Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 12:24

And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than [that of] Abel.

24. the mediator of the new covenant ] Rather, “Mediator of a New Covenant.” The word for “new” is here (“new in time”), not (“fresh in quality”), implying not only that it is “fresh” or “recent,” but also young and strong (Mat 26:27-29; Heb 9:15; Heb 10:22).

that speaketh better things than that of Abel ] The allusion is explained by Heb 9:13, Heb 10:22, Heb 11:4, Heb 13:12. “The blood of Abel cried for vengeance; that of Christ for remission” (Erasmus). In the original Hebrew it is (Gen 4:10) “The voice of thy brother’s bloods crieth from the ground,” and this was explained by the Rabbis of his blood “sprinkled on the trees and stones.” It was a curious Jewish Hagadah that the dispute between Cain and Abel rose from Cain’s denial that God was a Judge. The “sprinkling” of the blood of Jesus, an expression borrowed from the blood-sprinklings of the Old Covenant (Exo 24:8), is also alluded to by St Peter (1Pe 1:2).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant – This was the crowning excellence of the new dispensation in contradistinction from the old. They had been made acquainted with the true Messiah; they were united to him by faith; they had been sprinkled with his blood; see the notes on Heb 7:22, and Heb 8:6. The highest consideration which can be urged to induce anyone to persevere in a life of piety is the fact that the Son of God has come into the world and died to save sinners; compare notes on Heb 12:2-4 of this chapter.

And to the blood of sprinkling – The blood which Jesus shed, and which is sprinkled upon us to ratify the covenant; see notes on Heb 9:18-23.

That speaketh better things than that of Abel – Greek Than Abel; the words that of being supplied by the translators. In the original there is no reference to the blood of Abel shed by Cain, as our translators seem to have supposed, but the allusion is to the faith of Abel, or to the testimony which he bore to a great and vital truth of religion. The meaning here is, that the blood of Jesus speaks better things than Abel did; that is, that the blood of Jesus is the reality of which the offering of Abel was a type. Abel proclaimed by the sacrifice which he made the great truth that salvation could be only by a bloody offering – but he did this only in a typical and obscure manner; Jesus proclaimed it in a more distinct and better manner by the reality. The object here is to compare the Redeemer with Abel, not in the sense that the blood shed in either case calls for vengeance, but that salvation by blood is more clearly revealed in the Christian plan than in the ancient history; and hence illustrating, in accordance with the design of this Epistle, the superior excellency of the Christian scheme over all which had preceded it.

There were other points of resemblance between Abel and the Redeemer, but on them the apostle does not insist. Abel was a martyr, and so was Christ; Abel was cruelly murdered, and so was Christ; there was aggravated guilt in the murder of Abel by his brother, and so there was in that of Jesus by his brethren – his own countrymen; the blood of Abel called for vengeance, and was followed by a fearful penalty on Cain, and so was the death of the Redeemer on his murderers – for they said, his blood be on us and on our children, and are yet suffering under the fearful malediction then invoked; but the point of contrast here is, that the blood of Jesus makes a more full, distinct, and clear proclamation of the truth that salvation is by blood than the offering made by Abel did. The apostle alludes here to what he had said in Heb 11:4; see the notes on that verse. Such is the contrast between the former and the latter dispensations; and such the motives to perseverance presented by both.

In the former, the Jewish, all was imperfect, terrible, and alarming. In the latter, everything was comparatively mild, winning, alluring, animating. Terror was not the principal element, but heaven was opened to the eye of faith, and the Christian was permitted to survey the Mount Zion; the New Jerusalem; the angels; the redeemed; the blessed God; the glorious Mediator, and to feel that that blessed abode was to be his home. To that happy world he was tending; and with all these pure and glorious beings he was identified. Having stated and urged this argument, the apostle in the remainder of the chapter warns those whom he addressed in a most solemn manner against a renunciation of their Christian faith.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 24. And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant] The old covenant and its mediator, Moses, are passed away. See Heb 8:13. The new covenant, i.e. the Gospel, is now in force, and will be to the end of the world; and Jesus, the Son of God, the brightness of the Father’s glory, the Maker and Preserver of all things, the Saviour and the Judge of all men, is its mediator. Both the covenant and its mediator are infinitely superior to those of the Jews, and they are very properly set down here among the superior benefits and glories of Christianity.

To the blood of sprinkling] This is an allusion, as was before observed, to the sprinkling of the blood of the covenant sacrifice upon the people, when that covenant was made upon Mount Sinai; to the sprinkling of the blood of the sin-offerings before the mercy-seat; and probably to the sprinkling of the blood of the paschal lamb on their houses, to prevent their destruction by the destroying angel. But all these sprinklings were partial and inefficacious, and had no meaning but as they referred to this: the blood of sprinkling under the new covenant is ever ready; all may have it applied; it continues through ages; and is the highest glory of Christianity, because by it we draw nigh to God, and through it get our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience; and, in a word, have an entrance unto the holiest by the blood of Jesus.

Better things than that of Abel.] God accepted Abel’s sacrifice, and, was well pleased with it; for Abel was a righteous man, and offered his sacrifice by faith in the great promise. But the blood of Christ’s sacrifice was infinitely more precious than the blood of Abel’s sacrifice, as Jesus is infinitely greater than Abel; and the blood of Christ avails for the sins of the whole world, whereas the blood of Abel’s sacrifice could avail only for himself.

Many have supposed that the blood of Abel means here the blood that was shed by Cain in the murder of this holy man, and that the blood of Jesus speaks better things than it does, because the blood of Abel called for vengeance, but the blood of Christ for pardon; this interpretation reflects little credit on the understanding of the apostle. To say that the blood of Christ spoke better things than that of Abel is saying little indeed; it might speak very little good to any soul of man, and yet speak better things than that blood of Abel which spoke no kind of good to any human creature, and only called for vengeance against him that shed it. The truth is, the sacrifice offered by Abel is that which is intended; that, as we have already seen, was pleasing in the sight of God, and was accepted in behalf of him who offered it: but the blood of Christ is infinitely more acceptable with God; it was shed for the whole human race, and cleanses all who believe from all unrighteousness.

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

And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant: the Mediator of the Sion covenant is better than the mediator at Sinai, and more able to promote the holiness required by it. Believers have not now access unto, or dependence on, a Moses, a mere man, and a servant, declaring Gods will, only a sinner himself, trembling in his office, and weary of his clients, and whose ministry is vanishing, as his person dying; but unto God the Son himself incarnate, a Son-mediator, making sons, and bringing them nearer to God, satisfying the law for them, and writing it on their hearts; above all sin himself, though a sacrifice for it, who is able to save to the uttermost, for that he ever liveth to intercede for them, Heb 1:1-3; Heb 3:6; 7:26; Rev 1:13. He is the Mediator, not of a literal, dark, terrible, charging and condemning, temporary and vanishing, covenant; but of the most spiritual, lightsome, gracious, justifying, sanctifying, and everlasting testamental dispensation of God, more effectually influencing souls to holiness than the old, Heb 8:10,11; 2Co 3:6; 5:19.

And to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel: the sacrifice ratifying the Sion covenant is unexpressibly better than all the typical sacrifices confirming that at Sinai, it eminently purchasing and securing holiness to those interested in it. The blood of the immaculate Lamb of God, sprinkled on penitent, believing sinners, which hath purchased pardon for them, and, as follows, the Spirit, to sanctify them throughout, and perfect holiness in them, Heb 9:12; 1Pe 1:18; 1Jo 1:7,9; and so they are freed from access to the sprinkling of the blood of sacrificed beasts, which was only typical and weak to purge the conscience, calling sin to remembrance yearly and daily, which was now forbidden and rejected as of no worth, and which, like Abels, crieth for revenge and condemnation, Gen 4:10; since their blood now offered when Christ had split his, was accounted of God as the blood of innocents slain, as Isa 66:3. Others render the blood of Abel, for the blood of sprinkling of the sacrifice that Abel offered unto God, Gen 4:4, which was sprinkled upon him; and so prefer Christs sacrifice, not only to the Mosaical sacrifices, but to all that have been from the beginning of the world, which though accepted by God, yet not like Christ, of which they were the types. The sum of all these comparisons, is to show the greater helps, motives, and encouragements that Christians have to pursue and perfect holiness than all the Old Testament church had before them.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

24. newnot the usual term(kaine) applied to the Christian covenant (Heb9:15), which would mean new as different from, andsuperseding the old; but Greek, “nea,“”recent,” “lately established,” having the”freshness of youth,” as opposed to age. The mention ofJesus, the Perfecter of our faith (Heb12:2), and Himself perfected through sufferings and death, in Hisresurrection and ascension (Heb 2:10;Heb 5:9), is naturally suggestedby the mention of “the just made perfect” at theirresurrection (compare Heb 7:22).Paul uses “Jesus,” dwelling here on Him as the Personrealized as our loving friend, not merely in His officialcharacter as the Christ.

