Verse by Verse

¹ For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect.

² For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins.

³ But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.

⁴ For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

shadow (v.1) — the outline of an object

image (v.1) — the substance of an object

The tabernacle sacrifices were not of the same essence or image of Christ’s sacrifice, but were just a shadow or picture of it (v.1).

perfect (v.1) — complete (salvation)

worshipers (v.2) — servers, those bringing sacrifices

consciousness of sin (v.2) — consciousness of guilt for sin

reminder (v.3) — of sins committed since the previous sacrifice. The sacrifice itself (and the fact that it was needed) brought to mind the consciousness of sin.

The fact that the Old Testament sacrifices had to be repeated over and over showed that sin needed to be continually cleansed (v.3). They brought forgiveness, but not permanent forgiveness.

The figure of a promissory note might help here. Let us suppose one is in debt for a certain sum of money. He gives a note to run for a year. At the end of the year he finds himself unable to pay. He renews the note. The note has no real value in itself. Nor did the sacrifices have any moral or spiritual value in the sight of God. But in that note there is an acknowledgment of the debt from year to year. Now let us suppose some one who is well able to pay, endorses the note, what then? When it becomes due, it is referred to him for settlement and he discharges the obligation.

The application is simple and clear. It was not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins; but every time a believing Israelite brought his sacrifice to the altar, he was, so to speak, giving his note to God. He acknowledged his indebtedness, his sin, and accepted responsibility for the same. This was all he could do, but the preincarnate Christ endorsed every one of the notes and in the fullness of time came prepared to settle in full for all. — Ironside, page 116.

23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another —

26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,

28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

copies (v.23) — the earthly tabernacle. The tabernacle itself didn’t need purifying except that it was in the presence of sinful people. So the heavenly tabernacle needs purifying because it is fallen man’s meeting place with God.

As to the question why the heavenly things should require to be cleansed, the subject before us is not only the remission of our sins, but our access into the presence of God as His worshipers, through the eternal redemption obtained for us. The sanctuary of the presence of God required the savor of redemptive sacrifice. Just as the high priests of old entered into the Holy of Holies with the blood of sacrifice, on behalf of the people as worshipers of God, so only by the cleansing blood of Christ on the cross could the very presence of God become the meeting place between Him and the believer. — Vine, page 297.

sacrifices (v.23) — not that Christ offered multiple sacrifices, but that His one sacrifice was the fulfillment of several Old Testament sacrifices

The Old Testament tabernacle was a pattern, or type, of heaven itself (v.24)

That the Old Testament sacrifices weren’t perfect is shown by the fact that they had to be repeated.

The high priest entered the Holy of Holies with blood not his own (v.25) but Christ offered His own blood.

To offer Himself in the heavenly Holy of Holies multiple times would require that Christ suffer multiple times (v.25)

foundation of the world (v.26) — Revelation 13:8. If Christ’s death had to be repeated, it would have to have begun at the beginning of the world.

end of the ages (v.26) — the ages when Christ’s sacrifice was typified by tabernacle sacrifices

Christ came to earth for the purpose of sacrificing Himself to put away sin (v.26)

the idea that Christ has to die repeatedly is shown to be false because men die once (v.27).

without sin (v.28) — without a sin offering — nothing further is needed

those who eagerly wait for Him (v.28) — Israel

The words “unto them that look for Him,” refer to Israel. The disciples of John the Baptist came to Jesus and said, “Art thou He that should come, or look we for another?” (Matthew 11:3). The Rapture is not in view here, neither the Church. This is Jewish. The expression refers to the second advent of Messiah to Israel for the Millennium. The first appearance of the high priest on the Day of Atonement was at the Brazen Altar where the sacrifice was slain. This corresponds to Messiah’s first appearance on earth to die on the Cross. The second appearance of the high priest was in the Holy of Holies. This corresponds to Messiah’s present appearance before God in heaven now. The third appearance of the high priest was out the gate of the court surrounding the tabernacle, to Israel, having in a symbolic way accomplished salvation. This corresponds to Messiah’s appearance upon the earth in the second advent to Israel, having actually accomplished salvation. His return will be apart from sin in that He settled the sin question the first time He came. Now He comes with salvation for the one who puts his faith in Him. — Wuest, page 171.

__________

This closing portion of the chapter contains what are sometimes known as Christ’s three appearings. There are, however, three different words used in the original. In verse 24 the word is emphanizo, and there the idea is that of the presentation of Christ before the face of God in all the virtue and acceptance of His person and finished work. The second, in verse 26, is phaneroo, which is to bring into view that which before was hidden. Christ, who had been eternally sharing the glory of the Father, was now, by His incarnation brought into view in the world, in order that He might put away sin by His sacrifice at the height of the ages. The third, in verse 28, is a form of the verb horao, which here suggests that when He comes He will be actually seen, as He was before at His first advent, when He came to deal with the question of sin. — Vine, page 298.

15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

16 For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.

18 Therefore not even the first covenant was dedicated without blood.

19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water, scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people,

20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God has commanded you.”

21 Then likewise he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.

22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.

The word “mediator” is the translation of mesites which refers to one who intervenes between two, either to make or restore peace and friendship, to form a compact, or to ratify a covenant. Here the Messiah acts as a go-between or mediator between a holy God and sinful man. — Wuest, pages 162-163.

for this reason (v.15) — because Christ’s blood accomplished what the Old Covenant could not do — He brought redemption, even for sins committed under the Old Covenant. (The Old Testament sacrifices only made a covering for sin — atonement.)

The Old Testament sacrifices might be compared to the writing of a check. The paper upon which it is written is practically worthless. Yet, it is used and accepted in place of money, since it is backed by what has been deposited in the bank. Christ’s death was deposited from the foundation of the world as that which backed the Old Testament sacrifices. With Christ’s death upon the cross, the deposit was released and all the past checks were honored and paid. — KJV Commentary, page 1696.

testament (v.16) — same word as “covenant (8:6-7) = lit. “to place between two”

In every place in Hebrews except 9:16-17, diatheke refers either to the Levitical sacrificial system or to the sacrifice of the Messiah. The word refers to the disposition of eternal life to the recipient on the basis of his acceptance of the atoning merits of the latter sacrifice. In the sense that the word diatheke refers to the act of God as one party making a disposition to another on specified terms, the word means “a covenant.” But when the substitutionary death of the One making the disposition is brought into the picture, the idea of a covenant is merged with that of a will or testament. Since the new covenant was made effective through the death of the Testator, the Messiah, and since the first covenant is typical of the new, both covenants take on themselves the idea of a last will or testament. The present writer has, therefore, translated diatheke uniformly in Hebrews by the word “testament” in the sense which the writer to the Hebrews gives it in 9:16-17.

The word “inheritance” in 9:15″ leads the inspired penman to define the context of diatheke as it is used in this epistle. An inheritance involves the idea of someone making a disposition of his property, the heir receiving same at the death of the testator. Just as in human relationships, where a will or testament is of force only after the one who makes the will is dead, so in the case of God bequeathing salvation to the lost sinner, the bequest is only operative by reason of His death. Thus, in verse 15, the writer speaks of the Messiah as the Mediator of the New Testament who made that Testament effective through His death, and in that way, lost sinners who accept salvation on the terms of the will or testament come into their inheritance. — Wuest, page 165.

__________

These verses in Hebrews declare that the book of Matthew has no part in Israel’s New Testament prior to chapter 27:50. In Mark the Old Testament runs through chapter 15:41, in Luke it is chapter 23:49 and finally, in John, Old Testament doctrine operated through 19:37. It is at those verse locations where we find the death of the testator, the Lord Jesus Christ; and these verses in Hebrews teach that the New Testament cannot exist before those points. — M.A.D. about Hebrews, by Terence D. McLean, page 124.

Even the Old Testament, incomplete though it was, required blood (v.18).

blood of calves (v.19) — Exodus 24:5-6

water (v.19) — Leviticus 14:4-7; Numbers 19:18

likewise (v.21) — at a later time (the tabernacle hadn’t yet been built)

almost (v.22) — not all sins could be atoned for under the law (Numbers 15:30-31 for example) or by fire and water (Numbers 31:22-23)

11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.

12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,

14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

came (v.11 — first use) = arrived on the scene

to come (v.11 — second use) = realized — including not only future blessings but those already realized in Christ

not of this creation (v.11) — not created

Messiah arrives upon the scene of human sin and sorrow as a High Priest whose work of providing a salvation for the lost is “by a greater and more perfect tabernacle.” The word “by” is the translation of dia, the preposition of intermediate agency. That is, the kind of tabernacle the priest officiates in, determines the quality of his work. If he ministers in a tabernacle that is a mere type, his work is not efficacious so far as actual salvation is concerned, but only typical. If he on the other hand, serves in the actual tabernacle of which the other tabernacle is only a type, his work of salvation is actual and meritorious. — Wuest, page 157.

Most Holy Place (v.12) — the Holy of Holies — direct access to God

once (v.12) — once and only once

obtained (v.12) — not simply getting, but searching for something, finding it and appropriating it.

Christ’s blood was that of Deity and sinless humanity.

But not only were the tabernacles different. The blood offered was different. In the case of the Aaronic priests, it was the blood of goats and calves. In the case of Messiah, it was His own blood. The words “His own” are the translation of idios. Had the personal pronoun autos been used, the reference would be merely to the fact that it was by means of His blood that He entered the Holy of Holies. But the word idios speaks not merely of ownership, but of a personal, private, unique ownership. For instance John in his Gospel (5:18) states that fact that the Jews tried to kill our Lord because He had said that God was His personal, unique Father. Had John used autos, there would have been no justification of their accusation, for each one of these Jews claimed God as His Father. John used idios, reporting the Lord Jesus as saying that God was His private, unique Father. God was His Father in a different sense from that in which He might be the Father of others. Our Lord claimed unique Sonship, and, therefore, Deity. And these Jews recognized that fact. — Wuest, page 158.

the blood of bulls and goats (v.13) — sprinkled in the Holy of Holies by the high priest on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:5-)

heifer (v.13) — (Numbers 19). A red heifer would be taken outside the camp, killed, and then burned. As it was burning, the priest would throw cedar, hyssop, and scarlet wool upon it. Afterwards, the ashes would be gathered and stored outside the city. Whenever anyone became ceremonially unclean because of contact with a dead body, these ashes would be mixed with water to constitute a “water of separation” or “water for impurity” and sprinkled upon this one to the purifying of the flesh. — KJV Commentary, page 1695

These Old Testament sacrifices did effect cleansing, but how much better is the purging by Christ’s own blood? The blessings of the Old Testament tabernacle were temporary. The blessings by Christ are eternal.

The writer in this verse [v.13] speaks of the unclean Israelite, the person who was rendered ceremonially unclean by contact with a dead body, or by entering a house where a corpse was lying, or by touching a bone or a tomb. If he should enter the tabernacle while thus defiled, he was cut off from Israel. Ceremonial defilement was not in itself a sin, but a type of sin. Hence the blood of animals could cleanse away this defilement. It was only the flesh of the person which was defiled by contact with the dead. It was likewise only the flesh that was cleansed. Thus, defilement and cleansing were both symbolic.

The word “unclean” in the Greek text is koinoo which means “to make common, to render unhallowed, profane.” The word “sanctify is hagiazo which means “to set apart for God.” Thus, the word “unclean” means here “that which is common, profane, unhallowed, not related to or connected with God.” The unclean Israelite was, therefore, “out of bounds,” so to speak, so far as participation in the tabernacle service of Israel was concerned, and also his service to God. — Wuest, page 160.

serve (v.14) — worship

The effect of the death of Christ is to do away with all works on our part as a means of obtaining acceptance with God. They bring no pardon, no peace, no life, no communion. They leave the conscience still under a burden of defilement and alienation. But if the blood of Christ cleanses our conscience from such a condition, it brings us into a life of service to the living God, not a mere outward service as under the old covenant, but a service springing from the inward experience of communion with, and devotion to, the Lord, and therefore devoid of all self-merit. — Vine, page 295.

1 Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and the earthly sanctuary.

2 For a tabernacle was prepared: the first part, in which was the lampstand, the table, and the showbread, which is called the sanctuary;

3 and behind the second veil, the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All,

4 which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant;

5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

6 Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went into the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services.

7 But into the second part the high priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the people’s sins committed in ignorance;

8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing.

9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience —

10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.

earthly (v.1) — constructed of earthly materials

the first (v.2) — the first one a priest entered

second veil (v.3) — Exodus 26:31-37

Since the thumiaterion properly refers to the golden incense altar, how could the author locate it in the Holy of Holies? Quite the contrary, the author does not explicitly say the altar was in the Holy of Holies. When he refers to the incense altar, he changes his language from “wherein was” in verse 2 to “which had” in verse 4. The author’s intent seems to be that while the Holy Place had the candlestick and table within it, the Holy of Holies only had the incense altar related to it. Exodus 30:6 similarly stresses the close relation of the incense altar to the Holy of Holies, even though it was not in it physically: “… thou shalt put it before the veil that is by the ark of the testimony… ” (see also Exodus 40:); The altar was located in the Holy Place so incense could be placed upon fresh coals morning and evening. It was located immediately in front of the Holy of Holies so that its fragrance might enter into the Holy of Holies. Thus, its physical location was in the Holy Place, but its liturgical function was with the Holy of Holies.

Within the Holy of Holies proper was the ark of the covenant and the things stored within it. The golden pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were missing as early as Solomon’s day (1 Kings 8:9). The stone tables of the Law and the ark itself probably vanished during the Babylonian captivity — KJV Commentary, page 1694.

__________

Aaron’s rod that budded (v.4) — that was Moses’ rod when he tended the sheep of Jethro; he had it in use when called to deliver Israel (Exodus 4:2-17); it was a token of God’s power in that respect. It was that by which the rock was smitten from which water flowed. It budded to confirm Aaron’s priesthood (Numbers 17:1-10), and remained thus as a sign of God’s presence and power. — Vine, page 291.

__________

The writer next speaks of the cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat. The word “cherubim” is a transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning “living creatures.” Those in Ezekiel have four faces, of a man, a lion, an ox and an eagle, representing respectively intelligence, strength, steadfastness, and rapidity. They represented all that is best in creation by a combination of excellences found in no single animal.

The cherubim associated with the ark were two in number, made of gold, of one piece with the mercy seat, the golden cover of the ark, one at each end of the ark, looking towards one another, and overshadowing the mercy-seat. They are described as the cherubim of glory probably because they were closely attached to and attendant upon the place of the manifestation of the divine glory in redemption.

The words “mercy seat” are the translation of hilasterion, used in the LXX to designate the throne of mercy above the ark. This same word is used in Romans 3:25 where it is translated “propitiation.” This Greek word as used in the Bible does not as its English translation, “propitiation,” suggests, mean “something offered to placate or appease anger,” but refers to atonement or reconciliation through covering, and in that way getting rid of the sin which stands between God and sinful man. — Wuest, page 152.

the second (v.7) — Leviticus 16:2, 34

for (v.7) = for the sake of, in behalf of

With the tabernacle, the Holy Spirit was showing that the way into the immediate presence of the Lord was not yet known. This remained true until God no longer recognized the first tabernacle (v.8)

The writer states that the Holy Spirit is both the divine Author of the Levitical system of worship and its interpreter. The first tabernacle is the Holy Place. As long as that part of the Levitical institution was still in effect, Israel was to understand that the way into the presence of God had not yet been opened. The division of the tabernacle into the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies showed the limitations of the Levitical system, and kept the people from coming directly to God. The Holy Place barred both priests and people from the Holy of Holies.

When the new order of things was brought into being by the death of Messiah on the Cross, thus fulfilling the typical sacrifices, God rent the inner veil of the temple which separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies, making of the two rooms, one. There was, therefore, no more “within the veil.” This was God’s object lesson to the Aaronic priesthood that its ministry was now over, that the temple was to be closed, that a new Priest had arisen after the order of Melchisedec. But, Israel in its apostasy, repaired the veil, kept on offering sacrifices until God in His wrath, sent Rome to destroy the city of Jerusalem and scatter His chosen people to the ends of the Roman empire. — Wuest, page 154.

symbolic for the present time (v.9) = a parable for the time now present

perfect (v.9) = complete, needing nothing to make it as it should be — The ritual of the tabernacle could not clear a person’s conscience, only the Holy Spirit can do that.

washings (v.10) — same word as “baptisms” in 6:2

fleshly (v.10) — human

imposed (v.10) — with the idea of it being painful and burdensome

reformation (v.10) = making straight, bringing to a satisfactory state

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

The quote is from Jeremiah 31:33-34.

