Hebrews 5:11-6:12 Challenge to Grow

Hebrews 5:11-6:12 Challenge to Grow STRUCTURE: State of arrested growth (5:11-14) Challenge to grow (6:1-3) Warning about failure to grow (6:4-8) Encouragement for success (6:9-12) NOTES: Let me start out by reminding you of what you already know: this is a really difficult passage of scripture to understand, and for centuries the church has struggled with what the author was warning the hearers against and what were the possible consequences of their actions. So, our struggle with this text is not new, and we are probably not going to come up with a solution that will immediately convince everyone. I first wrote on this passage over 15 years ago, and I have been studying the passage off and on ever since. Though I am fairly convinced that my interpretation is correct, it is not a widely held interpretation, and I still have questions about certain aspects of this text and other parts of the other warning passages in Hebrews. All of that is to remind you of what we talked about on Wednesday evening. I would like for us to emphasize the process of interpretation Sunday as well as the teaching of the text. First, we do not come to the text from a particular theological conviction and then try to see how we can make this text fit our preconceived theology. Our first task is to understand the passage of scripture as it stands. What was the author trying to say to his audience, understanding that they had heard the teaching of Jesus through those who had seen him (2:3) and had read and studied the OT, but may never have seen a written gospel or perhaps even seen a letter that Paul had written? Second, when we have done our best to understand the passage in its immediate context, it is legitimate to turn to other clear passages of scripture and use them to help answer questions we have not been able to answer. For example, I don t think that the author of Hebrews ever clearly states what happens to a person who appears to be saved but later denies Christ. However, 1 John 2:19 clearly says that such a person was never really saved at all ( they went out from us, but they were not of us). What I didn t do Wednesday evening was to clearly summarize the various ways that this passage, especially the warning in 6:4-8, has been interpreted. There are probably more, but I want to mention four: 1. Many Christians argue that this passage teaches apostasy, that is that a genuinely saved person can sin in such a way that they lose their salvation and are no longer saved. 2. Others argue that the author has used a hypothetical situation to drive home his point. It is not possible for a truly saved person to lose their salvation, but if they could it would be really bad. 3. Others argue that the people involved appear to be Christians but they are really not. There are several variations on this view but basically the issue is that these people who fall away were never truly saved even though

they appeared to be. The 1 John 2:19 passage is used to explain this phenomenon. 4. Herschel Hobbs and a few others, including me, have argued that the primary issue that the author is addressing is not the believers salvation but their commitment to the world mission that Christ has called them to. Like the wilderness generation, they are being called to take the land for God, but fear is causing them to back away. Note that positions 2-4 can all fit within the framework of the security of the believer; only the first position holds that real Christians can actually become lost again. Also, note that both positions 3 and 4 take the warning of the author very seriously, that is, as referring to a decision that the hearers can actually make. Position 4 also uses 1 John 2:19 in that though the author s primary concern is about their commitment to the mission of God, those who are not willing to make that commitment need to seriously examine their lives to see if they are really saved. A decision to go out may indicate that they were never really saved at all. Now to the text. The passage we are studying is bracketed by an unusual word, used in the NT only in verses 5:11 and 6:12. Louw and Nida define the word as being slow to be involved in an activity. In first century medical texts the word was used to describe lethargic patients. In 5:11 the audience is chastised because they are lethargic with respect to hearing. In 6:12 the hearers are encouraged not to be lethargic but to imitate those who inherit the promises through faith and endurance. This same challenge is repeated frequently throughout the book. Bracketing the passage with this challenge not to be lazy sets the tone for the entire passage. 5:11-14 The author provides a transition to this section by pointing out the importance of what he has to say about Melchizedek, but chides them for their inability to understand it. This statement must be seen at least in some sense as sarcastic since in chapter 7 he picks back up the topic of Melchizedek and tells them what he said here that they were too slow to understand. Lane, in his commentary on Hebrews, says that this is irony used to shame them into action. This same line of argument continues as the author rebukes them for arrested spiritual growth: they had been Christians long enough that one would have thought that they were teachers, but they can t even get their ABC s down (the basic principles of the beginning of the sayings of God, v. 12). Solid food, like the teachings on Melchizedek, are for spiritually mature Christians not spiritual babies. The definition of mature in v. 14 focuses not on depth of theological knowledge but on the ability to discern good and evil. The contrast is between those who have no experience in the word of righteousness and those who through applying God s word to daily life have become proficient in evaluating good and evil. The implication is that they then act on that knowledge. 6:1-3 The author then encourages the hearers to lay aside word of the beginning of Christ (probably a reference the basics of the Christian

