Text -- Hebrews 9:1-28 (NET)

The Arrangement and Ritual of the Earthly Sanctuary

9:1 Now the first covenant, in fact, had regulations for worship and its earthly sanctuary. 9:2 For a tent was prepared, the outer one, which contained the lampstand, the table, and the presentation of the loaves; this is called the holy place. 9:3 And after the second curtain there was a tent called the holy of holies. 9:4 It contained the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered entirely with gold. In this ark were the golden urn containing the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 9:5 And above the ark were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Now is not the time to speak of these things in detail. 9:6 So with these things prepared like this, the priests enter continually into the outer tent as they perform their duties. 9:7 But only the high priest enters once a year into the inner tent, and not without blood that he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 9:8 The Holy Spirit is making clear that the way into the holy place had not yet appeared as long as the old tabernacle was standing. 9:9 This was a symbol for the time then present, when gifts and sacrifices were offered that could not perfect the conscience of the worshiper. 9:10 They served only for matters of food and drink and various washings; they are external regulations imposed until the new order came.

Christ’s Service in the Heavenly Sanctuary

9:11 But now Christ has come as the high priest of the good things to come. He passed through the greater and more perfect tent not made with hands, that is, not of this creation, 9:12 and he entered once for all into the most holy place not by the blood of goats and calves but by his own blood, and so he himself secured eternal redemption. 9:13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a young cow sprinkled on those who are defiled consecrated them and provided ritual purity, 9:14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our consciences from dead works to worship the living God. 9:15 And so he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the eternal inheritance he has promised, since he died to set them free from the violations committed under the first covenant. 9:16 For where there is a will, the death of the one who made it must be proven. 9:17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it carries no force while the one who made it is alive. 9:18 So even the first covenant was inaugurated with blood. 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every command to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and goats with water and scarlet wool and hyssop and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 9:20 and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that God has commanded you to keep.” 9:21 And both the tabernacle and all the utensils of worship he likewise sprinkled with blood. 9:22 Indeed according to the law almost everything was purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. 9:23 So it was necessary for the sketches of the things in heaven to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves required better sacrifices than these. 9:24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with hands– the representation of the true sanctuary– but into heaven itself, and he appears now in God’s presence for us. 9:25 And he did not enter to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the sanctuary year after year with blood that is not his own, 9:26 for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the consummation of the ages to put away sin by his sacrifice. 9:27 And just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment, 9:28 so also, after Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, to those who eagerly await him he will appear a second time, not to bear sin but to bring salvation.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Heb 9:1

Even the first covenant ( kai hē prōtē ).

Kai (even) is doubtful. No word for covenant with prōte (cf. Heb 8:7).

Robertson: Heb 9:1

Had ( eiche ).

Imperfect active, used to have.

Robertson: Heb 9:1

Ordinances ( dikaiōmata ).

Regulations (from dikaioō ) as in Luk 1:6; Rom 5:16.

Robertson: Heb 9:1

Of divine service ( latreias ).

No word for "divine,"though worship is meant as in Rom 9:4; Phi 3:3. Genitive case.

Robertson: Heb 9:1

And its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world ( to te hagion kosmikon ).

By to hagion the author describes the whole sanctuary (Exo 36:3; Num 3:38) like tōn hagiōn in Heb 8:2. Kosmikon is a late adjective (Aristotle, Plutarch) from kosmos , relating to this world, like epi gēs (upon earth) of Heb 8:4. It is in the predicate position, not attributive.

Robertson: Heb 9:2

A tabernacle the first ( skēnē hē prōtē ).

See Heb 8:2 for skēnē . Large tents usually had two divisions (the outer and the inner or the first and the second). Note prōtē for the first of two as with the first covenant (Heb 8:7, Heb 8:13; Heb 9:1). The large outer tent was entered first and was called Hagia (Holy), the first division of the tabernacle. The two divisions are here termed two tabernacles.

Robertson: Heb 9:2

Was prepared ( kateskeuasthē ).

First aorist passive of kataskeuazō . See Heb 3:3. For the furniture see Exod 25; 26. Three items are named here: the candlestick (hē luchnia , late word for luchnion ) or lampstand, necessary since there were no windows (Exo 25:31-39); the table (hē trapeza , old word, Mat 15:27) for the bread (Exo 25:23-30; Lev 24:6 of pure gold); the shewbread (hē prothesis tōn artōn ) as in Exo 25:30; Exo 40:23; Lev 24:5-9. Probably a hendiadys for the table with the loaves of God’ s Presence.

Robertson: Heb 9:3

After the second veil ( meta to deuteron katapetasma ).

The first veil opened from outside into the Holy Place, the second veil opened from the Holy Place into the Holy of Holies (Hagia Hagiōn ). The word katapetasma is from katapetannumi , to spread down, and we have already had it in Heb 6:19. Cf. also Mat 27:51.

Robertson: Heb 9:4

Having a golden censer ( chrusoun echousa thumiatērion ).

The present active participle echousa (feminine singular) agrees with skēnē (the Holy of Holies). It is not certain whether thumiatērion here means censer or altar of incense. In the lxx (2Chron 26:19; Exod 8:11; 4Macc 7:11) it means censer and apparently so in the inscriptions and papyri. But in Philo and Josephus it means altar of incense for which the lxx has thusiastērion tou thumiatos (Exod 30:1-10). Apparently the altar of incense was in the Holy Place, though in Exo 30:1-10 it is left quite vague. B puts it in Heb 9:2. So we leave the discrepancy unsettled. At any rate the altar of incense was used for the Holy of Holies ("its ritual associations,"Dods).

Robertson: Heb 9:4

The ark of the covenant ( tēn kibōton tēs diathēkēs ).

A box or chest four feet long, two and a half broad and high (Exo 25:10.). The Scotch have a "meal-ark."

Robertson: Heb 9:4

Wherein ( en hēi ).

In the ark. There were three treasures in the ark of the covenant (a pot of manna, Aaron’ s rod, the tables of the covenant). For the pot of manna (golden added in the lxx) see Exo 16:32-34. For Aaron’ s rod that budded (hē blastēsasa , first aorist active participle of blastanō ) see Num 17:1-11. For the tables of the covenant see Exo 25:16.; Exo 31:18; Deu 9:9; Deu 10:5. Not definitely clear about these items in the ark, but on front, except that 1Ki 8:9 states that it did contain the tables of the covenant. For plakes (tables) see 2Co 3:3 (only other N.T. example).

Robertson: Heb 9:5

Above it ( huperanō autēs ).

Up above, in local sense as in Eph 4:10, with ablative case autēs (it, the ark).

Robertson: Heb 9:5

Cherubim of glory ( Cheroubein doxēs ).

Hebrew word (dual form), two in number, made of gold (Exo 25:18-22). They are called zōa (living creatures) in the lxx (Isaiah 6:2f.; Ezek 1:5-10; 10:5-20).

Robertson: Heb 9:5

Overshadowing ( kataskiazonta ).

Present active participle of kataskiazō , old verb to shadow down on, cover with shade, only here in the N.T.

Robertson: Heb 9:5

The mercy seat ( to hilastērion ).

The pinions of the Cherubim spread over the rectangular gold slab on top of the ark termed the mercy seat. Here the adjective hilastērios has to mean mercy seat, the place, not the propitiatory gift or propitiation, as in Rom 3:25 (Deissmann, Bible Studies , pp. 124-35).

Robertson: Heb 9:5

Severally ( kata meros ).

In detail, distributive use of kata with meros (part).

Robertson: Heb 9:6

These things having been thus prepared ( toutōn houtōs kateskeuasmenōn ).

Genitive absolute with the perfect passive participle of kataskeuazō for which verb see Heb 9:2. A mere summary has been made of the furniture.

Robertson: Heb 9:6

Go in ( eisiasin ).

Present active indicative of eiseimi , to go in, old verb, in N.T. only here, Act 3:3; Act 21:18, Act 21:26.

Robertson: Heb 9:6

Accomplishing ( epitelountes ).

Present active participle of epiteleō for which see Heb 8:5.

Robertson: Heb 9:7

Alone ( monos ).

Predicate adjective with ho archiereus .

Robertson: Heb 9:7

Once in the year ( hapax tou eniautou ).

Once for each year (not pote , at any time) with genitive of time.

Robertson: Heb 9:7

Not without blood ( ou chōris haimatos ).

According to Lev 16:14. Not even he could enter the second tent (Holy of Holies) without blood.

Robertson: Heb 9:7

The errors of the people ( tōn tou laou agnoēmatōn ).

Late word from agnoeō , not to know (Heb 5:2), only here in the N.T., but in lxx, papyri, and inscriptions where a distinction is drawn between errors (agnoēmata ) and crimes (harmartēmata ). In Gen 43:12 agnoēma is "an oversight."But these sins of ignorance (agnoēmata ) were sins and called for atonement. See Heb 10:26 for willful sinning.

Robertson: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost this signifying ( touto dēlountos tou pneumatos tou hagiou ).

Genitive absolute with present active participle of dēloō , to make plain. Used as in Heb 12:27.

Robertson: Heb 9:8

The way into the Holy place ( tēn tōn hagiōn hodon ).

Here as in Heb 9:12, Heb 9:25 tōn hagiōn is used for the very Presence of God as in Heb 8:2 and is in the objective genitive. Hodon is the accusative of general reference with the infinitive.

Robertson: Heb 9:8

Hath not yet been made manifest ( mēpō pephanerōsthai ).

Perfect passive infinitive of phaneroō , to make plain (phaneros ) in indirect discourse after dēlountos with negative mēpō .

Robertson: Heb 9:8

While as the first tabernacle is yet standing ( eti tēs prōtēs skēnēs echousēs stasin ).

Another genitive absolute with present active participle of echō (having standing stasin ), "the first tabernacle still having a place."The veil at the entrance kept the people out of the first tent as the second veil (Heb 9:3) kept the priests out of the Holy of Holies (the very Presence of God).

Robertson: Heb 9:9

Which ( hētis ).

"Which very thing,"the first tent (tēs prōtēs skēnēs , division of the tabernacle), a parenthesis and explanation.

Robertson: Heb 9:9

A parable ( parabolē ).

Only in the Synoptic Gospels in the N.T. and Heb 9:9; Heb 11:19. See note on Mat 13:3 for the word (from paraballō , to place alongside). Here like tupos (type or shadow of "the heavenly reality,"Moffatt).

Robertson: Heb 9:9

For the time now present ( eis ton kairon ton enestēkota ).

"For the present crisis "(kairon , not aiōna , age, not chronon , time). Perfect active articular (repeated article) participle of enistēmi (intransitive), the age in which they lived, not the past, not the future. See 1Co 3:22; Rom 8:38 for contrast between enestōta and mellonta . This age of crisis, foreshadowed by the old tabernacle, pointed on to the richer fulfilment still to come.

Robertson: Heb 9:9

According to which ( kath' hēn ).

Here the relative refers to parabolē just mentioned, not to skēnēs . See Heb 5:1; Heb 8:3.

Robertson: Heb 9:9

As touching the conscience ( kata suneidēsin ).

For suneidēsis see 1Co 8:10; 1Co 10:17; Rom 2:15. This was the real failure of animal sacrifice (Heb 10:1-4).

Robertson: Heb 9:9

Make the worshipper perfect ( teleiōsai ton latreuonta ).

First aorist active infinitive (Heb 2:10). At best it was only ritual or ceremonial purification (Heb 7:11), that called for endless repetition (Heb 10:1-4).

Robertson: Heb 9:10

Only with meats and drinks and divers washings ( monon epi brōmasin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois ).

The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of epi here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of"(Luk 12:52; Joh 12:16; Act 21:24). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers"(diaphorois , late adjective, in N.T. only in Heb 1:4; Heb 8:6; Heb 9:10; Rom 12:6) say "different"or "various."Baptismois is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. Mar 7:4; Exo 29:4; Lev 11:25, Lev 11:28.; Num 8:7; Rev 6:2).

Robertson: Heb 9:10

Carnal ordinances ( dikaiōmasin sarkos ).

But the correct text is undoubtedly simply dikaiōmata sarkos (nominative case), in apposition with dōra te kai thusiai (gifts and sacrifices). See Heb 9:1 for dikaiōmata .

Robertson: Heb 9:10

Imposed ( epikeimena ).

Present middle or passive participle of epikeimai , old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. 1Co 9:16.

Robertson: Heb 9:10

Until a time of reformation ( mechri kairou diorthōseōs ).

Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in Heb 7:10-17; Heb 8:13 and argued clearly by Paul in Gal 3:15-22. Diorthōsis is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from diorthoō , to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like anorthoō in Heb 12:12. Here for reformation like diorthōma (reform) in Act 24:2. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see Gal 3; Rom 9).

Robertson: Heb 9:11

Having come ( paragenomenos ).

Second aorist middle participle of paraginomai . This is the great historic event that is the crux of history. "Christ came on the scene, and all was changed"(Moffatt).

Robertson: Heb 9:11

Of the good things to come ( tōn mellontōn agathōn ).

But B D read genomenōn (that are come). It is a nice question which is the true text. Both aspects are true, for Christ is High Priest of good things that have already come as well as of the glorious future of hope. Westcott prefers genomenōn , Moffatt mellontōn .

Robertson: Heb 9:11

Through the greater and more perfect tabernacle ( dia tēs meizonos kai teleioteras skēnēs ).

Probably the instrumental use of dia (2Co 2:4; Rom 2:27; Rom 14:20) as accompaniment, not the local idea (Heb 4:14; Heb 10:20). Christ as High Priest employed in his work the heavenly tabernacle (Heb 8:2) after which the earthly was patterned (Heb 9:24).

Robertson: Heb 9:11

Not made with hands ( ou cheiropoiētou ).

Old compound verbal for which see Mar 14:58; Act 7:48; Act 17:24. Cf. Heb 8:2. Here in the predicate position.

Robertson: Heb 9:11

Not of this creation ( ou tautēs tēs ktiseōs ).

Explanation of ou chieropoiētou . For ktisis see 2Co 5:17; Rom 8:19. For the idea see 2Co 4:18; Heb 8:2. This greater and more perfect tabernacle is heaven itself (Heb 9:24).

Robertson: Heb 9:12

Through his own blood ( dia tou idiou haimatos ).

This is the great distinction between Christ as High Priest and all other high priests. They offer blood (Heb 9:7), but he offered his own blood. He is both victim and High Priest. See the same phrase in Heb 13:12; Act 20:28.

Robertson: Heb 9:12

Once for all ( ephapax ).

In contrast to the repeated (annual) entrances of the Levitical high priests (Heb 9:7).

Robertson: Heb 9:12

Into the holy place ( eis ta hagia ).

Here, as in Heb 9:8, Heb 9:24 heaven itself.

Robertson: Heb 9:12

Having obtained ( heuramenos ).

First aorist middle (indirect) participle of heuriskō , simultaneous action with eisēlthen , and by or of himself "as the issue of personal labour directed to this end"(Westcott). The value of Christ’ s offering consists in the fact that he is the Son of God as well as the Son of man, that he is sinless and so a perfect sacrifice with no need of an offering for himself, and that it is voluntary on his part (Joh 10:17). Lutrōsis (from lutroō ) is a late word for the act of ransoming (cf. lutron , ransom), in O.T. only here and Luk 1:68; Luk 2:38. But apolutrōsis elsewhere (as in Luk 21:28; Rom 3:24; Heb 9:15; Heb 11:35). For "eternal"(aiōnian , here feminine form) see Heb 6:2. The author now turns to discuss the better sacrifice (9:13-10:18) already introduced.

Robertson: Heb 9:13

Ashes ( spodos ).

Old word, in N. T. only here, Mat 11:21; Luk 10:13. Common in lxx.

Robertson: Heb 9:13

Of a heifer ( damaleōs ).

Old word (damalis ), a red heifer whose ashes mingled with water (meta hudatos , Heb 9:19) were sprinkled (rantizousa , present active participle of rantizō , in lxx, though rainō more common) on the contaminated or defiled ones (Num 19) as the blood of bulls and goats was offered for sins (Lev 16).

Robertson: Heb 9:13

Sanctify ( hagiazei ).

First-class condition, assumed as true. This ceremonial ritual does serve "for the cleansing (katharotēta , old word here only in N.T.) of the flesh,"but not for the conscience (Heb 9:9). The cow was amōmon , the individual katharos .

Robertson: Heb 9:14

How much more ( posōi mallon ).

Instrumental case, "by how much more,"by the measure of the superiority of Christ’ s blood to that of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer.

Robertson: Heb 9:14

Through the eternal Spirit ( dia pneumatos aiōniou ).

Not the Holy Spirit, but Christ’ s own spirit which is eternal as he is. There is thus a moral quality in the blood of Christ not in that of other sacrifices.

Robertson: Heb 9:14

Offered himself ( heauton prosēnegken ).

Second aorist active indicative of prospherō (used so often as in Heb 5:1, Heb 5:3; Heb 8:3). The voluntary character of Christ’ s death is again emphasized.

Robertson: Heb 9:14

Without blemish ( amōmon ).

Old compound adjective (Col 1:22; 1Pe 1:19) as the sacrifice had to be (Exo 29:1; Lev 1:3, Lev 1:10).

Robertson: Heb 9:14

Shall cleanse from conscience ( kathariei tēn suneidēsin humōn ).

Future active indicative of katharizō . Some MSS. have hēmōn (our). The old Greek used kathairō , not katharizō (in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, Deissmann, Bible Studies , pp. 216f.), for cleansing.

Robertson: Heb 9:14

From dead works ( apo nekrōn ergōn ).

As in Heb 6:1. "A pause might be made before ergōn , from dead - (not bodies but) works."

Robertson: Heb 9:15

Mediator of a new covenant ( diathēkēs kainēs mesitēs ).

See Heb 8:6 for this phrase with kreittonos instead of kainēs .

Robertson: Heb 9:15

A death having taken place ( thanatou genomenou ).

Genitive absolute, referring to Christ’ s death.

Robertson: Heb 9:15

For the redemption ( eis apolutrōsin ).

Robertson: Heb 9:15

Of the transgressions ( tōn parabaseōn ).

Really ablative case, "from the transgressions."See Heb 9:12, lutrōsin .

Robertson: Heb 9:15

Under the first covenant ( epi tēi prōtēi diathēkēi ).

Here there is a definite statement that the real value in the typical sacrifices under the Old Testament system was in the realization in the death of Christ. It is Christ’ s death that gives worth to the types that pointed to him. So then the atoning sacrifice of Christ is the basis of the salvation of all who are saved before the Cross and since.

Robertson: Heb 9:15

That they may receive ( hopōs labōsin ).

Purpose clause (God’ s purpose in the rites and symbols) with hopōs and the second aorist active subjunctive of lambanō .

Robertson: Heb 9:16

A testament ( diathēkē ).

The same word occurs for covenant (Heb 9:15) and will (Heb 9:16). This double sense of the word is played upon also by Paul in Gal 3:15. We say today "The New Testament"( Novum Testamentum ) rather than "The New Covenant."Both terms are pertinent.

Robertson: Heb 9:16

That made it ( tou diathemenou ).

Genitive of the articular second aorist middle participle of diatithēmi from which diathēkē comes. The notion of will here falls in with klēronomia (inheritance, 1Pe 1:4) as well as with thanatos (death).

Robertson: Heb 9:16

Of force ( bebaia ).

Stable, firm as in Heb 3:6, Heb 3:14.

Robertson: Heb 9:16

Where there hath been death ( epi nekrois ).

"In the case of dead people."A will is only operative then.

Robertson: Heb 9:16

For doth it ever avail while he that made it liveth? ( epei mē pote ischuei hote zēi ho diathemenos ).

This is a possible punctuation with mē pote in a question (Joh 7:26). Without the question mark, it is a positive statement of fact. Aleph and D read tote (then) instead of pote . The use of mē in a causal sentence is allowable (Joh 3:18, hoti mē ).

Robertson: Heb 9:18

The first covenant ( hē prōtē ).

Supply diathēkē as in Heb 9:1.

Robertson: Heb 9:18

Has been dedicated ( enkekainistai ).

Stands dedicated. Perfect passive indicative of enkainizo , a late verb in lxx, one papyrus, and in N.T. only here and Heb 10:20. It means to renew, to inaugurate (1Sa 11:14; 2Ch 15:8) and in 1Ki 8:63 to dedicate. Note ta enkainia (Joh 10:22) for the feast of dedication.

Robertson: Heb 9:19

When every commandment had been spoken ( lalētheisēs ).

Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of laleō . The author uses the account in Exo 24:3. "with characteristic freedom"(Moffatt). There is nothing there about the water, the scarlet wool (erion , diminutive of eros ,eiros , old word, here and in Rev 1:14; for kokkinos see Mat 27:6, and note on Mat 27:28), and hyssop (hussōpou , a plant mentioned in Joh 19:29). It had become the custom to mingle water with the blood and to use a wisp of wool or a stem of hyssop for sprinkling (Num 10:2-10).

Robertson: Heb 9:19

Both the book itself ( auto te to biblion ).

There is nothing in Exodus about sprinkling the book of the covenant, though it may very well have been done. He omits the use of oil in Exo 40:9.; Lev 8:10. and applies blood to all the details.

Robertson: Heb 9:19

Sprinkled ( erantisen ).

First aorist active indicative from rantizō (from rantos and this from rainō ), like baptizō from baptō . Cf. Mar 7:4; Heb 10:22; Rev 19:13.

Robertson: Heb 9:20

This is ( touto ).

Instead of idou of the lxx (Exod 24:8), just like our Lord’ s words in Mar 14:24, a possible reminiscence of the Master’ s words (Dods). The author also has eneteilato (he commanded) for dietheto of the lxx.

Robertson: Heb 9:21

In like manner with the blood ( tōi haimati homoiōs ).

Instrumental case of haima (blood). But the use of the article does not necessarily refer to the blood mentioned in Heb 9:19. In Exo 40:9 Moses sprinkled the tabernacle with oil. It had not been erected at the time of Exo 24:5. Josephus ( Ant. III. 8, 6) gives a tradition that blood was used also at this dedication. Blood was used annually in the cleansing rites on the day of atonement.

Robertson: Heb 9:22

I may almost say ( schedon ).

Old adverb, only three times in the N.T., here, Act 13:44; Act 19:26. Here it qualifies the entire clause, not just panta .

Robertson: Heb 9:22

With blood ( en haimati ).

In blood. There were exceptions (Exo 19:10; Exo 32:30.; Lev 5:11.; Lev 15:5; Num 16:46.; Num 31:23., etc.).

Robertson: Heb 9:22

Apart from shedding of blood ( chōris haimatekchusias ).

A double compound first found here (coined by the writer) and later in ecclesiastical writers (haima , blood, ek , out, cheō , to pour, like ekchusis haimatos 1Ki 18:28). "Pouring out of blood."The author seems to have in mind Christ’ s words in Mat 26:28 : "This is my blood of the covenant which is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins."The blood is the vital principle and is efficacious as an atonement. The blood of Christ sets aside all other plans for pardon.

Robertson: Heb 9:23

The copies ( ta hupodeigmata ).

See Heb 8:5 for this word, the earthly (Heb 8:4; Heb 9:1) tabernacle.

Robertson: Heb 9:23

With these ( toutois ).

Instrumental case of houtos , like the rites above described (Heb 9:19), perhaps with some disparagement.

Robertson: Heb 9:23

Themselves ( auta ).

The heavenly realities (Heb 8:2, Heb 8:5; Heb 9:11.).

Robertson: Heb 9:23

With better sacrifices ( kreittosin thusiais ).

Instrumental case again. Point of this section (9:13-10:18).

Robertson: Heb 9:23

Than these ( para tautas ).

Use of para and the accusative case after a comparative as in Heb 1:4, Heb 1:9. To us it seems a bit strained to speak of the ritual cleansing or dedication of heaven itself by the appearance of Christ as Priest-Victim. But the whole picture is highly mystical.

Robertson: Heb 9:24

Made with hands ( cheiropoiēta ).

See Heb 9:11 for this word.

Robertson: Heb 9:24

Like in pattern to the true ( antitupa tōn alēthinōn ).

Late compound word, only twice in N.T. (here, 1Pe 3:21). Polybius uses antitupos for infantry "opposite"to the cavalry. In modern Greek it means a copy of a book. Here it is the "counterpart of reality"(Moffatt). Moses was shown a tupos (model) of the heavenly realities and he made an antitupon on that model, "answering to the type"(Dods) or model. In 1Pe 3:21 antitupos has the converse sense, "the reality of baptism which corresponds to or is the antitype of the deluge"(Dods).

Robertson: Heb 9:24

Now to appear ( nun emphanisthēnai ).

Purpose clause by the first aorist passive infinitive of emphanizō (Mat 27:53; Joh 14:21.). For the phrase see Psa 42:3. For this work of Christ as our High Priest and Paraclete in heaven see Heb 7:25; Rom 8:34; 1Jo 2:1.

Robertson: Heb 9:25

That he should offer himself often ( hina pollakis prospherēi heauton ).

Purpose clause with hina and present active subjunctive of prospherō (keep on offering himself, like Heb 5:1, Heb 5:3).

Robertson: Heb 9:25

With blood not his own ( en haimati allotriōi ).

So-called instrumental use of en (accompaniment). allotrios means "belonging to another,""not one’ s own"(Luk 16:12).

Robertson: Heb 9:26

Else must he often have suffered ( epei edei auton pollakis pathein ).

A common elliptical use of epei after which one must supply "if that were true"or "in that case,"a protasis of a condition of the second class assumed to be untrue. The conclusion with edei is without an (verbs of necessity, obligation, etc.). See Robertson, Grammar , p. 963. The conclusion with an occurs in Heb 10:2. See also 1Co 5:10. "Since, if that were true, it would be necessary for him to suffer often."

Robertson: Heb 9:26

Since the foundation of the world ( apo katabolēs kosmou ).

See Heb 4:3 for this phrase. The one sacrifice of Christ is of absolute and final value (1Pe 1:19.; Rev 13:8).

Robertson: Heb 9:26

At the end ( epi sunteleiāi ).

Consummation or completion as in Mat 13:39. which see.

Robertson: Heb 9:26

Hath he been manifested ( pephanerōtai ).

Perfect passive indicative of phaneroō , permanent state. See "the primitive hymn or confession of faith"(Moffatt) in 1Ti 3:16 and also 1Pe 1:20. Jesus came once for all (Heb 1:2).

Robertson: Heb 9:26

To put away sin ( eis athetēsin tēs hamartias ).

See Heb 7:18 for the word athetēsis . "The sacrifice of Christ dealt with sin as a principle: the Levitical sacrifices with individual transgressions"(Vincent).

Robertson: Heb 9:27

It is appointed ( apokeitai ).

Present middle (or passive) of apokeimai , "is laid away"for men. Cf. same verb in Luk 19:20; Col 1:5; 2Ti 4:8 (Paul’ s crown).

Robertson: Heb 9:27

Once to die ( hapax apothanein ).

Once for all to die, as once for all to live here. No reincarnation here.

Robertson: Heb 9:27

After this cometh judgment ( meta touto krisis ).

Death is not all. Man has to meet Christ as Judge as Jesus himself graphically pictures (Matt 25:31-46; Joh 5:25-29).

Robertson: Heb 9:28

Once ( hapax ).

"Once for all"(Heb 9:26) as already stated.

Robertson: Heb 9:28

Shall appear a second time ( ek deuterou ophthēsetai ).

Future passive indicative of horaō . Blessed assurance of the Second Coming of Christ, but this time "apart from sin"(chōris hamartias , no notion of a second chance then).

Robertson: Heb 9:28

Unto salvation ( eis sōtērian ).

Final and complete salvation for "them that wait for him"(tois auton apekdechomenois ). Dative plural of the articular participle present middle of apekdechomai , the very verb used by Paul in Phi 3:20 of waiting for the coming of Christ as Saviour.

Vincent: Heb 9:1

Ordinances of divine service ( δικαιώματα λατρείας )

For δικαίωμα ordinance , see on Rom 5:16. For λατρεία service , see on Luk 1:74; see on Rev 22:3; see on Phi 3:3; see on 2Ti 1:3. The meaning is ordinances directed to or adapted for divine service.

Vincent: Heb 9:1

A worldly sanctuary ( τὸ ἅγιον κοσμικόν )

The A.V. misses the force of the article. Rend. and its sanctuary a sanctuary of this world . Τὸ ἅγιον in the sense of sanctuary only here. Elsewhere the plural τὰ ἅγια . of this world in contrast with the heavenly sanctuary to be mentioned later.

Vincent: Heb 9:2

Was made ( κατεσκευάσθη )

See on Heb 3:3.

Vincent: Heb 9:2

The first

The first tabernacle , that is, the first division of the tabernacle. He speaks of the two divisions as two tabernacles.

Vincent: Heb 9:2

Candlestick ( λυχνία )

Rend. lampstand . See on Mat 5:15; see on Rev 1:12. Description in Exo 25:31-37. Comp. Zec 4:1-14.

Vincent: Heb 9:2

The table and the shewbread ( ἡ τράπεξα καὶ ἡ πρόθεσις τῶν ἀρτῶν )

See Exo 25:23-30; Exo 35:13; 2Ch 2:4; 2Ch 13:11. The table and the loaves are treated as one item. Lit. the table and the setting forth of the loaves , that is, the table with its loaves set forth . See on Mar 2:26; see on Act 11:23.

Vincent: Heb 9:2

Which is called the sanctuary ( ἥτις - ἅγια )

Since it was thus furnished. See on Heb 8:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:3

After the second veil ( μετὰ τὸ δεύτερον καταπέτασμα )

According to Exo 26:31-37 there were two veils, the one before the door of the tent and the other before the sanctuary. After passing the first veil and entering the tent, the worshipper would see before him the second veil behind which was the holy of holies. The writer calls this also a tabernacle , Heb 9:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:4

The golden censer ( χρυσοῦν θυμιατήριον )

The noun N.T.o . It may mean either censer or altar of incense . In lxx the altar of incense is called θυσιαστήριον θυμιάματος Exo 30:1, Exo 30:27; Lev 4:7 : comp. Luk 1:11. Θυμιατήριον is used of a censer , 2Ch 26:19; Eze 8:11; 4 Macc. 7:11. These are the only instances of the word in lxx: accordingly, never in lxx of the altar of incense. Josephus uses it for both. The golden censer is not mentioned in O.T. as a part of the furniture of the holy of holies. The facts of the case then are as follows: (a) according to Exodus 31 the incense-altar was in the holy place, not in the holy of holies; (b) Philo and Josephus use θυμιατήριον for the altar of incense; (c) there is no mention in O.T. of a censer set apart for the day of atonement; (d) the high priest was to enter with incense, so that the ark might be veiled by the smoke (Lev 16:12). Hence the censer could not have been kept in the holy of holies; (e) the writer clearly speaks of an abiding-place of the θυμιατήριον in a particular division of the tabernacle. There is evidently a discrepancy, probably owing to the fact that the writer drew his information from the O.T. by which he might have been led into error. Thus Exo 26:35, there are mentioned in the holy place without the veil only the candlestick and the table, and not the incense-altar. Again, when the standing-place of the incense altar was mentioned, the expressions were open to misconstruction: see Exo 30:6; Exo 40:5. On the day of atonement, the incense-altar, like the most holy place, was sprinkled with blood. This might have given rise to the impression that it was in the holy of holies.

Vincent: Heb 9:4

With gold ( χρυσίῳ )

Properly, wrought gold.

Vincent: Heb 9:4

Wherein ( ἐν ᾗ )

But according to Exo 16:34; Num 17:10, neither the pot of manna nor Aaron's rod was in the ark, but " before the testimony" ; while in Exo 25:16, Moses was commanded to put only the tables of the law into the ark; and in 1Ki 8:9 it is said of the ark in the temple, " there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone." The writer follows the rabbinical tradition that the pot of manna and the rod were inside of the ark.

Vincent: Heb 9:4

Golden pot ( στάμος χρυσῆ )

Σταμος , N.T.o , a few times in lxx, rare in Class. Golden is an addition of the lxx. Comp. Exo 16:33.

Vincent: Heb 9:5

Cherubim of glory ( χερουβεὶν δόξης )

Setting forth or exhibiting the divine glory. The word signifies living creatures , and they are described as ζῶα . Hence usually with the neuter article τὰ . See Isa 6:2, Isa 6:3; Eze 1:5-10; 10:5-20, and comp. Rev 4:6-8. Nothing could be more infelicitous than the A.V. rendering of ζῶα beasts .

Vincent: Heb 9:5

Shadowing the mercy-seat ( κατασκιάζοντα τὸ ἱλαστήριον )

Κατασκιάζειν , N.T.o , o lxx, occasionally in Class. Throwing their shadow down upon the mercy-seat. For, ἱλασρήριον , see on Rom 3:25. Used in lxx to translate ëַּôֹøֶè , the place of covering sin , the throne of mercy above the ark.

Vincent: Heb 9:5

Particularly ( κατὰ μέρος )

In detail; his main point being the twofold division of the tabernacle. The phrase N.T.o . Note the completeness of the list of articles of furniture in the tabernacle, even to the inclusion of things which had no connection with worship; also the emphasis on the costliness of the articles - gold. The writer will say all that can be said for this transitory, shadowy tabernacle; but all that he can say about the costliness of the apparatus only emphasizes the inferior and unspiritual character of the worship. The vessels are superior to the service.

Vincent: Heb 9:6

The inferiority of the ancient system was proved by the old tabernacle itself: by its division into two parts, both of which were inaccessible to the people.

Always ( διὰ παντὸς )

Rend. continually . The phrase is usually found in connection with matters involving relations to God - worship, sacrifice, etc. See Mat 18:10; Luk 24:53; Act 2:25; Act 10:2; 2Th 3:16; Heb 13:5.

Vincent: Heb 9:6

Accomplishing ( ἐπιτελοῦντες )

See on Heb 8:5, and see on Gal 3:3. The verb is used of performing religious services by Herodotus. See i. 167; ii. 63, 122; iv. 186.

Vincent: Heb 9:7

Errors ( ἀγνοημάτων )

Lit. ignorances . See on Heb 5:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost

Speaking through the appliances and forms of worship. The intimation is that God intended to emphasize, in the old economy itself, the fact of his inaccessibility, in order to create the desire for full access and to prepare the way for this.

Vincent: Heb 9:8

The way into the holiest of all ( τὴν τῶν ἁγίων ὁδὸν )

Lit. the way of the holies . For the construction comp. ὸδὸν ἐθνῶν way of the Gentiles , Mar 10:5. The phrase N.T.o . Τῶν ἀγίων as in Heb 9:12, Heb 9:24, Heb 9:25; Heb 10:19.

Vincent: Heb 9:8

While as the first tabernacle was yet standing ( ἔτι τῆς πρώτης σκηνῆς ἐχούσης στάσιν )

By the first tabernacle is meant the first division . The point is that the division of the tabernacle showed the limitations of the Levitical system, and kept the people from coming directly to God. Of this limitation the holy place, just outside the second veil, was specially significant; for the holy place barred priests and people alike from the holy of holies. The priests could not pass out of it into the holy of holies; the people could not pass through it to that sanctuary, since they were not allowed in the holy place. The priests in the holy place stood between the people and God as revealed in the shrine. Εξούσης στάσιν , lit. had standing . The phrase N.T.o . Στάσις everywhere in N.T. except here, is used in its secondary sense of faction , sedition , insurrection . Here in its original sense. Note that the sense is not physical and local as the A.V. implies, but remained a recognized institution .

Vincent: Heb 9:9

Which ( ἥτις )

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.

Vincent: Heb 9:9

A figure ( παραβολὴ )

Outside of the Synoptic Gospels, only here and Heb 11:19. Here of a visible symbol or type. See on Mat 13:3.

Vincent: Heb 9:9

For the time then present ( εικς τὸν καιρὸν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα )

Rend. now present, as contrasted with the " time of reformation," Heb 9:10. See on these last days , Heb 1:2. Ἐις for ; with reference to ; applying to . Καιρὸς season is used instead of αἰὼν 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 ἐνεστηκότα present, see on Gal 1:4, and comp. Rom 8:38; 1Co 3:22.

Vincent: Heb 9:9

In which ( καθ ' ἥν )

The A.V. wrongly assumes a reference to the tabernacle ; whereas the reference is to the parable . Rend. according to which .

Vincent: Heb 9:9

Were offered - could not ( προσφέρονται μὴ δυνάμεναι )

Rend. " are offered" or " are being offered " ; and for " could not," " cannot."

Vincent: Heb 9:9

Make him that did the service perfect ( τελειῶσαι τὸν λατρεύοντα )

Rend. as Rev. " make the worshipper perfect." See Heb 7:11.

Vincent: Heb 9:9

As pertaining to the conscience ( κατὰ συνείδησιν )

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. Mat 23:25, Mat 23:26. For συνείδησις conscience , see on 1Pe 3:16.

Vincent: Heb 9:10

The impotence of the gifts and sacrifices lay in the fact that they were only symbolic ordinances.

Which stood in ( ἐπὶ )

The passage should be read thus: " according to which are offered gifts and sacrifices which cannot perfect the worshipper as touching the conscience, being mere ordinances of the flesh on the ground of (ἐπὶ resting upon ) meats," etc.

Vincent: Heb 9:10

Meats and drinks and divers washings ( βρώμασιν καὶ πόμασιν καὶ διαφόροις βαπτισμοῖς )

Βρώμασιν , clean and unclean meats . πόμασιν drinks , concerning which the Levitical law laid down no prescriptions except as to abstinence in the case of a Nazarite vow, and of the priests when they were about to officiate. See Num 6:3; Lev 10:9. For βαπτισμοῖς washings see on Heb 6:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:10

And carnal ordinances ( δικαιώματα σαρκὸς )

Omit and . The phrase is a general description of meats , etc. Lit. ordinances of the flesh .

Vincent: Heb 9:10

Imposed ( ἐπικείμενα )

Some interpreters find in this the suggestion of a burden , which these ceremonial observances assuredly were. Comp. Act 15:10. This, however, is not probable.

Vincent: Heb 9:10

Until the time of reformation ( μέχρι καιροῦ διορθώσεως )

Διόρθωσις N.T.o , o lxx, occasionally in Class. Διόρθωμα correction , amendment , Act 24:2. Διόρθωσις lit. making straight : used by medical writers of straightening a distorted limb. The verb διορθοῦν (not in N.T.) in lxx of mending one's ways , Jer 7:3, Jer 7:5; Wisd. 9:18. Of setting up or establishing , Isa 16:5; Isa 42:7. " The time of reformation" is the Christian age, when God made with his people a better covenant. It was inaugurated by the death of Christ. See on Heb 1:2. The gifts and offerings were only provisional, to tide the people over to the better time.

