S.T.S. 1.5 [Main Article]

“ . . . On the Nature of True Saving Faith" [pt. 2]
(the truth about “falling from grace”)

I’d like to begin this follow-up edition with a question that many of us have probably wrestled with . . . “What about those ‘Christians’ who have completely abandoned their faith? Surely they won’t inherit the Kingdom of God, will they? How can they still call themselves ‘saved’?” This could also take another form (among others) . . . “Those constantly rebellious teenagers who were killed last week ‘walked the aisle’ and said ‘the prayer’ (10 years ago in V.B.S.), so they’re certainly headed for Heaven. They’re going to have a lot of growing to do when they get there, however, as they showed no signs of their salvation here in this life.” Were you able to see the same core assumptions involved above, although the peripheral matters were altered slightly?

My brothers and sisters, there is an extremely faulty, though commonplace, assumption lurking within the very questions themselves; this being the idea that anyone who professes to be a Christian must be a true Christian indeed (period . . . no questions asked). After all, “the aisle” has been walked and “the prayer” has been prayed! Shouldn’t those things do the trick?? I mean, if we could just get them to pray this simple prayer, regardless of whether there is a recognition of God’s holiness, man’s depravity/inadequacy, God’s provision in Christ the God-man, and man’s need to be rescued from his plight, then we’re good to go; the end justifies the means, right?? Absolutely not!! Where in the Scriptures did we come up with such nonsense?

Oh, that we would “rediscover the Book of the Law,” as did Hilkiah during the days of King Josiah (2 Kings 22-23). We would do well to pray God’s mercy on us for neglecting the whole counsel of his Word, particularly whereas the doctrine of salvation is concerned. May the Lord forgive us for seeking to placate our associations with extravagant numbers as we frantically seek to keep up with a “baptized” version of the Jones’s while Christianized bait & switch methodologies are employed and rewarded. In our day of pragmatism, please learn this lesson: “means,” not merely “ends,” will be tested on that Day according to their conformity to the Scriptures. There is no excuse for the enormous lack of Biblical knowledge that pervades the Body of Christ today. Lack of this knowledge has hindered, and even destroyed, the testimony of the people of God in times past, and can also do so once again.

In short, the answer to the scenarios at the top is that we can only conclude that the subjects described were never saved to begin with. The right question, therefore, is not whether someone can “lose” their salvation, but whether they were ever truly saved at all. When it comes to the issue of eternal security/perseverance of the saints (or the “preservation of the saints by the Father through the Savior,” as I like to call it), the overwhelming testimony of the Bible on this aspect of salvation is clear -- those who have been saved will never be lost. Read that last sentence once more. Although Jesus saves completely (Hebrews 7:25) and has made perfect forever (Hebrews 10:13) those who hear His word with faith, the author of the letter to the Hebrews exhorts the readers to prove the faith they profess by their perseverance. Christ Himself first pointed this out so beautifully when He, referring to true Believers, stated: “I give them eternal life, and they shall NEVER perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand . . .” [John 10:28]. Therefore, it should be very apparent - Jesus declared that no one who has ever received eternal life will ever lose it. Once again, read that last sentence very closely.

In a moment, I’d like to tackle an oft’-used “proof-text,” used many times by those who would take issue with what I’m now teaching. Before doing so, however, a few words regarding Biblical hermeneutics (the field of sound interpretation) would be most helpful to the subject matter at hand. When seeking to rightly interpret and/or exegete any passage of Scripture, the following general principles should be applied:

(1.) The Contextual Principle – What do the surrounding verses contribute to the
understanding of this text?

(2.) The Historical Principle – What is the history of the book and its subjects?

(3.) The Canonical Principle – What does the rest of the Bible have to say on this
subject; that is, what does the whole counsel of Scripture contribute to the
discussion?

(4.) The “Cloudy-Clear” Principle - Always interpret the “cloudy” in light of the
“clear” (or the “unknown” within the shadow of the “known”); & . . .

(5.) The “Read-More” Principle - Never read a Bible verse!!! You actually heard
me correctly! When dealing with questionable/seemingly ambiguous passages
(or any passage, for that matter), we need to read a paragraph at least . . . &
probably more. On an important note related to this principle, don’t ever
memorize a verse apart from its larger context. Doing so will always come
back to haunt you at a time when “haunting” is the last thing that you need.
Please note that I did not say that you had to actually memorize paragraphs
(though certainly plausible), but just that you should be familiar with the text
of the memorized verse.

