|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 26, 2009 18:11:40 GMT -8
So, part of the text we're studying this week is a text often pointed to in discussion about whether (or not) a believer can "lose their salvation".
Here's the passage in Hebrews:
Hebrews 5 6:4-12
4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.
7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
9Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation. 10God 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. 11We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. 12We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.
In conjunction with this passage from later in Hebrews:
Hebrews 10:26-31
26If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
So, as a further discussion starter, what's your perspective on what the Bible teaches about whether a believer can lose their salvation? And if so, under what circumstances.
Perhaps also you've heard debate about whether Scripture teaches that there is an "unforgiveable sin". That subject fits in here nicely as well.
I want to hear perspectives and let's bring relevant Scriptures to the table to discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Feb 26, 2009 19:17:19 GMT -8
I looked all over Hebrews 5 and can't find this passage anywhere  Ok, here's my take. I don't think a believer can lose their salvation. A believer, by definition, is someone who believes and therefore meets the conditions of salvation....faith (Eph 2:8-9). Having said that, I don't hold the Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) doctrine either. "Losing" salvation makes it sound like salvation is a thing to be lost, like one's car keys. Salvation is a benefit of abiding in Christ, that is, being a committed follower of His through faith (John 15). Eternal life is not something we own or possess, but something we partake of or share in when we are in Christ. John said: 1 John 5:11-13
11 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
NKJV
The life is not in us, we are in it as we are in Christ, because the life is in Christ and He alone possesses immortality (1Tim 6:16). But John goes on to suggest (by implication) that it's possible to depart from (and therefore forfeit) that life. 1 John 5:12-13 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
NKJV
I don't believe salvation can be "lost", I think Jesus indicated that the believer is eternally secure in Him (John 10). But the bible is very clear IMO that people can and do abandon that life by ceasing to believe in Jesus. We call it apostasy. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 1, 2009 16:52:16 GMT -8
Ok, here are my "notes" on this subject from the teaching today:
Hebrews 6:4-12 is a sobering passage surrounded by words of hope and affirmation
It's similar to passages such as Hebrews 10:26-31, 1 John 5:16-17 and Mark 3:29/Matthew 12:32/ Luke 12:10, but must be looked at in it’s own context as well.
I'll comment on these verses in chunks:
6:4-5 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.
Could verses 4-5 make it any more obvious that the author is talking about Christians here? Yet some Christians who hold to an apriori belief that Christians can’t lose their salvation are forced to try and wiggle out of it here. The author of Hebrews uses one intense run-on sentence to get his point across- he’s talking about people who at one point were believers.
The NIB commentary says that the word translated “if they fall away”, parapipto, which occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, can be translated “acting faithlessly” “breaking faith” or “dealing treacherously”. Let’s make this clear: this “falling away” isn’t a “careless slipping”, it isn’t some particular moral failure like adultery or murder, it isn’t some doctrinal error. It is nothing short of a deliberate rejection of Christ and the New Covenant. It is the sin of abandoning God.
For whom is it impossible to bring such people back to repentence? Is it impossible for God, other believers, or for the persons themselves?
I think there’s no reason to think that it is impossible to God, and ultimately, we don’t really have the power to cause another human being to repent, so it must be referring to an inability within the person who has “fallen away” to repent. This passage doesn’t say that a person who is slipping from their faith shouldn’t bother repenting. It is saying that there is a state that some believers could possibly find themselves in in which they no longer have any desire to repent—no longer any will to accept Christ’s grace or listen to the Holy Spirit.
If someone we suspect of falling away, including ourselves, were to repent, then de facto they couldn’t be in the state that’s under discussion here. This should alleviate any fear on anyone’s part that somehow they are beyond salvation. Even experiencing such a concern is an indication that one is still able to repent.
But, what is the sin which equals falling away, then? Here it is spoken of as “crucifying the Son of God all over again” and subjecting Him to “public disgrace”. Let’s look at some other passages which seem to discuss something similar and see if we can get a fuller picture of what this might mean.
The first observation I’d like to point out is how important the role of the Holy Spirit is in this thorny issue.
