Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 8:1

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 8:1” utilice nuestra app.

Now of the things which we have spoken [this is] the sum: We have such a high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

1. of the things which we have spoken this is the sum ] Rather, “the chief point in what we are saying is this.” The word rendered “sum” ( kephalaion) may mean, in its classical sense, “chief point,” and that must be the meaning here, because these verses are not a summary and they add fresh particulars to what he has been saying. Dr Field renders it “now to crown our present discourse;” Tyndale and Cranmer, “ pyth. ”

is set ] Rather, “sat” a mark of preeminence (Heb 10:11-12, Heb 12:2).

of the throne ] This conception seems to be the origin of the Jewish word Metatron, a sort of Prince of all the Angels, near the throne ( meta thronios).

of the Majesty in the heavens ] A very Alexandrian expression. See note on Heb 1:3.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Now of the things which we have spoken – Or, of the things of which we are speaking (Stuart); or as we should say, of what is said. The Greek does not necessarily mean things that had been spoken, but may refer to all that he was saying, taking the whole subject into consideration.

This is the sum – Or this is the principal thing; referring to what he was about to say, not what he had said. Our translators seem to have understood this as referring to a summing up, or recapitulation of what he had said, and there can be no doubt that the Greek would bear this interpretation. But another exposition has been proposed, adopted by Bloomfield, Stuart, Michaelis, and Storr, among the moderns, and found also in Suidas, Theodoret, Theophylact, and others, among the ancients. It is what regards the word rendered sum – kephalaion – as meaning the principal thing; the chief matter; the most important point. The reason for this interpretation is, that the apostle in fact goes into no recapitulation of what he had said, but enters on a new topic relating to the priesthood of Christ. Instead of going over what he had demonstrated, he enters on a more important point, that the priesthood of Christ is performed in heaven, and that he has entered into the true tabernacle there. All which preceded was type and shadow; this was that which the former economy had adumbrated. In the previous chapters the apostle had shown that he who sustained this office was superior in rank to the Jewish priests; that they were frail and dying, and that the office in their hands was changing from one to another, but that that of Christ was permanent and abiding. He now comes to consider the real nature of the office itself; the sacrifice which was offered; the substance of which all in the former dispensation was the type. This was the principal thing – kephalaion – the head, the most important matter; and the consideration of this is pursued through theHeb 8:1, Heb 9:1, and Heb 10:1 chapters Heb. 810.

We have such an high priest – That is settled; proved; indisputable. The Christian system is not destitute of what was regarded as so essential to the old dispensation – the office of a high priest.

Who is set on the right hand of a throne … – He is exalted to honor and glory before God. The right hand was regarded as the place of principal honor, and when it is said that Christ is at the right hand of God, the meaning is, that he is exalted to the highest honor in the universe; see the note at Mar 16:19. Of course the language is figurative – as God has no hands literally – but the language conveys an important meaning, that he is near to God; is high in his affection and love, and is raised to the most elevated situation in heaven; see Phi 2:9; notes Eph 1:21-22.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Heb 8:1

We have such an High Priest.

Our great High Priest

You can hardly fail to observe the tone of triumph of St. Paul in giving his summary; in announcing it as an established fact, that we have such an High Priest, a High Priest such as had been described–holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. He speaks as though nothing more could be needed, nothing more wished. Now then, as a preliminary view of this summary of the apostle, you will all admit that in speaking of our High Priest, St. Paul is evidently to be understood as speaking of a mighty Friend or Supporter. He is manifestly anxious to magnify this High Priest, that he may possess us with an exalted opinion of His greatness and His goodness. Yet we are not for a moment to think it implied that salvation is not a difficult thing, requiring effort, exertion, and sacrifice. In a preceding chapter St. Paul had said: Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. Though he here describes the same blessed truths, as in the summary of our text, he evidently indicates that we are in danger of letting go our profession through the greatness of the struggle needed for maintaining it. Thus you should set before yourselves the privilege of the Christi, n in treat his cause has been undertaken by a Being who is able to save to the uttermost: and at the same time the duty of the Christian, in that he must labour with all his might at a task which is both difficult and dangerous. And we are to labour at this difficult and dangerous task on the very account that we have such an High Priest, that our cause, that is, is in hands which are certain to make it prevail, Without a Mediator, repentance, even if it; might have been genuine, must have been unavailing; whereas, with a Mediator, repentance wrought in us by Gods Spirit, may be made the condition of our admission into Gods kingdom. Without a Mediator prayer, even if from the heart, could have brought down no blessing from above; whereas with a Mediator prayer has only to be the prayer of faith, and it will prevail with our Father in heaven. Without a Mediator the effort to keep Gods commandments, even if made with all diligence and sincerity, could have done nothing towards removing us from under the curse; whereas with a Mediator, our imperfect obedience, though void of any merit what ever, can be graciously accepted as a proof and token of faith, and noted by God, who out of His exuberant mercy designs to reward every man according to his works. He taut in any measure or sense trusts in his own strength, or leans on his own righteousness, as truly depends on a broken reed, now that Christ hath died ,or him, as though no Mediator had risen to make atonement; but Christ, as we have already said, puts us into a new state or condition, not a state in which we may be saved without labour, but a state in which labour may end in our being saved. He opened to us the kingdom of heaven, that kingdom which without Him would have remained for ever closed against the fallen and the feeble; but to open the kingdom, is not the same thing as to put us into the kingdom without any effort of our own. It is rather to encourage us to exertion, which, manifestly of no avail while the everlasting doors are firmly barred against us, may be graciously crowned with success when the bars have been removed by the Redeemer. Therefore, the whole power of the gospel, so far as motive is concerned, is against indolence and indifference, and on the side of energy and endeavour. Seeing that Christ hath been crucified, let us crucify ourselves; it would be of no avail striving to mortify the flesh whilst hell yawned for us and could not be escaped. Seeing that Christ hath died for sin, let us labour to die to sin. It is not a useless labour now, but it was till heaven had been opened, for which holiness makes fitness. Seeing that Christ pleads for us, let us be fervent in pleading for ourselves. Prayer can now be heard and answered, though it could not have been except as presented through an all-powerful Intercessor. Now, hitherto we have only treated the apostles summary as bearing generally on the fact, that the scheme of the gospel is so constructed as to urge us to endeavour, rather than to encourage us in inactivity. We will now, however, take a different view of the case. We will consider it as addressed simply to believers, constructed for the comfort and encouragement of those, who, in the midst of a troubled and sinful world, may be tempted to let go their Christian profession, despairing of being able to persevere to the end. There are two great points, or facts, upon which the apostle fastens as making up the sum of all that he had advanced. First, we have such an High Priest; such an one as had been described in the foregoing chapter–holy, harmless, and undefiled, separate from sinners, who being made perfect, became the Author of eternal salvation to all them that obey. The apostle speaks of Christ as still being a High Priest. He uses the present tense, and thus he reminds us that the priestly office was not completed or laid aside when the Mediator had offered up Himself, but that it still continues to be discharged, and will be so while the church is in any danger of letting go her profession. And this is a truth which is full of comfort to the Christian. There is an unlimited difference to him between we have had an High Priest, and we have an High Priest. What more of encouragement can we desire, what more of assurance of final victory, now that we are able to wind up all discussion upon the Christian scheme, in the words of our text–Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have,not we have had, but we have–we still have such an High Priest. Now we turn to the second point adduced by the apostle, and this relates to the present residence of the High Priest, who, according to St. Paul, is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. And the tone, as we before said, in which he gives his summary would seem to indicate that the fact of Christ having passed into heaven is one which should fill us with gladness and confidence. If that residence in the heavens prove to me that Christ prevailed in the great work which He undertook, and that because He thus prevailed all power has been given unto Him in heaven and in earth, what better reason can I have for adherence to Christianity? It is no cunningly devised fable which I follow, if indeed the Redeemer be thus on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. It is on no doubtful aid that I rely, it is no uncertain Advocate with whom I trust my cause, if He who died upon the cross hath been exalted to the throne. What want can there be for which He has not a supply? what sorrow for which He has not a solace? what sin for which He has not an expiation? what temptation which He cannot enable me to resist? or what enemy which He cannot strengthen me to overcome? Shall we, then, let go our profession? Shall we shrink at the approach of danger? Shall we play the coward and the recreant, because of persecution, distress, contumely, and difficulty? Nay, this were to desert a Leader, of whom we have every possible assurance, that no friend can trust Him and not be finally more than a conqueror–no foe resist Him, and not be finally crushed. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The great possession

I. THE REALITY OF THE FACT. We have such an High Priest. It is not a matter of useless desire or of future hope, but of present accomplished possession. The truth exists indeed in the unseen world, and is not at present visible to sight, as it will be hereafter. Hereafter the very eyes shall take cognisance of the fact, when forth from the holy of holies, the immediate presence of God, the great High Priest shall come to be manifested before the eyes of an astonished world. But why is that time delayed? Why lingers the great High Priest within the heavenly sanctuary? The answer is, that He waits till the number of the elect shall be completed, and the intercession which He for ever lives to make for His people shall be no longer necessary, when, His people being gathered safely in the last veil shall be for ever removed from between them end the full sight of God. Our High Priest still ministers for us till then.

II. THE SINGLENESS OF THE PERSON, AND OF THE OFFICE HE FULFILS. We have such an High Priest–not many, but one–one, and only one, so absolutely alone, that it is blasphemy to arrogate any part of His work. But will Christ be Priest for ever? This the apostle notices. Yes, for He liveth in the power of an endless life, and needs no successor.

III. THE PERFECTION OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST, AND THE PERFECTION OF HIM WHO FULFILS IT. We have such an High Priest. Turn back to the preceding chapter, and you will find that the apostle enumerates beauty after beauty in Christ, as if he were gathering together a cluster of jewels to deck His crown of glory. It is singular, when we read the passage carefully, how we find it crowded with insignia of honour. In human priests, if the most extravagant claims were admitted, It would yet be true that the dignity is only in the office, and not in the men. But when we turn to the true High Priest, how different it is! Here is not only the glory of the office, but the glory of the Person, infinitely qualified in His Deity, to stand between the justice of God and the whole human race. He is no mere dying man like an earthly priest, but clothed with the power of an endless life. He was not made after the law of a carnal commandment, but made after the oath of God Himself, a High Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. He has not entered into the tabernacle made with hands, with the blood of bulls and goats, but with His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. He is not one among many, like earthly priests, but is alone in His own single and unequalled majesty, the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. He does not fill a delegated office, like earthly priests, but fulfils His own office, and that so perfectly that He is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him. He needs not daily, as earthly priests, to seek forgiveness for His own sins, but is holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. He does not minister afar off from God, like earthly priests, but is already made higher than the heavens, and at the right hand of His Father pleads evermore for us. He needs not to repeat His daily offerings, as earthly priests, but has made atonement once, when He offered up Himself. And, lastly, He has no infirmity, like earthly priests, but is the Son of God, Himself God, blessed for evermore–omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, infinite! Who perfect as He? and what wonder that, thus perfect, He should govern as well as atone?-not only Priest, but King,–nay, bearing on His head the triple crown of glory–Prophet, Priest, King. (E. Garbett, M. A.)

The enthroned servant Christ

We have here two strikingly different representations of our Lords heavenly state. In the one He is regarded as seated on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty. In the other He is regarded as being, notwithstanding that session, a minister of the sanctuary; performing priestly functions there. Reigning He serves; serving He reigns.

I. THE SEATED CHRIST. We have a High Priest who–to translate a little more closely–has taken His seat on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. If we translate the symbol into colder words, it means that deep repose, which, like the Divine rest after creation, is not for recuperation of exhausted powers, but is the sign of an accomplished purpose and achieved task, a share in the sovereignty of heaven, and the wielding of the energies of Deity–rest, royalty, and power belong now to the Man sitting at the right hand of the throne of God.

II. THE SERVANT CHRIST. A minister of the sanctuary, says my text. The glorified Christ is a ministering Christ. In us, on us, for us He works, in all the activities of His exalted repose, as truly and more mightily than He did when here lie helped the weaknesses and healed the sicknesses, and soothed the sorrows and supplied the wants, and washed the feet of a handful of poor men. He has gone up on high, but in His rest He works. He is on the throne, but in His royalty He serves.

III. THE PRACTICAL LESSONS OF SUCH THOUGHTS AS THESE. They have a bearing on the three categories of past, present, future.

1. For the past a seal For what can be greater, what can afford a firmer foundation for us sinful men to rest our confidence upon than the death of which the recompense was that the Man who died sits on the throne of the universe?

2. A strength for the present. I know of nothing that is mighty enough to draw mens desires and fix solid reasonable thought and love upon that awful future, except the better that Christ is there. But with Christ in the heavens the heavens become the home of our hearts. See Christ, and He interprets, dwindles, and yet ennobles the world and life.

3. A prophecy for the future. There is the measure of the possibilities of human nature. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

The crowning point: Christ the High Priest in heaven

The Lord Jesus is our High Priest in heaven. These simple but majestic and weighty words sum up the teaching of the first eight chapters of our epistle. This is the crowning-point of the apostles profound and massive argument, Jesus, who suffered and died, is consecrated the priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec, after the power of an endless life. He is the minister of the heavenly sanctuary and the true tabernacle In no other portion of the new covenant Scriptures is the High Priesthood of the Lord Jesus explained. Hence in this precious and most essential epistle, more than in any other book, stress is laid upon the ascension rather than the resurrection, and upon the tact that Jesus is in heaven. The object of this epistle was to comfort and also to exhort the Jews, whose faith was sorely tried because they were excluded from the services of the temple in Jerusalem; to confirm unto them the great truth, that they had the reality of those things which were only temporary and signs, and that the real sanctuary was not upon earth but high in the heavens, and that Jesus had gone to be the minister of the holy things, and of the true and substantial tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. It is because the Son of man, who came down from heaven, hath ascended up into heaven, it is because Jesus is at the right band of God, that He is the true and perfect mediator between God and man. From His throne in heaven Be gives repentance and the remission of sins; from thence He gives unto His Church all needful gifts, even as He at first sent forth the Holy Ghost because He had been exalted by the right hand of God. From heaven He shall descend and gather His saints, changing their vile bodies, that they may be fashioned like unto His glorious body; from heaven He worketh now, and will work, until He hath subdued all things unto Himself. If Christ is in heaven, we must lift up our eyes and hearts to heaven. There are things above. The things above are the spiritual blessings in heavenly places. Seek those things which are above; faith and love, hope and patience, meekness, righteousness, and strength. The things above are also the future things for which we wait, seeing that our inheritance is not here upon earth. All that is pertaining unto the inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, belongs unto those things which Christ has now to minister in the tabernacle which God has made and not man. Our transfigured body, our perfectly enlightened mind, our soul entirely filled with the love of God, all the strength and gifts for government (for we shall be called to reign with Christ upon the ear h), all those powers and blessings which we have now only by faith and in germ, are in the heavenly places with Christ, who shall bring them to us when He comes again at the command of the Father. (A. Saphir.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER VIII.

The sum, or chief articles, of what the apostle has spoken,

concerning the eternal priesthood of Christ, 1-5:

The excellency of the new covenant beyond that of the old, 6-9.

The nature and perfection of the new covenant stated from the

predictions of the prophets, 10-12.

By this new covenant the old is abolished, 13.

NOTES ON CHAP. VIII.

Verse 1. Of the things which we have spoken this is the sum] The word , which we translate sum, signifies the chief, the principal, or head; or, as St. Chrysostom explains it, , “that which is greatest is always called kephalaion,” i.e. the head, or chief.

Who is set on the right hand of the throne] This is what the apostle states to be the chief or most important point of all that he had yet discussed. His sitting down at the right hand of the throne of God, proves,

1. That he is higher than all the high priests that ever existed.

2. That the sacrifice which he offered for the sins of the world was sufficient and effectual, and as such accepted by God.

3. That he has all power in the heavens and in the earth, and is able to save and defend to the uttermost all that come to God through him.

4. That he did not, like the Jewish high priest, depart out of the holy of holies, after having offered the atonement; but abides there at the throne of God, as a continual priest, in the permanent act of offering his crucified body unto God, in behalf of all the succeeding generations of mankind. It is no wonder the apostle should call this sitting down at the right hand of the throne of the Divine Majesty, the chief or head of all that he had before spoken.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The Spirit having cleared the doctrine of the priesthood of the great gospel Minister, now proceeds to show how he executed that office; and that therein as he far excelled, so he was to be valued and used before, the Aaronical priests. He introduceth it with a reflection on his foregoing discourse.

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum; the sum then of the things spoken, is some read, the head, i.e. the scope in a discourse driven at; others, the chief of all the excellencies of the priesthood hitherto held forth; as if it were palmarium argumentum, the highest and choicest of all that hitherto had been spoken; and it is proportionably true, as will be seen in what followeth: but it must necessarily join the foregoing and following discourse together, and so it notes a sum, contract, or epitome; a breviate of the heads formerly discoursed on and largely, Heb 7:1-28; and so shows the dependence of the matter remaining to be handled on what went before, when many things are summed up in a few words; as Christs priesthood, largely opened before from Psa 110:4, is, as to the substance of it, briefly handled in this verse.

We have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; we Paul, and believing Hebrews, opposed to the infidel Jews, have not only a right to, and interest in, but actual possession of, Christ, God-man, as our High Priest, while their infidel brethren had only a sinful man: He who hath eminent power above, and though crucified by men, yet thereby became victorious over sin, death, and hell, and the lord of them the devil, led principalities and powers in triumph, when he passed through their kingdom in the air, Col 2:15, entered into the heaven of heavens, and there sat him down and settled himself, as was his right, on the right hand of God, as he sat on his throne, invested with all power and dignity, as Gods royal Priest, near to him, and the great manager of all our concerns with him; while the sinful priest at Jerusalem stood trembling before the shadow of this heavenly temple on earth, Heb 1:3.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. the sumrather, “theprincipal point”; for the participle is present, not past,which would be required if the meaning were “the sum.” “Thechief point in (or, ‘in the case’; so the Greek, Heb 9:10;Heb 9:15; Heb 9:17)the things which we are speaking,” literally, “which arebeing spoken.”

suchso transcendentlypre-eminent, namely in this respect, that “He is set on theright hand of,” c. Infinitely above all other priests in thisone grand respect, He exercises His priesthood INHEAVEN, not in the earthly “holiest place”(Heb 10:12). The Leviticalhigh priests, even when they entered the Holiest Place once a year,only STOOD for a briefspace before the symbol of God’s throne but Jesus SITSon the throne of the Divine Majesty in the heaven itself, andthis for ever (Heb 10:11;Heb 10:12).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum,…. The scope and drift, the compendium and substance; or the principal of what has been said in or from Ps 110:4 and has been discoursed of in the three preceding chapters, is the priesthood of Christ:

we have such an high priest; as is described in the foregoing discourse, and in the following words: Christ is a priest, an high priest, and the saints’ high priest; they are not without one under the Gospel dispensation; and Christ is he, and always continues, in whose sacrifice and intercession they have a share:

who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; he is “set”, whereas the Levitical priests stood; which shows that he has done his work, and that with acceptance; and is in a state of ease and rest; and is possessed of honour, glory, majesty, and authority, and which continue: the place where he is set is, “on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty”; the same with the right hand of God; for by the throne of the Majesty is meant God the Father, in his royal glory and dignity; so Tiphereth, one of the ten numbers in the Jews’ Cabalistic tree, whose name is Jehovah, is called , “the throne of glory” c; so angels are called thrones, Col 1:16 but God is a throne of majesty superior to them; and at his right hand sits Christ the great high priest; which is expressive of his high honour, glory, and power, and even of his equality with God: the phrase, “in the heavens”, may refer both to God the throne of majesty, who is there, and to Christ the high priest, who is passed into them, and received by them, and sits there.

c Lex. Cabal. p. 483.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Priesthood of Christ.

A. D. 62.

1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such a high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; 2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. 3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. 4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: 5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.

Here is, I. A summary recital of what had been said before concerning the excellency of Christ’s priesthood, showing what we have in Christ, where he now resides, and what sanctuary he is the minister of, Heb 8:1; Heb 8:2. Observe, 1. What we have in Christ; we have a high priest, and such a high priest as no other people ever had, no age of the world, or of the church, ever produced; all others were but types and shadows of this high priest. He is adequately fitted and absolutely sufficient to all the intents and purposes of a high priest, both with respect to the honour of God and the happiness of men and himself; the great honour of all those who have an interest in him. 2. Where he now resides: He sits on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty on high, that is, of the glorious God of heaven. There the Mediator is placed, and he is possessed of all authority and power both in heaven and upon earth. This is the reward of his humiliation. This authority he exercises for the glory of his Father, for his own honour, and for the happiness of all who belong to him; and he will by his almighty power bring every one of them in their own order to the right hand of God in heaven, as members of his mystical body, that where he is they may be also. 3. What is that sanctuary of which he is a minister: Of the true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not man, v. 2. The tabernacle which was pitched by man, according to the appointment of God. There was an outer part, in which was the altar where they were to offer their sacrifices, which typified Christ dying; and there was an interior part within the veil, which typified Christ interceding for the people in heaven. Now this tabernacle Christ never entered into; but, having finished the work of satisfaction in the true tabernacle of his own body, he is now a minister of the sanctuary, the holy of holies, the true tabernacle in heaven, there taking care of his people’s affairs, interceding with God for them, that their sins may be pardoned and their persons and services accepted, through the merit of his sacrifice. He is not only in heaven enjoying great dominion and dignity, but, as the high priest of his church, executing this office for them all in general, and every member of the church in particular.

II. The apostle sets before the Hebrews the necessary parts of Christ’s priesthood, or what it was that belonged to that office, in conformity to what every high priest is ordained to, Heb 8:3; Heb 8:4. 1. Every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices. Whatever was brought by the people to be presented to God, whether expiatory sacrifices, or peace-offerings, or thank-offerings, must be offered by the priest, who was to expiate their guilt by the blood of the sacrifice, and perfume their gifts and services by his holy incense, to render their persons and performances typically acceptable; so then it necessarily belongs to the priesthood of Christ that he should have somewhat to offer; and he, as the antitype, had himself to offer, his human nature upon the altar of his divine nature, as the great atoning sacrifice that finished transgression, and made an end of sin once for all; and he has the incense of his own righteousness and merits too to offer with all that his people offer up to God by him, to render them acceptable. We must not dare to approach to God, or to present any thing to him, but in and through Christ, depending upon his merits and mediation; for if we are accepted, it is in the Beloved. 2. Christ must now execute his priesthood in heaven, in the holy of holies, the true tabernacle which the Lord hath fixed. Thus the type must be fully answered; having finished the work of sacrificing here, he must go into heaven, to present his righteousness and to make intercession there. For, (1.) If Christ were on earth, he would not be a priest (v. 4), that is, not according to the Levitical law, as not being of the line of that priesthood; and so long as that priesthood continued there must be a strict regard paid to the divine institution in everything. (2.) All the services of the priest, under the law, as well as every thing in that tabernacle which was framed according to the pattern in the mount, were only exemplars and shadows of heavenly things, v. 5. Christ is the substance and end of the law for righteousness. Something therefore there must be in Christ’s priesthood that answers to the high priest’s entering within the veil to make intercession, without which he could not have been a perfect priest; and what is this but the ascension of Christ into heaven, and his appearance there in the sight of God for his people, to present their prayers, and plead their cause? So that, if he had still continued on earth, he could not have been a perfect priest; and an imperfect one he could not be.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

In the things which we are saying ( ). Locative case of the articular present passive participle of after as in Luke 5:5; Heb 11:4, “in the matter of the things being discussed.”

The chief point (). Neuter singular of the adjective (from , head), belonging to the head. Vulgate capitulum, nominative absolute in old and common sense, the main matter (even so without the article as in Thucydides), “the pith” (Coverdale), common in the papyri as in Greek literature. The word also occurs in the sense of the sum total or a sum of money (Ac 22:28) as in Plutarch, Josephus, and also in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary).

Such an high priest ( ). As the one described in chapters 4:16-7:28 and in particular 7:26 () Heb 7:27; Heb 7:28. But the discussion of the priestly work of Jesus continues through 12:3. is both retrospective and prospective. Here we have a summary of the five points of superiority of Jesus as high priest (8:1-6). He is himself a better priest than Aaron ( in 8:1 such as shown in 4:16-7:28); he works in a better sanctuary (Heb 8:2; Heb 8:5); he offers a better sacrifice (8:3f.); he is mediator of a better covenant (8:6); his work rests on better promises (8:6); hence he has obtained a better ministry as a whole (8:6). In this resume () the author gives the pith () of his argument, curiously enough with both senses of (pith, summary) pertinent. He will discuss the four points remaining thus: (1) the better covenant, 8:7-13. (2) The better sanctuary, 9:1-12. (3) The better sacrifice, 9:13-10:18. (4) The better promises, 10:19-12:3. One point (the better high priest, like Melchizedek) has already been discussed (4:16-7:28).

Sat down (). Repetition of 1:3 with (the throne) added. This phrase prepares the way for the next point.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Of the things which we have spoken [ ] . The A. V. is wrong. jEpi is in the case of, or in the consideration of : not of, nor in addition to. Toiv legomenoiv “the things which are being spoken” : the matters now under discussion.

The sum [] . Rend. the chief point. It is not the sum of what precedes, but the main point of the present discussion. This point is that Christ is the minister of a better sanctuary, connected with a better covenant.

Such an high priest [] . Taken up from ch. 7 26.

Is set [] . Repeating ch. 1 3. Rend. sat down.

The throne of the majesty [ ] . See on ch. Heb 1:3. The phrase N. T. o.

In the heavens [ ] . Const. with sat down, not with majesty, which is complete in itself and needs no qualifying epithet.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Now, this is the sum,” (kepalaion) “Now (here is) a summary,” this is the essence, a review, or an abstract of what has been presented in Heb 1:1 to Heb 7:28.

2) “Of the things which we have spoken,” (opi tois legomenois) “Of or over the things (that I have said) being spoken;” This begins an extended summary of matters the writer has already discussed at length, concerning the superiority of Christ as Priest, High Priest, and King over that of the Levitical Law and Melchisedec, and of the church, as superior over the house or program of worship and service that Moses built.

3) “We have such an high priest,” (poiouton echomen archierea) “We have, hold, or possess (as our very own) such an high priest,” such an high priest as afore described, as holy, harmless, undefiled, in a separate class of nature and conduct from sinners, and from the priests of the Levitical Law order. What is more, our high priest is eternal, has no weakness, will never become weak, sick, die, or cease to make intercession on our behalf – – Hallelujah! What an advocate! Psa 110:1; Dan 7:13; Act 7:55-56. To receive departing souls and intercede for saints on earth Jesus is described as standing or seated in heaven at the right hand of the Father.

4) “Who is set on the right hand,” (hos ekathisen en deksia) “Who sat (and is seated) at the right hand,” not on,” as when the astute little boy in Sunday School asked, “Teacher, why is Jesus sitting on God’s right hand?” Eph 1:20; Col 3:1; Mar 16:19.

5) “Of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,” (tou thronou tes megalosunes en tois ouranois) “Of the throne of greatness (Majesty) in the heavens,” Heb 1:3; Heb 12:2; 1Pe 3:22. There angels, authorities, and powers are subject to him.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

1. Now of the things, etc. That readers might know the subject he handles, he reminds them that his object is to prove that Christ’s priesthood, by which that of the law had been abolished, is spiritual. He, indeed, proceeds with the same argument; but as he contends with various reasonings, he introduced this admonition, that he might keep his readers attentive to what he had in view.

He has already shown that Christ is a high priest; he now contends that his priesthood is celestial. It hence follows, that by his coming the priesthood established by Moses under the law was made void, for it was earthly. and as Christ suffered in the humble condition of his flesh, and having taken the form of a servant, made himself of no reputation in the world, (Phi 2:7😉 the Apostle reminds us of his ascension, by which was removed not only the reproach of the cross, but also of that abject and mean condition which he had assumed together with our flesh; for it is by the power of the Spirit which gloriously appeared in the resurrection and the ascension of Christ, that the dignity of his priesthood is to be estimated. He then reasons thus — “Since Christ has ascended to the right hand of God, that he might reign gloriously in heaven, he is not the minister of the earthly but of the heavenly sanctuary. (127)

(127) See Appendix D 2.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THE CONTRAST OF THE TWO COVENANTS

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

VIRTUALLY a new topic is dealt with in this chapter. Hitherto the personal characteristics of the high priest have occupied the chief place: from this point to Heb. 10:18, the ministration of the high priest receives special attention. The writer first contrasts the two covenants. God, who entered into the old covenant, had promised, in Jeremiah, a new covenant. It would prove to be superior to the old in three respects:

1. Because the law of it would be written on the heart.
2. Because it would be a universal covenant, not limited to any one race.
3. Because it would be a covenant pledging forgiveness of sins: and so dealing with what, in every age, is found to be mans deepest need. The decrepitude of the old covenant, indicated by its being called old, is a sign of its approaching and final evanescence (Heb. 8:13).

Heb. 8:1. The sum.; better, as R.V., the chief point; Stuart, the most important thing; Theophylact, that I may say the greatest thing, and the most comprehensive. The idea of review, or recapitulation, is not suitable here. The superiority of Christs person and office lead on to the superiority of Christs work and sacrifice. The superiority lies in thisthe work of Christ is spiritual. So the sacrifice He offered must be a spiritual sacrifice. Three new points are introduced:

1. The nature of Christs sacrifice.
2. The place where it is offered.
3. Its efficacy to atone for sin. Who is set.R.V. who sat down; perhaps with designed contrast. The older priests stood before God in His earthly sanctuary. But the contrast between the places is more important than between the attitudes. In the heavens.Spiritual temple. The one is seated on the throne of God in the heavens, while the other only ministers on earth, in a temple reared by the hands of men. Each is on the right side as ministrant, but Christ is in the true temple.

Heb. 8:2. Sanctuary.The spiritual, heavenly counterpart of the Holy of Holies, in which the ancient high priest specially and alone ministered. Margin, R.V., gives holy things. The word used for minister, , means public minister, not merely servant. True tabernacle.Not as distinct from false, but in our sense of real; veritable in contrast with unsubstantial. The tabernacle in heaven is the substance; that on earth is the accident, the image, the illustration. The Alexandrian Jews, as well as the Christian scholars of Alexandria, had adopted from Plato the doctrine of Ideas, which they regarded as Divine and eternal archetypes of which material and earthly things were but the imperfect copies. They regarded the Mosaic tabernacle as a mere sketch, copy, or outline of the Divine Idea or Pattern. The Idea is the perfected Reality of its material shadow (Farrar).

Heb. 8:3. Gifts.Oblations; firstfruits of grain, vegetables, etc. Sacrifices.Offerings involving the devotion of animal life. Both were presented to God by the priest, who acted as internuntius between Jehovah and the offerer.

Heb. 8:4. On earth.In the ordinary earthly relations with men. Seeing there were divinely appointed priests for the earthly sphere, Christ could have no place as priest. In the Jewish Temple He was not wanted. Notice how carefully this writer guards the Divine claims of Judaism, while recognising the limitation of its sphere, and the temporary character of its mission.

Heb. 8:5. Example and shadow., image, effigy, copy, resemblance. A token suggesting, and designed to suggest, the original. , shadow, slight and imperfect image, sketch. The shadow has no substance or independent existence, but represents only the outline of a body. The tabernacle is only a sketch, an outline, a ground pattern, as it wereat the best a representative imageof the heavenly Archetype. The words of God are not in the Greek. Pattern.Exo. 25:40. The writer seems to have in mind the Jewish tradition, that a heavenly tabernacle was actually presented to the vision of Moses, and this model was to be imitated by him precisely. The passage in Exodus does not require us to assume a visible representation.

Heb. 8:6. More excellent.In a higher range. Old priests kept in the material range; Christ belongs to the spiritual range. Read the clause, A ministry more excellent in proportion as He is also. Better covenant.Seen in one thing. Under the old there was law for the eyes; under the new there is law for the heart.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Heb. 8:1-6

The Principal Thing concerning Christ.This is the sum does not mean this is a brief recapitulation. It means this is the chief point: this is the most important thing; this is the consideration upon which attention should be most anxiously fixed. It is virtually a new topic that is dealt with here. The writer has treated of the superiority of Christs priesthood, in respect to duration and succession. He has shown that Christ was made priest by the solemnity of an oath, while the Levites were not introduced to their office by such a solemnity. The priesthood of the latter was liable to continual interruption and vicissitude, from the frail and dying state of those who were invested with the office of priest; while the perpetuity of Christs priestly office was never exposed to interruption from causes of this nature. And the Jewish priests were themselves not only peccable, but peccant men, and needed to offer sacrifices on their own account, as well as for the sake of others; while Christ was holy, and perfectly free from all sin, and exalted to a glorious state in which He was placed for ever beyond the reach of it, so that His sacrifice would endure solely to the benefit of sinful men. Now the writer comes to the consideration of the duties themselves: viz. the nature of the sacrifice which Jesus offers; the place where it is offered; the efficacy which it has, to atone for sin; and the difference, in regard to all these points, between the sacrifice offered by Christ, and that which was presented by the Jewish priests. The dignity of an office, and the particular qualifications of the person who is invested with it, are things which in their own nature are subordinate to the great end which is to be accomplished by the office itself (Moses Stuart). The passage before us introduces the new subject by reaffirming the essentially spiritual range and sphere in which this new, and altogether greater, High Priest works.

I. The sphere in which this great High Priest works is the spiritual tabernacle.Which was but represented and foreshadowed in the Jewish tabernacle. The points presented are

1. This High Priest is such by virtue of His character, which is a spiritual thing. He is holy, guileless, undefiled.
2. This High Priest is in heaven, the sphere in which God is and works, the sphere of spiritual interests and relations.
3. This High Priest ministers in holy thingsthat is, spiritual matters. (This is the marginal reading of the word sanctuary.) Reference, however, may be intended to the spiritual counterpart of the Holy of Holies, which Jesus, having once entered for us, never leaves. If the spiritual is higher than the natural; if it is that which the material pictures; if it is the reality,then the Jewish Christians need not hesitate to give up the shadow for the true, the spiritual tabernacle, and the spiritual Priest who ministers in it. But just what Christian teachers have found supremely difficult in every age, was found as difficult in the first Christian age: it is to awaken in the minds and hearts of men a fitting sense of the value of the spiritual; to deliver them from the deteriorating slavery of the material.

II. The office which the great High Priest holds is a spiritual priesthood.It is no question of rivalry with the Aaronic priests. Jesus cannot be compared with them at all. He does not lie in the same plane. There are priests, Divinely appointed, who serve that which is a copy and shadow of heavenly things. Jesus has nothing to do with firstfruits of grain, oblations of meal or of wine; blood of bulls or goats, ashes of heifers, or sweet-smelling incense. If He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all. A spiritual priesthood deals with the removal of sin, the effecting of reconciliation, the offering of men themselves to God, the covenant of soul-obedience, the maintenance of communion between God the Spirit and the spirits of men. A spiritual priesthood is the mediacy of spiritual affairs. As a priest Jesus must indeed have somewhat to offer. His offering was Himself. His sacrifice was thisHe offered Himself without spot to God. That is the true sacrifice, which every other sacrifice does but represent. St. Paul says, Christ hath given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour (Eph. 5:2).

III. The ministry in which the great High Priest is engaged is carrying out the conditions pledged in a spiritual covenant.He is established as Mediator of a better, because spiritual, covenant, which hath been enacted upon better, because spiritual, promises. The first covenant only promised external purification, and the civil or ecclesiastical pardon of an offender who complied with the rites which it enjoined; but under the new covenant real pardon of sin by God is to be obtained, with purification and peace of conscience, the hope of eternal life, and union at last with the assembly of the redeemed in a better world. Christ keeps for God all the terms of the new covenant on His side, and graciously and efficiently helps man to keep all the terms of the new covenant on his side. Judaism was but a shadow of which Christianity was the substance; Judaism was but a copy of which Christianity was the permanent idea and heavenly archetype; it was but a scaffolding within which the genuine temple had been built; it was (now) but a chrysalis from which the inward winged life had departed (Farrar).

Heb. 8:2. The Genuine Tabernacle.The word means genuine, and in this epistle ideal, archetypal. It is the antithesis not to what is spurious, but to what is material, secondary, and transient. The Alexandrian Jews, as well as the Christian scholars of Alexandria, had adopted from Plato the doctrine of Ideas, which they regarded as Divine and eternal archetypes of which material and earthly things were but the imperfect copies. They found their chief support for this introduction of Platonic views into the interpretation of the Bible in Exo. 25:40; Exo. 26:30 (quoted in Heb. 8:5). Accordingly they regarded the Mosaic tabernacle as a mere sketch, copy, or outline of the Divine Idea or Pattern. The Idea is the perfected Reality of its material shadow. They extended this conception much further:

What if earth

Be but the shadow of heaven, and things therein
Each to the other like, more than on earth is thought?

The genuine tabernacle is the heavenly Ideal (Heb. 9:24) shown to Moses. To interpret it of the glorified body of Christ, by a mere verbal comparison of Joh. 2:19, is to adopt the all-but-universal method of perverting the meaning of Scripture by the artificial elaborations and inferential after-thoughts of a scholastic theology.Farrar.

SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES

Heb. 8:1-2. The Enthroned Servant Christ.In these two verses strikingly different representations of our Lords heavenly state are given. In the one He is regarded as seated on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty. In the other He is regarded as being, notwithstanding that session, a minister of the sanctuary, performing priestly functions there. The royal repose of Jesus is full of activity for us. Resting, He works; working, He rests. Reigning, He serves; serving, He reigns.

I. The seated Christ.Has taken His seat. The writer, addressing Hebrews, who were steeped in Rabbinical thought, takes one of their own words, and speaks of God as the Majesty in the heavens, emphasising the idea of sovereignty, power, illimitable magnificence. At the right hand of this throned personal abstraction, the Majesty, sits the Man Christ Jesus. His manhood is elevated to this supreme dignity. The eternal Word who was with the Father in the beginning, before all the worlds, went back to the glory which He had with the Father. But the new thing was that there went, too, that human nature which Jesus Christ indissolubly united with Divinity in the mystery of the lowliness of His earthly life. We have a High Priest who, in His manhood, in which He is knit to us, hath taken His seat on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. There is a profound sense in which that session of Jesus at the right hand of God proclaims both the localisation of His present corporeal humanity, and the ubiquity of His presence. And what is the deepest meaning of it all? What means that majestic session at the right hand of the throne? Before that throne angels veil their faces. If in action, they stand; if in adoration, they fall before Him. Creatures bow prostrate. Who is He that, claiming and exercising a quality which in a creature is blasphemy and madness, takes His seat in that awful Presence? Other words of Scripture represent the same idea in a still more wonderful form when they speak of the throne of God and of the Lamb, and when He Himself speaks from heaven of Himself as set down with My Father on His throne. If we translate the symbol into colder words, it means that deep repose which, like the Divine rest after creation, is not for recuperation of exhausted powers, but is the sign of an accomplished purpose and achieved task, a share in the sovereignty of heaven, and the wielding of the energies of Deityrest, royalty, and power belong now to the Man sitting at the right hand of the throne of God.

II. The servant Christ.A minister of the sanctuary. The word employed here for minister, and which I have ventured variously to translate servant, means one who discharges some public official act of service, either to God or man, and it is especially, though by no means exclusively, employed in reference to the service of a ministering priest. The allusion in the second portion of my text is plainly enough to the ritual of the great Day of Atonement, on which the high priest once a year went into the Holy Place; and there, in the presence of God throned between the cherubim, by the offering of the blood of the sacrifice, made atonement for the sins of the people. Thus says our writer, that throned and sovereign Man who, in token of His accomplished work, and in the participation of Deity, sits hard by the throne of God, is yet ministering at one and the same time within the veil, and presenting the might of His own sacrifice. Put away the metaphor, and we just come to this, a truth which is far too little dwelt upon in this generation, that the work which Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross, all-sufficient and eternal as it was, in the range and duration of its efficacy, is not all His work. The past, glorious as it is, needs to be supplemented by the present, no less wonderful and glorious, in which Jesus Christ within the veil, in manners all unknown to us, by His presence there in the power of the sacrifice that He has made, brings down upon men the blessings that flow from that sacrifice. Our salvation is not so secured by the death upon the cross as to make needless the life before the throne. Jesus that died is the Christ that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. In its implication the text suggests to us other ways in which the rest of Christ is full of activity. I am among you as He that serveth is true for the heavenly glory of the exalted Lord quite as much as for the lowly humiliation of His life upon earth. And no more really did He stoop to serve when, laying aside His garments, He girded Himself with the towel, and wiped the disciples feet, than He does to-day when, having resumed the garments of His glorious Divinity, and having seated Himself in His place of authority above us, He comes forth, according to the wonderful condescension of His own parable, to serve His servants who have entered into rest, and those also who still toil. The glorified Christ is a ministering Christ. In us, on us, for us, He works, in all the activities of His exalted repose, as truly and more mightily than He did when here He helped the weaknesses, and healed the sicknesses, and soothed the sorrows, and supplied the wants, and washed the feet, of a handful of poor men. This vision of the ascended Christ is

1. For the past a seal. An ascended Christ forces us to believe in an atoning Christ.
2. For the present a strength. See Christ on the throne, and He interprets, dwindles, and yet ennobles the world and life.
3. For the future a prophecy. There is the measure of the possibilities of human nature. Whatever that Man is, we may be.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Heb. 8:3. Gifts and Sacrifices.In Heb. 5:1 the same distinction is made between gifts, or oblations, or free-will offerings, or thank-offerings, and sacrifices for sin, which include the various sin- and trespass-offerings, that involved taking the life of some animal. The two words are put together in order that the work of the old priests should not be unduly limited. If it were, their anticipation of the work of Christ would seem to limit His work also. And, in fact, the attention which has been so exclusively given to the bloody sacrifices of Judaism has involved a too exclusive attention to the sacrificial side of our Redeemers work. Christ also is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that He may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. The high priest acted the part of a mediator between God and men; he was to aid men in regard to their spiritual and religious concerns. It is infinitely important that our Lord should, by the offering of Himself as the sacrifice for sin, secure our reconciliation and acceptance with God. But we must beware of keeping our interest too exclusively to that. It is the most serious loss to lose Christs relations to the whole circle of our religious thought, and feeling, and expression, and relation.

Christs Spiritual Offering.Wherefore it is necessary that this High Priest also have somewhat to offer. But His range is the spiritual. There is no place for Christ as a priest in the material and earthly spheres. There are those who offer gifts according to the law. We can understand what gifts Christ can offer for us, if we can see what His own offering was. He offered Himself, in His human body, to God. He did not offer only something He possessedHe offered Himself, as a spiritual being. He offered to God His love, His trust, His obedience, His will, His lifeHimself. No matter what was the medium through which the offering was made, that, and nothing less than that, was the offering. It carried with it everything He possessed, but it was Himself. And the offering which Christ makes for us as our High Priest is a spiritual offeringit is ourselves. He offers us to God even as He offered Himselfour love, our trust, our obedience, our will, our life; but the offering carries with it all our possessions, all we have, and all we can do. The apostle Paul finds the precise term for the spiritual offering which Christ, as our Priest, presents for us when He says, I beseech you that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice. Christ offers us to God even as He offered Himself.

Heb. 8:6. The Spiritual is Every Way Better.A more excellent ministry. We can hardly wonder that the apostles found it so difficult to lift men into the region of spiritual thoughts, and feelings, and associations, seeing that, in these advanced times, we still find it so supremely difficult to do the same thing. Materialistic conceptions of the redemption work namper earnest and enlightened Christian teachers to-day, and such men are called vague and mystical when they try to do the same work that the writer of this epistle did. Still the work must be done, whatever may be the personal sacrifice involved in the doing. The spiritual is the real. Christ is a spiritual being; His mission is to spiritual beings; He deals with spiritual matters; He deals with them in spiritual ways; and He works towards spiritual ends. The salvation He provides is a soul salvation for men who are souls. And the old salvations of Judaism, and the bodily healings of our Lords earthly life, are strictly pictorial and illustrative; they are but figures of the true, and the spiritual is every way the better. Writing of the antipathies of Jesus to the formalising, materialising, and outward teachings of the Pharisees, so mischievous because not only so unspiritual, but so opposed to the spiritual, Dr. A. B. Bruce says: The spirit of Pharisaism lives on through the ages, ever embodying itself in new forms, and growing like a fungus on every manifestation of the Divine in human life, not excepting evangelic religion itself, which might be supposed to be its natural antithesis. The protest of the Founder of our faith did not slay the evil thing; it only clearly revealed its nature, and made manifest to the whole world that Christianity and it have nothing in common. Therefore the protest needs to be continually renewed. We must demand that our Lord Himself, His life-work on earth, and His continuous work in the heavenlies, shall all be seen in the spiritual light. Getting what illustrative help we may from material things and relations, we must see that He is spiritual. His atonement was a spiritual one, and His intercession is spiritual; and for us the spiritual is better; it bears relation to the spiritual beings that we are.

Heb. 8:6-13. Hand Guidance and Heart Guidance.The first covenant was not found faultless; therefore place was found for another and a better covenant.

I. The first covenant was the guidance of the hand (Heb. 8:9).It was very condescending and gracious on the part of God thus to conduct Israel, but such guidance is suggestive of many imperfections.

1. The guidance of the hand is the guidance of childhood. Thus the parent leads the child. So the first dispensation dealt with a people in a state of childhood. When I was a child I understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man I put away childish things. How often may we be reminded of these words in reading the history of Israel! How often do we feel that they were but children in moral understanding and strength, and that God dealt with them as such! This is the precise argument of the apostle (Gal. 4:1-5).

2. The guidance of the hand is the guidance of blindness. Thus do we lead a blind man. Israel was guided by precepts and ceremonies, seeing through a glass darkly. How imperfectly they apprehended the spirituality of the law, the real glory of atonement, the highest perfection of character, the future life! And God guided them as a blind man is guided.

3. The guidance of the hand is the guidance of weakness. You stretch out the hand to support the old or sick who walk with tottering step. Thus Israel was without strength. The law was weak through the flesh, and God by many gracious expedients sought to hold up the ever-fainting, sinking race. This economy was evidently not the best, although it was the best possible for the period, and the fact that Israel on such a large scale lapsed into idolatry and sin proved the weakness and unprofitableness of their carnal dispensation.

II. The second covenant was the guidance of the heart.

1. It is the guidance of manhood (Heb. 8:10). The child is controlled by what is external, the man by what is internal and spiritual. So the Christian dispensation makes the mind and affections the grand source of obedience. It puts the love of God and the love of Gods law deep into the soul, and trusts everything to this. It speaks to our rational, affectional, immortal nature, and seeks to harmonise that nature with the Divine nature, so that we may instinctively walk in the right path.

2. The guidance of knowledge (Heb. 8:11). All shall possess a true spiritual knowledge of God. In this dispensation the Spirit illuminates the soul, and we know the things which are freely given to us of God.

3. The guidance of power (Heb. 8:12). It gives that purity which is only another name for power. It pardons sin, cleanses from sin, and by imparting righteousness to the soul enables us to go from strength to strength. The Jews are condemned for failing under the first dispensation, although it has so many limitations and defects, but how much more shall we be condemned if we fail under this best of covenants!W. L. Watkinson.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

He is a priest of a better covenant. Heb. 8:1-13.

Officiates in the true tabernacle, of which the earthly was a type. Heb. 8:1-5.

Text

Heb. 8:1-5

Heb. 8:1 Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is this: We have such a High Priest, Who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, Heb. 8:2 a Minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.

Heb. 8:3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that this High Priest also have somewhat to offer. Heb. 8:4 Now if He were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the law; Heb. 8:5 who serve that which is a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount.

Paraphrase

Heb. 8:1 Now, of the things spoken concerning the priesthood of Christ, the chief is, That in Him we have such an High Priest as described chap. Heb. 7:26., Who, after offering the sacrifice of Himself for us in the true tabernacle, sat down at the right hand of the manifestation of the Divine Presence in the heavens, (chap. Heb. 9:5 note), as having by that sacrifice made a complete atonement.

Heb. 8:2 And as an abiding Minister of the real places, namely, of the heavenly tabernacle, which, being erected by the Lord and not by man, must be unspeakably more magnificent than the Mosaic tabernacle.

Heb. 8:3 The sitting down of Christ at the right hand of God, as the Minister of the true holy places, is a demonstration that He offered an acceptable sacrifice for sin in heaven: For every high priest being constituted to offer both free-will offerings and propitiatory sacrifices, it was necessary that this High Priest, Who was constituted by an oath, should have some sacrifice which He might offer in heaven, the only place where He could officiate.

Heb. 8:4 For verily if He were by the oath of God constituted a Priest on earth to offer sacrifice, He, Who was of the tribe of Judah, could not be a Priest, there being, in the only temple of God on earth, priests who offer sacrifices according to the law, which limits the priests office to the sons of Aaron.

Heb. 8:5 Further, that Christ exercises His priesthood in heaven appears from this also, that these priests perform the service of the tabernacles with sacrifices which are a representation and shadow of the sacrifice and intercession of Christ in heaven; as is plain from this, that Moses, when about to construct the tabernacle, and appoint its services, was admonished of God: See now, saith He that thou make all things according to the pattern which was showed thee in the mount.

The chief point is this, we have such a high priest

Everything said builds up to this one great point. All the discussion is to show the great superiority of Christ over all.

Who sat down on the right hand of the throne

The authors are agreed.

This is where Peter said He was on Pentecost, Acts 2.

This is where Stephen saw Him, Act. 7:55.

John saw Him there, Revelation 4. When did He sit down?

Heb. 10:11-13 answers: But this Man after He had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God.

of the majesty in the heavens

The majesty refers to God. The heavens would refer to the holy of holies where Christ now serves as Priest.

a minister of the sanctuary

The word minister usually means a public office of high and honorable rank.

This can be civil, or military, or religious.

Christ ministers in the sanctuary, indicating a spiritual service. The word sanctuary is also translated holy things. Milligan believes the word in the Greek means heaven itself. He says the word is used in that sense in Heb. 9:8; Heb. 9:12; Heb. 9:24-25; Heb. 10:19; Heb. 13:11. The word sanctuary probably refers to the heavens but the holy of holies and the tabernacle, to the church.

and of the true tabernacle

Here he means the substantial onethe perfect as in contrast with the imperfect.
Milligan has a lengthy discussion at this point (p. 219.)

Some try to say that the sanctuary and the tabernacle are different, others that they are the same.

. . . and of indicates a different subject is referred to than the sanctuary.

The church must be referred to here, for many scriptures teach that the church is a building. Act. 15:16-17; 1Co. 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6; 2Co. 6:16; Eph. 2:19-22; 1Ti. 3:15; 1Pe. 2:5; Heb. 3:6; Heb. 10:21.

which the Lord pitched, not man

This is a temple not made with hands.

Stephen said so. Act. 7:48.

Paul said so. Act. 17:24.

Mat. 16:18 : I will build My church, was a claim of Christ.

If the Lord pitched it, then we have no right to build otherwise.

The pattern is pitched; let us build accordingly.

For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices

Gifts would refer to the free-will offerings. Sacrifices refers to those specifically commanded of God.

wherefore it is necessary that this High Priest also have somewhat to offer

What could He offer but Himself? This offering does not need to be repeatedHeb. 7:27; Heb. 9:12; Heb. 9:26; Heb. 9:28; Heb. 10:12.

Jesus told what the greatest love was: to lay down a life for a friend, Joh. 15:13.

Christ was therefore obligated to die for man.

If He gave anything less, He could not show His love as marvelously.

Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all

He could not lawfully do it.

He was not of the house of Aaron; therefore, He was not qualified, Num. 18:1-7.

Severe punishment was provided for one who invaded the office. Num. 16:1-35; Num. 18:3-7; 2Ch. 26:16-21. Observe that even Levites were killed if they encroached upon the office. Num. 18:3.

who serve that which is a copy

Serve means the performance of sacred rites.

The old covenant with its ordinances and priests pictured to us a priesthood to come.

Serve as used here means to portray. Copy means an example.

The Levitical priests were serving as an example of what later was to come.

This made it very important that all things be made and done according to the pattern.

and shadow of the heavenly things

This is true typology. Too many endeavor to stretch typology over all the Old Testament, and they make some strange lessons. We can best understand heavenly things when God illustrates on earth as He did with this type.

Even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle

The warning is Exo. 25:40. This is stronger than just being informed how to build.

that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount

Moses was not allowed to changeadd or substitute. Observe three things:

The ancient rituals were appointed for a purpose.

All modes of worship are false which are not invented by the hand of God.

There are no true symbols except those which the Lord gives. We have similar warnings today. Gal. 1:8-9; Rev. 22:18-19; 1Co. 11:2.

What would the church be like if it were built according to the pattern?

The modernist says there is no pattern.

How can we find fault with Protestantism and Catholicism if there is no pattern?

God has a pattern for His church, and we must build accordingly.

Study Questions

1323.

In verse one Paul speaks of a chief point. What is it?

1324.

Where is this High Priest?

1325.

Is there significance in the statement, right hand?

1326.

Did other preachers and writers locate Him differently?

1327.

What verse of the Bible tells us when He sat down there?

1328.

What does the word majesty refer to?

1329.

What does the word heavens refer to?

1330.

What is the meaning of the word minister?

1331.

What is the meaning of the word sanctuary?

1332.

Could it mean holy things? Why?

1333.

Could it mean heaven, or the holy of holies?

1334.

What is the true tabernacle?

1335.

Is the church ever spoken of as a building? Cf. Act. 15:16-17; 1Co. 3:16; Heb. 3:6.

1336.

Does Rev. 21:3, which says, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, have a bearing?

1337.

Does Heb. 9:11 refer to the same tabernacle?

1338.

Verse two says this tabernacle was pitched by God, not man. If it is not the church, then what has He built besides the church, and where is it recorded?

1339.

What is meant by the name LordChrist or God?

1340.

If the Lord pitched, what is meant by it?

1341.

Do we have any right to build differently than the Lord commanded?

1342.

In this verse two words are significant, sacrifices and gifts, What is the difference?

1343.

Would Christ be performing a priestly duty if He had nothing to offer?

1344.

What did He offer?.

1345.

Is this offering repeated? Cf. Heb. 7:27; Heb. 9:12; Heb. 9:26; Heb. 9:28; Heb. 10:12.

1346.

Verse four is a short one stating that Christ could not act as High Priest on earth, Why?

1347.

Compare Num. 18:3 to see that Levites were limited in duties and privileges.

1348.

What is the meaning of the word serve?

1349.

What is the meaning of the word copy?

1350.

If all the Old Testament ritual and service was a copy or example of something to follow, was it necessary for the copy to be right?

1351.

What happens in a newspaper if the first copy has mistakes undetected or carelessly prepared?

1352.

What is a warning? Is it generally accompanied by a threat?

1353.

Of what was Moses warned? Exo. 25:40.

1354.

Is this stronger than just telling him how to build?

1355.

Would according to the pattern allow for substituting or alterations?

1356.

Where did Moses get his pattern?

1357.

Are there true symbols other than those of God?

1358.

Do we have any warnings about the gospel being kept pure? Cf. Gal. 1:8-9; Rev. 22:18-19; 1Co. 11:2; 2Ti. 3:16-17.

1359.

If the modernist is correct that there is no pattern for the church, do we have any right to be critical of Catholicism or Protestantism?

1360.

What would have been revealed about the character of Moses if he had dared to change the pattern, or was careless?

1361.

Could the same charge be brought to us?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(1) Now of the things . . .Better, Now in the things which we are saying (literally, which are being said) this is the chief point. Opinion has been much divided as to the meaning of the first Greek word, whether it should be taken as summary or as chief point, each of these meanings being well supported by the usage of the language. The words joined with it, in the things which we are saying, would lead us to prefer the second rendering; and when the course of the argument is traced we find it difficult to believe that the writer could express a summary of his thought in such words as those which follow.

Who is set.Better, who sat down. Twice before have the words of Psa. 110:1 been thus referred to Jesus (Heb. 1:3; Heb. 1:13), but their full significance in regard to the present subject has yet to be brought out. When in Heb. 7:26 we read, such an high priest became us, we must look to what precedes for the explanationsuch a one as has already been portrayed. Here the case is different, and the meaning of such is found in the description which the following words contain. The last verse of Hebrews 7 united the two predictions which pointed to Jesus as Priest and King, and the same thought is contained here, expressed in language which at once recalls Heb. 1:3. A later passage (Heb. 10:11-12) will show that the words sat down have yet further significance, involving a contrast to the continued and ever incomplete services of those who stood before God in His earthly sanctuary. The next verse must be closely joined with this, for the contrast just spoken of does not imply that He no longer ministers on behalf of men (see Heb. 7:25; Heb. 9:24); on the contrary, it is as a minister of the sanctuary that He sat down on the right hand of God.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 8

THE WAY TO REALITY ( Heb 8:1-6 )

8:1-6 The pith of what we are saying is this–it is just such a high priest we possess, a priest who has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens, a high priest who is a minister of the sanctuary and of the real tabernacle, which the Lord, and not man, founded. For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices. It is therefore necessary that he should have something which he might offer. If then he had been upon earth, lie would not even have been a priest, for there already exist those who offer the gifts the law lays down, men whose service is but a shadowy outline of the heavenly order, just as Moses received instructions when he was about to complete the tabernacle–“See,” it says, “that you do everything according to the pattern that was shown to you on the mountain.” But, as things are, he has obtained a more excellent ministry, in so far as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, a covenant which was enacted on the basis of superior promises.

The writer to the Hebrews has finished describing the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek in all its glory. He has described it as the priesthood which is for ever, without beginning and without end; the priesthood that God confirmed with an oath; the priesthood that is founded on personal greatness and not on any legal appointment or racial qualification; the priesthood which death cannot touch; the priesthood which is able to offer a sacrifice that never needs to be repeated; the priesthood which is so pure that it has no necessity to offer sacrifice for any sins of its own. Now he makes and underlines his great claim. “It is.” he says, “a priest precisely like that that we have in Jesus.”

He goes on to say two things about Jesus. (i) He took his scat at the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens. That is the final proof of his glory.

“The highest place that heaven affords

Is his, is his by right,

The King of kings, and Lord of lords,

And heaven’s eternal light.”

There can be no glory greater than that of the ascended and exalted Jesus. (ii) He says that Jesus is a minister of the sanctuary. That is the proof of his service. He is unique both in majesty and in service.

Jesus never looked on majesty as something to be selfishly enjoyed. One of the greatest of the Roman Emperors was Marcus Aurelius; as an administrator he was unsurpassed. He died at fifty-nine, having worked himself to death in the service of his people. He was one of the Stoic saints. When chosen to succeed in due time to the imperial power, his biographer Capitolinus tells us, “he was appalled rather than overjoyed, and when he was told to move to the private house of Hadrian, the Emperor, it was with reluctance that he departed from his mother’s villa. And when the members of the household asked him why he was sorry to receive the royal adoption, he enumerated to them the toils which sovereignty involved.” Marcus Aurelius saw kingship in terms of service and not of majesty.

Jesus is the unique example of divine majesty and divine service combined. He knew that he had been given his supreme position, not jealously to guard it in splendid isolation, but rather to enable others to attain to it and to share it. In him the supreme majesty and the supreme service met.

Now there enters into the picture a thought that was never far from the mind of the writer to the Hebrews. Religion to him, remember, was access to God; therefore the supreme function of any priest was to open the way to God for men. He removed the barriers between God and man; he built a bridge across which man could go into the presence of God. But we could put this another way. Instead of talking about access to God we might talk about access to reality. Every religious writer has to search for terms which his readers will understand. He has to present his message in language and in thoughts which will get home because they are familiar or at least will strike a chord in the reader’s mind. The Greeks had a basic thought about the universe. They thought in terms of two worlds, the real and the unreal. They believed that this world of space and time was only a pale copy of the real world. That was the basic doctrine of Plato, the greatest of all the Greek thinkers. He believed in what he called forms. Somewhere there was a world where there was laid up the perfect forms of which everything in this world is an imperfect copy. Sometimes he called the forms ideas. Somewhere there is the idea of a chair of which all actual chairs are imperfect copies. Somewhere there is an idea of a horse of which all actual horses are inadequate reflections. The Greeks were fascinated by this conception of a real world of which this world is only a flickering, imperfect copy. In this world we walk in shadows; somewhere there is reality. The great problem in life is how to pass from this world of shadows to the other world of realities. That is the idea of which the writer to the Hebrews makes use.

