Southern Baptist Convention Changes to Abortion

The Southern Baptist Convention's views on abortion have changed over the years, fortunately lately for the better. Previously, as I will show later in this article, they believed in significant exceptions where abortion was tolerable.

Decades ago William F Buckley Jr hosted the television show "The Firing Line." On the show in 1969 was the famous televangelist and Baptist minister affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention --Billy Graham. In the clip below they discuss the issue of abortion. Billy Graham plainly states he believes in abortion in certain instances,

"I believe in abortion for those who have been raped, for those who may be diseased to the point the child may be affected. I think there are certain areas we need some of our laws brought up to date."--Billy Graham, Interview on the "The Firing Line," 1969 (said at minute 41:33)

He explains that certain areas the Bible is silent on and therefore individuals must make ethical judgements for themselves, to which William makes a comment about the need for a magisterium.

Go to 41:33

Billy Graham was advocating at the time for expanding the nation's abortion laws before Roe v. Wade nationally legalized abortion. Granted, Mr Graham did not want it to the extend the Supreme Court legalized, he nonetheless was far from being an opponent of abortion. His views, in fact, were in line with his denomination's views. 

The Southern Baptist Convention believes the local congregation is self governing, so when the convention makes statements they are representative of the beliefs of its members. As we see below the convention's views on abortion over time:

WHEREAS, Christians in the American society today are faced with difficult decisions about abortion; and

WHEREAS, Some advocate that there be no abortion legislation, thus making the decision a purely private matter between a woman and her doctor; and

WHEREAS, Others advocate no legal abortion, or would permit abortion only if the life of the mother is threatened;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Convention express the belief that society has a responsibility to affirm through the laws of the state a high view of the sanctity of human life, including fetal life, in order to protect those who cannot protect themselves; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother --Southern Baptist Convention Resolution on Abortion. 1971. St Louis, Missouri. (emphasis mine)

These are famous exceptions for abortion that some conservatives believe in, which fails to recognize the intrinsic value of human life. As a side note, in 1962 the SBC acknowledged a decline in morals in the nation even among members of the SBC, in San Francisco of all places (Resolution On Christian Morality.  San Francisco, California - 1962). Then in 1967, the SBC passed a resolution on population control--another fad to worry about of the time, the SBC actively encouraged couples to use "medically approved methods of planned parenthood" (Resolution On Population Explosion. Miami, Florida. 1968) which is a euphemism for birth control, but not explicit mention of abortion that it is now. Contraception is a precursor to abortion. The 1968 position on birth control seems to be a reverse of its older position in 1934 that opposed the Hastings Bill in Congress which dealt with contraceptives since the SBC believed the "dissemination of information concerning contraceptives and birth control.....would prove seriously detrimental to the morals of our nation" (Resolution On Birth Control Fort Worth, Texas - 1934). We see the SBC discouraged contraceptives in 1934 them generation later promoting contraceptives in 1967 and promoting looser abortion laws by 1971!

After the 1971 Resolution permitting abortion in certain cases, a 1974 resolution referred to the 1971 one on abortion, and noted that the 1971 abortion resolution passed "overwhelmingly" but now the SBC was now starting to push back against total abortion legalization, while still affirming instances of justified abortion as they did in 1971:

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically held a high view of the sanctity of human life, and

WHEREAS, The messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in St. Louis in 1971 adopted overwhelmingly a resolution on abortion, and

WHEREAS, That resolution reflected a middle ground between the extreme of abortion on demand and the opposite extreme of all abortion as murder, and

WHEREAS, That resolution dealt responsibly from a Christian perspective with complexities of abortion problems in contemporary society;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, that we reaffirm the resolution on the subject adopted by the messengers to the St. Louis Southern Baptist Convention meeting in 1971, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we continue to seek God's guidance through prayer and study in order to bring about solutions to continuing abortion problems in our society.--Southern Baptist Convention, 1974. Resolution On Abortion And Sanctity Of Human Life. Dallas, Texas. (emphasis mine)

So in 1971 and 1974 some abortions were considered tolerable. By 1976 we see even more significant change that seems to become more pro-life:

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically held a biblical view of the sanctity of human life, and

WHEREAS, Abortion is a very serious moral and spiritual problem of continuing concern to the American people, and

WHEREAS, Christians have a responsibility to deal with all moral and spiritual issues which affect society, including the problems of abortion, and

WHEREAS, The practice of abortion for selfish non-therapeutic reasons want-only destroys fetal life, dulls our society's moral sensitivity, and leads to a cheapening of all human life, and

WHEREAS, Every decision for an abortion, for whatever reason must necessarily involve the decision to terminate the life of an innocent human being.

