is a true covenant with benefits and everything and you can lose all these benefits should you decide it is not where you want to be.
    I am mainly differentiating between elect into the covenant and elect into eternal life. My contention is that the Bible uses “elect” in these two different contexts. Thought?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s