Hebrews 6:8 Bible Teaching

Welcome.

The Word of God – it’s why we’re are here. To hear it taught, preached, and to (by the Holy Spirit) let IT sink in and renew our minds – bringing each of us – according to His will and ways (not our own, but His) . . . to a living knowledge of Him.

So let’s pray, then hear the word set to music (you can sing along if you are able) and then we’ll sit in a few minutes of silent reflection before coming back to John chapter 6 beginning at verse 40.

Prayer
Music
Silent time

Hebrews 6.8
Meat
January 12th 2014
Okay . . .

Let’s get back into our verse by verse study. In verses 1-2 the writer of Hebrews laid out the call for believers (in that day and then in this) to move on to perfection.

Then he adds in verse 3

Hebrews 6:3 “And this will we do, if God permit.”

In verse 9 and 10 of this chapter we see that Paul has confidence that the recipients of his epistle would be successful, nevertheless, he seems to have been compelled to both say that they would accomplish such progression “if God permit,” or better put, “with God’s help.”

I don’t think we can assume that the writer is saying God would not desire this, or that He would stop them in their efforts to mature as believers, but I think all he is doing is reminding them of their dependence on Him – for all things – including moving on to perfection.

We have talked quite a bit over the last few months about free will, about God’s sovereignty, and how this all plays out in the progress and the digression of believers.

My sold-out position is that God is sovereign and accomplishes His will by and through His foreknowledge of our free will choices and make-up.

To me, it is the only way to explain verses and entire books in scripture that speak to the will of man, our choices – and God accomplishing His desires.

We recall that Jesus Himself, said, looking out over Jerusalem (who had rejected Him)

Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and you would not!”

We recall that in the first chapter of Job, the angels (sons of man) came to God and Satan was among them and God said to Satan:

Job 1:7-8 “And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?”

Then the rest of the book is an example of Job choosing to endure the trials and tests God allowed Satan to put forth.

Such a contest would be wholly ridiculous if Job was powerless to accept or reject Satan’s trial with faith.

Somehow, the human experience – from the reception of salvation to growing in faith and love, and maturing in the faith or dwindling is a combination of God, by and through His foreknowledge, bringing about His sovereign will AND human beings making free-will choices.

After having warned the Hebrew reader that they could not possibly remain strong in the faith if they remain babes, and that they would have to be strong in the faith to ward off the trials that were headed their way, the writer adds:

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.
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.

Alright, back to verse 4 –

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,

Let’s begin by taking note of the first word in this verse – FOR – it hearkens back to all he has been writing and the points he has been making since the end of chapter five and the first three verse of six –

“For,” or in other words, “Therefore,” or “Then in light of all I have said . . .

“it is impossible for those who”

And he takes a minute to describe the heart and life of the believer he is speaking about.

The Greek word for impossible is “adoonatos,” and it best means it is not possible due to weakness.

“Dunatos” means “strong” in the Greek so by adding an “a” to it (adunatos) it means
“weak,” – so weak that accomplishing a feat that takes strength cannot be done.

The idea here is slamming – and I mean slamming down the idea of once save always saved (listen) NOT that we keep our salvation by and through our physical determination and will and desire, but that we actually die (or are dead) to such strengths – and live then more fully by the spirit – which is strengthened by faith.

In other words it is not strength but weakness and even death of the flesh that keeps a believer in Christ, and a thriving and abiding strength in the flesh that draws us away.

So when the writer says it is impossible for
Believers who “fall away” (I would suggest the phrase walk away is better) to be renewed again, the weakness that creates the impossibility resides in their spirit.

And this weakness, based on the context of all we have been talking about, occurs, it seems, from remaining in the milk of the Word and not the meat.

Additionally, if we look at the use of this Greek word in the New Testament, the impossibility of the subject is made manifestly impossible in each case.

In Matthew 19:25 (and Mark and Luke) Jesus had been teaching a concept and we read:

“When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”

Ask any Christian if any man can save themselves and scripture supply the response – with MAN it is IMPOSSIBLE.

In Acts 14:8 there was a man at Lystra who was a cripple from his mothers womb, never having walked. The Greek word for impotent is “adoonatos” impossible due to total weakness.

In Romans 8:3 Paul writes:

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.”

You know by now what he is saying – that the Law was impossibly weak in it’s interaction through human flesh, and being incapable of redeeming us, God sent us His Son.

In Romans 15:1 strong believers (dunatos) are exhorted to “bear the infirmities of the weak,”(adonatos) and to “not please ourselves,” meaning, for those who living the Christian life is an impossibility, those who are strong ought to step in and bear their burdens instead of thinking of themselves.”

Of course we have this verse in Hebrews 6:4 but the writer of Hebrews employs the term very effectively in his use of it, saying again in Hebrews 6:18 that “it is impossible for God to lie,”

And then in Hebrews 10:4 he says:

“For it is not possible (adonatos) that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.”

And then again, in Hebrews 11:6

“But without faith it is impossible to please God.”

Bottom line the impossibility is plainly stated in these passages, including verse 4-6:

“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.

These verses have created no small controversy among believers and the Body is inordinately divided on how it is interpreted.

Some contend that the passage is not intended to describe those who are true Christians, but only those who have been “awakened and enlightened,” and who then fall back.

On the other hand, (the opposing side) suggest that it plainly refers to those who are true Christians who apostatize.

Naturally the contending parties have been Calvinists and Armenians with each party, in general, interpreting the passages according to the views which are held on the question about falling from grace.
I do NOT side with either Calvin or Arminius.

I side with God and frankly see the combination of factors present from both sides in play.

This being said I would suggest that these passages absolutely refers to “true Christians” because

This is who the writer has been addressing – not new, but true Christians who he has been encouraging to eat milk instead of milk which would have been the recommendations for newbies.
The instructions are plainly aimed (like man instructions in the epistles) at keeping the Saints strong and “avoiding apostasy.”
Why the instructions – for the church then or for the church now – if once people are saved they will forever be saved?
We know from our examination of the New Testament books that it is filled with encouraging words to the Church at that day that they must “hang on” as the day of destruction was at hand” and that those who did would “escape the wrath to come,” but those who did not would be lost.” If this was the warning to the Saints in the church prior to seventy AD and they had the change to wander from the path, then the same warning is applicable to the church today. Abide in the vine and produce fruit, or detach and be burned.
If it was to the unsaved but enlightened the object of the writer would be for them to be regenerated. This is not the case at all. It was to avoid apostasy. Why? If “once saved always saved” is legit, then apostasy is a complete non event – unless apostasy is to be redefined as “remaining saved but just losing crowns in the hereafter . . .” but this is NOT what the writer here implies (which we’ll discover in a few verses) and neither do any of the other epistles that speak of apostasy (with one exception).

Then let’s just take a minute and hear the exact words and phrases the writer employs to describe who He is speaking about.

Ready? He uses five descriptions:

“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,

(down-read)
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they (not God who is or was in them, but seeing that “they” – of their own freewill and choice) crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Let’s tap on these five descriptions the writer uses here.

First, “ For those who were once enlightened.”

In and of itself it does not mean those who have been totally renewed or converted. Maybe we could see it as someone whose ears or eyes or heart has been cracked open and the truth is dawning on them or moreso to the conscience that Romans one says we all have and are therefore without excuse.

John 1:9 touches on this state saying (and speaking of Jesus):

“That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”

Because of this biblical application the Calvinist is able to read this passage as speaking to the unsaved only.

Contextually, however, it is obvious that the passage is speaking of believers, and enlightened can (biblically speaking) refer to us as well.

Light is the emblem of knowledge, and holiness. Fo-tid-zo is the Greek term for enlightenment and is applied to believers (Ephesians 1 speaks of it and it is used to describe Christ himself – who, by the way, was a believer.

So that is enlightened.

#2 “And have tasted.”

This is a biblical phrase which means to have experienced something, to understand something – at least as an introduction.

We taste to discern the nature or quality of a thing. In this sense, the audience described HAS tasted the heavenly gift (which again is Christ). They have, in a semi-literal sense, eaten His flesh and drank His blood – they have heard His word and tasted the gift given.

By the way, the use of the article, “the heavenly gift,” limits the gift to something special – it does not allow for it to simply mean, “inspiration and light,” but I would say it means, Jesus in particular.”

Because of this I don’t think it can be applied to anyone but a Christian.

But the writer is beefing up his description of the believer because he now says:

“And were made partakers of the Holy Ghost.”

There is no way to assign this line to anyone but believers. I say this because the word partakers (in the Greek) means “sharer.” We can only share the Holy Spirit with other believers as the presence of the Spirit is indicative that a person has been saved.

So while a non-believers may be “enlightened and awakened by the Holy Spirit,” this is not the purpose and point of the language.

The audience (or person) being described is someone who has “shared, with other believers, the Holy Spirit.

In fact there might not be a better way to describe a truly saved believer than to call Him or Her a sharer in the Holy Spirit.

“And have tasted the good word of God,”

At this point we might ask, “How come the writer uses tasted to describe this believer, instead of gobbled up the word of God, etc?

Had he used Gobbled up then people would say, “well, this falling away (or walking away) that he is describing is only applicable to mature believers who really, really understood the word.

I would suggest that He uses tasted to show that it means ANY believer – the young or mature – who walk from the faith once and for all!

Anyway . . . “have tasted the good word of God.”

Again, they have experienced the rhema of God (verses the logos of God which is also translated as Word). What’s the difference? This is not speaking of having tasted of Christ but of having heard the Word, specifically having heard and experienced and understood the SPOKEN word of God.

In other words, Christians who have been around awhile. And he adds:

“and the powers of the age to come,” (the King James uses world, which is not a good choice.)

“The age to come” was a phrase in common use among the Hebrews and the writer is using it to describe a Jewish convert who has understood the power of being a Christian in the age or dispensation or “the times” of the Messiah.

This clearly means an age which was to succeed the old dispensation which was the time of the Messiah.

This audience (as converted Jews) understood then what it was like to experience the power of being a Christian in a Jewish age . . . which was an age that was ending with the Christian age about to come.

In these five states we can see the writer gradually unfolding in his description that this was a believer in a very full sense.

They were first “enlightened,” then they had “tasted of the heavenly gift,” then they “were made partakers (sharers) of the Holy Ghost,” then they “tasted the good word of God,” and finally they “experienced the powers of the age to come.”

If he had only used one of these descriptors, or two there could be a question, but he went to great trouble and careful expression to let any discerning reader know – I AM TALKING ABOUT BELIEVERS HERE.

And he plainly says that it is impossible (for those who have essentially experienced Christ) that (verse 6)

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

Admittedly, the way this is written in the Greek does not support my argument really well that the writer is speaking of actual Christians who have fallen away or of those who will.

The best way to understand the way verse six is written would be to pretend we are all standing on a pier overlooking a storm tossed sea and I say:

“If anyone fell in today there is no way they could be saved.”

It is not an affirmation that any had actually fallen away, or that, in fact, they would walk away, but the statement is, that on the supposition that if they had fallen away it would be impossible to renew them again.

Again, this makes the Calvinist argue that it is impossible because the writer is not speaking of anyone there who has or even of anyone who will. Admittedly, it is a suppositional argument.

If I didn’t admit this I would be lying. Adding fuel to the Calvinist fire, I’m not sure the New Testament narrative actually speaks of truly converted people who have fallen (or walked) away, or who renounced Christianity once and for all.

But the presence of the supposition here on the writers part, and the ever present warnings to believers in the church then (and now) can only reasonably be seen as a warning of something that is possible – given the right circumstances.

Contextually speaking, the writer of Hebrews, we remember, is writing to keep the Jewish converts to Christianity from apostasy, and more specifically to show them that Judaism offers them nothing in addition to Christ, but in fact He is better in every way.

Remember?

I would surmise that for the danger “this audience” faced in “walking away” (whether any did or not we are not told) but it would have been for them to renounce grace, and Christ, and the cross, and to have returned to the Law, priesthood, circumcision, etc.

So, also speaking presuppositionally, what then would be the danger facing those who are really His today?

Since there is no difference now between Jew and Gentile, and therefore no law to return to, no priesthood to re-embrace, no circumcision to re-adapt, and since we have all been saved by grace through faith, not of anything we have done, and since Christ has paid for the sins of the world (with the exception of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit) it stands to reason that the danger believers today face in falling from grace would be failing in faith.

Hence all the warnings to believers for being “in the word and out of the world;” “in the Spirit and out of the flesh.”

Verse six adds to the line that it is impossible that “If they shall fall away . . .”

“ . . . to renew them again unto repentance;”

I’m not sure if there is a more definitive way to prove the writer is speaking to believers than this. “To Renew them AGAIN to repentance.”

Because it straightly implies that they had been before renewed, or had been true Christians.

The word again proves this. They, as true Christians, had once “repented” or changed their minds about who they were and who Jesus was, and their lives followed, and it is impossible to renew them again.

It is a clear articulation of truth.

Whether it is applicable (listen, or EVER) I do not know. But what we do know is there are plenty of warnings about it.

But in the case a Christian would or could walk from grace, he will perish from the first resurrection, he would go to hell, the lake of fire, and would never be considered as one of the elect or chosen.

The writer then tells us why?

“seeing” (this word seeing is not in the Greek by the way, so let’s read it this way) “having again crucified to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”

Seeing. This word is not in the Greek, though the sense is expressed. The Greek literally is, “having again crucified to themselves the Son of God.”

Having fully experienced they only way and means of salvation there would be nothing left to redeem them.

We are all on the pier. The waves are enormous and there is only one material object that could save a drowning man – a plank – which is thrown down to him.

He first embraces it, believes in its efficacy, uses and clings to it but then, for reasons unknown, rejects it – pushes it away – there is nothing left to do the job.

The writer says there is nothing left because in rejecting the only solution the rejecter has “crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh.”

Now, this line goes a long way to help our understanding of the heart of someone who “walks” from the faith – which I believe is a giant rarity and I wonder about it all together at times.

Nevertheless, the way this is described in our versions does not do it justice because these descriptions “to crucify him afresh,” makes it sound like our rejection of Him subjects Him to the same crucifixion all over again.

The Greek word “anastauroo” is an intensive word, but it best means that such an act of apostasy would be equivalent to personally crucifying him “in an heightened and aggravated” manner.
(of course this is figurative as we can’t literally take jesus and crucify Him.

But it does literally place the rebellious and hardened once-believer in a state of mind that they are not only all for His death but that they are the one who actually do the slaughtering.

See, according to Jesus, the Romans, who carried out the first crucifixion, did not know what they were doing.

Such a person who walked from the faith would.

Obviously – listen really closely – this is not describing someone who sins, who feels bad for disappointing God, or who has doubts – it is a state of full-blown venomous apostasy that has blood-thrist for the Son of God.

Where the Greek says that they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh it means that they themselves are driving the nails, it is their own heart, as far as they themselves could carry it out.”

Bible scholar Grotius puts it this way:

“They do it for themselves. They make the act their own. It is as if they did the very act themselves and they would be regarded as having done the deed with their own hands.”

And in taking such action the writer of Hebrews says the fallen would “put him to an open shame.”

To make him “a public example,” to “hold him up as worthy of death on the cross,”

We might add, how could someone get to such an extreme state of hatred and animus for the Lord – especially if they had once tasted the heavenly gift?

I don’t know. I mean, Satan fell, and was once considered great. Is that a model for us?

And while I still wonder if such a case has ever happened, we might ask ourselves, if it HASN’T (or if it is so rare it barely makes it worth to mention it) why HAS the writer mentioned it?

Maybe it’s to illustrate how great the sin of apostasy from God is if it were to occur.
Possibly it is used as an effectual means to warn us away from
apostasy. Like a sign on that steep cliff of no return?
I mean to publicly state that a fall from a precipice would cause certain death would certainly be one of the most effective ways of keeping people from the edge, wouldn’t it?

And while I believe the vicious heart described in a former true believer is extremely rare (if ever even a reality) there are warnings that cannot be ignored, aren’t there?

Remember Peter talks about it, saying in
2nd Peter 2:20-22

20 “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.
21 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.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”

Later in Hebrews 10:26-27 we read:

“For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.”

And frankly many, many more . . .

Aside from the one the nose warnings, Jesus gives a number of them relative to agriculture.

You may disagree with assigning His teaching of the sower to this point but I see a clear connection (and can see how I could be wrong).

But in John 15, where the Lord discusses Him being the True Vine, there is no getting away from the facts:

Remember, He says:

John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.

Finally, the writer of Hebrew also wraps this warning up with an illustration.

The design of the comparison is fairly apparent as it show the consequences of not making a proper use of all the privileges which Christians have, and the effect which would follow should those privileges that have been avoided fail.

His comparison is to the earth – let’s read it:

7 For (again, in reference to all that has been said) 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.

It seems to me that in this illustration believers are the earth, God sends the rain freely upon it, and His laborers dress it, and if the ground brings forth product is blessed of God.

But the ground, after having received the same rain, and same care, brings forth thorns and briars, is rejected, and is headed toward being cursed, and whose ultimate end is fire.

It would seem that this is a mixed metaphor – that the parable of the sower, and the vine, and this illustration is all based on fruit bearing and not so much our faith.

I would end by saying:

Exactly.

Questions?
Thoughts?