Aletheias

25 mind.40 Third, the writer of Hebrews (probably Paul) said that Christ might taste of death ὑπέρ παντὸς (Heb. 2:9). Strict Calvinists, such as Murray,41 argue from the context of Hebrews 2 that the παντὸς of verse nine is limited to the elect. But the writer of Hebrews has an obvious distinction in mind between the παντὸς of verse 9 and the πολλοὺς of verse 10. If no distinction was intended, the word “all” instead of “many” would have normally been used in verse 10. All is not equal to many in any language. The author is consistent in his use of “all” in Hebrews 11:39 as referring to everyone mentioned or inferred in that chapter. Would we not grant him the same consistency in chapter 2? Contextually chapter 2 deals with Christ as being the representative man who has regained the original sovereignty over the earth that man lost (vss.7-8). As representative man Christ tasted death for all (v.9). The ὑπέρ has the beneficial connotation in it.

The context after verse 9 is limited to the “many” which is out of the “all.” Only the “many” are redeemed. But Christ tasted death for the “all.” The “all” of verse nine has its contextual support in the previous verses (vss.6-8) where man in general is mentioned as Psalm 8 is alluded to which speaks of the human race as was represented in Adam. Thus, Christ was the representative man (Heb. 2:6-11) of a redeemed race, having died for the human race. In the larger context we see that Christ died ὑπέρ παντός (2:9); He now during this age appears in Heaven ὑπέρ ἡμῶν (9:24) and to intercede ὑπέρ αὐτῶν (7:25). So, the context goes from the inclusive to the exclusive: from the παντός (2:9) to the πολλῶν (9:28). Both aspects must be accepted. He died a substitutionary death for the “many,” but He represented “all.” From the representative man of mankind the “all” is benefited from His tasting of death.

PROOF FROM UNIVERSAL PASSAGES It is the purpose of this division to show that “world,” “all,” and “whosoever” passages may be interpreted in an unrestricted manner. Only some key passages in each area will be utilized. This writer believes that these references taken in their obvious contextual meanings lend support for universality. All five-point Calvinists must limit these references. Moderate Calvinists need not foster such limitation upon these passages because this position holds to an unlimited provision but to a limited application of the death of Christ. In the writer’s opinion this 40 Kurt Finsterbusch, “Extent of the Atonement in I Timothy 2:6,” Unpublished critical monograph, Grace Theological Seminary, 1960, 21.

41 John Murray, Redemption—Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1955), 71.