Remember . . . context – context – context!! Oh yes, did I mention context?!?!
If you would seek to understand and exercise these basic principles on a regular basis, you would build your spiritual muscle and discernment capacity like nobody’s business (and you would prove yourself to be a rare gem in today’s dense rough). It is essential that serious students of the Scriptures develop at least these basic skills. Otherwise, you leave yourself with no firm root to establish you and anchor you when the various winds of doctrine blow in your direction (and they are many these days). Aren’t you sick and tired of being blown here and there by every wind of doctrine? Most Christians don’t seem to be, at least if their actions have anything to contribute to that question.

Before us now lies a great opportunity to put some of these skills to work as we sort out the difficult meaning of a hard passage. Many times, Hebrews 6:4-6 is confidently quoted as a proof-text to provide Biblical justification to a true believer losing his or her salvation. As we will see in a moment, to use this passage in this manner will lead to major problems in the cohesiveness of Scripture. Admittedly, however, these are some of the hardest verses to understand in the entire Bible. With that said, let’s dive right in. For your convenience, I’ve included the referenced-passage below:

Hebrews 6:4-6 (E.S.V.)

[4] For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, [5] and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, [6] if they then fall away, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

For starters, many Scripture passages make it unmistakably clear that “true” salvation is eternal [cf. John 10:27-29; Rom. 8:28-30; Phil. 1:6; & 1 Pet. 1:4-5]. The Holy Scriptures are rife with references to the believer being “preserved,” “kept,” “sealed,” “hid,” etc. The new life that we have in Christ Jesus is indeed “everlasting.” I ask you to recall hermeneutical principles 3 & 4 above in light of the preceding statements. Moreover, those believers (though truly sincere) who want to make these verses mean that believers can truly lose their salvation will have to admit it would then also say that one could never get it back again. To see what I mean by that, read our passage again very carefully. On the contrary, these verses more likely refer to “Christianized” (yet still unregenerate) Jews who were apt to “tuck tail and run” when the fires of persecution were fanned. Other synonyms that could be substituted for these folks are “tares” (see Matthew 13:26-30; 36-43), “religious-but-lost” church members (and they aren’t few), “apostates,” etc., etc. For these “professed” Christians who absolutely refuse to progress in the faith, there are some woeful and troubling consequences, as well as a distinct prognosis of their true spiritual condition.

To whom is the writer speaking??? Surely these are genuine believers, right? Not necessarily so!

Hebrews (a masterpiece on the “Superiority of Christ”) offers a fair amount of information about the original recipients and their situation. Confusion abounds as to the subjects to whom the writer of Hebrews is writing: whether saved or lost, particularly Jew or Gentile, carnal or spiritual, and whether the situation presented is literal or hypothetical. The original readers look to have been familiar with certain concepts and imagery drawn from the Old Testament (i.e., they were interested in the Old Testament sanctuary, sacrificial system, and priesthood). They had not heard the Gospel (Good News) directly from Jesus, but from apostles (2:3), had faced previous persecution (10:32-34), and were facing present persecution, including expulsion from “familiar” Jewish institutions (13:12,13). They were in danger of falling away, perhaps fearing death (2:14-18), although their faith had not yet led to martyrdom (12:4). Drawing these features together, we can surmise that the recipients were professing Jewish Christians of the Dispersion (the scattering of Jews outside Palestine). Apparently the temple was still standing and its sacrificial rituals were being performed (10:2,3,11). Perhaps the situation is that of the persecutions under Nero (c. A.D. 64). In that case, the suffering mentioned in 10:32-34 could have been caused by the edict of Claudius, which expelled Jews from Rome in A.D. 49 (Acts 18:2). Subject to suffering and shame for their confession of Jesus, stripped of the familiar and visible institutions of organized Jewish religion, and confused by the hidden character of Jesus’ glory (veiled in suffering when He was on earth and now hidden in Heaven), the readers are tempted to turn away from the faith (10:38,39), to fall into unbelief and so to give up their pilgrimage towards God’s rest and God’s city (4:1,2,11; 11:10, 14-16; 13:14).

The highly regarded New Commentary on the Whole Bible by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, along with some miscellaneous commentary notes from pastor-teacher John MacArthur, will help to guide us through these deep theological waters. Please keep reading . . .

