Hebrews 6:1-8

Steven R. Cook

www.christonly.com

 

 

            Prior to the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross, Jews had been observing the Mosaic Law with its many rituals and sacrificial system for nearly fourteen hundred years.  Day after day, week after week, and year after year, the religious Jew anticipated the coming of Christ; which was reflected in the detailed sacrificial system of the Mosaic Law.  If a Jew began observing the Mosaic Law at a young age, and he lived to be seventy years old, those religious practices would be heavily ingrained into the deepest fiber of his thinking.  However, if Christ came and fulfilled all that the Mosaic Law pointed to, and put to rest once and for all the sacrificial practices of that system, it would perhaps be a struggle for the religious Jew to forever set aside his religious observances.

            Many believing Jews, who formed the first Christian church in the early part of Acts, had accepted the finished work of Christ and ceased from the sacrificial system because they realized it had been fulfilled.  However, some were reluctant to give up their practices, either because they were afraid to move away from what was familiar, or they thought that some aspects of the Mosaic Law continued into the new age. 

            The book of Hebrews is addressed to Jews who were confused about the place of Christ in their newly developing theology, and subsequently were hindered from advancing to maturity.  The writer of Hebrews seeks to demonstrate the superiority of Christ over against the now fulfilled sacrificial system of the Mosaic Law.  In demonstrating the superiority of Christ, the writer of Hebrews hopes to help his readers overcome any theological obstacles that may be hindering them, and push them on to maturity.  Overall, the book of Hebrews is “is marked by a unique intermingling of doctrine and exhortation. The rich theology of the epistle provides the basis for urging Christians to live in faith and obedience.”1

            The purpose of this paper is to discuss some the preliminary matters related to the book of Hebrews, such as the date of writing, authorship, audience, social background, and purpose.  Then, Hebrews 6:1-8 will be discussed in detail through exegesis, and consideration of biblical scholarship. 

 

Historical Context of Hebrews

 

            Establishing a date for the book of Hebrews rests largely on the content of the book.  The author writes as though the Mosaic sacrificial system was still in practice and this would seem to necessitate the presence of the Temple in Jerusalem.  Since the Temple was destroyed by Titus in A.D. 70, it seems best to place the writing shortly before its devastation.  Regarding the date of Hebrews Zane Hodges writes:

 

The epistle can hardly be later than about a.d. 95 since it was known to Clement of Rome and quoted by him in 1 Clement. In addition it can scarcely be dated after a.d. 70, since there is no reference to the destruction of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. Had this event already occurred, it would have given the author a definitive argument for the cessation of the Old Testament sacrificial system. Instead he seems to regard this system as still in operation (8:4, 13; 9:6-9; 10:1-3).2 

 

So, a date no later than A.D. 95, and probably before A.D. 70 fits best.

            The authorship of Hebrews is completely up in the air; however, educated guesses abound.  A sampling of candidates includes the Apostle Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, Luke, and Philip.  Whoever the writer was, he was familiar with the OT, and with the struggles of Jewish Christians.  Regarding authorship Merrill C. Tenney states:

 

The vocabulary and style of Hebrews indicate that its writer was a cultured Greek, who wrote with elegance and finesse. He was a student of the Old Testament Scriptures, and at the same time was well acquainted with the teaching concerning Christ that had already crystallized into a definite theology. One would think that so able an author would not have been easily overlooked, and that his name would have been permanently connected with his production, yet the epistle remains strangely anonymous.3

 

            From the internal evidence, it would seem the audience was Jewish.  The letter is written in such a way that assumes the audience is very familiar with the OT, and particularly the Mosaic sacrificial system.  It seems “the readers were chiefly of Jewish background. Though this has sometimes been questioned, the contents of the epistle argue for it.”4  It would also appear that the readers were “Jewish converts to the faith of the gospel, probably for the church at Jerusalem.”5

