Hebrews 6:4-6

Blammo,

That is what I said as seen below.

I fail to see a point.


Neither are our words the same as Greek words.

Hebrews 6:4-6 adunaton gar touV apax jwtisqentaV geusamenouV te thV dwreaV thV epouraniou kai metocouV genhqentaV pneumatoV agiou kai kalon geusamenouV qeou rhma dunameiV te mellontoV aiwnoV kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV

HHebrews 6:4 adunaton gar {FOR [IT IS] IMPOSSIBLE,} touV {THOSE} apax < {ONCE} fwtisqentaV {ENLIGHTENED,} geusamenouV te {AND [WHO] TASTED} thV {OF THE} dwreaV thV {GIFT} epouraniou {HEAVENLY,} kai {AND} metocouV {PARTAKERS} genhqentaV {BECAME} pneumatoV {OF [THE] SPIRIT} agiou {HOLY,}

kai {AND} kalon {[THE] GOOD} geusamenouV {TASTED} qeou {OF GOD} rhma {WORD} dunameiV te {AND [THE] WORKS OF} mellontoV {POWER OF [THE] TO COME} aiwnoV {AGE,}

kai {AND} parapesontaV {[WHO] FELL AWAY,} palin {AGAIN} anakainizein (5721) {TO RENEW} eiV {TO} metanoian {REPENTANCE,} anastaurountaV {CRUCIFYING} eautoiV {FOR THEMSELVES [AS THEY DO]} ton {THE} uion {SON} tou qeou {OF GOD,} kai {AND} paradeigmatizontaV {EXPOSING PUBLICLY}

How did I do? But what Bob fails to understand, is that the word order is changed in English. If we read this as it comes to us in Greek, it makes no sense.

This is why you place numbers in with the words to show order you must read the words. As I did before..

It reads like this...

When you come to a number, read 1 followed by 2...etc. This is how one reads a interlinear lexicon. Its not me that changes the order, its the english.

You are following a doctrine and not the text. The Greek text does not support your view.

No reason to guess...i do not have a better understanding of greek. But when its clear and all greek text agree...I'll go with the Greek.

If Bob would look in Strongs, Bob would see that James Strongs say in his book that the greek does not support this translation of "if". What Bob keeps doing is, look up the english word in strongs, and it will come up. But if you read his book you will see Strongs agrees with me.



As to the KJV...the facts were wrong.

More later...going to church

 

Now, these were translators. James says I fail to recognize the passage in Greek but he says we have to add the English Grammar. Well, that leaves it open to who ever the translator is, it is not an exact science.

I am saying that the Greek passage has conditionality, by the phraseology, and is implicit to use "if" as "kai".


I don't care what James or any one else says, from what I have had to study to defend my position shows me for sure that it is not an EXACT SCIENCE. If anyone don't acknowledge that they could be wrong they are not being truthful. All history of the translations, the first thing all the translators say is that there could be some mistakes, except of course, on BB.

Blammo there is a web site that translates it for him.
As you can see I can do the same thing only I just did the last part.

Hebrews 6:6{AND} {[WHO] FELL AWAY,} {TO RENEW}{TO} {REPENTANCE,} {CRUCIFYING} {FOR THEMSELVES [AS THEY DO]{THE}{SON}{OF GOD,} {AND} {EXPOSING PUBLICLY.}


