Explanation of the warning in Heb.6:1-8

[FHII]

Here are the unofficial Cliff Notes to Stranger's writings:

1. Many Jewish Christians accepted Jesus, but still had a hard time letting go of the Law.
2. Not letting go of the Law created Havoc in their lives as well as the life of Paul and many of the gentiles (I don't remember Stranger speaking on it, but let's not forget Galatians).
3. Paul wrote Hebrews to explain grace and God's rest (achieved with grace) and how to achieve it.
4. There are many forshadowings in the OT about entering into this "new version" of God's rest.
5. The warning in Hebrews 6:3-6 isn't about salvation (in the sense of eternal life as opposed to going to Hell or the Lake of Fire). It basically is a warning that you won't dwell in his rest. You won't have a form of peace in your earthly life but you will have to wait for eternal life.

In other words, if you are still tring to keep the law you are still in bondage in this life. You will be freed in eternal life, but you can have it now as well.

Cliff notes never work well in high school or college and I doubt they work well here.... Just too much pertinent information to cover. But I would like to know from Stranger if these are the points he was getting at. I am working on a response, but I want to make sure I have an understanding first.

 

[FHII]

Perhaps slightly related:

Judaism 101: Olam Ha-Ba: The Afterlife

This artcle is interesting in that it claims:

• Judaism believes in an afterlife but has little dogma about it
• The Jewish afterlife is called Olam Ha-Ba (The World to Come)
• Resurrection and reincarnation are within the range of traditional Jewish belief
• Temporary (but not eternal) punishment after death is within traditional belief

If true, it may be something to consider. Jesus and the Apostles talked in much more detail about the afterlife than the Hebrews were used to hearing. It would make sense that Paul had to speak about this life (milk) before he could expound further about Eternal life, which they clearly didn't fully understand.

 

[Stranger]

Here are the unofficial Cliff Notes to Stranger's writings:

1. Many Jewish Christians accepted Jesus, but still had a hard time letting go of the Law.
2. Not letting go of the Law created Havoc in their lives as well as the life of Paul and many of the gentiles (I don't remember Stranger speaking on it, but let's not forget Galatians).
3. Paul wrote Hebrews to explain grace and God's rest (achieved with grace) and how to achieve it.
4. There are many forshadowings in the OT about entering into this "new version" of God's rest.
5. The warning in Hebrews 6:3-6 isn't about salvation (in the sense of eternal life as opposed to going to Hell or the Lake of Fire). It basically is a warning that you won't dwell in his rest. You won't have a form of peace in your earthly life but you will have to wait for eternal life.

In other words, if you are still tring to keep the law you are still in bondage in this life. You will be freed in eternal life, but you can have it now as well.

Cliff notes never work well in high school or college and I doubt they work well here.... Just too much pertinent information to cover. But I would like to know from Stranger if these are the points he was getting at. I am working on a response, but I want to make sure I have an understanding first.

Yes, as far as I can tell those are fine.

Stranger

 

[FHII]

Yes, as far as I can tell those are fine.

Stranger

Ok thanks. Here is my commentary:

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

What is it that Paul and the Hebrews were going to do if permitted by God? The answer is "go on to perfection". To do so they had to leave the principles of the doctrine of Christ. He lists them: resurrection, baptism, faith, laying on of hands, repentance from dead works, etc.

That on the surface sounds crazy! Leave those principles? What I believe he means isn't forsaking them, but once they have been established, moving on. He even says, " not laying AGAIN the foundation...".

The audience Paul was speaking to wasn't there yet, as noted in ch 5. They were dull of hearing, still needed milj when they should've been ready for meat and should've been teachers.

Paul was encouraging them to move on from milk and even meat.... It was desert time!

This is what Paul was speaking of when he said, and this we will do if God permit."

In the next part Paul states that it's impossible to renew to repentance someone if they fall away. But he tells us who the someone is: those who were enightened, partakers of the Holy Ghost, tasted the heavenly gift... Etc...