The earthly Temple is a pale copy of the real Temple of God; earthly worship is a remote reflection of real worship; the earthly priesthood is an inadequate shadow of the real priesthood. All these things point beyond themselves to the reality of which they are the shadows. The writer to the Hebrews even finds that idea in the Old Testament itself. When Moses had received from God instructions about the construction of the tabernacle and all its furnishings, God said to him: “And see that you make them after the pattern for them, which is being shown you on the mountain” ( Exo 25:40). God had shown Moses the real pattern of which all earthly worship is the ghost-like copy. So then the writer to the Hebrews says that the earthly priests have a service which is but a shadowy outline of the heavenly order. For shadowy outline he combines two Greek words, hupodeigma ( G5262) , which means a specimen, or, still better, a sketch-plan, and skia ( G4639) , which means a shadow, a reflection, a phantom, a silhouette. The earthly priesthood is unreal and cannot lead men into reality; but Jesus can. We can say that Jesus leads us into the presence of God or we can say that Jesus leads us into reality; it means the same thing. When the writer to the Hebrews spoke of reality he was using language that his contemporaries used and understood.

In the highest that this world can offer there is some imperfection. It never quite reaches what we know the thing might be. Nothing we ever experience or achieve here quite reaches the ideal that haunts us. The real world is beyond. As Browning had it: “A man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?” Call it heaven, call it reality, call it the idea or the form, call it God–it is beyond.

As the writer to the Hebrews saw it, only Jesus can lead us out of the frustrating actuality into the all-satisfying real. So he calls him the mediator, the mesites ( G3316) . Mesites comes from mesos ( G3319) , which, in this case, means in the middle. A mesites ( G3316) is, therefore, one who stands in the middle between two people and brings them together. When Job is desperately anxious that somehow he should be able to put his case to God, he cries out hopelessly: “There is no umpire, mesites ( G3316) , between us” ( Job 9:33). Paul calls Moses the mesites ( G3316) ( Gal 3:19) in that he was the one between who brought the law from God to men. In Athens in classical times there was a body of men–all citizens in their sixtieth year–who could be called upon to act as mediators when there was a dispute between two citizens, and their first duty was to effect a reconciliation. In Rome there were arbitri. The judge settled points of law; but the arbitri settled matters of equity; and it was their duty to bring disputes to an end. Further, in legal Greek a mesites ( G3316) was a sponsor, a guarantor or a surely. He went bail for a friend who was on trial; he guaranteed a debt or an overdraft. The mesites ( G3316) was the man who was willing to pay his friend’s debt to make things right again.

The mesites ( G3316) is the man who stands between and brings together two other parties in reconciliation. Jesus is our perfect mesites ( G3316) ; he stands between us and God. He opens the way to reality and to God and is the only person who can effect reconciliation between man and God, between the real and the unreal. In other words, Jesus is the only person who can bring us real life.

THE NEW RELATIONSHIP ( Heb 8:7-13 )

8:7-13 For, if the first covenant, which is so well known to you, had been faultless there would have been no need to seek any place for a second one. It is to censure them that he says: “Look you the days are coming, says the Lord. when I will consummate a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be the same as the covenant which I made with their fathers, when I laid my hand on them to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; this must be so because they did not abide by my covenant, and I let them go their own way, says the Lord. It will be different because this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after these days, says the Lord. I will put my laws into their mind and I will inscribe them upon their hearts. I will be to them all that a God should be to them, and they will be to me all that a people should be to me. And no one will teach his fellow-citizen and no one will teach his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all will know me, small and great alike, because I will graciously forgive their iniquities and I will not remember their sins any more.” In that he calls the covenant new, he has rendered the first covenant out of date; and that which is out of date and ageing into decay is near to final obliteration.

Here Hebrews begins to deal with one of the great biblical ideas–that of a covenant. In the Bible the Greek word that is always used for a covenant is diatheke ( G1242) and there was a special reason for the choice of this rather unusual word. Ordinarily a covenant is an agreement entered into by two people. It is dependent on conditions on which they mutually agree; and if either should break the conditions the covenant becomes void. It is sometimes used in that simple sense in the Old Testament. For instance, it is used of the league that the Gibeonites wished to make with Joshua ( Jos 9:6); of the forbidden league with the Canaanites ( Jdg 2:2); and of David’s covenant with Jonathan ( 1Sa 23:18). But its distinctive use is to describe the relationship between Israel and God. “Take heed to yourselves, lest you forget the covenant of the Lord your God” ( Deu 4:23). In the New Testament the word is also used to describe the relationship between God and man.

But there is a strange point which requires explanation. For all normal uses the Greek word for an agreement is suntheke which is the word for a marriage covenant or bond and for an agreement between two states. Further, in all normal Greek diatheke ( G1242) means not an agreement, but a will. Why should the New Testament use this word for a covenant? The reason is this–suntheke always describes an agreement entered into on equal terms. The parties to a suntheke are on the one level and each can bargain with the other. But God and man do not meet on equal terms. In the biblical sense of a covenant, the whole approach comes from God. Man cannot bargain with God; he cannot argue about the terms of the covenant; he can only accept or reject the offer that God makes.

The supreme example of such an agreement is a will. The conditions of a will are not made on equal terms. They are made entirely by one person, the testator, and the other party cannot alter them but can only accept or refuse the inheritance offered.

That is why our relationship to God is described as a diatheke ( G1242) , a covenant for the terms of which only one person is responsible. That relationship is offered us solely on the initiative and the grace of God. As Philo said: “It is fitting for God to give and for a wise man to receive.” When we use the word covenant, we must always remember that it does not mean that man made a bargain with God on equal terms. It always means that the whole initiative is with God; the terms are his and man cannot alter them in the slightest.

The ancient covenant, so well known to the Jews, was the one made with the people after the giving of the law. God graciously approached the people of Israel. He offered them a unique relationship to himself; but that relationship was entirely dependent on the keeping of the law. We see the Israelites accepting that condition in Exo 24:1-8. The argument of the writer to the Hebrews is that that old covenant is done away with and that Jesus has brought a new relationship with God.

In this passage we can distinguish certain marks of the new covenant which Jesus brought.

(i) The writer begins by pointing out that the idea of a new covenant is not something revolutionary. It is already there in Jer 31:31-34, which he quotes in full. Further, the very fact that scripture speaks of the new covenant shows that the old was not fully satisfactory. Had it been, a new covenant would never have needed to be mentioned. Scripture looked to a new covenant and therefore itself indicated that the old covenant was not perfect.

(ii) This covenant will not only be new; it will be different in quality and in kind. In Greek there are two words for new. Neos ( G3501) describes a thing as being new in point of time. It might be a precise copy of its predecessors, but since it has been made after the others, it is neos ( G3501) . Kainos ( G2537) means not only new in point of time, but new in point of quality. A thing which is simply a reproduction of what went before may be neos ( G3501) but it is not kainos ( G2537) . This covenant which Jesus introduces is kainos ( G2537) , not merely neos ( G3501) ; it is different in quality from the old covenant. The writer to the Hebrews uses two words to describe the old covenant. He says that it is geraskon ( G1095) , which means not only ageing, but ageing into decay. He says that it is near to aphanismos ( G854) . Aphanismos is the word that is used for wiping out a city, obliterating an inscription, or abolishing a law. So the covenant which Jesus brings is new in quality and completely cancels the old.

(iii) Wherein is this covenant new? It is new in its scope. It is going to include the house of Israel and the house of Judah. One thousand years before this, in the days of Rehoboam, the kingdom had split apart, into Israel with the ten tribes and Judah with the two, and these two sections had never come together again. The new covenant is going to unite that which has been divided; in it the old enemies will be at one.

(iv) It is new in its universality. All men would know God from the least to the greatest. That was something quite new. In the ordinary life of the Jews there was a complete cleavage. On the one hand there were the Pharisees and the orthodox who kept the law; on the other hand there were what were contemptuously called The People of the Land, the ordinary people who did not fully observe the details of the ceremonial law. They were completely despised. It was forbidden to have any fellowship with them; to marry one’s daughter to one of them was worse than to throw her to a wild beast; it was forbidden to go on a journey with them; it was even forbidden, as far as it was possible, to have any trade or business dealings with them. To the rigid observers of the law the ordinary people were beyond the pale. But in the new covenant these breaches would no longer exist. All men, wise and simple, great and small, would know the Lord. The doors which had been shut were thrown wide open.

(v) There is one even more fundamental difference. The old covenant depended on obedience to an externally imposed law. The new covenant is to be written upon men’s hearts and minds. Men would obey God not because of the terror of punishment, but because they loved him. They would obey him not because the law compelled them unwillingly to do so, but because the desire to obey him was written on their hearts.

(vi) It will be a covenant which will really effect forgiveness. See how that forgiveness is to come. God said that he would be gracious to their iniquities and could forget their sins. Now it is all of God. The new relationship is based entirely on his love. Under the old covenant a man could keep this relationship to God only by obeying the law; that is, by his own efforts. Now everything is dependent not on man’s efforts, but solely on the grace of God. The new covenant puts men into relationship with a God who is still a God of justice but whose justice has been swallowed up in his love. The most tremendous thing about the new covenant is that it makes man’s relationship to God no longer dependent on man’s obedience but entirely dependent on God’s love.

One thing remains to say. In Jeremiah’s words about the new covenant there is no mention of sacrifice. It would seem that Jeremiah believed that in the new age sacrifice would be abolished as irrelevant; but the writer to the Hebrews cannot think except in terms of the sacrificial system and very shortly he will go on to speak of Jesus as himself the perfect sacrifice, whose death alone made the new covenant possible for men.

-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)

Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible

II. OUR ASCENDED HIGH PRIEST: INTRODUCING THE TRUE REALITY IN PLACE OF SHADOWS; AND SUBSTITUTING FOR AN OLD AND INFERIOR, A NEW AND SUPERIOR, DISPENSATION, Heb 8:1-13.

Heb 8:1-6 portray the real and divine High Priest as having gloriously ascended to the upper tabernacle the true and heavenly; Heb 8:7-13 portray the glory of the consequent new covenant, by him inaugurated, in comparison with the old.

1. The sum The main point, the outcome of the above view of the eternal priesthood, is this.

Such a high priest The strength of our argument lies in the greatness and glory of our high priest in his exalted session in the heavens.

Set Took seat. The earthly high priest reverently stood, and stood but for a moment, in presence of God in the holy of holies. But this, our high priest, sits a divine priest in the heavens.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

A Summary Statement of the Superior Priesthood of Jesus Christ Heb 8:1-2 serves as a summary of the previous passages explaining the superior priesthood of Jesus Christ. The main point, or summary, of the Heb 7:1-28 is given here. This is what the author has said about Jesus’ office as Great High Priest up to this point. Jesus now serves as a high priest of a heavenly Tabernacle of which Moses testified (Heb 8:5), in a superior place, and not an inferior, earthly Tabernacle as did the Levites.

Heb 8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

Heb 8:1 “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum” Word Study on “sum” – Strong says the Greek word “sum” ( ) (G2774) means, “a principle thing, main point.”

Comments The author now provides us a summary statement of his previous discussion.

Heb 8:1 “We have such an high priest” Word Study on “such” – Strong says the Greek word (G5108) means, “of this sort.”

Heb 8:1 “who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” – Scripture References – Note similar verses:

Psa 110:1, “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

Mat 16:19, “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Mat 22:44, “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?”

Act 2:34, “For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,”

Eph 1:20, “Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,”

Col 3:1, “If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.”

Heb 3:1, “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;”

Heb 10:12, “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;”

Heb 12:2, “Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

Rev 3:21, “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.”

Heb 8:1 Comments Heb 8:1 reflects back on the introduction to this epistle, which says, “when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.”

Heb 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Heb 8:2 “A minister of the sanctuary” Word Study on “sanctuary” Strong says the Greek word ( ) (G40) means, “sacred.”

Comments – There was a priest and there were ministers to assist the priest in the Levitical system (Num 16:8-10; Num 18:1-2). Jesus fulfills both roles. In the Old Testament, Aaron and his sons were the priests, and the Levites were the ministers. Only the priests offer incense (Num 16:40). Only the priests could touch the vessels of the sanctuary (Num 18:3)

Num 16:8-10, “And Moses said unto Korah, Hear, I pray you, ye sons of Levi: Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation to minister unto them? And he hath brought thee near to him, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee: and seek ye the priesthood also?”

Num 16:40, “To be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near to offer incense before the LORD; that he be not as Korah, and as his company: as the LORD said to him by the hand of Moses.”

Num 18:1-2, “And the LORD said unto Aaron, Thou and thy sons and thy father’s house with thee shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary: and thou and thy sons with thee shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood. And thy brethren also of the tribe of Levi, the tribe of thy father, bring thou with thee, that they may be joined unto thee, and minister unto thee: but thou and thy sons with thee shall minister before the tabernacle of witness.”

Num 18:3, “And they shall keep thy charge, and the charge of all the tabernacle: only they shall not come nigh the vessels of the sanctuary and the altar, that neither they, nor ye also, die.”

Heb 8:2 “and of the true tabernacle” Scripture Reference – Note:

Heb 9:11, “But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;”

Heb 8:2 Comments No Levitical priest could truly enter the presence of God, as does Jesus our Great High Priest.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Indoctrination: The Superior Priesthood of Jesus Christ Heb 6:1 to Heb 10:18 places emphasis upon our indoctrination as a part of our need to persevere in the Christian faith. This passage of Scripture offers us a theological discourse unlike any other in the Holy Scriptures. In order to persevere Jesus Christ made access to God’s throne freely available to all believers, by which we are exhorted to grow and mature in our spiritual journey (Heb 6:1-8). The author supports this exhortation with a doctrinal discourse on the analogy of the priesthood of Melchizedek with that of Jesus Christ (Heb 6:9 to Heb 10:18).

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. 3 rd Exhortation: Grow in Maturity Heb 6:1-8

2. 3 rd Doctrinal Discourse Heb 6:9 to Heb 10:18

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Third Doctrinal Discourse: The Superior Priesthood of Jesus Christ The author then leads the Hebrews into a revelation of the priestly office of the Lord Jesus Christ (Heb 6:9 to Heb 10:18), which reveals the need for indoctrination in order to persevere in the faith. He begins his doctrinal discourse by reminding them of their sure hope and promise by God of receiving eternal life (Heb 6:9-20).

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. God’s Sure Promises in Christ Jesus Heb 6:9-20

2. Jesus Offers Better Covenant Thru Superior Order Heb 7:1 to Heb 10:18

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Jesus Offers a New and Better Covenant through a Superior Priesthood and Sacrifice Jesus Christ offers a new and better covenant through a superior priesthood and a superior sacrifice. Heb 7:1-28 explains how the superior priesthood of Jesus Christ under the order of Melchizedek offers a new and better covenant for God’s people. Heb 8:1 to Heb 10:18 explains how Jesus Christ offers a new and better covenant through a superior sacrifice.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. A Superior Order of Melchizedek Heb 7:1-28

2. A Superior Sacrifice Heb 8:1 to Heb 10:18

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Jesus Christ Offers a New and Better Covenant Through a Superior Sacrifice Having proven that Jesus Christ is the mediator of a better and more superior office of priesthood in Heb 7:1-28 under the order of Melchizedek, the author then proceeds to explain how this new covenant necessitated a better sacrifice as well by referring to Jer 31:31-34 in Heb 8:8-12. Therefore, Heb 8:1 to Heb 10:18 focuses upon the establishment of a new covenant through the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ and a doing away of the old covenant, and it, and its serves largely as an exegesis of Jer 31:31-34.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. A Summary Statement Heb 8:1-2

2. The Promise of a New Covenant Heb 8:3-13

3. Sacrifices Under the Old Covenant Heb 9:1-10

4. Sacrifice Under New Covenant Heb 9:11 to Heb 10:18

Scripture References:

Heb 8:7, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.”

Heb 8:13, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”

Heb 9:15, “And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.”

Heb 10:9, “Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Christ’s Eternal Priesthood has Superseded the Temporary Priesthood of Aaron.

The more excellent ministry of Christ:

v. 1. Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: we have such an High Priest who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

v. 2. a minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

v. 3. For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices; wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.

v. 4. For if He were on earth, He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the Law;

v. 5. who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle; for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.

v. 6. But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry.

Beginning with chapter 5 the inspired writer has treated of Christ’s office of High Priest. He has shown the superiority of Christ, both as to His person and as to His qualifications. He now proceeds to emphasize the greater excellence of the Lord’s office from a consideration of the place of His ministry: But the chief point of all that has been said is this, Such a High Priest we have who is seated at the right hand of the throne of Majesty in the heavens. Many considerations have been urged till now to establish the claim of Christ’s superior excellence; what has been stated certainly does not lack in force or clearness. But the most persuasive argument, the point that clinches the matter, the thought which forms the headstone of the discussion, is that which the sacred author now offers. With solemn emphasis he says that the High Priest whom we have, in whom we place our trust, is such a one as to occupy a seat at the right hand of the eternal God’s majesty in the heavens. The most important part of Christ’s office as High Priest, so far as the certainty of faith is concerned, is that which He now performs as our advocate with the Father. His sacrifice here on earth gained salvation for us: our faith clings to the merits of the blood shed for us on Calvary. But we rest our hope of the bliss of heaven in the fact that Christ’s intercession for us continues day after day until the glorious consummation of the glory which is ours, though still in hope. For it is because of the fact that Christ is seated at the right hand of the Majesty that He, also according to His human nature, has assumed the free and unlimited use of the divine glory and majesty imparted to it, that His intercession in our behalf avails something, that it has such great and encompassing value. Thus “His sitting down at the right hand of the throne of God proves, 1. that He is higher than all the high priests that ever existed; 2. that the sacrifice which He offered for the sins of the world was sufficient and effectual, and as such accepted by God; 3. that He has all power in the heavens and in the earth, and is able to save and defend to the uttermost all that come to God through Him; 4. that He did not, like the Jewish high priests, depart out of the Holy of Holies after having offered the atonement, but abides there at the throne of God as a continual priest, in the permanent act of offering His crucified body unto God, in behalf of all the succeeding generations of mankind.”

Lest his readers fail to grasp the full significance of the distinction implied in this argument, the writer adds: A minister of holy things and of the true tabernacle which the Lord constructed, not man. The word with which Christ is here designated is that used of the officials of a church in the act of worshiping, of priests in the discharge of their duties. Thus Christ is engaged in the service of holy things; He is taking part in ceremonies and in a worship which is infinitely higher than all the services of the earth, even of the ancient Jewish cult. The service of Christ is in the true tabernacle of heaven. The Tabernacle of the children of Israel in the wilderness and during the first centuries in Palestine was symbolical, figurative, typical, foreshadowing the tabernacle, the sanctuary, which was to remain forever. For the old Tabernacle, although built by the command of God and according to designs and plans shown by Him to Moses, was only temporary. The abiding, eternal tabernacle is that above, constructed, built, by the Lord Himself, for His everlasting temple and habitation. See chap. 9:11-24.

The writer now explains his use of the term “servant of worship” with regard to Christ: For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts as well as sacrifices, whence follows the necessity that This One also have something to offer. It was not an idle, meaningless term which the inspired author used when he called Christ a minister of the sanctuary, but was fitting in every way. That was the business of the high priests of old, therein their service consisted, that they offered the gifts and sacrifices of the people to the Lord. We concede the necessity, therefore, of being able to show the Same facts with regard to Christ. And this offers no difficulty, for Christ did have something to offer, chap. 7:27, He accomplished His priestly office by offering up Himself. His own blood, a sacrifice which retains its force in eternity.

In connection with this thought, that Christ is actually making an offering, the sacred writer adds: And, indeed, if He were on earth, He would not even be a priest, since there are men that offer up gifts according to the Law. If this fact is accepted as the truth, that Christ is our High Priest, it is in heaven that He must be exercising His ministry. At the time when this epistle was written, the Jewish Temple was still standing, and all the ordinances of the Jewish worship were still in force. This included that the work of the priests was still performed by the members of the tribe of Levi. The Jewish Ceremonial Law excluded men of every other tribe from the office of priests, and Jesus, as a member of the tribe of Judah, could not have performed the ministry of the Levitical priesthood. Only men whose descent from Lev. could be definitely proved from the genealogical tables were permitted to offer up the sacrifices of the people in the Temple.

But far from detracting from the importance of Jesus, this fact rather brought out His excellency all the more: Who serve a mere type and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses received instructions when he was about to construct the Tabernacle; for, See, said He, that thou make everything according to the type that was shown to thee on the mountain. The priests of the Old Testament were busily serving, indeed, but their entire service, as they knew, was a mere outline and shadow prophetical of the heavenly things which were to be revealed in the Messiah. That fact distinguished their entire service: their work had no substance in itself, no independent existence, Their ministry would have been valueless without the hope of the coming fulfillment of all types and examples. The same lesson is drawn from the manner in which Moses prepared for the building of the Tabernacle. When he consulted with God, he was given the command to construct the Tabernacle and provide all its equipment, not according to his own ideas and designs, but according to the outline and patterns shown him on the mountain, Exo 25:40. It is immaterial whether these sketches were shown to Moses in a vision or delivered to him by the hand of angels. The fact remains that God communicated to him in such a way as to make His will known to him, and that Moses had a clear idea of the will of God with regard to the entire structure and all its appointments. On the same order as the service of Moses on this occasion was the entire ministry of the Old Testament priests; all the acts of worship performed by them were mere types or patterns, whether they were concerned with sacrifices or with the burning of incense or with the ceremonies of the great festivals. While the writer, then, readily concedes that Jesus did not belong to the priests of the Levitical order, he emphasizes all the more strongly: But, as it is, He has obtained a more excellent ministry. The fact that the ministry of Christ is now being carried on in heaven, and that it represents the fulfillment of all the types and figures of the Old Testament, elevates it high above all the Temple services of the Levitical priesthood.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST FULFILS THE SYMBOLISM OF THE AARONIC, AND IS ALONE AN ETERNAL REALITY.

Christ’s heavenly priesthood, shown above to be of a higher order than that of Aaron, destined to supersede it, is in this section of the Epistle (as intimated in the concluding verses of Heb 7:1-28) set forth in full as the reality foreshadowed by it. The two priesthoods are compared with respect to

(1) their spheres,

(2) their functions,

(3) their effects; and, in the course of the exposition, the two covenants () to which they respectively belong are explained and contrasted.

Heb 8:1

Now the chief matter in (or, in regard to) the things which are being said is (or, to sum up what we are saying). The word in itself may mean either “summary” or “chief point.” It is not “the sum of what we have spoken,” as in A.V. “Caput, id est praecipuum . dum haec omnia de archisacerdote nostro dicimus, caput totius sermonis, ordine ita postulante, commemorandum venit. Conf. , Heb 8:6; Heb 9:10, Heb 9:15, Heb 9:17; Heb 10:28” (Bengel). We have such a High Priest (i.e. such as has been described; cf. Heb 7:26), who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty (or, of Majesty) in the heavens (cf. Heb 1:3, and what was there said).

Heb 8:2

A minister of the sanctuary ( , neuter, as in Heb 9:12, equivalent to “the holy places;” cf. Heb 9:8; Heb 10:19), and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. The sphere of Christ’s priestly ministration ( , , being the recognized words in the LXX. and Josephus for denoting sacerdotal functions,hence Liturgy) is thus in the first place pointed to as being a heavenly one, symbolized only by the earthly sanctuary. But what is the true tabernacle, in which Christ ministers? Are we to suppose that an actual prototype of the earthly tabernacle is regarded as existing locally beyond the sky? No; it is only implied that there are, in the suprasensuous sphere, facts and relations which are symbolized and made level to our comprehension by local imagery. Still, there may be conceived as present to the writer’s mind an ideal picture of a heavenly temple, such as was seen in vision by prophets, and served to aid their conception of realities beyond their ken. Thus in Psa 29:1-11., where the thunderstorm is described, the LORD is conceived, in the introductory and concluding verses, as enthroned above it in his heavenly temple, sitting there a King for ever, and worshipped by the “sons of God.” Thus in 1Ki 22:19 Michaiah sees in vision “the Loud sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him, on his right hand and on his left.” In Isa 6:1-13. this throne is seen as the distinct counterpart of the mercy-seat in the earthly temple, with the winged forms above it, and the “house” filled with the smoke of incense, and live coals upon the altar. Ezekiel’s still more remarkable visions (Heb 1:1-14., 10., 11) are in like manner enlargements of the idea of the Shechinah in the holy of holies (cf. also Psa 11:4; Mic 1:2; Heb 2:1-18 :20). Then the visions of St. John in the Revelation have the same basis; there is still seen a glorious counterpart above of the temple below; though now with new accessories, expressive of accomplished redemption. But that St. John’s visions are meant only as imagery representing the incomprehensible is evident throughout, and especially from the ideal description of the holy city in Rev 21:1-27., in which Rev 21:22 is peculiarly significant: “And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.” In the same way is to be understood the “true tabernacle.” If, as we may suppose, the writer had before his mind the prophetic visions of such a heavenly temple, he entertains them only as imaging spiritual facts and relations in the regions of eternity. “Which the Lord pitched,” etc., may have reference to Isa 42:5, , LXX.

Heb 8:3, Heb 8:4

For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this one also have somewhat to offer. For (rather, nay; the reading being better supported than the Textus Receptus ) if he were on earth, he would not even be a priest, seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law. These verses are in proof of the assertion of Heb 8:2, viz. that Christ has his ministry in the heavenly tabernacle. He has been shown to be a High Priest: therefore he must make some offering, this being the very purpose of a high priest’s office (cf. Heb 5:1). But where? Not certainly in the earthly tabernacle, this being served already, and exclusively served, by the sons of Aaron. Therefore it must be in the heavenly sphere symbolized by the earthly tabernacle. And then, in Heb 8:5, that there is a heavenly reality, of which the earthly tabernacle is but a shadow, is shown by what was said of the latter when it was made. (What Christ offers in the heavenly sphere is surely his own atoning sacrifice. Some commentators have found a difficulty in this conception on the ground that this his sacrifice had been completed once for all before his ascension. True; but he is regarded as carrying its efficacy with him to the mercy-seat above, and so for ever offering it; even as it is continually commemorated and pleaded in the Eucharist by the Church below. And thus, be it observed, the symbolism of the Day of Atonement is accurately fulfilled. For the high priest did not sacrifice within the tabernacle; he only carried to the holy of holies the blood, representing the atoning efficacy of the sacrifice made outside before his entrance)

Heb 8:5

Who (i.e. being such as do so; ) serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things ( here, as in Heb 9:23, means” representation,” in the way of copy, not of pattern. “Shadow” () is opposed in Heb 10:1-39. I to , which denotes the reality, and in Col 2:17 to ), even as Moses is admonished of God when about to make the tabernacle (literally, to complete; but net in the sense of finishing a thing begun, but of carrying out a design to entire completion); for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount. For the sense of , according to Hellenistic usage, cf. Mat 2:22, “Being warned of God in a dream ( ).“ The reference here is to Exo 25:40; the words which “the LORD spake unto Moses.” Rabbinical writers, holding the view of an actual heavenly tabernacle, the prototype of the earthly one, have concluded from the passage in Exodus that Moses had a vision of it, or that a visible representation of it was exhibited to him on the mount. All that is necessarily implied is that he was divinely admonished to make the tabernacle after the fashion conveyed, in whatever way, to his apprehension when on the mount, so that it might be a true representation of some heavenly reality (cf. Act 7:44).

Heb 8:6

But now ( in its usual logical, not temporal, sense; cf. Heb 11:16; also Heb 2:8; Heb 9:26; Heb 12:26) hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the Mediator of a better covenant, which (, equivalent to quippequae, as usual) hath been established upon better promises. Here the idea of the new , introduced first in the way of anticipation at Heb 7:22, is brought to the front, to be carried out in what follows. There the proved superior greatness of the predicted priest was made the measure of the superior excellence of the covenant of which he has become Surety; here the superior excellence of the new covenant, which is now to be shown from prophecy, is made /he measure of that of Christ’s priestly ministry, which has just been proved to be of necessity in the sphere of heavenly realities of which the Mosaic ritual was but a copy and shadow. The word here used is not (“surety”), as in Heb 7:22, but (“mediator”); on which it is to be observed that the mediator of the old covenant was not Aaron, but Moses (see Gal 3:19): it was he that intervened between God and the congregation in the establishment of the covenant; and thus, in this respect also, the priesthood of the new covenant transcends the old one, in that (as was shown also in the earlier part of the Epistle) the type of Moses, as well as of Aaron, is fulfilled in it. The word (“established” in A.V; “enacted” in the recent R.V) expresses the promulgation of a lawappositely in the first place to the Law of Moses, which constituted the conditions of the old covenant; but also to the description of the new covenant, which follows from Jeremiah, according to which the law remains, but to be written on the heart. The gospel is elsewhere regarded under the idea of law, though not a law of bondage, but of libertya law, not of the letter, but of the Spirit (see Rom 3:27; Rom 8:2; Rom 9:31; Jas 1:25). The “better promises” are such as the passage from Jeremiah, quoted below, notably represents. Other passages might be referred to (such as Eze 36:25, etc; Eze 37:24, etc), of similar significance, though not with the same marked mention of a new covenant to supersede the old one. This memorable passage (Jer 31:31-35) occurs in a distinct section of Jeremiah’s prophecies (Jer 30:1-24; Jer 31:1-40), delivered after the commencement of the Captivity, and directed to be written in a book. The subject of the whole section is the restoration of Israel, its ultimate Messianic reference being patent to all who acknowledge any such at all in prophecy. In evidence of this there is not only the passage before us, pointing to an entirely new covenant with Israel, and the ideal tone of the whole prophecy, but also, in particular, the view of all the scattered tribes, not Judah onlythe whole ideal Israelbeing gathered together from all countries to Zion, and of David himself to rule over them as king. The national and local framework, which the picture has in common with other prophetic visions of the coming days, is of course no difficulty to those familiar with the style of the prophetic books.

Heb 8:7

For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for a second. “For” introduces this sentence as a reason for what has been already said; i.e. for a better covenant having been spoken of. The expression might be objected to by Hebrew readers as implying imperfection in the original Divine covenant. “Nay,” says the writer, “it was imperfect, it was not faultless; for prophecy itself declares this.” Should it be further objected that in the prophecy it is not the old covenant itself that is found fault with, but the people for not observing it, the answer would be that the remedy for their non-observance being the substitution of a new one that would answer its purpose better, some imperfection in the old one is implied. This is indeed the very point of this verse. If it be asked, further, how faultiness in the old covenant is compatible with the view of its Divine origin, the answer is abundantly supplied in St. Paul’s Epistles. His position constantly is that the Mosaic Law, though in itself “holy, just, and true,” and adequate to its purpose, was still imperfect as a means of justification. It was but a temporary dispensation, with a purpose of its own, intervening between the original promise to Abraham and the fulfillment of that promise in Christ. Thus it is no derogation to itself or to its Author to charge it with “weakness and unprofitableness” for a purpose it was never meant to answer.

Heb 8:8-12

For finding fault with them (i.e. the people), he saith (or, as some take it, finding fault, he saith to them), Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will accomplish upon the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new covenant: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts, and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. The passage is quoted from the LXX., with a few verbal differences which do not affect the meaning. In Heb 8:9 our A.V. renders the original in Jeremiah “although I was an Husband unto them,” instead of “and I regarded them not ( ).“ The LXX., followed in the text, gives the more probable meaning. On the whole passage be it observed:

1. “Behold, the days come,” like “in that day,” is a usual prophetic phrase for denoting the age of the Messiah.

2. The failure of the old covenant is attributed in the first place to the people’s not continuing in it, and then, as a consequence, to the LORD‘s withdrawal of his protection. The evidence of such withdrawal immediately before the prophet’s view may be supposed to have been the Babylonian captivity.

3. The distinguishing characteristics of the new covenant are

(1) God’s laws, not imposed as an external code, but put into the mind and written on the heart;

(2) the general knowledge of the Load by small as welt as great, without the former need of continual admonition; and

(3) as the originating and inspiring cause of all, the forgiveness on the Loan’s part of past sins.

It is important to perceive that this last characteristic of the new covenant, though coming last in order, is given as the reason for the other two; for this is a first principle of the gospel. The sense of forgiveness through Christ, of acceptance in the Beloved, is ever set forth as the inspiring principle of the obedience of Christians. “We love him, because he first loved us.“ And hence flow the two results denoted in the prophecy.

(1) “I will put my laws,” etc; i.e. there will ensue, through the inspiring Spirit, from the sense of forgiveness in Christ, a hearty service of love and loyalty; no mere mechanical observance of an external code. Then,

(2) “And they shall not teach,“ etc; i.e. those who thus, led by the Spirit, give themselves to such hearty service, will acquire, further, an immediate, and as it were instinctive, “knowledge of the Lord,” not confined to “the wise” or “the scribe,” but the personal privilege of even the “little ones” of Christ (cf. Mat 11:25, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes;” also Joh 6:45, “It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God;” also 1Th 4:9, “But as touching brotherly love, ye need not that I write unto you; for ye yourselves are taught of God to love one another;” also 1Jn 2:20, “But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things”). It is not to be inferred (as has been) from this last result that a distinct order of ministry is no essential constituent of the Christian Church for admonition of others. The fact that such a ministry was constituted from the first in all the Churches, and was in active operation when apostles wrote as above, is in itself sufficient disproof of such a view. All that is implied is that all faithful believers, small as well as great (using, of course, the means of grace and edification provided for them in the Church), should themselves have inward illumination and personal communion with God. This is indeed a peculiar glory of the Christian religion. The poorest and the simplest believer may have spiritual perceptions and spiritual experience of his own, surpassing those of his appointed guides, and remaining his own though priests and teachers be unfaithful. “I am small and despised”, “yet do not I forget thy precepts.” “I have more understanding than all my teachers; for thy testimonies are my meditation.” Observe, lastly, the ideality of the whole view given of the effects of the new covenant. It presents to us the purpose, the potentiality, of the new dispensation, rather than results to be fully realized in this world; though still actually realized so far as the “glorious light of the gospel” illuminates the Church, and is allowed to “shine into” the human heart. This remark applies to all Messianic prophecy.

Heb 8:13

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away. “He hath made the first old” () refers to the time of Jeremiah’s prophecy, not of the writing of the Epistle. The very mention of a new covenant had even then antiquated the other. It thenceforth survived only under the category of old as opposed to new; and further marked with the growing decrepitude which is the precursor of dissolution. This further idea is expressed by the present participle (elsewhere applied to garments that are wearing out; cf. Psa 102:27; Heb 1:11; Isa 1:9; Isa 51:6; Luk 12:33), and also by , a figure taken from the advance of old age in men. When the Epistle was written, it would not have been spoken of as “waxing old,” but as defunct. The temple, indeed, was still standing, with the old ritual going on; but it had become but as the stately shrine of a lifeless thing. As to the view of the antiquation having begun even in the prophetic age, we observe that the prophets themselves show a consciousness of this, in that their growing tendency is to depreciate rather than exalt the ceremonial Law, and to put mercy above sacrifice. In fact, the Old Testament itself, especially in its later parts, is replete with the principles of the new covenant, anticipated in part, though not to be fully revealed till Christ appeared. And so, when he did appear, the old dispensation had already become obsolete, and the new one prepared for; to be rejected in Israel by those only who, “in the reading of the Old Testament,” had “the veil upon their heart.”

HOMILETICS

Heb 8:1-6

The chief point.

This passage does not present a recapitulation of the topics already considered; it emphasizes, as the crowning topic in connection with our Lord’s priesthood, the fact that he has been “made higher than the heavens.”

I. THE HEAVENLY MAJESTY OF OUR HIGH PRIEST. (Heb 8:1) He dwells now in heaven, his native home. He occupies there the loftiest place; for he shares the sore-reign authority and the universal dominion of the absolute God. Aaron exercised his priesthood in an earthly sanctuary made by men’s hands; Christ officiates as our High Priest in the eternal uncreated heavens. Aaron, when he entered the holy of holies once a year on the great Jewish fast-day, merely stood for a short time before the symbolic thronehis attitude one of lowly service; but Christ has “sat down“ at the right hand of the Eternalhis attitude that of royal government. It is noticeable that in this treatise the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus does not receive the prominence which is given to it in almost every Epistle of Paul. Indeed, it is only once mentioned (Heb 13:20). But doubtless the reason of this is to be found in the unique design of the treatise. This book alone, of all the books of Scripture, expounds the doctrine of the priesthood of Christ; and it brings into the foreground, accordingly, only those acts which he performed as the Antitype of Aaronhis sacrifice of himself in the outer court of this world, and his passing within the blue veil of heaven to sprinkle his blood upon the mercy-seat. So the writer dwells only upon the death and the ascension of the Savior.

II. HIS HEAVENLY MINISTRY. (Heb 8:2-6) The ministry of the Redeemer is not incompatible with his majesty; for he performs it as the Plenipotentiary of the Godhead, and in virtue of his session at “the right hand of the throne.” The heavenly sanctuary in which Christ officiates is here contrasted with the Hebrew sanctuary. We are reminded that the Mosaic tabernacle and its ritual were nothing more than an adumbration of the realities of the true tabernacle. They were only a shadowy prophecy of the priestly ministry of the Lord Jesus. The very furniture of the sacred tent had a symbolic meaning; and every article was formed after a Divine “pattern” (Heb 8:5)the snuffers and incense-spoons as well as the magnificent lamp-stand. But how different the scene of Christ’s continual intercession from the Jewish tabernacle or temple! Having offered himself as a Sacrifice upon the altar of burnt offering which had been set up on Calvary, he had to appear within the sanctuary of God with his atoning blood. Not being, however, a high priest after the order of Aaron, he could not go for this purpose into the temple at Jerusalem; so, if he was to continue to be “a Priest at all’ (Heb 8:4), it behooved him to seek another temple. Jesus accordingly ascended to heaven, “the true tabernacle;’ and he carries on his ministry there in “the sanctuary,” i.e. in the holy of holies which belongs to that true tabernacle (Heb 8:2). The Levitical high priests were but typical mediators, who performed typical services in connection with a typical sanctuary. Jesus is the anti-typical High Priest, who has offered a real sacrifice for sin, and who makes prevailing intercession for his people within the true archetypal tabernacle. His ministry, therefore, is “more excellent” than Aaron’s.

LESSONS.

1. For the materialist. The Mosaic tabernacle was a “copy” of the celestial sanctuary; but are not all nature and all earthly relations just an adumbration of the unseen?

“What if earth
Be but the shadow of heaven, and things therein
Each to other like, more than on earth is thought?”

(Milton)

2. For the sacerdotalist. Jesus is the one mediating Priest of the New Testament Church; and even he is no longer a sacrificing Priest. He bled and died in the outer court; and he mediates in “the sanctuary” now by intercession.

3. For the formalist. How great the guilt of the man who, while professing to be a Christian, does not make the priesthood of Christ a main theme of his thoughts, and the joy of his heart!

4. For the Christian believer. The saint should more and more rejoice in Jesus as his Priest, and constantly re-commit his soul into his hands, to be introduced to God by him.

5. For the gospel minister. While the teaching of the pulpit ought to range, as far as possible, over the wide sweep of thought which is embraced in the orbit of the Bible, the doctrine of the mediation of our glorified Redeemer must be its “chief point”the key-stone of all its utterances, whether evangelical or ethical.

Heb 8:6-13

The new covenant.

Here we have another of the broad contrasts which everywhere meet us in this treatise. In those Epistles which are undoubtedly Paul’s, the process of reasoning resembles the movement of a file of soldiers; but in this to the Hebrews, the movement resembles rather that of soldiers in rank. The writer introduces his contrast between the covenants with the remark (Heb 8:6) that our Lord’s heavenly ministry as greatly excels that of Aaron as the new covenant which he administers is superior to the old.

I. THE OLD COVENANT WAS IMPERFECT. “That first covenant” (Heb 8:7) does not refer to the covenant of works, which was made with Adam in Eden; but to the Mosaic dispensation of the economy of grace. This covenant had been solemnly inaugurated and accepted by the Jews at the foot of Mount Sinai (Exo 24:4-8); and it had been repeatedly renewed in later times (Jos 24:24, Jos 24:25; 2Ch 15:12; 2Ki 11:17; 2Ch 29:1-36; Neh 9:1-38., 10). It was not “faultless;” that is, it was imperfect as a dispensation of grace. The Mosaic institutions were only preparatory to those of gospel times. They were legal rather than evangelical, and sensuous rather than spiritual. They were suited to the nonage of the Church; and “Israel was a child” when God “took him by the hand to lead him forth out of the land of Egypt” (Heb 8:9; Hos 11:1-4). So Judaism taught spiritual truth only in faint outline. Its method was that of spectacular representation. The Law was “our tutor to bring us unto Christ” (Gal 3:24).

II. A PROPHECY OF THE NEW COVENANT. In order to prove from the Jewish Scriptures the imperfection of the “first” covenant, and to describe the “better promises” of the “new” and final covenant, the writer quotes a most striking passage from the Book of Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34). This oracle was given when the Jews of Judah were on the brink of the Babylonish captivity, to comfort their desolate hearts with the cheering hope of Messianic times. The chosen people had not “continued” in God’s covenant; and, because they had broken it, he had “regarded them not” (verse 9), but allowed first Israel, and afterwards Judah, to be carried into exile. But Jeremiah is commissioned to announce that, notwithstanding all, God in his wonderful mercy “will make a new covenant” (verse 8), with the whole Hebrew nation. The twelve tribes shall again become one rod in his hand. And all Gentiles, who by faith belong to the true Israel, shall share the blessing.

III. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEW COVENANT. What are the “better promises”? Jeremiah’s oracle mentions three.

1. The Law written on the heart. (Verse 10) The child is controlled by positive external precept; the man by moral and spiritual principle. During the pupilage of the Church, the Divine laws were written “in tables of stone;” but, now that the Church has come to manhood, they are inscribed “in tables that are hearts of flesh” (2Co 3:3). The ascendancy of ritualism in any Christian Church means, therefore, a return to the” childish things” of the old covenanta going back to the swaddling-clothes of religious babyhood.

2. The universal knowledge of God. (Verse 11) During the Jewish dispensation, the average Jew had only an exceedingly dim apprehension of religious truth, whether about God or the way to him, or about holiness or immortality. But, under the new covenant, spiritual truth shall become the longer the more clearly perceived, and the more widely diffused. For now the Holy Spirit is the great Teacher of the Church; and he does not impart esoteric instruction to some special caste, but teaches every believer “from the least to the greatest.” What, then, is modern ritualism, but a return to the dim vision of the old economy? It is the use of candiessometimes literallyin broad daylight.

3. The full forgiveness of sins. (Verse 12) This “promise,” although introduced last, precedes the other two in actual bestowment. Sin must be pardoned and cleansed away before the Law can be written on the heart, or the mind flooded with spiritual light. None of the Levitical sacrifices could expiate moral guilt; but on the basis of Christ’s atonement God now imparts that forgiveness which is the precedent condition of moral renewal and of a holy life (Psa 130:4).

CONCLUSION. God said at Sinai, in setting up the “first” covenant, “Thou shalt not” (Exo 20:3-17); but now, in ordering the new covenant, his words are, “I will” (verses 10-12). And what does this change of language imply? “I will” really points to the effusion and diffusion of the Holy Spirit. He was poured out on the day of Pentecost, the anniversary of the giving of the Law from Mount Sinai. It is his presence within the New Testament Church that makes the new covenant so vastly superior to the old. We should ask ourselves whether our souls individually are sharing the blessings of the gospel dispensation. We must remember also that the “better promises” imply on our part definite duties and great responsibilities, And, as regards the world, we must be persuaded that only the general acceptance of the new covenant will extirpate by the roots the enormous evils which still afflict society.

HOMILIES BY W. JONES

Heb 8:6

Three better things.

“But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry’s etc. In these words the writer states in brief what he at once proceeds to illustrate and establish at considerable length, from this point on to Heb 10:18. We may perhaps with advantage take a general glance at these three better things, leaving their particular examination until summoned to it by the development of the Epistle.

I. THE BETTER MINISTRY. “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry” than the high priests of the Jewish Church. The proposition of the text is that our Lord’s ministry is as much better than theirs as the new covenant is better than the old, and the new covenant is better than the old because it has been enacted upon better promises. His ministry is that of our great High Priest, or, in the word used in the text, our Mediator. Let us mention a few particulars in which this ministry of his is more excellent than that of the Jewish high priests.

1. Because it is exercised in a higher sphere. They ministered in the material tabernacle and temple, and for a brief season once a year were permitted to enter the holy of holies where God manifested his presence by a symbol; but these were only copies and shadows of the heavenly realities. Our Savior is a Minister of the heavenly” sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.” He “appears before the face of God for us.”

2. Because it extends to greater numbers. The ministry of the Jewish high priests was exercised for the Jews only. It was limited to their own race, and to the proselytes to their religion. But the ministry of Jesus Christ is for all mankind. He “tasted death for every man.” He is the “Mediator between God and men” of every nationality, and every race, and every age, etc.

3. Because it is enduring. The ministry of individual Jewish high priests ended at their death, if not before; and that ministry as an institution waxed old and vanished away. But the ministry of our great High Priest is of perpetual vitality and efficacy. His mediation will never be superseded, never lose its attractiveness and glory, until man is fitted to approach God without a mediator.

4. Because it secures richer results. These results, or some of them at least, are referred to in the “better promises.” The results of the ministry of the Aaronic priesthood, like its functions, were to a great extent symbolic and shadowy rather than essential and real. But through the ministry of the Christ we obtain real benefits and essential blessings: e.g. reconciliation with God, forgiveness, etc.

II. THE BETTER COVENANT. “He is the Mediator of a better covenant.” But what are we to understand by the word “covenant”? As used in human relations it denotes a compact or agreement between two or more parties, who are equal, each of whom has the right to propose alterations in the terms of the compact, and to accept or reject such terms. In this sense there can be no covenant between God and man; for there is no equality between the parties, and man cannot reject any requirement of God without committing sin. Perhaps it is for this reason that the word which strictly signifies covenant is not used in the New Testament. But as applied to God and man the “covenant” denotes his method of revealing himself to men, and his will concerning their salvation, his arrangement of agencies and means and conditions by which they may be saved. “The word ‘covenant’ becomes appropriate in view of the solemn assent and consent with which man accepts God’s proposal, involved in his scheme or plan. In this context the ‘old covenant’ is the scheme revealed to Israel under Moses; the ‘new’ is the gospel scheme involving the gift and work of both the Son and the Spirit of God.” The old covenant was good, as our text implies. It originated in the grace of God. It involved on his part condescension towards man. It was designed and fitted to benefit and bless and save man. It promised life and blessing to those who complied with its terms; and its promises were true. But the new covenant is very much better than the old. This will appear when we come to notice the “better promises.” At present we mention only two aspects of its superiority.

1. It presents a more spiritual revelation of the character and will of God. Under the old covenant nearly everything was expressed by means of material forms and symbolsnearly everything appealed to the senses. Its laws, its ritual, its promised blessings, pertained largely to the visible, the sensuous, and the temporal. It was a revelation suited to the childhood and youth of our race. But the new covenant gives us a more spiritual manifestation of the Divine mind and will; it is a revelation for the manhood of our race. It proclaims the spirituality of God and of his worship. It writes the Divine law upon men’s hearts. It promises spiritual blessings.

2. It is a fuller expression of the grace of God. (Cf. Joh 1:14-18; Rom 3:24; Rom 5:21; Rom 6:14) The next division of our subject will show us that there is more of Divine grace manifested in the new than in the old covenant.

III. THE BETTER PROMISES. “A better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises.” The promises which the writer has chiefly in view are those mentioned in Heb 10:10-12. Let us mention some of these better promises of the new covenant.

1. It proffers strength to comply with its own conditions. The old covenant promised blessings to the obedient; the new promises blessings to enable us to render obedience. The Holy Spirit is promised to incline our hearts to the good, to strengthen us for duty, etc.

2. Justification for the sinner on condition of faith in Jesus Christ. (Cf. Rom 3:20-26; Rom 10:5-10; Gal 3:10-14)

3. Sanctification of the believer by the Holy Spirit. (Cf. Joh 14:16-18, Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:7-15; Rom 15:13, Rom 15:16; 2Co 3:18) 4. Glorification of his people forever in the future state. (Cf. Rom 8:17, Rom 8:18, Rom 8:30; 2Co 4:17; 2Ti 2:10; 1Pe 5:10) Verily, these are better promises than those of the old covenant. And the covenant to which they belong is far better than the old one. By so much, also, is our Lord’s ministry better than that of the Aaronic high priests. Let us give earnest heed to secure our personal interest in this new and “better covenant.”W.J.

Heb 8:10

Law and love in the new covenant.

“For this is the covenant that I will make,” etc. The paragraph from which our text is taken is a quotation from Jer 31:31-34. It is said that the Lord “will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;” but this is spoken, not of Israel according to the flesh, but of the spiritual Israelthe spiritual seed of Abraham (cf. Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29; Rom 9:6-8; Gal 3:7-9). Notice

I. THE REVELATION OF LAW IN THE NEW COVENANT. One of the great distinctions between the two covenants arises from the materiality of the old one and the spirituality of the new one. In nothing is this more manifest than in the matter of Law. Law is present in both of them. But in the old it was engraved upon tables of stone; in the new it is written upon the hearts of men. Under the old the people were led “by the hand,” guided by visible symbols; under the new they are led by the heart, guided by spiritual influences. Our text sets forth certain aspects of Law in the new covenant.

1. Law present in the mind. “I will put my laws into their mind.” It, the former dispensation Law was spoken to the outward ear, it was made visible to the bodily eye; and so given, it was often soon neglected and forgotten. But in the present dispensation, to those who have by faith entered into covenant relation with God, Law is given as a possession of their spiritual nature. It is not external to them, but is present within their minds as a rule of action and as a theme for meditation.

2. Law treasured in the heart. “And on their heart also will I write them.” When a thing is highly esteemed by us, or when a cause has awakened our deep interest, we say with propriety that it lies near our heart. With greater emphasis and deeper significance do we say the same of one whom we love. So in the new covenant Law holds a high place; it is prized and loved. It is loved as being good in itself. “The Law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good.” It is loved, also, as being the expression of our Father’s will. There were instances under the old covenant in which the Law was loved and delighted in, but they were rare exceptions to the general rule. Under the new covenant the Law of the Lord will be increasingly prized and loved and obeyed.

3. Law embodied in the life. “Out of the heart are the issues of life.” Writing the Law upon the heart is a pictorial way of expressing the inspiration of a disposition to obey Law. God will give his people courage to profess his laws, “and power to put them in practice; the whole habit and frame of their souls shall be a table and transcript of the Law of God.” The Law which they love in their heart they will express in their lives. This is the highest revelation of Law. It is most effective in relation to the individual; it is most clear in relation to others, and most influential also. This revelation is the work of the Holy Spirit. It is he who illumines the mind, inspires the heart, etc.

II. THE EXPRESSION OF LOVE IN THE NEW COVENANT. “And I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.” We do not mean to imply that the giving of the Law unto the minds and hearts of God’s people was not an expression of his love; for such in truth it was. But here is a brighter manifestation of his love. Notice:

1. God’s relation to the Christian. “I will be to them a God.” He will be to them all that they could desire and expect to find in their God. He gives himself as the chief blessing of the new covenant. He will be to his people “as great, as wise, as powerful, as good as he is in himself.” We have all things in him (1Co 3:21-23). We have his wisdom for our direction, his power for our protection, his love for our spiritual satisfaction and joy, his Spirit for our instruction, consolation, and sanctification, his heaven for our abiding and blessed home. A whole library dealing with these words could not fully express the number and preciousness of the blessings which are comprehended in them” I will be to them a God.”

2. The Christian’s relation to God. “And they shall be to me a people,” This is set forth as our privilege; and a great one it is. But the privilege has its obligations. If by faith in Jesus Christ we have entered into this covenant relation with God, we have the right to expect its blessings from him, and we axe solemnly bound to fulfill its duties to him. Our duty to which the covenant binds us includes

(1) supreme affection to God;

(2) reverent worship of him;

(3) hearty consecration to his service;

(4) cheerful compliance with his will

May we be enabled both to perform the duties and to enjoy the privileges of this gracious covenant.W.J.

Heb 8:11, Heb 8:12

Knowledge and mercy in the new covenant.

“And they shall not teach every man his neighbor,” etc.

I. MAN‘S KNOWLEDGE, OF GOD UNDER THE NEW COVENANT. “And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord,” etc. We have here:

1. The highest subject of knowledge. “The Lord: all shall know me?” This is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God,” etc. This knowledge is:

(1) Sublimest in its character. There is no knowledge so exalted as this. Knowledge of astronomy is a high attainment; but it is not to be compared with knowledge of him who made the stars and all worlds, and who sustains them and presides over them.

(2) Widest in its extent. He is infinite, and can never be fully known by man: “The knowledge of God and of Christ,” says Dr. Harris, “is the sum of all science; this is the only knowledge that can incorporate and mingle with our being; and all other knowledge is real only so far as it is symbolical of this.”

(3) Mightiest in its moral influence. It transforms the character of those who possess it (cf. 2Co 3:18).

2. The purest source of knowledge. The obligation of men under the old covenant to impart to each other the knowledge of God is implied in the text. This obligation is not abolished under the new covenant; but there is less need for such private instruction because of the frequent public services of qualified ministers of the gospel. Moreover, the text undoubtedly refers to the communication of knowledge by the Holy Spirit. “The agency of the Holy Ghost is assumed under this covenant as ‘the Spirit of truth,’ the supreme and most vital Teacher of this true knowledge of God. For the covenant, taken in the large sense of a system of agencies, is definitely and certainly the gospel age as distinguished from the Mosaic; and of this gospel age or dispensation, the gift of the Holy Ghost, to teach, impress, and enforce the true knowledge of God, is the center and the soul, even as Jesus is the center and soul of the Christian economy considered as ‘the Propitiation for our sins,’ and our great High Priest before the throne of God. The results as given here come of his teaching and of no other” (H. Cowles, D.D). This knowledge does not spring from mere human conjecture, or imagination, or investigation, or ratiocination; but from spiritual revelation. “All thy children shall be taught of the Lord.” “Ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all things” (1Jn 2:20, 1Jn 2:27).

3. The clear apprehension of knowledge. Proceeding from so crystalline a source, the stream will be clear. If our mind and heart be free from prejudice, then the instruction concerning God which we receive from the Word and the Spirit will be clear and correct; what we know of him we shall know truly.

4. The wide diffusion of knowledge. “All shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them.” Primarily the “all” refers to the “people” (Heb 8:10) of God: all of them shall know him. But eventually there shall be a universal diffusion of the knowledge of God. This the sacred Scriptures distinctly affirm (Mat 24:14; Mat 28:19; Luk 24:47; Rev 14:6).

II. GOD‘S MERCY TO MAN UNDER THE NEW COVENANT. “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins,” etc. Under the new covenant God manifests his rich grace in the way in which he forgives sin. We have here:

1. The source of forgiveness. “I will be merciful.” Forgiveness does not spring from man’s repentance, but from God’s mercy. Repentance is a condition of forgiveness, but the grace of God is its source. Apart from his grace repentance is impossible unto us. “By grace are ye saved,” etc. (cf. Eph 2:7-10).

2. The fullness of forgiveness. He pardons “their iniquities and their sins.” He cleanses “from all unrighteousness.” “The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” None are too numerous, none too aggravated, etc. (cf. Isa 1:18; Isa 4:1-6 :7).

3. The irrevocableness of forgiveness. “Their sins will I remember no more.” Strictly speaking, the Infinite Mind cannot forget anything. But God forgives so completely that the sins are as it were buried in deep oblivion. His forgiveness is irrevocable. This inspiring truth is repeatedly and impressively expressed in the Bible (Psa 103:12; Isa 38:17; Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22; Mic 7:19). This rich, abounding mercy is the reason of man’s fuller, clear knowledge of God. There was mercy in the old covenant, but in that it was not pre-eminent as in the new one. The chief feature of that was Law; the chief feature of this is grace. Forgiveness leads to gratitude and love to the Forgiver; and love leads to the clearer, wider knowledge of him. If you would know God truly, intimately, deeply, you must love him.W.J.

Heb 8:13

Decaying and departing.

“Now that which decayeth and waxeth old,“ etc. In these words the writer states a general principle of which the old covenant was an illustration. That covenant was relatively old, because a new one had been introduced; it was also absolutely old, and had not “in itself the strength to exist much longer.” When anything arrives at that condition its end is not far offit “is nigh unto vanishing away.” Let us indicate a few of the applications of this principle. It is applicable to

I. FORMS OF RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION. In our text it is thus applied to the Mosaic economy. Many of our present religious formsforms of Church government and forms of worshipare of human origin. If they are vital and suit the circum- stances and conditions of this age, let them be maintained; but if they do not, and cannot be made to do so, by all means let them go. In fact, a living Church will certainly put off its dead forms by the natural expression of its life. The late A.J. Scott says wisely and beautifully, “True reverence for antiquity seeks a Church presenting the clearest image of eternity in the midst of the mutations of time. This she is to do by the inward vigor of the essential principles of her life, dropping off forms no longer useful, as the oak has done the leaves of last summer. The live oak abides the same by its vitality, while it changes form and dimensions by growth: the mass of squared timber has lost its power of assimilation, its command of resources; death enables it to remain unchanged in form, till death brings decay that changes form and substance. What is dead is changed from without; what lives changes from within.” And Dr. Huntington forcibly says, “When religious forms have first been devised, a certain freshness of conviction has gone into them that has made them vital. But presently the life has refused to stand and stagnate in these cisterns, and so ebbed away and sought out new channels. The mistake has been that the forms have insisted on standing, after the life within was gone; and accordingly their figure has been that of wooden vessels shrunk and dried in the sun.” Now, where the vitality has gone, let the form go also; for, as Carlyle says, “the old never dies till all the soul of good that was in it has got itself transfused into the practical new.” Let the dead forms pass away

“For who would keep an ancient form?
Through which the spirit breathes no more?”

(Tennyson)

II. FORMS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF. Much that is said above on religious organizations is equally applicable to religious creeds. As Mr. J.A. Froude puts it, “While the essence of religion remains the same, the mode in which it is expressed changes and has changedchanges as living languages change and become dead, as institutions change, as forms of government change, as opinions on all things in heaven and earth change, as half the theories held at this time among ourselves will probably changethat is, the outward and mortal part of them.” The living faith of the Church may need restatement. The language in which man’s apprehension of the great verities of the gospel was expressed in past ages may become stiff, cold, unexpressive, and obsolete as regards the apprehension of those verities in this age. Then let it go. And reverently in the living language of today, let the living faith of today be expressed. The living faiththat is the great thing. “A living doctrine never need advertise for a body, nor go carefully about to invent one, any more than a young oak needs to advertise for a trunk and branches. God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him. Get the faith, and it will shape a form of its own.”

III. HUMAN LIFE IN THIS WORLD. If life be so far prolonged, the time comes when the human form becomes old and waxeth aged and is nigh unto vanishing away. “The days of our years are threescore years and ten,” etc. (Psa 90:10). When the earthly house of our tabernacle is worn out we know that it will soon be dissolved. The departing vitality tells us that the body itself will soon vanish away. Its decrepitude heralds its disappearance. This is a reason:

1. Why the aged should live in readiness for their departure hence.

2. Why the aged should be treated with considerate kindness.

Their age has a claim upon our respect, unless its character forbids respect, and then it should elicit our pity. Their feebleness makes its silent and touching appeal to us for support. And they will soon be beyond our sight and our services. By the help of God let us seek so to live that, when the time of our departure draws near, we may be ready to leave this world, having finished our work, and to enter upon the, to us, unknown future, having committed ourselves to the keeping of the “great God, and our Savior Jesus Christ.”W.J.

HOMILIES BY C. NEW

Heb 8:1-5

Heaven the place where this great High Priest ministers.

Does the writer mean, “This is the summing up,” or “This is the chief point”? We accept the latter, and that we have here no recapitulation, but an advance, the point to which he has been coming from the first. Christ, High Priest; Christ, High Priest greater than Aaron. So far we have come. SubjectHeaven the place where this great High Priest ministers. From this comes the truth to which he has been looking from the beginning, that in heaven, as the true holy of holies, is fulfilled what was exhibited in type in the tabernacle.

I. THE ASSURANCE THAT CHRIST IS FULFILLING HIS HIGH PRIESTLY WORK IN HEAVEN. “We have a High Priest,” etc. Jesus in heaven, acting as our Representative, is the crowning point of what the writer has to say about our Lord. Is not that the crowning point of all that can be said about him? Can we ever know the full blessedness of Jesus till, in our habitual thought of him, he who lived on earth, and died, and rose, is ever seen and felt to be living for us in the heavenly places?

1. The declarations of Scripture give us this assurance. That is intimated in the use made here of Psa 110:1-7., the whole of Heb 7:1-28. being based on itthe Messiah was to be a Priest at God’s right hand. The same word gives us the same assurance; but whereas to the Jew it was prediction, to us it is fulfillment. “He was received up into heaven,” declare evangelists and apostles.

2. The discharge of his priestly functions necessitates this. “But [not ‘now’] if he were on earth he would not be a priest at all,” etc. He could not discharge his priestly duties on earth; the Law would forbid it of one not of the tribe of Levi. If, then, he is Priest, and called to what is priestly, and this cannot be on earth, it must be in heaven, for there is no other place where he could legally minister. But we Christians get the assurance that Christ in heaven is acting as High Priest, in what we find he has actually done and is ever doing. He sends his people what he promised when he should be there. Those gifts and communications come to them from heaven which they know could not come but for his mediatorial work.

3. The fulfillment of sacred types demands this. (Heb 7:5) A very important statement, for it occurs no less than five times in the Pentateuchproof that the Jewish ritual was but a shadow of certain Divine realities. The ministry of the priests, therefore, must have its celestial counterpart. The high priest, after the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement, entered within the veil to present the atoning blood before the mercy-seat. That is the type; then the fulfillment must be in Christ. In the Book of Revelation the Christian sees this fulfilled in a series of visions: Christ redeeming the world, subduing his foes, completing his Church, and all this through his exaltation to the heavenly throne.

II. THE EXALTED POSITION IN HEAVEN IN WHICH THIS HIGH PRIESTLY WORK IS BEING FULFILLED. The Hebrews regarded the high priestly ministry with awe. How the majestic contrast drawn here must have arrested their attention, and surprised them by its claim: “We have such,” etc.!

1. It implies our Lord’s equality with the Father. On the supreme throne only Jehovah can sit; he who sits with him as his co-equal must, with him, be one God. He who ascended is he also who descended. The Incarnation was the condescension of God himself. Get high thoughts of Jesus, for it will exalt our hope, and make our salvation more sure to our mind, and reveal fresh depths in the Divine mercy.

2. This also implies his fearlessness in the presence of the Father. The Jewish priest stood and trembled and adored within the veil. Jesus sat down on the throne. Why should he fear? we might ask. Because he went there as man’s Representative. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all, he bowed his head in death under the awful burden, he then ascended into heaven, and sat down on the Father’s throne. Then how certainly he had put away sin by the offering of himself!

3. This further implies his possession of the favor of the Father. He sat therewhy? Because God said unto him, “Sit thou at my right,” etc. The Father’s delight must indeed be fixed on him he asks to share his throne. But it is as our Mediator he is exalted thus. Of his own right, by his own Deity, that throne was his; the invitation to ascend it was made to him as our Representative. That gives utmost encouragement to us. The welcome given to Jesus is really a welcome to all prayers for his people.

III. THE EFFECT WHICH THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST AS HIGH PRIEST SHOULD HAVE UPON OUR HEARTS.

1. It should lead us to inquire whether we are among God’s Israel. “We”whom does that include? The high priest entered the holiest of all for every Israelite; every Israelite could say, “He is there for me.” Christ, in like manner, appears in heaven for the true [not the typical] Israel, the true seed of Abraham, they who are of faith. Faith admits into God’s Israel, and for all these Christ is High Priest. Then, are we of these?

2. It should make us feet the sufficiency of his mediation. We can need no other priest if we have Jesus, and no other sacrifice. What can a man on earth add to that which in him we have in heaven itself!

3. It should assure us of the supply of every necessity. Jesus, who has the Father’s ear, is at the Father’s right hand; and there for us. Then we have nothing to fear.C.N.

Heb 8:6-13

Christ in heaven, the Mediator of the new covenant.

The argument of Heb 7:1-28. has a further object than the mere proving our Lord’s superiority to Aaron. The priesthood being altered and centered in him, most important facts bearing on the spiritual position of the Hebrews grow out of it. The priesthood was the center of the dispensation; they stood and fell together. A new priesthood means a new and better dispensation. That is the purport of Heb 8:10 -18, where this idea is worked out by the writer in three particulars.

(1) is in Heb 8:1-5. If the priesthood is raised to heaven, then heaven is the true tabernacle and the old is abolished.

(2) is that in these verses; subjectChrist in heaven, the Meditator of the new covenant. We have a Mediator in heaven; but for what ends does he mediate? Not those which the former priesthood had in view, for since they were appointed for them, they may be assumed to have been sufficient for them. It must, then, be for some higher end, for purposes not possible under Aaron. The writer turns, as usual, to their Scriptures, and points them to the declaration in the Book of Jeremiah, “Behold, the days come,” etc. A new and better covenant was promised six hundred years before. Behold in Christ the possibility of the fulfillment of that prediction; through him exalted are to be bestowed the larger blessings promised in the latter days. Moreover, the fact of another covenant promised proves the imperfection and temporary character of what then was. At the moment of writing, the old covenant was trembling to its fall. That generation had not passed till the venerable symbols of the old covenant had disappeared from the earth like the mist of the morning.

I. GOD HAS MADE A NEW COVENANT WITH MEN. A covenant is an agreement. God has undertaken, agreed, covenanted to give certain blessings to men. He is a God in covenant with the race. A testament is a will, a promise to be fulfilled after death. It is a covenant, with the additional idea that it can only be fulfilled after the death of him who makes it. In the Gospels and Epistles (though not so in Old Testament) these two words are used interchangeably as the translation of one word. The two “testaments” are God’s two covenants, which can only be fulfilled through the events of Calvary.

1. The history of the Divine covenant. The “new” covenant was only new in a certain sense; in reality it was the oldthe original covenant on which the Jewish was temporarily grafted. God’s covenant was one from beginning to end. First made in Eden, we see it gradually expanding and working out, till in the Apocalypse we have its perfect consummation in a redeemed world. The covenant with Abraham was a separate and special covenant with regard to his seed alone, and in time to be absorbed in the older covenant of world-wide aspect.

2. What was the purpose of the Abrahamic covenant? Owing to the corrupt state of the world, it was necessary that a nation should be singled out, and prepared to receive the Messiah and his gospela nation through which the truth should spread world-wide. Hence the covenant with Israela covenant of Law; wonderful blessings promised on obedience. This tended to humiliation, was constantly broken and renewed, and thus carried to the heart of the people the sinfulness of sin, man’s inability to deliver himself, and. his need of redemption through another. When that was accomplished it was no more needed, and was abolished, and only the original covenant remained.

II. THE PERFECTION OF THE NEW COVENANT IS SEEN IN ITS CONTRAST TO THE OLD. The prophecy of Jeremiah quoted here contains three particulars of such a contrast.

1. A conscience pacified by perfect forgiveness. The twelfth verse begins with “for,” and contains the ground of the preceding. Forgiveness first. In the Jewish economy the expiation of sin was imperfect and temporary, and quite unfit to perfect the conscience of the worshipper. The sacrifices provided a kind of legal pardon by which the nation was kept in special relation to Jehovah, but they could not put away moral guilt; “it was not possible that the blood,” etc. But the new covenant made ample provision for all that was neededa forgiveness free (“merciful”), comprehensive (“iniquities and sins”), irreversible (“remember no more”), a forgiveness that meant the annihilation of the record from the very memory of Heaven.

2. A mind enlightened by direct communion with God. “I will be to them,” etc. The Jewish ritual made the people dependent on the priests for their knowledge of Jehovah; they might not enter the tabernacle, nor approach the symbol of the Divine presence; for the mass of Israel clouds and darkness were round about God. But through the new covenant we all have “access by one Spirit unto the Father.”

3. A heart willingly consecrated to the Divine service. “My laws in their mind and heart.” Even under Judaism some were able to say,” Oh how I love thy Law!” but it was not so with the average Jew. To him the Law was irksome and restraining. He might conform to it outwardly, but it was by the compulsion of fear, or a slavish sense of duty; his obedience did not carry his heart with it. But under the new covenant there is a new nature in harmony with the Divine will, a disposition inclining us to obedience. “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”

III. BY THE INTRODUCTION OF A NEW AND PERFECT COVENANT, THE OLD IS DISANNULLED. “In that he saith, A new,” etc. The practical lesson for today in this isYou are living under the new covenant; see to it that you possess its blessings.

1. Remember the high character of these blessings covenanted to us. Doubtful, shadowy, partial forgiveness; the intervention of the priest for personal knowledge of God; right-doing not so much from willingness as fear;that was the old covenant. Are not many Christians rather living under this than under the new?

2. Remember the universal possibility of these blessings. The old covenant was restrictive, national, hereditary, and belonged to Abraham’s seed only. But under the new covenant exclusiveness has vanished. God is in covenant with the race. His promises are to “every creature.” The rainbow of this covenant spans the world.

3. Remember the certain permanence of these blessings secured by the mediation of Christ. As Aaron was the mediator of the old, Christ is of the new covenant; that is, its blessings are bestowed through him. We can only receive them from his pierced hands, and as the result of his priestly work. But he is ever presenting his pleading blood before the throne on his people’s behalf, therefore they shall continue for ever. Christ’s continuance is the pledge of their continuance; “an everlasting covenant, ordered in,” etc.C.N.

HOMILIES BY J.S. BRIGHT

Heb 8:1-5

Here we have

The substance of the argument, and illustrations hitherto adduced.

It was the aim of the writer to show from prophecy, and the nature of the priesthood, and sacrifices of the Mosaic Law, the unrivalled and peculiar glory of Jesus Christ, and in these few verses the truths of the preceding arguments are recapitulated. It hints at the desirableness of reviewing the course of exposition, and the advantage, well known to all teachers, of the value and necessity of repeating important truths, that the things which have been uttered may not be misunderstood or forgotten. In this summary we have

I. THE EXCLUSIVE GLORY OF CHRIST IN HIS ENTHRONEMENT. He is seated “as a Priest upon his throne,” which declares a decisive contrast to the brief and anxious standing of the high priest of old, who once a year, with anxiety and trembling, appeared in the holy of holies and performed the service of sprinkling the blood before the mercy-seat on the Day of Atonement. He prepared, as the Jews say, for this work with considerable solicitude, and returned to his own house at sunset in peace, and rejoiced that the solemn service had been legally performed. Our Lord is seated on the throne of an infinite majesty, and rejoices in the contrast between his past sorrows and his present glory. It was a blessed change for Moses to leave the tending of his flock and going after the lost and wandering sheep amid the solitudes of Sinai, and afterwards to commune with the “Father of lights,” and catch the transient splendor which honored him as a servant and betokened the Divine joy of his soul in the service of Jehovah. Our Redeemer has risen to a glory so exalted that John, when in Patmos, sank overpowered before the vision of his extraordinary resplendence. John had seen him a sufferer upon the cross; but then he saw him when all outery against him had forever ceased. There was no crown of thorns upon his brow, and death had been swallowed up in victory. Now he receives the due and predicted reward of his work, and is made glad with the light of his Father’s countenance. All things are put under him for his body’s sake, which is the Church. On his head are many crowns, and he sits in the ineffable light and glory of the eternal throne.

II. THE SUPERIOR PLACE IN WHICH HIS MINISTRY IS CARRIED ON. This is in the true tabernacle, and is, therefore, universally superior to that reared in the wilderness, which was made of wood, brass, gold, silver, goat’s hair, scarlet and fine-twined linen. This sacred tent was material, and the work of men’s hands. It needed an annual purification because sinful men worshipped in it, and sinful priests served at its altar. Though it was inferior to the sphere in which Christ ministers, it had a sacred meaning and typical significance, because it was made after a Divine pattern. The voice of God to Moses was, “See that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.” It assumes that all merely human ideas and human additions were to be excluded from his fabric. The thoughts of God were to be expressed, and he was to be all in all. Moses was faithful to the Divine charge, and when Jehovah looked upon the tabernacle he blessed it, as he approved and blessed his own creation at the beginning. It was a shadow and outline of heavenly realities. Whether Moses was permitted to look into heaven itself, or to gaze upon some sensuous representation which impressed itself in all its details upon his exact and capacious memory, we cannot determine. There are some points of resemblance which deserve attention. In heaven there are answering realities to the types of the earthly sanctuary. In both there is the Divine presence, and God is seated on a throne of grace. In both there is honor conferred upon the Law. It was customary, observes Ewald, for Egyptian priests to place their choicest treasures in the sacred chest in the temple, and God placed his Law in the ark of the covenant. His Law is ever precious in his sight. In both there was the solemn truth of sacrifice and atonement, for on earth there was the bleeding victim, and in heaven “the Lamb as it had been slain.” Worshippers approach through sacrifice; all adoration rises to God, and all blessings proceed from him through priestly service. It is the true tabernacle in which things in heaven and things in earth are reconciled through Christ. In a later part of the Epistle there is an impressive illustration of the all-encompassing extent of this spiritual building. “Ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, and to the general assembly and Church of the Firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to… Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel” (Heb 12:22-24).

III. THE DIVINE PRE–EMINENCE OF HIS SACRIFICE AND MINISTRY. He must have something to offer; but as a Priest he has the glory of offering to God every tear of penitence, every act of consecrating life to the Divine wilt in conversion, every prayer and thanksgiving, every noble surrender of wealth, labor, and life to the honor and service of his Father.

IV. NOTE THE COHERENCE AND HARMONY OF THESE DIVINE ARRANGEMENTS. God has exalted his dear Son and given him a Name above every name. Before him the names of patriarchs, lawgivers, captains, kings, psalmists, and prophets must yield as the stars are swallowed in the light of the morning. There is a profound suitability and reason in his exaltation. Then follows the suitability of the sphere of his ministry. The narrow dimensions and material quality of the old tabernacle were fitted for Aaron and his descendants; but the dignity of the Redeemer requires a loftier and more spacious temple, in which he shall exercise the office of a Priest over the whole Church of the living God. The former priests offered animal sacrifices and material gifts; but he presents the spiritual oblations of his redeemed followers.B.

Heb 8:6-13

The reasons assigned for the introduction of the new covenant.

These consist of the suitability of the Lord Jesus to be engaged in the administration of a higher and nobler covenant than that which was established with Israel at Sinai. The more excellent ministry and the more excellent covenant go together. There were promises attached to the observance of the Mosaic which related to temporal blessings, such as harvests, vintages, and the peace and quiet of the land. The better covenant is founded upon better promises, and requires a mediator whose character corresponds to the higher institution of Divine grace. The next reason is the unsatisfactory result of the former covenant. It was good in itself, and was, as everything which cometh from the Father of lights, suitable as a preparatory institution, while the Church was under tutors and governors. Under this dispensation there was frequent idolatry, desecration of the temple, injustice, and prevalent corruption. Jeremiah lived to see the carrying away to Babylon, which proved the Divine displeasure against people whose history began with a sublime act of redemption from the bondage and miseries of Egypt; which act should have been an abiding cause of grateful and persevering obedience to him who by signs and wonders had released them from subjection to a cruel power, and exalted them to the dignity of a nation which “was born in a day.” While Jeremiah saw the sin and punishment of his people, he found in the promise of a new and better covenant the consolation which sustained his soul, and provided encouragement for many others. The new covenant contains four blessings of the highest value.

I. THE INSCRIPTION OF THE LAW OR GOD IN THE HEART. It is a remark of Ewald’s that in Egyptian temples there were arks, or sacred chests, into which the priests put everything they deemed of the highest value. Jehovah had nothing more precious than his Law, which, being the expression of his righteous will, and for the good of Israel, was placed in the ark of the covenant. While the Law was in the sacred place the people forgot its claims, worshipped false gods, and were guilty of many transgressions. The new covenant places the Law in the heart, and thus life becomes a scene of obedience, a cause of sincerity in worship, and by its constant presence preserves believers from offending God, and produces the fruits of righteousness. Paul said, “With the mind I serve the Law of God; and the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.”

II. The next privilege it secures is THE SACRED RELATION WHICH SUBSISTS BETWEEN GOD AND HIS COVENANTED PEOPLE. This suggests the thought of king and subjects. He, as the King, is the glory of the true Israel. He can defend them from assault, can supply all their needs “according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.” The various images of his connection with his people are all summed up in this term, in which he undertakes to be the God of his redeemed ones. If the ancient subjects of Jehovah could say, “The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King; he will save us,” much more joyfully may Christians exult in him who is their covenant God. Those who enter into covenant become his people by spiritual civilization, and differ from the barbarous, unorganized tribes of the earth. As his subjects, they reveal the character of the government under which they live, serve the high purposes of God, and are a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Their citizenship is in heaven, and they belong to the kingdom of God.

III. There is THE ENJOYMENT OF ESSENTIAL AND SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE. It cannot be supposed that the followers of Christ will ever be raised above the need of ministerial help and instruction in the things of God, since the first great gift bestowed upon the Church included apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers. It is therefore presumable that this suggests the fact that all who belong to the New Testament Church will not require remonstrance and persuasion to acknowledge the fundamental truths of true religion. During the Law, there were many occasions on which righteous men had to say to their countrymen, “Know the Lord.” It appears from a passage in the Epistle to the Galatians (Gal 4:8) to mark the transition from idolatry to the worship of the true God. “Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service to them which by nature are no gods.” There may be a designed allusion to the people in the desert, where, in addition to the tabernacle, there was the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of the god Remphan. The new covenant secures the loyal adhesion of every believer to this fundamental truth, upon which, by prayer, reading, and attendance upon an enlightened ministry, the soul is nourished to larger strength, brighter knowledge, and loftier degrees of holiness.

IV. There is THE ENJOYMENT OF FORGIVENESS. It was not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin. The blood of the new covenant, shed for many for the remission of sins, cleanses from all stains, and produces Divine peace. Looking at forgiveness in the light of the Word of God, it is an invaluable blessing. It releases us from evil thoughts, and excuses which appeared in the words of Adam and Eve, and makes the spirit to be “without guile.” It disarms the power of temptation. It introduces those who are forgiven into the safe and joyful state of justification, with all the blessings which are inseparably connected therewith. It engages the presence and gracious action of the Spirit of God, who enriches the soul with fruits of righteousness, and creates, by his presence and power, an earnest of the life to come. The two covenants cannot stand together to distract the attention of mankind, and create uncertainty about the method of salvation. As the Jews did not pass over into the blessedness of the new covenant, God removed the temple, the altar, and the priesthood by an act of righteous judgment, which began at “the house of God;” and in the occupation of Jerusalem by an alien power, and the suspension of sacrifices for eighteen centuries, he has told the world that the old covenant is vanished away.B.

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG

Heb 8:1

The Minister of the true tabernacle, his position and his office.

I. His POSITION.

1. It is in the heavens. He has passed through the veil into the heavens. He is no longer a localized priest, near to some and far away from others, but is in heaven, which is near to all of us. This bringing of heaven in contact with every human being is set forth by the teaching of the natural world. No one man has come in contact With more than a very tiny piece, comparatively, of the world in which he lives; but once in twenty-four hours every man in the world sees the sun, which is the great visible representative of heavenly resource and blessing.

2. In the most glorious position a mediator can occupy. He is at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. This throne is the heavenly counterpart to the ark of the covenant in the earthly tabernacle.

3. In this position the High Priest Jesus is seated. Seated, for he is there permanently. Incessant are the needs of that human race for whom he acts. Seated also to indicate sonship, heirship, and Divine dignity.

II. HIS OFFICE. The high priest is a liturgical minister, He does holy offices in connection with a holy structure, on behalf of the people. The word “true” here is doubtless to be taken in connection with the holy things as well as with the tabernacle itself. Jesus is Minister of the true holy things in the true tabernacle. This word “true” is a most comprehensive one, as showing the inward compared with the outward, the essence compared with the form, the abiding compared with the changing, type as compared with antitype, ends that are spiritual and invisible, as compared with means that are material and visible. Notice the frequency of this word in the Blew Testament. We read of the true riches, the true light, the true worshippers, the true bread, the true vine, the true God, the true witness. The priesthood of Jesus is a new and perfect thing, and indicates a new and perfect system. If a number of types are related together, then the bringing in of the antitype to one of them means the bringing in of all the other antitypes. God has a glorious place of abode in the invisible world, a true holy of holies, where Jesus has gone, where Jesus remains; and to that holy of holies all true worshippers shall, in due time, be gathered.Y.

Heb 8:3

The high priestfor what appointed.

I. THE STATEMENT AS TO HIGH PRIESTLY FUNCTION IN GENERAL. All high priests, whether they be Aaronic priests or Jesus himself, are appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices. Thus the classification is made of offerings for God. There are gifts, the expressions of thankfulness and devotion, which may be offered, which ought to be offered, but which can only have value as they come spontaneously and of free-will. To give them only in response to a Divine commandment would be to alter their character altogether. Their very name indicates this, as being not simply things given, but , things given freely. Then there are also sacrifices, the purpose of which is more particularly defined in Heb 8:1, where they are mentioned as sacrifices for sin. And all this volume of gratitude and penitence, instead of being scattered about in individual manifestations, left to each one’s own time and place and manner, was reduced to order, and made a national proceeding. As to gifts, a man was free to settle in his own mind whether he would give or not; but if he gave, he must give in a particular way.

II. THE SPECIAL APPLICATION TO JESUS. How can he now discharge a priestly office in respect of gifts and sacrifices? With respect to sacrifices the answer is given plainly, not only in this Epistle, but in all apostolic teaching. A reference to Heb 9:14 may be enough to illustrate this. Jesus, the true High Priest, offered up himself as the true Sacrifice. But what about the gifts? These, be it remembered, we still have to provide. A sacrifice for sin we cannot provide, but it is provided for us. Gifts, however, we are bound to bestowgifts, more in quantity than ever, and better in quality, seeing that our obligations are added to by Christ’s provision of a sacrifice for sins. And we lay these gifts on God’s altar when most of all we serve the needy. As it is true that he who gives to the poor lends to the Lord, so he who gives to the needy because of their need, hoping for nothing again, makes an offering to the Lord. It is by the Spirit of Jesus Christ that we are led into that sort of gratitude which is acceptable to God. The gifts which are most acceptable for God to receive are those which indicate our appreciation of his spiritual mercies. It is a poor business if we have not received more from God than the things which he bestows equally on the good and the evil, the just and the unjust. Our best gifts are those which promote the cause of Christ, which are offered with a distinct intention towards the progress of that cause.Y.

Heb 8:6

A verse of comparisons.

A more excellent ministrya better covenantbetter promises. How all this illustrates the way of God! Whatever he appoints and plans is good, and good just because it is exactly proportioned to good ends. But these ends have to be measured by the power of men to fall in with them. Man, with his limited prospect, reckons to be an end what God reckons as only the means to a greater end. God made to Israel promises of a land of inheritance on earth, just that they might thereby be prepared in time to see that there was something much better. Higher demands were made, a completer obedience was possible, and the conditions existed for fulfilling richer promises. And of this new state of things Jesus, as the Mediator, is the central Figure; it is his presence and his power that make the new state of things possible. The better covenant is only better because it can become a reality, and Jesus it is who makes the reality. The old covenant, as we clearly see, was a broken covenant. God brought his people into the land of promise; but, after all, this could not be called the keeping of his promise. His promise was made upon conditions to be supplied by the people to whom the promise was made. They did not supply these conditions, consequently the promise could not be fulfilled. And now, instead of Moses, the mere proclaimer of law, there comes Jesus to complete law, to expand promises into their spiritual fullness, and, at the same time, act as a Mediator in really receiving these promises for men. If God’s laws are to be written upon our hearts, it can only be by the work of Jesus. If we are to be persuaded into a living interest in God’s promises, and to care for the things he wants us to care for, it must be by the work of Jesus. He only can inspire us individually with an inclination to set our names to the new covenant. He only can show us the inward realities of which outward shows are but the parabolic expression. Real mediation, how rich it is in results! It is not like the wire along which electricity travels, a mere medium of communication. It is a medium of life and growth. Jesus Christ is the real Mediator in living, abiding, unbreakable, necessary communion with God, and in the same sort of communion with man. The old covenant did nothing more than reveal man’s utter deplorable weakness in himself. The new covenant reveals man’s strength in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ can make all things new; he can make the good better; he can bring living realities instead of living, tantalizing forms; he can make man stand erect in the strength of his renewed nature, disposed to enter into covenant with God, and able to keep the terms of the covenant he has made.Y.

Heb 8:13

The advent of the new and the doom of the old.

I. WE MUST LOOK AT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEW. Mere novelty by itself counts for nothing. Man’s new things are too often brought in, not because they are needed, but from mere restlessness, love of change, and self-glorification. The right principle of change is necessity, superseding the old because it has done its work. That is the principle, we may be sure, on which God acts. Thus we must not too readily assume that the introduction of the new is the doom of the old; that is, using the word “old” in the sense of long-established. New philosophies, new schemes of the universe, rise up threatening the long-established gospel; but in time the philosophies become old, unsatisfying, and vanish away, while the gospel remains, still welcome, still powerful.

II. GOD‘S WISDOM IN DOING THINGS AT THE RIGHT TIME. God’s new things always come in at the fullness of time. The first covenant had done its work, but those who upheld the forms of it were the last to see this. Nay, more; just in proportion as the inward reality vanished did they cling with tenacity to the outward form. If it had depended on the rulers of Jerusalem to say when the new covenant was needed, it would have been a long time in coming. Man by himself cannot be trusted to say when the season of decrepitude for any institution has come. God takes the laws of necessary change into his own hands, and makes it evident to those who have eyes to see that his new things have not come without necessity. The new state of things needs to be experienced as a reality, and then it approves itself as an improvement on the old; it becomes plain that the old was not an end in itself, but only a stage toward the attainment of the new. Whatsoever new thing is true and manifestly serviceable must make its way; and it is well for its own sake that the way should be made through difficulties and discouragements. They are wise who can see in time the difference between a mere novelty and a novelty that has conquest and resistless growth in it. The bringing in of the new wine-skins is the doom of the old ones.Y.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Heb 8:1-2 . ] Now a main point is . is not accusative absolute (Bengel), nor yet the ordinary accusative with a to be supplemented (Ebrard), but nominative , and apposition to the whole ensuing proposition: , Heb 8:2 . Comp. Rom 8:3 . Just as are also the kindred formulas: , , , , etc., very frequently prefixed to a whole clause by way of apposition. See Khner, II. p. 146, Obs . 2. The expression itself is here understood by many expositors in the sense of “ sum ;” according to which the author would express the intention of immediately comprehending or recapitulating the substance of all his previous disquisition in a single statement. So Laurentius Valla (“in summam autem”), Erasmus, Clarius, Vatablus, Zeger, Calvin, H. Stephanus, Grotius (“post tot dicta haec esto summa”), Carpzov (“ut rem summatim et uno verbo complectar”), Stengel, Hofmann ( Schriftbew . II. 1, 2 Aufl. p. 405), Conybeare, M‘Caul, etc. This signification, however, although linguistically justified, is here inadmissible , since the author is passing over to something essentially new; a recapitulation of the previous argument accordingly does not take place at all. But neither is the anarthrous although in itself this is not inadmissible to be taken as equivalent to , as is done by Theophylact ( ), Bleek (“the essential thing, to which all else is subordinated”), Ebrard (“the keystone”), Bisping (“the core of all”), Stuart, Delitzsch, Riehm, Lehrbegr. des Hebrerbr . pp. 464, 481; Alford, Maier, Ewald, and others. For, besides the further main point in the superiority of the N. T. High Priest over the Levitical high priests, here to be mentioned (namely, His ministering in a better sanctuary), the author has yet before his mind the elucidation of a third leading distinction (that of the better sacrifice presented by Christ). Comp. Heb 9:9 ff.

] cannot be referred back specially, as is assumed by Erasmus, Clarius, Zeger, Estius, Jac. Cappellus, Grotius, Hammond, Carpzov, Schulz, Stein, Stengel, Ebrard, Ewald, and many others, to that which has already been said. For therewith the participle present does not agree; must have been put instead of it. Nor, accordingly, can the sense be: “in addition to that already treated of” (Calov, Wolf, Rambach, Peirce, Storr, Ebrard, al .). On the contrary, must be taken in the signification: “upon the supposition of,” “in the case of,” as Heb 9:17 and frequently, and has essentially the same meaning as the genitive . Thus: now a main point in the case of those things we are speaking of (or: in our argument ) is the following .

With the utmost violence does Hofmann tear the words asunder ( Schriftbew . II. 1, 2 Aufl. p. 406, and so still in his commentary, p. 302 f.), in that he will have separated from , and to the latter would supplement , and renders: “besides those who are called high priests, we have a High Priest who has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty.” That, moreover, the thought thus resulting would be a senseless one, inasmuch as it would then follow that Christians have several sorts of high priests, has already been pointed out by Nickel (in Reuter’s Repertor . 1858, Feb. p. 110). For how arbitrary it is when Hofmann seeks further to twist the statement, gained with so much toil, in the sense: “that the Christians possess a High Priest, compared with whom those who are so called have for them no significance,” hardly needs to be observed.

] is a preparation for the following . . . Wrongly does Bhme refer it back to , Heb 7:26 , and Carpzov to in the same verse. The latter, moreover, with an erroneous accentuation of the : “ habemus omnino talem pontificem sc . , quippe qui adeo consedit ad dextram Dei ,” in connection with which the progress of the discourse is lost sight of, and the fact remains unnoticed that the centre of gravity in the statement, Heb 8:1-2 , is contained only in Heb 8:2 .

] who has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven (Psa 110 .). Comp. Heb 1:3 : .

The opinion of Schlichting, Grotius, Limborch, Klee, Bleek, and Alford, that the author designed by , too, to indicate a point of superiority in Christ over the Levitical high priests, inasmuch as the latter, when they entered the Most Holy Place, instead of sitting down were required to stand, is far-fetched. There is nothing in the context to lead to such supposition. It is otherwise (on account of the express opposition there met with ) chap. Heb 10:11-12 .

] belongs to , not to (Bhme), since otherwise the article would have been repeated; still less to the opening words of Heb 8:2 (Hofmann, Schriftbew . II. 1, 2 Aufl. p. 405 f.), since in that case would have been the only natural expression, the rhythmical proportion of Heb 8:1-2 would have been destroyed, and the , Heb 1:3 , parallel to the in our passage, would have remained unnoticed as regards its coherence with that which precedes.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Heb 8:1-13 . Not merely, however, as regards His person is Christ highly exalted above the Levitical priests; the sanctuary, too, in which He fulfils the office of High Priest, is highly exalted above the Levitical sanctuary. For Christ sustains His high-priestly office in the heavenly tabernacle, erected by God Himself, of which as the archetype the earthly tabernacle, in which the Levitical priests fulfil their office, is a mere copy. So much the more excellent is the priestly ministry of Christ, in proportion as the Covenant of which He is the Mediator is a better covenant, because resting upon the foundation of better promises. The character of this promised New Covenant is a more inward, spiritual one; and by the promise of a New Covenant the Old is declared to be outworn and no longer serviceable.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

THIRD SECTION
______
THIS PRIESTHOOD CHRIST ACCOMPLISHES, AS HEAVENLY KING AND MEDIATOR OF THE NEW COVENANT, A COVENANT PREDICTED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
I
As High-priest of the true sanctuary which God reared and not man, Christ hath taken His seat at the right hand of Majesty in the heavens

Heb 8:1-5

1Now of the things which we have [are being] spoken this is the sum [chief point]: We have such a high priest, who is set [took his seat, ] on the right hand of the throne of the [om. the] Majesty in the heavens; 2A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and [om. and]1 not [a] man. 3For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices; wherefore it is of necessity that 4[also] this man [one] have somewhat also [om. also] to offer. For if [indeed, ]2 he were on earth, he should [would] not [even, ] be a priest, seeing that there are priests [those]3 that offer gifts according to the law: 5Who serve unto the example [as those who minister to a copy] and shadow of [the] heavenly things, [according] as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make [complete, ] the tabernacle: for See, saith he, that thou make4 all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

[Heb 8:1. , and as a capital point, not the sum; for he is not summing up the preceding, but advancing to a new discussion. , over, respecting the things which are being said=the points under discussion; not over the things which we have spoken (as if summing up what had been said) which would require ., sat down, took his seat.

Heb 8:2., true=genuine, archetypal, not the shadow or copy.

Heb 8:3. , for the offering, in order to offer., whence (not, wherefore) it is, or was necessary. , also this, scil., high-priest.

Heb 8:4. , for if indeed he were much better, in my judgment, than the reading , if, indeed, now. , not even would he be a priest; no emphasis on , as contrasted with , but the emphasizes , not even would he be. , there being=inasmuch as there are, those who are offering.

Heb 8:5., characteristic, as those who., to a copy; sometimes .=pattern., a thing shown under, i.e., in subserviency to, something else whether as model or copy. , of the heavenly, scil., , things, or, as I think, better, , sanctuary , according as Moses has been divinely instructed. , being about to accomplish, hence, complete, carry through the construction of.K.].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Heb 8:1. A capital point in respect of the things which we are saying.As the author comes now to a point not hitherto specially treated, and proceeds to a comparison between the priests who serve in the Mosaic tabernacle, and Christ, the royal Priest who ministers in heaven as the true sanctuary, must here denote not the sum (Erasm., Luth., Calv., etc.), but chief or capital point. The appended . too, excludes the idea of a summing up or recapitulation of a previous discussion, as this would demand the form . , sum of what has been said. The present part. shows also that the author is not introducing a fresh topic additional to the preceding (Calov, etc.), but simply bringing out into fuller notice and development, with reference to the special character of his readers, the chief and central point of the existing discussion. This cardinal point is the determining of the quality of our High-Priest Christ, who, as the Messiah seated at the right hand of God, can only minister in the sanctuary of which that of Moses is to be regarded as the earthly copy. Hence, Heb 8:2 is, without a comma, to be united with Heb 8:1. It is indifferent for the sense whether the words commencing the chapter are taken as Acc. absolute, or as an anticipatory nominative apposition to the entire following clause. The explanation of Hofmann, who puts a colon after . , is wholly erroneous: (in addition to those who were called high-priests we have, etc.).

Heb 8:2. As minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle.The Adj. is commonly, by Zeugma, referred also to . But we have thus either a tautology, or a difficulty in distinguishing and , if the former word be regarded as neuter. The distinction drawn by Chr. F. Schmid, who makes denote the whole temple, and the holiest of all, is entirely arbitrary. The reverse distinction would be much more in accordance with the general usage of the author, who uniformly, except Heb 9:3, designates the holiest of all by the simple . But why thus distinguish the part from the whole, if this part again is to be included in the whole? We should rather infer that the could also designate only a part of the entire sanctuary, and of course the part separated from the holiest of all, which Heb 9:2 is called . But what application shall we make of this distinction? According to Del. would seem to designate the throne of God situated above and beyond all the heavens, the eternal of God Himself, into which Christ has entered, and where He appears as mediator on our behalf; but , the heaven of angels and of all the blessed saints, where Christ rules with mediatorial sway. This view is refutedto say nothing of other objectionsby the very language of our passage, in which Christ, as minister , has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of Majesty in the heavens. Few, however, will be inclined, with Hofm. (Weiss. II. 189 ff.; Schriftbeweis II. 1, 405), to understand, after Beza, Gerhard, etc., by , the glorified body of Christ, or in a broader sense, after Calov, Braun, etc., the Christian church. It were more natural to refer , though not with Seb. Schmidt, Braun, Rambach, to the employments and utensils required for the priestly service, yet, with Luth. and others, to the holy and true goods and possessions. But this explanation is discountenanced alike by the word and the word , which latter in this connection, instead of its original signification of a public officer acting for the good of the people, has, doubtless, in accordance with the usage of the Sept. a special relation to the position and office of priest. If now we abandon the idea of a zeugma in the construction, we shall still not be obliged, either with Hofm., to resort to the unnatural construction of with . , nor to retain, with Primas. and cum., the masc. construction of , a construction illy harmonizing with the designation of Christ as . We need but take explicatively, and all difficulty vanishes.

[The last sentence undoubtedly suggests the true solution of this much vexed question. The term , holy place, sanctuary, is first naturally used with reference to the character and use of the tabernacle as consecrated to God, and a place of religious and priestly service. The word is then added to designate the structure, and to bring it into more distinct relation to the tabernacle of Moses. The added . is then a sort of loose synonyme or fuller statement of the idea conveyed by the . Delitzschs notion, that the is the heaven of the glorified saints, and Hofmanns that it is the glorified body of Christ, are both utterly unfounded conceitsthat of Hofmann preminently so; while the view of Alford, which undertakes to combine the two, with a preponderance in favor of Hofmanns, labors under the double difficulty of adopting two views, both of which are alike without support in the Epistle, and without a particle of intrinsic probability, and which are also irreconcilable with each other. Every interpretation that undertakes to carry into the heaven of the New Testament the distinction between the inner and the outer sanctuary of the Mosaic tabernacle, ignores the very fundamental idea of that distinction, and leads to inextricable difficulties in interpretation, as has been illustrated in the numerous hypotheses, purely conceits, which the attempt to fix the nature of that heavenly outer tabernacle has originated. And if it be urged that the Mosaic tabernacle was itself but the copy of the heavenly tabernacle, and that, therefore, the antitype must have the same divisions as are found in the pattern, I reply that this is pressing unduly the figurative language of the author. The real actual pattern of the Mosaic tabernacle was that which God showed to Moses in Mount Sinai, an exact model after which he was to construct his earthly material tabernacle, and nothing more. Now that the author again should make a figurative application of that literal language, need not surprise, and should not mislead us. Literally that tabernacle was modelled precisely after the pattern or the direction which God had given Moses in the mount. Figuratively that tabernacle becomes a copy or type of the heavenly tabernacle or sanctuary, inasmuch as the high-priest ministering there in a symbolical expiation and removal of sin, typifies the heavenly High-priest officiating on high in a real expiation and forgiveness of sins. But that we are thence to carry all the special features of the earthly tabernacle into the figurative, heavenly New Testament tabernacle, does not follow; and is in fact impossible. For the essential characteristic of the outer tabernacle as distinguished from the innerthe very thing which it denoted was, as we shall subsequently see, separation from God. The veil of the temple, answering to the veil of the tabernacle, was rent at the death of the Son of God. The separation between outer and inner tabernacle, was done awaynever to be renewed.K.]. excludes the untrue and unreal, excludes that which does not correspond to its idea. The measure of the is the actual, the measure of the is the ideal. In the idea corresponds to the object, in the object corresponds to the idea (Kahnis Eucharist, p. 119). For a parallel in thought see Wis 9:8.

Heb 8:3. For every high-priest, etc.Many expositors take Heb 8:3, which Camer., Beng., etc., enclose in a parenthesis as an incidental remark, unnecessary to the connection (Michael.), or disturbing the train of thought (De W.), or introducing a train of ideas that is again crowded out by others (Thol.), or merely explanatory of the word (Ln.). But the purpose of the author is not to show that Christ must be a Priest of sacrifice. Since the or dealing in sacrifices is essential to the function of every high-priest (Ln.); he rather proceeds to prove that the of Christ can be exercised only in a heavenly sanctuary, which corresponds to the idea of the sanctuary that in type and figure was presented in the Mosaic tabernacle. It was already demonstrated from Scripture, that the Messiah is appointed of God to be alike King and Priest. As High-priest He must necessarily have somewhat that he may offer. In what this consists, remains as yet unstated, and it is a purely arbitrary and embarrassing hypothesis, which limits and exclusively to offering sacrifices. We are but pointed (as already observed by Justiniani, Este., etc.) to the necessity of priestly functions and acts to be accomplished by Christ. But in the legal economy where the Levitical priests have their function, there was absolutely no place for the priesthood of Christ; He needs, consequently, for the exercise of His priestly vocation, a heavenly sanctuary, and one which fulfils the entire idea of a sanctuary. Hence we are to supply with not (Peshito, Bez., Beng., Bl., De W., Ln.), but (Vulg., Luth., Calv., etc.), and to refer the not to the sacrifice, offered once for all, of the body of Christ on the cross. The Aor. requires neither that we translate with Ln.: for which reason it was necessary that also this one should have something which he might offer; nor with Hofm.: for which reason it is necessary that he have something which he may have offered. To read =where for is totally unnecessary.

[I cannot but conceive that the true connection of the thought in Heb 8:3 has escaped nearly, or quite all the interpreters. That many of them have failed to detect it, is certain from the diversity of their explanations. Some, with Bengel, would put it in parenthesis. Michaelis regards it as entirely unessential to the connection; De Wette, as a disturbing intruder; Tholuck as turning to a thought that was again crowded out by others; Lnemann as added to explain the import of ; Alford, after Delitzsch, as belonging here only incidentally; while Moll regards it as simply a general statement of the high-priestly function of Christ as introductory to the proof that He is ministering in a heavenly tabernacle. In this general and wide diversity of views, all but one must be, and all may be, wrong. The following may perhaps only increase by one the number of opinions to be rejected. I think, however, that it will be found that a close analysis will sustain the view that the passage is neither parenthetical, nor irrelevant, nor incidental, but introduces the grand thought which forms the theme of discussion through this and the following chapter, and that in fact this states, and states in its proper place, what is the vital point of the whole Epistle. Christs Melchisedek Priesthood has been previously considered; now comes the consideration of His Aaronic high-priesthood. This is vital to the subject; for His mere Melchisedek priesthood, however intrinsically majestic and glorious, would be of no avail to sinners; He must minister in the heavenly sanctuary as the counterpart of Aaron, the Levitical high-priest, and, as such, in correspondence with this relation, He must have something to offer. What this is, is the point now to be stated, and of which the author only apparently loses sight, the point toward which he pursues a constant though somewhat indirect course from this to Hebrews 9. Heb 8:11. Let us follow the course of thought. So important is it that He have something to offer, that if He were on earth, He could not even be a priest, inasmuch as there there is a regularly ordained priesthood for all the offerings of the Mosaic law, and which cannot there be superceded. But in fact He has a Priesthood in the heavenly tabernacle, and a Priesthood as much superior to the Levitical as the Covenant which He guarantees is superior to that under which they served. This leads to a natural digressiona digression from the immediate point under discussion, but standing in intimate vital connection with the general theme of the Epistlein illustrating the superiority of the New Covenant, of which Christ was High-priestly Mediator and surety, over that Old Covenant of which the Levitical priests were servants. This illustration is effected by the apposite and beautiful citation from Jeremiah, which unfolds the better promises that characterize the New Covenant. This topic finished, the author resumes with Hebrews 9. the inquiry, what the New Testament High-Priest has to offer. He recurs, therefore, to the arrangements of that Old Covenant, whose high-priestly service was typical of that of the New. He naturally goes back to the tabernacle in which that service was performed (to the first Covenant now there belonged, etc.), dwells somewhat minutely on its features (in order, by delineating its majesty, to enhance the glory of the Covenant which it but symbolizes), and then adds the facts to which all this description is but introductory, viz., that while the ordinary priests enter daily into the outer sanctuary, into the inner the high-priest enters but once a year, alone, and not without blood. Thus we are prepared for the statement at Heb 8:11, to which all this has tended, viz., that Christ must enter the heavenly tabernacle also with blood, and here the author reaches the point which he had in mind at Heb 8:3, and which he has not since lost sight of. If this analysis be correct, it will be seen that Molls general division of the Epistle, which makes Hebrews 9 commence a new capital section, is vicious, inasmuch as it cuts right in two a chain of argument whose links are most closely connected. The same is true of Ebrards analysis, who begins, as it were, a new and independent section with the description of the Mosaic tabernacle, and neither Delitzsch nor Alford has made any improvement on them. In fact, this description of the Mosaic tabernacle, Hebrews 9, is merely incidental, or rather a subordinate link in a chain of reasoning by which the author is showing what the New Testament High-priest has to offer. Thus Heb 8:3 of Hebrews 8 formally introduces the topic around which the whole discussion turns from this point to Heb 10:19, where, in reality, the grand argument of the Epistle terminates.K.].

Heb 8:4. For if to be sure [ ] he were on earth. cannot here mean if he had been (Bhme, Kuinoel; nor is anything to be supplied, as e. g., either , Grot., etc.), or (Zeger, Beng., Carpz, etc.). The belongs to , not to . Had the author intended to say that in the case supposed Christ could not be even a priest, much less a high-priest, (Bl., Bisp., Hofm.), he would have written .

Heb 8:5. As those who minister to a copy and shadow of the heavenly. stands indeed commonly with the Dat. of the person whom one serves, yet is found also with the Dat. of the thing in which (not with which) one serves, as also Heb 13:10. The proper signification of is that of an embodying, representative image; for which reason the word can be used, Heb 4:11, as=, example, model, and here as at Heb 9:23, and more usually, denotes copy, with the subordinate idea of an outline simply drawn from memory. , shadow, may stand in antithesis to , body (as at Col 2:17), in which case it simply opposes the non-essential to the essence; or in antithesis to (as Heb 10:1), in which case it suggests to the imagination the obscurity of the shadowy image. With we need not, with Lnemann, supply ; for the following chapters show clearly that not heavenly localities, but heavenly relations and Divine ideas, as realized in Christ, are regarded as the archetype symbolized by the Mosaic sanctuary: [so Alford: the things in heaven, in the heavenly sanctuary. But the author, though treating of heavenly facts, relations, etc., yet does it under the imagery drawn from the earthly tabernacle. He has already employed that imagery, transferring to heaven the figure of the tabernacle (Heb 8:2), and to this he ever and anon returns (Heb 9:24), and in view especially of this passage just referred to, I incline to adopt Lnemanns view. This, of course, need not prejudice the fact that the thing essentially aimed at is ideas and relations.K.]. So also Exo 25:40. We need not assume an actual temple as archetype of the tabernacle which Moses from Sinai may be supposed to have beheld, standing in heaven, nor any original structure which God Himself had reared as a model upon Sinai, where, according to the later Rabbins, it was to stand forever, but a, pattern structure, which was shown to Moses in prophetic vision, and is described in the words of God, Exo 26:26-30. This signification, model building, the word (which Jos 22:28 denotes architecture, Deu 4:17, denotes sculpture of every kind, and Psa 144:12 points to a plastic model), will very well bear at Exo 25:40. But it by no means accords with the prophetic survey of a model building which expresses heavenly relations, to assume, with Ebrard, a mere drawing or outline edifice, although such a drawing might in itself apply to the word in question according to 2Ch 16:10, where it signifies sketch, outline, and 1Ch 28:11 ff., where it signifies ground plot. The typical signification comes out strongly at Isa 44:13, inasmuch as there, at Isa 8:14, the wood is to be sought for the carrying out and realization of the pattern structure given in Heb 8:13.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. After Christ, as High-Priest, had given His life as an expiatory offering on the cross, and with His atoning blood had entered into the inner sanctuary of heaven, He has not returned again from heaven to earth, as the Levitical high-priest was obliged, after completing the sprinkling of blood, again to quit the inner Sanctuary. The office and function of the Levitical priests suffices not as a type of Christs work of reconciliation, and of His mediatorial position. Christ is a Priest of a different description, and for this has Melchisedek for His type. In this comparison, the capital point is, the recognition of the fact that Christ is a royal Priest in heaven, i.e, after His elevation to the right hand of Majesty ceases not to exercise priestly sway.

2. Since the Melchisedek priesthood is of a different order from the Levitico-Aaronical, this cannot refer to an offering of Christ in heaven, but only to a Priestly function, by which the High-Priestly sacrifice that was previously, and once for all, offered upon the cross, is rendered prevalent with God, efficacious with respect to men. Yet this priestly function in making intercession and in bestowing blessings, Christ exercises as a High-Priest who sits upon the Throne of God, i.e, on the ground of His sacrificial death upon the cross, and by virtue of His position as glorified God-man. The blood of Christ has indeed been, in His sacrifice, poured out upon the earth, and so been separated from the sacrificial body, as was done with animals in the typical sacrifice. But still it behooved that it should not barely be sprinkled upon the earth, but be borne to the sanctuary of God to sprinkle the throne of grace. And after it has been once borne in thither, and sprinkled in a divine way, it belongs now to the office of our High-Priest whom we have in the sanctuary, to sprinkle it also upon our hearts and consciences, and this life of ours, still, indeed, having its source in blood, but not in the love of God, again to unite with the true life of Divine love. (Steinhofer).

3. Since, according to the Scriptures, the Priesthood belongs essentially to the Messiah, He must necessarily always exercise Priestly functions of essential significance; but it thence by no means follows that He must be conceived as in an act of perpetual sacrifice, as those do who understand by the heavenly offering either the person of the glorified God-man, and thence deduce the sacrifice of mass (as still recently Thalhofer) or regard the believers of all generations as the sacrificial offering of Christ to God, (Theodor. Mops., Chrys., Cyrill. Alex.). Nor even does it follow that in the offering which He makes we need specially think of blood. (Del.). Since if we, with justice, distinguish this act from the slaying of the victim, and in a detailed comparison of Christ with the Aaronic high-priests, as chaps. 9 and 10, refer the slaying specially to the crucifixion, and the offering to the sprinkling of the throne of God with the sacrificial blood, we must still, in the case of the expiation wrought in the death of Christ, refrain from pushing too far the points of comparison; and particularly we must not forget that these acts immediately followed one another on the day of atonement, belong, in fact, inseparably together, and work in the objective sense an expiation which is essentially distinguished from the reconciliation which is to be obtained by the subject only on this ground, and in consequence of this. In this relation the offering of Christ by His sacrifice of Himself on the cross, is an offering once for all, whereby He has effected an eternal redemption.

4. But to the priestly functions there belongs also a sanctuary. The earthly sanctuary, however, built by human hands, cannot be that in which Christ has His Priesthood. There, men minister who are from a stock to which Jesus, who is Christ, does not belong. Moreover, this sanctuary in its very erection was already designated as a mere copy. There must thus be a heavenly sanctuary, to which the Messianic priestly king belongs, and in which he exercises a priestly office. All endeavors, however, to fix such a sanctuary as a separate locality in heaven, which locality is the real archetype of the Mosaic tabernacle, fail, in the fact, that the different attributes here assigned to Christ, taken literally, exclude one another, (Thol.), and that according to Exodus 25., not only the tabernacle but also all its utensils were to be made after the heavenly model. We must thus regard this expression as a sensible embodiment of the idea of the reconciliation and restoration of our fellowship with God, wrought through Christ, introduced by the designation of Christs mission as a Priestly one, for which reason also Luther, with most of the ancients, understood by the sanctuary simply the spiritual blessings belonging to the kingdom of God.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The patterns after which we are to regulate our life and our condition, have been shown to us by God, and described in the Holy Scriptures.It is only by His royal throne in heaven that the High-Priestly dignity, power and work of Jesus, are rendered to us truly intelligible, challenge our admiration, and reach the depth of our spiritual needs.Whether we let the High-Priest whom we have, also influence us for our salvation?As the people of the New Testament we belong to the heavenly sanctuary, and thereby have great prerogatives: how do we stand with reference to the corresponding duties?

Starke:Thanks be to God that we have a High-Priest who sits at the right hand of the Majesty on high, and whose sacrifice and intercession have, therefore, unlimited power.Christ is the fosterer of His Church. He Himself communicates the holy and heavenly gift. Would that we with perfect faith might hasten to this faithful High-Priest, and from the fulness of His grace, bring forth a real treasure and amplitude of heavenly blessings.Precisely for the reason that Christ, after His one completed sacrifice, sits at the right hand of God, He fills all in all.Whoever offers to God only the outward and corporeal, offers a Jewish, and not a Christian sacrifice.

Rieger:We have a Priest, such as we need. The Father has prepared Him; love and obedience have drawn Him into His office; He is perfected according to all that which was written aforetime with regard to Him; He is set before us in the Gospel, and faith lays hold upon Him.As God has prepared to Himself a seat of Majesty, a central point of His Government, and of the bestowment of His life and His glory; He has also reared a dwelling, or holy tabernacle, in which is the seat of Majesty, and in which He receives the priestly service and worship of those who draw near to Him.The Saviour has made use of the temple, as His Fathers house, for instruction, and cleansed this house of prayer for all nations, from abuses; but on Golgotha, not at the foot of the altar, flowed His blood, shed upon the wood of His cross.

Hahn:We must follow with our gaze the dear Saviour on His course of suffering clear up into heaven.

Heubner:Were not Christ in this inconceivably close connection with God in heaven, He could not, in proper and complete authority, impart the forgiveness of sins, truly annihilate sin, and arrest its consequences.Our service of God and priesthood should be an imitation and copy of the service of God in heaven.

Footnotes:

[1]Heb 8:2. is to be expunged after Sin. B. D*. E*., 17.

[2]Heb 8:4.Instead of , should be read with Sin. A. B. D*., 17, 73, 80, 137, . [Tisch. retains , which seems to me much more accordant with the connection. The substitution of , for , though strongly supported and favored by most modern editors, I cannot but regard as the result of a misunderstanding of the connection.K.].

[3]Heb 8:4.The words before , are not found in Sin. A. B. D*. E*., 17, 73, 137, and are to be regarded as a gloss, which Grotius, Mill, and Griesbach were inclined to expunge. The Art. before is wanting in Sin. A. B., 57, 80.

[4]Heb 8:5.Instead of , all the best authorities require us to read .

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

We have more, and more precious Views of the Lord Jesus in this chapter. Christ the true tabernacle. God’s Covenant Love, secured in Christ, by Word and Oath.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

(1) Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such a high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; (2) A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

I would not for the world knowingly strain a single word in scripture, by way of making it speak more, or less, than is intended; but would pause over these verses, and humbly ask, whether God the Holy Ghost, in the opening of this Chapter, did not mean to call the Church to behold Christ as the sum and substance of all revelation? Let the Reader recollect, how blessedly the Holy Ghost had been speaking, in the seven preceding Chapters, concerning Christ. Beginning in the first Chapter with proclamations of his eternal Power and Godhead, then of his Mediator glories; and in the second Chapter, of his human nature; and in the following, largely dwelling upon the many sweet, and endearing features of his offices, and particularly of his Priesthood: and, having followed him from the time of having purged our sins by himself, until he held him forth as seated as a Priest upon his throne, in glory, the Lord the Spirit begins this Chapter in a form of words, such as can hardly be found in the whole book of God. Now of the things (saith the Lord) which we have spoken this is the sum. As if the whole of revelation was here brought into one view, in the Person of Christ. And no doubt it is. For Christ, as Christ, is the visible Jehovah. There could have been no revelation of Jehovah in his threefold character of Person, but in, and by Him. He is come forth from the bosom of the Father to declare him, Joh 1:18 . And, let the Reader further observe, how blessedly the Holy Ghost represents him, as having passed into the heavens, and there sat down, contrary to the priests on earth, who always stood ministering, Heb 10:11 . Numberless beauties are contained in this short verse. First. Jesus being seated as the High Priest of his people, on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, carries with it the most palpable conviction, that he hath by himself purged our sins; and in proof, is set down on the right hand of God. Secondly. It becomes no less a proof, that Christ hath been accepted as our Surety in redemption, or he never would have been received there. Christ’s sitting down on the right hand of the Majesty in heaven, is in perfect conformity to God’s word, and oath, Sit thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool, Psa 110:1 ; Joh 17:4 . Thirdly. Having such an High Priest there, our Advocate, whom God the Father heareth always; the same becomes an everlasting assurance, that all the concerns of his people, Jesus undertakes, and accomplisheth. No prayers can go unheard. No petitions remain unanswered. And all the ascension-gifts he is purposely exalted to bestow, are as certain, and sure, as if they were already in hand. God the Holy Ghost is come down, in confirmation, that Christ is gone up. He doth led captivity captive, and received gifts for men, yea, for the rebellious, that the Lord God might dwell among them, Psa 68:18 . And, lastly, to add no more; the sum and substance of the whole scripture being to tell the Church, that He who was dead, and is alive, and now liveth forevermore, and is on the throne of the majesty on high, is purposely there for his people, waiting to be gracious, and delighted to be by them employed. So he appeared to John , in his priestly vesture, dipped in blood, as if to say: See! I wear the vestments of office. Bring all your causes to me, and leave all with confidence in my hand.

But we must not stop here. He that is our High Priest, the Holy Ghost adds, is also a Minister of the Sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man. These offices also, are special, personal offices, peculiarly belonging to our Lord Jesus Christ, and to no other, and in which his people have everlasting concern. This sanctuary is not a worldly sanctuary of carnal ordinances; such as we read of, Heb 9:10Heb 9:10 . Neither is it an earthly sanctuary; neither is it an heavenly one; for then, it needed not to have been said, which the Lord pitched and not man. For it is well known, none but the Lord is the maker of heaven. But by the sanctuary, I should apprehend, is meant, the whole body of the Church, whom Christ, by the one offering of himself, once offered, hath perfected forever, as sanctified in himself, Psa 114:2 ; Isa 63:18 . And by the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man, can be meant no other, according to my view, than the human nature of Christ, in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And I am the more inclined to this opinion, because, all that is here said, is with the intention to magnify and exalt the Lord Jesus, by shewing, that all that was in the wilderness Church, was designed, but as the shadows of good things to come, and that all pointed to, and centered in Christ. Now, as the tabernacle in the wilderness, had frequently the Shechinah, or manifestation of the divine presence in it; here, was a lively representation of the Son of God, tabernacling in our nature, when he became flesh, and dwelt among us. And as the tabernacle was but a poor building, and to outward appearance, looking very wretched and mean; so the human nature, in which the Son of God tabernacled, was poor indeed, and had nothing of beauty, that we should desire him.

But the greatest point in this description remains to be considered. It is said, that the Lord pitched this true tabernacle, and not man. Yes! The whole Persons of the Godhead co-operated in the work. God the Father, prepared the body. So spake Christ by the Spirit of prophecy. Compare Psa 40:6-7 with Heb 10:5 . God the Son took the nature of man upon him, Heb 2:16Heb 2:16 . And God the Holy Ghost, formed that holy thing, so called, Luk 1:35 . Reader! do not hastily pass away, from the view of a subject so truly blessed. This true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man, is the only real temple, either in heaven, or on earth, for the divine residence., The divine essence, may, in one sense, be said to dwell everywhere; for, in the perfection of his Omnipresence, he fills heaven and earth. And God dwells by the influences of his Spirit in the hearts of his people. But it is not in either sense of this meaning, the tabernacle of the human nature of the Son of God, is inhabited by the indwelling residence of Jehovah. It is bodily in Christ, as fire in iron; essentially, personally, and eternally. Moreover, this is the only temple, Christ’s body, for meeting with his people. Here, the Lord comes to meet and bless them. In him, the Lord speaks to his people and they to him. Oh! the blessedness of this true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. How ought the redeemed to delight in Christ, and to be always going to Christ. It was the consciousness of this made David cry out; One thing have I desired of the Lord that I will seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to enquire in his temple, Psa 27:4 . Oh! for grace, to be often eyeing Christ, as the sum of the things the Holy Ghost hath here spoken. Such an High Priest, set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man!

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Heaven’s Teaching on Earth’s Duties

Heb 8:5

The experience of Moses on Mount Sinai, to which our text refers, was a remarkable example of communion between God and man. We may thankfully accept it as a symbol of spiritual truth, and typical of recurring experience. Fellowship with God is not peculiar to any age, or clime, or race; and access to the Father is now far more generally enjoyed than in Mosaic times; for since then the world has seen and heard Him who said: ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me’. This verse reminds us

I. That nothing is too trivial for God to notice. Moses was instructed in the mountain about the making of bowls, and dishes, and spoons, and staves, and tables. And if this fact suggests no other truth, at least it may remind us that the God of Jews and Christians is essentially unlike the God imagined by Epicureans ancient and modern; for there is nothing too insignificant to be cared for by Him. Human knowledge, especially of late years, has been going in the direction of the trivial. While the Son of God was on earth, what small things He cared for! He who spoke with angels noticed children playing in the marketplace. Now, if this be so, we ought not to wait before going to Him for help until some crushing sorrow comes to break us down.

II. We may speak to God about ordinary affairs in seasons of highest communion. If we are conscious that Christ goes with us, as He went with His disciples, to street, and marketplace, and home, we may speak to Him about every grief and anxiety that comes.

III. Even slight deviations from Divine directions are forbidden. I fear we must acknowledge with shame that even professedly Christian people, in dealing with those outside the Church, have sometimes deliberately set aside the principles they profess; and the Sermon on the Mount has been condemned as impracticable and absurd. If it be true that even slight deviations from Divine directions are forbidden, we must guard ourselves against those forms of sin which we generally condone.

IV. What God calls us to do has more depending on it than we suppose. God expects of His servants what we, with less right, expect of ours absolute fidelity and thoroughness in work, even though we do not see the object of it

A. Rowland, The Burdens of Life, p. 209.

The Pattern in the Mount

Heb 8:5

Here is a man who has left the multitude, with all its disturbing heats and clamours, and has sought the unperverting coolness of solitude, and on the cloud-capped height has found communion with his God. Now, one of the richest gifts with which God has dowered the race is the gift of mountain-men, men whose dwelling-place is on high, to whom the rarified atmosphere is their native air, who are finely perceptive of heavenly callings, and who are keen-eyed to discern the ideal tracings of the finger of God. There are the poets. What are these but mountain-men? And, then, there are the prophets, men again who have been cloistered on the heights with their God, and who descend into our mean discords with ‘the voice of the great eternal’ ringing in their mighty tones. There are mountain-moments in every life, when our tiny circle is immeasurably enlarged, when the cloud-rock breaks, and we see things as they are in the radiant glory of God.

