Hebrews 2:9: A Denial of Particular Redemption?

Hebrews 2 .9, but we see him, speaking of Jesus, and of course, the context is not all things are yet subject to him, but they will be subject to him.

But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

Now, just in passing, really, really fast, you should be aware of the fact that Bart Ehrman loves to talk about this particular, the whole idea of the grace of God here in Hebrews 2 .9.

There's another one in Hebrews 5, textual variant stuff. Just be aware of that. Might come up in less than three weeks.

Less than three weeks, which is shocking to me. Less than three weeks in Florida, but I'm going to try to leave that all over to the side for now and just deal with the common, as Troy Brooks describes himself,

OSAS Arminian. Once saved, always saved Arminian, which is the sound you hear is

Arminius spinning his grave, which is this wonderfully inconsistent position.

It was funny. I was reading something he had sent to me, and he was talking about how

Calvinists appeal to mystery. You have to appeal to mystery. That's a term I use all the time, isn't it?

Yeah, not quite. But then he refers us to this work by William Lane Craig.

And you start reading through the thing, William Lane Craig, and there's this whole paragraph about appealing to mystery. And he's doing it.

He's not decrying it. I guess if you're going to be a once -saved -always -saved -Arminian, consistency isn't real high on your list of things to be really focused on anyways.

But the point is, of course, Hebrews 2 .9, he might taste death for everyone.

There it is. Jesus died for everybody. That's exactly what Hebrews says. And at the

John 3 .16 conference, Hebrews 2 .9 was cited a number of times, just thrown out there. It was never exegeted, of course.

But it was just thrown out there. And a lot of people do that. And I tried to point out briefly to Mr.

Brooks, said, well, you know, it might be good if you read the whole section, because, once again, we have to ask the question.

So you're saying that the writer of Hebrews is saying that the term translated everyone here in Hebrews 2 .9,

which is the Greek term pontos, pos, pos, upon, the standard word.

And hupere is the standard preposition for substitution. It's all right there.

So this clearly means that, by the grace of God, Jesus has tasted death on behalf of every single human being.

All right, you need to be able to consistently read that through the context.

I mean, that's going to be the argument of the context, right? And you also might want to consider, as well, is my interpretation such that it maybe teaches something like universalism, maybe?

Am I maybe missing the point here? Because if you read the rest of the section, there is this consistent contextual reference to a particular group.

And let's see what that particular group is. Hebrews 2 .10, for it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory.

It can't be many sons to glory. It needs to be in bringing everyone to glory, because we just established that in 2 .9,

pos, pos, upon there, pontos means everyone, every single human being.

So maybe it's a textual variant here, because it shouldn't say bring many sons to glory, but bring everyone to glory.

Many sons is a limited term. So it can't mean that, because that would be a specific group.

Bringing many sons to glory should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.

OK, whoever this group is, this many sons, they are the saved. Because they have, it's the founder of their salvation.

Um, so, hm, so that whoever this group is, this pontos, the founder of their salvation was made perfectly suffering.

That's Jesus. And they are sons, many sons, who are brought to glory. That's what verse 10 says.

Let's see if there's anything more. For he who sanctifies, and those who are sanctified all have one source.

That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers. Hm, so now we have a group that is sanctified.

Is there a consistent discussion of those who are sanctified in the book of Hebrews? Well, there is.

Like in chapter 10, by his death, he perfects those who are being sanctified.

Hm, seems to be the same group. So wherever they are, they're perfected. So if 2 -9 means every single human being, then they're all perfected.

And this is a perfect, absolutely unquestionable, universalistic text. There's just no, there's no way around the fact that this is a text that teaches universalism.

Everybody's going to be saved. They've got salvation. They're brought to glory. They're sanctified.

Hebrews chapter 10 says those are being sanctified. They're perfected. Hm, doesn't seem any way around this.

You either got to be a universalist or maybe see that there is a specific group involved here that are called the brothers of the

Lord, saying, Hebrews 2 -12, I will tell of your name to my brothers in the midst of the congregation.

I will sing your praise. So there is a specific group here in view. And again,

I'll put my trust in him. And again, behold, the children God has given me. Is there any biblical concept of God giving a particular people to Christ?

There is. There is, isn't there? That would seem to fit with Hebrews 10 and Hebrews 8 and the

New Covenant. And it might even fit with John 6, and giving a particular people to Christ for salvation.

Isn't that interesting? Since, therefore, the children, seeming to be the children who are the founder of their salvation is

Jesus, share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery.

Well, again, it seems to me the only two possible ways of understanding this text is either to be a universalist, to believe that everyone is going to be delivered.

Everyone fears death, right? And so everyone is subject to lifelong slavery.

Well, slavery, that doesn't fit real well with the idea of free will.

But anyway, all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery.

And it says all of them, so you've either got a specific group here that have been given by God to the

Son and they, by the Spirit of God, come to understand their lifelong slavery and so on and so forth.

Or you're a universalist. Those are the only two possibilities I can see here. The Arminian view just isn't doing real well here.

For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Well, the offspring of Abraham, does that mean we're only talking about all

Jews here? Or is this the Christian concept as enunciated by the Apostle Paul, that those who are the offspring of Abraham are those who what?

Are of the faith of Abraham, believe as Abraham believed. Therefore, he had to be made like his brothers in every respect so that he might become a what?

A merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God to do what?

To make propitiation for the sins of the people. Hmm. Here's that high priest concept again, and that takes us right into the discussion of the high priest and who he intercedes for.

And the high priest always intercedes only for those for whom he's made the sacrifice. So if you're going to take this, if you're going to take 2 -9 the way that it was taken at the

John 3 -16 conference, or you can take the way Troy Brooks takes it, then you have to believe that Jesus is interceding for those who are in hell today, or will be.

But there is a consistent way of reading Hebrews 2 that flows right into the arguments, right through all of Hebrews.

And it just requires you to recognize that Hebrews 2 -9 has a specific group in mind.

That is the all that is being spoken of there. And the only other option is pure universalism, which is, of course, extremely contradictory to the testimony of scripture.

So when you hear people just throwing these texts out, just quoting them and saying, hey, there it is, you might want to ask them, could we read that in context?

Could we see if how you're reading that actually flows into the context in any meaningful fashion?