and to the blood ofsprinklinghere enumerated as distinct from “Jesus.”BENGEL reasonably arguesas follows: His blood was entirely “poured out” of His bodyby the various ways in which it was shed, His bloody sweat, the crownof thorns, the scourging, the nails, and after death the spear, justas the blood was entirely poured out and extravasated from the animalsacrifices of the law. It was incorruptible (1Pe 1:18;1Pe 1:19). No Scripture states itwas again put into the Lord’s body. At His ascension, as our greatHigh Priest, He entered the heavenly holiest place “BYHis own blood” (not after shedding His blood, nor withthe blood in His body, but), carrying it separately from his body(compare the type, Heb 9:7;Heb 9:12; Heb 9:25;Heb 13:11). Paul does not say, bythe efficacy of His blood, but, “by His own proper blood”(Heb 9:12); not MATERIALblood, but “the blood of Him who, through the eternal Spirit,offered Himself without spot unto God” (Heb9:14). So in Heb 10:29,the Son of God and the blood of the covenant wherewith he(the professor) was sanctified, are mentioned separately. Alsoin Heb 13:12; Heb 13:20;also compare Heb 10:19; Heb 10:21.So in the Lord’s Supper (1Co 10:16;1Co 11:24-26), the bodyand blood are separately represented. The blood itself,therefore, continues still in heaven before God, the perpetual ransomprice of “the eternal covenant” (Heb13:20). Once for all Christ sprinkled the blood peculiarly for usat His ascension (Heb 9:12).But it is called “the blood of sprinkling,” on account alsoof its continued use in heaven, and in the consciences of the saintson earth (Heb 9:14; Heb 10:22;Isa 52:15). This sprinkling isanalogous to the sprinkled blood of the Passover. Compare Re5:6, “In the midst of the throne, a Lamb as it had beenslain.” His glorified body does not require meat, nor thecirculation of the blood. His blood introduced into heaven took awaythe dragon’s right to accuse. Thus Rome’s theory of concomitancyof the blood with the body, the excuse for giving only the bread tothe laity, falls to the ground. The mention of “the blood ofsprinkling” naturally follows the mention of the “covenant,”which could not be consecrated without blood (Heb 9:18;Heb 9:22).

speaketh better things thanthat of Abelnamely, than the sprinkling (the best manuscriptsread the article masculine, which refers to “sprinkling,”not to “blood,” which last is neuter) of blood by Abel inhis sacrifice spake. This comparison between two things of thesame kind (namely, Christ’s sacrifice, and Abel’s sacrifice) ismore natural, than between two things different in kind and inresults (namely, Christ’s sacrifice, and Abel’s own blood[ALFORD], which was not asacrifice at all); compare Heb 11:4;Gen 4:4. This accords with thewhole tenor of the Epistle, and of this passage in particular (Heb12:18-22), which is to show the superiority of Christ’s sacrificeand the new covenant, to the Old Testament sacrifices (of whichAbel’s is the first recorded; it, moreover, was testified to by Godas acceptable to Him above Cain’s), compare Heb9:1-10:39. The word “better” implies superiority tosomething that is good: but Abel’s own blood was not at all good forthe purpose for which Christ’s blood was efficacious; nay, it criedfor vengeance. So ARCHBISHOPMAGEE, HAMMOND,and KNATCHBULL. BENGELtakes “the blood of Abel” as put for all the bloodshed on earth crying for vengeance, and greatly increasing the othercries raised by sin in the world; counteracted by the blood of Christcalmly speaking in heaven for us, and from heaven to us. I preferMAGEE’S view. Be this asit may, to deny that Christ’s atonement is truly a propitiation,overthrows Christ’s priesthood, makes the sacrifices of Moses’ law anunmeaning mummery, and represents Cain’s sacrifice as good as that ofAbel.

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

And to Jesus, the Mediator of the new covenant,…. Of the new covenant, and, of Christ’s being the Mediator of it,

[See comments on Heb 8:6].

[See comments on Heb 8:8]. Coming to Christ is by faith; and is different from a corporeal coming to him in the days of his flesh; and from an outward attendance on ordinances; it is a coming to him under a sense of want, and upon a sight of fulness; and is the produce of God’s efficacious grace; and souls must come to Christ as naked sinners; and without a Mediator, without anything of their own to ingratiate them; and it is free to all sensible sinners to come to him, and is the great privilege of saints: it is the blessing of blessings; such are safe, and settled, and at peace, who are come to Jesus; they can want no good thing, for all are theirs; they have free access to God through him, and a right to all privileges:

and to the blood of sprinkling: that is, the blood of Christ; so called, either in allusion to the blood of the passover, which was received in a basin, and with a bunch of hyssop was sprinkled upon the lintel and two side posts of the doors of the houses, in which the Israelites were; which being looked upon by Jehovah, he passed over them, and all were safe within, so that the destroyer did not touch them, when the firstborn in Egypt were destroyed, Ex 12:1 which is the case of all such as are sprinkled with the blood of Jesus: or else to the blood of the covenant, sprinkled by Moses on the book, and on all the people, Ex 24:8 or to the several sprinklings of blood in the legal sacrifices: and the phrase may denote the application of Christ’s blood to his people, for justification, pardon, and cleansing, which is their great mercy and privilege:

that speaketh better things than that of Abel; either “than Abel”, as the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions render it, who being dead, yet speaks; and who was a type of Christ in his death, and the punishment of it; for as he was slain by his own brother, who was punished for it, so Christ was put to death by his own nation and people, the Jews, for which wrath is come upon them to the uttermost: but the efficacy of Christ’s blood for the procuring pardon, peace, reconciliation, and the redemption and purchase of his church and people, shows him to be greater than Abel; and it speaks better things than he did, or does: or else, “than the blood of Abel”, as the Arabic version renders it; Abel’s blood cried for vengeance; Christ’s blood cries for peace and pardon, both in the court of heaven, where it is pleaded by Christ, and in the court of conscience, where it is sprinkled by his spirit: or than the sprinkling of the blood of Abel’s sacrifice, or than Abel’s sacrifice; which was the first blood that was sprinkled in that way, and the first sacrifice mentioned that was offered up by faith, and was typical of Christ’s; but then Christ’s sacrifice itself is better than that; and the sprinkling of his blood, to which believers may continually apply for their justification, remission, and purgation, and by which they have entrance into the holiest of all, is of greater efficacy than the sprinkling of blood in Abel’s sacrifice; and calls for and procures better things than that did; which sense may the rather be chosen, since the apostle’s view, in this epistle, is to show the superior excellency of Christ’s sacrifice to all others, even to the more excellent of them, as Abel’s was, Heb 11:4.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

To Jesus (). This great fact is not to be overlooked (Php 2:10f.). He is there as Lord and Saviour and still “Jesus.”

The mediator of a new covenant ( ). As already shown (Heb 7:22; Heb 8:6; Heb 8:8; Heb 8:9; Heb 8:10; Heb 9:15) and now gloriously consummated.

To the blood of sprinkling ( ). As in 9:19-28.

Than Abel ( ). Accusative as in 1:4.

Better (). Comparative of . Abel’s blood still speaks (11:4), but it is as nothing compared to that of Jesus.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) “And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant,” (kai diathekes neas mesite iesou) “And to Jesus mediator of a new covenant” This sentence began with Heb 12:18, “ye are not come unto (to Mt Sinai),” explaining that these Hebrew brethren, persons and people addressed constituted a church (new covenant fellowship), Eph 1:20-22; of worshipping people with Jesus Christ, as their new covenant mediator or head, in heaven, Heb 8:6; Heb 9:15.

2) “And to the blood of sprinkling,” (kai haimati hrantismpu) “And to a sprinkling of blood; This alludes to the continuing fulfillment of the types and shadows of the Old Testament sprinkling of blood as a symbol of the Source of moral cleansing, as Jesus offers his own blood at heaven’s mercy seat where he ever lives to make intercession for sins of his own today, Exo 24:7-8; Lev 16:2; Lev 16:14; ; 1Jn 1:7.

3) “That speaketh better things than that of Abel, (kreitton lalounti para ton abel) “Continually speaking a better thing than did the blood of Abel; Abel’s blood spoke first of his faith in the word of God and loyalty to it, and second of the vengeance and hate of Cain, his brother toward him. The blood of Abel cried for vengeance, Gen 4:10, but the blood of Jesus Christ our Saviour, Intercessor, and coming King of Kings and Lord of Lords speaks of pardon, forgiveness and remission of sins, Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; 1Pe 1:18-19; 1Jn 1:7; Rev 13:8.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

24. And to Jesus the Mediator, etc. He adds this in the last place, because it is he alone through whom the Father is reconciled to us, and who renders his face serene and lovely to us, so that we may come to him without fear. At the same time he shows how Christ becomes our Mediator, even through his own blood, which after the Hebrew mode of speaking he calls the blood of sprinkling, which means sprinkled blood; for as it was once for all shed to make an atonement for us, so our souls must be now cleansed by it through faith. At the same time the Apostle alludes to the ancient rite of the Law, which has been before mentioned.

That speaketh better things, etc. There is no reason why better may not be rendered adverbially in the following manner, — “Christ’s blood cries more efficaciously, and is better heard by God than the blood of Abel.” It is, however, preferable to take the words literally: the blood of Christ is said to speak better things, because it avails to obtain pardon for our sins. The blood of Abel did not properly cry out; for it was his murder that called for vengeance before God. But the blood of Christ cries out, and the atonement made by it is heard daily. (268)

(268) See Appendix X 2.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(24) And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant.Rather, a new covenant. There is another change in the Greek which it is not easy to-express. In all other places in which we read of the New Covenant (Heb. 8:8; Heb. 8:13; Heb. 9:15; Luk. 22:20; 1Co. 11:25; 2Co. 3:6) a word is used which implies newness of kind and quality; here it is a covenant which is newly madeliterally young, having all the freshness of youth in comparison with that which long since was waxing old (Heb. 8:13). Here also if we follow the order of the original (see Heb. 2:9; Heb. 3:1; Heb. 12:2, et al.), the description precedes, and the name Jesus follows, thus standing between the words which describe His covenant and those which speak of His blood.