            The social background of Jewish Christians in the first century was awkward.  Their identity was perhaps more difficult to define than their Gentile brothers and sisters.  Many saved Jews could no longer live under the sacrificial system which their unsaved Jewish contemporaries continued; and at the same time, they perhaps found it hard break the ties with that which was familiar to them.  Merrill C. Tenney states:

 

Hebrews, then, was written specifically to encourage a church that had been torn from its spiritual moorings and cast adrift in the uncertain political and social life of a chaotic age. Its members could no longer class themselves as Jews, for the Jewish system of temple worship which was about to perish offered them no refuge. Their faith in Christ was scorned by those who adhered to the law as an ethical system, and was ridiculed by the Gentiles who could discern no possibility of salvation in the crucified Galilean prophet. These believers were committed by their initial confession to the inescapable alternative of either renouncing Christ as a delusion or of reaffirming their original decision by the persistence of faith at the risk of ostracism and persecution. They were disoriented by the impending collapse of the Jewish commonwealth, were doctrinally unstable, and were fearful of the future.6

 

            It is this instability and vacillation that points to the purpose of the letter of Hebrews.  The writer musters all his intellectual might and rhetorical skills under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for the purpose of demonstrating “the superiority of Christ and Christianity over Judaism.”7  The writer seeks to take his readers to a fully committed Christian experience that will provide stability and consistency in their thinking and actions.  The writer argues that nothing less than complete confidence in Christ and His perfect sacrifice will be able to move the readers on to maturity. 

 

Hebrews 6:1-8

 

            In the latter part of Hebrews chapter five, the writer addresses his readers directly with the following rebuke:

 

Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil. (Hebrews 5:11-14)8

 

            The writer makes clear that his readers had “become dull of hearing.”  He goes on the state “for though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.”  No one likes to be called a baby, and certainly the recipients of this rebuke would have been challenged to evaluate themselves.  A rebuke is most effective when followed by instruction; and the writer of Hebrews takes the opportunity to encourage his readers in order to coax them to maturity.

            Hebrews 6:1 starts with the inferential conjunction dio. which seeks to move the readers away from the rebuke and to bring their focus to the matter of advancing to maturity.  The inferential conjunction is followed by avfe,ntej which appears to be an adverbial participle of means, expressing how the readers are to move away from immaturity.  The readers are encouraged to “leave the elementary teaching about the Christ,” and to “press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God.”  Maturity can only be obtained by those who already saved; so then, “the people under discussion are fully initiated Christians.”9

            The writer has a clear objective for his readers, and that is that they might “press on to maturity.”  These Christians had been saved for a while, and had enough Christian teaching that they could have been teachers themselves.  Yet, for some reason, they had failed to advance to maturity and to get away from foundational teaching.  Warren Wiersbe states:

 

No one can escape coming into the world as a baby because that is the only way to get here! But it is tragic when a baby fails to mature. No matter how much parents and grandparents love to hold and cuddle a baby, it is their great desire that the baby grow up and enjoy a full life as a mature adult. God has the same desire for His children.10

 

            The reference to “dead works” could be defined as “the external regulations associated with the Levitical priesthood in the earthly sanctuary;”11 that is, the sacrificial system of the OT which was abrogated subsequent to the superior sacrifice of Christ.  Faith toward God had permanently laid to rest any obligation from these Jewish believers to the OT Levitical sacrificial system.  “What, then, is the author of Hebrews saying? He is refusing to return to basics on the grounds that there is no use in doing so for people who have been accurately initiated into the Christian faith.”12

            It would seem clear that the writer is encouraging this audience “to abandon any adherence they may still have to the First Testament sacrificial system and to go on to faith in the New Testament truth.”13  This does not mean the foundational truths are unnecessary, but that the readers need to get beyond them if they are to advance to maturity.  “When the writer urges his readers to ‘leave standing’ the elementary Christian teaching, he is not dismissing it but regarding it as so well established that the urgent need is for a fuller appreciation and application of that teaching.”14  The writer wants the reader to move on “to maturity because there is no way to start over in the Christian life.”15

            In Hebrews 6:2 the writer continues his list of fundamentals which include “instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.”  The noun baptismw/n probably points to the ablutions practiced by the Levitical Priests in the OT.  Although, the reference to “baptisms” could also refer to the several baptisms which were now part of the Christian experience (i.e. Believer’s baptism, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit).  Washings (or Baptisms), the laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead were all teachings (didachv) that had already been communicated.  There was no need for the writer to go over old ground, but rather to move on to other matters.