message). Koester (303) translates the word leave or lay aside as granting and examples in extrabiblical texts where the phrase means to put aside for the moment one topic of conversation and move on to another topic. The idea is not that the first topic was bad but that, granting the importance of the first topic, it was now time to discuss other things. The author defines what he means by the basic message by giving 6 topics that can be granted or accepted so they can move on to other topics. All of these topics are important to the Christian faith. However, Hagner pointed out in his commentary that there is nothing distinctly Christian in any of these six tenets. All of them could be held without departing from their Jewish origins. If the congregation was, in fact, a Jewish Christian house church living in Rome shortly near the beginning of the persecution of Christians by Nero (Lane s position, which I accept), then the list may be a reference to a temptation by the Jewish Christians to go back to the synagogue and worship there, rather than going to church where they may be arrested and persecuted by Nero. Let me give a short aside again on the two persecutions mentioned in Hebrews (the former persecution in which they were faithful and the imminent persecution, which they are facing). Lane suggests that the expulsion of the Jews from Rome around AD 49 by Emperor Claudius may be the context for the former persecution (see Heb. 10:32-34). The Roman historian Suetonius tells of a dispute that arose among the Jews over Chrestus. This name is a common slave name, but not a common Jewish name. However, Christus is the Latin word for Christ or Messiah, which Suetonius was probably not familiar with. It appears that a group of believing Jews and a group of non-believing Jews were in a heated discussion about whether Jesus was the messiah (it happened to Paul all the time, but it wasn t his fault this time because he hadn t made his way to Rome by AD 49). Claudius expelled all the Jews, or at least the leaders of the disturbance. Priscilla and Aquilla were forced out of Rome at this time according to Acts. The second persecution could have been the persecution of Christians by Nero around AD 64. Paul probably died during this persecution. The first time Jewish Christians couldn t escape the persecution because it was directed at all Jews. This time the persecution was directed towards Christians only, so a Jewish Christian could return to the synagogue, discuss things that didn t cause a disturbance (like who is Jesus), and avoid persecution. The types of things mentioned in 6:1-2 would fit that category. 6:4-8 This section contains an exceptionally harsh warning (4-6) followed by an example designed to shed light on the matter (vv. 7-8). The Greek begins with the word it is impossible (one word in Greek), followed by 5 aorist participles. The participles have only one definite article ( the ) which means that they refer not to 5 different types of people, but one group of

people who are categorized by all 5 participles. The first four participles are all positive and are all open to debate. The issue is whether they describe Christians only or whether they could also describe people connected with Christianity who are not saved. If the answer to the second part is no (that is the people described must be Christians), then position #3 above can t be true. To hold to position #3 one must understand these 4 phrases in some way other than as genuine Christians. To do this the verb taste in the second and fourth phrase is understood in what I call the Baskin Robbins sense. They have sampled Christianity using the little spoon, but they have not yet placed their order. The only other occurrence of the verb taste in Hebrews is in 2:9 where the author said that Jesus tasted death for everyone. Here the verb obviously means to experience not to sample. It is difficult for me to see how someone who has experienced the heavenly gift and the word of God and the power of the coming age can be described as only appearing to be a Christian. The third phrase uses the same word we saw in 3:1 and 14. Here it is used to describe a partner or participator with the Holy Spirit. The first phrase (once for all enlightened) is used in other places to refer to conversion. That brings us to the fifth participle: the fell away. Notice that the author doesn t say what they fell away from. Those who hold to the possibility of apostasy (position #1 above) argue that the author is referring to salvation. This is argued from the larger context of the book and from the necessity of a really bad consequence to go along with this really harsh warning. What most commentaries that argue this position don t take into account are the implications of this view: once a person has been saved and then lost their salvation, they can t ever be restored. At various times in church history, there were those who held this view and took the consequences seriously. They would try to delay their baptism until as late in life as possible to minimize the risk of committing apostasy. The trick was to get baptized before you died but close enough to death so you didn t have the time or energy to lose it. Position #4 argues that the issue is not salvation and so doesn t have anything to do with apostasy. I feel that the example in vv. 7-8 is perhaps the most compelling evidence for this view (at least it is what convinced me). The earth that receives the rain is the constant in each side of the illustration. In the first half of the illustration, the earth produces vegetation useful to the ones who caused the field to be cultivated. Useful vegetation results in a blessing from God. The second half of the illustration details ground that receives the same rain but produces thorns and thistles. The author used three phrases to describe this ground: worthless, which is the counterpart to the useful vegetation in the first half, near cursing, and whose end is for burning. The second phrase could be near spatially or temporally, but in either case worthless vegetation has not

resulted in their condemnation but they are real close. A country preacher said, They ain t in hell, but they can see it from where they are. The final phrase is perhaps the most disputed. Fire is often used in connection with eschatological punishment (the lake of fire in the final judgement in the Revelation, and the unending fire of Gehenna in the teachings of Jesus). If the author means eschatological judgement, then the passage is obviously about the person s ultimate salvation. However, fire can also be used in connection with purifying and refining. This meaning fits better with the earth being burned, since burning the earth rids it of junk and makes future growth possible. Paul uses an architectural illustration in a similar way in 1 Corinthians 3. A building built on the foundation of Christ is still subject to fire. Stuff built with the proper building materials will stand the fire, but wood, stubble, and hay will be burned up. Paul makes the point that salvation is not the issue when he says that one will be saved as though through fire. He also points out that the person will suffer a great loss. The person s life will have been wasted, producing nothing for the kingdom, though they will be saved because of their faith in Christ. Only a very individualistic concept of salvation can say that this is not a stern situation. Rather than hearing well done thou good and faithful servant, this person will hear, come in quick before someone sees you. [That last line is obviously said in jest, but it emphasizes the importance for the Christian of hearing God s praise at the end of time. Our goal should not be just to get into heaven but to come up to the praise of our Father.] In the historical context of the book the warning is about those who, motivated by fear, aren t willing to go out to the danger presented by Nero but rather want to hide their Christian faith to escape persecution. Like the first wilderness generation, they are letting fear determine whether they participant in the mission God has set before his people. Also like the first wilderness generation, there is no second chance to be faithful in this particular persecution. If they hide now, God may be with them and guide them and sustain and protect them later, but they can never go back and re-enter the promised land. That opportunity is gone forever. Aside on salvation: from this perspective the issue is not that all of the group is saved or all of the group is lost. The group that rejected God s challenge to go forward lost that opportunity. Only the two men who did not (Joshua and Caleb) were allowed to enter. Obviously the whole first wilderness generation was not lost; Moses was one of those who didn t enter because of disobedience. Individual salvation was not the issue God forgave them; their individual salvation was a matter of their individual relationship to God. Some were probably saved and some were probably lost even though they may have considered themselves part of the group.

That brings us back to the issue of restoration. Verse 6 finishes the main clause: it is impossible to restore these people again to repentance. The infinitive to restore is modified by two present tense participles: crucifying and disgracing in public. The common interpretation is to consider these participles as causal, that is, as expressing the reason why restoration is impossible. Some measure of cause must be present. One who crucifies Christ and publicly disgraces him by their actions cannot be restored. However, the question is What if they stop this behavior. The present participles indicate a process not an overall event and could be translated while crucifying and disgracing. This translation would suggest that if those actions were stopped, restoration might be possible. However, understood as I described above, even though God may forgive and restore a relationship, the particular opportunity to serve that is in question may be gone forever. 6:9-12 The passage ends with a note of encouragement. The author acknowledges that his language has been harsh (even though we speak this way, v. 9b). However, he is confident that they will respond properly to his warning and make the right choice, a choice that is related to salvation. The use of this word can be seen as supporting views #1 and #3, which relate the whole issue to salvation. The phrase could also be translated things having to do with salvation. The author could mean that decisions to serve are the kinds of decisions that saved folk ought to make. The author reminds them of their former and present service by assuring them that God is not the kind of God to forget their choices to serve. Verses 11-12 end with a challenge to zeal, faith, and endurance. The phrase demonstrate the same eager devotion (11) reflects the statement made in 4:11. The full certainty of hope is available only to those who endure to the end. The last part of the sentence (12) reintroduces the idea of lethargy or laziness. Rather than be lazy, they need to imitate the ones who inherit the promises of God. In the OT context, this would be the second wilderness generation, who through faithful obedience entered the promised rest of God. The author s audience must through faith and endurance walk the same path they walked.