Clearly they hadn't. Anf I am not going to assume any here (including myself) have. Reason being is that those conditions are pretty big.

In short, Heb 6:4-6 is as serious as noted. If you have experienced all the things listed its going to be impossible to bring you back to repentance.

My points:

1. God wants us to move on from the foundational things. Not forget them, but build on them. But you can't do that until the foundation is solid. For Paul's audience, it wasn't.
2. If you meet all those requirements, you cannot be renewed to repentance. Does this pertain to eternal life? I think it does. It claims you are crucifying Chist again by doing so. He didn't die for salvation on earth.

I am open to the idea that if you fall short in Heb 6 that it doesn't mean damnation. The reason being the conditions given: 1. Being enightened; 2. Tasting the heavenly gift; 3. Being made partakers of the spirit of Truth and the comforter (that is the Holy Ghost); 4. Tasted the Word of God (Jesus, the truth); 5. Tasted the power of heaven and 6. Fall away. Do or get all this and I do believe you are in ruin.

This also in reverse is what is meant by moving beyond the principle doctrines. Once you have gone to perfection, going back is not an option if you want eternal life.

When the Hebrews and Moses faultered in the desert, no... They didn't go to Hell. They just died. But it was a foreshadowing of the spiritual. Joshua and the next generation did reach the promised land. Does that mean they entered Heaven? Of course not. But these things happened to display a greater event.

3. I fully agree that if we rest from the burden of the Law, we enter into his rest, which is here on earth as well as in Heaven.


4. There is another warning in Hebrews 10:22-30. That one is talking about going to hell and not just about entering into his rest.

I fear, Stranger, that I am not in total agreeance with you. Its tough to let go of old beliefs, but I am willing to do so without being a reed shaking in the wind (meaning I will put up a fight. -- not to be correct -- but to be convinced of the truth).

For sure, though... Your posts have taught me much and I hope you underatand my reluctance at this point. Look forward to your reply.

 

[Helen]

The context, which begins in chapter five and verse eleven, pertains not to unholy living or ungodliness. The complaint is that they are spiritually immature. The writer of Hebrews tells them that they are dull of hearing, are spiritually immature needing milk and are not practiced in discernment. He then exhorts them to move on and leave the elementary or rudimentary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity.

So the problem here is not that they are unfaithful or on verge of apostasy, as this passage is often used to allege. It is a complaint pertaining to their immature and spiritually stagnate condition. The phrase “fall away” in verse six is not the word in Greek that is commonly used for those who commit apostasy or reject the Lord. That would not fit the context. The word in Greek is parapiptos and means to fall aside. It pictures someone like the runner of a race who falls to the side due to fatigue and who is not as strong as the other athletes. He is weaker and untrained. This is the picture being painted by the author of Hebrews of his general readership.

I know this may interrupt the "flow" of Strangers great teaching here...
But I just must say...I was so blessed with your whole post here.
I have always had trouble with those verses in Hebrews 6:4-6 , not so much with the verses themselves but what people insist that they 'mean'.
I have never witnessed in my spirit with the 'mainline' teaching of final condemnation on this ..
THANK YOU!!
------------------
@Richard_oti Richard, this is a good thread, but could you read all of Post #2 and get back to me? We were discussing this in some thread the other day...remember? I forget where it was now. :)
Thanks...H

 

[Helen]

They were filled with unbelief or a lack of faith to go on. They had seen and experienced all these things that (Heb. 6:4-6) states. See (Deut. 1:26-32). Yet they faltered, they fell away. And God was displeased with them. And they then tried to repent, but God would not allow it. See (Deut. 1:41-42). God would not allow them to repent. Did they go to hell? No. They died in the wilderness. God didn't send them back to Egypt, they simply died in the wilderness.

Understand also, that the same was true of Moses. During the wilderness journey the Hebrews were needing water. Moses was frustrated at their unbelief. God told Moses to speak to the Rock and water would come forth. But Moses is in his anger struck the Rock and angered God. And because of this Moses was not allowed to go into the promised land. (Num. 20:10-12) And Moses tried to repent and asked God to let him go over. (Deut. 3:23-27) But God would not. Did Moses go to hell? No. But he was not permitted repentance and was not allowed to go into the Rest of God, the promised land.

Yay!!! EXCELLENT! \0/ \0/ \0/
Praise God. Lord, open the eyes of them that cannot see yet. .
Those verses have been used so destructively by The Adversary.

 

[Stranger]

My points:

1. God wants us to move on from the foundational things. Not forget them, but build on them. But you can't do that until the foundation is solid. For Paul's audience, it wasn't.
2. If you meet all those requirements, you cannot be renewed to repentance. Does this pertain to eternal life? I think it does. It claims you are crucifying Chist again by doing so. He didn't die for salvation on earth.

Why do you say this pertains to eternal life? How does crucifying Christ again mean loss of eternal life?

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

stranger on your statement that seems to mean that Moses repented of the event with the water for the reason to go to the promised land would be incorrect.



Deu 3:23 And I besought the LORD at that time, saying, 24 O Lord GOD, thou hast begun to shew thy servant thy greatness, and thy mighty hand: for what God is there in heaven or in earth, that can do according to thy works, and according to thy might? 25 I pray thee, let me go over, and see the good land that is beyond Jordan, that goodly mountain, and Lebanon. 26 But the LORD was wroth with me for your sakes, and would not hear me: and the LORD said unto me, Let it suffice thee; speak no more unto me of this matter. 27 Get thee up into the top of Pisgah, and lift up thine eyes westward, and northward, and southward, and eastward, and behold it with thine eyes: for thou shalt not go over this Jordan.


though we could be sure Moses was repentant after realizing his error when he made it, and yes it is the excuse used for Moses not going to the promised land. but repentance denied? no not seeing it. request denied yes. Moses was 120 years old when his work was over after dealing with the Almighty and the Hebrews at the time for 40 years. if you can't put two and two together here, oh well.

plus the Jews always looked to Moses and blamed Moses when things weren't to their liking but if Joshua takes then in its the Lord their God they have to deal with and who is making thing as they are not Moses not Joshua.

Not going into the promised land was punishment for the offence. (Num. 20:12) "And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify men in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them." If repentance is granted, the punishment is not issued. What else would the repentance be for?

See (Jonah 3:1-10). In 40 days Nineveh would be destroyed because of her wickedness. Nineveh repented, the destruction was averted.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Yay!!! EXCELLENT! \0/ \0/ \0/
Praise God. Lord, open the eyes of them that cannot see yet. .
Those verses have been used so destructively by The Adversary.

Indeed they have.

Stranger

 

[FHII]

Why do you say this pertains to eternal life? How does crucifying Christ again mean loss of eternal life?

Stranger

I may have to do research on it, but my knowledge of the subject leads me to believe the messiah would be more of a military general who would rid the Hebrews of Roman rule and give the (literal) promised land back to them. Yet that wasn't eber part of Jesus's agenda. He spoke of obtaining a kingdom not of this world. John 18:36, for example. His kingdom was not of this world. Its not the only verse that speaks of another kingdom.

Second, john 3:16, 3:36, 4:14, 5:24, Acts 13:46 and many more state that Jesus came that we may have everlasting life.

1 Cor 15:19 says if only in this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

So clearly Christ did not come to make our life on earth better. Such is true, but it is a side benefit.

The crucifixion of Jesus wasn't the act that gave us eternal life. It was the sacrifice. The resurrection is the promise of eternal life.

To understand and accept such gifts and to forsake it is to crucify Jesus again. That won't work because Jesus died ONCE for all.