            In verse three the writer states “and this we will do, if God permits.”  He includes himself with the readers by his use of the future active indicative 1st person plural of poie,w.  This lets his readers know they are not alone in their endeavor to advance to maturity, for the writer counts himself among them.  The writer wants to move his audience into a more stable place in their thinking and actions, and he is willing to lead them by the hand if necessary.

            Hebrews 6:4-6 is the section of this pericope that causes great consternation and doubt in the minds of many believers.  This section of Hebrews has been construed four different ways:

 

1.      That the Christian is in real danger of forfeiting his salvation.

2.      That these were not true Christians, but merely professors of Christ.

3.      That the writer is setting forth a hypothetical situation, which was to demonstrate the logical fallacy of the readers aberrant thinking.

4.      That the writer is not talking about loss of salvation, but loss of reward and service both in time and eternity.16

 

            The first point is very popular among those who think it possible for the Christian to forfeit his salvation.  The emphasis is often placed on the writer’s comment in verse 6 about believers who have “fallen away,” which is linked with verse 8 and the illustration to things “burned.”  “Fallen away” is taken to mean forfeiture of salvation, and things “burned” is understood as a reference to the Lake of Fire.  This position is to be rejected, since the immediate and greater context of the Bible argues for the security of the believer. 

            The second point regards verses 4-6 as referring to those who merely profess faith in Christ, without really possessing true salvation.  That is, they only nibbled at Christianity without fully consuming all that is offered to the one who comes in full faith.  That these are not Christians mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-6 is held by Charles Hodge who states:

 

The Bible therefore speaks of men as partakers of the Spirit who are not regenerated, and who finally come short of eternal life. It not only speaks of men repenting, of their believing for a time, and of their receiving the Word with joy, but still further of their being enlightened, of their tasting of the heavenly gift, and of their being made partakers of the Holy Ghost.17

 

And Kenneth Wuest agrees by stating:

 

 

These Hebrews had made a contract with the Holy Spirit in which they willingly allowed themselves to be led along in His presalvation work into the act of repentance. Now should they refuse the proffered faith and turn back to the First Testament sacrifices they would be breaking this contract . . . In falling away from their professed faith in Messiah as high priest back to the sacrifices they would be falling back upon their previous dependence upon them.18

 

            According to Hodge and Wuest, the readers addressed on Hebrews 6:4-6 were not saved, but had only “tasted” of the things Christianity offered.  What is interesting, is the Greek verb geu,omai appears in Hebrews 2:9 where the writer mentions that Christ was able to “taste death for everyone,” which He accomplished through His suffering and death.  Surely Christ did not “nibble” at what was presented to Him on the cross, and neither did the Christians mentioned in Hebrews 6.  The readers in Hebrews 6:4-6 “are people with a full Christian experience, defective in no way. In fact, this is one of the clearest descriptions of Christian initiation in the New Testament.”19

            The third point regards Hebrews 6:4-6 as a hypothetical situation created by the writer to bring the reader to the logical conclusion of his faulty thinking.  If the believer could fall away and forfeit his salvation, then the only way to save that person would be for Christ to be crucified again, thus declaring His first death as cheap and ineffective.  Since Christ cannot ever be crucified again, neither can the true believer ever completely fall away; yet, if the believer could fall away, it would be impossible to save him a second time, since Christ will never again be crucified.  Unlike the sacrifices under the Mosaic Law which were ongoing, Christ’s death was once for all. 

