The Earnest Contender

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Eternal Life (Part 4 Problematic Texts Heb. 6:4-9)

The texts that might cause one to question the doctrine of eternal life (or eternal salvation) are simply not in abundance. The two that seem to be most commonly cited are Heb. 6:4-9 and Ezek. 3:16-23. Let's look at them one at a time.

Hebrews 6: 4-9

4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, 5who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. 9Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case - things that accompany salvation.

Some have read this passage, and perhaps in haste, have come to the immediate conclusion that one who is saved can become unsaved, or lost. However, this passage is not speaking of a believer “...falling through a knothole in the plank of grace...”, as Earnest Pickering, a firey preacher has said. Jesus offers eternal life, not temporary life. If one can lose it, it is not eternal, but temporary. I think it was Zane Hodges who said, “If we are not born again to eternal life then the Bible should have called it something else!” I couldn’t agree more! Jesus makes it clear that this life begins the moment one believes the Father's message (see John 5:24). Jesus offers eternal life as a free gift, not as an item you must pay for, or make payments to keep. Since we know that “...God is not the author of confusion, but of peace...” (1Cor. 14:33), we need to ask God to illuminate our minds to understand this passage, especially if it doesn't SEEM to mesh with easier to understand verses on the same subject.

After comparing Scripture with Scripture (knowing the many times God’s Word speaks about eternal life) and remembering to keep verses in their context, we can accurately interpret this passage.

Explanation

This section of Scripture might throw us off a bit at first. However, using our guidelines for interpretation, we can conclude that it is not speaking of a saved person becoming unsaved again, but of a saved person losing his effectiveness and losing the rewards of a life lived for Christ.

This passage is in the context of Christian maturity (Heb. 5:12-6:3) it can be easily deduced that it is speaking about redeemed, saved people. Also, supporting this deduction is the fact that the experiences spoken of in vv. 4-5 pertain only to those who are saved or "born-again."

It seems clear, with this in mind, that what vv. 4-6a are saying is that it is "impossible" for a soul that is born again to become re-born again. At this point, we may be reminded of what we have learned in the rest of the New Testament: there was a once-and-for-all substitutionary sacrifice for sin, Jesus’ death on the cross. There is simply no other sacrifice to be made for sinful individuals in this wicked world. So, to our joy, we can see that vv. 4-6 are affirming the security of salvation and are stating that repentance unto salvation is a one-time appropriation of this one-time sacrifice. It cannot be repeated by an individual. Not only is it unnecessary, but, just like the author of Hebrews has said here: "it is impossible!"

The author of A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Moody Press, 1972) Dr. Charles Ryrie said on page 133 that “If this passage were teaching that it is possible to lose one’s salvation, then it also states, in no uncertain terms, that it is impossible to be saved a second time.”

Although it is clear that the passage is indeed a warning about something, one should not feel insecure because of the phrase "falling away". It is not speaking of losing salvation. This English phrase is a single Greek word that refers to a deliberate act of getting off the path and going one's own way. It does not mean salvation is lost, but instead the saved person has chosen a different path that leads to ineffective service in the work of furthering the cause of Christ. That is why it is a loss, but not a loss of salvation! Instead it is a loss of fruit (productivity) and rewards for faithful service.

Also, if this same person, in an effort to save or renew his testimony, erroneously said that Christ had saved him AGAIN, he would be, in effect, “crucifying the Son of God all over again" (and we know that can't be done and is not needful). Furthermore, in effect, it is the public declaration of such a (saved) person that, in his or her earthly life and practice, Christ’s salvation made no difference. All of this is the "public disgrace" of Jesus (which is spoken of in v. 6), who paid such an awful price for that person’s salvation. Verses 7 and 8 emphasize the whole teaching by use of metaphor. Verse 8 compares the life and service of a fruitful Christian to productive land that blesses others. Verse 8 likens the life of an unfruitful Christian (one who "falls away" by deliberately getting off the path and going his own way), to land that produces thorns and thistles and is worthless. It also says that such land is in danger of being "cursed" and it declares that it will be "burned".

