Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 9:9
Which [was] a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
9. which was a figure for the time then present ] i.e. And this outer Tabernacle is a parable for the present time. By “the present time” he means the prae-Christian epoch in which the unconverted Jews were still (practically) living. The full inauguration of the New Covenant of which Christ had prophesied as his Second Coming, began with the final annulment of the Old, which was only completed when the Temple fell, and when the observance of the Levitic system thus became (by the manifest interposition of God in history) a thing simply impossible. A Christian was already living in “the Future Aeon” ( Olam habba); a Jew who had not embraced the Gospel still belonged to “the present time” ( olam hazzeh ). The meaning of the verse is that the very existence of an outer Tabernacle (“the Holy Place”) emphasized the fact that close access to God (of which the entrance of the High Priest into the Holiest was a symbol) was not permitted under the Old Covenant.
in which ”] The true reading is not ‘ , but ‘ , so that the “which” refers to the word “parable” or “symbol,” “in accordance with which symbolism of the outer Tabernacle, both gifts and sacrifices are being offered, such as ( ) are not able, so far as the conscience is concerned, to perfect the worshipper.” He says “are offered” and “him that does the service,” using the present (not as in the A. V. the past tense), because he is throwing himself into the position of the Jew who still clings to the Old Covenant. The introduction of “a clear conscience” (or moral consciousness) into the question may seem like a new thought, but it is not. The implied argument is this: only the innocent can “ascend the hill of the Lord, and stand in His Holy Place:” the High Priest was regarded as symbolically innocent by virtue of minute precautions against any ceremonial defilement, and because he carried with him the atonement for his own sins and those of the people: he therefore, but he alone, was permitted to approach God by entering the Holiest Place. The worshippers in general were so little regarded as “perfected in conscience” that only the Priests could enter even the outer “Holy” (Heb 7:18-19, Heb 10:1-4; Heb 10:11).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Which was a figure for the time then present – That is, as long as the tabernacle stood. The word rendered figure – parabole – is not the same as type – tupos – (Rom 5:14; Act 7:13, Act 7:44; Joh 20:25; 1Co 10:6, 1Co 10:11; Phi 3:17, et al.) – but is the word commonly rendered parable; Mat 13:3, Mat 13:10, Mat 13:13, Mat 13:18, Mat 13:24, Mat 13:31, Mat 13:33-36, Mat 13:53; Mat 15:15, et soepe, and means properly a placing side by side; then a comparison, or similitude. Here it is used in the sense of image, or symbol – something to represent other things. The idea is, that the arrangements and services of the tabernacle were a representation of important realities, and of things which were more fully to be revealed at a future period. There can be no doubt that Paul meant to say that this service in general was symbolical or typical, though this will not authorize us to attempt to spiritualize every minute arrangement of it. Some of the things in which it was typical are specified by the apostle himself, and wisdom and safety in explaining the arrangements of the tabernacle and its services consist in adhering very closely to the explanations furnished by the inspired writers. An interpreter is on an open sea, to be driven he knows not whither, when he takes leave of these safe pilots.
Both gifts – Thank-offerings.
And sacrifices – Bloody offerings. The idea is, that all kinds of offerings to God were made there.
That could not make him that did the service perfect – That could not take away sin, and remove the stains of guilt on the soul; note, Heb 7:11; compare Heb 8:7; Heb 7:27; Heb 10:1, Heb 10:11.
As pertaining to the conscience – They related mainly to outward and ceremonial rites, and even when offerings were made for sin the conscience was not relieved. They could not expiate guilt; they could not make the soul pure; they could not of themselves impart peace to the soul by reconciling it to God. They could not fully accomplish what the conscience needed to have done in order to give it peace. Nothing will do this but the blood of the Redeemer.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Heb 9:9
Which was a figure
Types:
Prophecy is the prediction of the coming of the Redeemer in word; type is the prediction in act.
(W. B. Pope, D. D.)
The types are, indeed, pictures, but to understand the pictures it is necessary we should know something of the reality. The most perfect representation of a steam-engine to a South Sea savage would be wholly and hopelessly unintelligible to him simply because the reality, the outline of which was presented to him, was something hitherto unknown. But let the same drawing be shown to those who have seen the reality, such will have no difficulty in explaining the representation. And the greater the acquaintance with the reality, the greater will be the ability to explain the picture. (Andrew Jukes.)
Sacrifices.
Love in the ordinance of sacrifice
I. If we look over the religious practice of all men in all ages, unquestionably the most remarkable fact, common to them all, is the practice of SACRIFICE. What is its meaning? I find answer thus. Mans Fall was from love into selfishness. All sacrifice is an abnegation of selfishness; a devoting something to God, which otherwise would belong to self. All sacrifice is offering–bringing as a gift. Whether sin-offering, or thank-offering, or prayer, or thanksgiving, the essence of all these, which are equally sacrifices, is, the rendering up of ourselves or of that which is or seems to be ours, to God. And sacrifice is a direct recognition of One above us whom we wish thus to approach, and in approaching whom we must deny and go out of ourselves. The creature offered represents the person offering. From this, the transition is the simplest possible, if indeed it be strictly any transition at all, to regarding the death of that animal as representing the death which the offerers sin has merited; and the infliction of that death as representing the expiation of that sin. And throughout the nations unenlightened by a written revelation, these things were regarded as not only representing, but as actually being, the expiation required.
II. In order to be acceptable to God, the self-sacrifice must be UNRESERVED and COMPLETE. It must be the perfect rendering up of the will to His will, of the being to His disposal, of the energies to His obedience. Now it must be obvious to us, that such full and entire rendering up to God is impossible on the part of man, whose will is corrupted by sin. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Who can bring entire and perfect obedience out of one whose very leading principle is that of disobedience–whose thoughts and desires are, however his outward conduct may beordered, in a continual state of rebellion against God? And accordingly the Law, in its typical enactments, set this plainly before the ancient Church.
III. Every victim was to be WITHOUT BLEMISH. God would accept nothing which was corrupted, or imperfect, or contaminated.
IV. Then again, if each man could not for himself fulfil this spiritual meaning of sacrifice–that sacrifice itself taught him something of a SUBSTITUTE for himself, who in his stead might be offered to God. And the Law, working on this, further continually familiarised the people with the idea of one such substitute for all. The lamb of the passover was chosen, one for each household. The daily morning and evening sacrifice was one lamb for the whole people of Israel. The great annual day of atonement witnessed one goat slain for a sin-offering for all the people.
V. But there is plainly more than this–one important element in the meaning of sacrifice is yet unconsidered. Man, as sinful, rests under the just judgment of God. And the conflict of Gods will and his own will within him, if it end in his becoming united again to God, must obviously include the entire subjection of his own will, as in all other points so in this–the SUBMITTING TO THE PUNISHMENT OF SIN as part of Gods holy will. The animals offered in sacrifice were almost uniformly slain, and the remnants of them consumed by fire, which fire was the well-known symbol of the Divine wrath; which as uniformly, as we observed, were required to be without spot or blemish.
VI. Again, in the substitution indicated by the sacrifice, if any adequate idea of reconciliation to God is to be conveyed, there must be represented a TRANSFERENCE OF GUILT from the offerer to the substitute. For this the Law also took especial care. To mention only one instance: in the ceremonies of the day of atonement two goats are to be offered, typifying the double result of the Redeemers sacrifice–His death for sin, and His life for righteousness; His dying for our sins, and rising again for our justification.
VII. The next point is this: that some METHOD OF COMMUNICATION of its virtue, and its acceptableness to the offerers, should be indicated. Suppose the one atoning sacrifice represented as Offered; suppose God to be set forth as well pleased with it, and as accepting it: how was the offerer to apply these things to himself? In cases of offering for sin, and uncleanness, the blood of the slain animal was sprinkled or placed on the person of the offender for whom the victim was offered, or on the tabernacle or vessels which represented, in their use for holy things, the instrumentality of the whole people of Israel. In the great sacrifice first ordained, viz., that of the passover, this reconciliation by the imputation of blood shed in the offering was even more plainly pointed out. The blood was ordered to be sprinkled on the lintel and side-posts of the house-door of the family which offered the sacrifice; seeing which blood the destroying angel would pass over the house and would not touch them.
VIII. But more than this participation was signified also by the ceremonial law. The offerers actually PARTOOK of the sacrifice. The substance of the victim actually passed into their bodies, and was assimilated into their substance, and thus the victim became identified with themselves–their flesh and their blood; and the union between the offerer and the offered became the closest possible.
IX. The great and real sacrifice, when offered, is not only to reconcile man to God by the removal of guilt, but to possess a RENOVATING VIRTUE, by means of which man, unable before, shall be first enabled to offer himself, body, soul, and spirit, an offering acceptable to God. In other words, he is not only to be justified by the application of the atonement thus wrought to his person, but he is to be put into a process of SANCTIFICATION, whereby his whole body, soul, and spirit are to be made holy to the Lord. Did the Law in any way sybolise this, the ultimate object, as regards us, of what Christ has done for us? We may trace it in more ordinances than one. In the repeated washings and cleansings with water, of the priests, and all that belonged to the tabernacle service; in the inscription, Holiness to the Lord, on the forehead of the high priest; but above all in the fact that every sacrifice was ordered to be seasoned with salt–that preservative and restoring power, representing the Spirit of holiness, by which the believers are renovated onto the life Of God.
X. The Law also set forth the Redeemer and His work by PERSONS as well as by ordinances. A more striking type of Him cannot be imagined than the
Levitical high priest. It is an interesting question for us, though not the main question, how far these things may be supposed to have been patent to the Jewish worshipper of old–how far he took in his mind the idea of spiritual reconciliation by the sacrifice of a spotless Redeemer. The only answer to such an inquiry must be found in their own ancient interpretations of those remarkable prophecies which relate to the sufferings and atonement of Christ. And it is well kown that in commentaries of theirs, written probably before the Christian era, those passages such as the fifty-third of Isaiah are interpreted as prophecies of their future Messiah. We may also surmise the answer to such a question from the fact that John the Baptist could make use, when speaking to Jesus, himself a Jew, of such words respecting our Lord as theses Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world. From such facts as these, we are certainly justified in assuming that the meaning of the types in the Law was not altogether unknown to the pious Jew; though whether it influenced, or was intended to influence, his thoughts and the nature of his faith to any great extent, rosy well be doubted. It was perhaps enough for him to be taught, in distinction from all heathen nations, the utter inadequacy of sacrifice or offering to please God; and to be kept shut up under the ceremonial system, in a covenant with God of obedience and fidelity, in the abnegation, if he felt and lived Gods law, of all self-righteousness–waiting for the consolation of Israel; looking for the prophetic promises to be fulfilled in Gods good time. For he had not only types of Christ, but the voices of the prophets all point onward to the future Redeemer. (Dean Alford.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 9. Which] Tabernacle and its services, was a figure, , a dark enigmatical representation, for the time then present – for that age and dispensation, and for all those who lived under it.
In which, , during which, time or dispensation were offered both gifts and sacrifices – eucharistic offerings and victims for sin, that could not make him that did the service, whether the priest who made the offering, or the person who brought it in the behalf of his soul, perfect as pertaining to the conscience – could not take away guilt from the mind, nor purify the conscience from dead works. The whole was a figure, or dark representation, of a spiritual and more glorious system: and although a sinner, who made these offerings and sacrifices according to the law, might be considered as having done his duty, and thus he would be exempted from many ecclesiastical and legal disabilities and punishments; yet his conscience would ever tell him that the guilt of sin was still remaining, and that it was impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take it away. Thus even he that did the service best continued to be imperfect – had a guilty conscience, and an unholy heart.
The words , in which, referred in the above paraphrase to , the time, are read ‘ by ABD, and several others, one copy of the Slavonic, the Vulgate, and some of the fathers, and thus refer to , the tabernacle; and this is the reading which our translators appear to have followed. Griesbach places it in his margin, as a very probable reading; but I prefer the other.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Which was a figure for the time then present: the tabernacle in all its parts, and the whole economy of it, was , which signifieth the translation of a word or thing from its own natural signification to signify another, which thing so signified by it is commonly more excellent than itself, as the substance exceeds the shadow; equivalent it is to those terms of types, examples, figures of things to come: such are the tabernacle and its services, representations of things spiritual and Divine, and very imperfect shadows of them, serving only for that infant state of the church: and when its nonage was to expire by the coming of the truths themselves, then were they to expire too. The only time when the tabernacle administration was present, and no longer.
In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices; in which tabernacle were performed services to the great God, whose tent it was, suitable to his person, and agreeable to his will, even gifts and sacrifices, as before described, Heb 5:1; 8:3.
That could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; they were all impotent as to the restoring of a sinner to Gods favour by themselves; they could not reconcile him to God, preserve communion with him, nor bring them to happiness in him, Heb 10:3,4; no perfect justifying, sanctifying could be had by any of them, though never so often repeated. They might do all to the letter which God required, absolving the worshipper as to the external part, but not at all according to the conscience; or they could not take the guilt of sin from the conscience as to themselves, but it would cry guilty still; neither could they remove the power of it, for it was under bondage to it still; neither could they take away the fears and terrors of it, but left it shaking under them and unquiet still, being abused by them as a veil to keep them from Christ the true Priest and sacrifice, when as types and shadows they should have led these worshippers to him.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. Which“The which,”namely, anterior tabernacle: “as being that which was“[ALFORD].
figureGreek,“parable”: a parabolic setting forth of the character ofthe Old Testament.
for“inreference to the existing time.” The time of thetemple-worship really belonged to the Old Testament, butcontinued still in Paul’s time and that of his Hebrew readers.“The time of reformation” (Heb9:10) stands in contrast to this, “the existing time”;though, in reality, “the time of reformation,” the NewTestament time, was now present and existing. So “the ageto come,” is the phrase applied to the Gospel, because itwas present only to believers, and its fulness even to them isstill to come. Compare Heb9:11, “good things to come.”
in whichtabernacle,not time, according to the reading of the oldest manuscripts.Or translate, “according to which” parabolicrepresentation, or figure.
wereGreek,“are.”
giftsunbloodyoblations.
could notGreek,“cannot”: are not able.
him that did the serviceanyworshipper. The Greek is “latreuein,” serveGod, which is all men’s duty; not “leitourgein,” toserve in a ministerial office.
make . . . perfectperfectlyremove the sense of guilt, and sanctify inwardly through love.
as pertaining to theconscience“in respect to the (moral-religious)consciousness.” They can only reach as far as the outward flesh(compare “carnal ordinances,” Heb 9:10;Heb 9:13; Heb 9:14).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Which was a figure for the time then present,…. The tabernacle in general was a figure of Christ’s human nature, Heb 8:2 and the most holy part of it was a figure of heaven itself, Heb 9:24 the whole service of it was typical and shadowy; but it was but a temporary figure; it was for that present time only; the things of it were suited to that dispensation, and are now abolished, and ought not to be revived, the ordinances of the Gospel being greatly preferable to them; and while it did continue, it was only a parable, as the word here used signifies; it was like a dark saying; it had much obscurity and darkness in it; or as the Vulgate Latin version renders it, it was a “figure of the present time”; that is, of the Gospel dispensation; it was a shadow of good things to come under that; it prefigured what is now accomplished; or rather it was a “figure unto, or until the present time”; till Christ came, when all figures, types, and shadows fled away, and were of no more real use and service:
in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices; that is, in which tabernacle, or at which then present time, or ‘ , “according to which figure or parable”, as the Alexandrian copy and Vulgate Latin version read, gifts and sacrifices were offered by the priests; see Heb 5:1,
that could not make him that did the service perfect; neither the priest that offered them, nor the people whom he represented, and for whom he did the service; they could not make real and perfect expiation for sin, nor justify from it, nor cleanse and sanctify; the spiritual worshippers had their sins expiated by the sacrifice of Christ; and their persons were justified by his righteousness, and they were cleansed by his blood: the particular instance in which, legal sacrifices did not make perfect is, “pertaining to the conscience”; there is in every man a conscience, and when sin is charged home upon it, that is filled with a sense of divine wrath; nor can it be pacified with anything short of what will answer the law and justice of God, and which is only done by the blood and righteousness of Christ.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Which (). “Which very thing,” the first tent ( , division of the tabernacle), a parenthesis and explanation.
A parable (). Only in the Synoptic Gospels in the N.T. and Heb 9:9; Heb 11:19. See on Mt 13:3 for the word (from , to place alongside). Here like (type or shadow of “the heavenly reality,” Moffatt).
For the time now present ( ). “For the present crisis ” (, not , age, not , time). Perfect active articular (repeated article) participle of (intransitive), the age in which they lived, not the past, not the future. See 1Cor 3:22; Rom 8:38 for contrast between and . This age of crisis, foreshadowed by the old tabernacle, pointed on to the richer fulfilment still to come.
According to which (‘ ). Here the relative refers to just mentioned, not to . See Heb 5:1; Heb 8:3.
As touching the conscience ( ). For see 1Cor 8:10; 1Cor 10:17; Rom 2:15. This was the real failure of animal sacrifice (10:1-4).
Make the worshipper perfect ( ). First aorist active infinitive (2:10). At best it was only ritual or ceremonial purification (7:11), that called for endless repetition (10:1-4).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Which [] . The first division of the tabernacle. The double relative directs attention to the emphasis which belongs to the first tabernacle. The way into the holiest was not yet manifest while the first tabernacle continued to be a recognized institution, seeing that the first tabernacle was a parable, etc.
A figure [] . Outside of the Synoptic Gospels, only here and ch. 11 19. Here of a visible symbol or type. See on Mt 13:3. For the time then present [ ] . Rend. now present, as contrasted with the “time of reformation,” ver. 10. See on these last days, ch. 1 2. jEiv for; with reference to; applying to. Kairov season is used instead of aijwn age, because “the time” is conceived by the writer as a critical point, – a turning – point, at which the old system is to take its departure. For ejnesthkota present, see on Gal 1:4, and comp. Rom 8:38; 1Co 3:22.
In which [ ] . The A. V. wrongly assumes a reference to the tabernacle; whereas the reference is to the parable. Rend. according to which.
Were offered – could not [ ] . Rend. “are offered” or “are being offered “; and for” could not, “” cannot.” Make him that did the service perfect [ ] . Rend. as Rev. “make the worshipper perfect.” See ch. Heb 7:11.
As pertaining to the conscience [ ] . Having shown that the division of the tabernacle proved the imperfection of the worship, the writer will now show that the Levitical ritual did not accomplish the true end of religion. The radical defect of the Levitical system was its inability to deal with the conscience, and thus bring about the “perfection” which is the ideal of true religion. That ideal contemplated the cleansing and renewal of the inner man; not merely the removal of ceremonial uncleanness, or the formal expiation of sins. Comp. Mt 23:25, 26. For suneidhsiv conscience, see on 1Pe 3:16.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Which was a figure for the time then present,” (hetis parabole eis to kairon ton enestekota) “Which was a parable for the then present era,” the Law age, the shadow casting era,” Heb 10:1-4. Daily the priests stood, every day in the week, including the sabbath, making sacrifices that could not remit sins, Heb 10:11.
2) “In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices,” (kath en dora te kai thusisi prospherontai) “According to which times both gifts and sacrifices are being offered,” continually, daily, and altar fires were never permitted to go out,
3) “That could not make him that did the service perfect,” (me dunamenoi teleiosai ton latrueonta) “Not being able to make (to perfect) the one who administers the divine service,” Heb 7:18-19; Gal 3:21; Heb 10:1; Heb 10:4; Heb 10:11. “The blood of bulls and of goats,” could not take away sins, but the blood of Jesus can and does to and for every believer, Rom 3:24-25; 1Jn 1:7; Rev 5:9-10. On the basis of a broken and contrite heart of faith God does cleanse the penitent believer who calls for mercy, Psa 51:16-17; Rom 10:13.
4) “As pertaining to the conscience,” (kata sun eidesin) “In respect of or relating to (the) conscience,” that needs to be purged (cleansed) by the blood of Jesus Christ from all covetousness, self will, and sin, to serve the living God; Heb 9:14; Heb 10:22; 1Pe 2:19; 1Pe 3:16.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
9. Which was a figure, etc. The word παραθολὴ, used here, signifies, as I think, the same thing with ἀντίτυπος, antitype; for he means that that tabernacle was a second pattern which corresponded with the first. For the portrait of a man ought to be so like the man himself, that when seen, it ought immediately to remind us of him whom it represents. He says further, that it was a figure, or likeness, for the time then present, that is, as long as the external observance was in force; and he says this in order to confine its use and duration to the time of the Law; for it means the same with what he afterwards adds, that all the ceremonies were imposed until the time of reformation; nor is it any objection that he uses the present tense in saying, gifts are offered; for as he had to do with the Jews, he speaks by way of concession, as though he were one of those who sacrificed. Gifts and sacrifices differ, as the first is a general term, and the other is particular.
That could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience; that is, they did not reach the soul so as to confer true holiness. I do not reject the words, make perfect, and yet I prefer the term sanctify, as being more suitable to the context. But that readers may better understand the meaning of the Apostle, let the contrast between the flesh and the conscience be noticed; he denies that worshippers could be spiritually and inwardly cleansed by the sacrifices of the Law. It is added as a reason, that all these rites were of the flesh or carnal. What then does he allow them to be? It is commonly supposed, that they were useful only as means of training to men, conducive to virtue and decorum. But they who thus think do not sufficiently consider the promises which are added. This gloss, therefore, ought to be wholly repudiated. Absurdly and ignorantly too do they interpret the ordinances of the flesh, as being such as cleansed or sanctified only the body; for the Apostle understands by these words that they were earthly symbols, which did not reach the soul; for though they were true testimonies of perfect holiness, yet they by no means contained it in themselves, nor could they convey it to men; for the faithful were by such helps led, as it were, by the hand to Christ, that they might obtain from him what was wanting in the symbols.
Were any one to ask why the Apostle speaks with so little respect and even with contempt of Sacraments divinely instituted, and extenuates their efficacy? This he does, because he separates them from Christ; and we know that when viewed in themselves they are but beggarly elements, as Paul calls them. (Gal 4:9.)
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(9) Which was a figure . . .Rather, Which is a parable unto the time present, according to which (parable) are offered both gifts and sacrifices, which cannot perfect, as to the conscience, him that doeth the service. The general meaning may be given thus: this first Tabernacle (i.e., the existence of an outer as: distinguished from an inner sanctuary) is a parable for the period connected with it (literally, for the season that stands near it, the adjacent period, so to speak); and in full accordance with the parabolic character of the first Tabernacle (see Heb. 9:8) is the presentation of offerings which have no power to accomplish the perfect end of worship in the case of any worshipper. The priests offered sacrifices to God, but were limited to the outer sanctuary, which was not the place of Gods manifested presence; a fit symbol this of offerings which cannot purify the conscience (see Heb. 9:14; Heb. 10:1). The above rendering follows the best reading of the Greek; in the ordinary text the relative which, in the second clause, refers to the time, not to the first Tabernacle.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9. Which All agree that this relative refers to first tabernacle, in Heb 9:8. And that further demonstrates that the whole one tabernacle was meant: for is it not clear that it was the one whole tabernacle which was a figure, a parable, of the inefficacy of the type without the antitype? Were not the incense and blood as inefficacious, intrinsically, in the holiest as in the holy?
For the time then present Rather, for the time now insetting; that is, time that is now begun and is in progress. The same phrase is used at Rom 8:38; 1Co 3:22 ; 1Co 7:26; Gal 1:4; also, 2Th 2:2, where see note.
Were offered The Greek is in the present tense, are offered. The offerings are still made, for the temple at the apostle’s writing is still standing, and the inefficacy of the ritual still exists.
Make perfect Render justified and right.
Conscience The moral consciousness of guilt or innocence.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Which is a figure for the time present, according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshipper perfect, in the matter of meats and drinks and divers washings, carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation (making straight).’
So exclusion from the Holy of Holies was a ‘parable’, a figure, an illustration, an acted out prophecy, speaking to ‘the present time’, to those who had not, as Christians, entered the ‘age to come’, demonstrating that the way to God was still barred. It revealed that all the gifts and sacrifices, could not purify the conscience by providing a genuine dealing with and removal of all sin. It showed that they could not thus give the worshipper that perfection which would be necessary for him to enter God’s presence with a clear conscience. And this was something which each worshipper would well know in his own conscience.
For in his conscience was the recognition that he was deeply sinful and unworthy to meet God, and that all these gifts and sacrifices and rites had not and could not suffice to put him right. For they were merely carnal, earthly ordinances. All they could do was avert God’s wrath, God’s aversion to sin, for a time.
They involved among other things the eating of meat from certain sacrifices and the eating of parts of meal offerings, in the drinking of drink offerings, and in many kinds of washings. They may have thought in this that they were eating before Yahweh (Exo 24:11; Exo 18:12) or partaking of sacred food and drink before Him, or washing themselves clean from their earthiness, but it produced no means of real purity or genuine access into God’s presence. These gifts and sacrifices were merely provided by God as a sign of His watch over them and of what was to come, until there came the time of reformation, the time of ‘putting things straight’, when all would be put right, and there would be a new Eden and men and women would truly ‘eat and drink’ in God’s presence (Isa 11:6-9; Isa 65:25; Isa 25:6; Mat 26:29; Luk 22:30; Rev 2:7; Rev 2:17; Rev 7:16; Rev 22:2; Rev 22:17).
‘In the matter of meats and drinks and divers washings’. Others see this as simply referring to the many ritual restrictions, and requirements related thereto, including the eating of what was clean and the abstaining from what was unclean, and the keeping away from wine and strong drinks, together with the multiplicity of washings. They now no longer applied individually for the time of reformation had come. For the use of epi to express accompanying circumstances see especially 2Co 9:6; 1Th 4:7. Also 1Co 9:10; Gal 5:13; Eph 2:10; 2Ti 2:14.
The Transformation That Has Been Wrought By Christ Our High Priest (Heb 9:11-14).
Having established the temporary nature of the old Tabernacle and its ministry and offerings, Christ’s superiority is now brought out in a number of ways.
1) In that He officiates in a more excellent, a heavenly, Tabernacle (Heb 9:11).
2) In that He has offered to God a far superior sacrifice (Heb 9:11; Heb 9:14).
3) In that He has entered a more glorious Holy Place (Heb 9:12).
4) In that He secured a more efficacious and eternal redemption (Heb 9:12).
5) In that He has acted through a more excellent eternal Spirit (Heb 9:14).
6) In that He obtained for His people a better cleansing (Heb 9:14).
7) In that He has made possible for them a nobler service (Heb 9:14).
He is superior in every way.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Heb 9:9. Which was a figure for the time then present, The word then is not in the original, though our translators have not distinguished it, as usual in such cases, by putting it in a different character. By the present time many eminent commentators understand the present time of the temple service: “What the Holy Ghost pointed out from the construction of the tabernacle, and only the high-priest’s entrance into it, holds equally now under the temple at this present time; in which gifts and sacrifices are offered daily.” Doddridge, however, and others, give the passage a different turn; understanding it, not as referring merely to the temple, but that the constitution before described, was a figurative representation of the Christian dispensation, which, at the timewhen the apostle wrote, was displayed in all its glory: in which view, we read and translate as follows;“Which is only a kind of allegorical figure and parable, referring to the glorious displays of the present time; in which, nevertheless, there is hitherto a continuance of the temple service; so that gifts and sacrifices are still offered, which yet, in the nature of things, are not able to make the person who performs the service perfect, with respect to the conscience; as they refer not to the real expiation of guilt, but only to the averting of some temporal evils, which the law denounced on transgressions.” This, in a few words, expresses what seems to be of the greatest importance forunderstanding the Mosaic sacrifices; which is, that they were never intended to expiate offencesto such a degree, as to deliver the sinner from the final judgment of God, in another world; but merely to make his peace with the government under which he then was, and to furnish him with a pardon pleadable against any prosecution which might be commenced against him in their courts of justice, or any exclusion from the privilege of drawing near to God, as one externally at peace with him, in the solemnities of his temple worship. Expositors have perplexed themselves greatly with respect to the construction of this and the next verse; which however appears to me exceeding plain. The apostle’s reasoning seems to be this: “By what we have mentioned in the foregoing verses, the Holy Ghost plainly denoted what follows, Heb 9:8 namely, that the way into the holy of holies was not made manifest while the first tabernacle continued; which is a figure,a visibletype and emblem even to the present time: at which time the same kind of gifts and sacrifices are offered in the temple, as were heretofore offered in the tabernacle: and which neither then nor now are able to make perfect, as to the conscience, him that ministereth only in meats or drinks; .” This is a natural and easy construction of the words, and the 9th and 10th verses must otherwise appear as tautology, the apostle having before said thesame thing; unless we understand him as here speaking of the temple service, which it seems extremely proper for his argument to assert as of the same import and signification with the tabernacle service. Until the time of reformation, means the time of the Messiah, when all things should be set aright. See Act 3:19 and Act 11:19.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Heb 9:9 . ] is not synonymous with . It is employed argumentatively, in that it presents the following declaration as a fact, the truth of which is manifest.