I will (v.10) — God will carry out the terms of the new covenant — it is unconditional.

those days (v.10) — after Israel’s period of unbelief and disobedience

I will be their God (v.10) — bestowing all benefits and blessings

they shall be My people (v.10) — submitting completely to His will

neighbor (v.11) = fellow-citizen

know (v.11 — first usage ) = a progressive knowledge, still incomplete

know (v.11 — second usage) = comprehensive, intuitive knowledge

for (v.12) — the explanation for the preceding statement

In saying the word “new” (v.8) God through the prophet Jeremiah had even at that time made the First Testament old. The distinctive Greek word for “old” here is not archaios, namely, that which is old in point of time, but palaios, that which is old in point of use, worn-out, antiquated, useless, outmoded. Even in Jeremiah’s time, the insufficiency of the First Testament was recognized, and the need of a new one proclaimed. — Wuest, page 149.

__________

The new covenant says nothing of entrance into the Holiest, as we now know it; nothing of being raised up together and seated together in Christ Jesus in the heavenlies; nothing of union with Him as members of His Body by the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is blessing for the earth and on the earth in the coming day. But the fact that all these heavenly privileges are secured for the Church now by the shedding of the same blood of the covenant that is to procure future blessing for Israel, leads the apostle in the chapters that follow to stress our [?] present title to enter into the Holiest, while Israel and Judah are still dispersed among the Gentiles, waiting for the day when the new covenant will be confirmed to them. — Ironside, pages 100-101.

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.

8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah —

9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.

In chapter 7, the new covenant is seen to be better because it has a better priesthood. In chapter 8, the priesthood is seen to be better because it is part of a better covenant.

The first covenant couldn’t save (Romans 3:20) or sanctify (Romans 7:12-24), but it accomplished its purpose — to reveal sin (Romans 3:19-20) and point to Christ.

Since Christ is a priest in the heavenly temple, He has an office more exalted than that of the earthly priests; and this because the covenant under which He holds the office of priest excels the covenant enacted by Moses, in the blessing it ensures. — Vine, page 289.

The first covenant was never intended to be final (Galatians 3:23-25).

This new covenant is clearly a reaffirmation of the unconditional covenant made with Abraham, which the law, coming in centuries later, could not annul. During all the present years of wandering Israel and Judah are under the curse of that broken law. But in the regeneration, when they shall be gathered back to their own land and restored to the favor the Lord, this covenant of grace will be made with them.

It is most important to realize that nowhere are we told of a covenant made with the Church. In Romans 9:4 we learn that “the covenants” pertained to Israel. They were the chosen people with whom the Sinaitic covenant was made. According to the terms of that covenant they have forfeited all claim upon God’s favor. But He cannot deny Himself. He can never go back upon the covenant made with Abraham, but the terms of which He promised blessing unconditionally to Abraham’s seed. These promises He reiterates in the new covenant. — Ironside, page 99.

established (v.6) = lit. “enacted as a law”

The promise connected with the old covenant was conditional upon the fulfillment of its terms by the people. It offered life to those who kept the Law. The promise of life could not be fulfilled because they continued not in God’s covenant. The promises of the better covenant are absolute.He assumes Himself the entire responsibility of fulfilling its terms. Because Christ is the Mediator of this covenant, He will unfailingly carry out its conditions. — Vine, page 289.

faultless (v.7) = free from defect

Verses 8-12 are a quote from Jeremiah 31:31-34.

them (v.8) — Those (all) in Israel who failed under the first covenant.

There is a subtle delicacy of language in the insensible shifting of language from the covenant to the people. The covenant itself could hardly be said to be faultless, seeing that if failed to bind Israel to their God; but the true cause of failure lay in the character of the people, not in the law, which was holy, righteous, and good. The old covenant was faulty because it did not provide for enabling the people to live up to the terms or conditions of it. It was faulty inasmuch as it did not sufficiently provide against their faultiness.

It is important to note that the New Testament is not Christianity. The Book of Hebrews is not an argument the purpose of which is to prove that Christianity is superior to Judaism as seen in its founder, Christ. The First Testament was a covenant made with Israel. The New Testament is also a covenant made with Israel. God makes no covenants with the Gentiles. Israel is the chosen channel through which He brings salvation to the human race. The First Testament consisted of a system of sacrifices, symbolic in their import. The New Testament is a Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus at the Cross, actual in its character, and efficacious in its merits. The First Testament began at Genesis 3:21, and ended at the Cross. The New Testament began at the Cross and is an everlasting one (Hebrews 13:20). Christianity refers to the Mystical Body of Christ of which He is the Head. This Body is composed of all who are saved from [the salvation of Paul] to the Rapture. The New Testament made Christianity possible. The saints of the Church Age are saved through the blood of the sacrifice which was offered under the New Testament. That is the relationship between the New Testament and Christianity. — Wuest, page 144.

days are coming (v.18) = at some future period

make (v.8) = conclude, consummate

house of Israel and … the house of Judah (v.8) — all 12 tribes

covenant (v.9) = lit. “to place between two” — an arrangement between two parties

they did not continue (v.9) — in spite of their pledge (Exodus 19:5-8; Deuteronomy 5:27; 7:9-11)

continue (v.9) = persevere, hold fast, abide by

disregarded (v.9) = not to care for — God’s care became righteous anger at Israel’s sins.

The words “covenant” or “testament” refer in this epistle to one thing, the act of God providing for the salvation of the believing sinner through the blood atonement offered on Calvary’s Cross by the Lord Jesus. It is a covenant in the sense that it is an agreement on God’s part that He will give salvation to the sinner who will receive it by faith in the High Priest He has appointed. It is a last will or testament in the sense that God bequeaths salvation to the sinner who will receive it on the terms of the will, faith in the blood of Jesus. God, the divine Testator, dies to make the will effective. The words “covenant” and “testament” are used of one thing in this book, viewed from two angles.

The words “lead them by the hand,” speak of the fact that the First Testament was given to a people in its minority. Israel was treated as a minor. God put it under laws and regulations. If Israel behaved itself, it was rewarded, and if it misbehaved, it was punished. Israel was taught by object lessons as one would teach a child, for instance, the tabernacle, priesthood, offering, the gorgeous vestments of the high priest. — Wuest, page 145.

__________

The Law appears to be the mere ideal of a religious constitution, as it has never existed in fact: in practice, the Jews were almost throughout polytheists. The substance of their national feeling was formed by heathendom: the accidents only, by revelation. From the queen of heaven down to the abominations of the Phoenicians, and even Cybele, the Jews passed through every grade of paganism. In fact, there is no period of the history of Israel before the captivity, in which more or less idolatry was not united with the worship of Jehovah, except the time of David and the first years of Solomon, during which the influence of Samuel still continued to be felt. And when by the captivity idol-worship was completely eradicated from the people, as far at least as regards that part of it which returned, it is well-known that a hypocritical letter-worship got the mastery over them, which was morally very little better. — Wuest, page 146.

1 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,

2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.

3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer.

4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law;

5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”

Verses 1-2 present the chief point of the book.

things we are saying (v.1) — should be “the things to be considered”

such a High Priest (v.1) — refers back to 7:26-27

is seated (v.1) — His offering was finished

minister (v.2) — one who serves in an official capacity

It is called “the true tabernacle,” not as in contrast to a false one, but as that which is abiding and real in its spiritual significance in contrast to the temporary and figurative tabernacle in the wilderness. Further, the heavenly tabernacle is the true one as being that which was originally designed in the eternal counsels of God, and is thus contrasted with that which was the work of human hands. — Vine, page 288.

offer (v.3 — first use) = continue offering

offer (v.3 — second use) = offer once

something to offer (v.3) — Himself (7:27; 9:12-14) — A priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices. Therefore, to be a priest, he must have gifts and sacrifices to offer, and a sanctuary in which to offer them.

Christ could not be a priest on earth because the Mosaic law established the Levitical priesthood on earth and Christ could not be a Levitical priest. So, He must be a High Priest in heaven.

copy (v.5) = outline, suggestion

shadow (v.5) — an (imperfect) portrayal of a reality. It has not substance but is proof that there is a reality behind it.

Verse 5 sets forth three words that demonstrate the relation between the earthly and heavenly tabernacles. First, the earthly is called an example (Gr. hypodeigma), implying that it is a copy of model of the heavenly. This word is used again to express the relationship of the tabernacle furniture to the heavenly elements (9:23). It is an imitation of the heavenly. Second, the earthly is a shadow (Gr skia). This word suggests several further facts. A shadow requires the existence of the real thing from the beginning. The heavenly tabernacle has existed at least as long as its shadow — the earthly. A shadow also adds depth and perspective to the real. The Levitical priesthood with its Mosaic ritual is a shadow, but the reality is Christ (cf. Colossians 2:16-17). The third word, pattern (Gr typos), speaks to the opposite relationship — that of the heavenly to the earthly. The heavenly provided the stamp or imprint from which the earthly came. The pattern, or archetype, which Moses was to follow when building his tabernacle was that of the true tabernacle, spoken of in verse 2. Due to their presentation in the Old Testament, biblical types, such as the Mosaic tabernacle, are revealed before their antitype, which is found in the New. Their existence, however, is preceded by the antitype, as here with the heavenly tabernacle. — King James Bible Commentary, pages 1691-1692.

²⁶ For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens;

²⁷ who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.

²⁸ For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever.

fitting for us (v.26) — meets our needs

holy (v.26) = free of defilement, but also gracious

harmless (v.26) = faithful and considerate — entirely free from unkindness, guile and malice

undefiled (v.26) = free from all taint. The Old Testament priest had to cleanse himself (Leviticus 16:4). Christ is pure.

separate from sinners (v.26) — a physical separation to heaven — also, distinct from them and vindicated by God by His resurrection and ascension

higher than the heavens (v.26) — expresses the degree of His exaltation

daily (v.27) — the priests’ need was daily, although their entrance into the Holy of Holies was only once a year

for His own sins (v.27) — Leviticus 4:2-3; 16:6

once (v.27) = once for all

offered up Himself (v.27) — 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:24; John 10:18

infirmity (v.28) = weakness, morally, spiritually, physically

¹⁵ And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest

¹⁶ who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life.

¹⁷ For He testifies: “ You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.”

¹⁸ For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness,

¹⁹ for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.

²⁰ And inasmuch as He was not made priest without an oath

²¹ (for they have become priests without an oath, but He with an oath by Him who said to Him: “ The LORD has sworn and will not relent, ‘ You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’”),

²² by so much more Jesus has become a surety of a better covenant.

²³ Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing.

²⁴ But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood.

²⁵ Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.

far more evident (v.15) — that the priesthood must be changed

another (v.15) — not just a different one, but another of a different type

law (v.16) = norm, standard

fleshly (v.16) = temporary, physical (here) — not carnal in the sense of sinful

Christ was not appointed priest because of physical descent, but because of His divine power which gives Him an endless life (v.16).

endless (v.16) = cannot be dissolved or disunited

power (v.16) = authority — cannot be broken or destroyed

Quote in verse 17 is from Psalm 110:4

God never swore that the Levitical priesthood would last forever, but He did swear that the Mechizedekian priesthood would (v.17).

The Greek word translated covenant (Greek diatheke) is used seventeen times in Hebrews, the first being here. During the New Testament era this was the exclusive word for a will or testament (a one-sided promise involving the death of the testator). The Greek word uniformly used to express a compact, or covenant (a two-sided agreement), was syntheke. Yet, the Old Testament word for covenant (Hebrew berit) consistently uses diatheke, though one might expect to see syntheke. The reason for this word usage arises from the fact that God’s covenants were not compacts or agreements made between equal parties. Thus diatheke more aptly expresses the one-sided nature of God’s covenants. This better covenant is a promise, not an agreement. It was established solely by God and confirmed with His oath. No one can annul it or the eternal salvation which it promises. Jesus Himself is the surety (Greek eggyos) of the covenant. He is not here presented as the mediator, but as the guarantor, of this better covenant. A mediator is one who gathers the two parties to devise an agreement. A guarantor is one who sees that the obligations of the covenant are carried out. — King James Bible Commentary, page 1690.

annulling (v.18) = setting aside, abolishing of something established

previous (v.18) — not only precedence in time, but of a preliminary character

commandment (v.18) — the law

weakness (v.18) — because it could not accomplish the goal

unprofitableness (v.18) — unserviceable — it could not bring about the purification of sinners (v.11)

made nothing perfect (v.19) — brought nothing to completion

draw near to God (v.19) — under the law, the people could not enter the presence of God in the Holy of Holies. Only the high priest could, and he only once a year. In Christ, we have constant, direct access to God.

surety (v.22) = guarantee, pledge

unchangeable (v.24) — not passed along from priest to priest. Christ’s priesthood cannot be transferred to another.

able to save (v.25) = has power to save

uttermost (v.25) = complete in every respect, time and degree

intercession (v.25) — intervention (His offering Himself as our sacrifice) and intercession