There's in the covenant, and there's in the covenant. It's true in the New Covenant (visible/invisible church), as well as the old (not all Israel is Israel).

The problem comes, as seen in the debate, when you attempt to prove that Christ in not the federal head of all of God's covenant people. This makes no sense. What makes more sense is that there are some that are part of His covenant people in Christ as their covenant head, but will be cut off. This is what happened under the OC with God's divorce of Israel, and in light of the warnings in the NT, there is no reason to think the NC is any different in this respect.

It makes more sense to me to understand that they are cut off precisely because Christ was never their Federal Head -- because they lack the protective covering of his imputed righteousness.

Federal Headship actually has little to do with baptism, just as with circumcision. Circumcision didn't do anything to change the fact that a baby's Federal Head was still Adam. Likewise baptism. It all becomes clear if you just properly understand the visible/invisible distinction.

Anyways, my own response to the debate is here.

Ron,

I don't see how that was a "problem" for me.  I'm just saying what Hebrews says.  All who we are told have Christ as their high priest are those "who draw near to him."  Hebrews, or any where else in the NT, does not tell us that "all covenant members have drawn near."

I think you're drawing an invalid converse:

All dogs are mammals is true, but not the converse: all mammals are dogs.

Likewise, all who have Christy as their federal head are in the covenant does not logically imply that: all in the covenant have Christ as their federal head.

You can prove the first proposition easily, but not the second.

Regards,

WF

WF,

Where does the author of Hebrews make the priesthood of Christ contingent upon us first drawing near? Rather, I see him exhorting us to draw near because Christ is our faithful High Priest.

Hebrews 4:14-16
14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. 16 Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

It seems you are saying, "One has drawn near, therefore, he has a High Priest in Christ." But the author of Hebrews seems to be to be saying, "One has a High Priest in Christ, therefore, let him draw near."

This is how I see Paul arguing all the time; from grace to obligation. For instance, 1 Corinthians 4:1-2
1 [We have been] entrusted with the secret things of God. 2 Now [we] must prove faithful.

Ron,

It is accepted that faith is the condition of the covenant of grace.  This isn't causal, though.  At any rate, if one "has" the high priest, then one "has" had atonement made for their sins.  Now, why would any of them ever go to hell?  Does God require double-payment for sin?

Hebrews 7:25
Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for THEM.

The priestly intercession is only made for those who draw near.

Now, you need to prove that every single covenant member draws near.

If you can't, then I have shown that the priestly intercession is only for a subset of all covenant members.

If you say that "ALL" covenant members "draw near" then why would not "ALL" be saved because Christ is able to save "TO THE UTTERMOST" those who draw near.

Further, if all "draw near" then Christ makes "intercession for them."

Now, I'm sure you'll say that everyone does draw near (though I don't see how you could possibly prove this) and Christ only saves them if they continue to "draw near" until the end. Thus perserverance is what sets aside the finally saved from the part-way saved.

But if we're going to be reformed then you must belive that only the *regenerate* can draw near because Hebrews 11 tells us that one cannot draw near without faith (this isn;t the Hymanaeun faith since it's in Hebrews 11).

6: And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

And so Ron, can people who have once been regenerate loose this status?

I reject your first premise.

Why does the author say "save to the uttermost"? He has eternal salvation in mind. But he proclaims over and over again that Christ is "our" high priest, interceding for "us". Who is in view here? I believe he makes the point that all covenant members have Christ, but they have to abide in Him by "hold[ing] fast to the end." Hebrews 3:6

I assert that the author preaches to all of God's covenant people.

Again in chapter 10, he states, "19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith..."

Then, he makes it clear in vs 22 (to me anyway) that he is speaking to all covenant members: "...having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." The author here speaks to the union of the work of the Spirit in regeneration (clean conscience) and the sacrament of baptism (bodies washed with pure water). WCF XXVIII-I Baptism is a sign and seal of covenant membership and regeneration.

1. Baptism admits one into the Covenant of grace.
2. The author speaks to baptized people.
Therefore, the author speaks to Covenant members.