And to the blood of sprinkling.Rather, and to blood of sprinkling that speaketh better (or, more powerfully) than Abel. Jesus is Mediator of a new covenant (Heb. 8:6; Heb. 9:15) through the shedding of His blood (Heb. 9:15-17; Heb. 10:29). This is blood of sprinkling, blood which cleanseth the conscience from dead works to serve a living God (Heb. 9:14): it was typified by the blood of the covenant with which Moses sprinkled all the people (Heb. 9:19-20). Abel being dead yet speaketh (Heb. 11:4), for his. blood crieth for vengeance. This blood speaks with greater power, and speaks not for wrath but for purification and atonement. 1Jn. 2:1-2, completes the contrast: God was the Avenger of righteous Abel, but Jesus Christ the righteous is our Advocate with the Father, and He is the propitiation for our sins.

It does not seem probable that the writer designs a detailed contrast between the several particulars of these verses and of Heb. 12:18-21. The number in each case is the same (six), and in the case of the first and last some analogy may be traced; but this is all that can be said with safety. If our interpretation of these verses is correct, there is no mention of the Church on earth. But can we wonder at this? It is to that living Church that the words themselves are from age to age addressed. They describe the blessed heavenly fellowship to which each servant of Christ now toiling on earth is joined: when he has run the race set before him, he will, through the blood of sprinkling and through Jesus the Mediator, reach the company of the just made perfect, and stand before the God of all.

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

24. Jesus As Moses at Sinai was the mediator of the old covenant, so Jesus at Zion is the mediator of the new. Centrally, this mediator stands in the picture amid the spirits made perfect by the blood.

The blood of sprinkling The true cleansing efficacy of the atoning death figured as a sprinkled blood. Bengel has several pages on the physical blood of Jesus, (dubiously followed by Alford in a few lines,) which strike us as a most repulsive superstition.

Speaketh The blood of Christ, like the blood of Abel, has a voice; and it speaks better things; for as the blood of Abel spoke wrath on his murderer, the blood of Jesus speaks pardon and salvation. The true reading seems to be, not better things, but simply better than. That of not being in the Greek, the true reading is, that speaketh better than Abel.

In 18-24 we have a contrastive picture showing the gloom of the Judaistic and the glory of the Christian dispensation. It is introduced to show the fatal folly of the Hebrews’ selling their birthright, by apostatizing from the former to the latter. Our author now (25-29) emphasizes that folly by showing that Zion has its terrors on impenitence as terrible as those of Sinai. There is a law in the gospel, a penalty upon unbelief. God is a consuming fire (Heb 12:29) under every dispensation.

In the Zionic dispensation there is a Speaker who speaks from heaven, as there was one in the Sinaitic who spoke from earth, 25. It is the same Speaker as he who shook the ground at Sinai; and he promises that once more he will shake the sky as well as ground. This Speaker, through both dispensations, is, therefore, the same, namely, Jesus-Jehovah, 26. And this promise of a greater shaking than that of Sinai signifieth a removing of the shaken things, namely, the old covenant; which removable things are thereby seen to be transient, yet implying an underlying permanent domain that is irremovable and eternal the Messianic kingdom, Heb 12:27. We, accepting this irremovable and eternal kingdom, should serve God with godly fear, (28,) for the refuser to hear the earthly-heavenly Speaker will find a consuming fire in our God.

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

Heb 12:24. To the blood of sprinkling, We who have joined ourselves to Christ, have engaged ourselves to adhere to the blood of Christ, offered by him, either as our High-priest in heaven, or as ratifying the covenant of which he is the MediatorBlood, which though shed by wicked hands, yet has a quite different tendency from that of righteous Abel: for Abel’s blood cried unto God from the ground for vengeance, and the consequence was, that Cain was hid from God’s face; whereas the blood of Christ speaks goodness and favour, comfort and peace, and the enjoyment of God’s presence for ever.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Heb 12:24 . ] characterizes the covenant as new in regard to the time of its existence ( foedus recens ), whereas , Heb 8:8 ; Heb 8:13 , Heb 9:15 , described it as new in respect of its quality ( foedus novum ). Wrongly Bhme, Kuinoel, and others (de Wette likewise wavers): is here to be taken as of the same import with .

] Jesus’ atoning blood is called blood of sprinkling, inasmuch as those who believe in Him, in spirit sprinkled therewith, are cleansed from their sins and sanctified to God. Comp. Heb 9:13 f., Heb 10:22 , Heb 13:12 .

] is an adverb. Comp. 1Co 7:38 . Needlessly will Kurtz have it taken as a substantive adjective. Better does the blood of Christ speak than Abel with his blood; since the latter calls for the divine vengeance, the former, on the other hand, for God’s grace upon sinners.

] See at Heb 1:4 .

] may be looked upon as a well-known brachylogy for . This is not, however, at all necessary, seeing that, at Heb 11:4 likewise, Abel himself is represented as speaking after his death (by means of his blood which was shed).

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 2340
ABELS SACRIFICE AND CHRISTS COMPARED

Heb 12:22; Heb 12:24. Ye are come to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

AS the Christian dispensation differs widely from that of Moses as to the manner in which it was promulgated, so does it most essentially differ with respect to the spirit and temper which it is calculated to produce in the minds of men. The terrors of Mount Sinai were suited to impress the Jews with a servile fear; as their whole system of rites and ceremonies was, to keep them under bondage. But the mild genius of the Gospel introduces us at once to peace and liberty. In the passage before us the Apostle exemplifies this remark in many particulars; the last of which demands our attention at this time. We propose to shew,

I.

The efficacy of Abels blood

By the blood of Abel we are not to understand his own blood, but the blood of his sacrifice

[The generality of commentators indeed explain this as relating to Abels blood, which cried for vengeance against his murderous brother [Note: Gen 4:10.]. But to commend the blood of Christ in this view, would indeed be no commendation at all. The history of Abel informs us, that he offered one of the firstlings of his flock in addition to the same kind of offering as Cain brought [Note: This is well proved by Dr. Kennicott, in his dissertation on Cain and Abel.], manifesting thereby not merely his obligations to God as a creature, but his conscious guilt as a sinner, and his faith in that Lamb of God, who was to take away the sin of the world [Note: Heb 11:4.]. That sacrifice of his was honoured with very peculiar tokens of Gods acceptance [Note: Perhaps fire might be sent from heaven to consume the sacrifice. See instances of this, Lev 9:24. 1Ki 18:38. 1Ch 21:26 and 2Ch 7:1.]; and may therefore fitly be referred to as illustrative of the sacrifice of Christ.]

It spake to him that offered it very excellent things
[Had not the marks of Gods favour been such as were most desirable, Cain would not have so cruelly envied his brother the attainment of them. But they manifestly declared to Abel the acceptance of his person, and an approbation of his service. What could be more delightful than such a testimony to a pious soul? Had life itself been the price of such a blessing, it had been well bestowed.]
But the excellence of Abels sacrifice is far surpassed by,

II.

The superior efficacy of Christs

The blood of Christ is here, as in other places [Note: 1Pe 1:2.], called the blood of sprinkling

[There is in this place an allusion to the sprinkling of blood on the book and on the people, when God made his covenant with the Jewish nation [Note: Compare Exo 24:6-8. with Heb 9:18-22.]. The blood of Christ is sprinkled upon us, when we enter into covenant with God; and it binds God, if we may so say, to fulfil to us his promises, while it binds us on the other hand to obey his precepts.]

This speaks to us incomparably better things than the blood of Abel
[Great as the expressions of Gods love to Abel were in consequence of the sacrifice which that righteous man had offered, they were not to be compared with those which we receive through Christ. There was no inherent virtue in his sacrifice; its efficacy was derived from the relation it bore to Christ; and the blessings, enjoyed by means of it, were rather typical than real. The continuance of Gods favour to him was to be secured only by a constant repetition of the same sacrifices; nor could he obtain a full and perfect peace of conscience even by their means [Note: Heb 9:9.]: but Christ, by his one sacrifice of himself, has perfected for ever them that are sanctified [Note: Heb 10:14.]. Besides, whatever Abels sacrifice spake, it spake to him alone: whereas the blood of Christ speaks to the whole world, and proclaims acceptance to all who will trust in it for salvation. Thus, while the good things which the blood of Abel spake, were only typical, temporary, and personal, those which the blood of Christ speaks, are real, permanent, and universal.]

Nor will our concern in this matter appear unimportant, if we consider,

III.

The interest which the believer has in it

Every believer comes to this blood of sprinkling
[The efficacy of the Redeemers blood is not a matter of speculation, but of experience, to every true Christian. As Moses and the Israelites came to Mount Sinai in order to make a covenant with God, so do we come to the blood of sprinkling: they came as persons redeemed by God out of the house of bondage: we as redeemed from death and hell: they came to take God as their God, and to give up themselves to him as his people; and we come with precisely the same view: they offered sacrifices and were sprinkled with the blood, in token that they deserved to die, and could be cleansed only by the blood of atonement; and we come in the same manner to the blood of Christ: they looked through the typical sacrifices to him who was in due time to be offered; and we look to him, who in due time was offered for our sins upon the cross.]

In coming thus to Christ we experience all the efficacy of his blood
[Were we afar off? we are brought nigh to God [Note: Eph 2:13.]: Were we enemies to God? we are reconciled to him [Note: Col 1:20.]: Were we condemned for our iniquities? we are now justified [Note: Rom 5:9.]: Were our minds filled with a sense of guilt and a dread of punishment? our hearts are now sprinkled from an evil conscience [Note: Heb 10:22.], and enjoy peace with God [Note: Rom 5:1.]: Were we strangers to communion with God? we now have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus [Note: Heb 10:19.]: Were we enslaved by evil habits? we are now purged from dead works to serve the living God [Note: Heb 9:14.]: Did a sentence of eternal misery await us? we now look forward to the fruits of an eternal redemption [Note: Heb 9:12; Heb 9:15.]. Such is the interest that the Christian has in the blood of sprinkling; and in this sense it may be said of every believer, that he is come to it.]