Hebrews 10:26-31
26If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
What does “deliberately keep on sinning” in the above passage mean? Well, this verse comes right after the author warns his listeners not to stop gathering together as some have begun to. This isn’t just some warning about skipping a church service, or some other particular sin, this is a warning against deliberately leaving the family/kingdom of God behind.
“Deliberately keep on sinning” denotes ongoing, willful, rejection of Christ. The above passage describes this further as a rejection of Christ’s sanctifying blood, and insulting the Holy Spirit. Remember I mentioned how frequently the Holy Spirit comes up in regard to this topic? I think that is because the Holy Spirit is said to be the One who convicts us of sin in the first place- in other words, the Holy Spirit is our catalyst to repentance. We are enabled to repent by the Holy Spirit. So, this is why to reject/ disavow/ insult the Holy Spirit is so serious.
Jesus spoke about this elsewhere:
Matthew 12:32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
This is an interesting passage. Basically, Jesus is saying that someone who has insulted him can be forgiven and can be brought back to repentence, but if someone speaks against the Holy Spirit, they cannot receive forgiveness. Why? Because the Holy Spirit is what enables us to repent and be forgiven in the first place.
I think we need to be careful not to read this too literally, however. What if someone, in an evil moment, were to speak an insulting word about the Holy Spirit? Would they forever be unforgiveable and unable to repent. Certainly not. The fact that this has happened before with people who did later repent is proof enough of that. I think Jesus here is talking about more than careless words. He is talking about willful rejection and becoming adversaries of the Holy Spirit, as the Pharisees to which he was most likely referring to, did. And it was those same people who demonstrated that they were not going to listen to the Holy Spirit and ever repent.
So, if there is an “unforgiveable sin”, then it could be equated with a refusal to repent. If you’re a believer in free will, this will make sense. If God respects our free will, then he will not force us to repent. If we refuse to repent and ask forgiveness, he will not grant us forgiveness.
This fits with a somewhat strange passage out of 1 John:
1 John 5:16-18
16If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.
What is this “sin that leads to death” over which we shouldn’t even bother to pray? Well, considering the other passages we’ve looked at, I think it’s solid to conclude that it is none other than the sin of unrepentance/ rejection of Christ’s blood. While a person remains in this sin, there is no hope of forgiveness (by it’s very nature). God will not twist such a person’s arm; neither should we.
Going back to the mention of the “impossibility of repentence” mentioned in Hebrews- it’s apparent that there is a line in the sand which a person can cross after deliberate rejection of Christ and the Holy Spirit after which it is impossible to turn back. But where exactly is that line? We can’t say—except that if a person in danger of this does repent, we know they haven’t crossed that line.
We need not live in fear of crossing this line as long as we still care in the first place. Jesus Himself was quite clear in John 6:37 that He would never turn away anyone who came to Him:
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.
Jesus is also willing, as He instructed his disciples to do, to forgive us over and over again (Matthew 18:21-22)
Yet the author of Hebrews is warning us over and over again not to let our hearts get hardened because the final result of hardening can be irreversible. In the end a completely hardened heart will no longer want forgiveness and can no longer come to Jesus.
Perhaps after this discussion, this often misunderstood passage from Paul (2 Timothy 2:11-14) makes a bit more sense, and serves as both a warning and a great comfort to us:
11Here is a trustworthy saying:
If we died with him,
we will also live with him;
12if we endure,
we will also reign with him.
If we disown him,
he will also disown us;
13if we are faithless,
he will remain faithful,
for he cannot disown himself
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 1, 2009 16:53:35 GMT -8
Chris wrote:
Totally agreed. "losing you salvation" is a poor term for what we're talking about here. Falling away is precisely right.
Josh wrote:
So, Chris, you want to give your spin on this passage?
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 2, 2009 13:02:45 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 2, 2009 21:49:02 GMT -8
Rosemary and I got into an interesting conversation over the question of when this re-crucifying would be taking place- whether it would be at the moment of the apostasy or at the moment of attempting to come back to repentence.
I think it would be at the moment of the apostasy for the following logic:
Jesus died for us while we were yet sinners, and then after that we were able to repent. So I think that it is the apostasy that crucifies Jesus all over again and subjects Him to shame, rather than seeing this passage as saying something like,
"If you end up coming back to me with your tail between your legs asking for forgiveness, that shames me, and I'll make it impossible for you to get it"
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 3, 2009 18:48:49 GMT -8
4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.