I. Now in those mountain-moments we are all idealists. For what is an idealist? An idealist is one who sees the true idea of a thing. (1) In our mountain-moments we see the true idea of life. We see that the ideal life is a life of sublime fellowship, with sensitive perceptions and correspondences with the Highest. (2) And in these mountain-moments we see the true idea of the means of living. (3) And in these mountain-moments we see the true idea of society, as being a sacred fellowship, a gracious combination where competition does not poison or bruise, a fertile altruism in which the individual surely finds his appointed crown. (4) And so, too, we have the true idea of the fallen, the idea of the prodigal and the Magdalene, the pattern in the mount for her and him; God’s design in heaven for thee and me. (5) And we have the true idea of little children, as princes and princesses of royal blood, who are called to sovereign eminence and service in the inheritance of the saints in light The command is laid upon us as upon the men to whom the words were first spoken: ‘See that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount’.

II. And how are we to set about the task? (1) Let us keep our imaginations freshly and vividly furnished with the ideal we wish to realise. A great friend of Westcott’s wrote this great word about him: ‘He was only strong because he saw, and took time to see’. Amid all our jostling and clamouring realities let us take time to contemplate the vision on the mount (2) If we would retain the vision of the ideal, and be ministers of its incarnation, we must avoid all disgusting habits, whether the vulgarity be obtrusively bold or concealed beneath thin and superficial refinements. Above all, we must cultivate the fellowship and the friendship of the Lord Jesus Christ in that glorious communion, in that supreme ministry of grace, it is possible for us to keep a clear eye and a ready and obedient hand.

J. H. Jowett, The British Congregationalist, 4th June, 1908, p. 554.

Heb 8:5

‘Emerson,’ says Mr. Santayana in Poetry and Religion (p. 218), ‘was not a prophet who had once for all climbed his Sinai or his Tabor, and having there beheld the transfigured reality, descended again to make authoritative report of it to the world. Far from it At bottom he had no doctrine at all. The deeper he went and the more he tried to grapple with fundamental conceptions, the vaguer and more elusive they became in his hands.’

References. VIII. 6. T. M. Morris, Christian World Pulpit, vol. li. p. 314. B. J. Snell, The Virtue of Gladness, p. 121. Bishop Westcott, The Incarnation and Common Life, p. 141. W. Moore Ede, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. p. 332. Expositor (4th Series), vol. i. p. 437; ibid. (5th Series) vol. vi. p. 381. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Hebrews, p. 29. VIII. 6. Ibid. vol. x. p. 237. VIII. 8. W. H. Simcox, The Cessation of Prophecy, p. 168. VIII. 9. Expositor (4th Series), vol. iii. p. 119.

The Articles of the New Covenant

1. God’s Writing on the Heart

Heb 8:10

We can scarcely estimate the shock to a primitive Hebrew Christian when he discovered that Judaism was to fade away. Now, the great object of this Epistle is to insist on that truth, and to calm the early Hebrew Christians under it, by showing them that the disappearance of the older system left them no poorer but infinitely richer, inasmuch as all that was in it was more perfectly in Christ’s Gospel.

I. Let us first try to ascertain what exactly is the meaning of this great promise. These two clauses mean two things the clear perception of the will of God, and the coincidence of that will with our inclinations and desires. (1) How is that wonderful change upon men to be accomplished? ‘I will put, I will write.’ Only He can do it. (2) It comes to substitute for all other motives to obedience the one motive of love. The secret of Christian morality is that duty is changed into choice, because love is made the motive for obedience. (3) This great promise is fulfilled in the Christian life, because to have Christ shrined in the heart is the heart of Christianity, and Christ Himself is our law. (4) This great promise is fulfilled, because the very specific gift of Christianity to man is the gift of a new nature, which is ‘created in righteousness and holiness that flows from truth’.

(5) This great truth has to be held with caution.

(6) There is nothing in this promise which suspends the need for effort and for conflict.

II. Note the impassable gulf which this fulfilled promise makes between Christianity and all other systems. It is a new covenant, undoubtedly an altogether new thing in the world. For whatever other laws have been promulgated among men have had this in common, that they have stood over against the Will with a whip in one hand, and a box of sweets in the other, and have tried to influence desires and inclinations, first by the setting forth of duty, then by threatening, and then by promises to obedience. There is the inherent weakness of all which is merely law. But here is a system which says that it deals with the will as from within, and moves, and moulds, and revolutionises it. The peculiarity of the Gospel is that it gives both the knowledge of what we ought to be; and with and in the knowledge, the desire; and with and in the knowledge and the desire, the power to be what God would have us to be. St. Augustine penetrated to the very heart of this article when he prayed: ‘Give what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt’.

III. Note the freedom and blessedness of this fulfilled promise. Not to do wrong may be the mark of a slave’s timid obedience. Not to wish to do wrong is the charter of a son’s free and blessed service.

IV. The condition of the fulfilment of this promise to us. What is there to do? First, and last, and midst, keep close to Jesus Christ. When the astronomer wishes to get the image of some far-off star, invisible to the eye of sense, he regulates the motion of his sensitive plate, so that for hours it shall continue right beneath the unseen beam. So we have to still our hearts, and keep their plates the fleshy tables of them exposed to the heavens. Then the likeness of God will be stamped there. Be faithful to what is written there. This is a promise for us all.

A. Maclaren, Triumphant Certainties, p. 80.

The Articles of the New Covenant

2. Their God, My People

Heb 8:10

‘I am thine: thou art mine,’ is the very mother-tongue of love, and the source of blessedness. This mutual surrender, and, in surrender, reciprocal possession, is lifted up here into the highest regions. ‘I will be their God, they shall be My people.’ That was the fundamental promise of the Mosaic dispensation laid at Sinai, ‘Ye shall be unto Me a people for a possession’. So, the writer here, falling back upon the marvellous prophecy of Jeremiah, regards this as being one of the characteristics of Christianity, that what was shadowed in Israel’s possession of God and God’s possession of Israel, is, in substance, blessedly and permanently realised in the relations of God to Christian souls, and of Christian souls to God.

I. ‘I will be to them a God.’ That is God’s gift of Himself to us. The words go far deeper than the necessary Divine relation to all His creatures. (1) All that lies in that majestic monosyllable, which is shorthand for life, and light, and all perfectness, lived in a living person who has a heart, that word God, all that is included in that name, God will be to you and me, if we like to have Him for such. (2) It says, too, that all that Godhood, in all the incomprehensible sweep of its attributes, is on my side, if I will. (3) This giving of God to us by Himself is all concentrated in one historical act. He gave Himself to us when He spared not His only begotten Son.

II. And now we have to take the giving God and make Him our God.

III. We have to give ourselves to God. God comes first with the love that He pours over us poor creatures, and when ‘we have known and believed the love that God hath to us,’ then, and only then, do we throb back the reflected, ay, the kindred love. What is the surrender of the man who receives the love of God? In what region of my nature is that giving up of myself most imperative and blessed? In my will. The will is the man.

IV. God takes us for His. That is wonderful. It sometimes seems to me that it is more wonderful that God should take me for His than that He should give me Himself for mine.

A. Maclaren, Triumphant Certainties, p. 90.

Heb 8:10

On 22nd June, 1655, Cromwell wrote thus to Fleetwood: ‘Dear Charles, my dear love to thee; and to my dear Biddy, who is a joy to my heart, for what I hear of the Lord in her. Bid her be cheerful, and rejoice in the Lord once and again: if she knows the covenant, she cannot but do so. For that transaction is without her; sure and stedfast, between the Father and the Mediator in His blood: therefore, leaning upon the Son, or looking unto Him, thirsting after Him, and embracing Him, we are His seed; and the Covenant is sure to all the seed. The compact is for the seed; God is bound in faithfulness to Christ, and in Him to us: the Covenant is without us; a Transaction between God and Christ. Look up to it. God engageth in it to pardon us; to write His Law in our hearts; to plant His fear so that we shall never depart from Him. We, under all our sins and infirmities, can daily offer a perfect Christ, and thus we have peace and safety, and apprehension of love, from a Father in Covenant, who cannot deny Himself. And truly in this is all my salvation; and this helps me to bear my great burdens.’

References. VIII. 10. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xliii. No. 2506. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Hebrews, p. 36; ibid. p. 46.

The Articles of the New Covenant

3. All Shall Know Me

Heb 8:11

In old days there had been some direct communication between God and a chosen few, the spiritual aristocracy of the nation, and they spake the things that they had heard of God to the multitude who had had no such communication. My text says that all this is swept away, and that the prerogative of every Christian man is direct access to, communication with, and instruction from, God Himself.

I. I ask you to look with me at what this great promise means.

‘They shall know Me.’ We all know the difference between hearsay and sight. We all know the difference between hearsay and experience. To come still closer to the force of my text, we all know the difference between hearing about a man and making his acquaintance.

There is all the difference between knowing about God and knowing God; just the difference that there is between dogma and life, between theology and religion. We may have all articles of the Christian creed clear in our understandings, and may owe our possession of them to other people’s teaching; we may even, in a sense, believe them, and yet they may be absolutely outside of our lives. And it is only when they pass into the very substance of our being, and influence the springs of our conduct it is only then that we know God. I maintain that this acquaintance with Him is what is meant in our text. The whole case for Christianity cannot be appreciated from outside. ‘Taste and see.’

II. Notice how far this promise extends. ‘They all, from the least to the greatest, shall know.’ This is the true democracy of the Gospel the universal possession of the life of Christ through the Spirit.

(1) Now, if that be so, then it is by no means a truth to be kept simply for the purpose of fighting against ecclesiastical or sacerdotal encroachments and denials of it, but it ought to be taken as the candle of the Lord, by each of us, and in the light of it we ought to search very rigidly, and very often, our own Christian character and experiences. (2) But whilst thus the great promise of my text, in its very blessedness and fulness, does carry with it some solemn suggestions for searching self-examination, it also points in another direction. For consider what it excludes, and what it permits, in the way of brotherly help and guidance. It certainly excludes, on the one hand, all assumption of authority over the consciences and the understandings of Christian people, on the part either of churches or individuals, and it makes short work of all claims that there continues a class of persons officially distinguished from their brethren, and having closer access to God than they. (3) But brotherly help is not shut out.

III. The means by which this promise is fulfilled. (1) Jesus Christ’s blood, the seal of the Covenant, is the great means by which this promise is fulfilled, inasmuch as in that death He sweeps away all the hindrances which bar us out from the knowledge of God. (2) By His mission and death there is given to the whole world, if it will receive it, and to all who exercise faith in His name, the gift of that Divine Spirit who teaches in the inmost spirit the true knowledge of His Son. (8) The one way by which every man and woman on earth may find him and herself included within that ‘all, from the least to the greatest,’ is simply trust in Christ Jesus.

A. Maclaren, Triumphant Certainties, p. 98.

The Articles of the New Covenant

4. Forgiveness the Fundamental Blessing

Heb 8:12

The introductory ‘for’ in my text shows that the fulfilment of all the preceding great promises depends upon and follows the fulfilment of this, the greatest of them. Forgiveness is the keystone of the arch. Strike it out, and the whole tumbles into ruin.

I. Forgiveness deals with man’s deepest need. It is fundamental, because it grapples with the true evil of humanity, which is not sorrow, but is sin. The true notion and essence of forgiveness, as the Bible conceives it, is not the putting aside of consequences, but the flow of the Father’s heart to the erring child. If a man has sinned, no Divine forgiveness will ever take the memory of his transgressions, nor their effects, out of his character. But the Divine forgiveness may so modify the effects as that, instead of past sin being a source of torment or a tyrant which compels to future similar transgressions, pardoned sin will become a source of lowly self-distrust, and may even tend to increase in goodness and righteousness. When bees cannot remove some corruption out of the hives they cover it over with wax, and then it is harmless, and they can build upon it honey-bearing cells. Thus it is possible that, by pardon, the consequences which must be reaped may be turned into occasions for good. But the act of the Divine forgiveness does annihilate the deepest and the most serious consequences of my sin; for hell is separation from God, the sense of discord and alienation between Him and me; and all these are swept away.

II. This forgiveness is attained through Christ, and through Him only.

The Christian teaching of forgiveness is based upon the conception of Christ’s work and especially of Christ’s death, as being the Atonement for the world’s sin. Of course, my text itself does show that the very common misrepresentation of the New Testament evangelical teaching about this matter is a misrepresentation. It is often objected to that teaching that it alleges that Christ’s sacrifice effected a change in the Divine heart and disposition, and made God love men whom He did not love before. The mighty ‘I will’ of my text makes no specific reference to Christ’s death, and rather implies what is the true relation between the love of God and the death of Jesus Christ, that God’s love was the originating cause, of which Christ’s death was the redeeming effect.

III. This forgiveness is fundamental to all other Christian blessings.

A Christianity which does not begin with the proclamation of forgiveness is impotent A Christianity which does not base forgiveness on Christ’s sacrifice is impotent also. A Christianity which does not build holiness, delight in God’s law, conscious possession of Him and possession by Him, and deep, blessed knowledge of Him on forgiveness, is woefully imperfect.

A. Maclaren, Triumphant Certainties, p. 109.

References. VIII. 12. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii. No. 1685. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Hebrews, p. 62. IX. 1. J. Caird, Sermons, p. 272. Expositor (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 136. IX. 1-10. Ibid. (5th Series), vol. v. p. 379. IX. 4. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. viii. p. 194. IX. 5 . Ibid. (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 337. IX. 7. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. i. p. 88; ibid. (5th Series), vol. ii. p. 158; ibid. (7th Series), vol. v. p. 56.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

XXI

JESUS CHRIST, HIGH PRIEST OF THE NEW COVENANT, GREATER THAN AARON, HIGH PRIEST OF THE OLD COVENANT

Heb 4:14-8:5 .

The letter to the Hebrews is an inspired exposition of the Sinaitic covenant, and particularly of the book of Leviticus. Our analysis and exposition of the Sinaitic covenant (Exo 19:1-24:9 ) shows that this covenant consisted of three distinct elements:

1. God and the normal man, or the moral law (Exo 20:1-17 ) as a way of life; not simply an obligation but a condition of life they that do these things shall live, they that do them not shall perish.

2. God and the nation, or the ordinances that set forth the principles of civic righteousness (Exo 21:1-24:9 ); in obedience to which the nation lives, and in disobedience dies.

3. God and the sinner, or the Law of the Altar (Exo 20:22-26 ), or the way of the sinner’s approach to God in order to find mercy.

We learn that all subsequent statutory legislation in the Pentateuch was developed from these constitutional elements or principles. Deuteronomy was developed from the first and second, and from the third was developed the last sixteen chapters of Exodus, all of Leviticus, and most of the legislation in Numbers. The Altar part, or God and the sinner, was typical of the new covenant, and contained in figures the way of grace and mercy, and revealed the only way by which Parts 1-2 could be kept. Hence it was the most important element of the Sinaitic law.

In the Pentateuch we find also these elements of the law of the sinner’s approach to God:

1. The sanctuary, holy of holies, or a place where the sinner might find God.

2. A means of approach to God in the sanctuary, or vicarious, expiating sacrifices placating the divine wrath against sin.

3. A mediator to go between the sinner seeking mercy, and God bestowing mercy. This mediator, or priest, took the blood of the vicarious expiation and carried it behind the veil and offered it upon the mercy seat, where God dwelt between the cherubim. That mediator, on the basis of that offered blood, made intercession for the people.

4. Times in which to approach God are set forth elaborately in that book daily, weekly, monthly, annually, septennially, and every fiftieth year. Those were the times that they could go before God, but the heart of Leviticus, as well as the heart of Hebrews, was a particular time, to wit: On the great day of atonement, when the people appeared before God to receive through an offering presented by the priest, the remission of their sins, we find a prescribed ritual that gave the steps involved.

5. Then we find what place there was for penitence, faith, and prayer. We find penitence to indicate that the man approaching God came as a confessed sinner. We find faith set : forth by the laying on of hands upon the head of the victim the victim to take his place. We find the prayer part to be the petitions that went with the high priest and were presented by him when he made the offering. All that ia, presented in the book of Leviticus.

So we find that the sanctuary of God was that part which was called the holy of holies, and that there God was visibly manifested, according to all Jewish interpretation, in the Shekinah of fire between the cherubim on the mercy seat. We find the victims to be bullocks, goats, and lambs. We find the mediator to be, and particularly upon the great day of atonement, Aaron. We find the sacrifices constantly repeated every year; on the ‘great day of atonement the priest bad to go for the people, carrying the names of the tribes on his breastplate, going for them into the holy of holies. In the letter to the Hebrews, which expounds the Altar part of the Sinaitic covenant, Paul does not discuss the Temple of Solomon, nor of Zerubbabel, nor of Herod, but the tabernacle of Moses, because his plan is to go back to origins, and to the dignity of founders. It would have been incongruous if after discussing angels, Moses, Aaron, and the prophets, he had skipped to the ritual of the Herodian Temple.

He makes this argument: AB Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is greater than the prophets, greater than the angels, greater than Moses, greater than Joshua, so he is greater than Aaron. We do not discuss in this chapter superiority of the new covenant over the old, but the superiority of Jesus Christ over Aaron as high priest.

In some respects Aaron and Jesus Christ are alike neither one took the honor to himself. Aaron did not appoint himself high priest to go before God, and Jesus Christ did not appoint himself to be mediator. The Father appointed them. Aaron was one of the people. Christ was like Aaron in that respect he was one of the people. He took upon himself the nature of man and became as one of those who became his brethren.

So we have not yet arrived to the point of discrimination between Christ and Aaron, but we do now come to the dividing line: Aaron being a priest under the covenant made upon Mount Sinai, was himself of the tribe of Levi. Jesus Christ did not belong to that tribe. He was of the tribe of Judah, therefore the priesthood of Christ does not come within the law of the covenant established by Moses on Mount Sinai. It was not his office to go to the Temple at Jerusalem and there officiate as priest. He had no such place there. That is a distinction. It shows that the priesthood of Christ must be according to an entirely different covenant, otherwise he would have to be a son of Levi to be a priest.

In getting to this point of distinction, Paul takes up a fragment of the history of Genesis, about an ancient king of Jerusalem Melchizedek. Before Abraham had any possession there, this man was both a king and a priest of God before the call of Abraham, before the segregation of the Jewish nation, when there was no distinction between Jew and Gentilei He had no pedigree of which there is any record, but when we come to Aaron’s time, no man could officiate as an Aaronic priest unless he could trace his Levitical descent. Melchizedek had no such genealogy, and therefore in a genealogical sense’ he is said to be without father or mother, and held his office as king and priest directly from God. He was recognized as greater than Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, for when Abraham was returning from the victory over Chedorlaorner he paid tithes to the king of Salem and received a blessing from him.

In the days of the psalmist a reference is made to that history: “The Lord hath sworn, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” This makes another distinction Christ, not Aaron, was made priest by oath of God. So a distinction between Christ and Aaron is that Aaron is after the order of Levi and his priesthood is under the Mosaic covenant made upon Mount Sinai, and Jesus Christ is a priest after the order of Melchizedek anterior even to Abraham, much less Moses, and greater than Abraham, receiving tithes from the whole Jewish people in the person of Abraham, and inducted by the oath of God. It shows, too, that no scripture is of private interpretation. The prophets spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, and when you go to interpret a passage of Scripture which the Holy Spirit indicted, you get the meaning through the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

The next point is that when Aaron, under the Levitical law was preparing to offer a sacrifice for the sins of the people, he must first offer for himself because he was a sinner, and before he offered for others he must himself be cleansed; but this Man was holy, “tempted in all points as we are tempted, yet without sin.” That distinction in character is very strong between the two persons between the two orders of priesthood. Aaron was a sinner; our priest was not a sinner. No man ever convicted him of sin.

Then Aaron died and could not continue to live to intercede for the people, but this priest ever liveth to make intercession for his people.

We now take up the general superiority of the New Covenant, and it embraces items 10-12 of the analysis, only in expounding this I will follow a more orderly and logical method than we have in the analysis. This section extends from Heb 8:5-13:16 , and it even includes one verse of Heb 7 .

So far, our exposition has had to do with the person and most of the offices of the Mediator of the new covenant, but here we contrast the covenants themselves. Notwithstanding the previous statements of the elements of the Sinaitic covenant, we must restate them here briefly in order to clearness in this exposition. The old covenant is set forth in Exo 19:1-24:11 , and consists of three distinct elements:

1. The Decalogue, or God and the normal man.

2. The fundamental principles of civic righteousness, or God and the theocratic nation.

3. The altar, or God and the sinner, or the law of the sinner’s approach to God.

From the first and second elements are derived a part of Numbers, and all of Deuteronomy; from the third element, God and the sinner, or the law of the altar, are derived the last 16 chapters of Exodus, the whole of Leviticus, and a part of Numbers.

Our first question now arises: What are the faults of the old covenant, for our text says that God found that old covenant faulty? If we know what the faults are, we can then ‘ consider the superiorities of the new covenant. Evidently the one supreme fault of the first and second elements, that is, the moral code and the national code, was the inability of a fallen, sinful people to keep the law, as a way of life for the individual, or a way of life for the nation. The reason is that the moral element was written outside of the people and on tablets of stone; they had no internal personal knowledge spiritual knowledge of the law. So written, it discovered sin and condemned sin, but there was nothing in it to overcome this inability and render the obedience efficacious. The normal man Adam before his fall, and his descendants could have kept the Decalogue if he had not fallen and corrupted their nature derived from him, could have constituted a successful theocratic nation. But after the fall no lineal descendant from I Abraham, nor circumcision of the flesh, could impart a new nature.

And now what the faults of the third part of that covenant that is, the Levitical code the last three chapters of Exodus, the whole of Leviticus, and a part of Numbers? The faults of that element were:

1. It was in whole and in all its parts but a shadow merely of heavenly things to come; in its nature and in its intent it was only transitory and educational.

2. The lack of intrinsic merit in the expiating sacrifices to atone for sin.

3. The emptiness of its nonexpiatory sacrifices arising from the want of the heart back of them.

4. Conforming to it could never relieve the conscience from the sense of sin, guilt, and condemnation, and give peace and rest.

5. The repentance of the sinner on human go-betweens, or third parties in making offerings, and in the administration of cleansing ordinances, the limitation of one fixed place to meet God, and the further limitation of set times in which to meet God that is, the sinner could not for himself directly approach God at all times, in all places, and in all emergencies.

From these faults what our text declares necessarily and inevitably followed, to wit: “They continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.” Their whole national history is but the record of a series of breaches of the covenant on their part, and of God’s disregard of them on his part. They broke the covenant first in the very shadow of Sinai, before its tablets were completed, in the matter of the golden calf. They broke the covenant again at Kadesh-barnea, and the whole generation of adults were disregarded and perished. They broke the covenant again throughout the period of the judges, and at the close of that period their rebellion culminated in the rejection of God as King, and in the demand for a human monarchy. After that monarchy was established, the ten tribes broke the covenant at the very start in erecting the calves to worship at Dan and Bethel, and kept on breaking it without cessation until they perished. The Judah part of the monarchy, while more faithful than the ten tribes, repeatedly broke the covenant, and finally, at the downfall of the monarchy by Nebuchadnezzar, they were swept away. The hierarchy which, through the clemency of Persia, succeeded the monarchy and continued throughout the Grecian and Roman supremacies, repeatedly violated the covenant, and the culmination of their rebellion was in the days of our Lord when they rejected him and killed the Prince of Glory, bringing upon themselves the terrible denunciation in Matthew 21-23 the gravest judgment that was ever assessed against a people. This on account of the faults in that covenant. In every period of their probation they broke it and disregarded it.

This review of the faults enables us to sum up in one sweeping, inclusive generality the superiority of the new covenant, to wit: Our text says, “It was enacted on better promises,” so that our next question arises: What are these better promises? Here it is all important to make no mistake. If we do not discern these better promises clearly and retain them permanently in our hearts, we will utterly fail to master the priceless lessons of this book. Notwithstanding the importance of discerning and retaining these promises, what a sad thing it is, that if the preachers of Christendom were called up and asked to state what these better promises are, probably not more than one in a hundred could give them correctly, and three-fourths of so-called Christendom have never seen them. I will give them to you in the next chapter.

QUESTIONS

1. Hebrews is an exposition of what covenant, and what Old Testament book in particular?

2. Where is the record of the old covenant, and what are its constituent elements?

3. What subsequent parts of the Pentateuch developed from each of these elements?

4. What are the elements of the law of the sinner’s approach to God, and what the particulars of each?

5. What do we find as to the sanctuary, the victims of sacrifice, the mediator, the times and the work of the high priest under the old covenant?

6. Why does the author of the letter to the Hebrews discuss the tabernacle of Moses and not the Temple of Herod?

7. In what respects are Aaron and Christ alike?

8. In what particulars is Christ greater than Aaron? (See analysis.)

9. Who was Melchizedek, and how does he illustrate the order of Christ’s priesthood?

10. What are the fault of the first and second elements of the old covenant?

11. What are the faults of the third element of the same covenant?

12. From these faults what necessarily and inevitably followed, and what particular illustrations of this in the history of Gods people, Israel?

13. Sum up in a sweeping generality the superiority of the new covenant and show its importance.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

Ver. 1. Who is set on the right hand ] And is therefore a King, as well as a Priest, as was Melchisedec.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 13 .] Not only is Christ personally, as a High Priest, above the sons of Aaron, but the service and ordinances of the covenant to which his High Priesthood belongs are better than those of that to which they belong .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1 .] Now the principal matter ( most usually has this meaning. So Thuc. iv. 50, ( ) , . . .: Plato, Gorg. p. 453 A, ( ) . : Demosth. p. 815. 6, , , : and see many more examples in Bl. and Wetst., as in Thl., . The other meaning, sum total , would be apposite enough here, were the sense of . confined to Heb 8:1 , which has been treated of before: but Heb 8:2 contains new particulars, which cannot be said to be the sum of any things hitherto said. Besides, even were that condition fulfilled, this sense would require not the present participle , but the past, , or , and the participle itself would more probably be in the genitive, as in Isocr. Nicocl. p. 90, : Themist. de Pace, p. 230, .

is not, “ a principal matter,” as Lnem.: words thus thrown forward do not require the article to make them definite: cf. the examples given above) in the things which we are saying ( , ‘ upon :’ lying as it were, by, and among. This seems best; we might render it, as in Luk 16:26 , ‘ besides ,’ but the present part. seems to forbid rendering “the things already said,” as most Commentators and E. V. Hofmann, Schriftb. ii. 1, p. 287 f., adopts a curious arrangement: taking by itself, he understands after , and renders, “besides these, who are called high priests, we have,” &c. This is far-fetched and unnatural: for had borne any such meaning, we should certainly have had the predicate, which would thus be emphasized, expressed, and not understood: as in 1Co 8:5-6 , . . ., . . .): we have such an High Priest (emphasis on , which refers, not to what preceded, but to what is to follow, viz. . . .) who sat down (“In ch. Heb 1:3 , the sitting at the right hand of God was mentioned as a pre-eminence of the Son above the angels, who stand as ministering spirits before the presence of God: here, where the same is said of Christ as High Priest, Schlichting, Limborch, Klee, al. rightly remark that there is again a pre-eminence in over the Jewish high priests: for these, even when they entered the holiest place, did not sit down by the throne of God, but only stood before it for a moment: cf. ch. Heb 10:11-12 , . . .” Bleek. Lnem. calls this fanciful: but such distinctions are not surely to be overlooked altogether) on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens (better thus, than “of the majesty in the heavens,” . The last words, . , may belong not merely to ., but to the whole preceding, . . . . But see on ch. Heb 1:3 , where we have the very similar expression, : and where it seems simpler to join . with . If taken as above, it will be best for this reason also to drop the English definite art. before ‘ majesty ,’ and regard . as abstract. Hofmann (Schriftb. ii. 1. 289, and Weissagung u. Erfllung, ii. 190) strangely joins . with what follows, an order which hardly could be imagined in this Epistle, and wholly unnecessary for the sense, in which, Christ having been once asserted to have sat down in the heavens, it necessarily follows that the afterwards spoken of are . On the expression . . Thl. remarks, , , . The former and not the latter is evidently the sense here. All such mere periphrases of the adjectival predicate would be unworthy of the solemnity and dignity of the subject and style),

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

CHAP. Heb 5:1 to Heb 10:18 .] THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST: and this in several points of view. That which has before been twice by anticipation hinted at, ch. Heb 2:17 ; Heb 3:1 ; Heb 4:14-15 , is now taken up and thoroughly discussed. First of all, Heb 5:1-10 , two necessary qualifications of a high priest are stated, and Christ is proved to have fulfilled both: . Heb 5:1-3 , he must be taken from among men, capable, in respect of infirmity, of feeling for men , and, . Heb 5:4-10 , he must not have taken the dignity upon himself, but have been appointed by God .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

CHAP. Heb 7:1 to Heb 10:18 .] THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEK, SET FORTH IN ITS DISTINCTION FROM THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD: THE NEW COVENANT BROUGHT IN BY CHRIST, IN ITS DISTINCTION FROM THE OLD: AND THE FULL PROPITIATION WROUGHT BY HIM, IN DISTINCTION FROM THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICES FORMERLY OFFERED. And herein,

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Heb 8:1-6 . The idea of Christ’s priesthood, merely suggested in Heb 1:3 , expressly affirmed in Heb 2:17 , has been from Heb 4:14 onwards enlarged upon and illustrated. It has been shown that Christ is a priest, called by God to this office and proclaimed by God as High Priest. The superiority of His orders as belonging not to the hereditary Aaronic line, but as being “after the order of Melchisedek,” has also been exhibited. Passing now from the person and qualifications of the Priest, the author proceeds in chap. 8 to illustrate his greatness from a consideration of the place of His ministry. It is in heaven He is seated, a minister of the real tabernacle, not of that which had been pitched by Moses as an image and symbol of it. The priesthood to which God called Him must be a heavenly ministry, for were He on earth He would not even be a priest, not to say a High Priest. His ministry, therefore, being in the heaven of eternal realities, is a “better ministry,” in accordance with the fact that he is mediating a “better covenant”.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Heb 8:1 . , not, as A.V., “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum” ( cf. Grotius “post tot dicta haec esto summa”), but with Field “Now to crown our present discourse” or with Rendall “Now to crown what we are saying”. is used to denote either the sum , as of numbers added up from below to the head of the column where the result is set down, and in this sense it is here understood by Erasmus, Calvin and A.V.; or, the chief point as of a cope-stone or capital of a pillar, as in Thucyd., Heb 6:6 . , , . . . Other examples in Field’s O.N., to which add Plutarch, De Educ. Puer. , 8, . This latter sense alone satisfies the present passage, and also agrees better with for must here be taken in a quasi-local sense, as Vaughan paraphrases “as a capital upon the things which are being said as a thought (or fact) forming the headstone of the argument we add this”. Cf. Luk 16:26 . That is in the present is manifestly no objection to this rendering. The absence of the article before . does not involve, as Lnemann supposes, that the writer means “ a main point” among others, for such words do not in similar situations require the article, cf. Demosth., p. 924, . is most easily construed as a nominative absolute ( cf. Buttmann, p. 381) not, as Bruce, “an accusative in apposition with the following sentence”. “so great a High Priest have we as took His seat (or, is set down) on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens”. , not, as Farrar and Rendall, “retrospective,” although as contrasted with this is its proper meaning; but here, as frequently in classics [Soph., Antig. , 691, , and Demosth., p. 743, followed also by ] it finds its explanation in [ weist naturlich nicht rckwrts sondern vorwrts auf den dasselbe erluternden Relativsatz. Weiss.] The greatness of the High Priest is manifested by the place where He ministers. His greatness is revealed in his sitting down at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens. Westcott thinks that the thought of a High Priest who “is King as well as priest is clearly the prominent thought of the sentence”. And Moulton on Heb 10:12 says: “The words ‘sat down’ (Psa 110:1 ), add to the priestly imagery that of kingly state”. But undoubtedly Weiss is right in saying “Durch den Relativsatz soll nicht auf die knigliche Herrlichkeit Christi hingewiesen werden”. The writer means to magnify Christ’s priesthood by reminding his readers that it is exercised “in the heavens”; as he says in Heb 9:24 he has passed into heaven itself, the very presence of God and eternal reality, the ultimate, highest possible. On the words cf. note on Heb 1:3 . is considered by Buttmann to be one of those aorists which stand for the perfect (see his instructive remarks on the aversion to the perfect, Gram. , p. 198); but this may be doubted, as the sitting is not mentioned as the permanent attitude, but merely as suggesting the exaltation of the High Priest, and the finality of His purification of sins, as in Heb 1:3 . Augustine, De Fide et symbolo , 7, warns against the suggested anthropomorphism of the words “sitteth at the right hand” and says “ ad dextram intelligendum est dictum esse, in summa beatitudine, ubi justitia et pax et gaudium est”. Here, however, it is rather Christ’s majesty that is suggested, and as Pearson on this clause of the Creed says, “The belief of Christ’s glorious session is most necessary in respect of the immediate consequence which is his most gracious intercession,” rather his availing intercession. Cf. Hooker, Book V., chap. 55.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Hebrews Chapter 8

The truth of Christ as high priest, most important for the Christian and especially for such as had been Hebrews, has thus far been richly unfolded accorded to the order of Melchizedek, but not without a glance at its exercise after the type of Aaron, yet even here immeasurably superior even to frequent contrast. This however demands further development, and first as connected with “a better covenant which was established upon better promises.” The contrast of the first or legal covenant with a second and new one, never to grow old or vanish away, occupies our present chapter for the most part. But it opens with a reproduction of what has been laid down already under a brief heading.

“Now, as a summary on what is being said, we have such a high priest who sat down on [the] right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens, minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, not man” (verses 1, 2).

The glory of Christ’s person, Son of God and Son of man, is developed in Heb 1 and 2 and in both with His work (not only for purging us, but) to vindicate God, annul the power of evil, reconcile all things, succour the tried, and bring many sons to glory. This is the admirable introduction, followed by His office of Apostle and High Priest for those who are pilgrims passing through the wilderness of the world to the rest of God, as we see in Heb 3:4 ; and it is precisely to such, no longer in Egypt but with Canaan in view, that the priesthood of Christ applies, as is shown in 4, 5, 6, along with the hindrances by the way, the awful peril of going back, and the grounds and motives for the full assurance of hope to the end. Heb 7 is an elaborate proof from first to last of the Melchizedek priesthood, fulfilled not yet in its exercise but in its order in Christ, altogether and incontestably beyond that of Aaron.

If therefore a Hebrew Christian were in danger of pining after a Levitical high priest as drawing near to God for a moment on behalf of the ancient people of God, could he fail to see the infinite superiority of Christ in this very respect? It is not that Israel had one, and we Christians have not. Their own scriptures attest another and far higher coming, mysteriously bound up with the Messiah, to which their God was pledged by an oath, and this to abide for ever. There stands the promise in Psa 110 , and now it is beyond cavil accomplished in Jesus dead, risen, and glorified. It is inexcusable unbelief to evade this word of God. What a blessing to receive it as our assured portion in God’s grace! “We have such a high priest” to maintain us consistently with all that God is and loves as fully revealed, and with Christ’s work already wrought and perfect, to sustain us in our weakness, to sympathise with our every trial and pang. His position declares His unique and incomparable dignity, His intimate nearness to God in glory. His seat is “at the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens,” a stronger statement even than what was given at the starting-point of the Epistle (Heb 1:3 ). “Throne” is added now, and in the “heavens” take the place of “on high.” Could the most prejudiced Israelite fail to perceive the superior dignity and efficacy of such a high priest far above Aaron or the most favoured of his line? Nor could he deny the absolute authority of the scripture which reveals the divine intention now carried out in it. Is it for Jews to doubt the glory of the Messiah or the blessing achieved and secured to those that are His?

There has Christ taken His seat. It is calm and permanent intimacy where no believer can dispute the greatness, and the power, and the glory, any more than the love, and tender interest, and unfailing support. – He is “minister of the holies,” in no merely typical sense to bring truth down palpably to infantine minds. It is the house of heavenly worship and divine glory in its fullest reality and grandeur. Therein Christ ministers according to the nicest consideration of the living God, as the sole person suited to Him and to us equally and in perfection, true God and real man, who obeyed unto death (yea, of the cross), that God’s honour should be retrieved and His love meet with a love like His own who died for our sins when we were as powerless as ungodly, and thus again proved divine love to the uttermost no less than holiness and righteousness. Such is the minister of the holies, that God in the heavens and the saints on the earth should be adequately conciliated, even in the time of our present infirmity and exposure to temptation.

Thus the high priest we boast is exactly in keeping with “the tabernacle which the Lord pitched, not man.” For less and other than He would not suffice for the majesty of God, or for His grace. And as “the Father loveth the Son and hath given all things into his hand,” so does He delight in having Him ever nearest to Himself, that He may give us to enjoy His own ineffable satisfaction in Christ’s laying down His life that He might take it again (not merely laying it down for the sheep, Joh 10:15 compared with 17); so too in all the efficacy of His office maintaining us in harmony with Himself in heavenly glory, notwithstanding our pitiable weakness and the rude storms and hostility of the world we pass through.

We have noticed already that the ground of the Epistle is the wilderness, not the land; and so here is the “tabernacle,” rather than the temple which would suit the rest actually come, not the pilgrimage. This is full of instruction which Christendom has overlooked and abandoned. Great is the spiritual gain for such as seize the truth by divine teaching and are practically faithful. For nature chafes at the walk of faith and craves what is “settled” or “established” (2Sa 7 ), on the specious plea that the world is Jehovah’s and the fulness of it, for any present enjoyment as well as to adorn His sanctuary; as the royal and rich adorn for themselves a house of cedars. Whereas in truth since redemption to this day He had walked in a tent and in a tabernacle, nor had ever spoken a word to any, saying, Why build ye not Me a house of cedars? This is reserved for His Son, the Man of peace, when the sharp sword proceeding out of His mouth shall have smitten the nations in revolt, and the Man whose name is the Branch shall grow up out of His place and build the temple of Jehovah. Even He shall build the temple of Jehovah; and He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon His throne; and He shall be a priest upon His throne; and the counsel of peace shall be between them both (Zec 6 ). It is still the tribulation and kingdom and patience in Jesus, not yet Himself come to reign in power and glory over the earth. We are nothing if not heavenly, as He is for us in the heavens, minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, not man.

Even the tabernacle of old needed its gold and silver and precious things, as the Levitical high priest his varied jewels on his shoulders and breast. Ours is the true tabernacle on high where all is the glory of God and of His Son in the power of redemption. There created ornaments have no place. There Christ ministers, and thither we approach by faith, looking not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal. And no less than the Holy Spirit of God is given us as God’s children to make this access real and full of peace and joy. How sorrowful for any thus blessed to “turn again to the weak and beggarly elements” of earthly sights and shows and seasons like Israel, or to conceive that corruptible things as silver and gold can be acceptable in the hour now come, when God must be worshipped, if at all, in spirit and truth – worshipped also as the Father, Christ’s Father and our Father, His God and our God.

The immeasurable superiority of Christ as High-Priest will appear in Heb 9:10 . with the fullest evidence. Here the Holy Ghost only lays down the principle in a few words that His is a real active function and not a mere title, His heavenly glory only giving additional force to His functions.

“For every high priest is constituted to offer both gifts and sacrifices: wherefore [it is] necessary that this one also have something to offer. If then* he were upon earth, he would not even be a priest, since there are those* that offer the gifts according to* law, such as serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, even as Moses is divinely warned when about to complete the tabernacle: for See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shown to thee in the mountain. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as he is also mediator of a better covenant, such as [since it] is enacted upon better promises” (verses 3-6).

The Rec. Text has , but the critics on ancient authority: so also is rightly dropped, and the article before .

Thus the very aim of high-priesthood is presentation of what is acceptable to God and needed in the highest degree by man. Ministry of the word is essentially different, the communication to man of what God reveals. As the former characterised the Jewish system, so does the latter Christianity, and, it may be added, most distinctively the gospel of God’s grace proclaimed in the whole creation that is under heaven. Ministry of the church also could only be when the church was called into being Here it is not in question, any more than the “great mystery” of which it is part.

But there is another consideration, to which the type in the Book of Numbers gives marked and repeated expression (Num 3:9 ; Num 8:19 ; Num 18:6 , Num 18:7 ), which ought not to be overlooked. The Levites as a whole, whatever their distinctions of ministry, were given to Aaron and his sons; they were wholly, absolutely, given to serve Aaron on behalf of the children of Israel. Thus was the ministry of the tabernacle made essentially dependent on the Aaronic priesthood; and it had no place or propriety otherwise. The outward service entirely hung for its value and acceptance on the inner worship. The tribe of Levi was joined to Aaron and ministered to him, and had no other reason of existence. Undoubtedly the priesthood being now changed, of necessity a new change of law takes place. But the principle abides. After the likeness of Melchizedek there stands up a different priest, who has been made after the power of an indissoluble life, who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, not man. All real service, as it flows from the Lord, so depends on Him in the sanctuary and refers to Him there. Otherwise it becomes false, if the source be made human or the motives be of the world. The Lord can be no party to His own dishonour. How all-important for His servants to test themselves by what is not merely an O.T. type but the plainly revealed truth of the apostolic Epistles! The Holy Spirit is the power of all true ministry; but He works in us that we may serve the Lord Jesus, and there is the same Lord whatever may be the diversities of ministrations. On Him within the rent veil hangs all the worth and efficacy of what is ministered here below.

He who in personal dignity and official honour surpasses both Aaron and Melchizedek did not fall short in what He had to offer. He offered up what neither one nor other could on their part, what He only could – He offered up Himself (Heb 7:27 ); and it was once for all, for therein alone was the perfection of gift and sacrifice, as God marked His acceptance of all by seating Him at His own right hand in the heavens. It is no question here of propitiation but of His service in the true tabernacle. Propitiation was exceptional, and in it the high priest represented the people as well as his own house. None but he could do it, as the type of Christ lifted up from the earth on the cross; yet it was not his regular priestly service as setting forth the Lord’s ministry now on high.

“If then he were on earth, he would not even be a priest, since there are those that offer the gifts according to law, such as serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things,” etc. (verses 4, 5). Christ is characteristically to the Christian the heavenly Priest. On earth He could have no sacerdotal place: God had called Aaron and his sons in succession to minister and to serve therein; and, when the Epistle to the Hebrews was written, such there were still offering the gifts according to law. Christ’s priesthood was wholly different, of sovereign grace and exercised in glory, as was due to His person and His work, when the first man had fully displayed his failure, sin, and ruin, in the rejection of the promised Messiah, the Son of God, come in divine love to bless. But the chosen people, priests, and rulers would have none of Him; and in His death by lawless hands propitiation was wrought; and the risen Christ entered that sanctuary on high, where ever living He alone maintains His own in their weakness here below according to the efficacy of His sacrifice which has made purification of their sins. As yet the earthly Aaronic priesthood carried on their service, which was but a representation and shadow of the heavenly things, “according as Moses is oracularly told when about to make the tabernacle. For See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shown to thee in the mountain.”

In Christ all is real and enduring, as it is divinely and humanly perfect, the person, the work, and the priesthood, as indeed all else. No one beforehand could have conceived any one of them; yet when the facts came out, he who believes is thenceforth satisfied that not one of them could be otherwise, if God were to be glorified and man blessed now and evermore. A human priesthood on earth for Christian people is apostasy from the truth of the Son perfected for ever and ministering high according to power of indissoluble life; it is to rehabilitate the defunct Aaronic order, disannulled because of its weak and unprofitable nature; it is virtually to deny the very gospel of salvation which announces to all who believe that the blood of Jesus at once blots out their sins, and brings themselves nigh to God in a constant nearness, far beyond what the sons of Aaron and Aaron himself ever enjoyed (Heb 10:19 ). And if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life. For He is able to save completely those that approach through Him unto God, always living as He is to make intercession for them.

We see the importance of Aaron’s intervention in the Pentateuch when the people and his own sons had sinned (Lev 10 ; Lev 16 ), to say nothing of the beautiful type of the budding priestly rod which grace conferred on him to bring through the desert those for whom Moses’ authoritative rod could only have assigned and executed death. “But now hath he (Christ) obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as he is also mediator of a better covenant, the which (or, such as) is enacted upon better promises” (verse 6). Of this covenant we shall hear more and of its promises in the quotation from the O.T. which follows.

The object of the Holy Spirit is to prove the inferiority of the first covenant, to which Jewish unbelief was clinging, as pertinaciously as their fathers of old were prone to abandon it for any idol. Such alas! is the selfwill of man, from which no favours from God deliver, short of redemption and a new life in Christ. But as in Heb 7 we had the Levitical priest set aside by One after the order of Melchizedek according to Psa 110 , so Heb 8 with no less conclusiveness sets before us a new covenant promised in the unerring word.

“For, if that first had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. For, finding fault, he saith to them, Behold, days come, saith Jehovah, and I will consummate a new covenant as regards the house of Israel, and as regards the house of Judah” (verses 7, 8).

It is in vain for men to reason in an abstract way against the word of God. It was He that inaugurated the covenant of Sinai which confronted the self-confidence of fallen man and, if it had been used aright, would have convicted him of his evil and compelled him to look to Christ, the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. But Israel, like other natural men, perverted the law to make out a spurious righteousness of their own, and to cloak their sins under the smoke of their sacrifices; the end of which things is death, as the Jews were soon to prove even outwardly.

God is free to set aside the old and bring in the new. This He never does arbitrarily, but in goodness, wisdom, and holiness worthy of Himself. But the idea of absolute law is a common delusion of Judaism which some even of their Rabbis repudiated and disproved from Scripture, though Christian theologians, even such a man as Hooker (Eccl. Pol. i. 2, Keble’s ed. i. 204), have not failed to defend and use it controversially. But it is false, the fruit of man’s pride and perversity. God is sovereign: the blessed resource of His nature, to vindicate His name when wronged and insulted, no less than to deliver guilty man from his own evil and Satan’s power. And never was absolute law more mischievously employed than now by sceptics who avail themselves of theological errors to promote their own darker and more deadly unbelief, while concealing the source from which they derived their poisoned shaft. For they reduce God to nature, and insist on absolute law to deny miracle, prophecy, and revelation generally in any true sense, whatever the fair words in which the milder men deceive themselves and the unwary. But the idea is really heathen (and so Hooker quotes Homer, Merc. Trismegistus, Plato, and the Stoics), however much it delighted Jews and Christians, to say nothing of free-thinkers. For God is light and love, not law, and whatever He may have imposed on the creature, He left Himself entire liberty to work in sovereign grace for good; as He could not but judge what was inconsistent with His nature and majesty, and what rebelled against Him. To send His only-begotten Son to die is not law, any more than through the faith of Him to save sinners that deserve condemnation. It is grace, but through righteousness not ours but His in Christ.

Hence God, as He saw fit to bring in the first covenant, which condemned the sins of the first man, or more definitely of guilty Israel, is no less free to promise a new covenant, bringing out “Jehovah’s righteousness” in the Messiah, the Second man, by whom He can afford to pardon and give the knowledge of Himself to His people, however undeserving. How sad that those who need to the uttermost such saving mercy, should turn a deaf ear and prefer their own foolish reasonings to His word who cannot lie, and who is a Saviour God no less than a judge!

But the Jew objects, so long alas! the leader of the world’s incredulity, that it is the gospel which so proclaims; and this they believe not. Nay, son of Abraham, hear Your own acknowledged and inspired prophet. It is Jeremiah that speaks, full of sorrow over Judah’s apostasy from Jehovah, on which he pronounced speedy and severe judgment. But he divinely comforts by the vision of the final and everlasting restoration in His grace, people and land blessed under the true Beloved their King. He who had unsparingly chastised them for their iniquities, He will rejoice to bless both Israel’s house and Judah’s house as never of old, and will assuredly plant them in the land then truly glorious with His whole heart and with His whole soul. “Behold, days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. For thus saith the LORD: David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt-offerings, and to kindle meal-offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. And the word of the LORD came unto Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the LORD, If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season, then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne: and with the Levites the priests, my ministers. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me. Moreover the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying, Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The two families which the LORD hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? Thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the LORD, If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth, then will I cast away the seed of Jacob and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them” (Jer 33:14-26 ).

From a previous chapter (Jer 31 ) of this very portion our Epistle quotes. Its bearing on the future and still unaccomplished blessing of all Israel that shall be spared in the latter day is direct, unambiguous, tender, and beautiful.

“Behold, days are coming, saith the LORD, and (or, that) I will consummate a new covenant in respect of the house of Israel, and in respect of the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in [a] day of my taking their hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt, for they continued not in my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the LORD” (verses 8, 9).

Equally vain is the dream that the church, or the Christian, is here contemplated. On every sound principle of interpretation the same people, and in its divided houses, is reserved for future blessing, whose iniquities the prophet bewailed and denounced. The truth always suffers by tampering with its integrity or by ignorance. Israel only had the first covenant; Israel by grace will have the second. Israel lost their privileges and land under the old; Israel will be restored and blessed more than ever and for ever in their land under the new covenant.

Meanwhile we, once Gentiles, who had neither the adoption, nor the glory, nor the covenants, nor the law-giving, nor the promises – we are called by sovereign grace in the gospel to privileges higher far as God’s children, and members of Christ’s body wherein is neither Jew nor Gentile, blessed with every spiritual blessing in heavenly places in Christ, as Israel will be blessed in their land, when this age gives way to the new age of Christ displayed in power and glory.

But the death of Christ, which laid the basis for the gospel and also for the church united to Him glorified on high, is the ground of the new covenant also; as the Lord emphatically shows in the institution of His Supper (Mat 26:28 ; Mar 14:24 ; Luk 22:20 ; 1Co 11:25 ), and as the apostle characterises the ministry of the gospel in spirit, not in letter. Hence the application here and in Heb 10 is as full of comfort to the believing Hebrew, as 1Pe 2:10 in applying Hos 2:23 . The believer now anticipates all the blessing as far as the higher calling of Christianity admits of it. The earthly part awaits the earthly people; and the days are not yet come for the chosen nation as a whole to be blessed according to the strict and full terms of the prophecy in their own land. Heaven is to us what Palestine will be to Israel, and they will be seen there under Messiah.; as the Christian Jews are now to walk as pilgrims and strangers, waiting for an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and unfading reserved in heaven for them. Israel, not we, are to be sown to Jehovah in the earth; and this not before the day when Jehovah answers the heavens, and the heavens answer the earth.

But it is instructive to consider the terms of the new covenant as here cited from the prophet, though from the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew, and not without change even from that.

“For this [is] the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the LORD, Giving my laws into their mind, I will also write them upon their hearts: and I will be to them for God, and they shall be to me for people. And they shall not teach each his [fellow-] citizen and each his brother, crying, Know the LORD, because all shall know me from little one unto great of them” (verses 10, 11).

The essence of the new covenant is that Jehovah undertakes its accomplishment. The first covenant could not but fail, because it depended, not on God but on the Israelite; and the Israelite was already a sinful man. This the law made evident. As long as men only hear, and speak, and judge others (perhaps satisfactorily to themselves), they may keep up a claim of their own righteousness. It is quite another thing when they strive seriously to obey. Then they find out that they are without strength, enemies of God, and ungodly. Christ comes from God to meet the need, giving them life on the faith of Himself, and dying for their sins that they may be remitted of God, never to be remembered more.

But while there was evident propriety, in writing to Hebrew confessors, to quote from the inspired words of Jeremiah, it is an error to assume that the gospel as preached now is the fulfilment of the prediction. It is perfectly legitimate to apply the words to privileges conferred by the gospel without denying that the prophet has in view the days when the house of Israel and the house of Judah shall alike be blessed under the reign of the Messiah; whereas during gospel times the Gentile is as open to the call of grace as the Jew, the cross having proved that all sinned and come short of the glory of God. There is now no difference any more in sinners than in indiscriminate grace. Salvation is preached to them both alike.

But in the days which strictly the prophecy contemplates, God will own His ancient people again, and never more shall the seed of Israel cease from being a nation before Jehovah for ever. In those days shall the city be built to Jehovah from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goah. And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse-gate toward the east, shall be holy unto Jehovah; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down, any more for ever. It is the restoration of the people and the land and the city, when Messiah reigns on His own throne of which the reader can find more in Isa 11:12 , 35, 65, 66; Jer 3:16-18 , Jer 30 , Jer 32:37-44 , Jer 33 ; Ezek. 40-48; and in the minor prophets, especially Zech. 12 – 14. Allegory is vain as to all this.

Application of part to gospel times is not denied; for grace now reigns through righteousness by Jesus Christ our Lord, as then a King shall reign in righteousness. But judgment shall return to righteousness at that epoch, and the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness so as they never do now. All the earth shall be filled with the glory of Jehovah in that day, which it never can be in this day. To the believer now the principle of the new covenant applies, as far as his soul is concerned. but Israel will enjoy its terms directly and unqualifiedly, when the Branch of righteousness, crown to David, shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land, and all nations are blessed in Him.

The first blessing here specified is that Jehovah not only gives His laws into the mind, but also writes them upon the heart. It is in pointed contrast with the first covenant written on stones. The law as a system was external, and was characterised by an elaborate ritualism, visible and palpable, when anointed priest, Levite, ruler, and ordinary Israelite had his defined place, with meats and drinks and divers washings and carnal ordinances, as well as specific gifts and sacrifices which could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience. The blood of bulls and goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, could not do more than sanctify to the purifying of the flesh. The laws were outside the Israelite; they were not written on his heart. Far different is the work of grace now. God gives them into the mind and writes them on the heart of every believer. There is for the Christian a renewing of the mind, and the love of God shed abroad in the heart ‘by the Holy Spirit given to him. The principle of the new covenant is not only verified but in a richer way spiritually than Israel can have by-and-by, whatever their wondrous privileges in the exclusion of Satan and the presence of the Christ, and the whole creation delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God then reigning with Him.

Next, “I will be to them for God, and they shall be to me for people.” As this will be Israel’s portion in that day, so it is ours now. More yet is ours, because we can say by the Spirit “Abba, Father,” Christ’s Father and our Father, Christ’s God and our God. As before, it will be no longer an imposed ordinance or a possibly vain title of relationship. All now is by His grace made real, intrinsic, and abiding. All the blessing that is involved in what God is to His people is secured, as His people are secured in their due place toward Him. But we can add our Father, though this did not fall within the design of the Epistle to unfold as we find it elsewhere.

Further, “And they shall not teach each his [fellow-] citizen, and each his brother, saying, Know the LORD, because all shall know me from little one unto great of them.” This is another privilege in which we more than anticipate the blessings of Jehovah’s manifested kingdom. The Son of God is come and has given us an understanding that we may know Him that is true. And no wonder; for the Christian has eternal life in the Son, as he has also the Holy Spirit dwelling in him, both capacity and power that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. So it will be when the new covenant is established with both the houses of Israel. “In that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness. . . . They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.” As it is elsewhere written, which also explains it, “All thy children shall be taught of Jehovah; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” Hence it will be no question of teaching, each his fellow-citizen, and each his brother. The salvation which Israel enjoys in that day so illustrates the scripture, that there will be no need of objective knowledge ( ) for the ignorant, because all shall have intrinsically possessed conscious knowledge ( ) from little even to great of them. The universality of the result testifies that God it is who ensures it for under human teaching, however good, we see every degree of proficiency and at best knowledge far from perfect. Compare also Joe 2:28 . The Holy Spirit gives understanding and power.

Here too in Christianity we may observe remarkable analogy. It is in addressing the babes () of God’s family that the apostle John declares “ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. I have not written to you, because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.” This is of course true of the “fathers” and “young men” in Christ; but it is said expressly to those who most needed such encouragement, exposed as they were to seducers who boasted of their knowledge and undermined Christ “But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him” (1Jn 2:20 , 1Jn 2:21 , 1Jn 2:27 ). Teachers there are, and those that rule or guide, while Christ is on the throne of God; but they should be the first and the most in earnest to maintain the privileges of the simplest believer.

But there is a further and most needed gift of mercy to which God stands pledged in the new covenant. This too the apostle does not fail to cite as now applied to the believer; though to the Israelite it is set in the last place, whereas the Christian enjoys it as a starting-point, as we may see throughout the Acts of the Apostles.

“Because I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins* I will remember in no wise more” (verse 12). It will be noticed that the words “and their lawlessnesses” disappear. They are not in the Septuagint any more than the original Hebrew, which indeed has also the singular form, where the Greek gives the plural. It would seem that the words in question were inserted from Heb 10:17 , where beyond doubt they occur, but without “their unrighteousnesses.” In any case grace meets the once guilty but now renewed souls, and comforts those who feel and own their sinfulness with the assurance of divine forgiveness.

*A few of the most ancient MSS. and Vv. support this as the true text, many later copies adding “and their lawlessnesses” as in Text. Rec.

How different the terms of the first covenant, even when Moses went up on high the second time, and saw not Jehovah’s glory but His goodness pass before him, and heard Him proclaim Jehovah, Jehovah El, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy unto thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but by no means clearing the guilty, visiting, etc.! Now it is precisely clearance of conscience, or guilt, that the awakened soul longs for and seeks from God; and what the law could not do, God does in the gospel by virtue of Christ made sin for us. So our Lord spoke and dealt with Zacchaeus, chief publican though he was, and so most offensive in Pharisaic eyes. But the rejected Messiah, the Son of man, came to seek and to save that which is lost. His coming and work of expiation deposit an infinite fund of mercy toward the guilty, which God in the gospel uses to clear and justify all who believe.

“Merciful” here is not mere pity but “propitious.” Undoubtedly unrighteousnesses are hateful in God’s sight and abhorrent to His nature; so too they become to a soul when born again. For as that which is born of the flesh is flesh, so that which is born of the Spirit is spirit, as our Lord ruled. The old nature does not become new but remains evil and never to be allowed. But a new one is given, which finds not relief only or even pardon but deliverance in the death and resurrection of the Saviour. Here we transcend the terms and ideas of the new covenant which go no farther than God’s mercy in remission and remembrance of sin no more at all. This the Christian has, but in a far surpassing mode and measure. For he is entitled, as we know from other scriptures, to know that he died with Christ to sin, as set forth even in his baptism; that he is risen with Christ, and seated in Him in heavenly places. But as this pre-eminently exalted aspect of the believer’s present blessing is not in the most distant way couched in the promises of the new covenant, so it nowhere appears in the Epistle to the Hebrews. And this rightly; for the Holy Spirit is therein drawing out the force of the O.T., and at most what was latent in it, rather than going on to the wholly unrevealed fulness alike of Christ as head, of the church as His body, and of our individual Christian standing too.

An important inference is now drawn from a word. “In saying ‘new,’ he hath antiquated the first [covenant]: now what is being antiquated and growing aged [is] near disappearing” (verse 13). It is in vain therefore for Jews or other men to reason abstractly for the perpetuity of God’s law: His word has already decided the question. The prophet Jeremiah declares in the Spirit that Jehovah will make a new covenant, and an everlasting one, with all Israel. This, as is here shown antiquates the first or legal covenant. The new one is evidently not of man’s will or weakness, but of God’s gracious power working in His people. And those who believe now, whether Jews or Gentiles, anticipate Israel for whom it was made, but to whom it is not yet extended. But it is sure to Israel in due time, for the mouth of Jehovah has said it.

