Hebrews chapter 10

vs 21

He really is a great priest. That has been proven over some passages now.

vs 22

Again, here is the salve to conscience mentioned! I'm not sure whether the gerundial words are meant to be past tense or not. Like, do we come near to God because of these things, or for these things? I think it's for.

vs 23

Since, if we understand our hope correctly, it relies on us not a jot, then what's happening with us shouldn't swerve it. It should only be a change in God that swerves it, and that never happens. Life situations might suck, but that doesn't change who God is.

vs 24

This is a big deal. There is a communal aspect to God's promises. It's about more than just us individually. We are a community, and our salvation and relationship with God effects us communally.

vs 25

Why did they give up meeting? I can't say. What I can say is that meeting together is a flow-on effect of salvation. If you're not doing it, then you've got to ask, "How much of a Christian am I if the Spirit isn't leading me to meet together with other Christians?"

vs 26

Now the thing is, this can't mean what it on face says it means. Why? Because 1 John tell us that God covers our sins and that we are forgiven our sins when we do sin. Not to mention Paul talking about all those Christians in churches like Corinth who are doing wrong, and should stop. Perhaps this is where the idea of the last rites came from - that you need to confess at the end so that your sins are forgiven and you're right with God, because otherwise no sacrifice for sin is left? Who knows. Not me.

Okay, so we know what this can't mean - so what does it mean? Wesley was of the opinion that Christians could live without deliberately sinning against God. That's not true of my life. Does that make me not really a Christian? It's certainly very challenging. But I can't see that as plausible - that God only offers salvation once, and then if you fall after that, you're toast.

So perhaps it means that if you hear the truth, but you keep deliberately denying it, then there's no way you can be saved. After all, it says "knowledge of the truth". Think about this in the situation of a Jew who has been told about Christ. If you reject that truth, even though you've been told it, then there's really nothing more that can be done for you until you accept it. I don't really think that goes all the way to explaining it, but it's an option I suppose.

vs 27

After all, this is what happens to enemies of God, not his family. So surely those who are in the position of v26 are those who are enemies of God. Still feel uneasy there though.

vs 28

Okay.

vs 29

For us who recognise Christ as the Son of God to be called those who trample it underfoot because of a transgression seems illogical. But for those who deny his Godhood it sounds plausible. However, this letter is written to Christians, so surely it's meant to be a warning? Argh, what difficulties!

vs 30-31

I couldn't leave vs31 on its own. There it is, in black and white in vs 30 - this is talking about God's own people. So this is about us. It is about us sinning after we have knowledge of the truth. So what hope is there for us? Am I now forsaken? Surely not! But I keep coming back to vs26 and being scared by it. What can it mean, if not what it says, especially in light of vs 30? Is our spiritual life really such a rollercoaster of saved/not saved Shrodinger's improbability? It can't be. So then can we ignore this verse? Of course not. So I'm left back where I was at the beginning, I'm afraid - I think that if we as Christians turn our backs on God, then there is nothing that can be done for us. But surely we can turn to face him again. That is kind of backed up by these verses, but nothing fits perfectly.