Application
1.

Let us inquire whether we be indeed come to the blood of sprinkling

[It is not every nominal Christian, that has approached God in this way: all are not Israel who are of Israel. The outward form indeed which was observed by Moses is not required under the Christian dispensation; nor need we feel his terror, in order to obtain his comforts: but we must seriously draw nigh to God, sprinkling ourselves, as it were, with the blood of Christ, and professing our entire reliance upon that for our acceptance with him. Yea, we must go to God in the very spirit and temper in which Abel offered his sacrifice; not merely thanking him with pharisaic pride, as Cain may be supposed to have done; but smiting on our breasts like the Publican, and imploring mercy for Christs sake. Have we done this? Or rather, are we doing it yet daily? On this depends our happiness, both in this world and in the world to come. If God at this moment gives us the witness of his Spirit in our consciences that this is indeed our experience, let us rejoice in such a testimony, and be thankful for it. But if our consciences condemn us, O! let us delay no longer, but instantly sprinkle ourselves with that precious blood, on account of which he will speak peace unto our souls.]

2.

Let us endeavour to fulfil the obligations which this blood entails upon us

[When Moses sprinkled the Jews, and read to them the book of the covenant, they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient: O that there may be in us also such a heart,such a heart, I mean, not merely to promise, but to perform our promises! Certainly this is the end for which Christ shed his blood; he died, not merely to bring us to the enjoyment of privileges, but to lead us to the performance of our duties; he gave himself for us, to redeem us from all iniquity, and to purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works. Let us then strive to walk worthy of our high calling; and let the love of Christ constrain us to live unto him, who died for us and rose again.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Ver. 24. That speaketh better things ] Every drop whereof had a tongue to cry for vengeance; whence it is called bloods, in the plural, Gen 4:10 . But the blood of sprinkling (so Christ’s blood is here called, either in allusion to the blood of the paschal lamb sprinkled on the door posts, Exo 12:7 , or else to the sprinkling of that blood, of the covenant described Exo 24:8 , with Heb 9:18 ) speaketh reconciliation, peace, and eternal life.

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

24 .] and to the mediator of the latter covenant ( , not = . is recens : , novus : , the more objective word, , the more subjective. But this must not be taken exclusively. carries with it the freshness of youth, and is the livelier, more graphic word. See reff., esp. Col. In ch. Heb 9:15 our Lord is characterized as ), Jesus (the mention of the at once introduces that of Him who was Himself , ch. Heb 2:10 , and who is the , Heb 12:2 . Cf. ch. Heb 7:22 . Our Writer especially loves to use the name JESUS. To Christ , all that is predicated of our Lord belonged officially: but when it is predicated of Jesus, it becomes personal fact, realized in one whom we know and who loves us. That Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, is a theological truth: that Jesus is, is a glorious token of God’s love manifested to us men), and to the blood of sprinkling (naturally following on the mention of , for no is consecrated without blood, ch. Heb 9:18 ; Heb 9:22 . And if Moses had blood wherewith to sprinkle the people, much more Jesus, of whom Moses was a shadow. And therefore the Writer, enumerating the great differences of our Sion from their Sinai, though he has not recounted their blood of sprinkling, as not being worthy of mention in the face of the terrors of God’s law, mentions ours, by which we were redeemed unto God, and assigns it a place in the heavenly city, next to, but separate from, Jesus Himself in His glorified state. If we come to enquire how this can be, we enter on an interesting but high and difficult subject, on which learned and holy men have been much divided. Our Lord’s Blood was shed from Him on the Cross. And as His Body did not see corruption, it is obvious to suppose, that His Blood did not corrupt as that of ordinary men, being as it is so important a portion of the body. Hence, and because His resurrection Body seems to have been bloodless, see Luk 24:39 ; Joh 20:27 , and notes, some have supposed that the Blood of the Lord remains, as it was poured out, incorruptible, in the presence of God. On such a matter I would neither affirm nor deny, but mention, with all reverence, that which seems to suit the requirements of the words before us. By that Blood we live, wherever it is: but as here it is mentioned separately from the Lord Himself, as an item in the glories of the heavenly city, and as “yet speaking,” it seems to require some such view to account for the words used. Bengel has here a long excursus on the point, in which he takes strongly the above view. Chrys. also seems to have done so, Hom. xxxiii. on Heb 13 ., vol. xii. p. 229, where the text is in some confusion, but Mutianus seems to have expressed the sense (p. 447): “Foris quippe passus est, sed ad clum sanguis sublatus est” ( ). The blood of Christ is called , inasmuch as, like that sacrificial blood of old materially, it is spiritually sprinkled on the conscience of those who come unto God by Him, cf. ch. Heb 9:13 ff.; Heb 10:22 ; Heb 13:12 ) speaking better ( adverbially: as in 1Co 7:38 , is opposed to . And the adverb refers not to the manner of the speaking (as Thdrt., : Chrys., , , : and Schol.-Matthi, , . This accords with their understanding of above in ch. Heb 11:4 ), but to the matter spoken. So, after Cyr.-alex. de Adorat. in Spir., and ver. xv., vol. i. p. 528, c., , : “ille flagitabat ultionem, hic impetrat remissionem,” Erasm. (par.). And so most later Commentators. Delitzsch unites both views) than Abel (not, “ than that of Abel :” for in ch. Heb 11:4 , it is Abel himself who speaks, in his blood: see note there).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Hebrews

THE MESSENGER OF THE COVENANT AND ITS SEAT

Heb 12:24

IN previous sermons on the preceding context, we have had frequent occasion to remark on the parallel and contrast between Sinai and Zion, as expressive of the difference between the genius of Judaism and Christianity, which shapes the whole of this section That contrast and parallel are most obvious at its beginning and here at its close. In the beginning we had the mountain of the Law, swathed in darkness, lit by flashing flame, contrasted with the sunny slopes of Zion, palace- crowned, and the wild desert set in opposition to the city of peace that clustered round the foot of Zion’s Mount. Here at the close we have the key-words of the old revelation laid hold of and applied to the new. Judaism was a covenant in the form of a law, of which the terms were these: ‘Do, and thou shalt live!’ The gospel is a covenant in the form of a promise, of which the tenor is ‘Believe and live; live and do!’ The ancient covenant had Moses for its mediator, passing between the mountain and the plain. The gospel has a better and a truer link of union between God and man than any mere man, however exalted, can be. The ancient system had its sprinkled blood, by which the men on whom it fell entered into the covenant, and were ceremonially sanctified. The new covenant has its blood. An awful voice rolled amongst the peaks of Sinai. That ‘blood of sprinkling’ speaks too. And then the writer blends with that allusion another, to the voice of the blood of the first martyr, every drop of which cried to God for retribution, and points to the blood of the more innocent Abel, every drop of which appeals to the Father’s heart for pardon. Now it may be said that thus to present Christian truth under the guise of the symbols of an ancient ceremonial and external system is a retrograde step. And some people, who think themselves very enlightened, tell us that the time is past for looking at Christianity from such a point of view. One great man has let himself talk about ‘Hebrew old clothes.’ I am very much mistaken if these old clothes will not turn out to be something like the raiment that the Hebrews. wore in the wilderness, ‘which waxed not old for forty years,’ and outlasted a great many suits that other people had cut for themselves. We have only to ponder upon these emblems until they become significant to us, in order to see that, instead of being antiquated and effete, they are throbbing with life, and fit as close to the needs of to- lay u ever they did. They came with a special message, no doubt, to these men to whom this letter was first addressed, who were by descent and habit Hebrews, and saturated with the law. But their message is quite as much to you and me; and I desire now simply to bring out the large and permanent meanings which lie beneath them. I. First, then, note that God’s revelation to us is in the form of a covenant.