Hence it is added that what is being antiquated (not “decayeth” as in the A.V.) and growing aged is near disappearing. The cross fulfilled and annulled the legal covenant. the destruction of Jerusalem and of its temple was its grave.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

Hebrews

THE ENTHRONED SERVANT CHRIST

Heb 8:1-2

A LITTLE consideration will show that we have in these words two. strikingly different representations of our Lord’s heavenly state. In the one He is regarded as seated ‘on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty.’ In the other He is regarded as being, notwithstanding that session, a ‘minister of the sanctuary’; performing priestly functions there. This combination of two such opposite ideas is the very emphasis and force of the passage. The writer would have us think of the royal repose of Jesus as full of activity for us; and of His heavenly activity as consistent with deepest repose. Resting He works; working He rests. Reigning He serves; serving He reigns. So my purpose is simply to deal with these two representations, and to seek to draw from them and from their union the lessons that they teach. I. Note, then, first, the seated Christ. ‘We have a high priest who’ – to translate a little more closely – ‘has taken His seat on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.’ ‘Majesty’ is a singular expression or periphrasis for God. It is used once again in this letter, and seems probably to have been derived by the writer from the Rabbinical usage of his times, when, as we know, a certain misplaced, and yet most natural, reverential or perhaps superstitious awe, made men unwilling to name the mighty name, and inclined rather to fall back upon other forms of speech to express it. So the writer here, addressing Hebrews, steeped in Rabbinical thought, takes one of their own words and speaks of God as the ‘Majesty in the heavens’; emphasising the idea of sovereignty, power, illimitable magnificence. ‘At the right hand’ of this throned personal abstraction, ‘the Majesty,’ sits the Man Christ Jesus. Now the teaching, both of this Epistle to the Hebrews and of the whole New Testament, in reference to the state of our exalted Lord, is that His manhood is elevated to this supreme dignity. The Eternal Word who was with the Father in the beginning, before all the worlds, went back to ‘the glory which He had with the Father.’ But the new thing was that there went, too, that human nature which Jesus Christ indissolubly united with divinity in the mystery of the lowliness of His earthly life. An ancient prophet foretold that ‘in the Messianic times there should spring from the cut-down stump of the royal house of Israel a sucker which, feeble at first, and in strange contrast with the venerable ruin from which it arose, should grow so swiftly, so tall and strong, that it should become an ensign for the nations of the world; and then, he adds, ‘and His resting-place shall be glory.’ There was a deeper meaning in the words, I suppose, than the prophet knew, and we shall not be chargeable with forcing New Testament ideas upon Old Testament words which are a world too narrow for them, if we say that there is at least shadowed the great thought that the lowly manhood, sprung from the humbled royal stock, shall grow up as a root out of a dry ground, without form or comeliness, and be lifted to find its rest and dwelling-place in the very central blaze of the divine glory. We have a High Priest who, in His manhood, in which He is knit to us, hath taken His seat on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. Then, again, remember that whilst in such representations as this we have to do with realities set forth under the symbols of time and place, there is yet a profound sense in which that session of Jesus Christ at the right hand of God proclaims both the localisation of His present corporeal humanity and the ubiquity of His presence. For what is ‘the right hand of God’? What is it but the manifestation of His energies, the forthputting of His power? And where is that but everywhere, where He makes Himself known? Wheresoever divine activity is manifested, there is Jesus Christ. But yet, though this be true, and though it may be difficult for us to hold the balance and mark the dividing line between symbol and reality, we are not to forget that the facts of Christ’s wearing now a real though glorified body, and of His visible corporeal ascension, and the promise of a similar visible corporeal return to earth at the end of the days seem to require the belief that, above all the heavens, and filling all things, as that exalted manhood is, there is yet what we must call a place, wherein that glorified body now abides. And thus both the awful majestic idea of omnipresence, and the no less majestic idea of the present localisation in place of the glorified Christ, are taught us in the text. And what is the deepest meaning of it all? What means that majestic session at ‘the right hand of the throne’? Before that throne ‘angels veil their faces.’ If in action, they stand; if in adoration, they fall before Him. Creatures bow prostrate. Who is He that, claiming and exercising a power which in a creature is blasphemy and madness, takes His seat in that awful presence? Other words of Scripture represent the same idea in a still more wonderful form when they speak of ‘the throne of God and of the Lamb,’ and when He Himself speaks from heaven of Himself as ‘set down with My Father on His throne.’ If we translate the symbol into colder words, it means that deep repose, which, like the divine rest after creation, is not for recuperation of exhausted powers, but is the sign of an accomplished purpose and achieved task, a share in the sovereignty of heaven, and the wielding of the energies of deity – rest, royalty, and power belong now to the Man sitting at the right hand of the throne of God. II. Note, secondly, the servant Christ. A minister of the sanctuary; says my text. Now the word employed here for ‘minister,’ and which I have ventured variously to translate servant, means one who discharges some public official act of service either to God or man, and it is especially, though by no mean, exclusively, employed in reference to the service of a ministering priest. The allusion in the second portion of my text is plainly enough to the ritual of the great day of atonement, on which the high priest once a year went into the holy place; and there, in the presence of God throned between the cherubim, made atonement for the sins of the people, by the offering of the blood of the sacrifice. Thus, says our writer, that throned and sovereign Man who, in token of His accomplished work, and in the participation of deity, sits hard by the throne of God, is yet ministering at one and the same time within the veil, and presenting the might of His own sacrifice. Put away the metaphor and we just come to this, a truth which is far too little dwelt upon in this generation, that the work which Jesus Christ accomplished on the Cross, all sufficient and eternal as it was in the range and duration of its efficacy, is not all His work. The past, glorious as it is, needs to be supplemented by the present, no less wonderful and glorious, in which Jesus Christ within the veil, in manners all unknown to us, by His presence there in the power of the sacrifice that He has made, brings down upon men the blessings that flow from that sacrifice. It is not enough that the offering should be made. The deep teaching, the whole reasonableness of which it does not belong to us here and now to apprehend, but which faith will gladly grasp as a fact, though reason may not be able to answer the question of the why or how, tells us that the interceding Christ must necessarily take up the work of the suffering Christ. Dear brethren, our salvation is not so secured by the death upon the Cross as to make needless the life beside the throne. Jesus that died is the Christ ‘that is risen again, who is even at, the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.’ But, beyond that, may I remind you that my text, though not in its direct bearing, yet in its implication, suggests to us other ways in which the rest of Christ is full of activity. ‘I am among you as He that serveth’ is true for the heavenly glory of the exalted Lord quite as much as for the lowly humiliation of His life upon earth. And no more really did He stoop to serve when, laying aside His garments, He girded Himself with the towel, and wiped the disciples’ feet, than He does to-day when, having resumed the garments of His glorious divinity, and having seated Himself in His place of authority above us, He comes forth, according to the wonderful condescension of His own parable, to serve His servants who have entered into rest, and those also who still toil. The glorified Christ is a ministering Christ. In us, on us, for us He works, in all the activities of His exalted repose, as truly and more mightily than He did when here He helped the weaknesses and healed the sicknesses, and soothed the sorrows and supplied the wants, and washed the feet, of a handful of poor men. He has gone up on high, hut in His rest He works. He is on the throne, but in His royalty He serves. He is absent from us, but His power is with us. The world’s salvation was accomplished when He cried, ‘It is finished’! But ‘My Father worketh hitherto, and I work,’ and they who saw Him ascend into the heavens, and longingly followed the diminishing form as it moved slowly upward, with hands extended in benediction, as they turned away, when there was nothing more to be seen but the cloud, ‘went everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following.’ So then, let us ever hold fast, inextricably braided together, the rest and the activity, the royalty and the service, of the glorified Son of Man. III. And now, in the last place, let me point to one or two of the practical lessons of such thoughts as these. They have a bearing on the three categories of past, present, future. For the past a seal, for the present a strength, for the future a prophecy. For the past a seal. If it be true – and there are few historical facts the evidence for which is more solid or valid – that Jesus Christ really went up into the heavens, and abode there, then that is God’s last and most emphatic declaration, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’ The trail of light that He leaves behind Him, as He is borne onwards, falls on the Cross, and tells us that it is the centre of the world’s history. For what can be greater, what can afford a firmer foundation for us sinful men to rest our confidence upon, than the death of which the recompense was that the Man who died sits on the throne of the universe? Brethren! an ascended Christ forces us to believe in an atoning Christ. No words can exaggerate, nor can any faith exalt too highly, or trust too completely, the sacrifice which led straight to that exaltation. Read the Cross by the light of the throne. Let Olivet interpret Calvary, and we shall understand what Calvary means. Again, this double representation of my text is a strength for the present. I know of nothing that is mighty enough to draw men’s desires and fix solid reasonable thought and love upon that awful future, except the belief that Christ is there. I think that the men who have most deeply realised what a solemn, and yet what a vague and impalpable thing the conception of immortal life beyond the grave is, will be most ready to admit that the thought is cold, cheerless, full of blank misgivings and of waste places, in which the speculative spirit feels itself very much a foreigner. There is but one thought that flashes warmth into the coldness, and turns the awfulness and the terror of the chilling magnificence into attractiveness and homelikeness and sweetness, and that is that Christ is there sitting at the right hand of God. Foreign lands are changed in their aspect to us when we have brothers and sisters there; and our Brother has gone whither we too, when we send our thoughts after Him, can feel that our home is, because there He is. The weariness of existence here is only perpetuated and intensified when we think of it as prolonged for ever. But with Christ in the heavens, the heavens become the home of our hearts. In like manner, if we only lay upon our spirits as a solid reality, and keep ever clear before us, as a plain fact, the present glory of Jesus Christ and His activity for us, oh! then life becomes a different thing, sorrows lose their poison and their barb, cares become trivial, anxieties less gnawing, the weights of duty or of suffering less burdensome; and all things have a new aspect and a new aim. If you and I, dear friends, can sea the heavens opened, and Jesus on the throne, how petty, how unworthy to fix our desires, or to compel our griefs, will all the things hare below seem. We then have the true standard, and the littlenesses that swell themselves into magnitude when there is nothing to compare them with will shrink into their insignificance. Lift the mists and let the Himalayas shine out; and what then about the little molehills in the foreground, that looked so big whilst the great white mass was invisible? See Christ, and He interprets, dwindles, and yet ennobles the world and life. Lastly, such a vision gives us a prophecy for the future. There is the measure of the possibilities of human nature. A somewhat arrogant saying affirms, ‘Whatever a man has done, a man can do.’ Whatever that Man is, I may be. It is possible that humanity may be received into the closest union with divinity, and it is certain that if we knit ourselves to Jesus Christ by simple faith and lowly, obedient love, whatever He is He will give to us to share. ‘Even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father on His throne,’ is His own measure of what He will do for the men who are faithful and obedient to Him. I do not say that there is no other adequate proof of immortality than the facts of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. I do not know that I should be far wrong if I ventured even on that assertion. But I do say that there is no means by which a poor sinful soul will reach the realisation of the possibilities that open to it, except faith in Jesus Christ. If we love Him, anything unreasonable and impossible is more reasonable and possible than that the Head shall be glorified and the members Left to see corruption. If I am wedded to Jesus Christ, as you all may be if you will trust your souls to Him and love Him, then God will take us and Him as one into the glory of His presence, where we may dwell with and in Christ, in indissoluble union through the ages of eternity. My text is the answer to all doubts and fears for ourselves. It shows us what the true conception of a perfect heaven is, the perfection of rest and the perfection of service. As Christ’s heaven is the fulness of repose and of activity, so shall that of His servants he. ‘His servants shall serve Him ‘ – there is the activity – ‘and see His face’ – there is the restful contemplation – ‘and His name shall be in their foreheads’ – there is the full participation in His character and glory.

And so, dear brethren, for the world and for ourselves, hope is duty and despair is sin. Here is the answer to the question, Can I ever enter that blessed land? Here is the answer to the question, Is the dream of perfected manhood ever to be more than a dream? ‘We see not yet all things put under Him, but we see Jesus,’ and, seeing Him, no hope is absurd, and anything but hope is falling beneath our privileges. Then, dear friends, let us look unto Him who, ‘for the joy that was set before Him, endured the Cross, despising the shame, and is now set down at the right hand of the Throne of God.’

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Heb 8:1-13

1Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not Man 1:3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this high priest also have something to offer. 4Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; 5who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “See,” He says, “that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises. 7For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,

When I will effect a new covenant

With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;

9Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers

On the day when I took them by the hand

To lead them out of the land of Egypt;

For they did not continue in My covenant,

And I did not care for them, says the Lord.

10″For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel

After those days, says the Lord:

I will put My laws into their minds,

And I will write them on their hearts.

And I will be their God, And they shall be My people.

11″And they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen,

And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’

For all will know Me,

From the least to the greatest of them.

12″For I will be merciful to their iniquities,

And I will remember their sins no more.”

13When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

Heb 8:1

NASB, NKJV,

NRSV”main point”

TEV”the whole point”

NJB”the principle point”

This is a from a form of the Greek term “head,” (kephal) used metaphorically for the sum total of monies (cf. Act 22:28). The Ancients added their figures upward instead of downward. This term had the additional figurative sense of (1) the most important point of the argument of the book so far or (2) a summary of an argument already given.

“high priest” This title for Jesus is only found in Hebrews (cf. Heb 2:17; Heb 3:1; Heb 4:14-15; Heb 5:10; Heb 6:20; Heb 7:26; Heb 8:1; Heb 8:3; Heb 9:11; Heb 9:25). The priestly nature of the Messiah is revealed in Psalms 110 and Zechariah 3, 4. He is both priest and sacrifice (cf. Isaiah 53). He stands before God on mankind’s behalf and offers Himself as the solution to the sin problem.

“who has taken His seat” This is the continuing use of Psalms 110 (i.e., Heb 8:2). It refers to the finished work of Christ. However, it has a royal, not priestly, connotation. No priest ever sat down, only kings (cf. Heb 1:3).

“at the right hand” This is an anthropomorphic phrase for the place of authority and power (cf. Heb 1:3; Heb 1:13; Heb 8:1; Heb 10:12-13; Heb 12:2; Act 2:33-35).

“of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” God does not have a physical throne because He is a spirit. This is an anthropomorphic phrase describing God in human terms and categories. It is a circumlocutionary or periphrastic way of referring to God without mentioning His name (cf. Heb 12:2).

The term “heavens” is plural as it is in the OT. It is plural because it refers to several levels

1. the atmosphere above the earth where birds fly and clouds form (cf. Gen 1:1)

2. the starry sky, the realm of the heavenly lights, sun, moon, stars, and planets (cf. Gen 1:14)

3. the personal presence of God and the angelic realm

The rabbis often debated whether there were three heavens (cf. 2Co 12:2) or seven heavens (i.e., not in the Bible, but first century rabbinical sources). This concept of several levels can be seen in Deu 10:14; 1Ki 8:27; and Psa 68:33; Psa 148:4. The Gnostics used this concept of multiple heavens to assert levels of angelic authority. However, Jesus has passed through them (cf. Heb 4:14). The plural versus singular of ouranos (heaven) seems to have no theological significance in Hebrews (cf. Heb 9:23 versus Heb 9:24).

Heb 8:2 “tabernacle” This is a reference to the ideal tabernacle in heaven (cf. Heb 6:19-20), of which the one revealed to Moses on Mt. Sinai and constructed during the wilderness wandering period (cf. Exodus 25-40) was a mere copy (cf. Heb 9:11; Heb 9:24).

“which the Lord pitched, not man” This may be an allusion to the Septuagint (LXX) translation of Exo 33:7 (a special place to meet God) or it could be just another way of referring to the heavenly tabernacle made by God (cf. Heb 11:10).

Heb 8:3 “to offer” This is the emphasis on the substitutionary atonement of Christ’s sacrifice. His offering will be His life.

Heb 8:4 “if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all” This is a second class conditional sentence, which is called contrary to fact (cf. Heb 4:8; Heb 7:11; Heb 8:4; Heb 8:7; Heb 10:2; Heb 11:15). Jesus was not of the priestly Levitical tribe, but from the royal tribe of Judah. Jesus’ priestly ministry was ultimately performed in heaven.

Heb 8:5 “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things” The use of the terms “copy” and “shadow” are reminiscent of the writings of Philo of Alexandria, a Jewish writer and philosopher who lived from 20 B.C. to A.D. 42 and followed Plato. He allegorized the OT in an attempt to make it relevant to Greek society and to advocate Platonism as a means of elucidating YHWHism.

However, this passage does not reflect Philo, but the ancient Jewish tradition that Moses was given on Mt. Sinai a copy of the heavenly sanctuarythe tabernacle of the wilderness wandering period. This same type of reasoning is present in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which shows it was not unique to Plato (i.e., Greek philosophy). It is interesting that the author of Hebrews never discusses either Solomon’s or Herod’s Temple (nor their procedures). These were never commanded by God as was the tabernacle (cf. Exodus 25-40), although 1Ch 28:19 comes close to claiming that Solomon’s plans were divinely inspired.

The Jewish tradition that the early tabernacle was a copy of the true tabernacle in heaven can be seen in (1) Exo 25:9; Exo 25:40; (2) Rev 11:19; Rev 13:6; Rev 15:5; (3) II Baruch 4:5; (4) Martydom and Ascension of Isa 7:10; (5) Wis 9:8; (6) Flavius Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews 3:6:1

This passage cannot reflect Platonism because the Tabernacle in heaven had substance or reality. In Platonism the heavenly was an ideal, a mental, spiritual reality, but in the Bible it is a physical reality. Heaven is not just ideals/concepts/archetypes, but a true aspect of creation (cf. Col 1:16).

This heavenly tabernacle will one day cease to exist (cf. Rev 21:22). It served its purpose during this age, but will not be needed in the eschaton!

“He says” This is a quote from Exo 25:40. The tabernacle was not the plan of Moses, but the revelation of God.

Heb 8:6 “He has obtained a more excellent ministry” This is a Perfect active indicative. This same description of Jesus’ excellence is used in connection with the angels in Heb 1:4.

“He is also the mediator of a better covenant” All the verbs in Heb 8:6 are perfects. Like the previous one, this one is a perfect active indicative.

The term “mediator” is a legal term denoting an arbitrator. As a priest stands between a holy God and sinful mankind, so too, Jesus as a mediator (cf. Heb 9:15; Heb 12:24; 1Ti 2:5). This is another way of denoting the work of a High Priest.

“better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises” This is a perfect passive indicative. The author of Hebrews’ presentation of Jesus’ authority over the Mosaic covenant is revealed by his use of the term “better” (see note at Heb 7:7).

SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT

Heb 8:7 “if” This is another second class conditional sentence, which is called contrary to fact (cf. Heb 8:4). This is a major point of the argument. An obviously false statement is used to make a theological point. The first covenant did not produce the desired result of restoration and righteousness.

Heb 8:8 “For finding fault with them” Not the Law, but human weakness was the problem (cf. Rom 7:12; Rom 7:16; Galatians 3).

“He says” Heb 8:8-12 are a sustained quote from Jer 31:31-34. Notice “He” refers to YHWH; however, in Heb 10:15 this same phrase is attributed to the Holy Spirit. The inspiration of the OT is sometimes ascribed to the Spirit and sometimes to the Father.

“new covenant” This passage in Jeremiah (cf. Jer 31:31-34) is the only mention in the OT of a “new” covenant, but it is described in Eze 36:22-38. This would have been very shocking to Jews.

“house of Israel” This implies the reuniting of the people of God. After the United Monarchy (Saul, David, Solomon) split in 922 B.C., the northern tribes under Jeroboam I were called Israel and the southern tribes under Rehoboam were called Judah.

Heb 8:9 “not like the covenant” The difference is not in essence or goal but in methodology.

“On the day when I took them by the hand” This refers to YHWH as Father (cf. Hos 11:1-4).

“And I did not care for them” This follows the Septuagint (LXX) translation. The Masoretic Text (MT) has “although I was a husband to them.”

Heb 8:10 “minds” This follows the Septuagint (LXX) but the Masoretic text (MT) has “within them.” This is how the old covenant differs from the new. The old is characterized by Eze 18:31, the new by Eze 11:19; Eze 36:26-27.

“Hearts” This refers to the entire person (cf. Deu 6:6; Deu 11:18; Deu 30:6; Deu 30:14). See Special Topic at Heb 3:8.

“And I will be their God and they shall be my people” This is the covenantal formula of the OT.

Heb 8:11 There is a Greek manuscript variation in the term “citizen” versus “neighbor.” In light of the Hebrew understanding of covenant brother the variation makes no interpretive difference. As far as the older and more reliable Greek texts are concerned, “citizens” is the best choice (cf. P46, , A, B, D, K, L, and most later minuscule manuscripts).

Heb 8:12 This is the equality of the new covenant (cf. Jer 31:31-34). It is mentioned in the NT in Luk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6; and Heb 8:8; Heb 9:15. There will be no need for leaders, all will know the Lord and His will and ways. The sins that God forgives, God forgets (strong double negative). The OT promises of complete forgiveness are quite wonderful (cf. Psa 103:3; Psa 103:8-14; Isa 1:18; Isa 38:17; Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22; Mic 7:19).

Heb 8:13

NASB”But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear”

NKJV”Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away”

NRSV”And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear”

TEV”Anything that becomes old and worn out will soon disappear”

NJB”And anything old and aging is ready to disappear”

This phrase requires several comments. First, remember the historical setting. There is a group of people who are clinging to the Mosaic Law and another group who are contemplating returning to the Mosaic Law.

Second, this only has to do with the Law as a means of salvation. The OT surely was, and is, God’s revelation (cf. Mat 5:17-19). The Mosaic Law still has a purpose in God’s plan (cf. Galatians 3). It brings people to Christ by showing fallen humanity their sinfulness and need for salvation. It helps us understand God and His ways. It is related to the new covenant as promise to fulfillment. It was incapable of bringing salvation because of the weakness and sinfulness of fallen mankind.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

of = upon. Greek. epi. App-104.

sum = main point. Greek. kephalaio. See Act 22:28.

such. Emphatic.

is set = sat down. See Heb 1:3.

on. Greek. en. App-104.

Majesty. Greek. megalosune. See Heb 1:3.

in. Greek. en.

the heavens. See Mat 6:9, Mat 6:10.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1-13.] Not only is Christ personally, as a High Priest, above the sons of Aaron, but the service and ordinances of the covenant to which his High Priesthood belongs are better than those of that to which they belong.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Chapter 8

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the essence: We have such a high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heavens; he is a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer [that is the ministry of the priest to offer the gifts and the sacrifices]. For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer the gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and the shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: See, said the Lord, that you make all things according to the pattern that was shown you on the mount ( Heb 8:1-5 ).

The reason why there had to be such complete carefulness in the making of the tabernacle, that he makes it exactly according to the plan that God gave to Moses on the mount, is that the tabernacle is a model of heaven. You want to know what heaven is like? Do you want to know what it looks like and all? then study the tabernacle. The Holy of Holies is a model of the throne of God in heaven. The cherubim there in the tabernacle overshadowing the mercy seat. And so it is a model of the heaven.

Jesus didn’t enter into the earthly temple that had been built by Herod the Great. He didn’t enter into the Holy of Holies of the earthly temple, but He entered into the heaven, of which the earthly temple was a model. The earthly temple is not the real McCoy. It is just a model of what is real. So Jesus didn’t enter into the model, He entered into the real thing. The earthly temple is only a shadow or a model of that which is in heaven. Our great High Priest entered directly into the heavens, of which the earthly tabernacle was only a model, and there He is representing me before God in heaven, not before a model of that whole thing in the Holy of Holies in the temple here on the earth. These things were to serve as an example and a shadow of the heavenly things.

That is why, though oftentimes we get bogged down in Leviticus, if we understand as we are reading in Exodus and Leviticus, we are reading about the temple and the dimensions and the things that were in it. And you go into Leviticus and read about the offerings, then you’ll understand more about heaven and the heavenly things. And just to read it as a part of an old dead system that can destroy you. It’s like Latin language. In my Latin book in high school someone had written, “Latin is a language dead, as dead as dead can be. First it killed the Romans and now it is killing me.” The earthly system was now being abrogated, passing away, because the real has come. The earthly was only pointing forward to when the real should come. Once the real had arrived, no longer necessary for the model, that can be set aside. Now the reality is here.

But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises ( Heb 8:6 ).

Now as you go back in Exodus chapter 19, and you read the covenant that God made with the nation of Israel, in the giving of the law, the establishing of the priesthood. This covenant that God made with Israel was predicated upon the people’s faithfulness and the people’s obedience. Verse Heb 8:5 of chapter 19, “Now therefore,” God said, “if you will obey my voice indeed…” “If,” conditional, the covenant just isn’t a straight out, flat covenant, unilateral. It is a conditional covenant. “If you will obey my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me above all the people. For all the earth is mine, and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak,” God said to Moses, “to the children of Israel.” “And so Moses came down and called for the elders and all and told them of the people, and the people said, ‘All that the Lord hath spoken we will do.’ And so Moses returned the words of the people of the Lord” ( Exo 19:5-8 ). Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Hey, they said they will do everything You say.” They said that, but they didn’t. But you see, the covenant was “if” you will obey my commands, “if,” but they did not. And therefore, the first covenant was broken, not by God but by man, because it was predicated upon man’s obedience, man’s faithfulness. But man was not obedient or faithful.

Now Christ has been the mediator of a new covenant, which is a better covenant, because it is established on better promises. Why? Because the new covenant is not predicated upon my faithfulness. The new covenant is predicated upon God’s faithfulness. The new covenant is not predicated upon my work. The new covenant is predicated upon God’s work. And because the new covenant is predicated upon the faithfulness and the work of God, it shall stand. It’s good. I can enjoy it and be blessed by it, because it isn’t conditioned upon me. It is conditioned upon God and His faithfulness. So, the new covenant is a better covenant. The New Testament superior to the Old Testament, or the new covenant superior to the Old Testament, because it is based upon better promises of the work that God has wrought through Jesus Christ, that finished work. Once and for all, offering the sacrifice, and now my just believing in Him. And that is the condition, my believing in Him.

As I believe in Him, He then takes over and begins to work in my life, conforming me into His image. It is not a license to just go out and live a careless, reckless life, just sinning whenever I feel like it. In this new covenant, God begins a work in me. And continues that work in me, of conforming me into that image of Jesus Christ, and actually helping me to be what I could never be by the law. To live a better life that I could ever live, because now I’m living the life of the Spirit, and it is the Spirit of life in Christ conforming me into the image of Christ. You see, laws are only for the lawless. If you live by the right principles, if you’re living like Jesus, you don’t need laws. You don’t need someone telling you what you should or shouldn’t do. You do it, because it’s now written in my heart and it’s something that comes from my heart. It’s not an outward yoke that is put upon me, but this new covenant that God has established, not in the tables of stone, but in the fleshly tablets of my heart. So we’ll get to that in a minute. We’re jumping ahead.

If the first covenant had been faultless [had it been perfect], then there would be no reason sought to have a second covenant ( Heb 8:7 ).

If the first covenant could bring man into a righteous state before God, then you wouldn’t need another covenant. But it could not, and that’s why you needed a New Testament.

For finding fault with them, he said, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not [if you keep my commandments] in my covenant ( Heb 8:8-9 ),

It’s not going to be like that one predicated upon my obedience.

and I regarded them not, saith the Lord ( Heb 8:9 ).

They broke the covenant, so I did not keep the covenant, because they broke it.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people ( Heb 8:10 ):

You see, it’s God’s work now. He’s going to put His law in my mind and He’s going to write it in my heart. What does that mean? It means that God is going to express His will in my life, as I seek Him and as I submit my life to Him, God expresses His will for my life by putting the desire in my heart to do that which He wants done. He puts it into my mind to do something.

I was driving north to Ventura, driving up the freeway through Hollywood. Came to Sunset Boulevard, and I thought, “Beautiful day. I don’t have to be in Santa Barbara at any particular time. Why not go the Pacific Coast Highway, slower, but much more beautiful. Just flip the top down and I’ll cruise up through Malibu around Point Magu.”

So I wound all the way down Sunset Boulevard to Pacific Coast Highway. And as I turned on Pacific Coast Highway there was a young couple there hitchhiking, so I picked them up because I was by myself. I had a chance to witness to them all the way to Ventura, where we pulled off the road and they accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

I went on to Santa Barbara. When I got to Santa Barbara I got a phone call, “Chuck, you’ve got to come to Santa Ana right away.” So I jumped in my car and came right back to Santa Ana. But who put it in my mind, “Why not go by the beach?” Now that would be a natural thing for me to think, because I love the beach. But God said, “I will write my law in their mind.” It was just a flash in my mind, why not go the coast route? Enjoy a beautiful day, take a leisure drive. Who put that in my mind? The Lord wrote His law in my mind, because He knew a young couple from Montana were desperate and needed God. I’ll write my law in their hearts.

You see, I thought, “I love the beach and I love driving up by Malibu, and I love that whole drive up by Zuma Beach and the whole thing. Why not?” God put it in my heart. I thought, “Wow, this is…” and I love to so that I did it, because that’s what I wanted and love to do. I wasn’t thinking, “Oh, I’ve got to go by Malibu and Zuma..ugh.” No! It was the desire of my heart. That’s where God wrote His law. And as I turned and wound down Sunset Boulevard, God was saying, “Good boy!” Oh, He has made it so easy writing His law right on the fleshly tablets, right in our minds. Not on a table of stone, saying, “Thou shalt…thou shalt not.” Now it is, “Oh boy, I’d like to do that. Hey, that would be great.” And then all of a sudden I discover that is exactly what He wanted, that is what He had in mind. I’m following the plan of God. Oh, but it’s so much fun. Surely if it’s God’s plan it has to be miserable. I have to be struggling under this heavy cross and just trying my best to rise up under the agony and pain. No way! Jesus said, “My yoke is easy my burden is light. You will find rest for your soul. I’ll write my law in your mind and on the fleshly tablets of your heart.” That puts it in my reach.

And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more ( Heb 8:11-12 ).

Now see, this is God, this isn’t me. It’s not on my faithfulness now. It’s on God’s work in my heart, God’s work in my mind, God’s work in my life. I will know Him. He will reveal Himself. He will be merciful to my failures and He will not remember my iniquities anymore.

In that he saith, A new covenant, he made the first old. Now that which decays and waxes old is ready to vanish away ( Heb 8:13 ).

And the old covenant soon vanished. Right after this, the priesthood was over, 70 A.D., the end of the old covenant. And even those Jews today who are orthodox, or claim to be orthodox, are not obedient to the old covenant, because there is no priest. There is no high priest. There is no offering for their sins. They are not keeping covenant with God, no matter how religiously they may watch their diets or keep the Sabbath or offer their prayers at the Western Wall or at the tomb of David or at the tomb of Rachel or at the tomb of Abraham. The old decayed, passed away with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. This was written just six years before the destruction of Jerusalem. So his declaration, “Now that which decays and waxes old is ready to vanish away,” was fulfilled within six years. It vanished away.

But ours is an everlasting covenant, this new covenant that God has. A covenant established upon better promises, upon a high priest who does not die, does not change, who does not have to offer sacrifices for His own sins before He offers for me. But once and for all offered the sacrifice before God, by which I am saved to the uttermost as I come to God by Him.

Shall we pray.

Father, we thank you for our great High Priest, Jesus Christ. Who has passed into heaven for us, not into the earthly tabernacle, but, Lord, right there before Your throne, right there on your right hand. And how grateful we are, Father, that You have given to us such a great High Priest who loves us and who has washed us and cleansed us from our unrighteousness and who has changed our hearts and who has changed our minds and who has changed our nature. Through whom we have been born again by the Spirit of God into a spiritual life. Thank You, Father, for the walk and the life in the Spirit that we experience through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Jesus said, “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden. Take my yoke upon you and learn of Me.” The purpose of these Sunday evening studies is to fulfill the third part of that command of Jesus to learn of Him. The reason why He said, “Learn of Me,” is that He knows that the more you know Him, the more you will love Him. Because the more you will realize how much He loves you and all that He has done for you. So we encourage you to continue your reading faithfully. Next week the ninth and the tenth chapters as we continue through the Bible learning about Jesus Christ. For He declared Himself that the volume of the book was written about Him. “Lo, I have come as it is written of Me in the volume of the book to do Thy will, O Lord.” And so coming and learning of Him we grow in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior.

And so may the Lord be with you and may the Lord bless you and keep His hand upon your life and watch over you and strengthen you and guide you this week. As He lays upon your heart His desires and His plans, as He plants in your mind His will and His purpose. And may you just have a beautiful week walking in the Lord, obedient unto Him, doing His will. In Jesus’ name. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Heb 8:1. , the head, the sum) The Accusative absolute, which Paul uses, 1Ti 2:6, note. The head, that is, the principal point.- ) while these things are being spoken of, while we are treating of this object, while we are stating all these things concerning our High Priest, the sum of the whole discourse, as the arrangement so requires it, comes now to be mentioned: comp. , Heb 8:6, ch. Heb 9:10; Heb 9:15; Heb 9:17; Heb 10:28. The force of the Greek prepositions ought sometimes to be taken by itself, nor does it admit of an adequate Latin or German periphrasis. See note 3 on Heb 9:15, ch. 9. I did not quote that verse at ch. Heb 7:11, note 5; wherefore the words of this note 5 are not to be extended to ch. Heb 9:15. also applies to concomitancy, which is expressed by while.-, such) The capital proposition standing out very prominent. For, after having finished the explanation of the type in Melchisedec, he begins simply (without type) to discuss the excellence of the priesthood of Christ above the Levitical priesthood.-, sat down) after having presented His oblation. [This is the very sum of the whole discussion, says the Apostle, that Christ, sitting in heaven, performs His office of priest, ch. Heb 10:12.-V. g.]- , of the majesty) i.e. , of GOD, ch. Heb 12:2, at the end.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Heb 8:1-5

THE SUPERIORITY OF CHRISTS

PRIESTHOOD FURTHER DEMONSTRATED

FROM THE HIGHER AND BETTER

SPHERE OF HIS MINISTRY

Heb 8:1-5

Heb 8:1 —Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum. Or more literally: But the crown upon the things spoken [is this]; we have such a High Priest who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a Minister of the Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man.-The word rendered sum (kephalaion) means (1) that which is chief or principal; (2) the sum or result of numbers added together and set down at the head of the column; (3) the crown or that which gives completeness to anything, and (4) the division of a book, as a chapter or section. The object of the Apostle is not to give a summary of what was said before, for in the next verse, he states as an additional argument, the sublime fact that Jesus is now a Minister of the heavenly Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man. His idea therefore seems to be this: that in what follows we have not only the chief, but also the crowning point of the whole argument. It all culminates in the glorious and important fact that Jesus is now a High Priest and Minister, not of the typical economy, but of the real; not of the shadow, but of the substance.

Heb 8:1—who is set on the right hand, etc.-Who sat down (ekath- isen) : that is, when he made his one offering in the heavenly Sanctuary. The best commentary on these words is given by the Apostle himself in Heb 10:11-13. Every High Priest, he says, [belonging to the Levitical order] standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies he made his footstool.

Heb 8:2 —A minister of the sanctuary,-The word rendered minister (leitonrgos) means a public officer of high and honorable rank, whether civil, military, or religious. It is here applied to Christ, as the High Priest of the New Covenant. The word sanctuary (ta hagia) means Heaven itself, the archetype of the Most Holy Place of the ancient Tabernacle. In this sense, the same Greek words are used in Heb 9:8 Heb 9:12 Heb 9:24-25 Heb 10:19 Heb 13:11.

Heb 8:2 —and of the true tabernacle,-The adjective true (alethinos) denotes not only the real as opposed to the false (as alethes), but also, and more particularly, the perfect and substantial, as opposed to the imperfect and unsubstantial. The Tabernacle of Moses was a real structure, formed and fashioned according to the exact model which was shown to him in the mount. But nevertheless it was a mere shadow of the true; the type of that in which Christ now officiates as our High Priest. The former was made by human hands, and was constructed of perishable materials; but the latter is the workmanship of God himself, a Bethel that will never wax old.

What, then, is this true Tabernacle, of which Christ has become the prime Minister?

Some, as Moll and Kendrick, maintain that it is identical with the Sanctuary; and that the term true tabernacle is therefore but another name for Heaven itself, into which Christ has for us entered. They argue that the rending of the Vail, when Christ was crucified, was a virtual removal of all distinctions between the Holy Place and the Most Holy; and that henceforth they were to be regarded as one and the same; so that the name, true tabernacle, is used here but as an explanatory synonym of the word sanctuary.

But to this it may be objected (1) that the rending of the Vail did not in any way change the local relations and objects of the two apartments. It only indicated that henceforth the way from the Holy Place into the Most Holy was made manifest. See 9: 8. (2) Molls view is inconsistent with the most natural construction and obvious meaning of the sentence. The first impression of any one on reading the text would be that the Apostle refers here to two separate and distinct apartments. (3) It is opposed to the ttsus loquendi of the Hebrews, for whose special benefit the Epistle was written. Sometimes indeed the word tabernacle (skene) is used as the name of the whole structure, including both the Holy Place and the Most Holy; and sometimes it is used to denote either of these apartments. But when it is used, as here, in connection with the word sanctuary (to hagion or ta hagia) it means simply the east room of the Tabernacle, or that of which this was a type. See Lev 16:16-17 Lev 16:20 Lev 16:23 Lev 16:33, etc. And (4) in 9: 11, 12, our author evidently keeps up a distinction between the Tabernacle and the Holy of holies; for Christ, he says, according to the most approved rendering of the passage, passed through the true or more perfect Tabernacle into the Most Holy Place. For these and other like reasons, most expositors justly maintain that there is still a difference between the Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. But if there is a difference, what is it ?

Macknight, following Josephus and Philo, makes the whole Tabernacle a symbolical representation of the universe; alleging that the Most Holy Place was symbolical of Heaven, and that the Holy Place was a symbol of the whole Earth. See Jos. Ant. iii. 7.3. This hypothesis originated in an attempt on the part of Josephus, Philo, and others, to make the symbolical system of Moses harmonize with the tenets and speculations of Gentile philosophy. It has no foundation whatever in the word of God. Delitzsch maintains, as we have seen (Heb 7:26), that the Sanctuary was a symbol of the uncreated Holy of holies of the Divine nature, into which Christ entered when he ascended from Mount Olivet; and that the Tabernacle proper or Holy Place was a symbol of the highest created heaven, where dwell the angels and the spirits of the just made perfect. But this again is too fanciful, and without scriptural support.

A more plausible hypothesis is that of Hofmann and others, who maintain that by the true Tabernacle is meant here the glorified body, or, as some say, the human nature, of Christ. In support of this hypothesis it is alleged (1) that in Joh 1:14, it is said, The Word was made flesh and dwelt (eskenosen, tabernacled) among us; (2) that in Joh 2:21, Christ himself speaks of his body as a tabernacle or temple (3) that in Heb 10:20, the Vail of the Temple is represented as a symbol of his flesh; and (4) that in Eph 2:19-22, Christ and the Church are together compared to a holy temple. All this is quite plausible, but by no means conclusive. That Christ’s body may be properly compared to a tabernacle, no one, of course, doubts who believes the Bible to be the word of God. But this is not the question. The point to be determined is, not whether there is any analogy between the body of Christ and a tabernacle, but whether it is the antitype for the symbolizing of which the Jewish Tabernacle was constructed. That it is not, seems probable for several reasons; but chiefly for this, that the true Tabernacle is here represented not as a part of Christ, but simply as the sphere in which he, in his full and proper personality performs his ministry.

Is then the Church of Christ the true Tabernacle?

In favor of this hypothesis it may be said (1) that the Church sustains the same relation to Heaven that the Holy Place of the Tabernacle and Temple did to the Most Holy. Gods only revealed way of entering into Heaven is through the Church. (2) The Holy Place of the Tabernacle had ordinances corresponding with the ordinances of the Church. In it was the Table supplied constantly with the twelve loaves emblematical of the bread of life, of which we partake, not in, but through, the ordinances of the Church, particularly the Lords Supper. See Joh 6:33 Joh 6:35 Joh 6:48 Joh 6:50 Joh 6:53-56. There, too, was the Altar of incense, corresponding with the altar of prayer (Psa 141:2; Luk 1:9-10; Rev 5:8 Rev 8:3-4) ; and there was the light of the seven lamps of the golden Candlestick, corresponding with the light of the Holy Spirit, by means of which the Church is made the light of the world (Isa 60:1; Mat 5:14; Rev 1:20). (3) The Church of Christ is compared in Act 15:16-17, to a booth or tent (skene), so enlarged that the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, may find shelter and protection under it. Compare Isa 54:1-4. (4) In 1Co 3:16, Paul says to the Corinthian brethren, Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? And in 2Co 6:16, he says, Ye are the Temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And again the same Apostle says in his Epistle to the Ephesians (2: 19-22), Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth into a holy Temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit. In like manner, writing to Timothy, he calls the Church the house of God (1Ti 3:15) ; and so he does also in Heb 3:6 Heb 10:21. The same thought is also expressed in 1Pe 2:5. From all of which we are constrained to believe that the true Tabernacle and the Church of Christ cannot be separated: they are certainly identical in whole or in part.

But to this view, it is proper to say, there is this apparent objection. The Church of Christ did not exist as a distinct organization till the Day of Pentecost, A.D. 34, about ten days after Christs ascension. That God had a people even from the beginning, and that Christ had followers from the beginning of his public ministry, is of course conceded. But not till the Pentecost that next followed after his resurrection, was he publicly proclaimed the anointed Sovereign of the universe (Act 2:36) ; not till then was any one baptized by his authority into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Act 2:38) ; and not till then was the Spirit given to animate the body (Joh 7:37-39). And yet it is said in Heb 9:11-12, that Christ entered through a greater and more perfect Tabernacle (than that of Moses) into the Most Holy Place. Now I think it must be conceded that this greater and more perfect Tabernacle is identical with the true Tabernacle of our text; and if the true Tabernacle is identical with the Church, then how could it be said with propriety that Christ went up through the Church ten days before it had a distinct organic existence ?

Perhaps a reference to Christs mode of teaching by parables may assist us in solving this confessedly difficult problem. At one time he compares the kingdom of Heaven to a grain of mustard seed; at another, to leaven; at another, to a dragnet; at another, to ten virgins, etc.; his object being in all these cases to illustrate only some one element or characteristic of his Kingdom. Seldom, if ever, does he include in his comparisons all that belongs to it as a complete and perfect organization. May not Paul then, in like manner, speak by synecdoche of the greater and more perfect Tabernacle, having reference at the same time to some of the elements of the Church of Christ? The Church is the same thing as the Kingdom of Christ on earth, only viewed under different aspects. It, as well as the Kingdom, has its essential elements. Christ is its head; believers anointed with the Holy Spirit are its members: the promise given to Abraham concerning Christ (Gal 3:17) may be regarded as its constitution; the rules and regulations given by the Apostles are its laws and ordinances; Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Elders, and Deacons, are its officers; the sanctified portion of the Earth is its territory, and the blue vault of heaven, covered with cherubim, may perhaps be regarded as an emblem of its canopy or inner curtain. Now as Christ so often speaks of his Church or Kingdom by synecdoche, putting a part for the whole; and as the inner curtain of the Tabernacle is often put for the Tabernacle itself (see, for instance, Exo 40:19), may we not with propriety regard the sky, covered as it is with the wings of angels and the protecting shield of Gods providence, as emblematical of the greater and more perfect Tabernacle referred to in Heb 9:11 ? And is not this view corroborated by what is said in Heb 4:14? See notes on Heb 9:11.

If this view of the matter is correct, it may serve to explain that precept of the Law which required that no one should be in the Tabernacle while the High Priest went into the Holy of holies to make an atonement for the people. (Lev 16:17.) When Christ went up through the heavens (Heb 4:14) into the Most Holy Place, on the fortieth day after his resurrection, he left behind him many sincere and devoted followers; but it was not until after that he had made expiation for the sins of the world, and came out to bless the people by his Spirit on the following Pentecost, that the Church was fully organized and prepared for a habitation of God through the Spirit. Then, for the first time, believers were received into it on condition of their repenting and being baptized into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Heb 8:3 —For every high priest is ordained, etc.-The logical train of thought in this connection is well stated by Delitzsch as follows: Christ is a priest in the heavenly archetypal Sanctuary (verses 1, 2), for there is no priest without some sacrificial function (verse 3);; and if here on earth he would not be a priest at all (verse 4), where there are priests already who serve the typical and shadowy Sanctuary (verse 5). The priestly functions of Christ must therefore be discharged in a higher sphere, and so it is. Or to express the same train of thought syllogistically, A priests office is to offer sacrifice; Christ is a priest; and therefore he must have something to offer. The sphere in which Christs priestly office is discharged must be either an earthly or a heavenly one; but an earthly one it cannot be, inasmuch as on earth (in the material Tabernacle) there are other priests officiating according to the law, and therefore Christs sphere of priestly operation must be a heavenly one.

To this view of the matter it has been objected that Christ is thus represented as making frequent and continual offerings like the Levitical priests, whereas our author says distinctly that he has made but one offering, and that this has been made once for all, never again to be repeated. See Heb 7:27 Heb 9:12 Heb 9:26 Heb 9:28 Heb 10:12.

But the allegation does not logically follow from the premises, for the Apostle speaks here indefinitely with regard to time, and the whole expression may be rendered thus: Wherefore it [was] necessary that this [Priest] should also have something which he might offer (prosenegke). So the passage is translated by Beza, Bengel, Bleek, De Wette, Lunemann, Hofmann, Macknight, and others. And hence the reference may be simply to the one offering which Christ made of himself in the heavenly Sanctuary after his ascension. But as this one offering of Christ, by means of which he made an atonement for the sins of the world, is the ground of his continued ministry in our behalf, I am inclined to think with Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others, that the Apostle refers here particularly to the constant use and application of the one offering of Christ, as the only means of procuring our pardon, justification, and sanctification. Christs one offering is, in fact, a continual offering; an offering the efficacy of which will endure forever. So that while he officiates as a minister in the heavenly Sanctuary, and in the true Tabernacle, he will always have to offer what is fully adequate to the justification and salvation of all who come unto God by him.

Heb 8:4 —For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest,-The meaning of this verse is quite obvious from what precedes. As Christ was not of the house of Aaron, he could not lawfully officiate as a priest on earth. (Num 18:1-7.) True, indeed, as our author shows in 7: 11-19, the law had ere this been abolished. As a religious institution, it was abrogated when Christ was crucified. (Col 2:14.) But no other law creating a new order of earthly priesthood had been enacted in its place. And as, for wise and benevolent reasons, God allowed the law of Moses to continue for a time as a civil institution, it was, in fact, the only existing law on earth, of Divine appointment, according to which gifts and sacrifices could be rightfully offered. This point of the argument was, of course, well understood and appreciated by the Hebrew brethren.

Heb 8:5 —Who serve unto the example, etc.-Or more literally and correctly: Who serve the delineation and shadow of heavenly things. The word rendered delineation (hupodeigma) means (1) a private sign or secret token, and (2) a delineation or copy of anything. Here, it denotes that the Jewish Tabernacle, with all that pertained to it, was but a faint symbolical representation of the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. The word shadow (skia) is added with the view of intensifying the thought; thus indicating that the given representation was wholly destitute of the substance which is inherent in the heavenly realities.

Heb 8:5 —as Moses was admonished of God, etc.-The Apostle now submits as proof of the above allegation, the fact recorded in Exo 25:40, that when Moses was about to make the Tabernacle, God directed him to frame it according to the exact pattern (tupos) showed to him in the mount. In order that this symbolical structure might exactly correspond in its shadowy outlines with the heavenly archetypes, God, it seems, caused Moses to see in vision a just representation of these on Mount Sinai, and then instructed him to make the Tabernacle according to this pattern. And hence, according to the testimony of Moses, the Jewish Tabernacle was not an original structure, but only a copy of the representation which God gave to him of the heavenly Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle. From all of which it is evident that the sphere of Christs ministry is greatly superior to that in which Aaron and his successors performed their services, and consequently that his priesthood is also greatly superior to theirs.

It is no objection to the view above taken of the true Tabernacle, that it is here ranked and classified with the heavenly things, of which the Jewish Tabernacle was but a shadowy representation. For the Church of Christ is in no proper sense a worldly institution. It is in all its essential elements identical with the kingdom of heaven, and hence those who become members of it are said to sit down together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. See Eph 1:3 Eph 2:6; Heb 9:23.

REFLECTIONS

1. How true it is that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (Heb 7:1-10.) Who, without the aid of the Holy Spirit, would have ever thought that the fourteenth chapter of Genesis has any reference to Christ? But it is even so. God who sees the end from the beginning, knows always by what means his ends and purposes can be best accomplished. To effect these, he often turns the hearts of kings as the rivers of water (Pro 21:1), and makes the history of individuals and of nations fill up the exact measure of his benevolent intentions. Thus it was, for instance, that he made Hagar a type of the Old Covenant, and Sarah a type of the New (Gal 4:21-31) ; and thus it was that he made Melchisedec a type of Christ; so that in the ages to come he might make it manifest to all that he is himself the author of the whole plan of redemption, and that his son, Jesus Christ, is the Alpha and Omega of the whole Bible.

2. As Jesus had no predecessor, so also he has no successor in office (verses 16, 17). Like Melchisedec, he remains a priest upon his throne perpetually. Not that he has to offer daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices, like the Levitical priests; for by one offering he has made full and complete expiation for the sins of the world. But as he ever lives to make intercession for us, so also he must of necessity be continually presenting the one offering of

himself to God, as the ground of his intercessions, and as the only means of our justification. This priestly function can never be transferred to another. And consequently the word of the oath which was since the Law maketh him a priest forevermore.

3. The Old Testament is not a fable devised by learned and crafty Hebrews, but a revelation from God, given to us by holy men of old, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. (2Pe 1:20-21.) What Jew would ever ot his own accord have predicted the rise of another priest after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the order of Aaron? What, but the Spirit of the Almighty, could have ever induced David to utter a prophecy involving the abrogation of the whole Jewish economy? Truly, all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.

4. None who believe in Christ need ever be dismayed at the approach of death or anything else, for he is both able and willing to save to the uttermost all who come unto God through him, seeing he ever lives to make intercession for us (Heb 7:5). All other helps will fail, sooner or later. Our friends may now comfort us in many ways; and physicians by their skill and timely remedies may greatly relieve our present sufferings. But death will soon separate us all, and put an end to all our kind offices here in behalf of one another. For no man can redeem his brother from death, nor save him from the corruption of the grave. But Jesus never forsakes those who trust in him. (Heb 13:5.) Having washed us from our sins in his own precious blood, he will not desert us in the hour of death, nor will he then allow any calamity to overcome us; so that we may say confidently with David, Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. (Psa 23:4.) And with Paul we may exclaim, O Death, where is thy sting? O Grave, where is thy victory? (1Co 15:55.) But what else than the religion of Jesus can fill the soul with such confidence and consolation ? What has infidelity to offer in the hour of death to her many votaries? What has she ever done, and what can she do, to enlighten the understanding and fill the heart with confidence in reference to the future? What skeptic was ever known to say, as does Paul, We know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens? Who but the Christian can say with confidence, To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord? And again, It is better to depart and to be with Christ? And still again, There is a rest which remains for the people of God ? This is the language of him, and of him only, who knows in whom he has believed, and who is fully persuaded that he is able to keep that which he has committed to him. (2Ti 1:12.)

5. The religion of the Lord Jesus is just such a religion as we all need (Heb 7:26-27). Notwithstanding all that infidels and scoffers have said against it, it so happens that the man who understands and obeys it most perfectly, is always, other things being equal, the most happy and the most useful member of society. And so, also, it is with whole communities and nations. Those that are most completely under the influence of the religion of Christ, are always the most happy and prosperous. The religions of the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Celts, and Goths, all failed because of their incapacity to make men happy. There was nothing in them to satisfy the longing desires of the human heart. And for the same reason, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Mahometanism, and all other systems of false religion, are now waxing old and are ready to vanish away. But Christianity is constantly gaining more power and influence over mankind, as civilization advances. And it is doing so simply because it presents to us a perfect Savior; one who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. It reveals to us the only proper antidote for sin, the only atonement that is at all adequate to so meet and satisfy the claims of the Divine government, that God can be just in justifying those who believe in Jesus. It presents to us just such motives as best serve to make us hate sin, love holiness, do justice, and walk humbly, righteously, and godly in this present world. And, finally, it offers to us on the simple conditions of faith and obedience, just such a salvation as the heart of every man desires: a salvation from sin, death, hell, and the grave. And, in a word, it withholds from us nothing that is calculated to elevate, refine, and purify the heart; to make us like God; to fit us for doing his will here, and for enjoying his presence hereafter. Can such a religion be a falsehood? Judge the tree by its fruit.

6. How infinitely glorious and exalted is the great High Priest of our confession! (Heb 8:1-2.) Having by the grace of God tasted death for every man, and made an atonement for the sins of the world, he now sits as a priest upon his throne, and officiates as a minister of the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. No wonder, then, that all heaven is filled with his praises, while the angels and the redeemed behold his glory and think of his condescending love in providing for the ransom of millions, who without his atoning sacrifice must have perished forever.

But angels can never express,

Nor saints who sit nearest his throne,

How rich are his treasures of grace;

No, this is a secret unknown.

Commentary on Heb 8:1-5 by Donald E. Boatman

Heb 8:1 –The chief point is this, we have such a high priest

Everything said builds up to this one great point. All the discussion is to show the great superiority of Christ over all.

Heb 8:1 –Who sat down on the right hand of the throne

The authors are agreed.

a. This is where Peter said He was on Pentecost, Acts 2.

b. This is where Stephen saw Him, Act 7:55.

c. John saw Him there, Revelation 4.

When did He sit down?

a. Heb 10:11-13 answers: But this Man after He had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God.

Heb 8:1 –of the majesty in the heavens

The majesty refers to God. The heavens would refer to the holy of holies where Christ now serves as Priest.

Heb 8:2 –a minister of the sanctuary

The word minister usually means a public office of high and honorable rank.

a. This can be civil, or military, or religious.

b. Christ ministers in the sanctuary, indicating a spiritual service. The word sanctuary is also translated holy things. Milligan believes the word in the Greek means heaven itself. He says the word is used in that sense in Heb 9:8; Heb 9:12; Heb 9:24-25; Heb 10:19; Heb 13:11. The word sanctuary probably refers to the heavens but the holy of holies and the tabernacle, to the church.

Heb 8:2 –and of the true tabernacle

Here he means the substantial one-the perfect as in contrast with the imperfect.

Milligan has a lengthy discussion at this point (p. 219.)

a. Some try to say that the sanctuary and the tabernacle are different, others that they are the same.

b. . . . and of indicates a different subject is referred to than the sanctuary.

The church must be referred to here, for many scriptures teach that the church is a building. Act 15:16-17; 1Co 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6; 2Co 6:16; Eph 2:19-22; 1Ti 3:15; 1Pe 2:5; Heb 3:6; Heb 10:21.

Heb 8:2 –which the Lord pitched, not man

This is a temple not made with hands.

a. Stephen said so. Act 7:48.

b. Paul said so. Act 17:24.

Mat 16:18 : I will build My church, was a claim of Christ.

a. If the Lord pitched it, then we have no right to build otherwise.

b. The pattern is pitched; let us build accordingly.

Heb 8:3 –For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices

Gifts would refer to the free-will offerings. Sacrifices refers to those specifically commanded of God.

Heb 8:3 –wherefore it is necessary that this High Priest also have somewhat to offer

What could He offer but Himself? This offering does not need to be repeated-Heb 7:27; Heb 9:12; Heb 9:26; Heb 9:28; Heb 10:12.

Jesus told what the greatest love was: -to lay down a life for a friend, Joh 15:13.

a. Christ was therefore obligated to die for man.

b. If He gave anything less, He could not show His love as marvelously.

Heb 8:4 –Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all

He could not lawfully do it.

a. He was not of the house of Aaron; therefore, He was not qualified, Num 18:1-7.

Severe punishment was provided for one who invaded the office. Num 16:1-35; Num 18:3-7; 2Ch 26:16-21. Observe that even Levites were killed if they encroached upon the office. Num 18:3.

Heb 8:5 –who serve that which is a copy

Serve means the performance of sacred rites.

a. The old covenant with its ordinances and priests pictured to us a priesthood to come.

b. Serve as used here means to portray.

Copy means an example.

a. The Levitical priests were serving as an example of what later was to come.

b. This made it very important that all things be made and done according to the pattern.

Heb 8:5 –and shadow of the heavenly things

Heb 8:5 –Even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle

The warning is Exo 25:40. This is stronger than just being informed how to build.

Heb 8:5 –that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount

Moses was not allowed to change-add or substitute. Observe three things:

a. The ancient rituals were appointed for a purpose.

b. All modes of worship are false which are not invented by the hand of God.

c. There are no true symbols except those which the Lord gives. We have similar warnings today. Gal 1:8-9; Rev 22:18-19; 1Co 11:2.

What would the church be like if it were built according to the pattern?

a. The modernist says there is no pattern.

b. How can we find fault with Protestantism and Catholicism if there is no pattern?

c. God has a pattern for His church, and we must build accordingly.

Study Questions

1323. In verse one Paul speaks of a chief point. What is it?

1324. Where is this High Priest?

1325. Is there significance in the statement, right hand?

1326. Did other preachers and writers locate Him differently?

1327. What verse of the Bible tells us when He sat down there?

1328. What does the word majesty refer to?

1329. What does the word heavens refer to?

1330. What is the meaning of the word minister?

1331. What is the meaning of the word sanctuary?

1332. Could it mean holy things? Why?

1333. Could it mean heaven, or the holy of holies?

1334. What is the true tabernacle?

1335. Is the church ever spoken of as a building? Cf. Act 15:16-17; 1Co 3:16; Heb 3:6.

1336. Does Rev 21:3, which says, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, have a bearing?

1337. Does Heb 9:11 refer to the same tabernacle?

1338. Verse two says this tabernacle was pitched by God, not man. If it is not the church, then what has He built besides the church, and where is it recorded?

1339. What is meant by the name Lord-Christ or God?

1340. If the Lord pitched, what is meant by it?

1341. Do we have any right to build differently than the Lord commanded?

1342. In this verse two words are significant, sacrifices and gifts, What is the difference?

1343. Would Christ be performing a priestly duty if He had nothing to offer?

1344. What did He offer?.

1345. Is this offering repeated? Cf. Heb 7:27; Heb 9:12; Heb 9:26; Heb 9:28; Heb 10:12.

1346. Verse four is a short one stating that Christ could not act as High Priest on earth, Why?

1347. Compare Num 18:3 to see that Levites were limited in duties and privileges.

1348. What is the meaning of the word serve?

1349. What is the meaning of the word copy?

1350. If all the Old Testament ritual and service was a copy or example of something to follow, was it necessary for the copy to be right?

1351. What happens in a newspaper if the first copy has mistakes undetected or carelessly prepared?

1352. What is a warning? Is it generally accompanied by a threat?

1353. Of what was Moses warned? Exo 25:40.

1354. Is this stronger than just telling him how to build?

1355. Would according to the pattern allow for substituting or alterations?

1356. Where did Moses get his pattern?

1357. Are there true symbols other than those of God?

1358. Do we have any warnings about the gospel being kept pure? Cf. Gal 1:8-9; Rev 22:18-19; 1Co 11:2; 2Ti 3:16-17.

1359. If the modernist is correct that there is no pattern for the church, do we have any right to be critical of Catholicism or Protestantism?

1360. What would have been revealed about the character of Moses if he had dared to change the pattern, or was careless?

1361. Could the same charge be brought to us?

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

, , .

. Syr., , caput. Vulg., capitulum, summa. Beta, caeterum eorum quae diximus haec summa est, moreover this is the sum of what we speak; summatim autem dicendo, to speak briefly.

. Syr., , of all these things; the head, chief, or principal of all these things. Vulg., super ea quae dicuntur. Rhem., the sum concerning these things which he said.

. Syr., We have an high priest, him who sitteth; omitting this word, or including it in , is, ille.

. Vulg., magnitudinis; which the Rhemists render by majesty; and they retain sedis for . Beza, majestatis illius; or, throni virtutis magnificandi. [1]

[1] TRANSLATIONS. . Literally, of the things which are being spoken. Conybeare and Howson. Of which we are speaking. Craik. In the course of being spoken. Turner. To what has been hitherto said. Ebrard. . The prominent point. Turner. The crowning point. Craik. Sumwill do here, if understood not of a recapitulation, but as a product resulting from all that goes before. Ebrard. The most important thing in regard to what we are now treating of. Stuart. ED.

Heb 8:1. Now of the things that are spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.

This first verse contains two things:

1. A preface unto that part of the ensuing discourse which immediately concerns the priesthood of Christ, unto the end of verse 5.

2. A declaration of the first pre-eminence of our high priest; which the apostle would have us in an especial manner to consider.

First, The preface is in these words, : which may be considered either as unto its design in general, or as unto the sense of the words:

1. The design of the apostle in this interlocution (which is not unusual with him), is to stir up the Hebrews unto a diligent consideration of what he insisted on, and to leave an impression of it on their minds. And this he doth for two reasons:

(1.) Lest the length and difficulty of his preceding discourse should have any way discomposed their minds, or wearied them in their attention, so as that they could not well retain the substance of what he pleaded. In such cases it was always usual with them who pleaded important causes before the wisest judges, to recapitulate what had been spoken at length before, and to show what hath been evinced by the arguments they had used in their plea. To this purpose speaks Quintilian, lib. 6: cap. i.:

Perorationis duplex ratio est posita, aut in rebus, aut in affectibus. Rerum repetitio et congregatio, quae Graece dicitur , a quibusdam Latinorum enumeratio, et memoriam judicis reficit, et totam simul causam ante oculos ponit; et etiam si per singula minus moverat, turba valet. In hac, quaae repetemus quam brevissime dicenda sunt, et (quod Graeco verbo patet) decurrendum per capita.

How this whole course is steered by the apostle in this place is easy for any one to observe.

(2.) Because of the importance of the matter in hand. He is treating of the very head of all the differences between the law and the gospel, between those who adhered unto Mosaical institutions and those who embraced the faith. Hence he calleth them unto a renewed attention unto what he delivered. For herein he set life and death before them, and was zealous for them, and earnest with them, that they would choose life, and not die in their unbelief.