We have not, however, to take with as a designation of the subject (Calvin, al .: which emblem was only for the present time; Storr, al .: which emblem was to continue only to the present; Zeger, Semler, de Wette, al .: which emblem has reference to the present time). For the verb to be supplemented would not be the mere copula; it would have a peculiar signification, and thus could not be omitted. alone is consequently the subject, and the predicate. Yet is not to be referred back to (Chr. Fr. Schmid), for the expression does not occupy a sufficiently independent position in the preceding context to justify this; still less what is thought possible by Cramer to , by which the idea would be rendered unmeaning. Nor have we to assume an attraction to , in such wise that should stand in the sense of (so Bengel, who makes it point back to Heb 9:6-8 ; Maier, who makes it refer to Heb 9:7-8 ; Michaelis, who makes it refer to . . ., and others), or, what amounts to the same thing, to supplement to the phrase , comprehended together as a subject, as a predicate: which emblem (described Heb 9:6-8 ) is an emblem for the present time (so Nickel in Reuter’s Repertor . 1858, Mrz, p. 188 f.). for, in the course of Heb 9:9-10 , respect is had just to the closing words alone of Heb 9:8 : . The exclusively right construction, therefore, is the referring back of to , Heb 9:8 .
] sc . . in the Gospels very frequently a fictitious historic likeness. Here a likeness by means of a fact, an emblem. Not incorrectly, therefore, is it explained, on the part of Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and Theophylact, by .
] in reference to , as regards. Instead of , consequently, the mere might have been written.
] the present time . The opposite thereto is formed by the , Heb 9:10 , by which the reader is referred to the Christian epoch of time, the (Heb 6:5 ; comp. also Heb 2:5 ). is therefore synonymous with the elsewhere, and indicates the pre-Christian period of time still extending onward into the present. [90] The term , however, is chosen, instead of the more general or , because it is the thought of the author that this period of time has already reached its turning-point, at which it is to take its departure.
] conformably to which , or in accordance with which , applies not to (Oecumenius, Bleek, Bisping, Delitzsch, Nickel, l.c. , Riehm, Lehrbegr. des Hebrerbr . p. 495, Obs. ; Alford, Woerner, al .), but to , as the last preceding main notion; stands thus parallel to .
] is to be taken in close connection with (against Bhme, who unwarrantably presses the force of the plural ).
] as regards the consciousness , or as to the conscience (Theophylact: ), i.e. so that the reality of being led to perfection is inwardly experienced, and the conscience in connection therewith feels itself satisfied.
] him rendering the service (Heb 10:2 ). Not specially the priest is meant (Estius, Gerhard; comp. also Drusius), but in general, the man doing homage to God by the offering of sacrifice , whether it be a priest who offers for himself, or another who presents this offering through the medium of the priest. [Mat 4:10 ; cf. , Heb 10:1 .]
[90] Quite mistaken (as is already apparent even from the opposition to , ver. 10) is the opinion of Delitzsch, with whom Alford concurs, that denotes the present begun with the , the present of the New Testament time, in which the parable has attained its close. See, on the contrary, Riehm, Lehrbegr. des Hebrerbr . p. 494, Obs. , and specially Reiche, Commentar. Crit . p. 74 sq. That, for the rest, by only that present in which the author lived and wrote can be meant, needs not another word of explanation. When Kurtz and Hofmann deny this, and the former will understand only an “imagined present,” into which the author “only transposed himself;” the latter, “ that present in which the Holy Ghost prophesied by means of that which was written in the law,” this is done only in the interest of their wrong interpretations of ver. 6.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Heb 9:9-10 are closely, indeed, connected grammatically with that which precedes, but, logically regarded, introduce the third and last main point of the disquisition on the high-priestly superiority of Christ over the Levitical high priests. For after (1) it had been shown that Christ, as regards His person , is exalted above the Levitical high priests (Heb 4:14 to Heb 7:28 ), and then afterwards (2) it was proved that likewise the sanctuary in which He ministers surpasses in sublimity the Levitical sanctuary (Heb 8:1 to Heb 9:8 ), it is now further stated (3) that the sacrifice also which He has offered is more excellent than the Levitical sacrifices (Heb 9:9 to Heb 10:18 ).
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Ver. 9. Which was a figure ] Gr. , a parable, that is, such a form of service as intimated some greater matter than to the sense appeared; and called upon the people to look through the type to the truth of things, through the history to the mystery.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
9 .] the which ( = ‘quippe qu,’ as almost always. , viz. the first or anterior tabernacle, and that especially considered as obstructing, by its yet remaining, the way into the holiest. This is better than with Primasius to understand qu res , and account for the gender by attraction) is (not, “ was ,” see above) a parable ( . , Thl. is predicate, not subject, as Calvin, Storr, De W., al. If we make it subject, the verb to be supplied would not be the mere copula, but a significant verb, which would require to be expressed) for (in reference to: or it may be taken as indicating the terminus ad quem, ‘ until :’ but I prefer the other: see reff.) the time (period, or season, with reference to the divine dispensations) now present (so Primasius, commenting on the “parabola temporis instantis” of the vulg., “Quod enim agebatur in templo tum temporis, figura erat et similitudo istius veritatis qu jam in ecclesia completur.” And thus recently, and to my mind decisively, Delitzsch. But observe, the first tabernacle was not a parable of the present time, so that should be the thing represented: but a parable, for , reserved unto, or given in reference to, the present time, of heavenly things, to which the access is in the present time revealed.
This application of . . . to the time now present , has not been the general view of Commentators. , says Chrys., ; , ; and thus c., Thl., Schlichting, Seb. Schmidt, Baumg., Bengel, Stein, al. But this meaning, “ the time which was instant ,” would not agree with the pres. , to which consequently those interpreters are obliged to do violence. Accordingly we have modifications of this view, e. g. that of Ebrard, al., reading below, that . is the present time of offering O. T. sacrifices, in which the readers of the Epistle were still taking a part. “The author might have called the time of the O. T. worship ‘the past time,’ and he would doubtless have so called it, had he been minded to speak from his own standing-point: but with practical wisdom he here speaks from that of his readers, who yet joined in the temple worship, and for whom the period of sacrifices was not yet passed away.” Ebrard: that of Bleek, Tholuck, and Lnemann, “This is, or there lies in its establishment, a parabolic setting forth of the character of the present time in general, i. e. of the time of the O. T., of Judaism.” Bl. And so E. V., “which was a figure for the time then present.” See more below under ), according to which ( : so cum., : i. e. in accordance with which typical meaning ; a specification accounting for and justifying the profitless character of the ordinances about to be spoken of. Some (as Ln., al.) have referred to , but would hardly thus apply: we should rather expect . Those who read naturally refer it to , thereby modifying their view of what is to be understood by . . : see above) both gifts and sacrifices are offered (see reff. for these words. The present implies only the matter-of-fact endurance of the Levitical offerings, not their subsistence in the divine plan) having no power ( . , subjective, ‘qu non valeant:’ not ., ‘invalida,’ ‘qu non valent.’ The gender of the participle, as so often, is taken from the subst. next to it) to perfect in conscience (see below ) him that serveth (i. e. not the priests, as Est., al., who , but the people, who offered through them. “The offering Israelite assures, doing, as he does, that which God’s law requires, his part, as a member, in the people of the law and of the promised salvation: he obtains also, if he does this with right feeling, operations of divine grace, which he seeks in the way prescribed: but, seeing that the Holy of holies is not yet unveiled, the offerings cannot him , i. e. cannot put his moral-religious consciousness, in its inward feeling, into a state of entire and joyful looking for of salvation, so that his should be an onward-waxing consciousness of perfect restoration, of entire clearing up, of total emancipation, of his relation to God.” Delitzsch: who continues, “The material offerings of animals are only parables, referring to the time when that which is parabolically set forth becomes actual and passes into reality. They are, considered of themselves, incapable of any action on the inner part of a man, they are”),
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Heb 9:9 . “for this is a parable for the time [then] present,” for the contemporary period. has for its antecedent . This is the simplest construction ( Cf. Winer, p. 207). That suggested by Primasius and Vaughan “Which thing (the fact of there being a separate from the Holy of Holies) was a parable” is grammatically admissible. . , “for the time being”. In the usual division of time into past, present and future, the present was termed . But present to whom? Several interpreters reply, To those living under the Christian dispensation. So especially Delitzsch and Alford. But N.T. usage, and especially the usage of this Epistle which speaks of the Christian dispensation as “the coming age” (Heb 6:5 ), “the future world” (Heb 2:5 ), indicates that “the present time” must refer to the O.T. period. Besides, the opposition to points in the same direction; as also does the clause under . is here “with reference to”. And the meaning is, that the outer tent which did not itself contain God’s presence, but rather stood barring access to it, was a parable of the entire dispensation. In other words, this Tabernacle arrangement was a striking symbol of the Mosaic economy which could not of itself effect spiritual approach and abiding fellowship with God. The Levitical themselves, on the ground of which all these arrangements proceed, emphatically declared their own inadequacy. Wrapped up in them was the truth that they could not bring the worshipper into God’s presence. “in accordance with which [parable] are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot perfect him that doth the service as regards conscience, being only ordinances of the flesh resting upon meats and drinks and divers washings, imposed until a time of rectification”. – referring to ; it is in accordance with the parabolic significance of the Tabernacle and its arrangements, that gifts and sacrifices were offered which could only purge the flesh, not the conscience. , Winer’s note (p. 608) is misleading. Cf. Jebb’s Appendix to Vincent and Dickson’s Modern Greek , p. 340. “In later Greek, tended to usurp the place of ,” especially with participles. Cf. Blass, 255. means, to give to the worshipper the consciousness that he is inwardly cleansed from defilement and is truly in communion with God; to bring conscience finally into peace.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
was = is.
figure. Greek. parabole. Here and Heb 11:19 translated “figure”. Elsewhere in the Gospels always “parable”, save Mar 4:30. Luk 4:23.
for. Greek. eis. App-104.
time. See App-195.
then. Omit.
in = according to. Greek. kata. App-104.
were = are. The Temple ritual still continuing.
make . . . perfect. Greek. teleioo. App-125.
did the service = serves. Greek. latreuo. See Heb 8:5.
as pertaining to. Greek. kata, as above.
the. Omit.
conscience. See Act 23:1.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
9.] the which ( = quippe qu, as almost always. , viz. the first or anterior tabernacle, and that especially considered as obstructing, by its yet remaining, the way into the holiest. This is better than with Primasius to understand qu res, and account for the gender by attraction) is (not, was, see above) a parable ( . , Thl. is predicate, not subject, as Calvin, Storr, De W., al. If we make it subject, the verb to be supplied would not be the mere copula, but a significant verb, which would require to be expressed) for (in reference to: or it may be taken as indicating the terminus ad quem, until: but I prefer the other: see reff.) the time (period, or season, with reference to the divine dispensations) now present (so Primasius, commenting on the parabola temporis instantis of the vulg., Quod enim agebatur in templo tum temporis, figura erat et similitudo istius veritatis qu jam in ecclesia completur. And thus recently, and to my mind decisively, Delitzsch. But observe, the first tabernacle was not a parable of the present time, so that should be the thing represented:-but a parable,-for, reserved unto, or given in reference to, the present time,-of heavenly things, to which the access is in the present time revealed.
