Hebrews 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man once to die...

[webdog]

The greek for "appoint", apokeimai (ap-ok'-i-mahee)
means to be reserved; figuratively to await: - be appointed, (be) laid up.

According to this verse alone, this would negate unconditional election and limited atonement. If all men are appointed to die once, this would apply to the reprobate as well as the elect. This would mean that nobody was created for the sole purpose of destruction. If man were created to be reprobate (for destruction), the reprobate would have been appointed "twice" to die, not once.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

I agree with your conclusion but it isn't supported by this verse.

Hbr 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Hbr 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Verse 27 is talking ONLY about the first (physical) death. Verse 28 does say that those who look for Him will not suffer the second (spiritual) death but doesn't elaborate on who those people are (the Elect or those that believe on Him and follow Him).

 

[Me4Him]

Born once, die twice
Born twice, die once.

Simple.

 

[mountainrun]

I believe the answer is found in..

Revelation 20:6.
Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

There IS a second death for unbelievers, it is simply unmentioned in Heb. 9:27.

The second death is not appointed.
You could say it is optional.

MR

 

[webdog]

The second death is not appointed.
You could say it is optional.

That's what I'm getting at! Calvinism falsely claims that the reprobate were created for destruction, meaning that they would have been created TWICE to die...once physically and once spiritually. This cannot be the case, as the Bible tells us that it is appointed for man ONCE to die...physically.

 

[jw]

That's what I'm getting at! Calvinism falsely claims that the reprobate were created for destruction, meaning that they would have been created TWICE to die...once physically and once spiritually. This cannot be the case, as the Bible tells us that it is appointed for man ONCE to die...physically.

1. Not all calvinist believe that.
2. This verse has nothing to do with the second death.

That's like saying "God likes to toture furry animals because John 3:16 doesn't say that He doens't like to toture furry animals". You cannot make an arguement from silence.

 

[webdog]

1. Not all calvinist believe what, that some were created for destruction? News to me. I think they are called arminians.
2. It does have to do with the second death. The verse implies that. If it didn't, there would be no need to stress that man is appointed to die once . This is insinuating there is a second death for some after "the judgement" in the verse.

 

[jw]

Originally posted by webdog:
1. Not all calvinist believe what, that some were created for destruction? News to me. I think they are called arminians.
2. It does have to do with the second death. The verse implies that. If it didn't, there would be no need to stress that man is appointed to die once . This is insinuating there is a second death for some after "the judgement" in the verse.

1. If it's news to you then apparently you don't listen or have a very short memory. I've been in debate threads with you in the past on Calvinism and I, as well as several others, informed you of our position.

2. The second death is mentioned no where in Hebrews. The writer of Hebrews isn't trying to make a case for defeating Calvinism, he is comparing Christ's sacrafice (a once for all thing) to the High Priests sacrafice that had to be offered every year. He draws the comparison that human beings by nature die once and Christ, as human, could die only once.

Read the whole paragraph man!

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

This is why I quit arguing with you in the other Calvinist threads. You twist the scriptures to mean whatever you want them to mean.

 

[webdog]

1. If it's news to you then apparently you don't listen or have a very short memory. I've been in debate threads with you in the past on Calvinism and I, as well as several others, informed you of our position.

Now "unconditional election" and "limited atonement" are not part of calvinism? Talk about confusing!

2. The second death is mentioned no where in Hebrews. The writer of Hebrews isn't trying to make a case for defeating Calvinism, he is comparing Christ's sacrafice (a once for all thing) to the High Priests sacrafice that had to be offered every year. He draws the comparison that human beings by nature die once and Christ, as human, could die only once.

I have never claimed the second death was directly mentioned in Hebrews. It does, however, mention that it is appointed the man die ONCE. Calvinist love to use Romans 9:21-22 to "prove" that God does create some for destruction. These people, then, would have been appointed to die TWICE! I am also aware of what the true context is in the paragraph you posted, but the underlying point that man was appointed to die ONCE cannot be brushed under the rug.

This is why I quit arguing with you in the other Calvinist threads.

I don't recall "arguing" with you about anything. If you think it's an argument, and not debate, you have issues.

You twist the scriptures to mean whatever you want them to mean.

I remember hearing about someone living in a glass house not throwing stones....

 

[jw]

Now "unconditional election" and "limited atonement" are not part of Calvinism? Talk about confusing!

This is the point where I am tempted to say, "bah!" and walk away. Yet for some crazy reason I still want to answer your false statement, though I and others have many times before.

