Hebrews 6:4-6

Doesn't the last choice imply the second? If they were never born again, than isn't the situation described hypothetical?

 

I chose option 4, but option 3 would be my second choice.

Option 2, in my opinion, would mean the writer was disingenuous when writing Hebrews.

I do not believe in loss of salvation, so I exclude option 1. Additionally, if true, the loss of salvation as outlined in this passage would seem to be without remedy. It would create a "once saved, rarely saved" situation.

 

Sure. I picked the last one, although I think it implies that the situation is hypothetical. Here's why I picked the last one. After the author gets done describing what would be an abominal situation, he says...

9 But, beloved, we are confident of better things concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation, though we speak in this manner.

In other words, when he says he is confident of better things [than what we just described] concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation -- I have to ask myself "as opposed to what?" The answer I get is "worse things like what we just described, as in things that accompany non-salvation".

 

Amen, npetreley!

 

The answer is.... Option 1.

A. IF you say they were never born again - then you give too much credit and "Ability" to the totally depraved nature as if IT could escape the slavery of sin "for a while".

B. If you say that this is a saved person who is being warned against an easter-bunny like mythical danger that is in fact not remotely possible as a real risk -- then you deflate the warning in the text. In fact to "Warn" against the easter bunny is simply a joke.

There is no such thing as a practical warning against a mythical danger.

C. If the warning is to the saved - and is about a real falling away that is only temporary - then saying "it is IMPOSSIBLE to renew them again" is made void. The very sole of this scenario is that they ARE going to be renewed again and that this IS not a permanent problem.

Futher - "good for nothing and burned" - does not mean "heavenly bliss for all eternity".

In Christ,

Bob

 

This is not valid exegesis. One can not argue "I don't like what the text actually says and I know others that don't either - so we must find another meaning".

The sin of John 5 appears to fit this Hebrews 6 situation. Recall that John speaks of sin that is beyond the line. One for which we do not pray.

Christ also speaks of sin not forgiven in this life or the life to come.

Deleting this verse alone does not solve the problem.

In Christ,

Bob

 

PB,

First, I would guess that the author of Hebrews is Barnabas, not Paul. Paul was an excellent writer who knew how to fully develop his themes and bring them to completion. Hebrews is more of a patch-work written by someone who occasionally has trouble staying on topic. It is also written in a style very similar to other work attributed to Barnabas (although the authorship there is in question, too).

The "patchwork" style makes it impossible to pull "we" from one section of the epistle and apply it to others. This is especially true of Hebrews 6, where the author drops back into "teacher" mode, with the introduction...

1 Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection...[...] 3And this we will[1] do if God permits.

The only use of "we" refers to what "we" will teach at this point. Then when discussing the falling away, he shifts very plainly into "they".

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

Then he comes back to "we" to express his opinion of the readers ("you").

9 But, beloved, we are confident of better things concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation, though we speak in this manner.

And as I said, this verse seems to draw a distinction between what he just said about those who fall away, and things that accompany salvation -- meaning that what he was just talking about cannot be things accompanying salvation.

By the way, this is also what I mean by "patchwork" style. He spends a few verses teaching a point, and then seems to forget he was in "teaching" mode and goes right back to addressing the readers on a personal level. He has a hard time staying on track.

Now, the only really difficult part of the passage to reconcile, IMO, is the phrase "partakers of the Holy Spirit".

If he was talking about people who were unsaved, then I can only take this to mean one of two things. Either he was talking hypothetically in order to teach his lesson, or he was talking about partaking in the Holy Spirit in some way other than having the Holy Spirit live inside you and regenerate you.

Personally, I still haven't decided which of the above. But I'm satisfied that he couldn't have been talking about people who were saved, because he compares those symptoms with "things that accompany salvation" as a contrast.

 

Well, like I said, I have a bigger problem with "partakers of the Holy Spirit" than I do with "enlightened", which could mean just about anything. Maybe I'm not phased by "enlightened" because I used to live in California, where everyone believed they were "enlightened" about something or another.

Anyway, if I am to assume that the situation in verses 4-6 refer to people who are saved, then the only other way I can harmonize that with the rest of scripture is to ask what he means by "renew to repentance"?

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance

Does that really mean "to be saved again"? Or does it mean "to be brought to a point of re-repentance"? Let me put it this way -- remember the Corinthians who were treating the Lord's supper with disrespect? It was for this reason many of them were sick and some had "fallen asleep". Was this God's "solution" to the problem because they could not be renewed to repentance after what they'd done?

I think it's possible, but it's a stretch, and it creates a problem for verse 9, which is a pretty strong argument that verses 4-6 refer to "things that accompany non-salvation".

So verse 9 makes me more inclined to think verses 4-6 are a hypothetical situation stated to emphasize to the readers how immensely important it is to progress in our walk, because if it were possible to fall away like that, the only way to be renewed would be to crucify Jesus again.

The bottom line is this is a very difficult passage to unravel completely, because IMO the writer was not a very good one, and his intent for even making this point at all is not clear.

 

With the way these verses were written, I'm not sure we'll understand what the point was while we're on this side of heaven!

Is anyone else wishing that we had a 67th book of the Bible that was a nice, systematic, theological treatise?

 

Well, I'm not sure it sounds like a warning to me. It sounds more to me like this:

"Hey people, it's time to get past salvation 101, okay? I mean, by now you should know what basic repentance means. But to continue our lesson: TRUE repentance is something that can happen only once. You can't truly repent, reap all the benefits, fall away and then repent again! If you did that, it would be like crucifying Jesus all over again! But I'm confident of better things from you, not just superficial repentance but TRUE repentance and growth - you know, things that are indicative of real salvation."

 

this is a clear understanding of the process of election. election is unto salvation. it is not in and of itself salvation.

both the elect and non elect are called and enlightened. yet the wisdom hasnt been tried until the unvealing of the spirit within.
the true elect will receive true faith of the resurrected spirit of Christ within them and true understanding that associates with the wisdom taught of the Holy Spirit.
the non elect will derive their understanding from their carnal spirit using their own carnal faith. which leads to not understanding the wisdom and eventually twisting and losing the original truths taught of the Holy Spirit.

Hebrews 6 is about moving forward FROM the child stage to an unvealing of the spirit of Christ within them. discovering this truth draws the understanding that it is impossible to recrusify an already resurrected spirit that is within you.

the non elect will only worsen with their carnal imaginations and faith..

Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Me2

 

My mama tanned my hide when she "expected better of me".

lacy