            Under this view, it would seem the readers had viewed Christ’s sacrifice as one among many, in a succession of sacrifices beginning with the institution of the Mosaic Law.  To view Christ this way, and then engage in sacrifices subsequent to the cross, is to put Him to open shame, since it would cheapen His death by limiting its potency.

             The fourth view regards Hebrews 6:4-6 not as a warning which threatens loss of salvation, but rather loss of reward and service.  The believer should not resort to previous sacrificial practices, since that would produce and unproductive life which is contrary to God’s plan.  The illustration in Hebrews 6:6-8 supports this view, since what is burned up is the production of the ground, not the ground itself.  Regarding this view Zane Hodges states:

 

Their apostasy would be like stepping back over the line again and once more expressing solidarity with their compatriots who wanted Jesus put on the cross. That this was most serious was precisely the writer’s point. Such persons could not be won back to the state of repentance which marked their original conversion to Christianity. In affirming this, the author’s words suggested a deep hardening of their hearts against all efforts to win them back, not to Christian conversion, but to Christian commitment.20

 

            So then, the warning here is to believers who are in jeopardy of misunderstanding the value of Christ’s sacrifice, and of resorting to a previous system that has been fulfilled, with the result that future rewards are at risk.  There is some merit to this view, since verses 7-8 seem to refer to loss of production, not salvation.  This is born out elsewhere in Scripture by the apostle Paul who stated “If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire” (1 Cor. 3:15).

            Whatever view is taken, one thing clear, the audience is harming themselves if they seek to promote a sacrificial system that has been laid to rest.  In verse six the writer makes clear that those who have reverted back to the old sacrificial system “crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.”  The Greek reflexive pronoun ἑαυτοῖς appears to be a dative of disadvantage which would mean the readers are harming themselves.21  The force of the reflexive is frequently used to indicate that the subject is also the object of the action of the verb. The pronoun thus ‘reflects back’ on the subject.”22  It is not Christ who is harming these believers; rather, they are harming themselves.

            The crucifixion mentioned by the writer is not real, but figurative.  Christ is in heaven, and cannot be brought back to earth for a second or third crucifixion, since His death was once for all (Heb. 10:12-14).  ἀνασταυρόω is used figuratively of believers whose sin causes Christ to be crucified again in the sense of exposing Christ to public shame by virtue of the misdeeds of his professed followers.”23  Their reversion back to an abrogated system would imply that Christ’s death was weak, and not lasting. 

            In Hebrews 6:7-8 the writer advances his argument with the use of a metaphor in which he states:

 

For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned (Heb. 6:7-8).

 

The metaphor conjures up images of a well watered field that produces useless things like “thorns and thistles.”   The emphasis in the metaphor is on production, that is, what the ground produces.  The fruit of the ground is to be compared with the Christian’s spiritual production.  Regarding this, William Lane states:

 

6:7 There is a firm basis for confidence that the community will share in further blessing from God. But if the Christian community should become apostate, it would be like a field which was well watered and cultivated, but which then produced only thorns and thistles (v 8). In the parable all interest is concentrated on the harvest, rather than on preliminary stages of growth. What is decisive is what is produced. The issue is usefulness or worthlessness.24

 

            The idea of “burning” might lead some to think of the Lake of fire where many will spend eternity away from God in eternal judgment.  However, as already noted earlier in this paper, fire also is related to a believers loss of reward in eternity (1 Cor. 3:15).  “The metaphor recalls God’s original curse on the ground (Gen. 3:17-19) and suggests that an unproductive Christian life ultimately (“in the end”) falls under the severe condemnation of God and is subject to His blazing wrath and judgment.”25

 

Conclusion

 

            The book of Hebrews is powerfully packed with theology and practical doctrine to aide a Christian in his understanding about the value of Christ and His death on the cross.  From the early church until today Christians have wondered about what Christ accomplished, and if there is anything else left for them to do with regard to their salvation and growth.  Hebrews 6:1-8 is a passage many students linger over for some time, hoping to lay to rest any fears they may have about whether it is possible to forfeit their salvation.  The answer to that question is no!  Christ has paid for sin once for all time, and there is no other sacrifice that can paid; and certainly Christ can never pay it again.  In the end, it would seem the weight of evidence would suggest that Hebrews 6:1-8 addresses Christians who were hung up on the value of Christ’s death, and also the Old Testament sacrificial system of which they were coming out.

_________________________________________________________________

endnotes

1.      Roy B. Zuck, Darrell L. Bock, A Biblical Theology of the New Testament  (Chicago: Moody Press, 1996), 405.

1.      Zane Hodges, Hebrews, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Vol. 2, (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 777.

2.      Merrill C. Tenney, “A New Approach to the Book of Hebrews,” Bibliotheca Sacra 123 (1988): 219.

3.      Zane Hodges, Hebrews, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Vol. 2, 778.

4.      M.G. Easton, Epistle to the Hebrews: Easton's Bible Dictionary (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos, 1996), 347.

5.      Merrill C. Tenney, “A New Approach to the Book of Hebrews,” 221.

6.      Paul P. Enns, Hebrews: The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, Ill.: Moody Press, 1997), 118.

7.      All Scripture quotes are from the New American Standard Bible Updated © 1995 by The Lockman Foundation.

8.      Walter C. Kaiser, Hard Sayings of the Bible, (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity, 1997), 682.

9.      Warren W. Wiersbe, Hebrews: The Bible Exposition Commentary (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1996), 44.

10.  William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1998), 140.

11.  Walter C. Kaiser, Hard Sayings of the Bible, 683.

12.  Kenneth Wuest, “Hebrews Six in the Greek New Testament,” Bibliotheca Sacra 119 (1998), 51.

13.  William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A, 139.

14.  Charles Caldwell Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody Press, 1995), 159.

15.  Zane Hodges, Hebrews, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Vol. 2, 778.

16.  Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos, 1872, 1997) 669.

17.  Kenneth Wuest, “Hebrews Six in the Greek New Testament,” 52-53

18.  Walter C. Kaiser, Hard Sayings of the Bible, 682.

19.  Zane C. Hodges, Hebrews, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Vol. 2,795.

20.  Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics - Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing, 1996), 144.

21.  Ibid., 350,

22.  Johannes P. Louw, and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, Vol. 1, 2nd edition., (New York: United Bible societies, 1996), 236

23.  William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 47A, 143.

24.  Zane C. Hodges, Hebrews, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Vol. 2, 795.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Abbott, T. K. Epistle to the Ephesians and to the Colossians. The International Critical Commentary, ed. Samuel Rolles Driver, Alfred Plummer and Charles Augustus Briggs. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishing, 1979.

 

Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. Revised and edited by Fredrick William Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

 

Bromiley, Geoffrey W., ed. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 4 Vols. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982.

                                         

Brown, Colin, ed. The New International Dictionary of New testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1986.

 

Eadie, John. Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians. Minneapolis: James and Kock Christian Publishing, 1977.

 

Ellicot, Charles J. St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, 4th ed. London: Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer Publishing, 1868.

 

Fee, Gordon D. New Testament Exegesis, 3rd ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002.

 

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositors Bible Commentary, vol. 11. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

 

Green, J. P., ed. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1979.

 

Hoehner, Harold W. Ephesians, An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House Co., 2002.

 

Hoehner, Harold W. Ephesians, Bible Knowledge Commentary. Dallas: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983.

 

Kebric, Robert B. Roman People. Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1993.

 

Kittel, Gerhard and Friedrich, Gerhard, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 Vols. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978.

 

Lincoln, Andrew T. Ephesians. Word Biblical Commentray, ed. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker, vol. 42. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990.

 

Martin, Thomas R. Ancient Greece. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.

 

Metxger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 3rd ed. London: United Bible             Societies, 1971