(2) OSAS advocates have frozen like Bambi in the headlights at the case against OSAS in the Letters to the 7 Churches. So let's move on to Hebrews. A few introductory comments are helpful to the discussion:
(a) No academic commentary on Hebrews supports Paul's authorship of this epistle.
(b) The scholarly consensus recognizes the addressees as the church of Rome, a Gentile church with some Jewish Christians. Thus, the earliest citations of Hebrews come from Rome.
(c) Like the Gentile church of Alexandria, the predominantly Gentile church of Rome was interested in OT typology.
Raymond Brown reports the scholarly consensus about Hebrews in his magisterial “An Introduction to the New Testament” (878 pages):
“Most scholars agree that the title “To the Hebrews” was not supplied by the author...Almost certainly it represents a conjecture attached to the work because of an analysis of the contents that deal so largely with Israelite cult...At the beginning they [the addressees] were properly enlightened and baptized into Christ. The community received the Christian message from evangelists whose work was accompanied by the working of miracles. The activity of the Holy Spirit was part of that experience (2:3-4: 6:4-5). Then...they were afflicted by some type of persecution, hostility, and/ or harassment (10:32-34). They were deprived of property and some were put in prison. (p. 697).”
The discussion of Hebrews will focus on 2 central texts
in contexts that decisively refute OSAS.
(1) Hebrews 10:26. 29 jointly make it clear that born again believers can lose their salvation and become apostates destined for hellfire:
"If we willfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin, but a fearsome prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire (Heb. 10:26)."
Such apostates were once "
made holy, but outraged the Spirit of grace (10:29)." But this holiness can be forfeited and therefore needs to be pursued: "Pursue holiness,
without which no one will see the Lord (12:14)." (2) "It is impossible to restore again to repentance those who once been enlightened and have
tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partners (Greek: "metachoi") with the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, since on their own, they are crucifying again the Son of God and are holding Him up for contempt (6:4-5)."
Such people do not benefit from eternal security. In the context the author likens them to ground that grows "thorns and thistles" that is "cursed" and destined to being "burned over (6:8)" and therefore to be consigned to Hell. Yet these apostates have received the "heavenly gift" of salvation (cp.
Ephesians 2:8-9) and the Holy Spirit, and so, they were once born again of the Spirit.
The claim that those who become “metachoi” (= “partners” or “sharers” with the Holy Spirit might not actually possess the Holy Spirit can be dismissed on 2 grounds: (a) The author addresses his readers as "holy partners ("metachoi") in the heavenly calling" (3:1). (b) The author then warns: "For we have become partners ("metochoi") of Christ,
if only we hold our FIRST confidence firm till the end (3:14)." By implication the saving partnership with Christ or the Holy Spirit is dissolved if we don't persevere until the end, but become apostates! "Metachoi" in 6:4 means "partners" as well as "sharers." So the Christians addressed in 6:4 "have become partners ("metochoi") with the Holy Spirit," meaning they have been saved by the work of the Spirit. The significance of the phrase, "it is impossible
to restore again to repentance" must not be overlooked. "Restore
again" implies the Christians in question have already genuinely repented when they became partners with Christ and the Holy Spirit. This is the standard interpretation of academic book commentaries on Hebrews, which posters here have never read. By academic book commentaries, I mean commentararies on just one Bible book written by PhDs in Scriptures who know and discuss in detail the nuances of the Greek text. For example, justbyfaith likes to cite John Courson, who is a pastor/ preacher, not a scholar qualified to discuss the Greek text in detail and who has not written ab an academic commentary focused on just one NT book.