Compare this idea with 1Cor. 3:13-15; “Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”

Let it be understood that Heb. 6:6-8 is a contrast of a fruitful (i.e. productive) and an unfruitful (i.e. unproductive) Christian. The expressed desire of the author of Hebrews for his fellow believers is not an immature or suspended faith, but rather a growing, vibrant faith: “...better things... things that accompany salvation...[!]” (See v. 9). This passage is not saying that an unproductive Christian will be cast into hell to be burned forever. The word forever is not used here at all, so it can not be speaking of the eternal soul of man. Rather, it is the works that are no good that are in danger of being cursed or thrown into the fire to be burned (i.e. forgotten altogether).

Reading the book of Hebrews in its entirety, one can readily see the tenor and theme of this treasured discourse:

Jesus who is supreeme, alone paid the full sin debt once

Jesus who is supreme, alone made full pardon once

Jesus who is supreeme, did it for all of the sins of the whole world once

Jesus who is supreeme, covered once; sins of the past, present, & future

No other sacrifice will do or even begin to come close to this, ever

This sacrifice, alone, is all one should trust for the forgiveness of sin

My next post will deal with Ezekiel 3:16-23

Are there other problematic texts on this subject you would like me to treat some time?

27 Comments:

Dear John,
The exposition you offer on this text is very biased and presupposes a hermeneutic before it approaches the text. This isn't honest exegesis. I write this with respect to the very good work I've read here before on your site.

There are many holes in your reasonings, but the most interesting is this:

"Also, if this same person, in an effort to save or renew his testimony, erroneously said that Christ had saved him AGAIN, he would be, in effect, “crucifying the Son of God all over again" (and we know that can't be done and is not needful)."

That is not what the writer is saying at all. It is a fabrication to get "around" the real message. Remember, this person has also regarded the blood of the covenant as unclean, and trampled the Son of God under foot.
He is facing a "terrifying expectation" of judgement, and a "fury of fire" with "severe punishment." This is not a lack of "fruitbearing" but is a warning against hell. Don't let Free- Grace theology demand a distorted interpretation of this book and it's warnings. They are real and not to be explained away, or to be misconstrued to be backsliding or doubting of salvation. It is a repudiation of Christ, and no less.
I believe you are more than capable to see this, and would, if you let go of the "systematic theological" presuppositional approach to this book and text. Does it really matter what it does to your positions on certain things? Or does it matter that you are honestly engaging the particular book and text in hand?

In His Love,
Joseph

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 8:47 AM
I think the key in these passages is to understand the condition this body of believers were facing. The author at one point even says, "WE are expected better things of you *though we speak thus*. Things that come with salvation."

Remember Moses' intercession at Israels bleakest moment and find hope in that Jesus intercedes for us. This is a winnowing text. The sifting Peter was warned about by Jesus at a point when Judas and Peter were nearly *seemingly* close to one anothers plight, yet we know Peter believed and Judas did not.

Remember Jesus called Peter "Satan" at one time as well as told him that he could have no part with him, when trying to wash his feet. Hebrews is written for believers as James is as well. Both as Jumper cables to ignite the battery that needs to be rechardged as well as to sift and winnow.

This was the hardest thing for me to realize in one of my darkest hours, but praise God I am his and he is mine. The believers here needed to be moved from milk and stagnation to maturity. I believe there is a danger in taking the sting out of these texts, but at the same time we can go to far if we do not encourage as the author does in telling them that they have hope in the midst of speaking like this.

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 11:45 AM
Welcome back by the way.

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 11:49 AM
Yes, John, welcome back!
I really do appreciate your love for Christ,His Word, and people.

Brian,
I agree 100% and think that this is the whole reason for the magnitude of the warnings, and the pleas to steadfast "resting" in the Messiah, with the pastoral assurances of his hope that they would indeed listen to "His voice."

These tensions are intended to be tense.

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 12:10 PM
Which leads me to ask you this Joseph,

Do you think that it is a mistake that Piper and Hodges have that tension. I mean is it possible that both are pulling on opposite ends of the rope in a sense?

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 1:08 PM
In John 15 we have branches Jesus says are *In Him* that are cut off. If however you look at the greek word you will see that the meaning also is to lift up. A bizarre word.

I have often meditated on the seriousness of John Marks seeming Apostacy. Paul cut him off and Barnabas had a bitter disagreement about it. Of course I don't think that Piper truly has a sense of Pauline doctrine, but i do see where his teaching cutts off and renders many to believe they are hopeless. I would say Piper follows it to an extreme as I believe Zane Hodges follows Barnabbas to an extreme, but I do believe both are there and still minister for the cause of Christ. This is one reason why I believe men like Erwin Lutzer and Spurgeon have or had a proper understanding. I am not sure that John is far from agreeing with us.
His use of Zane Hodges does not mean he completely agrees with him. I had a good talk with him once on the phone and realized he was farther along in understanding some things than I was.

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 1:17 PM
Re-read over Johns article. I missed that he already said a couple of things already. Sometimes I read to fast and glaze over some things.

John,

You don't fully affirm all that the FG system teaches do you?

I would like to read some stuff by Pickering. Perhaps you can post his thoughts in the future.

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 1:23 PM
Brian,
On these texts I believe that it must be read without the modern arguments in mind. Piper and Hodges are defending their systems in their exegesis, and not approaching the text as fresh material. I don't think they even have a grip on the rope. Their presuppositions are in their hands and make them too full to hold the actual material.
The issue here in Hebrews is that of premeditated repudiation of Christ. It is not carnality, although carnality was leading up to the presumption and resignation of faith in Messiah. There is a progression of indictments and increase and enlargement of the degree of warning. There is a contempt for the sacrifice of Christ that is at hand, not a re-commitment that is faulty in it's conceptual understanding of what it is doing in relation to the doctrine of eternal security.
That whole line of working through the text is foreign to the context and troublesome to the conscience of the one putting it forth for sure.
As for Piper and Hodges, I think their theology is really sad in most areas. Piper's Trinity and "active obedience" along with his Calvinistic "limited atonement" and wild eschatology is almost enought to let him go. But his missions material and zeal for God's glory is magnetic and refreshing in our modern environment of deadness and self.
Hodges is a sad case all around. I stay away from any hint of his work, simply not to be grieved.

Please pray for me tonight. I just got a call to speak to an International lawyers group in the morning at the old town castle. They are from 13 different countries, and I have freedom to choose my own topic. Maybe Hebrews!
Thanks

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 1:51 PM
By the way Brian,
I think John Mark just got home sick and missed mom. I don't think Paul had him down as an apostate, he just didn't want any more cries for "Ma" in the heat of battle.

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 1:56 PM
Just a side note:

Using the following to excuse the possibility of an irreconcilable subject is not healthy or true:

Quoted from original post;

"Since we know that “...God is not the author of confusion, but of peace...” (1Cor. 14:33), we need to ask God to illuminate our minds to understand this passage, especially if it doesn't SEEM to mesh with easier to understand verses on the same subject."

1 Cor.14:33 should not be used for this problem.

In Peace,
Joseph

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 2:21 PM
Thanks Joseph,

You said this>Piper and Hodges are defending their systems in their exegesis, and not approaching the text as fresh material. I don't think they even have a grip on the rope. Their presuppositions are in their hands and make them too full to hold the actual material.<

Wow! I couldn't agree more.

As to John Mark. The word in greek is the same word for Apostacy is it not. Some have sugested that he actually was upset with how Paul was handling things. I can see your mom argument, but I tend to think there may have been more there. In any case, you have brought up some good thoughts to pursue.

May God bless you and strengthen you in your endeavor with the meeting.

Brian

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 4:29 PM
Brian,
The (aphistemi) {af-is'-tay-mee}of John Mark was from the mission team, not from the faith. It also has the simple meaning of "leaving."
See below:

1) to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to remove

a) to excite to revolt

2) to stand off, to stand aloof

a) to go away, to depart from anyone

b) to desert, withdraw from one

c) to fall away, become faithless

d) to shun, flee from

e) to cease to vex one

f) to withdraw one's self from, to fall away

g) to keep one's self from, absent one's self from

It was his "going away" from the work, not the Lord. This happens so often. We send off young and zealous men, and see them return when it gets hot. Paul thought of the cause, and Barnabas of the young man. (though both had interest in each, each was weightier for one than the other.)
Culture shock, intense spiritual opposition, sleeping arrangements, antagonistic people,and much more give us reason to have a soft place for John Mark in our hearts, and an "amen" when Paul asks for him in 2 Timothy 4:11 and says he will be "useful" to him for service. It is a beautiful and sobering account of possibly laying hands on someone too quickly, and then again it is a story of multiplication of efforts through disagreeing brethren. It's not always a bad thing to move on in this way, as the Spirit of God has gifts that differ, and emphasis that are directed through conflict. I think they were both right! I think Mark would agree today if we could speak to him that he loved them both for their stand taken on his return to Pamphylia. He needed to endure a foot race before he ran with chariots.
Your Brother,(thanks for the fathers day post!)
Joseph

By POWER PRO, at 17/6/06 5:21 PM
Amen! This is true. I am a John Mark.

May you have a blessed fathers day.

By Bhedr, at 17/6/06 5:38 PM
I agree, John.

Great to see you back.

By Matthew Celestine, at 18/6/06 10:11 AM
There are several views about this passage (Heb. 6) and various approaches. My approach is historico/gramatico/theologico. With the highest regard to certain one/s who disagree with the conclusion of my exegetical treatment on this text I offer this polite rebuttal.

I have come to this conclusion because I was not completely satisfied with my previously held view, which I will mention in brief with some other views, which I now believe are inferior to the one I set forth in this, the second tract I wrote, printed and distribute still. I am that confident. This was an area that I looked into intently comparing my view with those expressed in commentaries, study Bibles and a plethora of articles; being challenged and questioned by my best critic, who always wants to be reasonable. Now, for my disclaimer, allow me to quote yet another man who has given me some personal mentoring Dr. David Rockwell, overseer of Christian education at EBC, previously chief editor at RBP, (I make his quote my own as well) “Nothing I say is my original thought, everything I teach I was taught by someone else.”

Not that I could ever touch G. Campbell Morgan (few can), but please tell me, if you can find in print his view of this passage. I could not. There are other commentators that completely avoid this problematic text as well. In the interest of finding a satisfactory interpretation and for clarification of my previously held view here are some positions I have discovered and compared.

1. The idea that one who is born again can loose his/her eternal life is most repugnant to this bloger. If you hold this view and you are in Christ I am your brother and I love you, yet I don’t view God as One who will commit spiritual abortions nor One who will change His mind about those He brings into His family. I will not even discuss this Armenian view in light of the many, many passages that one must find at odds with this thinking a few of which I have mentioned in part 2 of this series.

2. The “hypothetical” view, (“If they shall fall away…”) that this is the biggest “IF” in the Bible is somewhat acceptable, but IMHO this position fell short of the actual warning/s that should not be viewed lightly as if the writer were saying “since it is not really possible, it’s OK to live as you wish no harm will befall you or anyone else.” This is not now, nor was it ever this bloggers position. I am fairly certain that one of the theologians I highly respect holds this view, yet I am not 100% certain, therefore, his name is withheld here.

3. The “professors” view, points up that there is no “IF” in Greek at all and that a proper translation should be “Having fallen away…” The idea according to this view is that these are not genuine believers. However, in the greater context of Hebrews (cf. 4:2-3) there are striking differences between those who rest in Christ and those who have not rested in Him. Hebrews 5:11 speaks of those who are “…dull of hearing…” NOT those who are blind or dead in sin. Hebrews 5:12 speaks of the spiritual condition as well; Who ever heard of giving a dead person milk? Although I do not agree with them here I appreciate Matthew Henry, John Darby, and C.I Scofield who put forth this view, because they treated it, and it was a view to consider. To make myself clear, however, I hold that this passage is speaking of genuine believers not mere professors.

4. This passage is addressing “Jewish believers”; at least that was my previous view of this passage. The temple, I reasoned, was still standing at the time Hebrews was written and this was a warning not to return to the sacrificial system, because they would in affect be declaring that Christ did not die for there sins. Therefore this passage only applied to those Jews of the first century and not to anyone today especially not gentile believers.

5. The “impossible (with man), but possible with God” view is yet another idea that I considered for about a minute and there are other thoughts on this passage as well (feel free to express yours).

