Call to Persevere with Jesus (Heb. 5:11–6:12)

This sermon was preached on 19/5/2013

                 

Did we ever have the experience of speaking to someone and sensing that the person is unable to understand what you are speaking about? I know some people have had that experience with me. Many a mechanic has begun to explain to me what has been wrong with the cars of mine that he has checked, and despite my nodding he soon realises that I am unable to understand him. Why was that the case? Despite several opportunities I had made no effort to understand what I was being told. I could have done so, but I did not, therefore I could not follow his explanation.

                 

In a far more serious manner, the author realises that his readers are unable to understand what he would like to say to them about the significance of the Old Testament character, Melchizedek. I wonder what we could say about him, if we were asked. Fortunately, for them and us, he proceeded to explain their current problem, then to warn them of a possible consequence, and to urge them to make a right response. We will look at each of these details, beginning with their current problem.

                 

Their current problem (5:11-14)

The reason why they could not understand his teaching is that they had become 'dull of hearing'. The idea behind the word ‘dull’ is negligent or sluggish; his readers had become inattentive, but not by accident. Instead they had not grown in their capacity to absorb stronger doctrines, which he here calls ‘solid food’, as opposed to the basic principles of the Christian faith, which he here calls ‘milk’.

The outcome was that instead of being teachers, able to share the deeper doctrines of the faith with others, they were unable even to understand the basic doctrines. The scenario is not that they could understand the basics but found the deeper ideas hard. The author is very clear that they actually needed someone to teach them again about the basics which they had already heard and believed some time before, perhaps several years in the past.

His description here highlights several important aspects of the Christian life and I would mention five. First, the author obviously expected all Christians to understand deeper truths about Jesus. This is the point of his reference to Melchizedek. The author did not want them merely to become knowledgeable about that ancient priest. Instead he wanted his readers to see what the biblical references to Melchizedek said about Jesus.

                 

Second, the author makes it clear that if Christians don’t go forwards, they will go backwards; his words make it clear that no one stands still, as it were. His readers were in danger of losing their previous understanding, they would lose it if they decide to go back, and if that happens they will need to be re-instructed in the basics of the faith. 

Third, every Christian should make it a goal to be able to teach other Christians. We have adopted the idea that teaching must involve something new whereas an essential feature of teaching is reminding one another of the doctrines of the faith, ones that we may have known for a long time. The author is not saying that all believers are expected to teach from a pulpit. But they are expected to teach one another as they have fellowship together.

Fourth, the only way to reach this level of communication is by constant practice. Practice indicates a definite effort to do so. We can see the problem with the recipients of this letter. They were being harassed and perhaps may have assumed that it would be safer to keep quiet. Yet doing so would cause the flame within to flicker weakly.

Fifth, if we remain with the basics, we will remain unskilled in the word of righteousness. What does the author mean by ‘word of righteousness’? It is the word that speaks about righteousness, which could refer to the Bible or to the gospel requirements that they heard. In a sense, it does not matter which one because the gospel message is the message of the Bible. The important detail here is the necessity of using the message skillfully both for our own benefit and for the benefit of others, and we can only do this if we are maturing as believers. Clearly we should use the message to inform our faith, to know its divine promises, to appreciate its divine instructions and to defeat our spiritual enemies.

A possible consequence (6:1-8)

The writer calls his readers to grow up, to become spiritual adults. They had become the opposite, spiritual infants, but they could leave that immaturity and resume spiritual growth. In order for this to happen, they had to start building on the foundation rather than relaying it, which is the connection to his use of repentance and faith. They could not grow if they persisted in focusing only on what they had known in their initial steps in the Christian life. He also mentions four other doctrines and practices, and here are some suggestions about why he did.

We might be surprised at some of the doctrines and practices the author classifies as elementary, and it looks as if he uses three sets of two in doing so. In saying they are elementary, he is not saying that they are unimportant. Instead each one of them is a doctrine or practice that demands an ongoing response. His first couplet is ‘repentance from dead works and of faith toward God’. It is obvious that they are not the climax of Christian experience because they first reveal themselves at the onset of our Christian lives. Their dead works were what they did before conversion, the lifestyles they lived. It is not enough to be sorry for those sins; in addition believers have to live dedicated lives. Similarly, with regard to faith, there is a difference in the way a new Christian exercises it and the way a mature Christian will exercise it.

The second couplet is ‘instruction about washings’ and ‘the laying on of hands’. The common aspect of this pair is that they are probably Jewish practices about which a great deal of pointless discussion was taking place among Jews and that would reach the ears of these converted Hebrews. For example, earlier in the chapter the author has been speaking about the high priest in Jerusalem. The high priest was involved with rituals that would include washings and laying on of hands. From a Christian point of view, such practices were now of no value, so there was no benefit from focusing on them.

The third couplet is ‘the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.’ Clearly the author cannot mean that the resurrection and the sentences to be given on the Day of Judgement are unimportant. So what could he have in mind regarding them? Here are two options. First, I would suggest he is indicating that speculations about what will happen then are pointless if we have not been told about those details. Second, perhaps he is saying that his readers should understand them from the point of view of the greater revelation given in the New Testament, which says much more about them than does the Old.

                 

The author then refers to some people who had given up the Christian faith. They had done so despite having been instructed in (enlightened) and affected by the gospel in a variety of ways. Now they have turned away and are saying that the work of Jesus on the cross was of no value and, in doing so, are making themselves open to divine judgement as well as causing others to despise the work of Christ. Many a Christian has puzzled over this description, wondering if they are about to commit apostasy.

In endeavouring to help his readers appreciate what has been taking place, the author uses an illustration of rain falling on a field. The outcome of the rain is that there can be a field with a harvest or there can be a field full of thistles and thorns. The farmer may work equally hard in both fields (or in both parts of the one field), yet despite his best efforts the bad ground continues to produce weeds. Therefore he decides to leave that ground. God can do that with those who despise what he sends from heaven.

                 

The writer says that it is impossible to restore such again. Of course, the question is, Impossible for whom? We cannot say that it would be impossible for God to do so as far as his divine ability is concerned. Of course, it would be impossible if God had said, ‘I will never forgive those who give up the Christian faith.’ That may be the answer. Yet it is also possible to read the difficulty as one that was impossible for humans to rectify. It certainly is beyond the ability of any Christian or group of Christians to cause someone to have a genuine spiritual experience. So what the author could be saying is that there is no point in arguing with such persons at the moment and to leave them with God. Despite the best efforts of their Christian friends, they had given up and while they retained that outlook there would be no point trying to get them to return to the faith. After all, the church has no new message for them and if they are determined to reject it, what other argument can the church use to win them? Instead we have to leave them with God.

A right response (6:9-14)

The author resumes speaking about his readers whom he distinguishes from the people he has just described. He wants to comfort and re-assure them and also to stimulate them to make spiritual progress, even although they currently live in a difficult situation of hostility.

First, he speaks about the things that belong to salvation and by them he means expressions of brotherly love. The apostle John tells his readers that if they love their fellow Christians they have passed from death to life (1 John 3:14 – of course, there are other marks of salvation and John mentions some of them elsewhere in his first letter). Paul tells the Corinthians that living a life of love is the best way (1. Cor. 12:33–13:13). And our author loves his readers as well. No doubt, times of persecution can be testing times for brotherly love because Christians in such times may forget the needs of other believers. So far, the recipients of the letter had continued to express brotherly love, therefore the author was confident that they were genuine. And he was also confident that God would reward them for their lives of practical love.

                                                        

Second, he and his friends want them to be as eager for obtaining what he calls ‘the full assurance of hope’. Hope focuses on the future, so the author must have in mind what believers will receive when they die or when Jesus comes back. Hope is concerned with final salvation. It is linked with faith – John Owen describes hope as ‘the daughter, the sister, and the companion of faith.’

The author says that it is possible to have assurance of hope. In other words, a believer can anticipate sharing in the blessings of final salvation. Yet the author also makes clear that there are degrees of assurance because he urges his readers to give every effort to attain what he calls full assurance. Full assurance must be stronger and deeper than an assurance that is not full.

He also says that full assurance will not be given to those who are lazy in a spiritual sense. The way by which we show this energy is by using the various means of grace that God has provided for us individually and corporately. One of the consequences of Bible reading, prayer, fellowship, church attendance and witnessing is increased assurance. One of the consequences of not engaging in those things is loss of this assurance.

What are the benefits of this assurance? First, it will give us comfort when things go against us, whatever those things might involve. Second, it will give us courage when opposition increases. Third, it will stimulate communion with God and fellowship with those who long to have this hope increase. Fourth, it will increase our confidence in Jesus, and when that happens we will serve him warmly.