Hebrews 6:4 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 book of Hebrews is a contrast between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. To properly understand the book of Hebrews this must be kept in mind. One of the main keywords in Hebrews is better which is used in reference to the New Covenant. The writer of Hebrew is dealing with converts under the New Covenant who are going back to the things of the old covenant for whatever reason. There are about five different explanations for the five warning passages in Hebrews such as the verses above. Some teach that this is speaking about a false professor, one who came close to being saved even partaking of spiritual things. I reject this explanation because the writer uses the strongest possible words to describe one who is truly a Christian. Also in chapter 10 we read:
Hebrews 10:26 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?
Notice that the person mentioned here cannot be a false professor because verse 29 says he was sanctified by the blood of the covenant or in other words he was set apart by the blood of Jesus. This cannot happen to anyone but a child of God. The unsaved are not sanctified by the blood of Jesus.
Another very popular explanation for these passages is that the person was truly a child of God but lost his salvation. I reject this explanation as well. First, there are to many Scriptures that teach that a child of God is granted eternal life at his conversion in Christ. If a person could lose their salvation then we have to redefine many words. For example forever would not mean forever, eternal would not mean eternal, everlasting would not mean everlasting, never perish would not mean never perish. Now if we change the meanings for these words in relation to salvation then we ought to be honest with ourselves and apply the same meaning wherever we see the words. So when Scripture teach that those who are thrown into the lake of fire and the smoke of their burning ascendeth forever then we must conclude that this might not br forever seeing the same word is used in relation to salvation. Look at the problems you would have if you are consistent in applying the same definitions to word concerning other issues as you do concerning salvation. Below is a small sample.
Rom. 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God.
If salvation is not everlasting then a honest person would have to ask is God everlasting seeing the same word is used to describe both.
2 Cor. 9:9 (As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth for ever.
If salvation is not forever how can Gods righteousness be forever seeing the same words are used to describe both?
Rev 4:9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, 10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever , and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
If salvation is not forever then does the Lord live forever seeing the same words are used to describe both?
Hebrews 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].
Was it eternal redemption or was is temporary in some cases?
Heb. 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. 15 [Whereof] the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, 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
Did the Lord perfect forever those that are sanctified or in some cases only temporary?
Rev. 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him [be] glory and dominion for ever and ever . Amen
If salvation is not forever then is the Lords glory and dominion for ever and ever, seeing the same words are used to describe both?
Matt. 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
If salvation is not forever then is the fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels forever, seeing the same words are used to describe both?
Matt. 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal
If salvation is not forever then is the everlasting punishment of unbelievers forever, seeing the same words are used to describe both?
2 Thes. 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
I hope you can see the danger in redefining words with set meanings in order to accommodate a doctrine. This boils down to letting your doctrine define the Word of God instead of letting the Word of God define your doctrine. Here are the set meaning of some of the words, what right do we have in redefining them?
Forever
165 aion {ahee-ohn'}
from the same as 104; TDNT - 1:197,31; n m
AV - ever 71, world 38, never + 3364 + 1519 + 3588 6, evermore 4,
age 2, eternal 2, misc 5; 128
1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2) the worlds, universe
3) period of time, age
Eternal life, Everlasting
166 aionios {ahee-o'-nee-os}
from 165; TDNT - 1:208,31; adj
AV - eternal 42, everlasting 25, the world began + 5550 2,
since the world began + 5550 1, for ever 1; 71
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and
always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting
For Synonyms see entry 5801
Dwelleth
3306 meno {men'-o}
a root word; TDNT - 4:574,581; v
AV - abide 61, remain 16, dwell 15, continue 11, tarry 9, endure 3,
misc 5; 120
1) to remain, abide
1a) in reference to place
1a1) to sojourn, tarry
1a2) not to depart
1a2a) to continue to be present
1a2b) to be held, kept, continually
1b) in reference to time
1b1) to continue to be, not to perish, to last, endure
1b1a) of persons, to survive, live
1c) in reference to state or condition
1c1) to remain as one, not to become another or different
2) to wait for, await one
Everlasting
126 aidios {ah-id'-ee-os}
from 104; TDNT - 1:168,25; adj
AV - eternal 1, everlasting 1; 2
1) eternal, everlasting
For Synonyms see entry 5801
Perish
622 apollumi {ap-ol'-loo-mee}
from 575 and the base of 3639; TDNT - 1:394,67; v
AV - perish 33, destroy 26, lose 22, be lost 5, lost 4, misc 2; 92
1) to destroy
1a) to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin
1b) render useless
1c) to kill
1d) to declare that one must be put to death
1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell
1f) to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed
2) to destroy
2a) to lose
that never shall be quenched
BDB/Thayers # 762
762 asbestos as'-bes-tos}
from 1 (as a negative particle) and a derivative of 4570;; adj
AV - unquenchable 2, never shall be quenched 2; 4
1) unquenched, unquenchable
1a) of eternal hell fire to punish the ******
Another explanation which I believe is the correct one is that the writer of Hebrews is using a hypothetical situation to make a point. This is the only explanation that I am aware of the does not violate other Scriptures. The writer of Hebrews is concerned that some are turning back to the Old Covenant ways so he sets out to prove how foolish this is in light of how much better the New Covenant is. His argument would amount to something like this for Hebrews 6:4-6 (the verses at the top of this post).
If it were possible for someone who is truly saved (verses 4-5) to fall away and abandon the salvation he has received by the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus (verse 6). It would be impossible for him to be renewed to repentance (salvation) because in order for him to be renewed he would have to crucify the Son of God again, and put him to an open shame which will never happen (verse 6). The point being that outside of the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus in the New Covenant there is no salvation.
I believe this explains Hebrews 10 as well.
Hebrews 10:26 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?
The argument is something like this. If it were possible for a true Christian to sin willfully after receiving the gospel truth by rejecting it, there would be no hope of him ever getting saved again. The only thing awaiting him is the fiery indignation of God seeing that he has trodden under foot the Lord Jesus and counted His blood by which he was saved an unholy thing. The only way of salvation is through the blood of Jesus and if a Christian could reject that there is no hope for him seeing he rejected the only thing that could save his soul.
The hypothetical is the only way I know of that allows these verses to fall in perfect harmony with the rest of Scriptures. I hope this may help some. May God open all of our eyes of understanding.
PilgrimSteve
