Hebrews #6- Jesus Christ: A Better Priest than Levi’s House, 6:1-20
1. The writer urges a leaving of “the elementary teachings about the Christ” in vv.1-2.
Please identify to what each of the listed pairs of elementary teachings specifically refer,
and tell why they were particularly relevant to the Hebrew Christian audience of this
epistle:
a. “foundation of repentance from dead works and faith toward God”-
b. “instruction about washings, and laying on of hands”-
c. “the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment”-
2. If vv.4-5 are describing people in a saved relationship (and they are), then why does v.6
say that after they have “fallen away” it is “impossible to renew them again to
repentance”? Wouldn’t this contradict passages such as Matt.18:15 and Gal.6:1-2?
3. How do vv.7-8 relate to or help explain vv.4-6?
4. In v.9, the writer refers to the audience as “beloved” (the Greek word agapetos).
Although this term is quite common in the other N.T. epistles, this is the only time it
appears in Hebrews. Why, then, is it used so conspicuously here?
5. What does v.10 say God would not “forget”? Where are these acts referenced in other
passages?
6. Vv.11-12 list the desires the writer has for these Hebrew Christians. What are they?
7. What two points are being made with the illustration of God’s promises to Abraham in
vv.13-15?
8. What are the “two unchangeable things” (NASB), or the “two immutable things” (KJV), to
which v.18 refers?
9. How, or why, would these two things provide “strong encouragement” to the epistle’s
audience?
10. How did the “hope” mentioned in v.19 enter “within the veil”?
11. What is the significance of this entering within the veil to the Hebrew Christians to whom
this epistle was written? Additionally, what is its significance to non-Hebrew Christians
today?
Hebrews #6- Jesus Christ: A Better Priest than Levi’s House, 6:1-20
1. The writer urges a leaving of “the elementary teachings about the Christ” in vv.1-2.
Please identify to what each of the listed pairs of elementary teachings specifically refer,
and tell why they were particularly relevant to the Hebrew Christian audience of this
epistle:
a. “foundation of repentance from dead works and faith toward God”Repentance is a change of heart and mind that leads to a life change in
course/direction and allegiance.
The dead works part is a little more difficult to determine. There are basically two
choices regarding the specific meaning of dead works: 1) the abrogated and
ineffectual Levitical system sacrifices as a means of justification; or, 2) sinful deeds
that result in spiritual death. Which is correct?
Perhaps the first inclination would be to equate them with the works of the Law
(animal sacrifices, adherence to the Law of Moses, the Levitical Priesthood, etc.), but
there is a problem with this. The writer is urging these Hebrew Christians to “press on
to maturity” rather than “laying again a foundation…” v.1. These aspects of
Christianity are going to be included in the “meat” which will be dealt with in the
coming chapters, rather than the “milk” from which the writer is urging them to “press
on to maturity,” cf. 5:11-14.
So, it seems to me at least, that the dead works under consideration in v.1 would
therefore be more foundational- like the “deeds of the flesh” from which all Christians
must repent, cf. Gal.5:19ff, and which produce death, Rom.6:23.
Also, dead works and faith toward God are linked together. Again to me, they both
seem to be referring to the Hebrew’s initial repentance from dead works and faith to
God. These are in keeping with milk, or foundational and elementary teachings from
which the writer is urging his audience to press on to maturity.
b. “instruction about washings, and laying on of hands”These, also, seem to be in reference to the elementary or foundational teachings of
the gospel rather than Judaism. The whole point of the epistle is to educate these
Hebrew Christians on the superiority of everything in Jesus Christ to allow them to
properly understand and “value” what they have. In so doing, it will prevent their
apostasy back to an inferior system in Judaism. Thus, the instructions about
washings and laying on of hands more likely refers to foundational teachings about
Christian baptism than the ceremonial washings of the Law; and laying on of hands is
a reference to the impartation of the Holy Spirit in the early Christian dispensation
rather than a ceremonial anointing/blessing from the Law of Moses.
Also, why are “washings” or “baptisms” in the plural given Eph.4:5? Remember that
there were at least 4 baptisms associated with the transfer from the Mosaical to the
Christian systems: 1) the baptism of John, Matt.3:1ff; 2) the baptism of the Holy
Spirit, Matt.3:11a; Acts 2:1-4; 3) the baptism in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness
of sins, Acts 2:38; et al; and, the baptism of fire, Matt.3:11b-12 (which is
testing/purifying). However, instruction regarding these would still be considered
foundational for a maturing Christian, and thus the admonition to “press on to
maturity” is appropriately given.
c. “the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment”As with the previous answers, this one, too, is inseparably tied to the
milk/elementary/foundational teachings of Christianity. Remember that the
Sadducees denied resurrection, Matt.22:23, as did heathen philosophers of the time,
Acts 17:32. So, conversion to Christ would require an initial understanding and
acceptance of life after death. This leads to the concept of eternal judgment, which is
also foundational to Christianity, for, most of the rewards- both positive and negative,
occur not in the “here and now” but the “hereafter.” While these are indeed
foundational/elementary/milk concepts, the Hebrews had to be willing to move on to
meatier matters in order to mature.
There is one more key observation regarding these things. Take a step back and look
at the “big picture” of these paired concepts. The first, repentance and faith, have to
do with man’s relationship to God- a turning from the world to Him. The second,
baptisms and the laying on of hands, have to do with entrance into and progress of
the church (through continuing revelation of the Spirit at that time at least). And the
third, resurrection and eternal judgment, have to do with eternal destiny. The fact that
Judaism and Christianity shared, for the most part, these primary tenets perhaps
made it easier for Jewish converts to Christ to hold on to the notion that the two
systems could be blended wherein both were maintained. Obviously, this is where
they needed meatier teaching and understanding to press on to maturity!
