The natural reading of these verses [Hebrews 8:10-12] (whether in Jeremiah or Hebrews) is that in the Old Covenant only some knew the Lord and in the NC, everybody does. What you are doing is indulging in a fine piece of eisogesis to make the Scriptures agree with your pre-suppositions. However, there are at least two NT texts that place this ‘Knowing of the Lord’ very firmly in the present:-
To insist that EVERYONE
without exception in the “visible church” is in the NC (
in a saving way) and that
without exception “know the LORD” (
in a saving way) is against
the whole counsel of God! Apparently in your examination of Hebrews 8, you failed to read and understand Hebrews 6 and 10. Kistemaker,
one of my former professors, even states concerning Heb 10:29;
Once again the author of Hebrews employs the device of contrast. He sets the times of the old covenant over against those of the new covenant. He compares the penalty of physical death with the much more severe sentence of spiritual death. And he differentiates between rejecting the law of Moses and despising the Son of God and the Spirit of God. He asks the reader to reflect on this difference. The sinner who rebels against God in the times of the new covenant rejects the person of Christ, the work of Christ, and the person of the Holy Spirit.
Thus, even he has issue with what you assumed he said. Your constant failure to discern the difference between the
visible and
invisible Church continues to hamper your perception of the truth of God in this matter. Please review this
diagram again.
While it is true, as you have shown in 1 John 2:20; 1 Cor 2:12, 15, that those in the “invisible” Church “know the Lord” this is
not true of ALL in the “visible” Church. You only proof texted part of the Gospel message. What about those in the “visible” church, who are not members of the “invisible”? What of those who are only visible members of the NC and not invisible members; who use the covenant language (LORD, LORD), do the covenant works of Christ, and participate in the NC in various forms (hear the Word, take the sacraments, etc.) and yet they are false teachers, permanent covenant breakers,
professors only, and not
possessors of real life;
Matthew 7: 21-23 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Calvin comments;
… we have said that Holy Scripture speaks of the church in two ways. Sometimes by the term “church” it means that which is actually in God’s presence, into which no persons are received but those who are children of God by grace of adoption and true members of Christ by sanctification of the Holy Spirit. Then, indeed, the church includes not only the saints presently living on earth, but all the elect from the beginning of the world. Often, however, the name “church” designates the whole multitude of men spread over the earth who profess to worship one God and Christ. By baptism we are initiated into faith in him; by partaking in the Lord’s Supper we attest our unity in true doctrine and love; in the Word of the Lord we have agreement, and for the preaching of the Word the ministry instituted by Christ is preserved. In this church are mingled many hypocrites who have nothing of Christ but the name and outward appearance. There are very many ambitious, greedy, envious persons, evil speakers, and some of quite unclean life. Such are tolerated for a time either because they cannot be convicted by a competent tribunal or because a vigorous discipline does not always flourish as it ought. Just as we must believe, therefore, that the former church, invisible to us, is visible to the eyes of God alone, so we are commanded to revere and keep communion with the latter, which is called “church” in respect to men.
Are there hypocrites, covenant breakers, and deceivers in the “visible” church, in the OC/NC? In John 11:45-53, Caiaphas, the high priest and a member of the “visible” Church, revealed without question that he was not a member of the “invisible” church, for after his counsel, many “from that day forth took counsel together for to put [Jesus] to death.”
In Matthew 23:1-3 and 13, Christ himself plainly affirms that hypocrites are members of the “visible” church. In these passages, Jesus recognizes the scribes and Pharisees status as properly appointed teachers in the “visible” Church. Indeed, He commands His disciples that they must respect them when they teach
the laws of Moses. However, He warns them not to follow their hypocritical model, as they do not practice what they preach. He explicitly identifies them as hypocrites (covenant breakers) and affirms that they are not in the “invisible” Church for they will not enter the "kingdom of heaven." However, in contrast their membership in the “visible” church is both recognized and sustained.
What of the example of Judas (Matt 10:1-5)? Judas was a part of the “visible” Church having received an external call from Christ himself. Christ also personally commissioned Judas to preach the Gospel! Moreover, Christ empowered Judas to cast out demons and heal the sick. Are we now to suppose that Judas was never a member of the “visible” church (though he was visibly doing all these things)? Did Jesus know that Judas was a covenant breaker before He selected him—i.e. the son of perdition? Who selected this reprobate to preach? The answer is clear; Judas, as a member of the “visible” Church, having a close association with other covenant members and selected by Christ himself, was a covenant breaker, deserted Christ during a covenant meal, and betrayed the covenant head!
You mentioned Heb 10:29. Can apostates be said to have been ‘sanctified’? … These apostates were never in the NC, whether or not they were baptized. They had, ‘neither part nor portion in this matter’ (Acts 8:21 ) and ‘were not of us’ (1 John 2:19 ).
Yes, unbelievers can be sanctified (1 Cor 7:14). Please note “sanctified” has different meanings in different contexts—you are confusing the sanctification of salvation with other types of sanctification. Kistemaker states;
A study of the Scriptures reveals that the Greek word to sanctify has at least four different meanings. It signifies, first, to set things aside for sacred functions (e.g., items relating to worship at the tabernacle [Exod. 29:37, 44]); next, to consecrate people by either baptism (I Cor. 6:11), a Christian marriage (I Cor. 7:14), or atonement for sin (Heb. 9:13); third, to reverence people, names, or things (I Peter 3:15); and last, to purity someone from evil. The second meaning of the verb to sanctify applies to the verse at hand [1 Cor 7:14]. The believing husband or wife sanctified the unbelieving spouse much as the temple sanctified the gold connected with it, or the altar the gift laid upon it (Matt. 23:17, 19). The object was not holy in itself but was holy by association.
Paul is not saying that the Gentile spouse has a personal relationship with Christ, for then he or she would no longer be called an unbeliever. Nonetheless, this person’s conduct is affected by that of the Christian partner. He or she agrees to live with a Christian in whom God’s Spirit resides, fulfills the obligations that stem from the institution of marriage (Gen. 2:24), and keeps the marriage intact in obedience to Jesus’ command (Matt. 19:6). Both spouses live in a sanctified environment, for the home is consecrated by the reading and application of God’s Word and by prayer.
While in reference to the “invisible” Church apostates have ‘neither part nor portion in this matter’ (Acts 8:21 ) and ‘were not of us’ (1John 2:19 ), this is
not true in reference to the “visible” Church, as already shown to you above. Again, you are (1) not looking at the
whole counsel of God, and (2) confusing visible and invisible Church distinctions in Scripture.
since Pentecost was a Jewish festival, and since only Jews were allowed into most of the Temple area (Acts 21:28 ), it seems to be reasonable to suppose that most if not all of the ‘multiude’ (Acts 2:5-6 ) to whom Paul spoke on the Day of Pentecost were circumcised Jews. If there is only one covenant and if these men had already received one covenant sign, why did Paul command them to receive another? And why did they obey him without demur?
Judaism is not Christianity! Circumcision had been replaced with baptism, as Paul wrote in Col 2:11-13. Why did they obey, because they were now Christians and knew the above facts were true for themselves and all their house (Acts 2:38f). Same covenant, different administration, different sign, same Lord. As Wes states, ‘Paul revealed the progressive revelation of God's covenant which found fulfillment in Christ.’
Scripture, good to the last drop and beyond. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/coffee2.gif" alt="" />