6. The view I now hold to was expressed by a Baptist preacher Dr. J. B. Rowell in Bibliotheca Sacra. One can get a feel of my view by reading the post of this thread. It came to me second hand from a commentary on Hebrews by J. Vernon McGee. There is much more to it than I felt was necessary to include in this little post (for some) who may be troubled by the idea that “one who is saved can become lost and be abandon forever in the “lake of fire” where the worm never sleeps, the smoke of their torment ascends forever, a place of outer darkness and gnashing of teeth, and worse no personal fellowship with the One who died to save ‘em; that would be Hell.” On the other hand (though it was a fair amount), it was well worth the read and study for me and satisfied my interests and I recommend it to anyone who would read it with patience and openness (Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee Volume 5 pp.543-550).

Now I will make some finer points individually as warented, when I get time.

By J. Wendell, at 19/6/06 7:47 AM
John,

Why did Jesus tell his disciples "One of You will betray me!"?

Would you say that Peter was dull of hearing at the even't? He assured Christ that he was more faithful than all the other disciples who when they heard this grew sorrowfull and said, "Is is I?"

Prior to this event Judas grew angry that a woman poured her expense out on Jesus for his burial. He thought Jesus was not worthy of it and that the poor were.

John,

Why did the disciples say, "Is it I." Surely they knew that it couldn't be them!

No that was Judas' response and Peter followed with strong denial of Christs saying he would deny.

Question? Would you say that Peter was dull of hearing? Do you think that maybe he needed to come to the point of the other disciples who were greived about this?

You see, when Jesus taught them, he constantly rebuked to keep there ears sharp. In the process Judas grew angrier and more vindictive towards him. Peter grew more self-confident and through this ordeal he would mature and come into a greater understanding of himself.

These are just some thoughts. I do not believe anybody loses their salvation, but I do believe that some people follow God to get something out of him and are not approaching him in need of salvation. They want possibaly to use God to arbitrate their cause. Peter needed to be reminded of his need, while Judas was to be exposed. This is the winnowing sting of the word of God.

By Bhedr, at 19/6/06 8:16 PM
Dear Joseph,
Thank you for reading this post.

With all due respect, to accuse one of “not being honest” in their exegesis of Scripture invokes an emotional response rather than a rational response so forgive me for ignoring your greeting this once, and I would appreciate the benefit of the doubt even if we disagree on a point or two.

Here are two questions for you… Joseph, do you think that our Lord can be crucified again? Do you think God will condemn one of His own children? Think about how you might answer these questions in light of Hebrews 6.

You accuse me of fabrication, and then throw your own fabrication into the text. This passage (Hebrews 6) is not dealing with, “… this person has also regarded the blood of the covenant as unclean, and trampled the Son of God under foot.” Does Hebrews 6 say, “He is facing a "terrifying expectation" of [judgment], and a "fury of fire" with "severe punishment."? Instead, Hebrews 6 begins with these words “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, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. (vv.1&2)

Perhaps I am not fabricating and allowing personal bias to influence my view here.

Further, brother you charge, “Don't let Free-Grace theology demand a distorted interpretation of this book and [its] warnings. They are real and not to be explained away, or to be misconstrued to be backsliding or doubting of salvation. It is a repudiation of Christ, and no less.”

I have not heard of Free-Grace Theology until last year, I have inserted a quote of Zane Hodges in this post because I felt what he said was pertinent, as Mother Theresa once said, “God does not demand that I be successful. God demands that I be faithful.” (In My Own Words, p.40 Barnes and Noble) I hope, Joseph, that you do not think I give whole-sale endorsements of everyone (or even anyone) I quote. A few years ago I stopped giving the disclaimer, “I don’t agree with everything that (whoever) says even the most important person to me on the face of God’s green earth and I do not always agree either, but….”

I agree that the warnings spoken of in this passage are real, but they are meant to be properly explained, not emotionally explained and should not be explained away. There is nothing light hearted about what we do as Christians, and there is nothing more severe, for a believer, then to face Christ with nothing, no fruit, or to be disqualified for service, or having operated in the flesh for a show here and now, just to see it all burn up as fast as wood, straw, and stubble, Ffsst, poof * ! It’s gone, nothing of eternal value.
:~(

The writer in Hebrews 6 is saying, “But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned. But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.” (pp.8-12)

BTW where are those "many holes"?

By J. Wendell, at 20/6/06 8:22 AM
Bheder~
Thank you for your confidence.