Therefore be it RESOLVED, that the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Norfolk in June 1976 reaffirm the biblical sacredness and dignity of all human life, including fetal life, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we call on Southern Baptists and all citizens of the nation to work to change those attitudes and conditions which encourage many people to turn to abortion as a means of birth control, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that in the best interest of our society, we reject any indiscriminate attitude toward abortion, as contrary to the biblical view, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we also affirm our conviction about the limited role of government in dealing with matters relating to abortion, and support the right of expectant mothers to the full range of medical services and personal counseling for the preservation of life and health. --Southern Baptist Convention, 1976 Resolution On Abortion. Norfolk, Virginia (emphasis mine)

This statement as the prior ones is against abortion as birth control, but its unclear if its still holding to its prior views on abortion being acceptable for incest, rape, fetal abnormality, the health of the mother. There is no clear reaffirmation of the 1971 or 1974 resolutions on abortion. The last statement about supporting "the right of expectant mothers to the full range of medical services.....for the preservation of life and health" makes you wonder if its just simply stating women need better care and services, or if "full range" includes abortions to as the 1971 resolution defended for reasons of health of the mother. Likely the ambiguity of these statements was intentional, though clearly this resolution is more hostile to abortion than 1974 and 1971 resolutions on abortion. The next resolution on abortion in 1977 seems to acknowledge the confusion caused by the 1976 statement and does little to clarify other than stating opposition to abortion. Below is a chart comparing the 1976 and 1977.

Resolution On Abortion Norfolk, Virginia - 1976	Resolution On Abortion Kansas City, Missouri - 1977
RESOLVED that this Convention reaffirm the strong stand against abortion adopted by the 1976 Convention, and, in view of some confusion in interpreting part of this resolution we confirm our strong opposition to abortion on demand and all governmental policies and actions which permit this.
The 1976 resolution on abortion is as follows:
WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically held a biblical view of the sanctity of human life, and	WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically held a biblical view of the sanctity of human life, and
WHEREAS, Abortion is a very serious moral and spiritual problem of continuing concern to the American people, and	WHEREAS, Abortion is a very serious moral and spiritual problem of continuing concern to the American people, and
WHEREAS, Christians have a responsibility to deal with all moral and spiritual issues which affect society, including the problems of abortion, and	WHEREAS, Christians have a responsibility to deal with all moral and spiritual issues which affect society, including the problems of abortion, and
WHEREAS, The practice of abortion for selfish non-therapeutic reasons wantonly destroys fetal life, dulls our society's moral sensitivity, and leads to a cheapening of all human life.	WHEREAS, The practice of abortion for selfish non-therapeutic reasons want-only destroys fetal life, dulls our society's moral sensitivity, and leads to a cheapening of all human life, and
	WHEREAS, Every decision for an abortion, for whatever reason must necessarily involve the decision to terminate the life of an innocent human being.
Therefore be it RESOLVED, that the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Norfolk in June, 1976 reaffirm the biblical sacredness and dignity of all human life, including fetal life, and	Therefore be it RESOLVED, that the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Norfolk in June 1976 reaffirm the biblical sacredness and dignity of all human life, including fetal life, and
Be it further RESOLVED, that we call on Southern Baptists and all citizens of the nation to work to change those attitudes and conditions which encourage many people to turn to abortion as a means of birth control, and	Be it further RESOLVED, that we call on Southern Baptists and all citizens of the nation to work to change those attitudes and conditions which encourage many people to turn to abortion as a means of birth control, and
Be it further RESOLVED, that in the best interest of our society, we reject any indiscriminate attitude toward abortion, as contrary to the biblical view, and	Be it further RESOLVED, that in the best interest of our society, we reject any indiscriminate attitude toward abortion, as contrary to the biblical view, and
Be it further RESOLVED, that we also affirm our conviction about the limited role of government in dealing with matters relating to abortion, and support the right of expectant mothers to the full range of medical services and personal counseling for the preservation of life and health.)	Be it further RESOLVED, that we also affirm our conviction about the limited role of government in dealing with matters relating to abortion, and support the right of expectant mothers to the full range of medical services and personal counseling for the preservation of life and health.

As can be seen the 1977 resolution seems to omit, perhaps mistakenly, the part of the resolution stating "WHEREAS, Every decision for an abortion, for whatever reason must necessarily involve the decision to terminate the life of an innocent human being." Though it would seem strange for a very sensitive issue to see such a big omission. The 1977 Resolution, interestingly, while trying to clarify the matter clouds it further with "we confirm our strong opposition to abortion on demand." This statement would make it seem the SBC is only opposed to abortion on demand, implying the permissibility of abortion for other circumcstances like the 1971/1974 Resolutions affirmed. 

The following year in 1978 the SBC reaffirmed the 1977 resolution on abortion stating:

WHEREAS, Abortion is a matter of continuing moral concern to the American people, and

WHEREAS, The Southern Baptist Convention in annual session in 1977 spoke clearly and forthrightly to this issue,

Be it therefore RESOLVED, that we the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Atlanta in June 1978, reaffirm the resolution passed by the 1977 Kansas City Southern Baptist Convention.--Southern Baptist Convention, Resolution On Abortion. 1978. Atlanta, Georgia

The SBC strangely claims its 1977 resolution was stated "clearly and forthrightly to this issue" when the resolution omitted the section about abortion in all cases being the termination of an innocent life, and it only clearly condemns abortion on demand.

