Can We Lose Our Salvation?

Tim Staples' Blog ^ | October 5, 2013 | Tim Staples

[GonzoII]

Can We Lose Our Salvation?

Hebrews 6:4-6 reveals a rather unsettling truth: We can lose our state of grace and fall away from the Lord.

For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt.

For those who teach what Calvinists call “the final perseverance of the saints,” this text presents real problems. Some will argue the above description only refers to people who “knew about the Lord,” but were never really saved to begin with. I have always wondered if those making that argument can really be satisfied with it. It seems the inspired author makes clear, almost to the point of redundancy, that he was speaking about those who have been saved and then “commit apostasy.”

Another Protestant tack is to claim the author is presenting an impossible hypothetical. In other words, he’s saying it would be impossible to restore again to repentance one who had truly been baptized into Jesus Christ because it is impossible for such a person to fall away to begin with.

This doesn’t work, either. The author is presenting a warning of the peril of falling away from the Lord. He would hardly warn his readers of something that is impossible to actually happen.

Do Catholics Prove Too Much?

Most “eternally secure” Protestants with whom I have spoken about these verses of Scripture end up acknowledging their case to be weak from the text alone. But when cornered, I have found almost invariably they attempt to turn the tables on me by claiming I prove too much as a Catholic. If this text is saying one can fall away, then it also says the one who falls away cannot be restored. This would be contrary to Catholic teaching.

The greater context of the entire epistle gives us the answer to this apparent difficulty. Hebrews was written to… you guessed it… Hebrews. But more specifically to Hebrew Christians who were being tempted to go back to the Old Covenant priesthood, sacrifices, and other practices, like circumcision, in order to be saved. It is in this context—from start to finish—that the inspired author runs the gamut on Jewish belief showing how Christ is greater than and/or is the fulfillment of the entire Old Covenant.

In chapters one and two, Jesus is revealed to be greater than the angels; he’s revealed to be God (see Hebrews 1:5-10). In chapters three and four, he is our true high priest, greater than Moses, and fulfillment of what the Sabbath symbolized (see 3:3; 4:2-11). In chapters five and seven, he is the antitype of Melchizadek (5:5-10; 7:11). In chapter eight, he is superior to and the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in establishing the New (8:8-13). In chapters nine and ten, he is superior to the temple and its sacrifices (9:23-24; 10:4-10). And it is in this context that the inspired author then exhorts his readers to endure the persecution that had already begun by this time (10:32-39). He calls them to “hold fast the confession of [their] hope without wavering” (10:23), and to remain faithful to the Church Jesus established rather than go back to an Old Covenant and its sacrifices that have no power to save (10:25-31; 12:18-25; 13:7-10).

If we understand the greater context, we understand that the author of Hebrews is not saying it is impossible to be forgiven of the sin of apostasy; rather, it is impossible for those who “have tasted the heavenly gift” of the New Covenant and would then return to the Old Covenant to be saved. Why? Because they are trusting in a covenant, law, priesthood, sacrifice, and more that do not possess the power to save. They are returning to a well without water.

If these same Hebrews, or by allusion anyone down through the centuries who may have apostatized, turn back to Christ and his Church trusting in the graces that alone come from the sacrifice of Christ, then of course they can be restored to a saving relationship with God.

[HarleyD]

Haven't gone thru all the posts in this thread yet...but I find the "once saved, always saved" folks don't really like to discuss Heb. 6:4-6...and therefore they avoid it (like the plague).

I find people take the book of Hebrews completely out of contexts. I have stated on previous threads that it is impossible to do a serious study on the book of Hebrews here. Certainly taking snippets of verses here and there to build entire doctrine around while ignoring other verses in the scriptures is a very dangerous practice. I would suggest reading John MacArthur's excellent commentary on Hebrews. No we don't avoid it like the plague. People just don't wish to understand it within it's context.

However, to briefly explain Hebrews 6:4-6 so I'm not lumped into the group:

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit,

Heb 6:5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come,

Heb 6:6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

The book of Hebrews is written to just that, to Hebrews as an evangelistic letter. This is the love of God that He would so include an evangelistic call to the Jews within His scripture.