Dr. Zane C. Hodges, Greek professor from Dallas Theological seminary, in "Defending the Majority Greek Text," explains regarding textual transmission that "copies of a text nearest the (original) autograph normally have the largest number of descendants. This means that the "further removed in the history of transmission a text becomes from its source, the less time it has to leave behind a large family of offspring. Hence, in a large tradition where a pronounced unity is observed between, let us say, eighty percent of the evidence, a very strong presumption is raised that this numerical preponderance is due to direct derivation from the very oldest sources. In the absence of any convincing contrary explanation, this presumption is raised to a very high level of probability indeed. Thus, the Majority (Greek) Text upon which the King James Version is based (1611 King James Version, King James Version II, and the "Literal Translation of the Bible" ISBN: 0913-573-42-6 by Jay P. Green Sr.) has in reality the strongest claim possible to be regarded as an authentic representation of the original text." (op. cit., p. 21)" [Excerpted from the BFT Monthly News Report V:2 - 2/14/1975 - Rev. D. A. Waite, Th.D., Ph.D.] We have over four thousand two hundred manuscripts extant representing and supporting this type of text that are 95% in agreement amongst themselves, differences being those of spelling and grammar. Today's Greek version is called "The New Testament - the Greek Text Underlying the English Authorized Version of 1611" by the Trinitarian Bible Society, 217 Kingston Road, London SW19 3NN, England. This is the text that I utilized for this work. (The New King James Version is not of the Textus Receptus, but of the shorter variety: It has 20,066 words missing when compared to the 1611 king James Version.)

 

You're right. You failed to see the point.

You started the whole "if" thing and ruined the point of the thread. Why can't we just stick with the English? You really think you are more equiped to translate the Greek than the translators of old? I don't.

So here is the point: I don't want to open this thread and read one more word about "if", Greek, Calvin, or your book. I want to read peoples thoughts on what the passage means. If you want to start a thread about "if" in the Bible translations section, do it. You will not see me there, cause I don't care about Greek, much less your knowledge of it. I read and study an English Bible.

The passage may be just as good a translation without the word "if", but I don't have any problem with it using the word "if", and smarter people than you and me put together didn't have a problem with the word "if" either.

For crying out loud!!! Does someone really need to be a Greek scholar to understand the Bible? If so, God help us, we are all under the authority of Greek scholars. The faithful English translations of the Bible have stood the test of time. They don't need any help from you. The work of translating has been completed. Give it a rest!!!

 

I agree Blammo;
Rest time.


"If God permits." - eanper, "If indeed". The second particle used with the conditional particle emphasizes that the proposed action is in spite of opposition; i.e., "if in spite of his opposition God permits." "If indeed after all" (A. T. Robertson).

Let us now read this passage of scripture again with an informed understanding: "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the age to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

This is an article from A T Robertson. An early SBC Seminar Theologian Teacher.

This is why the "if" is there:
I am saying that the Greek passage has conditionality, by the phraseology, and is implicit to use "if" as "kai".

 

When one builds a doctrine around one word, and the word is not there in the text...then it must be a problem. Bob posted translation, I can post just as many if not more translation that do NOT have the word. I have not gone the path, for all translation come from the greek.

You said...The English translations...where are more that have not been posted. We already have seen 3 others.


English translations.
NASB
Hebrews 6:6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

TEV
Hebrews 6:6 And then they abandoned their faith! It is impossible to bring them back to repent again, because they are again crucifying the Son of God and exposing him to public shame.

Rotherham
Hebrews 6:6 And who have fallen away, again, to be remoulding them into repentance; seeing they are again crucifying unto themselves the Son of God, and holding him up as an example.

BBE
Hebrews 6:6 And then let themselves be turned away, it is not possible for their hearts to be made new a second time; because they themselves put the Son of God on the cross again, openly shaming him.

GodsWord
Hebrews 6:6 "Yet, they have deserted Christ. They are crucifying the Son of God again and publicly disgracing him. Therefore, they cannot be led a second time to God."

Holman NT
Hebrews 6:6 and who have fallen away, because, to their own harm, they are recrucifying the Son of God and holding Him up to contempt.

ISV NT
Hebrews 6:6 and who have fallen away, as long as they continue to crucify to themselves the Son of God and to expose him to public ridicule.

ASV
Hebrews 6:6 and [then] fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Darby
Hebrews 6:6 and have fallen away, crucifying for themselves [as they do] the Son of God, and making a show of [him].

Wey NT
Hebrews 6:6 it is impossible, I say, to keep bringing them back to a new repentance, for, to their own undoing, they are repeatedly crucifying the Son of God afresh and exposing Him to open shame.

Young
Hebrews 6:6 and having fallen away, again to renew [them] to reformation, having crucified again to themselves the Son of God, and exposed to public shame.

MKJV (Green)
Hebrews 6:6 and who have fallen away; it is impossible, I say, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify the Son of God afresh to themselves and put Him to an open shame.

LITV (Green) Hebrews 6:6 and having fallen away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.

Douay-Rheims
Hebrews 6:6 And are fallen away: to be renewed again to penance, crucifying again to themselves the Son of God and making him a mockery


GREEK

(Greek NT - Byz./Maj.)
Hebrews 6:6 kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV

(Greek NT - W-H )
Hebrews 6:6 kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV

(Greek NT - Textus Rec.)
Hebrews 6:6 kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV


I have asked to show me one greek text where it is found so far NOTHING.

I highjack the thread based on a false claim. If Bob does not agree, he needs only post where I am wrong, or drop it. If I carry a highjack it is with Bob.

To this point I have address everything tossed at me. Because you do not like the facts, you attach me. That is fine, but one easy way to shut me up is to post facts that over rule my claims. This has not been done. Not just me, but most Bible translators. You are ruled by your your doctrine.

One should never be afraid of the truth. Even when it does not make sense to you. God is the truth, and we can be sure the truth is always in God.


As to running me off.....

The last time I checked this is a public BB. The "if" was brought up by your buddy. He has failed to support it. This was well in lines with the rules of the debate. Being you do not like it, maybe you have support you can post. Put up...or.....

 

Must be all his friends for I haven't heard of over half of them. Who cares? Now, he has resorted to what he has been accusing me of and that is the translations of others.

 

My bad,
the correct Latin phrase (adapted into the English) is:

reductio ad absurdum

meaning 'reduction to absurdity'

definition:
Logic the proof of a proposition by showing
its opposite to be an obvious falsity or self-contradiciton,
or
the disproof of a proposition by showing its consequesnces to be
impossible or absurd when carried to the logical conclusion

Heb 6:4-5 (KJV1611 Edition):
For it is impossible for
those who were once inlightned,
and
haue tasted of the heauenly gift,
and
were made partakers of the holy Ghost,
5 And
haue tasted the good word of God,
and
[have tasted] the powers of the world to come;

IMHO
SAVED = those who were once inlightned,
and
haue tasted of the heauenly gift,
and
were made partakers of the holy Ghost,
5 And
haue tasted the good word of God,
and
[have tasted] the powers of the world to come;

So we can read the whole argument somewhat easier
if we say:


Heb 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were SAVED;
6 If they shall fall away,
to renue them againe vnto repentance:
seeing they crucifie to themselues the Sonne of God
afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Easier to see is that those who were saved,
should they fall away from grace,
then they can't be resaved.


BTW, the Doctrine of Security of the Believer doesn't
hinge on the 'if' starting verse 6.

John 3:16 (KJV1611 Edition):
For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne:
that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish,
but haue euerlasting life.

Everlasting life that stops (i.e. gettin unsaved) does not
qualify as 'everlasting life'.

Does anybody want to have a topic on:
What should I be doing now that i'm saved
to show i've been saved? GOOD WORKS would make
a better title, for it is good works that is what
we should be doing now that we have been saved
and can be SURE WE REALLY ARE SAVED.

 

You do not believe the Greek, and now you want to ban the Greek. Was said...Only English...

How about the 1st English translation??

Wycliffe New Testament

Nope..not there.

If its not in the 1st English translation, and its not in the Greek, someone added it.

 

I agree. No one should fear the truth...it will set you free.

 

Quote:
6:4 But it is impossible, that thei that ben onys liytned, and `han tastid also an heuenly yifte, and ben maad parceneris of the Hooli Goost,

6:5 and netheles han tastid the good word of God, and the vertues of the world to comynge, and ben slidun fer awei,

6:6 that thei be renewid eftsoone to penaunce. Whiche eftsones crucifien to hem silf the sone of God, and han to scorn.


Nope..not there.

If its not in the 1st English translation, and its not in the Greek, someone added it.

Can you understand it. It was crying out to add the "if" and a whole lot more if Wycliffe actually was capable of understanding Greek, but you win James, All those who have gone before us were wrong and Jauthor is right. God help us!

The "Early Version" of the "Wycliffe Bible", hand-printed about 1382, has long been criticized by Bible historians as too literal, often unintelligible, cumbersome, at best a deeply flawed 1st attempt. In fact, much of the Gospels and the Apocalypse were transferred without significant change from the "Early Version" to the "Later Version", and closely resemble the "Wycliffe-Purvey" text.

So this is where you got your information about Greek?

 

I don't blame you at all. After spilling that kind of nonsense on a thread, I would run to!:thumbs:

 

Ha! Ha! Well said! I love the spirit among us! Praise God for discussion without malice!

 

Yes…I’m the only one. I’m the lone one that feels this way. Crazy old James. Oops. I forgot about the Greek. Crazy old James and his silly Greek. All the Greek text? Yes all the Greek text…just James and his silly Greek text. How dare him!!

No English translations. Oops..for got, only most of the English Translations. Ok..its James and those silly Greek text and most of the translations.

But the new translations changed it. Yeah..thats the ticket. It has always been like that till the new ones came along.

Oops..I forgot about the 1st English translation.

Ok…so the its only James and his silly Greek text and most all of the English translation along with the 1st English translation. But that is it.

Opps..forgot about Vines… He says its not there. Strongs says its not there. Young says no…not there.

But other then that…no one James. You are a loner. You are going against everyone else James…come on Man.

Oops..I forgot about todays for most Greek expert…Wuest. Lets look at what he has to say…”and have fallen away”.

But still its only James and those silly old Greek text most of the English translations, as well as the 1st English and Strongs, Young, Vine, and Wuest. But that’s it!!! So face it James you’re a loner on this. No Commentary supports you.

Oops..I for got about Jamieson, Fausset and Brown.
6. If--Greek, "And (yet) have fallen away

And oh yes..Barns Notes.
If they shall fall away. Literally, "and having fallen away.


Smith….
So it doesn't mean that if I falter or if I fall or if I fail that I'm out, that God puts me out and I have no hope of redemption. It's impossible that I might be renewed unto repentance.

Piper
In spite of all these blessings and experiences, this person then falls away (verse 6). That is, he falls away from Christ and the Spirit and the word and the powers of the age to come. He turns his back on the worth of these great realities and goes after other things with his heart. The effect of this is to re-crucify Christ and put him to open shame

Gil Rugh
The question is how they react to the truth, and verse 6 gives us an indication to their reaction; 'and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame.'

Dr Wilson…
"There is no if in the Greek in this place--' having fallen away.'"

Clark…
…..HAVE fallen away. Nevertheless, our translators, following Beza, who without any authority from ancient MSS. has inserted in his version the word si, if, have rendered this clause, IF they fall away, that this text might not appear to contradict the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. But as no translator should take upon him to add to or alter the Scriptures, for the sake of any favourite doctrine,….


And lets not forget The Pulpit Commentary by no less then 8 writers. Not to be left out, The Bible Knowledge Commentary says it is not there

But still james..you are on your own here…you big loner.

 

James, is there anyone with you at this time. You are not alone I hope!!! Call a medic or somebody! You shouldn't be on here James its too much for you. Now, just settle down and get you a nice warm glass of milk, put your feet up and try to put this all out of your mind. Maybe you get well if you just take it easy. I am worried about you! I sure hope they don't have to put you away somewhere, man I don't know who I would drive out of their mind next.

Had some good laughs myself.

 

I somehow knew from the start that this would end this way. I have laughed my self crazy reading this Greek debate. I needed this. Ha! Ha!

 

Then according to your logic the passage is meant for no one, for the saved have nothing to fear, and the lost in the passage cannot be brought back. Why not save ink and leave it out, unless it actually does have serious import for all its readers.

 

Bob,

Please be respectful...

Then you gave us a bad link. I followed the link and it was a google thread. I clicked on the first "find" (link) and it led to a discussion of Colossians 1:23a, with the precise quote you mentioned.

Now I respect AT Robertson. Doesn't mean that I agree with everything he says.

BTW, I don't base what I believe or how I view an exegesis on WHO makes the argument. But knowing someone, like Dr. Wallace or AT Robertson, helps give me confidence that it's sound logic. I have grammars by both those gentlemen and use them regularly.

OK, I googled what you had in quotes below and found that article by Robertson. But it was just an article on "falling away" from the faith - apostasy - NOT on Hebrews 6 specifically. Now if we look at the quote you attributed to AT Robertson on Hebrews 6 in that article, we see that it is actually about Col. 1:23, as I said before:

Bob,

The quote you gave had nothing to do with Hebrews 6, but about Col. 1:23a. When you blast people, please get your facts right first. Please point out the "prepositions in compound" in Hebrews 6:4-6. There are none. Where in Hebrews 6:4-6 does the writer talk about continuing?

Now let's drop this whole thing on "if." As has been pointed out, we're talking about the Greek, not English. In English, the use of "if" shows conditionality. I personally do not see conditionality there, but at this point let's just pursue the rest of your argument.
:wavey:
Thx,

FA

I'll make some comments on your analysis in another quote.

FA

 

Faith Alone;
This article is from A T Robertson and you asked for a quote from him supporting the "if", so I gave you this one. If you can't read it then I can't help that. I even highlighted where it is Hebrews and covers 6:6. After I give you what YOU said you needed to be convinced, then you talk down the article itself from A T Robertson and say now that you don't believe everything he wrote or stood for and you are the one who gave me his name. So, live with it!!!!


Moving on to our last section of scripture we will see revealed the mechanics of falling away from the faith - Hebrews 5:11-6:12. Notice that these Christians start out being rebuked for their spiritual neglect and resultant immaturity - the precursor for falling away - and then are admonished about the danger of falling away and its consequences.

”Of whom we have many things to say, but will be hard to speak, seeing you are slow of hearing. For when you ought to now be teachers, you have need that one teach you again the basic principles of the truth of God; and are become such as have need of milk and not of strong meat. For everyone that uses milk is unskillful in the Word of righteousness: for he is a baby. But strong meat belongs to them that are of full age (mature), even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Therefore, leaving the rudiments of the doctrine of Christ, LET US GN TO MATURITY; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgement. And this we will do, IF GOD PERMITS.

”FOR IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THOSE WHO WERE ONCE AND FOR ALL ENLIGHTENED, AND HAVE TASTED OF THE HEAVENLY GIFT, AND WERE MADE PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND HAVE TASTED THE GOOD WORD OF GOD, AND THE POWERS OF THE AGE TO COME, IF THEY SHALL FALL AWAY, TO RENEW THEM AGAIN UNTO REPENTANCE, SEEING THEY CRUCIFY TO THEMSELVES THE SON OF GOD AFRESH, AND PUT HIM TO AN OPEN SHAME.

”For the earth which drinks in the rain that comes often upon it, and brings forth plants suitable for them by whom it is dressed, receives blessing from God: But that which bears thorns and briers is rejected (no useable fruit), and is near to being cursed; whose end is to be burned. But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, THINGS THAT BELONG TO SALVATION, though we speak like this. For God is not unrighteous that he would forget your work and labor of love, which you have showed towards his name, in that you have ministered to the saints, AND CONTINUE TO DO SO. AND WE DESIRE THAT EVERY ONE OF YOU DO SHOW THE SAME DILIGENCE TO THE FULL ASSURANCE OF HOPE UNTO THE END; THAT YE BE NOT SLOTHFUL, BUT FOLLOWERS OF THEM WHO THROUGH FAITH AND ENDURANCE INHERIT THE PROMISES.”

"Let us go on to maturity” - pherometha, present passive subjunctive of phero, meaning to carry, and in the passive, to be carried. The subjunctive is cohortative, e.g. “let us be carried,” and the passive gives the thought of personal surrender to an active influence (Westcott). It is not a matter of the learners being carried by their instructors, but of both being carried forward together by God. It is a “divine pass” implying the agency of God (Hughes). Better rendered, “Let us be carried on to maturity.”

"If God permits.” - eanper, “If indeed”. The second particle used with the conditional particle emphasizes that the proposed action is in spite of opposition; i.e., “if in spite of his opposition God permits.” “If indeed after all” (A. T. Robertson).

The writer of this letter to the Hebrews desires the spiritual health of the recipients of his letter (this also includes us, now that we have it in our possession), and he is willing to reinculcate the badly neglected souls of Christians with truths that will bring them to a state of spiritual maturity. Here the addressed believer’s association with the things of God is experiential. The general thought of these emphasized portions of scripture is that the believer in a deteriorated state of spirituality, if he is willing, may be allowed to be carried forth to spiritual maturity by him, others, and God, in spite of his own past irresponsible neglect of spiritual matters; but this would only be possible without the opposition of God; for only God knows for sure if their deteriorated state is due to falling away into unbelief. “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” “And to him who has will more be given, but to him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” That is why the following scripture begins with “For”, for it connects the condition which follows under which God would oppose the reinculcation of those who have displayed spiritual deterioration with spiritual truths; for if they had fallen away into unbelief, it would be throwing Christian pearls before swine.

The justice of God would oppose the reinstatement of anyone who has fallen away into unbelief, for that would be to insult and humiliate the One who died in his place. He paid for us with his life once, and he is not able to, nor can he do it, again. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” Believe again on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved again? I think not! It would be like drinking a soda pop. Once you have consumed it you can’t consume it a second time because it has already been consumed. Swallowing implies commitment.

apax means “once for all”. The verb for “enlightened” means to illuminate. In other words, God has once and for all enlightened the eyes and spiritual understanding of this person, and it was a completed transaction. There is no doubt about it that this person was a saved individual.

The verb “tasting” of the heavenly gift expresses a real and conscious enjoyment of the blessings apprehended in its true character (Westcott).

metouxos, “partaker”, means a sharer, or a participant. genethentas, “and were made,” means to come into existence, to be created, to exist by creation, established, to come into a particular state or condition, be changed or converted, to be born. In other words, this person was a new creation in Christ, was born again, and had the indwelling Holy Spirit - and here I emphasize the word "had," meaning that it has departed from him due to his change of heart towards his God.

He “tasted” the good word of God and the powerful deeds of the age which is to come. Again as above, a real and conscious enjoyment of the blessings apprehended in its true character.

”Falling away”, parapesontas, means to fall by the side of, to fall off or away from, or make defection from. Again, one can’t fall away or defect from a place he has never been; so I don’t care what kind of theological gymnastics any Bible scholar may go through to make the point of his doctrine of eternal security, this passage, and others like it clearly teach that believers can and do defect from the faith, and in doing so, throw away their salvation to their own irremedial loss.

palin anakainidzein, a present active infinitive, means to renew again, to make new again, referring to continuous or repeated action. These words refer back to the words, “For it is impossible.” It is impossible for such a person to be again renewed unto repentance.

anastaurountas, present active participle accusative plural masculine, eautois, dative of advantage, “crucifying again for themselves.” The participle is causal showing why it is impossible for such people to be brought to a place of repentance and begin anew for their own advantage.

Let us now read this passage of scripture again with an informed understanding: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the age to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”

This is an article from A T Robertson. :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead:

 

Bob, actually I like this argument. Because what Hebrews is talking about is someone who is not in a condition in which they can be "renewed to a repentant attitude." I agree with this. It would take God's doing (perhaps through trials) IOT bring the person to a state at which they might repent. Just one more comment, then I gotta go: We are not saved by repenting, but by believing.

FA

 

Bob,

No, it is not a quote by AT Robertson about the "if" in Hebrews 6. It's about Col. 1:23a - as part of an article covering apostasy. Now, please answer my question:

Please point out the "prepositions in compound" in Hebrews 6:4-6 that you say that ATR is talking about. There are none. Where in Hebrews 6:4-6 does the writer talk about continuing?

Thx,

FA