And he says that they have been sanctified by Christ's blood, but can reject that sacrifice and be cut off from the covenant.

Hebrews 10:29 "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?"

Ron,

I reject your causal view of Heb. 3.  I take the coinditional as an evidence-to-inference conditional.  This type of view is supported by men like Carson in Exegetical Fallacies, and Gleason in Four Views on the Warning Passages.  For your argument to have force you'd need to substantiate the causal view.

I agree that the author *preaches* to all "covenant members."  It would be a non-sequitur to say that what he says is *true* of all covenant members.  Indeed, he says, "we are not of those who shrink back."  But, we know that some people apostatized!  Therefore there's a distinction between what is *said* to all of them, and what is *true* of all of them.  You'd do well to recover the reformed idea of "the principle of charity."

I also take Heb. 10:29 to be referring to "Christ."  Christ is the "he" that was sanctified.  I refer you to James White and/or John Owen on this point.

Lastly, you didn't quite answer my question.  Heb. 11 teaches of the saving faith people have had through redemptive history.  Abraham's faith.  The paradigm.  Ch. 11 teaches that it is *impossible* to draw near without this kind of faith. According to reformed orthodoxy, regeneration proceeds faith.  Therefore, on your view, since "ALL" covenant member "draw near" and since I've proven that "all who draw near are regenerate," then do you believe that people who truely have been born again, born from above, born of water and spirit, truely regenerate from God's perspective, etc., will go to hell and break God's covenant?

excuse me, I meant Buist Fanning supports the evidence-to-inference view, not Gleason.

You'd do well to recover the reformed idea of "the principle of charity."

That's what I keep telling him, but for reasons (presuppositions?) I can't understand, he continues to dismiss that possibility out-of-hand.

"I reject your causal view of Heb. 3."

God is the first cause of all things. I acknowledge that. But WCF 3.1 on God's eternal decrees states that there are second causes which the fulfillment of God’s decrees is contingent upon. But God decreed those second causes to take place, so in the case of "abiding", it is still all of grace.

How's this for causal? Hebrews 10:36 “You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised.” Receiving the promised salvation is contingent upon persevering. I don’t know why you want to argue this point. You know the Bible frequently speaks like this.

"I agree that the author *preaches* to all "covenant members."  It would be a non-sequitur to say that what he says is *true* of all covenant members."

Not if I assert that God only tells His covenant people the truth.

1.      God only tells His covenant people the truth. 2.      Hebrews was addressed to a group of God’s covenant people.
Therefore, everything in Hebrews is true for God’s covenant people (or at least that group of them).

The only way I see of rejecting that argument is to reject premise 1. Are you really going to reject premise 1 and thereby accuse the God of truth of lying to His people?

"We are those who do not shrink back" This is true, head for head, across the board for all of God's covenant people. When a covenant member shrinks back, he becomes both a non-covenant member and one who shrinks back.

"You'd do well to recover the reformed idea of "the principle of charity.""

If that means when a pastor tells someone he is saved, the pastor is just saying it because he has to be nice, I don't see the value of recovering that principle. Anyway, that is not the only reformed view.

According to Calvin, when Paul says to the Corinthian church, "... you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God," he means it.

"His meaning is, that having been once justified, they must not draw down upon themselves a new condemnation — that, having been sanctified, they must not pollute themselves anew — that, having been washed, they must not disgrace themselves with new defilements, but, on the contrary, aim at purity, persevere in true holiness, and abominate their former pollutions." ~ Calvin's commentary on 1 Corinthians

No talk of making charitable, Pollyanna idealistic, potential falsehoods to the Church. Those things are true for all covenant members.

You'd do well to recover the reformed idea of "covenant".

"That's what I keep telling him, but for reasons (presuppositions?) I can't understand, he continues to dismiss that possibility out-of-hand."

Here is the reason: God does not lie to His people. If someone falls away from God's promises, God is true, and that man is a liar. Psalm 25:10

Further, if someone is headed for hell, it is not all that charitable to tell them they are forgiven of their sins and headed for heaven, is it?

The notion falls that easily.

