Hebrews 6 does speak of people becoming reprobates but that does not mean that every other (and less severe) form of rejection of Christ implies that the person is still saved - nor that he is unsaved plus beyond repentance.Originally Posted by Quest
[QUOTE]Do you really believe that? I have never thought of God as cutting us off. Look at Song of Solomon, which comes close to saying that, but....not.
Song of Songs 5New International Version (NIV)
.She
2*
I slept but my heart was awake.
****Listen! My beloved is knocking:
“Open to me, my sister, my darling,
****my dove, my flawless one.
My head is drenched with dew,
****my hair with the dampness of the night.”
3*
I have taken off my robe—
****must I put it on again?
I have washed my feet—
****must I soil them again?
4*
My beloved thrust his hand through the latch-opening;
****my heart began to pound for him.
5*
I arose to open for my beloved,
****and my hands dripped with myrrh,
my fingers with flowing myrrh,
****on the handles of the bolt.
6*
I opened for my beloved,
****but my beloved had left; he was gone.
****My heart sank at his departure.[a]
I looked for him but did not find him.
****I called him but he did not answer
In these verses it appears that God is constantly trying to be with us, but it's our laziness, and unwillingness that keeps Him away. But this doesn't mean we're cut off from Him because HE cuts us off.
Quest (06-17-2017)
Just to reiterate my POV and why...http://evidenceforchristianity.org/c...ore-than-once/
As I stated...when a Christian rejects Christ to the point f the departure of the Holy Spirit they ARE reprobate...
curly sue (06-18-2017)
https://www.gotquestions.org/grafted-Israel.html
The passage regarding grafted in branches hs nothing to do with backsliding...being re lost and re born again...
I am tired so prefer to let these guys who have already answered the questions answer for me for now...
I was quoting Romans 11, it's not my personal opinion.
Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.
19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
The term used about the branches is that they are "broken off". We were discussing if these broken off branches could be grafted in again like the Jews are. According to Quest they can not, which would mean that they are "cut off" in the sense of finality.
In Song of Solomon terms this would compare to Solomon's wife committing adultery and what happens then.
Mat 10:32 “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.
33 But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.
2 Peter 2 doesn't discuss the finality of apostasy, only that their state is now worse than before they believed.
How about you reply to post #21 above where I already discussed Hebrews 6 ?
The article you linked doesn't really discuss the specific issue.
Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened .... if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance ....
If we include no more details than that then it teaches "once apostate always apostate". There are many more details in the passage. Here are the ones at the first dots :
"and have tasted the heavenly gift"
"and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit"
"and have tasted the good word of God"
"and the powers of the age to come"
The first two can be interpreted to describe all Christians but the latter two are more specific. Every Christian has not tasted the good word of God, that is something deeper. Every Christian has certainly not tasted the powers of the age to come, that is even deeper. So every Christian certainly does not qualify for the "cannot be renewed to repentance" conclusion, regardless of what is found at the second set of dots :
"since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame."
There is apparently no word in the original Greek text for "since", it is merely implied. The footnote says that it could as well be translated as "while", making it specific to a situation. The interpretative translation as "since" would imply that the sentence just above is a description of what it means to "fall away" but that is not necessarily what the author is trying to say. "while" makes it situational, meaning that those who fall away in the way described cannot be renewed to repentance.
So what does it mean to "crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame." Some people think that it means to sin, others that it means to abandon the faith. There is nothing outside of the letter to the Hebrews that suggests that. There is an other passage from Hebrews that uses similar language :
Heb 10:29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
Let's group the elements together :
"they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame."
"has trampled the Son of God underfoot"
"counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing"
"insulted the Spirit of grace"
None of the language is used elsewhere except the last part which is similar to when Jesus talks about the unforgiveable sin, that of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 6 also talks about an unforgiveable sin in that they cannot be brought to repentance. So is the author of Hebrews simply talking about blasphemy of the Holy Spirit ? Not really. He says a lot more than that.
During the early days of the internet, back in the mid-to-late nineties, there were lots of good sites on theology. In general it was much easier to find good sites if there were any, they weren't typically buried under 10,000 other entries in a search engine. One site that I haven't been able to find later stated that all of the above is a description of a concrete ritual that Christians at the time were required to perform if they wished to return to Judaism. The Hebrews, or Jews, that received this letter would all know about that ritual and recognize it by the description in the two passages in Hebrews.
What it means is that the ritual involved, at the very least, that the person participating in it would crucify a representation of Jesus, putting him to open shame. The person would trample a representation of Jesus underfoot, count his blood an unholy thing, and literally insult the Holy Spirit.
Against this background it is easy to understand Hebrews 6. Those who performed this ritual were in peril of committing the unforgiveable sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit as Jesus discussed and they would be beyond repentance. Those among them who qualified according to the description, including "having tasted the powers of the coming age" would with certainty be guilty of that sin.
Does this mean that everyone who doesn't qualify as guilty of Holy Spirit blasphemy but has actually rejected the faith, is still saved ? No, that is OSAS and totally so. They are on their way to hell but there is still hope, they aren't beyond repentance. As Cardinal TT pointed out earlier, there are lots of people who abandon the faith after having been fervent Christians and also lots of people who later return to the faith again.
2 Peter 2:9 ... and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment,
10 and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries,
11 whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord.
12 But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,
13 and will receive the wages of unrighteousness...
What is Peter talking about here ? The Jewish Christians living outside Israel who are the audience of his letters (1 Peter 1) were able to recognize it, just like was the case with Hebrews 6 and 10. He's describing people who specifically live in sexual perversion and mess around with fallen angels. Jude describes the same phenomenon and these people seem to have infiltrated Jewish Christian churches.
2:17 These are wells without water, clouds carried by a tempest, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
Jude uses very similar terminology to describe them, one would almost think that one of them read the other's letter before writing his own to his particular churches. Here is his version of the same :
Jude 12 ...They are clouds without water, carried about by the winds; late autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, pulled up by the roots;
13 raging waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame; wandering stars for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
They are apostates since they are twice dead. So they were originally Jewish Christians but they have bought into some false doctrine and have shipwrecked their faith and are leading others to do the same. But are they reprobates ? Neither passage says that but the severity of the wording leads me to think that some or many of them were. Just like Paul talks to the Galatians as if they were all apostates. Not all of them were but some were.
The passage serves as an other example of the author talking about something readily recognizable to his immediate audience but non-recognizable to us - unless we somehow figure it out or manage to dig up details about it from sources outside the Bible, the Bible itself doesn't necessarily contain sufficient information about it.
We should however be very careful about watering it down to amount to a general rendering of all people who live in sin or something like that, just as we should be very careful about watering down the statements made in Hebrews 6 and 10 to a general rendering of all people who are apostates. The details are there for a reason.
I am not in the OSAS camp
However if indeed these people were no longer saved why then does Paul continue to refer to them as Children Of God in Galatians 3
Seems to me that this article is rightly critical of those who will live by the law but turns around and applies a hefty dose of legalism in and of itself . No ?
Galatians 3
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote