Heb 27–28. It is somewhat unexpected for the writer to introduce at this stage the idea of judgment. But he has been dwelling on the necessity for Christ’s death and this leads him to make a general statement about man’s destiny. Death in itself is unavoidable: it is appointed for men to die once. No-one is exempt from this experience. The difference between Christ’s death and all others is that his was voluntary whereas for all others it is appointed (apokeitai), i.e. stored up for them. The expectation that some will escape death (cf. 1 Thess. 4:15ff.) is an exception to the general rule stated, occasioned by the special event of the coming of Christ. It is not therefore in conflict with this statement in Hebrews.
The words and after that comes judgment are not intended to imply that judgment follows immediately after death, but rather that judgment is to be expected subsequent to death. Furthermore this does not mean that no act of judgment ever happens before death. The judgment (krisis) alluded to is the final assessment.
In making the comparison between everyman and Christ, the writer begins with a common factor: he died once, a point repeated yet again. What is most significant about this statement is that the death is now stated in the passive, having been offered, instead of the active as in verse 14. No hint is here given about who made the offering. Taken in conjunction with verse 14, it may be said that both active and passive aspects are necessary for a complete understanding of the offering. While it was voluntary, it was also imposed by external circumstances: historically by the malice of the Jewish murderers and theologically by the definite plan of God (cf. Acts 2:23).
The purpose of the offering is again stated in similar though slightly different terms from verse 26. Here the phrase to bear the sins of many (pollōn anenenkein hamartias) is precisely paralleled in the Septuagint of Isaiah 53:12. The same idea occurs in 1 Peter 2:24 where the bearing of sins is said to have been ‘in his body on the tree’. Similarly John the Baptist’s announcement that the Lamb of God would bear away the sin of the world echoes the same thought. The ‘many’ contrasts with the one offering.
The Christ who has dealt with sin at his first coming will appear a second time for a different purpose. Had the parallel with judgment been pressed, some aspect of Christ’s coming to judge might have been introduced. But the second coming is said to be for salvation. The second coming is in fact the divine seal on the complete acceptance of the sacrifice offered previously. The emphasis falls on the effect that the second coming of Christ will have on those who are eagerly waiting for him (i.e. Christians). Nothing is said about unbelievers as would have been natural after the mention of judgment. But it is Christ’s work of salvation which engages the writer’s attention. There might here be some analogy to the expectations of the worshippers as they wait to greet the high priest on his return from the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement. But the words not to deal with sin (chōris hamartias) quickly put a different complexion on the analogy. Sin needs no further atonement. All that is necessary is the appropriation of the salvation which Christ’s self-offering has secured. The verb translated eagerly waiting (apekdechomenois) occurs in 1 Corinthians 1:7, Philippians 3:20 and Romans 8:19, 23, 25, in each case of the great expectancy of believers waiting for the glories to come.


Guthrie, D. (1983). Hebrews: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 15, pp. 201–203). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.