Ron,

I'm not talking about first cause.  I'm not sure if you understand what I'm even talking about.  Anyweay, I'm sure you don't want to rebbit trail about conditional and cause or evidence-to-inference views.

RS: "Receiving the promised salvation is contingent upon persevering."

WF: Yes, but contingent in what sense?  I take it that it *demonstrates* the salvation we fully obtained in Christ.  You're begging the question due to your unfamiliarity with this issue.

RS: "Not if I assert that God only tells His covenant people the truth.  1.  God only tells His covenant people the truth.  2.  Hebrews was addressed to a group of God’s covenant people. 3. Therefore, everything in Hebrews is true for God’s covenant people (or at least that group of them). "

WF:  Bad move

i) If God "only" tells his *covenant people* the truth, then does he never tell non-covenant people the truth?

ii)  You have a term in your conclusion that is not in your premise, "true for."  Thus your conclusion goes beyond your premises.

iii)  How about this:

Hag. 2:21-23  The word of the LORD came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month:  "Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah that I will shake the heavens and the earth.  I will overturn royal thrones and shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and their drivers; horses and their riders will fall, each by the sword of his brother. " 'On that day,' declares the LORD Almighty, 'I will take you, my servant Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,' declares the LORD, 'and I will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you,' declares the LORD Almighty."

But, Zerubbabel DID NOT become King and the surrounding nations were not destroyed!!

iv)  How is "true for" to be understood?  Conditionals can be true, while not being instantiated. 

v)  If God only tells his covenant people the truth, then how could covenant members be keep from the love of God and final salvation?

**********

Romans 8:What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36As it is written:
   "For your sake we face death all day long;
      we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered."[l] 37No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[m] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

**********

So it appears that Ron knows what can seperate us from the Love of God!  Paul forgot to add that "our ability to persevere can keep is from the love of God."  If Christ died for everyone in Hebrews, as you say, then how can God "fail to give them all the promises?  Isn't final salvation (glorification in v.28) one of those "promises?"  Ron, are you going to correct Paul for forgetting FV doctrine?

RS: "We are those who do not shrink back" This is true, head for head, across the board for all of God's covenant people. When a covenant member shrinks back, he becomes both a non-covenant member and one who shrinks back."

PM:  Uh, Ron, if it is *true* that the "we" are not "of those who shrink back" then how can any of those spoken two "shrink back."  if they do, then they are of those who shrink back.  And, if he becomes a "non-covenant member" then how is he judged on the last day as a covenant member (the Lord will judge His people?)  Furthermore, it says that the "we" are "not destroyed."  So, are you saying that no one in that group apostatized and ends up destroyed in hell?  And, the "we" are those who "belive and are saved."

 38But my righteous one will live by faith.
   And if he shrinks back,
      I will not be pleased with him." 39But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.

See that, Ron!  Hebrews says that the "we" will not "shrink back" by the use of "but."  The "if he shrinks back" is *future* and so the *but* is applied to the *future* as well.

RS: "If that means when a pastor tells someone he is saved, the pastor is just saying it because he has to be nice, I don't see the value of recovering that principle. Anyway, that is not the only reformed view. "

PM:  No, that's not what it means.  Do you think it represents careful thinking and an unbiased mind to misrepresent people's position this bad?

You then cite Calvin and read your FV assumptions into what he wrote.  Yes, speaking from the perspective of election, this is true.  That Calvin didn;t hold your view is proved by Hebrews, for example:

But here arises a new question, how can it be that he who has once made such a progress should afterwards fall away? For God, it may be said, calls none effectually but the elect, and Paul testifies that they are really his sons who are led by his Spirit, (Romans 8:14;) and he teaches us, that it is a sure pledge of adoption when Christ makes us partakers of his Spirit. The elect are also beyond the danger of finally falling away; for the Father who gave them to be preserved by Christ his Son is greater than all, and Christ promises to watch over them all so that none may perish. To all this I answer, That God indeed favors none but the elect alone with the Spirit of regeneration, and that by this they are distinguished from the reprobate; for they are renewed after his image and receive the earnest of the Spirit in hope of the future inheritance, and by the same Spirit the Gospel is sealed in their hearts. -Calvin on Hebrews ch. 6

And,

The Lord shall judge his people. Here another and a greater difficulty arises; for the meaning of Moses seems not to agree with what here intended. The Apostle seems to have quoted this passage as though Moses had used the word punish, and not judge; but as it immediately follows by way of explanation, “He will be merciful to his saints,” it appears evident that to judge here is to act as a governor, according to its frequent meaning in the Hebrew; but this seems to have little to do with the present subject. Nevertheless he who weighs well all things will find that this passage is fitly and suitably adduced here; for God cannot govern the Church without purifying it, and without restoring to order the confusion that may be in it. Therefore this governing ought justly to be dreaded by hypocrites, who will then be punished for usurping a place among the faithful, and for perfidiously using the sacred name of God, when the master of the family undertakes himself the care of setting in order his own house. It is in this sense that God is said to arise to judge his people, that is, when he separates the truly godly from hypocrites, (Psalm 1:4;) and in Psalm 125:5, 188Ps 125:3, which seems to be directed more at the fact that the wicked will not persevere over the righteous, whereas Ps 125:5 refers to the wicked joining the “workers of iniquity,” and that “peace will be upon Israel”; neither are quite as explicit as the commentary in terms of the final destruction of the wicked, but in my humble opinion, verse 5 has more relevance.-fj. <!-- initNote("fnf_xvi.vi-p30.3"); //--> where the Prophet speaks of exterminating hypocrites, that they might no more dare to boast that they were of the Church, because God bore with them; he promises peace to Israel after having executed his judgment.

Therefore to cite calvin as agreeing with your position is totally dishonest.  The above proves beyond all shadow of a doubt, that Calvin doesn't think in your categories.  Notice the distinctions between "elect" and "covenant memebrs."  Not all "covenant members" are regenerate, etc.  And, not all "covenant members" are members of the Church?  But, Paul does think they are members of the "church" the letter was written too.

Now, lastly, you never answered me, for a third time.  Since only those who "draw near" have "the faith of Abraham," then do you believe that every single person in the church of the hebrews was "regenerate?"  If so, can those who have born of the Spirit, bron again, raised to newness of life, fall away and go to hell? 

~WF

"i) If God "only" tells his *covenant people* the truth, then does he never tell non-covenant people the truth?"

I don't know why I put "only" in there. I meant "always".

"How is "true for" to be understood?  Conditionals can be true, while not being instantiated."

Exactly. That is my point. The promises of God directed at His people are always true, but they are always conditioned upon continued faith and faithful obedience. Likewise, the warnings are true, but conditioned upon apostasy.

"How is "true for" to be understood?  Conditionals can be true, while not being instantiated."

Exactly. That is my point. The promises of God directed at His people are always true, but they are always conditioned upon continued faith and faithful obedience. Likewise, the warnings are true, but conditioned upon apostasy.

"So it appears that Ron knows what can seperate us from the Love of God! "

As that verse explicitly states, that love is IN Christ Jesus. That love belongs only to those IN Christ Jesus. And as Paul clearly states in chapter 11 of that same book, one can be cut out of Jesus, just like the branches of Old Israel, if he does not remain "in His goodness, otherwise [he] too will be cut off."

"If Christ died for everyone in Hebrews, as you say, then how can God "fail to give them all the promises?"

He can't. He offers grace to the pre-apostate, and while they receive it at first, and therefore receive all the benefits and blessings of the covenant, they eventually fall from grace and lose those benefits and blessings. While this is all in accordance with God's eternal decree, the apostate is responsible for rejecting the grace offered them.

Ron,

If I grant your point then all you've done is say that the conditional statements are true, but this doesn't mean that they all *have* what the statements say.  Therefore you're back at square one.  Prove that ALL covenant members have drawn near.  The atonement is ONLY MADE for those who draw near.  You said that it was made for EVERYONE in the covenant.  If so, prove that EVERYONE in the covenant has drawn near.  If you can't prove this, then you're simply asserting FV dogma without proving it.

Ron, that verse in Romans clearly states that nothing can seperate "us" from the love of God. NOTHING.  You said that God always speaks the truth.  But you also say that something can separate "us" from the love of God. The verse clearly states that NOTHING can happen whereby we don't receive the promises, but you say things can happen.

Your going to Romans 11 is called eisogesis.  And, furthermore, you're assuming that the people who can and/or are cut out of the tree are the same type of people in Romans 8.  But they're not.  If they were you'd have a contradiction.  You don't view an internal/external sense of being in Christ.  This raises contradictions. So then you guys just say, "To hell with logic and systematics, then!"

I said:  "If Christ died for everyone in Hebrews, as you say, then how can God "fail to give them all the promises?"

Ron said:  He can't. He offers grace to the pre-apostate, and while they receive it at first, and therefore receive all the benefits and blessings of the covenant, they eventually fall from grace and lose those benefits and blessings. While this is all in accordance with God's eternal decree, the apostate is responsible for rejecting the grace offered them.

I respond with Ron;s fatal flaw:  Perserverance is one of the promises, Ron!

Ron: He can't. He offers grace to the pre-apostate, and while they receive it at first, and therefore receive all the benefits and blessings of the covenant

WF:  they don't receive the benefit of perserverance, though.

And, Hebrews says that one of the benefits is that Jesus made "propitiation" for those he died for.  How can he have "turned away God's wrath" yet some of them will still suffer wrath?  How can Christ have "paid their sins," but some still "pay for their sins?"  Is God just?  Does he ask for double-payment?  If Christ really paid for ALL their sins, then you have a God who makes Christ pay, and the apostate pay.  God who despises people who charge too much for something actually turns out to charge double the price for something that has already been paid.

Ron, don't you see the illogic in your positition?

Ron,

Are there any *qualitative* distinctions between professing-unregenerate-non-elect members of the covenant, and regenerate-elect members of the covenant? Is the only distinction that some persevere, and others do not? --Josh Brisby

"No, that's not what it means.  Do you think it represents careful thinking and an unbiased mind to misrepresent people's position this bad?"

I know you do not think so, but this is what I believe it essentially means. Perhaps you could contrast your view of "the principle of charity" to mine.

"do you believe that every single person in the church of the hebrews was "regenerate?" 

Sorry to have put this one off. While I simply cannot answer all the objections you raise at this time, I admit I continued to dodge this one deliberately because it is difficult.

I cannot know if they were or were not regenerate in the sense you mean it because I cannot know if they all persevered to the end. Probably not. But I still hold that as baptized members of the Covenant, Christ was their federal head and high priest. Those who fell, fell away from grace. Grace was theirs and they rejected it. Christ was theirs and they were Christ's (John 15), but they rejected Christ and were cut off.

"Perserverance is one of the promises, Ron!"

Yes, I know. But promises are conditioned on faith and faithfulness, Paul! :) So we have a small conundrum, don’t we?  Your solution is to say that the promise of perseverance wasn't directed at the apostate. Mine is to say that it was directed at the apostate, but he didn't receive that promise in faith, so he didn't receive the fruit of the promise. I believe mine is more in line with scripture and covenant theology.

Look at God's promise to the righteous in Ezekiel 33:

13 "When I say to the righteous he will surely live, and he so trusts in his righteousness that he commits iniquity, none of his righteous deeds will be remembered; but in that same iniquity of his which he has committed he will die."

God promises the righteous life. But when the righteous turn to unrighteousness, they reject that promise. The opposite goes for warnings against the wicked:

14"But when I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and he turns from his sin and practices justice and righteousness, 15 if a wicked man restores a pledge, pays back what he has taken by robbery, walks by the statutes which ensure life without committing iniquity, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 16 None of his sins that he has committed will be remembered against him. He has practiced justice and righteousness; he shall surely live."

This is how God speaks to His people. He promises life, but that promise is conditioned upon faith and faithfulness. And He threatens death conditioned upon unbelief and wickedness.