bdratzsch{at}aol.com wrote:

>
> Unless one is committed to a hyper-Calvinism denying human free will,
> he is thus endowed with the ability - and responsibility - to choose.
> Having once made the choice of faith, can one similarly choose, for
> whatever reason, to later renounce his commitment of faith? The
author
> of the Epistle to the Hebrews obviously believed so.

Presumption based upon yet another presumption.  That is NOT what Heb 6
is teaching contextually.  Context is important isn't?

> Indeed, apart from
> this perspective, the writing holds little meaning in terms of the
> stern warnings given for turning one's back on "having once been
> enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and being made
> partakers of the Holy Spirit" (Heb. 6:1-6).
>
CONTEXT!  Who is the writer speaking directly to?  What is the warning
concerning specifically?  If you can get these two question correct you
will see that loss of salvation is nowhere in the context!
>
> The argument sometimes advanced at this point is that those to whom
> such warning was written were not really saved.

A poor argument, yet no worse than the one you are presenting because
both disregard the context.

> This not only undercuts
> the entire purpose of the epistle (encouraging discouraged Hebrew
> Christians to NOT abandon the faith

NO!  It is to abandon the new economy of sins being atoned for through
the work of Christ back to the shedding of blood via the animal
sacrifices.  The immediacy of the context ended in 70AD at the
destruction of the temple and temple sacrifices.

Do not confuse interpretation with secondary and tertiary applications.

> and return to Judaism in a
> renunciation of the faith),

They are not renuncing the faith per se, they are, as one should be
empathetic with, having difficulty transitioning out of the old economy
into the new.  The same principle is taught by Peter in 2 Pet2,
especially the later verses.  Loss of salvation is not in the context
either.  Rather it is the new believer again becoming "entangled" by
the old ways of the flesh.  "It would be [almost] better for them" in
the regards of the Rom 7 experience.  Peter's point is that is one
really wanted to enjoy the ways of the flesh, then it would be best
that he didn't become a Christian in the first place because once one
becomes a Christian, he can never enjoy the flesh in the same way
because now he has both the indwelling Spirit and the heavy hand of God
upon him.

> but renders the author of the epistle self
> contradictory (to say little of being confused) in having pronounced
> grim warning relative to those in danger of falling away from their
> unsaved position!
>
It is you who confuses what has been written by "reading into" the
passage your presupposition of one's ability to lose their salvation.
>
> One is saved through the exercise of faith;

A gift, not a work performed.  That means he did not merit it.  That
means he cannot demerit it as well.  Gifts of God are given freely,
that is, there are no strings attached.  Otherwise it wouldn't really
be a gift.

> his position in grace is
> similarly maintained, not by works, but by faith.
>
"It is FINISHED."  Not almost finished.  Not, "I made the
down payment,
it is now up to you keep up the installments."
>
>(It should further be
> noted that the argument of some that the needful continuance in faith
> represents a "works" based approach to grace necessarily requires
their
> affirmation that one's initial acceptance of Christ by faith thus
> represents a "works" based salvation as well. The issue speaks for
> itself.
>
Perhaps, but it appears you did not hear it speaking to you.

Answer me this, how can you read Eph 1 and come away with man 1) coming
to God autonomously, 2) man autonomously gaining his salvation, 3) man
then losing his salvation -autonomously.  Your who argument is based
upon the false presupposition that man is autonomous.  You deny the
depravity of man and need of grace.  In essence, you deny the salvation
offered by Christ for your presupposition naturally leads to a man who
is able to keep himself!  Not quite thought this whole thing through,
have we!

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/15/05 9:23:55 PM ---