This is a difficult passage. I hope you and Blaurock, can see that my approach, view, and treatment of this passage was not thoughtlessly contrived, but that it is honest and that it has some merit. You may not agree, but “…here I stand.”

By J. Wendell, at 20/6/06 8:32 AM
Hey all is Cool John,

You know its been more than once that I have had to apologize, so I hope I didn't offend here. I believe you are seeking the truth.

I agree this is tough.

My point about Judas and the disciples is that he was the seed being prompted by Satan. If you look in the other Gospels you will find that the disciples sided with Judas and critisised the woman for pouring out her expenisive ointment. How do you think this made Jesus feel? Often times we don't take into consideration how much we hurt him sometimes.

Jesus told them all actually to leave her alone and that she was honoring him. Why is this so important? I think it helps unlock why God's word has to sting and wake us up to who is always trying to beguile us and deceive our hearts into following treachery. The Hebrews were under similar circumstances. They had come so far with Christ and now they were slapping him in the face and telling him by their lack of confidence, that he is just not worth it. As in the case with Judas and the disciples, there is always an alien element that is tricking us into thinking false thoughts and turning our backs on the Saviour. The Word of God has to sting us and show us that we are the ones letting our hearts grow cold to him. Remember Jesus warned even his disciples, "Beware of the Leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod? The point is. What are you doing here? Whose side are you on? It also isolates the disturber among the body that seeks to beguile and helps the sheep flee the voice of the beguiler by shocking the little lamb and letting it see the danger it embraces as little dumb lambs often do.

So after the disciples sided with Judas and critisized Jesus, they all willfully followed Judas who was being prompted by Satan. They were buying into the fact that the poor were more important than this glory of God in front of them. do you understand why he told all of them:

"One of You will betray me."

Now do you mind if we look at Hebrews 10:26 in light of this?

"For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins"

Now It deeply concerns me that this be considered only for brethren because brethren should not consider themselves to be in this category here:

"But a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries." verse 27

This is meant for God's adversaries.

of course we have this to tell us that even though he is saying this will befall some people who have deceived themselves. I think verse 25 is helpful possibly although ther are backsliders but we know the author tells us here:

"But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls." Hebrews 10:39

Now I do believe in the sin unto death for believers, but I also believe there are some who deep down resent God and are among us. Men who are like Judas who have heard the invitation "Try Jesus" and not "Trust Jesus"

By Bhedr, at 20/6/06 9:03 PM
Hi Brian,
All is well; you have not offended me in the least.

I appreciate your reasoning and treatment of the two sighted passages and your mention of the others you have contributed to this thread. I did consider treating Heb. 10 with the two problematic texts, but I felt that the little flier was already to long and would loose the interest of the readers and if I included too many difficult passages, I was concerned that I would leave the impression that the Bible is too difficult to understand. I did not want anyone to think that one must rely on religious professionals to read and understand God’s Word and be discouraged from doing so.

I agree with your view that this passage in Hebrews 10 is like a scalpel and a machete, a tuning fork and a gong. I also hold the view that this passage is for believers as well as the pretenders in their midst. The writer of Hebrews must have been somewhat familiar with Peter and perhaps was even writing this letter after his martyrdom and wanted to make sure that others who knew the apostle Peter and his reputation as a good Jew to remember that God uses fishermen as well as scholars, because Hebrews 10:26 and 2Peter 2:21 are very similar. Here is where I fall back to the Hebrew believer view that true (Jewish) believers were being persuaded by those pretending believers to actually go into the temple (which was still standing until A.D. 70) and offer sacrifices there. Who knows why they would have done what they did? Perhaps they wanted some to notice they were still Jews (Peter was confronted in a similar way regarding circumcision, maybe by the same one who is now confronting these believers). Perhaps they just loved the ceremony and missed the worshipful experience. Perhaps they were trying to emerge with the culture. Perhaps it was a cooperative effort for political or academic acceptance. Perhaps it was an attempt at ecumenical evangelism. I don’t know what motivated them to do this; they may have had the best intentions, but they were wrong! If they didn’t stop they were in big trouble.

When Ananias and Sapphira were slain in the Spirit (Acts 5) they were confronted by Peter and were stopped in their tracks. I think this was the effect this scholarly writer to the Hebrews desired, as he (inspired by the Holy Spirit) laid down the gauntlet.

