Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Hebrews

[Head William]

Hebrew 6 verses 1 - 6 the word impossible comes up. what is impossible in these verses?

[jimwalton]

Great question. Many scholars interpret the text to be about spiritual immaturity or dullness, but that doesn’t really make sense. Hebrews is about the old covenant and the new covenant that supersedes it, so we have to keep that in mind when we decipher what this means. The “maturity” in question in verse 1 is grasping the truth about Christ as high priest. The focal point is the new covenant and its elements. The real tension is not Christian maturity vs. immaturity, but between covenantal perfection vs. imperfection. The old covenant was works of the law. The elements mentioned in v. 2 are foundational Jewish teachings of the old covenant that need to be abandoned. Their development within Christianity is still valid (don’t think we’re giving up on baptism, resurrection, and judgment), but not the old covenant versions of these things. The baptisms were Jewish cult practices; laying on of hands was an OT practice as part of the sacrificial ritual; the resurrection doctrine of the OT was shrouded in obscurity; the eternal judgment according to Jewish belief was only a partial view, etc.

The audience isn’t in danger of immature Christianity, but of leaving the perfect revelation of Jesus and salvation by grace to regress to belief in the old covenant and be slaves to the law and Jewish ritual. What is impossible is for people who have come to Christ to keep living by the old covenant, as Paul also teaches in Galatians. Anybody who renounces his identity with Christ in the new covenant and returns to old covenant practices will bring upon himself not the blessings of the new but the curses and judgments for deserting the true gospel (Galatians, again).

Verses 5.11-6.6 might be summarized this way: As believers in Jesus, you need to believe and live according to the new covenant: Jesus as the complete revelation, Jesus as the high priest, Jesus’ blood as the new covenant, saved by grace, and living by faith in the Spirit. You need to leave behind all vestiges of old covenant living and move into life by the Spirit. I will teach you these truths, but if you turn back to the Law I cannot make you right with God just by constantly teaching you these new things. If you are the one who turned away, you must be the one who comes back.

Galatians 3 is very instructive in these matters. Also Galatians 4.8-5.26. It is impossible to attain Christ by one’s own efforts (Gal. 3.3). All who rely on the law are under a curse (Gal. 3.10-13), and it is impossible for them to be justified by faith. Those principles are enslaving, not freeing (Gal. 4.9; 5.1).

The writer of Hebrews is saying the same thing. If a person insists on despising the new covenant (and all that Christ has done), and returning to the old covenant, it is impossible for that person to experience true life in the Spirit and to come to repentance before Christ. They put Jesus out of their life; they break off all connection with Him.

[Head William]

i'm not convinced about your explanation of impossible.

[jimwalton]

Yeah, I know it’s debatable. We can discuss it more. The author has been saying that Jesus is not a mere angel, but is far superior to them—He’s actually God (Heb. 1.3). But he is still able to identify with humans because he was so human (chapter 2). In chapter 3 we find out he’s greater than Moses (3.3-6). Then the author starts in with the language of the covenant, talking about the Sabbath, and that the real Sabbath still lies ahead of us (4.9). At the end of chapter 4 he launches into explaining that Jesus is the high priest that no human priest ever was, and that he is actually a perfect high priest (5.8). He will have much more to say about the covenant, but at this place is where the warnings against falling away (5.11-6.12) come into the picture. “You ought to be much further along in your understanding” he says (my summary). I think he’s talking about the new covenant vs. the old, but I’ll be pleased to hear what you think. I went in the direction I did (old covenant vs. new covenant) because that seems to be the thrust of the book, and therefore our understanding of this passage should fit into that template. If he’s talking to Jews, which is a reasonable assumption, given that the title of the book is “To the Hebrews,” it makes sense that they are dedicated to the old covenant and struggling to leave it behind, as were many of the Jews Paul preached and wrote to, and that the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 was about. By this time, he says, they should have made the switch (Heb. 5.12).

What is “the teaching about righteousness” in 5.13? It’s interpreted in several different ways: moral truth, principles about Jesus, or the teachings of the new covenant.

In verse 14 he says “solid food is for the mature (teleion).” There are 14 occurrences of this word (in its various forms) in Hebrews, and the translation of “perfect” fits all of them, if the author is talking about the new covenant as the final and perfect revelation of God and target for the Christian. Christ (over angels, Moses, Joshua, the Law, Sabbath, and the high priest) is the perfect revelation of God and the mediator of the new covenant.

Chapter 6: "Therefore let’s leave behind this other stuff.” Well, we certainly aren’t leavening behind teaching about Christ, baptisms, faith, resurrection, and judgment, so (my stance is) we’re leaving behind Old Testament (old covenant) understandings of such things, since that’s the theme of the book. And (v. 4), if you’ve been introduced to the teachings about Jesus, the Holy Spirit, etc. (the new covenant), if you go back to the old covenant, there’s no hope for you, because you’re just crucifying the Son all over again, i.e., the OT law was a practice of repeated sacrifices, not a once-for-all atonement.

The “goodness of the word of God” is a covenant term, often used in the OT relating to covenant blessings (Josh. 23.14-15; Dt. 28.15-68; 22.16). This author uses it to speak of the new covenant and its blessings.

So what’s “impossible” is to be a Christian, living in the Spirit, while at the same time rejecting the new covenant and living under the Law. It’s impossible, if you desert the new covenant and go back to the Law, to know the blessings of the new covenant (as it says in Galatians 4-5).

But, you know, this is all very debatable, and Christians have disagreed about this text for centuries. That’s my take on it. What’s your interpretation?