Name This Sin in Hebrews 10:26

[stovebolts]

Believers get complicated when they go outside the reference of the chapter in question.

The answer to what the sin is that believers that willfully sin in of Hebrews 10:26 is within the context of that verse as explained in the chapter as the OP testify.

Well, if you want to draw near to the text, lets do some basic exegesis that can later support our redaction. Fair?
1. Who was the author? Was he Jewish or Gentile?
2. Who were the recipients? Jewish or Gentile?
3. Did Temple service occur during the writing of Hebrews?
4. Do you believe the recipients of the letter worshipped at the temple or synagogue?
5. Within context, how was the blood of Jesus as it related to temple service in terms of:
A: forgiveness of sins
B: covenant

 

[Jim Parker]

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
I believe the sinning willfully part here is when we had received the knowledge of the truth that there is no more sacrifice for sins, BUT yet continue to believe that there still is necessity to have another sacrifice for sins, then that is the sin that believers are sinning willfully in.

I don't know of any Christian who thinks that there is still a necessity for another sacrifice.
Who do you think believes that?

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

If any believer had been practicing receiving the one time sacrifice for sins "again" like say at communion, they can repent, and just do communion only in remembrance of Him instead.

Communion is not "another" sacrifice.
Neither is it just a "remembrance."
Whose commentary have you been reading, Jack Chick's?

 

[markathome]

Well, if you want to draw near to the text, lets do some basic exegesis that can later support our redaction. Fair?
1. Who was the author? Was he Jewish or Gentile?
Has to be Jewish, don't think it was Paul. Paul always talks about himself a lot. Very little of it in this chapter.

2. Who were the recipients? Jewish or Gentile?
Its to the Hebrews aka Jews but applies to all who put themselves under the Law.

3. Did Temple service occur during the writing of Hebrews?
Sounds like it was still going on in the temple.

4. Do you believe the recipients of the letter worshipped at the temple or synagogue?
Sounds like the temple.

5. Within context, how was the blood of Jesus as it related to temple service in terms of:

A: forgiveness of sins (the 2 was getting mixed)
B: covenant (the 2 covenant's was also getting mixed together)

[1063] : for(gar-in the Beginning)
[2257] : our/we/us
[0264] : to miss the mark/ to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong/ to wander from the law of God, violate God's law, sin
[1596] : voluntarily, willingly, of one's own accord/ to sin wilfully as opposed to sins committed inconsiderately, and from ignorance or from weakness
[3326] : with/after/behind
[2983] : to take/to receive (what is given), to gain, get, obtain, to get back
[1922] : precise and correct knowledge
[0225] : truth/that candour of mind which is free from affection
[0620] : to leave, to leave behind/to desert or forsake
[3765] : not yet/no longer
[2378] : a sacrifice, victim
[4012] : about/concerning/because of, around, near
[0266] : sin/offence/ equivalent to 264 to be without a share in/to miss the mark to err, be mistaken

Sounds like the story of the Israelites in the desert after receiving the Law. They wandered from the Law in the OT and they did so voluntarily[1596] after God/Christ was with them in the desert. They received the knowledge of the Truth[0225] and decided to worship idols. There was no more sacrifice because of sin. God destroyed them. Ezekiel 20:13

Simple, If ya concerned about yourself falling back into sin and losing your salvation then just ask Jesus to take your life before it happens. More then likely ya will just need a swift kick in the rear end to wake up.

 

[Malachi]

Communion is not "another" sacrifice. Neither is it just a "remembrance."

Let's leave asked Jack Chick. According to Catholic beliefs, the "real presence" of Christ is treated as "transubstantiation" which translates into the bloodless sacrifice of Christ at the Mass.

Transubstantiation

(in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσίωσις metousiosis) is, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, the change of substance by which the bread and the wine offered in the sacrifice of the sacrament of the Eucharist during the Mass, become, in reality, the physical Body and Blood of Jesus the Christ. The Catholic Church teaches that the substance, or reality, of the Eucharistic offering (either bread alone, or bread and wine) is changed into both the Body and Blood of Christ.

 

[Jim Parker]

According to Catholic beliefs, the "real presence" of Christ is treated as "transubstantiation" which translates into the bloodless sacrifice of Christ at the Mass.

That has essentially been the teaching of the church since her beginning.
Again:

Ignatius of Antioch (30-107 A. D. A disciple of the apostle John and Bishop of Antioch) in his Epistle to the Smyrnaens, Ch. VII: “Let Us Stand Aloof from Such Heretics” states; “They (the heretics) abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins,..”

He was taught by the John, the beloved disciple of Christ and, in this statement, he affirms the teaching of the apostles and Christ that the bread is Christ’s body. He declared that those who denied that the Eucharist is the flesh of Jesus are "heretics."

Justin Martyr, the church’s first apologist, wrote in the first half of the 2nd century in his “The First Apology of Justin”, in Chapter LXVI.—Of the Eucharist. In it he reports what he was taught as a new Christian by the church. That would mean that the teaching he received was already established in the church. It is not some later innovation by the Roman church but was a part of the teaching of the apostles who taught what they learned from Jesus. It is God’s inspired teaching to the church by His Son, through the apostles to the church.
He said: “And this food is called among us Eujcaristiva [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body; ”and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood; ”and gave it to them alone.”

How the change takes place is a mystery. "Transubstantiation" is the RCC's attempt (an unnecessary attempt in my opinion) at explaining that mystery but the change from bread and wine to body and blood has been the teaching of the church since her beginning.

 

[WIP]