This application of . . . to the time now present, has not been the general view of Commentators. , says Chrys., ; , ; and thus c., Thl., Schlichting, Seb. Schmidt, Baumg., Bengel, Stein, al. But this meaning, the time which was instant, would not agree with the pres. , to which consequently those interpreters are obliged to do violence. Accordingly we have modifications of this view, e. g. that of Ebrard, al., reading below, that . is the present time of offering O. T. sacrifices, in which the readers of the Epistle were still taking a part. The author might have called the time of the O. T. worship the past time, and he would doubtless have so called it, had he been minded to speak from his own standing-point: but with practical wisdom he here speaks from that of his readers, who yet joined in the temple worship, and for whom the period of sacrifices was not yet passed away. Ebrard:-that of Bleek, Tholuck, and Lnemann, This is, or there lies in its establishment, a parabolic setting forth of the character of the present time in general, i. e. of the time of the O. T.,-of Judaism. Bl. And so E. V., which was a figure for the time then present. See more below under ), according to which (: so cum., : i. e. in accordance with which typical meaning; a specification accounting for and justifying the profitless character of the ordinances about to be spoken of. Some (as Ln., al.) have referred to , but would hardly thus apply: we should rather expect . Those who read naturally refer it to , thereby modifying their view of what is to be understood by . . : see above) both gifts and sacrifices are offered (see reff. for these words. The present implies only the matter-of-fact endurance of the Levitical offerings, not their subsistence in the divine plan) having no power ( ., subjective, qu non valeant: not ., invalida, qu non valent. The gender of the participle, as so often, is taken from the subst. next to it) to perfect in conscience (see below) him that serveth (i. e. not the priests, as Est., al., who , but the people, who offered through them. The offering Israelite assures,-doing, as he does, that which Gods law requires,-his part, as a member, in the people of the law and of the promised salvation: he obtains also, if he does this with right feeling, operations of divine grace, which he seeks in the way prescribed: but, seeing that the Holy of holies is not yet unveiled, the offerings cannot him , i. e. cannot put his moral-religious consciousness, in its inward feeling, into a state of entire and joyful looking for of salvation, so that his should be an onward-waxing consciousness of perfect restoration, of entire clearing up, of total emancipation, of his relation to God. Delitzsch: who continues, The material offerings of animals are only parables, referring to the time when that which is parabolically set forth becomes actual and passes into reality. They are, considered of themselves, incapable of any action on the inner part of a man, they are),
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Heb 9:9. , which is a figure) for , before the feminine, . This relative has regard to the three preceding verses.-) present, in respect of that standing. The standing, emphatically as such, now no longer existed, although , the tabernacle, was not yet broken up, was not yet destroyed, was not yet razed to the foundation. The antithesis is, , of things to come, Heb 9:11.- , …, gifts and sacrifices not able, etc.) The victims (sacrifices) might seem to be more efficacious than the other gifts: therefore with great elegance the efficacy is more expressly withheld from the sacrifices [by being made agree with , not ].-, conscience) The same word occurs, ch. Heb 10:2; Heb 10:22. The antithesis is , of the flesh, Heb 9:10, as Heb 9:13-14 [1Pe 3:21].- , him that did the service) the priest, who offered for himself; or the Israelite, for whom the priest offered.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
, , , , , .
. Vulg. Lat., quae parabola est. Syr., , an exemplar, or example. So all render it, though it answers the Hebrew , a parable or proverb. quod erat exemplar; so Beza and others.
. Vulg. Lat., temporis instantis, of the instant time or season; which Arias rectifies into in tempus praesens, for the time present; Beza, pro tempore illo praesente, for that present time; pro tempore tum praesente, for the time that was then present; Syr., , for that time, omitting .
. Vulg. Lat., juxta quam. It being uncertain what he refers quam unto, Arias rectifieth it, juxta quod; for answereth unto , and not unto . Quo, wherein; Syr., in quo, wherein.
. Vulg. Lat., munera et hostiae, dona et sacrificia. Syr., gifts (that is, meat and drink offerings) and sacrifices by blood. Syr., , oblations and victims, or bloody sacrifices.
. Vulg. Lat, juxta conscientiam perfectum facere servientem, make him that did the service perfect according to conscience; others, in conscientia sanctificare cultorem; others, consummare: of the sense of the word we have spoken before. Syr., perfect the conscience of him that offered them.
. Syr., in meat and drink, in the singular number.
. Syr., And in the washing of kinds kinds, that is, various kinds; with respect not unto the various rites of washing, but the various kinds of things that were washed. . Vulg. Lat., justitiis carnis; so it renders by justitia, or justificatio, constantly, but very improperly. Syr precepts of the flesh. Ritibus carnalibus, ordinances, institutions, rites of the flesh, concerning fleshly things.
. Vulg. Lat., impositis; others, imposita; incumbent on, lying on them. [4]
[4] VARIOUS READING. Scholz, Lachmann, Tholuck, and Theile, prefer to . According to the dative reading, the translation and punctuation will run thus Being only along with meats, and drinks, and various washings, fleshly ordinances things imposed until the time of reformation.With the nominative it will be thus: Being only along with meats, and drinks, and various washings fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation. Turner. ED.
Heb 9:9-10. Which [was] a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices that could not make him that did the service perfect, as per-raining to the conscience; [which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.
I shall not alter the translation, but show what might be more properly expressed, as unto some instances, in our exposition.
Expositors have made use of various conjectures in their commentaries on this place. What is material in the most eminent of them, the reader may see in Mr. Pooles Collections. But I must needs say, that in my judgment they have brought more difficulty unto the text than they have freed it from. Wherefore I shall not detain the reader in the examination of them; but I shall give that interpretation of the text which I hope will evidence its truth unto such as impartially seek after it, and are in any measure acquainted with the things treated of.
The apostle, in these two verses, gives a summary account and reason of the imperfection of the tabernacle and all its services, wherein the administration of the old covenant did consist. This was direct and proper unto his present argument. For his design is to prove the pre-eminence of the new covenant above the old, from the excellency of the high priest thereof, with his tabernacle and sacrifice. Unto this end a discovery of the imperfection and weakness of the first tabernacle and services was indispensably necessary. And if, notwithstanding its outward excellency and glory, it was no other but what it is here declared to be, as evidently it was not, then was it not only an unreasonable thing, and a plain rejection of the wisdom and grace of God, to adhere unto it in opposition unto the gospel, which was done by the most of the Hebrews, but it was altogether unmeet and useless to be retained with the profession of the gospel, which the residue of them earnestly contended for. This was that which the apostle designed ultimately to convince them of. And a work herein both great and difficult was committed unto him. For there is nothing more difficult than to dispossess the minds of men of such persuasions in religion as they have been bred up in, and received by a long tract of tradition from their fathers. So we find it to be in such persuasions and observances as are evidently false and impious, unto the understandings of all that are not under the power of such prejudices: so is it at present with them of the Roman church, and others. But these Hebrews had a pretense or plea for their obstinacy herein which none other ever had in the like case but themselves; for the things which they adhered unto were confessedly of divine institution. Wherefore the apostle labors principally to prove, that in the will and wisdom of God they were to continue only for a season, and also that the season of their expiration was now come. And this he doth in this place, by a declaration of their nature and use whilst they did continue; whence it is evident that God never designed them a perpetual station in the church, and that because they could not effect what he purposed and had promised to do for it. This is the substance of his present argument.
1. The subject spoken of, , which.
2. The proper use and end of it; it was a figure.
3. The limitation of that use as unto time; for the time then present.
4. The especial nature of it; the offering of gifts and sacrifices.
5. The imperfection of it therein; they could not consummate the worshippers in conscience.
6. The reason of that imperfection; it stood only in meats and drinks, etc.
7. The manner of its establishment; it was imposed.
8. The time allotted for its continuance; until the time of reformation.
1. The subject spoken of is expressed by , which. Some would refer it unto following, and so read the words, Which figure was for the time present. But there is no cause for this traduction of the words. The verb substantive, , is deficient, as usually, and is to be supplied as in our translation, which was. Which, that is, , the tabernacle; not only the fabric and structure of it, but the tabernacle in both parts of it, with all its furniture, vessels, utensils, and services, as before described.
2. As unto its proper use and end, the apostle affirms that it was , figura, exemplar, exemplum, comparatio, similitudo, typus, representatio: so variously is this word rendered by interpreters. Most fix on exemplar or exemplum; but they are and , not . And in all these versions the proper sense of the word as used in the Scripture is missed. It is not that the apostle intends, but , as it is rendered by the Syriac.
And this many have observed, namely, that it answers unto , but yet have missed in the interpretation of it. is the same with wherewith it is joined, as of the same signification and importance, Psa 49:5; Psa 78:2. And whereas it is said that the queen of Sheba tried the wisdom of Solomon , 1Ki 10:1; the Targum renders it by , the Chaldee , and the Syriac , being the same with the Hebrew . Now is enigma, problema, , a riddle, a hard question; and is to speak enigmatically, obscurely, so as that one thing is to be gathered out of another. So is used also, Eze 20:49, Is he not , proverbiator proverbiorum? one that speaks darkly and obscurely; that expresseth one thing and intends another, using similitudes and metaphors; an obscure, mystical instruction, by figures, signs, symbols, metaphors, and the like.
Thus is almost constantly used in the New Testament. So our Lord Jesus Christ expressly opposeth speaking in parables unto a clear, plain, open teaching, so as to be understood of all. See Mat 13:10, Joh 16:28-29, Now speakest thou openly, and no parable. Wherefore , in this place, is an obscure, mystical, metaphorical instruction. God taught the church of old the mysteries of our redemption by Christ, by the tabernacle, its fabric, parts, utensils, and services; but it was but an obscure, parabolical, figurative instruction. So should the word here be rendered, a figurative instruction, or the word parable be here retained, as it is in other places. This was Gods way of teaching the mysteries of his wisdom and grace; which, as it was sufficient for the state of the church which was then present, so it instructs us in what he requires, what he expects from us, unto whom all these things are unfolded, made plain and evident. 3. The third thing in the text is the time or season wherein the tabernacle was so parabolically or mystically instructive. It was . Some few copies for read , as doth that now before me, unto this present time. This reading is generally rejected by expositors, as not suited unto the mind of the apostle in this place. For he intends not the time that was then present when he wrote the epistle, not the times of the gospel, not the time after the resurrection of Christ until the destruction of the temple, which the addition of that word would denote; for God had prepared another kind of instruction for that season, and not by parables, or mystical metaphors. But yet the word may be retained, and a sense given of the words both sound and proper. For may well signify as much as until; or be taken , as it is often.
, unto this season; until the time that God would grant another kind of teaching, which now he hath done. It served until this present season, wherein the gospel is preached, and all the things signified by it are accomplished.But I shall rather follow the reading of the most copies, though the Vulgar Latin reading temporis instantis seems to favor the first. And Arias rectifying it into in tempus praesens, gives the same sense also. But the word being of the preterimperfect tense, signifies a time that was then present, but is now past. And it is therefore well rendered by our translators, the time then present; as if had been in the text; the time then present when the tabernacle was made and erected, , the season of the church which was then present. For the apostle in this whole discourse not only respects the tabernacle, and not the temple, but he considers the first erection of the tabernacle in a peculiar manner; for then was it proposed as the means of the administration of the first covenant and the worship thereunto belonging. It is the covenants which he principally designeth a comparison between. And he doth in that way of the disposition and administration of them, which was given and appointed at their first establishment. As this in the new covenant was the person, office, sacrifice, and ministry of Christ; so as unto the first, it was the tabernacle and all the services of it.
Wherefore the time then present, was the state and condition of the church at the first setting up of the tabernacle. Not as though this time were confined unto that or those ages wherein the tabernacle was in use, before the building of the temple; but this instruction, which was then signally given, was the whole of what God granted unto the church during that state wherein it was obliged unto the ordinances and services which were then instituted. The instructions which God thought meet to grant unto the church at that season were obscure, mystical, and figuratively representative; yet was it sufficient for the faith and obedience of the church, had it been diligently attended unto, and what the Holy Ghost signified thereby. So are all Gods ways of instruction in all seasons. We cannot err but either by a neglect of inquiry into them, or by looking for more than God in his wisdom hath committed unto them.
And this sense those who render by a figure, type, or example, must come unto: for the use of it is confined unto the time of the erection of the tabernacle, and the institution of the ordinances thereunto belonging; but a type or figure was unto them of no use but so far as it was instructive, which was obscurely and mystically. And that this is the sense of the word the apostle declares, verse 8, where he shows the substance of what the Holy Ghost signified by the building, disposal, and services of the tabernacle; that is, what he taught the church thereby parabolically and figuratively.
This kind of instruction, whatever now it seem to us, was meet and fit for them unto whom it was given. And by the administration of grace in it, it was a blessed means to ingenerate faith, love, and obedience, in the hearts and lives of many unto an eminent degree. And we may consider from hence what is required of us, unto whom the clear revelation of the wisdom, grace, and love of God, is made known from the bosom of the Father, by the Son himself.
4. The especial nature and use of this tabernacle and its service is declared: In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices. , the Vulgar Latin reads juxta quam; making the relative to answer unto , or to . But the gender will not allow it in the original. is as much as , in which time, during which season: for immediately upon the setting up of the tabernacle God gave unto Moses laws and institutions for all the gifts and sacrifices of the people, which were to be offered therein. This was the first direction which God gave after the setting up of the tabernacle, namely, the way and manner of offering all sorts of gifts and sacrifices unto him. And the apostle here distributes all the , all the sacred offerings, into and , that is, unbloody and bloody sacrifices; as he did before, Heb 5:1, where the distinction hath been explained.
Of them all he affirms, , They are offered; not that they were so: for the apostle erects a scheme of the first tabernacle and all its services at its first institution, and presents it unto the consideration of the Hebrews as if it were then first erected. He doth, indeed, sometimes speak of the priests and sacrifices as then in being, with respect unto that continuance of the temple and its worship which it had in the patience of God, as we have showed on Heb 8:4; but here, treating only of the tabernacle and its worship, as that which was granted in the confirmation and for the administration of the old covenant, then entered into, as the tabernacle, priesthood, and sacrifice of Christ were given in the confirmation of the new, he represents that as present which was past long before. The tabernacle served aptly for the use whereunto it was designed, it was meet for the offering of gifts and sacrifices; and so alone is the tabernacle of Christ for its proper end also.
5. On these concessions, the apostle declares the imperfection of this whole order of things, and its impotency as unto the great end that might be expected from it; for these gifts and sacrifices could not make perfect him that did the service, as pertaining unto the conscience. This was the end aimed at, this was represented in them and by them. And if they could not really effect it, they were weak and imperfect, and so not always to be continued. The end represented in and by them, was to make atonement for sin, that the anger of God being pacified, they might have peace with him. The covenant was then newly established between God and the church, before any laws were given about these offerings and sacrifices, Exodus 24. God knew that there would be among the people, and even the priests themselves, many sins and transgressions against the rules and laws of that covenant. This of itself it could not dispense withal; for its sanction was the curse against every one that continued not in all things written in the book of it: wherefore if this curse on all just and righteous occasions should rigidly have been put in execution, the covenant would only have proved the means and cause of the utter destruction and excision of the whole people; for there is no man that liveth and sinneth not. And on many occasions sin abounded in that state of the church, wherein light and grace were but sparingly dispensed, in comparison of the times of the new covenant. Wherefore God, in his mercy and patience, provided that by sacred gifts and offerings atonement should be made for sin, so as that the curse of the covenant should not be put in immediate execution against the sinner, Lev 17:11. But there were two things to be considered in those sins which God had appointed that atonement should be made for. The first was, the external, temporal punishment which was due unto them, according unto the place which the law or covenant had in the polity or commonwealth of Israel. The other, that eternal punishment which was due unto every sin by the law, as the rule of all moral obedience; for the wages of sin is death. In the first of these, the person of the sinner, in all his outward circumstances, his life, his goods, his liberty, and the like, was concerned. In the latter, his conscience, or the inward man alone was so. And as unto the first of them, the gifts and sacrifices mentioned, being rightly offered, were able in themselves, ex opere operato, to free the sinner from all temporal, political inconvenience or detriment, so as that his life and inheritance should be continued in the land of Canaan, or his state preserved entire in the commonwealth of Israel This the apostle here tacitly acknowledgeth, namely, that the gifts and sacrifices were able to free the sinner from temporal punishment, and give him outward peace in his possessions. But as unto the latter, wherein conscience was concerned, he denies that they had any such efficacy.
They were not able, . It agrees in gender with , only, and not with , which being of the neuter gender, usually regulates the construction in such conjunctions: but most think it equally respects both the antecedent substantives; and instances may be given where a participle respecting more antecedent substantives than one may agree in gender with either of them, as, Leges et plebiscita coactae. But I rather think that the apostle confines the impotency he mentions unto sacrifices only; that is, , slain and bloody sacrifices. For those things which were , gifts, and no more, were not designed to make atonement for sin; that was to be done by blood, and no otherwise: so the words should be read, offered gifts and sacrifices that could not perfect.
These sacrifices were impotent and ineffectual unto this end, . What the is which the apostle so frequently mentions in this epistle, I have before declared, and so what it is . It is indeed to perfect, to consummate, to sanctify, to dedicate, to consecrate; but whereas those sacrifices did all these things outwardly, and as unto the flesh, as the apostle grants, Heb 9:13, he doth not here absolutely deny it unto them, but in a certain respect only. They could not do it as unto the conscience of the sinner before God. What he intends hereby he doth more fully declare, Heb 10:2. There is a conscience condemning for sin. This could not be taken away by those sacrifices. They were not able to do it; for if they could have done so, the sinner would have had complete peace with God, and would not have had need to have offered those sacrifices any more.
But they were multiplied and often repeated, because of their disability unto this end. Wherefore , is to give peace of conscience unto men, through a sense of perfect atonement made for sin, in the sight of God, with an interest in his love and favor thereon. This, it is to be perfect or consummated, as pertaining to conscience in the sight of God, namely, to have a conscience condemning for sin taken away. This those sacrifices of the law could not effect. It will be said, then, Unto what end did they serve? Were they of no use but only to free men from the penalties of the law or covenant, as it was a rule of the polity or commonwealth of Israel, and the tenure of their possessions in Canaan? Yes, they were moreover part of the or mystical instruction which God granted the church in those days, directing them unto the one sacrifice and offering of Christ, typically representing it, and through faith applying the virtue and efficacy of it unto their consciences every day.
