Hebrews Chapter Six

All those who teach against the assurance of eternal life for a Christian take refuge in Hebrews 6. Particularly this part -

"For it is impossible for those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,

And yet have fallen away, to renew themselves again unto repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God and putting Him to open shame." (Heb 6: 4-6)

I will discuss the context and what I think is the best interpretation of the portion of Hebrews.

Let me begin by saying that this chapter is not about basic salvation. This chapter is about going on from elementary Christian teaching to maturity. It is not about the laying of the basic foundation of the Christian life but of maturing on to adulthood.

It is not about the initial things of the "milk" of basic Christian teaching. It is a plea for the audience to go on to more mature "solid meat" of advancement.

Stop here.

Of course division of chapters came much latter in the New Testament in history from its writing. We should see how chapter six of Hebrews is related to the previous chapter five.

You can see that the writer's comments in chapter 6 are a kind of scolding for believers who should be, by this time be more mature, to advance from their stunted level of arrested development to go on to maturity.

Chapter 5 verses 12-14 lays the backround:

"For when because of the time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you what the rudiments of the beginning of the oracles of God are and have become those who have need of milk and not of solid food.

For everyone who partakes of milk is inexperienced in the word of righteousness, for he is an infant.

But solid food is for the full-grown, who because of practice have their faculties exercised for discriminating between both good and evil." (Heb. 5:12-14)

The subject of Hebrews 6 is not salvation in its initial stage. It really is not about salvation at all in terms of eternal life or eternal redemption. It is about progressing on from basic teaching concerning the initial foundations of the Christian life.

So the backround of Hebrews 6 is the writer's desire to bring the audience forward from an infant like state in their Christian journey to a more mature "adult" state.

The "good word" is contrasted with the more mature "word of righteousness".

The "beginning of the oracles of God" are contrasted with "solid food".

The "milk" is the "rudiments". And they are in contrast to where the writer wishes to go. That is into more "solid food".

From being "infants" he wishes to bring them on to being "full-grown" .

The exhortation is a progress from "the word of the beginning of Christ" on to something more substantial of Christian living "maturity".

IE. 6:1 -

"Therefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us be brought on to maturity, ..." (Heb. 6:1a)

So we can see that this scolding from the writer is like this:

1.) By now you all should have gone on from very basic teachings.

2.) By now you all should have become teachers rather than in need of the ABCs of the Christian gospel.

3.) By now you all should be able to discern good and evil in your Christian living and not be so insensitive and dull.

4.) I wish to bring you on from the foundational things of the Christian life to more substantial concepts.

5.) I wish to feed you with "solid food" like the spiritual adults you should be by now. I do not want to again go over the foundational "milk" of rudimentary Christian concepts.

6.) You have had TIME but you have not grown as should be expected within the TIME that you have already had as followers of Jesus.

Now we look at the things the writer considers the concepts FROM WHICH he desires to progress with his audience:

"Therefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us be brought on to maturity, ... NOT laying AGAIN a FOUNDATION of ...

repentance from dead works,
and of faith in God,
or of teaching of baptisms
and of the laying on of hands,
of resurrection from the dead
and of eternal judgment.

And this we will do if God permits." (Heb. 6:1-3)

All these preliminary comments have to be understood before we can rightly understand in context the controversial verses 4-6.

stop here

So far my opening comments are to demonstrate that the purpose of Hebrews 6 is not to tell people how to be saved eternally. It is to tell Christians how to progress.

The purpose is not to teach newcomers to the faith how they may obtain eternal redemption. It is to help Christians who are arrested in growth to go on to more maturity - to progress further.

Originally posted by sonship
So far my opening comments are to demonstrate that the purpose of [b]Hebrews 6 is not to tell people how to be saved eternally. It is to tell Christians how to progress.

The purpose is not to teach newcomers to the faith how they may obtain eternal redemption. It is to help Christians who are arrested in growth to go on to more maturity - to progress further.[/b]

So far you have not succeeded in your mission. The statement by the writer from Hebrews stand unaltered by your analysis. In any event what I find amusing is that if/when you people try to support your doctrines you quote several passages all at once to prove your point.