There is no mention in this passage to salvation, regeneration, the new birth or anything else that is typically used in the New Testament to indicate these people are saved. Rather the enlightenment spoken here is an intellectual understanding. Dr. MacArthur states the word used here is the Greek word photizo which means to give light by knowledge or teaching. To make mentally aware of something. This is in the same sense as "The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great light." It doesn't mean they were saved. It means that they knew they were visited by God, just the way they knew when they stood in front of Mount Sinai with Moses.

This group not only saw the heavenly light but they also tasted of the heavenly gift. Believers do not just "taste" of the heavenly gift, they drink of the living waters and eat of the living bread. Tasting infers they were never participates in the divine meal of Christ.

Sharing (or partakers) has to do with association. The scriptures never talk about believers being "associated" with the Holy Spirit. It speaks of the Holy Spirit indwelling us. These people were sharing in what was happening around them, yet the Holy Spirit was not working through them.

They have tasted (sampled) the word (rhema-not logos) of God meaning they knew bits and pieces but never fit it into context. They have tasted (sampled) of the age to come meaning they've seen the miracles and the wondrous blessings. And with all this tasting and sampling and bits and pieces of understanding, they still wouldn't believe. They were like the Jews in the later case:

Act_17:32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, "We will hear you again about this."

They heard and saw all of this, yet they never came to a full knowledge of Christ. This was not unlike Judas who participated in God's glory, walked with Christ, heard His words, even cast out demons, but never came to a full understanding of who Christ was or what He was about.

As John MacArthur states:

These particular Jews had even heard the apostles preach and had seen them perform signs and wonders and miracles (Heb 2:4). They had been privileged to behold virtually all the manifestations of His saving Word and power that God could give. They had heard it all and seen it all. They even had accepted it all intellectually. Any who are so informed, so witnessed to, so blessed with every opportunity to know God's gospel, and who then turn their backs on it-for Judaism or anything else-are eternally lost. They not only reject the gospel, but crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. They had either to go on to full knowledge of God through faith in Christ or else turn away from Him, to become apostate and be lost forever.

[redleghunter]

Need I ask or dare to ask how the conversation from “Can I lose my salvation” finally came to a discussion on Rome again:)?

[redleghunter]

These particular Jews had even heard the apostles preach and had seen them perform signs and wonders and miracles (Heb 2:4). They had been privileged to behold virtually all the manifestations of His saving Word and power that God could give. They had heard it all and seen it all. They even had accepted it all intellectually. Any who are so informed, so witnessed to, so blessed with every opportunity to know God's gospel, and who then turn their backs on it-for Judaism or anything else-are eternally lost. They not only reject the gospel, but crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. They had either to go on to full knowledge of God through faith in Christ or else turn away from Him, to become apostate and be lost forever.

And as John Mac goes on to say, the same can happen today. AKA, someone denying the Completed Work of Jesus Christ for another system that offers external works for salvation as equal or portioned.

[daniel1212]

My premise, you ask? I already gave you my premise. You deny it, simply.

No, you simply made a statement and i am asking what your argument really is, if your premise is that under the supremacy of Scripture, as in sola scriptura or sola prima, then there are divisions and schisms, versus under sola ecclesia, the model under which Catholicism operates.

Why avoid it?

2nd— To the contrary, protestants that I know are not propaganda. I shared what they admit.

3rd— “No”, to all the links to those disputing sites that strain for argument, in the face of 2000 years of history, artifacts, etc., etc. I know because I lived there, already been-there-done-that. I am a convert. Hardly a fair fight.

But the historical argument for Rome's historical claims and for the perpetuated Petrine papacy, and of unanimous consent for Mt. 16:18 referring to Peter as being the Rock is propaganda.

Then that is simply an assertion, but reveals ignorance of the evidence against your arguments, which is not propaganda but scholarship.

4th— Now you launch a filibuster that disrespects any dialogue,

This has been made warranted by RCs who will not follow links to evidence that refutes them, and then dismiss what they will not look at, as if there is none. And which your assertions indicate you are like.

Old news of laborious suppositions...

Neither the issue of whether when the apocrypha was infallibly defined as Scripture proper,or research on the historical claims of Rome and its papacy and unbroken succession are old news.

So now answer my questions if you want to have respect to dialogue.

[daniel1212]

Need I ask or dare to ask how the conversation from “Can I lose my salvation” finally came to a discussion on Rome again:)?