6. The person is described towards whom this effect of purifying the conscience is denied. They could not thus perfect , him that did the service, saith our translation, I think not so properly. He that did the service was the priest only; but respect is had unto every one that brought his gift or offering unto the altar. , sacredly to accomplish the services, was the work of the priest alone, Heb 9:6. But , is the same with , Heb 10:1; that is, every one who brought his sacrifice to be offered, that atonement might be made for him. And comprehends the whole of divine worship in all individuals: , Mat 4:10. But he also may be said to do the service, on whose account and in whose stead it was performed.
But the defect charged doth not in the first place reflect on the persons, as though it was by their default. They worshipped God according unto his own institutions; but it was in the sacrifices themselves. And if they could not make the worshippers, those who did the service, perfect, they could make none so, for it was they alone who had the benefit of them.
The note of Grotius on this place is, Isti cultus non possunt sectatorum suorum animos purgare a vitiis quemadmodum evan-gelium; most remote from the mind of the Holy Ghost: for he speaks not of purging our minds from vices, but of purifying conscience by atonement made for the guilt of sin; and opposeth not those sacrifices unto the doctrine of the gospel, but unto the sacrifice of Christ. And we may hence observe,
Obs. 1. There is a state of perfect peace with God to be attained under imperfect obedience. For it is charged as a weakness in the legal administrations, that they could not give such a peace where any sin remained; it is therefore to be found in the sacrifice of Christ, as is proved at large in the next chapter. Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.
Obs. 2. Nothing can give perfect peace of conscience with God but what can make atonement for sin. And whoever attempt it any other way but by virtue of that atonement, will never attain it, in this world nor hereafter.
Heb 9:10. Only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.
It is acknowledged that there is no small difficulty in the connection of these words, or their relation unto what doth immediately precede; and therefore expositors have multiplied conjectures about it, in whose examination we are not concerned. I shall therefore no further consider any of them, but as they relate unto what I judge to be their true coherence. Two things are plain and evident unto this purpose:
1. That the design of the apostle in the words themselves, is to manifest and declare the weakness of the services of the tabernacle, and their insufficiency for attaining the end proposed in them. This end in general was the perfecting of the church-state in religious worship; and in particular, to make the worshippers perfect as unto their consciences before God. And he gives such a description of them as of itself will sufficiently evince their weakness and insufficiency. For what is it possible that things of that kind and nature which is here described can contribute unto these ends
2. That the things instanced in do comprise a great part of the Levitical institutions; and his assertion concerning them may, by a parity of reason, be extended unto them all. For to render his description of them comprehensive, the apostle
(1.) Expresseth them in a particular enumeration of the heads whereunto they might be reduced, Meats and drinks, and divers washings. And then,
(2.) To show that he intends all things of an alike nature with them, he adds the general nature of them all, they were carnal ordinances:
(1.) A great part of the Levitical religious observances may be reduced unto these heads of meats and drinks, and divers washings. Laws and institutions were multiplied about these things; what they might eat, and what they might not; what was clean, and what was unclean unto that end; what they might drink, and what vessels defiled all liquors; what were to be, their eatings and drinkings, and when upon their peace-offering, and at their solemn feasts; their great variety of washings, of the priests, of the people, of their garments, and their flesh, stated and occasional, do take up a great part of the entire system of their ordinances. And as laws were multiplied concerning these things, so many of them were enforced with very severe penalties. Hence they were difficultly to be learned, and always impossible to be observed. The Mishna and Talmud that is, the whole religion of the present Jews consist almost wholly in scrupulous inquiries, and endless determinations, or rather conjectures, about these things and their circumstances.
(2.) All the laws concerning these things were carnal, carnal ordinances; such as, for the matter, manner of performance, and end of them, were carnal. This being their nature, it evidently follows that they were instituted only for a time, and were so far from being able themselves to perfect the state of the church, as that they were not consistent with that perfect state of spiritual things which God would introduce, and had promised so to do.
The scope and design of the apostle being thus fixed, the coherence and interpretation of the words will not be so difficult as at first view they may appear. , Only in meats and drinks, etc, Our translators observing the sense elliptical, have supplied it with which stood, which stood only in meats and drinks. And that supplement may give a double sense:
1. It may respect the substance of the things spoken of. Which, relates to gifts and sacrifices. And so the sense intended is, that they consisted in meats and drinks, and divers washings. And this was the natural substance of them. They consisted in such things as might be eaten and drunk, being duly prepared, as flesh, flour, salt, oil, and wine. Hence were they called meat and drink-offerings. And they had washings also that belonged unto them, as the washing of the inwards, Exo 29:17; and of the burnt- offerings peculiarly, Lev 1:9; Lev 1:13; of the hands and feet of the priests, Exo 30:18-19; and of the leper, Lev 14:9. Howbeit it cannot be said that the gifts and sacrifices, as they were such, did consist in these things, though in them things of this nature were offered unto God. Wherefore the supplement of, which stood, cannot be admitted in that sense.]
2. It may respect the consummation of these gifts and sacrifices, or the celebration of the whole service that belonged unto them, and all their necessary circumstances or consequents: which stood in these things;that is, which were accompanied with them. and not perfected without them.
The argument in the words is to prove the insufficiency of the gifts and sacrifices of the law unto the end mentioned, of perfecting conscience before God. And this is evidenced by the consideration of their necessary adjuncts, or what belonged unto them, and were inseparable from them. It is not said that these gifts and sacrifices were only meats and drinks, and so things of no value: for neither doth the apostle treat of the old institutions with such contempt, nor would the truth of his assertion have been evident unto the Hebrews; but he argues unto a discovery of their use and end from the things that did always accompany them, and were inseparable from them. For those by whom they were offered were obliged, by the same divine institution, at the same time unto sundry meats and drinks, and divers washings; which proves both the gifts and sacrifices to have been of the same kind, and to have had respect unto carnal things, as they had. For if those gifts and sacrifices had an immediate effect on the consciences of men unto their purification before God, by any virtue inherent in them, whence is it that the observances which by the same law accompanied them were only about meats and drinks, and divers washings? And this sense is not to be refused.
But whereas there is an ellipsis in the connection of the words, it may be otherwise supplied. For having mentioned the gifts and sacrifices of the law, the apostle makes an addition unto them of the remaining institutions and ceremonies of it, whose very nature and use declared their insufficiency unto the end inquired after; [And other laws] only concerning meats and drinks, and divers washings; which in general he calls carnal rites. Hereby is the argument in hand carried on and completed.
There are four things in the words:
1. An account of the legal institutions, under several heads.
2. Their nature in general, with that of others of the same kind; they were carnal ordinances, or fleshly rites.
3. The way of the relation of the people unto them; they were imposed on them.
4. The time for which they were imposed, or the measure of their duration; which was, until the time of reformation.
First, For the nature of them, they consisted,
1. In meats and drinks. Take the words in their full extent, and they may be comprehensive of four sorts of institutions:
(1.) Of all those which concerned meats, or things to be eaten or not eaten, as being clean or unclean; an account whereof is given, Leviticus 11 throughout. With reference thereunto doth the apostle reflect on the Levitical institutions in these words, Touch not, taste not, handle not; which all are to perish with the using, Col 2:21-22, are all carnal things.
(2.) The portion of the priests out of the sacrifices; especially what they were to eat in the holy place, as the portion of the sin-offering, Exo 29:31-33; Lev 10:12-13; Lev 10:17; and what they were to eat of the peace-offerings in any clean place, verses 14, 15. And the prohibition of drinking wine or strong drink in the holy place, verses 8, 9, may be here respected in drinks, about which these institutions were. And these were such, as without which the service of the sacrifices could not be acceptably performed, verses 17, 18. And therefore are they intended in this place in an especial manner, if it be the design of the apostle to prove the insufficiency of the sacrifices from the nature of their inseparable adjuncts, which were carnal and perishing things.
(3.) The eating of the remainder of the peace-offering, whether of a vow or of thanksgiving; the law whereof is given as a holy ordinance, Lev 7:14-17.
(4.) The laws concerning the feasts of the whole people, with their eating and drinking before the Lord, Leviticus 23. All these divine ordinances were , concerning meats and drinks, that were necessary to be observed with their offering of gifts and sacrifices, declaring of what nature they were. And the observation of them all was at the same time imposed on them.
2. They consisted in, or were concerning divers washings is any kind of washing, whether by, dipping or sprinkling, putting the thing to be washed into the water, or applying the water unto the thing itself to be washed. Of these washings there were various sorts or kinds under the law: for the priests were washed, Exo 29:4; and the Levites, Num 8:7; and the people, after they had contracted any impurity, Lev 15:8; Lev 15:16. But the apostle seems to have particular respect unto the washings of the priests and of the offerings in the court of the tabernacle, before the altar; for these were such, as without which the gifts and sacrifices could not be rightly offered unto God.
Secondly, It is added in the description of these things, , institutis carnalibus, ritibus, ceremoniis, justitiis, justificationibus carnis. Carnal ordinances, say we. The signification of in this place hath been spoken unto before. Rites of worship arbitrarily imposed, whose jus or right depended on the will or pleasure of God. And they are said to be of the flesh for the reason given, Heb 9:13, they sanctified unto the purifying of the flesh, and no more.