In 1979, the Resolution on abortion states:

WHEREAS, Abortion is a matter of serious concern to the American people in general and to Christians in particular, and

WHEREAS, Messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention have spoken clearly to this issue in 1976 as follow:

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically held a biblical view of the sanctity of human life, and

WHEREAS, Abortion is a very serious moral and spiritual problem of continuing concern to the American people, and

WHEREAS, Christians have a responsibility to deal with all moral and spiritual issues which affect society, including the problems of abortion, and

WHEREAS, The practice of abortion for selfish non-therapeutic reasons wantonly destroys fetal life, dulls our society's moral sensitivity, and leads to a cheapening of all human life, and

Therefore be it RESOLVED, that the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Norfolk in June, 1976 reaffirm the biblical sacredness and dignity of all human life, including fetal life, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we call on Southern Baptists and all citizens of the nation to work to change those attitudes and conditions which encourage many people to turn to abortion as a means of birth control, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that in the best interest of our society, we reject any indiscriminate attitude toward abortion, as contrary to the biblical view, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we also affirm our conviction about the limited role of government in dealing with matters relating to abortion, and support the right of expectant mothers to the full range of medical services and personal counseling for the preservation of life and health.

WHEREAS, This resolution was reaffirmed in 1978.

Therefore be it RESOLVED, that we affirm the positions taken by these Conventions, and

Be it further RESOLVED, that we urge all Southern Baptists to pray earnestly and work faithfully in dealing with this issue--Southern Baptist Convention, Resolution On Abortion. 1979. Houston, Texas.

 The resolution, again, insisting the SBC has been clear, then seems to only directly condemn "non-therapeutic" abortion and "as a means of birth control."

In the 1980 Resolution on Abortion progresses to a clearer pro-life position after years of lack of clarity called clarity:

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically affirmed the biblical teaching of the sanctity of all human life, and

WHEREAS, All medical evidence indicates that abortion ends the life of a developing human being, and

WHEREAS, Our national laws permit a policy commonly referred to as "abortion on demand,"

Be it therefore RESOLVED, That the Southern Baptist Convention reaffirm the view of the Scriptures of the sacredness and dignity of all human life, born and unborn, and

Be it further RESOLVED, That opposition be expressed toward all policies that allow "abortion on demand," and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we abhor the use of tax money or public, tax-supported medical facilities for selfish, non-therapeutic abortion, and

Be it finally RESOLVED, That we favor appropriate legislation and/or a constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion except to save the life of the mother.--Southern Baptist Convention, Resolution On Abortion. 1980. St. Louis, Missouri.

The 1980 resolution says abortion to save the mother's life is the only acceptable time, while just 9 years before in 1971 they accepted it for rape, incest, fetal abnormality.

In 1982 the Resolution reads:

WHEREAS, Both medical science and biblical references indicate that human life begins at conception, and

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have traditionally upheld the sanctity and worth of all human life, both born and pre-born, as being created in the image of God, and

WHEREAS, Current judicial opinion gives no guarantee of protection of pre-born persons, thus permitting the widespread practice of abortion on demand, which has led to the killing of an estimated four thousand developing human beings daily in the United States, and

WHEREAS, Social acceptance of abortion has begun to dull society's respect for all human life, leading to growing occurrences of infanticide, child abuse, and active euthanasia.

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the messengers to the 1982 Southern Baptist Convention affirm that all human life, both born and pre-born, is sacred, bearing the image of God, and is not subject to personal judgments as to "quality of life" based on such subjective criteria as stage of development, abnormality, intelligence level, degree of dependency, cost of medical treatment, or inconvenience to parents.

Be it further RESOLVED, That we abhor the use of federal, state or local tax money; public, tax-supported medical facilities; or Southern Baptist supported medical facilities for the practice of selfish, medically unnecessary abortions and/or the practice of withholding treatment from unwanted or defective newly born infants.

Be it finally RESOLVED, That we support and will work for appropriate legislation and/or constitutional amendment which will prohibit abortions except to save the physical life of the mother, and that we also support and will work for legislation which will prohibit the practice of infanticide.--Southern Baptist Convention, Resolution On Abortion And Infanticide. New Orleans, Louisiana - 1982  (Emphasis mine)

This 1982 Resolution includes slight improvement and embellishment over the previous resolution. It changes the language from "unborn" to "preborn" a term that is important to Abortion Abolitionists. The Resolution affirms life starts at conception, which was not clearly stated in the previous years resolutions. The Resolution only allows abortion strictly to save the "physical life of the mother." The addition of the word physical restricts the reasons for abortion down to physical, whereas the 1971 Resolution on abortion (that was advocating for looser abortions laws) stated "damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother" as valid reasons for an abortion, this resolution also rejects the fetal "abnormality" exception the 1971 Resolution defended.

