around us which assist us in our conflict with the world, the flesh, and the devil; we are surrounded on all sides by the supernatural. καὶ παραπεσόντας : and have fallen away. Παραπίπτω is to swerve, to fall into sin, here to apostatise. The statement is not to be understood conditionally as in the Authorised Version, but is a continuation of the description of the case stated. Those alluded to had tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, and had fallen away. Every sin is a falling away (парάптшμα); but the case here alluded to is evidently not a partial, but an entire falling away-complete apostasy. No gross sin is here alluded to, or any partial defection. Many have thus fallen away who have been afterwards fully restored. As Calvin remarks: "The Apostle speaks not here of theft, or perjury, or murder, or drunkenness, or adultery; but he refers to a total defection or falling away from the Gospel, when a sinner offends God not in some one thing, but entirely renounces His grace." Nor is it an inadvertent fall that is here spoken of, as when a man is surprised into the commission of some heinous wickedness, but wilful and deliberate apostasy. The words are similar to those used by the author in the parallel passage: "If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth" (Heb. x. 26). The man not only made a profession of religion, but he was spiritually illuminated; he had experienced a sense of the blessings of the Gospel and the influences of the Spirit; he had felt the consolations of the word of God, and his soul had been powerfully impressed with divine things; yet, notwithstanding all this experience, he had fallen from the faith. The Hebrews addressed in this Epistle were in peculiar danger of apostasy. They were strongly tempted to renounce Christianity, and to relapse into Judaism and open opposition to Christ; and therefore they required this special warning. So, also, in a similar manner St. Paul writes to the Galatians, who were in a similar danger of relapsing into Judaism: "Ye are severed from Christ, ye who would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace" (Gal. v. 4). πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν : to renew them again unto repentance. To those words adúvarov has to be attached. It is impossible to renew again those above described to repentance. The words πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν are not to be considered as a pleonasm, as if the verb renew contained in itself the idea of again. Those mentioned had already been renewed when they were enlightened and made partakers of the Holy Ghost; and what is denied with regard to them is a second renewal—to renew them again (wáλw) after they had fallen away. It is also to be observed that it is not said that it is impossible to renew them by repentance (dià μeravoías); if they repented of their apostasy they would be restored. But what is affirmed is that it is impossible to renew them unto repentance (eis peтávolav); their wilful apostasy made them morally incapable of repentance; they had fallen into a state of hardened impenitence: nothing can now be done to arouse them; they have closed the door of grace against themselves. ἀνασταυροῦντας ἑαυτῶις τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ παραδειγματίζοντας: having crucified to themselves afresh the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. 'AvaσTaupe is to re-crucify, hence to crucify again or afresh. The reason of the impossibility of their repentance is here assigned: they here committed the awful crime of crucifying anew the Lord Jesus Christ. The title, Son of God, is here given to emphasise the enormity of their sin. They have re-acted the part of the Jews in crucifying Christ; nay, as Ebrard remarks, they have surpassed the Jews in their wickedness. "The Jews crucified in their madness a pseudo-Messiah, or at the worse a prophet. But he who has known and experienced Jesus as his Saviour and Redeemer, and yet after all falls away from Christianity, actually declares Him whom he has known as the Son of God to be a pseudo-Messiah and contemns Him." As in the parallel passage in this Epistle, "they have trodden under foot the Son of God, and have counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith they were sanctified, an unholy thing" (Heb. x. 29). It is said that they have crucified Christ to themselves (avTôis); that is, to their own great peril and guilt; they are guilty of the crucifixion of Christ, as the same disposition which induced the Jews to crucify Him actuates them. It is added, and have put Him to an open shame. The allusion may be to the shamful death of the Cross. They dishonour Christ among men, and give occasion to the enemies of the cross to blaspheme. By having first professed Christ, and afterwards denied Him, they have exposed Him to the reproaches of an ungodly world. Such is the exegesis of the passage. We now come to the consideration of the different views which have been taken of it, and of the controversies which have arisen from it. Before entering upon this subject, we have to observe that we have not here to deal with a supposed case. Some get over the difficulties of the passage by asserting that the writer here only advances a supposition, states a hypothetical case which can never possibly happen; no one who has passed through all the experiences here mentioned-who has been spiritually illuminated, who has been made a partaker of the Holy Ghost, can actually fall from the faith. The author mentions an impossible case, in order to impress upon the Hebrews the awful danger of every approach to apostasy. But this certainly is a most inadequate explanation, and would render the admonition of the sacred writer useless. It is not a mere hypothesis which he gives, but an actual case which might and which did happen. 1. In the primitive Church this passage was one great argument by which the Montanists, Novatians, Donatists, and other sects who held severe notions of ecclesiastical discipline supported their views. According to them, the lapsed should not be restored to the Christian Church. They who from fear of martyrdom had fallen from the faith and denied Christ, or had been guilty of certain heinous sins as licentiousness and murder, and had thus crucified the Son of God afresh, were incapable of restoration to the Christian Church; by no repentance could they be restored. Thus Tertullian, when he became a Montanist, quotes this passage in confirmation of the opinion that apostates cannot be restored. He attributes the Epistle to the Hebrews to Barnabas, and, after quoting the words under consideration and similar declarations, he says: "He (Barnabas), who learnt this from the Apostles and taught it with the Apostles, never knew of any second repentance promised by the Apostles to the adulterer and the fornicator." It is, however, to be observed that they did not deny the divine forgiveness: God, they admitted, may forgive such sinners on their repentance, but it was impossible for the Church to do so; its gates were for ever barred against such heinous offenders. The Fathers in general took an opposite view. According to them, if the lapsed repented, they were to be restored. The passage does not relate to penitent sinners, but to those who by their conduct rendered themselves incapable of repentance. And certainly this milder view of the subject is fully justified. 2. The Fathers, in general, understand the passage not as a declaration of the impossibility of repentance for apostates, but as a prohibition against the repetition of baptism. Thus Justin Martyr employs the words porμós and porte to denote baptism: "This washing (baptism) is called illuminative (propós), because they who learn these things are illuminated (pwrigóμevo) in their understandings." Chrysostom justifies the name poruμós given to baptism by reference to the two places where it occurs in this Epistle. According to this view, the whole passage has a reference to baptism: those who were once enlightened are those who have experienced spiritual illumination as a preparation for baptism; those who have tasted of the heavenly gift are those who have been made partakers of the grace conferred by baptism; those who have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost are those who have experienced baptismal regeneration; and those who have felt the powers of the world to come are those who have experienced those spiritual powers which result from baptism. If those who have been baptised fall away, they may be re-admitted into the Christian Church on their repentance, but are not to be re-baptised: to do so would amount to crucifying the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame. Such a view is very ingenious, and was much employed by the Fathers in their contest with the Montanists and Novatians. It is now almost entirely relinquished as being too artificial and not borne out by the correct explanation of the particulars. 3. The Calvinists, in the interests of the doctrines of the indefectibility of grace and the perseverance of the saints, suppose that the persons here alluded to were never really regenerated, but had only experienced the convincing influences of the Spirit; they were mere professors, and had never attained to the condition of true believers. Thus Calvin observes: "The elect are beyond the danger of finally falling away; for the Father who gave them to be preserved in Christ the Son is greater than all, and Christ promises to watch over them all so that none may perish. But I cannot admit that all this is any reason why He should not grant the reprobate also some taste of grace, why He should not irradiate their minds with some sparks of light, why He should not give them some perception of His goodness, and in some sort engrave His word on their hearts." According to this view, having been once enlightened refers to an external knowledge of the Gospel; having tasted of the heavenly gift refers to the common privileges of the Gospel; having been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, refers to the convincing influences of the Spirit; having tasted the good word of God, refers to the joy with which some receive the word, but have no root in themselves; and having tasted the powers of the world to come, refers to those who have been deeply impressed with the truths of the Gospel, but whose impressions have worn away. Assuming the doctrine of the indefectibility of grace, that if a man is once in a state of grace he cannot fall from it, they hold that this passage must be explained in conformity with the testimony of Scripture in other places; that what is difficult must be explained with what is plain and evident. The well-known anecdote of Oliver Cromwell illustrates this view. When on his death-bed, and recalling with dismay the later events of his life, he asked his chaplain if the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints was a reality, and being answered in the affirmative, he replied, "I can now die in peace, for I am sure that I was once in a state of grace." 