Post by Admin on Jan 3, 2015 11:22:02 GMT -5
Before Calvin the prominent view was that Hebrews 6:4-6 spoke of Christians, and this is verified by hundreds of historical documents.
Up until the time of Calvin there are numerous doctrines that were universally understood to be...Christian...but were not.
The argument that what the early Church fathers believed either supports or denies a doctrine or interpretation of a verse, passage, book, or even a Testament is not only weak it is contrary to what we are commanded to do...test them against the Word of God.
The only documents relevant to an understanding of the passages in view is in fact the passages themselves. We allow for the error of men within the framework of doctrinal positions of the early fathers, but we do not allow for error on the part of inspired Scripture, nor those used to present it to the Church.
If the writer of Hebrews was writing about the unsaved, the writer was a ridiculously incompetent writer and was severely misunderstood!
Misunderstood, yes. That is why these passages remain among the most hotly debated passages in Scripture.
That doesn't mean that what he wrote has to be misunderstood.
It seems the focus is whether those written to in Hebrews 6:4-6 were saved or not. We know the writer addressed the Church, that is not in question, but, seeing you say you are an ordained Baptist Minister, let me ask you: did you assume that everyone in your congregation...was saved? Born again? Did you neglect to warn, exhort, rebuke, correct...because, after all, everyone was saved so you had no need to consider the possibility that someone among them was playing Church?
Let's look at it, but let's back up to find the context:
Hebrews 5:8-12
King James Version (KJV)
8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.
11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
Notice the writer begins to speak of Christ. Christ, being made perfect, became the Author of Eternal Salvation unto them that obey Him. The writer states " 'We' have many things to say (about Him), but it is difficult to do, seeing ye are...dull of hearing."
Those hearing this, who were without question assumed by the writer and his ministry team to be people who would hear this epistle, were part of the congregation/s they wrote to, so again, the question is...were they saved?
Again, when you preach/ed to an audience...did you assume they were all saved? That there was no error in their lives which needed to be addressed? That there were no visitors that were not saved?
So what does the writer say about Christ our Great High Priest?
Well, nothing...yet.
He has to stop and address an issue which he felt interfered with those he wrote to, namely...their ignorance and sloth concerning the First Principles of the Oracles (Word) of God.
First...they are dull of hearing. We can bracket this section all the way through the unfortunate chapter division (which men introduced, not the Lord) to Hebrews 6:12, where he exhorts them not to be slothful (nothros, translated "dull" in 5:11). While it is true that born again believers can be lazy and not understand either the First Principles found in the Old Testament or the more complete knowledge afforded by the writer and others used to clarify and declare Christ, it is equally true that those who are guilty of what those in this first century congregation(s) are stated of being guilty of show that their faith did not lie in Christ, because they were still practicing the (Covenant) Law.
Secondly, they need to be taught again, and take note...the First Principles of the Oracles of God. What does he mean? He may as well say "It is no wonder you cannot understand New Covenant teaching...you are confused about the teachings of Christ in the Law!" And the reason is...they were lazy.
Third, the insult here is that they had been associated long enough with Christ that they should themselves be teaching, but they are not. They need to be taught again, and as most of the New Testament writers did, they taught men by expounding Christ from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). The writer does this often in this Epistle.
Fourth, they have become in need of milk, like babes.
The sum statement is "Because you are lazy you are not capable of teaching others, but need others to teach you the basic principles. You cannot ingest strong meat, but need milk."
Now who is it that needs milk? Those that are limited in their understanding, which would include new believers, but does not in any way exclude those who have not been saved.
All of this is a result of the actions and conduct of those he writes to, thus his teaching concerning Christ's Priesthood is interrupted to address serious error found among those he writes to.
Next he states...
Hebrews 5:13-14
King James Version (KJV)
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
He separates those that partake of strong meat from those are in need of milk, or in other words, those who would understand what he wants to teach concerning our Great High Priest from those that are as he described in the previous verses.
Those using milk are "without experience" which, seeing it is the Word of God in view (and particularly knowledge of Christ), the primary lack in their lives is understanding of Christ Himself.
Now note that strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age. Many will view this as saying "Strong meat belongs to them that are mature," but I would suggest to you, based on the contrast between those that are in need of learning First, or Basic Principles of Christ, and those who are not slothful and are able to ingest deeper knowledge, that, while we can see an application of maturity here, what is actually in view is salvation itself. "Full Age" speaks about something that is brought to an end, or, made complete. It is used in Hebrews 9:11 to contrast the earthly tabernacle with the Heavenly.
Again, we see a contrast drawn between two different things. Here, the contrast is between those made perfect and those in need of the First Principles.
To find out what the writer means, we simply step into the next chapter, and the first verse expands the teaching of the perfection that is in view:
Hebrews 6
King James Version (KJV)
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Again, strong meat belongs to those contrasted with those that are rebuked, those of full age (perfect, made perfect) with those lazy to hear and in need of milk.
Here, the writer states "Therefore, leaving the First (principles) of the Doctrine of Christ..."
...stop.