The 1984 Resolution on abortion makes slight changes but advocates for more anti-abortion activism while preserving the language for the physical life of the mother:

WHEREAS, The Southern Baptist Convention, meeting in New Orleans in June 1982, clearly stated its opposition to abortion and called upon Southern Baptists to work for appropriate legislation and/or constitutional amendment which will prohibit abortions except to save the physical life of the mother; and

WHEREAS, In addition to legislative remedies for this national sin, it is incumbent that we encourage the woman who is considering abortion to think seriously about the grave significance of such action by presenting information to her about the unborn child in her womb, who is a living individual human being, and encourage her to consider alternatives to abortion; and

WHEREAS, Christlike love requires that such alternatives be made available.

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Kansas City, Missouri, June 12-14, 1984, encourage all of its institutions, cooperating churches, and members to work diligently to provide counseling, housing, and adoption placement services for unwed mothers with the specific intent of bringing them into a relationship with Jesus Christ and/or a sense of Christian responsibility; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we deplore the practice of performing abortions, as well as dispensing to minors without parental consent or even notification, contraceptive medications which have potentially dangerous side effects, and deplore also the use of tax funds for such activities; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon all Southern Baptists to renew their commitment to support and work for legislation and/or constitutional amendment which will prohibit abortion except to save the physical life of the mother; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage Southern Baptists to inquire whether or not their physicians perform abortions on demand or give referrals for abortions, and that we commend those of the medical profession who abstain from performing abortions or making abortion referrals; and

Be it finally RESOLVED, That we urge our agencies and institutions to provide leadership for our cooperating churches and members, by preparing literature to take a clear and strong stand against abortion, and to inform and motivate our members to action to eliminate abortion on demand.--Southern Baptist Convention, Resolution On Abortion Kansas City, Missouri - 1984

Again, we see language similar to 1982, but again still mentioning the exception for "the physical life of the mother," the language reverts to "unborn" instead of "pre-born"

In 1986 the SBC in a resolution on adolescent pregnancy states:

We also affirm that abortion is unscriptural and has harmful effects on the mother as well as the elimination of the unborn child.--Southern Baptist Convention, 1986. Resolution On Sex Education And Adolescent Pregnancy. Atlanta, Georgia

 The resolution overtly calls abortion unscriptural, a big improvement over Billy Graham in 1969 who said the Scripture is silent on the matter in cases of rape, incest, fetal abnormality and the life of the mother at risk, and it is up to each person's conscience.

The 1987 Resolution seems to be fairly creative, and it did not copy the language of prior years

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have traditionally upheld the sanctity of all innocent human life and have opposed abortion on demand; and

WHEREAS, 4,000 unborn children are being killed daily in America's abortuaries;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That we, the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention, meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, June 16-18, 1987, encourage the Christian Life Commission to continue the expansion of program services related to the sanctity of human life and to actively lobby for legislation to protect the lives of the unborn; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage the Christian Life Commission to continue to make the abortion issue a priority on its agenda; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage the Home Mission Board to train churches for ministry in crisis pregnancy centers and residential care homes for pregnant women and children; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage churches, associations, and state conventions to expand their children's homes ministry to include outpatient and residential care for unwed mothers; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage all agencies and institutions of the SBC to use their resources and program ministries to promote the sanctity of human life; and

Be it further RESOLVED, That we encourage individuals to minister to those who need physical, emotional, and spiritual support in the midst of a crisis pregnancy; and

Be it finally RESOLVED, That we encourage all churches of the SBC to observe Sanctity of Human Life Sunday on the Convention's calendar, January 17, 1988.--Southern Baptist Convention, 1987 Resolution On Abortion. St. Louis, Missouri.

The language advocates more activism against abortion, including resources to prevent them. The SBC honestly says they have always opposed abortion on demand, though one must wonder if their advocacy for looser abortion laws lead to abortion on demand unintentionally. This resolution does not directly mention the sort of abortions tolerable or forbidden besides the opposition to abortion on demand. The mention of lobbying for the "lives of the unborn" seems to apply to all those yet born. The Convention encourages members to adopt Sanctity of Life Sunday.

A 1987 Resolution on the Danforth Amendment starts off:

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have traditionally opposed abortion; --

The Resolution as a whole is to prevent government expansion on abortion, and the Left's push to make it a civil right. The SBC though makes a whooper with the blanket claim they "traditionally opposed abortion," rather than their language in other years that was more honest when it stated they are "opposed abortion on demand." The omission of "on demand" gives the false impression the Convention did not have giant exceptions for when abortion was tolerable as it did in 1971.

Since that time the SBC has included several more statements on abortion, all of which are opposed to it and encourage its abolition. In 2019 the SBC condemned the decisions of governors that expanded abortion even to birth and commended the southern governors that passed laws verging on abolition of abortion.

KJV 1611 and its Popishness

I have recently run into a community of Seventh Day Adventists that are very anti-Catholic and very pro-KJV, insisting that the other Bibles are riddled with the fleas of Popery. Let's check out some of the Popish Romanism the KJV 1611 is logged full of.

In the KJV 1611 Kalendar under February

Popish Holyday the "Purification of Mary" aka Candlemas is on February 2!

Popish feast day of St Valentine is listed under its present date February 14!

Prayers listed under February 2 includes Wisd. 9 and Wisd 12 (a Catholic book omitted in modern edition of the KJV 1611)

Prayers listed under February 24 includes Wisd xix (the last chapter of this papist book!)

Next Page--March

This page exposes even grander examples of the KJV's popery!

The Popish feast day of St Edward the Martyr--A Romish English, Saint, King and Martyr is listed under March 18 the traditional papist date

The Romish feast day of the Annunciation of Mary is listed under March 25--9 months before the holyday Christmas.

The Popish feast of the founder of Western monasticism St Benedict of Nursia is celebrated on March 21, as some do.

Even worse, in its most blatant, unashamed example of Popery yet it lists a Romish Pope on its Kalendar!

Pope Gregorie aka Gregory the Great (reigned AD 590-604) is listed under its present day of March 12!

Conclusion: This and many more show the Catholic influence in the King James Version 1611 Bible. A good seventh day Adventist or good Baptist should either reject this so called translation for its obvious influence by Popery or become a miserable papist himself! As it must be asked if Adventists and Baptists insist the KJV 1611 is perfect because of its pure manuscripts from Textus receptus of the Antioch Line, then why is it no Baptist or Adventist makes a modern-updated version of the text into modern English, rather than spend all the time on the older English of the KJV--since after all the NKJV is corrupt? Could it be no Baptist or Adventist is qualified to do such a thing, or that they cannot trust their own people?!

ADDENDUM:

Per request, the KJV 1611 calendar for December-January:

December:

Notice it includes the "Conc. of Mary" ie the Feast of the Immaculate Conception on December 8,  feast day of St Nicholas on December 6, Luci virgin (St Lucy) on December 13, as well as Christmas on December 25, the feast of [Pope] St Sylvester on December 31

January:

Hebrews 10:14 does not prove Calvinism

This article is long overdue.

Calvinism, and a number of other Protestant sects (which descend from Calvinism including "evangelicalism," Baptists, etc) teach that when a person is saved God magically pretends not to see all their sins and filth, pretending they are morally perfect--just like His Son! One of the verses they love to appeal to, the Calvinists especially, is Hebrews 10:14 which is the King James Version says:

For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.-Hebrews 10:14 

The Greek text of Hebrews:

μιᾷ γὰρ προσφορᾷ τετελείωκεν εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς τοὺς ἁγιαζομένους.--Hebrews 10:14

At first glance, it seems to say exactly what the Calvinists say it means, that we are permanently made perfect at the moment of regeneration. But, is Hebrews 10:14 saying that? No!

Hebrews uses the word "perfect" in a special way.  As I show, the word for perfect is τετελείωκεν.
Let's go through all the times Hebrews uses the root word τελειόω ("perfect"), how Hebrews uses it may shock, considering who one of the people that are "made perfect" in Hebrews.

For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.--Hebrews 2:10

Ἔπρεπεν γὰρ αὐτῷ, δι' ὃν τὰ πάντα καὶ δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, πολλοὺς υἱοὺς εἰς δόξαν ἀγαγόντα τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τῆς σωτηρίας αὐτῶν διὰ παθημάτων τελειῶσαι.--Hebrews 2:10

And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;--Hebrews 5:9 

καὶ τελειωθεὶς ἐγένετο πᾶσιν τοῖς ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ αἴτιος σωτηρίας αἰωνίου,--Hebrews 5:9

For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.--Hebrews 7:19

οὐδὲν γὰρ ἐτελείωσεν ὁ νόμος, ἐπεισαγωγὴ δὲ κρείττονος ἐλπίδος, δι' ἧς ἐγγίζομεν τῷ θεῷ.--Hebrews 7:19

For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.--Hebrews 7:28

ὁ νόμος γὰρ ἀνθρώπους καθίστησιν ἀρχιερεῖς ἔχοντας ἀσθένειαν, ὁ λόγος δὲ τῆς ὁρκωμοσίας τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον υἱόν, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον.--Hebrews 7:28 

Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;--Hebrews 9:9

ἥτις παραβολὴ εἰς τὸν καιρὸν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα, καθ' ἣν δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίαι προσφέρονται μὴ δυνάμεναι κατὰ συνείδησιν τελειῶσαι τὸν λατρεύοντα,--Hebrews 9:9

For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.--Hebrews 10:1

Σκιὰν γὰρ ἔχων ὁ νόμος τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν, οὐκ αὐτὴν τὴν εἰκόνα τῶν πραγμάτων, κατ' ἐνιαυτὸν ταῖς αὐταῖς θυσίαις ἃς προσφέρουσιν εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς οὐδέποτε δύναται τοὺς προσερχομένους τελειῶσαι· --Hebrews 10:1