However when dealing with the passages which contradict you, then your approach is different. You take one of the passages in isolation and try to twist it to mean something different. So here are several passages which are in line with Heb 6. Lets see you twist and manipulate ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

1. ... if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. (Hebrews 10:38 KJV)

2. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. (2 Pet 2:20-21)

3. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:21-23 KJV)

4. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, (Hebrews 10:26 KJV)

5. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 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. (Hebrews 6:4-6 KJV)

6. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. (1 Corinthians 3:16-17 KJV)

Then there are examples of Christians in the Bible, Judas Iscariot [committed suicide] , Ananias and Sapphira [struck down by God], who clearly will not receive eternal life. There are statements by Apostles of Christians in the early church following after idolatry and worldiness and who were condemned. If you want your analysis to have any credibility then deal with all of these simultaneously.

By the way 5 short posts = 1 long post. Obviously you are concerned that people are not reading what you write. I think it has more to do with the content rather than the length.

Romans Chapter 6 Summary:

- Should the converted Christian who is under grace continue to sin? NO
- Baptism = death of the old sinful life, and a new life, alive in Christ free of sin
- If you continue on with sin, you will die
- If you continue with righteousness you will be given everlasting life.

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:1-23 KJV)

Originally posted by Rajk999

So far you have not succeeded in your mission. The statement by the writer from Hebrews stand unaltered by your analysis. In any event what I find amusing is that if/when you people try to support your doctrines you quote several passages all at once to prove your point.

First I will finish discussing Hebrews 6. I have not gotten to the misunderstood [by you] verses 4 - 6 yet.

It is well established that the FOUNDATIONAL matters are listed in verse 4

Therefore leaving the word of the BEGINNING of Christ ... not laying again a FOUNDATION ..." (6:1)

The writer does not want to re-lay the FOUNDATION of the BEGINNING of the rudimentary truths of the Gospel. And what are those rudimentary truths again?

1.) Repentance from dead works
2.) Faith in God
3.) Teaching of baptisms
4.) Laying on of hands
5.) Resurrection of the dead
6.) Eternal judgment


These are the matters from which the writer seeks that his audience would graduate. It is time, high time, for them to leave these original and elementary concepts to be brought on to maturity.

Please notice that the very FIRST item the writer mentions in his list of foundational things is -

" ... a foundation of REPENTANCE from dead works ..." (v.1)

Actually we could couple "repentance from dead works" together with his next phrase "and of faith in God".

At the very bedrock of the Christian Gospel is "repentance from dead works" being replaced by "faith in God". No longer does the sinner have any confidence that for eternal salvation he can depend upon his works. The works of trying to keep the law in his unregenerated and fallen nature are called "DEAD WORKS" .

Because the Gospel message of Christ's saving salvation has come the sinner turns from "dead works" and turns TO "faith in God". That is he turns to be justified by faith. He turns FROM attempting to be justified by "dead works" as the law keeping teachers of Moses taught.

Before I continue, I would stress that I do agree with Rajk999 that verses 4 through 6 refer to Christian believers. Some may try to argue that they refer to nominal Christians. I will not spend time to refute that.

It is a GIVEN for both Rajk999 and myself that the following words indicate genuine Christian disciples:

... those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and yet have fallen away ..." (vs. 4-6a) [/b]

In short, and to be defended more thoroughly in the future, is the truth here that the FOUNDATION lain ONCE is impossible to re-lay.

ONCE having done "repentance from dead works" it is impossible to again lay that foundation. "For it is IMPOSSIBLE for those ... to renew themselves again unto repentance ..."

It is unnecessary,
It is not right to do so,
It is impossible to do so.

It is unnecessary, not right, and impossible to do what? It is unnecessary, not right and impossible to lay again the ONCE put down foundation of "repentance from dead works and faith in God" .

This is a post not to be too lengthy. The repentance in verse 6 " ( ... impossible ... to renew ... again unto repentance " ) refers not to a general repentance. It refers to the very first repentance in the laying of the ridumentary foundation of the Gospel in foundation - " ... a foundation of repentance from dead works ..." .