Well, since a Catholic posted it, i began by saying "Catholics cannot lose what they never had," and i went on from there.

[redleghunter]

since we are cut out of the equation.

That is an important point you bring up. In the Finished Work of Christ there is no "we" as it pertains to "us."

In Ephesians 2 it says:

10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Usually at this point is where we hear those who denounce good works save us are hedonists. Which my response is usually that those who think so should dig up Anne Hutchinson and put her on trial, because as far as I know no antinomians reside here on FR.

So I don't disagree with you that "we" or "us" are in the salvation equation. In fact, we are the part of the equation which is the negative side being sinners in need of the Finished Work of Jesus Christ.

[redleghunter]

Thanks for the post. I find it interesting we have a great volume of testimonies just here on FR reference the Lord coming to get a wayward sheep. Have we any of none ever returning to the fold?

[boatbums]

Though you claim to not be “a trained Bible scholar or pastor”, you did an excellent job of being an ambassador for Christ. The good news was preached clearly and lovingly. Thank you.

[boatbums]

I think the "altar call" is one of many ways that God uses to call His chosen to faith at the appointed time. We have the Scripture that tells us, "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." (Romans 10:9,10) as well as Jesus saying as in Matthew 10:32 "Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven." We can see that, in many cases, people just believed and then proceeded to glorify God in their lives as well as verbally before others.

So, regardless if a person walks down an aisle in a church at the "invitation" or quietly alone in a room prays to God to save him confessing faith in Christ, their salvation is begun and will ultimately lead to sanctification and glorification through the grace of God. The Shepherd knows His sheep and they know Him and will follow Him and He gives to them eternal life and they shall never perish or be plucked from His hand. BTW...that even means we cannot pluck ourselves from His hands because he holds onto us, we don't hold onto Him.

[boatbums]

That has been my experience as well. In fact, if I EVER attended a church where the pastor preached that the gift of eternal life was a “free pass” to live any way one likes, I would get up and leave. That “gospel” is every much as accursed as saying we must have faith and works to be saved.

[boatbums]

So...kinda "funny" that people think that a sinful person in Christ living in a sinful world would never walk away from the Lord; while at the same time they acknowledge that a perfect being living in a perfect environment in a perfect relationship with the Lord can lose their relationship with God. See, when it comes to explaining demons, the "once related to Christ, always related to Christ" folks seem to dissipate -- as in 100% of them. Anyone care to explain that?

I'll give it a shot. The angels are different beings from humans. Jesus didn't die to save angels. Even angels who "kept their first estate" or stayed faithful to Almighty God are not "filled with the Holy Spirit" which is given to humans as the "earnest of our inheritance", were not adopted into the family of God, are not heirs and joint heirs with Jesus Christ and do not have their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

The demons are the fallen angels who rebelled against Almighty God and were kicked out of heaven along with their ring leader, Satan, a.k.a Lucifer. They had their chance to choose whose side to be on and they chose foolishly - which shows that they can err to their everlasting doom. The fallen angels have no redeemer - Jesus didn't pay for their sin of rebellion.

To me, this is the main reason why we, as humans, can have the assurance of our salvation once we come to saving faith in Christ because we HAVE been justified by faith, sanctified by the Spirit and made righteous by the grace of God. We are indwelt and sealed with the Holy Spirit UNTIL the day of redemption (when we enter heaven) and, because we cannot break that seal, God will not send the Holy Spirit to hell should we fall away into sin. There IS no falling from grace in the sense that God's grace can lose its grip on us. The only way someone can "fall from grace" is when they seek to be justified by the law (see Galatians 5:4) and they were not saved to begin with.

Some people, because it's our nature, will see the gospel of grace not by works as an easy way to live it up and still go to heaven when they die - presumptuously playing God as some kind of pasty for making such an offer in the first place. But what we DO know is that genuine faith begins with a heartfelt repentance - it is a recognition that we are sinners deserving eternal damnation and accepting that it is wholly by God's matchless grace that we have any hope for redemption and a changing of our minds from the way of death we were traveling to the way of life through faith in Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit creates in us a new, spirit nature that intrinsically alters our way of thinking and gives us not only a heart that seeks after God but grows to detest the sin that so easily besets us and clouds our relationship with our Father.