2. If vv.4-5 are describing people in a saved relationship (and they are), then why does v.6
say that after they have “fallen away” it is “impossible to renew them again to
repentance”? Wouldn’t this contradict passages such as Matt.18:15 and Gal.6:1-2?
This passage causes tremendous difficulties for Calvinists who believe in the
“impossibility of apostasy”- otherwise known as “once saved, always saved.” They
generally seek to “dodge” the unmistakable conclusion of the passage, which clearly
contradicts their doctrine, in one of two ways:
a. By suggesting that those under consideration in the text were never really saved.
But the specific language of vv.4-5 just won’t allow that conclusion to stand- and
neither will Acts 8:12-13,18-24.
b. By suggesting that if the passage meant that it was possible for the saved to
become lost, then they could never again repent to become saved once more.
Since this is a conclusion that they believe to be incongruous with Scripture, they
say this cannot be the meaning of the verse.
The key phrase, obviously overlooked by some, in these verses is “since they again
crucify to themselves the Son of God,” v.6. Who would argue that anyone- erring
Christian or alien sinner, could repent (and thus return to God) while crucifying Christ to
themselves? This is the crux of the matter. Vv.4-5 clearly indicate that those under
consideration are Christians. V.6a makes the possibility of apostasy clearly evident (such
is actually the whole point of the epistle!). But v.6b qualifies the impossibility of fallen
Christians being renewed to repentance as pertaining to those who crucify afresh the Son
of God. Jesus was crucified due to a lack of faith and understanding. This same lack of
faith and understanding will, even when found in an erring Christian, prevent repentance
and renewal. Those on Pentecost repented of having crucified Christ when they were
saved, cf. Acts 2:23,36,37-41. They were not saved while crucifying Him!
3. How do vv.7-8 relate to or help explain vv.4-6?
The illustration is that of two kinds of land. Both receive the resource of rain, but one
produces useful vegetation and the other produces only thorns and thistles.
Consequently, God blesses the former while the latter is close to being cursed and
burned by Him.
The point is that the Hebrew Christians are in a precarious position- either they will press
on to maturity and bear useful fruit to God, or they will apostatize into unproductivity (of
Judaism), and be lost, cf. Matt.21:18-21,43!
4. In v.9, the writer refers to the audience as “beloved” (the Greek word agapetos).
Although this term is quite common in the other N.T. epistles, this is the only time it
appears in Hebrews. Why, then, is it used so conspicuously here?
The writer has just issued a rebuke in severe terms in 5:11 – 6:8. This rebuke includes
charging them with being dull of hearing, 5:11; spiritually immature, 5:12-14; and in
danger of apostasy and subsequent destruction, 6:4-8. However, he wants them to know
that these rebukes, charges, and warnings are given from a spirit of love with warmth and
deep affection for their spiritual and eternal well-being.
5. What does v.10 say God would not “forget”? Where are these acts referenced in other
passages?
Specifically, the text says, “your work and the love which you have shown toward His
name, in having ministered and in still ministering to the saints.” Apparently,
despite the issues mentioned in the rebuke of 5:11 – 6:8, these Hebrew Christians were
still practicing benevolence toward their brethren. Acts 2:44ff and 4:32ff are evidence of
the practice. In this way, they were demonstrating 1John 3:14-18.
6. Vv.11-12 list the desires the writer has for these Hebrew Christians. What are they?
The desires are as follows:
a. “each one of you show the same diligence,” v.11a; that the current Hebrew
Christians continue in the path trod by their former brethren;
b. “so as to realize the full assurance of hope until the end,” v.11b; that they press on
to maturity and fruitfulness so as to enter their rest;
c. “that you may not be sluggish,” v.12a; that they be not dull either in hearing or
activity;
d. “but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises,” v.12b;
as did Joshua and Caleb.
7. What two points are being made with the illustration of God’s promises to Abraham in
vv.13-15?
First, God is able to bring to pass that which He has promised- both for Abraham and for
these Hebrew Christians, vv.13-14. And secondly, patient “endurance” (KJV) and faithful
obedience to God’s commands were required of Abraham, v.15. These Hebrew
Christians needed both of those lessons, even as do we!
8. What are the “two unchangeable things” (NASB), or the “two immutable things” (KJV), to
which v.18 refers?
This is a little hard to see, but the two are: the promise of God, v.13ff, and the oath of
God, vv.16-17. By the promise and oath of God, “the unchangeable of His purpose” is
made sure, vv.17-18.
9. How, or why, would these two things provide “strong encouragement” to the epistle’s
audience?
The promise and oath of God brings “strong encouragement” precisely because “it is
impossible for God to lie,” v.18. Thus, the planned salvation of v.9, the justice of God in
v.10, and His and the writer’s desire of them to inherit the promises of vv.11-12 should
convince the audience to “show diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope until
the end,” v.11!
10. How did the “hope” mentioned in v.19 enter “within the veil”?
Obviously, the writer here has reference to the veil of the Temple being torn from top to
bottom at the crucifixion of Jesus. His sacrifice took down the partition that separated the
Holy Place from the Holy of Holies, cf. Ex.26:33 and Matt.27:51 with v.20.
11. What is the significance of this entering within the veil to the Hebrew Christians to whom
this epistle was written? Additionally, what is its significance to non-Hebrew Christians
today?
The writer uses that symbolism here to show that “the hope set before us” (v.18b)
enables us, through the sacrifice of Christ of course, allows the faithful, diligent, and
patient Christian to enter beyond the veil to the presence of God Himself- heaven! Thus,
the anchor of hope is set in heaven, from which it stabilizes the Christian during the
storms of life, and draws them home to glory afterwards!