“A proper interpretation of this epistle requires the recognition that it addresses 3 distinct groups of “Jewish” people: (1) Believers; (2) unbelievers who were intellectually convinced of the Gospel; and (3) unbelievers who were attracted by the Gospel and the person of Christ but who had reached no final conviction about Him. Failure to acknowledge these groups leads to interpretations inconsistent with the rest of Scripture (and “the Scriptures cannot be broken,” according to our Master). The primary group addressed was Hebrew Christians who suffered rejection and persecution by fellow Jews (10:32-34), although none had yet been martyred (12:4). The letter was written to give them encouragement and confidence in Christ, a far superior (spotless/unblemished) High-Priest and sacrifice. They were likely an immature group of Believers who were tempted to hold on to the symbolic, but spiritually powerless, rituals and traditions of Judaism. The second group addressed was Jewish unbelievers who were convinced of the Gospel’s truth but who had not placed their faith in Jesus Christ as their own Savior and Lord. They were intellectually persuaded yet spiritually uncommitted. These folks are addressed in such passages as 2:1-3; 6:4-6; 10:26-29; and 12:15-17. The third group addressed was Jewish unbelievers who were not convinced of the Gospel’s truth but had some exposure to it. Chapter 9 is largely devoted to them.”

From the “Introduction to Hebrews”, pp. 1895-1896
The MacArthur Study Bible
Word Publishing, 1997

“These verses are difficult to interpret because it is not fully clear who the writer is speaking of and what it means to renew them again unto repentance. Some say the people are Jewish Christians who, desiring to return to Judaism (in light of an increasingly hostile atmosphere), would lose their salvation. Still others say that the people are ‘professing’ Christians who ‘apostatize’ from the faith (again, in light of growing persecution) and thus show that they were never really believers (see 1 John 2:19 and the case of Simon Magus in Acts 8). Those who apostatize (fall away) from the faith do so willfully; it is therefore impossible for these people to repent (Morris) – which, of course, means that it is impossible for these people to obtain salvation. Lindsell said, ‘Whatever view is taken about the state of an apostate prior to his apostasy, the outcome is the same. Whoever openly and consciously rejects Jesus Christ is unregenerate even if he seemed to have been saved earlier. The Arminian would say he had lost his salvation; the Calvinist that he never had it. Either way, the result is identical.”

New Commentary on the Whole Bible
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown



Now, let’s unpack this suitcase piece by piece . . .


Once Enlightened – This speaks of increased awareness brought about by the truth of the Gospel; by the light of Christ. This, by sheer necessity, is inevitably accompanied by some degree of intellectual perception (but not “reception,” per se). We should not prematurely equate “enlightenment” with salvation (see John 1:9).

Tasted of the Heavenly Gift – This indicates at least an initial, surface-level experience of or exposure to God’s gift in Christ (see John 4:10). Many Jews during the Lord’s earthly ministry experienced the blessings of Heaven that He brought – healings, deliverance from demons, eating the food He created miraculously (John 6), etc. Again, however, experience should not be viewed as the equivalent of salvation in the final analysis.

Partakers of the Holy Spirit – “Shared in the Holy Spirit” (NIV); without faith, however, proximity to God in the fellowship of His covenant people is no blessing; rather, it subjects apostates to more severe judgment . . . be so very careful as to what you expose yourselves to, for further exposure creates further accountability/responsibility. The concept of partaking is used in 3:1; 3:14; & 12:8 of a relationship which believers have; however, the context must be the final determining factor. If I said: “Boy, that was a gay affair,” what would I be conveying? Remember . . . context – context – context!

Tasted the Good Word of God – They were repeating the sins of those who died in the wilderness [after seeing] the miracles of God performed through Moses and Aaron and [after hearing] the voice of God at Sinai. If you’ll recall, these Israelites were supposed to go into the Promised Land, but then refused to enter. This should tell us something big about lost people; namely, that the lack of evidence isn’t as problematic in the life of the unregenerate man so much as the suppression of evidence. The previous comment should not be taken to mean that there is no “evidence” for the Christian faith or that the study or presentation of “evidence” is futile or sinful. There is an appropriate place for those endeavors, but a detailed explanation of that place is not the purpose of this issue. The New Commentary on the Whole Bible goes on to say that “a person can experience many of the same blessings as genuine Christians do and then later reject the faith. Such rejection is called apostasy.” Like Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24) or Judas Iscariot, these Hebrews had not yet been regenerated in spite of all they had heard and seen (cf. Matthew 13:3-9; John 6:60-66).

The Powers of the World to Come – Most obviously, the signs and wonders that accompanied the introduction of the Gospel. We should take note here that these folks are not described with any terms that the Scriptures apply only to Believers (holy, born again, righteous, or saints).

[It’s Impossible] If They “Fall Away,” to Renew Them Again Unto Repentance – If those who toy with Christianity become unsettled and decide against Christ, they are no longer undecided, and their personalities will likely crystallize around that decision. After crossing this point of no return, it can be said that they would not repent (and one could see why). Those who sinned against Christ in such a way had (and still have) no hope of restoration or forgiveness (cf. 2:2,3: 10:26,27; 12:25). The reason is that they rejected Him with full knowledge of what they were doing. With full revelation they rejected the truth, concluding the opposite of the truth about Christ, and thus had no hope of ever being saved. They could never have had more knowledge than they had when they rejected it. To reiterate an earlier point, those who want to make this verse mean that Believers can lose salvation will have to admit that it would then also say that one could never get it back again . . . “twice lost – always lost.”

They Crucify to Themselves the Son of God Afresh – By their final decision, they join the side of those who put Him to death; that is, by renouncing their faith in Christ, they (by default) declare that Christ’s cross is not a holy (justified/valid) sacrifice for other’s sins, but rather the deserved execution of a guilty criminal (10:29). They have concluded that Jesus should have been crucified, and they stand with His enemies. When the work of Christ is consciously rejected and spurned, what other sacrifice/remedy is left for sins (see John 14:6 and Acts 4:12).

IS THE SITUATION IN VERSE 6 HYPOTHETICAL OR LITERAL???

Only after finally realizing – in light of the larger testimony of Scripture – that the situation of verse 6 is presented in the context of apostasy did I settle on the literal interpretation. The hypothetical is simply not clear, making that rendering even more suspect. Upon much reflection, I can say that these verses are literally talking about people who are “tares” (see Matthew 13:26-30, 36-43). In other words, they look like Christians on the outside, but have never been born again on the inside. This thoroughly Biblical theme makes the religious-but-lost concept even more critical. If the falling from grace crowd would ever fully realize and accept the extent of the religious-but-lost problem, it could potentially solve this debate. They would see the multitudes of apostates not as having lost their salvation, but having never had it in the first place. At the risk of sounding repetitive, the subjects of Hebrews 6:4-6 were unbelievers who had been exposed to God’s redemptive truth, and perhaps had even made a profession of faith, but had not exercised genuine saving faith. As in Hebrews 10:26, the reference once again is to apostates (“tares” who apostatized/fell away during tough times), not to genuine Believers who are often incorrectly thought to lose their salvation because of their sins.

In conclusion, the false doctrine often labeled “falling from grace” comes in large part from a misunderstanding of this text (although there are more) and that is very unfortunate. The teaching of eternal security has strong Biblical justification; as such, it is not merely a “denominational darling,” per se, invented to make excuses for licentious living or to soothe our lives as some sort of “fire-insurance policy” alone. This is not simply a narrow-minded Baptist or Presbyterian dogma that we blindly hold-on to for the sake of tradition . . . God help us if that’s the case!! Since I am an “equal opportunity picker” (I stole that one from my Pastor), there is much modification that needs to be made on the parts of both your avg. Baptist (weak/carnal version of preservation called “once saved, always saved”) and those who take a position against a valid/clear Biblical teaching. I have abandoned the frequently heard statement, “once saved, always saved” (as it can be sorely misleading) in honor of a more sound Biblical theology and phraseology. If there was even a possibility that a true Christian’s salvation could abruptly end, the Word itself is fatally flawed and the hope of living forever in Christ is conditional on the works of humanity (our ship would be “sunk” every week if that were the case). Brethren, as you struggle with and handle the revealed Word of our Lord with much fear and trembling when you rise up, when you lie down, and when you walk in the way, I pray the Lord would be your Guide.

In the August 2005 issue of Scratching the Surface, my great friend and accountability partner, Daniel Copeland, will come on board to do a little “surface scratching,” as he tackles the issue of rightly handling the Word of truth in greater detail than I have here. I’ve seen the bulk of that article already and am thankfully excited for what our Lord has in store for you all in S.T.S. 1.6. To God be the glory, great things He has done!

You’re bound to slip “on-board,” but you won‘t fall “over-board!”