The wording of Hebrews 10:26 in the King James Version (seen in the graphic at the reader's left) is somewhat clumsy and outdated, but I suppose that is not surprising in light of the fact that the English rendering of this verse is over four centuries old. Because it tends to be clumsy, it can also be, for some, rather confusing. Even more puzzling for many students of the Scriptures is that this text, as here worded, seems to be in conflict theologically with other vital Christian doctrines relating to our redemption and salvation. Specifically, this verse appears, at least at first reading, to refute the powerful Pauline proclamation of Divine grace found in Ephesians 1:7, in which this apostle tells us we have the forgiveness of "willful/deliberate sins" (and since this statement appears in the present tense, and the sins are plural, it speaks of ongoing sins as we journey through life). I dealt with the meaning of this statement in Ephesians 1:7 in my previous article titled, "Deliverance from Deliberate Sins: Insight from a Greek Word in Ephesians 1:7" (Reflections #874). If Paul declares our continuing willful sins are forgiven by the sacrifice of our Savior on the cross, but the writer of the passage in Hebrews says these sins are NOT covered by that bloody sacrifice on the cross (or any other sacrifice), then there is a huge problem here that needs to be addressed. A Reflections reader in Texas noticed this after reading my last article, and immediately wrote me, saying, "Al, I really appreciate you taking on this subject, but I'm pretty sure that you are going to be asked about Hebrew 10:26. Would you please respond to that challenge in your next issue, and thanks!" The reader in Texas raises a very legitimate concern, and it deserves to be addressed, which I will do in this present article.

Before you continue, however, I would urge you to go back and read my previous issue of Reflections (just click on the link above), for the study you are about to read will make a lot more sense if you have the context in mind of the apostle Paul's prior teaching found in Ephesians 1:7. There are several key Greek words and theological concepts that one must be aware of before the concerns raised by Hebrews 10:26 can be truly understood and reconciled with ultimate biblical Truth. The two passages really are not in conflict with one another at all; indeed, they harmonize with each other and with Truth quite well. On the surface, due to imperfect translations of key terms and the rise of certain church dogmas over the centuries, the two verses might seem to be at odds with one another theologically. I think you will soon find, as you delve more deeply into the texts, that this assumption is completely unwarranted and untrue. Let's begin with the wording (in English) of the Hebrews 10:26 passage. In the graphic at the beginning of this article you have the wording of the King James Version. Consider several other English versions and translations of this text:

1. New King James Version - For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.
2. New International Version - If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left.
3. New Life Version - If we keep on sinning because we want to after we have received and know the truth, there is no gift that will take away sins then.
4. Common English Bible - If we make the decision to sin after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there isn't a sacrifice for sins left any longer.
5. Contemporary English Version - No sacrifices can be made for people who decide to sin after they find out about the truth.
6. English Standard Version - For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.
7. Good News Translation - For there is no longer any sacrifice that will take away sins if we purposely go on sinning after the truth has been made known to us.
8. New Revised Standard Version - For if we willfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.
9. The Living Bible - If anyone sins deliberately by rejecting the Savior after knowing the truth of forgiveness, this sin is not covered by Christ's death; there is no way to get rid of it.
10. The Message - If we give up and turn our backs on all we've learned, all we've been given, all the truth we now know, we repudiate Christ's sacrifice and are left on our own to face the judgment.
11. New American Standard Bible - For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.

The point of confusion is fairly obvious just from a general reading of the two texts. In Ephesians 1:7, Paul informs his readers that in Christ Jesus "we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace" (KJV). The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is clearly in view, for our redemption is "through His blood" that was shed on the cross. This act of redeeming us resulted in "the forgiveness of sins," an act of Divine grace! As noted in my previous article, the word in this passage translated "sins" is NOT the normal Greek word for sin ("hamartia"), but is the lesser used Greek word "paraptoma," which refers to a reckless, willful, deliberate, intentional falling short of God's will for our lives. Paul says that when we are "in Christ Jesus" (i.e., in relationship with Him), our misdeeds and missteps, even those which may be willful and deliberate at times, are forgiven by the blood of His sacrifice. Yet, the writer of Hebrews (who was not Paul, by the way: "The Authorship of Hebrews: In-depth Investigation into Identity" - Reflections #128) informs us that there is NO sacrifice, thus NO forgiveness, for those persons who "sin willfully" after receiving the knowledge of what Christ did for them. This, then, is our dilemma. Which of these views is true, for they seem to be declaring opposing doctrines? Are those "in Christ" who sin willfully (and who among us doesn't at times?!) unable to be forgiven? Are those "in Christ" who commit on occasion deliberate acts that are contrary to the will of God (and again, who doesn't ?!) beyond the reach of the cleansing power of the blood of Christ? Does His sacrifice NOT cover them?! If so, are any of us saved?!! This is a very serious matter, and we need to clarify what seems to be a huge conflict between these two biblical texts.

Dr. F. F. Bruce (1910-1990), the renowned Scottish biblical scholar, author, and university professor, correctly observed, with regard to the text in Hebrews 10:26f, "This passage was destined to have repercussions in Christian history beyond what our author could have foreseen" [The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 258]. The American theologian, author, and abolitionist Dr. Albert Barnes (1798-1870) wrote, "This passage has given rise to much difference of opinion" [Barnes' Notes on the Bible, e-Sword]. Dr. Matthew Henry (1662-1714), the acclaimed Nonconformist theologian and author from Wales, also observed, "This text has been the occasion of great distress to some gracious souls, for they have been ready to conclude that every willful sin, after conviction and against knowledge, is the unpardonable sin; but this has been their infirmity and error" [Commentary on the Whole Bible, e-Sword]. The failing of many who examine this text is that they fail to consider the context within which this statement appears, as well as failing to carefully consider the actual Greek words employed in the text itself, both of which are critical to one's grasp of the author's original intent. In other words, when the writer of Hebrews 10:26 speaks of someone persisting in sin, we must ask: (1) of whom is he speaking, (2) what word for "sin" does he use, (3) what specific term is employed that we translate into English as "persisting in," and (4) what is the message here in view of the overall context of this epistle and the main purpose of this author? One then needs to consider: in light of the responses to these same questions posed with respect to Ephesians 1:7, how do these two passages relate to one another? Is there consistency of teaching, or is their inconsistency? Does one passage truly refute the other, as some have suggested, or are the two actually in harmony, and the confusion lies with the reader, not with the texts themselves?

Look at the word "sin" used in the two texts, for example. Are they the same word? In English, the word "sin" may be used in both, but in Greek the words are different. When Paul spoke of sins or trespasses done deliberately or willfully, he used just one word, and it was not the commonly used word for "sin" (hamartia) in the NT writings. Instead, Paul used the word "paraptoma," with the concept of willfulness and deliberateness inherent in the word itself. It spoke of various willful failings that one makes while still IN HIM. Thus, these missteps by those attempting to walk in the light with their Lord, but who daily fall short of perfection in that endeavor (and sometimes willfully), are covered by the blood of Christ. His sacrifice continually cleanses them of ALL sin, for these redeemed ones are IN HIM. Jesus, having dealt with the state/condition of sin by a once-for-all sacrifice, put an end to that state for us, and He transferred us to a new state/condition: one of GRACE. We are transferred from death to life, and our daily stumbles and falls are no longer counted against us while IN HIM.