2. The sense of the words is to be considered. is capitulum, caput; properly the head of any living creature. But the most frequent use of it is in a sense metaphorical, as it is here used by the apostle. And so it hath a double sense and use, whereunto it is principally applied (for it hath also other significations). For,

(1.) It is taken for that which is chief and principal in any matter, business, or cause. , Isoc.; The head of the whole business. , , Plato, de Legib., lib.; The principal thing in education or instruction. And so is caput used among the Latins: Caput est in omni procuratione negotii et muneris publici, ut avaritiae pellatur etiam minima suspicio; This is the chief or principal thing in the management of all public affairs, that all suspicion of covetousness be far away.

(2.) It is taken for the sum and substance of what hath been spoken or declared, reduced into a short scheme: , Ut summatim dicam, Demosthenes. And so some render these words summatim dicendo. And Isocrates hath an expression directly answering that of the apostle in this place, Nicoc.: , The sum of what hath been spoken. So , caput, the head, is used in the Hebrew: , Exo 30:12; When thou takest the head (the sum) of the children of Israel. So also Num 4:2. And in this sense is , used by our apostle, as some think, Eph 1:10 : but it may have another sense in that place.

In whether of these two significations it is here used by our apostle, will best appear from the consideration of what it is applied unto, . For these words also are capable of a double interpretation.

(1.) may be put for , in or among; and then the things themselves treated of may be intended., And if so, requires the first signification, the chief and principal thing or matter: Among all the things treated of, this is the principal; as indeed it is, and that which all other things in debate did depend upon.

(2.) If be in a manner redundant, and no more is intended but , of the things spoken, then is to be taken in the second signification, and denotes a recapitulation of them: This is that which my arguments amount unto, the sum of what I have pleaded.

Both these senses are consistent. For the apostle in this and the ensuing verses doth both briefly recapitulate what he had evinced by his preceding arguments, and also declare what is the principal thing that he had contended for and proved. I incline unto the latter signification of the word, respected in our translation; yet so as that the former also is true, and safely applicable unto the text.

And some directions we may take from the wisdom of the apostle in this management of his present subject, in our preaching or teaching of spiritual things; for,

Obs. 1. When the nature and weight of the matter treated of, or the variety of arguments wherein it is concerned, do require that our discourse of it should be drawn forth unto a length more than ordinary, it is useful to refresh the minds and relieve the memories of our hearers, by a brief recapitulation of the things insisted on. It is so, I say, sometimes; as this way is taken once, and but once, by our apostle. When it is necessary, is left unto the wisdom and choice of those who are called unto this work. I mean, of such who, laboring diligently and conscientiously in the discharge of it, do really consider at all times what is for the benefit and edification of their hearers. But this is to be done only on great and important occasions. The usual way of the repetition of the heads of sermons before preached, is, in my judgment, useless and unprofitable.

Obs. 2. When doctrines are important, and such as the eternal welfare of the souls of men are immediately concerned in, we are by all means to endeavor an impression of them on the minds of our hearers. Be they never so precious and worthy of all acceptation, ofttimes they will not obtain an entrance into mens minds, unless they have an edge ministerially put upon them. Wherefore they are by all suitable means, with gravity and zeal, to be called unto a diligent attendance unto them. Weight is to be laid doctrinally, in their delivery, on things that are of weight really in themselves.

And this is the first part of this verse, or the preface of what ensues,

Secondly, The second part of it, in the following words, contains the first general pre-eminence of our high priest, and that taken from his present and eternal state or condition. And there are three things considerable in the words:

1. Our relation unto this high priest.

2. The general denotation of him.

3. His eminency and dignity in particular above all others.

1. Our relation unto him is expressed in the word , we have. For the apostle, together with his assertion of the priesthood of Christ, and the declaration of the nature of it, doth frequently intersert the mention of our interest therein, or our relation unto him in the discharge of that office: Such an high priest became us, Heb 7:26; We have not an high priest that cannot, etc., Heb 4:15; The high priest of our profession, Heb 3:1; and here, We have such an high priest. And to the same purpose, We have an altar, Heb 13:10. And three things the apostle seems to design herein:

(1.) The dignity of the Christian church, as now separated from the church of the Jews. In all their confidence in their worship, that which they principally boasted of was their high priest and his office. He was anointed with the holy oil. He wore the garments that were made for beauty and for glory. He had on his forehead a plate of gold with that glorious inscription, Holiness unto Jehovah. And he alone entered into the holy place, having made expiation for the sins of the people. The Christians, who were now separated from them, they despised, as those who had no lot nor portion in all this glory; no such visible high priest as they had. So the same persons were afterwards reproached by the Pagans, that they had neither temples, nor altars, nor images or visible deities. So hard was it to call off the carnal minds of men from things visible and sensible in divine worship, unto those that are spiritual and heavenly. And herein lies the reproach of degenerated Christians, especially those of the Roman church, that whereas the gospel, in asserting the pure, heavenly, spiritual worship of God, had prevailed against the world, and triumphed over all that is carnal, invented to please the senses and satisfy the superstitious minds of men; they have made themselves the scorn and spoil of their conquered enemies, by returning to the same kind of worship, in various degrees, which was before destroyed and triumphed over.. And as therein they seem to make a public acknowledgment, that the gospel, in the management of their predecessors, had much injured the world, in the introduction of a worship spiritual and divine, excluding all those visible glories which it had found out to entertain the minds of men; so it will appear in the issue that they have made themselves transgressors, by building up what was before destroyed. But the primitive Christians did still oppose the spiritual worship of sanctified souls, in the observation of the institutions of Christ, unto all the pretences of glory and beauty pleaded to be in their outward forms. So the apostle here, to evince the dignity of the Christian church against the unbelief of the Jews, pleads their relation unto an invisible, spiritual high priest, exalted in glory and dignity far above all that they could enjoy by virtue of a carnal commandment. Whatever you think of us, whatever you boast of yourselves, we have an high priest;and that such an one as he immediately declares.

(2.) He would teach us, that whatever be the glory and dignity of this high priest, without an interest in him, without an especial relation unto him, unless we have an high priest, we are not concerned therein. Many do give their assent unto this truth, that Christ is a high priest; but how or wherein he is so to them they know not, nor yet do they make any use of him as such. Yea, unto many, the principal mysteries of the gospel are but mere notions and barren speculations; what it is to be practically influenced by them, and to live in the power of them, they know not. That there is a high priest, they believe, but what it is for them to have a high priest, they cannot understand. But this is that we are to look after, if we intend any benefit by it. And we may know whether we have a high priest or no, really and substantially, by the use which we make of him as such in all our approaches unto God. For he presides over the whole house of God, and all the sacred services thereof. None can come unto the Father but by him. Through him have we boldness, through him have we ability, through him have we access unto and acceptance with God. He presents both our persons and duties unto him. Without a daily improvement by faith of the office of Christ unto these ends, it cannot be said that we have a high priest.

(3.) That the office of the priesthood of Christ is confined unto the church, unto believers. Theirs he is, and for them alone doth he administer before God in this office.

2. There is a general denotation of this priest, as to his qualifications, in the word . He doth not now say, that we have an high priest, only; nor another high priest, not according to the ordinances of the law, which he had proved before, from the type of Melchisedec and the testimony of the psalmist; but moreover such an one as hath that dignity and those excellencies which he now ascribes unto him. The salvation of the church doth not depend merely on its having a high priest, which yet in itself is absolutely necessary thereunto, but on his dignity and excellency, his exaltation and glory.

Wherefore it is affirmed of him, that he is such an high priest as is set on the right hand of the throne of the glorious Majesty in the heavens. And two things we must consider in these words:

(1.) The design of the apostle in them; and,

(2.) Their particular interpretation:

(1.) The design of the apostle, as we observed before, was not to prove the reality of his priesthood, that he was truly a priest; nor yet absolutely the qualifications of his person; but his dignity and excellency. For our LORD Jesus Christ, when he was on the earth, and whilst he offered up to God his great propitiatory sacrifice, was, as unto his outward state and condition, inferior unto the Levitical high priests, who were in great honor and veneration among the people. But the state and condition of any in the bearing and discharge of an office is not to be esteemed and reckoned from what he condescends unto, with respect unto any action or duty belonging unto that office, for a king may condescend unto very mean services, when the condition of his subjects and good of the kingdom require it of him, but it is to be reckoned from his durable estate, and perpetual abode therein. Now, although our LORD Christ was for a season in a condition of deep humiliation, taking on him the form of a servant, and being esteemed even as a worm, and no man, which was necessary unto the sacrifice he had to offer, yet as unto his durable state, wherein he continues in the discharge of his office, he is incomparably exalted above all the high priests under the law. And this is that which the apostle designs here to declare. For what did the high priest do, after he had offered the anniversary sacrifice of expiation unto God? He entered, indeed, into the holy place with the blood of the sacrifice, presenting it there before the august pledges of the presence of God; but all the while he was there, he stood before the typical throne, or ark and mercy-seat, with holy awe and reverence; and immediately on the discharge of his present duty, he was to withdraw and go out of the holy place. A great privilege this was, and a great honor was herein put on the high priest; for all others, both priests and people, were everlastingly excluded out of that sanctuary. But what is this unto the glory of our high priest? For after he had offered his great sacrifice unto God, he entered not into the holy place made with hands, but into heaven itself. And he entered, not to stand with humble reverence before the throne, but to sit on the throne of God, at his right hand. Nor did he do so to abide there for a season, but for evermore.

(2.) As to the words themselves, we may observe, that the apostle three times in this epistle maketh use of them with some little variety, Heb 1:3; Heb 12:2, and in this place. Heb 1:3, He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; where there is no mention of the throne. Heb 12:2, He is set down at the right hand of the throne of God; where Majesty is not added. Here we have both, The right hand of the throne of the Majesty. In the first place, the glory of his kingly power is intended; in the last, his exaltation and glory, as they ensued on his sufferings; and in this place, the declaration of his glory in his priestly office. The same glory and advancement hath respect unto various acts and powers in the LORD Christ:

[1.] The manner of his enjoyment of this dignity and glory is expressed in the word , he sat down. Hereof there was nothing typical in the legal high priest, who never sat down in the holy place. But as he was in many things typed by the Levitical priests, so in what they could not reach unto, he was represented in Melchisedec, who was both a king and a priest. And hence he is prophesied of as a priest upon his throne, Zec 6:13. And the immutable stability of his state and condition is also intended.

[2.] The dignity itself consists in the place of his residence, where he sat down; and this was , at the right hand. See the exposition hereof, Heb 1:3.

[3.] This right hand is said to be . There is frequent mention in the Scripture of the throne of God. A throne is insigne regium, an ensign of royal power. That intended by it is the manifestation of the glory and power of God, in his authority and sovereign rule over all.

[4.] This throne is here said to be , of Majesty, or glorious greatness and power; that is, of God himself, for his essential glory and power are intended. The right hand of the throne of Majesty, is the same with the right hand of God; only God is represented in all his glory, as on his throne. Christ is set down at the right hand of God, as considered in all his glorious power and rule. Higher expression there cannot be used to lead us into a holy adoration of the tremendous invisible glory which is intended. And this is the eternal stable condition of the LORD Christ, our high priest, a state of inconceivable power and glory. Herein he dischargeth the remaining duties of his mediation, according as the nature of his especial offices do require. In this state doth he take care to provide for the application of the benefits of his oblation or sacrifice unto believers; and that by intercession, whereof we have spoken.

[5.] Thus is he said to be , in the heavens; as in the other place , in the highest, that is, heavens. And by the heavens here, not these visible, aspectable heavens are intended, for with respect unto them he is said to be exalted above all heavens, and to have passed through them, but it is that which the Scripture calls the heaven of heavens, 1Ki 8:27, wherein is the especial residence and manifestation of the glorious presence of God. With respect hereunto our Savior hath taught us to call on our Father which is in heaven. And from the words we may observe, that,

Obs. 3. The principal glory of the priestly office of Christ depends on the glorious exaltation of his person. To this end is it here pleaded by the apostle, and thereby he evinceth his glorious excellency above all the high priests under the law. To evidence and make useful this observation, the things ensuing are to be observed:

1. The divine nature of Christ is capable of no real exaltation by an addition of glory, but only by the way of manifestation. So God absolutely is often in the Scriptures said to be exalted; that is, he is so when he himself, by any acts of grace or providence, makes the eternal glory of his power, his holiness, or any other property of his nature, manifest and conspicuous; or when others ascribe unto him the glory and praise that are his due. So only may the LORD Christ be exalted, or made glorious, with respect unto his divine nature, wherein he is essentially over all, God blessed for ever. And there is in this way an exaltation or manifestation of glory peculiar and proper unto the person of Christ, as distinct from the persons of the Father and the Holy Spirit; for he did in a peculiar way and manner for a season forego and leave his glory, as to the manifestation of it. For

being (essentially) in the form of God, and counting it not robbery to be equal with God, yet he made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, Php 2:6-7.

In his incarnation, and his whole converse on the earth, he cast a veil over his eternal glory, so as that it appeared not in its own native lustre. Those, indeed, who believed on him,

beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, Joh 1:14;

but they saw it darkly, and as in a glass, during the time of his humiliation. But after his resurrection his glory was unveiled, and made conspicuous, even when he was

declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Rom 1:4.

2. The person of Christ, as to his divine nature, was always on the throne, and is incapable of the exaltation here mentioned, of sitting down at the right hand of it. Although he came down from heaven, although he descended into the lower parts of the earth, although he was exposed unto all miseries, was obedient unto death, the death of the cross, wherein God redeemed his church with his own blood, yet did he all this in the human nature that he assumed. His divine person can no more really leave the throne of majesty than cease to be. So he saith of himself,

No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Sea of man, which is in heaven, Joh 3:13,

His ascension into heaven in this place, which preceded the actual ascension of his human nature, is nothing but his admission into the knowledge of heavenly things, of all the secrets of the counsel of God (see Joh 1:18, Mat 11:27); for it is of the knowledge of heavenly mysteries that he is there discoursing with Nicodemus. In his incarnation, he came down from heaven, assuming a nature upon the earth; the highest condescension of God, And whereas the acting of his power on the earth is often called his coming down from heaven, Gen 18:21, Isa 64:1, how much more may this infinite condescension of the second person in assuming our nature be so called! But yet he was still in heaven; the Son of man, which is in heaven. In his divine nature he was still on the throne of majesty; for this being an inseparable property of divine authority, he could never really forego it. Then,

3. It is the human nature of Christ, or Christ in his human nature, or with respect unto it, that is capable of this real exaltation, by a real addition of glory. It is not the manifestation of his glory with respect unto his human nature, but the real collation of glory on him after his ascension, that is intended. This the whole Scripture testifieth unto, namely, a real communication of glory unto Christ by the Father, after his ascension, which he had not before. See Luk 24:26; Joh 17:24; Act 2:33, Rom 14:9; Eph 1:20-23; Php 2:9-11; Heb 1:3; Heb 12:2; 1Pe 1:21; Rev 5:12. And concerning this glory given him of God, we may observe,

(1.) That it is not absolutely infinite and essentially divine glory. This cannot be communicated unto any. A creature, as was the human nature of Christ, cannot be made God, by an essential communication of divine properties unto it. Neither are they so communicable, nor is that a capable subject of their inhesion. Wherefore they speak dangerously who assert a real communication of the properties of the one nature of Christ unto the other, so as that the human nature of Christ shall be omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient: neither doth the union of the two natures in the person of Christ require any more the transfusion of the divine properties into the human, than those of the human into the divine. If, therefore, by that union, the human nature should be thought to be rendered subjectively omnipotent and omnipresent, the divine, on the other hand, must become limited and finite. But whatever belongs unto Christ with respect unto either nature, belongs unto the person of Christ; and therein he is all that he is in either nature; and in both hath done and doth what in either of them he hath done and doth, they yet continuing distinct in their essential properties.

(2.) Yet this exaltation and glory of Christ in his human nature is not only absolutely above, but also of another kind, than the utmost of what any other created being either hath or is capable of. It is more than any other creature is capable of, because it is founded in the union of his person; a privilege which no other creature can ever pretend unto, or be made partaker of unto eternity, Heb 2:16. This renders his glory in his exaltation of another kind than that of the most glorious creatures in their best condition. Again, it consists greatly in that power and authority over the whole creation, and every individual in it, and all their concerns, which is committed unto him. See our explanation hereof at large on Heb 1:3.

4. This exaltation of the person of Christ gives glory unto his office, as the apostle here declares. It is the person of Christ which is vested with the office of the priesthood, or God could not have redeemed the church with his own blood; although he exercises all the duties of it, both here below and above, in the human nature only. And it is the person of Christ which is thus exalted and made glorious, although the especial subject of this exaltation and glory be the human nature only. And this gives glory unto his office; for, (1.) This is a manifest pledge and evidence of the absolute perfection of his oblation, and that by one offering he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified. When the high priest of old appeared for a while in the holy place, he returned again unto his former station, that he might be in a condition to offer another sacrifice at the return of the year; and hence doth our apostle prove that none of the worshippers were perfected by those sacrifices. But our high priest, having offered himself once for all, now sitting down for ever at the right hand of God, in glory and majesty inconceivable, it is evident that he hath fully expiated the sins of all that come unto God by him. And this declares the glory of his office.

(2.) By his glorious power he makes all things subservient unto the ends of his mediation; for he is given to be head over all things to the church. All things are in his power and at his disposal, as he is exalted at the right hand of God; and he will assuredly make them all work together for the good of them that do believe. And,

(3.) He is able to render the persons and duties of believers accepted in the sight of God. To present them unto God is the great remaining duty of his office. That they be so, is their only real concern in this world, and that alone which their minds are principally exercised about. And what greater security can they have hereof than the interest and glory which this their high priest hath in heaven? 1Jn 2:1-2.

Fuente: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews

Having established the fact of the superiority of Christ, the argument now proceeds to deal with the superiority of the relationships consequent thereupon. The central verity is set forth in the words, “We have such a High Priest.” Because this is so, His ministry must be superior in all its details. It is so in the place of its exercise. In position and localization He is not on earth. He rules over the whole spiritual House, ”which House are we,” in which God dwells, and in which He is the perfect and prevailing Priest.

The result of this more excellent ministry and place of ministry is a better covenant. In a quotation from Jeremiah the writer claims that in and through Christ the new order which prophets saw and foretold is realized.

The superiority of the covenant is threefold. First, it is written on the heart, and so is internal rather than external. Second, it is inclusive, for its far-reaching scope men will not need to teach each other concerning God. Finally, it is based on that incalculable blessings of the forgiveness of sins, the putting away of those things which so long had stood between man and God. The writer ends by saying that the old “is nigh unto vanishing away” because of the coming of the new.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

1 The point of all this is, we do have such a highpriest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of Majesty (see 1:3) in the heavens, 2 and who officiates in the sanctuary or true tabernacle set up by the Lord and not by man. 3 Now, as every highpriest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices, he too must have something to offer. 4 Were he on earth, he would not be a priest at all, for there are priests already to offer the gifts prescribed by Law (5 men who serve a mere outline and shadow of the heavenly-as Moses was instructed when he was about to execute the building of the tabernacle: see, God said, that (sc. ) you make everything on the pattern shown you upon the mountain). 6 As it is, however, the divine service he has obtained is superior, owing to the fact that he mediates a superior covenant, enacted with superior promises.

The terseness of the clause , (v. 1) is spoiled by the insertion of before (A K L P vg boh syr arm eth Cosm). In v. 4 becomes in Dc K L syrhkl arm Chrys. Theod., and a similar group of authorities add after . is prefixed needlessly to by c D K L P Chrys. Dam. to conform to the usage in 7:5, 9:22; but the sense is really unaffected, for the only legal regulation conceivable is that of the Law. In v. 6. and (9:26) are both attested; the former is more common in the papyri. The Hellenistic (from Aristotle onwards) form (c B Dc 5 226, 487, 623, 920, 927, 1311, 1827, 1836, 1873, 2004, 2143, etc.: or , c A D* K L) has been corrected in P 6, 33, 1908 Orig. to the Attic . Before , is omitted by D* 69, 436, 462 arm Thdt.

(the pith, Coverdale), which is nominative absolute, is used as in Cic. ad Attic. v.18: et multa, immo omnia, quorum , etc., Dem. 13:36: , , (at the close of a speech); Musonius (ed. Hense, 67 f.) , etc. The word in this sense is common throughout literature and the more colloquial papyri, here with (concerning what has been said). In passing from the intricate argument about the Melchizedek priesthood, which is now dropped, the writer disentangles the salient and central truth of the discussion, in order to continue his exposition of Jesus as highpriest. Such, I have said, was the for us, and such is the we have -One who is enthroned, , next to God himself. While Philo spiritualizes the highpriesthood, not unlike Paul (Rom 12:1f.), by arguing that devotion to God is the real highpriesthood ( , , de Fug. 7), our author sees its essential functions transcended by Jesus in the spiritual order.

The phrase in v. 2 , offers two points of interest. First, the linguistic form . The form stands between the older or , which waned apparently from the third cent. b.c., and the later form; sim. socios habet omnium temporum papyros praeter perpaucas recentiores quae sacris fere cum libris conspirantes scribunt (Crnert, Memoria Graeca Hercul. 39). Then, the meaning of . Philo has the phrase, in Leg. Alleg. iii. 46, , where means sacred things, as in de Fug. 17, where the Levites are described as priests . This might be the meaning here. But the writer uses elsewhere (9:8f. 10:19, 13:11) of the sanctuary, a rendering favoured by the context. By he means, as often in the LXX, the sanctuary in general, without any reference to the distinction (cp. 9:2f.) between the outer and the inner shrine. The LXX avoids the pagan term in this connexion, though itself was already in use among ethnic writers (e.g. the edict of Ptolemy iii., = in sacrario templi, Dittenberger, OGIS 56:59). It is here defined ( epexegetic) as the true or real , 1 (a reminiscence of Num 24:6 , and of Exo 33:7 ). The reality and authenticity of the writers faith come out in a term like . What he means by it he will explain in a moment (v. 5). Meanwhile he turns to the of Jesus in this ideal sanctuary. This of ours, in his vocation (v. 3, cp. 5:1), must have (, sc. ) some sacrifice to present before God, though what this offering is, the writer does not definitely say, even later in 9:24. The analogy of a highpriest carrying the blood of an animal inside the sacred shrine had its obvious limitations, for Jesus was both and offering, by his self-sacrifice. is the Hellenistic aorist subjunctive, where classical Greek would have employed a future indicative (Radermacher, 138). The writer proceeds to argue that this is far superior to the levitical cultus (vv. 4f.). Even in the heavenly sanctuary there must be sacrifice of some kind-for sacrifice is essential to communion, in his view. It is not a sacrifice according to the levitical ritual; indeed Jesus on this level would not be in levitical orders at all. But so far from that being any drawback or disqualification to our , it is a proof of his superiority, for the bible itself indicates that the levitical cultus is only an inferior copy of the heavenly order to which Jesus belongs.

Instead of contrasting at this point (v. 4) (sacrifices, as in 11:4) of the levitical priests with the spiritual sacrifice of Jesus, he hints that the mere fact of these sacrifices being made is a proof of their inferiority. This is put into a parenthesis (v. 5); but, though a grammatical aside, it contains one of the writers fundamental ideas about religion (Eusebius, in Praep. Evang. xii.19, after quoting Heb 8:5, refers to the similar Platonic view in the sixth book of the Republic). Such priests (, the simple relative as in 9:2, 10:8, 11, 12:5) (with dative as in 13:10) (cp. 9:23). here as in 9:23 is a mere outline or copy (the only analogous instance in the LXX being Eze 42:15 ); the phrase is practically a hendiadys for a shadowy outline, a second-hand, inferior reproduction. The proof of this is given in a reference to Exo 25:40: – ,2 as often in the LXX and the papyri, of divine revelations as well as of royal instructions- . The subject of the is God, understood from , and the 1 introduces the quotation, in which the writer, following Philo (Leg. Alleg. iii. 33), as probably codex Ambrosianus (F) of the LXX followed him, adds . He also substitutes for , which Philo keeps ( ), and retains the LXX (like Stephen in Act 7:44). The idea was current in Alexandrian Judaism, under the influence of Platonism, that this on earth had been but a reproduction of the pre-existent heavenly sanctuary. Thus the author of Wisdom makes Solomon remind God that he had been told to build the temple ( ) as (9:8), where is plainly the heavenly sanctuary as the eternal archetype. This idealism determines the thought of our writer (see Introd. pp. xxxi f.). Above the shows and shadows of material things he sees the real order of being, and it is most real to him on account of Jesus being there, for the entire relationship between God and man depends upon this function and vocation of Jesus in the eternal sanctuary.

Such ideas were not unknown in other circles. Seneca (Ep. lviii.18-19) had just explained to Lucilius that the Platonic ideas were what all visible things were created from, and what formed the pattern for all things, quoting the Parmenides, 132 D, to prove that the Platonic idea was the everlasting pattern of all things in nature. The metaphor is more than once used by Cicero, e.g. Tusc. iii.2. 3, and in de Officiis, 3:17, where he writes: We have no real and life-like (solidam et expressam effigiem) likeness of real law and genuine justice; all we enjoy is shadow and sketch (umbra et imaginibus). Would that we were true even to these! For they are taken from the excellent patterns provided by nature and truth. But our authors thought is deeper. In the contemporary Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch the idea of Exo 25:40 is developed into the thought that the heavenly Jerusalem was also revealed to Moses along with the patterns of the and its utensils (4:4f.); God also showed Moses the pattern of Zion and its measures, in the pattern of which the sanctuary of the present time was to be made (Charles tr.). The origin of this notion is very ancient; it goes back to Sumerian sources, for Gudea the prince-priest of Lagash (c. 3000 b.c.) receives in a vision the plan of the temple which he is commanded to build (cp. A. Jeremias, Babylonisches im NT, pp. 62 f.). It is to this fundamental conception that the author of recurs, only to elaborate it in an altogether new form, which went far beyond Philo. Philos argument (Leg. Alleg. iii. 33), on this very verse of Exodus, is that Bezaleel only constructed an imitation () of given to Moses; the latter was called up to the mountain to receive the direct idea of God, whereas the former worked simply . In de Plant. 6 he observes that the very name of Bezaleel ( ) means one who works in shadows ( ); in De Somniis, i. 35, he defines it as in the shadow of God, and again contrasts Bezaleel with Moses: , , . In Vit. Mos. iii.3 he argues that in building the Moses designed to produce .

He then continues (v. 6 , logical as in 2:8, 9:26, answering to in v. 4) the thought of Christs superior by describing him again (cp. 7:22) in connexion with the superior , and using now not but . (see on Gal 3:19) commonly means an arbitrator (e.g. Job 9:33, ReinP 44:3 [a.d. 104] ) or intermediary in some civil transaction (OP 1298:19); but this writers use of it, always in connexion with (9:15, 12:24)1 and always as a description of Jesus (as in 1Ti 2:5), implies that it is practically (see on 7:22) a synonym for . Indeed, linguistically, it is a Hellenistic equivalent for the Attic , and in Diod. Siculus, iv. 54 ( ), its meaning corresponds to that of . The sense is plain, even before the writer develops his ideas about the new , for, whenever the idea of reconciliation emerges, terms like and are natural. is Philos phrase2 for Moses (Vit. Mos. iii:19). And as a was a gracious order of religious fellowship, inaugurated upon some historical occasion by sacrifice, it was natural to speak of Jesus as the One who mediated this new of Christianity. He gave it (Theophyl. ); he it was who realized it for men and who maintains it for men. All that the writer has to say meantime about the is that it has been enacted (v. 6) . This passive use of is not unexampled; cf. e.g. OGIS. 493:55 (ii a.d.) . It is implied, of course, that God is (as in LXX Psa 83:7). What the better promises are, he now proceeds to explain, by a contrast between their and its predecessor. The superiority of the new is shown by the fact that God thereby superseded the with which the levitical cultus was bound up; the writer quotes an oracle from Jeremiah, again laying stress on the fact that it came after the older (vv. 7-13), and enumerating its promises ascontained in a new .

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second. 8 Whereas God does find fault with the people of that covenant, when he says:

The day is coming, saith the Lord,

when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.

9 It will not be on the lines of the covenant I made with their fathers,

on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypts Land;

for they would not hold to my covenant,

so I left them alone, saith the Lord,

10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel when that (the day of v. 8) day comes, saith the Lord;

I will set my laws within their mind,

inscribing them upon their hearts;

I will be a God ( , i.e. all that men can expect a God to be) to them,

and they shall be a People to me;

11 one citizen will no longer teach his fellow,

one man will no longer teach his brother ( , i.e. one another, Exo 10:23),

saying, Know the Lord.

for all shall know me, low and high together.

12 I will be merciful to their iniquities,

and remember their sins no more.

13 By saying a new covenant, he antiquates the first. And whatever is antiquated and aged is on the verge of vanishing.

The contents of the prediction of a by God, and the very fact that such was necessary, prove the defectiveness of the first . The writer is struck by the mention of a new even in the OT itself, and he now explains the significance of this. As for (sc. ) , (if no fault could have been found with it), . is replaced by in B* (so B. Weiss, Blass); but, while could follow (Mat 21:30), is the term chosen in 10:9, and B* is far too slender evidence by itself. is one of those idiomatic phrases, like and , of which the writer was fond. The force of the after is: and there was occasion for a second , the first was not , since, etc. It need make little or no difference to the sense whether we read (c B Dc L 6, 38, 88, 104, 256, 436, 487, 999, 1311, 1319, 1739, 1837, 1845, 1912, 2004, 2127 Origen) or (* A D* K P W 33 vg arm), for can take a dative as well as an accusative (cf. Arist. Rhet. i.6. 24, : Aesch. Prom. 63, ) in the sense of censuring or finding fault with, and naturally goes with or . The objection to taking with 1 is that the quotation is not addressed directly to the people, but spoken at large. Thus the parallel from 2 Mal 2:7 ( ) is not decisive, and the vg is probably correct in rendering vituperans enim eos dicit. The context explains here as in 4:8 and 11:28 who are meant by . The real interest of the writer in this Jeremianic oracle is shown when he returns to it in 10:16-18; what arrests him is the promise of a free, full pardon at the close. But he quotes it at length, partly because it did imply the supersession of the older and partly because it contained high promises (vv. 10-12), higher than had yet been given to the People. No doubt it also contains a warning (v. 9), like the text from the 95th psalm (3:7f.), but this is not why he recites it (see p. xl).

The text of Jer 38:31-34 (31:31-34) as he read it in his bible (i.e. in A) ran thus:

, ,

, .

, ,

Our author follows as usual the text of A upon the whole (e.g. for in v. 31, in v. 32, the omission of after and of after in v. 33, for in v. 34 and the omission of after ), but substitutes (his) for in v. 31, reads for in v. 32 and v. 33, alters into (Q*), and follows B in reading . before the verb (v. 33), and in v. 34, as well as in omitting . (A ) in the former verse; in v. 34 he reads ( Q) instead of , the forms of and being repeatedly confused (cp. Thackeray, 278). These minor changes may be partly due to the fact that he is quoting from memory. In some cases his own text has been conformed to other versions of the LXX; e.g. A D boh restore in v. 10, * K vg Clem. Chrys. read (with in LXX), though the singular1 is plainly a conformation to (Fr den Plural sprechen ausser A D L noch B, wo nur das C in verschrieben und daraus geworden ist, und P, wo der Dat. in den Acc. verwandelt, B. Weiss in Texte u. Untersuchungen, xiv. 3. 16, 55); B arm revive the LXX (B) variant ; the LXX (Q) variant is substituted for by P vg syrhkl eth 38 206 218 226 257 547 642 1288 1311 1912 etc. Cyril, and the LXX (B Q ) restored after by De L syr boh eth, etc. On the other hand, a trait like the reading in the LXX text of Q* may be due to the influence of Hebrews itself. The addition of after or before in v. 12 is a homiletic gloss from 10:17, though strongly entrenched in c A C D K L P 6 104 326 etc. vg pesh arm Clem

, a literary LXX variant for , recalls the phrase (Jer 41:8 (34:8), and, as 12:24 ( ) shows, the writer draws no distinction between and (v. 8). In v. 9 the genitive absolute ( ) after , instead of (as Justin correctly puts it, Dial. xi.), is a Hellenistic innovation, due here to translation, but paralleled in Bar 2:28 ); in (causal only here and in v. 10) , the latter is our abide by, in the sense of obey or practise, exactly as in Isokrates, , 20: . Bengel has a crisp comment on here and on (correlata sed ratione inversa; populus fecerat initium tollendi foederis prius, in novo omnia et incipit et perficit Deus); and, as it happens, there is a dramatic contrast between here and the only other use of the verb in this epistle (2:3). In v. 10 , by the omission of , is left hanging in the air; but (cp. Moulton, 222) such participles could be taken as finite verbs in popular Greek of the period (cp. e.g. in 2Co 8:19). The is to be on entirely fresh lines, not a mere revival of the past; it is to realize a knowledge of God which is inward and intuitive (vv. 10, 11). There is significance in the promise, . A was always between God and his people, and this had been the object even of the former (Exo 6:7); now it is to be realized at last. Philos sentence (even if we are sluggish, however, He is not sluggish about taking to Himself those who are fit for His service; for He says, I will take you to be a people for myself, and I will be your God, De Sacrif. Abelis et Caini, 26) is an apt comment; but our author, who sees the new fulfilled in Christianity, has his own views about how such a promise and purpose was attainable, for while the oracle ignores the sacrificial ritual altogether, he cannot conceive any pardon apart from sacrifice, nor any apart from a basal sacrifice. These ideas he is to develop in his next paragraphs, for it is the closing promise of pardon1 which is to him the supreme boon. Meanwhile, before passing on to explain how this had been mediated by Jesus, he (v. 13) drives home the truth of the contrast between old and new (see Introd., p. xxxix). (same construction as in 2:8)-when the word (sc. ) was pronounced, it sealed the doom of the old . () in this transitive sense (he hath abrogat, Tyndale) is known to the LXX (Job 9:5, Lam 3:4, both times of God in action); is practically equivalent to , and implies decay (see Wilamowitz on Eur. Herakles, 1223). The two words (as in 6:8) , at the end of the paragraph, sound like the notes of a knell, though they have no contemporary reference; the writer simply means that the end of the old was at hand (p. xxii). The new would soon follow, as it had done (1:1). The verb (-) is applied to legislation (e.g., Lysias, 868, ) in the sense of abolition, lapsing or falling into desuetude, Dion. Hal. Ant. iii. 178, (i.e. Numas laws) , the opposite of being (ibid. ix. 608, , , ), and the sense of disappearance in appears already in the LXX (e.g. Jer 28:37 ).

But the new is also superior to the old by its sacrifice (9:1f.), sacrifice being essential to any forgiveness such as has been promised. The older had its sanctuary and ritual (vv. 1-5), but even these (vv. 6f.) indicated a defect.

A [02: 4].

K [018:1:1].

L [020: 5] cont. 1:1-13:10.

P [025: 3] cont. 1:1-12:8 12:11-13:25.

boh The Coptic Version of the NT in the Northern Dialect (Oxford, 1905), vol. iii. pp. 472-555.

Cosm Cosmas Indicopleustes (ed. E. O. Winstedt, CAmbridge, 1909)

D [06: 1026] cont. 1:1-13:20. Codex Claromontanus is a Graeco-Latin MS, whose Greek text is poorly* reproduced in the later (saec. ix.-x.) E = codex Sangermanensis. The Greek text of the latter (1:1-12:8) is therefore of no independent value (cp. Hort in WH, 335-337); for its Latin text, as well as for that of F=codex Augiensis (saec. ix.), whose Greek text of has not been preserved, see below, p. lxix.

Theod. Theodore of Mospsuestia

[01: 2).

B [03: 1] cont. 1:1-9:18: for remainder cp. cursive 293.

5 [ 453]

226 [ 156]

487 [ 171]

623 [ 173]

920 [ 55]

927 [ 251]

1311 [ 170]

1827 [ 367]

1836 [ 65]

1873 [ 252]

2004 [ 56]

2143 [ 184]

[044: 6] cont. 1:1-8:11 9:19-13:25.

6 [ 356] cont. 1:1-9:3 10:22-13:25

33 [ 48] Horts 17

1908 [O 103]

69 [ 505]

436 [ 172]

462 [ 502]

Thdt. Theodoret

Philo Philonis Alexandriai Opera Quae Supersunt (recognoverunt L. Cohn et P. Wendland).

LXX The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint Version (ed. H. B. Swete).

OGIS Dittenbergers Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae (1903-1905).

1 is not assimilated, though might have been written; the practice varied (cp. e.g. Deu 5:31 , and 12:1 ).

Radermacher Neutestamentliche Grammatik (1911), in Lietzmanns Handbuch zum Neuen Testament (vol. i.).

2 Passively in the NT in Act 10:22, but the exact parallel is in Josephus, Ant. iii.8. 8, .

1 Put before , because the point is not that the oracle was given, but what the oracle contained.

ReinP Papyrus Grecs et Dmotiques (Paris, 1905), ed. Th. Reinach.

OP The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (ed. B. P. Grenfell and A. Hunt).

1 In these two latter passages, at least, there may be an allusion to the contemporary description of Moses as mediator of the covenant (arbiter testamenti, Ass. Mosis, i.14). The writer does not contrast Jesus with Michael, who was the great angelic mediator in some circles of Jewish piety (cp. Jub 1:29, Test. Dan_6).

2 Josephus (Ant. xvi.2. 2) says that Herod , and that his influence moved . .

Weiss B. Weiss, Textkritik der paulinischen Briefe (in Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, vol. xiv. 3), also Der Hebrerbrief in Zeitgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung (1910).

Blass F. Blass, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch: vierte, vllig neugearbeitete Auflage, besorgt von Albert Debrunner (1913); also, Brief an die Hebrer, Text mit Angabe der Rhythmen (1903).

38 [ 355]

88 [ 200]

104 [ 103]

256 [ 216]

999 [ 353]

1319 [ 180]

1739 [ 78]

1837 [ 192]

1845 [ 64]

1912 [ 1066]

2127 [ 202]

W [I] cont. 1:1-3, 9-12. 2:4-7, 12-14. 3:4-6, 14-16 4:3-6, 12-14 5:5-7 6:1-3, 10-13, 20 7:1-2, 7-11, 18-20, 27-28 8:1, 7-9 9:1-4, 9-11, 16-19, 25-27 10:5-8, 16-18, 26-29, 35-38 11:6-7, 12-15, 22-24, 31-33, 38-40 12:1, 7-9, 16-18, 25-27 13:7-9, 16-18, 23-25: NT MSS in Freer Collection, The Washington MS of the Epp. of Paul (1918), pp. 294-306. Supports Alexandrian text, and is quite free from Western readings.

1 is then by way of censure, and some think the writer purposely avoided adding . Which, in view of what he says in v. 13, is doubtful; besides, he has just said that the former was not .

1 only occurs in Hebrews in quotations (here, 10:17, 13:5); out of about ninety-six occurrences in the NT, only eight are with the future.

Thackeray H. St J. Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek (1909).

vg vg Vulgate, saec. iv.

1 That takes the accusative here is shown by 10:16; cannot be the genitive singular alongside of an accusative.

C [04: 3] cont. 2:4-7:26 9:15-10:24 12:16-13:25.

206 [ 365]

218 [ 300]

257 [ 466]

547 [ 157]

642 [ 552] cont. 1:1-7:18 9:13-13:25

1288 [ 162]

326 [ 257]

Moulton J. H. Moultons Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. i. (2nd edition, 1906).

1 With compare the parable of R. Jochanan and R. Eliezer on Gods readiness to forget the sinful nature of his servants: There is a parable concerning a king of flesh and blood, who said to his servants, Build me a great palace on the dunghill. They went and built it for him. It was not thenceforward the kings pleasure to remember the dunghill which had been there (Chagiga, 16 a. i. 27).

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

The Mediator of the New Covenant

Heb 8:1-13

Such a High Priest, Heb 8:1-6. He sits because His work is finished so far as His sacrifice is concerned. His place is at Gods right hand-the seat of power. By faith we, too, may serve in the inner sanctuary of the spirit. Before you start building, and while engaged in building, your life-work, see that your eyes are fixed on the divine ideal and pattern.

Such a new covenant, Heb 8:7-13. It is as superior to the former as Christs priesthood is to Aarons. A covenant is a promise, made on conditions to be fulfilled, and attested by an outward sign, like the rainbow, or circumcision, or the Lords Supper. The covenant under which we live is between God and Christ on behalf of those who belong to Him. We have a perfect right to put our hand on every one of these eight provisions, and claim that each be made good to us. We need not ask that God should do as he has said, but with lowly reverence expect that He will-especially when we drink of the cup of the New Covenant at the Lords table.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Subdivision 2. Chap. 8

The Mediator of the New Covenant

Section A. Heb 8:1-6

The Ascended Priest

We now have a summing up of the instruction we have already received concerning the Priesthood of our Blessed Lord. We see in Him a High Priest who through His own inherent right has taken a place which no Levitical priest could ever take. Instead of merely being permitted to enter once a year into the Holy of Holies, and that only for a few moments, not daring to sit down in the presence of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the ascended Man, has entered into the heavenly sanctuary and is there seated on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. There He ministers in the Holiest in that glorious tabernacle of which the earthly tent was but a type.

How important it is for us to realize that we are represented before God by a Man in the glory, for though we no longer know Christ after the flesh, yet He has gone up to Heaven as the representative Man to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

The earthly high priest of old was appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. By gifts we understand those offerings which were the expression of the grateful, adoring hearts of the people of Israel. The sacrifices, on the other hand, had to do directly with making expiation for sin. Our Lord did this latter when He offered Himself up on the cross. But now that He is ministering in the heavenly sanctuary, it is of course necessary that He have something to offer. He presents before God our prayers and praises. Our heartfelt worship ascends to the Father by Him.

Our great High Priest is sitting

At Gods right hand above;

For us His hands uplifted

In sympathy and love.

To all our prayers and praises,

Christ adds His sweet perfume,

And love the censer raises,

These odors to consume.

We may often be discouraged as we realize something of the imperfections even of our highest and best efforts to glorify God. Like Cowper, we may exclaim:

Sin twines itself about my thoughts,

And slides into my prayers.

But it is blessed to know that nothing reaches God that is not perfect. Our Great High Priest takes out of our prayers and praises everything that is unholy or of the flesh, everything that is contrary to the nature of the God we adore. Then to what is left, He adds his own infinite perfections and thus presents all to the Father on our behalf.

His Priesthood is altogether heavenly in character, for, If He were on earth He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. This is not to say that He never acted in a priestly capacity while in this scene. He certainly did. As a Priest, He prayed for His disciples. In the seventeenth of John we have a wonderful sample of His High Priestly intercession. As Priest too, He offered Himself upon the cross as the supreme sacrifice for sin, as in the case of Aaron offering the bullock and the goat on the great day of atonement. But the point is, His entire Priesthood was heavenly in character. It was not inherited after the Aaronic order. Looked at from that standpoint, He would not be a Priest at all, as He did not belong to the tribe of Levi or the household of Aaron. He is the Second Man, the Lord from Heaven, and as such He is our Great High Priest, fulfilling the types and shadows of heavenly things, as set forth, for instance, in the book of Leviticus. In fact everything in connection with the tabernacle and its service was typical of Christ, picturing His glorious Person and His wondrous work. This was why God was so particular in regard to all its details. Moses was admonished of God, we are told, when he was about to make the tabernacle: See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount. There was no room for human ingenuity or for Moses own thoughts. All must be as ordered of God, for He alone knew the Son and the work He was to accomplish.

And now that the typical dispensation has been replaced by the present economy of grace, Christ has entered upon His better ministry, owing to the fact that He is the Mediator of a better covenant which was established upon better promises. The covenant of old depended upon mans ability to carry out its requirements. God in effect said, If you will do thus and so, I will do certain things. Thus the promise of blessing rested upon mans ability to claim that blessing on the ground of his obedience to the law. No man ever could obtain the promises on that basis. And so our Lord Jesus took upon Himself the curse of a broken law, was made a curse for us, became the great sin offering, and now has become the Mediator of a better covenant, in which all the promise is on Gods part and man receives every blessing as pure grace.

Section B. Heb 8:7-13

The Better Covenant Supersedes the Old

Had that first covenant been perfect, it would never have been set to one side and a new covenant brought in. But because of its imperfection on account of the weakness and frailty of the flesh, God had declared long before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ into the world that a new covenant was to be consummated with Israel and Judah. The apostle quotes from Jer 31:31-34 : For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when 1 will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in My covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put My laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to Me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know Me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. This new covenant is clearly a reaffirmation of the unconditional covenant made with Abraham, which the law, coming in centuries later, could not annul. During all the present years of wandering Israel and Judah are under the curse of that broken law. But in the regeneration, when they shall be gathered back to their own land and restored to the favor of the Lord, this covenant of grace will be made with them.

It is most important to realize that nowhere are we told of a covenant made with the Church. In Rom 9:4 we learn that the covenants pertained to Israel. They were the chosen people with whom the Sinaitic covenant was made. According to the terms of that covenant they have forfeited all claim upon Gods favor. But He cannot deny Himself. He can never go back upon the covenant made with Abraham, by the terms of which He promised blessing unconditionally to Abrahams seed. These promises He reiterates in the new covenant. The blood of that covenant has been shed upon the cross. Our Lord said, as He gave the communion cup to His disciples, This is the new covenant in My blood which is shed for you. On the basis of that precious blood all who now believe in Him who shed it, enter into the spiritual blessings of the new covenant, even though Gentiles after the flesh, and therefore by nature, strangers to the covenants of promise. But in the fulness of times, when the day of Israels blessing shall arrive, the new covenant will be confirmed to them and they will be born of God-a nation shall be born in a day-and He will own them as His covenant people. His laws will then be instilled in their minds and written upon their hearts, and they will render to Him glad, happy service, not in order to make themselves worthy of covenant blessing, but because of the gladness of their souls when they know Him as their God and realize that they are indeed His ransomed people. The day of their blindness will have gone forever. The veil will be taken away from their hearts. No longer in need of human instruction, they shall all know the Lord from the least to the greatest in that wondrous day when He will be merciful to their unrighteousness and will remember their sins and iniquities no more.

While this does not reach the full height of Christian blessing, yet it will be wonderful grace indeed shown to the people who failed so terribly when they crucified the Lord of glory. The new covenant says nothing of entrance into the Holiest, as we now know it; nothing of being raised up together and seated together in Christ Jesus in the heavenlies; nothing of union with Him as members of His Body by the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is blessing for the earth and on the earth in the coming day. But the fact that all these heavenly privileges are secured for the Church now by the shedding of the same blood of the covenant that is to procure future blessing for Israel, leads the apostle in the chapters that follow to stress our present title to enter into the Holiest, while Israel and Judah are still dispersed among the Gentiles, waiting for the day when the new covenant will be confirmed to them.

The very expression a new covenant, in itself makes the former testament null and void. It served its purpose up to the cross. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. It is pathetic how little many Christians enter into this and understand how the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ has freed us from all obligation to that temporary dispensation. It is to be feared that many who sometimes sing of such liberty fail really to understand its import.

Free from the law! Oh, happy condition!

Jesus hath bled, and there is remission;

Cursed by the law and bruised by the fall,

Christ hath redeemed us once for all.

Not yet do the earthly people understand this, and many who in a vague way have trusted in Christ and are undoubtedly regenerated, are still far from enjoying the liberty that is ours in Christ. Our present relationship to God is one of pure grace during this parenthetical period, in which God, having set aside Israel after the flesh, is taking out from among the Gentiles a people for His name. After this work is completed, He will build again the tabernacle of David that is fallen down and will make a new covenant with those in Israel and Judah who will turn to the Lord in that day.

The important thing to see is that the new covenant, as such, does not go beyond blessing on the earth. It has to do with the earthly side of the kingdom of God, to enter into which new birth is a prerequisite, as our Lord told Nicodemus. This is what is meant by the writing of the divine law upon the hearts in the day that Israel and Judah will turn to the One who was once rejected.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Heb 8:1

The Great Possession.

I. Let us look at the reality of the fact. We have such an High Priest. It is not a matter of useless desire or of future hope, but of present accomplished possession.

II. The words affirm the singleness of the Person, and of the office He fulfils. “We have such an High Priest”-not many, but one, one and only one; so absolutely alone that it is blasphemy to arrogate any part of His work. Who shall dare to do what Christ is doing, and what room is there for human priests, when the Divine Priest ever liveth? It is as if a man bought a wretched taper to help the light of the noonday sun.

III. The words call attention strongly to the perfection of the high priesthood of Christ, the perfection of Him who fulfils it. “We have such an High Priest.” Turn back to the preceding chapter, and you will find that the Apostle enumerates beauty after beauty in Christ, as if he were gathering together a cluster of jewels to deck His crown of glory. It is singular, when we read the passage carefully, how we find it crowded with insignia of honour. In human priests, if the most extravagant claims were admitted, it would yet be true that the dignity is only in the office, and not in the men. But when we turn to the true High Priest, how different it is. Here is not only the glory of the office, but the glory of the Person, infinitely qualified in His Deity to stand between the justice of God and the whole human race. He is no mere dying man like an earthly priest, but clothed with the power of an endless life. He does not fill a delegated office, like earthly priests, but fulfils His own office, and that so perfectly that He is able to save to the uttermost those that come unto God by Him. Let us, therefore, come boldly to the throne-come for pardon, come for peace, come for protection, come for sympathy, come for help here and glory hereafter, since we have such an High Priest.

E. Garbett, Experiences of the Inner Life, p. 40.

The Crowning Point-Christ the High Priest in heaven.

I. Christ in heaven. This sums up all our faith. Here is our righteousness and our standing before God; here our storehouse of inexhaustible blessings, and of unsearchable riches; here our armoury, whence we obtain the weapons of our warfare; here is our citizenship and the hope of our glory. The right hand is the place of affection, as well as of honour and dignity. Christ is on the right hand of the Father, being His beloved Son, in whom He manifests His glory. The right hand is also the symbol of sovereign power and rule. Christ is Lord over all. Heaven being the locality of Christ’s priesthood, it must needs be perfect, eternal, spiritual, and substantial. What are the things with which Christ is now occupied as a priest? In one respect He rests, because He finished His work upon the earth, and, therefore, He is described as sitting down on His Father’s throne; His is now the perfect and peaceful rest of victory, for He has overcome. But, on the other hand, His is now a constant priestly activity.

II. If Christ is in heaven, we must lift up our eyes and hearts to heaven. There are things above. The things above are the spiritual blessings in heavenly places. The things above are also the future things for which we wait, seeing that our inheritance is not here upon earth. If our life is now hid with Christ in God, then, when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, we also shall appear with Him in glory. Our citizenship is in heaven, and Jesus, whom we now love and serve, will come to receive us unto Himself.

A. Saphir, Lectures on Hebrews, vol. ii., p. 1.

Heb 8:1-2

The True Tabernacle.

I. The tabernacle has no fewer than three meanings: (1) In the first place, the tabernacle is a type, a visible illustration, of the heavenly place in which God has His dwelling. (2) The tabernacle is a type of Jesus Christ, who is the meeting-place between God and man. (3) The tabernacle is a type of Christ in the Church, of the communion of Jesus with all believers.

II. Our High Priest, by virtue of the one sacrifice, is in heaven. There can be only one temple. There was only one ark in the days of Noah, one tabernacle in the wilderness, one temple in Jerusalem. The forgiving, merciful, and glorious presence of Jehovah is manifested now in the throne on which Jesus is seated. Before the coming of Jesus, the shadow symbolised truth to believing worshippers. After the coming of Jesus, it must fade and vanish before the substance. If this is true of the Levitical priesthood, which was of Divine appointment, how much more fearful is the assumption of any priestly title, position, or function, during the new dispensation. All Christians are priests. To imitate a revival of that which God has Himself set aside by a fulfilment, perfect and glorious, is audacious, and full of peril to the souls of men. It is not even the shadow of a substance, but the unauthorised shadow of a departed shade.

III. We learn here of the wonderful grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the minister of the sanctuary; He is still going on with His service. He has ascended into the holiest, into the region of perfection and glory; but not to forget us who are still in the wilderness. As he loved His own, even to the end, He loves them now, and throughout all the ages; and He will come again to receive us unto Himself.

A. Saphir, Lectures on Hebrews, vol. ii., p. 31.

References: Heb 8:1-3.-G. Huntingdon, Sermons for Holy Seasons, p. 223. Heb 8:1-5.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 358; R. W. Dale, The Jewish Temple and the Christian Church, p. 153.

Heb 8:1-2, Heb 8:6, Heb 8:10-12

The New Covenant-Its Promises.

I. Pardon is the last named of the promises, but it is the first bestowed. The terms of the promise indicate two things respecting the blessing it holds forth, namely, its source and its fulness. (1) Its source-“I will be merciful to their unrighteousness.” The source, then, of the promised pardon is the mercifulness of God. We mean, of course, its moral source, for its legal source is the atonement of Jesus Christ. (2) The fulness of mercy-“Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” This oblivion of transgression is a feature of the Divine pardon, much emphasized in Scripture, with a view no doubt of duly impressing men with the fact of its absolute entirety.

II. The intuitional knowledge of God assured by the better Covenant. The knowledge of God obtained through experience of His pardon is the grandest of all knowledge of Him. This is a knowledge of God that makes Him the predominant idea of the man’s whole life, the supreme fact of his life, whether as regards its activities or its happiness.

III. The Divine kinship assured by the New Covenant. “God is not ashamed to be their God.” He permits His people the utmost freedom in their assertion of the relationship. He holds it not in any way derogatory to His Divine dignity to be recognised as their Father. This relationship is in itself a guarantee of the fullest and most devoted service on their behalf.

IV. Observe the assurance which the better Covenant gives of a loving, childlike subjection to the Divine will. “I will put My laws in their minds, and will write them in their hearts.” We see from this how completely the law of God, or the Divine will, becomes the motive power in the life of the divinely pardoned man, how wholly it assimilates his entire being, bringing it into beautiful harmony with the mind of God.

A. J. Parry, Phases of Christian Truth, p. 170.

References: Heb 8:2.-W. M. Statham, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xii., p. 1. Heb 8:5.-P. Brooks, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiii., p. 344; Ibid., vol. xxxiv., p. 150; A. Johnson, Ibid., vol. xxxv., p. 356; S. Macnaughton, Real Religion and Real Life, p. 184.

Heb 8:6

The New Covenant-The Superiority of Its Promises.

This superiority relates to two things-the quality of the promises and their certainty.

I. The Quality of the Blessings. (1) Note the greater excellence of the Christian blessings. The Jewish religion had its pardon, or something that passed for pardon; the superiority, however, of the pardon held forth by the gospel is indicated by the expression, “And their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” Contrast this statement with what is said respecting the method of dealing with sins under the Old Covenant: “But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance of sins every year.” In the one case we have the forgetting of sins, in the other the remembrance of them. The ancient pardon, then, was not really such, but only a kind of reprieve annually renewed, a kind of suspension of the sentence, not the removal or abrogation of it. It was in the nature of a ticket-of-leave transaction. A convict, through good behaviour, obtains a suspension of his punishment, but he is not pardoned; for one of the conditions of his liberty is that he report himself regularly at stated times to the authorities. There was only sufficient efficacy in the Jewish sacrifices to revive the memory of sin; but the infinite sacrifice of Christ, on the contrary, is of sufficient efficacy, not only to abolish the penalty of sin, but also to obliterate the very memory of it, in the sense we have explained, from the mind of God. (2) The greater excellence of the knowledge of God, assured by the New Covenant. (3) The greater excellence of the relationship between God and His people. (4) The greater excellence of the formative principle of the New Covenant.

II. The superior certainty of the promise of the New Covenant. The utmost assurance that these promises will be fully realised in the experience of every one who accepts Christ’s salvation is given us in the fact that they are called by the term covenant. The term “promise” is merged in the term “covenant.” This substitution of covenant for promise indicates the element of certainty belonging to the latter. To appreciate properly the nice use of terms by our author, we must bear in mind the difference between a promise and a covenant. A promise is the bare word; a covenant is the act which ratifies that word and guarantees its due performance. It is implied, then, by this designation “covenant,” applied to the promises, that they are accompanied by guarantees for their due fulfilment. The promises of the gospel rest upon the atonement of Christ The grand and mighty act of sacrifice is the sure foundation whereon rest the Divine promises enumerated in the text.

A. J. Parry, Phases of Christian Truth, p. 184.

Heb 8:6-13

The Blessings of the New Covenant.

I. The blessings of the New Covenant are all based upon the forgiveness of sin. God promises to put His laws into our minds, and write them upon our hearts, and to be to us a God, because He is merciful to our unrighteousness, and will remember our sins and iniquities no more. All our progress in the Divine life, and all the consolations of the Christian pilgrim, are rooted in this primary doctrine of forgiveness through faith in Jesus.

II. From Jesus, the Anointed, all Christians receive the Holy Ghost. They have, according to their name, the unction from above. Hence they possess the Teacher who guides unto all truth. Knowledge is within them. There is within them a well of living water. Every Christian knows himself individually, and that because he is taught of God; he relies not on the testimony of man; his faith stands in the power of God.

III. The personal knowledge of our God is the source of our spiritual life. It is our safeguard against error and against sin. It is the great and constant gift of God, the fruit of Christ’s redemption. We now see and know God and His Son; we know Jesus, because Jesus always knows His sheep, revealing Himself unto them, and giving them guidance and life. This knowledge is nothing less than walking with God, walking in the light, praying without ceasing. The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him. In much darkness, amid many difficulties, and in constant warfare, we yet walk in the light of His countenance, until at last we shall see Him as He is, and know even as we are known.

A. Saphir, Lectures on Hebrews, vol. ii., p. 55.

References: Heb 8:6-13.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 359; R. W. Dale, The Jewish Temple and the Christian Church, p. 103. Heb 8:9-11.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 83. Heb 8:10.-Good Words, vol. iii., p. 571; Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times,” vol. ix., p. 231; Homilist, 2nd series, vol. iii., p. 52. Heb 8:12.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii., No. 1685. Heb 8:13.-G. Dawson, Sermons on Disputed Points, p. 73.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 8

1. Christ, the High Priest (Heb 8:1-6)

2. The old covenant and the new (Heb 8:7-13)

Heb 7:1-6

The new priesthood which the better priest exerciseth in heaven furthermore implies also a change in the sacrifices and in the covenant. This is now more fully developed in the last three chapters of this section. There is first of all a summary. The priest we have is not ministering on earth but we have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man. Every high priest had to offer gifts and sacrifices, so it was of necessity that He also should have something to offer. What He has offered is brought out in the ninth and tenth chapters. As high priest He offered up Himself on the cross and then, as the high priest who had brought this perfect offering, He passed through the heavens and into heaven itself. If He were upon the earth and His priesthood went no further than the earth, He would not be a priest. He has no place among the Levitical priests, the priests who offered according to the law, whose office and ministrations were but shadows of heavenly things; but He hath obtained a more excellent ministry, because He is the mediator of a better covenant, which has for a foundation better promises.

As Christ came not from Aarons family He could not be a priest after that pattern; His priesthood is wholly different, for it is heavenly and exercised in glory. With this more excellent priesthood, foreshadowed in the earthly Levitical priesthood, the latter has been completely set aside. This is the truth these Hebrew believers needed more fully to lay hold on, because the earthly tabernacle was still standing and the earthly priests were still exercising their empty and meaningless functions. And that which is put away, which is gone, because the one great offering was brought, and the true high priest has entered into the holiest and is in the presence of God for His people, Satan has successfully introduced and established upon Christian ground as one of the most soul-destroying inventions. Ritualistic Christendom with a priesthood patterned after the extinct Jewish priesthood, with a worship more or less after the model of Israels worship, is the shade of the departed shadow. It is apostasy from the truth of the gospel of grace; it is a wicked denial of the gospel of our salvation. This priestly assumption of men is the worst possible corruption of the doctrine of Christ.

Heb 8:7-13

The preceding verse showed that Christ is the mediator of a better covenant. This leads next to a contrast between the first (the old) and the new covenant. A covenant contains the necessary principles established by God under which man may live with God, in which He deals with man. There are only two covenants. The old covenant which was established at Sinai, the law-covenant, and the new covenant which in its fullest meaning has not yet been ratified, for it also relates to the people of Israel as we shall soon learn from this chapter. Strictly speaking the gospel, the proclamation of the salvation of God, is not a covenant. Still those who accept the gospel possess all the spiritual blessings of this new covenant, and much more than Israel can ever possess, when at last as a converted nation this new covenant will be established with them.

The argument is simple. The fact that a new covenant is promised shows that the old covenant was insufficient. For if that first one had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for the second. It could not accomplish what was in Gods heart to bring His people into the closest and nearest relationship with Himself. The first covenant, the law, could not do this, and therefore finding fault, He saith unto them, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, because they did not continue in my covenant, and I did not regard them, saith the Lord.

