HOW MUCH SEVERER PUNISHMENT
DO YOU THINK HE WILL DESERVE: poso dokeite (2PPAI) cheironos
axiothesetai (3SFPI): (2:3;
12:25)
The judgment on those who reject God’s work in Christ
will be immeasurably worse than what the wilderness generation suffered, as
the writer showed by his “how much more” arguments in Heb 2:2,3;10:29;12:25.
Such an arguing style was typical of the Rabbinical school and was “the
first of Hillel’s seven rules for exegesis”. Since the “lesser” punishment
was death, it is frightening to consider what punishment could possibly be
worse than death itself (v27). Again, the resemblance to 6:4-8,v8 is
striking ("ends up being burned").
THINK ABOUT WHAT HE IS PICTURING HERE: The judgment of God is described as
punishment and it is a punishment that is worse than death , because it goes
beyond death. Punishment WORSE THAN DEATH! If immediate death was the
penalty for violating the law of Moses (which was but a shadow or picture),
how much more should one expect severer judgment for continually rejecting,
knowingly and deliberately, the reality which is Jesus and his sacrifice!
There will be degrees of punishment in hell. This is clearly indicated in
Mt 11:21,22, 23, 24 (also Mt 10:15; Mk 6:11; Lu 12:47, 48)
Jesus told Pilate, “He who delivered Me up to you has
the greater sin” (Jn19:11). Judas’s sin was greater than Pilate’s. Both were
unbelievers, but Judas was an apostate. He had light and evidence far beyond
what Pilate had, and was therefore far more guilty in betraying Christ.
Jesus also made it clear that judgment, like guilt, is in proportion to sin.
Lu 12:47,48).
Remember even though we don't see such an apostate getting what he deserves
now, one must keep in mind that the ultimate fulfillment (will deserve =
future tense) is yet future when he is judged according to his deeds
(Rev 20:12,13).
WHO HAS TRAMPLED UNDER FOOT THE SON OF GOD, : timorias o ton huion tou theou
katapatesas (AAPMSN):
(2 Kings
9:33;
Psalms 91:13;
Isaiah 14:19;
28:3;
Lamentations 1:15;
Ezekiel 16:6;
Micah 7:10;
Matthew 7:6;
Romans 16:20;
1 Corinthians 15:25,27)
(Interesting that Esau is described as "ungodly" in
Heb12:16 & Greek word "bebelos" = trodden under foot!)
1Sa 2:29 In the ancient Near East one of the gestures used to show contempt
for someone was to “lift up the foot” against or toward them (cf. Ps41:9).
To walk on top of someone or something was a more extreme gesture showing
utter contempt and scorn (cf. 2Ki9:33; Isa14:19; Mic7:10; Zec10:5). Such
contempt demonstrates a complete rejection of Christ as Savior and Lord.
Jesus employed katapateo to describe the fate of salt which has lost its
saltiness: Mt 5:13. On another occasion he warned his disciples not to “throw
your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet”
(Mt 7:6). Those who “deliberately keep on sinning” evidence the same attitude
toward the Son of God. They regard him as not good for anything and life in
complete disregard for his worth.
He lived for himself, and himself alone;
For himself, and none beside.
Just as if Jesus had never lived,
And as if he had never died!
AND HAS REGARDED AS UNCLEAN THE BLOOD
OF THE COVENANT BY WHICH HE WAS SANCTIFIED: kai to haima tes diathekes koinon egesamenos, (AMPMSN)
en o hegiasthe
(3SAPI):
(9:20;
13:20)
(2:11;
9:13;
Jeremiah 1:5;
John 10:36;
17:19;
1 Corinthians 11:27,29)
Regarded (hegeomai) refers to a conscious
judgment resting on deliberate weighing of the facts. Here it implies a
deliberate, contemptuous rejection of the Messianic sacrifice of the Son of
God. Once they regarded themselves as holy (sanctified) by the blood of
Jesus, but now they deny this and reject the Cross (His blood was spilt on
Calvary) as unnecessary for acceptance before God.
