Can ANY Arminian KNOW that Heaven is his home?

Bingo. And that conclusion is one that best suits the immediate context and historical context. The latter half of the 10th chapter through the end of Hebrews contain many good warnings and exhortations to these Jewish Christians to continue in the truth. Really, that's what the whole book of Hebrews was intended to accomplish: to show that Christ and the new covenant were better than what came before and thus we should continue in them.

 

Wow, I can't beleive people can not understand what I said. Listen closly;

My statement is on the mathmatical logic used when someone (I foget who and am too lazy to look it up) stated that since Jesus said that (IF !a THEN !b) is true proves that (IF a THEN b) is also true. This is incorrect logic. a and b are varibles. In the case of John 3 those variables are 'Born Again' and 'see the kingdom of God'.

They said that proves that if one is born again they will see the kingdom of God. I simply say that what Jesus said in John Chapter 3 does not logically prove this statement. IT may or may not be true, but you can not use (IF !a THEN !b) as proof. IT IS ILLOGICAL Any Mathmatician or Computer programmer can tell you that.

example:

IF you do not have 1$ THEN you can not buy a new car. TRUE STATEMENT
IF you have 1$ you can buy a new car. NOT TRUE. You may or may not be able to buy the car depending on how many $$ you have.

 

Well, I suppose a person can interpret scripture any way they wish. But both of you seem to believe as Arminians here. You are saying a person can be saved, and then later reject Christ.

There are really only two possibilities with Hebrews 6:4-9.

#1 it is speaking of unsaved, unregenerate persons who reject Christ.

#2 it is speaking of saved, regenerate persons who reject Christ.

Calvinists have great difficulty accepting proposition #1 because the doctrine of Total Depravity does not allow the possibility that an unregenerate person can be enlightened and be a partaker of the Holy Spirit. Arminians on the other hand can allow this.

But... #2 is also unacceptable to Calvinists, because they believe it impossible for a regenerate person to fall away. However, the Arminians can allow this also.

But I am neither Calvinist or Arminian. I believe the unregenerate can be enlightened and be a partaker of the Holy Spirit, but I do not believe once you are saved that you can fall away and be lost.

The Calvinist will say the unregenerate has no ability to be enlightened by the Spirit, but this also limits God. Does God have the power and ability to enlighten the unregenerate?

So, the doctrine of Total Depravity as believed by Calvinists does not simply limit man, it limits God too. It is saying God does not have the power or ability to speak to and enlighten the spiritually dead. But Jesus could speak to the dead.

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

But if you insist the unregenerate cannot possibly be enlightened and be a partaker of the Holy Spirit, then you must agree with the Arminians that Heb. 6 is teaching that a regenerate person can fall away and be lost.

And we know this passage is speaking of salvation from verse 9.

Heb 6:9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

No, I agree with Matthew Henry that this passage is speaking of unregenerate persons who have been enlightened and partakers of the Holy Spirit. However, they have not truly trusted Christ. They have tasted, but not eaten.

Matthew Henry was a Calvinist, but he displays Arminian belief here.

 

You are wrong because you assume that I believe the people here are warned of falling away eternally. I do not because they are not. They are being warned, as they are elsewhere in the book of Hebrews, of leaving the truth and going to a false system. It has to do with religion not eternity. The people warned are believers in Jesus Christ and members of the gospel church. They are under pressure to leave the church to go back under the law. This is serious business and is being treated as such.

Paul in Galatians does many of the same things. He there warns these Christians are being entangled in a false system. The law system is a system of bondage, the people under its administration are in bondage, whereas the gospel church gives freedom. Paul calls those folks foolish, calls the false teachers that were bringing in damnable heresies bewitchers, and states with utmost urgency the importance of staying in the church and the truth.

 

They are being warned that there is no other gospel or way of salvation other than the New covenant through Christ.

Whether ALL the audience was considered to have been saved at that time was not the main issue, the main issue was the only gospel through Christ and "here HE is, here is the truth...etc".......

Darren

 

Wow, that is a very unusual interpretation you both have there, I cannot see how you get that out of this passage. To me it is obvious that it is speaking of persons who have been enlightened and partakers of the Holy Spirit and says if they fall away it will be impossible to renew them to repentance again. And Matthew Henry interpreted it the same.

As I said, I guess a person can interpret scripture to mean anything they want it to mean, but I cannot see how you got your interpretation out of this passage.

 

Hebrews 6 and Interpretations

Here is what the ESV Study Bible has about the passage

Heb. 6:4–8 This passage has been subject to substantially different interpretations. The central debate concerns whether the descriptions of vv. 4–5 (e.g., “enlightened,” “tasted the heavenly gift,” “shared in the Holy Spirit,” “tasted of the goodness of the word of God”) depict people who were once true Christians.

(1) Some argue these phrases do describe true Christians, implying that Christians can “fall away” and lose their salvation (cf. note on 3:14, however, indicating a fundamental difficulty with this view). Nonetheless, most who advocate this view hold that some who backslide can still return to Christian faith, thus limiting 6:4–6 to hardened cases of apostasy in which it is “impossible … to restore them again to repentance” (vv. 4, 6).

(2) Most argue, however, that although these people may have participated fully in the Christian covenantal community (where they experienced enlightened instruction in the Word of God, where they saw public repentance occur, and where the Holy Spirit was at work in powerful ways), when such people do “fall away” it is clear that they are not true Christians because they have not made a true, saving response to the gospel, resulting in genuine faith, love, and perseverance (vv. 9–12). Significantly, they are like land that received much rain but bore no good fruit, only “thorns and thistles” (v. 8). They may have participated outwardly in the Christian community and they even may have shared in the blessings of Christian fellowship; but, like the seed that fell on rocky ground in the parable of the sower, “they have no root” (Mark 4:17) and they “fall away” when faced with persecution.

(3) Another view is that the warnings are addressed to true believers, and though they will never completely fall away, the warnings are still the means that God uses to challenge them to persevere in their faith and so to preserve those whom the Lord has chosen.

(4) A fourth view is that the “falling away” described in Heb. 6:6 has to do with loss of heavenly rewards. In any case, though the author recognizes that there may be a few in the congregation who fit the description of vv. 4–8, in general he does not think it to be true as a whole of the congregation to which he is writing, for he says, “yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things—things that belong to salvation” (v. 9).

 

Are assuming that "falling away" actually means to be eternally lost or cast out of heaven or loss of salvation? One big IF is that it is problematic at the least to think that the Blood Atonement will actually fail therefore it cannot be "reapplied". You would have to crucify Christ again which is not possible, once for all, you can only be atoned for once... I'm thinking the issue has nothing to do with loss of salvation because the point raised by the author (most likely Paul) cannot occur. Unless there is other verses in scripture to cross-reference that falling away is a real matter and any such that do fall away cannot be saved again..

Darren

 

That's a little insulting... Especially when people are trying to explain their position just the same as you do yourself.

Darren

 

So, you think the author (probably Paul) is going to all this trouble to warn people against something that is impossible? Does that really make sense? Why write a passage that would cause people to worry and doubt when Paul wants someone to be sure? Why not just say it is impossible to fall?

I have seen this argument before, but it is very weak.

 

It is weak because you have taken what I said out of context. The whole point as far as I'm concerned is to reason that there is no other way of salvation especially the old covenant. Therefore there is no salvation unless through Christ and His blood. If you would think that I receive His blood atonement one day, try it out and then "fall away" to the effect that the blood atonement has no effect it would be thought of as an impossible situation, firstly to be renewed to be Atoned for again (not possible) secondly to think that the Atonement failed the first time round (not possible). You think that's a waste of time to explain? I don't...

The Hebrew christians were struggling in their faith towards Christ and were thinking of going back to the old covenant, this was part of that reasoning to show how God is no longer using the old covenant and that the Atoning Blood of Christ (and His resurrection) finalises the law and no further sacrifices can be made. Makes perfect sense.

Darren

 

Just for the record I think what you are saying is that "fall away" means that a person whom is "almost saved" (once enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, partakers of the Holy Ghost, tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come) that "falls away" from their being almost saved cannot be redeemed ever, since they crucify for themselves the Son of God afresh and put Him to an open shame.... They were in effect "not saved" but eventually reached a state that they could never be saved because they fall away from that.

Is that your position??

Darren

 

Well, what does it actually say is impossible? It says it is impossible to "renew them again unto repentance".

Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

I believe this is a person who fully understands that they are a sinner, and they understand that Jesus died for them, and that they need to trust Jesus. They have been brought to repentance.

I personally believe if a person rejects Jesus at this point they will be hardened. They will never again approach this level of conviction or repentance. This is why it says several times in Hebrews that if you today hear his voice, harden not your heart.

Heb 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

I believe this is crossing the line with God, as shown in Romans 1.

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

There are really numerous verses like this.

2 Thess 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

These are persons who know they should trust Jesus, but because of a love of sin reject him. At some point that only God knows, he gives them up, he does not strive with them any longer. He actually gives them what they desire and allows them to believe a lie.

This is what I think Hebrews 6 is speaking of also.

 

Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Obviously 6:4 is refering to another group not the direct audience -

6:9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

However that doesn't mean that the people that were irredeemable arrived there because they were almost saved and then had fallen away. I think the second problem you would have to come to is to show how a person can almost be saved to that effect. I can't agree that 6:4-6 is conclusive to support your conclusion.

For example how can you say a person is regenerated after they believe but not before but then be able to be - once enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, partakers of the Holy Ghost, tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come. They can experience partial spiritual experiences, even be a partaker of the Holy Spirit (does that mean indwelling??) yet do this as an unregenerate sinner?? Seems you are adding a further problem to the context in my opinion kind of like propositional isogesis.

Darren

 

Ok I believe in going to Walmart, I also believe that if I die along the way to driving to Walmart I would not make it to Walmart. I died along the way, I woke up at Walmart. That seems illogical? Of course and comparing heaven to Walmart is equally illogical as being saved by grace through faith is likened to driving to a destination via a car.

I'm merely saying that taking a word built from layers of doctrine and use the word as purely generic grammar would be un-theological. You would no longer be refering to the doctrines involved for "salvation" (soteriology) in the use and quotations with the word salvation or saved.

Sorry. It still is though, no insult intented.

Darren