Take careful note that this is speaking about what is written of Christ in the Hebrew Scriptures. That is what is in view.
Now to whom would we tell they have need to leave (and this does not mean abandon) what is written about Christ in the Old Testament?
Those who had not fully accepted that the Christ had come and that what was now being taught was to be embraced.
Note he states..."let us go on unto perfection." Does he mean "Let us mature and stop being babies in understanding"? Yes. But...the maturity in view is not that of an older, wiser believer, but the contrast is between believers in Christ from an Old Testament understanding and believers in Christ with a New Testament understanding.
We can see the difference between the understanding of Peter, for example, in regards to his understanding of Christ...in two primary positions. Before the Cross and Pentecost, something many do not recognize in Peter, is that he was in opposition to the Gospel of Christ. Sound like an outrageous statement? Go back to the Gospels and see Peter's rebuke of Christ for stating He was going to Jerusalem to die. See Peter's desperate attempt to fulfill Old Testament prophecy concerning Christ, which was a temporal Kingdom ruled by Christ...when he takes up the sword to defend Christ, that He might not be taken and thus die. Then contrast that with Peter's understanding and conduct after Pentecost, after He was Baptized with the Holy Ghost. And if you are not sure whether Peter was, or was not Baptized with the Holy Ghost prior to Pentecost, simply consult Acts 1:4-8.
In view in Hebrews is not a modern understanding impacted by understanding of the New Testament, but Jews who truly believed Christ was coming, and could accept that Christ...might be the Messiah. But many Jews still had that temporal understanding of Christ, and had not gone on unto perfection, or, true faith in Christ.
In v.1 the writer forbids laying again the foundational principles, which would be found in the Old Testament.
Hebrews 6
King James Version (KJV)
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do, if God permit.
We can contrast each of these basic principles with New Testament principles, but the writer will sum all of them up:
4 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,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
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.
Verse 4 makes some believe this proves that those being rebuked here were born again believers, but, what is forgotten is that it is the Holy Spirit, in the ministry of Comforter, that enlightens all men...that they might be saved. Did not Christ teach that when He was come, He would convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment? "Of sin," said He, "...because they believe not on Me."
Some of the divisive issues in the Body of Christ can be easily resolved if we forego what men have taught and focus on what the Word of God teaches. Calvinists and Arminians could heal their great breach simply by acknowledging that unbelievers are ministered to by the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, Who began His Ministry on the Day of Pentecost. This particular passage loses it's power as a loss of salvation teaching when a very simple principle is maintained: the Comforter convicts of sin, and He uses the very Word of God to do so. The response of those ministered to varies, some will yield, some will reject.
But no-one comes to repentance apart from the Ministry of the Comforter. And not all those enlightened will yield to God and be saved. Peter writes "...it would be 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 Peter 2:21)." We see in this single verse that men can be enlightened, understand...turn from it. In John 6, which I view as the greatest passage dealing with how we are saved, where Christ states specifically that men must believe He died for them, we see disciples who were willing to follow Christ for gain (being fed), but when the specifics arise, they walk away.
One more point from this passage:
4 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,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
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.
The foundational principles being laid again result in a rejection of Christ the ministry of the Comforter.
Note here that those who fall away "crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh." What does he mean?
Simply put, to offer up again the sacrifices of the Law...was to do again that which those sacrifices did in the first place: picture Christ.
Those guilty of this crucified Christ again, in figure, and this...to themselves.
In Hebrews 10:29 it is written...
Hebrews 10:29
King James Version (KJV)
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
...and again we see a contrast between the First Covenant (The Covenant of Law) and the New Covenant (see vv.26-29 in context). We see that in view is not the sins that every believer will commit as he is growing and being conformed to the image of Christ, but the specific sin of rejection of Christ Himself, as well as the means of enlightenment, the Ministry of the Comforter.
Again, in view is the understanding of those he writes to of the Word of God, and he goes on to say...
7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
The Word of God goes out to all men. While there are those who may never hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Paul assures us that all men will have the revelation of God, whether it be through Creation, the internal witness of God, or specific revelation such as the Word of God, no man or woman will stand before God and say, "But...you never told me!"
Again we see a contrast, not between good or mature believers and those not so mature, but between believers and unbelievers. We will know them by their fruit, and by their words, and by their deeds. For those in view here, the writer has already spent much time warning against unbelief. Anyone reading chs. 3-4 and stating that unbelievers are never in view...need to read it again.
If that is true it calls into question whether this Epistle is inspired Scripture.
The interpretations of men do not impact, and are not relevant to the Inspiration of Scripture. That men can misinterpret, and still be genuine in their faith in Christ is a possibility. If what we have concluded is in conflict with what is taught elsewhere in Scripture, then it is we that must go back and find out where our error lies.
And we can say with confidence that an interpretation of this passage as teaching loss of salvation is in error. We need not go out of Hebrews to show this:
Hebrews 10:14
King James Version (KJV)
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Again, the writer exhorts his Hebrew brethren..."Therefore, let us go on unto perfection."