Unclean (koinos) which conveys the fundamental idea is that which is “shared by all,
public” of that which was “common,” that is “unclean” (Mk 7:2; Acts 10:14, 28;
11:8; Ro 14:14). From this comes the idea of “not sacred” that is, “not set
apart for God’s use.” The idea here is that the apostate regarded Messiah’s
blood as common, having no more sacred character or specific worth than the
blood of any ordinary person and implies that Christ was a sinner and a
blemished sacrifice!!! Such thinking is truly blasphemous. They drank the cup of the new covenant, said, "Nice juice," and went away
to sin , as if it were not the most precious reality in the universe.
The blood of the
covenant -
Oh, precious is the
flow
That makes me white as snow;
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
(Play
Nothing but the Blood)
Covenant
(1242)
(diatheke from dia = two + tithemi = to place pictures
that which is placed between two Thus, a covenant is something placed
between two, an arrangement between two parties.) was a commonly used in the
Greco-Roman world to define a legal transaction in settling an inheritance.
Diatheke denotes an irrevocable decision, which cannot be cancelled
by anyone. A prerequisite of its effectiveness before the law is the death
of the disposer and thus diatheke was like a "final will and
testament". In reference to the divine covenants, such as the Abrahamic
covenant, diatheke is not a covenant in the sense that God came to agreement
or compromise with fallen man as if signing a contract. Rather, it involves
declaration of God’s unconditional promise to make Abraham and his seed the
recipients of certain blessings.
Christ’s death
inaugurated or ratified the New Covenant...
for this is My blood of the covenant,
which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. (Mt 26:28)
And He said to them, "This is My blood of
the covenant, which is poured out for many. (Mark 14:24)
And in the same way He took the cup after
they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new
covenant in My blood. (Luke 22:19)
His blood was
poured out for the forgiveness of sins. Thus to regard this precious blood
as "unclean" leaves absolutely no sacrifice for sins! Would a genuine born
again person trample the precious blood of the Lamb of God. I doubt it. Yes
it is true -- We
all wander (and wonder) and stray off path but not to the point of such
abysmal, utter blasphemy as to trample ( figuratively it means to treat
contemptuously) Jesus' blood!
He was sanctified -
It should not be surprising that sanctified is controversial
and some take it to mean that one can be born again, justified by faith, on
their way to heaven, experiencing sanctification, and yet in the final
analysis be lost and destroyed as a result of forsaking the
truth. This type of interpretation arises from the fact that these apostates
are said to have been sanctified. But
Scripture does not support the teaching that one can lose their salvation.
In
Hebrews 3:14
the writer says
For we
have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our
assurance firm until the end (see note
Hebrews 3:14)
The meaning is that if we do not hold fast to the
end, then we "had not become a partaker of Christ." It follows
that failure to persevere in the
faith is not a sign of losing salvation but of never having had it in the
first place. You cannot lose what you never possess. And
Hebrews 10:14 says
By one offering He
has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified (descriptive of an
ongoing process of growth in Christlikeness). (see note
Hebrews 10:14)
In other words,
there is a kind of true, spiritual sanctification that is sure evidence that
one is eternally perfected in God's sight and for all time. And the evidence that it is
done, is that we are progressively being truly made holy or sanctified.
Others interpret this verse as stating that the possibility of sanctified
persons committing
apostasy will never happen, because those who are truly elect and
born again will be kept from apostasy by the work of the Holy Spirit. So sanctified
persons never actually apostatize. And they thus conclude that the prospect in
Hebrews 10:26-31 never happens. The warning they say is theoretical and
meant to spur believers onward. This manner of interpreting this passage
goes on to say that the elect will take heed to the warning and persevere
in faith.
In my opinion, the
correct interpretation of this difficult passage is that the apostate pictured here at one time
professed faith in
Christ, listened to the Word preached, and even celebrated the Lord’s Supper
with genuine believers. His "faith", such as it was, was not internal
and was not genuine (see discussion of
faith),
and the fruit of that root of his faithlessness was a conscious rejection of Christ’s
finished work. For example, he might come to the point where he says
something like "The blood of Christ is common and just like any other man’s.
There is nothing special about it".
In short, this latter interpretation necessitates a conclusion that
sanctification of
Hebrews 10:29 is not the same as the
sanctification of
Hebrews 10:14. The one proves eternal perfection (Hebrews
10:14) and the other
proves great guilt after apostasy (Hebrews
10:29).
What is this fruitless
sanctification? What does it look like? As alluded to above, this
"sanctification" appears to be an external religious separation and outward
purification that often happens when a person becomes part of the visible
church. The Pharisees of Jesus' day are a perfect illustration of those who
on the outside looked so devout, so legitimate, so "set apart" (the root
meaning of Pharisee even means set apart - from Aramaic word peras,
signifying to separate to a different manner of life from that of the
general public - sounds a lot like "sanctified"!) or "sanctified". Jesus
Himself testified to their external set apartness or "sanctification"
declaring to the audience listening to His sermon on the mount...
For I say to you, that unless your
righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not
enter the kingdom of heaven. (see note
Matthew 5:20)
Could anyone have been
more righteous appearing than the Pharisees? Clearly not, at least according
to Jesus' assessment. And yet what did these "set apart" ones do (most of
them at least)? Did they not reject Jesus the essence of Truth
even to the point of seeking to kill Him (compare "trampled under foot the
Son of God")? Surely their desire to kill Jesus was nothing short of willful sinning
and an insult to the Spirit of grace!
In the same way, the
apostates the writer of Hebrews is describing had heard and come
under the influence of truth about Jesus. They had mingled with and to a
degree come under the
influence of the love of Christ among His true followers. They had come under the influence of
Christian
ordinances like water baptism and the Lord's Supper (both of which are
external acts that can easily be performed by unbelievers). And when
one looked at their acclamations and actions, for all intents and purposes
these men and women appeared to be set apart from
the corruption of the world. But their sanctification was only on the
outside. They were set apart in much the same way as were the people of Israel
in the OT who were set apart from the Gentile
nations, even though many of them were faithless apostates!
AND HAS INSULTED THE SPIRIT OF GRACE: kai to pneuma tes charitos enubrisas (AAPMSN):
(Isaiah
63:10;
Matthew 12:31,32;
Luke 12:10;
Acts 7:51;
Ephesians 4:30)
(Psalms
143:10;
Zechariah 12:10)
Insulted (1796)
(enubrizo from en = in + hubrízo = act arrogantly,
ill-treat, exercise violence, abuse, use reproachfully or despitefully, act
insolently or spitefully toward someone) means to treat with reproach.
Insulted the Spirit
of grace - As explained above, this phrase most likely refers to the act of
a professed Hebrew believer, who
after allowing the Holy Spirit to lead him along in His pre-salvation work
of convicting of sin and of energizing him to consider repentance, now
turns away from the Spirit's further impartation of faith, instead choosing
to turn from grace and go back to the Law and the
temple sacrifices.
Hughes comments
that...
This is the only place in the New
Testament where the Holy Spirit is called “the Spirit of grace” (but cf.
Zechariah 12:10), and what a beautiful and fitting title it is. He
enlightens our minds, he seals our hearts in adoption, he regenerates us
with spiritual life, and he grafts us into the Body of Christ—all effects of
grace. We ought to make note of this lovely ascription and use it
devotionally. The Spirit of grace—the Holy Spirit of grace—He gives and
gives and gives! (Hughes,
R. K. Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul. Volume 1. Crossway Books;
Volume 2 or
Logos)
In a passage that
bears some resemblance to that here in Hebrews 10, Matthew records Jesus
words regarding blasphemy of the Spirit...
Therefore I say to you, any sin and
blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not
be forgiven. And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall
be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall
not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come. (Matthew 12:31,32)
Jesus' warning
deserves some explanation. From the context one notes that the unpardonable
sin is a knowledgeable, verbal, and continuous attributing of the work of
the Holy Spirit to Satan. Can one commit this sin today is the question?
William MacDonald
has a well worded thought on the unpardonable sin writing that...
These verses mark a crisis in Christ’s
dealings with the leaders of Israel. He accuses them of committing the
unpardonable sin by blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, that is, by
charging that Jesus performed His miracles by the power of Satan rather than
by the power of the Holy Spirit. In effect, this was calling the Holy Spirit
Beelzebub, the ruler of demons.
There is forgiveness for other forms of
sin and blasphemy. A man may even speak against the Son of Man and be
forgiven. But to blaspheme the Holy Spirit is a sin for which there is no
forgiveness in this age or in the millennial age to come. When Jesus said in
this age, He was speaking of the days of His public ministry on earth. There
is reasonable doubt whether the unpardonable sin can be committed today,
because He is not bodily present performing miracles.
The unpardonable sin is not the same as
rejecting the gospel; a man may spurn the Savior for years, then repent,
believe, and be saved. (Of course, if he dies in unbelief, he remains
unforgiven.) Nor is the unforgivable sin the same as backsliding; a believer
may wander far from the Lord, yet be restored to fellowship in God’s family.
Many people worry that they have
committed the unpardonable sin. Even if this sin could be committed today,
the fact that a person is concerned is evidence that he is not guilty of it.
Those who committed it were hard and unrelenting in their opposition to
Christ. They had no qualms about insulting the Spirit and no hesitancy in
plotting the death of the Son. They showed neither remorse nor repentance. (MacDonald,
W & Farstad, A. Believer's Bible Commentary: Thomas Nelson
or
Logos)
Kent Hughes
gives an illustration of trampling "the Son of God under foot" writing
that...
The January 1991 issue of
Harper’s Magazine carried a reproduction of an anti-Christian tract entitled
Dear Believer, a “non-tract” published by the Freedom from Religion
Foundation of Madison, Wisconsin. The tract variously attacked creation and
miracles and then God Himself, finally coming to Jesus and saying:
And Jesus is a chip off the old block. He said, “I and
My Father are One,”
and He upheld “every jot and tittle” of the Old Testament law. He preached
the same old judgment: vengeance and death, wrath and distress, hell and
torture for all nonconformists. He never denounced the subjugation of slaves
or women. He irrationally cursed and withered a fig tree for being barren
out of season. He mandated burning unbelievers. (The Church has complied
with relish.) He stole a horse. You want me to accept Jesus, but I think
I’ll pick my own friends, thank you. I also find Christianity to be morally
repugnant. The concepts of original sin, depravity, substitutionary
forgiveness, intolerance, eternal punishment, and humble worship are all
beneath the dignity of intelligent human beings.
This tract captures the emotion of the word “trampled,” which is a
singularly powerful expression for disdain as, for example, when the swine
find your pearls and “trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear
you to pieces” (Matthew 7:6; cf. Matthew 5:13; Luke 8:5). Figuratively,
the metaphor portrays taking “the Son of God”—the highest accord given to
Christ in Hebrews—and grinding him into the dirt. Thus, turning away from
Christ is an attack on his person. (Hughes,
R. K. Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul. Volume 1. Crossway Books;
Volume 2 or
Logos)
><> ><> ><>
Our Daily Bread - Half-Baked Christians
The prophet Hosea used the tribe of Ephraim as a poetic representation
of the northern kingdom of Israel. In a colorful admonition, he wrote
that Ephraim had become "a cake unturned" (Hosea 7:8).
In today's terminology, the prophet might have said that Ephraim was
"half-baked." The people were like a pancake burned on one side but
raw on the other. Although they took advantage of the Lord's goodness,
they did not seek Him with their heart. When they needed help, they
turned to other sources (vv.10-11,14-16). They had become tasteless
and useless to God, so He was forced to judge them.
Jesus echoed the words of the prophet. Although He had gentle words
for penitent sinners, He gave a scathing rebuke to the haughty and
self-righteous who wanted to live as they pleased. He was furious at
two-faced religious leaders who talked a good talk but turned around
and exploited their followers (Matthew 23:13-30).
God is never soft on sin. He sent His only Son to redeem us from sin's
penalty (John 3:16). Let's not be half-baked Christians, claiming
God's forgiveness but still living as we please. The only fitting
response to God's mercy and grace is to serve Him in humility and
love.—Haddon W. Robinson
(Our
Daily Bread, Copyright RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, MI. Reprinted by
permission. All rights reserved)
Thinking It Through
What is the basis of our salvation? (Ephesians 2:8-9).
How are we to respond to God's grace? (v.10).
How does God correct His children? (Hebrews 12:5-11).
God's grace is not license to live as we please—it's liberty to please
God.
We all depend upon the
strength
We draw from one another,
For we are one in faith and love
With every Christian brother. --Sper
Two Christians are better
than one--when they're one.
