Ver. 6. καὶ παραπεσόντας, “and fell away,” 1.6., from the condition depicted
298
Θεοῦ ῥῆμα, 6. δυνάμεις τε μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, καὶ παραπεσόντας, πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν, ἀνασταυροῦντας ἑαυτοῖς τὸν υἱὸν-
by the preceding participles; ‘‘ grave verbum subito occurrens” (Bengel). The word in classical Greek has the meaning ‘fall in with” or ‘fall upon” ; in Poly- bius, “to fall away from,” “(ο err,” followed by τ. ὁδοῦ, τ. ἀληθείας, τ. καθήκοντος; also absolutely “το err”. In the Greek fathers the lapsed are called οἱ παραπεπτωκότες Or οἱ παραπεσόντες. The full meaning of the word is given in ὑποστολῆς cis ἀπώλειαν of x. 39. The translation of the A.V. and early Eng- lish versions ‘‘if they shall fall away,” although accused of dogmatic bias, is justifiable. It is a hypothesis that is here introduced. Thus far the writer has accumulated expressions which pre- sent the picture of persons who have not merely professed the Christian. faith but have enjoyed rich experience of its peculiar and characteristic influence, but now a word is introduced which com- pletely alters the picture. They have enjoyed all these things, but the last thing to be said of them is that they have ‘fallen from” their former state. The writer describes a condition which he considers possible. And of persons realising this possibility he says ἀδύνατον «ον πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν, ‘it is impossible to renew [them] again to repentance,” “impossible,” not “ diffi- cult” [as in the Graeco-Latin Codex Claromontanus, “ difficile”’]; impossible not only to a teacher, but to God, for in every case of renewal it is God who is the Agent. [Bengel says “ hominibus est impossibile, non Deo,’ and that therefore the ministers of God must leave such persons to Him and wait for what God may accomplish ‘per singulares afflictiones et operationes”’. But cf. x. 26-31.] πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν, πάλιν is not pleonastic, but denotes that those who have once experienced ἀνακαινισμός Cannot again have a like experience. It suggests that the word ἄνακαιν. involves, or naturally leads on to, all that is expressed in the participles under ἅπαξ from φωτισθέντας to αἰῶνος of ver. 5. A renewed person is one who is enlightened, tastes the heavenly gift, and so on. But as the first stone in the foundation was μετάνοια (ver. 1), so here the first manifestation of renewal is in μετάνοια. The persons described cannot again be brought to a life-changing re- nentance—a statement which opens one
of the most important psychological problems. The reason this writer as- signs for the impossibility is given in the words ἀνασταυροῦντας .. . παρα- δειγματίζοντας, “ crucifying [or ‘seeing that they crucify”] to themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open. shame”. Edwards understands these participles as putting a hypothetical case, and renders ‘‘they cannot be re- newed after falling away if they persist in crucifying, etc.”. This, however, re- duces the statement to a vapid truism, and, although grammatically admissible, does not agree with the οὐκέτι of the parallel passage in x. 26. The mitiga- tion of the severity of the statement is rather to be sought in the enormity and therefore rarity of the sin described, which is equivalent to the deliberate and insolent rejection of Christ alluded to in x. 26, 29, and the suicidal blas- phemy alluded to in Mk. iii. 29. On the doctrine of the passage, see Harless, Ethics, c. 29. In classical and later Greek the word for “crucify” is not σταυρόω (of which Stephanus cites only one example, and that from Polybius), but ἀνασταυροῦν, so that the ava does not mean ‘‘again” or ‘afresh,’ but refers to the lifting #f on the cross, as in ἀναρτάω or ἀνασκολοπίζω. In the N.T. no doubt σταυρόω is uniformly used, but never in this Epistle; and it was inevitable that a Hellenist would: understand ἀνασταυρ. in its ordinary meaning. There is no ground therefore for the translation of the Vulg. ‘ rursum crucifigentes,” although it is so com- monly followed. Besides, any crucifixion by the Hebrews [ἑαυτοῖς] must have been a fresh crucifixion, and needs no express indication of that feature of it. The significance of ἑαυτοῖς seems to be “‘so- far as they are concerned,” not ‘“‘to: their own judgment” or ‘‘to their own destruction”. The apostate crucifies Christ on his own account by virtually confirming the judgment of the actual crucifiers, declaring that he too has made trial of Jesus and found Him πο: true Messiah but a deceiver, and there- fore worthy of death. The greatness of the guilt in so doing is aggravated by the fact that apostates thus treat τὸν υἱὸν τ. Θεοῦ, cf. x. 29. καὶ παρα- δειγματίζοντας, the verb is found in Numb. xxv. 4, where it implies εχ--