This first covenant was conditional, and the people did not keep this covenant and the Lord, because they were disobedient, did not regard them. That first covenant was unto their condemnation. And therefore the Lord had announced through the prophet Jeremiah that a new covenant was to be consummated for Israel and Judah, the same people with whom the first covenant was made. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their mind, and with them in their hearts; and I will be God unto them, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, know the Lord: for all shall know me of the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins, and their iniquities I will remember no more (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant is unlike the old one in that it has no condition attached to it. In it the Lord speaks alone in words of sovereign grace–I will. It is the same what Jehovah promised to the nation through the prophet Ezekiel (Eze 36:1-38). And this grace covenant awaits its fulfillment for that nation in coming days.

The ground of this new covenant is the sacrificial death of Christ, His blood, as we learn from His own words when He instituted His supper. Because He died for that nation (Joh 6:51-52) all Israel –the house of Israel and the house of Judah –will be brought into the promised blessings through this grace covenant. In the meantime, while Israel has not yet entered into this new covenant, Gentiles, who are by nature aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise (no new covenant being promised to Gentiles), believing in Christ, are made nigh by the blood of Christ (Eph 2:12-13), enjoy every spiritual blessing in heavenly places in Christ, become members of the body of Christ and joint heirs with the Lord Jesus Christ. When the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (Rom 11:25) then God will turn in mercy to His people Israel, whom He hath not cast away, and this new covenant will be fully established and all the promises as to restoration, temporal blessings, as well, spiritual blessings, so richly promised throughout the Old Testament prophetic word, will through grace come upon them. Then their sins and iniquities will be remembered no more. It all comes to pass when He comes again, who alone can turn away ungodliness from Jacob. What light and joy these facts of the old covenant set aside and the promises of the new covenant must have brought to the hearts of these Hebrew believers who read first this great message.

(Modern Judaism [both rabbinical and rationalistic] is not able to account for the cessation of sacrifices and the Levitical dispensation. The former acknowledges that in the destruction of the temple and the present condition of Israel without high priest and offerings, divine judgment on the nations sin is expressed: the idea of atonement through a vicarious sacrifice is not quite extinct, as appears in the rite of the cock performed on the eve of the day of atonement, though devoid of all Scriptural authority. Rationalistic Judaism has departed still further from the truth. Rejecting the idea of substitution and expiation in connection with sacrifices, it regards the present condition of Israel as a more spiritual development, misinterpreting the protests of David and the prophets against a mere external view of the ceremonial law (Psa 40:7; Hos 6:6; Jer 7:21-23). The old has indeed vanished; but according to the will of God, because the true light now shineth, because the substance has come in Christ A. Saphir.)

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

This Is Our Priest

We bow to no earthly priest. Our great High Priest, the only Mediator and Priest by which sinners may approach the holy Lord God is in heaven. The eighth chapter shows us the superiority of Christs ministry as our High Priest over the ministry of the Aaronic priests in the Old Testament. The superiority of our Saviors priestly ministry is here demonstrated in three ways.

A Seated Priest

Our great High Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ, is a Seated Priest. We have such a high priest, who is set (Heb 8:1; Psa 110:1; Heb 1:1-3; Heb 10:12-13). The fact that he sat down declares that his work was done. When our Lord Jesus cried, It is finished, he meant, It is finished! What was finished? All the types, promises and prophecies concerning him were fulfilled and finished. All the commandments and ceremonies of the law were fulfilled and finished. All the work of redemption, which he came into the world to perform, was finished. No priest ever sat down in the typical holy of holies, because none of those priest could ever finish their work. Their sacrifices could never put away sin. The Lord Jesus Christ sat down, because his work was finished.

Seated Upon A Throne

Our great High Priest is seated upon the throne of God! On the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens (Heb 8:1). The fact that he is seated upon the throne of God, the throne of universal monarchy, the throne of grace, declares that he is, indeed, able to (and most assuredly will) save all his people unto the uttermost, for he has been given power over all flesh for that purpose (Joh 17:1-2; Rom 14:9.

The True Sanctuary

All earthly priests served in the earth. Theirs was an earthly, carnal ministry. Our Lord Jesus Christ is a minister of the true sanctuary in heaven. (Heb 8:2). The fact that he sat down declares that his work is done. The fact that he sat down on the throne of God declares that he is able to save all for whom he died, whose interests he serves as Gods High Priest. And the fact that he sat down in heaven declares that his work has been accepted. Hallelujah!

Be sure you do not miss this. When he sat down in heaven, our Savior sat down as our Forerunner, and our Covenant Head; and we sat down in him (Eph 2:4-7). He took possession of eternal salvation and all the glory of heaven in the name of his people, as our representative. That means that we entered into heaven and sat down with him. He entered into and took possession of heaven as our Forerunner. That means that we, for whom he entered in, shall also enter into heaven by him.

Our great High Priest, the Son of God in human flesh, ministers for us continually in the holy of holies, not on earth, but in heaven itself, in that holy place not made with hands, in the very presence of God (Heb 9:24). This is the superiority of our Saviors priestly ministry. Our great High Priest is interceding for us in heaven (Rom 8:33-34). That is the work of a priest. He makes intercession; and the intercession of that Priest, who has been accepted in heaven for us, is infallibly effectual.

The Father hears Him pray, His dear anointed One,

He cannot turn away The presence of His Son!

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

sum: Or, chief, principal point, in both which senses [Strong’s G2774] is used by profane writers.

We have: Heb 7:26-28

who: Heb 1:3, Heb 1:13, Heb 10:12, Heb 12:2, Eph 6:20, Col 3:1, Rev 3:21

the Majesty: 1Ch 29:11, Job 37:22, Psa 21:5, Psa 45:3, Psa 45:4, Psa 104:1, Psa 145:12, Isa 24:14, Mic 5:4

Reciprocal: Exo 40:15 – everlasting Psa 68:18 – ascended Psa 102:19 – the height Psa 103:19 – prepared Eze 1:26 – the likeness of a Mar 14:62 – the Son Mar 16:19 – he was Luk 22:69 – on Joh 12:16 – when Act 7:55 – standing Rom 8:34 – who is even Eph 4:10 – ascended 1Ti 3:16 – received Heb 3:1 – and Heb 4:14 – that is Heb 6:20 – for Heb 9:11 – an high priest Heb 10:21 – an 1Pe 3:22 – is gone Rev 4:2 – and one Rev 7:15 – are

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD

The right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.

Heb 8:1

The soul of man in its transactions with God has to look to heaven. Once it could take its place in the outer court and wait while the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies. Between the two places, between the High Priest and the people, there was the holy place; a place of sacrifice and service. Between the Holy of Holies to which Christ has gone and the Christian soul there is no building made with hands; no holy place where priests may but others may not enter.

I. We are right to set apart certain men who shall be employed in the ministry of our churches, who shall lead the prayers and praises of the people, shall give all their time to the study of the Scriptures, the spiritual care of the young, the sick, and the ignorant. But to think that this excuses unordained Christian folk from taking any part other than a silent one in these things is wholly to mistake the meaning of the Christian priesthood, which is the calling of every Christian.

II. Two especial dangers may be pointed out.

(a) We are apt to assume that a lower standard of holy life is expected of the laity than of the clergy. A clergyman cannot engage in the ordinary business of life because he has a life-work marked out for him which demands all his time. If there be any other reason than this which would make you shrink from seeing him share your everyday life, see to it, lest you are making a distinction for which you have no warrant; lest you are trying to keep a strict line of demarcation between the times you give to the service of God and to the business of life respectively.

(b) God forbid that we should be thought to encourage the interference of the minister of Christ with secular things. Quite the contrary. It is the laymans life which we would see spiritualised, not the clergymans secularised. His life is a blessed one, indeed, if it bring time for much study of the Bible, for converse about heavenly things, for communion with God. It is a glorious eldership. The privilege of preaching the Gospel of Christ is unspeakably great. But the ordinary man neither sells his own privilege of doing definite work for Christ nor rids himself of the responsibility of doing so by supporting the clergyman with his presence and his purse.

Let us, then, set up the very highest standard of Christian life and service for every member of Christ, since every one is an attendant priest waiting until the High Priest shall come out from His Fathers presence and examine His work.

III. Waiting, do we say?Who knows how eagerly the Lord Himself may be waiting until we will do His work and let Him come? No little band of priests does the Church need; but it asks every member of it to realise his ordination as a priest and king unto God. Clad in the righteousness of our Lord, we are to stand and wait and work, offering up our powers of body, mind, and soul, and doing this cheerfully and perfectly, in heathen lands or at home, reckoning that no earthly business can excuse us from the duties of our high office. We are to live, too, a life of serious, high-minded thought as well as effort, for it becomes us to think much and deeply of the great truths whose witnesses we are. Petty things must not vex the priests of God; idle words they must not utter. They have been baptized with a baptism; they have died and risen with Christ; they must seek those things that are above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God; at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.

Rev. Dr. Flecker.

Illustration

If the service of God cannot permeate the business of life you are in a wrong business and had better separate yourself from it. It is well to be perfectly outspoken on this matter. It is with recreations as with business. Theatre-going, card-playing, gentle gambling, are right or wrong quite irrespectively of the person who takes part in them. The parson and the working man have as much, or as little, right to bet as the wealthiest in the land; there lies a terrible danger in the notion that by approving of clergymen being punctilious and by supporting them on Sundays you have fulfilled all the laws demands; that there is a little licence allowed you in the matter of eating and drinking, of reading, of amusing yourselves, of spending your money, which is not allowed to the clergy.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

CHAPTER 7 HAVING set before us in full detail the contrast between the temporary priesthood of Aaron and the abiding priesthood of Christ, chapter 8 opens with a summary of the whole matter. In this summary, occupying verses Heb 8:1-2 there are four things which we shall do well to note.

Firstly, the Lord Jesus is such an High Priest, that is such an One as chapter 7 has shown Him to be. We need therefore to refresh our minds as to all those points of contrast which show forth the infinite superiority of Christ, as expounded in that chapter.

Secondly, being such He has taken His seat at the highest point of glory. The supreme Majesty has His throne in the heavens, and on the right hand of that throne He is seated-that is, in the place which signifies that all its executive functions are vested in Him. There is no weakness, no infirmity, in Him. The place He fills indicates that He wields all power. We learned that this exalted place is His when we had only read so far as Heb 1:3; but there we saw Him seated in glory as the answer to His finished work in the purging of sins. Here it is as the Priest that He is crowned with glory.

Thirdly, His priestly ministry concerns itself, not with the holy places on earth, constructed and pitched by Moses, which were the scenes of Aarons ministry, but with that real sanctuary and tabernacle which came from the hand of God. The real sanctuary is the heaven of Gods immediate presence: the true tabernacle is that mighty universe of created things, wherein the third heaven of Gods presence lies. Christs priestly service has to do with God and His presence as its centre; whilst within its circumference it embraces the whole creation of God. What a stupendous thought is this! How paltry do Aarons glories look beside it!

Fourthly, such an High Priest as this is ours. WE have such an High Priest; while Israel had priests of Aarons order. This one fact, apart from all other considerations, indicates how far in advance of Judaism is Christianity. These Hebrews, as we have seen, were inclined to slackness; some of them showed signs of going back. Let them lay hold of this, and how it would encourage them to hold fast, and keep on in the path of faith. Let us lay hold of it and we too shall feel its encouraging power.

Our thoughts turn from the High Priest Himself to His service and ministry when we read verses Heb 8:3-6. It is helpful to notice that verse Heb 8:5 is really a parenthesis; the whole verse might well be printed within brackets. The sense follows straight on from verse Heb 8:4 to verse Heb 8:6.

Though the Lord Jesus is not a priest of Aarons order yet in many a way He exercises His ministry after the pattern set forth in Aaron. So it is necessary that He should have something to offer in the presence of God; and that something cannot be a gift of the kind that was customary in connection with the law, for had He been on earth He would have been no priest at all, for He did not spring out of Levi or Aaron. His priesthood is of an heavenly order. Only as risen and glorified has He formally assumed His priestly office.

What the Lord has to offer in His priestly capacity we are not told at this point; but we believe that the reference is, not to the fact that He offered up Himself, as stated in verse 27 of the previous chapter, but to what we find when we reach Heb 13:15. It is by Him that we offer the praise of our lips to God. He it is, who offers up to God as the great High Priest all the praises springing from those who have been constituted priests by the grace of God. What we are told is that His ministry is more excellent than any that was entrusted to Aaron; and that its superiority is exactly proportioned to the superiority of the promises and the covenant of which He is the Mediator.

Before considering this, however, let us make note of two things. First, that the last clause of verse Heb 8:4 shows us that this epistle was penned before Jerusalem was destroyed, when the Jewish offerings ceased. There are priests, it says, not, there used to be. This same fact confronts us when we come to the last chapter; and the importance of it is made manifest there.

In the second place notice that in the parenthesis (verse Heb 8:5) it is made quite plain that the tabernacle and all its appointments were only a shadowy representation of heavenly things; and not the things themselves. This no doubt was a hard saying to a Jew, for he was very apt to think of these visible things in which he boasted as though they were the great end, beyond which nothing was needed. He should not have thought of them in this way, for from the outset they were declared to be but a representation of the things God had before Him. Moses was not to deviate one hairs breadth from the pattern shown to him in the mount. Had he deviated he would have misrepresented instead of representing the great realities which had to be shadowed forth.

This fact being digested we at once see that the Old Testament types, connected with tabernacle and offerings, are worthy of our earnest consideration. The study of them is not, as some may think, an intellectual pastime giving scope to a lively imagination, but a pursuit in which there is much instruction and profit. They must be interpreted of course in the light of the heavenly things themselves, which are revealed in the New Testament.

The ministry of Christ as Priest, the new covenant, of which He is the Mediator, and the promises on which that covenant is founded, are all brought together in verse Heb 8:6.

It could hardly be said that the old covenant of law was established upon promises at all, though there were certain promises connected with it. It was established rather upon a bargain, in which Israel undertook in all things to obey, and God guaranteed certain blessings conditional upon their obedience. The bargain was hardly concluded before it was broken by Israel making the golden calf. The fact that the new covenant is established upon promises, that those promises are Gods, and that they are better than anything proposed under the law, at once differentiates it sharply from the old. To gain some idea of these better promises you must read the latter part of our chapter, which is quoted from the passage in Jer 31:1-40-where the new covenant itself is promised-verses 31 to 34. Gods I will, is the characteristic feature of it. All is a question of what God is going to do, and of what consequently Israel is going to be and have.

Now of this better covenant Christ is the Mediator. We might well ask, On what ground can God thus scatter blessings upon unworthy men without infringing the claims of righteousness? The only possible answer to this is found in the mediatorial work of Christ. As Mediator He has given Himself a ransom for all (1Ti 2:6). As Mediator too He administers the covenant which has been established in His blood.

The Lord Jesus is presented to us in this epistle in a variety of characters. We sometimes sing,

How rich the character He bears,

And all the form of love He wears,

Exalted on the throne. but do we stop sufficiently to consider the richness of His character in all its variety? We have already had Him brought before us as Apostle, High Priest, Forerunner, Surety, Victim, and now as Mediator. All these offices He holds in connection with the new covenant and those who come into new covenant blessing. As Apostle He announces it. As Surety He assumes full responsibility for it. As Victim He shed the blood that ratifies it. As High Priest He sustains it. As Mediator He administers it. As Forerunner He guarantees the arrival in glory of all those blessed under it in the present dispensation.

What flaw can be discovered in this? None whatever! Where is the loophole through which evil or failure may creep? No such loophole exists! All new covenant blessing is rooted and grounded in the mighty Son of God and is as flawless and perfect as He. Is not this magnificent? Does it not fill our souls with assurance and triumph?

The first covenant of law was not faultless as verse Heb 8:7 indicates. There was no fault in the law, but the covenant was faulty inasmuch as all was conditioned upon faulty man. Hence it is set aside in favour of the second, which is based upon Gods purpose and Gods work. As the last verse of the chapter puts it, the very fact that He speaks of a new covenant shows that the first has grown old and is ready to disappear.

Jeremiahs prophecy, which is quoted here, shows us that the new covenant is to be formally established with the house of Israel and the house of Judah; that is, with restored and reunited Israel. Under it they will enter upon the blessings of the millennial reign. By the new birth the law will be written on their hearts, so that it will be as natural to them to fulfil it as now it is natural to them to infringe it. Moreover their sins will be forgiven; they will have the knowledge of God, and be His people. But the gospel today brings us just these blessings upon an exactly similar basis.

The fact is that everyone converted today, no matter from what nation they come, is blessed upon new covenant principles, though as yet the new covenant is not formally established at all; and when it is established it will be with Israel, and not with the nations, nor even with the church. We have it, in the spirit of it, and thus we anticipate what is to come. At the same time we must carefully note that Christian blessings are by no means confined to those promised to Israel under the new covenant. On the contrary we enjoy blessings which go far beyond them. Such, for instance, are the blessings spoken of in the epistle to the Ephesians.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Our Great High Priest

Heb 7:1-28 and Heb 8:1-13

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

Christ was God’s Priest after the order of Melchisedec. “The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.”

This oath is mentioned in the 110th Psalm. There it says: “The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.”

Let us consider an incomparable Psalm, a Psalm so full of beauty and of glory, that it scintillates with the Divine touch of inspiration. Man did not write the 110th Psalm, neither did he write the oath that it contains concerning Christ as a High Priest after the order of Melchisedec. The Psalm’s record about Melchisedec, king of Salem, comes in like a flash, and goes out like a flash.

Let us examine the Psalm:

“The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”

The Psalm, then, is a Resurrection Psalm. It is the Psalm of a Risen Christ, of an enthroned Christ who has passed through the humiliation unto the exaltation, In this Psalm, Christ is sitting at the right hand of God in the Heavens. That is where Christ is now. So, we are interested in this Psalm; we like present-day scenes, do we not?

“The Lord said unto My Lord.”

There are two persons of the Trinity in these words: both of them are called Jehovah.

“The Lord (God the Father) said unto My Lord (God the Son), Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”

God is going to flash Melchisedec on us in a minute, so keep the context before you. It was after the battle was won, that Melchisedec came on the scene before Abraham. Is it after the battle is won, after He makes His enemies His footstool, that the Melchisedec type is used? All right, now let us read on:

“The Lord shall send the rod of Thy strength out of Zion.”

You know what that means.

“Rule Thou in the midst of Thine enemies.”

Israel has wandered away from God into sin; for twenty-three hundred years they have been in exile without a king; they have been taken captive into all lands.

“Thy people shall be willing in the day of Thy power.”

When Christ was on earth, it was the day of His self-imposed weakness; it was the day when He emptied Himself; when He comes to earth again, it will be the day of His power. He will come in great power, with His holy angels, and in the glory of His Father, You may hunt through all literature, and you find nothing, anywhere, that has ever been penned by man, comparable in beauty, and rhetorical, rhythmic cadence, to the beautiful words we are about to read. Listen to them:

“In the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: Thou hast the dew of Thy youth.”

Isn’t that beautiful? It is the picture of the Lord Jesus Christ coming again. He will come in the beauty of His holiness. What will it be, when we see Him! He will come out of the womb of the morning. He comes when the day dawns, and the daystar arises. It is night now, but when He comes, His star will announce the break of day; and His sun will burst forth in glory. Out of the womb of the morning the Son of God steps forth. A holy day, a happy day, an eternal day, will be born, as Christ emerges from the womb of the night’s travail and darkness, of the night’s sorrows, and gloom, and pain. Yes, out of the birth-throes of the night, Christ will step forth in the blaze of the morning’s glory.

I love the next statement:

“Thou hast the dew of Thy youth.”

It has been a long time since Christ was here. He was a youth, thirty-three years of age in the flesh, when He laid down His life for us. As He hung upon Calvary’s Cross, His visage was more marred than that of any man, and His form more than the sons of men. When He comes again, from the womb of the morning, when we look upon Him, we will shout one exultant cry: “Thou hast the dew of Thy youth!”

No wrinkles will mark His brow, no lines of care, will mar His face; His countenance will shine brighter than the sun in its glory.

We are now ready for the Melchisedec type.

“The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.”

This is the second time Melchisedec is mentioned in the Bible. That wonderful story of Melchisedec was written far back in Genesis, and in Psa 110:1-7, and in Heb 7:1-28 and Heb 8:1-13, for no other purpose than this: that in the fullness of times it might be thrown on the screen as God’s pledge and perfect type of Christ our King-Priest.

I. CHRIST, A PRIEST FOR EVER (Heb 7:23-24)

Of old, there were many priests, because one priest could not continue by reason of death; but this Man, because He continueth for ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.

His priesthood never passes away. What is the result of that unchangeable priesthood?

“Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.”

He is an High Priest, whose eye is never weary, whose heart never ceases to love, whose hand never fails to reach down. We have an High Priest who never changes, never tires, is never forgetful. His eye is always upon us in our behalf. It is a wonderful thing to us to know that there is a High Priest who ever liveth, and who never fails us.

“His eye is on the sparrow,

And I know He cares for me.”

There is One, up yonder, who is able to save to the completion. He will not let you go.

“When I fear my feet will fall,

Christ will hold me fast.”

Aren’t you glad there is someone in Heaven, the ever-living One, who is taking you even now by the right hand and saying, “Fear not, I will help you, for I am your representative in the courts of Heaven”?

“Wherefore He is able also to save them to the completion, that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to manage our affairs for us.”

II. CHRIST, A PRIEST HOLY, HARMLESS, UNDEFILED (Heb 7:26-27)

Every high priest, who lived in the days past, had to offer up sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of others; but the Lord Jesus Christ, our High Priest, is holy and harmless and undefiled. We have such an High Priest in Heaven. How we can trust Him, How we can lean upon Him!

I thank God that we have an High Priest who is holy, and harmless, and undefiled, and that through Him we have access to the Father.

There are many who seek access to God apart from Jesus. That is impossible. No man can worship God, unless he comes to God through the ascended and seated High Priest, the One who is holy and undefiled. He is the One who gives us access.

In the old days, approach was made unto God through the high priest, who went in once a year, to the Holy of Holies, but not without blood. We have an High Priest, who has gone in to the Holiest of All, and is ever there for us. Before He went in, as He died, the veil of the Temple was rent, and we all have the right of approach through Him unto the Father.

There were many priests of old, of the Levitical line, but, beloved, there is but one Priest today. Do not think for one moment that you can get audience to God through men, they are not your priests.

Since we have an High Priest who is undefiled, and harmless, and holy, and since He is in Heaven to give us access to the Father; Let us enter in boldly by the Blood of Jesus. I would be afraid to go into that Holy Place, if it were not that the Blood of Christ had made me whiter than snow.

“By a new and living way, which He hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh; and having an High Priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.”

We have an High Priest who is in Heaven for us; He is the minister of the new Tabernacle. Let us pass in, through Him, into the presence of God.

“Take time to be holy,

Speak oft with thy Lord.

Abide with Him always,

And feast on His Word.”

God has given us the privilege of access; do we use our privilege?

III. CHRIST, A PRIEST SEATED (Heb 8:1)

“Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum.”

Let us read it thus: “Now, of the things which we have spoken, this is the climax, this is the predominant note”: “We have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens.”

We want you to see Christ seated there. Only once, so far as I know in the Word of God, is Jesus described as standing in Heaven. That was when Stephen was stoned. As his spirit was about to leave his body, God opened Heaven and Stephen was permitted to look through, and he saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God. Jesus, now, is seated there. He passed up through the heavens and He sat down. What does it all mean? When one finishes a task, they sit down. Taking a seat means that service is completed, that work is accomplished. We have an High Priest at the right hand of God, who sat down. That is, He finished His task on Calvary’s Cross. Remember how He said, “It is finished.” Then, He went up, and sat down. Aren’t you glad that He is sitting there? I wonder how He feels when He sees a poor sinner running around trying to work out his own redemption? Christ would not be sitting down, it there was anything left for a sinner to do. If your redemption was incomplete, He would be here toiling; He could not have gone to the Father, and He could not have sat down. Thus, the picture of our High Priest seated, is the picture of a finished earthly task.

We remember that, just before He returned to the Father, He said: “I have finished the work which Thou gavest Me to do.” Then on the Cross He cried: “It is finished,” and committing His spirit to the Father, He cried with a loud voice, and yielded up the ghost.

IV. CHRIST, A PRIEST SEATED IN THE HEAVENS (Heb 8:1)

Let us notice where Christ is seated. He is seated in the Heavens. How did He get there? He passed up through principalities and powers and took His seat above them all. Thus, the picture of Christ in Hebrews, is the picture of our High Priest, as a conqueror, who, having subdued death and hell, and having overcome principalities and powers, (Satan and all his forces) is seated far above them all. Now, brethren, with such an High Priest, we can press forward to victory. He is able to help us and carry us through, for He is seated above all opposing forces, and He says, “I will lead you in the train of My triumph.”

“The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose,

I will not, I will not, desert to his foes;

That soul, though all hell shall endeavor to shake,

I’ll never, no, never, no, never forsake.”

The story is told of a certain soldier who was put into an underground dungeon. He was led by one of the soldiers, down and on through a long labyrinth underground, and then the soldier left him. He heard the click of the gates, as the one who left him captive, went his way. The man said, “When I realized that I was all alone in a darkness blacker than night, I felt my brain reel, my mind was crazed. It was awful, such a darkness.” Then, all of a sudden, the imprisoned soldier heard the tramp, tramp, tramp of feet above him. He wondered what those steps could mean. Then he heard the faint, far away voice of the chaplain of his regiment as he said, “I know where you are. I know the darkness of your prison, and the loneliness. When you get nervous and afraid, listen, and you will hear the tramp of my feet. I will be walking just above your head.” Thus, through the time of his incarceration, what time he would feel the darkness and be afraid, he could hear the tramp, tramp, tramp of the feet above, and he knew that one was near.

V. CHRIST, A PRIEST SEATED AT THE FATHER’S RIGHT HAND (Heb 8:1)

Not only is Christ seated above principalities and powers, but He is seated at the right hand of the Father. Ah, beloved, do not tell me that Christ is disowned and dishonored of God, for He is seated at His right hand. Do not tell me that God will not have Him. That is what they said of Christ as He hung on Calvary’s Cross. However, God did have Him, for God raised Him from the dead, and God gave Him a seat at His own right hand.

Unsaved man or woman, God is satisfied with Christ, are you? “God is now willing, in Christ, reconciled; ready to save you and make you His child; God is now willing, are you? Are you?”

Christ is an accepted High Priest. He has taken His seat. When you sit down by a friend if he looks toward you with favor, you know that you are accepted. Jesus Christ is seated in Heaven by the side of the Father. When He hung upon the Cross He said, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” Ah, God forsook Him then because He was there in the sinner’s stead. After the work of Calvary was completed; after Jesus cried, “It is finished”; after Christ said, “Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit”; after His resurrection, and the forty days had passed, then Christ ascended up to the Father, and sat down at His right hand.

Today, He sits the approved, accepted and exalted Son. He who was once forsaken of God, is now recognized and received. You know, it is one thing to be seated on the left side, and another thing to be seated on the right. Jesus Christ is the Man at “the Father’s right hand.” Now, what does that mean? It means just this-“All authority is given unto Me in Heaven and in earth.” Isn’t it wonderful? We have an High Priest in with God, in whom God is well pleased.

VI. CHRIST, A PRIEST OF THE TRUE TABERNACLE (Heb 8:2)

Now, the last statement! We have an High Priest of the True Tabernacle. “A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.”

Oh, beloved, there is something in this that is so wonderful! Let me read just a statement about the old tabernacle. It is in Heb 8:5 :

“Who serve unto the example and shadow of Heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.”

You know God gave Moses a pattern, showed it to him in the mount, then Moses builded the tabernacle according to a pattern. Why did God give Moses a pattern? Why did God say, “See that you build according to this pattern”? It was because the earthly tabernacle was a pattern of the Heavenly.

Why didn’t God say, “Come, Moses, I will take you up to Heaven and let you see the True Tabernacle”? Why did not God show Moses the True Tabernacle, and then say, “Now, go down to earth and build Me one like it”? The True Tabernacle was so wonderful, so beautiful, so. all-glorious, that Moses could not duplicate it. So God did not suffer Moses to see it. He knew it would dishearten him. He said, “I want to give you a pattern of the True Tabernacle, now build it in the wilderness according to the pattern.” The tabernacle with its outer court, and its brazen bowl and laver; with its holy place, and its shew-bread; its altar of incense and seven golden candlesticks; with its Holy of Holies and its ark, with the cherubim and the mercy-seat, where the blood was carried once a year, and the wings of the cherubims overlapping, was a type of the True Tabernacle which the Lord pitched in Heaven. There under the stretched-forth wings of the cherubims, God met with His people. That was a pattern of something that is up in Heaven, the True Tabernacle which God hath pitched and not man.

In that true Tabernacle, Christ sits as our Great High Priest-a priest for ever.

AN ILLUSTRATION

You say, “Will you not go to God for me?” I can pray for you, but you can also pray for yourself. Either or both of us must have access unto the Father, through the Lord Jesus Christ. Aren’t you glad that you have an High Priest who is holy and undefiled; He is with the Father, and through Him you can go?

If you were dying in the desert, where there was no one near you, you would have perfect access, through the Lord Jesus Christ unto the Father. He will take anyone and everyone who comes to God by Him, and carry them through. “For such an High Priest became us, who was holy and undefiled.” What then is my conclusion? Let me read this time from Hebrews the 10th chapter, Heb 10:19; listen to it:

“Having therefore, -brethren, boldness” (you can be bold about it) “to enter into the Holiest by the Blood of Jesus.”

There is a knock at my door. I say, “Who is there?” “I am a man named Jones; is Mr. Neighbour in?” “Yes, I am here.” “Well, could I have a few moments of your time?” “I guess so, Mr. Jones; perhaps I can give you a few moments of my time. I am pretty busy, but I will be glad to see you. Come in, Mr. Jones.”

Here is another scene. I am sitting alone, in the midst of my study, digging away, preparing for my Lord’s Day message. Suddenly I hear the patter of little feet; there is no knock, there is no “Is Mr. Neighbour in?” My own little Martha, pushes the door open, runs in, curls up right into my lap. I say, “What are you doing in here?” “Why, granddaddy, I came to help you get up your sermon.” “Oh, you did? Well, don’t tip the ink-well over.” She entered in boldly.

Trust Him, He will manage your affairs. You take care of your baby’s needs. You work by day, and sometimes at night in order to feed and clothe your little ones. They never have a worry or care. Run up to that little four-year-old and ask, “Where are you going to get your supper?” He will answer in one word, “Mamma,” “Where do your clothes come from?” “Mamma.” It is all mamma. The child thinks the sun rises and sets in mamma. When you say to mamma, “Where do you get your all?” She just lifts her eyes up toward Heaven and says, “His eye is on me.” Your little one looks to you and depends on you, and you depend on Him.

“He ever liveth to manage my affairs.”

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

Heb 8:1. Sum is from KEPHALAION which Thayer defines, “The chief or main point, the principal thing.” It refers to what Paul said in the: preceding chapter, together with w h at follows in the present one, concerning the priesthood of Christ. Such an high priest has virtually the same significance as sum. The Levitical priests served in Jerusalem while Christ is at the right hand of his Father. Majesty pertains to the greatness of the throne of God. In the heavens has the same significance as “higher than t h e heavens” in chapter 7:26.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Heb 8:1. Nowa transitional particlein regard to (or in) the things here spoken of (literally being spoken of), the chief point is this: The sum is this is a possible meaning of the word; but it does not agree with the force of the preposition, with the incomplete tense of the verb, or with what follows where it is implied that the previous enumeration is unfinished: We have such a high priest who (having finished His work) took his seat on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens. The main point is that Christ, being exalted to the throne of God, and seated there, has an equally exalted sphere for His priestly office, with greater power than the priests of the Law.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Subdivision 2. (Heb 8:1-13.)

His more excellent ministry as Mediator of a better covenant.

The second subdivision speaks here, too, now of our having a better ministry than that of the earthly priesthood, founded as it is upon a better covenant. The first six verses emphasize the fact that it is of the true tabernacle Christ is Minister. The last seven verses speak of the change of covenant.

1. We must remember that it is the Priest in the Sanctuary that the apostle is now showing us, -a Priest who has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. In the Lord’s case we must separate widely, as with a mere human high priest one could not, between the ministry outside and the ministry inside the tabernacle. For Him the one ceased before the other was entered upon; yet He was the High Priest when He “offered up Himself” upon the cross, and He was the High Priest when He “passed through the heavens” (Heb 4:14). There was no difference in this respect, if we are to take exactly what is written. Upon this there would seem no need to insist; yet a verse here has been so interpreted as to mean the opposite, -that the Lord was not Priest upon earth at all; and every other statement of Scripture has been discredited to uphold what is not its statement, but a mistaken interpretation of something very different from this. The apostle does not say that when Christ was upon earth He was not a Priest, but that “if then indeed He were upon earth He would not even be a Priest.” Plainly he is speaking of One not on earth, and not as looking back either to the time when He was there. He is speaking, as he says, of Christ as the glorified High Priest, the Minister of the true tabernacle, and the reason he gives is conclusive as to this. Why would He not even be a Priest on earth? Because, he answers, “there are those who offer gifts according to the law.” The law, as he has said, has defined its priests as of the family of Aaron, and Christ has no place in the line of that succession; but that has nothing to do with the Lord’s work on earth, as is evident. It is a totally different thing from saying that when Christ offered Himself up He was not a Priest to say that if He were on earth He would be no Priest of any sanctuary there. True it is that the law has no place on earth for this Minister of the true tabernacle. If His name were sought upon the earthly register, it could not be found in what is but the “example and shadow of heavenly things” His place is not. Necessarily so, for He has “a more excellent ministry” in connection with the “heavenly things themselves.” Here, as already said, the confusion between the killing of the victim, which was not itself a priestly work, and the offering up of the sacrifice, which was absolutely so, has hindered many from seeing the truth. Yet every one must see at once that the Lord did not kill Himself, and yet offered Himself. The killing of the victim is the death of Christ looked at, as we may say, from its human side. The offering by the priest set forth, though still under a veil, what God found in it, but they both apply to what was done upon earth. The offering up of the sacrifice was not inside the tabernacle, but in the outer court, and is thus distinctly made to refer to something done upon earth. There was no presentation to God or burning of the victim in the tabernacle itself, -that is, in the sanctuary; and it is to be noted that while the apostle previously speaks of every high priest being constituted for the offering “both of gifts and sacrifices,” when he comes here to the Lord’s tabernacle work, he speaks of the offering of “gifts” alone. The incense and the show-bread, to go no further, belonged, of course, to the tabernacle work. The sacrifices never entered there, except in the blood being carried in. All here, therefore, is in absolute consistency with itself and with all other Scripture.

But light has been thought to be thrown by this assertion, as it is taken to be, of Christ not having been a Priest on earth, upon that propitiation which it was His, as we have been told in the second chapter, distinctly as High Priest to make. This, then, it is urged, must have been made in heaven, and refers not to the work of the cross, but to the presentation for acceptance of that work before God, by the Lord, as having entered into His presence there. If, indeed, the Lord were not a Priest on earth, there would be reason, no doubt, for such an interpretation. As it is, there is none whatever. We shall have to look at it further in the chapter following this, but the acceptance of the work of the cross by God was clearly at the moment of its being made; not only the veil rent when the Lord died shows it, but also the fact that even before He dies the cloud that was upon Him is removed. He says no more “My God,” as when He was forsaken, but He says “Father,” in the sense of nearness. Wrath-bearing was at an end, although the death which was still due from man as a sinner had to be taken. This He takes, therefore, proclaiming at the same time: “It is finished,” as He gives up His Spirit. There was no more to be done. No presentation further was necessary before Him whose Eyes are in every place, and who gives testimony as promptly as it can be done to the work which so fully satisfies Him. With regard to the interpretation of the type here, the actual entering in of the high priest into the sanctuary with the blood which he puts upon the mercy-seat, we shall have, necessarily, to look at in what follows presently.

We have yet another question, however, to consider in connection with this thought of Christ’s priesthood being exercised entirely in heaven; and that is, if His be, as the apostle insists, entirely a Melchisedec priesthood, how else could it be exercised than after death, when the “many priests” of Aaron’s order proved their incompetency by the fact that “they were not able to continue, by reason of death;” and in contrast with them Christ’s Melchisedec character is seen in this, that He abideth forever “in the power of an endless life”?

Now, whatever the difficulty here, it is certain that Christ was “a merciful and faithful High Priest to make propitiation” and therefore He was High Priest before propitiation was, or could be, made. If death, then, negatived the possibility of His being this at that time, then it would necessarily forbid His being so while in death, until resurrection had taken place. That is as plain as it is really decisive; for His resurrection was already the witness of the acceptance of His work, and, consequently, of propitiation (that is, appeasal) having been already made. Propitiation is by blood, and that was shed on earth; nor, when this was shed, did it wait an hour for the tokens of its acceptance. His own words, “It is finished,” were followed immediately by the rending of the veil, by which the holiest was opened to man; where Christ has now gone in to take His place for us with God, in the value of that blood, our Representative.

Thus, being made perfect, He is greeted (or, “hailed”) of God a High Priest after the order of Melchisedec. Notice, it is not the same word as when it is said He was “called” to the priesthood. He is “hailed” now as Victor after His conflict, when the power of that endless life that was His had been manifested in His victory over death and him that had the power of it. Death had been but the sword which the Conqueror turned against him who wielded it; and over Him it could not have dominion when once, to do the will of God, He had descended into it. That eternal life which was in Him could not be touched by it; and the giving up of earthly life, which for the merely human priests had ended their priesthood fully, and taken them entirely away from the scene of their earthly ministry, could not affect the office of Him who could answer the appeal to Him as Lord of the dying malefactor with the royal words, “This day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise.” Thus was He still Priest and King all through. Presently, with the keys of death and hades at His girdle, He is hailed in resurrection as the Royal Priest; not made so then, but approved as fully manifested such. Already, while the disciples gaze upward after Him, a cloud received Him out of their sight (Act 1:9). Was it mere earthly vapor? or was it not, rather, the “hail,” -the welcome home, of the manifest glory? Not one poor returning prodigal, but the Father runs to greet and bring him home. Was it not fit (as when, for the objects of His redeeming love, the Lord of glory -not leaving it to angelic hosts even to give them welcome, -“the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven,”) that He who was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father should thus -the angels nowhere as yet seen -be welcomed back to where He had been before, even when creation, as yet, was not called into being by His word?

(2) We are now called, in connection with this, to see the new covenant according to which the new Priest draws near to God. There is a sharp contrast here shown us between this and the legal one. The very fact, says the apostle, of the Lord’s speaking of a new covenant, shows that the old was to pass away. It was, therefore, a “finding fault” with the first covenant, and all that belonged to it as such. We know what this means. God’s heart was set upon the bringing His people nigh, and according to the law they could never be brought nigh. Thus, even, as regards the house of Israel and the house of Judah, with whom the new covenant is to be made in days to come, the terms of their relation to God are entirely altered. That covenant made with them in the day that He took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, did not abide. Conditional as it was, they did not fulfil its terms, did not, therefore, continue in it, and He did not regard them. It was, in fact, impossible that He could do so without denying His own nature. The covenant that He is going to make, on the other hand, asks for no fulfilment on the part of man at all, but is the simple, positive affirmation of what He will do for them. “I will put My laws into their mind, and will write them also upon their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.” It is plain here that the common thought that God’s law is written naturally upon everybody’s heart or mind, is entirely contradicted. It is grace alone that accomplishes it for any; and we must remember that God is speaking here explicitly of His earthly people, and not of any heavenly one. So, when He says: “They shall not teach each one his fellow-citizen, and each one his brother, saying, Know the Lord: because all shall inwardly know Me, from him that is little to him that is great among them,” a condition of things is implied such as the earth has yet never seen, and such as will not be seen until God brings back Israel to Himself, and the people, as He declares, shall be “all holy,” -when there shall be among them no one who does not know Him. And this, too, will be, not merely externally, so as to be orthodox in the faith, but, as the word is here, they shall “inwardly” know Him. And the ground of it will be this: “I will be merciful to their unrighteousnesses, and their sins and their lawlessnesses I will remember no more.’ ‘ Thus, the people with whom this covenant will be made will be a people in that day entirely according to His mind.

It will be asked how, according to this, the new covenant applies at all to us. Other scriptures answer this clearly by assuring us that if we have not the covenant made with us, it can yet, in all the blessings of which it speaks, be ministered to us. This unconditional grace is not limited by conditions. We have, thank God, much more than even what the new covenant declares; and grace, having laid the foundation in righteousness, can act according to its own sovereignty, and in such largeness as suits the bounty of God. We have, therefore, the new covenant fully ours, while we have much more than this, for all the “mysteries” which constitute Christianity proper are things before hidden, and really beyond it. The apostle’s purpose here is evidently and simply to show us that the legal covenant is set aside, displaced by that which alone could bring any blessing for man at all.

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST AND AARON

CHRIST IS A PRIEST OF A BETTER COVENANT THAN AARON (Hebrews 8)

Better not morally, but efficaciously, i.e., established on better promises (Heb 8:6), in the sense that they are written on the heart rather than tablets of stone (Heb 8:10); that they are universal in their application and not limited to a single people (Heb 8:11); and that they bring with them eternal forgiveness.

CHRIST IS A PRIEST OF A BETTER TABERNACLE (Heb 9:1-14)

It is not a material but a spiritual structure (Heb 9:11).

It is hallowed not by the blood of beasts but by His own blood (Heb 9:12).

It stands not for temporary but eternal redemption (Heb 9:12-14).

CHRIST IS A PRIEST OF A BETTER SACRIFICE (Heb 9:15 to Heb 10:18)

Not a sacrifice of calves and goats (Heb 9:19) but the sacrifice of Himself (Heb 9:23); Not a sacrifice repeated every year (Heb 9:25) but offered only once (Heb 9:26); A sacrifice which does away with the covenant of the Old Testament and establishes that of the New (Heb 10:5-9).

The reference to the sacrifice offered but once is worked out richly: first, the fact is stated (Heb 9:24-26); secondly, an inference is drawn from it (Heb 10:1-3); third, the fact is emphasized anew (Heb 10:4-13), and finally its precious truth is applied (Heb 10:14-18).

QUESTIONS

1. In what sense is the covenant of Christs priesthood better than that of Aaron?

2. In what sense is it established on better promises?

3. In what sense is Christ a priest of a better tabernacle?

4. In what sense is He a priest of a better sacrifice?

5. Have you tried to work out in detail the exposition of Heb 9:24 to Heb 10:18?

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

Observe here, 1. The apostle’s preface in which he doth briefly recapitulate the sum and substance of his preceding arguments, Now of the things which we have spoken, this is the sum.

Learn hence, That when doctrines are important, and the matters treated of very weighty and momentous, we should endeavour by all means to make an impression of them upon the minds of our hearers, by a brief recapitulation of the things we have insisted on; thus doth our apostle here.

Observe, 2. A declaration of the first general pre-eminence of our High Priest, and that is taken from his present state and eternal condition. He is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. A throne, a sceptre, a crown, are ensigns of majesty, and ornaments of sovereign power: To sit in the throne, is to possess sovereign power and dominion: This Christ now enjoys in heaven, as the reward of his deep humiliation, and as the highest degree of his exaltation.

Learn hence, That the principal glory of the priestly office of Christ depends of the glorious exaltation of his person.

Observe, 3. Another pre-eminence of our Lord Jesus Christ, as our great High Priest; he is called a minister of the sanctuary.

A minister; this intimates to us, that our great High Priest, in the height of his glory condescends to discharge the office of a public minister in the behalf of his church. Our thoughts sometimes dwell upon what Christ did for us on earth, but too seldom are they taken up with the contemplation of what he is still doing for us in heaven.

And a minister of the sanctuary or true tabernacle; that is, not of the literary sanctuary and tabernacle here below, for Christ never entered into that, but of the sanctuary of heaven, in which dwelleth all that was represented in the sanctuary here below: Christ our great High Priest abides in the sanctuary of heaven for us continually: always representing the efficacy of that blood whereby atonement was made for all our sins.

O blessed Jesus! Thy being continually in heaven, will draw our hearts and minds continually thither, if so be we are really interested in thy holy ministration.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Jesus’ Work As Our High Priest

Jesus has finished making the only offering necessary and is now seated at the right hand of God in heaven. He is the High Priest in heaven, described here as the sanctuary. He also serves as High Priest in the church, which is the greater part of the true tabernacle. The tabernacle Moses was instructed to build was a shadow of the true tabernacle, or the church ( Heb 8:1-2 ).

Since the duty of a priest is to make offerings, Jesus must have something to offer and a place to offer it. He did not make His offering within the sphere of this earth, as the priests of the material tabernacle did, but within a heavenly sphere. He continues to intercede for us, but does not continue to “offer gifts and sacrifices.” He could not make His offering on this earth, as the only priesthood authorized on this earth was the Aaronic priesthood. Only the Levites could offer sacrifices on earth ( Heb 8:3-4 ; Num 18:1-7 ).

The priests under Moses’ law and the tabernacle in which they served were only a shadow of the true substance to come. Exo 25:40 , which is quoted by the writer of Hebrews, proves the tabernacle was built according to a pattern. The word translated “pattern” primarily means the impression left by a blow. The tabernacle had to be built according to the pattern so it could be a good shadow of the archetype. Christ’s ministry is better than that of the Levitical priests by virtue of the better covenant under which He serves. Jesus is the mediator, or go-between for God and man, for this covenant ( Heb 8:5-6 ; 1Ti 2:5 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Heb 8:1. The apostle having shown that Jesus, as a High-Priest, is superior to all the Levitical high-priests, inasmuch as, like Melchisedec, he is a King, as well as a Priest; nay, a more righteous King than even Melchisedec, being absolutely free from sin, he in this and the following chapter, for the further illustration of the glory of Christ, as a High-Priest, compares his ministrations with those of the Levitical high-priests, both in respect of the place where he officiates, and of the efficacy of his ministrations. Of this chapter there are two general parts. 1st, A further explication of the excellence of the priesthood of Christ, or of Christ himself as vested with that office. 2d, A further confirmation thereof, wherein is introduced the consideration of the two covenants, the old and the new. For to the former was the administration of the Levitical priests confined; of the latter, Christ is our Priest, Mediator, and Surety.

Now of the things which we have spoken Namely, in the preceding part of this discourse; this is the sum Or rather, the chief article, as is interpreted by Chrysostom and Theophylact, in which sense the Syriac and Vulgate translations understand the expression. He calls Christs sitting down at the right hand of God the chief of all the things he had hitherto mentioned, because it implied, 1st, That the sacrifice of himself which he had offered was accepted of God as a sufficient atonement for the sins of the world. 2d, That he possesses all power in heaven and on earth next to the Father; so that he is able to defend the people for whom he officiates from their enemies, and is authorized by God to acquit and reward them at the final judgment. 3d, That he did not, like the Levitical high-priests, depart out of the most holy place after finishing the atonement, but abideth there always as the minister thereof, to open that holy place to the prayers and other acts of worship performed by his people on earth, and to their persons after death and judgment. We have such a High-Priest One so great and illustrious as hath been described, made after the order, or similitude, of Melchisedec, and by the oath of God himself invested with immortal honours. The expression answers to such a High-Priest became us, (Heb 7:26,) and brings to the readers recollection the description there given of the High-Priest who could effectually officiate for us. Who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. That is, at the right hand of the visible glory, whereby the divine presence is manifested to the angels in heaven. Of this Stephen had a clear view before he expired; for being full of the Holy Ghost, and looking up steadfastly into heaven, he saw the glory of God, and Jesus at the right hand of God. This sight, it is probable, the apostle himself enjoyed when he was caught up into the third heaven. That the Deity manifests his presence to his intelligent creatures in a sensible manner, somewhere in the universe, is a notion, says Macknight, which has been entertained by all mankind. Higher expressions cannot be imagined than those here used to lead us into a holy adoration of the tremendous glory intended to be described. And now, what was the glory of the Jewish high-priest, if considered in comparison with that of the Lord Christ, the High-Priest of our profession? The legal priest indeed entered into the holy place made with hands, and presented there the blood of the sacrifices of beasts before the august pledges of the divine presence; but all the while he was there he stood before the typical throne with holy awe and reverence, and immediately on the discharge of his duty was to withdraw, and depart out of the sacred place; but our High-Priest, after he had offered his great sacrifice on the cross, entered with the virtue of his own blood, not into the holy places made with hands, but into heaven itself, not to stand with humble reverence before the throne, but to sit on the throne of God at his right hand, and that for evermore!

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Hebrews Chapter 8

Chapter 8 in this respect is simple and clear; the last verses only give room for a few remarks.

The sum of the doctrine we have been considering is, that we have a High Priest who is seated on the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a Minister of the heavenly sanctuary which is not made with hands. As such, He must have an offering to present there. Jesus, were He on earth, would not be a Priest; there were priests on earth according to the law, in which all things were but figures of the heavenly things; as Moses was told to make all according to the pattern that was shewn him in the mount. But the ministry of Jesus is more excellent, because He is the Mediator of a better covenant, spoken of in Jer 31:1-40, which is here quoted; a clear and simple proof that the first covenant was not to continue.

We again find here that particular development of the truth which was called for by the character of the persons to whom this letter was addressed.

The first covenant was made with Israel; the second must be so likewise, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah. The epistle however in this passage only makes use of the fact that there was to be a second covenant, in order to demonstrate that the first was to last no longer. It had grown old, and was to vanish away. He recites the terms of the new covenant. We shall find that he makes use of it afterwards. In that which follows, he contrasts the services that belonged to the first with the perfect work on which Christianity is founded. Thus the extent and the value of the work of Christ are introduced.

Although there is no difficulty here, it is important to have light with regard to these two covenants, because some have very vague ideas on this point, and many souls, putting themselves under covenants, that is, in relationship with God under conditions in which He has not placed them-lose their simplicity, and do not hold fast grace and the fullness of the work of Christ, and the position He has acquired for them in heaven.

A covenant is a principle of relationship with God on the earth-conditions established by God under which man is to live with Him. The word may perhaps be used figuratively, or by accommodation. It is applied to details of the relationship of God with Israel, and so to Abraham (Gen 15:1-21), and like cases; but, strictly speaking, there are but two covenants, in which God has dealt with man on earth, or will-the old and the new. The old was established at Sinai. The new covenant is made also with the two houses of Israel.[15]

The gospel is not a covenant, but the revelation of the salvation of God. It proclaims the, great salvation of God. We enjoy indeed all the essential privileges of the new covenant, its foundation being laid on Gods part in the blood of Christ, but we do so in spirit, not according to the letter.

The new covenant will be established formally with Israel in the millennium. Meanwhile the old covenant is judged by the fact that there is a new one.

Footnotes for Hebrews Chapter 8

15: We have also, at the end of the epistle, the expression the blood of the everlasting covenant. Covenant he uses I doubt not (as the word law also is used), because it was commonly employed as the condition of relationship with God, and eternal is characteristic of the Hebrews. There have been, and will be, covenants in time and for the earth; but we have eternal conditions of relationship with God, of which the blood of Christ is the expression and security, founded in everlasting grace, and righteousness as well as grace, by that precious blood, in which all the character and all the purpose of God has been made good and glorified, as well as our sins been put away.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

Heb 8:1-6. Of the things which we have spoken, this is the sum. Paul here recapitulates, for so the grandeur of his arguments required, and he does not do it in a dry and barren manner, but with rich illustrations. As this is a good way of concluding sermons full of doctrine, preachers may here take the hint from Paul. The heads are, the installation of Christ into the mediatorial throne in heaven. He is minister now of the true tabernacle, the church which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all. The tabernacle of Moses was not the folly of some ingenious architect, but was made after the pattern shown him in the mount. It had three grand divisions; the outward court for all nations, the inner court for the circumcised, and the holy of holies, a figure of heaven. It had also the laver, the altar, the table of incense, the holy fire, and the shewbread; figures highly expressive of better things, as stated in the next chapter.

Had the Redeemer been on earth, he could not have officiated in the temple, not being of Aarons race. Therefore his temple is in the heavens, the equal, the catholic temple of all nations; judaism now exists no more. The Messiah creates new heavens, and a new earth. He creates Jerusalem a joy of many generations. The prophet, full of the gospel glory, cries, Zion, arise and shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee. The multitude of the gentile host shall come to thee, and the sons of strangers shall build thy walls.

Paul demonstrates the certainty of those things, because by Moses they are given under the form of a covenant, the circumcision of the heart; and a new covenant, full of grace and full of glory. See more on Jeremiah 31. and Deu 28:29.

Heb 8:8-10. I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts. The apostle quotes this passage from Jer 31:33, to show that the jewish dispensation was waxen old, was intended to be superseded by the gospel, and that therefore the disposition of the believing jews to relapse into judaism was highly unreasonable, and altogether inconsistent with the language of their own prophets. The covenant made at Sinai they had broken, as was obscurely intimated by Mosess breaking the tables of the law at the foot of the mount; they had wholly violated that covenant by the introduction of idolatry, first into the kingdom of Israel, and afterwards of Judah, and the Lord regarded them not, but sent them into captivity in Assyria and in Babylon. Now he will make a new covenant with his believing people, whether jews or gentiles, rounded on better promises, confirmed with an oath, and in the hands of an alsufficient Mediator, who ever lives to see it carried into full effect.

The former covenant was written on tables of stone, which were put into the ark of the testimony; now saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts. Not any new law, to supersede or abrogate the old, for that can never be made void, but the same law as was at first impressed upon the heart of man, when created in righteousness and true holiness, a rempression of that which is a transcript of the divine perfections, or the restoration of man to the moral likeness of God. This image was defaced by sin, and another law entered into the members, warring against the law of the mind, which is become carnal, and wholly at enmity with God. Rom 8:7. Regeneration consists in restoring this image, and rengraving this law upon the heart.

The effect of this gracious change is a knowledge of Gods righteousness, of the equity of his requirements, and a desire to do his will. Isa 51:7. The heart becomes the ark in which the tables of the law are deposited; there is now a conviction of its purity, extent, and spirituality, and a delighting in it after the inner man. Obedience is not rendered merely on the ground of its authority, but also from a perception of the excellency of its requirements, its congeniality with the predominant feelings of the mind, and the happiness found in a conformity to its precepts. To be like God is now the ruling passion, and an entire exemption from sin the ultimate object of the believers hope.

REFLECTIONS.

The new covenant, being the grand charter of the christian hope, and the inventory of our privileges, merits a serious revision, because it is a covenant on which providence has acted in regard to the jews, and a covenant realized to the christian church in the first planting of the gospel. These are facts which confirm our confidence and our hope.

This new covenant has a Mediator, and a Priest far superior to the leviticum of the jews, which demonstrate that the covenant of Sinai is disannulled and abrogated. It is a new testament, put in full force by the death of the Testator. It is a covenant of peace, which shall subsist when the mountains and the hills are removed. Isa 54:10. it is a covenant of righteousness and life, eclipsing the glory of the old dispensation, as much as the light of the sun eclipses the dawning of the day. In a word, it is a covenant of perfection, giving a consummation to the successive covenants renewed with Noah, with Abraham, and with the Hebrews.

This covenant is equally the magna charta of the jewish nation and the gentile world. The Father says, I will give thee for a covenant to the people and nations that know thee not shall run unto thee; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. It removes the stony heart, and leaves the law of love inscribed on the inward parts. It gives adoption and glory, and makes us heirs of an eternal inheritance.

If such be the glory of the covenant, is it not lamentable, that our church dignitaries and our presbyterians should contend, that neither pardon nor eternal life were clearly promised under the law? And that the author of the divine legation of Moses should make those points his favourite theme; and that Moses, when he said of the precepts, he that doeth them shall live in them, Lev 18:5, promised no more to man, and the best of men, than he did to the beasts? If so, the prophet was not wise to turn and repeat this promise to the jews, saying that the Lord gave them his statutes, which if a man did he should even live in them. Eze 20:11. If so, our Saviour also was doubly in error to promise life to obedience, both to the young ruler, and likewise to the lawyer. This do, and thou shalt live. To whom, Lord, shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Heb 8:1 to Heb 10:18. The greatness of the High Priest has now been sufficiently proved, and the writer proceeds to demonstrate the greatness of His ministry. This section constitutes the heart of the epistle, as we are expressly told in the opening verse. The point to which the whole discourse has been leading up (Heb 8:1) is this, that Jesus, having taken His place at Gods right hand, exercises His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He acts as High Priest in that eternal tabernacle of which the earthly one was only the shadow and symbol (Heb 8:2).

Heb 8:3-6. That Jesus fulfils His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary is a necessary inference from the fact of His priesthood. The one task of a High Priest is to offer sacrifice in a sanctuary, and Jesus, in virtue of His priesthood, was called to that office. What His sacrifice was will be considered later, but meanwhile it is enough to note that the presentation of an offering was His appointed work (Heb 8:3). The scene of His ministry, however, cannot be anywhere in this lower world. Since He was not of Levitical descent He was debarred from offering any gift in the earthly sanctuary, which is described, in the very passage of Scripture (Exo 25:40) that commands the building of it, as only a copy, modelled on the reality which exists in heaven. It follows that His exclusion from an earthly ministry was no token of inferiority. We must infer, rather, that He was called to a priesthood far excelling that of the Levitical priests, just as the covenant for which it stands is far higher than the old covenant, and carries with it far nobler promises (Heb 8:4 ff.).

Heb 8:6. enacted upon: i.e. these promises formed the basis of the covenant, and determined its character.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

“Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: we have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens: a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.” Another contrast now appears in ch. 8 between Aaron and Christ: not only is the Priest Himself of a higher and perfect character, but the ministry He introduces is “more excellent” than that of Aaron (see verse 6). But the first verse would focus our attention upon “such an High Priest,” exalted to the highest possible place of glory. For if He is indeed “a minister,” He is more than that – the Object of fullest worship and adoration. But being “a minister of the sanctuary (or of the holy places) and of the true tabernacle,” His ministry is of universal character, eternal, purely and fully of God. The earthly tabernacle was but a faint picture of this, for though God’s pattern was followed with utmost care, it was yet actually the work of men’s hands, its ministry therefore temporary. For the tabernacle is symbolic of the universe. The inner sanctuary typifies Heaven itself, the ark therein a type of the throne of God. The outer sanctuary would indicate Israel, the priestly nation, as in the millennium, in closest outward relationship to God. The court would speak of the rest of creation. Actually, in the coming day, all of creation will be affected by the High Priestly work of the Lord Jesus, but its character is Heavenly, for He Himself has entered the “Holiest of all,” now in the presence of God for us. This is a great, universal ministry, therefore, and not one confined to one nation under heaven.

But in verse 3, a comparison is again noted: “For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this Man have somewhat also to offer.” Since this is the necessary character of a priest, then certainly this High Priest must have an offering to present to God. In this case, the apostle does not speak of His offering Himself up in death, but of a present offering. “For if He were on earth, He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law.” Here again is contrast. He could not be an official priest of an earthly sanctuary, for this was confined to the line of Aaron. His official priesthood now is far above this. Note that the verse does not say that He was not a priest on earth; “but if He were on earth He should not be a priest.” His present priesthood has no place now on earth, for He is officially High Priest now. As we have seen, in moral character He always was a Priest, but not officially on earth at all. Similarly, even on earth He was actually King of Israel; but He will not officially take His throne as such until a yet future day. These distinctions ought to give no difficulty.

Priests on earth however, who are linked with Israel’s legal system, “serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.” The word “example” here may be rightly translated “representation.” Moses was given no light or indifferent task. He was not allowed in one iota to change the pattern God gave him, however the children of Israel might have felt about it or considered that some things might he improved upon in their eyes. This was to represent heavenly things, and only God could be depended on to give instructions. How solemn a word for the church today also, as regards true order according to God. Sad indeed that in too many cases man’s thoughts have been allowed to qualify and alter the truth of God concerning the order of the church. This is a gross insult to God, and a false representation of His mind and will.

But besides representation the legal system was a “shadow.” There was no solid substance in it: this is found only in Christ. The actual substance is heavenly, and the shadow of this was cast on earth, in anticipation of the substance.

“But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” His ministry is superior because He is the Mediator of a superior covenant, which is founded upon superior promises. Indeed, the promise to Abraham was long before the law. Moreover, it was an unconditional promise as to Abraham and his seed, while the promise given to Moses was conditional upon the obedience of the people. How vastly inferior this was, for it could introduce no blessing at all. But the new covenant is the actual fulfilment of the magnificent promise to Abraham, which really manifests the heart of God, and the sufficiency of God, – He Himself accomplishing all blessing, with nothing dependent upon the energy or virtue of man. How much sweeter therefore, how much stronger, how much more full of blessing is the ministry of our Lord, the great Mediator of the new covenant.

Not that the new covenant is addressed to Christians, no more than was the Old. Both are definitely Jewish. This is seen clearly in verses 7 to 10. Nevertheless, though we are not therefore under a covenant in any respect, yet the blessings of the new covenant are ministered to Christians by pure grace, through Him Who is Mediator of the new covenant. This is grace, the branches of blessing spreading out over the wall of Jewish separation, and reaching Gentiles, who were not the subjects of promise, nor ever in any covenant relationship with God.