 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.--Hebrews 10:14

 μιᾷ γὰρ προσφορᾷ τετελείωκεν εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς τοὺς ἁγιαζομένους.--Hebrews 10:14

God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.--Hebrews 11:40

τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ ἡμῶν κρεῖττόν τι προβλεψαμένου, ἵνα μὴ χωρὶς ἡμῶν τελειωθῶσιν.--Hebrews 11:40 

To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect--Hebrews 12:23

καὶ ἐκκλησίᾳ πρωτοτόκων ἀπογεγραμμένων ἐν οὐρανοῖς, καὶ κριτῇ θεῷ πάντων, καὶ πνεύμασι δικαίων τετελειωμένων,--Hebrews 12:23

 As we see according to Hebrews 2:10 and Hebrews 5:9 Christ was "made perfect" similar to how Hebrews 10:14 has people "made perfect" because of Christ. If we assume as the Calvinist do, that "made perfect" means that we who were once sinners BECAME perfect through an alien imputation, then Hebrews 2:10, Hebrews 5:9 (and Hebrews 7:28) would mean Christ was not always morally perfect, but only became morally perfect! We know this is not the case, because the Holy Scriptures are clear that Christ was always sinless and morally perfect!

When Hebrews says made perfect in these verse, it means "made consecrated" or "ordained." In fact, Hebrews 7:28 as I showed above uses the same Greek root for "perfect" but the KJV translates it in this instance as "consecrated" instead of "perfect." In fact many Protestant perfered resources like such as Strong's concordance (which is NOT a Lexicon) says:

G5048 From G5046; to complete, that is, (literally) accomplish, or (figuratively) consummate (in character): - consecrate, finish, fulfil, (make) perfect. 

I should also mention that many commentaries note that the word "perfect" may have a technical meaning that's related to the Septuagint. τελειόω in this view may be an ellipse for the "filling of hands" used in the Torah for the ordination of priests, since most of the time its followed with the works "the hands [of]"--"τελειώσεις τὰς χεῖρας". The translation I am using says "validate" instead of "perfect", however, another translation I have does use the word perfect for the Greek word τελειώσεις . τελειώσεις is seen in the LXX the following times (generally in relation to the priesthood):

καὶ ζώσεις αὐτοὺς ταῖς ζώναις καὶ περιθήσεις αὐτοῖς τὰς κιδάρεις καὶ ἔσται αὐτοῖς ἱερατεία ἐμοὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ τελειώσεις τὰς χεῖρας Ααρων καὶ τὰς χεῖρας τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ--Exodus 29:9 Septuagint (LXX)

"and gird them with the sashes and put on them the turbans, and they shall have a priesthood to me forever. And you shall validate (τελειώσεις) the hands of Aaron and the hands of his sons"--Exodus 29:9 (NETS, LXX translation)

καὶ ἡ στολὴ τοῦ ἁγίου ἥ ἐστιν Ααρων ἔσται τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ μετ’ αὐτόν χρισθῆναι αὐτοὺς ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ τελειῶσαι τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν--Exodus 29:29 (LXX)

and the vestment of the holy place that is for Aaron shall be for his sons after him, for them to be anointed in them and to validate their hands.--Exodus 29:29 (NETS, LXX translation)

ἔδονται αὐτά ἐν οἷς ἡγιάσθησαν ἐν αὐτοῖς τελειῶσαι τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἁγιάσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἀλλογενὴς οὐκ ἔδεται ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ἔστιν γὰρ ἅγια--Exodus 29:33 (LXX)

they shall eat these things that they have been consecrated by, to validate their hands, to consecrate them, and an alien shall not eat from these things, for they are holy--Exodus 29:33 (NETS, LXX translation)

καὶ ποιήσεις Ααρων καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ οὕτως κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην σοι ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τελειώσεις αὐτῶν τὰς χεῖρας--Exodus 29:35 (LXX)

And you shall do to Aaron and his sons thus according to all things I commanded you, For seven days you shall validate their hands--Exodus 29:35 (NETS, LXX translation)

καὶ λαβὼν ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χριστὸς ὁ τετελειωμένος τὰς χεῖρας ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ μόσχου καὶ εἰσοίσει αὐτὸ ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου--Leviticus 4:5 (LXX)

and the priest, who has his hands validated, after taking some of the blood of the bull calf, shall then bring it into the tent of witness--Leviticus 4:5 (NETS, LXX translation)

 

καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς θύρας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου οὐκ ἐξελεύσεσθε ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἕως ἡμέρα πληρωθῇ ἡμέρα τελειώσεως ὑμῶν ἑπτὰ γὰρ ἡμέρας τελειώσει τὰς χεῖρας ὑμῶν--Leviticus 8:33

And you shall not go outside the door of the tent of witness seven days until the day of your validation is completed.  For for seven days he will validate your hands.--Leviticus 8:33 (NETS, LXX translation) 

