Hebrews 6: No Turning Back

For once people have been enlightened — when they’ve tasted the heavenly gift and have had a share in the holy spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the coming age — it’s impossible to restore them again to repentance if they fall away, since they are crucifying God’s son all over again, on their own account, and holding him up to contempt. (6:4-6)

We don’t like the word “impossible in this passage, do we?

Is this really saying if a person rejects Jesus it is impossible for them to return to Jesus?  Once lost, always lost?

One commentator argued this passage is likely the most controversial passage in the whole book of Hebrews.  Absolutely!

We need to look to verse 10 for some guidance: “God is not unjust.”  I think most of us would say a god who is unwilling to rescue a person who wants to be saved is a rather unjust god.  By that point alone, I think we need to reject any interpretation of this passage that argues a second genuine repentance would be rejected by God after apostasy.

Some commentators have argued that the word “tasted,” used twice in this passage, means the hypothetical person only tried out Jesus, like a seeker who might try on religion for a few months.  This is the person who tastes the free samples at Sam’s but then walks on without buying a box.  He never really accepted Jesus in the first place.  But verse 6 does indicate this hypothetical person has previously repented and the idea of “sharing” or partnering in verse 4 connotes active participation in the life of the Holy Spirit.  This sounds like more than a seeker.

The best explanation I have read in my limited study of this passage comes from George Guthrie (Hebrews, NIV Application Commentary) who says the Greek construction of the last part of this sentence — “since they are crucifying God’s son all over again, on their own account, and holding him up to contempt” — is best interpreted in a causal (“because they”) or temporal (“while they”) manner.  So the last clause is best read: “as long as they are crucifying God’s son all over again, on their own account, and hold ing him up to contempt.”  Thus the point is that as long as people are in the act of rejecting Jesus they could not feasibly be turned back to him.  Their hardness of heart would not allow it.  Of course, if their hearts softened and they wanted to repent again, that would be possible.  It is not that God would not allow them to return, their own hearts would not allow it.

He was the angriest, most bitter student I have ever taught.  He made no bones about it.  He hated God, hated the Bible, hated my Bible class, and I suspect he hated me by virtue of association.  At first I was perplexed by him, then hurt, then angered, and by the end I just hurt for him.  I have never met someone so unhappy with anything and everything.  His anti-religious bent made more sense to me when I learned that he had been raised by a zealously religious parent who he claimed did not treat him in a very godly manner.  He had been raised to have faith, but then he rejected all he had ever been taught.  To him, Jesus was a disgraceful fake fit only for simpletons.  God was a lunatic’s dream at best.  All of it was an object of contempt.  Try as I might to share a different view of God, religion, and Christians it was like speaking to a wall.  He had one illogical argument after another for why what I was saying could not be true.  His perception of God, Jesus, and Christians could best be described as caricatures.  Everything was black and white, and religion was purely evil.  His heart was hardened like stone.  It seemed impossible to hope that he would ever turn again to Jesus.  I would like to say he did, but I don’t believe he ever has.

Sad to say, today’s passage makes more sense when I think of him.

What do you think?

Categories: Hebrews | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Post navigation

7 thoughts on “Hebrews 6: No Turning Back

  1. I don’t think that (6:4-6) as the most controversial verse, in Hebrew. I see the most controversial shall awarded to 6:1.
    1)let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity,
    2) not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,
    3) and of faith in God

    By rejecting those 3 principle, what I can conclude is the verse itself is heresy to Jesus and God itself.

    In my believe by saying “teaching of Muhamad pbuh is outdated or not reliable or just leave it for a while” is already heresy/apostate.

    How I am going to judge the verse that is heresy to fundamental of teaching itself. I can understand if non-Cristian or atheist saying that, but this is a verse of Bible.
    Even I don’t believe your religion is true religion, this is totally outrageous.

    Even try to justify it by saying “And God permitting, we will do so”. Wow.

    v4-8; Only certain people can do that. The more religious Christian is, the more they can leave to the teaching.

    To make the thing worse, v9-10, we are confident of better things in your case–things that accompany salvation. God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown
    him as you have helped his people and continue to help them.

    Wow, did I just read a conspiracy letter? I can conclude;

    it OK to do abandon the teaching of Jesus and later they justify with God will love you. Only certain people who have gain enlighten can abandon the teaching of God or abandon faith to God.


    • Let me calm your outrage but assuring you that the Hebrews author did not mean what you think this passage means. He is not saying leave Jesus as in reject Jesus. That is what the Hebrew Christians are considering doing and he is warning them sternly not to do it. So he would not contradict himself like that. He means leave the teachings about Jesus as in move beyond that. They are a foundation, now they should build on that. It is like he is saying al they have learned about Jesus is equivalent to their ABCs. Now, it it time to start learning some grammar, not just keep going over the alphabet. Try reading it again with this understanding in mind.

  2. Melanie Semore

    I appreciate your helpful insight on the “impossible” section.

  3. Gandrew

    I really liked the final paragraph of this; threw the whole thing into a new perspective for me.

    Im sure all the readers are wondering ‘who?’
    I have an idea.

    I am grateful for these spirit moments!
    Thank you Mr.K!

  4. Pingback: How to Master the Toughest Situations « He Dwells — The B'log in My Eye

  5. There is so much that strikes me in this chapter. The conditionality (“Stay the course . . . and get everything promised”), the way Paul pleads with them (“Let’s get on with it”), and the confusing (“That’s impossible”). But what strikes me most in the last section. It is easy to paint the God of this passage as a dispassionate god who let’s you pick from two options equally and unbiasedly. Not at all! In the same passage that some have seen a “once-lost-always-lost” theology comes the reminder that God promises to bless his people and he does not go back on those promises – “it’s an unbreakable spiritual lifeline.” There is more going on in this passage than we might think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: