I've brought up this scripture a couple of different times on this blog. It was brought up in the comments on this post, and expounded on in this post.
I came to this conclusion in those posts: "So, my position is this: I believe in conditional eternal security with the condition being that, after conversion, you do not reject God." I still think that's true, but now I understand that James was writing that passage in Hebrews to show that born-again Christians will not reject God, so the "condition" is a moot point.
I think the reason I had such a hard time with those verses is because I had an incomplete view of the doctrines of Grace.
I think this sermon by Charles Spurgeon is an excellent handling of those verses.
About Me
- Luke
- I started this blog out of curiousity and it grew to become a great encouragement for me in my Christian walk. I hope the writings here can be used by God to further His work in your life.
My Blog List
-
-
-
-
-
-
What's This? A Blog Post???8 months ago
-
opening day [squeezed in versinon]1 year ago
-
[Free *HD*] The Good Lie Free5 years ago
-
-
Three Princes... and a Pauper7 years ago
-
What day is it?7 years ago
-
-
the.big.28 years ago
-
Our ellipsis . . .8 years ago
-
Disney World8 years ago
-
-
November 20148 years ago
-
The Other Side of the Hill8 years ago
-
-
-
Pink Explosion8 years ago
-
Illnesses and injuries9 years ago
-
What they say about Good Friday9 years ago
-
I am unclean9 years ago
-
-
My Blog has Moved!9 years ago
-
December... Full, Full, Full!9 years ago
-
-
An Overnight Guest10 years ago
-
A New Beginning...10 years ago
-
Worlds Greatest Beans10 years ago
-
5 or 50??10 years ago
-
Zach & Daniela's Wedding Reception11 years ago
-
July in Review11 years ago
-
A Note from Tucker11 years ago
-
I wonder how many times12 years ago
-
Finally!12 years ago
-
2012 resolutions12 years ago
-
7.24.1112 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12 comments:
facts are facts. because God is the reason we become christians, He is also the reason we stay christians. it's a good thing too. a man left to obtain and maintain faith on his own will fail every time.
I look forward to reading that sermon. Thanks for challenging me, Luke!
:-) It's the word that's challenging, but you're welcome for posting it.
I read the sermon now.
And yes, you're right, it is God's word that challenges me.
I used to think grace was a fluffy thing. Now I now that I don't even have the capability to grasp its strength.
After reading Spurgeon, I find myself agreeing with you about that "condition" being a moot point.
"Now I know..." it was supposed to say...
Plus, I really like using the phrase "moot point". I'm not sure why. :-)
Spurgeon has some wonderful sermons on line. So powerful, yet so easy to read. Most sermons from his era are full of flowery language that makes them difficult to grasp.
He definitely had a gift.
A good resource for spurgeon related materials is: http://www.spurgeon.org/mainpage.htm
You might find it a bit easier to navigate.
Mark: Thanks for pointing me towards truth as I've studied this and other passages of scripture. I appreciate your patience.
Wow, it only takes 8 pages of unfounded speculation to conclude that three simple, straightforward verses can't possibly mean what they say.
Luke,
I'm humbled and very happy to think that any of the scribble I've written has helped you in any way.
One of the wonderful things about the truth is that it essentially needs no defense. It just needs good expositors. What does a good expositor do? Just "release" the truth. As Spurgeon said: "Scripture is like a lion. Who ever heard of defending a lion? Just turn it loose; it will defend itself."
Since preconceptions are so common, especially in regard to tricky texts such as Hebrews 6, the work of an expositor (in other words "releasing" the lion) may be a difficult task. Why? Because it means tiptoeing around CENTURIES of preconceived notions that are built into peoples understandings of the texts!
Your posts tend to be challenging and searching. One can really see that you are an eager student of the word. Keep up the good work!
Anonymous,
I must congratulate you. You have just done something that likely no-one in church history has EVER done. You've said that those three verses in Hebrews 6 are "simple, straightforward".
There are so many godly and experienced expositors of the Bible who have been perplexed by this passage, both Arminians and Calvinists, that I marvel what sort of spiritual/intellectual stature you must have to say such a thing.
But if we are to assume that Paul was the author of Hebrews, there's a Biblical passage which could potentially prove you wrong: 2Pe 3:16
Spurgeon (and all others who seriously want to understand what the Bible says) are very serious about understanding and accepting what Hebrews 6:4-6 says, as it is written.
The tricky part is that the nature of grammar, words, and language in general (especially ancient languages) as well as context require that we understand these passages AS THE AUTHOR INTENDED TO COMMUNICATE THEM. So the idea we are looking for is not to understand this passage as you assume it says, but rather to understand what it actually says.
You may read Hebrews 6 and assume it is simple. But that is just because your theological system has made it simple (I say this not knowing the specific details of your theological system). Your theological system invests meaning into certain words, significance into certain phrases, assumptions to connect certain material, etc. So does mine! You don't have to be ashamed about interpreting scripture, but you should be upfront and not try to pass of your interpretation as "the text meaning what it says".
The terse flippancy of your post leads me to believe you haven't fully understood this yet.
hey anonymous, can you please explain how romans 9 can't possibly mean exactly what is says? or john 6? or ehp 1-2? or could explain how spurgeon is using any unfounded speculation? where is he wrong? could you possibly find the courage to use your name or establish any kind of credibility by explaining anything?
I remember having a nice discussion about heroes and monsters over at Ben Reinhard's [now defunct] blog. We were arguing if there is ever a point at which a man's humanity has been totally destroyed, when the devil has laid waste to every last bit of who we are so that there is nothing left (forgive me, but I had Tolkien's Black Riders, the monsters from Beowulf, and perhaps serial killers from Criminal Minds in mind here). This, I think, is what Spurgeon refers to as "falling away". It's not about sinning, it's about the end (telos) of sin. It's about the perseverance of sin.
We can make rather small arguments for this interpretation (present tense Greek and all), though at this point I believe that we're further into Christian tradition than exegesis (with some of my own modern entertainment references thrown in above for fun).
I did find Spurgeon's sermon interesting, particularly insofar as he at times needed to defend a fairly straightforward reading (that he who falls away as such may not repent over again) against others.
For another metaphor, NT Wright (in a bit on hell) refers to them as having become ex-humans (CS Lewis' vision of hell largely agrees). Another analagous example I gave was the Temple, which God did leave (though only after repeated, habitual sin left it liable to destruction. In the end, I would like to think that monsters don't exist, that there are no ex-humans that stalk the land, though this is the same bit of me that would like to think that no one would ever permanently lose their minds.
Post a Comment