It is this new nature that brings about a change in our hearts and a gradual spiritual growth so that even if/when we sin, we will find that we become repulsed by our actions and regret with shame and remorse the past sinful life we led. It IS a process, so no one should imagine that a new believer will automatically be transformed into a perfect example of a Christian. We are a work in progress - a work that God began in us and HE will bring it to completion. That's why we are told to not judge what is another's heart. We can only see the outside, but God looks on the heart. He knows those who are His.

[Iscool]

This has been made warranted by RCs who will not follow links to evidence that refutes them, and then dismiss what they will not look at, as if there is none. And which your assertions indicate you are like.

[Colofornian]

To me, this is the main reason why we, as humans, can have the assurance of our salvation once we come to saving faith in Christ because we HAVE been justified by faith, sanctified by the Spirit and made righteous by the grace of God.

Hear me out: I've never said that a person in Christ is beyond "assurance of our salvation."

Scripture is clear that such assurance is possible: 10 Whoever believes in the Son of God accepts this testimony. Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. (1 John 5)

The gift of eternal life, says John (& He says this also in verses in John quoted by Metmom earlier in the thread), is present tense (1 John 5:11-13). And v. 13 is clear assurance -- "that you may KNOW" (not that you may "guess").

And 2 Tim. 2:13 also comes to mind: if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot disown himself.

God's gift is Himself; God doesn't yank away such a gift (He is faithful); God offers complete security in His Son (John 10:28-29); and all of this trust is quite reassuring beyond comprehension.

It'd be the same thing married to the most perfect understanding committed spouse in the world, who wouldn't dump you. You can have complete security and confidence and trust and reassurance that the relationship is "forever."

But, you know, people do abandon relationships completely -- in some cases, no matter how great that spouse is. It won't do any good to take the "Catholic" road once trod -- and "annul" the marriage -- and pretend it never happened.

I cited 2 Tim. 2:13 above...but we can't take v. 13 apart from v. 12: "IF we endure, we will also reign with him. IF we disown him, he will disown us."

You see the key to understanding 2 Tim. 2:12-13 is that v. 13 is said by someone who is obviously trusting fully that God will rescue him; when someone abandons that trust completely and fully -- that trust that God will always rescue Him no matter what...then Calvinists would be applying irresistable grace to 100% of prodigal sons. [And please, no "well, some of those prodigal sons were never a 'son' to begin with." ... Jesus didn't leave that option in that parable]

Your last two graphs: No disagreement at all.

Jesus didn't die to save angels.

Jesus created all beings says Col. 1:16, including angels. The same divine creative power emerged from Him in creating a "perfect nature" angel as was used in re-creating each of us in that new regeneration nature in Christ. (The Source is the same)

Other verses (among MANY others) to consider:

John 15:6: If anyone does not REMAIN in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned." [It won't do anygood to claim Jesus is talking about people who weren't in Him]

Colossians 1:22-23: "But now he has reconciled you by Christ's physical body through death to prsent you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation--IF you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel."

See -- with God's gift of faith, and His continual empowerment in exercising that faith, we have firm assurance -- we are indeed unmoveable from any external source. (That doesn't mean we can't internally move ourselves)

1 Timothy 1:19-20: "Somehave rejected these [context is faith and a good conscience] and so have shipwrecked their faith. Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme."

Now we both know that a "shipwreck" is not an automatic death sentence. People do survive shipwrecks. But it's quite ludicrous to claim that the survival rate of shipwrecks is 100%. Or that those who died aboard such ships weren't really "mates" after all...Or they don't count anyway 'cause we'll just presume that 100% of those lost were stowaways not listed on the manifest.

[Colofornian]

Harley thanks for your reply.

I'll cover this statement below again -- but this one statement of yours strikes me as a bit of an overwhelming standard...as you described who you think is referenced in Heb. 6:4-6:

"...they never came to a full knowledge of Christ. This was not unlike Judas who participated in God's glory, walked with Christ, heard His words, even cast out demons, but never came to a full understanding of who Christ was or what He was about."

OK, Harley, really? Ya wanna give me a full list of all the people who've walked the earth who...
...(a) have come to a FULL knowledge of Christ?
...and (b) have come "to a FULL understanding of who Christ was or what He was about?"

If this is your standard, then who would ever remain in Christ???

