Consequences of the Warning Passages in Hebrews

[Blammo]

One thing is clear, the write does sure HOPES they will not. Maybe the wording is stronger as you seem to be saying. That is a hard call to make. Or I feel it is.


Yet...I feel it is addressing believers in both cases.... I would say the writer has hopes he is ..."persuaded better things of you"...and that the "warning" will not take place to those he addresses


6:9...But, beloved, we ((((the writer I think all would agree))) are persuaded better things of you ((((better things then the worthless works that were set afire in the verse above)))), and things that accompany salvation, ((((This shows what the passage is talking about. Not the salvation even, but the events after salvation))))))though we thus speak.


But...I could be wrong.

This is where I am so far...

- The warnings are to believers.
- Though what is warned against are real possibilities, they are not to be expected of faithful Christians.
- There are dire consequences for disobedience after salvation.

 

[James_Newman]

Why does the parallel verse in Matthew say "life" instead of "kingdom of God"?

Matthew 18:9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Because those who do not enter into the kingdom will not enter into life during that age. They will not be raised up again until a thousand years later. Basically they will experience death during the millennium.

Joh 8:51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.

This is a conditional promise of never seeing death, if we keep His saying. We can't apply this to physical death, because everyone dies. If we apply this to eternal salvation, then eternal salvation is by keeping the Lord's saying. I think it is a conditional promise of escaping death at the judgment seat of Christ.

 

[EdSutton]

Thx James. Can you expand on your thinking here? How is the author of Hebrews using the firey ordeal of Hebrews 10 as a warning of hell-fire and yet not warning of possible loss of salvation? I'm very interested in hearing more about your approach.


Just a comment: the severe judgment referred to here (referencing the OT) was referring to punishment of believers, not unbelievers in the OT context, as I see it.

Each warning given in Hebrews is progressively worse. The 1st warning is the danger of drifting away from the truth (2:1-4); the next danger of not entering into His rest (ch. 3-4); and the third is the danger of not going on to maturity (ch. 5-6). In the 4th warning - Hebrews 10 - the believer is warned about the impossibility of going back to the OT sacrificial system. Some of those Jewish believers were considering compromising their faith. The 5th warning has to do with renewing your spiritual vitality and the danger of lost rewards. In fact, IMO all of the warnings passages refer, directly or indirectly, to lost rewards and other temporal consequences.

The author uses illustrations to make his point, and often uses ones that are very graphic and serious in nature. That does not necessarily imply, IMO, that it must refer to eternal punishment. Some say, perhaps you do, James, that the reference to eternal punishment was given here in Hebrews 10 IOT point out that there was no provision for deliberate sin in the OT by the annual sacrifices. Hence, if they were turning away from Christ's sacrifice, upon what were they relying? Is that your position?

But IMO all of these dangers are only for the child of God, not for the world in general. Many who support eternal security take a different position in these warning passages in Hebrews. The danger of the unsaved is not to be saved and thus go to the lake of fire. But I do not believe that to be the focus in Hebrews. There the focus is that there is a danger for the saved to lose rewards, to have a wasted life, and ultimately, that of physical death. As believers we often take the severity of the consequences for our sin too lightly.

So in Hebrews 5:11ff Barnabas, after rebuking his hearers for not being teachers of the Word even though they had been saved long enough that they should have progressed that far, but they were still needing to be taught the milk of the Word. Barnabas urges them in chapter 5 and 6 to “go on to maturity.” The reason for doing this is because it is impossible for someone who is saved if they should defect from the faith and are set in this to renew them again to an attitude of repentance. After coming to Christ, everything we do will come before the judgment seat of Christ and it will be rewarded if it is good, or burnt if it is good-for-nothing.

For example, earlier in chapter 10 Barnabas (or whoever the author of Hebrews was) had exhorted them to hang in there - to stand tall. Yet he also expressed confidence that they would do so. What is the nature of the judgment? It just comes down to this, IMO: desiring to escape man’s judgment, they will fall into the judgment of God instead! As I said, this is a serious warning.

But IMO the judgment cannot be loss of eternal salvation or of eternal life (10:39). Also, this judgment does involve loss of spiritual rewards (See 10:35-36). And the judgment could involve actual physical death for this is certain to come if they continue and persist in sinning (10:28-29).