ἐξιλάσεται ὁ ἱερεύς ὃν ἂν χρίσωσιν αὐτὸν καὶ ὃν ἂν τελειώσουσιν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ ἱερατεύειν μετὰ τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται τὴν στολὴν τὴν λινῆν στολὴν ἁγίαν--Leviticus 16:32 (LXX)

the priest, he whom they shall anoint, and he whose hands they shall validate to serve as priests in his father's place shall make atonement, and they shall put on the linen garment, the holy vestment.--Leviticus 16:32 (NETS, LXX translation) 

καὶ ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ μέγας ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἐπικεχυμένου ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ ἐλαίου τοῦ χριστοῦ καὶ τετελειωμένου * ἐνδύσασθαι τὰ ἱμάτια τὴν κεφαλὴν οὐκ ἀποκιδαρώσει καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια οὐ διαρρήξει--Leviticus 21:10 (LXX) *other version of the LXX add the "the hands" that is "τὰς χεῖρας"

And the priest who is great among his brothers, when the anointing oil has been poured on his head and when he has been validated * to wear the vestments, shall not unbind his head and shall not tear his vestments-Leviticus 21:10 (NETS, LXX translation)  *other version of the LXX add the "the hands" that is "τὰς χεῖρας"

ταῦτα τὰ ὀνόματα τῶν υἱῶν Ααρων οἱ ἱερεῖς οἱ ἠλειμμένοι οὓς ἐτελείωσαν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἱερατεύειν--Numbers 3:3 LXX

These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the anointed priest, whose hands they had validated to serve as priests.--Numbers 3:3 (NETS, LXX translation) 

 Anyway, these are times it appears in the Torah. It appears around a half more dozen times elsewhere in the Hebrew scriptures.

So, it may be Hebrews is using this meaning, though it lacks the "the hands" part, but this may be because literal hands had nothing to do with Jesus "ordination." Or perhaps it is an ellipse for the whole phrase.

Regardless, the case is when Hebrews 10:14 says "made perfect forever" it does not refer to "imputed righteousness" or anything else of the sort at all, but refers to consecration, a non moral "perfection," perhaps the ordination to the priesthood (of believers) that is the "royal priesthood" mentioned in Exodus 19:6 and 1 Peter 2:8-9.

Finally, I should also note that when reading Hebrews 10:14, Calvinists are awful fond of reading the KJV at this point, and ignoring many translations that read the latter half of the sentence different. The KJV and Calvinists read it as  having all the "sanctification" as if it occurred once and in the past, as we see:

For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.-Hebrews 10:14 KJV

However, some other translations state:

For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.(NIV)

For by that one offering he forever made perfect those who are being made holy.(NLT)

For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.(ESV)

Here is what the NIGTC says on Hebrews 10:14 on the matter that concerns us:

Here, as elsewhere in Hebrews (->2:10), τελειοω implies the fulfillment of the Christian goal, namely an access to God which was formerly open only to the high priest. Hebrews emphasizes the unique priesthood of Jesus. (Vanhoye 1980.242-247), and thus does not speak explicitly of the priesthood of all believers; but he comes close to doing so here, in language which is not only cultic (Bourgin 1959.79-81) but priestly (Zimmermann 1977.116-125, following G. Delling in TDNT 8.83f.) The perfect tense joins with the following phrase to emphasize the permanent effects of Christ’s sacrifice.

Εις το διηωεχες: Christ now has continuous and uninterrupted access (v. 12) to the Father, and shares authority at his right hand.  Because of his one sacrifice, Christians, though still on earth, share in the same permanent access to the Father.

Εις αγιαζομενους: ->2:11. The force of the present participle, in apparent contrast with the perfect ηγιασμενοι in v.10, is disputed (MHT 1.127): is it timeless (so Riggenbach, Bruce), iterative (“those who from time to time receive sanctification”: unlikely in this context), or durative (“those who are in the process of sanctification”; so Michel)? The most likely explanations, not mutually exclusive, are (1) that the author felt that yet another perfect here would be redundant; and (2) that the present was used to balance the previous words and avoid the possible implications that Christians had already reached their goal. “Sanctification has taken place, but it still remains a task” (Braun); “the appropriation of the enduring effects of Christ’s act is an ongoing present reality” (Attridge). ‘Αγιαζω and τελειοω (->2:11).are used interchangeably in Hebrews Ƥ⁴⁶ reads ανασωζομενουσ**, “who are being saved” (26x LXX). Here by transcriptal error (Attridge. Against Hoskier 27-30).--The New International Greek New Testament Commentary: The Epistle to the Hebrews, on Hebrews 10:14, p 511, by Paul Ellingworth

Interesting this book was given a positive review by Reformed Theological Review.  According to this commentary, Hebrews 10:14 is saying we are always given access to God by Christ's offering and though sanctification was set up by Christ, we still have to go through the process.

Addendum: Note, (here) is a good Catholic article on this from another blog that I read years ago but forgot about it until now.

