Introduction
In
the last several years, there has been a trend of books that have come out
covering several different perspectives on some pretty divisive issues;
baptism, eschatology and so forth. This book while called four views almost
represents five views, because in Bateman’s introduction he cannot help but
present his own view on the text. The work itself covers four major positions
both the classical views of Arminianism (Grant R. Osborne) and Calvinism (Buist
M. Fanning), along with a Wesleyan Arminian (Gareth L. Cockerill) view, and a
modified reformed perspective (Randall C. Gleason).
For
each position there is a well-respected scholar who argues his position and
each also has the chance to refute the other positions mentioned in the book in
another short article. By the end of the book each author has offered us close
to 75-100 pages of their view on these passages of Scripture. While there are four major voices that are
heard throughout this work we cannot forget about the General Editor Herbert W.
Bateman, and the man who has the final word George H. Guthrie.
Right
now you may be asking yourself “What are warning passages, and why are they
such a big deal?” According to Bateman “… the warning passages clearly force us
to address the issue of assurance and the doctrine of eternal security…. The
biblical theologians who contributed to this book believe that the recipients
are true believers.”[1]
These are going to be some of the major areas this review is going to be
focusing upon. While there are four
views expressed in this work, it is this author’s intention to focus on the
classical views.
The Classic Arminian View
Osborne starts his discussion on the
warning passages by first drawing a line in the sand in regards to the classic
Arminian view verses the classic Calvinist perspective. Once he has established
his a priori he moves into his understanding of some of the most controversial
verses found in the NT. One topic that is of great importance to Osborne and
the other authors as well is whether or not the recipients of the letter are
truly followers of Christ or not. For example Osborne says, “This fits well the
descriptions above; indeed, it is hard to see this language as fitting those
who are members of the church but not actually saved. Such strong depictions
can hardly describe such people—they must be actual believers.”[2]
Another
area he seems to concentrate on for a period of time is the greater to lesser
argument that can be found throughout the book of Hebrews; he makes it a point
to show the areas of similarity and difference between the OT and the NT. In
one reference to these differences Osborne states, “What they are disregarding
is “so great a salvation,” meaning “so much greater” than the Torah.”[3]
The
greatest concern of the book and for anyone no matter what angle you chose to
look at this from is the thought of apostasy. He feels that there is the chance
for those who have made a profession of faith could actually tergiversate from
the faith they have claimed to be their own. According to Osborne, “While the
promise remains, the danger is quit real, for some might fail to receive the
promise due to unbelief.”[4]
In a section from pages 111-116 he tackles what he calls the central passage of
the whole argument Hebrews 6:4-8. Osborne also calls this the “strongest
warning passage in Scripture.”[5]
If all we had to go on was Osborne’s point of view he makes a very strong argument,
however, we have other author’s to consider and that is what we will do now.
The Classic Reformed (Calvinist) View
Even
though Buist M. Fanning’s section is called the classical reformed view there
would be some that may disagree, so let’s get that out in the open from the
start. There is much to be appreciated
from his view and the way he approached the topic as a whole. Fanning did not
address each section one piece at a time but rather he addressed it topic by
topic in an effort to “synthesize” the material. Fanning’s very first sentence
lets the reader know that this is not going to be an easy process, but one to
be taken seriously. He says, “In most Reformed circles the warnings of Hebrews
requires a “solution,” because they seem to go against our larger doctrinal
stance regarding security of salvation.”[6]
Unlike
some of his counterparts in this work Fanning wants us to view the whole
theology of the work, and not piece by piece; therefore forcing us to have to
find ways that synthesize the material to make sense as an entire literary
piece (or sermon in this case). He says,
“The warning passages in Hebrews are best approached by considering the
interpretation of four or five elements or themes they all have in common.”[7] As any first year Bible student would tell
you this is a proper way to do exegesis, Fanning makes an excellent point when
he says, “What is to be avoided at all cost is a firm decision about the sense
of one passage or one element in isolation, which is then imposed upon all the
others.”[8]
Just
as Osborne, Fanning feels that it is vital to determine the status of the
audience to whom the pastor of Hebrews is writing. It is my understanding
(which could be wrong) that Fanning feels that these are not true Christians.
One line of argument that is made is “Jesus’ eternal priesthood is said to
provide complete and lasting security for his people.”[9]
It should be noted that there are some very important grammatical observations
that need to be kept in mind when reading all of the warning passages. Several of them when dealing with the falling
away and apostasy are predominantly written in the third person, while the
exhortations are frequently written in the first and second person.[10]Fanning
in his final summation says, “…those who repudiate Christ thereby give evidence
that they have never partaken in the benefits of Christ’s cleansing
sacrifice….”[11]
Critique
This
work as a whole is very well executed, but is at points very in accessible to
people who have no background in the original languages. The book itself could have been much shorter
had the introduction been scaled back 80 pages seems a little excessive for an
introduction in my opinion. For someone working on an exegetical work on the
warning passages this book could very easy be an invaluable tool. But as
mentioned previously by Fanning we should not enter into this without the
willingness to review all the material before making a snap judgment.
While I personally
do not agree with Osborne’s view there are some things that can be taken away
from his essay. Such as, “In Hebrews, in fact, there are two antidotes to
apostasy: the vertical side, the confession of our hope before God; and the
horizontal side, the involvement of community in the life of the individual
believer.”[12]He
also focuses on one specific section that speaks of the lack of motivation
where the pastor ultimately calls the hearers lazy, sluggish, dull, dim witted
or just plain negligent.[13]
Fanning near the
beginning of his essay makes a statement that gave me a greater respect for an
author whom I honestly had never heard of. He says, “In the process I want to
be held accountable to handle the biblical text responsibly and to focus on the
issues and not pursue personal or belittling attacks.”[14]
Conclusion
For me Fanning
offers the best reasoning and gives us a well-rounded approach to show that
just as people in a church today could be unbelievers the same was possible in
the ancient church the pastor was writing to. I have no qualms in saying that I
am a full five point Calvinist and in reading this work I was challenged by the
different points of view, but ultimately the presentation made by Fanning was
the best presented. Even though he admitted there were challenges to how his
point of view worked he offered a clear and well arguable points to
substantiate it. This is a work easily recommended to someone who is struggling
with the topics covered: apostasy, eternal security and so much more.
Bibliography
Bateman,
Herebert W. ed., and et. al, . Four Views on the Warining Passages in
Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2007.