Vincent: Heb 9:11

The time of reformation introduces a higher sanctuary, a better offering, a more radical salvation.

Having come ( παραγενόμενος )

Having appeared in the world. Only here in Hebrews, and only once in Paul. 1Co 16:3. Most frequent in Luke and Acts.

Vincent: Heb 9:11

Of good things to come ( τῶν γενομένων ἀγαθῶν )

According to this reading the A.V. is wrong. It should be " of the good things realized ," or that have come to pass . The A.V. follows the reading μελλόντων about to be . So Tischendorf and Rev. T. Weiss with Westcott and Hort read γενομένων . Blessings not merely prophetic or objects of hope, but actually attained; free approach to God, the better covenant, personal communion with God, the purging of the conscience.

Vincent: Heb 9:11

Through a greater and more perfect tabernacle ( διὰ )

The preposition is instrumental. Comp. Heb 9:12. Const. with ἀρχιερεὺς high priest , and as qualifying it. " A high priest with a greater and more perfect tabernacle." It has been shown that the new high priest must have a sanctuary and an offering (Heb 8:2-8). Accordingly, as the Levitical priests were attached to (were priests with ) an inferior tabernacle, so Christ appears with a greater and more perfect tabernacle. For this use of διὰ see Rom 2:27; Rom 14:20; 2Co 2:4; 2Co 3:11. Note the article with tabernacle , his greater, etc.

Vincent: Heb 9:11

That is to say not of this building ( τοῦτ ' ἔστιν οὐ ταύτης τῆς κτίσεως )

For building rend. creation . See on Rom 8:19; see on 2Co 5:17; see on Col 1:15. The meaning is, not belonging to this natural creation either in its materials or its maker.

Vincent: Heb 9:12

By the blood of goats and calves ( δι ' αἵματος τράγων καὶ μόσχων )

Διὰ with, as Heb 9:11. Μόσχος originally a tender shoot or sprout : then offspring generally. Everywhere in the Bible calf or bullock , and always masculine.

Vincent: Heb 9:12

His own blood

The distinction is not between the different bloods , but between the victims . The difference of blood is unimportant. Regarded merely as blood, Christ's offering is not superior to the Levitical sacrifice. If Christianity gives us only the shedding of blood, even Christ's blood, it does not give us a real or an efficient atonement. Whatever significance may attach to the blood is derived from something else. See on Heb 9:14.

Vincent: Heb 9:12

Once ( ἐφάπαξ )

Rend. once for all .

Vincent: Heb 9:12

Having obtained eternal redemption ( αἰωνίαν λύτρωσιν εὑράμενος )

Having found and won by his act of entrance into the heavenly sanctuary. This is better than to explain " entered the sanctuary after having obtained redemption by his life, death, and resurrection" ; for the work of redemption is crowned and completed by Christ's ascension to glory and his ministry in heaven (see Romans 6). Even in the old sanctuary the rite of the Day of Atonement was not complete until the blood had been offered in the sanctuary. Eternal , see or Heb 6:2. Not mere duration is contemplated, but quality ; a redemption answering in its quality to that age when all the conditions of time shall be no more: a redemption not ritual, but profoundly ethical and spiritual. Λύτρωσιν redemption , only here, Luk 1:68; Luk 2:38. See on might redeem , Tit 2:4.

Vincent: Heb 9:13

Ashes of a heifer ( σποδός δαμάλεως )

Σποδός ashes, only here, Mat 11:21; Luk 10:13, in both instances in the phrase sackcloth and ashes . Often in lxx. Δαμάλις heifer , N.T.o . The two examples selected cover the entire legal provision for removing uncleanness, whether contracted by sin or by contact with death. " The blood of bulls and goats" refers to the sin-offerings, perhaps especially to the annual atonement (Leviticus 16); " the ashes of a heifer" to the occasional sacrifice of the red heifer (Numbers 19) for purification from uncleanness contracted by contact with the dead. The Levitical law required two remedies: the Christian economy furnishes one for all phases of defilement.

Vincent: Heb 9:13

Sprinkling the unclean ( ῥαντίζουσα τοὺς κεκοινωμένους )

For sprinkling see on 1Pe 1:2. The verb only in Hebrews, except Mar 7:4. For the unclean rend. them that have been defiled . The literal rendering of the participle brings out better the incidental or occasional character of the defilement.

Vincent: Heb 9:14

Through the eternal spirit ( διὰ πνεύματος αἰωνίου )

For the rend. an . Διὰ through = by virtue of . Not the Holy Spirit, who is never so designated, but Christ's own human spirit: the higher element of Christ's being in his human life, which was charged with the eternal principle of the divine life. Comp. Rom 1:4; 1Co 15:45; 1Pe 3:18; Heb 7:16. This is the key to the doctrine of Christ's sacrifice. The significance and value of his atonement lie in the personal quality and motive of Christ himself which are back of the sacrificial act. The offering was the offering of Christ's deepest self - his inmost personality. Therein consists the attraction of the cross, not to the shedding of blood, but to Christ himself. This is Christ's own declaration, Joh 12:32. " I will draw all men unto me ." Therein consists its potency for men: not in Christ's satisfaction of justice by suffering a legal penalty, but in that the cross is the supreme expression of a divine spirit of love, truth, mercy, brotherhood, faith, ministry, unselfishness, holiness, - a spirit which goes out to men with divine intensity of purpose and yearning to draw them into its own sphere, and to make them partakers of its own eternal quality. This was a fact before the foundation of the world, is a fact today, and will be a fact so long as any life remains unreconciled to God. Atonement is eternal in virtue of the eternal spirit of Christ through which he offered himself to God.

Vincent: Heb 9:14

Offered himself without spot ( ἑαυτὸν προσήνεγκεν ἄμωμον )

The two other elements which give superior validity to Christ's sacrifice. It was voluntary , a self-offering , unlike that of brute beasts who had no volition and no sense of the reason why they were offered. It was spotless . He was a perfectly righteous, sinless being, perfectly and voluntarily obedient to the Father's will, even unto the suffering of death. The legal victims were only physically unblemished according to ceremonial standards. Ἄμωμος in lxx, technically, of victims, Exo 29:1; Lev 1:3, Lev 1:10, etc.

Vincent: Heb 9:14

Purge your conscience ( καθαριεῖ τὴν συνείδησιν ἡμῶν )

For your rend. our . The superior nature of Christ's sacrifice appears in its deeper effect . While the Levitical sacrifice accomplished only formal, ritual expiation, leaving the inner man unaffected, while it wrought externally and dealt with specific sins the effect of Christ's sacrifice goes to the center of the moral and spiritual life, and cleanses the very fountainhead of being, thus doing its work where only an eternal spirit can do it. Καθαρίζειν to purge is not a classical word. In Class. καθαιρεῖν (also in lxx): but καθαρίζειν appears in inscriptions in a ritual sense, and with ἀπὸ from , as here, thus showing that the word was not confined to biblical and ecclesiastical Greek.

Vincent: Heb 9:14

From dead works ( ἀπὸ νεκρῶν ἔργων )

The effect of Christ's sacrifice upon the conscience transmits itself to the works, and fills them with the living energy of the eternal spirit. It changes the character of works by purging them of the element of death. This element belongs not only to works which are acknowledged as sinful and are committed by sinful men, but to works which go under the name of religious, yet are performed in a merely legal spirit. None the less, because it is preeminently the religion of faith, does Christianity apply the severest and most radical of tests to works. Professor Bruce truthfully says that " the severest test of Christ's power to redeem is his ability to loose the bonds springing out of a legal religion, by which many are bound who have escaped the dominion of gross, sinful habits."

Vincent: Heb 9:15

The efficacy of Christ's sacrifice is bound up with a covenant. His priesthood involves a new and a better covenant. See Heb 8:6-13. That covenant involves his death.

For this cause ( διὰ τοῦτο )

Indicating the close relation between the cleansing power of Christ's blood and the new covenant.

Vincent: Heb 9:15

Mediator of the new testament ( διαθήκης καινῆς μεσίτης )

For the new testament rend. a new covenant . See on next verse. For μεσίτης mediator , see on Gal 3:19, Gal 3:20.

Vincent: Heb 9:15

By means of death ( θανάτου γενομένου )

Rend. a death having taken place .

Vincent: Heb 9:15

For the redemption of the transgressions ( εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῶν παραβάσεων )

The phrase redemption of transgressions (that is, from transgressions) only here. Ἀπολύτρωσις in N.T. mostly absolutely: the redemption, or your redemption, or simply redemption . Twice with genitive of that which is redeemed, Rom 8:23; Eph 1:14. Only once in lxx, Dan 4:32. For παράβασις transgression , see on Rom 2:23.

Vincent: Heb 9:15

Under the first testament ( ἐπὶ )

On the basis of: estimated according to the standard of the provisions of the first covenant, and to be atoned for in the way which it prescribed. By this expression he emphasizes the insufficiency of every other atoning provision, selecting the system which represented the most elaborate and complete atonement for sin prior to Christ. The intimation is in the same direction with that of the phrase through an eternal spirit - that the ideal redemption must be eternal.

Vincent: Heb 9:15

They which are called ( οἱ κεκλημένοι )

Without regard to nationality. The scope of the new covenant was wider than that of the old. Comp. Act 2:39. In Heb 3:1, the readers are addressed as " partakers of a heavenly calling," which corresponds with " eternal inheritance" here. Those who obtain this inheritance are designated as " called." See Eph 1:18; 1Th 2:12; 1Th 5:24; 1Pe 3:9.

Vincent: Heb 9:15

Of eternal inheritance ( τῆς αἰωνίου κληρονομίας )

Rend. " the eternal inheritance" : something recognized as a fact. For κληρονομία inheritance , see on 1Pe 1:4, and comp. Eph 1:14. The whole statement implies that the provisions of the Levitical system were inadequate to procure and insure full salvation.

Vincent: Heb 9:16

For where a testament is ( ὅπου γὰρ διαθήκη )

" The English Version has involved this passage in hopeless obscurity by introducing the idea of a testament and a testator." This statement of Rendall (Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 159) is none too strong. That interpretation, however, is maintained by a very strong array of modern expositors. It is based upon κληρονομία inheritance ; it being claimed that this word changes the whole current of thought. Hence it is said that the new covenant established by Christ is here represented as a testamentary disposition on his part, which could become operative in putting the heirs in possession of the inheritance only through the death of Christ. See Additional Note at the end of this chapter.

Vincent: Heb 9:16

There must also of necessity be the death of the testator ( θάνατου ἀνάγκη φέρεσθαι τοῦ διαθεμένου )

Rend. it is necessary that the death of the institutor ( of the covenant ) should be borne . With the rendering testament , φέρεσθαι is well-nigh inexplicable. If covenant the meaning is not difficult. If he had meant to say it is necessary that the institutor die , he might better have used γένεσθαι : " it is necessary that the death of the institutor take place " ; but he meant to say that it was necessary that the institutor die representatively ; that death should be borne for him by an animal victim. If we render testament , it follows that the death of the testator himself is referred to, for which θάνατου φέρεσθαι is a very unusual and awkward expression.

Additional Note on Heb 9:16

Against the rendering testament for διαθήκη , and in favor of retaining covenant , are the following considerations:

(a) The abruptness of the change , and its interruption of the line of reasoning . It is introduced into the middle of a continuous argument, in which the new covenant is compared and contrasted with the Mosaic covenant (8:6-10:18).

(b) The turning-point, both of the analogy and of the contrast, is that both covenants were inaugurated and ratified by death : not ordinary , natural death, but sacrificial, violent death, accompanied with bloodshedding as an essential feature. Such a death is plainly indicated in Heb 9:15. If διαθήκη signifies testament , θάνατον death in Heb 9:16 must mean natural death without bloodshed.

(c) The figure of a testament would not appeal to Hebrews in connection with an inheritance. On the contrary, the idea of the κληρονομία was always associated in the Hebrew mind with the inheritance of Canaan, and that inheritance with the idea of a covenant. See Deu 4:20-23; 1Ch 16:15-18; Psa 105:8-11.

(d) In lxx, from which our writer habitually quotes, διαθήκη has universally the meaning of covenant. It occurs about 350 times, mostly representing áְּøִéú , covenant . In the Apocryphal books it has the same sense, except in Sir. 38:33, where it signifies disposition or arrangement . Διατιθέσθαι to dispose or arrange represents ëָּøַֽú , to cut off , hew , divide . The phrase ëָּøַֽú áְּøִֽú , to cut (i.e., make ) a covenant , is very common. The verb marks a disposing by the divine will, to which man becomes a party by assent; while συντιθέσθαι indicates an arrangement between two equal parties. There is not a trace of the meaning testament in the Greek O.T. In the classics διαθήκη is usually testament . Philo uses the word in the sense of covenant , but also shows how it acquired that of testament ( De Mutatione Nominum , § 6 ff.). The Vulgate has testamentum , even where the sense of covenant is indisputable. See Exo 30:26; Num 14:44; 2Ki 6:15; Jer 3:16; Mal 3:1; Luk 1:72, Act 3:25; Act 7:8. Also in N.T. quotations from the O.T., where, in its translation of the O.T., it uses foedus . See Jer 31:31, cit. Heb 8:8. For διατιθέσθαι of making a covenant, see Heb 8:10; Act 3:25; Heb 10:16.

(e) The ratification of a covenant by the sacrifice of a victim is attested by Gen 15:10; Psa 1:5; Jer 34:18. This is suggested also by the phrase ëָּøַֽú áְּøִֽú , to cut a covenant , which finds abundant analogy in both Greek and Latin. Thus we have ὅρκια τάμνειν to cut oaths , that is, to sacrifice a victim in attestation (Hom. Il . ii. 124; Od . xxiv. 483: Hdt. vii. 132). Similarly, σπονδὰς let us cut ( make ) a league (Eurip. Hel . 1235): φίλια τέμνεσθαι to cement friendship by sacrificing a victim; lit. to cut friendship (Eurip. Suppl . 375). In Latin, foedus ferire to strike a league foedus ictum a ratified league, ratified by a blow ( ictus ).

(f) If testament is the correct translation in Heb 9:16, Heb 9:17, the writer is fairly chargeable with a rhetorical blunder; for Heb 9:18 ff. is plainly intended as a historical illustration of the propositions in Heb 9:16, Heb 9:17, and the illustration turns on a point entirely different from the matter illustrated. The writer is made to say, " A will is of no force until after the testator's death; therefore the first covenant was ratified with the blood of victims.

Vincent: Heb 9:17

For a testament is of force after men are dead ( διαθήκη γὰρ ἐπὶ νεκροῖς βεβαία )

Rend. " for a covenant is of force (or sure) over (or upon) dead (victims)." Comp. Soph. Elect . 237; Eurip. Ion . 228; Aesch. Eumen . 316; Hdt. iv. 162. See also Lev 21:5.

Vincent: Heb 9:17

Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth ( ἐπεὶ μὴ τότε ἰσχύει ὅτε ζῇ ὁ διαθέμενος )

Rend. " since it hath not then force when the institutor is alive" : until he has been representatively slain.

Vincent: Heb 9:18

Whereupon ( ὅθεν )

Rend. wherefore , or for which reason : on the general principle that a covenant must be ratified by death.

Vincent: Heb 9:18

Neither the first testament was dedicated without blood ( οὐδὲ ἡ πρώτη χωρὶς αἵματος ἐνκεκαίνισται )

Rend. " neither hath the first (covenant) been inaugurated without blood." There is surely no excuse for inserting testament here, as A.V., since the allusion is clearly to the ratification of a covenant with blood. But further, as this and the verses immediately following are intended to furnish a historical illustration of the statements in Heb 9:16, Heb 9:17, we seem forced either to render covenant in those verses, or to assume that the transaction here related was the ratification of a will and testament, or to find our writer guilty of using an illustration which turns on a point entirely different from the matter which he is illustrating. Thus: a testament is of force after men are dead. It has no force so long as the testator is alive. Wherefore , the first covenant was ratified by slaying victims and sprinkling their blood. For the incident see Exo 24:8. Ἐνκαινίζειν only here and Heb 10:20. lxx, to renew , 1Sa 11:14; 2Ch 15:8; Psa 51:10 : to dedicate , 1Ki 8:63; 1 Macc. 4:36. Comp. τὰ ἐνκαίνια the feast of dedication , Joh 10:22. Rend. οὐδὲ neither , as A.V., and not not even , in which case the meaning would be, " not even the first covenant, although its ministries did not perfect the worshipper as touching the conscience," a thought which would be foreign to the point, which is merely the analogy in the matter of death.

Vincent: Heb 9:19

The statement of Heb 9:18 historically confirmed by the story of the establishment of the law-covenant, Exodus 24.

Of calves and goats ( τῶν μόσχων καὶ τῶν τράγων )

Not mentioned in the O.T. account. The goat was always for a sin-offering, and the sacrifices on this occasion were oxen, and are described as burnt offerings and sacrifices of peace, Exo 24:5. In the original covenant with Abraham a she-goat and a heifer are specially mentioned, Gen 15:9.

Vincent: Heb 9:19

Water, scarlet wool, hyssop - sprinkled the book ( ὕδατος, ἐρίου κοκκίνου, ὑσσώπου αὐτό τε τὸ βιβλίον ἐράντισεν )

None of these are mentioned in the O.T. account, which the writer appears to have filled up from the details of subsequent usage. Comp. the additions in Heb 9:5, Heb 9:10. It will also be observed that the sacrifices on the occasion of establishing the law covenant were not made according to the Mosaic ritual. They were offered, not by the priests, but by the young men, Exo 24:5. For κόκκινος scarlet , see on Mat 27:6. Ὕσσωπος hyssop appears in Exo 12:22; Lev 14:4, Lev 14:6, Lev 14:49; Num 19:6, Num 19:18; Psa 51:9; Joh 19:29. Mostly in connection with lustral ceremonies. The vexed question of the precise botanical character of the plant has never been decisively settled.

Vincent: Heb 9:22

The historical facts are summed up, emphasizing one point - cleansing by blood.

Almost all things ( σχεδον - πάντα )

The A.V. is wrong. Σξεδὸν almost or nearly is prefixed to the entire clause, and applies to both its members. Rend. " and I may almost say, it is in blood," etc. Almost provides for such exceptions as Exo 19:10; Exo 32:30-32; Exo 5:11-13; Lev 15:5; Lev 16:26-28; Lev 22:6; Num 16:46-48; Num 31:23, Num 31:24; Psalm 51:1-17; Psa 32:1, Psa 32:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:22

And without shedding of blood is no remission ( καὶ χωρὶς αἱματεκχυσίας οὐ γίνεται ἄφεσις )

This sentence also is covered by " I may almost say." It does not state that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, which " would be in conflict with the history and literature of the Old Testament." See exceptions above. Ἁιματεκχυσία shedding of blood , N.T.o , o lxx, o Class. Οὐ γίνεται ἄφεσις , lit. remission does not take place or ensue . For ἄφεσις see on Jam 5:15; most frequent in Luke and Acts. In Hebrews only here and Heb 10:18. Commonly with a genitive, in the phrase remission of sins : but sometimes absolutely as here, Mar 3:29; Luk 4:18.

Vincent: Heb 9:23

The heavenly sanctuary required a better purification than the Levitical.

The patterns of things in the heavens

The earthly tabernacle and its furniture. See on Heb 8:5.

Vincent: Heb 9:23

With these ( τούτοις )

Things specified in Heb 9:19.

Vincent: Heb 9:23

With better sacrifices ( κρείττοσι θυσίαις )

How can it be said that the heavenly things needed cleansing? It is not easy to answer. Various explanations have been proposed, which the student will find collected in Alford's note on this passage. The expression is rhetorical and figurative, and appears to be founded on that feature of the Levitical ritual according to which the high priest was required, on the Great Day of Atonement, to make an atonement for the sanctuary, " because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel." He was to do this also for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the great altar. See Lev 16:16 ff. The rite implied that even the holy of holies had contracted defilement from the people's sin. Similarly, the atoning blood of Christ is conceived as purifying the things of the heavenly sanctuary which had been defiled by the sins of men. " If the heavenly city of God, with its Holy Place, is, conformably with the promise, destined for the covenant-people, that they may there attain to perfect fellowship with God, then their guilt has defiled these holy things as well as the earthly, and they must be purified in the same way as the typical law appointed for the latter, only not by the blood of an imperfect, but of a perfect sacrifice" (Delitzsch).

Vincent: Heb 9:24

Under the old covenant, the bloodshedding was symbolical: the death of the institutor was by proxy. In the ratification of the new covenant, Christ himself was the covenant-victim, and a real cleansing power attaches to his blood as the offering of his eternal spirit.

The holy places made with hands ( χειροποίητα ἅγια )

For holy places rend. a holy place , the plural being used of the sanctuary. Christ is not entered into a hand-made sanctuary.

Vincent: Heb 9:24

Figures ( ἀντίτυπα )

Or. figure . Only here and 1Pe 3:21, see note. Answering to the patterns in the heavens, Heb 8:5. Rev. like in pattern .

Vincent: Heb 9:24

Now to appear ( νῦν ἐμφανισθῆναι )

Now , not only in contrast with the time of the old, typical economy, but also implying a continually-present manifestation, for us , now , as at his first entrance into the heavenly sanctuary . Ἐμφανισθῆναι , rend. to be manifested . Better than to appear , because it exhibits the manifestation of Christ as something brought about as the result of a new and better economy, and distinctly contemplated in the institution of that economy. Christ is made openly manifest before the face of God. The Levitical priest was compelled to shroud the ark and the shekinah with incense-smoke, that he might not look upon God face to face.

Vincent: Heb 9:25

Nor yet that ( οὐ δ ' ἵνα )

Supply did he enter . " Nor yet did he enter that he might offer," etc.

Vincent: Heb 9:25

He should offer himself often ( πολλάκις προσφέρῃ ἑαυτόν )

His offering did not need repetition like the Levitical sacrifices. Offer himself refers rather to Christ's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary and presentation of himself before God, than to his offering on the cross. See on Heb 9:14. The sacrifice on the cross is described by παθεῖν suffer , Heb 9:26, and is introduced as a distinct thought. The point is that, being once in the heavenly sanctuary, Christ was not compelled to renew often his presentation of himself there, since, in that case, it would be necessary for him to suffer often. Each separate offering would necessitate a corresponding suffering.

Vincent: Heb 9:26

Since the foundation of the world ( ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου )

For, from the foundation of the world, sin required atonement by sacrifice; and, therefore, if Christ had been a victim like others, which must be offered repeatedly, he would have had to suffer repeatedly from the foundation of the world. If his sacrifice, like the animal atonements, had availed for a time only, he would have been obliged to repeat his offering whenever that time expired; and, since his atonement was designed to be universal, it would have been necessary for him to appear repeatedly upon earth, and to die repeatedly from the foundation of the world. Comp. 1Pe 1:20; Rev 13:8.

Vincent: Heb 9:26

In the end of the world ( ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων )

In N.T συντέλεια consummation , always with αἰὼν age . With the plural αἰώσων only here. Everywhere else συντέλεια αἰῶνος . The A.V. gives a wrong impression as of the end of this visible world. The true sense is the consummation of the ages : that is to say, Christ appeared when the former ages had reached their moral consummation under the old Levitical economy. Comp. Heb 1:2.

Vincent: Heb 9:26

To put away sin ( εἰς ἀθίτησιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας )

Lit. for the putting away of sin . For ἀθέτησις see on Heb 7:18. Note the singular number, sin . The sacrifice of Christ dealt with sin as a principle: the Levitical sacrifices with individual transgressions.

Vincent: Heb 9:27

That there is no place for a repeated offering of Christ is further shown by reference to the lot of men in general. The very idea is absurd; for men die once, and judgment follows. Christ was man, and Christ died. He will not come to earth to live and die again. Christ died, but judgment did not follow in his case. On the contrary, he became judge of all.

It is appointed ( ἀπόκειται )

Lit. is laid by in store . Comp. Luk 19:20; Col 1:5 (see note); 2Ti 4:8.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

Christ

Emphasizing him, as the figure to which the old economy pointed.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

Was once offered ( ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς )

Lit. having been offered once for all . Note the passive in contrast with offer himself , Heb 9:25. He was appointed to die as truly as we. Comp. Luk 24:26; Mat 26:53, Mat 26:54; Psa 40:7, Psa 40:8.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

To bear ( ἀνενεγκεῖν )

Not in the sense of bearing a sin offering up to the cross ; for ἁμαρτία never means a sin-offering; nor in the sense of putting away ; but signifying to take upon himself and bear as a burden .

Vincent: Heb 9:28

Unto them that look for him ( τοῖς αὐτὸν ἀπεκδεχομένοις )

Rend. await him . For the verb, see on Phi 3:20. This second coming with salvation is only for those who await him in faith.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

Shall he appear ( ὀφθήσεται )

The usual verb for the appearance of Christ after his resurrection.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

The second time ( ἐκ δευτέρου )

A phrase quite common in N.T., but not in Paul. The idea is, beginning from the second: the second in a series taken as the point of departure. As among men judgment follows as the second thing after death, so, when Christ shall appear for the second time, he will appear as the sinless Savior.

Vincent: Heb 9:28

Unto salvation ( εἰς σωτηρίαν )

Not as a sinner to be judged, but as the Savior of mankind. It is not said that he will appear as judge, but only that he will not share the judgment which befalls all men after death. Still the phrase may imply that he will award salvation, as judge, to such as have believed on him.

Wesley: Heb 9:1

a visible, material sanctuary, or tabernacle. Of this sanctuary he treats, Heb 9:2-5. Of those ordinances, Heb 9:6-10.

Wesley: Heb 9:2

The outward tabernacle. In which was the candlestick, and the table - The shewbread, shown continually before God and all the people, consisting of twelve loaves, according to the number of the tribes, was placed on this table in two rows, six upon one another in each row. This candlestick and bread seem to have typified the light and life which are more largely dispensed under the gospel by Him who is the Light of the world, and the Bread of life.

Wesley: Heb 9:3

The second veil divided the holy place from the most holy, as the first veil did the holy place from the courts.

Wesley: Heb 9:4

Used by the high priest only, on the great day of atonement. And the ark, or chest, of the covenant - So called from the tables of the covenant contained therein.

Wesley: Heb 9:4

The monument of God's care over Israel.

Wesley: Heb 9:4

The monument of the regular priesthood.

Wesley: Heb 9:4

The two tables of stone, on which the ten commandments were written by the finger of God the most venerable monument of all.

Wesley: Heb 9:5

Over which the glory of God used to appear. Some suppose each of these had four faces, and so represented the Three - One God, with the manhood assumed by the Second Person.

Wesley: Heb 9:5

spread wings shadowing the mercy - seat - Which was a lid or plate of gold, covering the ark.

Wesley: Heb 9:6

Every day.

Wesley: Heb 9:6

Lighting the lamps, changing the shewbread, burning incense, and sprinkling the blood of the sin offerings.

Wesley: Heb 9:7

That is, sins of ignorance, to which only those atonements extended.

Wesley: Heb 9:8

By this token.

Wesley: Heb 9:8

Into heaven.

Wesley: Heb 9:8

Not so clearly revealed. While the first tabernacle, and its service, were still subsisting - And remaining in force.

Wesley: Heb 9:9

Tabernacle, with all its furniture and services.

Wesley: Heb 9:9

Or type, of good things to come Which cannot perfect the worshipper - Neither the priest nor him who brought the offering.

Wesley: Heb 9:9

So that he should be no longer conscious of the guilt or power of sin. Observe, the temple was as yet standing.

Wesley: Heb 9:10

Till Christ came.

Wesley: Heb 9:11

Described, Heb 9:15. Entered through a greater, that is, a more noble, and perfect tabernacle - Namely, his own body.

Wesley: Heb 9:11

Not framed by man, as that tabernacle was.

Wesley: Heb 9:12

Heaven.

Wesley: Heb 9:12

All that believe.

Wesley: Heb 9:13

Consumed by fire as a sin-offering, being sprinkled on them who were legally unclean.

Wesley: Heb 9:13

Removed that legal uncleanness, and re - admitted them to the temple and the congregation. Num 19:17-19.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

The merit of all his sufferings.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

The work of redemption being the work of the whole Trinity. Neither is the Second Person alone concerned even in the amazing condescension that was needful to complete it. The Father delivers up the kingdom to the Son; and the Holy Ghost becomes the gift of the Messiah, being, as it were, sent according to his good pleasure.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

Infinitely more precious than any created victim, and that without spot to God.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

Our inmost soul.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

From all the inward and outward works of the devil, which spring from spiritual death in the soul, and lead to death everlasting.

Wesley: Heb 9:14

In the life of faith, in perfect love and spotless holiness.

Wesley: Heb 9:15

To the engagements and benefits thereof. Might receive the eternal inheritance promised to Abraham: not by means of legal sacrifices, but of his meritorious death.

Wesley: Heb 9:15

That is, for the redemption of transgressors from the guilt and punishment of those sins which were committed in the time of the old covenant. The article of his death properly divides the old covenant from the new.

Wesley: Heb 9:16

Seeing it is by his death that the benefits of it are purchased. It seems beneath the dignity of the apostle to play upon the ambiguity of the Greek word, as the common translation supposes him to do.

Wesley: Heb 9:17

Neither this, nor after men are dead is a literal translation of the words. It is a very perplexed passage.

Wesley: Heb 9:18

The Jewish covenant, originally transacted without the blood of an appointed sacrifice.

Wesley: Heb 9:19

Or heifers. And of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop - All these circumstances are not particularly mentioned in that chapter of Exodus, but are supposed to be already known from other passages of Moses.

Wesley: Heb 9:19

Which contained all he had said.

Wesley: Heb 9:19

Who were near him. The blood was mixed with water to prevent its growing too stiff for sprinkling; perhaps also to typify that blood and water, Joh 19:34. Exo 24:7-8

Wesley: Heb 9:20

By this it is established. Exo 24:8.

Wesley: Heb 9:21

When it was made, and all its vessels, to be sprinkled with blood once a year.

Wesley: Heb 9:22

For some were purified by water or fire.

Wesley: Heb 9:22

Offered or sprinkled. And according to the law, there is no forgiveness of sins without shedding of blood - All this pointed to the blood of Christ effectually cleansing from all sin, and intimated, there can be no purification from it by any other means.

Wesley: Heb 9:23

That is, it plainly appears from what has been said.

Wesley: Heb 9:23

According to the appointment of God. That the tabernacle and all its utensils, which were patterns, shadowy representations, of things in heaven, should be purified by these - Sacrifices and sprinklings.

Wesley: Heb 9:23

Our heaven - born spirits: what more this may mean we know not yet.

Wesley: Heb 9:23

That is, by a better sacrifice, which is here opposed to all the legal sacrifices, and is expressed plurally, because it includes the signification of them all, and is of so much more eminent virtue.

Wesley: Heb 9:24

He never went into the holy of holies at Jerusalem, the figure of the true tabernacle in heaven, Heb 8:2. But into heaven itself, to appear in the presence of God for us - As our glorious high priest and powerful intercessor.

Wesley: Heb 9:26

This supposes, That by suffering once he atoned for all the sins which had been committed from the foundation of the world. That he could not have atoned for them without suffering.

Wesley: Heb 9:26

The sacrifice of Christ divides the whole age or duration of the world into two parts, and extends its virtue backward and forward, from this middle point wherein they meet to abolish both the guilt and power of sin.

Wesley: Heb 9:27

Of the great day. At the moment of death every man's final state is determined. But there is not a word in scripture of a particular judgment immediately after death.

Wesley: Heb 9:28

The punishment due to them.

Wesley: Heb 9:28

Even as many as are born into the world.

Wesley: Heb 9:28

When he comes to judgment.

Wesley: Heb 9:28

Not as he did before, bearing on himself the sins of many, but to bestow everlasting salvation.

JFB: Heb 9:1

Greek, "Accordingly then." Resuming the subject from Heb 8:5. In accordance with the command given to Moses, "the first covenant had," &c.

JFB: Heb 9:1

Not "has," for as a covenant it no longer existed, though its rites were observed till the destruction of Jerusalem.

JFB: Heb 9:1

Of divine right and institution.

JFB: Heb 9:1

Worship.

JFB: Heb 9:1

Greek, "its (literally, 'the') sanctuary worldly," mundane; consisting of the elements of the visible world. Contrasted with the heavenly sanctuary. Compare Heb 9:11-12, "not of this building," Heb 9:24. Material, outward, perishing (however precious its materials were), and also defective religiously. In Heb 9:2-5, "the worldly sanctuary" is discussed; in Heb 9:6, &c., the "ordinances of worship." The outer tabernacle the Jews believed, signified this world; the Holy of Holies, heaven. JOSEPHUS calls the outer, divided into two parts, "a secular and common place," answering to "the earth and sea"; and the inner holiest place, the third part, appropriated to God and not accessible to men.

JFB: Heb 9:2

Defining "the worldly tabernacle."

JFB: Heb 9:2

"the tabernacle."

JFB: Heb 9:2

Built and furnished.

JFB: Heb 9:2

The anterior tabernacle.

JFB: Heb 9:2

Typifying light and life (Exo 25:31-39). The candlestick consisted of a shaft and six branches of gold, seven in all, the bowls made like almonds, with a knop and a flower in one branch. It was carried in Vespasian's triumph, and the figure is to be seen on Titus' arch at Rome. The table of shittim wood, covered with gold, was for the showbread (Exo 25:23-30).

JFB: Heb 9:2

Literally, "the setting forth of the loaves," that is, the loaves set forth: "the show of the bread" [ALFORD]. In the outer holy place: so the Eucharist continues until our entrance into the heavenly Holy of Holies (1Co 11:26).

JFB: Heb 9:2

"which (tabernacle) is called the holy place," as distinguished from "the Holy of Holies."

JFB: Heb 9:3

Greek, "But."

JFB: Heb 9:3

Behind; within.

JFB: Heb 9:3

There were two veils or curtains, one before the Holy of Holies (catapetasma), here alluded to, the other before the tabernacle door (calumma).

JFB: Heb 9:3

As opposed to "the true."

JFB: Heb 9:4

The Greek, must not be translated "altar of incense," for it was not in "the holiest" place "after the second veil," but in "the holy place"; but as in 2Ch 26:19, and Eze 8:11, "censer": so Vulgate and Syriac. This GOLDEN censer was only used on the day of atonement (other kinds of censers on other days), and is therefore associated with the holiest place, as being taken into it on that anniversary by the high priest. The expression "which had," does not mean that the golden censer was deposited there, for in that case the high priest would have had to go in and bring it out before burning incense in it; but that the golden censer was one of the articles belonging to, and used for, the yearly service in the holiest place. He virtually supposes (without specifying) the existence of the "altar of incense" in the anterior holy place, by mentioning the golden censer filled with incense from it: the incense answers to the prayers of the saints; and the altar though outside the holiest place, is connected with it (standing close by the second veil, directly before the ark of the covenant), even as we find an antitypical altar in heaven. The rending of the veil by Christ has brought the antitypes to the altar, candlestick, and showbread of the anterior holy place into the holiest place, heaven. In 1Ki 6:22, Hebrew, "the altar" is said to belong to the oracle, or holiest place (compare Exo 30:6).

JFB: Heb 9:4

Of shittim wood, that is, acacia. Not in the second temple, but in its stead was a stone basement (called "the stone of foundation"), three fingers high.

JFB: Heb 9:4

"golden," added in the Septuagint, and sanctioned by Paul.

JFB: Heb 9:4

An omer, each man's daily portion. In 1Ki 8:9; 2Ch 5:10, it is said there was nothing in the ark of Solomon's temple save the two stone tables of the law put in by Moses. But the expression that there was nothing THEN therein save the two tables, leaves the inference to be drawn that formerly there were the other things mentioned by the Rabbis and by Paul here, the pot of manna (the memorial of God's providential care of Israel) and the rod of Aaron, the memorial of the lawful priesthood (Num 17:3, Num 17:5, Num 17:7, Num 17:10). The expressions "before the Lord" (Exo 16:32), and "before the testimony" (Num 17:10) thus mean, "IN the ark." "In," however, may be used here (as the corresponding Hebrew word) as to things attached to the ark as appendages, as the book of the law was put "in the side of the ark," and so the golden jewels offered by the Philistines (1Sa 6:8).

JFB: Heb 9:4

(Deu 9:9; Deu 10:2).

JFB: Heb 9:5

Over "the ark of the covenant."

JFB: Heb 9:5

Representing the ruling powers by which God acts in the moral and natural world. (See on Eze 1:6; Eze 10:1). Hence sometimes they answer to the ministering angels; but mostly to the elect redeemed, by whom God shall hereafter rule the world and set forth His manifold wisdom: redeemed humanity, combining in, and with itself, the highest forms of subordinate creaturely life; not angels. They stand on the mercy seat, and on that ground become the habitation of God, from which His glory is to shine upon the world. They expressly say, Rev 5:8-10, "Thou hast redeemed us." They are there distinguished from the angels, and associated with the elders. They were of one piece with the mercy seat, even as the Church is one with Christ: their sole standing is on the blood-sprinkled mercy seat; they gaze down at it as the redeemed shall for ever; they are "the habitation of God through the Spirit."

JFB: Heb 9:5

The cherubim were bearers of the divine glory, whence, perhaps, they derive their name. The Shekinah, or cloud of glory, in which Jehovah appeared between the cherubim over the mercy seat, the lid of the ark, is doubtless the reference. THOLUCK thinks the twelve loaves of the showbread represent the twelve tribes of the nation, presented as a community before God consecrated to Him (just as in the Lord's Supper believers, the spiritual Israel, all partaking of the one bread, and becoming one bread and one body, present themselves before the Lord as consecrated to Him, 1Co 10:16-17); the oil and light, the pure knowledge of the Lord, in which the covenant people are to shine (the seven (lights), implying perfection); the ark of the covenant, the symbol of God's kingdom in the old covenant, and representing God dwelling among His own; the ten commandments in the ark, the law as the basis of union between God and man; the mercy seat covering the law and sprinkled with the blood of atonement for the collective sin of the people, God's mercy [in Christ] stronger than the law; the cherubim, the personified [redeemed] creation, looking down on the mercy seat, where God's mercy, and God's law, are set forth as the basis of creation.

JFB: Heb 9:5

Greek, "the propitiatory": the golden cover of the ark, on which was sprinkled the blood of the propitiatory sacrifice on the day of atonement; the footstool of Jehovah, the meeting place of Him and His people.