The FOUNDATION cannot be put down a second or third or fourth time.
This argues really for Once Saved Always Saved. It is impossible to renew again the foundational rudiments of initial salvation brought about by "repentance from dead works and faith in God".

It is not necessary.
It is not right to do if you tried.
It is impossible to do if you tried.

But lets not go too fast. It is exceedingly evident that NEGATIVE consequences are mentioned in connection to the fallen away Christians. Right?

Yes, negative consequences are mentioned for those fallen away from the tasters of the heavenly gift, and tasters of the powers of the age to come, and tasters of the good word of God. True. Here is what it says are the negative results following their falling away:

" And yet have fallen away, to renew themselves again unto repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of god and putting Him to open shame.

For the earth, which drinks the rain which often comes upon it and produces vegetation suitable to thoe for whose sake also it is cultvated, partakes of blessing from God.

But if it brings forth thorns and thistles, it is disapproved and near a curse, whose ind is to be burned. " (vs. 6-8)

1.) The vegetation refers to the fruit of the Christian.
2.) The worthless vegetation is burned.
3.) The fallen away Christian is "near a curse" . It does not say he is cursed. He is only "near a curse" .

What is being burned up is not the Christian believer forever.
The "thorns and thistles of fleshy and backslidden works which are "disapproved" are what are burned up.

For sure this will not be pleasant for them. But they will be "saved yet so as through fire" (1 Cor. 3:15) .

However when dealing with the passages which contradict you, then your approach is different. You take one of the passages in isolation and try to twist it to mean something different.

Rajk999 has done more isolating of passages. I have put them into context with the surrounding words quite related.

Could the writer have meant that the fallen away Christian will perish forever ?

Then why didn't Peter perish forever with his many blunders?
Peter's name is on the foundation of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:14).

"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." (Rev. 21:14). That would of course include the name of Peter.

Peter was once enlightened.
Peter tasted of the heavenly gift.
Peter partook of the Holy Spirit.
Peter tasted the good word of God.
Peter tasted the powers of the millennial age to come.

Stop here. Let Rajk999 explain why Peter did not find it impossible to be saved after his numerous blunders, one of which won for him a public rebuke from the younger Apostle Paul for Peter's hypocrisy.

I am attempting to keep each post to a manageable amount of reading.

Originally posted by sonship
.. Then why didn't Peter perish forever with his many blunders?

What an utterly stupid question.

Sin or blunders is NOT 'fallen away.

Originally posted by Rajk999
What an utterly stupid question.

Sin or blunders is NOT 'fallen away.

The Greek for fallen away, I read, means have a flip of the foot.

When it says that it is impossible to again renew themselves unto repentance, many think it means perdition. It does not mean that one having a slip of the foot finds it impossible to recover their walk with God.

The book of Proverbs says that a righteous man falls seven times and gets up and keeps going.

Proverbs 24:16:

New International Version
for though the righteous fall seven times, they rise again, but the wicked stumble when calamity strikes.

New Living Translation
The godly may trip seven times, but they will get up again. But one disaster is enough to overthrow the wicked.

English Standard Version
for the righteous falls seven times and rises again, but the wicked stumble in times of calamity.

New American Standard Bible
For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again, But the wicked stumble in time of calamity.

The backround of the book of Hebrews is believers in the city of Jerusalem who were tempted to return to the temple to offer Levitical sacrifices according to the law of Moses.

Some were wavering in indecision, wearying under persecution, and tempted to return to the Old Covenant animal sacrifices laying another foundation for their salvation.

But they had become those on the new covenant foundation. And it was impossible for them to replace that with another.

Originally posted by sonship
The Greek for fallen away, I read, means have a flip of the foot.

When it says that it is impossible to again renew themselves unto repentance, many think it means perdition. It does not mean that one having a slip of the foot finds it impossible to recover their walk with God.

The book of Proverbs says that a righteous man falls seven times and gets ...[text shortened]... ose on the new covenant foundation. And it was impossible for them to replace that with another.

The Greek word for fallen away is :

parapipto - to fall aside, that is, (figuratively) to apostatize: - fall away.parapipto

Please provide any proof you have of your meaning.