And those that have been made perfect in regards to remission of sin have been, according to New Covenant promise, forgiven their sins, and that sin will no more be remembered by the Lord.
And if one tries to establish a "Clean Slate" soteriology, keep in mind that in doing so the Word of God is nullified in preference for a theological view that conflicts with Eternal Redemption itself. If sins were remembered, then it could not be said that those sanctified by the Blood of Christ have been made perfect forever.
The same terminology to describe Christians that other New Testament writers used for that purpose—and that terminology is never used to describe the unsaved (or in other words the writer never speaks about the unsaved in Hebrews)
Actually, he spends quite a bit of time speaking about unsaved people. Here are a few examples:
Hebrews 3:12
King James Version (KJV)
12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
Hebrews 3:17-19
King James Version (KJV)
17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
Hebrews 4
King James Version (KJV)
1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
It is difficult stating those that were unbelievers were saved. The contrast drawn here is between those with an evil heart of unbelief in the Wilderness, and those, in the New Testament Economy who have entered into Rest through faith and belief. We do not divorce obedience in this comparison, but we do note that unbelievers, who cannot be said to be saved (because the Word they heard was not mixed with faith), are definitely spoken of by the writer, and this is a constant theme.
The warning here is to those who might replicate the unbelief of those who did not enter into the temporal rest of God, and in so doing not enter into Rest in Christ.
The early Ante-Nicene Fathers of the Church used the same terminology to describe the saved and they never used it to describe the unsaved either (again the primary point being that the terminology used speaks only of those saved and never speaks about the unsaved).
Just not an accurate statement, as seen in passage above.
When we approach Hebrews 6:4-6. let us not overlook the foundation the writer lays going into his rebuke of those who are simply negligent to place priority on the Word of God, and thus come to an understanding of Christ.
Hebrews 10:26 is no different, because if we look at the groundwork laid in chs.8-9, not to mention his specific address of sacrifice for sin which contrasts Christ's sacrifice with the sacrifices of the Levitical Economy, we would not erroneously conclude that born again believers are in view in 10:26.
They are contrasted with the unsaved under the Law, who rejected...not embraced...the Covenant in view:
Hebrews 10:26-29
King James Version (KJV)
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Those that despise Christ and the New Covenant are contrasted and compared with those that despised Moses' Law (the First Covenant, Covenant of Law). Rejection of Christ is why certain judgment will come, and the writer asks..."How much sorer will it be?"
It is a question that demands an answer, and the answer is it will be much more severe than those that despised Moses' Law.
In view is rejection of the New Covenant, which the writer speaks about in great detail before making this declaration of warning.
And we see the same statement here...
Hebrews 10:16-18
King James Version (KJV)
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
...that he makes here...
Hebrews 10:26
King James Version (KJV)
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
...which is the consistent teaching of the New Testament...only the sacrifice of Christ can save. Only through His death can we receive remission of sins.
Yet no-one mistakes the intent of the writer in the former passage, so we ask...how can they misinterpret the latter?
It is because of faith and loyalty to a Theology System, which I would suggest is unnecessary in the Body of Christ to begin with, and based on error itself.
We need to be in the Books of the Bible, not in books about the Bible.
The writer was careful to avoid being misunderstood—and it was not until Calvin's time that many verses were reinterpreted to justify Calvinistic doctrine.
I have to disagree, because error in regards to Christ, Christian conduct, and Christian Doctrine...does not even wait until the entirety of the New Testament is given us by God.
Much of the New Testament Epistles address...error. Even with living, breathing Apostles ministering to the Church, error was present and had to be dealt with.
To imply that until Calvin the Church was doing just fine, lol, cannot be concluded from the Books of the New Testament. To imply that the doctrinal positions of the Church were in good order before Calvin is also something that few would try to actually support.
Only Scripture can be consulted if we want flawless doctrine. The doctrines of men will always have one problem...men are involved.
As to whether those doctrines "reinterpret" or not, that should be easily enough settled...in the Word.
One error Paul addressed in 1 Corinthians, and addressed it before anything else...was sectarian division and exalting men, who did not die for us.
Paul did not die for us. Apollos did not die for us. We can place any name, except for the Name of Christ, in that statement, and it will always be true. Only Christ could and did die for us, to take upon Himself the penalty for our sins, and as God promised and then fulfilled in Christ, when we are sanctified by the blood of Christ, we are made perfect, complete...forever.
God will not renege on His promise to no more remember our sins. Faith in Christ, and specifically, that He died for our sins, is our entrance into New Covenant relationship with God. For the first century Jew, prior to the destruction of the Temple, there was a very difficult situation presented. Those who were born and bred into one of the most religious cultures the world has ever seen were faced with great loss by turning away from the Law and it's sacrifices. But that was the choice they had. For them to associate with Christ and still offer up sacrifice for remission of sins was a clear statement that they were not trusting in Christ for remission of sins, but that they were still under obligation to offer up according to the Law. Those who did so "crucified to themselves Christ again."
And that is why the writer makes it clear "There is no more sacrifice for sins."
If one despises Christ, there is no other sacrifice for sins which they can turn to.
God bless.