“For if the first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, He saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in My covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.” The first covenant was not faultless, because it could procure no blessing for those who broke it; and of course those to whom it was given proved themselves far from faultless. Consequently, there was ample room for, and necessity of a new covenant. Observe that verse 8 says, “finding fault with them,” not with the covenant.

The apostle quotes from Jer 31:1-40, and of course it is plain that the new covenant was there promised exclusively to the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Both are mentioned because of the division of the ten tribes from the two in Rehoboam’s time. No tribe will be excluded from the new covenant: in that order of things the division will be Divinely healed. And the terms of the covenant must he in contrast to the terms of the former one, given when God led them out of Egypt. Note the reference here to God’s compassionate mercy in liberating them from Egypt, a work altogether of sovereign power and grace, in the face of which Israel yet had the ignorant boldness to choose a covenant of law! They required more than this experience to convince them that the mercy of God was their only source of blessing; and the nation has not learned it yet. But they certainly “continued not” in the first covenant, and God has “regarded them not.” This will be so until they cease “going about to establish their own righteousness,” and abandon themselves to the mercy of God.

“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put My laws into their minds, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to Me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know Me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” How vastly different are the terms of this covenant from those of the old. There is no condition whatever here, that is, nothing based upon the fulfilment of human responsibility. No requirement is stipulated at all as regards Israel: it is entirely a matter of God alone fulfilling the terms. Israel has proven that she is utterly without ability to present to God anything that could possibly deserve His favor; and therefore if she is to be favored, it must be entirely on the ground of God’s work. Of course, it is necessary that she be brought down to first acknowledge her utter destitution and helplessness before she will submit to this great and sovereign grace: only thus will she be in a state to give the entire glory to God.

Putting His laws into their minds and writing them in their hearts is a miracle of mercy. Does it not plainly speak of the new birth, a complete changing of the heart in true repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ? Nothing short of this will do for Israel. and it is just as necessary for every soul of man today. “Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God” (Joh 3:3). It is the goodness of God that leads to repentance (Rom 2:4), and it is by the Word of God that new life is given (1Pe 1:23).

This will be true of “all Israel” in the millennial age. The Gospel will not be preached among them, for all shall know the Lord. How mighty a work of Divine grace in that stubborn nation, so long dealt with in chastisement and affliction before being broken and blessed. Isa 66:8 prophesies of the wonder of this great work: “Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.” Such is the blessed work of God within the soul. Verse 10 however also speaks of the actual outward acts of disobedience, and shows that Divine mercy would be required to dismiss these. “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.” How God could righteously show this mercy is not here mentioned, but chapters 9 and 10 dwell upon the greatness of the public work that must be done for this, – that is, the wondrous sacrifice of Christ.

“In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” The legal covenant, not having in it the capacity to endure the stress of man’s condition, must be replaced by that which endures. The new covenant necessarily renders the first old, and it will never be revived. The new is not merely a method of patching the old: the old must be entirely discarded. And the new will give place to nothing else: it is perpetually new.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

7 The New Covenant

(Hebrews 8)

In the seventh chapter there has been presented the new order of priesthood, to which Christ has been called, and its superiority over the Aaronic priesthood, involving the setting aside of the law of the Levitical priesthood.

Now we are to learn that the new priesthood not only sets aside the Mosaic law as to the appointment of the priest, but opens the way for the new covenant, based on a new sacrifice and exercised in the new sanctuary for new worshippers. The two great themes of this chapter are: firstly, the great fact that Christ’s priestly service is now exercised in connection with heaven (verses 1-5); secondly, that it implies the new covenant (verses 6-13).

(Vv. 1, 2).The chapter opens with a brief summary of the truth already presented. The apostle states, not only that there is such an High Priest, but that we have such an High Priest. This great and glorious Person, called to be an High Priest after the order of Melchisedec, is for service to us. He is One to whom we can turn for sympathy in our sorrow and for succour in our infirmities. The apostle reminds us of the incomparable dignity of our High Priest by bringing before us His place of power on the right hand of the throne, His nearness to God, the throne of the Majesty, and His exalted position, in the heavens.

Moreover, He is a minister of the sanctuary, or holy places. This is not the earthly sanctuary, but the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man. Later in the Epistle we are told that this is heaven itself (Heb 9:24). The mention of the sanctuary introduces another part of the priestly service of Christ. This is no longer the service of succouring us in our sorrows, or support in our weakness, but rather that higher service by which we are led as worshippers into the presence of God. His service for us in our wilderness circumstances has been presented in Hebrews 2-7; His priestly service in leading us into the sanctuary as worshippers is more definitely presented in Hebrews 8-10.

(V. 3). Even as it was an important part of the work of the Levitical priests to offer gifts and sacrifices, so Christ as our High Priest has somewhat to offer, as we read later in the Epistle, By Him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually (Heb 13:15).

(Vv. 4, 5). This priestly work of Christ is exercised in heaven and on behalf of a heavenly people. If He were on earth He would not be a priest, as on earth the only human priests ever sanctioned by God as a distinct class among the people of God were appointed according to the law. They served as the representation and shadow of heavenly things. This is implied by the explicit directions given to Moses, who was told to make the tabernacle after the pattern shown to him in the mount (Exo 25:40). Christ having come, the representation and shadow of heavenly things has fulfilled its purpose. The human priesthood exercised on earth on behalf of an earthly people gives place to the heavenly priesthood of Christ, exercised in heaven on behalf of an heavenly people.

Alas! Christendom, having lost the heavenly calling of the Christian, has set up an earthly system after the pattern of Judaism, with a humanly ordained priesthood as a distinct class amongst the people of God. In doing so there is not only a return to the shadows and the loss of the substance, but there is the practical denial of the priesthood of Christ and the usurpation of His office and service.

(Vv. 6-9). Not only does Christ exercise a more excellent ministry in heaven, but He is the Mediator of a better covenant, established upon better promises. Of this new covenant the apostle speaks in verses 6-13.

A covenant sets forth the terms on which two people can be in relation with each other. Scripture speaks of two great covenants between God and men, the old covenant and the new, the covenant of law and the covenant of grace. Both the old and the new covenants set forth the terms on which God can bless His earthly people. The great difference between the covenants is that under the terms of the first covenant the blessing depended upon man doing his part, whereas under the second covenant the blessing is secured by the unconditional promise of God. The mediatorial work of Christ lays a righteous basis for God to bless the believer in sovereign grace according to the terms of the new covenant.

In the book of Exodus we have the historical account of Israel formally entering into a covenant with God. Jehovah undertakes to bless the people if they will obey His voice and keep His covenant. The people on their side undertake to do their part, as we read, All the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do (Exo 19:5-8). Later, this covenant is renewed by the people and sealed with blood (Exo 24:6-8).

It becomes manifest that, under the old covenant, the people of Israel were set in outward relationship with God on the ground of law. If they kept the law, life and blessing on earth were promised to them; if they broke the law, they were cursed. The blessing all depended upon man doing his part. This was the weakness of the first covenant, for it is manifest that a fallen man cannot keep God’s holy law. Thus a place is sought for a second covenant, of which Christ is the Mediator.

Jehovah does not indeed find fault with the first covenant itself, but with those who were unable to fulfil its terms. Finding fault with them, Jehovah speaks of a new covenant. The apostle, in verses 8-12, quotes from the Septuagint version of Jer 31:31-34 to bring before us the terms of this new covenant.

From this quotation we learn that the new covenant has in view the day to come, and strictly is made with Israel and applies to an earthly people. Nevertheless, if the letter of the new covenant is confined to Israel, the spirit of it can be applied to Christians. Therefore, in another epistle the apostle speaks of himself as being an able minister of the new covenant, not of the letter, but of the spirit (2Co 3:6).

For this reason we should hardly expect to find in the new covenant any of the truths that exclusively set forth Christian privileges, but rather blessings that are essential for all the people of God and common to all the redeemed. These blessings that restored and redeemed Israel will enter into in a day to come are anticipatively enjoyed by believers in the present day of grace.

The new covenant is in contrast with the old covenant made with Israel in the day when they were led out of Egypt. In that day God separated the nation from the world of Egypt that they might be in relationship with Himself. But, as we have seen, according to the terms of the covenant, the blessing depended upon the people carrying out their part of the covenant. This they failed to do, as the Lord says, They continued not in My covenant. Consequently they lost the blessing, and the Lord regarded them not. To regard a people who, by disobedience and idolatry, failed to carry out their obligations would be to sanction their evil. Thus God refused to own them as in relationship with Himself on the ground of the old covenant. On this ground the nation is rejected.

(Vv. 10-12). Nevertheless, God can and does fall back on His sovereign grace and speaks of a fresh covenant for the days to come. This new covenant depends entirely upon the sovereign grace of God and sets forth the terms upon which He can be with man according to His own holy nature and His own will. In setting forth the blessing of the new covenant, again and again the Lord says, I will – I will make a new covenant; I will put My laws into their mind; I will be to them a God; I will be merciful; Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. It is clear that the blessings of the new covenant depend, not on man’s doings or man’s will, but on God’s sovereign will. The essence of the new covenant is that the Lord undertakes its accomplishment.

Jeremiah tells us that the blessings of the new covenant are, firstly, a work of God in the hearts of His people, whereby their minds will be renewed and their affections engaged, so that the law of God will be written in the heart, in contrast with being written on tables of stone. Secondly, those thus wrought upon will be a people in relationship with God. Into the spirit of this believers in this day enter, as we read in the Gospel of John, As many as received Him, to them gave He the right to be children of God, to those that believe on His Name; who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God. (Joh 1:12; Joh 1:13). Thirdly, there will be the conscious knowledge of the Lord, so that there will be no question of teaching a neighbour or a brother to know the Lord. How truly this is so amongst the true people of God today, who personally know the Lord, however much they may have to learn about the Lord, and in this sense need teaching! Fourthly, there will be the mercy of the Lord by which their sins will be so righteously dealt with that God will be able to say, Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. Into this great blessing every believer is brought today.

(V. 13). Such are the terms and blessings of the new covenant. If there is a new priesthood by which we draw nigh to God, there must of necessity be a new covenant, otherwise the new priesthood, however perfect, would be of no avail. Under the first covenant our drawing nigh to God would depend upon our keeping the terms of the covenant. This being impossible we should find ourselves constantly shut out from God by our own failures. Under the new covenant we are in relationship with God entirely on the ground of what God has done in sovereign grace.

The covenant is new in the sense that it is entirely different to the old covenant: it is not a new covenant of the same pattern. Being new makes the old out of date; and decaying and waxing old, it is ready to vanish away. It is vain, therefore, for Jews or Christendom to go back to that which man has broken and which God has set aside by the cross, and the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible

8:1 Now {1} of the things which we have spoken [this is] the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

(1) He briefly repeats that to which all these things are to be referred, that is, that we have another High Priest than those Levitical high priests, even such a one as sits at the right hand of the Most High God in heaven.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Christ’s better ministry 8:1-5

In this section the writer first stated (Heb 8:1-2) and then explained (Heb 8:3-5) Jesus Christ’s better ministry. It is superior in three respects. He serves as a seated priest, having finished His work of offering a final sacrifice for sins (Heb 8:1). He is an enthroned priest, having taken His place at the right hand of God the Father (Heb 8:1). And He is a heavenly priest, having entered the true sanctuary where He now ministers (Heb 8:1-2).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

"What has been said" (Heb 8:1) refers to chapter 7. This is a transitional statement. The writer now moved on to explain Jesus Christ’s ministry more fully. Chapter 7 was in a sense introductory and foundational to what follows.

". . . the doctrine of Christ’s high priesthood and the pilgrimage of God’s people dominate the expository and paraenetic [i.e., exhortation] sections [of the epistle]. The theme of Christ as High Priest, however, is central to the epistle as a whole." [Note: David J. MacLeod, "The Doctrinal Center of the Book of Hebrews," Bibliotheca Sacra 146:583 (July-September 1989):300.]

The writer again referred to the heavens where God abides and where Jesus Christ now serves as the real tabernacle, the only one that does not imitate something better than itself. In particular, the holy of holies is in view. These verses summarize what follows in chapter 8. [Note: See Philip E. Hughes, "The Blood of Jesus and His Heavenly Priesthood in Hebrews," Bibliotheca Sacra 130:520 (October-December 1973):305-14.]

"The throne He occupies and from which He ministers is not David’s throne, which He will one day occupy here on earth as the promised Messiah (Mat 25:31). Rather, He was identified with the throne of ’the Majesty in the heavens.’ The authority assigned to the One so enthroned was to be ’a minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle’ (Heb 8:2). Thus He was not appointed to be a king in an earthly domain, but rather He was appointed to function as a High priest in a new sanctuary. And the appointment as High Priest, according to Psa 110:4, follows the enthronement of Christ at His Father’s right hand." [Note: Pentecost, pp. 131-32.]

We not only have a high priest who has taken His seat at the Father’s right hand (Heb 8:1), but we have one who now ministers as a priest in the heavenly sanctuary (Heb 8:2; cf. Psa 110:1).

"There are other sons beside the Son (Heb 2:10), but no other priests subordinated to Christ as high priest." [Note: Ellingworth, p. 403.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER VIII.

THE NEW COVENANT.

“Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is this: We have such a High-priest, Who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a Minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. For every high-priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that this High-priest also have somewhat to offer. Now if He were on earth, He would not be a Priest at all, seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; who serve that which is a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount. But now hath He obtained a ministry the more excellent, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises.”– Heb 8:1-6 (R.V.).

The Apostle has interpreted the beautiful story of Melchizedek with wonderful felicity and force. The point of the whole Epistle, he now tells us, lies there. He has brought forth the headstone of the corner, the keystone of the arch.[142] It is, in short, that we have such a High-priest. Country, holy city, ark of the covenant, all are lost. But if we have the High-priest, all are restored to us in a better and more enduring form. Jesus is the High-priest and King. He has taken His seat once for all, as King, on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty, and, as Priest, is also Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle. The indefinite and somewhat unusual term “minister” or “public servant”[143] is intentionally chosen, partly to emphasise the contrast between Christ’s kingly dignity and His priestly service, partly because the author wishes to explain at greater length in what Christ’s actual work as High-priest in heaven consists. For Christ’s heavenly glory is a life of service, not of selfish gratification. Every high-priest serves.[144] He is appointed for no other purpose than to offer gifts and sacrifices. The Apostle’s readers admitted that Christ was High-priest. But they were forgetting that, as such, He too must necessarily minister and have something which He can offer. Our theology is still in like danger. We are sometimes prone to regard Christ’s life in heaven as only a state of exaltation and power, and, consequently, to speak more of the saints’ happiness than of their service. It is the natural result of superficial theories of the Atonement that little practical use is made by many Christians of the truth of Christ’s priestly intercession. The debt has been paid, the debtor discharged, and the transaction ended. Christ’s present activity towards God is acknowledged and–neglected. Protestants are confirmed in this baneful worldliness of conception by their just desire to keep at a safe distance from the error in the opposite extreme: that Christ presents to God the Church’s sacrifices of the mass.

The truth lies midway between two errors. On the one hand, Christ’s intercession is not itself the making or constituting of a sacrifice; on the other, it is not mere pleading and prayer. The sacrifice was made and completed on the Cross, as the victims were slain in the outer court. But it was through the blood of those victims the high-priest had authority to enter the holiest place; and when he had entered, he must sprinkle the warm blood, and so present the sacrifice to God. Similarly Christ must enter a sanctuary in order to present the sacrifice slain on Calvary. The words of the Apostle John, “We have an Advocate with the Father,” express only one side of the truth. But he adds the other side of the conception in the same verse, “And He is the propitiation,” which is a very different thing from saying, “His death was the propitiation.” But what sanctuary shall He enter? He could not approach the holiest place in the earthly temple. For if He were on earth, He would not be a Priest at all, seeing there are men ordained by the Law to offer the appointed gifts on earth.[145] The Jewish priests have satisfied and exhausted the idea of an earthly priesthood. Even Melchizedek could not found an order. If he may be regarded as an attempt to acclimatise on earth the priesthood of personal greatness, the attempt was a failure. It always fails, though it is always renewed. On earth there can be no order of goodness. When a great saint appears among men, he is but a bird of passage, and is not to be found, because God has translated him. If it is so of His saints, what of Christ? Christ on earth through the ages? Impossible! And what is impossible today will be equally inconceivable at any point of time in the future. A correct conception of Christ’s priestly intercession is inconsistent with the dream of a reign of Christ on earth. It may, or may not, be consistent with His kingly office. But His priesthood forbids. We infer that Christ has transformed the heaven of glory into the holiest place of a temple, and the throne of God into a shrine before which He, as High-priest, presents His sacrifice.

The Jewish priesthood itself teaches the existence of a heavenly sanctuary.[146] All the arrangements of tabernacle and ritual were made after a pattern shown to Moses on Mount Sinai. The priests, in the tabernacle and through their ritual, ministered to the holiest place, as the visible image and outline of the real holiest place–that is, heaven–which the Lord pitched, not man.

Now Christ’s more excellent ministry as High-priest in heaven carries in its bosom all that the Apostle contends for,–the establishment of a new covenant which has set aside for ever the covenant of the Law. “He has obtained a ministry the more excellent by how much He is the Mediator of a better covenant.”[147] These words contain in a nutshell the entire argument, or series of arguments, that extends from the sixth verse of the eighth chapter to the eighteenth verse of the tenth. The course of thought may be divided as follows:–

1. That the Lord intends to establish a new covenant is first of all shown by a citation from the prophet Jeremiah (Heb 8:7-13).

2. A description of the tabernacle and of the entrance of the priests and high-priests into it teaches that the way into the holiest place was not yet open to men. This is contrasted with the entering of Christ into heaven through His own blood, which proves that He has obtained for us an eternal redemption and is Mediator of a new covenant, founded on His death (ix. 1-18).

3. The frequent entering of the high-priest into the holiest place is contrasted with the one death of Christ and His entering heaven once. This proves the power of His sacrifice and intercession to bring in the better covenant and set aside the former one (Heb 9:25 – Heb 10:18).

I. A NEW COVENANT PROMISED THROUGH JEREMIAH.

“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. For finding fault with them, He saith,

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, That I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers In the day that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt; For they continued not in My covenant, And I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those days, saith the Lord; I will put My laws into their mind, And on their heart also will I write them: And I will be to them a God, And they shall be to Me a people: And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, And every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: For all shall know Me, From the least to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And their sins will I remember no more.

In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away.”– Heb 8:7-13 (R.V.).

The more spiritual men under the dispensation of law anticipated a new and better era. The Psalmist had spoken of another day, and prophesied of the appearance of a Priest after the order of Melchizedek and a Son of David Who would also be David’s Lord. But Jeremiah is very bold, and says[148] that the covenant itself on which the hope of his nation hangs will pass away, and his dream of a more spiritual covenant, established on better promises, will at some distant day come true. It is well to bear in mind that this discontent with the present order lodged in the hearts, not of the worst, but of the best and greatest, sons of Judaism. It was the salt of their character, the life of their inspiration, the message of their prophecy. In days of national distress and despair, this star shone the brighter for the darkness. The terrible shame of the Captivity and the profound agony that followed it were lit up with the glorious vision of a better future in store for the people of God. On the quivering lips of the prophet that “sat weeping,” as he is described in the Septuagint,[149] this strong hope found utterance. He had washed the dust of worldliness from his eyes with tears, and, therefore, saw more clearly than the men of his time the threatened downfall of Judah and the bright dawn beyond. In reading his prophecy of the new covenant we almost cease to wonder that some persons thought Jesus was Jeremiah risen from the dead. The prophet’s words have the same ring of undaunted cheerfulness, of intense compassion, of prophetic faith; and Christ, as well as the Apostle, cites His prediction that all shall be taught of God.[150]

Jeremiah blames the people.[151] But the Apostle infers that the covenant itself was not faultless, inasmuch as the prophet seeks, in his censure of the people, to make room for another covenant. We have already been told that there was on earth no room for the priesthood of Christ.[152] Similarly, in the sphere of earthly nationality, there was no room for a covenant other than that which God had made with His people Israel when He brought them out of the land of Egypt. But the earthly priesthood could not give efficacy to its ministering, and thus room is found for a heavenly priesthood. So also, the covenant on which the earthly priesthood rested being inadequate, the prophet makes room for the introduction of a new and better covenant.

Now the peculiar character of the old covenant was that it dealt with men in the aggregate which we call the nation. Nationalism is the distinctive feature of the old world, within the precincts of Judaism and among the peoples of heathendom. Even the prophets could not see the spiritual truth, which they themselves foretold, except through the medium of nationality. The Messiah was the national king idealised, even when He was a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. In the passage before us the prophet Jeremiah speaks of God’s promise to write His law on the heart as made to the house of Judah and the house of Israel, as if he were not aware that, in so speaking, he was really contradicting himself. For the blessing promised was a spiritual and, consequently, personal one, with which nationality cannot possibly have any sort of connection. It is a matter of profound joy to every lover of his people to witness and share in the uprising of a national consciousness. Some among us are beginning to know now for the first time that a national ideal is possible in thought, and sentiment, and life. But there must not, cannot, be a nationality in religion. A moral law in the heart does not recognise the quality of the blood that circulates through. This truth the prophets strove to utter, often in vain. Yet the breaking up of the nation into Judah and Israel helped to dispel the illusion. The loss of national independence prepared for the universalism of Jesus Christ and St. Paul. Now also, when an epistle is written to the Hebrew Christians, the threatened extinction of nationality drives men to seek the bond of union in a more stable covenant, which will save them, if anything can, from the utter collapse of all religious fellowship and civil society. It is the glory of Christianity that it creates the individual and at the same moment keeps perfectly clear of individualism. Its blessings are personal, but they imply a covenant. If nationalism has been dethroned, individualism has not climbed to the vacant seat. How it achieves this great result will be understood from an examination of Jeremiah’s prophecy.

The new covenant deals with the same fundamental conceptions which dominated the former one. These are the moral law, knowledge of God, and forgiveness of sin. So far the two dispensations are one. Because these great conceptions lie at the root of all human goodness, religion is essentially the same thing under both covenants. There is a sense in which St. Augustine was right in speaking of the saints under the old Testament as “Christians before Christ.” Judaism and Christianity stand shoulder to shoulder over against the religious ideas and practices of all the heathen nations of the world. But in Judaism these sublime conceptions are undeveloped. Nationalism dwarfs their growth. They are like seeds falling on the thorns, and the thorns grow up and choke them. God, therefore, spoke unto the Jews in parables, in types and shadows. Seeing, they saw not; and hearing, they heard not, neither did they understand.

Because the former covenant was a national one, the conceptions of the moral law, of God, of sin and its forgiveness, would be narrow and external. The moral law would be embedded in the national code. God would be revealed in the history of the nation. Sin would consist either in faults of ignorance and inadvertence or in national apostasy from the theocratic King. In these three respects the new covenant excels,–in respect, that is, of the moral law, knowledge of God, and forgiveness of sin, which yet may be justly regarded as the three sides of the revelation given under the former covenant.

1. The moral law will either forget its own holiness, righteousness, and goodness, and degenerate into national rules of conduct, or else, by the innate force of its spirituality, create in men a consciousness of sin and a strong desire for reconciliation with God. Men will resist, and, when resistance is vain, will chafe against its terrible strength. “The Law came in beside, that the trespass might abound.”[153] But it often happens that guilt of conscience is the alarum that awakens moral self-consciousness out of sleep, never to fall asleep again when holiness has found entrance into the soul. Beyond this the old covenant advanced not a step. The promise of the new covenant is to put the Law into the mind, not in an ark of shittim wood, and to write it in the heart, not on tables of stone. The Law was given on Sinai as an external commandment; it is put into the mind as a knowledge of moral truth. It was written on the two tables in the weakness of the letter; on the heart it is written as a principle and a power of obedience. The power of God to command becomes the strength of man to obey. In this way the new covenant realises what the former covenant demanded. The new covenant is the old covenant transformed, made spiritual. God is become the God of His people; and this was the promise of the former covenant. They are no more children, as they were when God took them by the hand and led them out of the land of Egypt. Instead of the external guidance, they have the unction within, and know all things. Renewed in the spirit of their mind, they put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and the holiness of truth.

2. So also of knowing God. The moral attributes of the Most High are revealed under the former covenant, and the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New. Abraham knows Him as the everlasting God. Elisha understands that there is no darkness or shadow of death where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves. Balaam declares that God is not a man that He should lie. The Psalmist confesses to God that he cannot flee from His presence. The father of believers fears not to ask, “Shall not the Judge of the earth do right?” Moses recognises that the Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression. Isaiah hears the seraphim crying one to another, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts.” But nationalism distorted the image. The conception of God’s Fatherhood is most indistinct. When, however, Christ taught His disciples to say in prayer, “Our Father,” He could then at once add the words “Who art in heaven.” The spirit of man rose immediately with a mighty upheaval above the narrow bounds of nationalism. The attributes of God became more lofty as well as more amiable to the eyes of His children. The God of a nation is not great enough to be our Father. The God Who is our Father is God in heaven.

Not only are God’s attributes revealed, but the faculty to know Him is also bestowed. The moral law and a heart to love it are the two elements of a knowledge of God’s nature. For God Himself is holiness and love. In vain will men cry one to another, saying, “Know the Lord.” As well might they bid the blind behold the light, or the wicked love purity. Knowledge of nature can be taught. It can be parcelled in propositions, carried about, and handed to others. But the character of God is not a notion, and cannot be taught as a lesson or in a creed, however true the creed may be. The two opposite ends of all our knowledge are our sensations and God. In one respect the two are alike. Knowledge of them cannot be conveyed in words.

3. The only thing concerning God that can be known by a man who is not holy himself is that He will punish the impenitent, and can forgive. These are objective facts. They may be announced to the world, and believed. In the history of all holy men, under the Old Testament as well as under the New, they are their first lesson in spiritual theology. To say that penitent sinners under the Law could not be absolved from guilt or taste the sweetness of God’s forgiving grace must be false. St. Paul himself, who describes the Law as a covenant that “gendereth to bondage,” cites the words of the Psalmist, “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered,” to prove that God imputes righteousness without works.[154] When the Apostle Peter was declaring that all the prophets witness to Jesus Christ, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins, the Holy Ghost fell on all who heard the word. The very promise which Jeremiah says will be fulfilled under the future covenant Isaiah claims for his own days: “I, even I, am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for Mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.”[155]

On the other hand, it is equally plain that St. Paul and the author of this Epistle agree in teaching that the sacrifices of the old covenant had in them no virtue to remove guilt. They cannot take away sin, and they cannot remove the consciousness of sin.[156] The writer evidently considers it sufficient to state the impossibility, without labouring to prove it. His readers’ consciences would bear him out in the assertion that it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

It remains–and it is the only supposition left to us–that peace of conscience must have been the result of another revelation, simultaneous with the covenant of the Law, but differing from it in purpose and instruments. Such a revelation would be given through the prophets, who stood apart as a distinct order from the priesthood. They were the preachers. They quickened conscience, and spoke of God’s hatred of sin and willingness to forgive. Every advance in the revelation came through the prophets, not through the priests. The latter represent the stationary side of the covenant, but the prophets hold before the eyes of men the idea of progress. What, then, was the weakness of prophecy in reference to forgiveness of sin when compared with the new covenant? The prophets predicted a future redemption. This was their strength. It was also their weakness. For that future was not balanced by an equally great past. However glorious the history of the nation had been, it was not strong enough to bear the weight of so transcendent a future. Every nation that believes in the greatness of its own future already possesses a great past. If not, it creates one. Mythology and hero-worship are the attempt of a people to erect their future on a sufficient foundation. But men had not experienced anything great enough to inspire them with a living faith in the reality of the promises which the prophets announced. Sin had not been atoned for. The Christian preacher can point to the wonderful but well-assured facts of the life and death of Jesus Christ. If he could not do this, or if he neglects to do it, feeble and unreal will sound his proclamation of the terrors and joys of the world to come. The Gospel has for one of its primary objects to appease the guilty conscience. How it achieves this purpose our author will tell us in another chapter. For the present all we learn is that knowledge of God is knowledge of His moral nature, and that this knowledge belongs to the man whose moral consciousness has been quickened. The evangelical doctrine that the source of holiness is thankfulness was well meant, as an antidote to legalism on the one hand and to Antinomianism on the other. The sinner, we were told, once redeemed from the curse of the Law and delivered from the danger of perdition, begins to love the Christ Who redeemed and saved him. The doctrine contains a truth, and is applicable to this extent; that he to whom much is forgiven loveth much. But it would not be true to say that all good men have sought God’s forgiveness because they feared hell torments. To some their guilt is their hell. Fear is too narrow a foundation of holiness. We cannot explain saintliness by mere gratitude. For “thankfulness” we must write “conscience,” and substitute forgiveness and absolution from guilt for safety from future misery, if we would lay a foundation broad and firm enough on which to erect the sublimest holiness of man.

Our author infers from the words of Jeremiah that there was an inherent decay in the former covenant. It was itself ready to vanish away, and make room for a new and more spiritual one.[157]

II. A NEW COVENANT SYMBOLIZED IN THE TABERNACLE.

“Now even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service, and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world. For there was a tabernacle prepared, the first, wherein were the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the Holy place. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of holies; having a golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was a golden pot holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; and above it cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy-seat; of which we cannot now speak severally. Now these things having been thus prepared, the priests go in continually into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the services; but into the second the high-priest alone, once in the year, not without blood, which he offereth for himself, and for the errors of the people: the Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while as the first tabernacle is yet standing; which is a parable for the time now present; according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshipper perfect, being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation. But Christ having come a High-priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”– Heb 9:1-14 (R.V.).

With the words of a prophet the Apostle contrasts the ritual of the priests. Jeremiah prophesied of a better covenant, because he found the former one did not satisfy conscience. A description of the tabernacle, its furniture and ordinances of Divine service, follows. At first it appears strange that the author should have thought it necessary to enumerate in detail what the tabernacle contained. But to infer that he is a Hellenist, to whom the matter had all the charm of novelty, would be very precarious. His purpose is to show that the way of the holiest was not yet open. The tabernacle consisted of two chambers: the foremost and larger of the two, called the sanctuary, and an inner one, called the holiest of all. Now the sanctuary had its furniture and stated rites. It was not a mere vestibule or passage leading to the holiest. The eighth verse, literally rendered, expresses that the outer sanctuary “held a position.”[158] Its furniture was for daily use. The candelabrum supported the seven lamps, which gave light to the ministering priests. The shewbread, laid on the table in rows of twelve cakes, was eaten by Aaron and his sons. Into this chamber the priests went always, accomplishing the daily services. Moreover, between the holy place and the holiest of all hung a thick veil. Into the holiest the high-priest only was permitted to enter, and he could only enter on the annual day of atonement. This chamber also had its proper furniture. To it belonged[159] the altar of incense (for so we must read in the fourth verse, instead of “golden censer”), although its actual place was in the outer sanctuary. It stood in front of the veil that the high-priest might take the incense from it, without which he was not permitted to enter the holiest; and when he came out, he sprinkled it with blood as he had sprinkled the holiest place itself. In the inner chamber stood the ark of the covenant, containing the pot of manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the two tables of stone on which the Ten Commandments were written. On the ark was the mercy-seat, and above the mercy-seat were the cherubim. But there were no lamps to give light; there was no shewbread for food. The glory of the Lord filled it, and was the light thereof. When the high-priest had performed the atoning rites, he was not permitted to stay within. It is evident that reconciliation through blood was the idea symbolized by the holiest place, its furniture, and the yearly rite performed within it. But the veil and the outer chamber stood between the sinful people and the mercy-seat. Our author ascribes this arrangement of the two chambers, the veil, and the one entrance every year of the high-priest into the inner shrine, to the Holy Spirit, Who teaches men by symbol[160] that the way to God is not yet open. But He also teaches them through the ordinances of the outer sanctuary that access to God is a necessity of conscience, and yet that the gifts and sacrifices there offered cannot satisfy conscience, resting, as they do, only on meats and drinks and divers washings. All we can say of them is that they were the requirements of natural conscience, here termed “flesh,” and that these demands of human consciousness of guilt were sanctioned and imposed on men by God provisionally, until the time came for restoring permanently the long-lost peace between God and men.

Contrast with all this the ministry of Christ. He made His appearance on earth as High-priest of the things which have now at length come to us.[161] The blessings prophesied by Jeremiah have been realised. As High-priest He entered the true holiest place, a tabernacle greater and more perfect, even heaven itself.[162] It is greater; that is, larger. The outer sanctuary has ceased to exist, because the veil has been rent in twain, and the holy place has been taken into the holiest place. The tabernacle has now only one chamber, and in that chamber God meets all His worshipping saints, who come to Him through and with Jesus, the High-priest. The tabernacle of God is with men, and He shall dwell, as in the tabernacle, with them, and they shall be His peoples, and God Himself shall be with them.[163] Yea, the holiest place has spread itself over Mount Zion, on which stood the king’s palace, and over the whole city of Jerusalem, which lieth four-square, and is become the heavenly and holy city, having no temple, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple thereof. “And the city hath no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine upon it; for the glory of God lightens it, and the lamp thereof is the Lamb.” The city and the holiest place are commensurate. So large, indeed, is the holiest that the nations shall walk amidst the light thereof. It is also more perfect.[164] For Christ has entered into the presence of God for us. Such a tabernacle is not constructed of the materials of this world,[165] nor fashioned with the hands of cunning artificers, Bezaleel and Aholiab. When Christ destroyed the sanctuary made with hands, in three days He built another made without hands. In a true sense it is not made at all, not even by the hands of Him Who built all things; for it is essentially God’s presence. Into this holiest place Christ entered, to appear in the immediate presence of God. But the Apostle is not satisfied with saying that He entered within. Ten thousand times ten thousand of His saints will do this. He has done more. He went through[166] the holiest. He has passed through the heavens.[167] He has been made higher than the heavens.[168] He has taken His seat on the right hand of God.[169] The Melchizedek Priest has ascended to the mercy-seat and made it His throne. He is Himself henceforth the shechinah, and the manifested glory of the unseen Father. All this is expressed in the words “through a greater and more perfect tabernacle.”

Moreover, the high-priest entered into the holiest place in virtue of the blood of goats and calves.[170] Add, if you will, the ceremony of cleansing a person who had contracted defilement by touching a dead body.[171] He also was cleansed by having the ashes of a heifer sprinkled upon his flesh. Why, the very defilement is unreal and artificial. To touch a dead body a sin! It may have been well to make it a crime from sanitary considerations, and it may become a sin because God has forbidden it. So far it touched conscience. When Elijah stretched himself upon the dead child of the widow of Zarephath three times, and the soul of the child came into him again, or when Elisha put his mouth upon the mouth of the dead son of the Shunammite, his eyes upon his eyes, and his hands upon his hands, and the flesh of the child waxed warm, God’s holy prophet was defiled! The mother and the child might bring their thank-offering to the sanctuary; but the prophet, who had done the deed of power and mercy, was excluded from joining in thanksgiving and prayer. If the defilement is unreal, what shall we think of the means of cleansing? To touch a dead child defiles, but the touch of the ashes of a burnt heifer cleanses! Yet natural conscience felt guilty when thus defiled, and recovered itself, in some measure, from its shame when thus made clean.[172] Such men resemble the persons, referred to by St. Paul, who have “a conscience of the idol.”[173] Judaism enfeebled the conscience. A man of morbid religious sentiment is often defiled in his own eyes by what is not really wrong, and often finds peace and comfort in what is not really a propitiation or a forgiveness.

On the other hand, Christ entered the true holiest place by His own blood. He offered Himself. The High-priest is the sacrifice. Under the old covenant the victim must be “without spot.” But the high-priest was not without blemish, and he offered for himself as well as for the errors of the people. But in the offering of Christ, the spotless purity of the Victim ensures that the High-priest Himself is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners. For this reason it is said here[174] that He offered Himself “through an eternal spirit,” or, as we should say in modern phrase, “through His eternal personality.” He is the High-priest after the order of Melchizedek; and He invests the sacrifice with all the personal greatness of the High-priest. Is He “without beginning of days or end of life”? So also His sacrifice abides for ever. His power of an indissoluble life belongs to His atonement. Is He untouched by the rolling stream of time? His death was of infinite merit in reference to the past and to the future, though it took place historically at the end of the ages. His eternal personality made it unnecessary for Him to suffer often since the foundation of the world. Because of His personal greatness, it sufficed that He should suffer once only and enter once into the holiest place. The eternal High-priest in one transitory act of death offered a sacrifice that remains eternally, and obtains for us an eternal redemption. If, then, the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of an heifer appease, in some measure, the weak, frightened conscience of unenlightened nature, how much more shall the conscious, voluntary sacrifice of this eternal, personal Son deliver the conscience of him who worships, not a phantom deity, but an eternal, personal, living God, from the guilt of dead works, and bring him to worship that living God with an eternal, living personality!

Mark the contrasted notions. The brute life, dragged to the altar, little knowing that its hot blood is to be a propitiation for human guilt, is contrasted with the blood of the Christ (for there is but one), Who, with the consciousness and strength of an eternal personality, willingly offers Himself as a sacrifice. Between these two lives are all the lives which God created, human and angelic. Yet the offering of a beast in some fashion and to some degree appeased conscience, unillumined by the fierce light of God’s holiness and untouched by the pathos of Christ’s death. With this imperfect and negative peace, or, to speak more correctly, truce, of conscience is contrasted the living, eager worship of him whose enlightened conscience has been purified from spiritual defilement by the blood of Christ. Such a man’s entire service is worship, and his worship is the ministering of a priest.[175] He stands in the congregation of the righteous, and ascends unto God’s holy hill. He enters the holiest place with Christ. He draws near with boldness to the mercy-seat, now the very throne itself of grace.

It will be seen, if we have rightly traced the line of thought, that the outer sanctuary no longer exists. The larger and more perfect tabernacle is the holiest place itself, when the veil has been removed, and the sanctuary and courts are all included in the expanded holiest. Several very able expositors deny this. They find an antitype of the holy place either in the body of Christ or in the created heavens, through which He has passed into the immediate presence of God. But this introduces confusion, adds nothing of value to the meaning of the type, and is inconsistent with our author’s express statement that the way into the holiest was not yet open so long as the holy place stood.

III. A NEW COVENANT RATIFIED IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST.

“And for this cause He is the Mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him that made it. For a testament is of force where there hath been death; for doth it ever avail while he that made it liveth? Wherefore even the first covenant hath not been dedicated without blood. For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses unto all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself, and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to you-ward. Moreover the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry he sprinkled in like manner with the blood. And according to the Law, I may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and apart from shedding of blood there is no remission. It was necessary therefore that the copies of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ entered not into a holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us: nor yet that He should offer Himself often; as the high-priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own; else must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages hath He been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for Him, unto salvation. For the Law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, they can never with the same sacrifices year by year, which they offer continually, make perfect them that draw nigh. Else would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have had no more conscience of sins? But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year by year. For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. Wherefore when He cometh into the world, He saith,

Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, But a body didst Thou prepare for Me: In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hadst no pleasure:

Then said I,

Lo, I am come (In the roll of the book it is written of Me) To do Thy will, O God. Saying above, Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein (the which are offered according to the Law),

then hath He said,

Lo, I am come to do Thy will.

He taketh away the first, that He may establish the second. By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest indeed standeth day by day ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, the which can never take away sins: but He, when He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till His enemies be made the footstool of His feet. For by one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. And the Holy Ghost also beareth witness to us: for after He hath said,

This is the covenant that I will make with them After those days, saith the Lord; I will put My laws on their heart, And upon their mind also will I write them;

then saith He,

And their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.”– Heb 9:15-28; Heb 10:1-18 (R.V.).

The Apostle has proved that a new covenant was promised through the prophet and prefigured in the tabernacle. Christ is come to earth and entered into the holiest place of God, as High-priest. The inference is that His high-priesthood has abolished the old covenant and ratified the new. The priesthood has been changed, and change of the priesthood implies change of the covenant. In fact, to this priesthood the rites of the former covenant pointed, and on it the priestly absolution rested. Sins were forgiven, but not in virtue of any efficacy supposed to belong to the rites or sacrifices, all of which were types of another and infinitely greater death. For a death has taken place for the redemption of all past transgressions, which had been accumulating under the former covenant. Now at length sin has been put out of the way. The heirs of the promise made to Abraham, centuries before the giving of the Law, come at last into possession of their inheritance. The call has sounded. The hour has struck. For this inheritance they waited till Christ should die. The earthly Canaan may pass from one race to another race; but the unchangeable, eternal[176] inheritance, into which none but the rightful heirs can enter, is incorruptible, undefiled, fading not away, reserved in heaven for those who are kept[177] for its possession.

Because possession of it was delayed till Christ died, it may be likened to an inheritance bequeathed by a testator in his last will. For when a person leaves property by will to another, the will is of no force, the transference is not actually made, the property does not change hands, in the testator’s lifetime. The transaction takes place after and in consequence of his death. This may serve as an illustration. Its pertinence as such is increased by the fact, which in all probability suggested it to our author, that the same word would be used by a Hebrew, writing in Greek, for “covenant,” and by a native of Greece for “a testamentary disposition of property.”[178] But it is only an illustration. We cannot suppose that it was intended to be anything more.[179]

To return to argument, the blood of Christ may be shown to have ratified a covenant from the use of blood by Moses to inaugurate the former covenant. The Apostle has spoken before of the shedding and sprinkling of blood in sacrifice. When the high-priest entered into the holiest place, he offered blood for himself and the people. But, besides its use in sacrifice, blood was sprinkled on the book of the law, on the tabernacle, and on all the vessels of the ministry. Without a copious stream, a veritable “outflow”[180] of blood, both as ratifying the covenant and as offered in sacrifice, there was under the Law no remission of sins. Now the typical character of all the arrangements and ordinances instituted by Moses is assumed throughout. Even the purification of the tabernacle and its vessels with blood must be symbolical of a spiritual truth. There is, therefore, in the new covenant a purification of the true holiest place. To make the matter still more evident, the author reminds his readers of a fact, which he has already mentioned,[181] in reference to the construction of the tabernacle. Moses was admonished of God to make it a copy and shadow of heavenly things. “For, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.” It appears, then, that not only the covenant was typical, but the tabernacle, its vessels, and the purifying of all with blood were a copy of things in the heavens, the true holiest place. And, inasmuch as the holiest place has now, in Christ, included within it the sanctuary, and every veil and wall of partition has been removed, the purification of the tabernacle corresponds to a purification, under the new covenant, of heaven itself.

Not that the heaven of God is polluted. Even the earthly shrine had not itself contracted defilement. The blood sprinkled on the tabernacle and its vessels was not different from the blood of the sacrifice. As sacrificial blood, it consecrated the place, and was also offered to God. Similarly the blood of Christ made heaven a sanctuary, erected there a holiest place for the appearing of the great High-priest, constituted the throne of the Most High a mercy-seat for men. By the same act it became an offering to God, enthroned on the mercy-seat. The two notions of ratifying the covenant and atoning for sin cannot be separated. For this reason our author says the heavenly things are purified with sacrifices. But as heaven is higher than the earth, as the true holiest place excels the typical, so must the sacrifices that purify heaven be better than the sacrifices that purified the tabernacle. But Christ is great enough to make heaven itself a new place, whereas He Himself remains unchanged, “yesterday and today the same, and for ever.”

The thought of Christ’s eternal oneness is apparently suggested to the Apostle by the contrast between Christ and the purified heaven. But it helps his argument. For the blood of Christ, when offered in heaven, so fully and perfectly ratified the new covenant that He remains for evermore in the holiest place and evermore offers Himself to God in one eternally unbroken act. He did not enter heaven to come out again, as the high-priests presented their offering repeatedly, year after year. They could not do otherwise, because they entered “with blood not their own,” or, as we may render the word, “with alien[182] blood.” The blood of goats and bulls cannot take away sin. Consequently, the absolution obtained is unreal and, therefore, temporary in its effect. The blood of the beasts must be renewed as the annual day of atonement comes round. If Christ’s offering of Himself had only a temporary efficacy, He must often have suffered since the foundation of the world. The forgiveness under the former covenant put off the retribution for one year. St. Paul expresses the same conception when he describes it as not a real forgiveness, but as “the passing over[183] of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God.” The writer of the Epistle infers that, if Christ’s sacrifice were meritorious for a time only, then He ought to have repeated His offering whenever the period for which it was efficacious came to an end; and, inasmuch as His atonement was not restricted to one nation, it would have been necessary for Him to appear on earth repeatedly, and repeatedly die, not from the time of Moses or of Abraham, but from the foundation of the world. But our author has long since said “that the works were finished from the foundation of the world.”[184] God Himself after the work of creation entered on His Sabbath rest. The Sabbath developed from initial creation to final atonement, and, because Christ’s atonement is final, He has perfected the Sabbath eternally in the heavens. But the Sabbath of God would have been no Sabbath to the Son of God, but a constant recurrence of sufferings and deaths, if He did not finish transgression and atone for sin by His one death. “Once, at the end of the ages,” when the tale of sin and woe has been all told, “hath He appeared,” which proves that He has finally and for ever put away sin through His one sacrifice.[185]

The Apostle speaks as one who believed that the end of the world was at hand. He even builds an argument on this to him assured fact of the near future. True, the end of the world was not yet. But the argument is equally valid in its essential bearing. For the important point is that Christ appeared on earth only once. Whether His one death occurred at the beginning of human history, or at the end, or at the end of one period and the beginning of another, is immaterial.

Then follows a very original piece of reasoning, plainly intended to be an additional proof that Christ’s dying once put away sin for ever. To appear on earth often, and to die often, would have been impossible for Him. He was true man, of woman born, not an apparition, not an angel assuming the appearance of humanity, not the Son of God really and man only seemingly. But it is appointed unto men once, and only once, to die. After their one death comes, sooner or later, judgment. To return to earth and make a new beginning, to retrieve the errors and failures of a completed life, is not given to men. This is the Divine appointment. Exception to the Apostle’s argument must not be taken from the resurrection of Lazarus and others who were restored to life. The Apostle speaks of God’s usual course of action. So understood, it is difficult to conceive how any words can be more decisive against the doctrine of probation after death. For, however long judgment may tarry, our author acknowledges no possibility of changing any man’s state or character between death and the final award. On this impossibility of retrieving the past the force of the argument entirely depends. If Christ, Who was true man, failed in His one life and one death, the failure is irretrievable. He cannot come again to earth and try anew. To Him, as to other men, it was appointed to die once only. In His case, as in the case of others, judgment follows death,–judgment irreversible on the things done in the body. To add emphasis to the notion of finality in the work of Christ’s life on earth, the Apostle uses the passive verb, “was offered.”[186] The offering, it is true, was made by Christ Himself. But here the deed is more emphatic than the Doer: “He was offered once for all.” The result of the offering is also emphasised: “He was offered so as[187] to lift up sins, like a heavy burden, and bear them away for ever.” Even the word “many” is not to be slurred over. It too indicates that the work of Christ was final; for the sins of many have been put away.

What will be the judgment on Christ’s one redemptive death? Has it been a failure? The answer is that His death and His coming into the judgment have a closer relation to men than mere similarity. He entered into the presence of God as a sin-offering. He will be proved, at His second appearing, to have put away sin. For He will appear then apart from[188] sin. God will pronounce that Christ’s blood has been accepted, and that His work has been finished. His acquittal will be the acquittal of those whose sins He bare in His body on the tree.

Nor will His appearing be now long delayed. It was already the end of the ages when He first appeared. Therefore look out for Him with eager expectancy[189] and upward gaze. For He will be once again actually beheld by human eyes, and the vision will be unto salvation.

We must not fail to note that, when the Apostle speaks in this passage of Christ’s being once offered, he refers to His death. The analogy between men and Christ breaks down completely if the death of Christ was not the offering for sin. Faustus Socinus revived the Nestorian doctrine that our author represents the earthly life and death of Jesus as a moral preparation for the priesthood which was conferred upon Him at His ascension to the right hand of God. The bearing of this interpretation of the Epistle on the Socinian doctrine generally is plain. A moral preparation there undoubtedly was, as the Apostle has shown in the second chapter. But if Christ was not Priest on earth, His death was not an atoning sacrifice. If He was not Priest, He was not Victim. Moreover, if He fills the office of Priest in heaven only, His priesthood cannot involve suffering and, therefore, cannot be an atonement. But the view is inconsistent with the Apostle’s express statement that, “as it is appointed unto men once to die, so Christ was once offered.” Of course, we cannot acquiesce in the opposite view that His death was Christ’s only priestly act, and that His life in heaven is such a state of exaltation as excludes the possibility of priestly service. For He is “a Minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man,”[190] The death of Christ was a distinct act of priestly service. But it must not be separated from His entering into heaven. Aaron received into his hands the blood of the newly slain victim, and immediately carried the smoking blood into the holiest place. The act of offering the blood before God was as necessary to constitute the atonement as the previous act of slaying the animal. Hence it is that the shedding and the sprinkling of the blood are spoken of as one and the same action. Christ, in like manner, went into the true holiest through His death. Any other way of entering heaven than through a sacrificial death would have destroyed the priestly character of His heavenly life. But His death would have been insufficient. He must offer His blood and appear in the presence of God for us. To give men access unto God was the ultimate purpose of redemption. He must, therefore, consecrate through the veil of His flesh–a new and living way by which we may come unto God through Him.

Must we, therefore, say that Christ entered the holiest place at His death, not at His ascension? Does the Apostle refer only to the entrance of the soul into the invisible world? The question is not an easy one. If the Apostle means the Ascension, what doctrinal use does he make of the interval between the Crucifixion and the Ascension? Many of the fathers are evidently at a loss to know what to make of this interval. They think the Divine person, as well as the human soul, of Christ was conveyed to Hades to satisfy what they call the law of death. Does the Epistle to the Hebrews pass over in silence the descent into Hades and the resurrection? On the other hand, if our author means that Christ entered the holiest place immediately at His death, we are met by the difficulty that He leaves the holiest, to return finally at His ascension, whereas the Apostle has argued that Christ differs from the high-priests under the former covenant in that He does not enter repeatedly. Much of the confusion has arisen from the tendency of theologians, under the influence of Augustine, to construct their systems exclusively on the lines of St. Paul. In his Epistles atonement is a forensic conception. “Through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to the justification of life.”[191] Consequently the death of Christ is contrasted with His present life. “For the death that He died, He died unto sin once; but the life that He liveth, He liveth unto God.”[192] But our author does not put his doctrine in a Pauline framework. Instead of forensic notions, we meet with terms pertaining to ritual and priesthood. What St. Paul speaks of as law is, in his language, a covenant, and what is designated justification in the Epistle to the Romans appears here as sanctification. Conscience is purified; the worshipper is perfected. The entering of the high-priest into the holiest place is as prominent as the slaying of the victim. These are two distinct, but inseparable, parts of one priestly action. All that lies between is ignored. It is as if it were not. Christ entered into the holiest through His death and ascension to the right hand of the Majesty. But the initial and the ultimate stages of the act must not be put asunder. Nothing comes between. Our author elsewhere speaks of Christ’s resurrection as a historical fact.[193] But His resurrection does not form a distinct notion in the idea of His entrance into the holiest place.

The Apostle has spoken of the former covenant with surprising severity, not to say harshness. It was the law of a carnal commandment; it has been set aside because of its weakness and unprofitableness; it has grown old and waxed aged; it was nigh unto vanishing away. His austere language will compare with St. Paul’s description of heathenism as a bondage to weak and beggarly elements.

The root of all the mischief was unreality. Our author brings his argument to a close by contrasting the shadow and the substance, the unavailing sacrifices of the Law, which could only renew the remembrance of sins, and the sacrifice of the Son, which has fulfilled the will of God.

The Law had only a shadow.[194] He is careful not to say that the Law was itself but a shadow. On the contrary, the very promise includes that God will put His laws in the heart and write them upon the mind. This was one of “the good things to come.” Endless repetition of sacrifice after sacrifice year by year in a weary round of ceremonies only made it more and more evident that men were walking in a vain show and disquieting themselves in vain. The Law was holy, righteous, and good; but the manifestation of its nature in sacrifices was unreal, like the dark outline of an object that breaks the stream of light. Nothing more substantial, as a revelation of God’s moral character; was befitting or possible in that stage of human development, when the purposes of His grace also not seldom found expression in dreams of the night and apparitions of the day.

To prove the unreal nature of these ever-recurring sacrifices, the writer argues that otherwise they would have ceased to be offered, inasmuch as the worshippers, if they had been once really cleansed from their guilt, would have had no more conscience of sins.[195] The reasoning is very remarkable. It is not that God would have ceased to require sacrifices, but that the worshipper would have ceased to offer them. It implies that, when a sufficient atonement for sin has been offered to God, the sinner knows it is sufficient, and, as the result, has peace of conscience. The possibility of a pardoned sinner still fearing and doubting does not seem to have occurred to the Apostle. One difference apparently between the saints under the Old Testament and believers under the New is the joyful assurance of pardon which the latter receive, whereas the former were all their lifetime subject to bondage from fear of death, and that although in the one case the sacrifice was offered by the worshipper himself through the priest, but in the latter case by Another, even Christ, on his behalf. And we must not ask the Apostle such questions as these: Are we not in danger of deceiving ourselves? How is the assurance created and kept alive? Does it spring spontaneously in the heart, or is it the acceptance of the authoritative absolution of God’s ministers? Such problems were not thought of when the Epistle to the Hebrews was written. They belong to a later and more subjective state of mind. To men who cannot leave off introspection and forget themselves in the joy of a new faith, the Apostle’s argument will have little force and perhaps less meaning.

If the sacrifices were unreal, why, we naturally inquire, were they continually repeated? The answer is that there were two sides to the sacrificial rites of the old covenant. On the one hand, they were, like the heathen gods, “nothings;” on the other, their empty shadowiness itself fitted them to be a Divinely appointed means to call sins to remembrance. They represented on the one side the invincible, though always baffled, effort of natural conscience. For conscience was endeavouring to purify itself from a sense of guilt. But God also had a purpose in awakening and disciplining conscience. The worshipper sought to appease conscience through sacrifice, and God, by the same sacrifice, proclaimed that reconciliation had not been effected. The Apostle’s judgment on the subject[196] is not different from St. Paul’s answer to the question, What then is the Law? “It was added because of transgressions…. The Scripture hath shut up all things under sin…. We were kept in ward under the Law…. We were held in bondage under the rudiments of the world.”[197] In allusion to this idea, that the sacrifices were instituted by God in order to renew the remembrance of sins every year, Christ said, “Do this in remembrance of Me,”–of Him Who hath put away sins by the sacrifice of Himself.

Such then was the shadow, at once unreal and dark. In contrast to it, the Apostle designates the substance as “the very image of the objects.” Instead of repeating the indefinite expression “good things to come,” he speaks of them as “objects,”[198] individually distinct, substantial, true. The image[199] of a thing is the full manifestation of its inmost essence, in the same sense in which St. Paul says that the Son of God’s love, in Whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins, is the image of the invisible God.[200] Indeed, it is extremely questionable whether our author too does not refer allusively to the same truth. For, in the verses that follow, he contrasts with the sacrifices of the former covenant the coming of Jesus Christ into the world to accomplish the work which they had failed to do.[201] When the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin, inasmuch as it was an unreal atonement, God prepared a body for His own eternal Son. The Son responded to the Divine summons and, in accordance with the prophecies of Scripture concerning Him, came from heaven to earth to give Himself as the sufficient sacrifice for sin. The contrast, as heretofore, is between the vanity of animal sacrifices and the greatness of the Son, Who offered Himself. His assumption of humanity had for its ultimate end to enable the Son to do the will of God. The gracious purpose of God is to forgive sin, and this was accomplished by the infinite humiliation of the infinite Son. God’s will was to sanctify us; that is, to remove our guilt.[202] We have actually been thus sanctified through the one offering of the body of Jesus Christ. The sacrifices of the Law are taken out of the way in order to establish the sacrifice of the Son.[203]

It will be observed that the Apostle is not contrasting sacrifice and obedience. His meaning is not precisely the same as the prophet Samuel’s: that “to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.”[204] It is perfectly true that the sacrifice of the Son involved obedience,–a conscious, deliberate, willing obedience, which the beasts to be slain in sacrifice could not offer. The idea pervades these verses, as an atmosphere. But it is not the idea expressed. The dominant thoughts of the passage are the greatness of the Person Who obeyed and the greatness of the sacrifice from which His obedience did not shrink. The Son is here represented as existing and acting apart from His human nature.[205] He comes into the world, and is not originated in the world. The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews is identical in this vital point with that of St. Paul. The purpose of the Son’s coming is already formed. He comes to offer His body, and we have been taught in a previous chapter that He did this with an eternal spirit.[206] For the will of God means our sanctification, in the meaning attached to the word “sanctification” in this Epistle, the removal of guilt, the forgiveness of sins. But the fulfilment of this gracious will of God demands a sacrifice, even a sacrificial death, and that not the death of beasts, but the infinite self-sacrifice and obedience unto death of the Son of God. This is implied in the expression “the offering of the body of Jesus Christ.”[207]

The superstructure of argument has been raised. Christ as High-priest has been proved to be superior to the high-priests of the former covenant. It remains only to lay the topstone in its place. This brings us back to our starting point. Jesus Christ, the eternal High-priest, is for ever King. For the priests under the Law stand while they perform the duties of their ministry.[208] They stand because they are only priests. But Christ has taken His seat, as King, on the right hand of God.[209] They offer the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins, and wait, and wait, but in vain. Though they are priests of the true God, yet they wait, like the priests of Baal, from morning until midday is past and until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice. But there is neither voice nor any to answer. Christ also waits, but not to renew an ineffectual sacrifice. He waits eagerly[210] to receive from God the reward of His effective sacrifice in the subjugation of His enemies. The priests under the Law had no enemies. Their persons were sacred. They incurred no hatred, inspired no love. Our High-priest goes out to war, the most hated, the most loved, of all captains of men.

The foundation of this kingly power is in two things: first, He has perfected men for ever by His one offering; second, He has put the law of God into the hearts of His people. The final conclusion is that the sacrifices of the Law have passed away, because they are no longer needed. “For where there is forgiveness, there is no more an offering for sin.”

FOOTNOTES:

[142] kephalaion (Heb 8:1).

[143] leitourgos (Heb 8:2).

[144] Heb 8:3.

[145] Heb 8:4.

[146] Heb 8:5

[147] Heb 8:6.

[148] Jer 31:31-34.

[149] Lamentations, Preface.

[150] Joh 6:45.

[151] autous (Heb 8:8).

[152] Heb 8:4.

[153] Rom 5:20.

[154] Rom 4:7.

[155] Isa 43:25.

[156] Heb 10:2; Heb 10:4.

[157] Heb 3:13.

[158] echouss stasin (Heb 9:8).

[159] echousa (Heb 9:4).

[160] dlountos (Heb 9:8).

[161] Reading genomenn (Heb 9:11).

[162] Heb 9:11. Cf. Heb 9:24.

[163] Rev 21:3.

[164] teleioteras (Heb 9:11).

[165] kosmikon (Heb 9:1).

[166] dia (Heb 9:11).

[167] Heb 4:14.

[168] Heb 7:26.

[169] Heb 10:12.

[170] Heb 9:12.

[171] Heb 9:13.

[172] hagiazei (Heb 9:13).

[173] 1Co 8:7.

[174] Heb 9:14.

[175] latreuein (Heb 9:14).

[176] ainiou (Heb 9:15).

[177] tetrmenn … phrouroumenous (1Pe 1:4).

[178] diathk.

[179] To forestall censure for inconsistency, the present writer may be permitted to refer to what he now sees to have been a desperate attempt on his part (in the Expositor) to explain the passage on the supposition that the word diathk means “covenant” throughout. He is bound to admit that the attempt was a failure. If he lives to write retractations, this will be one.

[180] haimatekchysias (Heb 9:22).

[181] Heb 8:5.

[182] allotri (Heb 9:25).

[183] paresin (Rom 3:25), as contrasted with aphesis.

[184] Heb 4:3.

[185] Heb 9:26.

[186] prosenechtheis (Heb 9:28).

[187] eis.

[188] chris.

[189] apekdechomenois.

[190] Heb 8:2.

[191] Rom 5:18.

[192] Rom 6:10.

[193] Heb 13:20.

[194] Heb 10:1.

[195] Heb 10:2.

[196] Heb 10:3.

[197] Gal 3:19 -iv. 3.

[198] pragmatn (Heb 10:1).

[199] eikona.

[200] Col 1:14-15.

[201] Heb 10:5 sqq.

[202] Heb 10:10.

[203] Heb 10:9.

[204] 1Sa 15:22.

[205] Heb 10:7.

[206] Heb 9:14.

[207] Heb 10:10.

[208] Heb 10:11.

[209] Heb 10:13.

[210] ekdechomenos (Heb 10:13).

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles