"if we sin willfully" Hebrews 10:26

Vincent

26. We sin wilfully (ἑκουσίως ἁμαρτανόντων ἡμῶν). Εκουσίως wilfully, only here and 1 Pet. 5:2. Comp. Philem. 14, κατʼ ἑκούσιον of free will. See LXX, Num. 15:3. The wilful sin is the abandonment of Christianity for Judaism.
Vincent, M. R. (1887). Word Studies in the New Testament (Heb 10:26). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Robertson

Hebrews 10:26
If we sin wilfully (ἑκουσιως ἁμαρτανοντων ἡμων [hekousiōs hamartanontōn hēmōn]). Genitive absolute with the present active participle of ἁμαρτανω [hamartanō], circumstantial participle here in a conditional sense. After that we have received (μετα το λαβειν [meta to labein]). “After the receiving” (accusative case of the articular infinitive second aorist active of λαμβανω [lambanō] after μετα [meta]). Knowledge (ἐπιγνωσιν [epignōsin]). “Full knowledge,” as in 6:4f. There remaineth no more (οὐκετι ἀπολειπεται [ouketi apoleipetai]). “No longer is there left behind” (present passive indicative as in 4:9), for one has renounced the one and only sacrifice for sin that does or can remove sin (10:1–18).
Robertson, A. (1933). Word Pictures in the New Testament (Heb 10:26). Nashville, TN: Broadman Press.

Wuest

 (10:26) This wilful sin must be defined in its context. It will not do to ignore the historical background of this book and its analysis, and then put an arbitrary meaning upon the words. That is not exegesis, namely, taking out of the text what is there, but eisegesis, putting into the text what is not there. The sin which the book warns against is that of a Jew of the first century who left the temple sacrifices, identified himself with the visible Church and made a profession of Messiah as High Priest, renouncing that profession and returning to the temple sacrifices. This sin is spoken of in 2:1 as letting New Testament truth slip away, in 3:7, 8 as hardening the heart against the Holy Spirit, in 6:4 as falling away and crucifying the Son of God, in 10:26 as a wilful sin, and is analyzed in 10:29 as the three-fold sin against the three Persons of the Triune God. This sin could only be committed in the first century while the temple was still standing and only by an unsaved Jew or proselyte to Judaism. In this case, there can be no secondary application to present day circumstances or individuals.
This sin is described as a wilful sin. The word is hekousios (ἑκουσιος), which means, “voluntarily, of one’s own accord.” It is opposed to sins committed inconsiderately, and from ignorance or weakness. The Greek has it, “If we go on sinning wilfully,” stress being placed upon the habitual aspect of the sin. The immediate context defines that sin as one of the continued forsaking of the means of grace at the services of the Christian assemblies, and the habitual commission of the sin defined in 10:29.
The word “knowledge” is not the simple word gnosis (γνοσις), but the stronger word epignosis (ἐπιγνοσις). Alford quotes Delitzsch as saying: “When epignosis (ἐπιγνοσις) is used, there is the assumption of an actual direction of the spirit to a definite object and of a real grasping of the same: so that we may speak of a false gnosis (γνοσις), but not of a false epignosis (ἐπιγνοσις). And the Writer, by the use of this word, gives us to understand that he means by it not only a shallow historical notion about the Truth, but a living believing knowledge of it, which has laid hold of a man and fused him into union with itself.” Thus it is clear that the Jew who committed this sin, was fully informed by the Holy Spirit of the issues involved between the First Testament and the New Testament, and also of the meaning and the implications of the New Testament, (6:4, “who were once enlightened”) and therefore, he sinned with his eyes wide open.
Should he commit this sin, there would remain no more sacrifice for sin. Expositor’s quotes Delitzsch as follows: “The meaning is not merely that the Jewish sacrifices to which the apostate has returned have in themselves no sin-destroying power, nor even that there is no second sacrifice additional to that of Christ, but further that for a sinner of this kind the very sacrifice of Christ itself has no more atoning or reconciling power.” Alford, commenting upon this same thing says: “There is but One true sacrifice for sins: if a man, having availed himself of that One, then deliberately casts it behind him, there is no second left for him. It will be observed that one thing is not, and need not be, specified in the text. That he has exhausted the virtue of the one sacrifice, is not said: but in proportion to his willing rejection of it, has ceased to operate for him. He has in fact, as Delitzsch observes, shut the door of repentance behind him, by the very fact of his being in an abiding state of willing sin.” All of which means that this abandonment of the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah, and the return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament, was not a snap judgment on the part of this first century Jew, but a confirmed state of heart.
Translation. For if we go on sinning wilfully after having received a full knowledge of the truth, no longer for sins does there remain a sacrifice.
Wuest, K. S. (1997). Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: For the English Reader (Heb 10:25–26). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

