The external and internal call.

[Arial]

The fact remains the text does not actually state they fell away from their salvation or lost it. All of the attributes in the surrounding text apply to saved people. If they were saved then the falling away cannot be the loss of salvation, but it could be the loss of maturity and/or productivity in Christ.

No it can't because it says they can't be brought to repentance.

If they were not saved at all, ever, then none of the attributes in the surrounding text apply and we're left with Paul talking about people with various attributes of salvation and then in the middle of it he makes a single comment about unsaved people in a letter to and about the saints.

That depends entirely upon what the author's purpose was in bringing what is in those verses up. And entirely what HE meant by the terms he used. He does not even identify them as being actual persons he is referencing but rather presenting hypotheticals as a warning. A very strong one. Because of the persecution they were dealing with they may be tempted to fall away. An internal struggle. If they fell away, knowing what they knew and believed, there would be no coming back.

Some times I think you don't actually read and absorb what someone else writes because often you respond as though they had not posted at all. I do not mean that as a put down, but an observation. Examples of this would be in your responses to my posts #10, 12,25

The fact remains the people bout whom the author is writing had once been enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift and made partakers of the Holy Spirit.

Is he writing about particular persons? I have given my understanding of enlightened, tasted of the heavenly gift, and partakers of the Holy Spirit. You made no comment on it. So now you need to tell us what you think they mean.

Or it could mean they were saved and not matured and become productive in Christ. To read the passage to be about unsaved people it must be explained how they partook of the word, knew (and lived) the elementary teachings, possessed a foundation of repentance, had faith in God, were made partakers in the Holy Spirit and tasted the gifts of God and yet were not saved.

That is in no way related to the post that was quoted. But how could it mean they were saved and not matured and productive in Christ if it also says they cannot be brought back to repentance? And I did explain it. Post #10. See what I mean? And you are bringing things that were said

The text does not state from what they fell. To know what it was from which they fell, the passage must be exegeted working from the verse in question outwardly through the surrounding text and then to passages elsewhere in the epistolary that use the same terms beginning with those used in similar context. When that is done the attributes list in Hebrews are all those of the saved.

If by the attributes you mean what is said in verses 1 and 2 those are things that do belong to the saved. That does not mean that what is said in verses 4-6 is talking about specific people falling away, but rather what it would mean if they did. The date and occasion of this writing has everything to do with what was being taught. I suggest you examine that. I am not going to go into it as it derails, but I have hinted at some of it. Also it was written to Jewish Christians of the dispersion, who were reading the OT in Greek.

Their professed faith and their salvation are not synonymous.

Did I ever in any post even suggest such a thing? So why say it?

Walking away from association............................... is not synonymous with losing one's salvation. It might mean they were never saved in the first place, or it could mean they were not bearing fruit consistent with the gospel, life in Christ, and the indwelling Spirit.

You are grossly misrepresenting my posts. I have been saying in every post that they did not fall away from their salvation because no one can. And then in the second sentence you repeat what I have been saying, as though it were your own brilliant idea and I never said it.

I'm sure we could all recount ways in which we understood and misunderstood scripture, but anecdotal reports do not prove anything one way or another. Despite our collective years in Christ and prowess with scripture we could all still be wrong.

Well jack, I wasn't trying to prove anything.

 

[Carbon]

Many people hear the gospel and are never enlightened.

Really?

Those that are enlightened when they hear the gospel are enlighten by grace. They are called to the gospel by God, drawn to Christ by God, and much more. John 6:44 says nothing about men hearing the gospel being enlightened and every single NT use of Isaiah 6:9 proves it.

You speak of these things lightly. Not sure why you don't try and explain what you mean but, okay.

Poor selection to support the position, imo.

Thanks for your opinion

 

[Carbon]

Never happened. My comment about Calvinism may have been read that way but that is not what it states. As I previously stated, I am open to the evidence proving there are three kinds of people, saved, unsaved, and some other yet to be defined group. Had that evidence been provided when the question first arose this current exchange would be unnecessary. Post the proof and I'll amend my posts accordingly. Absent any such proof accept what was posted.

Go back and read your comment, then what I replied. Then you might understand.

But it's not really important. If it really bothers you, I can go back and explain it.

If not, lets move on.

 

[Carbon]

Some times I think you don't actually read and absorb what someone else writes because often you respond as though they had not posted at all. I do not mean that as a put down, but an observation. Examples of this would be in your responses to my posts #10, 12,25

No offense intended, but I agree.

 

[Carbon]

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift Hebrews 6.

I think I already explained what I believe enlightened is.

Tasted of the heavenly gift I believe could mean one of two things,
1) After being around Christians in the church they finally leave because they eventually find, it's not for them.
Or,
2) which makes more sense, they have joined in communion (the Lord's Supper) Therefore tasted.

 

[Carbon]

Jesus responded and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3.
If someone is born again, placed in Christ, drawn to Christ, they are illuminated and finally become willing. This elect leans upon Christ as savior and through Christ upon God.
who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. 1 Peter 1:21.


The born-again, apprehend because they have been apprehended.
Not that I have already grasped it all or have already become perfect, but I press on if I may also take hold of that for which I was even taken hold of by Christ Jesus. Phil 3:12.

 

[Arial]

@Josheb

You cannot say that Heb 6:4-6 means that Christians can lose their salvation and also believe that they cannot, by saying the terms "enlightened", "tasted of the heavenly gift", "shared in the Holy Spirit", "the goodness of the word". are only ever applied to Christians and are never used in any other way. It is obviously talking about salvation, because it says "it is impossible to restore them to repentance." It is either a hypothetical, or the author is using those terms in a different way other than the salvation of the person who falls away. What has to be ascertained is what the writer meant, how he was using them.

So it is either that it is regarding a person who has sat under the teaching of the word and the witness of the Spirit, and received some of the blessings of the community, experienced it, went along with it, was thought to be one of the community of believers, said they were, acted like they were but weren't. Much like many attend church all their lives and are never saved. Because they do not believe in their heart, just their head,

There are also other explanations of the meanings of those terms in various analysis of these scripturesm that pertain to the way the church operated in apostolic days.

Enlightened: They had the knowledge of God disclosed in the gospel message and publicly confessed in baptism. In early Christian writings conversion and baptism were sometimes termed enlightenment.

tasted the heavenly gift: some see this as a reference to participation in the Lord's Supper, Or if could be paired with enlightenment as a broad description of apparent conversion.

shared in the Holy Spirit: They had some experience with the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but it is not necessary to conclude that regeneration is specifically intended.

powers of the age to come: Witness of the signs and wonders that were present in the apostolic church.

 

[Carbon]

@Josheb

You cannot say that Heb 6:4-6 means that Christians can lose their salvation and also believe that they cannot, by saying the terms "enlightened", "tasted of the heavenly gift", "shared in the Holy Spirit", "the goodness of the word". are only ever applied to Christians and are never used in any other way. It is obviously talking about salvation, because it says "it is impossible to restore them to repentance." It is either a hypothetical, or the author is using those terms in a different way other than the salvation of the person who falls away. What has to be ascertained is what the writer meant, how he was using them.

So it is either that it is regarding a person who has sat under the teaching of the word and the witness of the Spirit, and received some of the blessings of the community, experienced it, went along with it, was thought to be one of the community of believers, said they were, acted like they were but weren't. Much like many attend church all their lives and are never saved. Because they do not believe in their heart, just their head,

There are also other explanations of the meanings of those terms in various analysis of these scripturesm that pertain to the way the church operated in apostolic days.

Enlightened: They had the knowledge of God disclosed in the gospel message and publicly confessed in baptism. In early Christian writings conversion and baptism were sometimes termed enlightenment.

tasted the heavenly gift: some see this as a reference to participation in the Lord's Supper, Or if could be paired with enlightenment as a broad description of apparent conversion.

shared in the Holy Spirit: They had some experience with the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but it is not necessary to conclude that regeneration is specifically intended.

powers of the age to come: Witness of the signs and wonders that were present in the apostolic church.

Great points

 

[Josheb]

@Josheb

You cannot say that Heb 6:4-6 means that Christians can lose their salvation

Did I say that?

 

[Carbon]

Did I say that?

Why would you only answer part of what she said?

 

[Josheb]

Really?

Yes, really.

You speak of these things lightly.

Prove it.

Not sure why you don't try and explain what you mean but, okay.

I have explained everything I was asked to explain (and it's getting to the point of repetition).

Thanks for your opinion

You're welcome.

Anything op-relevant to add?

Go back and read your comment, then what I replied. Then you might understand.

What leads you to think I do not understand. I understand. I disagree.

But it's not really important.

Then why belabor the matter?

If it really bothers you, I can go back and explain it.

What makes you think I was bothered?

If not, lets move on.

Yes, let's.

 

[Carbon]

Prove it.

Why?
I don't really care. Just sayin.

Yes, let's.