4. The Arminians, on the other hand, hold that this passage teaches the defectibility of grace, that a regenerate person may fall from the faith. The expressions they consider to be too strong and cumulative to be toned down so as to denote nothing more than a mere nominal profession of Christianity. The phrase, "to renew again," can have no meaning if there were not a previous renewal. And if the persons spoken of had never been regenerated, how can it be more difficult to bring them to repentance than others who are also unconverted? Accordingly, they affirm that the passage does plainly teach that the regenerate may fall from the faith. "Our passage," observes Ebrard, "unmistakeably declares the possibility that a regenerate person may fall away." Such are the respective views of the Calvinists and Arminians on the verse: the one holding that the passage does not necessarily teach the falling away of the regenerate; the other, that it does evidently imply this. Both interpret the verse according to their dogmatic views. We must come to the study of the subject with unbiassed minds. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is a doctrine of logic rather than of experience, and does not admit of much practical application. The motives of our conduct are so complicated, and our hearts are so deceitful, that it is our wisdom not to trust to any sense of security. St. Paul says that he judged not himself, although he knew nothing against himself. So we, although we may indulge a good hope through grace, yet must work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, and fear lest, even after all our experience, we should be castaways. Many who apparently were converted have fallen from the faith. But, it may be asked, wherein does this impossibility of repentance consist? Not because it is beyond the power of God; God is able to do all things that are not inconsistent with His moral perfections, and do not NO. III.-VOL. I.-THE THINKER. involve a natural impossibility. Not because it is beyond the efficacy of the atonement of Christ; for the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin, and He is able to save to the uttermost. Not because God will not receive such a sinner on his repentance; for no sinner who turns to Him with sincere repentance will ever be rejected. But the reason is because the man has lost the power to repent: it is impossible to renew him again unto repentance; and without repentance he cannot be saved. He has rejected the only method of salvation; he has turned a deaf ear to the invitations of the Gospel. Besides it is to be observed that it is not a single act that is here described, but a fixed and stated condition, a deliberate and wilful apostasy, and as long as a man continues in a state of apostasy, he is beyond the pale of salvation. In the solemn words of the author of this Epistle, in language tantamount to that of the passage under consideration, "If we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking-for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries." The sin here mentioned bears a striking resemblance to the sin against the Holy Ghost mentioned by our Saviour. Like it, it is unpardonable; like it, it manifests itself in obstinate impenitence, and in the final rejection of the Saviour; like it, it is the continued resistance to the influence of the Spirit-"doing despite to the Spirit of grace" -such a prolonged resistance as causes the Spirit to withdraw and give up the man to a reprobate mind. In various parts of Scripture mention is made of unpardonable sin, as in the passage under consideration and in that similar passage often adverted to in this same Epistle; in our Lord's declaration concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost; and in those words of St. John: "If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it" (1 John. v. 16). These are solemn considerations - dark, impenetrable mysteries. We can only stand with our heads uncovered and bow before the Judge of all the earth; hoping that such a sin as is here described is seldom committed, and that what is impossible with man is possible with God. The judgments of God are a great depth which our feeble reason cannot fathom, and which must be left to the disclosures of a future life. "If Thou Lord shouldst mark iniquity, who can stand? But there is forgiveness with Thee that Thou mayst be feared." "DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμὸν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ του πονηρού. THE old and seemingly endless discussion has been re-opened in THE THINKER on the gender of ovηpov in the Lord's Prayer. Whether it is neuter; and our Lord, as is then often assumed, puts into our lips a petition |