Hebrews 6:4-6: impossible to renew them again to repentance: What Christian Writers Said, AD 250 to 1949

Who the persons are

13 passages · 9 writers · 1500s to 1900s

Wesley says those enlightened have been given the light of God's love in Christ, have tasted remission of sins, and partake of the witness and fruit of the Spirit, and Fausset says the heavenly gift is Christ, who confers peace in the remission of sins and bestows the Holy Spirit. Owen says those firstly and directly intended were those who in those days had received extraordinary or miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, and that by analogy it extends to others who now hold the gifts and privileges that continue. Owen says a falling away that is partial only is incident to true believers, who are renewed by repentance when God heals their backslidings. Calvin says only the elect receive the Spirit of regeneration, but that God also gives the reprobate some taste of his grace, some sparks of his light, and a temporary faith. Berkhof says that Scripture's cases of apostasy, including Hebrews 6:4-6, do not prove that real believers can fall unless it is shown that the persons had true faith and not a mere temporal faith not rooted in regeneration. Fausset says such persons may be in some sense renewed and yet fall away finally, that they are not the elect, and that a temporary faith is possible without being one of the elect. Spurgeon says that Judas and Simon Magus came near to this condition, but the work of grace did not renew their natures, and that a man who has wandered into sin for a time, as David did, is not the character described. Barnes says the word "again" shows that true Christians are meant, and that a Christian who fell from grace must perish and could never be saved.

1549 · John Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews 6.4

But here arises a new question, how can it be that he who has once made such a progress should afterwards fall away? For God, it may be said, calls none effectually but the elect, and Paul testifies that they are really his sons who are led by his Spirit, (Romans 8:14;) and he teaches us, that it is a sure pledge of adoption when Christ makes us partakers of his Spirit. The elect are also beyond the danger of finally falling away; for the Father who gave them to be preserved by Christ his Son is greater than all, and Christ promises to watch over them all so that none may perish. To all this I answer, That God indeed favors none but the elect alone with the Spirit of regeneration, and that by this they are distinguished from the reprobate; for they are renewed after his image and receive the earnest of the Spirit in hope of the future inheritance, and by the same Spirit the Gospel is sealed in their hearts. But I cannot admit that all this is any reason why he should not grant the reprobate also some taste of his grace, why he should not irradiate their minds with some sparks of his light, why he should not give them some perception of his goodness, and in some sort engrave his word on their hearts. Otherwise, where would be the temporal faith mentioned by Mark 4:17?

1754 · John Wesley, Explanatory Notes on Hebrews 6.4

It is impossible for those who were once enlightened - With the light of the glorious love of God in Christ. And have tasted the heavenly gift - Remission of sins, sweeter than honey and the honeycomb. And been made partakers of the Holy Ghost - Of the witness and the fruit of the Spirit.

1871 · A. R. Fausset, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on Hebrews 6.6

"It is the curse of evil eternally to propagate evil" [Tholuck]. "He who is led into the whole (?) compass of Christian experiences, may yet cease to abide in them; he who abides not in them, was, at the very time when he had those objective experiences, not subjectively true to them; otherwise there would have been fulfilled in him, "Whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance" (Mt 13:12), so that he would have abided in them and not have fallen away" [Tholuck]. Such a one was never truly a Spirit-led disciple of Christ (Ro 8:14-17). The sin against the Holy Ghost, though somewhat similar, is not identical with this sin; for that sin may be committed by those outside the Church (as in Mt 12:24, 31, 32); this, only by those inside.

What the falling away is

8 passages · 5 writers · 1500s to 1800s

Calvin says there is a twofold falling away, particular and general, and that the Apostle does not speak of theft, perjury, murder, drunkenness, or adultery but of a total defection from the Gospel, which he says happens to no one but him who sins against the Holy Spirit. Calvin also says the passage refers to those who with deliberate impiety have quenched the light of the Spirit, so that the thing expressed is not some particular vice but universal aversion to God, the apostasy of the whole man, and that men commit the sin against the Holy Spirit when they undertake a voluntary war against God to extinguish the light of the Spirit offered to them. Owen says that no particular sin a man falls into occasionally through temptation brings this threat, since Peter fell and was renewed, so a course of sin must be meant, and he describes the falling away as a voluntary, resolved relinquishment of and apostasy from the gospel. Owen also says total apostasy from the gospel once professed is a greater sin than the Jews' crucifying of Christ in the days of his flesh. Fausset says an entire and wilful apostasy is meant, which the Hebrews had not yet committed. Wesley says the falling away is an absolute, total apostasy, a plain relation of fact, by those who have cast away the power and form of godliness and lost faith, hope, and love, and that wilfully. Edwards says those intended were guilty of the unpardonable sin, an apostasy from Christianity in which, in the days of the miraculous gifts, they openly reproached the Spirit that Christians were endued with.

1549 · John Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews 6.4

Whosoever then understands its meaning, can easily extricate himself from every difficulty. But it must be noticed, that there is a twofold falling away, one particular, and the other general. He who has in anything, or in any ways offended, has fallen away from his state as a Christian; therefore all sins are so many fallings. But 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 not God in some one thing, but entirely renounces his grace. And that this may be better understood, let us suppose a contrast between the gifts of God, which he has mentioned, and this falling away. For he falls away who forsakes the word of God, who extinguishes its light, who deprives himself of the taste of the heavenly gift, who relinquishes the participation of the Spirit. Now this is wholly to renounce God. We now see whom he excluded from the hope of pardon, even the apostates who alienated themselves from the Gospel of Christ, which they had previously embraced, and from the grace of God; and this happens to no one but to him who sins against the Holy Spirit.

1676 · John Owen, The Nature and Causes of Apostasy from the Gospel 1

This is the “falling away” intended by the apostle, — a voluntary, resolved relinquishment of, and apostasy from, the gospel, the faith, rule, and obedience thereof; which cannot be without casting the highest reproach and contumely imaginable upon the person of Christ himself, as it is afterward expressed. Concerning these persons, and their thus “falling away,” two things are to be considered in the text:— 1. What is affirmed of them; 2. The reason of that affirmation. 1. The first is, That it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance.

1834 · Jonathan Edwards, Notes on the Bible heb-rev

Heb. vi. 4, 5, 6. “For it is impossible,” &c. Those that the apostle here has respect to, must be such as were guilty of the unpardonable sin. The falling away that he speaks of is an apostacy from Christianity. It could not be otherwise but that those who in those days had been Christians, and then openly renounced Christianity, must openly reproach that spirit that Christians were then so generally endued with in his miraculous gifts, which was so notorious, and was so great a thing, and the principal thing in them that drew the eyes of the world upon them, and was the greatest seal that God gave them to evidence in the sight of the world that they were his people, and which was the argument that was principally effectual for the gaining others to them. When they openly renounced Christianity, that they once had appeared to embrace, their renunciation contained a great and open reproach, for it was an avowed casting away and rejecting a thing that has been received, as having found it naught and vile. He that admits and receives another in the capacity of a wife, or husband, or lord, or other relation, and then afterwards on trial rejects them and turns them out of doors, casts a vastly greater reproach on them than those that never received them: much more those that received any one for their God. So these apostates here spoken of, in renouncing Christianity, did openly cast the greatest reproach on Christianity; and therefore the apostle says,ver. 6. they put him to an open shame. And indeed an open, declared renunciation of Christianity after it had been embraced, is itself an open reproaching, and blaspheming of it in words; and they that apostatized and openly renounced Christianity in those days, and the church being in those circumstances that have already been mentioned, must openly renounce and reproach that Spirit that the Christians were endued with, and confirmed by; for that Spirit was the principal and most obvious thing in that Christianity that they renounced and reproached.

What impossible means

18 passages · 9 writers · 200s to 1800s

Chrysostom says Paul used "impossible" rather than "not seemly," "not expedient," or "not lawful" in order to cast them into despair of obtaining it. Calvin rejects taking "impossible" as rare or difficult, and rejects confining the passage to the repentance that prepared catechumens for baptism. Tillotson takes "impossible" to mean extremely difficult, as with the rich man entering the kingdom of heaven, and notes that some understand it as a moral impossibility, because the ancient church refused to admit apostates to a course of penance. Tong says it is extremely hazardous to renew them, that very few such persons have been brought to true repentance, and that the sin is plainly apostasy from the truth and ways of Christ, though some have thought it the sin against the Holy Ghost, without ground. Spurgeon rejects the reading "very hard" and says that if such a case were to happen it would be impossible for man and for God, since God has purposed never to grant a second salvation to those whom the first has failed to deliver. Calvin says repentance is required and is never truly felt by one who has wholly fallen away, who is deprived of God's Spirit and given up to a reprobate mind, and that repentance is given by God only to those who have not wholly fallen away from the faith. Calvin says that God's pardoning apostates would expose his own Son to contempt, which is why crucifying Christ afresh is a ground of severity, and that the Apostle does not leave no hope of pardon for voluntary sins. Owen says the impossibility respects God's giving such apostates up to obstinacy, so that they neither will nor shall sincerely seek repentance, and that those who sincerely seek to repent have the door of mercy open. Owen distinguishes what is impossible absolutely from what is impossible on a supposition, says he is not positive that the repentance of these apostates is impossible in the first sense, and says it is not for us to hope for, pray for, or endeavour their renewal. Owen also says it is inconsistent with God's holiness and faithfulness to renew those fully and openly guilty of this sin, and that "to renew them again" means bringing them again into a state of profession by a second renovation and a second baptism, which he calls impossible. Owen says that crucifying the Son of God afresh is done by the apostates in and to themselves, and is part of their sin of falling away, which renders it unpardonable. Edwards argues that if it is impossible to renew such persons to repentance after they have rebelled against the light and means used with them in this world, much less is it to be expected at the day of judgment after further obstinacy. Spurgeon says Christ made atonement for those who crucified him once, but that if believers fell away and crucified him afresh there would be no second Calvary, and that regeneration, like birth, is once for all. Theognostus says the blasphemy against the Spirit excludes pardon not because the Spirit is superior to the Son, but because the imperfect have pardon, while for those who have tasted the heavenly gift and been made perfect no plea for pardon remains.

c. 403–404 · John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews 9.5

, 5. “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance, crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame.” And see how putting them to shame, and forbiddingly he begins. “Impossible.” No longer (he says) expect that which is not possible; (For he said not, It is not seemly, or, It is not expedient, or, It is not lawful, but “impossible,” so as to cast [them] into despair), if ye have once been altogether enlightened. Then he adds, “and have tasted of the heavenly gift. If ye have tasted” (he says) “of the heavenly gift,” that is, of forgiveness. “And been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and tasted the good word of God” (he is speaking here of the doctrine) “and the powers of the world to come” (what powers is he speaking of? either the working of miracles, or “the earnest of the Spirit”— 2 Cor. i. 22 ) “and have fallen away, to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh and put Him to an open shame.” “Renew them,” he says, “unto repentance,” that is, by repentance, for unto repentance is by repentance.

1549 · John Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews 6.4

Some who hold sacred the authority of the Epistle, while they attempt to dissipate this absurdity, yet do nothing but evade it. For some take “impossible” in the sense of rare or difficult, which is wholly different from its meaning. Many confine it to that repentance by which the catechumens in the ancient Church were wont to be prepared for baptism, as though indeed the Apostles prescribed fasting, or such things to the baptized. And then what great thing would the Apostle have said, by denying that repentance, the appendage of baptism, could be repeated? He threatens with the severest vengeance of God all those who would cast away the grace which had been once received; what weight would the sentence have had to shake the secure and the wavering with terror, if he only reminded them that there was no longer room for their first repentance?

1676 · John Owen, The Nature and Causes of Apostasy from the Gospel 1

There is therefore in it that which tends greatly to the encouragement of such sinners; for whereas it is here declared, concerning those who are thus rejected of God, that “it is impossible to renew them,” or to do any thing towards them that shall have a tendency unto repentance, those who are not satisfied that they do yet savingly repent, but only are sincerely exercised how they may attain thereunto, have no concernment in this commination, but evidently have the door of mercy still open unto them, for it is shut only against those who shall never endeavour to turn by repentance. And although persons so rejected of God may fall under convictions of their sin, attended with despair (which is unto them a foresight of their future condition), yet as unto the least attempt after repentance, on the terms of the gospel, they do never rise up unto it. Wherefore, the impossibility intended, of what sort soever it be, respects the severity of God, not in refusing or rejecting the greatest sinners which seek after and would be renewed unto repentance (which is contrary unto innumerable of his promises); but in the giving up such sinners as these are, here mentioned, unto such obdurateness and obstinacy in sinning, that blindness of mind and hardness of heart, as that they neither will nor shall ever sincerely seek after repentance, nor may any means, according to the mind of God, be used to bring them thereunto.

Baptism and the Novatian dispute

5 passages · 4 writers · 300s to 1600s

Aquinas says the text excludes the Novatian error that denied pardon to sinners after baptism, that the renewal denied is the one given by baptism, which is not repeated, and that the Apostle does not say such persons cannot be reclaimed to penance. Ambrose says the writer is speaking of baptism, to relieve the anxiety that sins after baptism cannot be forgiven and to show that baptism is not to be repeated. Taylor says there is but one repentance in a man's life in the strict evangelical covenant sense, and that after a man falls into the contrary state and is wholly estranged from God, no place is left for more repentance, naming voluntary malicious apostates and obstinate impenitent persons among those he means. Owen says Novatus and Novatianus denied hope of church pardon to those who fell into open sin after baptism, resting this on the nature of baptism and on this passage, and that they would not bring their interpretation to the analogy of faith. Owen also says some, in terror of conscience after a great sin, wrongly suppose themselves to have fallen into the condition the passage describes and so to be irrecoverably lost.

c. 384–394 · Ambrose of Milan, Concerning Repentance (De paenitentia) 2.2.7

Inasmuch, then, as the Apostle spoke of remitting penance, he could not be silent as to those who thought that baptism was to be repeated. And it was right first of all to remove our anxiety, and to let us know that even after baptism, if any sinned their sins could be forgiven them, lest a false belief in a reiterated baptism should lead astray those who were destitute of all hope of forgiveness. And secondly, it was right to set forth in a well-reasoned argument that baptism is not to be repeated. And that the writer was speaking of baptism is evident from the very words in which it is stated that it is impossible to renew unto repentance those who were fallen, inasmuch as we are renewed by means of the laver of baptism, whereby we are born again, as Paul says himself: “For we are buried with Him through baptism into death, that, like as Christ rose from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we, too, should walk in newness of life.”

1261–1264 · Thomas Aquinas, Of God and His Creatures: An Annotated Translation (With some Abridgement) of the Summa contra Gentiles 4.71

Hereby is excluded the error of the Novatians, who denied pardon to sinners after baptism. They took occasion of their error from the text: It is impossible for those who have been once enlightened [φωτισθέντας, baptised], and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost . . . . and have fallen, to be again renewed [ἀνακαινίζειν, renovari, Vulg.] unto penance (Heb. vi, 4, 6). But the sense is plain from the immediate context: crucifying to themselves again the Son of God, and making him a mockery. There is denied to them then that renewal unto penance, whereby a man is crucified along with Christ, which is by baptism: for as many of us as have been baptised in Christ Jesus, have been baptised in his death (Rom. vi, 3, 6: Gal. ii, 19, 20: v, 24). As then Christ is not to be crucified again, so he who sins after baptism is not to be baptised again. Hence the Apostle does not say that it is impossible for such persons to be reclaimed, or converted, to penance, but that it is impossible for them to be renewed [ἀνακαινίζειν], renovation being the effect usually ascribed to baptism, which is called the laver of regeneration and renewal [ἀνακαινώσεως] (Titus iii, 5).

Who the persons are

What the falling away is

What impossible means

Baptism and the Novatian dispute

A daily email of quotes from church history