If you find it curious that I believe Jesus died and resurrected so we may have eternal or everlasting life, I find it much more so that you would believe he did so to have a better life here on earth.

Absolutely we can have a better life here on earth. But its the side benefit, not the main point.

 

[Helen]

Why do you say this pertains to eternal life? How does crucifying Christ again mean loss of eternal life?

Stranger

Agree, I believe it means taking the work of the Cross 'in vain', as in , not full commitment it allowing it to work in the life.
Just like grace...2 Cor 6:1
“We then, as workers together with Him, beseech you that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.”
They held the grace of God in vain. ie ( grace meaning -"God's ability in us, to do what we can't do" Just so the cross.

 

[FHII]

Hebrews 10 says we are sanctified by the offering of Jesus Christ once for all.

Jesus does not reappear every generation to die for them. He mafe one sacrifice for all generations. If after you get that and are enlightened and benefit from it, then turn away its like killing Jesus again. He isn't going to die again because he doesn't habe to. You only have to conquer death once.

If Jesus died once for every generation, he certainly isn't going to die twice for you. In your heart and mind, you may crucify him twice... But he isn't going to resurrect a second time for you. And even though you crucify him again in your mind, he ain't dead. You are dead to him.

 

[DPMartin]

Not going into the promised land was punishment for the offence. (Num. 20:12) "And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify men in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them." If repentance is granted, the punishment is not issued. What else would the repentance be for?

See (Jonah 3:1-10). In 40 days Nineveh would be destroyed because of her wickedness. Nineveh repented, the destruction was averted.

Stranger

that doesn't show that repentance was denied does it?

and this show you don't seem to understand what repentance is for.

"If repentance is granted, the punishment is not issued. What else would the repentance be for?"


repentance isn't for averting some physical experience, or the will of God. repentance is for one's relationship with the Lord their God. you can repent from committing a crime but that still doesn't get you out of jail does it? but it does heal one's relationship with his God, and that is something Moses didn't have a problem with. also in Jonah's case that was supposed to be the result of Nineveh's repentance because God was threatening to destroy it and had Jonah call for repentance. so the town made right with God, and its on God to grant or not to grant but even if He destroyed Nineveh the souls therein would be right with God wouldn't they have?


it the case of the Lord God is about your relationship with Him, and the rest is optional. you could have done some thing that would cause your own death and asked God to forgive you for that act that may have been sinful, and now you are right with the Lord, but to save you from the result in the flesh is another matter.

your life in the flesh maybe what you value, but your Life He has given you that is with Him is what He values.

 

[Stranger]

I may have to do research on it, but my knowledge of the subject leads me to believe the messiah would be more of a military general who would rid the Hebrews of Roman rule and give the (literal) promised land back to them. Yet that wasn't eber part of Jesus's agenda. He spoke of obtaining a kingdom not of this world. John 18:36, for example. His kingdom was not of this world. Its not the only verse that speaks of another kingdom.

Second, john 3:16, 3:36, 4:14, 5:24, Acts 13:46 and many more state that Jesus came that we may have everlasting life.

1 Cor 15:19 says if only in this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

So clearly Christ did not come to make our life on earth better. Such is true, but it is a side benefit.

The crucifixion of Jesus wasn't the act that gave us eternal life. It was the sacrifice. The resurrection is the promise of eternal life.

To understand and accept such gifts and to forsake it is to crucify Jesus again. That won't work because Jesus died ONCE for all.

If you find it curious that I believe Jesus died and resurrected so we may have eternal or everlasting life, I find it much more so that you would believe he did so to have a better life here on earth.

Absolutely we can have a better life here on earth. But its the side benefit, not the main point.

You said a lot...but didn't answer the questions.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

that doesn't show that repentance was denied does it?

and this show you don't seem to understand what repentance is for.