This is NOT what is being talked about in Hebrews 10:26, however. The word for "sin" is not "paraptoma," which describes these individual faults and failings, some of which are, sadly, willful in nature, but it is the word "hamartia," which is describing the state or condition of sin, which ALL MEN are in OUTSIDE of Christ; a state our Lord "took away" for those who believe and are thus now IN HIM. So, the writer of Hebrews is talking about some circumstance in which some people willfully and deliberately embrace this state or condition of sin, which the sacrifice of Jesus "took away." The context tells us that these people who do this, do so AFTER learning the Truth of what the Lord did for them (vs. 26), and AFTER being sanctified by His blood (vs. 29). The writer also states that this action of embracing this "state of sin" is done by a deliberate act on their part. They didn't stumble back into that "state of sin," they chose it. He uses the Greek adverb "hekousios," which appears only here and in 1 Peter 5:2. It means "voluntarily, of one's own accord" [Dr. Kenneth S. Wuest, Word Studies from the Greek NT, vol. 2 - Hebrews, p. 183]. It should also be pointed out that this voluntary embracing of the state or condition of sin is phrased as a present participle in the Greek, not as an aorist, thus informing us that one is willfully, deliberately, voluntarily persisting in this state/condition of sin. It is a rejection of walking in the light, and a voluntary return to an habitual life of sin, and it is done AFTER having experienced the blessed state of Grace where such sins are covered and forgiven while IN HIM. When one rejects God's greatest gift, however, when one rejects Jesus and His sacrifice, what is left?! No further gift remains. A return to the sacrifices of Judaism won't avail them. They have trampled underfoot the Son of God and counted His blood as "common," which is an insult to the Holy Spirit of God (Hebrews 10:29). When one does this voluntarily, willfully, they have passed that point of no return (Hebrews 6:4-6), and all that remains for them "is a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume" them (Hebrews 10:27).

The difference, therefore, between Ephesians 1:7 and Hebrew 10:26, is that the former speaks of the blessed reality of having our misdeeds and stumblings, some of which, sadly, we will do knowingly and deliberately, forgiven because we are still IN HIM, whereas the latter speaks of those who had chosen to embrace Jesus, but who later chose to deliberately reject Him and His sacrifice, and who willfully returned to a life and state of habitual sin. For the former, such occasional deliberate acts are covered by His blood; for the latter, because of their deliberate rejection of Jesus and His blood and their deliberate embracing of the state of sin as a lifestyle, no sacrifice remains, only judgment, for they trampled both Jesus and His blood into the dirt. Both texts proclaim Truth; neither text is in conflict with the other, for they are not even describing the same type or condition of sin, nor the same type of person. The confusion of some over these two texts is quickly cleared up by considering both context and text properly. The Greek scholar Dr. Kenneth Wuest, in his comments on the Hebrew 10:26f text, correctly states, "This willful sin must be defined in its context. It will not do to ignore the historical background of this book and its analysis, and then put an arbitrary meaning upon the words. That is not exegesis, but eisegesis" [Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek NT, vol. 2 - Hebrews, p. 183]. Although the immediate context of the Hebrew epistle is Jewish Christians rejecting Jesus and returning to Judaism; rejecting HIS blood and embracing again the blood of bulls and goats, thinking that in them one may find the solution to the state/condition of sin, one must also not discount the broader context of those who reject Jesus and His blood for a return to the world. Both are deadly departures from faith IN HIM, although one seeks to find other solutions for sin, while the other has no interest in a solution at all, but joyfully returns to a life of sin.

"This case is that of a deliberate apostate - one who has utterly rejected Jesus Christ and His atonement, and renounced the whole Gospel system. It has nothing to do with backsliders in our common use of that term. A man may be overtaken in a fault, or he may deliberately go into a sin, and yet neither of these renounce the Gospel, nor do they deny the Lord that bought him. His case is dreary and dangerous, but it is not hopeless; no case is hopeless but that of the deliberate apostate, who rejects the whole Gospel system, after having been saved by grace. To him there remains no more sacrifice for sin; for there is but the one sacrifice - Jesus - and this he has utterly rejected" [Dr. Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Whole Bible, vol. 6, p. 757]. "The context suggests that something much more serious is in his mind than what Paul calls being 'overtaken in any trespass.' ... That outright apostasy is intended here - those who have deliberately abandoned reliance on the perfect sacrifice of Christ - seems plain from the language of verse 29. ... This is that renunciation of Christianity against which he warned his readers in chapter 6:4-8. To have received the knowledge of the truth and then reject it is to give up the only way of salvation" [Dr. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 258-259].