Interestingly, I was reading through the Ancient Christian Commentary on Hebrews today (a bit late for my lesson, but...) and was surprised to find that other than Tertullian and some lesser known "rigorists", most of the Early Church Fathers had an entirely different take on this passage. Their view (Ambrose, Chrysostom, and many others) was that this passage was simply prohibiting the re-baptising of people who sinned. These father assert that God can forgive any sin, but that the returning Christian instead of seeking to be re-baptised should pursue penance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Margot on Mar 6, 2009 18:38:40 GMT -8
All very interesting stuff. Chris, I'll have to think more about what you wrote re: losing salvation v.s. apostasy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 7, 2009 19:53:15 GMT -8
Elsewhere, yeshuafreak wrote:
YF- you seem to have a very different understanding of this passage. Are you saying that for post-baptismal sins Jesus' sacrifice isn't enough?
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Jul 22, 2009 16:15:12 GMT -8
i agree completely. a believer cannot loose their salvation, but there are plenty of instances of people leaving the faith out of unbelief. and because of unbelief they "lose" the benefits along with it.
shalom- john
oh josh, i read your post. i am saying that we cannot have what is called an "evil inclination" (whichi is the word for the greek "sin" here) after recieving the truth. otherwise, that truth is no longer in us, for light an darkness cannot co-exist.
i am probably going to get in trouble with this like wesley did when he said that a man can be perfect after recieving salvation. This is in fact, whcat we are to expect, nothing less. dont kill yourself if you dont reach this goal, but keep trying, it is not unrealistic. i have not reached it yet, and i have to admit that i am a bad procrastinator, but that it slowly and progressively diaapearing.
Jesus' sacrifice is enough for anyone. but we cannot accept this sacrifice when we are sinning. we have to fall back into the truth.
and i dont think that baptism (mikveh) saves either. i think that it is the representation of what saves, our faith. so to word the questin like you did is misleading.
shalom
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jul 22, 2009 22:46:54 GMT -8
Is this "evil inclination" you speak of different than or the same from actual sinful acts? In other words, can a Christian still sin?
Furthermore, as to our sinful nature or evil inclination, in Paul's metaphors the old man and the new creation co-exist. We are to daily die to the old nature and be constantly renewed in Christ.
I agree with you that the goal is always complete holiness. That is God's intention for us- He is going to conform us to His likeness one way or another. However, I do think it is unrealistic to expect complete static sinlessness in this life, especially with the following considerations:
a) it is sin to not do the good we know we ought to (James 4:17)
b) it is sin to do anything without faith (Rom 14:23) and
c) even James said "we all stumble in many ways" (James 3:2)
d) John says:
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:8
So, are you saying that if while yelling in unrighteous anger at a guy who cut me off on the freeway I suddenly died of a brain aneurysm, Christ's sacrifice would not avail me at the judgment?
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Jul 23, 2009 10:39:28 GMT -8
possibly, though i dont think that we should take the words of this scripture to that extreme. i always pondered if one sin was enough to damn a soul to hell.
as for your scripture in John, i already explained that. i can point out other scriptures that say that if any man sins, the light is not in him and he is not a son of God. we already had this discussion so i will not repeat it. i dont have enough time. if you can find the thread dont hesitate to identify where we talked about it. i think it was on my forum.
i am very aware of that and have referred to that scripture more than any other on the definition of sin in my life. i still dont think that that that goal is unrealistic. we have to remember that the whole point of the teachings of the apostles is to show us what the
right-wrong mentality of christ would be. that is simply what is defined by the law.
it is sin to do anything without faith (Rom 14:23) and
i am aware of this too. i use this sctiprue 2-most in my definition giving of sin. the last one is in John where it says that any breaking of the law is sin. and essentailly, i think these are all saying the same thing. if we have faith in God, then we are going to see wrong as what he sees as wrong. and his definition of wrong is given in his mitzvot of Torah. (not to be followed legalistically). so esentially they are saying that you should follow Gods commands with the priorities in the right place (ie, a priest can touch a leper if the leper is being ransacked by men or such, even though a priest is said not to touch lepers for they are unclean... the mitzvot to love his neighbor is a weightier cammand).
the old man spoken of by paul is the yetzer hara as Paul was conveying it to the greeks. but i dont think that we are to let the old man raise agian and then kill it, raise again and then kill it, etc... i think that we are to continually crucify it, never giving it the time to raise again. instead, we are to let the new man continually live. The Yetzer hara is not a bad thing per se. its like an athletes anger that can cause two things to happen (1) it can cause the player to be disqualified if he takes it out on another player or (2) he can do better at the game by controlling th anger and using it to motivate him in the game. the yetzer hara is this anger, that eitherr the good inclination can use for motivation, or we can let the Yetzer hara take full control and hurt others by it. so when i say they cannot co-exist i mean that both cannot be in full control at one time.
the evil inclination is not the sins themselves, only the inclination to do those sins. if it is in full control than we have an addiction, almost uncontrollably sinning. but if we use our good inclination, the Yetzer hatov, to control it than we can use it for the bettering of our living a godly life.
|
|
|
|
Post by krhagan19 on Aug 21, 2009 6:05:12 GMT -8
The "Unforgivable sin" is blasphemy against the holy spirit. At one point in my spiritual journey I visited a pentecostal church. I thought that they were wacked and described experience over a couple of beers at Applebees to my friend. I ended up inadvertently mocking their sequential belief about God. (The United Pentecostal Church) is a non trinitarian Church. They believe that God manifested himself as three persons at three different times. God the Father, OLD TESTAMENT, The the Son (Life of Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit Post resurrection until the return of the son and father (supposedly simultaneously,I really don't get it. Anyways, I was very concerned that in my mocking of their non trinitarian world view I have mocked the Holy spirit and thus committed Blasphemy against the holy spirit. (OH S&*() I am going to hell I thought. So I consulted with my Pastor at the time, who assured me that I had not in fact committed that crime, and I also consulted with a professor at Western Theological Seminary who concurred with my Pastor. It seems that the only way to commit "Blashemy against the holy spirit" is to die without being convicted by the holy spirit and thus seek salvation in Christ. Therefore, if you are saved through your faith in Christ, you are incapable of committing the unforgivable sin.
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Jan 17, 2010 21:21:38 GMT -8
my pentecostal preachers said that if one is afraid one commited the unforgivable sin, one has not committed it.
dont know what i think about this seeing as how my view of sin differs widely from the voice who spoke it, but thought it might be interesting to put out there.
-john
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jan 17, 2010 21:48:32 GMT -8
I agree with that sentiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 25, 2024 20:55:05 GMT -8
Revisiting this subject from my current perspective of Universal Reconciliatino (all are eventually saved, even out of hell, by Jesus), I have a few things to add:
Matthew 12:32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
The key to understanding this passage is to understand how the role of the Holy Spirit differs from that of Jesus, particularly in regard to conviction of sin.
In John, Jesus makes this clear:
John 16:7 However, I am telling you the truth: It’s good for you that I’m going away. If I don’t go away, the helper won’t come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. 8 He will come to convict the world of sin, to show the world what has God’s approval, and to convince the world that God judges it. 9 He will convict the world of sin, because people don’t believe in me. 10 He will show the world what has God’s approval, because I’m going to the Father and you won’t see me anymore. 11 He will convince the world that God judges it, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
Since the Holy Spirit is the one who convicts us, to reject or disavow the Holy Spirit is synonymous with a refusal to repent. One must repent to enter the kingdom of God.
Jesus knows that some sins are forgiven now, and others will even be forgiven in the age to come (in "hell"), but refusal to repent can by its very nature never be forgiveable. One must choose to repent, and can at any time, in order to be forgiven. In other words, Jesus is saying that as long as you resist the Holy Spirit's work of conviction, you cannot expect to be forgiven.
What the passage CANNOT mean is that anyone who ever at some moment in time rejects the Holy Spirit is from then on never able to be forgiven. If that was the case, St. Paul himself would have no hope, for, he along with most of the Pharisees, was guilty of the sin which Jesus is describing in Matthew 12:32. It must be reversable, and the answer is that the unforgiveable sin is unwillingness to repent as long as it endures.
|
|