The IVP Bible Background Commentary

10:26. Judaism had long distinguished intentional and unintentional sin (Num 15:29–31; cf., e.g., Lev 4:2, 22); one who knew better would be punished more strictly than one who was ignorant. Sacrifices atoned for sins of ignorance, but Judaism taught that no sacrifice availed for the person who knowingly rejected the authority of God’s law. (For such persons, many Jewish teachers insisted that repentance, the Day of Atonement and death were all necessary. Jewish teachers also observed that those who sinned presuming that they would be automatically forgiven were not genuinely repentant and hence were not forgiven.) In the Dead Sea Scrolls, slight transgressions required temporary penance, but deliberate rebellion against God’s law demanded expulsion from the community. The sin in this context is unrepentant, thorough apostasy (10:29).
Keener, C. S. (1993). The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Heb 10:26). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

George Guthrie
The distiction between those who sin in ignorance, wandering off the path (5:2), and those who radically rebel against the Word of God may be seen in Numbers 15:27-31, where the latter course is said to be blasphemy.*  So in Hebrews 10:26 those whom the author has in mind demonstrate continuity between the time before hearing the gospel and after, continuing a lifestyle of rejection God's Word.  For those persons there exists no sacrifice for their sins.  In 10:1-18 the author has already made clear that the sacrifice offered by Christ has rendered all others obsolete.  Where, then, can one go other than to Christ for an efficacious sacrifice?  Once he and his provision have been rejected, there is nowhere else to turn.
*Hughes, A commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 419 
George H. Guthrie. Hebrews (NIVAP), p.355

Bible Knowledge Commentary

10:26-27. The KJV translation here, “if we sin willfully,” is superior to NIV‘s if we deliberately keep on sinning, as the words “keep on” overplay the Greek tense. As the context shows (cf. v. 23), the author was concerned here, as throughout the epistle, with the danger of defection from the faith. Most sin is “deliberate,” but the writer was here influenced by the Old Testament’s teaching about sins of presumption (cf. Num. 15:29-31) which lay outside the sacrificial provisions of the Law. Apostasy from the faith would be such a “willful” act and for those who commit it no sacrifice for sins is left (cf. Heb. 10:18). If the efficacious sacrifice of Christ should be renounced, there remained no other available sacrifice which could shield an apostate from God’s judgment by raging fire. A Christian who abandons “the confidence [he] had at first” (3:14) puts himself on the side of God’s enemies and, as the writer had already said, is in effect “crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting Him to public disgrace” (6:6). Such reprehensible conduct can scarcely be worthy of anything but God’s flaming indignation and retribution. This, however, as stated earlier (cf. comments on 6:8), is not a reference to hell (cf. comments on 10:29).
 Zane C. Hodges in  Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Heb 10:26–27). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