Let's be painfully honest with ourselves! ALL of us who are in Christ Jesus, ALL of us who believe in Him and wear His blessed name, will at times in our walk with Him through this life commit acts that are sinful. It is the reality of our fallen nature; and sometimes these sins will be voluntary, willful, and deliberate. We will find ourselves in the same state of disgust with ourselves as the apostle Paul did in Romans 7:14ff. However, as Paul himself realized, God's grace and love, and the blood of His Son, covers/propitiates those sins continuously as long as we strive, with the help of His indwelling Spirit, to walk in the light and become more and more like Him in our attitudes and actions. Will we ever be perfect? NO!! But, we WILL be forgiven, and we WILL be continuously cleansed, by the blood of His Son's sacrifice. BUT what becomes of us if, AFTER having come to this state of grace IN HIM, we willfully and voluntarily and deliberately choose, of our own free will, to REJECT our Savior and His sacrifice and RETURN to that state/condition of sin? Then, the Hebrew writer declares, we have cast off the only source of our redemption, for there is no other sacrifice that "takes away the sin of the world" except the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Reject that and we face certain judgment! In Ephesians 1:7, Paul speaks of those Christians who choose to REMAIN in Christ, but who at times along the way will stumble and fall, and who will at times do so willfully. Such believers are covered. The Hebrew writer, however, speaks of those who REJECT Christ, and who, in so doing, RETURN to the state/condition of sin from which His sacrifice provided the only source of relief. Thus, by their rejection of Him, they perish.

John Darby (1800-1882), the British scholar and Bible translator (translating the Scriptures from the Hebrew and Greek into English, Dutch, German, and French), made this observation about the text in Hebrews 10, "This is about the renunciation of the confession of Christ, deliberately preferring, after having known the truth, to walk according to one's own will in sin. It was not simple disobedience, however evil that might be; it was contempt of the grace of God, and of that which He had done, in the Person of Jesus, in order to deliver us from the consequences of disobedience" [Synopsis of the Bible, e-Sword]. The Anglican priest and author Robert Hawker (1753-1827), known as "the Star of the West" for his very popular preaching, wrote, "Willful sins against light and knowledge are not the sin which the writer alluded to in this scripture. Such there are in the best of men!" [Poor Man's Commentary, e-Sword]. There is simply no way, from the text and context itself, Hawker states, that this passage "could allude to the common sins and infirmities of the brethren, whether involuntary errors or those of a more deliberate nature" [ibid]. Such apostates have "rejected all the work, the words, the preaching, the pleadings of the Holy Spirit. ... They have despised God's mercy and trampled it underfoot; they have treated His blood as if it was unholy" [Dr. B. W. Johnson, The People's NT with Explanatory Notes, vol. 2, p. 324-325]. "It is clear that the writer has apostasy in mind. The people in question, then, know what God has done in Christ; their acquaintance with Christian teaching is more than superficial. If, knowing this, they revert to an attitude of rejection, of continual sinning (the present participle 'hamartematon' is rendered 'keep on sinning'), then there remains no sacrifice for sins. Such people have rejected the sacrifice of Christ, and the preceding argument has shown that there is no other" [The Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 12, p. 106].

The apostle Peter writes, "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, 'A dog returns to its own vomit,' and, 'A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire'" (2 Peter 2:20-22). The use in Hebrews 10:26 of the Greek present participle, according to Dr. Henry Alford (1810-1871), the Dean of Canterbury, who produced a four-volume commentary on the Greek NT that is a classic work to this day, indicates to us that the sins spoken of in this text are "not isolated acts, but a state of sin," not just isolated violations of God's will, but a rejection "of the whole economy of the New Testament" [quoted by Drs. Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, p. 1429]. "The state described is one of willful and continued sin, which is the result and the expression of apostasy from Christ" [Dr. Charles Ellicott, Commentary on the Whole Bible, vol. 8, p. 327]. He goes on to say that the sins found in the Hebrew text are NOT those we commit daily due to our human nature, but rather they refer to a willful, deliberate, continuous STATE of sin that constitutes a complete rejection of God's grace and Jesus' sacrifice. In The Expositor's Greek Testament, it is stressed that "the present tense of 'hamartematon' must not be overlooked! Willful sin, continued in, means apostasy, repudiation of the covenant. ... It is a condition which is explained in detail in Hebrews 6. Without this preceding knowledge of the covenant, its willful repudiation is impossible. ... For those who have repudiated and keep repudiating the one sacrifice of Christ, it is an irredeemable condition" [vol. 4, p. 348]. "The participle is not aorist, but present tense, expressing a persistent habit. ... The state contemplated here ... implies total repudiation of Christ ... deliberate sin with a high hand ... a final obdurate defection from the faith" [The Pulpit Commentary, vol. 21 - Hebrews, p. 268].

Let me close with this quote from the American theologian Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), and may it serve as strong warning against the drift into apostasy that so quickly leads to a state of sin from which there is only one ultimate fate! He wrote, "The writer is not speaking of some ordinary transgression of the Ten Commandments, such as even Christians become guilty of every day. ... The denial of Christ is the sin, and the contempt of the means of grace is the road leading thereto. People that become guilty of this sin do so purposely, with deliberate intent, and they go on sinning, they persist in their transgression. Having received the knowledge of the truth, having accepted Jesus Christ and His salvation, such people maliciously and blasphemously deny the accepted facts, the truths of the Gospel. And in their case, it holds true that the sacrifice for sins no longer exists for them. The very nature of their sin has this result; for, having denied the expiatory offering of Christ which they had once received in faith, they have discarded the only means of salvation" [Popular Commentary of the Bible: The NT, vol. 2, p. 477].

From a Reader in Idaho:

Good Morning, Al. I'm sending you a chain of emails between a pastor and me on the topic of "eternal punishment." He is a good man, and I generally appreciate his teaching very much. I have read Edward Fudge's book ("The Fire that Consumes"), as well as your book ("From Ruin to Resurrection"), and it seems logical to me that eternal conscious punishment does not fit the nature of God. In our email exchanges, I sent him your article titled "God's Consuming Fire: Examining the Final Fate of the Wicked in Light of Biblical Language" (Reflections #46). In turn, this pastor wrote, "When the Bible teaches something that fallen humans find distasteful (like eternal torment), people try to find ways to make the Bible say something different. Providentially, I'll be touching on this in church Sunday when I deal with Matthew 25:46 - 'These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.' The view represented in what you sent me by Al Maxey requires that the word 'eternal' in that verse has two mutually-exclusively and contradictory definitions in one sentence. Grammatically, though, they are parallel and not contrasting." Al, how would you address this pastor's point of view on Matthew 25:46? I know you're busy, but let me thank you in advance for any help you can give me on this. May God richly bless you and your family, and also your continued work!!

• The belief that God will endlessly torture the lost in a fiery pit called Hell is indeed distasteful in the eyes of many sincere believers, and rightly so, for the Bible teaches no such thing. Both Edward Fudge and I (as well as a good many other reputable biblical scholars over the centuries) have thoroughly refuted this doctrine in our books (Edward wrote the Foreword to mine, and he also quoted me and referred to my work in the 3rd edition of his book). I also have a published debate on this very topic that goes into a tremendous amount of in-depth study of the Bible on the matter, looking at all sides of the issue. That debate can be found online and read free of charge at this link: "The Maxey-Thrasher Debate - "Eternal Destiny of the Wicked: Perpetual Torment or Ultimate Extinction?" The reader from Idaho sent this pastor Issue #46 of my Reflections, which is good, but he should have also included the previous article as well (for the two really go together): "Tortured or Terminated? A Study of Revelation 14:9-11" (Reflections #45).

