<- Previous   First   Next ->

For aijwvnio" see Heb. 6:9 note. Heb. 6:3. kai; tou'to poihvsomen ] The fulfilment of the Apostle's purpose is not made in any way to depend on the condition of those whom he addresses. His message has to be delivered. Compare Ezek. 2:5; and contrast ferwvmeqa v. 1.

Hoc faciemus , hoc est, ad majora vos ducemus et de his omnibus quae enumeravimus plenissime docebimus vos, ut non sit iterum necesse ex toto et a capite ponere fundamentum (Primas.).
ejavnper ejpitrevph/ oJ qeov" ] Compare 1 Cor. 16:7. ei[wqe oJ ajpovstolo" pavnta ejxarta'n th'" qeiva" promhqeiva" (Theod.). James 4:15.

( b ) The perils of apostasy (Heb. 6:4-8). The Apostle has given expression to a general charge in which he has joined his readers with himself ( ferwvmeqa ), but he makes one limitation to the efficacy of the work which he proposes. He cannot do again what has been done once for all. He cannot offer a fresh Gospel able to change the whole aspect of life and thought, if the one Gospel has been received and afterwards rejected (6:4-6). Nature itself teaches that the divine gifts must be used fruitfully: they carry with them an inevitable responsibility (6:7, 8).

4 For in the case of those who were once for all enlightened, having both tasted of the heavenly gift and been made partakers of the Holy Spirit , 5

and who tasted the good word of God and the powers of a world to come, 6 and fell away, it is impossible again to renew them to repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.

6:4-6. The necessity of progress lies in the very nature of things. There can be no repetition of the beginning. The preacher cannot again renew to ‘repentance’ ( metavnoia ), a complete change of the intellectual, moral, spiritual state. He must go on to the completion of his work. Those who fall away from the Faith, of which they have felt the power, are as men who crucify ‘the Son of God.’

This description of apostates is closely parallel with that given in the Apostolical Constitutions (6.18, 2) of ‘godless, impenitent leaders of heresy’: ou|toiv eijsin oiJ blasfhmhvsante" to; pneu'ma th'" cavrito" (Heb. 10:29) kai; ajpoptuvsante" th;n parj aujtou' dwrea;n meta; th;n cavrin, oi|" oujk ajfeqhvsetai ou[te ejn tw'/ aijw'ni touvtw/ ou[te ejn tw'/ mevllonti .

The correlation of the four participles ( fwtisqevnta", geusamevnou", genhqevnta", geusamevnou" ) is by no means clear, nor are the conjunctions decisive ( geusamevnou" te ... kai; metovcou" gen. ... kai; kalo;n geusamevnou" ...).
The
te may (1) introduce a new and distinct clause closely connected with fwtisqevnta" and in a sense subordinate to it ( who were once enlightened and so tasted..., and were made ...); or (2) it may be taken in connexion with the kaiv ... kaiv ... which follow, so that the three clauses geusamevnou" te ..., kai; metovcou" genhqevnta" ... kai; kalo;n geusamevnou" ..., are coordinate with fwtisqevnta" and explanatory of it ( who were once illuminated, having both tasted...and been made partakers...and tasted ...); or (3) it may be taken with the kai; which immediately follows, so that geusamevnou" te ... kai;
metovcou"
... genhqevnta" form the twofold explanation of fwtisqevnta" while kai; kalo;n geusamevnou" is an independent clause ( who were once illuminated—having both tasted...and been made partakers...—and who tasted ...). Both uses of te are fully justified. It occurs as a retrospective and


<- Previous   First   Next ->