Unconditional Election and Reprobation are not necessarily the same doctrine. Try learning what the terms mean before you argue against them.

Limited Atonement is a debated subject, even among Calvinist. If you claim you've never heard of this then I have no problem calling you a liar, because I know for a fact we've discussed it - and I can dig out the threads if you like.

I have never claimed the second death was directly mentioned in Hebrews. It does, however, mention that it is appointed the man die ONCE.

Which has nothing to do with the second death. You ripped the verse out of context. Try giving a rebuttal to my previous explanation of the verse from context instead of just reasserting the same old bad interpretation.

Calvinist love to use Romans 9:21-22 to "prove" that God does create some for destruction. These people, then, would have been appointed to die TWICE!

*sigh*... Once again, not everyone believes in reprobation. Further, you are STILL twisting what the writer of Hebrews was saying. He was talking about a PHYSICAL death from a PHYSICAL sacrifice, namely Christ's. He was not talking about a physical death and then a spiritual death resulting from the last Judgment.

I am also aware of what the true context is in the paragraph you posted, but the underlying point that man was appointed to die ONCE cannot be brushed under the rug.

Apparently you aren't ware of it, or you would retract your ridiculous argument. I did not "brush" anything "under the rug". I explained what "once to die" meant, and it has nothing to do with what you are trying to apply it to.

I don't recall "arguing" with you about anything. If you think it's an argument, and not debate, you have issues.

Argument, debate, whatever.

I remember hearing about someone living in a glass house not throwing stones....

So you're putting down your rocks?

What scripture have a twisted? Explain how I've twisted it.

 

[jw]

... another flawed part of your argument.

1. If you stick to the strict literal interpretation that you do then the author of Hebrews must have believed that Enoch was predestined to hell, because in Heb 11:5 he clearly states that Enoch did not have a physical death. Therefore his appointed death, according to your logic, must be the second death. Further, Elijah must be in hell as well.

2. The widow's son that Elijah raised, Lazarus, and the man that fell out the window while Paul was preaching must all still be alive today, because they are only appointed ONCE to die, and could not possibly have died again.

3. The gospel account that says the Pharisees killed Lazarus after he had been resurected is obviously a total lie or a mistake, because he was only appointed ONCE to die.

Do you see what kind of problems you ripping this verse out of context and applying a super-literal meaning to it causes?

 

[webdog]

Fact remains, nowhere is it mentioned in Scripture that it is appointed unto men TWICE To die. Even if it is a generality (not directed toward Enoch, Elijah or those who remain during Christ's return) toward mankind, you cannot dodge the fact that man was never created for destruction, something you will not come out and admit.

He was talking about a PHYSICAL death from a PHYSICAL sacrifice, namely Christ's.

Explain what Christ will be judged on. Hebrews 9:27 is referring to mankind in general.

Argument, debate, whatever.

"Try learning what the terms mean."
I hope you are not alway this full of anger. Try to post with a smile next time.

Do you see what kind of problems you ripping this verse out of context and applying a super-literal meaning to it causes?

Strawman. I never applied a "super literal" meaning, you tried to make me out like I did. My entire argument is that it is nowhere found that man is created for destruction.

 

[Me4Him]

Originally posted by jw:
... another flawed part of your argument.

1. If you stick to the strict literal interpretation that you do then the author of Hebrews must have believed that Enoch was predestined to hell, because in Heb 11:5 he clearly states that Enoch did not have a physical death. Therefore his appointed death, according to your logic, must be the second death. Further, Elijah must be in hell as well.

2. The widow's son that Elijah raised, Lazarus, and the man that fell out the window while Paul was preaching must all still be alive today, because they are only appointed ONCE to die, and could not possibly have died again.

3. The gospel account that says the Pharisees killed Lazarus after he had been resurected is obviously a total lie or a mistake, because he was only appointed ONCE to die.

Do you see what kind of problems you ripping this verse out of context and applying a super-literal meaning to it causes?

Those in the "Rapture" escape even this "once appointment" of death.

All those Jesus resurrrected, died again, Jesus was the "FIRSTFRUIT" resurrected unto "Eternal life". (never to die again)

Things occur in scripture that are "outside" the normal procedures so that

THE SCRIPTURES MAY BE FULFILLED.

If you don't learn that, you end up in a "web of confusion".

The "Second death" is only appointed to "unbelievers", this is why the gospel is preached to have them become "Believers" and only have to die "ONCE". (physically)