Also, as I read this from your post, some vague reference I remember somebody once indicated Luther said came to me...something to the effect that the Gospel is so simple, a schoolchild can understand it and responsively trust Christ; yet so complex we could study & "mine it" every day of our lives and still like a diamond uncover a new facet about it.

Anyway, doesn't seem like any of those school children Luther was referencing would make your "grade" there about reaching a complete knowledge/understanding of Christ -- and yet God wouldn't consider them any less of His adopted children.

**************************

I decided the way to approach your post was to break down how you described these people referenced in Heb. 6:4-6:

* They were unsaved, you say ("It doesn't mean they were saved.")
* They were "atmospheric" type church members ("These people were sharing in what was happening around them, yet the Holy Spirit was not working through them.")
* They were receivers of bits & pieces of God's Word ("They have tasted (sampled) the word (rhema-not logos) of God meaning they knew bits and pieces but never fit it into context.")
* They were either unbelievers and/or indecisive types about their faith ("...they still wouldn't believe. They were like the Jews in the later case: Act_17:32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, "We will hear you again about this.")
* Their knowledge of Christ was incomplete ("...they never came to a full knowledge of Christ. This was not unlike Judas who participated in God's glory, walked with Christ, heard His words, even cast out demons, but never came to a full understanding of who Christ was or what He was about.")
* And then you cited McArthur which essentially boiled them down to "back-turners"

Now you might quibble that the above six bullet points isn't a complete summary of your post, but let's just sum it up as the "problem" of those referenced in Heb. 6 is that they were (1) unsaved; (2) "atmospheric" Christians minus the Holy Spirit indwelling them; (3) were incomplete in digesting God's Word; (4) unbelievers/agnostics; (5) incomplete in their knowledge/understanding of who Jesus was and His mission; and (6) became back-turners.

OK, you also properly spelled out the verses in question (Heb. 6:4-6).

So here's the question I'd like to ask you (& others):
Three of the first four words in Heb. 6:4 is: ...it is IMPOSSIBLE... right? And v. 6 qualifies what that "impossibility" is: to restore them to repentance.

So, what I'd now like to do is apply that word "impossible" to each of the six aspects of who those people supposedly were:

Is it "Impossible" for the first category -- the unsaved -- to be restored to repentance? (Answer: I don't think any of us in this thread would say "No"; so certainly not enough there to apply the standard of impossibility on this aspect (at least alone).
Category 2: If somebody's never had the Holy Spirit indwell in them, is that an automatic disqualifier for such restoration? (Again, "no")
Category 3: If you've flunked out or gotten a "D" in "Bible 101" or "The Essentials of Christian Growth," does that automatically disqualify you from restoration? (Answer: No)
Category 4: This is similar to Category 1...if you haven't believed -- or have yet to be decisive in your commitment in Christ -- that, too, isn't an automatic impossible cut-off from restoration, right?
Category 5: Well, I've already addressed this one right off the bat in my post...pretty obvious that this standard isn't even reached in this life.
Which takes us to the last category: Back-turners.

Now Calvinists regard "back-turners" in dual ways: On the one hand, they like to sum them up as people who were never in Christ to begin with; BUT...they also like to simultaneously regard prodigals as people that if they REALLY are in Christ, they will never lose their salvation because God doesn't give up on them, God doesn't revoke His gifts, God remains faithful, etc. IoW, if you were to take a poll of Calvinists - and ask them: "Is it impossible for a back-turning prodigal son type to be restored unto repentance?" Do you know what % would likely say "Yes"??? (Very minimal)...

So...you have YET to convince me that any of those factors that you have ascribed to the people in Hebrews 6 would make it an absolute IMPOSSIBILITY to be restored unto repentance.

And until a descriptor fits that "IMPOSSIBILITY" disqualifier, you're gonna have to run those categories out of the picture. Because the 6 or so puzzle pieces you gave me simply doesn't "fit the frame" that wraps around Hebrews 6.

[metmom]

See, when it comes to explaining demons, the "once related to Christ, always related to Christ" folks seem to dissipate -- as in 100% of them.

I don't see that Scripture ever said that angels were saved or ever *in Christ*.

True they believe that there is one God, and they shudder, but that does not equate to salvation but can be the simple intellectual assent that many non-believers have.

Nor is there any record in Scripture that God offered a means of salvation to the angels. Therefore, the fallen angels were never saved from their fallenness so could not lose what they never had.

[metmom]

Yet one losing their relationship with God doesn't have anything to do with God, who remains completely faithful.

It's not the relationship which is lost but the fellowship. The relationship is damaged but not broken by our unfaithfulness because of God's faithfulness.

So...kinda "funny" that people think that a sinful person in Christ living in a sinful world would never walk away from the Lord; while at the same time they acknowledge that a perfect being living in a perfect environment in a perfect relationship with the Lord can lose their relationship with God.

Nobody ever said a person would not *walk away from the Lord* (if by that you mean merely falling into sin as opposed to making a deliberate, volitional choice to reject Christ, as which point, I don't believe that person was ever saved to begin with. Falling ≠ volitional rejection)

I firmly believe in the security of the believer based on the Scripture passages I posted in post 74 on this thread. Here's the link to them again.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3104107/posts?page=74#74

Besides, if I am not saved by works, I am not kept by works. If I am saved by grace, I am kept by grace.

[metmom]

Excellent, bb, as usual.

[Colofornian]

It's not the relationship which is lost but the fellowship. The relationship is damaged but not broken by our unfaithfulness because of God's faithfulness.

Metmom, we see marriages even among faithful Christians where both of what you describe has happened:

A 2-in-1 couple doesn't lose the relationship, just the fellowship for a period of time. And then there's those where indeed both were lost, where usually the fellowship went first.

As it occurs in the natural world, so, too, the supernatural world.

Besides, if I am not saved by works, I am not kept by works. If I am saved by grace, I am kept by grace.

Agreed.

Think, for example, of what Jesus said in John 10:

28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.

We readily agree, "Now there's security in Christ! 100% guaranteed completed (no good-works-added) external security!"

So, we're on the same page about what God does;
and, we're on the same page that we can't add to what God does...(the technical theological term for that being synergism)

You see I'm not talking at all about what man does as some sort of "ingredient" in the divine "formula" for salvation; if you go back to John 10:28-29...everything said about God is so! And He allows no one to snatch us; yet, of one's own free will, a person can ask for release.

This kind of spiritual resistance to the fellowship and relationship with God can in no way be described as a "good work" -- even when practiced in the reverse of the negative I just described; so your application doesn't apply.

I don't think any Christian would describe sudden resistance to God -- or lack of it -- as a "good work" to be done.

[HarleyD]

So, what I'd now like to do is apply that word "impossible" to each of the six aspects of who those people supposedly were: ...

First off, it is God who leads a person to repentance and God must grant that repentance.

2Ti_2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth,

Second, nothing is "impossible" for God...

Mar_10:27 Jesus looked at them and said, "With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God."

So when the writer of Hebrews says that it is impossible to bring them back to repentance, he is telling us that God will not grant them the ability to repent.

If you would like a scriptural example of this, besides Judas, I would call your attention to King Belshazzar in Daniel 5. Though he saw the handwriting on the wall (literally), he could not bring himself to repent and ask God's forgiveness. Why? Because as we see in Timothy, it is God that must grant us the ability to repent. This is what the book of Hebrews tells us:

Heb 12:16 that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal.

Heb_12:17 For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it with tears.

There is your story summed up in chapter 12. Esau wanted to repent but he found no chance to repent-even though he sought it with tears. God would not allow Esau to repent. Repentance does not depend on us. Repentance is the work of the Lord.

People can walk the walk and talk the talk, but unless God has granted them the ability to truly repent and turn to Him, they are without hope. If they have tasted of the gifts of God, that doesn't mean anything.

The book of Hebrews is an evangelistic outward call to the Jews. That is all. It is telling the Jews (and all of us really) that we must ask of God to make us new creature. It's a Billy Graham crusade of the New Testament. It's an altar call.

But make no mistake. In the end it is God's Holy Spirit that changes our hearts to ask God for true repentance. This is the inward call of being a new creature. He must give us a heart of flesh and remove from us our heart of stone. And God does this whether we seek after Him or not.

Isa_6:10 Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."

[Colofornian]

First off, it is God who leads a person to repentance and God must grant that repentance. 2Ti_2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth...

100% agree. Acts 5:31 and Acts 11:18 emphasize the same thing.

Gotto go...but will ponder the rest of your post later.