I'm not trying to talk about Hebrews 10, but just using it as an example of what I'm trying to say here.

The fire is applied to the land in Hebrews 6. Since the land is what is burned, this parallels the curses on the land of promise in Deuteronomy 28–29. There we see that the land was cursed and not productive. We do know that a common practice in those days was to burn off the foilage on the land so that the land itself would be returned to productive use. It is my opinion that this is what the author of Hebrews is referencing in the 3rd warning passage (Hebrews 5:11 - 6:8).

That's how I see the warnings of fire in Hebrews. Also, the concept of loss of rewatrds appears again and again in hebrews, yet is mostly ignored by commentators.

FA

Apollos, bro.! :thumbsup: :BangHead: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

This is why I feel the "fire" and "burned" is in regards to our works, those being wood hay and stubble, and not hell fire.

Yep! :thumbsup:

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

This is where I am so far...

- The warnings are to believers.
- Though what is warned against are real possibilities, they are not to be expected of faithful Christians.
- There are dire consequences for disobedience after salvation.

"Yup!" "Yup!" and "Yup!" in that order to your three points. :thumbsup: :smilewinkgrin:

Ed

 

[swaimj]

Before we can determine how the writer of Hebrew's words apply to us we must determine what the writer of Hebrews was saying to his listeners.

The writer of Hebrews is writing to Jews who had confessed Christ, but were now considering forsaking Christ and returning to Jewish worship. He is clearly telling these Jews that, if they turn their backs upon Christ, they will face eternal damnation.

So, these Jews are either saved and they are being threatened with the loss of salvation.

...or they are not saved and are being threatened with eternal judgement if they do not accept Christ.

...or we don't know whether they are saved or not (and the writers seems to have his doubts), thus they are being warned of eternal judgement unless they continue in the faith that they have professed.

I think the third view is accurate and, having just preached through this section on Sunday nights, this is the way I applied the passages to our flock. I said something like this:

"It is possible that, in ten years, someone sitting here tonight, a faithful member of our church (after all, you are here on Sunday night!), might fall away from Christ. That is, you will stop worshipping Jesus, you will stop taking communion, you will sin willfully and continually and never confess it, you might become involved in drunkeness or pornography. If that occurs, I can offer no comfort that you are saved and you should not delude yourself with a false confidence. You see, the one who is justified shall continually live by faith. If we stop living by faith and we live in rebellion against God, we can have no confidence that we are God's child. Rather we should in fear that we are going to face God's wrath."

 

[webdog]

Sounds like Lordship salvation to me...false doctrine.

 

[swaimj]

Webdog, a couple of questions for you about the text.

Consider Heb 10:26: For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiveing the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacriefice for sins,

Can a person enter heaven if they have sins which are not atoned for and for which there is no atonement?

And then verse 27: but a fearful expectation of judgement, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.

If a person faces God with unatoned sins, will their judgement be of their works or will it be the condemnation of their soul? If a person experiences the "fury of fire" with sins that are not atoned for, will the fire not be the fire of hell?

These are tough verses, there is no doubt. Please don't accuse me of "Lordship salvation" or "false doctrine". I have wrestled with this text and come to a conclusion with a clear conscience. If I am wrong I hope I am humble enough to learn if you can show me otherwise. I welcome a discussion of the text and its meaning but I don't care much for name-calling.

 

[EdSutton]

Webdog, a couple of questions for you about the text.

Consider Heb 10:26: For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiveing the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacriefice for sins,

Can a person enter heaven if they have sins which are not atoned for and for which there is no atonement?

And then verse 27: but a fearful expectation of judgement, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.

If a person faces God with unatoned sins, will their judgement be of their works or will it be the condemnation of their soul? If a person experiences the "fury of fire" with sins that are not atoned for, will the fire not be the fire of hell?

It's easy to accuse me of "Lordship salvation" and "false doctrine", but it's tough to explain these verses. Please explain them.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=900982&postcount=37

I'm not Webdog, and this is my first try at sending any link but here is some of what I take this to mean, actually from another subject that touches on this, I believe.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Webdog, a couple of questions for you about the text.

Consider Heb 10:26: For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiveing the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacriefice for sins,

Can a person enter heaven if they have sins which are not atoned for and for which there is no atonement?

And then verse 27: but a fearful expectation of judgement, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.

If a person faces God with unatoned sins, will their judgement be of their works or will it be the condemnation of their soul? If a person experiences the "fury of fire" with sins that are not atoned for, will the fire not be the fire of hell?

These are tough verses, there is no doubt. Please don't accuse me of "Lordship salvation" or "false doctrine". I have wrestled with this text and come to a conclusion with a clear conscience. If I am wrong I hope I am humble enough to learn if you can show me otherwise. I welcome a discussion of the text and its meaning but I don't care much for name-calling.

"May I say" something? I may or may not believe something is "false doctrine", but I don't think that characterization is necessarily "name calling", be it either the interpretation of the 'poster' or the 'answerer'. And unfortunately as well as frankly, both you and I see enough "name calling" on this Board.

And there is a 'system' of doctrine that is 'described' and/or 'defined' as 'Lordship Salvation'. To identify something as 'Lordship salvation' is not name calling, either, any more than 'free grace', 'Baptist', or 'OSAS', to name three, are "name calling", especially when merely noted as to define a teaching or teachings or polity someone is proclaiming.

Regardless of how at ease one is with his or her conclusions, if one cannot 'define' this without it being assumed as 'name calling', how can distinctions and definitions be debated. I admit to being classified in the so-called "free grace" crowd, even though the term is redundant from the outset. I have also been 'accused', at times, of being an Arminian (I'm not!), a Calvinist (Nope!), a 'Dispensationalist' (Yep! I guess one out of three ain't too bad.), as characterizations, and a few more which I won't print, that were "name calling", and I was rightly annoyed, IMO. But for someone to merely disagree with my positions, or attempt to give a 'shorthand title' is not the same thing.

Anyway, ya'll have a good day tomorow, and just remember that if ol' Ben Franklin had got his way 225 years ago, the turkey would have been the National Bird, and we'd have long since eaten the eagle into extinction. :tongue3: :laugh:

Ed

 

[Faith alone]

I agree with you mostly. These warnings are definitely talking about rewards for believers. But I think we downplay the seriousness of the rewards. I think we also have a general misunderstanding of the nature of rewards themselves. We tend to think of reward only in a positive sense, while scripture teaches that there are negative rewards, or basically what we would call consequences for sin. Looking again at Hebrews 10, what we are talking about is called in verse 39 the saving of the soul.

Falling into the hands of a living God is a fearful thing indeed. While physical death is certainly a danger for disobedience (see Ananias and Sapphira), Jesus warned us that we should fear God who could destroy both body and soul in hell. As you say, this would not involve losing eternal salvation, but forfeiting rewards in the next life in order to secure temporary comfort in this life has it's own reward.

Matthew 16:24-27
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

James,

I agree with this - without reservation, FYI. I too agree that the "rewards" are not only positive in nature, but negative. I believe that there are degrees of punishment for those who do not trust in Christ as well.

And I also think that the "consequences" will be at least for the duration of the mellenium, perhaps for eternity.

FA

 

[Faith alone]

Good discussion, so far. And I do think that a thread on "Lordship salvation" would be fun at some point. But of course, we would need to carefully define it.

FA

 

[EdSutton]

Good discussion, so far. And I do think that a thread on "Lordship salvation" would be fun at some point. But of course, we would need to carefully define it.

FA

Try:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=1895

Ed

 

[swaimj]

Ed Sutton,

When I posted on this thread, I addressed the topic and a specific passage.

The reply which used the terms "Lorship Salvation" and "false doctrine" did no address my statement or advance any argument for a posititon. It characterized my comments without providing any reasoning. This is a discussion board, so why not discuss my comments rather than label my post with derogatory words (not that you did this).

If my comments stand without refutation then readers who do not post will have to consider their validity. In that sense I am glad I posted and my post serves its purpose. I am disappointed that no discussion occurred in reference to my comments, however.

 

[James_Newman]

Before we can determine how the writer of Hebrew's words apply to us we must determine what the writer of Hebrews was saying to his listeners.

The writer of Hebrews is writing to Jews who had confessed Christ, but were now considering forsaking Christ and returning to Jewish worship. He is clearly telling these Jews that, if they turn their backs upon Christ, they will face eternal damnation.

So, these Jews are either saved and they are being threatened with the loss of salvation.

...or they are not saved and are being threatened with eternal judgement if they do not accept Christ.

...or we don't know whether they are saved or not (and the writers seems to have his doubts), thus they are being warned of eternal judgement unless they continue in the faith that they have professed.

I think the third view is accurate and, having just preached through this section on Sunday nights, this is the way I applied the passages to our flock. I said something like this:

"It is possible that, in ten years, someone sitting here tonight, a faithful member of our church (after all, you are here on Sunday night!), might fall away from Christ. That is, you will stop worshipping Jesus, you will stop taking communion, you will sin willfully and continually and never confess it, you might become involved in drunkeness or pornography. If that occurs, I can offer no comfort that you are saved and you should not delude yourself with a false confidence. You see, the one who is justified shall continually live by faith. If we stop living by faith and we live in rebellion against God, we can have no confidence that we are God's child. Rather we should in fear that we are going to face God's wrath."

You have overlooked the fourth option, which is what we have been discussing (at least I have), namely that a person who is saved eternally by the blood of Christ may nevertheless be found worthy of punishment at the judgment seat of Christ. Christ either paid for my sins on the cross or He didn't. How can you expect a 'believer' to be able to live an overcoming Christian life if it is not firmly grounded on the faith that you have been redeemed, and you have been created a new creature? Abstaining from sin can be no assurance of salvation, if at some point down the road you may find yourself to be unsaved due to the fact that you 'stopped living by faith'. How were you ever living by faith if you weren't saved? If such a 'believer' wasn't living by faith, how do you know you are living by faith?

Consider Heb 10:26: For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiveing the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacriefice for sins,

Can a person enter heaven if they have sins which are not atoned for and for which there is no atonement?

All those sins have been atoned for as far as eternal security is concerned.
Hebrews 10:12-14
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.
In regard to the eternal penalty for sin, all our sins have been covered by the blood of Jesus and we have been made perfect.
Hebrews 10:17-18
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
Sacrifices have been done away with, because we have remission of our sins through the blood of Jesus.
Hebrews 10:29
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
This is not talking about an unbeliever who sneaked into church. If he was sanctified by the blood of the covenant, then he too was perfected forever by the one offering. There is no further sacrifice to be made. But that one offering does not excuse us from sin. It saves us from the lake of fire, but it will not save us from wrath at the judgment seat, and we are no longer allowed to kill a goat and call it even.

 

[swaimj]

a person who is saved eternally by the blood of Christ may nevertheless be found worthy of punishment at the judgment seat of Christ.

Worthy of punishment? Punishment for what? Sin? If Christ paid for his sin, how could he be liable for punishment? If Christ did not pay for his sin then how is he entering heaven in the first place?

I don't think your solution solved the problem of Hebrews 10.

Thanks for discussing the topic :wavey:

 

[James_Newman]

Worthy of punishment? Punishment for what? Sin? If Christ paid for his sin, how could he be liable for punishment? If Christ did not pay for his sin then how is he entering heaven in the first place?

I don't think your solution solved the problem of Hebrews 10.

Thanks for discussing the topic :wavey:

If Christ's sacrifice paid for our sins, how can we be chastened for them in this life? The atonement guaranteed that we would be kept from the lake of fire at the great white throne. It didn't guarantee that we would be crowned at the judgment seat of Christ. There are unconditional promises and there are conditional promises. A believer is promised that they will be raised up on the last day, regardless of works. But we are also promised that we will be rewarded for our works, whether they be good or bad. If we suffer we shall reign. If we deny Him, He also will deny us.

 

[swaimj]

If Christ's sacrifice paid for our sins, how can we be chastened for them in this life?

I am not familiar with the concept that believers are chastened for their sins in this life. Where do you find that?

 

[Allan]

If we deny Him, He also will deny us

This has abosutely NOTHING to with a believer as Christ will NEVER deny us!

 

[swaimj]

Yes, Allan, I agree. The verse continues, "if we are faithless, he remains faithful; he cannot deny himself."