No One Will See the Lord.......Unless

.
Hebrews 12:24 (NASB)

Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.

Matthew 22:11-14New American Standard Bible (NASB)

11 "But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding clothes, 12 and he *said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes?’ And the man was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ 14 For many are [a]called, but few are chosen.”

-------------------------------------

If we were to receive an invitation to a firmal dinner. The invitation will specify formal attire required. For men this would generally mean a black tie and a tuxedo.  For women this will generally mean a formal gown. Let us say a modest formal gown for the sake of our sisters. One would not think of showing up at the formal dinner with t-shir, cutoffs, and flip-flops on. Chances are you would not be admitted to the dinner. If you did get past the receptionist or security. You, no doubt, would be escorted promptly off the premises.

Such a thing did happen in the account of the wedding feast that Matthew writes about. But it had eternal consequences. The person at the wedding feast did not have on the required wedding apparel.  Because of that he was thrown outside into the outer darkness where there was weeping and gnashing of teeth. We can only assume that he was thrown into hell.

One may ask what is Jesus getting out here?  What is the big deal about not having the proper wedding clothes on? Revelation 19:8 gives the answer,

It was given to her to clothe yourself and find linen, bright and clean; for the final inning is the righteous acts of the Saints.

Jesus had in mind the wedding feast that would be taking place when He would come to receive His bride, that would be the church. The required wedding garments would be the righteous acts of the saints.

This is what the writer of Hebrews is getting at when he says to pursue sanctification without which no one will see the Lord. Given the context of this verse and the chapterr, what is implied is a practical sanctification that issues forth in righteous deeds. 

The word sanctification means set apart. In the scriptures sanctification mans being set apart for the Lord. Other words that may be used are holiness and consecration. Again meaning set apart. And again meeting set apart as for the Lord.

In the Old Testament when the Tabernacle and the temple were being built. Implements that were used to worship the Lord had to be consecrated or sanctified. Nothing impure or unclean or profane were to touch these implements. To use an uncleansed Implement in the worship of God  in the Tabernacle would have devastating consequences. Often the death of the priest that was using it. This happened in the case of the strange fire that was offered before the Lord.

Also the priests themselves where to be consecrated or sanctified to the Lord. They had to observe a very strict cleansing regimen to minister as unto the Lord.

In light of the discussion on the Christian and drinking taking place in the forum, Leviticus 10:9 comes to mind,

... Do not drink wine nor strong drink, neither you nor your sons with you, when you come into the tent of meeting, so that you will not die--- it is a perpetual statue it throughout your generations---

This is something that we need to give serious thought to as we are kings and priests under the new covenant.. But it seems to me that the Old Testament saints had a greater understanding of holiness and consecration then we do. That is those of us that are under the new covenant of grace.

The writer of Hebrews gives us a very serious admonition and exhortation. He says without sanctification one will not see the Lord. That would imply that without the righteous deeds that would come from a heart that is changed in Jesus no one will be in the presence of Christ.

The serious admonition comes out of Hebrews 12:14. This is the Word of God. This is not a book about beer making as one has jokingly suggested in the forum. 

Brothers and sisters this is an example of us not taking seriously the holy things of God. When we start joking about the word of God and treating it with contempt. Where do we draw the line?

If we truly desire to see the Lord Jesus Christ. Then let us pursue the practical sanctification that He requires for us to be in His presence.  Let us not look for justification to defend lawful practices such as drinking. But instead let us look for means to crucify the lawful. So that His holiness will be reflected in us as yielded vessels before him.

This morning I woke up with my digital New Testament playing. The verse that came to my mind as I woke up was put on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh.

So in essence this is the required wedding garment that we should be wearing in preparation for his soon return. That would be putting on the Lord Jesus Christ and making no provision for the flesh.  Putting on Jesus will be necessary if we are to see Him.

Simply my thoughts from the foot of His cross.

Bear,
While I love your enthusiasm & heart for the issue, there are some major issues with connecting the dots with scripture the way you did. Those same priests also couldn't eat shellfish, or pork, or lie with their wife during her menstrual period, nor trim their beard, nor a list of over 700 other Laws in the OT period. In fact, the Nazrite vow was one of the strictest vows of consecration one could take. And it said you couldn't cut your hair. Are you refraining from cutting your hair Blaine to "go all the way"? Interesting how that would actually contradict what is taught in 1 Corinthians about men with long hair (& women with short hair). And if you REALLY wanted to do all that the Law commanded, and you find out a woman committed adultery, you would have grounds for stoning her! No bacon. No oysters. And circumcision is the most important outward sign of consecration under the old covenant. I'm not trying to be funny, but the way you are connecting these scriptures demands we connect these other requirements of the Law too. If you don't want to drink to consecrate yourself to God, then praise God! If want to warn people of the dangers of alchohol use & not being sober (ie "drunkeness" as the scriptures speak of), praise God! If you want to use the OT Law to try to forbid others' having a private drink occasionally when neither their conscience (nor the Lord) condemns them, then I really think you should give that some more thought brother. I appreciate your passion though brother. Just be careful you neither condone drunkeness, nor use the Law & the guilt & shame of it to try to convince believers with New Covenant Born Again Grace (& a Bible) that because they don't adhere to OT Law requirements for the Levitical priests. That by definition is legalism (forbidding for others that which God has not specifically forbid with NT New Covenant doctrine).
God Bless you Bro!
Jeff

Fletcher,
It's interesting that I did not even read your post when I wrote mine but we said almost exactly essentially the same thing. And the reason for that is not because were looking for excuses for anyone, but that we know what the Scriptures do and do not teach on the subject.

And honestly, This type of discussion answers the question that has been asked on the forums before: why does doctrine matter?

And I like some of JMac's teaching, but some of it can be dry, accusatory, & condemning. There I said it. Not only is he a cessationist (fine if that's where he stands), but he also went on a tirade on EVERYTHING that is New Testament New Covenant Biblical manifestations of the Hoky Spirit and called it "strange fire". As one brother Bryan Purtle said, "Strange Fire is offering to God that which God has not ordained. Cessationism is itself 'strange fire'". And JMac's overshot the argument of gifts out of control to say not that there's strange fire, but he prefers "no fire". Michael Brown wrote a whole book responding to it. JMac does that with a lot of things. Same can be said of alchohol. Because there are drinks and excesses, now anyone who drinks is not a baptist, I mean is in sin. They same the same about dancing. Because there is sensual dancing outside of marriage, they historically condoned ALL dancing (ever heard of an old movie called Footloose that basically mocked the Lord & His church for this?). David danced like a fool before man for the Lord!

Honestly, this is why theology, doctrine, rightly dividing the Word, teaching, understanding the New covenant, etc. matter. Tremendously

Hopefully what I was trying to say was clear: that doctrine, theology, hermeneutics, context, application, teaching, etc. DOES matter. It does. So much confusion or misapplication of text can be avoided by it & I believe God gave Us His Word in large part for this reason.

.
Wow!!! How things have changed on Sermon Undex. I go back and look at some of the earlier threads when this ministry started. I am amazed that the topics focused on revival and holiness in one's life. Men such as Leonard Ravenhill, John MacArthur, Paul Washer David Wilkerson, etc. were highly respected for their teachings on practical holiness. Not so now.

I never knew that practical holiness would be such an unpopular topic in this forum. And that such a threat as this would create such backlash. But I guess it should not surprise me given the low state of holiness in the American church.

Also I can see that I don't need to worry about my name being on an ISIS hit list. :-)

Simply my thoughts.