  The real problem one encounters with regard to Matthew 25:46, however, is the woeful misunderstanding of the nature of man himself (does he possess an "immortal soul"?) and how that impacts one's understanding of the biblical concept of death in its various forms: physical, relational, and eternal. If man is viewed as inherently immortal (by virtue of having an immortal soul), then in reality he is undying! Thus, if the body dies, the soul lives on somewhere in some state (either bliss or misery). This very pagan, and highly Platonic, belief found its way into Judaism during the so-called Intertestamental Period, and from there (especially via Roman Catholicism) into the teaching of Christendom. If this view is adopted (i.e., that man is inherently immortal by nature), then "death" must be redefined. It is no longer a loss of life, but a life of loss. The "dead" are not really dead, but more alive than ever; just somewhere else: either singing around the throne or burning in the fire. Thus, as long as the saved sing, the sinners sizzle! The pastor's remark is mostly correct, by the way: the two fates found in Matthew 25:46 are indeed grammatically parallel - i.e., for as long as the saved have LIFE, the unsaved will have DEATH. If one is quantitative, so is the other; both are "forever." But here is where one needs to take some time to grasp the true meaning of this Greek term: "aionios," for this word has both a qualitative as well as a quantitative meaning and application in Scripture, and both usages are found an equal number of times. I would recommend the pastor consider this word's biblical significance a bit more carefully, as I have done in my article titled, "Reflective Analysis of 'Forever': Analyzing the Attributes of 'Aionios'" (Reflections #74). It is significant in understanding the true nature of man and his eternal destiny.

  Further, the pastor really, really needs to read Matthew 25:46 once again and carefully NOTE exactly what it is that Jesus identifies as being "eternal" in this passage!! It is "life" on the one hand, and "punishment" on the other. PunishMENT, not punishING. This is absolutely critical. What is the punishment that is inflicted for sin? It is DEATH. This is seen throughout the OT and NT writings. Moses told the people of Israel, "Behold, I have set before you life and death ... Choose life!" (Deuteronomy 30:19). Paul wrote, "The wages of sin is DEATH, but the gift of God is eternal LIFE in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23). Life is not inherently ours because we are by nature immortal; immortality is a GIFT of God IN Christ Jesus. Our just due (our wages) is death! If it were not for His grace and Christ's sacrifice, the dead would perish altogether!! Paul brings this out in 1 Corinthians 15. Yet, life and immortality were brought to light in the Gospel (2 Timothy 2:10) for those who accepted it by faith. "And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life" (1 John 5:11-12). Matthew 25:46 speaks of those who have life and of those who don't: the reward and the punishment. The pastor needs to rethink this: if the punishment is death, is it ever reached (if what he teaches is true)? Do the lost ever DIE, or do they just LIVE forever in misery?! Dying is a process that ultimately is designed to result in death! If the actual punishment is the PROCESS, however, and not the RESULT, then death is removed from the equation, unless one redefines "death" to mean "life," and then qualifies that "life" as being "lived" forever in torment. I would urge the reader to examine my following study on this often misunderstood and misapplied topic: "DEATH - Defining the Biblical Parameters: Physical, Relational, Eternal" (Reflections #79).

  Further, if the punishment for sin is eternal torment, rather than death, did Jesus actually PAY IN FULL that price for us? We sing the hymn "Jesus Paid It ALL" ... but do we believe it? Do we preach it? If the price for sin is death (a true cessation of life), then He paid it. HE DIED. If the price is endless conscious torture in a pit of fire, then HE DID NOT, and sinners will be forced to pay a price He never paid. I dealt with this in my article titled, "Paying the Debt for Our Sin: Was the Crucifixion of Christ on the Cross TOTAL or TOKEN Payment for Sin?" (Reflections #152). When all of this is carefully and prayerfully considered in light of God's revelation, the pastor's view of the text in question, and what he believes it teaches, completely crumbles. -- Al Maxey

From a Minister in New Zealand:

Al, thank you for your latest Reflections article, "Deliverance from Deliberate Sins: Insight from a Greek Word in Ephesians 1:7" (Reflections #874). I think it is important, regarding Paul's view of himself in Romans 7, to point out that he is describing a man under the Law, and one who is devoid of the Spirit. The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, however, is powerful (Romans 8:2). Though we still sin, we shun from it, with God's help, and attempt to minimize it. Awareness of any sin should motivate us to change with God's help through His indwelling Spirit. Persistence in wrong-doing is not in harmony with the mind of the Spirit, and it shows rebellion on our part, and taking pleasure in wrong behavior. Repentance is the key. Walking in the Spirit has the advantage of displacing, minimizing, and even overcoming fleshly indulgence in a certain direction. Thanks again, Al, for an insightful article. Love you, brother!

