My point in referencing Jeremiah was to say that, in general, covenants, even those between God and man can be broken. That we are able to break the New Covenant we have with Jesus can be demonstrated in Hebrews:
26 If we deliberately go on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no further sacrifice for sins remains, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume all adversaries.…(Hebrews 10:26)
a). DELIBERATELY: ἑκουσίως: An Adverb meaning voluntarily, willingly, of one's own accord: Hebrews 10:26 ἑκουσίως ἁμαρτάνειν (A. V. to sin willfully) as opposed to sins committed inconsiderately [i.e., without thought, carelessly], or from ignorance or weakness); in full awareness and with deliberate intent. It stands in contrast to anything done by compulsion, ignorance, or external coercion. The Lexical reference goes even further adding that in Hebrews 10:26 ἑκουσίως characterizes ongoing, high-handed rebellion that parallels Numbers 15:30–31. Such sin knowingly tramples the Son of God and rejects the only atonement God has provided. The warning underscores personal responsibility: persistent, willful sin places the sinner under certain judgment (Hebrews 10:27–29).
[
https://biblehub.com/greek/1596.htm]
b).
GO ON SINNING: The GRAMMATICAL FORM of the word SIN that is used here does not mean simply to
commit a sin or even to commit a serious sin. Instead the author uses the PRESENT TENSE PARTICIPLE of the word sin which is
hamartanontōn [
ἁμαρτανόντων] to indicate that this person has fallen into an
ONGOING CONTINUAL PRACTICE [or life style] of sin.
Jimi,
I appreciate the lexical and grammatical precision you brought to the table regarding
Hebrews 10:26. Your definitions of
hekousiōs (willfully),
hamartanontōn (present tense participle for ongoing practice), and
epignōsis (full/experiential knowledge) are entirely accurate.
However, your conclusion that this means a true child of promise can break the New Covenant completely collapses because you have failed to identify
the specific, singular sin that the author of Hebrews is addressing, and you have misunderstood the legal architecture of a covenant.
You are treating "go on sinning" (
hamartanontōn) as a generic lifestyle of moral failure or backsliding. But the immediate context dictates that the "willful sin" in view is not general immorality, but
the specific sin of total apostasy—the decisive renunciation of Christ to return to the Levitical temple sacrifices.
1. The Real Meaning of Hebrews 10:26
Notice what the text says happens if someone commits this sin:
"...there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (
Heb 10:26).
Why would the author frame the consequence this way? Because he is writing to a first-century Jewish audience undergoing severe persecution. They were tempted to escape persecution by turning their backs on Jesus and going back to the temple to offer bulls and goats again.
The author’s argument is legal and absolute: If you willfully reject Jesus, you cannot go back to the temple for safety, because God has permanently abolished that system! Jesus is the final sacrifice (
Heb 10:12–14). If you reject Him,
there is simply no other sacrifice left in existence to cover you. Three verses later, he defines this willful sin explicitly: it is
treading under foot the Son of God and treating His covenant blood with high-handed, malicious contempt (v. 29).
2. Why an "Epignōsis" of the Truth Does Not Equal Regeneration
You argue that because they received
epignōsis (full, experiential knowledge), they must be true believers. But Scripture repeatedly shows that a person can have an elevated, experiential exposure to the truth, taste its power, and still be completely unregenerate.
- Judas Iscariot had the highest epignōsis imaginable. He lived with the Truth incarnate for three years, preached the gospel, cast out devils, and experienced the relational dynamics of the apostolic ministry. Yet Jesus explicitly stated Judas was a "devil" from the beginning (John 6:70).
- The Unchanged Nature: Peter describes these exact same false teachers in 2 Peter 2:20–22. He notes that they "escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge [epignōsis] of the Lord and Saviour." Yet what was their actual internal nature? Peter says they were dogs returning to their vomit and swine returning to the mire. They were never transformed into sheep; they were clean pigs.
3. The Unbreakable Legal Architecture of the New Covenant
Most importantly, your entire argument hinges on a fundamental misunderstanding of covenant mechanics. You are treating the New Covenant as if it were just like the Old Mosaic Covenant—a contract dependent on human performance that man can break.
But the New Covenant technically
isn't a contract between God and volatile human beings. It is an intra-Trinitarian compact established between the Father and the Son, mediated by Christ. Man did not co-sign it; Jesus Christ is its exclusive
Surety (
Hebrews 7:22), taking full legal responsibility for the debt.
As
Psalm 89:27–36 flawlessly demonstrates, God made this everlasting covenant with the true David—Jesus Christ. The Father swore an immutable oath to the Son that He would
never break His covenant or alter what left His lips, even when the Son's children stumble and require fatherly discipline (v. 30–34).
Look at the absolute legal reality of what you are suggesting: The Son has
faithfully, legally, and completely taken care of the entire sin debt of His people on the cross (
Heb. 10:14). If a single soul for whom Christ paid that debt were to break the covenant and perish in hell,
it would mean the Father broke His sworn covenant with the Son. It would mean the Father accepted Christ’s payment but refused to deliver the purchased captive. That is a theological and legal impossibility.
4. The Author’s Direct Exclusion
The author of Hebrews completely refutes your idea that true believers are the ones drawing back to destruction. Look at how he concludes the entire warning section in
Hebrews 10:39:
“But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”
The author deliberately draws a line in the sand. There is a class of unregenerate professors who possess
epignōsis, hang around the church, and then willfully draw back to perdition because their hearts were never changed. But the true Church—the children of promise—
are fundamentally NOT of that group. They persevere because they have been perfected forever by the one, unbreakable offering of Christ.