SMACK!!!

“Knock it of you knuckleheads, don’t you know that by sacrificing in the Temple you’re saying that the death of our Lord is nothing to you! You may as well be trampling underfoot the precious blood of the holy One just like the religious mockers and pagan Romans did at Calvary!

There will not be any other sacrifice, Jesus paid it all! Don’t go looking for, wait up thinking that God is going to do something else for any of us, as if we were in an intermission waiting for another act of God’s grace.

Get out of that Temple made with hands and restore your fellowship with the Holy Spirit, who although He has made you to be His temple, is grieved by you! Don’t be influenced any longer by the pretenders who if they do not repent will be judged and go to Hell.

By following them you are influencing others (saved and unsaved) to a religious system of works. You, therefore, are in jeopardy of severe chastisement from God. It is fearful to be a sinner or a saint in the hands of the living God!

Repent! Turn from this disgusting practice.
Remember! You started off trusting in Christ alone because of the illumination of the Holy Spirit and have even faced perils.
Restore, your fellowship with God, and...
Receive His promises afresh.

The just shall live by faith! I will take no pleasure in you at all, (being thus warned) if you continue in this compromise of works righteousness, and neither will God!" (My own paraphrase)

Brian, are we on the same page on this one or am I off the road and on a trail?

God bless.

By J. Wendell, at 21/6/06 8:43 AM
John,

I think we are on the same page. I think the fearful warning is for the pretender, but will also serve as you said, a kind of machete to the heart. The idiom that is used hear is actually Hebrew as well and comes from Davids presumptuous sin of numbering the people. Remember he said, "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of men, but the mercies of the Lord are great." anyway, something like that.

The text serves as a warning to not presume like David, I believe.

Still the Jews had fallen away and needed to be warned back and given hope, yet the ones that were pressuring them needed to be exposed and where this false germ of thought originated would be punched out of them by the hammer of God's word. Our hearts can harden, but Jesus also said his sheep will listen, but that those who are of the father of lies will love the lies and hearken to them.

Still there is a sin unto death and the branch sometimes needs to be cut off so that it doesn't drain the rest of the group. There are complexities here that we know not of, as we are dealing with the mind of God. I think you have done a good job addressing this.

Brian

By Bhedr, at 21/6/06 5:25 PM
Brian-
Thanks for bearing this out with me, your patience is appreciated.

Funny that you mentioned that, “There are complexities here that we know not of, as we are dealing with the mind of God.” That is almost exactly my position when it comes to God’s sovereignty, and man’s responsibility.

By J. Wendell, at 22/6/06 12:46 PM
Amen. You are likeminded and I believe both to be true. 100% each. and that is why we may indeed be heading in the same direction on this series I am exploring on finding favor with God.

You speak of dispensations. I often agree with some systems of thought, but the point where I disagree is in the appropriation. IOW, I believe discovered truth leads to faith, where as forced truth leads to mental assent.

A.B.W.E just did an article on this and has expolored this in their mission endeavors. You see what I am convicted about is the same truths that lead one to faith can also offer a fig leaf for unbelief to the gnostic mind of man. IOW, when grace is discovered it is a most glorious thing, but when those truths are drilled into the mind it builds up resistance to those precious truths. Handling truth is a fearful thing is it not?

Maybe not for you and I, but for others. I am only just now learning to be careful about this.

By Bhedr, at 22/6/06 1:33 PM
What I mean by that is...it is good in one sense, not to be a theologian. Amen?

By Bhedr, at 22/6/06 4:37 PM
Brian~
I get the "Message"! To the End of the Earth (Acts 1:8). Great periodical.

Brother I hope this won’t become a Battleground for us, but you are wrong about one finer point.

YOU ARE A THEOLOGION.

By J. Wendell, at 22/6/06 5:19 PM
Your too kind brother, but can't you see me sitting with my arm on the chair?

I am discovering that the more I know, the less I do most of the time:-)

You are a theologian too, of course I guess the good thing is. Our writings don't go out to mass population and are followed by men. The whole thought of that just scares me half to death. They will have to account for this one day. I don't wanna be in those shoes. Do you?

By Bhedr, at 22/6/06 5:57 PM
Amen!

By J. Wendell, at 23/6/06 5:18 AM