• People have pondered and puzzled over this passage for centuries, for a number of differing reasons, but the primary one is whether or not Paul was speaking of his condition prior to being "a man in Christ Jesus" or after entering into relationship with the Lord and receiving the indwelling Spirit. Back in 2004, a reader from Oklahoma wrote me: "Al, I truly enjoy the way you discern the Word of God, but I must disagree with your understanding of Romans 7:14-25 as being the Christian Paul and not the pre-Christian Paul. I recognize the verb tense problem, but the context seems too powerful for me to see Paul struggling to this degree after becoming a Christian. I realize that he continued to buffet his body after becoming a Christian, but I just don't believe that he struggled with the carnal nature to this degree." In response to that reader's concern, I did a more in-depth study of this passage, and my following article was the result of that study. I hope it helps my brother and dear friend from NZ, and any others who may still have questions about this text. "Fighting The Battle Within: Romans 7:14-25 - Is Paul Presenting Pre- or Post-Redemption Reality?" (Reflections #143). -- Al Maxey

From Dr. Wayne Newland in Maine:
(Who makes a Special Offer to the readers)

Thanks so much, Al, for your study on "Deborah - The Honey Bee of Israel" (Reflections #872). I was soon rereading that part of Judges with new appreciation for this "fiery-spirited woman." I also saw in that issue of Reflections the reader's query about what within the OT writings is binding on us today. That was me a few decades back: struggling with the legalistic thinking and the Pattern/CENI/Silence hermeneutic of my "Churches of Christ" heritage - i.e., the need to puzzle out and obey all the right rules required for salvation. It was not until I was in my early seventies that I "found" Galatians 2:21 and 5:1, Ephesians 2:1-10, Romans 13:8-10, James 1:25 and 2:8, and other great passages about grace and freedom (that were actually there all the time). I came to know another KIND of "law," a law with but two commands: Love Him and His. Now, in my nineth decade of life, this found freedom is so refreshing every day! By the way, you were kind enough in July, 2019 (in Reflections #776) to mention to your readers my humble attempt to describe these understandings in a 40-page booklet I wrote titled "Not Every Hill Is Calvary: A Hermeneutic of Love and Freedom." I would be pleased to share it with interested readers, free and postpaid, if they would just email their USPS mailing address to me at Heritage21@maine.rr.com. Thanks for being there, Al. Blessings, Grace, and Peace to you!

From a Minister in West Virginia:

Greetings from WV, Al. It's been a long time since I've communicated with you -- not because I haven't been keeping up with your Reflections, though. I read each of them at least once, and I have used a few of them to develop lessons for my own use (of course, I make note of you and of each of these articles I use by title and number). I'm writing to tell you that I found your article "Deliverance from Deliberate Sins: Insight from a Greek Word in Ephesians 1:7" (Reflections #874) very interesting, informative, and meaningful. I liked it, and don't take issue with the message at all. "In Him" we are truly blessed and forgiven! Wishing you well, brother! Keep up the great work!

From an Author in Florida:
(Who in the Readers' Response section of
my last article requested "a Reader's Digest
condensed version of your lengthy articles")

Good Brother, "Deliverance from Deliberate Sins" is a powerful essay on sin. Some days I feel that I am the chief of sinners. Al, this piece on our "blessed assurance" is fantastic. Thanks. Can you believe I actually read one of your tomes completely?!! (LOL)

From a Reader in California:

Brother Al, I read the comment of the guy in Florida who mentioned that the length of your articles is a bit of a ... how shall I say it ... of a "turn off." To that I would say: Yes, if you ask Al Maxey what time it is, he will tell you how to make a watch. But it is a very good watch! And, yes, it DOES tell time! Al, you just keep doing what the Lord has called you to do, brother.

********************
If you would like to be added to or removed from this
mailing list, Contact Me and I'll immediately comply.
If you are challenged by these Reflections, feel free to
send them on to others and encourage them to write for
a free subscription. These studies are also offered on a
special thumb drive. Check the link below for the
details, and for all past issues of these Reflections:
https://www.zianet.com/maxey/Reflect2.htm