"If repentance is granted, the punishment is not issued. What else would the repentance be for?"


repentance isn't for averting some physical experience, or the will of God. repentance is for one's relationship with the Lord their God. you can repent from committing a crime but that still doesn't get you out of jail does it? but it does heal one's relationship with his God, and that is something Moses didn't have a problem with. also in Jonah's case that was supposed to be the result of Nineveh's repentance because God was threatening to destroy it and had Jonah call for repentance. so the town made right with God, and its on God to grant or not to grant but even if He destroyed Nineveh the souls therein would be right with God wouldn't they have?


it the case of the Lord God is about your relationship with Him, and the rest is optional. you could have done some thing that would cause your own death and asked God to forgive you for that act that may have been sinful, and now you are right with the Lord, but to save you from the result in the flesh is another matter.

your life in the flesh maybe what you value, but your Life He has given you that is with Him is what He values.

Exactly. Nineveh doesn't show repentance was denied...it shows it was granted. Thus in 40 days, God did not destroy Nineveh. Thus God permitted them the repentance they manifested.

Remember, it is God who says He may permit repentance or not. Not me. (Heb. 6:3-6)

Stranger

 

[FHII]

You said a lot...but didn't answer the questions.

Stranger

But it did adress the questions. Its up to youto answer the questions.you put forth a big theory. When i question it reasonably, its your burden to answer.

I haven't proclaimed anythinf: you did. Defend it. Don't put it on me.

 

[Richard_oti]

I know this may interrupt the "flow" of Strangers great teaching here...
But I just must say...I was so blessed with your whole post here.
I have always had trouble with those verses in Hebrews 6:4-6 , not so much with the verses themselves but what people insist that they 'mean'.
I have never witnessed in my spirit with the 'mainline' teaching of final condemnation on this ..
THANK YOU!!
------------------
@Richard_oti Richard, this is a good thread, but could you read all of Post #2 and get back to me? We were discussing this in some thread the other day...remember? I forget where it was now. :)
Thanks...H

Hi ByGrace,

Since you requested it, I have read all of post #2. I have not read the whole thread as I do not have the time this evening. I did skim through some and I am most in accord with @FHII. However, I do not entirely agree with FHII either. As you know, my background has given me perhaps a different perspective on some things. One phrase that sticks out:

"trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil"

Of which Romans 11 comes to mind:

Rom 11:22 Behold then the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity; but toward thee, God's goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

As for "rest", there are two spoken of. One, in the entrance, and two particularly in the phrase "as God did from His". I do not see a way to attempt to explain away that last phrase.

My time shall be very limited for a while, so my apologies if I do not get back to you sooner.

 

[Helen]

@Richard_oti No problem at all...I just wanted you to read @FFII posts.
It helped me very much, as you know I don't like how people use those verse in Heb 6... but I didn't know why I didn't like how they are used.

Thank you

God bless.

 

[Richard_oti]

@Richard_oti No problem at all...I just wanted you to read @FFII posts.
It helped me very much, as you know I don't like how people use those verse in Heb 6... but I didn't know why I didn't like how they are used.

Thank you

God bless.

I do understand how you feel and where you are coming from with regard to them. For myself, I am better able to accept such as Pharaoh and that, than I am the thought of annihilating an entire "people" inclusive of women and children at the word of "God" after the Exodus. In that respect, I also may have failed when "proved" in that regard.

PS: I meant to include a tidbit with regard to what you stated as to taking the work of the cross in "vain". For that from my perspective, would be to take / make it as such.

 

[Stranger]

But it did adress the questions. Its up to youto answer the questions.you put forth a big theory. When i question it reasonably, its your burden to answer.

I haven't proclaimed anythinf: you did. Defend it. Don't put it on me.

You stated in post #24 that (Heb. 6:1-6) pertains to eternal life. I have already shown how it does not. My question to you was what makes it pertain to eternal life? You haven't answered.

If you haven't proclaimed anything, what is post #24 and 30? If you haven't proclaimed anything, then why do I need to defend anything.

Stranger