The
reader did not make clear what he meant by the phrase "as long as they are
gone". We assume he meant to ask us if the passage teaches that those who fall
away can return to repentance. Our "short" answer is that the passage
teaches that such return to repentance is impossible, provided the
individual referred to remains in a state of crucifying to themselves the
Son of God and exposing him to public ridicule. But once the person stops
doing those two things, restoration to repentance then occurs.
Furthermore, we assume
the question "How do you prove this translation?" means that the reader is
asking us what grammatical evidence in the text led us to translate the
passage the way we did.
By way
of overview, we remind our readers that the policy of our Committee on
Translation is to render ambiguities in the Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic text
as ambiguities in the English. Having said this, we make the following
grammatical observations regarding the passage in question:
Hebrews
6:6 is part of a longer sentence that begins in verse 4 of chapter six of
the letter to the Hebrews. The longer sentence consists of a string of
participles that modify the adjective "impossible", adunaton, in
verse 4, of which parapesontas (fallen away) is only one component,
but which it and the other participles contained in verses 4-5 are described
as leading to an impossibility (adunaton, the first word in verse 4)
of being renewed (or restored) to repentance (anakainizein eis metanoian).
This
impossibility is modified, however, by two participles: the two-fold
continuous actions of anastaurountas (crucifying) and
paradeigmatizontas (publicly ridiculing).
The
state of impossibility continues, according to the grammar, during the
continuous states of crucifying to themselves and publicly ridiculing. Both
of these participles are present active, which means that they are informing
all of the activities of the other participles that occur in verses 4-5, all
of which are aorist (thus connoting completed activities or simple historic
events) except for the participle that describes the coming (mellontos)
age. The verb "coming" is a present participle.
To sum
up, the impossibility continues during the present state of crucifying and
the present state of ridiculing. The grammar of the passage connotes that
the main verb of the sentence (i.e., the verb "to be") and its descriptive
aorist participles that modify it in verses 4-5 are all limited and defined
by the present tense of the participles in verse six. That is, the actions
described by the aorist participles occur during the time of the crucifying
to themselves and the public ridiculing.
After
the person stops these two actions, at which time these behaviors become
past tense activities as soon as they are ceased, the impossibility of
renewal or restoration no longer applies, since they no longer are present
tense activities relating to the word "impossible".
By the
way, the impossibility referred to is an impossibility to restore
repentance, not to restore salvation, and the restoration of the repentance
is connoted by the verbs as occurring only during the time of the various
verbs described by the two present participles.
Once
these two present actions cease, the impossibility is removed. If the
impossibility were described by the author as being permanent, the two
present tense participles would have to have been described with aorist
participles.
But the
author uses the present tense, thus giving hope to those who might otherwise
be hopeless. If the author had used aorist participles, for the verbs
"crucify" and "ridicule", anybody who fell away for a season could never be
renewed to repentance.
Then,
if he had written "salvation" instead of "repentance", once somebody
committed the sins noted in verse 4-6, he would lose his salvation. But the
text of Hebrews mentions neither of these hypothetical situations.
Thus,
for example, neither permanent loss of repentance (let along any loss of
salvation, for that matter) is mentioned in this verse.