He also mentioned Calvin did not agree with the translation of "perfected":

"At the same time the word teteleioken, which I render "has consecrated," may yet be rendered "has perfected;" but I prefer the former meaning, because he treats here of sacred things."-- https://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/hebrews/10.htm

Infant Baptism in the Talmud

Today, I was in a room where Anticatholics, who are Reformed, in this case reformed Baptist, insisted infant baptism is completely without basis in ancient Israel, one of them even said Jewish Encyclopedia does not mention it, and he also alluded to the Talmud implying that it too does not teach infant baptism. I objected and said if a baby were part of the family of a "ger" a convert to Judaism--the child would be baptized. I showed them this website which states the procedures for a baby converting:

The conversion of a female infant or child according to Conservative and Orthodox practices only requires tevilah (immersion in a ritual bath called a mikveh). A male child also requires immersion in the mikveh. While parents might have trepidation about immersing a newborn completely in water, the supervising rabbi will facilitate the procedure with great care ensuring that the infant is safe during this momentary immersion.....A beit din, usually consisting of three rabbis, is convened for the immersion. Parents can enter the mikveh. If the children are old enough, they recite the needed prayers; if not, a rabbi does so for them. After the tevilah ceremony is completed, and a name chosen if one has not already been selected, the child is declared by the beit din to be Jewish.

Furthermore, I have found in the Talmud, which they requested I use, it states:

R. Jose stated, It happened at 'En Bol that the infant was made to undergo ritual immersion  before her mother; and Rabbi stated, It once happened at Beth She'arim that the infant was made to undergo ritual immersion  before her mother; and R. Joseph stated, It once happened at Pumbeditha that the infant was made to undergo ritual immersion  before her mother;  One can well understand the incidents spoken of by R. Joseph and Rabbi  since [immersion was necessary as a protection for] the terumah  of Palestine; but why was that necessary in the case spoken of by R. Joseph,  seeing that Samuel had laid down: The terumah of a country outside the Land of Israel is not forbidden unless [it came in contact] with a person whose uncleanness emanated from his body,  and this applies only to eating but not to contact?-- Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Niddah 32a

 As we see, this issue was not even one that Rabbis debated over, it was already accepted as a fact that babies were baptized, and why wouldn't they be, they can become ritually "unclean" like adults! 

What, however, of the following statement of Raba. 'If a pregnant gentile woman was converted, there is no need for her son to perform ritual immersion'.  Why is there no need for him to perform immersion?-- Babylonian Talmud: Tractate ‘Abodah Zarah57a

Note the discussion here is why SHOULDN'T a baby still in a mothers womb be subject to baptism after birth, the reason is because his mother while still pregnant converted(and assumedly was baptized) therefore making the child have no need for baptism in the Jewish mindset.

Also, Tractate Kethuboth11a discusses the conversion of minors, including ones less than "three years and one day old" and states "A minor proselyte is immersed by the direction of the court."

There are other sources too, but this should suffice for now.

Each Shall die for his own sin

Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin. -Deuteronomy 24:16

The idea that Christ died as if He commited our sin violates the Biblical teaching that each man be put to death for his OWN sins.  This verse, however, seems to only apply to adults, since young children in the Bible are put to death, or killed, because of their parents sins, as in the case of David's son, or the nations God commanded the Israelites to destroys.  Regardless, Christ could not have been put to death for the sins of others (at least justly!). Rather, Christ willingly laid down His own life for the sake of others, not that He should die as their substitute, but that by His righteous death, God would show mercy to mankind, thus allowing man forgiveness on the condition they repent of their sins.  After all, Christ did make several warning statements that certain sins would cause the soul to go to Hell forever, as we see in Matthew 5 with sexual sins, Matthew 6 with withholding forgiving your brother's sins and so on.

On another point, Deuteronomy 24:16 is a verse anti/counter-Missionary Jews use against Christians.  Their claim is legitimate, but only against baptistic and Calvinistic types of Christians that espouse this particular view of the atonement that says "Christ died in our place" or "He took the wrath of God in our place" and so on.  Rather, the Biblical Christ was a propitiation for the sins of the world, meaning His death provided MERCY for mankind. 

I have already written before that the idea of a penal substitution when logically followed out is a denial of Trinitarianism, or can be an affirmation of a sort of Arianism (since God cannot be forsaken by God), or some form of theology where Christ as a man and Christ as God are divorced (undoing the incarnation).

Calvinists try to prove a penaly substitution with verses like 2 Corinthians 5:21, or Isaiah 53 and so on.  When the fact is 2 Corinthians 5:21 by saying Christ "became sin for us" is an expression St Paul was using for a sin offering, and Isaiah 53 doesn't mean God treated Christ as if He had our sins, in fact Matthew 8:17 interprets this part of Isaiah as Jesus healing the sick and casting out demons:

When it was evening, they brought him many who were possessed by demons, and he drove out the spirits by a word and cured all the sick, to fulfill what had been said by Isaiah the prophet: “He took away our infirmities and bore our diseases.”--Matthew 8:16-17