The words may be an expression of the nature in general of the law about meats, drinks, and washings; they were carnal ordinances. But the distinctive copulative, , and, will not admit of that sense. It seems, therefore, to contain an addition of all those other legal ordinances which any way belonged unto the purifications of the law. The force of the reasonings in these words is evident. For the design of the apostle is to prove, that, in the perfect church-state which God would bring in under the new covenant, the worshippers were to enjoy peace of conscience, with joy and boldness in the presence of God, from a perfect atonement and purification of sin. Holy this is effected by the one sacrifice of Christ, he afterwards declares. But the ordinances of the law, and the Levitical sacrifices, were weak and imperfect as unto this end; for in them and by them men were conversant wholly in carnal things, in meats, drinks, washings, and such like carnal observances, which could reach no farther than the sanctification of the flesh, as he evidenceth in the application of all these things unto his present argument, Heb 9:13. And the faith of believers is rather weakened than confirmed by all things of the like nature, that divert their minds from an immediate respect unto and total dependence on the one sacrifice of Christ.
Thirdly, Concerning all these things it is affirmed, that they were imposed on the people, . There is a difficulty in the syntax of this word, which all interpreters take notice of. If it refers unto the substantives immediately foregoing, , etc., it agrees not with them in case; if unto in the other verse, it agrees not with it in gender. And the apostle had before adjoined unto it a participle of the feminine gender, . Some think that the letter iota is added unto the first word, or taken from the latter, so that originally they were both of the same gender. But whereas the apostle had put together , the one of the neuter, the other of the feminine gender, he might apply his adjectives either to one or both, without offense to grammar. Yet I rather judge that in this word he had respect unto all the things whereof he had discoursed from the very beginning of the chapter. Concerning them all he declares that they were thus imposed; and so the use of the word in the neuter gender is proper.
Many judge that there is an objection anticipated in these words. For upon the description of the nature and use of the tabernacle, with all its furniture and services, he declares that they could not all of them, nor any of them, perfect the worshippers that attended unto them. Hereon it might be well inquired, To what purpose, then, were they appointed? unto what end did they serve?Hereunto he replies, That they were never designed unto perpetual use, but only imposed on the people unto the time of reformation.But whether there be a respect unto any such objection or no, he plainly declares their use and duration according unto the mind of God; which were such as their nature did require. And hereby also he confirms his argument of their insufficiency unto the great end of perfecting, sanctifying, or consecrating the state of the church. And hereof there are two evidences in these words:
1. They were things imposed; that is, on the people under the law. They were laid on them as a burden. The word is properly incumbentia, lying on them; that is, as a burden. There was a weight in all these legal rites and ceremonies, which is called a yoke, and too heavy for the people to bear, Act 15:10. And if the imposition of them be principally intended, as we render the word, imposed, it respects the bondage they were brought into by them. Men may have a weight lying on them, and yet not be brought into bondage thereby. But these things were so imposed on them as that they might feel their weight, and groan under the burden of it. Of this bondage the apostle treats at large in the epistle unto the Galatians. And it was impossible that those things should perfect a church-state, whichin themselves were such a burden, and effective of such a bondage.
2. As unto the duration assigned unto them, they were thus imposed , for a determined limited, season. They were never designed to continue for ever. And this is the great controversy which we have at this day with the Jews. The principal foundation of their present unbelief is, that the law of Moses is eternal, and that the observation of its rites and institutions is to be continued unto the end of the world. The contrary hereunto the apostle had evidently proved in the foregoing chapters. Whereas, therefore, he had undeniably demonstrated that they were not to be of perpetual use in the church, nor could ever effect that state of perfection which God designed unto it, he now declares that there was a certain determinate season fixed in the purpose and counsel of God for their cessation and removal. And this he describes in the last word.
This was the season : correction, say some; direction, others; we, of reformation, restraining the word unto the things spoken of, and retaining its usual signification, most improperly. For reformation is the amendment and reduction of any thing in the church unto its primitive institution, by abolishing and taking away the abuses that have crept into it, or corrupt additions that have been made unto it; but nothing of that nature is here intended. Many such seasons there were under the old testament, wherein the things belonging unto the worship of God were so reformed; but now not the reduction of the tabernacle and its services unto its first institution is intended, but its utter removal and taking away out of the service of God in the church. But if respect be had unto the whole state of the church in general, and what God designed unto it, taking the word reformation in a universal sense, for the introduction of a new animating form and life, with new means and ways of their expression and exercise in new ordinances of worship, the word may be of use in this place.
Those who render it, of correction, are no less out of the way. For correction might be applied unto the abuses that had crept into the worship of God; so it was by our Savior with respect unto pharasaical traditions: but the apostle treats here of the worship itself as it was first instituted by God, without respect unto any such abuses. This was not the object of any just correction.
The time intended is sufficiently known and agreed upon. It is the great time or season of the coming of the Messiah, as the king, priest, and prophet of the church, to order and alter all things, so as it might attain its perfect state. This was the season that was to put an end unto all legal observances, wherein they were to expire.
Unto the bringing in of this season God had ordered and disposed all things from the foundation of the world. See Luk 1:68-75. And it is called , because therein God finally disposed and directed all things in the church unto his own glory and the eternal salvation thereof. See Eph 1:10. And we may observe from the whole verse,
Obs. 1. That there is nothing in its own nature so mean and abject, but the will and authority of God can render it of sacred use and sacred efficacy, when he is pleased to ordain and appoint it. Such were the meats and drinks, and divers washings, under the law; which, however contemptible in themselves, had a religious use from the appointment of God. For others to attempt the like, as they do with their salt, and oil, and the like, in the Papacy, is foolishly to imitate his sovereignty, and proudly to usurp his authority.
Obs. 2. The fixing of times and seasons, for the state of things in the church, is solely in the hand of God. and at his sovereign disposal. He alone appointed this time of reformation; the church could neither hasten it nor was to refuse it. Wherefore quiet waiting alone is our duty, as unto the accomplishment of all promises concerning the state of the church in this world.
Obs. 3. It is a great part of the blessed liberty which the Lord Christ brought into the church, namely, its freedom and liberty from legal impositions, and every thing of the like nature in the worship of God
Obs. 4. The time of the coming of Christ was the time of the general final reformation of the worship of God, wherein all things were unchangeably directed unto their proper use.
Fuente: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews
perfect
(See Scofield “Mat 5:48”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
a figure: Heb 9:24, Heb 11:19, Rom 5:14, 1Pe 3:21
the time: Heb 7:11, Heb 11:39, Heb 11:40, 1Pe 1:11, 1Pe 1:12
gifts: Heb 5:1
that could: Heb 9:13, Heb 9:14, Heb 7:18, Heb 7:19, Heb 10:1-4, Heb 10:11, Psa 40:6, Psa 40:7, Gal 3:21
as pertaining: Psa 51:16-19
Reciprocal: Exo 25:9 – the pattern of the tabernacle Exo 26:1 – the tabernacle with ten curtains Exo 26:35 – the table Lev 6:28 – General Deu 23:11 – wash himself 2Ch 3:8 – the most holy Son 2:9 – he standeth Jer 3:16 – The ark Joh 3:31 – he that is Act 6:14 – change Act 10:15 – What Act 13:38 – that Act 13:39 – from which Act 15:10 – which Gal 3:3 – having Eph 2:15 – the law Col 2:14 – the handwriting Col 2:17 – a shadow 1Ti 4:8 – little Heb 7:16 – the law Heb 8:5 – the example Heb 8:13 – he hath Heb 9:23 – the patterns Heb 10:4 – not Heb 13:9 – not with
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Heb 9:9. Which was a figure means these things were types of the institutions of Christ. Gifts and sacrifices is explained at chapter 8:3. Not make him . . . perfect. A popular notion is that sins were not forgiven under the Mosaic law. This subject will be dealt with fully when we come to chapter 10:4.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Heb 9:9. The which tabernacle is a figure (literally a parable, an arrangement with a lesson) for, i.e in reference to (or lasting till) the time [now] present, or [then] present, for neither is expressed. Either makes good sense. The former, now present, better suits the writers purpose; the latter, then present, has found most favour with the commentators. The arrangement might have taught those who first witnessed it (then present) that the gifts and sacrifices which are still being offered (present tense) could not meet the needs of the human conscience or give free access to God. The arrangement teaches us (now present) the same lessons imposed, as it is till the fulness of the time when all is to be rightly arranged and with better results. And according to which parable (or tabernacle, i.e a holy place with the holy of holies veiled and inaccessibleeither meaning gives the same lessons, and the Greek admits either) were offered gifts and sacrifices which could not give peace to the conscience or satisfy Gods justice.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
As if the apostle had said, “The first tabernacle was but a figure, or typical representation of good things to come, serving only for the present nonage of the church: for the gifts and sacrifices then offered could not, of themselves, perfectly justify, sanctify, or save any man, nor could they pacify the conscience of the sinner.”
Where note, That conscience cannot be satisfied until God’s wrath be pacified. Now, the ceremonial rites could not pacify God’s wrath, because they could not satisfy God’s justice: nothing but the blood of Christ could do that, which those sacrifices were only typical representations and prefigurations of.
Observe farther, The apostle’s reasons why those legal rites could not make them perfect; namely, because the nature of them was such, that they reached only to the outward man, consisting only, for the most part, in meats, drinks, and divers washings, that concerned the flesh and body of man, which did not, of themselves, commend any man to God and were imposed upon them as a yoke, until the times of reformation; that is, the time of the Messiah, the times of the New Testament dispensaton.
Note here, The great imperfection of the Jewish dispensation, it was weak and imperfect, and consequently not to be continued.
Note farther, That nothing can give peace to conscience but what gives satisfaction to God’s justice. Whoever seeks it in any other way, than by virtue of Christ’s atonement, will never attain it in this world, or in that which is to come: No offerings could make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 9
Which was a figure; a type or symbol.–That could not make, &c.; that is, could not spiritually redeem and save him.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
9:9 {4} Which [was] a figure {f} for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
(4) An objection: If the way to heaven was not opened by those sacrifices (that is to say, if the worshippers were not purged by them) why then were those ceremonies used? That is, that men might be called back to that spiritual example, that is to say, to Christ who would correct all those things at his coming.
(f) For that time that that figure had to last.