Now, of course, when we talk about a covenant or compact between two men, we mean a matter of bargaining on the terms of which both have been consulted, and which has assumed its final form after negotiations and perhaps compromise. But there are necessarily limitations to the transference of all human ideas to divine relations. One such limitation is expressed in the very language of the original. The word rendered ‘covenant’ suppresses the idea of conjunction, and emphasises that of appointment. By which we are to learn that the covenant which God makes with man is of His own settling and is not the result of mutual giving and taking; that men have nothing to do with the determining of these conditions; that He Himself has made them, and that He is bound by them, not because we have arranged them with Him, but because He has announced them to us. With that limitation we can take the idea and apply it to the relation between God and us, established in the great message of the gospel. For what is the notion that underlies the old-fashioned, and to some of you obsolete and unwelcome word? Why, simply this, it is a definite disclosure of God’s purpose as affecting you and me, by which disclosure He is prepared to stand and to be bound. It is a revelation, but a revelation that obliges the Revealer to a certain course of conduct; or, if you would rather have a less theological word, it is a system of promise under which God mercifully has willed that we should live. And just as when a king gives forth a proclamation, he is bound by the fact that he gave it forth, so God, out of all the infinite possibilities of His action, condescends to tell us what His line is to be, and He will adhere to it. He lets us see the works of the clock, if I may so say, not wholly, but in so far as we are affected by His action. What, then, are the terms of this covenant? We have them drawn out, first, in the words of Jeremiah, who apprehended, when he was dwelling in the midst of that eternal system, that it could not be a final system; and next, by the writer of this letter quoting the prophet, who, in the midst of the vanishing of that which could be shaken, saw emerging, like the fairy form of the fabled goddess out of the sea-foam, the vast and permanent outlines of a nobler system. The promises of the covenant are, then, full forgiveness as the foundation of all, and built upon that, a knowledge of God inwardly illuminating and making a man independent of external helps, though he may sometimes be grateful for them; then a mutual possession which is based upon these, whereby I, even I, can venture to say, God is mine, and, more ‘wonderful still, I, even I, can venture to believe that He bends down from heaven and says: ‘And thou, thou art Mine!’ and then, as the result of all – named first, but coming last in the order of nature – the law of His commandment will be So written upon the heart that delight and duty are spelt with the same letters, and His will is our will. These are the elements, or you can gather them all up into one, namely, the promise of eternal life- based upon forgiveness, operating through the knowledge of God, and issuing in perfect conformity to His blessed will. If these, then, be the articles of the paction, think for a moment of the blessedness that lies hived in this ancient, and to some of us musty, thought of a covenant of God’s. It gives a basis for knowledge. Unless He audibly and articulately and verifiably utters His mind and will, I know not There men are to go to get it. Without an actual revelation from heaven, of other nature, of clearer contents, of more solid certitude than the revelations that may have been written upon the tablets of our hearts, over which we have too often scrawled the devil’s message, and over and above the ambiguous articles that may be picked out and pieced together, from reflection upon providence and nature, we need something better and firmer, more comprehensively and more manifestly authoritative, before we are entitled to say, ‘Behold! I know that God loves me, and that I may put my trust in Him.’ Brethren! I for my part believe that between agnosticism on that side, and the full evangeliced faith of the New Testament in a supernatural revelation on this side, all forms of so-called Christianity which shy at the idea of a supernatural ‘revelation are destined to have the life squeezed out of them, and that what will be left will be the two logical positions; first, God, if there be a God, never spoke, and we do not know anything about Him; and, second, ‘God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son.’ If there be a God at all, and if there be in Him any love and any righteousness, it is infinitely more reasonable to suppose that He should have spoken His mind and heart to men, and given them a covenant on which they can reckon, than that He has been from the beginning a dumb God, that never opened His mouth with a word of guidance or of sympathy for the sons of men. Believe that who may; I cannot believe in a pure theism, which has no place for a supernatural revelation. And then, again, let me remind you how here is the one foothold, if I may so say, for confidence. If God hath not spoken there is nothing to reckon upon. There are perhaps, probabilities if you like, possibilities, but nothing beyond, and no man can build a faith on a peradventure. There must be solid ground on which to rest; and here is solid ground: ‘I make a covenant with you.’ ‘God is not a man that He should lie, nor the Son of Man that He should repent.’ And armed with that great thought that He has verily rent the darkness and spoken words which commit Him and assure us, we, even the weakest of us, may venture to go to Him, and plead with Him that He cannot and dare not alter the thing that has gone forth out of His mouth; and so, in deepest reverence, can approach Him and plead the necessity of a great Must under which He has placed Himself by His own word. God is faithful, the covenant-making and the covenant- keeping God.

II. Secondly, mark that Jesus Christ is the Executor of this covenant.

Moses, of course, was a go-between, in a mere external sense; from the mountain to the plain and from the plain to the mountain, he passed, and in either case simply carried a message bearing God’s will to man or man’s submission to God. But we have to dig far deeper into the idea than that of a mere outward messenger who carries what is entrusted to him, as an errand boy might, if we are to get the notion of Christ’s relation to these great promises, which, massed together, are God’s covenant with us. Observe that the emphasis is here laid on the manhood of the Lord. It is Jesus who is the ‘Mediator of the covenant’: and observe, too, that that idea passes into the wider notion of His place as the link uniting God and man. The depth of the thought is only reached whoa we recognise His divinity and His humanity. He is the ladder with its foot on earth and its top in heaven. Because God dwells in Him, and the word became flesh, He is able to lay His hand upon both, and to bring God to man and man to God. He brings God to man. If what I have been saying is at all true, that for all solid faith we must have an articulate declaration of the divine mind and heart, it seems to me to be equally irrefragable that for any such declaration of the divine heart and mind we must have a human vehicle. God speaks through men. It is His highest way of making Himself known to mere And Jesus Christ in His Manhood declares God to us. Not by the mere words which He speaks, as a teacher and a wise man, a religious genius and a saint, a philosopher and a poet, a moralist and a judge; but by these, and also by His life, by His emotions of pity and gentleness and patience, and by everything that He does and everything that He endures, He speaks to us of God. Brethren, where shall a poor man rest his soul outside of the direct or indirect influences of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ? Why I the very men who reject Him to-day, on the plea that they have learnt a nobler conception of God than they can find in Christianity, owe their conception of Him to the gospel which they reject. Where else is there certitude solid enough to resist the pressure of sorrow and of sin; confidence enough to maintain faith in the face of difficulty and conscious evil and death; or energy enough in a creed to make religion an all-controlling influence and an all-gladdening stay except in Jesus Christ? I venture to say, nowhere I Nowhere beyond the limits to which either the river of the water of life has manifestly flowed; or some rills and rivulets from it have crept underground to give strange verdure to some far-off pasture; nowhere else is there found the confidence in the Father’s heart which is the property of the Christian man, and the result of the Christian covenant. Jesus Christ brings God to man by the declaration of His nature incarnate in humanity. And, on the other hand, He brings man to God: for He stands to each of us as our true Brother, and-united to us by such close and real bends as that all which He has been and done may be ours if we join ourselves to Him by faith. And He brings men to God, because in Him only do we find the drawings that incline wayward and wandering hearts to the Father. And He seals for us that great Covenant in His own person and work, in so far as what He in manhood has done has made it possible that such promises should be given to us. And, still further, He is the Mediator of the covenant, in so far as He Himself possesses in His humanity all the blessings which manhood is capable of deriving from the Father, and He has them all in order that He may give them all. There is the great reservoir from which all men may fill their tiny cups. Men tell us that they want no Mediator between them and God. Ah, my brother! go down into your own hearts; try to understand what sin is; and then go up as near as you can to the dazzling white light, and try partially to conceive of what God’s holiness is, and tell us, Do you think you, as you are, could walk in that light and not be consumed? It seems to me that no man who has any deep knowledge of his own heart, and any, though it be inadequate, yet true, conception of the divine nature, dare take upon his lips that boast that we often hear, ‘We need none to come between us and God.’ For me, I thankfully hear Him say, ‘No man cometh to the Father but by Me’; and pray for grace to tread in that only way that leadeth unto God. III. Note the sprinkling of the blood which seals the covenant. There is an allusion there, as I have already suggested, to the ceremonial at Sinai, when, in token of their entrance into the covenant, the Blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled upon the crowd; and also an allusion to the voice of the blood of the innocent Abel, which ‘cried to God from the ground.’ The writer has already referred to that in the earlier part of the letter; and here he weaves the two together because, with whatever differences of representation, the substantial meaning of both images is the same. The blood shed establishes the covenant; and the blood sprinkled brings us into it. If Jesus had not died, there would have been no promises for us, beginning in forgiveness and ending in wills delighting in God’s law. It is ‘the new covenant in His blood.’ The death of Christ is ever present to the divine mind and determines the divine action. Hence the allusion to the voice, in contrast both to the dread voice that echoed among the grim peaks of Sinai, and to that which, as if each drop had a tongue, called from Abel’s innocent blood for retribution. Christ’s, too, has a voice, and that an all-powerful one. It cries for pardon with the same authority of intercession as we hear in His wondrous high-priestly prayer: ‘Father, I will.’ Further, that sprinkling, which introduced technically and formally these people into that covenant, represents for us the personal application to ourselves of the power of His death and of His life by which we may make all God’s promises our own, and be cleansed from all sin. It is ‘sprinkled.’ Then it is capable of division into indefinitely small portions, and of the closest contact with individuals. That is but a highly metaphorical way of saying that Jesus Christ has died for each of us, that each of us may find acceptance and cleansing, and the inheritance of all the promises, if we put our trust in Him. For remember, these words of my text are the end of a great sentence, which begins, ‘Ye are come.’ Faith is that coming. What did Christ say? ‘He that cometh unto Me shall never hunger. He that believeth on Me shall never thirst.’ There is His own interpretation of the metaphor. Whosoever trusts Him, comes to Him. If I put my tremulous faith on that dear Lord, though He be on the throne of the universe, and I down here, in this far-away dim corner of His creation, I am with Him where He is, and no film of distance need separate us. If we trust Him we come to Him. If we rest upon Him as our advocate and hope, then the loud voice of our sins will not be heard, accusing-tongued though they be, above the voice of His pleading blood. And they who come to Christ, therein and thereby, come to all other glorious and precious persons and things in the universe. For, as I have already said, my text is the end of a long sentence, and is last named as being the foundation of all that precedes, and the condition of our finding ourselves in touch with all the other glories of which the writer has been speaking. He that comes to Christ is in the city. He that comes to Christ is – not will be – in the palace. He that comes to Christ is in the presence of the Judge. He that comes to Christ touches angels and perfected spirits, and is knit to all that are knit to the same Lord. He that comes to Christ comes to cleansing, and enters into the fulness of the promise, and lives in the presence and companionship of his present-absent Lord. If we come to Jesus by faith, Jesus will come at last to us to receive us to Himself; and join us to the choirs of the perfected spirits who ‘have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.’

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

Mediator. Greek. mesites. See Heb 9:15.

the = a.

covenant. See Mat 26:28.

blood of sprinkling (Greek. rhantismos). The phrase only here and 1Pe 1:2 (sprinkling of blood).

speaketh. Greek. laleo. App-121.

than. Greek. para. App-104. Compare Heb 1:4. In Heb 12:18-24 seven statements are set forth as to the Old Covenant dispensation, followed by ten of the New. Together seventeen (see App-10).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

24.] and to the mediator of the latter covenant (, not = . is recens: , novus: , the more objective word, , the more subjective. But this must not be taken exclusively. carries with it the freshness of youth, and is the livelier, more graphic word. See reff., esp. Col. In ch. Heb 9:15 our Lord is characterized as ), Jesus (the mention of the at once introduces that of Him who was Himself , ch. Heb 2:10, and who is the , Heb 12:2. Cf. ch. Heb 7:22. Our Writer especially loves to use the name JESUS. To Christ, all that is predicated of our Lord belonged officially: but when it is predicated of Jesus, it becomes personal fact, realized in one whom we know and who loves us. That Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, is a theological truth: that Jesus is, is a glorious token of Gods love manifested to us men), and to the blood of sprinkling (naturally following on the mention of , for no is consecrated without blood, ch. Heb 9:18; Heb 9:22. And if Moses had blood wherewith to sprinkle the people, much more Jesus, of whom Moses was a shadow. And therefore the Writer, enumerating the great differences of our Sion from their Sinai, though he has not recounted their blood of sprinkling, as not being worthy of mention in the face of the terrors of Gods law, mentions ours, by which we were redeemed unto God, and assigns it a place in the heavenly city, next to, but separate from, Jesus Himself in His glorified state. If we come to enquire how this can be, we enter on an interesting but high and difficult subject, on which learned and holy men have been much divided. Our Lords Blood was shed from Him on the Cross. And as His Body did not see corruption, it is obvious to suppose, that His Blood did not corrupt as that of ordinary men, being as it is so important a portion of the body. Hence, and because His resurrection Body seems to have been bloodless,-see Luk 24:39; Joh 20:27, and notes,-some have supposed that the Blood of the Lord remains, as it was poured out, incorruptible, in the presence of God. On such a matter I would neither affirm nor deny, but mention, with all reverence, that which seems to suit the requirements of the words before us. By that Blood we live, wherever it is: but as here it is mentioned separately from the Lord Himself, as an item in the glories of the heavenly city, and as yet speaking, it seems to require some such view to account for the words used. Bengel has here a long excursus on the point, in which he takes strongly the above view. Chrys. also seems to have done so, Hom. xxxiii. on Hebrews 13., vol. xii. p. 229, where the text is in some confusion, but Mutianus seems to have expressed the sense (p. 447): Foris quippe passus est, sed ad clum sanguis sublatus est ( ). The blood of Christ is called , inasmuch as, like that sacrificial blood of old materially, it is spiritually sprinkled on the conscience of those who come unto God by Him, cf. ch. Heb 9:13 ff.; Heb 10:22; Heb 13:12) speaking better ( adverbially: as in 1Co 7:38, is opposed to . And the adverb refers not to the manner of the speaking (as Thdrt., : Chrys., , , : and Schol.-Matthi, , . This accords with their understanding of above in ch. Heb 11:4), but to the matter spoken. So, after Cyr.-alex. de Adorat. in Spir., and ver. xv., vol. i. p. 528, c., , : ille flagitabat ultionem, hic impetrat remissionem, Erasm. (par.). And so most later Commentators. Delitzsch unites both views) than Abel (not, than that of Abel: for in ch. Heb 11:4, it is Abel himself who speaks, in his blood: see note there).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Heb 12:24. , of the new covenant) It is elsewhere called , here: denotes the newness of that which is native or born, or even that which is living: comp. ch. Heb 8:13, note,[82] and ch. Heb 10:20; Isa 43:19.-, to the Mediator) Formerly Moses, himself the mediating messenger, feared and trembled: now access has been granted to the Mediator of the New Testament.- , to the blood of sprinkling) A remarkable connection to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, AND to the blood of sprinkling. The blood is looked upon in this passage, as it is in heaven, in the same way as the Mediator is looked upon, and God, and the ten thousands, etc. Attend, reader, to what is now to be said, by distinct positions.

[82] , the opposite of ; as is of , , recent or lately originated, young. , new, that which comes in place of what was formerly. So , the New Testament, as opposed to the Old covenant or Testament: but , the recently established covenant, of which the Jews were now partakers.-

1. The blood of Jesus Christ was most abundantly shed in His suffering and after His death.

In the sacrifices of the Old Testament, , the shedding of blood, was requisite; and the blood was to be entirely poured out, so that nothing should remain in the veins and vessels of the bodies. This was accomplished also in the one oblation of the New Testament-the oblation of the body of Jesus. Shedding of this most precious blood in every way then took place: in the garden, by sweat; in the palace, by scourging; on the cross, by the nails; and after death, by the spear. Thus Christ was manifestly put to death in the flesh, 1Pe 3:18. I do not know whether he who has duly weighed the words of Psa 22:15-16, can say, that even a drop of the whole mass of blood remained in His most holy body: I am poured out like WATER. My strength IS DRIED UP as a potsherd, and my tongue has cleaved to my jaws; and Thou hast brought me unto THE DUST of death. Truly the Lamb of God , was sacrificed. It does not mean, that one part of His blood was shed, another part not shed: but, as His whole body was delivered up, so His whole blood was shed: Mat 26:28. The shedding of the blood and the death of Christ are concomitant: the one is not the cause of the other. He truly laid down His blood and His life; but not for natural causes, on account of which ordinarily they die, who perish by a violent death. This arises from the surpassing excellence of the Subject.

2. The state of the shed blood followed the actual shedding of that blood.

The actual shedding of the blood was, while it was being shed; we call the state of the shed blood the whole period of its continuance out of the body of the Lord, whether that be short or long.

3. That blood, even in its state of being shed, was free from all corruption.

We were redeemed NOT WITH CORRUPTIBLE THINGS, such as silver or gold, but with the PRECIOUS blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot; 1Pe 1:18-19. The preciousness of that blood excludes all corruption. This remains firm and sure; nor do we in any way approve of the unworthy opinions of some respecting the shed blood of Christ, whom Hoepfner expressly confutes, especially in Tract. de S. C., p. 55.

4. It cannot be affirmed, that the blood, which was shed, was again put into the veins of our Lords body.

Human reason comprehends nothing but what refers to this life: wherefore we only put our trust in Scripture, which very often refers to the shedding of the blood and to the death of Jesus Christ; and it too does not less celebrate His resurrection and eternal life. But it gives no direct intimation of the putting of the blood again into the body; nor is that fact to be deduced from Scripture by fair inference. Certainly this mode of reasoning makes a large leap: The blood of Christ is incorruptible; therefore it returned into His veins. If the body without the blood, and the blood out of the body, were uncorrupted during the three days of His death, each of them remains also more uncorrupted, after death was fully accomplished, without the other. Let us hear what Scripture suggests.

5. At the time of the ascension the blood separated from the body was carried into heaven.

The entrance of the Priest of the New Testament into the true sanctuary was His Ascension into heaven; and indeed, at the death of Christ, the veil of the earthly temple was rent asunder, and then the true sanctuary, heaven, was opened; but the entrance itself was made by ascending into heaven. The resurrection took place on the third day after His death; His ascension, forty days after the resurrection. Moreover Christ entered into the sanctuary by His own blood; not merely after the blood was shed, and by the force of its being shed, nor with the blood taken back into the body, but BY the blood: therefore this Priest Himself carried into the sanctuary His own blood separately from His body (Scherzerus, in Syst., p. 390, accuses one of rashness, who thought that the particles of Christs blood which adhered to the lash, to the crown of thorns, and to the nails, and the drops of blood shed, were miraculously preserved on the earth, and were multiplied in the Eucharist); and at the very time of His entrance or ascension Christ had His blood separate from His body. His body was bloodless; yet not lifeless, but alive. The blood in His body would not have agreed with the type of the priest under the Old Testament, who entered into the sanctuary with the blood of animals. See ch. Heb 9:7; Heb 9:25, and especially Heb 12:12, where and entirely correspond to each other with the same meaning. Witsius, in Diss. de sacerdotio Aaronis et Christi, T. I. Misc., p. 510, where he treats of the passage Heb 13:11, acknowledges, that the analogy between the type and the antitype should be preserved; but he at the same time interprets the blood of Christ to be His soul, not correctly: for blood, properly so called, is denoted, as in the type, so in the antitype. Comp. Exx. in Symb. ap., p. 171. Moreover there is a still weaker explanation given by Sibrandus Lubbertus, lib. ii. c. Socin. de J. C. Servatore, c. 21: We read concerning the annual sacrifice, Leviticus 16, that its blood was carried into the most holy place; but there is a great difference between this blood and the blood of Christ. For the material blood, that was shed when the animal victim was slain, was carried into the sanctuary; but the material blood of Christ, which was shed when He was slain for us, was NOT carried into heaven. What then was done? As the priest under the law appeared in the Levitical sanctuary with the blood of the victim slain for himself and the people, so Christ appears for us in heaven, not with the material blood that was shed, but by the power and efficacy of the blood shed for us. The apostle does not say, the power and efficacy of the blood, but Christs own (proper) blood (ch. Heb 9:12), by which an entrance was made into the sanctuary: nor does he call it MATERIAL blood, but the blood of Him, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot unto God. The discourses of excellent interpreters and commentators often imitate this emphasis, which is given to this subject by the apostle. Chrysost. Hom. 33, on Hebrews 13 : The actual economy of the suffering was without-I say, without; but the blood was carried up INTO heaven. You observe, that we are partakers of the blood that was carried into the sanctuary-the true sanctuary-the blood of the sacrifice in which He alone, the High Priest, delighted. Some refer certain words of this passage to one thing, others to another; but all agree in giving the same meaning to , … The above translation is that which I am inclined to adopt. Conr. Pellicanus on Hebrews 9 : Christ brought the price of His blood for redeeming us to the Father, into heaven. Calvin on Hebrews 10.: Since the blood of cattle became soon corrupted, it could not long retain its efficacy; but the blood of Christ, which has no foul corruption, but always flows with untainted colour, will be sufficient for us to the end of the world. We cannot wonder, if the sacrifices of cattle that had been slain had no power to give life, as they were dead; but Christ, who rose from the dead, to confer life upon us, diffuses His own life into us. This consecration of the way is perpetual, because the blood of Christ is always in a manner dropping before the Fathers face for the purpose of bedewing heaven and earth. And on ch. 13: Christ carried His own blood INTO the heavenly sanctuary, to make atonement for the sins of the world. Again: The apostle (Heb 13:20) seems to me to mean, that Christ so rose from the dead, that His death notwithstanding is not effaced, but retains eternal freshness and efficacy; as if he had said, God raised His Son, but in such a way, that the blood which He shed once for all in His death, for the ratification of the eternal covenant, still retains its efficacy (vigour) after the resurrection, and brings forth its own fruit, as if it were continually flowing. Hunnius on Hebrews 13 : Christ carried His own blood into the Holy of Holies. Dorscheus, P. I. Theol. Zach., p. 51, etc., says on Zec 9:11 : The blood is considered under that aspect of profusion and effusion, but not as it is in its natural state and within its ordinary vessels. 1. Because the manner (nature) of the type requires this: for the blood, under the Old Testament or Covenant, was considered as extravasated and shed, and by this very circumstance it was the shadow of the profusion and effusion of blood which was to take place under the New Testament. 2. Because the nature of the Divine covenant requires this, which demands shedding of blood. 3. Because in this aspect of the blood [i.e. by the effusion of the blood] an act of satisfactory obedience due to God for sin is performed, etc. Sal. Deylingius: Christ having ascended into heaven, and sitting at the right hand of GOD, commits our affairs to GOD, and shows to the Father His blood that was shed for us, and His wounds. Again, quoting Rappoltus, he says: He presents (shows) to His Father His own blood as the ransom and price of redemption for us, and teaches that by the shedding of it Divine justice has been satisfied. Observ. Miscell., pp. 571, 572. I do not maintain that these interpreters show the present condition of the blood that has been shed; but I say, that their statements, if such a condition be kept in mind, are more consistent with the texts of which they treat.

6. The blood of Jesus Christ always remains blood shed.

If the return of the blood of Jesus Christ into His body ever could or should have happened, it could or should have happened at least at the very moment of the resurrection, and not later. But that this did not happen before the ascension is evident from the preceding section. Therefore it did not happen at the resurrection; and therefore no time can be found, to which we may ascribe that return. The condition of the blood shed is perpetual. Jesus Himself is in heaven, and His body is also there: so too is His blood in heaven; but His blood is not for that reason now in His body. I am not inclined to refer to this the vision in Rev 1:14, concerning the whiteness of the head of Jesus Christ, as if it were bloodless; for it has respect to the hair white as snow; but the face is compared to the exceeding brightness of the sun in his greatest strength, ibid. v. 16. Nor do we allege what is found at Luk 24:39, which has been alleged by Augustine, as bearing on this point; for the blood, although it be in the body, is less felt and seen than the flesh and bones. There are other indications given of the blood being separate from the body. The sacred writings present the body and blood under the aspect of things divided, not only in the sufferings and death of our Lord, but also in the supper instituted in remembrance of His death. Examine ch. Heb 13:9, etc., Heb 10:10; Heb 10:29; 1Co 11:24-25. The mode of predicating follows the mode of existence; for this very reason the body and blood of Christ are considered as quite distinct, because there is a distinction or separation existing in respect (on the part) of the subject. Therefore the blood, as shed, is still in heaven before the eyes of God; it still speaks for us; it is still the blood of sprinkling: 1Pe 1:2. The blood of Abel, which the earth, having opened its mouth, drank from the hand of Cain, cried out apart from the body; so the blood of Jesus Christ speaks, likewise apart, in heaven, with greater power and benignity. For this reason mention is here properly made of the blood of sprinkling apart from Jesus Himself, as in ch. Heb 10:19; Heb 10:21, the entrance into the sanctuary in the blood of Jesus, and this same High Priest, are praised (spoken of) apart; and ch. Heb 13:12, the blood of Jesus is considered apart from His body (comp. Heb 12:11); and ch. Heb 13:20, the very raising of the great Shepherd of the sheep from the dead is said to have been accomplished through the blood of the eternal covenant. Comp. Rev. Riegeri. Hist. Frr. Boh., vol. ii., p. 68, etc., where, following the footsteps of Pfaffius, a very wide field of old and more recent opinions is so spread out before us, that this single opinion, which he skilfully states, comes forth without any of the disadvantages attending on the rest. The blood itself shed, not the shedding of the blood, is the ransom, the price of eternal redemption. That price, paid to God, remains paid, without being restored to the body of the Redeemer. The redemption is eternal; the value of the price is eternal, just as if the Redeemer hung on the cross daily and expired daily for us. In His death there was the power of a life that was not to be dissolved. In His life there is the value of His death, which is perpetual. The death of the Lord itself swept away the weakness of His life in the world, in which (weakness), for the sake of undergoing death, He became a partaker of flesh and blood, ch. Heb 2:14 : and so the same death, as a passage to a glorious life, had something forthwith suited to a glorious life. Comp. 1Ti 3:16, note. Hence the annunciation (showing forth) of the Lords death comprises His whole history, even that of His burial and resurrection (with which latter the burial is closely connected, 1Co 15:4), that of His ascension, that of His sitting at the right hand of God until He come: 1Co 11:26. The great Shepherd of the sheep was brought from the dead, but the covenant, in the blood of which He was brought, is eternal, ch. Heb 13:20. From this it is plain, that John has described with great propriety the Lamb, seen by him in His life and glory, as slain.

7. This same fact was acknowledged by the ancient Doctors of the Church.

The fathers generally agreed, that the body of the Lord is now bloodless, nay, even arial: see Magnif. Pfaffii diss. c. Roger, p. 50; and from this point some have descended even to too great subtlety. The author of the questions among the works of Athanasius, T. ii., f. 433, qu. 128, says, The men of old themselves, and the ancient prophets, were baptized with that blood and water which flowed from the side of Christ. And how? Listen: Since the human body consists of four elements, it is again resolved into the same after death. So it happened also with Christ: because His holy side gave forth its blood and water, they were resolved, as those of the prophets were resolved, namely, into elements; and He thus baptized these (the elements of the prophets, etc.) when found, etc. Theodorus Abucaras has furnished a paraphrase to this philosophic observation, to whom alone Ittigius ascribes it in the Exercitation, in which he both publishes and refutes the little work of Abucaras. To be resolved into elements,-what is that, but to be subjected to corruption? But away with any thought of this kind concerning the blood of the Lord. These writers would not have fallen into this mistake, if they had learned from older authors, that the blood was put into His body when He rose from the dead. I know not whether this restoration of the blood was even acknowledged by the fathers (the proof [onus probandi] lies with him who maintains the acknowledgment), or at least that it is to be found brought forward before that communion in one kind (at length in the 13th and 14th cent.) began to prevail; to the defenders of which dogma, the Schoolmen, the excuse of concomitancy was convenient. The restoration of the blood was not universally maintained even in the age of Gerson, as is evident from his sermons on the day of the Lords circumcision, and from the Josephini, dist. 8. After the Reformation many admitted and propagated that opinion without any controversy, and therefore, as it happens usually, without any doubt. But the grounds on which they rest, evince that the blood of the Lord remained free from corruption, and that His remains (relics), accompanied with miracles, do not continue in the earth; both of which we heartily acknowledge; but by these same arguments it is not positively defined what is the present condition of that precious blood. Sec. I. Gerhards dispp., p. 789, 1426, seq.; J. Meisneri. exam. catech. Pal., p. 596, etc. It will be thy duty, Christian reader, to compare together the several opinions on this subject, and decide on them according to the rule of sacred Scripture.

8. The personal union and the state of the shed blood well agree (are quite compatible with one another).

These two are not at variance with each other during the three days of His death: and much less is there any opposition ever afterwards. This whole consideration admits nothing Nestorian, nothing Eutychian.

9. The resurrection and glorious life of Jesus Christ does not set aside the state of the shed blood.

If any one were to suppose that a small quantity of blood remained in the body of the Saviour even after His side was pierced, the restoration of the blood shed to the body might seem on that account the less necessary to the natural reason. But the whole blood was indeed shed, and yet it was not again restored; for the natural or animal life consists in the blood and its circulation, and is supported by bread; but the word of God without bread feeds the bodies of the saints. See concerning Moses, Exo 24:18; Exo 34:28; also concerning Elias, 1Ki 19:8; but chiefly concerning Jesus Christ, Mat 4:2; Mat 4:4. For His whole mode of living is known to have exceeded in purity that of all men even from the suitableness of his raiment, Joh 19:23, note. But if the power of God effects that on the earth, how much more is that done and will be done in heaven? Mat 22:29 (and for this reason the reader should by the way, but seriously, be reminded, that blood newly produced in the place of that which was shed, was never even dreamt of being ascribed by us to the risen Redeemer): His glorified life does not require the circulation of the blood. The whole is of God, Rom 4:4; Rom 4:10; 1Co 6:13; 1Co 15:44; 1Co 15:50. Our body, our blood, are subject to corruption. What will happen in regard to our blood, I know not; (even in the animal life itself we consider a very great loss of blood, provided life be not endangered, as a matter of less importance than the maiming of a finger or a joint:) The Saviour will certainly make the body conformable to His glorious body. Comp. Samml. von A. und N. 1739; I. Beytr. art. 8; Vales. philos. sacr., p. 81; Melch. I. 712. We think it quite clear, that the battle fought by Michael, Revelation 12, did not take place immediately after Christs ascension into heaven, whither THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB being introduced, took away the dragons right to accuse. Pfaff. Syst. germ., p. 307; Heding. ad Heb 9:24; Heb 10:14; Kraft Nachr. I. Band, p. 878. The hole in the side (such as a deadly wound would be in the natural body) is the never-failing proof and ornament of His glorified life: Eze 37:6; Eze 37:8. The veins are not mentioned, but are nerves or muscles.

10. The state of the shed blood very strongly confirms communion in both kinds.

The defenders of communion in one kind have no more specious pretence than the concomitancy of the body and blood. But the relation of the body and of the blood of the Lord in the sacred Supper is most distinct [the footing or aspect of the one is quite distinct from that of the other]. First, He says, This is My body: then next, This is My blood. Therefore the body is not exhibited by the blood, but by itself; the blood is not exhibited by the body, but by itself. Lightfoot, in Chron. of the Old Testament, compares Gen 9:4 with this passage. But the language of Dannhawerus is much to the purpose, who writes as follows: The blood of Jesus Christ, shed for His disciples and for many, is a heavenly thing, as it is drunk in the sacred Eucharist, and because it is incorruptible, it still exists, 1Pe 1:19, and was carried by Christ into the sanctuary not made with hands; and yet (the blood spiritually received in the Eucharist) it is the very blood shed in the time of His passion. We must not enter here into scholastic disputes, truly scholastic and trifling, about the remains of Christs blood, and its being taken back, concerning which Baron. should be consulted, etc. Hodos. p. 1202. At the death of Christ the blood was drawn out of the body: the showing forth of that death (1Co 11:26) demands that the bread, after having been blessed, should be eaten in remembrance of the Lord, and that the cup, after having been blessed, should be drunk in like manner in remembrance of the Lord; 1Co 11:24-25. Thomas Bromley has a profound Answer, published in ten treatises, on the different nature of enjoying the body and blood of Christ.

11. The same cause [reason] admirably supports our faith.

The same Bromley, in the Revelation of Paradise, writes thus: The blood of the eternal covenant is sprinkled in the sanctuary, which was in a peculiar manner performed once for all by the Lord Jesus after His ascension, according to Heb 9:12, By His own blood He entered once into the sanctuary, after He had obtained eternal redemption. But that is still continued at certain times by our great High Priest, for the purpose of allaying the wrath of God occasioned by sin; and it is therefore called the blood of sprinkling, on account of its use, which is continued in heaven, and in the consciences of the saints upon the earth. Heb 9:14. They who are strong in spiritual judgment may decide such matters as these. Truly, believers, in the whole exercise of their faith, and especially in the sacred Supper, as much enjoy the efficacy of the blood of Jesus Christ, as if they had been established (placed) at the moment at which His blood was shed.

12. This circumstance demands more ample consideration from the lovers of Christ.

We may transfer to the present discussion what Andreas Adamus Hochstetterus, P. M., has written in his Exercitation on the entrance of the High Priest into the Holy of Holies. We do not doubt that the reader will perceive, from the discussion of an argument so perplexed, and omitted by even great interpreters, how much is still left to our own investigation (searching of the Scriptures), and will apply to the glory of the Saviour the labour which we have taken in searching out the hidden truth, pp. 20, 21. I confess, I find this field but little cultivated, and on such a subject few in general are brought to stop and direct their attention to its consideration. But he who will not straightway shrink from that which seems at first a paradox (something contrary to what would be thought), will soon after taste its sweetness with the progress of faith. Notwithstanding, I obtrude nothing on any man; I merely ask the wise to condescend religiously to examine the whole subject, not according to the rule of human, but Divine judgment. Carnal curiosity has no place here, but the desire of knowing the Redeemer, so far as He has chosen to make known His glory by the rays of the apostolic testimony to them who love Him.

In commentaries and systems, indeed, this subject is not found to be well or fully treated; it is only slightly touched upon; and this perhaps arises from the following reasons: 1. In the passages concerning applicatory grace [applying to us redemption], it is said: The operating cause terminatively[83] is the Holy Spirit, which is true; but the mention of Christ and His merits is only made in relation to the question respecting the external impulsive cause. It so happens that the efficacious operation of Christ and His blood cannot come into consideration either in the one place or the other. 2. The proper (strict) consideration of Christs blood is sparingly introduced, and many have straightway recourse to a figure, whereby they understand under this word, blood, either the whole merit of Christ or His life, i.e. the living principle or soul. 3. In serious treatises, the writers directly refer rather to the holy and blessed fruits, than to the mode of the operations themselves, from which these fruits take their rise; comp., for example, the writing of an Anonymous author, die reinigende Kraft des Gottes-Blutes Jesu Christi (ed. A. 1745, Prenzl.), p. 49. When I was young, I anxiously meditated a solid disquisition on the bearing of the merit of Christ on our salvation; but after much thinking, I never proceeded so far as to write a special treatise on that subject. May the Lord Jesus, for His own names sake, now and henceforth bestow upon us the bright ray of His own light. Amen.

[83] As opposed to the external impulsive cause.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Christ Is Better

Throughout the Book of Hebrews the Holy Spirits purpose is to show us the superiority of this gospel age to that of the Old Testament. A key word in these 13 chapters is the word better. It is used repeatedly.

Christ is better than the angels. Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they (Heb 1:4). Christ has given us better things, things that accompany salvation. But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak (Heb 6:9). Christ, our Melchizedek, is better than Abraham. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better (Heb 7:7). Christ gives us a better hope (a good hope through grace), than the law could ever give. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God (Heb 7:19). Christ is the Surety of a better covenant. By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament (Heb 7:22). Christ is the Mediator of a better covenant. 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). Christ is a better sacrifice. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these (Heb 9:23). Christ gives us a better, enduring, heavenly inheritance. For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance (Heb 10:34). In Christ we are made citizens of a better country. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city (Heb 11:16). Christ gives us hope of a better resurrection. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection (Heb 11:35). God has provided for us better things in Christ. God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (Heb 11:40). Christs sacrifice and blood speaks better things than the blood of Abel and his sacrifice. And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel (Heb 12:24).

Coming to Christ

And (ye are come) to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant. Faith is coming to Christ. All who are born of God and taught of him come to Christ. But coming to Christ is not at all what people imagine it to be. Coming to Christ is an act of faith. It is altogether something that is done in the heart. It is altogether a spiritual thing. Many came to Christ physically, touching him, and being touched by him, who never came to him. It is the spirit that quickeneth. The flesh profitteth nothing. Multitudes come to Christ outwardly, by profession, in the place of public worship, who never come to him (Ananias and Sapphira Simon Magus). Faith is a heart work. It is coming to Christ with a sense of need. It is coming to him as the One, the only One, who has infinite fulness to meet our souls need. This faith is the gift and operation of Gods almighty, omnipotent, irresistible, efficacious grace. Faith is coming to Christ and no one else. It is coming to him alone for everything (1Co 1:30-31). It is coming to Christ as a poor, helpless, bankrupt, naked, needy sinner. It is coming to Christ with no aide, no assistant, no mediator, no priest, and no sacrifice. It is coming to Christ bringing nothing of your own to ingratiate you. It is coming to Christ bringing nothing but your filth for him to cleanse, your sin for him to forgive, your nakedness for him to cover, and your need for him to meet. To all who come, our Savior promises, Him that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out!

A Divine Gift

This gift of faith is the great privilege of Gods elect. It is the blessing of blessings. All who are given this great boon of grace are saved, safe, settled, secure, and at peace. They can want no good thing, for all things are theirs. We have free access to God through Christ, and a right to all privileges of the sons of God in him!

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

Jesus: Heb 7:22, Heb 8:6, Heb 8:8, 1Ti 2:5

new: Heb 13:20, Isa 55:3, Jer 31:31-33

covenant: or, testament, Heb 9:15, Mat 26:28, Mar 14:24, Luk 22:20

to the blood: Heb 9:21, Heb 10:22, Heb 11:28, Exo 24:8, 1Pe 1:2

speaketh: Heb 11:4, Gen 4:10, Mat 23:35, Luk 11:51

Reciprocal: Exo 12:22 – a bunch Exo 12:23 – and will not Exo 24:6 – the blood he Exo 29:20 – sprinkle Lev 1:5 – sprinkle Lev 3:13 – sprinkle Lev 5:9 – sprinkle Lev 7:2 – and the Lev 14:7 – sprinkle Lev 16:14 – General Num 19:4 – sprinkle Deu 18:18 – like unto 2Ki 23:3 – made a covenant Psa 50:5 – made Psa 68:35 – terrible Psa 130:4 – that thou mayest Isa 42:6 – and give Isa 49:8 – give thee Isa 52:15 – sprinkle Eze 16:60 – I will establish Eze 43:18 – to offer Hab 2:11 – the stone Luk 19:42 – the things 2Co 3:6 – the new Gal 4:24 – the two Heb 9:19 – sprinkled Heb 11:40 – better 1Pe 4:17 – what 1Jo 3:12 – and his 1Jo 5:6 – blood Rev 6:10 – they cried Rev 21:8 – and the

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Heb 12:24. Jesus became the mediator of the new covenant by giving that law into the world to take the place of the law of Moses. Blood of sprin- kling is so worded because under the system of Moses the blood of animals was literally sprinkled on the objects to be affected. The blood of Christ is sprinkled figuratively when men obey the Gospel which brings them into the benefits of that blood. (See 1Jn 1:7.) Speaketh better things than that of Abel. The blood of Abel cried for vengeance (Gen 4:10 Gen 4:15), while the blood of Christ calls for mercy (chapter 2:17). The word better means “more useful or serviceable.” The blood of Christ opened up a way of salvation for all mankind, which was not true of the blood of Abel.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Verse 24

That speaketh better things, &c. It speaks mercy and pardon. The blood of Abel cried for vengeance.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament