Between March 2020 and March 2025 I was a PhD student at Laidlaw College, through the Auckland University of Technology. This saw me busy researching and writing a single project to earn a doctorate in theology. Some Christians might think that a four-year self-directed is simple a big ol’ Bible study where you get to read and study whatever you feel like in the Bible. But that is not the case. A PhD in theology (as in any subject) is a focused, disciplined study on a single, cohesive topic. It requires the student to develop well-honed skills in their discipline, know about everything that has been written on the specific topic, interact intelligently with the experts in the field, and ultimately make a high-quality contribution to the subject you have studied.
My four years of study were much like a multi-day hike through the mountains. Much of the time it was hard and grinding work, pressing ever onwards to the next goal. But there were plenty of great sights to see, and looking back I am glad for the things I learned and the skills I developed. My motivations to do doctoral studies were originally stirred by reading a biography of the influential evangelical theologian J. I. Packer (1926–2020). What impressed me about Packer’s ministry as a younger man was the way that he used his mind in the service of the church, helping it develop strong roots in the word and gospel of God. This resonated with me, and thus began my own journey of upskilling my mind for the purposes of serving God’s church and helping it stay faithful to him in the face of the temptations and pressures of our time.
Below is a summary of my doctoral thesis.
Thesis Title: “Preserving Perseverance: John Owen’s Reception within the History of Reformed Interpretation of Hebrews 6:4–6.”
Thesis Summary: Hebrews 6:4–6 is regularly identified as a challenge to the doctrine of perseverance. This study presents a history of Reformed interpretation of Hebrews 6:4–6 with particular focus on the question of the doctrine of perseverance and the identity of those described in this passage. It also traces the reception of John Owen and his interpretation of that passage within the English history of interpretation [Read HERE to find out what is “Reception History”, with a fun twist].
Owen (1616–1683) is significant to this history because he stands as a prominent early figure of the Reformed tradition, and his Exposition on Hebrews is a massive and thoughtful contribution to the body of interpretive literature on Hebrews in the English-speaking world.
Later Reformed biblical interpreters are grouped and analysed within their hermeneutical, theological, and exegetical contexts. Critically adopting the methodology of reception history as presented by Parris and Evans, these later interpretations of Hebrews 6:4–6 are examined with the intent of discerning to what extent Owen’s interpretation of this passage is formative on later readings in terms of continuity, rebuttal, and modification, and for how long and in what ways.
This is the first study to examine the influence of John Owen’s work on Heb 6:4–6 on later Reformed exegetes. It finds that within the history of interpretation, most Reformed interpreters have declined to see the descriptive markers of Heb 6:4–5 as denoting genuine Christians. Earlier interpreters instead tended to regard the markers in a negative light and to emphasise how they fell short of describing a state of salvation [read more about that HERE].
However, a trend began with Owen to see these markers in a positive light. While not denoting salvation, these were instead understood to be designed to demonstrate how much these people had experienced. This broad position characterised all Reformed interpretations until the early nineteenth century.
From this point, another consistent minority tradition of dissent began which held that Heb 6:4–6 did indeed describe true Christians, and adopted different strategies which nevertheless left the doctrine of perseverance intact.
Much of Owen’s influence on this interpretive history has been concentrated around the interpreters who have foregrounded the theological and pastoral purposes of Scripture. This itself has been aligned with acceptance of the majority Reformed position on Heb 6:4–6 and with the fortunes of theologically-oriented interpretation through the past three centuries. Owen’s influence has been uneven, with varied redeployment of his exegetical choices and interpretive moves found within the work of appreciative interpreters. Reasons for any of these interpreters adopting, rejecting, or ignoring any given feature(s) of Owen’s interpretation cannot usually be known for certain. However, explanations for his irregular reception are likely linked to the shifting expectations of biblical interpretation, the changing importance given to the question of perseverance, and to the onerous size of Owen’s Exposition.
This study concludes that while Owen’s work on Hebrews, including 6:4–6 specifically, has retained a substantial amount of general esteem, his actual impact on later interpretations of Heb 6:4–6 has been more limited.
Chris Northcott 