Albert Barnes

Verse 26. For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth. If, after we are converted and become true Christians, we should apostatize, it would be impossible to be recovered again, for there would be no other sacrifice for sin; no way by which we could be saved. This passage, however, like Hebrews 6:4-6, has given rise to much difference of opinion. But that the above is the correct interpretation seems evident to me from the following considerations:
(1.) It is the natural and obvious interpretation, such as would occur probably to ninety nine readers in a hundred, if there were no theory to support, and no fear that it would conflict with some other doctrine.
(2.) It accords with the scope of the epistle, which is to keep those whom the apostle addressed from returning again to the Jewish religion, under the trials to which they were subjected.
(3.) It is in accordance with the fair meaning of the language--the words, "after that we have received the knowledge of the truth," referring more naturally to true conversion than to any other state of mind.
(4.) The sentiment would not be correct if it referred to any but real Christians. It would not be true that one who had been somewhat enlightened, and who then sinned "wilfully," must look on fearfully to the judgment, without a possibility of being saved. There are multitudes of cases where such persons are saved. They willfully resist the Holy Spirit; they strive against him; they for a long time refuse to yield, but they are brought again to reflection, and are led to give their hearts to God.
(5.) It is true, and always will be true, that if a sincere Christian should apostatize, he could never be converted again. See Barnes "Hebrews 6:4-6". The reasons are obvious. He would have tried the only plan of salvation, and it would have failed. He would have embraced the Saviour, and there would not have been efficacy enough in his blood to keep him, and there would be no more powerful Saviour, and no more efficacious blood of atonement. He would have renounced the Holy Spirit, and would have shown that his influences were not effectual to keep him, and there would be no other agent of greater power to renew and save him after he had apostatized. For these reasons it seems clear to me that this passage refers to true Christians, and that the doctrine here taught is, that if such an one should apostatize, he must look forward only to the terrors of the judgment, and to final condemnation. Whether this, in fact, ever occurs, is quite another question. In regard to that inquiry, see See Barnes "Hebrews 6:4", and following. If this view be correct, we may add, that the passage should not be regarded as applying to what is commonly known as the "sin against the Holy Ghost," or "the unpardonable sin." The word rendered "wilfully"--\~ekousiwv\~ -- occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in 1 Peter 5:2, where it is rendered willingly--" taking the oversight thereof [of the church] not by constraint, but willingly". It properly means, willingly, voluntarily, of our own accord, and applies to cases where no constraint is used. It is not to be construed here strictly, or metaphysically, for all sin is voluntary, or is committed willingly, but must refer to a deliberate act, where a man MEANS to abandon his religion, and to turn away from God. If it were to be taken with metaphysical exactness, it would demonstrate that every Christian who ever does anything wrong, no matter how small, would be lost. But this cannot, from the nature of the case, be the meaning. The apostle well knew that Christians do commit such sins, (see See Barnes "Romans 7:1") and following and his object here is not to set forth the danger of such sins, but to guard Christians against apostasy from their religion. In the Jewish law, as is indeed the case everywhere, a distinction is made between sins of oversight, inadvertence, or ignorance, (Leviticus 4:2,13,22,27; 5:15;; Numbers 15:24,27-29. Comp. Acts 3:17; 17:30,) and sins of presumption; sins that are deliberately and intentionally committed. See Exodus 21:14; Numbers 15:30; Deuteronomy 17:12; Psalms 19:13. The apostle here has reference, evidently, to such a distinction, and means to speak of a decided and deliberate purpose to break away from the restraints and obligations of the Christian religion.
There remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. Should a man do this, there is no sacrifice for sins which could save him. He would have rejected deliberately the only atonement made for sin, and there will be no other made. It is as if a man should reject the only medicine that could heal him, or push away the only boat that could save him when shipwrecked. See See Barnes "Hebrews 6:6". The sacrifice made for sin by the Redeemer is never to be repeated, and if that is deliberately rejected, the soul must be lost.
{a} "if we sin willfully" Numbers 15:30; Hebrews 6:4
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Hebrews 10". Barnes' Notes on the New Testament

F. B. Hole
If instead of holding fast we begin to let go, who can tell whereunto our drawing back will take us? Who indeed, but God Himself! He alone knows the heart. All too often this drawing back, which commenced, as far as human eye can see, with forsaking Christian company, never stops until utter apostasy is reached. This terrible sin was much before the mind of the writer of this epistle, as we saw when considering Hebrews 3 and Hebrews 6. He greatly feared that some of the Hebrews to whom he wrote might fall into it. Hence he again refers to it here. The rest of our chapter is taken up with it. In verse 26 he speaks of sinning "wilfully." In the last verse he speaks of drawing back "unto perdition."
To "sin wilfully" is evidently to forsake the faith of Christ, with one's eyes open. No true believer does this, but a professed believer may do so, and it is just this fact, that we have reached perfection and finality in Christ, which makes it so serious. There is no more sacrifice for sins. This fact which seemed so unspeakably blessed in verse 18, is seen in the light of verse 26, to have a side to it which is unspeakably serious. There is beyond nothing but judgment. And that judgment will be of a very fearful character, hot with indignation.
STEM Publishing : F. B. Hole : Hebrews  

John Calvin

26. For if we sin willfully, or voluntarily etc. He shows how severe a vengeance of God awaits all those who fall away from the grace of Christ; for being without that one true salvation, they are now as it were given up to an inevitable destruction. With this testimony Novatus and his sect formerly armed themselves, in order to take away the hope of pardon from all indiscriminately who had fallen after baptism. They who were not able to refute his calumny chose rather to deny the authority of this Epistle than to subscribe to so great an absurdity. But the true meaning of the passage, unaided by any help from any other part, is quite sufficient of itself to expose the effrontery of Novatus

Those who sin, mentioned by the Apostle, are not such as offend in any way, but such as forsake the Church, and wholly alienate themselves from Christ. For he speaks not here of this or of that sin, but he condemns by name those who willfully renounced fellowship with the Church. But there is a vast difference between particular fallings and a complete defection of this kind, by which we entirely fall away from the grace of Christ. And as this cannot be the case with any one except he has been already enlightened, he says, If we sin willfully, after that we have received the knowledge of the truth; as though he had said, “If we knowingly and willingly renounce the grace which we had obtained.” It is now evident how widely apart is this doctrine from the error of Novatus

And that the Apostle here refers only to apostates, is clear from the whole passage; for what he treats of is this, that those who had been once received into the Church ought not to forsake it, as some were wont to do. He now declares that there remained for such no sacrifice for sin, because they had willfully sinned after having received the knowledge of the truth. But as to sinners who fall in any other way, Christ offers himself daily to them, so that they are to seek no other sacrifice for expiating their sins. He denies, then, that any sacrifice remains for them who renounce the death of Christ, which is not done by any offense except by a total renunciation of the faith.

This severity of God is indeed dreadful, but it is set forth for the purpose of inspiring terror. He cannot, however, be accused of cruelty; for as the death of Christ is the only remedy by which we can be delivered from eternal death, are not they who destroy as far as they can its virtue and benefit worthy of being left to despair? God invites to daily reconciliation those who abide in Christ; they are daily washed by the blood of Christ, their sins are daily expiated by his perpetual sacrifice. As salvation is not to be sought except in him, there is no need to wonder that all those who willfully forsake him are deprived of every hope of pardon: this is the import of the adverb ἔτι, more. But Christ’s sacrifice is efficacious to the godly even to death, though they often sin; nay, it retains ever its efficacy, for this very reason, because they cannot be free from sin as long as they dwell in the flesh. The Apostle then refers to those alone who wickedly forsake Christ, and thus deprive themselves of the benefit of his death.

The clause, “after having received the knowledge of the truth,” was added for the purpose of aggravating their ingratitude; for he who willingly and with deliberate impiety extinguishes the light of God kindled in his heart has nothing to allege as an excuse before God. Let us then learn not only to receive with reverence and prompt docility of mind the truth offered to us, but also firmly to persevere in the knowledge of it, so that we may not suffer the terrible punishment of those who despise it. 

Commentary on Hebrews by John Calvin  Grand Rapids, MI: Chr

istian Classics Ethereal Library

Bob Deffinbaugh

“For” at the beginning of verse 26 indicates to us that the warnings of verses 26-31 are closely related to the exhortations of those verses which precede them. If the work of Christ is full and final, so that “there is no longer any [other] offering for sin” (10:18), then to reject the supreme and ultimate sacrifice of Christ is to leave oneself with no other means of forgiveness.

Think of Abraham and his two sons, Ishmael (born to him by Hagar) and Isaac (born to him by Sarah). God had clearly indicated to Abraham that the covenant which He had made with him was going to be fulfilled through Isaac, and not through Ishmael.¹¹ Thus, we are not surprised to find that God instructed Abraham to send Ishmael away, so that Isaac became his only heir, and his only hope. There was nothing else for Abraham to fall back on, other than God’s promise to bless Abraham through his son, Isaac. This set the stage for his supreme test in Genesis 22, where God instructed him to offer his son, Isaac, as a sacrifice. So, too, when God sent His only Son to become the ultimate offering for sin, there could be no other sacrifice, no other way of salvation. To reject the Son and His sacrifice, then, would be the ultimate sin, and we would expect that the consequences would correspond in terms of gravity and severity – which I believe they do.

Allow me to call attention to the pronouns “we” and “us” which the author employs as he commences his warning in verse 26: “For if we deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of the truth, no further sacrifice for sins is left for us.” The author includes himself – and I presume other believers – in his warning, which makes it difficult for me to see this as a warning only to unbelievers who have fallen short of coming to genuine faith. It appears to me to be a warning to believers in general. This would be consistent with the exhortations and warnings found elsewhere in the book.

The author warns of a specific kind of sin, rather than of sin in some more general sense. This specific sin is described for us in verse 26 as that which is conscious, deliberate, and persistent. This sin is committed in spite of the fact that the sinner had received the knowledge of the truth. Not only is this sin willful, it is also persistent and ongoing. In verse 29 we are given three more characteristics of this particular sin:

• It expresses contempt for the Son of God
• It profanes the blood of the covenant, the very blood that sanctified¹² him
• It insults the Spirit of grace

Deliberate sin is not new to the readers of Hebrews. It was something for which the Old Testament sacrifices had no solution:

² See Numbers 15:27-31.

³ Isaiah 26:11; see also 33:14.

⁴ Deuteronomy 17:2-7; 13:8.

⁵ Deuteronomy 32:35-36.

⁶ See 2 Samuel 24:14.

"Should There Be Second-Class Saints?" (Hebrews 10:26-39) by Bob Deffinbaugh