My understanding of this is two fold.
- Willful sin = A sin against the Word of God. Not just a sin on purpose. But a sin against even wanting to honor or care about God’s law as anything special. Christ is the new thing God is doing. To not accept Christ as what God is now doing is = to not wanting to honor the God of the OT at all. The irony is that many Hebrews would turn away from Christ and return to Judaism…what they were familiar with and what was more acceptable. However, that system (which had been) was no longer “what God was now doing.” So it would be equal to a sin against Judaism as a whole for which there was no sacrifice in the Old Testament that would cover such a sin in so doing.
- Meaning of “Sanctified.” – Please read in detail below for deeper backdrop, commentary, and context. Ultimately I believe what this is saying in Heb 10:29 is that the person identified as a believer but ironically thought cheaply upon the blood that “supposedly” sanctified him. This looks like it may be the blasphemy against the holy spirit. If it is, where ever do we see this plainly though? The Pharisees that did this never wanted to come to Christ to begin with. It would seem that this is rather a warning that if you go back to Judaism it is as if you truly walked away from it altogether…and there is no longer any hope for you in that system, or Christianity…since you no longer see it fit for yourself. The context suggests Heb 10:19-25 is about people who would meet with the church and also Judaism. Like straddling the fence. So it was an encouragement to meet only or mostly or increasingly with the church and move away from their OT system. The danger in not doing so were the following verses 10:26 +.
W I L L F U L L S I N
Hebrews is written to Hebrew believers. The temptation to go back to the old animal sacrifice system was huge. This is a warning not to turn back to Old Testament belief. Can we only imagine how fierce the devil would be toward that church at these most earliest forming years…still writing the written word?
If you look in the old testament there is no sacrifice for a willful sin (willful in the context of deliberately contesting the word of God–obviously steeling was wilful to an extent), however there were many willful sins listed that do. For example Lev 20:15. This person did not steal by accident. The idea in Hebrews 10 is “deliberately against the word of God…like to defy God’s word or laws.” Deliberate in the sense of “purposefully going against something because it is GOD’S LAW.” This had no sacrifice. So the idea in Heb 10 is that if you refuse God’s Word, CHRIST, then there is no sin offering because CHRIST is the WORD.
S A N C T I F I E D
Biblestudytools.com.
… either of the person, the apostate himself, who was sanctified or separated from others by a visible profession of religion; having given himself up to a church, to walk with it in the ordinances of the Gospel; and having submitted to baptism, and partook of the Lord’s supper, and drank of the cup, “the blood of the New Testament”, or “covenant”: though he did not spiritually discern the body and blood of Christ in the ordinance, but counted the bread and wine, the symbols of them, as common things; or who professed himself, and was looked upon by others, to be truly sanctified by the Spirit, and to be justified by the blood of Christ, though he was not really so: or rather the Son of God himself is meant, who was sanctified, set apart, hallowed, and consecrated, as Aaron and his sons were sanctified by the sacrifices of slain beasts, to minister in the priest’s office: so Christ, when he had offered himself, and shed his precious blood, by which the covenant of grace was ratified, by the same blood he was brought again from the dead, and declared to be the Son of God with power; and being set down at God’s right hand, he ever lives to make intercession, which is the other part of his priestly office he is sanctified by his own blood to accomplish. This clause, “wherewith he was sanctified”, is left out in the Alexandrian copy.
John Macarthur also holds this position (although Heb 7:26-27 seems to suggest not even a picture of this as a mirror of the earthly…but rather Christ coming from a completely different priesthood as one who lives forever…much less of course Christ would have no need of being sanctified having no real need of it–but for ceremonial representation, perhaps–yet I see no real match for this biblically either).
2 Peter 2:1 “the Master who bought them— bringing swift destruction on themselves.” This could be the the kind of sense in which “sanctified” is used. For Christ died for all. Provision was made. Yet not all will believe upon Him for it. In the same sense there is a ministry in Christ where He separate out unto mankind, salvation. In that the provision for mankind to be sanctified could also be seen as possible for all…and thus…and “already” done deal in the sense of Christ making provision (not literally cleansing all from sin) of sanctification kind of thing.
l
BENGEL
…by which he was sanctified) Therefore Christ died even for such a man as this. The same word is used concerning the redeemed, Hebrews 10:10; Hebrews 10:14, ch. Hebrews 2:11 (where they are distinguished from the Redeemer, who sanctifies);
BARNES
And hath counted the blood of the covenant - The blood of Jesus by which the new covenant between God and man was ratified; see the notes on Hebrews 9:16-20; compare the notes on Matthew 26:28.
Wherewith he was sanctified - Made holy, or set apart to the service of God. The word “sanctify” is used in both these senses. Prof. Stuart renders it, “by which expiation is made;” and many others, in accordance with this view, have supposed that it refers to the Lord Jesus. But it seems to me that it refers to the person who is here supposed to renounce the Christian religion, or to apostatize from it. The reasons for this are such as these:
(1) it is the natural and proper meaning of the word rendered here “sanctified.” This word is commonly applied to Christians in the sense that they are made holy; see Acts 20:32; Acts 26:18; 1 Corinthians 1:2; Jde 1:1; compare John 10:36; John 17:17.
(2) it is unusual to apply this word to the Saviour. It is true, indeed, that he says John 17:19, “for their sakes I sanctify myself,” but there is no instance in which he says that he was sanctified by his own blood. And where is there an instance in which the word is used as meaning “to make expiations?”
(3) the supposition that it refers to one who is here spoken of as in danger of apostasy, and not of the Lord Jesus, agrees with the scope of the argument. The apostle is showing the great guilt, and the certain destruction, of one who should apostatize from the Christian religion. In doing this it was natural to speak of the dishonor which would thus be done to the means which had been used for his sanctification - the blood of the Redeemer. It would be treating it as if it were a common thing, or as if it might be disregarded like anything else which was of no value.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
wherewith he was sanctified—for Christ died even for him. “Sanctified,” in the fullest sense, belongs only to the saved elect. But in some sense it belongs also to those who have gone a far way in Christian experience, and yet fall away at last. The higher such a one’s past Christian experiences, the deeper his fall.
A F T E R T H O U G H T
PERHAPS THERE IS A SENSE IN WHICH CHRIST’S BLOOD SANCTIFIED OFFICIALY THE ENTIRE SENSE ABOUT THE REALITY OF THERE EVEN EVER NEEDING TO BE A HIGH PREIST. HIS BLOOD HAVING ALSO SANCTIFIED THE OFFICE (not that He Himself needed it) FOR ALL ETERNITY. SANCTIFYING THE OFFICE TO LIVE ON FOREVER AS HE. There might be some flaws with this view. But thought to put it out there. Nonetheless, Christ does say He did sanctify Himself…which is interesting to consider–although most likely in the sense of separating. But whatever the case I do not believe the person “sanctified” in Heb 10:26 was ever saved. Or ever really sanctified.
To me what sanctified means is that we become Chosen. Not from eternity past. But chosen to qualify to become Christ like. I believe that is the profound meaning of both Eph 1:4 & Romans 8:29. In both of those cases it appears that believers become chosen then to become like Christ (or on journey to become conformed to Christ likeness through the sanctification process over time) after that believer receives Christ and then become officially “in Christ.” It is not likely one qualifies and chosen to be Christlike and then ops out. This becoming Christ like process was what was ordained in eternity past to occur for a believer–once that believer accepted Christ. It is also a very strong notion for eternal security. Those chosen by God in Christ to become Christ like was something He ordained in eternity past. It is outside the scope of our temporal minds to mess up. Hope this is somewhat helpful…blessings.
get out of the way