To go into apostacy is a dangerous sin. The mere fact that you try to liken Peters sins to more serious sins associated with falling away means that you are grasping as straws, and arguing like a fool. You have no case worth considering. Many sins are forgiven, and on many occasions. But the scripture is clear - there comes a point when the sin/s are so grevious and so continuous that God will not forgive any longer.

Some Christians can and do fall away and are not afforded forgiveness and are cast into the lake of fire and destroyed. Read the related passages I quoted earlier.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The Greek word for fallen away is :

parapipto - to fall aside, that is, (figuratively) to apostatize: - fall away.parapipto

Please provide any proof you have of your meaning.

To go into apostacy is a dangerous sin. The mere fact that you try to liken Peters sins to more serious sins associated with falling away means that you are grasping ...[text shortened]... s and are cast into the lake of fire and destroyed. Read the related passages I quoted earlier.

I will not press the matter of slippage of the foot. "Fall away" is perfectly communicative to me. The proper apprehension of the passage is not dependent upon what I read in "The Gospel of God" by Watchmen Nee. on page 363.

"One British brother who studied Greek and specialized in book of Hebrews for his whole lifetime said that the falling away here means to have a sli of the foot."

Verifying that I will do at my leisure for my own edification. It is fine that you asked. It is not that crucial to defeating Arminian elevator salvational legalism.

parapipto - apstatize - too fall aside that is perfectly acceptable to me.

It is apparent that the audience to whom the writer is speaking are still saved Christian.

"But we are persuaded of better things concerning you, beloved, and things which belong to salvation, though we speak thus." (v.9)

They had not become unsaved.

In the book of Hebrews, which is a book with Five stern warnings to Christians, nowhere supports any lose of the gift of eternal life.

Originally posted by sonship
All those who teach against the assurance of eternal life for a Christian take refuge in [b]Hebrews 6. Particularly this part -

[quote]
"For it is impossible for those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to ...[text shortened]... lea for the audience to go on to more mature [b]"solid meat" of advancement.

Stop here.[/b]

This is the kind of stuff that drove me insane at Bible studies.

The attempt to pretend that the whole Bible is one unified whole, when clearly it is not.

Clearly the author has gone to a more severe line of thought in verses 4-6. He has gone past the 'you should be further along learning this stuff' to 'what do you want to do, crucify Jesus a 2nd time?!' He has gone from chastising the slow learners to warning the apostates that there is no way back.

Yes, this flies in the face of verses that sound more assuring about salvation. But that's what happens when you get different people in different places, often unaware of each other, expounding on (what they personally perceive to be proper) theology.

So, duh. Some passages are going to end up being disharmonious at best, and flat-out contradictory at worst. So simple once you just admit the obvious.

Originally posted by sonship
I will not press the matter of slippage of the foot. [b]"Fall away" is perfectly communicative to me. The proper apprehension of the passage is not dependent upon what I read in "The Gospel of God" by Watchmen Nee. on page 363.

[quote] "One British brother who studied Greek and specialized in book of Hebrews for his whole lifetime said that ...[text shortened]... k with Five stern warnings to Christians, nowhere supports any lose of the gift of eternal life.[/b]

Nothing of substance here. Foolish talk, speculation and another reference to Walkman Nee .. whoever that is.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
This is the kind of stuff that drove me insane at Bible studies.

The attempt to pretend that the whole Bible is one unified whole, when clearly it is not.

Clearly the author has gone to a more severe line of thought in verses 4-6. He has gone past the 'you should be further along learning this stuff' to 'what do you want to do, crucify Jesus a 2 ...[text shortened]... monious at best, and flat-out contradictory at worst. So simple once you just admit the obvious.

Yes, to admitting that some passages cannot be reconciled. Many Christians fall into the trap of trying to explain everything and make themselves look foolish in the process.

Regarding the issue of Christian falling away, the OSAS have put their foot in their mouth by telling converts that they are eternally saved when the truth is that only God knows who is eternally saved. That information is not known to man. So they find themselves painted in a corner with the verses I quoted above, and their explanations read like kids trying to explain the obviously unexplainable.

While the Bible speaks of some Christians who certainly cannot lose their eternal life, it is clear that not all are in that category.