(2)
The duty of Christian progress: the perils of relapse
(Hebrews 6:1-
8)
The apostle bases a general exhortation on the view which he has given of the spiritual degeneracy of the Hebrews. He first ( a ) enforces the duty of progress, both positively and negatively, and accepts the obligation for himself (6:1-3); and then ( b ) portrays the perils of relapse, pointing out the impossibility (from the human side) of repeating the past, and appealing to the stern teaching of nature (6:4-8).
( a ) The duty of progress (6:1-3). The succession of thoughts is simple and natural. The general principle is first stated, with a clear enunciation of what must (6:1 a), and what must not be done (vs. 1 b, 2); and then the writer accepts the consequence as decisive for his own teaching (vs. 3).
6:1-3. A question has been raised whether these verses contain an exhortation to the Hebrews or a declaration of the writer's own purpose. The two ideas seem to be inseparable. If the readers are to strain forward to a higher knowledge the writer must lead them. If the writer is to aim at the exposition of deeper truth it must be with the conviction that his readers will endeavour to follow him. Thus he first identifies himself with those whom he addresses ( ferwvmeqa ) and afterwards he indicates his own purpose definitely ( poihvsomen ). The words ajfevnte" and teleiovth" take their appropriate meanings in each case.
1 Wherefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ (or the Christ, the Messiah ), let us be borne on to perfection, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith upon God ,
2 of teaching
(or
a teaching
)
of baptisms and laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do if God permit.
dio; ajfevnte" to;n t. ajrch'" tou' c. l
....] Vulg.
Quapropter intermittentes
inchoationis Christi sermonem
... It is characteristic of the tone of the Epistle that the exhortation to progress is based directly on the stern criticism which precedes (
diov
). At first sight an adversative particle would have seemed more natural. But it is assumed that the position of inferiority occupied by the readers of the Epistle is not to be acquiesced in. The fact that they do for the moment hold it is an overwhelming reason for effort. Quia exercitatos sensus decet nos habere in lege domini...ad profunda et alta mysteria...ducamur (Primasius).
The necessary condition of progress is a giving up. We hold what we have as a preparation for something more. At the same time all that is surrendered is incorporated in that which is afterwards gained. In relation to the Hebrews the word ajfevnte" has the sense of leaving as applied to those who advance to a deeper knowledge: in relation to the writer, as applied to those who pass to a new subject. Both senses are perfectly natural, and there is no confusion in the double application of the word. For the thought compare Phil. 3:14.
In the remarkable phrase oJ th'" ajrch'" tou' Cristou' lovgo" , the word , the exposition, of the beginning , the elementary view of the Christ , there can be little doubt that hJ ajrch; tou' Cristou' go together, and that oJ th'" ajrch'" lovgo" does not form a compound noun. On this point the order seems to be decisive. The beginning of Christ (or the Christ) is the fundamental