 

[Josheb]

Why would you only answer part of what she said?

Taking it one portion at a time. Why would you interrupt?

The fact is I never said "You cannot say that Heb 6:4-6 means that Christians can lose their salvation and also believe that they cannot, by saying the terms "enlightened", "tasted of the heavenly gift", "shared in the Holy Spirit", "the goodness of the word". are only ever applied to Christians and are never used in any other way," so the premise is non sequitur.

None of us Calls think anyone can lose their salvation.
I don't think enlightened, etc., etc. can be applied to Christians and never used in any other way, so that too is non sequitur (or a straw man if it was intended to reflect something I posted.


Whether or not the CAN be used in any other way, the fact of scripture is that they are not used in any way applicable to the unsaved. All anyone has to do to prove otherwise is post scripture attributing those qualities to the unsaved.

 

[Carbon]

Taking it one portion at a time. Why would you interrupt?

Just sayin.

 

[makesends]

@Carbon @Josheb

My view on Heb 6:4-8.

I have come to see the "once been enlightened". "tasted of the heavenly gift", "shared (ESV) in the Holy Spirit", and "the powers of the age to come", to refer to persons who have been a part of the visible church community in close proximity to these things, experienced the blessings, witnessed the power (signs wonders that accompanied the first century church), and gave every appearance of faith, but showed they did not by walking away, in the sense of denying it. (Contempt.) In what follows in verses 7 and 8 "For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles , it is worthless and hear to being cursed, and it end is to be burned." I find it to most likely be speaking of the seed that fell on rocky ground or among the thorns in the parable of the sower.

As such, the author is giving a stern warning to persevere in producing the fruit of salvation, and not lose heart. Although there are instances of someone having appeared to truly believe, and then later having contempt for this salvation, in many ways I think this is being presented as an "if" hypothetical. This I get from verse 9 Though we speak in this way, yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things---things that belong to salvation." Which resolves the issue of Hebrews being written to believers, but verses 4-6 not actually applying to them.

OKay

We're talking about salvation here, aren't we?


Well here ya go brother, perseverance of the saints.

We are talking about those in Hebrews 6:4 who Hebrews 6:6 states had fallen away.

If those in Hebrews 6 who fell away were saved and their falling away means the lost the salvation, they actually really possessed then that makes perseverance incorrect, and for those that think losing any on letter in the acronym proves fatal to the whole, that means the entire TULIP fails. Alternatively, if they were really, truly, factually, actually saved (just trying to emphasize the point and cover the bases ) and perseverance is correct then the falling away is about something else, some other kind of falling away. If they were not saved EVER then from what they fell away should be identified because if they were not saved, then they were not falling away from salvation. They weren't falling away from a salvation they never possessed to begin with. Maybe they were falling away from potential salvation, or the prospect of salvation.... but, monergistically speaking, if they are among the elect ordained from eternity then their salvation is inevitable and if they weren't among the elct then not only will they never be saved but we're back to defining what it is they were falling away from.

Yes, if the fallen away people were saved then they would, in the end, persevere. If they were never saved then none of the attributes listed in the larger passage apply.


Post 3 states a disagreement with the Hebrews 6 falling away folks' salvation. Post 6 reiterates the belief they were not saved. I explicitly asked the case for that position be made.

I have yet to witness that in this thread. What the posts actual show is two verses removed from their surrounding text and their respective contexts and then put together to "interpret" one another. That has actually happened in the the thread and that fact is objectively verifiable by any reader (al or not), not a matter of my personal opinion.

How about we keep the posts about the posts and not the posters?

How about we keep the posts about the posts and not the posters?

For the record: I did not say Phil. 3:12 did not relate. What I did say is I was not discussing the verse until the Hebrews text had been properly exegeted. So please do not put words into my posts I did not write.

I have already answered those questions and asked you to make the case for the position the Hebrews 6:4 people were not saved. It is, after all, I did not write this op. My posts could be incorrect but that would not make the op correct.

How about we keep the posts about the posts and not the posters?

Hey, y'all. I've started a new thread on those passages in Hebrews 6 and 10. Would really appreciate your participation.

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/perseverance-of-the-saints-and-hebrews-6-4-6-10-26-31.1563/

 

[Arial]

Did I say that?

If you quote the whole sentence instead of just a select part of a sentence (also known as keeping the context) and then address the post, the above question is found to be out of line.

 

[Arial]

None of us Calls think anyone can lose their salvation.
I don't think enlightened, etc., etc. can be applied to Christians and never used in any other way, so that too is non sequitur (or a straw man if it was intended to reflect something I posted.

Or it could mean they were saved and not matured and become productive in Christ. To read the passage to be about unsaved people it must be explained how they partook of the word, knew (and lived) the elementary teachings, possessed a foundation of repentance, had faith in God, were made partakers in the Holy Spirit and tasted the gifts of God and yet were not saved.

The text does not state from what they fell. To know what it was from which they fell, the passage must be exegeted working from the verse in question outwardly through the surrounding text and then to passages elsewhere in the epistolary that use the same terms beginning with those used in similar context. When that is done the attributes list in Hebrews are all those of the saved.

 

[Josheb]

If you quote the whole sentence instead of just a select part of a sentence (also known as keeping the context) and then address the post, the above question is found to be out of line.

Already addressed that with @Carbon. There's a reason I quote mined the whole statement, and the question asked can be answered without doing damage to your post or the thread overall. I addressed the whole statement in Post 53, and I see that's been recognized. Maybe check the html tags in post 57.

 

[Arial]

Already addressed that with @Carbon. There's a reason I quote mined the whole statement, and the question asked can be answered without doing damage to your post or the thread overall. I addressed the whole statement in Post 53, and I see that's been recognized. Maybe check the html tags in post 57.

You only addressed that one statement in the post, even though the rest of it was critical to the discussion and the false dilemma you are creating in your poorly articulated exegesis of the Heb 6:4-6 passages. It is often difficult to pin point what you are saying because you muddy it up with peripherals, themselves not clearly defined as to the relationship to the topic, and excess, unnecessary wordage. It causes a person to have to struggle in a puzzle sorting way, to find your point and your assertion.

I did point out in responding to you not having said that in a post to @Carbon I believe, that you did indicate something that could be construed as what I made in my statement. In other words, it was very unclear and seemed to create a conflict where there was none, or misidentified the conflict associated with the passages.

I will go back and respond to your response to Carbon, and try and articulate the way in which you are doing the same thing again. It isn't easy to articulate because your comment is so elusive as to difficult to catch hold of. It can be seen, but the way in which it is moving away from the issue and into another is difficult to define. Post #53.

 

[David1701]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread; but, from what I have read, there seems to be some confusion about that to which Hebrews 6 refers.

Heb. 6:1-9 (Webster)
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith towards God,
2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do, if God permit.
4 For it is impossible for those who have been once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit.
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 to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh often upon it, and bringeth forth herbs fit for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh to cursing; whose end is to be burned.
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

A) The intended audience, and subject matter, of the book of Hebrews is, unsurprisingly, Hebrews (i.e. Jews; and, as the book makes clear, Jews who had heard the gospel, many (but not all) of whom were probably believers).

B) With the above point in mind, let's go through the passage.

Verse 1: The doctrine of Christ is an unfortunate translation here (although not exactly wrong), since it obscures the fact that this is to and about Jews. The reference is to the principles of the doctrine of the Messiah (i.e. the OT teachings about him).

The exhortation to go on to perfection, from the foundational OC teachings about repentance from dead works and faith towards God, is about going on to faith in the Messiah who has now come.

Verse 2: This verse continues in same vein, describing OT doctrines, from which they need to move on to faith in the Messiah.

Verse 3: This verse shows that there is a potential hindrance to going on from OT doctrines to faith in the Messiah; and the following verses describe a pre-salvation condition, from which, if one returns to Judaism, there is no repentance possible.

Verses 4, 5: This is a list of things that an unsaved Jew could have experienced, including knowledge about the Messiah and the powers of the NC, even including a corporate partaking in the Holy Spirit (many unbelievers have experienced this kind of external experience of the Holy Spirit's presence as well) and experience of the gifts of the Holy Spirit (e.g. hearing a prophecy, or being physically healed).

It's important to note that not one of the things in this list is a indicator that the person has been saved (there is nothing about faith in the Messiah, or about being born again, or about justification or forgiveness, or adoption, etc.).

Verse 6: What are these people, potentially, falling away from? They would be falling away from knowledge about the Messiah and personal experience of the powers of the NC. If they then revert to Judaism, they are rejecting the Messiah, the fulfilment of the OC sacrifices, and the only way of salvation.

Verses 7,8: Contrasts between those who are blessed and those who are cursed (a very well known theme in the OC).

Verse 9: The author is convinced of better things than the described reprobation, in his intended audience - and things that accompany salvation. In other words, he confirms here that the people described in preceding verses did not have salvation at all.