Hebrews 6:6

καὶ παραπεσόντας, “and fell away,” i.e., from the condition depicted by the preceding participles; “grave verbum subito occurrens” (Bengel). The word in classical Greek has the meaning “fall in with” or “fall upon”; in Polybius, “to fall away from,” “to err,” followed by τ. ὁδοῦ, τ. ἀληθείας, τ. καθήκοντος; also absolutely “to err”. In the Greek fathers the lapsed are called οἱ παραπεπτωκότες or οἱ παραπεσόντες. The full meaning of the word is given in ὑποστολῆς εἰς ἀπώλειαν of Hebrews 10:39. The translation of the A.V. and early English versions “if they shall fall away,” although accused of dogmatic bias, is justifiable. It is a hypothesis that is here introduced. Thus far the writer has accumulated expressions which present the picture of persons who have not merely professed the Christian faith but have enjoyed rich experience of its peculiar and characteristic influence, but now a word is introduced which completely alters the picture. They have enjoyed all these things, but the last thing to be said of them is that they have “fallen from” their former state. The writer describes a condition which he considers possible. And of persons realising this possibility he says ἀδύνατον … πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν, “it is impossible to renew [them] again to repentance,” “impossible,” not “difficult” [as in the Graeco-Latin Codex Claromontanus, “difficile”]; impossible not only to a teacher, but to God, for in every case of renewal it is God who is the Agent. [Bengel says “hominibus est impossibile, non Deo,” and that therefore the ministers of God must leave such persons to Him and wait for what God may accomplish “per singulares afflictiones et operationes”. But cf. Hebrews 10:26-31.] πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν, πάλιν is not pleonastic, but denotes that those who have once experienced ἀνακαινισμός cannot again have a like experience. It suggests that the word ἀνακαιν. involves, or naturally leads on to, all that is expressed in the participles under ἅπαξ from φωτισθέντας to αἰῶνος of Hebrews 6:5. A renewed person is one who is enlightened, tastes the heavenly gift, and so on. But as the first stone in the foundation was μετάνοια (Hebrews 6:1), so here the first manifestation of renewal is in μετάνοια. The persons described cannot again be brought to a life-changing repentance a statement which opens one of the most important psychological problems. The reason this writer assigns for the impossibility is given in the words ἀνασταυροῦντας … παραδειγματίζοντας, “crucifying [or “seeing that they crucify”] to themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame”. Edwards understands these participles as putting a hypothetical case, and renders “they cannot be renewed after falling away if they persist in crucifying, etc.”. This, however, reduces the statement to a vapid truism, and, although grammatically admissible, does not agree with the οὐκέτι of the parallel passage in Hebrews 10:26. The mitigation of the severity of the statement is rather to be sought in the enormity and therefore rarity of the sin described, which is equivalent to the deliberate and insolent rejection of Christ alluded to in Hebrews 10:26; Hebrews 10:29, and the suicidal blasphemy alluded to in Mark 3:29. On the doctrine of the passage, see Harless, Ethics, c. 29. In classical and later Greek the word for “crucify” is not σταυρόω (of which Stephanus cites only one example, and that from Polybius), but ἀνασταυροῦν, so that the ἀνα does not mean “again” or “afresh,” but refers to the lifting up on the cross, as in ἀναρτάω or ἀνασκολοπίζω. In the N.T. no doubt σταυρόω is uniformly used, but never in this Epistle; and it was inevitable that a Hellenist would understand ἀνασταυρ. in its ordinary meaning. There is no ground therefore for the translation of the Vulg. “rursum crucifigentes,” although it is so commonly followed. Besides, any crucifixion by the Hebrews [ἑαυτοῖς] must have been a fresh crucifixion, and needs no express indication of that feature of it. The significance of ἑαυτοῖς seems to be “so far as they are concerned,” not “to their own judgment” or “to their own destruction”. The apostate crucifies Christ on his own account by virtually confirming the judgment of the actual crucifiers, declaring that he too has made trial of Jesus and found Him no true Messiah but a deceiver, and therefore worthy of death. The greatness of the guilt in so doing is aggravated by the fact that apostates thus treat τὸν υἱὸν τ. Θεοῦ, cf. Hebrews 10:29. καὶ παραδειγματίζοντας, the verb is found in Numbers 25:4, where it implies exposing to ignominy or infamy, such as was effected in barbarous times by exposing the quarters of the executed criminal, or leaving him hanging in chains. Archilochus, says Plutarch (Moral., 520), rendered himself infamous, ἑαυτὸν παρεδειγ., by writing obscene verses. The verb is therefore a strong expression; “put Him to open shame” excellently renders it. “This was the crime the Hebrew Christians were tempted to commit. A fatal step it must be when taken; for men who left the Christian Church and went back to the synagogue became companions of persons who thought they did God service in cursing the name of Jesus” (Bruce).