JFB: Heb 9:5

Conveniently: besides what met the eye in the sanctuary, there were spiritual realities symbolized which it would take too long to discuss in detail, our chief subject at present being the priesthood and the sacrifices. "Which" refers not merely to the cherubim, but to all the contents of the sanctuary enumerated in Heb 9:2-5.

JFB: Heb 9:6

The use made of the sanctuary so furnished by the high priest on the anniversary of atonement.

JFB: Heb 9:6

Arranged.

JFB: Heb 9:6

Twice at the least every day, for the morning and evening care of the lamps, and offering of incense (Exo 30:7-8).

JFB: Heb 9:6

Greek, "enter": present tense.

JFB: Heb 9:7

The tenth day of the seventh month. He entered within the veil on that day twice at least. Thus "once" means here on the one occasion only. The two, or possibly more, entrances on that one day were regarded as parts of the one whole.

JFB: Heb 9:7

(Heb 8:3).

JFB: Heb 9:7

Greek, "offers."

JFB: Heb 9:7

Greek, "ignorances": "inadvertent errors." They might have known, as the law was clearly promulged, and they were bound to study it; so that their ignorance was culpable (compare Act 3:17; Eph 4:18; 1Pe 1:14). Though one's ignorance may mitigate one's punishment (Luk 12:48), it does not wholly exempt from punishment.

JFB: Heb 9:8

Moses himself did not comprehend the typical meaning (1Pe 1:11-12).

JFB: Heb 9:8

By the typical exclusion of all from the holiest, save the high priest once a year.

JFB: Heb 9:8

Heaven, the antitype.

JFB: Heb 9:8

The anterior tabernacle, representative of the whole Levitical system. While it (the first tabernacle, and that which represents the Levitical system) as yet "has a standing" (so the Greek, that is, "has continuance": "lasts"), the way to heaven (the antitypical "holiest place") is not yet made manifest (compare Heb 10:19-20). The Old Testament economy is represented by the holy place, the New Testament economy by the Holy of Holies. Redemption, by Christ, has opened the Holy of Holies (access to heaven by faith now, Heb 4:16; Heb 7:19, Heb 7:25; Heb 10:19, Heb 10:22; by sight hereafter, Isa 33:24; Rev 11:19; Rev 21:2-3) to all mankind. The Greek for "not yet" (me po) refers to the mind of the Spirit: the Spirit intimating that men should not think the way was yet opened [TITTMANN]. The Greek negative, "ou po," would deny the fact objectively; "me po" denies the thing subjectively.

JFB: Heb 9:9

"The which," namely, anterior tabernacle: "as being that which was" [ALFORD].

JFB: Heb 9:9

Greek, "parable": a parabolic setting forth of the character of the Old Testament.

JFB: Heb 9:9

"in reference to the existing time." The time of the temple-worship really belonged to the Old Testament, but continued still in Paul's time and that of his Hebrew readers. "The time of reformation" (Heb 9:10) stands in contrast to this, "the existing time"; though, in reality, "the time of reformation," the New Testament time, was now present and existing. So "the age to come," is the phrase applied to the Gospel, because it was present only to believers, and its fulness even to them is still to come. Compare Heb 9:11, "good things to come."

JFB: Heb 9:9

Tabernacle, not time, according to the reading of the oldest manuscripts. Or translate, "according to which" parabolic representation, or figure.

JFB: Heb 9:9

Greek, "are."

JFB: Heb 9:9

Unbloody oblations.

JFB: Heb 9:9

Greek, "cannot": are not able.

JFB: Heb 9:9

Any worshipper. The Greek is "latreuein," serve God, which is all men's duty; not "leitourgein," to serve in a ministerial office.

JFB: Heb 9:9

Perfectly remove the sense of guilt, and sanctify inwardly through love.

JFB: Heb 9:9

"in respect to the (moral-religious) consciousness." They can only reach as far as the outward flesh (compare "carnal ordinances," Heb 9:10, Heb 9:13-14).

JFB: Heb 9:10

Sacrifices.

JFB: Heb 9:10

Consisted in [ALFORD]; or, "have attached to them" only things which appertain to the use of foods, &c. The rites of meats, &c., go side by side with the sacrifices [THOLUCK and WAHL]; compare Col 2:16.

JFB: Heb 9:10

(Lev 10:9; Lev 11:4). Usage subsequently to the law added many observances as to meats and drinks.

JFB: Heb 9:10

(Exo 29:4).

JFB: Heb 9:10

One oldest manuscript, Syriac and Coptic, omit "and." "Carnal ordinances" stand in apposition to "sacrifices" (Heb 9:9). Carnal (outward, affecting only the flesh) is opposed to spiritual. Contrast "flesh" with "conscience" (Heb 9:13-14).

JFB: Heb 9:10

As a burden (Act 15:10, Act 15:28) continually pressing heavy.

JFB: Heb 9:10

Greek, "the season of rectification," when the reality should supersede the type (Heb 8:8-12). Compare "better," Heb 9:23.

JFB: Heb 9:11

In contrast to "could not make . . . perfect" (Heb 9:9).

JFB: Heb 9:11

The Messiah, of whom all the prophets foretold; not "Jesus" here. From whom the "reformation" (Heb 9:10), or rectification, emanates, which frees from the yoke of carnal ordinances, and which is being realized gradually now, and shall be perfectly in the consummation of "the age (world) to come." "Christ . . . High Priest," exactly answers to Lev 4:5, "the priest that is anointed."

JFB: Heb 9:11

Rather, "having come forward (compare Heb 10:7, a different Greek word, picturesquely presenting Him before us) as High Priest." The Levitical priests must therefore retire. Just as on the day of atonement, no work was done, no sacrifice was offered, or priest was allowed to be in the tabernacle while the high priest went into the holiest place to make atonement (Lev 16:17, Lev 16:29). So not our righteousness, nor any other priest's sacrifice, but Christ alone atones; and as the high priest before offering incense had on common garments of a priest, but after it wore his holy garments of "glory and beauty" (Exo 28:2, Exo 28:40) in entering the holiest, so Christ entered the heavenly holiest in His glorified body.

JFB: Heb 9:11

Greek, "the good things to come," Heb 10:1; "better promises," (Heb 8:6; the "eternal inheritance," Heb 9:15; 1Pe 1:4; the "things hoped for," Heb 11:1).

JFB: Heb 9:11

Joined with "He entered." Translate, "Through the . . . tabernacle" (of which we know) [ALFORD]. As the Jewish high priest passed through the anterior tabernacle into the holiest place, so Christ passed through heaven into the inner abode of the unseen and unapproachable God. Thus, "the tabernacle" here is the heavens through which He passed (see on Heb 4:14). But "the tabernacle" is also the glorified body of Christ (see on Heb 8:2), "not of this building" (not of the mere natural "creation, but of the spiritual and heavenly, the new creation"), the Head of the mystical body, the Church. Through this glorified body He passes into the heavenly holiest place (Heb 9:24), the immaterial, unapproachable presence of God, where He intercedes for us. His glorified body, as the meeting place of God and all Christ's redeemed, and the angels, answers to the heavens through which He passed, and passes. His body is opposed to the tabernacle, as His blood to the blood of goats, &c.

JFB: Heb 9:11

As contrasted with the small dimensions of the earthly anterior tabernacle.

JFB: Heb 9:11

Effective in giving pardon, peace, sanctification, and access to closest communion with God (compare Heb 9:9; Heb 10:1).

JFB: Heb 9:11

But by the Lord Himself (Heb 8:2).

JFB: Heb 9:12

"Nor yet."

JFB: Heb 9:12

"through"; as the means of His approach.

JFB: Heb 9:12

Not a bullock, such as the Levitical high priest offered for himself, and a goat for the people, on the day of atonement (Lev 16:6, Lev 16:15), year by year, whence the plural is used, goats . . . calves. Besides the goat offered for the people the blood of which was sprinkled before the mercy seat, the high priest led forth a second goat, namely, the scapegoat; over it he confessed the people's sins, putting them on the head of the goat, which was sent as the sin-bearer into the wilderness out of sight, implying that the atonement effected by the goat sin offering (of which the ceremony of the scapegoat is a part, and not distinct from the sin offering) consisted in the transfer of the people's sins on the goat, and their consequent removal out of sight. The translation of sins on the victim usual in other expiatory sacrifices being omitted in the case of the slain goat, but employed in the case of the goat sent away, proved the two goats were regarded as one offering [ARCHBISHOP MAGEE]. Christ's death is symbolized by the slain goat; His resurrection to life by the living goat sent away. Modern Jews substitute in some places a cock for the goat as an expiation, the sins of the offerers being transferred to the entrails, and exposed on the housetop for the birds to carry out of sight, as the scapegoat did; the Hebrew for "man" and "cock" being similar, gebher [BUXTORF].

JFB: Heb 9:12

"through," as the means of His entrance; the key unlocking the heavenly Holy of Holies to Him. The Greek is forcible, "through THE blood of His own" (compare Heb 9:23).

JFB: Heb 9:12

"once for all."

JFB: Heb 9:12

Having thereby obtained; literally, "found for Himself," as a thing of insuperable difficulty to all save Divine Omnipotence, self-devoting zeal, and love, to find. The access of Christ to the Father was arduous (Heb 5:7). None before had trodden the path.

JFB: Heb 9:12

The entrance of our Redeemer, once for all, into the heavenly holiest place, secures eternal redemption to us; whereas the Jewish high priest's entrance was repeated year by year, and the effect temporary and partial, "On redemption," compare Mat 20:28; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1Ti 2:5; Tit 2:14; 1Pe 1:19.

JFB: Heb 9:13

As we know is the case; so the Greek indicative means. Argument from the less to the greater. If the blood of mere brutes could purify in any, however small a degree, how much more shall inward purification, and complete and eternal salvation, be wrought by the blood of Christ, in whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead?

JFB: Heb 9:13

(Num 19:16-18). The type is full of comfort for us. The water of separation, made of the ashes of the red heifer, was the provision for removing ceremonial defilement whenever incurred by contact with the dead. As she was slain without the camp, so Christ (compare Heb 13:11; Num 19:3-4). The ashes were laid by for constant use; so the continually cleansing effects of Christ's blood, once for all shed. In our wilderness journey we are continually contracting defilement by contact with the spiritually dead, and with dead works, and need therefore continual application to the antitypical life-giving cleansing blood of Christ, whereby we are afresh restored to peace and living communion with God in the heavenly holy place.

JFB: Heb 9:13

Greek, "those defiled" on any particular occasion.

JFB: Heb 9:13

Greek, "purity."

JFB: Heb 9:13

Their effect in themselves extended no further. The law had a carnal and a spiritual aspect; carnal, as an instrument of the Hebrew polity, God, their King, accepting, in minor offenses, expiatory victims instead of the sinner, otherwise doomed to death; spiritual, as the shadow of good things to come (Heb 10:1). The spiritual Israelite derived, in partaking of these legal rights, spiritual blessings not flowing from them, but from the great antitype. Ceremonial sacrifices released from temporal penalties and ceremonial disqualifications; Christ's sacrifice releases from everlasting penalties (Heb 9:12), and moral impurities on the conscience disqualifying from access to God (Heb 9:14). The purification of the flesh (the mere outward man) was by "sprinkling"; the washing followed by inseparable connection (Num 19:19). So justification is followed by renewing.

JFB: Heb 9:14

The voluntary nature of the offering gives it especial efficacy. He "through the eternal Spirit," that is, His divine Spirit (Rom 1:4, in contrast to His "flesh," Heb 9:3; His Godhead, 1Ti 3:16; 1Pe 3:18), "His inner personality" [ALFORD], which gave a free consent to the act, offered Himself. The animals offered had no spirit or will to consent in the act of sacrifice; they were offered according to the law; they had a life neither enduring, nor of any intrinsic efficacy. But He from eternity, with His divine and everlasting Spirit, concurred with the Father's will of redemption by Him. His offering began on the altar of the cross, and was completed in His entering the holiest place with His blood. The eternity and infinitude of His divine Spirit (compare Heb 7:16) gives eternal ("eternal redemption," Heb 9:12, also compare Heb 9:15) and infinite merit to His offering, so that not even the infinite justice of God has any exception to take against it. It was "through His most burning love, flowing from His eternal Spirit," that He offered Himself [OECOLAMPADIUS].

JFB: Heb 9:14

The animal victims had to be without outward blemish; Christ on the cross was a victim inwardly and essentially stainless (1Pe 1:19).

JFB: Heb 9:14

Purify from fear, guilt, alienation from Him, and selfishness, the source of dead works (Heb 9:22-23).

JFB: Heb 9:14

The oldest manuscripts read "our." The Vulgate, however, supports English Version reading.

JFB: Heb 9:14

Moral religious consciousness.

JFB: Heb 9:14

All works done in the natural state, which is a state of sin, are dead; for they come not from living faith in, and love to, "the living God" (Heb 11:6). As contact with a dead body defiled ceremonially (compare the allusion, "ashes of an heifer," Heb 9:13), so dead works defile the inner consciousness spiritually.

JFB: Heb 9:14

So as to serve. The ceremonially unclean could not serve God in the outward communion of His people; so the unrenewed cannot serve God in spiritual communion. Man's works before justification, however lifelike they look, are dead, and cannot therefore be accepted before the living God. To have offered a dead animal to God would have been an insult (compare Mal 1:8); much more for a man not justified by Christ's blood to offer dead works. But those purified by Christ's blood in living faith do serve (Rom 12:1), and shall more fully serve God (Rev 22:3).

JFB: Heb 9:14

Therefore requiring living spiritual service (Joh 4:24).

JFB: Heb 9:15

Because of the all-cleansing power of His blood, this fits Him to be Mediator (Heb 8:6, ensuring to both parties, God and us, the ratification) of the new covenant, which secures both forgiveness for the sins not covered by the former imperfect covenant or testament, and also an eternal inheritance to the called.

JFB: Heb 9:15

Rather, as Greek, "death having taken place." At the moment that His death took place, the necessary effect is, "the called receive the (fulfilment of the) promise" (so Luk 24:49 uses "promise"; Heb 6:15; Act 1:4); that moment divides the Old from the New Testament. The "called" are the elect "heirs," "partakers of the heavenly calling" (Heb 3:1).

JFB: Heb 9:15

The transgressions of all men from Adam to Christ, first against the primitive revelation, then against the revelations to the patriarchs, then against the law given to Israel, the representative people of the world. The "first testament" thus includes the whole period from Adam to Christ, and not merely that of the covenant with Israel, which was a concentrated representation of the covenant made with (or the first testament given to) mankind by sacrifice, down from the fall to redemption. Before the inheritance by the New Testament (for here the idea of the "INHERITANCE," following as the result of Christ's "death," being introduced, requires the Greek to be translated "testament," as it was before covenant) could come in, there must be redemption of (that is, deliverance from the penalties incurred by) the transgressions committed under the first testament, for the propitiatory sacrifices under the first testament reached only as far as removing outward ceremonial defilement. But in order to obtain the inheritance which is a reality, there must be a real propitiation, since God could not enter into covenant relation with us so long as past sins were unexpiated; Rom 3:24-25, "a propitiation . . . His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past."

JFB: Heb 9:15

Greek, "may receive," which previously they could not (Heb 11:39-40).

JFB: Heb 9:15

To Abraham.

JFB: Heb 9:16

A general axiomatic truth; it is "a testament"; not the testament. The testator must die before his testament takes effect (Heb 9:17). This is a common meaning of the Greek noun diathece. So in Luk 22:29, "I appoint (by testamentary disposition; the cognate Greek verb diatithemai) unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me." The need of death before the testamentary appointment takes effect, holds good in Christ's relation as MAN to us; Of course not in God's relation to Christ.

JFB: Heb 9:16

Literally, be borne": "be involved in the case"; be inferred; or else, "be brought forward in court," so as to give effect to the will. This sense (testament) of the Greek "diathece" here does not exclude its other secondary senses in the other passages of the New Testament: (1) a covenant between two parties; (2) an arrangement, or disposition, made by God alone in relation to us. Thus, Mat 26:28 may be translated, "Blood of the covenant"; for a testament does not require blood shedding. Compare Exo 24:8 (covenant), which Christ quotes, though it is probable He included in a sense "testament" also under the Greek word diathece (comprehending both meanings, "covenant" and "testament"), as this designation strictly and properly applies to the new dispensation, and is rightly applicable to the old also, not in itself, but when viewed as typifying the new, which is properly a testament. Moses (Exo 24:8) speaks of the same thing as [Christ and] Paul. Moses, by the term "covenant," does not mean aught save one concerning giving the heavenly inheritance typified by Canaan after the death of the Testator, which he represented by the sprinkling of blood. And Paul, by the term "testament," does not mean aught save one having conditions attached to it, one which is at the same time a covenant [POLI, Synopsis]; the conditions are fulfilled by Christ, not by us, except that we must believe, but even this God works in His people. THOLUCK explains, as elsewhere, "covenant . . . covenant . . . mediating victim"; the masculine is used of the victim personified, and regarded as mediator of the covenant; especially as in the new covenant a MAN (Christ) took the place of the victim. The covenanting parties used to pass between the divided parts of the sacrificed animals; but, without reference to this rite, the need of a sacrifice for establishing a covenant sufficiently explains this verse. Others, also, explaining the Greek as "covenant," consider that the death of the sacrificial victim represented in all covenants the death of both parties as unalterably bound to the covenant. So in the redemption-covenant, the death of Jesus symbolized the death of God (?) in the person of the mediating victim, and the death of man in the same. But the expression is not "there must be the death of both parties making the covenant," but singular, "of Him who made (aorist, past time; not 'of Him making') the testament." Also, it is "death," not "sacrifice" or "slaying." Plainly, the death is supposed to be past (aorist, "made"); and the fact of the death is brought (Greek) before court to give effect to the will. These requisites of a will, or testament, concur here: (1) a testator; (2) heirs; (3) goods; (4) the death of the testator; (5) the fact of the death brought forward in court. In Mat 26:28 two other requisites appear: witnesses, the disciples; and a seal, the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the sign of His blood wherewith the testament is primarily sealed. It is true the heir is ordinarily the successor of him who dies and so ceases to have the possession. But in this case Christ comes to life again, and is Himself (including all that He hath), in the power of His now endless life, His people's inheritance; in His being Heir (Heb 1:2), they are heirs.

JFB: Heb 9:17

Literally, "over," as we say "upon the death of the testators"; not as THOLUCK, "on the condition that slain sacrifices be there," which the Greek hardly sanctions.

JFB: Heb 9:17

"seeing that it is never availing" [ALFORD]. BENGEL and LACHMANN read with an interrogation, "Since, is it ever in force (surely not) while the testator liveth?"

JFB: Heb 9:18

Rather, "Whence."

JFB: Heb 9:18

"inaugurated." The Old Testament strictly and formally began on that day of inauguration. "Where the disposition, or arrangement, is ratified by the blood of another, namely, of animals, which cannot make a covenant, much less make a testament, it is not strictly a testament, where it is ratified by the death of him that makes the arrangement, it is strictly, Greek 'diathece,' Hebrew 'berith,' taken in a wider sense, a testament" [BENGEL]; thus, in Heb 9:18, referring to the old dispensation, we may translate, "the first (covenant)": or better, retain "the first (testament)," not that the old dispensation, regarded by itself, is a testament, but it is so when regarded as the typical representative of the new, which is strictly a Testament.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Confirming the general truth, Heb 9:16.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Strictly adhering to every direction of "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" (Eph 2:15). Compare Exo 24:3, "Moses told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments; and all the people answered with one voice," &c.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Greek, "the calves," namely, those sacrificed by the "young men" whom he sent to do so (Exo 24:5). The "peace offerings" there mentioned were "of oxen" (Septuagint, "little calves"), and the "burnt offerings" were probably (though this is not specified), as on the day of atonement, goats. The law in Exodus sanctioned formally many sacrificial practices in use by tradition, from the primitive revelation long before.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Prescribed, though not in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus, yet in other purifications; for example, of the leper, and the water of separation which contained the ashes of the red heifer.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Ordinarily used for purification. Scarlet or crimson, resembling blood: it was thought to be a peculiarly deep, fast dye, whence it typified sin (see on Isa 1:18). So Jesus wore a scarlet robe, the emblem of the deep-dyed sins He bore on Him, though He had none in Him. Wool was used as imbibing and retaining water; the hyssop, as a bushy, tufty plant (wrapt round with the scarlet wool), was used for sprinkling it. The wool was also a symbol of purity (Isa 1:18). The Hyssopus officinalis grows on walls, with small lancet-formed woolly leaves, an inch long, with blue and white flowers, and a knotty stalk about a foot high.

JFB: Heb 9:19

Namely, out of which he had read "every precept": the book of the testament or covenant. This sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus. Hence BENGEL translates, "And (having taken) the book itself (so Exo 24:7), he both sprinkled all the people, and (Heb 9:21) moreover sprinkled the tabernacle." But the Greek supports English Version. Paul, by inspiration, supplies the particular specified here, not in Exo 24:7. The sprinkling of the roll (so the Greek for "book") of the covenant, or testament, as well as of the people, implies that neither can the law be fulfilled, nor the people be purged from their sins, save by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ (1Pe 1:2). Compare Heb 9:23, which shows that there is something antitypical to the Bible in heaven itself (compare Rev 20:12). The Greek, "itself," distinguishes the book itself from the "precepts" in it which he "spake."

JFB: Heb 9:20

Exo 24:8, "Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you concerning all these words." The change is here made to accord with Christ's inauguration of the new testament, or covenant, as recorded in Luk 22:20, "This cup (is) the new Testament in My blood, which is shed for you": the only Gospel in which the "is" has to be supplied. Luke was Paul's companion, which accounts for the correspondence, as here too "is" has to be supplied.

JFB: Heb 9:20

(See on Heb 9:16-17). The Greek "diathece" means both "testament" and "covenant": the term "covenant" better suits the old dispensation, though the idea testament is included, for the old was one in its typical relation to the new dispensation, to which the term "testament" is better suited. Christ has sealed the testament with His blood, of which the Lord's Supper is the sacramental sign. The testator was represented by the animals slain in the old dispensation. In both dispensations the inheritance was bequeathed: in the new by One who has come in person and died; in the old by the same one, only typically and ceremonially present. See ALFORD'S excellent Note.

JFB: Heb 9:20

Commissioned me to ratify in relation to you. In the old dispensation the condition to be fulfilled on the people's part is implied in the words, Exo 24:8, "(Lord made with you) concerning all these words." But here Paul omits this clause, as he includes the fulfilment of this condition of obedience to "all these words" in the new covenant, as part of God's promise, in Heb 8:8, Heb 8:10, Heb 8:12, whereby Christ fulfils all for our justification, and will enable us by putting His Spirit in us to fulfil all in our now progressive, and finally complete, sanctification.

JFB: Heb 9:21

Greek, "And, moreover, in like manner." The sprinkling of the tabernacle with blood is added by inspiration here to the account in Exo 30:25-30; Exo 40:9-10, which mentions only Moses' anointing the tabernacle and its vessels. In Lev 8:10, Lev 8:15, Lev 8:30, the sprinkling of blood upon Aaron and his garments, and upon his sons, and upon the altar, is mentioned as well as the anointing, so that we might naturally infer, as JOSEPHUS has distinctly stated, that the tabernacle and its vessels were sprinkled with blood as well as being anointed: Lev 16:16, Lev 16:20, Lev 16:33, virtually sanctions this inference. The tabernacle and its contents needed purification (2Ch 29:21).

JFB: Heb 9:22

To be joined with "all things," namely almost all things under the old dispensation. The exceptions to all things being purified by blood are, Exo 19:10; Lev 15:5, &c.; Lev 16:26, Lev 16:28; Lev 22:6; Num 31:22-24.

JFB: Heb 9:22

Greek, "apart from."

JFB: Heb 9:22

Shed in the slaughter of the victim, and poured out at the altar subsequently. The pouring out of the blood on the altar is the main part of the sacrifice (Lev 17:11), and it could not have place apart from the previous shedding of the blood in the slaying. Paul has, perhaps, in mind here, Luk 22:20, "This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."

JFB: Heb 9:22

Greek, "takes place": comes to pass.

JFB: Heb 9:22

Of sins: a favorite expression of Luke, Paul's companion. Properly used of remitting a debt (Mat 6:12; Mat 18:27, Mat 18:32); our sins are debts. On the truth here, compare Lev 5:11-13, an exception because of poverty, confirming the general rule.

JFB: Heb 9:23

"the suggestive representations"; the typical copies (see on Heb 8:5).

JFB: Heb 9:23

The heavenly tabernacle and the things therein.

JFB: Heb 9:23

With the blood of bulls and goats.

JFB: Heb 9:23

The archetypes. Man's sin had introduced an element of disorder into the relations of God and His holy angels in respect to man. The purification removes this element of disorder and changes God's wrath against man in heaven (designed to be the place of God's revealing His grace to men and angels) into a smile of reconciliation. Compare "peace in heaven" (Luk 19:38). "The uncreated heaven of God, though in itself untroubled light, yet needed a purification in so far as the light of love was obscured by the fire of wrath against sinful man" [DELITZSCH in ALFORD]. Contrast Rev 12:7-10. Christ's atonement had the effect also of casting Satan out of heaven (Luk 10:18; Joh 12:31, compare Heb 2:14). Christ's body, the true tabernacle (see on Heb 8:2; Heb 9:11), as bearing our imputed sin (2Co 5:21), was consecrated (Joh 17:17, Joh 17:19) and purified by the shedding of His blood to be the meeting place of God and man.

JFB: Heb 9:23

The plural is used in expressing the general proposition, though strictly referring to the one sacrifice of Christ once for all. Paul implies that His one sacrifice, by its matchless excellency, is equivalent to the Levitical many sacrifices. It, though but one, is manifold in its effects and applicability to many.

JFB: Heb 9:24

Resumption more fully of the thought, "He entered in once into the holy place," Heb 9:12. He has in Heb 9:13-14, expanded the words "by his own blood," Heb 9:12; and in Heb 9:15-23, he has enlarged on "an High Priest of good things to come."

JFB: Heb 9:24

As was the Holy of Holies in the earthly tabernacle (see on Heb 9:11).

JFB: Heb 9:24

Copies "of the true" holiest place, heaven, the original archetype (Heb 8:5).

JFB: Heb 9:24

The immediate presence of the invisible God beyond all the created heavens, through which latter Jesus passed (see on Heb 4:14; 1Ti 6:16).

JFB: Heb 9:24

Ever since His ascension in the present economy (compare Heb 9:26).

JFB: Heb 9:24

To PRESENT HIMSELF; Greek, "to be made to appear." Mere man may have a vision through a medium, or veil, as Moses had (Exo 33:18, Exo 33:20-23). Christ alone beholds the Father without a veil, and is His perfect image. Through seeing HIM only can we see the Father.

JFB: Heb 9:24

Greek, "to the face of God." The saints shall hereafter see God's face in Christ (Rev 22:4): the earnest of which is now given (2Co 3:18). Aaron, the Levitical high priest for the people, stood before the ark and only saw the cloud, the symbol of God's glory (Exo 28:30).

JFB: Heb 9:24

In our behalf as our Advocate and Intercessor (Heb 7:25; Rom 8:34; 1Jo 2:1). "It is enough that Jesus should show Himself for us to the Father: the sight of Jesus satisfied God in our behalf. He brings before the face of God no offering which has exhausted itself, and, as only sufficing for a time, needs renewal; but He himself is in person, by virtue of the eternal Spirit, that is, the imperishable life of His person, now and for ever freed from death, our eternally present offering before God" [DELITZSCH in ALFORD].

JFB: Heb 9:25

As in Heb 9:24, Paul said, it was not into the typical, but the true sanctuary, that Christ is entered; so now he says, that His sacrifice needs not, as the Levitical sacrifices did, to be repeated. Construe, "Nor yet did He enter for this purpose that He may offer Himself often," that is, "present Himself in the presence of God, as the high priest does (Paul uses the present tense, as the legal service was then existing), year by year, on the day of atonement, entering the Holy of Holies.

JFB: Heb 9:25

Literally, "in."

JFB: Heb 9:25

Not his own, as Christ did.

JFB: Heb 9:26

In that case.

JFB: Heb 9:26

Rather as Greek, "It would have been necessary for Him often to suffer." In order to "offer" (Heb 9:25), or present Himself often before God in the heavenly holiest place, like the legal high priests making fresh renewals of this high priestly function. He would have had, and would have often to suffer. His oblation of Himself before God was once for all (that is, the bringing in of His blood into the heavenly Holy of Holies), and therefore the preliminary suffering was once for all.

JFB: Heb 9:26

The continued sins of men, from their first creation, would entail a continual suffering on earth, and consequent oblation of His blood in the heavenly holiest place, since the foundation of the world, if the one oblation "in the fulness of time" were not sufficient. PHILO [The Creation of the World, p. 637], shows that the high priest of the Hebrews offered sacrifices for the whole human race. "If there had been greater efficacy in the repetition of the oblation, Christ necessarily would not have been so long promised, but would have been sent immediately after the foundation of the world to suffer, and offer Himself at successive periods" [GROTIUS].

JFB: Heb 9:26

As the case is,

JFB: Heb 9:26

For all; without need of renewal. Rome's fiction of an UNBLOODY sacrifice in the mass, contradicts her assertion that the blood of Christ is present in the wine; and also confutes her assertion that the mass is propitiatory; for, if unbloody, it cannot be propitiatory; for without shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb 9:22). Moreover, the expression "once" for all here, and in Heb 9:28, and Heb 10:10, Heb 10:12, proves the falsity of her view that there is a continually repeated offering of Christ in the Eucharist or mass. The offering of Christ was a thing once done that it might be thought of for ever (compare Note, see on Heb 10:12).

JFB: Heb 9:26

Greek, "at the consummation of the ages"; the winding up of all the previous ages from the foundation of the world; to be followed by a new age (Heb 1:1-2). The last age, beyond which no further age is to be expected before Christ's speedy second coming, which is the complement of the first coming; literally, "the ends of the ages"; Mat 28:20 is literally, "the consummation of the age," or world (singular; not as here, plural, ages). Compare "the fulness of times," Eph 1:10.

JFB: Heb 9:26

Greek, "been manifested" on earth (1Ti 3:16; 1Pe 1:20). English Version has confounded three distinct Greek verbs, by translating all alike, Heb 9:24, Heb 9:26, Heb 9:28, "appear." But, in Heb 9:24, it is "to present Himself," namely, before God in the heavenly sanctuary; in Heb 9:26, "been manifested" on earth: in Heb 9:28, "shall be seen" by all, and especially believers.

JFB: Heb 9:26

Abolish; doing away sin's power as well by delivering men from its guilt and penalty, so that it should be powerless to condemn men, as also from its yoke, so that they shall at last sin no more.

JFB: Heb 9:26

Singular number; all the sins of men of every age are regarded as one mass laid on Christ. He hath not only droned for all actual sins, but destroyed sin itself. Joh 1:29, "Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin (not merely the sins: singular, not plural) of the world."

JFB: Heb 9:26

Greek, "by (through) His own sacrifice"; not by "blood of others" (Heb 9:25). ALFORD loses this contrast in translating, "by His sacrifice."

JFB: Heb 9:27

Inasmuch as.

JFB: Heb 9:27

Greek, "it is laid up (as our appointed lot)," Col 1:5. The word "appointed" (so Hebrew "seth" means) in the case of man, answers to "anointed" in the case of Jesus; therefore "the Christ," that is, the anointed, is the title here given designedly. He is the representative man; and there is a strict correspondence between the history of man and that of the Son of man. The two most solemn facts of our being are here connected with the two most gracious truths of our dispensation, our death and judgment answering in parallelism to Christ's first coming to die for us, and His second coming to consummate our salvation.

JFB: Heb 9:27

And no more.

JFB: Heb 9:27

Namely, at Christ's appearing, to which, in Heb 9:28, "judgment" in this verse is parallel. Not, "after this comes the heavenly glory." The intermediate state is a state of joyous, or else agonizing and fearful, expectation of "judgment"; after the judgment comes the full and final state of joy, or else woe.

JFB: Heb 9:28

Greek, "THE Christ"; the representative MAN; representing all men, as the first Adam did.

JFB: Heb 9:28

Not "often," Heb 9:25; just as "men," of whom He is the representative Head, are appointed by God once to die. He did not need to die again and again for each individual, or each successive generation of men, for He represents all men of every age, and therefore needed to die but once for all, so as to exhaust the penalty of death incurred by all. He was offered by the Father, His own "eternal Spirit" (Heb 9:14) concurring; as Abraham spared not Isaac, but offered him, the son himself unresistingly submitting to the father's will (Gen. 22:1-24).

JFB: Heb 9:28

Referring to Isa 53:12, "He bare the sins of many," namely, on Himself; so "bear" means, Lev 24:15; Num 5:31; Num 14:34. The Greek is literally "to bear up" (1Pe 2:24). "Our sins were laid on Him. When, therefore, He was lifted up on the cross, He bare up our sins along with Him" [BENGEL].

JFB: Heb 9:28

Not opposed to all, but to few. He, the One, was offered for many; and that once for all (compare Mat 20:28).

JFB: Heb 9:28

With waiting expectation even unto the end (so the Greek). It is translated "wait for" in Rom 8:19, Rom 8:23; 1Co 1:7, which see.

JFB: Heb 9:28

Rather, as Greek, "be seen." No longer in the alien "form of a servant," but in His own proper glory.

JFB: Heb 9:28

Apart from, separate from, sin. Not bearing the sin of many on Him as at His first coming (even then there was no sin in Him). That sin has been at His first coming once for all taken away, so as to need no repetition of His sin offering of Himself (Heb 9:26). At His second coming He shall have no more to do with sin.

JFB: Heb 9:28

To bring in completed salvation; redeeming then the body which is as yet subject to the bondage of corruption. Hence, in Phi 3:20 he says, "we look for THE SAVIOUR." Note, Christ's prophetical office, as the divine Teacher, was especially exercised during His earthly ministry; His priestly is now from His first to His second coming; His kingly office shall be fully manifested at, and after, His second coming.

Clarke: Heb 9:1

The first covenant had also ordinances - Our translators have introduced the word covenant, as if διαθηκη had been, if not originally in the text, yet in the apostle’ s mind. Several MSS., but not of good note, as well as printed editions, with the Coptic version, have σκηνη tabernacle; but this is omitted by ABDE, several others, both the Syriac, Ethiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, and several of the Greek fathers; it is in all probability a spurious reading, the whole context showing that covenant is that to which the apostle refers, as that was the subject in the preceding chapter, and this is a continuation of the same discourse

Clarke: Heb 9:1

Ordinances - Δικαιωματα· Rites and ceremonies

Clarke: Heb 9:1

A worldly sanctuary - Ἁγιον κοσμικον . It is supposed that the term worldly, here, is opposed to the term heavenly, Heb 8:5; and that the whole should be referred to the carnality or secular nature of the tabernacle service. But I think there is nothing plainer than that the apostle is speaking here in praise of this sublimely emblematic service, and hence he proceeds to enumerate the various things contained in the first tabernacle, which added vastly to its splendor and importance; such as the table of the show-bread, the golden candlestick, the golden censer, the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, in which was the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’ s rod that budded, and the two tables which God had written with his own finger: hence I am led to believe that κοσμικος is here taken in its proper, natural meaning, and signifies adorned, embellished, splendid; and hence κοσμος, the world: Tota hujus universi machina, coelum et terram complectens et quicquid utroque contineter , κοσμος dicitur, quod nihil ea est mundius, pulchrius, et ornatius . "The whole machine of this universe, comprehending the heavens and the earth, and whatsoever is contained in both, is called κοσμος, because nothing is more beautiful, more fair, and more elegant."So Pliny, Hist. Nat., l. ii. c. 5: Nam quem κοσμον Graeci nomine ornamenti appellaverunt, eum nos a perfecta absolutaque elegantia, Mundum . "That which the Greeks call κοσμος, ornament, we, (the Latins), from its perfect and absolute elegance call mundum, world."See on Gen 2:1 (note)

The Jews believe that the tabernacle was an epitome of the world; and it is remarkable, when speaking of their city, that they express this sentiment by the same Greek word, in Hebrew letters, which the apostle uses here: so in Bereshith Rabba, s. 19, fol. 19: כל קוזמיקון שלו שם הוא col kozmikon ( κοσμικον ) shelo sham hu . "All his world is placed there."Philo says much to the same purpose

If my exposition be not admitted, the next most likely is, that God has a worldly tabernacle as well as a heavenly one; that he as truly dwelt in the Jewish tabernacle as he did in the heaven of heavens; the one being his worldly house, the other his heavenly house.

Clarke: Heb 9:2

For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein - The sense is here very obscure, and the construction involved: leaving out all punctuation, which is the case with all the very ancient MSS., the verse stands thus: Σκηνη γαρ κατεσκευασθη ἡ πρωτη εν ᾑ ἡ τε λυχνια, κ. τ. λ. which I suppose an indifferent person, who understood the language, would without hesitation render, For, there was the first tabernacle constructed, in which were the candlestick, etc. And this tabernacle or dwelling may be called the first dwelling place which God had among men, to distinguish it from the second dwelling place, the temple built by Solomon; for tabernacle here is to be considered in its general sense, as implying a dwelling

To have a proper understanding of what the apostle relates here, we should endeavor to take a concise view of the tabernacle erected by Moses in the wilderness. This tabernacle was the epitome of the Jewish temple; or rather, according to this as a model was the Jewish temple built. It comprised

1.    The court where the people might enter

2.    In this was contained the altar of burnt-offerings, on which were offered the sacrifices in general, besides offerings of bread, wine, and other things

3.    At the bottom or lower end of this court was the tent of the covenant; the two principal parts of the tabernacle were, the holy place and the holy of holies

In the temple built by Solomon there was a court for the Levites, different from that of the people; and, at the entrance of the holy place, a vestibule. But in the tabernacle built by Moses these parts were not found, nor does the apostle mention them here

In the holy place, as the apostle observes, there were

1.    The golden candlestick of seven branches, on the south

2.    The golden altar, or altar of incense, on the north

3.    The altar, or table of the show-bread; or where the twelve loaves, representing the twelve tribes, were laid before the Lord

1.    In each branch of the golden candlestick was a lamp; these were lighted every evening, and extinguished every morning. They were intended to give light by night

2.    The altar of incense was of gold; and a priest, chosen by lot each week, offered incense every morning and evening in a golden censer, which he probably left on the altar after the completion of the offering

3.    The table of the show-bread was covered with plates of gold; and on this, every Sabbath, they placed twelve loaves in two piles, six in each, which continued there all the week till the next Sabbath, when they were removed, and fresh loaves put in their place. The whole of this may be seen in all its details in the book of Exodus, from chap. 35 to Exo 40:1. See Calmet also

Clarke: Heb 9:2

Which is called the sanctuary - Ἡτις λεγεται ἁγια· This is called holy. This clause may apply to any of the nouns in this verse, in the nominative case, which are all of the feminine gender; and the adjective ἁγια, holy, may be considered here as the nominative singular feminine, agreeing with ἡτις . Several editions accent the words in reference to this construction. The word σκηνη, tabernacle, may be the proper antecedent; and then we may read ἁγία, instead of ἅγια : but these niceties belong chiefly to grammarians.

Clarke: Heb 9:3

And after the second veil - The first veil, of which the apostle has not yet spoken, was at the entrance of the holy place, and separated the temple from the court, and prevented the people, and even the Levites, from seeing what was in the holy place

The second veil, of which the apostle speaks here, separated the holy place from the holy of holies

Clarke: Heb 9:3

The tabernacle, which is called the Holiest of all - That is, that part of the tabernacle which is called the holy of holies.

Clarke: Heb 9:4

Which had the golden censer - It is evident that the apostle speaks here of the tabernacle built by Moses, and of the state and contents of that tabernacle as they were during the lifetime of Moses. For, as Calmet remarks, in the temple which was afterwards built there were many things added which were not in the tabernacle, and several things left out. The ark of the covenant and the two tables of the law were never found after the return from the Babylonish captivity. We have no proof that, even in the time of Solomon, the golden pot of manna, or the rod of Aaron, was either in or near the ark. In Solomon’ s temple the holy place was separated from the holy of holies by a solid wall, instead of a veil, and by strong wooden doors, 1Ki 6:31-33. In the same temple there was a large vestibule before the holy place; and round about this and the holy of holies there were many chambers in three stories, 1Ki 6:5, 1Ki 6:6. But there was nothing of all this in the Mosaic tabernacle; therefore, says Calmet, we need not trouble ourselves to reconcile the various scriptures which mention this subject; some of which refer to the tabernacle, others to Solomon’ s temple, and others to the temple built by Zorobabel; which places were very different from each other

The apostle says that the golden censer was in the holy of holies; but this is nowhere mentioned by Moses. But he tells us that the high priest went in, once every year, with the golden censer to burn incense; and Calmet thinks this censer was left there all the year, and that its place was supplied by a new one, brought in by the priest the year following. Others think it was left just within the veil, so that the priest, by putting his hand under the curtain, could take it out, and prepare it for his next entrance into the holiest

Clarke: Heb 9:4

The ark of the covenant - This was a sort of chest overlaid with plates of gold, in which the two tables of the law, Aaron’ s rod, the pot of manna, etc., were deposited. Its top, or lid, was the propitiatory or mercy-seat.

Clarke: Heb 9:5

And over it the cherubims of glory - Cherubim is the plural of cherub, and it is absurd to add our plural termination (s) to the plural termination of the Hebrew. The glory here signifies the shechinah or symbol of the Divine presence

Clarke: Heb 9:5

Shadowing the mercy-seat - One at each end of the ark, with their faces turned toward each other, but looking down on the cover or propitiatory, ἱλαστηριον, here called the mercy-seat

Clarke: Heb 9:5

Of which we cannot now speak particularly - The apostle did not judge any farther account of these to be necessary; and I may be excused from considering them particularly here, having said so much on each in the places where they occur in the Pentateuch. What these point out or signify is thus explained by St. Cyril: Christus licet unus sit, multifariam tamen a nobis intelligitur: Ipse est Tabernaculum propter carnis tegumenturn: Ipse est Mensa, quia noster cibus est et vita: Ipse est Arca habens legem Dei reconditam, quia est Verbum Patris: Ipse est Candelabrum, quia est lux spiritualis: Ipse est Altare incensi, quia est odor suavitatis in sanctificationem: Ipse est Altare holocausti, quia est hostia pro totius mundi vita in cruce oblata . "Although Christ be but one, yet he is understood by us under a variety of forms. He is the Tabernacle, on account of the human body in which he dwelt. He is the Table, because he is our Bread of life. He is the Ark which has the law of God enclosed within, because he is the Word of the Father. He is the Candlestick, because he is our spiritual light. He is the Altar of incense, because he is the sweet-smelling odour of sanctification. He is the Altar of burnt-offering, because he is the victim, by death on the cross, for the sins of the whole world."This father has said, in a few words, what others have employed whole volumes on, by refining, spiritualizing, and allegorizing.

Clarke: Heb 9:6

When these thing were thus ordained - When the tabernacle was made, and its furniture placed in it, according to the Divine direction

Clarke: Heb 9:6

The priests went always into the first Tabernacle - That is, into the first part of the tabernacle, or holy place, into which he went every day twice, accomplishing the services, τας λατρειας επιτελουντες, which included his burning the incense at the morning and evening sacrifice, dressing the lamps, removing the old show-bread and laying on the new, and sprinkling the blood of the sin-offerings before the veil Lev 4:6 : and for these works he must have constant access to the place.

Clarke: Heb 9:7

But into the second - That is, the holy of holies, or second part of the tabernacle, the high priest alone, once every year, that is, on one day in the year only, which was the day on which the general atonement was made. The high priest could enter into this place only on one day in the year; but on that day he might enter several times. See Lev. 16

Clarke: Heb 9:7

Not without blood - The day prescribed by the law for this great solemnity was the tenth of the month Tisri, in which the high priest brought in the incense or perfumes, which he placed on the golden censer; he brought also the blood of the bullock; and sprinkled some portion of it seven times before the ark, and the veil which separated the holy place from the holy of holies. See Lev 16:14. He then came out, and, taking some of the blood of the goat which had been sacrificed, he sprinkled it between the veil and the ark of the covenant, Lev 16:15

Clarke: Heb 9:7

Which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people - Ὑπερ των του λαου αγνοηματων· For transgressions of which they were not conscious: there were so many niceties in the ritual worship of the Jews, and so many ways in which they might offend against the law and incur guilt, that it was found necessary to institute sacrifices to atone for these sins of ignorance. And as the high priest was also clothed with infirmity, he required to have an interest in the same sacrifice, on the same account. This was a national sacrifice; and by it the people understood that they were absolved from all the errors of the past year, and that they now had a renewed right of access to the mercy-seat.

Clarke: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost this signifying - These services were divinely appointed, and by each of them the Holy Spirit of God is supposed to speak

Clarke: Heb 9:8

The way into the holiest - That full access to God was not the common privilege of the people, while the Mosaic economy subsisted. That the apostle means that it is only by Christ that any man and every man can approach God, is evident from Heb 10:19-22, and it is about this, and not about the tabernacle of this world, that he is here discoursing

I have already observed that the apostle appears to use the word σκηνη, or tabernacle, in the general sense of a dwelling place; and therefore applies it to the temple, which was reputed the house or dwelling place of God, as well as the ancient tabernacle. Therefore, what he speaks here concerning the first tabernacle, may be understood as applying with propriety to the then Jewish temple, as well as to the ancient tabernacle, which, even with all their sacrifices and ceremonies, could not make the way of holiness plain, nor the way to God’ s favor possible.

Clarke: Heb 9:9

Which - Tabernacle and its services, was a figure, παραβολη, a dark enigmatical representation, for the time then present - for that age and dispensation, and for all those who lived under it

In which, καθ ’ ὁν, 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 καθ ’ ὁν, in which, referred in the above paraphrase to τον καιρον, the time, are read καθ ’ ἡν by ABD, and several others, one copy of the Slavonic, the Vulgate, and some of the fathers, and thus refer to την σκηνην, 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.

Clarke: Heb 9:10

In meats and drinks, and divers washings - He had already mentioned eucharistic and sacrificial offerings, and nothing properly remained but the different kinds of clean and unclean animals which were used, or forbidden to be used, as articles of food; together with the different kinds or drinks, washings, βαπτισμοις, baptisms, immersions, sprinklings and washings of the body and the clothes, and carnal ordinances, or things which had respect merely to the body, and could have no moral influence upon the soul, unless considered in reference to that of which they were the similitudes, or figures

Clarke: Heb 9:10

Carnal ordinances - Δικαιωματα σαρκος· Rites and ceremonies pertaining merely to the body. The word carnal is not used here, nor scarcely in any part of the New Testament, in that catachrestical or degrading sense in which many preachers and professors of Christianity take the liberty to use it

Clarke: Heb 9:10

Imposed on them until the time of reformation - These rites and ceremonies were enacted, by Divine authority, as proper representations of the Gospel system, which should reform and rectify all things

The time of reformation, καιρος διορθωσεως, the time of rectifying, signifies the Gospel dispensation, under which every thing is set straight; every thing referred to its proper purpose and end; the ceremonial law fulfilled and abrogated; the moral law exhibited and more strictly enjoined; (see our Lord’ s sermon upon the mount); and the spiritual nature of God’ s worship taught, and grace promised to purify the heart: so that, through the power of the eternal Spirit, all that was wrong in the soul is rectified; the affections, passions, and appetites purified; the understanding enlightened; the judgment corrected; the will refined; in a word, all things made new.

Clarke: Heb 9:11

But Christ being come a high priest of good things - I think this and the succeeding verses not happily translated: indeed, the division of them has led to a wrong translation; therefore they must be taken together, thus: But the Christ, the high priest of those good things (or services) which were to come, through a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is, not of the same workmanship, entered once for all into the sanctuary; having obtained eternal redemption for us, not by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, Heb 9:13. For if the blood of Goats, and bulls, and calves, and a heifer’ s ashes, sprinkled on the unclean, sanctifieth to the cleansing of the flesh, (Heb 9:14), how much more shall the blood of Christ, who, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God, cleanse your consciences from dead works, in order to worship (or that ye may worship) the living God

In the above translation I have added, in Heb 9:13, τραγων, of goats, on the authority of ABDE, three others, the Syriac, the Arabic of Erpen, Coptic, Vulgate, two copies of the Itala, and Theodoret. And I have rendered εις το λατρευειν, (Heb 9:14), In Order to worship, or That Ye May worship; for this is the meaning of these particles εις το in many parts of the New Testament. I shall now make a few observations on some of the principal expressions

Clarke: Heb 9:11

High priest of good things - Or services, to come, των μελλοντων αγαθων . He is the High Priest of Christianity; he officiates in the behalf of all mankind; for by him are all the prayers, praises, and services of mankind offered to God; and he ever appears in the presence of God for us

Clarke: Heb 9:11

A greater and more perfect tabernacle - This appears to mean our Lord’ s human nature. That, in which dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, was fitly typified by the tabernacle and temple, in both of which the majesty of God dwelt

Clarke: Heb 9:11

Not made with hands - Though our Lord’ s body was a perfect human body, yet it did not come in the way of natural generation; his miraculous conception will sufficiently justify the expressions used here by the apostle.

Clarke: Heb 9:12

But by his own blood - Here the redemption of man is attributed to the blood of Christ; and this blood is stated to be shed in a sacrificial way, precisely as the blood of bulls, goats and calves was shed under the law

Clarke: Heb 9:12

Once - Once for all, εφαπαξ, in opposition to the annual entering of the high priest into the holiest, with the blood of the annual victim

Clarke: Heb 9:12

The holy place - Or sanctuary, τα ἁγιᾳ, signifies heaven, into which Jesus entered with his own blood, as the high priest entered into the holy of holies with the blood of the victims which he had sacrificed

Clarke: Heb 9:12

Eternal redemption - Αιωνιαν λυτρωσιν· A redemption price which should stand good for ever, when once offered; and an endless redemption from sin, in reference to the pardon of which, and reconciliation to God, there needs no other sacrifice: it is eternal in its merit and efficacy.

Clarke: Heb 9:13

Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh - Answers the end proposed by the law; namely, to remove legal disabilities and punishments, having the body and its interests particularly in view, though adumbrating or typifying the soul and its concerns.

Clarke: Heb 9:14

Who through the eternal Spirit - This expression is understood two ways

1.    Of the Holy Ghost himself. As Christ’ s miraculous conception was by the Holy Spirit, and he wrought all his miracles by the Spirit of God, so his death or final offering was made through or by the eternal Spirit; and by that Spirit he was raised from the dead, 1Pe 3:18. Indeed, through the whole of his life be was justified by the Spirit; and we find that in this great work of human redemption, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were continually employed: therefore the words may be understood of the Holy Spirit properly

2.    Of the eternal Logos or Deity which dwelt in the man Christ Jesus, through the energy of which the offering of his humanity became an infinitely meritorious victim; therefore the Deity of Christ is here intended

But we cannot well consider one of these distinct from the other; and hence probably arose the various readings in the MSS. and versions on this article. Instead of δια Πνευματος αιωνιου, by the Eternal Spirit, δια Πνευματος Ἁγιου, by the Holy Spirit, is the reading of D*, and more than twenty others of good note, besides the Coptic, Slavonic, Vulgate, two copies of the Itala, Cyril, Athanasius sometimes, Damascenus, Chrysostom, and some others. But the common reading is supported by ABD**, and others, besides the Syriac, all the Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Athanasius generally, Theodoret, Theophylact, and Ambrosius. This, therefore, is the reading that should he preferred, as it is probable that the Holy Ghost, not the Logos, is what the apostle had more immediately in view. But still we must say, that the Holy Spirit, with the eternal Logos, and the almighty Father, equally concurred in offering up the sacrifice of the human nature of Christ, in order to make atonement for the sin of the world

Clarke: Heb 9:14

Purge your conscience - Καθαριει την συνειδησιν· Purify your conscience. The term purify should be everywhere, both in the translation of the Scriptures, and in preaching the Gospel, preferred to the word purge, which, at present, is scarcely ever used in the sense in which our translators have employed it

Clarke: Heb 9:14

Dead works - Sin in general, or acts to which the penalty of death is annexed by the law. See the phrase explained, Heb 6:1 (note).

Clarke: Heb 9:15

And for this cause - Some translate δια τουτο, on account of this (blood.) Perhaps it means no more than a mere inference, such as therefore, or wherefore

Clarke: Heb 9:15

He is the Mediator of the new testament - There was no proper reason why our translators should render διαθηκη by testament here, when in almost every other case they render it covenant, which is its proper ecclesiastical meaning, as answering to the Hebrew ברית berith , which see largely explained, Gen 15:10, and in other places of the Pentateuch

Very few persons are satisfied with the translation of the following verses to the 20th, particularly the 16th and 17th; at all events the word covenant must be retained. He - Jesus Christ, is Mediator; the μεσιτης, or mediator, was the person who witnessed the contract made between the two contracting parties, slew the victim, and sprinkled each with its blood

Clarke: Heb 9:15

Of the new testament - The new contract betwixt God and the whole human race, by Christ Jesus the Mediator, distinguished here from the old covenant between God and the Israelites, in which Moses was the mediator

Clarke: Heb 9:15

That by means of death - His own death upon the cross

Clarke: Heb 9:15

For the redemption of the transgressions - To make atonement for the transgressions which were committed under the old covenant, which the blood of bulls and calves could not do; so the death of Jesus had respect to all the time antecedent to it, as well as to all the time afterward till the conclusion of the world

Clarke: Heb 9:15

They which are called - The Gentiles, might receive the promise - might, by being brought into a covenant with God, have an equal right with the Jews, not merely to an inheritance such as the promised land, but to an eternal inheritance, and consequently infinitely superior to that of the Jews, inasmuch as the new covenant is superior in every point of view to the old

How frequently the Gentiles are termed οἱ κλητοι and οἱ κεκλημενοι, the called, all St. Paul’ s writings show. And they were thus termed because they were called and elected in the place of the Jews, the ancient called and elect, who were now divorced and reprobated because of their disobedience.

Clarke: Heb 9:16

For where a testament is - A learned and judicious friend furnishes me with the following translation of this and the 17th verse: -

"For where there is a covenant, it is necessary that the death of the appointed victim should be exhibited, because a covenant is confirmed over dead victims, since it is not at all valid while the appointed victim is alive.

He observes, "There is no word signifying testator, or men, in the original. Διαθεμενος is not a substantive, but a participle, or a participial adjective, derived from the same root as διατηκη, and must have a substantive understood. I therefore render it the disposed or appointed victim, alluding to the manner of disposing or setting apart the pieces of the victim, when they were going to ratify a covenant; and you know well the old custom of ratifying a covenant, to which the apostle alludes. I refer to your own notes on Gen 6:18 (note), and Gen 15:10 (note). - J. C.

Mr. Wakefield has translated the passage nearly in the same way

"For where a covenant is, there must be necessarily introduced the death of that which establisheth the covenant; because a covenant is confirmed over dead things, and is of no force at all whilst that which establisheth the covenant is alive."This is undoubtedly the meaning of this passage; and we should endeavor to forget that testament and testator were ever introduced, as they totally change the apostle’ s meaning. See the observations at the end of this chapter.

Clarke: Heb 9:18

Whereupon - Ὁθεν . Wherefore, as a victim was required for the ratification of every covenant, the first covenant made between God and the Hebrews, by the mediation of Moses, was not dedicated, εγκεκαινισται, renewed or solemnized, without blood - without the death of a victim, and the aspersion of its blood.

Clarke: Heb 9:19

When Moses had spoken every precept - The place to which the apostle alludes is Exo 24:4-8, where the reader is requested to consult the notes

Clarke: Heb 9:19

And sprinkled both the book - The sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in the place to which the apostle refers, (see above), nor did it in fact take place. The words αυτο τε το βιβλιον, and the book itself, should be referred to λαβων, having taken, and not to ερῥαντισε, he sprinkled; the verse should therefore be read thus: For after every commandment of the law had been recited by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of the calves, and of the goats, with water and scarlet wool, and the book itself, and sprinkled all the people. The rite was performed thus: Having received the blood of the calves and goats into basins, and mingled it with water to prevent it from coagulating, he then took a bunch of hyssop, and having bound it together with thread made of scarlet wool, he dipped this in the basin, and sprinkled the blood and water upon the people who were nearest to him, and who might be considered on this occasion the representatives of all the rest; for it is impossible that he should have had blood enough to have sprinkled the whole of the congregation

Some think that the blood was actually sprinkled upon the book itself, which contained the written covenant, to signify that the covenant itself was ratified by the blood.

Clarke: Heb 9:20

This is the blood of the testament - (covenant.) Our Lord refers to the conduct of Moses here, and partly quotes his words in the institution of the eucharist: This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins, Mat 26:28. And by thus using the words and applying them, he shows that his sacrificial blood was intended by the blood shed and sprinkled on this occasion, and that by it alone the remission of sins is obtained.

Clarke: Heb 9:21

He sprinkled - with blood - all the vessels of the ministry - To intimate that every thing used by sinful man is polluted, and that nothing can be acceptable in the sight of a holy God that has not in effect the sprinkling of the atoning blood.

Clarke: Heb 9:22

And almost all things are - purged with blood - The apostle says almost, because in some cases certain vessels were purified by water, some by fire, Num 31:23, and some with the ashes of the red heifer, Num 19:2-10, but it was always understood that every thing was at first consecrated by the blood of the victim

Clarke: Heb 9:22

And without shedding of blood is no remission - The apostle shows fully here what is one of his great objects in the whole of this epistle, viz. that there is no salvation but through the sacrificial death of Christ, and to prefigure this the law itself would not grant any remission of sin without the blood of a victim. This is a maxim even among the Jews themselves, אין כפרה אלא בדם ein capparah ella bedam , "There is no expiation but by blood."Yoma, fol. 5, 1; Menachoth, fol. 93, 2. Every sinner has forfeited his life by his transgressions, and the law of God requires his death; the blood of the victim, which is its life, is shed as a substitute for the life of the sinner. By these victims the sacrifice of Christ was typified. He gave his life for the life of the world; human life for human life, but a life infinitely dignified by its union with God.

Clarke: Heb 9:23

The patterns of things in the heavens - That is: The tabernacle and all its utensils, services, etc., must be purified by these, viz.: The blood of calves and goats, and the sprinkling of the blood and water with the bunch of hyssop bound about with scarlet wool. These are called patterns, ὑποδειγματα, exemplars, earthly things, which were the representatives of heavenly things. And there is no doubt that every thing in the tabernacle, its parts, divisions, utensils, ministry, etc., as appointed by God, were representations of celestial matters; but how far and in what way we cannot now see

Purification implies, not only cleansing from defilement, but also dedication or consecration. All the utensils employed in the tabernacle service were thus purified though incapable of any moral pollution

Clarke: Heb 9:23

But the heavenly things themselves -

1.    Some think this means heaven itself, which, by receiving the sacrificed body of Christ, which appears in the presence of God for us, may be said to be purified, i.e., set apart for the reception of the souls of those who have found redemption in his blood

2.    Others think the body of Christ is intended, which is the tabernacle in which his Divinity dwelt; and that this might be said to be purified by its own sacrifice, as he is said, Joh 17:19, to sanctify himself; that is, to consecrate himself unto God as a sin-offering for the redemption of man

3.    Others suppose the Church is intended, which he is to present to the Father without spot or wrinkle or any such thing

4.    As the entrance to the holy of holies must be made by the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifice, and as that holy of holies represented heaven, the apostle’ s meaning seems to be that there was and could be no entrance to the holiest but through his blood; and therefore, when by a more perfect tabernacle, Heb 9:11, Heb 9:12, he passed into the heavens, not with the blood of bulls and goats, but by his own blood, he thus purified or laid open the entrance to the holiest, by a more valuable sacrifice than those required to open the entrance of the holy of holies. It was necessary, therefore, for God had appointed it so, that the tabernacle and its parts, etc., which were patterns of things in the heavens, should be consecrated and entered with such sacrifices as have already been mentioned; but the heaven of heavens into which Jesus entered, and whither he will bring all his faithful followers, must be propitiated, consecrated, and entered, by the infinitely better sacrifice of his own body and blood. That this is the meaning appears from the following verse.

Clarke: Heb 9:24

Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands - He is not gone into the holy of holies of the tabernacle or temple, as the Jewish high priest does once in the year with the blood of the victim, to sprinkle it before the mercy-seat there; but into heaven itself, which he has thus opened to all believers, having made the propitiatory offering by which both he and those whom he represents are entitled to enter and enjoy eternal blessedness. And hence we may consider that Christ, appearing in his crucified body before the throne, is a real offering of himself to the Divine justice in behalf of man; and that there he continues in the constant act of being offered, so that every penitent and believer, coming unto God through him, find him their ever ready and available sacrifice, officiating as the High Priest of mankind in the presence of God.

Clarke: Heb 9:25

Nor yet that he should offer himself often - The sacrifice of Christ is not like that of the Jewish high priest; his must be offered every year, Christ has offered himself once for all: and this sacrificial act has ever the same efficacy, his crucified body being still a powerful and infinitely meritorious sacrifice before the throne.

Clarke: Heb 9:26

For then must he often have suffered - In the counsel of God, Christ was considered the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, Rev 13:8, so that all believers before his advent were equally interested in his sacrificial death with those who have lived since his coming. Humanly speaking, the virtue of the annual atonement could not last long, and must be repeated; Christ’ s sacrifice is ever the same; his life’ s blood is still considered as in the act of being continually poured out. See Rev 5:6

Clarke: Heb 9:26

The end of the world - The conclusion of the Jewish dispensation, the Christian dispensation being that which shall continue till the end of time

Clarke: Heb 9:26

To put away sin - Εις αθετησιν ἁμαρτιας· To abolish the sin-offerings; i.e. to put an end to the Mosaic economy by his one offering of himself. It is certain that, after Christ had offered himself, the typical sin-offerings of the law ceased; and this was expressly foretold by the Prophet Daniel, Dan 9:24. Some think that the expression should be applied to the putting away the guilt, power, and being of sin from the souls of believers.

Clarke: Heb 9:27

As it is appointed - Αποκειται· It is laid before them by the Divine decree: Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return. Unto men generally, during the course of the present world, not all men as some falsely quote; for Enoch and Elijah have not died, and those that shall be alive at the day of judgment shall not die, but be changed

Clarke: Heb 9:27

But after this the judgment - They shall die but once, and be judged but once, therefore there is no metempsychosis, no transmigration from body to body; judgment succeeds to dying; and as they shall be judged but once, they can die but once.

Clarke: Heb 9:28

So Christ was once offered - He shall die no more; he has borne away the sins of many, and what he has done once shall stand good for ever. Yet he will appear a second time without sin, χωρις ἁμαρτιας, without a sin-offering; That he has already made

Clarke: Heb 9:28

Unto salvation - To deliver the bodies of believers from the empire of death, to reunite them to their purified souls, and bring both into his eternal glory. This is salvation, and the very highest of which the human being is capable. Amen! Even so, come Lord Jesus! Hallelujah

1. In the preceding notes I have given my reasons for dissenting from our translation of the 15th, 16th, and 17th verses. Many learned men are of the same opinion; but I have not met with one who appears to have treated the whole in a more satisfactory manner than Dr. Macknight, and for the edification of my readers I shall here subjoin the substance of what he has written on this point

" Heb 9:15. Mediator of the new covenant. See Heb 8:7. The word διαθηκη, here translated covenant, answers to the Hebrew word berith , which all the translators of the Jewish Scriptures have understood to signify a covenant. The same signification our translators have affixed to the word διαθηκη, as often as it occurs in the writings of the evangelists and apostles, except in the history of the institution of the supper, and in 2Co 3:6 : and Heb 7:22, and in the passage under consideration; in which places, copying the Vulgate version, they have rendered διαθηκη by the word testament. Beza, following the Syriac Version, translates διαθηκη everywhere by the words foedas, pactum , except in the 16th, 17th, and 20th verses of this chapter, where likewise following the Syriac version, he has testamentum . Now if καινη διαθηκη, the new testament, in the passages above mentioned, means the Gospel covenant, as all interpreters acknowledge, παλαια διαθηκη, the old testament, 2Co 3:14, and πρωτη διαθηκη, the first testament, Heb 9:15, must certainly be the Sinaitic covenant or law of Moses, as is evident also from Heb 9:20. On this supposition it may be asked

1.    In what sense the Sinaitic covenant or law of Moses, which required perfect obedience to all its precepts under penalty of death, and allowed no mercy to any sinner, however penitent, can be called a testament, which is a deed conferring something valuable on a person who may accept or refuse it, as he thinks fit? Besides, the transaction at Sinai, in which God promised to continue the Israelites in Canaan, on condition they refrained from the wicked practices of the Canaanites, and observed his statutes, Lev. 18, can in no sense be called a testament

2.    If the law of Moses be a testament, and if, to render that testament valid, the death of the testator be necessary, as the English translators have taught us, Heb 9:16, I ask who it was that made the testament of the law? Was it God or Moses? And did either of them die to render it valid

3.    I observe that even the Gospel covenant is improperly called a testament, because, notwithstanding all its blessings were procured by the death of Christ, and are most freely bestowed, it lost any validity which, as a testament, it is thought to have received by the death of Christ, when he revived again on the third day

4.    The things affirmed in the common translation of Heb 9:15, concerning the new testament, namely, that it has a Mediator; that that Mediator is the Testator himself; that there were transgressions of a former testament, for the redemption of which the Mediator of the new testament died; and, Heb 9:19, that the first testament was made by sprinkling the people in whose favor it was made with blood; are all things quite foreign to a testament. For was it ever known in any nation that a testament needed a mediator? Or that the testator was the mediator of his own testament? Or that it was necessary the testator of a new testament should die to redeem the transgressions of a former testament? Or that any testament was ever made by sprinkling the legatees with blood? These things however were usual in covenants. They had mediators who assisted at the making of them, and were sureties for the performance of them. They were commonly ratified by sacrifices, the blood of which was sprinkled on the parties; withal, if any former covenant was infringed by the parties, satisfaction was given at the making of a second covenant

5.    By calling Christ the Mediator of the new testament our thoughts are turned away entirely from the view which the Scriptures give us of his death as a sacrifice for sin; whereas, if he is called the Mediator of the new covenant, which is the true translation of διαθηκης καινης μεσιτης, that appellation directly suggests to us that the new covenant was procured and ratified by his death as a sacrifice for sin. Accordingly Jesus, on account of his being made a priest by the oath of God, is said to be the Priest or Mediator of a better covenant than that of which the Levitical priests were the mediators. I acknowledge that in classical Greek διαθηκη, commonly signifies a testament. Yet, since the Seventy have uniformly translated the Hebrew word berith , which properly signifies a covenant, by the word διαθηκη, in writing Greek the Jews naturally used διαθηκη for συνθηκη as our translators have acknowledged by their version of Heb 10:16. To conclude: Seeing in the verses under consideration διαθηκη may be translated a covenant; and seeing, when so translated, these verses make a better sense, and agree better with the scope of the apostle’ s reasoning than if it were translated a testament; we can be at no loss to know which translation of διαθηκη in these verses ought to be preferred. Nevertheless, the absurdity of a phraseology to which readers have been long accustomed, without attending distinctly to its meaning, does not soon appear

" He is the Mediator. Here it is remarkable that Jesus is not called διαθεμενος, the Testator, but μεσιτης, the Mediator, of the new covenant; first, because he procured the new covenant for mankind, in which the pardon of sin is promised; for, as the apostle tells us, his death, as a sacrifice for sin, is the consideration on account of which the pardon of the transgressions of the first covenant is granted. Secondly, because the new covenant having been ratified as well as procured by the death of Christ, he is fitly called the Mediator of that covenant in the same sense that God’ s oath is called, Heb 6:17, the mediator, or confirmor, of his promise. Thirdly, Jesus, who died to procure the new covenant, being appointed by God the high priest thereof, to dispense his blessings, he is on that account also called, Heb 8:6, the mediator of that better covenant

Heb 9:16. For where a covenant (is made by sacrifice), there is a necessity that the death of the appointed sacrifice be produced. This elliptical expression must be completed, if, as is probable, the apostle had now in his eye the covenant which God made with Noah and Abraham. His covenant is recorded, Gen 8:20, where we are told, that on coming out of the ark Noah offered a burnt-offering of every clean beast and fowl. And the Lord smelled a sweet savor. And the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground, neither will I again smite any more every living thing as I have done. This promise or declaration God called his covenant with men, and with every living creature. Gen 9:9, Gen 9:10. In like manner God made a covenant with Abraham by sacrifice, Gen 15:9, Gen 15:18, and with the Israelites at Sinai, Exo 24:8. See also Psa 50:5. By making his covenants with men in this manner, God taught them that his intercourses with them were all founded on an expiation afterwards to be made for their sins by the sacrifice of the seed of the woman, the bruising of whose heel, or death, was foretold at the fall. On the authority of these examples, the practice of making covenants by sacrifice prevailed among the Jews; Jer 34:18; Zec 9:11; and even among the heathens; for they had the knowledge of these examples by tradition. Stabant et caesa jungebant foedera porca ; Virgil, Aeneid, viii. 611. Hence the phrases, foedus ferire and percutere, to strike or kill the covenant

" There is a necessity that the death του διαθεμενου, of the appointed. Here we may supply either the word θυματος, sacrifice, or ζωου, animal, which might be either a calf, a goat, a bull, or any other animal which the parties making the covenant chose. Διαθεμενου is the participle of the second aorist of the middle voice of the verb διατιθημι, constituo , I appoint. Wherefore its primary and literal signification is, of the appointed. Our translators have given the word this sense, Luk 22:29; Καγω διατιθεμαι ὑμιν, καθως διετιθετο μοι ὁ Πατηρ μου, βασιλειαν . And I appoint to you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed to me a kingdom

" Be brought in ; Θανατον αναγκη φερεσθαι του διαθεμενου, Elsner, vol. ii., p. 381, has shown that the word φερεσθαι is sometimes used in a forensic sense for what is produced, or proved, or made apparent in a court of judicature. Wherefore the apostle’ s meaning is, that it is necessary the death of the appointed sacrifice be brought in, or produced, at the making of the covenant. In the margin of our Bibles this clause is rightly translated, be brought in. See Act 25:7, where φεροντες is used in the forensic sense

Heb 9:17. A covenant is firm over dead sacrifices; Επι νεκροις . Νεκροις being an adjective, it must have a substantive agreeing with it, either expressed or understood. The substantive understood in this place, I think, is θυμασι, sacrifices; for which reason I have supplied it in the translation. Perhaps the word ζωοις, animals, may be equally proper; especially as, in the following clause, διαθεμενος is in the gender of the animals appointed for the sacrifice. Our translators have supplied the word ανθρωποις, men, and have translated επι νεκροις, after men are dead, contrary to the propriety of the phrase

" It never hath force whilst the appointed liveth; Ὁτε ζῃ ὁ διαθεμενος . Supply μοσχος, or τραγος, or ταυρος· whilst the calf, or goat, or bull, appointed for the sacrifice of ratification, liveth. The apostle having, in Heb 9:15, showed that Christ’ s death was necessary as ὁ Μεσιτης, the Mediator, that is, the procurer, and ratifier of the new covenant, he in the 16th and 17th verses observes that, since God’ s covenants with men were all ratified by sacrifice to show that his intercourses with men are founded on the sacrifice of his Son, it was necessary that the new covenant itself should be ratified by his Son’ s actually dying as a sacrifice

1.    "The faultiness of the common translation of the 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, and 20th verses of this chapter having been already shown in the notes, nothing needs be added here, except to call the reader’ s attention to the propriety and strength of the apostle’ s reasoning, as it appears in the translation of these verses which I have given, compared with his reasoning as represented in the common version.

2.    It is supposed that in Heb 9:28, the apostle, in speaking about Christ’ s bearing the sins of many, alludes to the ceremony of the scape goat. This mysterious sacrifice was to be presented to God, Lev 16:7, and the sins of the people were to be confessed over the head of it, Lev 16:21, and after this the goat was dismissed into a land uninhabited, laden, as the institution implied, with the sins of the people; and this the word ανενεγκειν, to bear or carry away, seems to imply. So truly as the goat did metaphorically bear away the sins of the many, so truly did Christ literally bear the punishment due to our sins; and in reference to every believer, has so borne them away that they shall never more rise in judgment against him

3.    In Christ’ s coming, or appearing the second time, it is very probable, as Dr. Doddridge and others have conjectured, that there is an allusion to the return of the high priest from the inner tabernacle; for, after appearing there in the presence of God, and making atonement for the people in the plain dress of an ordinary priest, Lev 16:23, Lev 16:24, he came out arrayed in his magnificent robes, to bless the people, who waited for him in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation. "But there will be this difference,"says Dr. Macknight, "between the return of Christ to bless his people, and the return of the high priest to bless the congregation. The latter, after coming out of the most holy place, made a new atonement in his pontifical robes for himself and for the people, Lev 16:24, which showed that the former atonement was not real but typical. Whereas Jesus, after having made atonement, (and presented himself in heaven, before God), will not return to the earth for the purpose of making himself a sacrifice the second time; but having procured an eternal redemption for us, by the sacrifice of himself once offered, he will return for the purpose of declaring to them who wait for him that they are accepted, and of bestowing on them the great blessing of eternal life. This reward he, being surrounded with the glory of the Father, Mat 16:27, will give them in the presence of an assembled universe, both as their King and their Priest. This is the great salvation which Christ came to preach, and which was confirmed to the world by them who heard him: Heb 2:3."Reader, lay this sincerely to heart

4.    The form in which the high priest and the ordinary priests were to bless the people, after burning the incense in the tabernacle, is prescribed, Num 6:23-26. Literally translated from the Hebrew it is as follows, and consists of three parts or benedictions: -

1.    May Jehovah bless thee, and preserve thee

2.    May Jehovah cause his face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee

3.    May Jehovah lift up his faces upon thee, and may he put prosperity unto thee! (See my notes on the place, Num 6:23-26.

We may therefore say that Christ, our High Priest, came to bless each of us, by turning us away from our iniquity. And let no one ever expect to see him at his second coming with joy, unless he have, in this life, been turned away from his iniquity, and obtained remission of all his sins, and that holiness without which none can see God. Reader, the time of his reappearing is, to thee, at hand! Prepare to meet thy God

On the word conscience, which occurs so often in this chapter, and in other parts of this epistle, see the observations at the end of chap. 13.

Calvin: Heb 9:1

1.=== Then verily the first, === etc ¹³⁸ After having spoken generally of the abrogation of the old covenant, he now refers specially to the ceremonies. His object is to show that there was nothing practiced then to which Christ’s coming has not put an end. He says first, that under the old covenant there was a specific form of divine worship, and that it was peculiarly adapted to that time. It will hereafter appear by the comparison what kind of things were those rituals prescribed under the Law.

Some copies read, πρώτη σκηνὴ the first tabernacle; but I suspect that there is a mistake as to the word “tabernacle;” nor do I doubt but that some unlearned reader, not finding a noun to the adjective, and in his ignorance applying to the tabernacle what had been said of the covenant, unwisely added the wordσκηνὴ tabernacle. I indeed greatly wonder that the mistake had so prevailed, that it is found in the Greek copies almost universally. ¹³⁹ But necessity constrains me to follow the ancient reading. For the Apostle, as I have said, had been speaking of the old covenant; he now comes to ceremonies, which were additions, as it were, to it. He then intimates that all the rites of the Mosaic Law were a part of the old covenant, and that they partook of the same ancientness, and were therefore to perish.

Many take the wordλατρείας as an accusative plural. I agree with those who connect the two words together, δικαιώματα λατρείας for institutes or rites, which the Hebrews call חוקים , and the Greeks have rendered by the wordδικαιώματα ordinances. The sense is, that the whole form or manner of worshipping God was annexed to the old covenant, and that it consisted of sacrifices, ablutions, and other symbols, together with the sanctuary. And he calls it a worldly sanctuary, because there was no heavenly truth or reality in those rites; for though the sanctuary was the effigy of the original pattern which had been shown to Moses; yet an effigy or image is a different thing from the reality, and especially when they are compared, as here, as things opposed to each other. Hence the sanctuary in itself was indeed earthly, and is rightly classed among the elements of the world, it was yet heavenly as to what it signified. ¹⁴⁰

Calvin: Heb 9:2

2.=== For there was a tabernacle, === etc. As the Apostle here touches but lightly on the structure of the tabernacle, that he might not be detained beyond what his subject required; so will I also designedly abstain from any refined explanation of it. It is then sufficient for our present purpose to consider the tabernacle in its three parts, — the first was the court of the people; the middle was commonly called the sanctuary; and the last was the inner sanctuary, which they called, by way of eminence, the holy of holies. ¹⁴¹

As to the first sanctuary, which was contiguous to the court of the people, he says that there were the candlestick and the table on which the shew­bread was set: he calls this place, in the plural number, the holies. Then, after this is mentioned, the most secret place, which they called the holy of holies, still more remote from the view of the people, and it was even hid from the priests who ministered in the first sanctuary; for as by a veil the sanctuary was closed up to the people, so another veil kept the priests from the holy of holies. There, the Apostle says, was theθυμιατήριον by which name I understand the altar of incense, or fumigation, rather than the censer; ¹⁴² then the ark of the covenant, with its covering, the two cherubim, the golden pot filled with manna, the rod of Aaron, and the two tables. Thus far the Apostle proceeds in describing the tabernacle.

But he says that the pot in which Moses had deposited the manna, and Aaron’s rod which had budded, were in the ark with the two tables; but this seems inconsistent with sacred history, which in 1Kg 8:9, relates that there was nothing in the ark but the two tables. But it is easy to reconcile these two passages: God had commanded the pot and Aaron’s rod to be laid up before the testimony; it is hence probable that they were deposited in the ark, together with the tables. But when the Temple was built, these things were arranged in a different order, and certain history relates it as a thing new that the ark had nothing else but the two tables. ¹⁴³

Calvin: Heb 9:5

5.=== Of which we cannot now, === etc. As nothing can satisfy, curious men, the apostle cuts off every occasion for refinements unsuitable to his present purpose, and lest a longer discussion of these things should break off the thread of his argument. If, therefore, any one should disregard the Apostle’s example, and dwell more minutely on the subject, he would be acting very unreasonably. There might be, indeed, an occasion for doing this elsewhere; but it is now better to attend to the subject of which he treats: it may further be said, that to philosophize beyond just limits, which some do, is not only useless, but also dangerous. There are some things which are not obscure and fitted for the edification of faith; but discretion and sobriety ought to be observed, lest we seek to be wise above what God has been pleased to reveal.

Calvin: Heb 9:6

6.=== Now, when these things were thus ordained, === etc. Omitting other things, he undertakes to handle the chief point in dispute: he says that the priests who performed sacred rites were wont to enter the first tabernacle daily, but that the chief priest entered the holy of holies only yearly with the appointed sacrifice. He hence concludes, that while the tabernacle under the Law was standing, the sanctuary was closed up, and that only through that being removed could the way be open for us to the kingdom of God. We see that the very form of the ancient tabernacle reminded the Jews that they were to look for something else. Then foolishly did they act who, by retaining the shadows of the Law, willfully obstructed their own way.

He mentionsπρώτην σκηνὴν the first tabernacle, in Heb 9:2, in a different sense from what it has here, for here it means the first sanctuary, but there the whole tabernacle; for he sets it in opposition to the spiritual sanctuary of Christ, which he presently mentions. He contends that this had fallen for our great benefit, for through its fall a more familiar access to God has been obtained for us.

Calvin: Heb 9:7

7.For himself and for the errors of the people, or for his own and the ignorances of the people. As the verb |shagag|, means in Hebrew to err, to mistake, so |shgagah|, derived from it, properly denotes error, or mistake; but yet it is generally taken for any kind of sin; and doubtless we never sin except when deceived by the allurements of Satan. The Apostle does not understand by it mere ignorance, as they say, but, on the contrary, he includes also voluntary sins; but as I have already said, no sin is free from error or ignorance; for however knowingly and willfully any one may sin, yet it must be that he is blinded by his lust, so that he does not judge rightly, or rather he forgets himself and God; for men never deliberately rush headlong into ruin, but being entangled in the deceptions of Satan, they lose the power of judging rightly. ¹⁴⁴

Calvin: Heb 9:9

9.Which was a figure, === etc. The wordπαραθολὴ, used here, signifies, as I think, the same thing withἀντίτυπος, 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.)

Calvin: Heb 9:10

10.=== Until the time of reformation, === etc. Here he alludes to the prophecy of Jeremiah. (Jer 31:31.) ¹⁴⁵ The new covenant succeeded the old as a reformation. He expressly mentions meats and drinks, and other things of minor importance, because by these trifling observances a more certain opinion may be formed how far short was the Law of the perfection of the Gospel. ¹⁴⁶

Calvin: Heb 9:11

11.But Christ being come, === etc. He now sets before us the reality of the things under the Law, that it may turn our eyes from them to itself; for he who believes that the things then shadowed forth under the Law have been really found in Christ, will no longer cleave to the shadows, but will embrace the substance and the genuine reality.

But the particulars of the comparison between Christ and the ancient high priest, ought to be carefully noticed. He had said that the high priest alone entered the sanctuary once a year with blood to expiate sins. Christ is in this life the ancient high priests for he alone possesses the dignity and the office of a high priest; but he differs from him in this respect, that he brings with him eternal blessings which secure a perpetuity to his priesthood. Secondly, there is this likeness between the ancient high priest and ours, that both entered the holy of holies through the sanctuary; but they differ in this, that Christ alone entered into heaven through the temple of his own body. That the holy of holies was once every year opened to the high priest to make the appointed expiation — this obscurely prefigured the one true sacrifice of Christ. To enter once then was common to both, but to the earthly it was every year, while it was to the heavenly forever, even to the end of the world. The offering of blood was common to both; but there was a great difference as to the blood; for Christ offered, not the blood of beasts, but his own blood. Expiation was common to both; but that according to the Law, as it was inefficacious, was repeated every year; but the expiation made by Christ is always effectual and is the cause of eternal salvation to us. Thus, there is great importance almost in every word. Some render the words, “But Christ standing by,” or asking; but the meaning of the Apostle is not thus expressed; for he intimates that when the Levitical priests had for the prefixed time performed their office, Christ came in their place, according to what we found in the seventh chapter. ¹⁴⁷

===Of good things to come, === etc. Take these for eternal things; for asμέλλων καιρὸς, time to come, is set in opposition to the presentτῷ ἐνεστηκότι; so future blessings are to the present. The meaning is, that we are led by Christ’s priesthood into the celestial kingdom of God, and that we are made partakers of spiritual righteousness and of eternal life, so that it is not right to desire anything better. Christ alone, then, has that by which he can retain and satisfy us in himself. ¹⁴⁸

===By a greater and more perfect tabernacle, etc. Though this passage is variously explained, yet I have no doubt but that he means the body of Christ; for as there was formerly an access for the Levitical high priest to the holy of holies through the sanctuary, so Christ through his own body entered into the glory of heaven; for as he had put on our flesh and in it suffered, he obtained for himself this privilege, that he should appear before God as a Mediator for us. In the first place, the word sanctuary is fitly and suitably applied to the body of Christ, for it is the temple in which the whole majesty of God dwells. He is further said to have made a way for us by his body to ascend into heaven, because in that body he consecrated himself to God, he became in it sanctified to be our true righteousness, he prepared himself in it to offer a sacrifice; in a word, he made himself in it of no reputation, and suffered the death of the cross; therefore, the Father highly exalted him and gave him a name above every name, that every knee should bow to him. (Phi 2:8.) He then entered into heaven through his own body, because on this account it is that he now sits at the Father’s right hand; he for this reason intercedes for us in heaven, because he had put on our flesh, and consecrated it as a temple to God the Father, and in it sanctified himself to obtain for us an eternal righteousness, having made an expiation for our sins. ¹⁴⁹

It may however seem strange, that he denies the body of Christ to be of this building; for doubtless he proceeded from the seed of Abraham, and was liable to sufferings and to death. To this I reply, that he speaks not here of his material body, or of what belongs to the body as such, but of the spiritual efficacy which emanates from it to us. For as far as Christ’s flesh is quickening, and is a heavenly food to nourish souls, as far as his blood is a spiritual drink and has a cleansing power, we are not to imagine anything earthly or material as being in them. And then we must remember that this is said in allusion to the ancient tabernacle, which was made of wood, brass, skins, silver, and gold, which were all dead things; but the power of God made the flesh of Christ to be a living and spiritual temple.

Calvin: Heb 9:12

12.=== Neither by the blood of goats, === etc. All these things tend to show that the things of Christ so far excel the shadows of the Law, that they justly reduce them all to nothing. For what is the value of Christ’s blood, if it be deemed no better than the blood of beasts? What sort of expiation was made by his death, if the purgations according to the Law be still retained? As soon then as Christ came forth with the efficacious influence of his death, all the typical observances must necessarily have ceased.

Calvin: Heb 9:13

13.=== For if the blood of bulls, === etc. This passage has given to many all occasion to go astray, because they did not consider that sacraments are spoken of, which had a spiritual import. The cleansing of the flesh they leave explained of what avails among men, as the heathens had their expiations to blot out the infamy of crimes. But this explanation is indeed very heathenish; for wrong is done to God’s promises, if we restrict the effect to civil matters only. Often does this declaration occur in the writings of Moses, that iniquity was expiated when a sacrifice was duly offered. This is no doubt the spiritual teaching of faith. Besides, all the sacrifices were destined for this end, that they might lead men to Christ; as the eternal salvation of the soul is through Christ, so these were true witnesses of this salvation.

What then does the Apostle mean when he speaks of the purgations of the flesh? He means what is symbolical or sacramental, as follows, — If the blood of beasts was a true symbol of purgation, so that it cleansed in a sacramental manner, how much more shall Christ who is himself the truth, not only bear witness to a purgation by an external rite, but also really perform this for consciences? The argument then is from the signs to the thing signified; for the effect by a long time preceded the reality of the signs.

Calvin: Heb 9:14

14.Who through the eternal Spirit, === etc. He now clearly shows how Christ’s death is to be estimated, not by the external act, but by the power of the Spirit. For Christ suffered as man; but that death becomes saving to us through the efficacious power of the Spirit; for a sacrifice, which was to be an eternal expiation, was a work more than human. And he calls the Spirit eternal for this reason, that we may know that the reconciliation, of which he is the worker or effecter, is eternal. ¹⁵⁰ By saying, without spot, or unblamable, though he alludes to the victims under the Law, which were not to have a blemish or defect, he yet means, that Christ alone was the lawful victim and capable of appeasing God; for there was always in others something that might be justly deemed wanting; and hence he said before that the covenant of the Law was notἀμεμπτον, blameless.

===From dead works, === etc. Understand by these either such works as produce death, or such as are the fruits or effects of death; for as the life of the soul is our union with God, so they who are alienated from him through sin may be justly deemed to be dead.

===To serve the living God This, we must observe, is the end of our purgation; for we are not washed by Christ, that we may plunge ourselves again into new filth, but that our purity may serve to glorify God. Besides, he teaches us, that nothing can proceed from us that can be pleasing to God until we are purified by the blood of Christ; for as we are all enemies to God before our reconciliation, so he regards as abominable all our works; hence the beginning of acceptable service is reconciliation. And then, as no work is so pure and so free from stains, that it can of itself please God, it is necessary that the purgation through the blood of Christ should intervene, which alone can efface all stains. And there is a striking contrast between the living God and dead works.

Calvin: Heb 9:15

15.=== And for this cause he is Mediator of the New Testament, === etc. He concludes that there is no more need of another priest, for Christ fulfills the office under the New Testament; for he claims not for Christ the honor of a Mediator, so that others may at the same time remain as such with him; but he maintains that all others were repudiated when Christ undertook the office. But that he might more fully confirm this fact, he mentions how he commenced to discharge his office of a Mediator; even through death intervening. Since this is found alone in Christ, being wanting in all others, it follows that he alone can be justly deemed a Mediator. ¹⁵¹

He further records the virtue and efficacy of his death by saying that he paid the price for sins under the first covenant or testament, which could not be blotted out by the blood of beasts; by which words he was seeking draw away the Jews from the Law to Christ. For, if the Law was so weak that all the remedies it applied for expiating sins did by no means accomplish what they represented, who could rest in it as in a safe harbor? This one thing, then, ought to have been enough to stimulate them to seek for something better than the law; for they could not but be in perpetual anxiety. On the other hand, when we come to Christ, as we obtain in him a full redemption, there is nothing which can any more distress us. Then, in these words he shows that the Law is weak, that the Jews might no longer recumb on it; and he teaches them to rely on Christ, for in him is found whatever can be desired for pacifying consciences.

Now, if any one asks, whether sins under the Law where remitted to the fathers, we must bear in mind the solution already stated, — that they were remitted, but remitted through Christ. Then notwithstanding their external expiations, they were always held guilty. For this reason Paul says, that the Law was a handwriting against us. (Col 2:14.) For when the sinner came forward and openly confessed that he was guilty before God, and acknowledged by sacrificing an innocent animal that he was worthy of eternal death, what did he obtain by his victim, except that he sealed his own death as it were by this handwriting? In short, even then they only reposed in the remission of sins, when they looked to Christ. But if only a regard to Christ took away sins, they could never have been freed from them, had they continued to rest in the Law. David indeed declares, that blessed is the man to whom sins are not imputed, (Psa 32:2;) but that he might be a partaker of this blessedness, it was necessary for him to leave the Law, and to have his eyes fixed on Christ; for if he rested in the Law, he could never have been freed from guilt.

===They who are called, === etc. The object of the divine covenant is, that having been adopted as children, we may at length be made heirs of eternal life. The Apostle teaches us that we obtain this by Christ. It is hence evident, that in him is the fulfillment of the covenant. But the promise of the inheritance is to be taken for the promised inheritance, as though he had said, “The promise of eternal life is not otherwise made to us to be enjoined, than through the death of Christ.” Life, indeed, was formerly promised to the fathers, and the same has been the inheritance of God’s children from the beginning, but we do not otherwise enter into the possession of it, than through the blood of Christ previously shed.

But he speaks of the called, that he might the more influence the Jews who were made partakers of this calling; for it is a singular favor, when we have the gift of the knowledge of Christ bestowed on us. We ought then to take the more heed, lest we neglect so valuable a treasure, and our thoughts should wander elsewhere. Some regard the called to be the elect, but incorrectly in my judgment; for the Apostle teaches here the same thing as we find in Rom 3:25, that righteousness and salvation have been procured by the blood of Christ, but that we become partakers of them by faith.

Calvin: Heb 9:16

16.=== For where a testament is, === etc. Even this one passage is a sufficient proof, that this Epistle was not written in Hebrew; for ברית means in Hebrew a covenant, but not a testament; but in Greek, διαθήκη, includes both ideas; and the Apostle, alluding to its secondary meaning, holds that the promises should not have been otherwise ratified and valid, had they not been sealed by the death of Christ. And this he proves by referring to what is usually the case as to wills or testaments, the effect of which is suspended until the death of those whose wills they are.

The Apostle may yet seem to rest on too weak an argument, so that what he says may be easily disproved. For it may be said, that God made no testament or will under the Law; but it was a covenant that he made with the ancient people. Thus, neither from the fact nor from the name, can it be concluded that Christ’s death was necessary. For if he infers from the fact, that Christ ought to have died, because a testament is not ratified except by the death of the testator, the answer may be this, that |berit|, the word ever used by Moses, is a covenant made between those who are alive, and we cannot think otherwise of the fact itself. Now, as to the word used, he simply alluded, as I have already said, to the two meanings it has in Greek; he therefore dwells chiefly on the thing in itself. Nor is it any objection to say, that it was a covenant that God made with his people; for that very covenant bore some likeness to a testament, for it was ratified by blood. ¹⁵²

We must ever hold this truth, that no symbols have ever been adopted by God unnecessarily or unsuitably. And God in establishing the covenant of the law made use of blood. Then it was not such a contract, as they say, between the living, as did not require death. Besides, what rightly belongs to a testament is, that it begins to take effect after death. If we consider that the Apostle reasons from the thing itself, and not from the word, and if we bear in mind that he avowedly takes as granted what I have already stated, that nothing has been instituted in vain by God, there will be no great difficulty.

If anyone objects and says, that the heathens ratified covenants according to the other meaning by sacrifices; this indeed I admit to be true; but God did not borrow the rite of sacrificing from the practice of the heathens; on the contrary, all the heathen sacrifices were corruptions, which had derived their origin from the institutions of God. We must then return to the same point, that the covenant of God which was made with blood, may be fitly compared to a testament, as it is of the same kind and character.

Calvin: Heb 9:18

18.=== Whereupon neither the first, === etc. It hence appears that the fact is what is mainly urged, and that it is not a question about the word, though the Apostle turned to his own purpose a word presented to his attention in that language in which he wrote, as though one, while speaking of God’s covenant, which is often called in Greekμαρτυρία, a testimony, were to recommend it among other things under that title. And doubtless that is a testimony, μαρτυρία, to which angels from heaven has borne witness, and of which there have been so many illustrious witnesses on earth, even all the holy Prophets, Apostles, and a vast number of martyrs, and of which at last the Son of God himself became a surety. No one in such a discourse would deem any such thing as unreasonable. And yet the Hebrew word, תעודה will admit of no such meaning as a covenant; but as nothing is advanced but what is consistent with the thing itself, no scrupulous regard is to be paid to the meaning of a word.

The Apostle then says, that the old testament or covenant was dedicated with blood. He hence concludes, that men were even then reminded, that it could not be valid and efficacious except death intervened. For though the blood of beasts was then shed, yet, he denies that it availed to confine an everlasting covenant. That this may appear more clearly, we must notice the custom of sprinkling which he quotes from Moses. He first teaches us that the covenant was dedicated or consecrated, not that it had in itself anything profane; but as there is nothing so holy that men by their uncleanness will not defile, except God prevents it by making a renewal of all things, therefore the dedication was made on account of men, who alone wanted it.

He afterwards adds, that the tabernacle and all the vessels, and also the very book of the law, were sprinkled; by which rite the people were then taught, that God could not be sought or looked to for salvation, nor rightly worshipped, except faith in every case looked to an intervening blood. For the majesty of God is justly to be dreaded by us, and the way to his presence is nothing to us but a dangerous labyrinth, until we know that he is pacified towards us through the blood of Christ, and that this blood affords to us a free access. All kinds of worship are then faulty and impure until Christ cleanses them by the sprinkling of his blood. ¹⁵³

For the tabernacle was a sort of visible image of God; and as the vessels for ministering were destined for his service, so they were symbols of true worship. But since none of these were for salvation to the people, we hence reasonably conclude, that where Christ does not appear with his blood, we have nothing to do with God. So doctrine itself, however unchangeable may be the will of God, cannot be efficacious for our benefit, unless it be dedicated by blood, as is plainly set forth in this verse.

I know that others give a different interpretation; for they consider the tabernacle to be the body of the Church, and vessels the faithful, whose ministry God employs; but what I have stated is much more appropriate. For whenever God was to be called upon, they turned themselves to the sanctuary; and it was a common way of speaking to say that they stood before the Lord when they appeared in the temple.

Calvin: Heb 9:20

20.Saying, This is the blood of the testament, ¹⁵⁴ etc. If that was the blood of the testament, then neither the testament was without blood ratified, nor the blood without the testament available for expiation. It is hence necessary that both should be united; and we see that before the explanation of the Law, no symbol was added, for what would a sacrament be except the word preceded it? Hence a symbol is a kind of appendage to the word. And mark, this word was not whispered like a magic incantation, but pronounced with a clear voice, as it was destined for the people, according to what the words of the covenant express, which God hath enjoined unto you. ¹⁵⁵ Perverted, then, are the sacraments, and it is a wicked corruption when there is no explanation of the commandment given, which is as it were the very soul of the sacrament. Hence the Papists, who take away the true understanding of things from signs, retain only dead elements.

This passage reminds us that the promises of God are then only profitable to us when they are confirmed by the blood of Christ. For what Paul testifies in 2Co 1:20, that all God’s promises are yea and amen in Christ — this happens when his blood like a seal is engraven on our hearts, or when we not only hear God speaking, but also see Christ offering himself as a pledge for those things which are spoken. If this thought only came to our minds, that what we read is not written so much with ink as with the blood of Christ, that when the Gospel is preached, his sacred blood distills together with the voice, there would be far greater attention as well as reverence on our part. A symbol of this was the sprinkling mentioned by Moses!

At the same time there is more stated here than what is expressed by Moses; for he does not mention that the book and the people were sprinkled, nor does he name the goats, nor the scarlet wool, nor the hyssop. As to the book, that it was sprinkled cannot be clearly shown, yet the probability is that it was, for Moses is said to have produced it after he had sacrificed; and he did this when he bound the people to God by a solemn compact. With regard to the rest, the Apostle seems to have blended together various kinds of expiations, the reason for which was the same. Nor indeed was there anything unsuitable in this, since he was speaking of the general subject Or purgation under the Old Testament, which was done by means of blood. Now as to the sprinkling made by hyssop and scarlet wool, it is evident that it represented the mystical sprinkling made by the Spirit. We know that the hyssop possesses a singular power to cleanse and to purify; so Christ employs his Spirit to sprinkle us in order to wash us by his own blood when he leads us to true repentance, when he purifies us from the depraved lusts of our flesh, when he imbues us with the precious gift of his own righteousness. For it was not in vain that God had instituted this rite. David also alluded to this when he said,

“Thou wilt sprinkle me, O Lord, with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed.” (Psa 51:7.)

These remarks will be sufficient for those who wish to be sober­minded in their speculations.

Calvin: Heb 9:22

22.=== And almost all things, === etc. By saying almost he seems to imply that some things were otherwise purified. And doubtless they often washed themselves and other unclean things with water. But even water itself derived its power to cleanse from the sacrifices; so that the Apostle at length truly declares that without blood there was no remission. ¹⁵⁶ Then uncleanness was imputed until it was expiated by a sacrifice. And as without Christ there is no purity nor salvation, so nothing without blood can be either pure or saving; for Christ is never to be separated from the sacrifice of his death. But the Apostle meant only to say that this symbol was almost always made use of. But if at any time the purgation was not so made, it was nevertheless through blood, since all the rites derived their efficacy in a manner from the general expiation. For the people were not each of them sprinkled, (for how could so small a portion of blood be sufficient for so large a multitude?) yet the purgation extended to all. Hence the particle almost signifies the same as though he had said, that the use of this rite was so common that they seldom omitted it in purgations. For what Chrysostom says, that unfitness is thus denoted, because these were only figures under the Law, is inconsistent with the Apostle’s design.

===No remission, === etc. Thus men are prevented from appearing before God; for as he is justly displeased with them all, there is no ground for them to promise themselves any favor until he is pacified. But there is but one way of pacification, and that is by an expiation made by blood: hence no pardon of sins can be hoped for unless we bring blood, and this is done when we flee by faith to the death of Christ.

Calvin: Heb 9:23

23.The patterns, or exemplars, etc. Lest any one should object and say that the blood by which the old testament was dedicated was different from that of a testator, the Apostle meets this objection, and says that it was no wonder that the tabernacle which was earthly was consecrated by the sacrificing of beasts; for there was an analogy and a likeness between the purification and the things purified. But the heavenly pattern or exemplar of which he now speaks was to be consecrated in a very different way; there was here no need of goats or of calves. It hence follows that the death of the testator was necessary.

The meaning then is this, — as under the Law there were only earthly images of spiritual things, so the rite of expiation was also, so to speak, carnal and figurative; but as the heavenly pattern allows of nothing earthly, so it requires another blood than that of beasts, such as may correspond with its excellency. Thus the death of the testator is necessary, in order that the testament may be really consecrated.

He calls the kingdom of Christ heavenly things, ¹⁵⁷ for it is spiritual and possesses a full revelation of the truth. Better sacrifices he mentions instead of “a better sacrifice,” for it was only one; but he uses the plural number for the sake of the antithesis or contrast.

Calvin: Heb 9:24

24.=== For Christ is not entered, === etc. This is a confirmation of the former verse. He had spoken of the true sanctuary, even the heavenly; he now adds that Christ entered there. It hence follows that a suitable confirmation is required. The holy places he takes for the sanctuary; he says that it is not made with hands, because it ought not to be classed with the created things which are subject to decay; for he does not mean here the heaven we see, and in which the stars shine, but the glorious kingdom of God which is above all the heavens. He calls the old sanctuary theἀντίτυπον, the antitype of the true, that is, of the spiritual; for all the external figures represented as in a mirror what would have otherwise been above our corporeal senses. Greek writers sometimes use the same word in speaking of our sacraments, and wisely too and suitably, for every sacrament is a visible image of what is invisible.

===Now to appear, === etc. So formerly the Levitical priest stood before God in the name of the people, but typically; for in Christ is found the reality and the full accomplishment of what was typified. The ark was indeed a symbol of the divine presence; But it is Christ who really presents himself before God, and stands there to obtain favor for us, so that now there is no reason why we should flee from God’s tribunal, since we have so kind an advocate, through whose faithfulness and protection we are made secure and safe. Christ was indeed our advocate when he was on earth; but it was a further concession made to our infirmity that he ascended into heaven to undertake there the office of an advocate. So that whenever mention is made of his ascension into heaven, this benefit ought ever to come to our minds, that he appears there before God to defend us by his advocacy. Foolishly, then, and unreasonably the question is asked by some, has he not always appeared there? For the Apostle speaks here only of his intercession, for the sake of which he entered the heavenly sanctuary.

Calvin: Heb 9:25

25.=== Nor yet that he should offer himself often, === etc. How, then, is he a priest, one may say, if he offers no sacrifices? To this I reply that it is not requited of a priest that he should be continually sacrificing; for even under the Law there were days appointed for the chief sacrifices every year; they had also their hours daily morning and evening. But as that only true sacrifice which Christ offered once for all is ever efficacious, and thus perpetual in its effects, it is no wonder that on its virtue, which never fails, Christ’s eternal priesthood should be sustained. And here again he shows how and in what things Christ differs from the Levitical priest. Of the sanctuary he had spoken before; but he notices one difference as to the kind of sacrifice, for Christ offered himself and not an animal; and he adds another; that he repeated not his sacrifice, as under the Law, for the repetition there was frequent and even incessant.

Calvin: Heb 9:26

26.For then must he often have suffered, === etc. He shows how great an absurdity follows, if we do not count it enough that an expiation has been made by the one sacrifice of Christ. For he hence concludes that he must have died often; for death is connected with sacrifices. How this latter supposition is most unreasonable; it then follows that the virtue of the one sacrifice is eternal and extends to all ages. And he says since the foundation of the world, or from the beginning of the world ¹⁵⁸ for in all ages from the beginning there were sins which needed expiation. Except then the sacrifice of Christ was efficacious, no one of the fathers would have obtained salvation; for as they were exposed to God’s wrath, a remedy for deliverance would have failed them, had not Christ by suffering once suffered so much as was necessary to reconcile men to God from the beginning of the world even to the end. Except then we look for many deaths, we must be satisfied with the one true sacrifice.

And hence it is evident how frivolous is the distinction, in the acuteness of which the Papists take so much delight; for they say that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross was bloody, but that the sacrifice of the mass which they pretend to offer daily to God, is unbloody. Were this subtle evasion adopted, then the Spirit of God would be accused of inadvertence, having not thought of such a thing; for the Apostle assumes it here as an admitted truth, that there is no sacrifice without death. I care nothing that ancient writers have spoken thus; for it is not in the power of men to invent sacrifices as they please. Here stands a truth declared by the Holy Spirit, that sins are not expiated by a sacrifice except blood be shed. Therefore the notion, that Christ is often offered, is a device of the devil.

===But now once in the end of the world, === etc. He calls that the end of the world or the consummation of the ages, which Paul calls “the fullness of time,” (Gal 4:4;) for it was the maturity of that time which God had determined in his eternal purpose; and thus cut off is every occasion for men’s curiosity, that they may not dare to inquire why it was no sooner, or why in that age rather than in another. For it behooves us to acquiesce in God’s secret purpose, the reason for which appears clear to him, though it may not be evident to us. In short, the Apostle intimates that Christ’s death was in due time, as he was sent into the world for this end by the Father, in whose power is the lawful right to regulate all things as well as time, and who ordains their succession with consummate wisdom, though often hid from us

This consummation is also set in opposition to the imperfection of past time; for God so held his ancient people in suspense, that it might have been easily concluded that things had not yet reached a fixed state. Hence Paul declares that the end of the ages had come upon us, (1Co 10:11;) by which he means that the kingdom of Christ contained the accomplishment of all things. But since it was the fullness of time when Christ appeared to expiate sins, they are guilty of offering him an atrocious insult, who seek to renew his sacrifice, as though all things were not completed by his death. He then appeared once for all; for had he done so once or twice, there must have been something defective in the first oblation; but this is inconsistent with fullness.

===To put away, or to destroy sin, etc. ¹⁵⁹ This agrees with Daniel’s prophecy, in which the sealing up and the abolition of sins are promised, and in which it is also declared that there would be an end to sacrifices, (Dan 9:24;) for to what purpose are expiations when sins are destroyed? But this destruction is then only effected, when sins are not imputed to those who flee to the sacrifice of Christ; for though pardon is to be sought daily, as we daily provoke God’s wrath; yet as we are reconciled to God in no other way than by the one death of Christ, sin is rightly said to be put away or destroyed by it.

Calvin: Heb 9:27

27.=== And as it is appointed, === etc. The meaning is this: since we patiently wait after death for the day of judgment, it being the common lot of nature which it is not right to struggle against; why should there be less patience in waiting for the second coming of Christ? For if a long interval of time does not diminish, as to men, the hope of a happy resurrection, how unreasonable would it be to render less honor to Christ? But less would it be, were we to call upon him to undergo a second death, when he had once died. Were any one to object and say, that some had died twice, such as Lazarus, and not once; the answer would be this, — that the Apostle speaks here of the ordinary lot of men; but they are to be excepted from this condition, who shall by an instantaneous change put off corruption, (1Co 15:51;) for he includes none but those who wait for a long time in the dust for the redemption of their bodies.

Calvin: Heb 9:28

28.=== The second time without sin, === etc. The Apostle urges this one thing, — that we ought not to be disquieted by vain and impure longings for new kinds of expiations, for the death of Christ is abundantly sufficient for us. Hence he says, that he once appeared and made a sacrifice to abolish sins, and that at his second coming he will make openly manifest the efficacy of his death, so that sin will have no more power to hurt us. ¹⁶⁰

To bear, or, take away sins, is to free from guilt by his satisfaction those who have sinned. He says the sins of many, that is, of all, as in Rom 5:15. It is yet certain that all receive no benefit from the death of Christ; but this happens, because their unbelief prevents them. At the same time this question is not to be discussed here, for the Apostle is not speaking of the few or of the many to whom the death of Christ may be available; but he simply means that he died for others and not for himself; and therefore he opposes many to one. ¹⁶¹

But what does he mean by saying that Christ will appear without sin? Some say, without a propitiation or an expiatory sacrifice for sin, as the word sin is taken in Rom 8:3; 2Co 5:21; and in many places in the writings of Moses; but in my judgment he intended to express something more suitable to his present purpose, namely, that Christ at his coming will make it known how truly and really he had taken away sins, so that there would be no need of any other sacrifice to pacify God; as though he had said, “When we come to the tribunal of Christ, we shall find that there was nothing wanting in his death.” ¹⁶²

And to the same effect is what he immediately adds, unto salvation to them who look, or wait for him. Others render the sentence differently, “To them who look for him unto salvation;” But the other meaning is the most appropriate; for he means that those shall find complete salvation who recumb with quiet minds on the death of Christ; for this looking for or wanting has a reference to the subject discussed. The Scripture indeed does elsewhere ascribe this in common to believers, that they look for the coming of the Lord, in order to distinguish them from the ungodly, by whom his coming is dreaded, (1Th 1:10;) but as the Apostle now contends that we ought to acquiesce in the one true sacrifice of Christ, he calls it the looking for Christ, when we are satisfied with his redemption alone, and seek no other remedies or helps. ¹⁶³

Defender: Heb 9:2

The design of the tabernacle in the wilderness, with its appurtenances, is described specifically in Exodus 25-27. Many of these details, as well as the worship services specified for the tabernacle, were models of the heavenly tabernacle and types of the spiritual ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ, our great High Priest (Heb 9:9, Heb 9:23, Heb 9:24)."

Defender: Heb 9:3

Also called "the most holy place" (Exo 26:34), in extra-Biblical writings it has been called "the Holy of holies." This chamber could only be entered once a year on the great Day of Atonement by the high priest to present sacrificial blood for all the people (Heb 9:25; see Leviticus 16)."

Defender: Heb 9:4

The "golden censer" was only brought into the holiest place on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:12-15), burning incense with coals from the altar, so the cloud of incense would cover the mercy seat where the sacrificial blood was to be sprinkled.

Defender: Heb 9:4

See Exo 16:33.

Defender: Heb 9:4

See Num 17:10.

Defender: Heb 9:4

These were the two tables of the law containing God's ten commandments (Deu 10:2-5)."

Defender: Heb 9:5

The carved figures of the "cherubims" overshadowed the mercy seat (Exo 25:18-20), guarding access to God just as the true cherubims guarded the entrance to Eden after the expulsion of Adam and Eve (Gen 3:24).

Defender: Heb 9:5

"Mercyseat" is a translation of the same Greek word translated "propitiation" in Rom 3:25. It was the place where the high priest offered the blood of the propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the people."

Defender: Heb 9:9

"Figure" is from the Greek parabole, from which we get "parable." The wilderness tabernacle with its various services was a sort of parable or picture of Christ's ministry in the heavenly tabernacle."

Defender: Heb 9:15

This is the same Greek word (diatheke) translated "covenant" elsewhere (Heb 8:7, Heb 8:8). The reference here is not to the Old and New Testaments as the two divisions of the Bible, but rather to the contrast between God's old covenant with Israel under the Mosaic law and the new covenant with both Jewish and Gentile believers as sealed by the blood of Christ (Heb 9:12)."

Defender: Heb 9:16

Although not all covenants require death on the part of the one making the covenant before the covenant comes into force, the particular type of covenant involved in a will does, and this is the type of covenant in view here. The first covenant made by God with man (at least the first actually called a covenant) was the unconditional covenant made with Noah after the flood (Gen 9:9, Gen 9:11, Gen 9:12, Gen 9:13, Gen 9:15, Gen 9:16, Gen 9:17) following the sacrifice of clean animals when they came out of the ark (Gen 8:20). Similarly, His unconditional covenant with Abraham followed a sacrifice of five animals (Gen 15:9-10, Gen 15:17-18). When God gave the law to Israel on Mount Sinai, He made a covenant with them (Exo 19:5, Exo 19:6) conditioned on their obedience, and this was accompanied by burnt offerings and peace offerings and the sprinkling of "the blood of the covenant" (Exo 24:5-8). However, all of these offerings of animals were only temporal and typical, prefiguring and prophesying the eternal offering of the blood of Christ and the making of the new covenant. Thus, in the case of these particular covenants made by God with man, death was required to bring them into operation so that the Mosaic covenant and Christian covenant, in effect, become "testaments" or wills. The translators appropriately used this word under these circumstances, and it is altogether fitting that the two divisions of the Bible, centering on the covenants of law and grace, became known as the Old Testament and New Testament.

Defender: Heb 9:16

The word translated "testator" (Greek diatithemai) simply means "the one who made it" (the covenant). Not all covenants require the death of one or both of the covenanters, but the particular covenants being discussed in this section of Hebrews do involve death. The men with whom God was making the covenants all were under the judgment of death because of sin, but God Himself covenanted to die in their place, although they may not have understood its full implications at the time. In prophetic symbolism, both man's merited death and God's future substitutionary death were pictured by the animal sacrifices of the earlier covenants, and then finally fulfilled by the once-for-all death of God in Christ. All of these were sealed, as it were, by "the shedding of blood" (Heb 9:22), and their terms appropriated and effectuated by the faith of the men who received them in the covenant promises of God."

Defender: Heb 9:20

Compare the words of Christ concerning the blood of the new covenant (Mat 26:28) with those of Moses concerning the blood of the old covenant (Exo 24:8)."

Defender: Heb 9:24

Thus, the wilderness tabernacle and the temple in Jerusalem were only "figures of the true" tabernacle. The latter is not merely a structure in heaven, but is "heaven itself.""

Defender: Heb 9:27

Enoch and Elijah seem to have been exceptions to this principle (Gen 5:24; 2Ki 2:11), but they will probably return to the earth in the last days and then die (see notes on Rev 11:3-12). There will be one great exception, the saints living on earth when Christ returns (1Co 15:51-53), but all (even those who will be living at that time) must prepare for death, for no one can be sure he will not die before Christ comes."

Defender: Heb 9:28

"Bear" here is the same word as "offer up" in Heb 7:27. Christ not only bore the penalty of our sins on the cross but also offered up His sacrificial blood to the Father as proof thereof (compare Heb 9:24, Heb 9:25). Israel's high priest offered up the blood of animals as an atonement for sins. Our High Priest offered up Himself.

Defender: Heb 9:28

To "look for Him" means to "expectantly wait for Him," knowing that He might come at any time. There is nothing in the whole scope of prophesied events in the last days that must be fulfilled before He comes. Many of these events could happen before His return, but none must happen. We should "look for him" every day and "love his appearing" (2Ti 4:8)."

TSK: Heb 9:1

the first : Heb 8:7, Heb 8:13

had : Heb 9:10; Lev 18:3, Lev 18:4, Lev 18:30, Lev 22:9; Num 9:12; Eze 43:11; Luk 1:6

ordinances : or, ceremonies

and : Heb 9:10,Heb 9:11, Heb 8:2; Exo 25:8; Col 2:8

TSK: Heb 9:2

a tabernacle : Exod. 26:1-30, Exo 29:1, Exo 29:35, 36:8-38, Exo 39:32-34, Exo 40:2, Exo 40:18-20

the first : Exod. 25:23-40, Exo 26:35, Exo 37:10-24, Exo 39:36-38, Exo 40:4, Exo 40:22-24

the table : Exo 40:4; Lev 24:5, Lev 24:6

the showbread : Exo 25:23, Exo 25:30

the sanctuary : or, holy, Exo 26:33

TSK: Heb 9:3

the second : Heb 6:19, Heb 10:20; Exo 26:31-33, Exo 36:35-38, Exo 40:3, Exo 40:21; 2Ch 3:14; Isa 25:7; Mat 27:51

the Holiest : Heb 9:8, Heb 10:19; 1Ki 8:6

TSK: Heb 9:4

the golden : Lev 16:12; 1Ki 7:50; Rev 8:3

the ark : Exo 25:10-16, Exo 26:33, Exo 37:1-5, Exo 39:35, Exo 40:3, Exo 40:21

was : Exo 16:33, Exo 16:34

and Aaron’ s : Num 17:5, Num 17:8, Num 17:10; Psa 110:2, Psa 110:3

and the : Exo 25:16, Exo 25:21, Exo 26:33, Exo 34:29, Exo 40:3, Exo 40:20,Exo 40:21; Deu 10:2-5; 1Ki 8:9, 1Ki 8:21; 2Ch 5:10

TSK: Heb 9:5

over : Exo 25:17-22, Exo 37:6-9; Lev 16:2; Num 7:89; 1Sa 4:4; 1Ki 8:6, 1Ki 8:7; 2Ki 19:15; Psa 80:1, Psa 99:1; Eph 3:10; 1Pe 1:12

the mercyseat : Heb 4:16; Lev 16:2, Lev 16:13; 1Ch 28:11

TSK: Heb 9:6

the priests : Exo 27:21, Exo 30:7, Exo 30:8; Num 28:3; 2Ch 26:16-19; Dan 8:11; Luk 1:8-11

TSK: Heb 9:7

into : Heb 9:24, Heb 9:25; Exo 30:10; Lev. 16:2-20,Lev 16:34

not : Heb 5:3, Heb 7:27, Heb 10:19, Heb 10:20

errors : Lev 5:18; 2Sa 6:7; 2Ch 33:9; Psa 19:12, Psa 95:10; Isa 3:12, Isa 9:16, Isa 28:7; Isa 29:14; Hos 4:12; Amo 2:14

TSK: Heb 9:8

Holy Ghost : Heb 3:7, Heb 10:15; Isa 63:11; Act 7:51, Act 7:52, Act 28:25; Gal 3:8; 2Pe 1:21

the way : Heb 9:3, Heb 4:15, Heb 4:16, Heb 10:19-22; Joh 10:7, Joh 10:9, Joh 14:6; Eph 2:18

TSK: Heb 9:9

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

TSK: Heb 9:10

in meats : Heb 13:9; Lev. 11:2-47; Deut. 14:3-21; Eze 4:14; Act 10:13-15; Col 2:16

divers : Heb 6:2 *Gr: Heb 10:22; Exo 29:4, Exo 30:19-21, Exo 40:12; Lev 14:8, Lev 14:9, Lev 16:4, Lev 16:24, Lev 17:15, Lev 17:16, Lev 22:6; Num 19:7-21; Deu 21:6, Deu 23:11

carnal : Heb 9:1, Heb 7:16; Gal 4:3, Gal 4:9; Eph 2:15; Col 2:20-22

ordinances : or, rites, or, ceremonies

until : Heb 2:5, Heb 6:5; Gal 4:4; Eph 1:10

TSK: Heb 9:11

Christ : Gen 49:10; Psa 40:7; Isa 59:20; Mal 3:1; Mat 2:6, Mat 11:3; Joh 4:25; 1Jo 4:2, 1Jo 4:3, 1Jo 5:20; 2Jo 1:7

an high priest : Heb 2:17, Heb 3:1, Heb 4:15, Heb 5:5, Heb 5:6, Heb 7:1, 11-26, Heb 7:27, Heb 8:1

of good : Heb 10:1

by a greater : Heb 9:1-9, Heb 8:2; Joh 1:14 *Gr.

not made : Heb 9:23, Heb 9:24; Act 7:48, Act 17:24, Act 17:25; 2Co 5:1; Col 2:11

TSK: Heb 9:12

by the : Heb 9:13, Heb 10:4; Lev 8:2, Lev 9:15, Lev 16:5-10

by his : Heb 1:3, Heb 10:9-14; Act 20:28; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; Tit 2:14; 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19; Rev 1:5, Rev 5:9

he entered : Heb 9:7, Heb 9:24-26, Heb 10:12, Heb 10:19

once : Heb 9:26, Heb 9:28, Heb 10:10; Zec 3:9

having : Heb 9:15, Heb 5:9; Dan 9:24; Mar 3:29; Gal 3:13, Gal 3:14; 1Th 1:10

TSK: Heb 9:13

if : Lev 16:14, Lev 16:16

and : Num. 19:2-21

the purifying : Num 8:7, Num 19:12; 2Ch 30:19; Psa 51:7; Act 15:9; 1Pe 1:22

TSK: Heb 9:14

How : Deu 31:27; 2Sa 4:11; Job 15:16; Mat 7:11; Luk 12:24, Luk 12:28; Rom 11:12, Rom 11:24

the blood : Heb 9:12; 1Pe 1:19; 1Jo 1:7; Rev 1:5

who : Isa 42:1, Isa 61:1; Mat 12:28; Luk 4:18; Joh 3:34; Act 1:2, Act 10:38; Rom 1:4; 1Pe 3:18

eternal : Deu 33:27; Isa 57:15; Jer 10:10; Rom 1:20; 1Ti 1:17

offered : Heb 9:7, Heb 7:27; Mat 20:28; Eph 2:5, Eph 5:2; Tit 2:14; 1Pe 2:24, 1Pe 3:18

without : Lev 22:20; Num. 19:2-21, Num 28:3, Num 28:9, Num 28:11; Deu 15:21, Deu 17:1; Isa 53:9; Dan 9:24-26; 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 1:19, 1Pe 2:22; 1Jo 3:5

spot : or, fault

purge : Heb 9:9, Heb 1:3, Heb 10:2, Heb 10:22

dead works : Heb 6:1

to serve : Luk 1:74; Rom 6:13, Rom 6:22; Gal 2:19; 1Th 1:9; 1Pe 4:2

the living : Heb 11:21; Deu 5:26; 1Sa 17:26; 2Ki 19:16; Jer 10:10; Dan 6:26; Act 14:15; 2Co 6:16; 1Ti 3:15

TSK: Heb 9:15

the mediator : Heb 7:22, Heb 8:6, Heb 12:24; 1Ti 2:5

the new : Heb 8:8; 2Co 3:6

means : Heb 9:16, Heb 9:28, Heb 2:14, Heb 13:20; Isa 53:10-12; Dan 9:26

for : Heb 9:12, Heb 11:40; Rom 3:24-26, Rom 5:6, Rom 5:8, Rom 5:10; Eph 1:7; 1Pe 3:18; Rev 5:9, Rev 14:3, Rev 14:4

the first : Heb 9:1, Heb 8:7, Heb 8:13

they which : Heb 3:1; Rom 8:28, Rom 8:30, Rom 9:24; 2Th 2:14

promise : Heb 6:13, Heb 11:13, Heb 11:39, Heb 11:40; Jam 1:12; 1Jo 2:25

eternal : Psa 37:18; Mat 19:29, Mat 25:34, Mat 25:36; Mar 10:17; Luk 18:18; Joh 10:28; Rom 6:23; 2Ti 2:10; Tit 1:2, Tit 3:7; 1Pe 1:3, 1Pe 1:4, 1Pe 5:10

TSK: Heb 9:16

be : or, be brought in, Heb 9:16

TSK: Heb 9:17

Gen 48:21; Joh 14:27 *Gr: Gal 3:15

TSK: Heb 9:18

the first : Heb 8:7-9; Exo 12:22, Exo 24:3-8

dedicated : or, purified, Heb 9:14, Heb 9:22

TSK: Heb 9:19

the blood : Heb 9:12, Heb 10:4; Exo 24:5, Exo 24:6, Exo 24:8-11; Lev 1:2, Lev 1:3, Lev 1:10, Lev 3:6, Lev 16:14-18

scarlet : or, purple, Lev 14:4-6, Lev 14:49-52; Num 19:6; Mat 27:28; Mar 15:17, Mar 15:20; Joh 19:2, Joh 19:5

hyssop : Exo 12:22; Num 19:18; Psa 51:7

sprinkled : Heb 12:24; Exo 24:8; Isa 52:15; Eze 36:25; 1Pe 1:2

TSK: Heb 9:20

This : Heb 13:20; Zec 9:11; Mat 26:28

testament : Rather, covenant. Heb 9:16 and Heb 9:17 may be better rendered, ""For where a covenant is, there must necessarily be the death of that by which it is confirmed; for a covenant is confirmed over dead victims, and does not avail while that by which it is confirmed liveth.""Deu 29:12; Jos 9:6

TSK: Heb 9:21

Exo 29:12, Exo 29:20,Exo 29:36; Lev 8:15, Lev 8:19, Lev 9:8, Lev 9:9, Lev 9:18, Lev 16:14-19; 2Ch 29:19-22; Eze 43:18-26

TSK: Heb 9:22

almost : Lev 14:6, Lev 14:14, Lev 14:25, Lev 14:51, Lev 14:52

and without : Lev 4:20,Lev 4:26, Lev 4:35, Lev 5:10,Lev 5:12, Lev 5:18, Lev 6:7, Lev 17:11

TSK: Heb 9:23

the patterns : Heb 9:9, Heb 9:10,Heb 9:24, Heb 8:5, Heb 10:1; Col 2:17

the heavenly : Heb 9:11, Heb 9:12, Heb 9:14, Heb 9:24, Heb 10:4, Heb 10:10-17; Luk 24:26, Luk 24:46; Joh 14:3; 1Pe 1:19-21; Rev 5:9

TSK: Heb 9:24

the holy : Heb 9:11; Mar 14:58; Joh 2:19-21

the figures : Heb 9:9, Heb 9:23, Heb 8:2

but : Heb 1:3, Heb 6:20, Heb 7:26, Heb 8:2, Heb 8:5, Heb 12:2; Psa 68:18; Mar 16:19; Luk 24:51; Joh 6:62; Joh 16:28; Act 1:9-11, Act 3:21; Eph 1:20-22, Eph 4:8-11; Col 3:2; 1Pe 3:22

appear : Heb 7:25; Exo 28:12, Exo 28:29; Zec 3:1; Rom 8:33; 1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:2; Rev 8:3

TSK: Heb 9:25

offer : Heb 9:7, Heb 9:14, Heb 9:26, Heb 10:10

as : Heb 9:12; Exo 30:10; Lev. 16:2-34

TSK: Heb 9:26

the foundation : Mat 25:34; Joh 17:24; 1Pe 1:20; Rev 13:8, Rev 17:8

in : Heb 1:2; Isa 2:2; Dan 10:14; Mic 4:1; 1Co 10:11; Gal 4:1; Eph 1:10; 1Pe 1:20

he appeared : Heb 9:12, Heb 7:27, Heb 10:4, Heb 10:10; Lev 16:21, Lev 16:22; 2Sa 12:13, 2Sa 24:10; Job 7:21; Dan 9:24; Joh 1:29; 1Pe 2:24, 1Pe 3:18; 1Jo 3:5

the sacrifice : Heb 9:14, Heb 10:12, Heb 10:26; Eph 5:2; Tit 2:14

TSK: Heb 9:27

as : Gen 3:19; 2Sa 14:14; Job 14:5, Job 30:23; Psa 89:48; Ecc 3:20, Ecc 9:5, Ecc 9:10, Ecc 12:7; Rom 5:12

but : Heb 6:2; Job 19:25; Ecc 11:9, Ecc 12:14; Matt. 25:31-46; Joh 5:26-29; Act 17:31; Rom 2:5, Rom 14:9-12; 1Co 4:5; 2Co 5:10; 2Ti 4:1; Jud 1:15; Rev 20:11

TSK: Heb 9:28

was : Heb 9:25; Rom 6:10; 1Pe 3:18; 1Jo 3:5

to bear : Lev 10:17; Num 18:1, Num 18:23; Isa 53:4-6, Isa 53:11, Isa 53:12; Mat 26:28; Rom 5:15; 1Pe 2:24

them : Phi 3:20; 1Th 1:10; 2Ti 4:8; Tit 2:13; 2Pe 3:12

he appear : Zec 14:5; Joh 14:3; Act 1:11; 1Th 4:14-16; 2Th 1:5-9, 2Th 2:1; 1Jo 3:2; Rev 1:7

without : Rom 6:10, Rom 8:3

unto : Isa 25:9; Rom 8:23; 1Co 15:54; Phi 3:21; 1Th 4:17; 2Th 1:10

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Heb 9:1

Then verily - Or, moreover. The object is to describe the tabernacle in which the service of God was celebrated under the former dispensation, and to show that it had a reference to what was future, and was only an imperfect representation of the reality. It was important to show this, as the Jews regarded the ordinances of the tabernacle and of the whole Levitical service as of divine appointment, and of perpetual obligation. The object of Paul is to prove that they were to give place to a more perfect system, and hence, it was necessary to discuss their real nature.

The first covenant - The word "covenant"is not in the Greek, but is not improperly supplied. The meaning is, that the former arrangement or dispensation had religious rites and services connected with it.

Had also ordinances - Margin, "Ceremonies."The Greek word means "laws, precepts, ordinances;"and the idea is, that there were laws regulating the worship of God. The Jewish institutions abounded with such laws.

And a worldly sanctuary - The word "sanctuary"means a holy place, and is applied to a house of worship, or a temple. Here it may refer either to the temple or to the tabernacle. As the temple was constructed after the same form as the tabernacle, and had the same furniture, the description of the apostle may be regarded as applicable to either of them, and it is difficult to determine which he had in his eye. The term "worldly,"applied to "sanctuary,"here means that it pertained to this world; it was contradistinguished from the heavenly sanctuary not made with hands where Christ was now gone; compare Heb 9:11-24. It does not mean that it was "worldly"in the sense in which that word is now used as denoting the opposite of spiritual, serious, religious; but worldly in the sense that it belonged to the earth rather than to heaven; it was made by human hands, not directly by the hands of God.

Barnes: Heb 9:2

For there was a tabernacle made - The word "tabernacle"properly means a tent, a booth, or a hut, and was then given by way of eminence to the tent for public worship made by Moses in the wilderness. For a description of this, see Exo. 26. In this place the word means the "outer sanctuary"or "room"in the tabernacle; that is, the "first"room which was entered - called here "the first."The same word - σκηνή skēnē - is used in Heb 9:3 to denote the "inner"sanctuary, or holy of holies. The tabernacle, like the temple afterward, was divided into two parts by the veil Exo 26:31, Exo 26:33, one of which was called "the holy place,"and the other "the holy of holies."The exact size of the two rooms in the tabernacle is not specified in the Scriptures, but it is commonly supposed that the tabernacle was divided in the same manner as the temple was afterward; that is, two-thirds of the interior constituted the holy place, and one-third the holy of holies. According to this, the holy place, or "first tabernacle"was twenty cubits long by ten broad, and the most holy place was ten cubits square. The whole length of the tabernacle was about fifty-five feet, the breadth eighteen, and the height eighteen. In the temple, the two rooms, though of the same relative proportions, were of course much larger. See a description of the temple in the notes on Mat 21:12. In both cases, the holy place was at the east, and the Holy of Holies at the west end of the sacred edifice.

The first - The first room on entering the sacred edifice, here called the "first tabernacle."The apostle proceeds now to enumerate the various articles of furniture which were in the two rooms of the tabernacle and temple. His object seems to be, not for information, for it could not be supposed that they to whom he was writing were ignorant on this point, but partly to show that it could not be said that he spoke of that of which he had no information, or that he undervalued it; and partly to show the real nature of the institution, and to prove that it was of an imperfect and typical character, and had a designed reference to something that was to come. It is remarkable that though he maintains that the whole institution was a "figure"of what was to come, and though he specifies by name all the furniture of the tabernacle, he does not attempt to explain their particular typical character, nor does he affirm that they had such a character.

He does not say that the candlestick, and the table of show-bread, and the ark, and the cherubim were designed to adumbrate some particular truth or fact of the future dispensation, or had a designed spiritual meaning. It would have been happy if all expositors had followed the example of Paul, and had been content, as he was, to state the facts about the tabernacle, and the general truth that the dispensation was intended to introduce a more perfect economy, without endeavoring to explain the typical import of every pin and pillar of the ancient place of worship. If those things had such a designed typical reference, it is remarkable that Paul did not go into an explanation of that fact in the Epistle before us. Never could a better opportunity for doing it occur than was furnished here. Yet it was not done. Paul is silent where many expositors have found occasion for admiration. Where they have seen the profoundest wisdom, he saw none; where they have found spiritual instruction in the various implements of divine service in the sanctuary, he found none.

Why should we be more wise than he was? Why attempt to hunt for types and shadows where he found none? And why should we not be limited to the views which he actually expressed in regard to the design and import of the ancient dispensation? Following an inspired example we are on solid ground, and are not in danger. But the moment we leave that, and attempt to spiritualize everything in the ancient economy, we are in an open sea without compass or chart, and no one knows to what fairy lands he may be drifted. As there are frequent allusions in the New Testament to the different parts of the tabernacle furniture here specified, it may be a matter of interest and profit to furnish an illustration of the most material of them.

(Without attempting to explain the typical import of every pin and pillar of the tabernacle, one may be excused for thinking, that such prominent parts of its furniture, as the ark, the candlestick, and the cherubim, were designed as types. Nor can it be wrong to inquire into the spiritual significancy of them, under such guidance as the light of Scripture, here or affords elsewhere. This has been done by a host of most sober and learned commentators. It is of no use to allege, that the apostle himself has given no particular explanation of these matters, since this would have kept him back too long from his main object; and is, therefore, expressly declined by him. "Yet,"says McLean, his manner of declining it implies, that each of these sacred utensils had a mystical signification. They were all constructed according to particular divine directions, Exo. 25. The apostle terms them, "the example and shadow of heavenly things,"Heb 8:5; "the patterns of things in the heavens, Heb 9:23; and these typical patterns included not only the tabernacle and its services, but every article of its furniture, as is plain from the words of Moses, Exo 25:8-9. There are also other passages which seem to allude to, and even to explain, some of these articles, such as the golden candlestick, with its seven lamps, Rev 1:12-13, Rev 1:20; the golden censer, Rev 8:3-4; the vail, Heb 10:20; the mercy-seat, Rom 3:25; Heb 4:16; and, perhaps, the angelic cherubim, 1Pe 1:12."It must, however, be acknowledged that too great care and caution cannot be used in investigating such subjects.)

The candlestick - For an account of the candlestick, see Exo 25:31-37. It was made of pure gold, and had seven branches, that is, three on each side and one in the center. These branches had on the extremities seven golden lamps, which were fed with pure olive oil, and which were lighted "to give light over against it;"that is, they shed light on the altar of incense, the table of show-bread, and generally on the furniture of the holy place. These branches were made with three "bowls,""knops,"and "flowers"occurring alternately on each one of the six branches; while on the center or upright shaft there were four "bowls,""knops"and "flowers"of this kind. These ornaments were probably taken from the almond, and represented the flower of that tree in various stages. The "bowls"on the branches of the candlestick probably meant the calyx or cup of that plant from which the flower springs.

The "knops"probably referred to some ornament on the candlestick mingled with the "bowls"and the "flowers,"perhaps designed as an imitation of the nut or fruit of the almond. The "flowers"were evidently ornaments resembling the flowers on the almond-tree, wrought, as all the rest were, in pure gold. See Bush’ s notes on Exodus 25. The candlestick was undoubtedly designed to furnish light in the dark room of the tabernacle and temple; and in accordance with the general plan of those edifices, was ornamented after the most chaste and pure views of ornamental architecture of those times - but there is no evidence that its branches, and bowls, and knops, and flowers each had a special typical significance. The sacred writers are wholly silent as to any such reference, and it is not well to attempt to be "wise above that which is written."An expositor of the Scripture cannot have a safer guide than the sacred writers themselves.

How should any uninspired man know that these things had such a special typical signification? The candlestick was placed on the south, or lefthand side of the holy place as one entered, the row of lamps being probably parallel with the wall. It was at first placed in the tabernacle, and afterward removed into the temple built by Solomon. Its subsequent history is unknown. Probably it was destroyed when the temple was taken by the Chaldeans. The form of the candlestick in the second temple, whose figure is preserved on the "Arch of Titus"in Rome, was of somewhat different construction. But it is to be remembered that the articles taken away from the temple by Vespasian were not the same as those made by Moses, and Josephus says expressly that the candlestick was altered from its original form.

And the table - That is, the table on which the showbread was placed. This table was made of shittim-wood, overlaid with gold. It was two cubits long, and one cubit broad, and a cubit and a half high; that is, about three feet and a half in length, one foot and nine inches wide, and two feet and a half in height. It was furnished with rings or staples, through which were passed staves, by which it was carried. These staves, we are informed by Josephus, were removed when the table was at rest, so that they might not be in the way of the priest as they officiated in the tabernacle. It stood lengthwise east and west, on the north side of the holy place.

And the show-bread - On the table just described. This bread consisted of twelve loaves, placed on the table, every Sabbath. The Hebrews affirm that they were square loaves, having the four sides covered with leaves of gold. They were arranged in two piles, of course with six in a pile; Lev 24:5-9. The number twelve was selected with reference to the twelve tribes of Israel. They were made without leaven; were renewed each Sabbath, when the old loaves were then taken away to be eaten by the priests only. The Hebrew phrase rendered "show-bread"means properly "bread of faces,"or "bread of presence."The Septuagint render it ἄρτους ἐνώπιους artous enōpious - foreplaced loaves. In the New Testament it is, ἡ πρόθεσις τῶν ἄρτων hē prothesis tōn artōn - "the placing of bread;"and in Symmachus, "bread of proposition,"or placing. Why it was called "bread of presence"has been a subject on which expositors have been much divided.

Some have held that it was because it was "before,"or in the presence of the symbol of the divine presence in the tabernacle, though in another department; some that it was because it was set there to be seen by people, rather than to be seen by God. Others that it had an emblematic design, looking forward to the Messiah as the food or nourishment of the soul, and was substantially the same as the table spread with the symbols of the Saviour’ s body and blood. See Bush, in loc. But of this last-mentioned opinion, it may be asked where is the proof? It is not found in the account of it in the Old Testament, and there is not the slightest intimation in the New Testament that it had any such design. The object for which it was placed there can be only a matter of conjecture, as it is not explained in the Bible, and it is more difficult to ascertain the use and design of the show-bread than of almost any other emblem of the Jewish economy."

Calmet. Perhaps the true idea, after all that has been written and conjectured is, that the table and the bread were for the sake of carrying out the idea that the tabernacle was the dwelling-place of God, and that there was a propriety that it should be prepared with the usual appurtenances of a dwelling. Hence, there was a candlestick and a table, because these were the common and ordinary furniture of a room; and the idea was to be kept up constantly that that was the dwelling-place of the Most High by lighting and trimming the lamps every day, and by renewing the bread on the table periodically. The most simple explanation of the phrase "bread of faces,"or "bread of presence"is, that it was so called because it was set before the "face"or in the "presence"of God in the tabernacle. The various forms which it has been supposed would represent the table of showbread may be seen in Calmet’ s Large Dictionary. The Jews say that they were separated by plates of gold.

Which is called the sanctuary - Margin, "Or, holy."That is, "the holy place."The name sanctuary was commonly given to the whole edifice, but with strict propriety appertained only to this first room.

Barnes: Heb 9:3

And after the second veil - There were two "veils"to the tabernacle. The one which is described in Exo 26:36-37, was called "the hanging for the door of the tent,"and was made of "blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen,"and was suspended on five pillars of shittim-wood, overlaid with gold. This answered for a door to the whole tabernacle. The second or inner veil, here referred to, divided the holy from the most holy place. This is described in Exo 26:31-33. It was made of the same materials as the other, though it would seem in a more costly manner, and with more embroidered work. On this veil the figures of the cherubim were curiously wrought. The design of this veil was to separate the holy from the most holy place; and in regard to its symbolical meaning we can be at no loss, for the apostle Paul has himself explained it in this chapter; see notes on Heb 9:8-14. "The tabernacle."That is, the inner tabernacle; or what more properly was called the tabernacle. The name was given to either of the two rooms into which it was divided, or to the whole structure.

Which is called the Holiest of all - It was called "the Most Holy place;""the Holy of Holies;"or "the Holiest of all."It was so called because the symbol of the divine presence - the "Shekinah"- dwelt there between the Cherubim.

Barnes: Heb 9:4

Which had the golden censer - The censer was a "fire-pan,"made for the purpose of carrying fire, in order to burn incense on it in the place of worship. The forms of the censer were various. Some difficulty has been felt respecting the statement of Paul here that the "golden censer"was in the most holy place, from the fact that no such utensil is mentioned by Moses as pertaining to the tabernacle, nor in the description of Solomon’ s temple, which was modelled after the tabernacle, is there any account of it given. But the following considerations will probably remove the difficulty.

(1) Paul was a Jew, and was familiar with what pertained to the temple, and gave such a description of it as would be in accordance with what actually existed in his time. The fact that Moses does not expressly mention it, does not prove that in fact no such censer was laid up in the most holy place.

(2) Aaron and his successors were expressly commanded to burn incense in a "censer"in the most holy place before the mercy-seat. This was to be done on the great day of atonement, and but once in a year; Lev 16:12-13.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 here is every probability that the censer that was used on such an occasion was made of gold. All the implements that were employed in the most holy place were made of gold, or overlaid with gold, and it is in the highest degree improbable that the high priest would use any other on so solemn an occasion; compare 1Ki 7:50.

\caps1 (4) a\caps0 s the golden censer was to be used only once in a year, it would naturally be laid away in some secure situation, and none would so obviously occur as the most holy place. There it would be perfectly safe. No one was permitted to enter there but the high priest, and being preserved there it would be always ready for his use. The statement of Paul, therefore, has the highest probability, and undoubtedly accords with what actually occurred in the tabernacle and the temple. The object of the incense burned in worship was to produce an agreeable fragrance or smell; see notes on Luk 1:9.

And the ark of the covenant - This ark or chest was made of shittim-wood, was two cubits and a half long, a cubit and a half broad, and the same in height; Exo 25:10. It was completely covered with gold, and had a "lid,"which was called the "mercy-seat,"on which rested the Shekinah, the symbol of the divine presence, between the outstretched wings of the cherubim. It was called "the ark of the covenant,"because within it were the two tables of the covenant, or the Law of God written on tables of stone. It was a simple "chest, coffer, or box,"with little ornament, though rich in its materials. A golden crown or molding ran around the top, and it had rings and staves in its sides by which it might be borne; Exo 25:12-16. This ark was regarded as the most sacred of all the appendages of the tabernacle. Containing the Law, and being the place where the symbol of the divine presence was manifested, it was regarded as especially holy, and in the various wars and revolutions in the Hebrew commonwealth, it was guarded with special care.

After the passage over the Jordan it remained for some time at Gilgal Jos 4:19, whence it was removed to Shiloh; 1Sa 1:3. From hence, the Israelites took it to their camp, apparently to animate them in battle, but it was taken by the Philistines; 1 Sam. 4. The Philistines, however, oppressed by the hand of God, resolved to return it, and sent it to Kirjath-Jearim; 1Sa 7:1. In the reign of Saul it was at Nob. David conveyed it to the house of Obededom, and thence to his palace on Mount Zion; 2 Sam. 6. At the dedication of the temple it was placed in the Holy of Holies by Solomon, where it remained for many years. Subsequently, it is said, the wicked kings of Judah, abandoning themselves to idolatry, established idols in the most holy place itself, and the priests removed the ark, and bore it from place to place to secure it from profanation. "Calmet."When Josiah ascended the throne he commanded the priests to restore the ark to its place in the sanctuary, and forbade them to carry it about from one place to another as they had before done; 2Ch 35:3. The subsequent history of the ark is unknown. It is probable that it was either destroyed when the city of Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, or that it was carried with other spoils to Babylon, There is no good reason to suppose that it was ever in the second temple, and it is generally admitted by the Jews that the ark of the covenant was one of the things that were wanting there. Abarbanel says, that the Jews flatter themselves that it will be restored by the Messiah.

Wherein - That is, in the ark - for so the construction naturally requires. In 1Ki 8:9, however, it is said that there was nothing in the ark, "save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb,"and it has been supposed by some that the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron were not in the ark, but that they were in capsules, or ledges made on its sides for their safe keeping, and that this should be rendered "by the ark."But the apostle uses the same language respecting the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron which he does about the two tables of stone, and as they were certainly in the ark, the fair construction here is that the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron were in it also. The account in Exo 16:32-34; Num 17:10, is, that they were laid up in the most holy place, "before the testimony,"and there is no improbability whatever in the supposition that they were in the ark. Indeed, that would be the most safe place to keep them, as the tabernacle was often taken down and removed from place to place. It is clear from the passage in 1Ki 8:9, that they were not in the ark in the temple, but there is no improbability in the supposition that before the temple was built they might have been removed from the ark and lost. When the ark was carried from place to place, or during its captivity by the Philistines, it is probable that they were lost, as we never hear of them afterward.

The golden pot - In Exo 16:33, it is simply "a pot,"without specifying the material. In the Septuagint it is rendered "golden pot,"and as the other utensils of the sanctuary were of gold, it may be fairly presumed that this was also.

That had manna - A small quantity of manna which was to be preserved as a perpetual remembrancer of the food which they had eaten in their long journey in the wilderness, and of the goodness of God in miraculously supplying their wants. As the manna, also, would not of itself keep, Exo 16:20, the fact that this was to be laid up to be preserved from age to age, was a perpetual miracle in proof of the presence and faithfulness of God. On the subject of the manna, see Bush’ s notes on Exo 16:15.

And Aaron’ s rod that budded - That budded and blossomed as a proof that God had chosen him to minister to him. The princes of the tribes were disposed to rebel, and to call in question the authority of Aaron. To settle the matter, each one was required to take a rod or staff of office, and to bring it to Moses with the name of the tribe to which it appertained written on it. These were laid up by Moses in the tabernacle, and it was found on the next day that the rod marked with the name of Levi had budded and blossomed, and produced almonds. In perpetual remembrance of this miracle, the rod was preserved in the ark; Num 17:1-13. Its subsequent history is unknown. It was not in the ark when the temple was built, nor is there any reason to suppose that it was preserved to that time.

And the tables of the covenant - The two tables of stone on which the ten commandments were written. They were expressly called "the words of the covenant"in Exo 34:28. On the word "covenant"; see notes on Heb 9:16 and 17 of this chapter. These two tables were in the ark at the time the temple was dedicated. 1Ki 8:9. Their subsequent history is unknown. It is probable that they shared the fate of the ark, and were either carried to Babylon, or were destroyed when the city was taken by Nebuchadnezzar.

Barnes: Heb 9:5

And over it - That is, over the ark.

The cherubim of glory - A Hebrew mode of expression, meaning "the glorious cherubim."The word "cherubim"is the Hebrew form of the plural, of which cherub is the singular. The word "glory"used here in connection with "cherubim,"refers to the splendor, or magnificence of the image, as being carved with great skill, and covered with gold. There were two cherubim on the ark, placed on the lid in such a manner that their faces looked inward toward each other, and downward toward the mercy-seat. They stretched out their wings "on high,"and covered the mercy-seat, or the lid of the ark; Exo 25:18-20; compare 1Ki 8:6-7; 1Ch 28:18. In the temple, the cherubim were made of the olive tree, and were ten cubits high. They were overlaid with gold, and were so placed that the wing of one touched the wall on one side of the Holy of Holies, and that of the other the other side, and their wings met together over the ark; 1Ki 6:23-28.

It is not probable, however, that this was the form used in the tabernacle, as wings thus expanded would have rendered it inconvenient to carry them from place to place. Of the form and design of the cherubim much has been written, and much that is the mere creation of fancy, and the fruit of wild conjecture. Their design is not explained in the Bible, and silence in regard to it would have been wisdom. If they were intended to be symbolical, as is certainly possible, (compare Eze 10:20-22), it is impossible now to determine the object of the symbol. Who is authorized to explain it? Who can give to his speculations anything more than the authority of "pious conjecture?"And of what advantage, therefore, can speculation be, where the volume of inspiration says nothing? They who wish to examine this subject more fully, with the various opinions that have been formed on it, may consult the following works, namely, Calmet’ s Dictionary, Fragment No. 152, with the numerous illustrations; Bush’ s notes on Exo 25:18; and the Quarterly Christian Spectator, vol. viii. pp. 368-388. Drawings resembling the cherubim were not uncommon on ancient sculptures.

Shadowing - Stretching out its wings so as to cover the mercy-seat.

The mercy-seat - The cover of the ark on which rested the cloud or visible symbol of the divine presence. It was called "mercy-seat,"or "propitiatory"- ἱλαστήριον hilastērion - because it was this which was sprinkled over with the blood of atonement or propitiation, and because it was from this place, on which the symbol of the deity rested, that God manifested himself as propitious to sinners. The blood of the atonement was that through or by means of which he declared his mercy to the guilty. Here God was supposed to be seated, and from this place he was supposed to dispense mercy to man when the blood of the atonement was sprinkled there. This was undoubtedly designed to be a symbol of his dispensing mercy to people in virtue of the blood which the Saviour shed as the great sacrifice for guilt; see Heb 9:13-14.

Of which we cannot now speak particularly - That is, it is not my present design to speak particularly of these things. These matters were well understood by those to whom he wrote, and his object did not require him to go into a fuller explanation.

Barnes: Heb 9:6

When these things were thus ordained - Thus arranged or appointed. Having shown what the tabernacle was, the apostle proceeds to show what was done in it. "The priests went always into the first tabernacle."The outer tabernacle called the holy place. They were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies, that being entered only once in a year by the High Priest. The holy place was entered every day to make the morning and evening oblation.

Accomplishing the service of God - Performing the acts of worship which God had appointed - burning incense, etc.; Luk 1:9.

Barnes: Heb 9:7

But into the second - The second apartment or room, called the most holy place; Heb 9:3.

Went the high priest alone once every year - On the great day of atonement; Exo 30:10. On that day he probably entered the Holy of Holies three or four times, first to burn incense, Lev 16:12; then to sprinkle the blood of the bullock on the mercy-seat, Lev 16:14; then he was to kill the goat of the sin-offering, and bring that blood within the Veil and sprinkle it also on the mercy-seat, and then, perhaps, he entered again to bring out the golden censer. The Jewish tradition is, that he entered the Holy of Holies four times on that day. After all, however, the number of times is not certain, nor is it material, the only important point being that he entered it only on one day of the year, while the holy place was entered every day.

Not without blood - That is, he bare with him blood to sprinkle on the mercy-seat. This was the blood of the bullock and of the goat - borne in at two different times.

Which he offered for himself - The blood of the bullock was offered for himself and for his house or family - thus keeping impressively before his own mind and the mind of the people the fact that the priests even of the highest order were sinners, and needed expiation like others; Lev 9:7.

And for the errors of the people - The blood of the goat was offered for them; Lev 16:15. The word rendered "errors"- ἀγνόημα agnoēma - denotes properly "ignorance, involuntary error;"and then error or fault in general - the same as the Hebrew משׁגה mishgeh - from שׁגה shaagah - "to err."The object was to make expiation for all the errors and sins of the people, and this occurred once in the year. The repetition of these sacrifices was a constant remembrancer of sin, and the design was that neither the priests nor the people should lose sight of the fact that they were violators of the Law of God.

Barnes: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost - Who appointed all this. The whole arrangement in the service of the tabernacle is represented as having been under the direction of the Holy Spirit, or this was one of his methods of teaching the great truths of religion, and of keeping them before the minds of people. Sometimes that Spirit taught by direct revelation; sometimes by the written word, and sometimes by symbols. The tabernacle, with its different apartments, utensils, and services, was a permanent means of keeping important truths before the minds of the ancient people of God.

This signifying - That is, showing this truth, or making use of this arrangement to impress this truth on the minds of people that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest.

That the way into the holiest of all - Into heaven - of which the Most Holy place in the tabernacle was undoubtedly designed to be an emblem. It was the place where the visible symbol of God - the Shekinah - dwelt; where the blood of propitiation was sprinkled, and was, therefore, an appropriate emblem of that holy heaven where God dwells, and whence pardon is obtained by the blood of the atonement.

Was not yet made manifest - The way to heaven was not opened or fully understood. It was not known how people could appear before God, or how they could come with the hope of pardon. That way has now been opened by the ascension of the Redeemer to heaven, and by the assurance that all who will may come in his name.

While as the first tabernacle was yet standing - As long as it stood, and the appointed services were held in it. The idea is, that until it was superseded by a more perfect system, it was a "proof"that the way to heaven was not yet fully and freely optioned, and that the Holy Spirit "designed"that it should be such a proof. The apostle does not specify in what the proof consisted, but it may have been in something like the following.

(1)\caps1     i\caps0 t was a mere "symbol,"and not the "reality"- showing that the true way was not yet fully understood.

(2)\caps1     i\caps0 t was entered but once a year - showing that there was not access at all times.

(3)\caps1     i\caps0 t was entered only by the High Priest - showing that there was not free end full access to all the people.

(4)\caps1     i\caps0 t was accessible only by Jews - showing that the way in which all men might be saved was not then fully revealed.

The sense is, that it was a system of types and shadows, in which there were many burdensome rites and many things to prevent people from coming before the symbol of the divinity, and was, therefore, an "imperfect system."All these obstructions are now removed; the Saviour - the great High Priest of his people - has entered heaven and "opened it to all true believers,"and all of every nation may now have free access to God; see Heb 9:12; compare Heb 10:19-22.

Barnes: Heb 9:9

Which was a figure for the time then present - That is, as long as the tabernacle stood. The word rendered "figure"- παραβολὴ parabolē - is not the same as type - τύπος 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.

Barnes: Heb 9:10

Which stood only in meats and drinks - The idea is, that the ordinances of the Jews, in connection with the services of religion, consisted much of laws pertaining to what was lawful to eat and drink, etc. A considerable part of those laws related to the distinction between clean and unclean beasts, and to such arrangements as were designed to keep them externally distinct from other nations. It is possible also that there may be a reference here to meat and drink offerings. On the grammatical difficulties of this verse, see Stuart on the Hebrews, in loc.

And divers washings - The various ablutions which were required in the service of the tabernacle and the temple - washing of the hands, of the victim that was to be offered, etc. It was for this purpose that the laver was erected in front of the tabernacle Exo 30:18; Exo 31:9; Exo 35:16, and that the brass sea and the lavers were constructed in connection with the temple of Solomon; 2Ch 4:2-5; 1Ki 7:26. The Greek word here is "baptisms."On its meaning, see Mat 3:6 note; Mar 7:4 note.

And carnal ordinances - Margin, "Or, rites, or ceremonies."Greek "Ordinances of the flesh;"that is, which pertained to the flesh or to external ceremonies. The object was rather to keep them "externally"pure than to cleanse the conscience and make them holy in heart.

Imposed on them - "Laid on them"- ἐπικέιμενα epikeimena . It does not mean that there was any "oppression"or "injustice"in regard to these ordinances, but that they were appointed for a temporary purpose.

Until the time of reformation - The word rendered here "reformation"- διόρθωσις diorthōsis - means properly "emendation, improvement, reform."It refers to putting a thing in a right condition; making it better; or raising up and restoring what is fallen down. Passow. Here the reference is undoubtedly to the gospel as being a better system - "a putting things where they ought to be;"compare notes on Act 3:21. The idea here is, that those ordinances were only temporary in their nature, and were designed to endure until a more perfect system should be introduced. They were of value "to introduce"that better system; they were not adapted to purify the conscience and remove the stains of guilt from the soul.

Barnes: Heb 9:11

But Christ being come - Now that the Messiah has come, a more perfect system is introduced by which the conscience may be made free from guilt.

An high priest of good things to come - see Heb 10:1. The apostle having described the tabernacle, and shown wherein it was defective in regard to the real wants of sinners, proceeds now to describe the Christian system, and to show how that met the real condition of man, and especially how it was adapted to remove sin from the soul. The phrase "high priest of good things to come,"seems to refer to those "good things"which belonged to the dispensation that was to come; that is, the dispensation under the Messiah. The Jews anticipated great blessings in that time. They looked forward to better things than they enjoyed under the old dispensation. They expected more signal proofs of the divine favor; a clearer knowledge of the way of pardon; and more eminent spiritual enjoyments. Of these, the apostle says that Christ, who had come, was now the high priest. It was he by whom they were procured; and the time had actually arrived when they might enjoy the long-anticipated good things under the Messiah.

By a greater and more perfect tabernacle - The meaning is, that Christ officiated as high priest in a much more magnificent and perfect temple than either the tabernacle or the temple under the old dispensation. He performed the great functions of his priestly office - the sprinkling of the blood of the atonement - in heaven itself, of which the most holy place in the tabernacle was but the emblem. The Jewish high priest entered the sanctuary made with hands to minister before God; Christ entered into heaven itself. The word "by"here - διὰ dia - means probably through, and the idea is, that Christ passed through a more perfect tabernacle on his way to the mercy-seat in heaven than the Jewish high priest did when he passed through the outer tabernacle Heb 9:2 and through the veil into the most holy place. Probably the idea in the mind of the writer was that of the Saviour passing through the "visible heavens"above us, to which the veil, dividing the holy from the most holy place in the temple, bore some resemblance. Many, however, have understood the word "tabernacle"here as denoting the "body of Christ"(see Grotius and Bloomfield in loc.); and according to this the idea is, that Christ, by means of his own body and blood offered as a sacrifice, entered into the most holy place in heaven. But it seems to me that the whole scope of the passage requires us to understand it of the more perfect temple in heaven where Christ performs his ministry, and of which the tabernacle of the Hebrews was but the emblem. Christ did not belong to the tribe of Levi; he was not an high priest of the order of Aaron; he did not enter the holy place on earth, but he entered the heavens, and perfects the work of his ministry there.

Not made with hands - A phrase that properly describes heaven as being prepared by God himself; see notes on 2Co 5:1.

Not of this building - Greek "of this "creation"- κτίσεως ktiseōs . The meaning is, that the place where he officiates is not made by human power and art, but is the work of God. The object is to show that his ministry is altogether more perfect than what could be rendered by a Jewish priest, and performed in a temple which could not have been reared by human skill and power.

Barnes: Heb 9:12

Neither by the blood of goats and calves - The Jewish sacrifice consisted of the shedding of the blood of animals. On the great day of the atonement the high priest took with him into the most holy place:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 he blood of a young bullock Lev 16:3, Lev 16:11, which is here called the blood of a "calf,"which he offered for his own sin; and,

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 he blood of a goat, as a sin-offering for others; Lev 16:9, Lev 16:15. It was "by,"or "by means of"- διὰ dia - blood thus sprinkled on the mercyseat, that the high priest sought the forgiveness of his own sins and the sins of the people.

But by his own blood - That is, by his own blood shed for the remission of sins. The meaning is, that it was in virtue of his own blood, or "by means"of that, that he sought the pardon of his people. That blood was not shed for himself - for he had no sin - and consequently there was a material difference between his offering and that of the Jewish high priest. The difference related to such points as these.

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 he offering which Christ made was wholly for others; that of the Jewish priest for himself as well as for them.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 he blood offered by the Jewish priest was that of animals; that offered by the Saviour was his own.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat offered by the Jewish priest was only an emblem or type - for it could not take away sin; that offered by Christ had a real efficacy, and removes transgression from the soul.

He entered into the holy place - Heaven. The meaning is, that as the Jewish high priest bore the blood of the animal into the Holy of Holies, and sprinkled it there as the means of expiation, so the offering which Christ has to make in heaven, or the consideration on which he pleads for the pardon of his people, is the blood which he shed on Calvary. Having made the atonement, he now pleads the merit of it as a "reason"why sinners should be saved. It is not of course meant that he literally bore his own blood into heaven - as the high priest did the blood of the bullock and the goat into the sanctuary; or that he literally "sprinkled"it on the mercy-seat there, but that that blood, having been shed for sin, is now the ground of his pleading and intercession for the pardon of sin - as the sprinkled blood of the Jewish sacrifice was the ground of the pleading of the Jewish high priest for the pardon of himself and the people.

Having obtained eternal redemption for us - That is, by the shedding of his blood. On the meaning of the word "redemption,"see notes on Gal 3:13. The redemption which the Lord Jesus effected for his people is eternal. It will continue forever. It is not a temporary deliverance leaving the redeemed in danger of falling into sin and ruin, but it makes salvation secure, and in its effects extends through eternity. Who can estimate the extent of that love which purchased for us "such"a redemption? Who can be sufficiently grateful that he is thus redeemed? The doctrine in this verse is, that the blood of Christ is the means of redemption, or atones for sin. In the following verses the apostle shows that it not only makes atonement for sin, but that it is the means of sanctifying or purifying the soul.

Barnes: Heb 9:13

For if the blood of bulls and of goats - Referring still to the great day of atonement, when the offering made was the sacrifice of a bullock and a goat.

And the ashes of an heifer - For an account of this, see Num 19:2-10. In ver. 9, it is said that the ashes of the heifer, after it was burnt, should be kept "for a water of separation; it is a purification for sin."That is, the ashes were to be carefully preserved, and being mixed with water were sprinkled on those who were from any cause ceremonially impure. The "reason"for this appears to have been that the heifer was considered as a sacrifice whose blood has been offered, and the application of the ashes to which she had been burnt was regarded as an evidence of participation in that sacrifice. It was needful, where the laws were so numerous respecting external pollutions, or where the members of the Jewish community were regarded as so frequently "unclean"by contact with dead bodies, and in various other ways, that there should be some method in which they could be declared to be cleansed from their "uncleanness."The nature of these institutions also required that this should be in connection with "sacrifice,"and in order to this, it was arranged that there should be this "permanent sacrifice"- the ashes of the heifer that had been sacrificed - of which they could avail themselves at any time, without the expense and delay of making a bloody offering specifically for the occasion. It was, therefore, a provision of convenience, and at the same time was designed to keep up the idea, that all purification was somehow connected with the shedding of blood.

Sprinkling the unclean - Mingled with water, and sprinkled on the unclean. The word "unclean"here refers to such as had been defiled by contact with dead bodies, or when one had died in the family, etc.; see Num 19:11-22.

Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh - Makes holy so far as the flesh or body is concerned. The uncleanness here referred to related to the body only, and of course the means of cleansing extended only to that. It was not designed to give peace to the conscience, or to expiate moral offences. The offering thus made removed the obstructions to the worship of God so far as to allow him who had been defiled to approach him in a regular manner. Thus, much the apostle allows was accomplished by the Jewish rites. They had an efficacy in removing ceremonial uncleanness, and in rendering it proper that he who had been polluted should be permitted again to approach and worship God. The apostle goes on to argue that if they had such an efficacy, it was fair to presume that the blood of Christ would have far greater efficacy, and would reach to the conscience itself, and make that pure.

Barnes: Heb 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ - As being infinitely more precious than the blood of an animal could possibly be. If the blood of an animal had any efficacy at all, even in removing ceremonial pollutions, how much more is it reasonable to suppose may be effected by the blood of the Son of God!

Who through the eternal Spirit - This expression is very difficult, and has given rise to a great variety of interpretation. - Some mss. instead of "eternal"here, read "holy,"making it refer directly to the Holy Spirit; see "Wetstein."These various readings, however, are not regarded as of sufficient authority to lead to a change in the text, and are of importance only as showing that it was an early opinion that the Holy Spirit is here referred to. The principal opinions which have been entertained of the meaning of this phrase, are the following.

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat which regards it as referring to the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity. This was the opinion of Owen, Doddridge, and archbishop Tillotson.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat which refers it to the "divine nature"of Christ. Among those who have maintained this opinion, are Beza, Ernesti, Wolf, Vitringa, Storr, and the late Dr. John P. Wilson. mss. Notes.

\caps1 (3) o\caps0 thers, as Grotius, Rosenmuller, Koppe, understand it as meaning "endless"or "immortal life,"in contradistinction from the Jewish sacrifices which were of a perishable nature, and which needed so often to be repeated.

\caps1 (4) o\caps0 thers regard it as referring to the glorified person of the Saviour, meaning that in his exalted, or spiritual station in heaven, he presents the efficacy of his blood.

\caps1 (5) o\caps0 thers suppose that it means "divine influence,"and that the idea is, that Christ was actuated and filled with a divine influence when he offered up himself as a sacrifice; an influence which was not of a temporal and fleeting nature, but which was eternal in its efficacy. This is the interpretation preferred by Prof. Stuart.

For an examination of these various opinions, see his " Excursus , xviii."on this Epistle. It is difficult, if not impossible, to decide what is the true meaning of the passage amidst this diversity of opinion; but there are some reasons which seem to me to make it probable that the Holy Spirit is intended, and that the idea is, that Christ made his great sacrifice under "the extraordinary influences of that Eternal Spirit."The reasons which lead me to this opinion, are the following:

(1)    It is what would occur to the great mass of the readers of the New Testament. It is presumed that the great body of sober, plain, and intelligent readers of the Bible, on perusing the passage, suppose that it refers to the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity. There are few better and safer rules for the interpretation of a volume designed like the Bible for the mass of mankind, than to abide by the sense in which they understand it.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 his interpretation is one which is most naturally conveyed by the language of the original. The phrase "the spirit"- τὸ πνέυμα to pneuma - has so far a technical and established meaning in the New Testament as to denote the Holy Spirit, unless there is something in the connection which renders such an application improper. In this case there is nothing certainly which "necessarily"forbids such an application. The high names and Classical authority of those who have held this opinion, are a sufficient guarantee of this.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 his interpretation accords with the fact that the Lord Jesus is represented as having been eminently endowed with the influences of the Holy Spirit; compare notes on Joh 3:34. Though he was divine, yet he was also a man, and as such was under influences similar to those of other pious people. The Holy Spirit is the source and sustainer of all piety in the soul, and it is not improper to suppose that the man Christ Jesus was in a remarkable manner influenced by the Holy Spirit in his readiness to obey God and to suffer according to his will.

(4)\caps1     i\caps0 f there was ever any occasion on which we may suppose he was influenced by the Holy Spirit, that of his sufferings and death here referred to may be supposed eminently to have been such an one. It was expressive of the highest state of piety - of the purest love to God and man - which has ever existed in the human bosom; it was the most trying time of his own life; it was the period when there would be the most strong temptation to abandon his work; and as the redemption of the whole world was dependent on that act, it is reasonable to suppose that the richest heavenly grace would be there imparted to him, and that he would then be eminently under the influence of that Spirit which was granted not "by measure unto him."notes, Joh 3:34.

(5)\caps1     t\caps0 his representation is not inconsistent with the belief that the sufferings and death of the Redeemer were "voluntary,"and had all the merit which belongs to a voluntary transaction. Piety in the heart of a Christian now is not less voluntary because it is produced and cherished by the Holy Spirit, nor is there less excellence in it because the Holy Spirit imparts strong faith in the time of temptation and trial. It seems to me, therefore, that the meaning of this expression is, that the Lord Jesus was led by the strong influences of the Spirit of God to devote himself as a sacrifice for sin. It was not by any temporary influence; not by mere excitement; it was by the influence of the "Eternal"Spirit of God, and the sacrifice thus offered could, therefore, accomplish effects which would be eternal in their character. It was not like the offering made by the Jewish high priest which was necessarily renewed every year, but it was under the influence of one who was "eternal,"and the effects of whose influence might be everlasting. It may be added, that if this is a correct exposition, it follows that the Holy Spirit is eternal, and must, therefore, be divine.

Offered himself - That is, as a sacrifice. He did not offer a bullock or a goat, but he offered "himself."The sacrifice of oneself is the highest offering which he can make; in this case it was the highest which the universe had to make.

Without spot - Margin, "Or fault."The animal that was offered in the Jewish sacrifices was to be without blemish; see Lev 1:10; Lev 22:17-22. It was not to be lame, or blind, or diseased. The word which is used here and rendered "without spot" ἄμωμος amōmos - refers to this fact - that there was no defect or blemish. The idea is, that the Lord Jesus, the great sacrifice, was "perfect;"see Heb 7:26.

Purge your conscience - That is, cleanse, purify, or sanctify your conscience. The idea is, that this offering would take away whatever rendered the conscience defiled or sinful. The offerings of the Jews related in the main to external purification, and were not adapted to give peace to a troubled conscience. They could render the worshipper externally pure so that he might draw near to God and not be excluded by any ceremonial pollution or defilement; but the mind, the heart, the conscience, they could not make pure. They could not remove what troubles a man when he recollects that he has violated a holy law and has offended God, and when he looks forward to an awful judgment-bar. The word "conscience"here is not to be understood as a distinct and independent faculty of the soul, but as the soul or mind itself reflecting and pronouncing on its own acts. The whole expression refers to a mind alarmed by the recollection of guilt - for it is guilt only that disturbs a man’ s conscience.

Guilt originates in the soul remorse and despair; guilt makes a man troubled when he thinks of death and the judgment; it is guilt only which alarms a man when he thinks of a holy God; and it is nothing but guilt that makes the entrance into another world terrible and awful. If a man had no guilt he would never dread his Maker, nor would the presence of his God be ever painful to him (compare Gen 3:6-10); if a man had no guilt he would not fear to die - for what have the innocent to fear anywhere? The universe is under the government of a God of goodness and truth, and, under such a government, how can those who have done no wrong have anything to dread? The fear of death, the apprehension of the judgment to come, and "the dread of God,"are strong and irrefragable proofs that every man is a sinner. The only thing, therefore, which ever disturbs the conscience, and makes death dreadful, and God an object of aversion, and eternity awful, is guilt. If that is removed, man is calm and peaceful; if not, he is the victim of wretchedness and despair.

From dead works - From works that are deadly in their nature, or that lead to death. Or it may mean from works that have no spirituality and no life. By "works"here the apostle does not refer to their outward religious acts particularly, but to the conduct of the life, to what people do; and the idea is, that their acts are not spiritual and saving but such as lead to death; see note, Heb 6:1.

To serve the living God - Not in outward form, but in sincerity and in truth; to be his true friends and worshippers. The phrase "the living God"is commonly used in the Scriptures to describe the true God as distinguished from idols, which are represented as "dead,"or without life; Psa 115:4-7. The idea in this verse is, that it is only the sacrifice made by Christ which can remove the stain of guilt from the soul. It could not be done by the blood of bulls and of goats - for that did not furnish relief to a guilty conscience, but it could be done by the blood of Christ. The sacrifice which he made for sin was so pure and of such value, that God can consistently pardon the offender and restore him to his favor. That blood too can give peace - for Christ poured it out in behalf of the guilty. It is not that he took part with the sinner against God; it is not that he endeavors to convince him who has a troubled conscience that he is needlessly alarmed, or that sin is not as bad as it is represented to be, or that it does not expose the soul to danger. Christ never took the part of the sinner against God; he never taught that sin was a small matter, or that it did not expose to danger. He admitted all that is said of its evil. But he provides for giving peace to the guilty conscience by shedding his blood that it may be forgiven, and by revealing a God of mercy who is willing to receive the offender into favor, and to treat him as though he had never sinned. Thus, the troubled conscience may find peace; and thus, though guilty, man may be delivered from the dread of the wrath to come.

Barnes: Heb 9:15

And for this cause - With this view; that is, to make an effectual atonement for sin, and to provide a way by which the troubled conscience may have peace.

He is the Mediator - see notes on Gal 3:19-20. He is the Mediator between God and man in respect to that new covenant which he has made, or that new dispensation by which people are to be saved. He stands between God and man - the parties at variance - and undertakes the work of mediation and reconciliation.

Of the New Testament - Not "testament"- for a "testament,"or "will,"needs no mediator; but of the "new covenant,"or the new "arrangement"or "disposition"of things under which he proposes to pardon and save the guilty; see notes on Heb 9:16-17.

That by means of death - His own death as a sacrifice for sin. The "old"covenant or arrangement also contemplated "death"- but it was the death of an "animal."The purposes of this were to be effected by the death of the Mediator himself; or this covenant was to be ratified in his blood.

For the redemption of the transgression that were "under the first testament - The covenant or arrangement under Moses. The general idea here is, that these were offences for which no expiation could be made by the sacrifices under that dispensation, or from which the blood then shed could not redeem. This general idea may include two particulars.

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat they who had committed transgressions under that covenant, and who could not be fully pardoned by the imperfect sacrifices then made, would receive a full forgiveness of all their sins in the great day of account through the blood of Christ. Though the blood of bulls and goats could not expiate, yet they offered that blood in faith; they relied on the promised mercy of God; they looked forward to a perfect sacrifice - and now the blood of the great atonement offered as a "full"expiation for all their sins, would be the ground of their acquittal in the last day.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat the blood of Christ would now avail for the remission of all those sins which could not be expiated by the sacrifices offered under the Law. It not only contemplated the remission of all the offences committed by the truly pious under that Law, but would now avail to put away sin entirely. No sacrifice which people could offer would avail, but the blood of Christ would remove all that guilt.

That they which are called - Alike under the old covenant and the new.

Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance - That is, the fulfillment of the promise; or that they might be made partakers of eternal blessings. That blood is effectual alike to save those under the ancient covenant and the new - so that they will be saved in the same manner, and unite in the same song of redeeming love.

Barnes: Heb 9:16

For where a testament is - This is the same word - διαθήκη diathēkē - which in Heb 8:6, is rendered "covenant."For the general signification of the word, see note on that verse. There is so much depending, however, on the meaning of the word, not only in the interpretation of this passage, but also of other parts of the Bible, that it may be proper to explain it here more at length. The word - διαθήκη diathēkē - occurs in the New Testament thirty-three times. It is translated "covenant"in the common version, in Luk 1:72; Act 3:25; Act 7:8; Rom 9:4; Rom 11:27; Gal 3:15, Gal 3:17; Gal 4:24; Eph 2:12; Heb 8:6, Heb 8:9, "twice,"Heb 8:10; Heb 9:4, "twice,"Heb 10:16; Heb 12:24; Heb 13:20. In the remaining places it is rendered "testament;"Mat 26:28; Mar 14:24; Luk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6, 2Co 3:14; Heb 7:22; Heb 9:15-17, Heb 9:20; Rev 11:19. In four of those instances (Mat 26:28; Mar 14:24; Luk 22:20, and 1Co 11:25), it is used with reference to the institution or celebration of the Lord’ s Supper. In the Septuagint it occurs not far from 300 times, in considerably more than 200 times of which it is the translation of the Hebrew word בּרית b^e riyt .

In one instance Zec 11:14 it is the translation of the word "brotherhood;"once Deu 9:5, of דּבר daabaar - "word;"once Jer 11:2, of "words of the covenant;"once Lev 26:11), of "tabernacle;"once Exo 31:7, of "testimony;"it occurs once Eze 20:37, where the reading of the Greek and Hebrew text is doubtful; and it occurs three times 1Sa 11:2; 1Sa 20:8; 1Ki 8:9, where there is no corresponding word in the Hebrew text. From this use of the word by the authors of the Septuagint, it is evident that they regarded it as the proper translation of the Hebrew - בּרית b^e riyt , and as conveying the same sense which that word does. It cannot be reasonably doubted that the writers of the New Testament were led to the use of the word, in part, at least, by the fact that they found it occurring so frequently in the version in common use, but it cannot be doubted also that they regarded it as fairly conveying the sense of the word בּרית b^e riyt . On no principle can it be supposed that inspired and honest people would use a word in referring to transactions in the Old Testament which did not "fairly"convey the idea which the writers of the Old Testament meant to express. The use being thus regarded as settled, there are some "facts"in reference to it which are of great importance in interpreting the New Testament, and in understanding the nature of the "covenant"which God makes with man. These facts are the following:

(1) The word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- is not what properly denotes "compact, agreement,"or "covenant."That word is συνθήκη sunthēkē - "syntheke"or in other forms σύνθεσις sunthesis and συνθεσίας sunthesias ; or if the word "diatheke"is used in that signification it is only remotely, and as a secondary meaning; see "Passow;"compare the Septuagint in Isa 28:15; Isa 30:1; Dan 11:6, and Wisdom Dan 1:16; 1 Macc. 10:26; 2 Macc. 13:25; 14:26. It is not the word which a "Greek"would have employed to denote a "compact"or "covenant."He would have employed it to denote a "disposition, ordering,"or "arrangement"of things, whether of religious rites, civil customs, or property; or if used with reference to a compact, it would have been with the idea of an "arrangement,"or "ordering"of matters, not with the primary notion of an agreement with another.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he word properly expressive of a "covenant"or "compact"- συνθήκη sunthēkē - is "never"used in the New Testament. In all the allusions to the transactions between God and man, this word never occurs. From some cause, the writers and speakers in the New Testament seem to have supposed that the word would leave an impression which they did not wish to leave. Though it might have been supposed that in speaking of the various transactions between God and man they would have selected this word, yet with entire uniformity they have avoided it. No one of them - though the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- has been used by no less than six of them - has been betrayed in a single instance into the use of the word συνθήκη sunthēkē - "syntheke,"or has differed from the other writers in the language employed. This cannot be supposed to be the result of concert or collusion, but it must have been founded on some reason which operated equally on all their minds.

\caps1 (3) i\caps0 n like manner, and with like remarkable uniformity, the word συνθήκη sunthēkē - syntheke - is "never"used in the Septuagint with reference to any arrangement or "covenant"between God and man. Once indeed in the Apocrypha, and but once, it is used in that sense. In the three only other instances in which it occurs in the Septuagint, it is with reference to compacts between man and man; Isa 28:15; Isa 30:1; Dan 11:6. This remarkable fact that the authors of that version never use the word to denote any transaction between God and man, shows that there must have been some reason for it which acted on their minds with entire uniformity.

\caps1 (4) i\caps0 t is no less remarkable that neither in the Septuagint nor the New Testament is the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- "ever"used in the sense of "will"or "testament,"unless it be in the case before us. This is conceded on all hands, and is expressly admitted by Prof. Stuart; (Com. on Heb. p. 439), though he defends this use of the word in this passage. - A very important inquiry presents itself here, which has never received a solution generally regarded as satisfactory. It is, why the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- was selected by the writers of the New Testament to express the nature of the transaction between God and man in the plan of salvation. It might be said indeed that they found this word uniformly used in the Septuagint, and that they employed it as expressing the idea which they wished to convey, with sufficient accuracy. But this is only removing the difficulty one step further back.

Why did the Septuagint adopt this word? Why did they not rather use the common and appropriate Greek word to express the notion of a covenant? A suggestion on this subject has already been made in the notes on Heb 8:6; compare Bib. Repository vol. xx. p. 55. Another reason may, however, be suggested for this remarkable fact which is liable to no objection. It is, that in the apprehension of the authors of the Septuagint, and of the writers of the New Testament, the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- in its original and proper signification "fairly"conveyed the sense of the Hebrew word בּרית b^e riyt , and that the word συνθήκη sunthēkē - or "compact, agreement,"would "not"express that; and "that they never meant to be understood as conveying the idea either that God entered into a compact or covenant with man, or that he made a will."They meant to represent; him as making "an arrangement, a disposition, an ordering"of things, by which his service might be kept up among his people, and by which people might be saved; but they were equally remote from representing him as making a "compact,"or a "will."In support of this there may be alleged.

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 he remarkable uniformity in which the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- is used, showing that there was some "settled principle"from which they never departed; and,

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is used mainly as the meaning of the word itself. Prof. Stuart has, undoubtedly, given the accurate original sense of the word. "The real, genuine, and original meaning of διαθήκη diathēkē (diatheke) is, "arrangement, disposition,"or "disposal"of a thing."P. 440. The word from which it is derived - διατίθημι diatithēmi - means to place apart or asunder; and then to set, arrange, dispose in a certain order. "Passow."From this original signification is derived the use which the word has with singular uniformity in the Scriptures. It denotes the "arrangment, disposition,"or "ordering"of things which God made in relation to mankind, by which he designed to keep up his worship on earth, and to save the soul. It means neither covenant nor will; neither compact nor legacy; neither agreement nor testament. It is an "arrangement"of an entirely different order from either of them, and the sacred writers with an uniformity which could have been secured only by the presiding influence of the One Eternal Spirit, have avoided the suggestion that God made with man either a "compact"or a "will."

We have no word which precisely expresses this idea, and hence, our conceptions are constantly floating between a "compact"and a "will,"and the views which we have are as unsettled as they are. unscriptural. The simple idea is, that God has made an "arrangement"by which his worship may be celebrated and souls saved. Under the Jewish economy this arrangement assumed one form; under the Christian another. In neither was it a compact or covenant between two parties in such a sense that one party would be at liberty to reject the terms proposed; in neither was it a testament or will, as if God had left a legacy to man, but in both there were some things in regard to the arrangement such as are found in a covenant or compact. One of those things - equally appropriate to a compact between man and man and to this arrangement, the apostle refers to here - that it implied in all cases the death of the victim.

If these remarks are well-founded, they should be allowed materially to shape our views in the interpretation of the Bible. Whole treatises of divinity have been written on a mistaken view of the meaning of this word - understood as meaning "covenant."Volumes of angry controversy have been published on the nature of the "covenant"with Adam, and on its influence on his posterity. The only literal "covenant"which can he supposed in the plan of redemption is that between the Father and the Son - though even the existence of such a covenant is rather the result of devout and learned imagining than of any distinct statement in the volume of inspiration. The simple statement there is, that God has made an arrangement for salvation, the execution of which he has entrusted to his Son, and has proposed it to man to be accepted as the only arrangement by which man can be saved, and which he is not at liberty to disregard.

There has been much difference of opinion in reference to the meaning of the passage here, and to the design of the illustration introduced. If the word used - διαθήκη diathēkē - means "testament,"in the sense of a "will,"then the sense of that passage is that "a will is of force only when he who made it dies, for it relates to a disposition of his property after his death."The force of the remark of the apostle then would be, that the fact that the Lord Jesus made or expressed his "will"to mankind, implied that he would die to confirm it; or that since in the ordinary mode of making a will, it was of force only when he who made it was dead, therefore it was necessary that the Redeemer should die, in order to confirm and ratify what he made. But the objections to this, which appears to have been the view of our translators, seem to me to be insuperable. They are these:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 he word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- is not used in this sense in the New Testament elsewhere; see the remarks above.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 he Lord Jesus made no such will. He had no property, and the commandments and instructions which he gave to his disciples were not of the nature of a will or testament.

(3)\caps1     s\caps0 uch an illustration would not be pertinent to the design of the apostle, or in keeping with his argument.

He is comparing the Jewish and Christian dispensations, and the point of comparison in this chapter relates to the question about the efficacy of sacrifice in the two arrangements. He showed that the arrangement for blood-shedding by sacrifice entered into both; that the high priest of both offered blood as an expiation; that the holy place was entered with blood, and that consequently there was death in both the arrangements, or dispensations. The former arrangement or dispensation was ratified with blood, and it was equally proper that the new arrangement should be also. The point of comparison is not that Moses made a will or testament which could be of force only when he died, and that the same thing was required in the new dispensation, but it is that the former covenant was "ratified by blood,"or "by the death of a victim,"and that it might be expected that the new dispensation would be confirmed, and that it was in fact confirmed in the same manner. In this view of the argument, what pertinency would there be in introducing an illustration respecting a will, and the manner in which it became efficient; compare notes on Heb 9:18. It seems clear, therefore, to me, that the word rendered "testament"here is to be taken in the sense in which it is ordinarily used in the New Testament. The opinion that the word here means such a divine arrangement as is commonly denoted a "covenant,"and not testament, is sanctioned by not a few names of eminence in criticism, such as Pierce, Doddridge, Michaelis, Steudel, and the late Dr. John P. Wilson. Bloomfield says that the connection here demands this. The principal objections to this view are:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it is not proved that no covenants or compacts were valid except such as were made by the intervention of sacrifices.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the word rendered "testator"- διαθεμενος diathemenos - cannot refer to the death of an animal slain for the purpose of ratifying a covenant, but must mean either a "testator,"or a "contractor,"that is, one of two contracting parties.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the word rendered "dead"Heb 9:17 - νεκροῖς nekrois - means only "dead men,"and never is applied to the dead bodies of animals; (see Stuart on the Hebrew, p. 442.)

These objections to the supposition that the passage refers to a covenant or compact, Prof. Stuart says are in his view insuperable, and they are certainly entitled to grave consideration. Whether the view above presented is one which can be sustained, we may be better able to determine after an examination of the words and phrases which the apostle uses. Those objections which depend wholly on the "philological"argument derived from the words used, will be considered of course in such an examination. It is to be remembered at the outset:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- is never used in the New Testament in the sense of "testament,"or "will,"unless in this place;

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it is never used in this sense in the Septuagint; and,

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the Hebrew word בּרית b^e riyt - "never"has this signification. This is admitted; see Stuart on the Heb. pp. 439, 440. It must require very strong reasons to prove that it has this meaning here, and that Paul has employed the word in a sense differing from its uniform signification elsewhere in the Bible; compare, however, the remarks of Prof. Stuart in Bib. Repos. vol. xx. p. 364.

There must also of necessity be - ἀνάγκη anagkē - That is, it is necessary in order to confirm the covenant, or it would not be binding in cases where this did not occur. The "necessity"in the case is simply to make it valid or obligatory. So we say now there must "necessarily"be a "seal,"or a deed would not be valid. The fair interpretation of this is, that this was the common and established custom in making a "covenant"with God, or confirming the arrangement with him in regard to salvation. To this it is objected (see the first objection above), that "it is yet to be made out that no covenants were valid execpt those by the intervention of sacrifices."In reply to this, we may observe:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat the point to be made out is not that this was a custom in compacts between "man and man,"but between "man and his Maker."There is no evidence, as it seems to me, that the apostle alludes to a compact between man and man. The mistake on this subject has arisen partly from the use of the word "testament"by our translators, in the sense of "will"- supposing that it must refer to some transaction relating to man only; and partly from the insertion of the word "men"in Heb 9:17, in the translation of the phrase - ἐπὶ νεκροῖς epi nekrois - "upon the dead,"or"over the dead."But it is not necessary to suppose that there is a reference here to any transaction between man and man at all, as the whole force of the illustration introduced by the apostle will be retained if we suppose him speaking "only"of a covenant between man and God. Then his assertion will be simply that in the arrangement between God and man there was a "necessity"of the death of something, or of the shedding of blood in order to ratify it. This view will save the necessity of proof that the custom of ratifying compacts between man and man by sacrifice prevailed. Whether that can be made out or not, the assertion of the apostle may be true, that in the arrangement which God makes with man, sacrifice was necessary in order to confirm or ratify it.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he point to be made out is, not that such a custom is or was universal among all nations, but that it was the known and regular opinion among the Hebrews that a sacrifice was necessary in a "covenant"with God, in the same way as if we should say that a deed was not valid without a seal, it would not be necessary to show this in regard to all nations, but only that it is the law or the custom in the nation where the writer lived, and at the time when he lived. Other nations may have very different modes of confirming or ratifying a deed, and the same nation may have different methods at various times. The fact or custom to which I suppose there is allusion here, is that of sacrificing an animal to ratify the arrangement between man and his Maker, commonly called a "covenant."In regard to the existence of such a custom, particularly among the Hebrews, we may make the following observations.

It was the common mode of ratifying the "covenant"between God and man. That was done over a sacrifice, or by the shedding of blood. So the covenant with Abraham was ratified by slaying an heifer, a she-goat, a ram, a turtle-dove, and a young pigeon. The animals were divided and a burning lamp passed between them; Gen 15:9, Gen 15:18. So the covenant made with the Hebrews in the wilderness was ratified in the same manner; Exo 24:6, seq. Thus, in Jer 34:18, God speaks of the "men that had transgressed his covenant which they had made before him when they cut the calf in twain, and passed between the parts thereof;"see also Zec 9:11. Indeed all the Jewish sacrifices were regarded as a ratification of the covenant. It was never supposed that it was ratified or confirmed in a proper manner without such a sacrifice. Instances occur, indeed, in which there was no sacrifice offered when a covenant was made between man and man (see Gen 23:16; Gen 24:9; Deu 25:7, Deu 25:9; Rth 4:7), but these cases do not establish the point that the custom did not prevail of ratifying a covenant with God by the blood of sacrifice.

Further; the terms used in the Hebrew in regard to making a covenant with God, prove that it was understood to be ratified by sacrifice, or that the death of a victim was necessary כּרת ברית kaarat b^e riyt , "to cut a covenant"- the word כרת kaarat meaning "to cut; to cut off; to cut down,"and the allusion being to the victims offered in sacrifice, and "cut in pieces"on occasion of entering into a covenant; see Gen 15:10; Jer 34:18-19. The same idea is expressed in the Greek phrases ὅρκια τέμνειν , τέμνειν σπονδάς horkia temnein , temnein spondas , and in the Latin "icere foedus ;"compare Virgil, Aeneid viii. 941.

Et caesa jungebant foedera porca .

These considerations show that it was the common sentiment, alike among the Hebrews and the pagan, that a covenant with God was to be ratified or sanctioned by sacrifice; and the statement of Paul here is, that the death of a sacrificial victim was needful to confirm or ratify such a covenant with God. It was not secure, or confirmed, until blood was thus shed. This was well understood among the Hebrews, that all their covenant transactions with God were to be ratified by a sacrifice; and Paul says that the same principle must apply to any arrangement between God and human beings. Hence, he goes on to show that it was "necessary"that a sacrificial victim should die in the new covenant which God established by man through the Mediator; see Heb 9:23. This I understand to be the sum of the argument here. It is not that every contract made between man and man was to be ratified or confirmed by a sacrifice - for the apostle is not discussing that point; but it is that every similar transaction with God must be based on such a sacrifice, and that no covenant with him could be complete without such a sacrifice. This was provided for in the ancient dispensation by the sacrifices which were constantly offered in their worship; in the new, by the one great sacrifice offered on the cross. Hence, all our approaches to God are based on the supposition of such a sacrifice, and are, as it were, ratified over it. We ratify or confirm such a covenant arrangement, not by offering the sacrifice anew, but by recalling it in a proper manner when we celebrate the death of Christ, and when in view of his cross we solemnly pledge ourselves to be the Lord’ s.

The death of the testator - According to our common version, "the death of him who makes a will."But if the views above expressed are correct, this should be rendered the "covenanter,"or "the victim set apart to be slain."The Greek will admit of the translation of the word διαθέμενος diathemenos , "diathemenos,"by the word "covenanter,"if the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- is rendered "covenant."To such a translation here as would make the word refer "to a victim slain in order to ratify a covenant,"it is objected that the "word has no such meaning anywhere else. It must either mean a "testator,"or a "contractor,"that is, one of two covenanting parties. But where is the death of a person covenanting made necessary in order to confirm the covenant?"Prof. Stuart, in loc. To this objection I remark respectfully:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat the word is never used in the sense of "testator"either in the New Testament or the Old, unless it be here. It is admitted of the word διαθήκη diathēkē - by Prof. Stuart himself, that it never means "will,"or "testament,"unless it be here, and it is equally true of the word used here that it never means one "who makes a will."If, therefore, it should be that a meaning quite uncommon, or wholly unknown in the usage of the Scriptures, is to be assigned to the use of the word here, why should it be "assumed"that that unusual meaning should be that of "making a will,"and not that of confirming a covenant?

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 f the apostle used the word διαθήκη diathēkē - "diatheke"- in the sense of "a covenant"in this passage, nothing is more natural than that he should use the corresponding word διαθέμενος diathemenos - "diathemenos"- in the sense of that by which a covenant was ratified. He wished to express the idea that the covenant was always ratified by the death of a victim - a sacrifice of an animal under the Law, and the sacrifice of the Redeemer under the gospel - and no word would so naturally convey that idea as the one from which the word "covenant"was derived. It is to be remembered also that there was no word to express that thought. Neither the Hebrew nor the Greek furnished such a word; nor have we now any word to express that thought, but are obliged to use circumlocution to convey the idea. The word "covenanter"would not do it; nor the words "victim,"or "sacrifice."We can express the idea only by some phrase like this - "the victim set apart to be slain to ratify the covenant."But it was not an unusual thing for the apostle Paul to make use of a word in a sense quite unique to himself; compare 2Co 4:17.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he word διατίθημι diatithēmi - properly means, "to place apart, to set in order, to arrange."It is rendered "appoint"in Luk 22:29; "made,"and "make,"with reference to a covenant, Act 3:25; Heb 8:10; Heb 10:16. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in the passage before us. The idea of "placing, laying, disposing, arranging,"etc., enters into the word - as to place wares or merchandise for sale, to arrange a contract, &c; see "Passow."The fair meaning of the word here may be, whatever goes to arrange, dispose, or settle the covenant, or to make the covenant secure and firm. If the reference be to a compact, it cannot relate to one of the contracting parties, because the death of neither is necessary to confirm it. But it may refer to that which was well-known as an established opinion, that a covenant with God was ratified only by a sacrifice. Still, it must be admitted that this use of the word is not found elsewhere, and the only material question is, whether it is to be presumed that the apostle would employ a word in a single instance in a special signification, where the connection would not render it difficult to be understood. This must be admitted, that he might, whichever view is taken of the meaning of this passage, for on the supposition that he refers here to a will, it is conceded that he uses the word in a sense which does not once occur elsewhere either in the Old Testament or the New. It seems to me, therefore, that the word here may, without impropriety, be regarded as referring to "the victim that was slain in order to ratify a covenant with God,"and that the meaning is, that such a covenant was not regarded as confirmed until the victim was slain. It may be added that the authority of Michaelis, Macknight, Doddridge, Bloomfield, and Dr. JohnP. Wilson, is a proof that such an interpretation cannot be a very serious departure from the proper use of a Greek word.

Barnes: Heb 9:17

For a testament - Such an arrangement as God enters into with man; see the remarks on Heb 9:16.

Is of force - Is ratified, or confirmed - in the same way as a deed or compact is confirmed by affixing a seal.

After men are dead - ἐπὶ νεκροῖς epi nekrois . "Over the dead."That is, in accordance with the view given above, after the animal is dead; or over the body of the animal slain for sacrifice, and to confirm the covenant. "For a covenant is completed or confirmed over dead sacrifices, seeing it is never of force as long as the victim set apart for its ratification is still living."ms. notes of Dr. JohnP. Wilson. To this interpretation it is objected, that " νεκροῖς nekrois - "nekrois"- means only "dead men;"but human beings surely were not sacrificed by the Jews, as a mediating sacrifice in order to confirm a covenant."Prof. Stuart in loc. In regard to this objection, and to the proper meaning of the passage, we may remark:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat the word "men"is not in the Greek, nor is it necessarily implied, unless it be in the use of the Greek word rendered "dead."The proper translation is, "upon, or over the dead."The use of the word "men"here by our translators would seem to limit it to the making of a will.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is to be presumed, unless there is positive proof to the contrary, that the Greeks and Hebrews used the word "dead"as it is used by other people, and that it "might"refer to deceased animals, or vegetables, as well as to human beings. A sacrifice that had been offered was dead; a tree that had fallen was dead; an animal that had been torn by other wild animals was dead. It is "possible"that a people might have one word to refer to "dead men,"and another to "dead animals,"and another to "dead vegetables:"but what is the evidence that the Hebrews or the Greeks had such words?

\caps1 (3) w\caps0 hat is the meaning of this very word - νεκρός nekros - "nekros"- in Heb 6:1; Heb 9:14, of this very Epistle when it is applied to works - "dead works"- if it never refers to anything but people? compare Jam 2:17, Jam 2:20, Jam 2:26; Eph 2:1, Eph 2:5; Rev 3:1. In Ecc 9:4, it is applied to a dead lion. I suppose, therefore, that the Greek phrase here will admit of the interpretation which the "exigency of the place"seems to demand, and that the idea is, that a covenant with God was ratified over the animals slain in sacrifice, and was not considered as confirmed until the sacrifice was killed.

Otherwise - Since - ἐπεί epei . That is, unless this takes place it will be of no force.

It is of no strength - It is not "strong"- ἰσχύει ischuei - it is not confirmed or ratified. "While the testator liveth."Or while the animal selected to confirm the covenant is alive. It can be confirmed only by its being slain. A full examination of the meaning of this passage Heb 9:16-17 may be found in an article in the Biblical Repository, vol. 20, pp. 51-71, and in Prof. Stuart’ s reply to that article. Bib. Repos. 20, pp. 356-381.

Barnes: Heb 9:18

Whereupon - Ὅθεν Hothen - "Whence."Or since this is a settled principle, or an indisputable fact, it occurred in accordance with this, that the first covenant was confirmed by the shedding of blood. The admitted principle which the apostle had stated, that the death of the victim was necessary to confirm the covenant, was the "reason"why the first covenant was ratified with blood. If there were any doubt about the correctness of the interpretation given above, that Heb 9:16-17, refer to a "covenant,"and not a "will,"this verse would seem to be enough to remove it. For how could the fact that a will is not binding until he who makes it is dead, be a reason why a "covenant"should be confirmed by blood? What bearing would such a fact have on the question whether it ought or ought not to be confirmed in this manner? Or how could that fact, though it is universal, be given as a "reason"to account for the fact that the covenant made by the instrumentality of Moses was ratified with blood?

No possible connection can be seen in such reasoning. But admit that Paul had stated in Heb 9:16-17, a general principle that in all covenant transactions with God, the death of a victim was necessary, and everything is plain. We then see why he offered the sacrifice and sprinkled the blood. It was not on the basis of such reasoning as this: "The death of a man who makes a will is indispensable before the will is of binding force, therefore it was that Moses confirmed the covenant made with our fathers by the blood of a sacrifice;"but by such reasoning as this: "It is a great principle that in order to ratify a covenant between God and his people a victim should be slain, therefore it was that Moses ratified the old covenant in this manner, and "therefore"it was also that the death of a victim was necessary under the new dispensation."Here the reasoning of Paul is clear and explicit; but who could see the force of the former?

Prof. Stuart indeed connects this verse with Heb 9:15, and says that the course of thought is, "The new covenant or redemption from sin was sanctioned by the death of Jesus; consequently, or wherefore ( ὅθεν hothen ) the old covenant, which is a type of the new, was sanctioned by the blood of victims."But is this the reasoning of Paul? Does he say that because the blood of a Mediator was to be shed under the new dispensation, and because the old was a type of this, that therefore the old was confirmed by blood? Is he not rather accounting for the shedding of blood at all, and showing that it was "necessary"that the blood of the Mediator should be shed rather than assuming that, and from that arguing that a typical shedding of blood was needful? Besides, on this supposition, why is the statement in Heb 9:16-17, introduced? What bearing have these verses in the train of thought? What are they but an inexplicable obstruction?

The first testament - Or rather covenant - the word "testament"being supplied by the translators.

Was dedicated - Margin, "Purified."The word used to "ratify,"to "confirm,"to "consecrate,"to "sanction."Literally, "to renew."

Without blood - It was ratified by the blood of the animals that were slain in sacrifice. The blood was then sprinkled on the principal objects that were regarded as holy under that dispensation.

Barnes: Heb 9:19

For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people - When he had recited all the Law, and had given all the commandments entrusted him to deliver; Exo 24:3.

He took the blood of calves and of goats - This passage has given great perplexity to commentators from the fact that Moses in his account of the transactions connected with the ratification of the covenant with the people, Exo. 24, mentions only a part of the circumstances here referred to. He says nothing of the blood of calves and of goats; nothing of water, and scarletwool, and hyssop; nothing of sprinkling the book, the tabernacle, or the vessels of the ministry. It has been made a question, therefore, whence Paul obtained a knowledge of these circumstances? Since the account is not contained in the Old Testament, it must have been either by tradition, or by direct inspiration. The latter supposition is hardly probable, because:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 he information here can hardly be regarded as of sufficient importance to have required an original revelation; for the illustration would have had sufficient force to sustain his conclusion if the literal account in Exodus only had been given, that Moses sprinkled the people, but

\caps1 (2) s\caps0 uch an original act of inspiration here would not have been consistent with the object of the apostle. In that argument it was essential that he should state only the facts about the ancient dispensation which were admitted by the Hebrews themselves. Any statement of his own about things which they did not concede to be true, or which was not well understood as a custom, might have been called in question, and would have done much to invalidate the entire force of the argument. It is to be presumed, therefore, that the facts here referred to had been preserved by tradition; and in regard to this, and the authority due to such a tradition, we may remark:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it is well known that the Jews had a great number of traditions which they carefully preserved;

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat there is no improbability in the supposition that many events in their history would be preserved in this manner, since in the small compass of a volume like the Old Testament it cannot be presumed that all the events of their nation had been recorded;

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hough they had many traditions of a trifling nature, and many which were false (compare notes on Mat 15:2), yet they doubtless had many that were true;

(4)\caps1     i\caps0 n referring to those traditions, there is no impropriety in supposing that Paul may have been guided by the Spirit of inspiration in selecting only those which were true; and,

(5)\caps1     n\caps0 othing is more probable than what is here stated. If Moses sprinkled "the people;"if he read "the book of the law"then Exo 24:7, and if this was regarded as a solemn act of ratifying a covenant with God, nothing would be more natural than that he should sprinkle the book of the covenant, and even the tabernacle and its various sacred utensils.

We are to remember also, that it was common among the Hebrews to sprinkle blood for the purpose of consecrating, or as an emblem of purifying. Thus, Aaron and his sons and their garments were sprinkled with blood when they were consecrated to the office of priests, Exo 29:19-21; the blood of sacrifices was sprinkled on the altar, Lev 1:5, Lev 1:11; Lev 3:2, Lev 3:13; and blood was sprinkled before the veil of the sanctuary, Lev 4:10, Lev 4:17; compare Lev 6:27; Lev 7:14. So Josephus speaks of the garments of Aaron and of his sons being sprinkled with "the blood of the slain beasts, and with spring water.""Having consecrated them and their garments,"he says, "for seven days together, he did the same to the tabernacle, and the vessels thereto belonging, both with oil and with the blood of bulls and of rams." Ant . book iii, chapter 8, section 6. These circumstances show the strong "probability"of the truth of what is here affirmed by Paul, while it is impossible to prove that Moses did not sprinkle the book and the tabernacle in the manner stated. The mere omission by Moses cannot demonstrate that it was not done. On the phrase "the blood of calves and of goats,"see note on Heb 9:12.

With water - Agreeably to the declaration of Josephus that "spring water was used."In Lev 14:49-51, it is expressly mentioned that the blood of the bird that was killed to cleanse a house from the plague of leprosy should be shed over running water, and that the blood and the water should be sprinkled on the walls. It has been suggested also (see Bloomfield), that the use of water was necessary in order to prevent the blood from coagulating, or so as to make it possible to sprinkle it.

And scarlet wool - Margin, "Purple."The word used here denotes crimson, or deep-scarlet. The colour was obtained from a small insect which was found adhering to the shoots of a species of oak in Spain and in Western Asia, of about the size of a pea. It was regarded as the most valuable of the colours for dyeing, and was very expensive. Why the wool used by Moses was of this colour is not known, unless it be because it was the most expensive of colours, and thus accorded with everything employed in the construction of the tabernacle and its utensils. Wool appears to have been used in order to absorb and retain the blood.

And hyssop - That is, a bunch of hyssop intermingled with the wool, or so connected with it as to constitute a convenient instrument for sprinkling; compare Lev 14:51. Hyssop is a low shrub, regarded as one of the smallest of the plants, and hence, put in contrast with the cedar of Lebanon. It sprung out of the rocks or walls, 1Ki 4:33, and was used for purposes of purification. The term seems to have comprised not only the common hyssop, but also lavender and other aromatic plants. Its fragrance, as well as its size, may have suggested the idea of using it in the sacred services of the tabernacle.

And sprinkled both the book - This circumstance is not mentioned by Moses, but it has been shown above not to be improbable. Some expositors, however, in order to avoid the difficulty in the passage, have taken this in connection with the word λαβὼν labōn - rendered "he took"- meaning "taking the blood, and the book itself;"but the more natural and proper construction is, that the book was sprinkled with the blood.

And all the people - Moses says, "and sprinkled it on the people;"Exo 24:8. We are not to suppose that either Moses or Paul designs to say that the blood was actually sprinkled on each one of the three millions of people in the wilderness, but the meaning doubtless is that the blood was sprinkled over the people, though in fact it might have fallen on a few. So a man now standing on an elevated place, and surrounded by a large assembly, if he should sprinkle water over them from the place where he stood, might be said to sprinkle it on the people, though in fact but few might have been touched by it. The act would be equally significant whether the emblem fell on few or many.

Barnes: Heb 9:20

Saying, This is the blood of the testament - Of the covenant; see notes on Heb 9:16-17. That is, this is the blood by which the covenant is ratified. It was the means used to confirm it; the sacred and solemn form by which it was made sure. When this was done, the covenant between God and the people was confirmed - as a covenant between man and man is when it is sealed.

Which God hath enjoined unto you - In Exo 24:8, "which God hath made with you."The language used by Paul, "which God hath enjoined"- ἐνετείλατο eneteilato - "commanded"- shows that he did not regard this as strictly of the nature of a "covenant,"or "compact."When a compact is made between parties, one does not "enjoin"or "command"the other, but it is a mutual "agreement."In the transactions between God and man, though called בּרית b^e riyt , or διαθήκη diathēkē , the idea of a "covenant"or "compact"is so far excluded that God never loses his right to "command"or "enjoin."It is not a transaction between equals, or an "agreement;"it is a solemn "arrangement"on the part of God which he proposes to mankind, and which he enjoins them to embrace; which they are not indeed at liberty to disregard, but which when embraced is appropriately ratified by some solemn act on their part; compare notes on Heb 8:6.

Barnes: Heb 9:21

He sprinkled ...both the tabernacle - This circumstance is not stated by Moses. On the probability that this was done, see notes on Heb 9:19. The account of setting up the tabernacle occurs in Exo 11:1-10. In that account it is said that Moses "anointed"the tabernacle with the holy anointing oil; Heb 9:9-11. Josephus ( Ant . book iii, chapter 8, section 6), says that he consecrated it and the vessels thereto belonging with the blood of bulls and of rams. This was undoubtedly the tradition in the time of Paul, and no one can prove that it is not correct.

And all the vessels of the ministry - Employed in the service of God. The altar, the laver, Exo 40:10-11, the censers, dishes, bowls, etc., which were used in the tabernacle.

Barnes: Heb 9:22

And almost all things - It is a general custom to purify everything by blood. This rule was not universal, for some things were purified by fire and water, Num 31:22-23, and some by water only; Num 31:24; Lev 16:26, Lev 16:28. But the exceptions to the general rule were few. Almost everything in the tabernacle and temple service, was consecrated or purified by blood.

And without shedding of blood is no remission - Remission or forgiveness of sins. That is, though some things were purified by fire and water, yet when the matter pertained to the forgiveness of sins, it was "universally"true that no sins were pardoned except by the shedding of blood. Some impurities might be removed by water and fire, but the stain of "sin"could be removed only by blood. This declaration referred in its primary meaning, to the Jewish rites, and the sense is, that under that dispensation it was universally true that in order to the forgiveness of sin blood must be shed. But it contains a truth of higher order and importance still. "It is universally true that sin never has been, and never will be forgiven, except in connection with, and in virtue of the shedding of blood."It is on this principle that the plan of salvation by the atonement is based, and on this that God in fact bestows pardon upon people. There is not the slightest evidence that any man has ever been pardoned except through the blood shed for the remission of sins. The infidel who rejects the atonement has no evidence that his sins are pardoned; the man who lives in the neglect of the gospel, though he has abundant evidence that he is a sinner, furnishes none that his sins are forgiven; and the Mussulman and the pagan can point to no proof that their sins are blotted out. It remains to be demonstrated that one single member of the human family has ever had the slightest evidence of pardoned sin, except through the blood of expiation. In the divine arrangement there is no principle better established than this, that all sin which is forgiven is remitted through the blood of the atonement; a principle which has never been departed from hitherto, and which never will be. It follows, therefore:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat no sinner can hope for forgiveness except through the blood of Christ;

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat if people are ever saved they must be willing to rely on the merits of that blood;

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat all people are on a level in regard to salvation, since all are to be saved in the same way; and,

(4)\caps1     t\caps0 hat there will be one and the same song in heaven - the song of redeeming love.

Barnes: Heb 9:23

The patterns of things in the heavens - The tabernacle and its various utensils; see the notes on Heb 8:5.

Be purified with these - With water and blood, and by these ceremonies.

But the heavenly things themselves - The heavenly tabernacle or sanctuary into which Christ has entered, and where he performs the functions of his ministry. The use of the word "purified"here applied to heaven, does not imply that heaven was before "unholy,"but it denotes that it is now made accessible to sinners; or that they may come and worship there in an acceptable manner. The ancient tabernacle was purified or consecrated by the blood of the victims slain, so that people might approach with acceptance and worship; the heavens by purer blood are rendered accessible to the guilty. The necessity for "better sacrifices"in regard to the latter was, that it was designed to make the conscience pure, and because the service in heaven is more holy than any rendered on earth.

With better sacrifices than these - To wit, the sacrifice made by the offering of the Lord Jesus on the cross. This infinitely surpassed in value all that had been offered under the Jewish dispensation.

Barnes: Heb 9:24

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands - Into the temple or tabernacle. The Jewish high priest alone entered into the most holy place; and the other priests into the holy place. Jesus, being of the tribe of Judah, and not of Levi, never entered the temple proper. He had access only to the courts of the temple, in the same way as any other Jew had; see the notes on Mat 21:12. He has entered into the true temple - heaven - of which the earthly tabernacle was the type.

Which are the figures of the true - Literally, "the antitypes"- ἀντίτυπα antitupa . The word properly means what is formed after a model, pattern, or type; and then what corresponds to something or answers to it. The idea here is, that the "type"or "fashion"- the "true"figure or form - was shown to Moses in the Mount, and then the tabernacle was made after that model, or corresponded to it. The "true original"figure is heaven itself; the tabernacle was an antitype of that - or was so formed as in some sense to correspond to it. That is, it corresponded in regard to the matters under consideration - the most holy place denoted heaven; the mercy-seat and the shekinah were symbols of the presence of God, and of the fact that he shows mercy in heaven; the entrance of the high priest was emblematical of the entrance of the Redeemer into heaven; the sprinkling of the blood there was a type of what the Redeemer would do in heaven.

Now to appear in the presence of God for us - As the Jewish high priest appeared before the shekinah, the symbol of the divine presence in the tabernacle, so Christ appears before God himself in our behalf in heaven. He has gone to plead for our salvation; to present the merits of his blood as a permanent reason why we should be saved; Rom 8:34 note; Heb 7:25 note.

Barnes: Heb 9:25

Nor yet that he should offer himself often - The Jewish high priest entered the most holy place with blood once every year. In this respect the offering made by Christ, and the work which he performed, differed from that of the Jewish high priest. It was not needful that he should enter the holy place but once. Having entered there, he permanently remains there.

With the blood of others - That is, with the blood of calves, and goats. This is a second point in which the work of Christ differs from that of the Jewish high priest. Christ entered there with his own blood; notes on Heb 9:12.

Barnes: Heb 9:26

For then must he often have suffered - That is, if his blood had no more efficacy than what the Jewish high priest offered, and which was so often repeated, it would have been necessary that Christ should have often died.

But now once - Once for all; once in the sense that it is not to be repeated again - ἅπαξ hapax .

In the end of the world - In the last dispensation or economy; that under which the affairs of the world will be wound up; see the phrase fully explained in Heb 1:2 note, and Act 2:17 note; 1Co 10:11, and Isa 2:2.

Hath he appeared - He has been manifested in human form.

To put away sin -

(1)    To remove the punishment due to sin, or to provide a way of pardon; and,

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 o remove the stain of sin from the soul; see the notes on Heb 9:14.

By the sacrifice of himself - see the notes on Heb 1:3; Heb 2:14; Heb 7:27.

Barnes: Heb 9:27

And as it is appointed unto men once to die - Or, "since it is appointed unto men to die once only."The object of this is to illustrate the fact that Christ died but once for sin, and that is done by showing that the most important events pertaining to man occur but once. Thus, it is with "death."That does not, and cannot occur many times. It is the great law of our being that people die only once, and hence, the same thing was to be expected to occur in regard to him who made the atonement. It could not be supposed that this great law pertaining to man would be departed from in the case of him who died to make the atonement, and that he would repeatedly undergo the pains of death. The same thing was true in regard to the "judgment."Man is to he judged once, and but once. The decision is to be final, and is not to be repeated. In like manner there was a fitness that the great Redeemer should die "but once,"and that his death should, without being repeated, determine the destiny of man. There was a remarkable "oneness"in the great events which most affected people; and neither death, the judgment, nor the atonement could be repeated. In regard to the declaration here that "it is appointed unto men once to die,"we may observe:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat death is the result of "appointment;"Gen 3:19. It is not the effect of chance, or haphazard. It is not a "debt of nature."It is not the condition to which man was subject by the laws of his creation. It is not to be accounted for by the mere principles of physiology. God could as well have made the heart to play forever as for 50 years. Death is no more the regular result of physical laws than the guillotine and the gallows are. It is in all cases the result of "intelligent appointment,"and for "an adequate cause."

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat cause, or the reason of that appointment, is sin; notes, Rom 6:23. This is the adequate cause; this explains the whole of it. Holy beings do not die. There is not the slightest proof that an angel in heaven has died, or that any perfectly holy being has ever died except the Lord Jesus. In every death, then, we have a demonstration that the race is guilty; in each case of mortality we have an affecting memento that we are individually transgressors.

\caps1 (3) d\caps0 eath occurs but "once"in this world. It cannot be repeated if we should desire to have it repeated. Whatever truths or facts then pertain to death; whatever lessons it is calculated to convey, pertain to it as an event which is not to occur again. That which is to occur but once in an eternity of existence acquires, from that very fact, if there were no other circumstances, an immense importance. What is to be done but, "once,"we should wish to be done well. We should make all proper preparation for it; we should regard it with singular interest. If preparation is to be made for it, we should make all which we expect "ever"to make. A man who is to cross the ocean but "once;"to go away from his home never to return, should make the right kind of preparation. He cannot come back to take what he has forgotten; to arrange what he has neglected; to give counsel which he has failed to do; to ask forgiveness for offences for which he has neglected to seek pardon. And so of death. A man who dies, dies but once. He cannot come back again to make preparation if he has neglected it; to repair the evils which he has caused by a wicked life; or to implore pardon for sins for which he had failed to ask forgiveness. Whatever is "to be done"with reference to death, is to be done "once for all"before he dies.

\caps1 (4) d\caps0 eath occurs to all. "It is appointed unto men"- to the race. It is not an appointment for one, but for all. No one is appointed by name to die; and not an individual is designated as one who shall escape. No exception is made in favour of youth, beauty, or blood; no rank or station is exempt; no merit, no virtue, no patriotism, no talent, can purchase freedom from it. In every other sentence which goes out against people there may be "some"hope of reprieve. Here there is none. We cannot meet an individual who is not "under sentence of death."It is not only the poor wretch in the dungeon doomed to the gallows who is to die, it is the rich man in his palace; the frivolous trifler in the assembly room; the friend that we embrace and love; and she whom we meet in the crowded saloon of fashion with all the graces of accomplishment and adorning. Each one of these is just as much under sentence of death as the poor wretch in the cell, and the execution on any one of them may occur before his. It is too for substantially the same cause, and is as really deserved. It is for "sin"that all are doomed to death, and the "fact"that we must die should be a constant remembrancer of our guilt.

\caps1 (5) a\caps0 s death is to occur to us but once, there is a cheering interest in the reflection that when it is passed it is passed "forever."The dying pang, the chill, the cold sweat, are not to be repeated. Death is not to approach us often - he is to be allowed to come to us but once. When we have once passed through the dark valley, we shall have the assurance that we shall never tread its gloomy way again. Once, then, let us be willing to die - since we can die "but"once; and let us rejoice in the assurance which the gospel furnishes, that they who die in the Lord leave the world to go where death in any form is unknown.

But after this the judgment - The apostle does not say "how long"after death this will be, nor is it possible for us to know; Act 1:7; compare Mat 24:36. We may suppose, however. that there will be two periods in which there will be an act of judgment passed on those who die.

\caps1 (1) i\caps0 mmediately after death when they pass into the eternal world, when their destiny will be made known to them. This seems to be necessarily implied in the supposition that they will continue to live, and to be happy or miserable after death. This act of judgment may not be formal or public, but it will be such as to show them what must be the issues of the final day, and as the result of that interview with God, they will be made happy or miserable until the final doom shall be pronounced.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he more public and formal act of judgment, when the whole world will be assembled at the bar of Christ; Matt. 25. The decision of that day will not change or reverse the former; but the trial will be of such a nature as to bring out all the deeds done on earth, and the sentence which will be pronounced will be in view of the universe, and will fix the everlasting doom. Then the body will have been raised; the affairs of the world will be wound up; the elect will all be gathered in, and the state of retribution will commence, to continue forever. The main thought of the apostle here may be, that after death will commence a state of "retribution"which can never change. Hence, there was a propriety that Christ should die but once. In that future world he would not die to make atonement, for there all will be fixed and final. If people, therefore, neglect to avail themselves of the benefits of the atonement here, the opportunity will be lost forever. In that changeless state which constitutes the eternal judgment no sacrifice will be again offered for sin; there will be no opportunity to embrace that Saviour who was rejected here on earth.

Barnes: Heb 9:28

So Christ was once offered - Since people are to die but once; and as all beyond the grave is fixed by the judgment, so that his death there would make no change in the destiny, there was a propriety that he should die but once for sin. The argument is, there is one probation only, and therefore there was need of but one sacrifice, or of his dying but once. If death were to occur frequently in the existence of each individual, and if each intermediate period were a state of probation, then there might be a propriety that an atonement should be made with reference to each state. Or if beyond the grave there were a state of probation still, then also there might be propriety that an atoning sacrifice should be offered there. But since neither of these things is true, there was a fitness that the great victim should die but once.

(Rather, perhaps, as in the original sentence, "once dying"was the penalty denounced on the sinner, so the substitute in enduring it, is in like manner, under necessity of dying but once. By this he fully answers the requirement of the Law. Or there may be in the passage a simple intimation that, in this respect, as in others. Christ is like us, namely, in being but once subject to death. It would be inconsistent with the nature which he sustains, to suppose him a second time subject to death.)

To bear the sins of many - To suffer and die on account of their sins; see Isa 53:6, Isa 53:11 notes; Gal 3:13 note. The phrase does not mean:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat Christ was a "sinner"- for that was in no sense true. See Heb 7:26. Nor

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat he literally bore the penalty due to transgression - for that is equally untrue.

The penalty of the Law for sin is all which the Law when executed inflicts on the offender for his transgression, and includes, in "fact,"remorse of conscience, overwhelming despair, and eternal punishment. But Christ did not suffer forever, nor did he experience remorse of conscience, nor did he endure utter despair. Nor.

\caps1 (3) d\caps0 oes it mean that he was literally "punished"for our sins. Punishment pertains only to the guilty. An innocent being may "suffer"for what another does, but there is no propriety in saying that he is "punished"for it. A father suffers much from the misconduct of a son, but we do not say that he is punished for it; a child suffers much from the intemperance of a parent - but no one would say that it was a punishment on the child. Men always connect the idea of criminality with punishment, and when we say that a man is punished, we suppose at once that there is "guilt."The phrase here means simply, that Christ endured sufferings in his own person, which, if they had been inflicted on us, would have been the proper punishment of sin. He who was innocent interposed, and received on himself what was descending to meet us, and consented to be treated "as he would have deserved if he had been a sinner."Thus, he bore what was due to us; and this, in Scripture phrase, is what is meant by "bearing our iniquities;"see the notes Isa 53:4.

(It is indeed true, that Christ did not endure the very penalty which we had incurred, and, but for his interference, should have endured. His sufferings must be regarded in the light of an equivalent to the Law’ s original claim, of a satisfaction to its injured honor, which the Lawgiver has been pleased to accept. It is, however, equally true, that the sufferings of Christ were strictly penal. They were the punishment of sin. The true meaning of the important phrase in this verse, "to bear sin,"establishes this point. It can have no other meaning than bearing the punishment of sin. See Stuart’ s xix. Excursus. That punishment supposes guilt is not denied. What then? Not certainly that Christ was personally guilty, but that our guilt has been imputed to him - that he has taken the place of the guilty, and become answerable for their transgressions. See Supp. note, 2Co 5:21.)

And unto them that look for him - To his people. It is one of the characteristics of Christians that they look for the return of their Lord; Tit 2:13; 2Pe 3:12; compare the notes, 1Th 1:10. They fully believe that he will come. They earnestly desire that he will come; 2Ti 4:8; Rev 22:20. They are waiting for his appearing; 1Th 1:10. He left the world and ascended to heaven, but he will again return to earth, and his people are looking for that time as the period when they shall be raised up from their graves; when they shall be publicly acknowledged to be his, and when they shall be admitted to heaven; see the notes on Joh 14:3.

Shall he appear the second time - He first appeared as the man of sorrows to make atonement for sin. His second appearance will be as the Lord of his people, and the Judge of the quick and the dead; Mat 25:31, see the notes, Act 1:11. The apostle does not say when this would be, nor is any intimation given in the Scriptures when it will occur. It is on the contrary everywhere declared that this is concealed from people Act 1:7; Mat 24:36, and all that is known respecting the time is, that it will be suddenly and at an unexpected moment; Mat 24:42, Mat 24:44, Mat 24:50.

Without sin - That is, when be comes again he will not make himself a sin-offering; or will not come in order to make atonement for sin. It is not implied that when he came the first time he was in any sense a sinner, but that he came then with reference to sin. or that the main object of his incarnation was to "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."When he comes the second time, it will be with reference to another object.

Unto salvation - That is, to receive his friends and followers to eternal salvation. He will come to save them from all their sins and temptations; to raise them from their graves; to place them at his right hand in glory, and to confirm them in the everlasting inheritance which he has promised to all who truly love him, and who wait for his appearing.

In view of this anticipated return of the Redeemer, we may remark:

(1) There is a propriety that the Lord Jesus should thus return. He came once to be humbled, despised, and put to death; and there is a fitness that he should come to be honored in his own world.

\caps1 (2) e\caps0 very person on earth is interested in the fact that he will return, for "every eye shall see him;"Rev 1:7. All who are now In their graves, and all who now live, and all who will hereafter live, will behold the Redeemer in his glory.

\caps1 (3) i\caps0 t will not be merely to gaze upon him, and to admire his magnificence that they will see him. It will be for greater and more momentous purposes - with reference to an eternal doom.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 he great mass of people are not prepared to meet him. They do not believe that he will return; they do not desire that he should appear; they are not ready for the solemn interview which they will have with him. His appearing now would overwhelm them with surprise and horror. There is nothing in the future which they less expect and desire than the second coming of the Son of God, and in, the present state of the world his appearance would produce almost universal consternation and despair. It would be like the coming of the flood of waters on the old world; like the sheets of flame on the cities of the plain; or as "death"now comes to the great mass of those who die.

(5) Christians "are"prepared for his coming. They believe in it; they desire it; they are expecting it. In this they are distinguished from all the world besides, and they would be ready to hail his coming as that of a friend, and to rejoice in his appearance as that of "their"Saviour.

\caps1 (6) l\caps0 et us then live in habitual preparation for his advent. To each one of us he will come soon; to all he will come suddenly. Whether he come to remove us by death, or whether in the clouds of heaven to judge the world, the period is not far distant when "we"shall see him. Yes, our eyes shall behold the Son of God in his glory! That which we have long desired - a sight of our Saviour who died for us, shall soon, very soon be granted unto us. No Christian begins a week or a day in which there is not a possibility that, before its close, he may have seen the Son of God in his glory; none lies down upon his bed at night who may not, when the morning dawns upon this world, be gazing with infinite delight on the glories of the Great Redeemer in the heavens.

Poole: Heb 9:1

Heb 9:1-14 The service and sacrifices of the first tabernacle

were far less perfect and efficacious to purge the

conscience than the blood of Christ.

Heb 9:15-22 The necessity of Christ’ s death for the confirmation

of the new covenant,

Heb 9:23,24 and of better sacrifices than those legal ones to

purify the heavenly things.

Heb 9:25-28 Christ was offered once for all.

The Holy Spirit, Heb 9:1-10:18 , is illustrating his two last arguments taken from the tabernacle and covenant administrations, about which both the Aaronical priests and the gospel High Priest did minister; in both which Christ hath beyond all comparison the pre-eminence, which the Spirit proves by an argument drawn a comparatis, of the tabernacle and service of the Aaronical priests, and the tabernacle and work of Christ. He beginneth with a proposition of the adjuncts of the first covenant from Heb 9:1-10 : The three particles introducing it, men , oun , and kai , agree, the one in connecting, the other demonstrating, and the last in asserting, that which followeth to depend on what went before, as: And then truly the first.

The first covenant: h prwth is an ellipsis, nothing is in the Greek text joined with it, though some Greek copies add skhnh , the first tabernacle; but this is to make the same thing a property of itself, and it is absurd to read, the first tabernacle had a tabernacle; it is therefore better supplied from that which first relates to in Heb 8:7,13 , viz. the Mosaical covenant administration, which had or possessed, as its proper adjuncts, even those three distinct ones following.

Had also ordinancesdikaiwmata , we read ordinances; others, ceremonies or rites. It is derived from a passive verb, and may signify, a righteous sentence or ordinance of God, or a righteous event that answers that law or decree, as Rom 8:4 . In the plural it notes jura, the laws of God, but especially here the ceremonial laws, these just constitutions for ministry which God gave by Moses to the Aaronical priesthood.

Of divine servicelatreiav , which our translators make of the genitive case singular; but this is repugnant to the next words connected to it, which should strictly be of the same case; it is therefore best rendered in the accusative case plural, and by apposition to ordinances, and so is read services or worship, which because it refers to God, our translators have added to it the word Divine. How various this worship was in the ministry of the high priest and ordinary priests, the apostle showeth afterward, and therefore most properly to be rendered services.

And a worldy sanctuary: to agion was the sanctuary where these services were performed, called the holy, from its relation to God and his service. It consisted of two tabernacles, as is described, Heb 9:2,3 . It is styled kosmikon , being externally decent, beautiful, and glorious, as is evident by its description, Exo 26:1-37 . Made it was after God’ s own model, a mystical structure, and a type of a better; yet though that were so pleasing to the eye of the world, its materials were, like it, frail, brittle, and passing away, as things made with hands make way for better, Heb 9:24 .

Poole: Heb 9:2

For there was a tabernacle made: the Spirit descends to a particular account of the three former adjuncts to the covenant, beginning with the last, the sanctuary; which being glorious, he advanceth the glory of Christ from the place of his ministry above it.

For is demonstrative of what was asserted Heb 9:1 , the first visible habitation that God had amongst men, 2Sa 7:6 , as a token of his gracious presence with them. This tabernacle consisted of three parts, of the court where stood the brazen altar of burnt offerings, the brazen laver for the priests to wash the sacrifices in, and to purify themselves when they came and offered them upon the altar, Exo 27:1 , &c.; Exo 30:17-21 38:1-20 40:28-33 . This court the Holy Ghost here leaves out. Separated from this court by a veil was the first tent or tabernacle, called the sanctuary, or holy place, where the priest did the daily service, which is called the first, Exo 26:36 40:22-29 . Inward of this, and separated by a veil, was the holy of holiest, where the ark was, and where the high priest only entered once a year, Exo 25:10,22 40:20,21 . This tabernacle was according to God’ s pattern and command, prepared, finished, and reared up by Moses, Exo 40:1-38 .

The first the sanctuary, or holy place, separated by one veil from the holy of holiest, and from the court by another, had in it the following sacred utensils.

The candlestick for matter and form answering God’ s pattern, as Exo 25:31,40 37:17,25 40:24,25 . It was of pure gold, and of six branches artificially wrought, by which was typified that Spirit of light which Christ giveth to the true tabernacle, his body mystical, the church wherein God dwelleth, not unusually set out by lamps, Rev 4:5 . And by reason of that light is the church set out by the emblem of candlesticks, Rev 1:4,12,13,20 .

The table for matter, of plates of pure gold covering the shittim wood, and a crowning verge of gold round it, Exo 25:23-30 37:10-16 Exo 40:22,23 . Most excellent for its spiritual use, setting out Christ in all his excellencies, well stored and furnished for his; which the Jews by their unbelief and profaneness made contemptible, Mal 1:7 .

The shewbread was twelve cakes made and set on the table, new every sabbath day in the morning, and when taken away were to be eaten by the priests only, Exo 25:30 40:23 Lev 24:5-9 . However, on David’ s necessity God dispensed with that law, and allowed him to eat of it, Mar 2:26 . This was an emblem of God’ s provision for the twelve tribes, the type of his church; and the bestowing on them the bread of life from heaven, the all-sufficient food for them, Joh 6:32-58 ; compare Col 2:16,17 .

Which is called the sanctuary which first tabernacle was called the holy place or sanctuary, being relatively so, as God’ s tent, and no otherwise, so is it styled by the Spirit, Exo 26:33 .

Poole: Heb 9:3

And after the second veil: this distinguisheth the second tabernacle from the first; for, passing through it to the end of it, there hung up a curious veil made of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen, with figures of cherubims, Exo 26:31,32 36:35,36 40:21 . The mystery of which is interpreted after, Heb 9:8 : see Heb 6:19 . A veil noteth distance and obscurity; or, covering, opposite to that which is open and free.

The tabernacle which is called the holiest of all: behind this veil was the second tabernacle, called the holy of holiest, Exo 26:33 , by God himself, which did really, though typically, hold out the place of God’ s special appearance for propitiation and gracious answers of peace to the desires of his people in the Lord Jesus; applied afterwards to heaven itself, the holiest of all, where the High Priest is entered for us, and sits at the right hand of his Father, making intercession for us, Heb 6:19,20 7:25 9:24 10:19 .

Poole: Heb 9:4

Which had the golden censer in the holy of holiest was reserved the golden censer, on which the high priest put the incense when annually he entered there, see Lev 16:12,13that the cloud of it might cover the mercy-seat, and so was kept for that service in it: see Joseph. Antiq. lib. 3. 7. Many would refer this to the golden altar of incense that stood before the veil in the holy place, Exo 30:6-8 ; and so they read it, having the golden altar of incense before it for its service, and not within it; signifying the Godhead, by which Christ maketh his intercession, sanctifying and perfuming his own, and all offerings made in his name.

And the ark of the covenant it was a coffer or chest of shittim wood, plated all over with gold, Exo 25:10-22 37:1,6 40:20,21 . This chest had for its cover a mercy-seat, listed or verged with a crown of gold round it; and is called the ark of the covenant, because the tables of testimony were laid up in it, Exo 25:16 40:20 ; those two stone tables wrought by Moses, and carried up into the mount, (after he had on the idolatry of Israel broken those of God’ s own making, and on which God had written the ten laws, the terms of his covenant with them), on which God wrote afresh his laws, and renewed his covenant with them, Exo 34:1,2,28,29 ; compare Exo 31:18 . This ark was a type of Christ interposing between God and us, who had broken the covenant of his laws.

Wherein was the golden pot that had mannaen h , wherein, refers not to the ark mentioned just before, for in it was nothing pnt but the two tables of the covenant; but the tabernacle, called the holy of holiest, in which was reserved the golden censer, pot of manna, provided by God’ s charge before the giving of the law, and laid up afterwards in that archive by God’ s order, Exo 16:32-34 . This manna was the bread God fed Israel in his church with forty years in the wilderness, and is called angels’ food, Psa 78:25 ; a type of Christ the true bread, that God gave from heaven to his church, Joh 6:31-58 .

And Aaron’ s rod that budded which was by God’ s order put before the testimony in the holy of holiest, and not into the ark, for it was to be in view there as a token of the true priesthood, the type of Christ’ s, against all after-murmurers and usurpers: see Num 17:1-11 .

And the tables of the covenant and as these, the urn of manna and rod of Aaron, were in the holy of holiest; so especially the two tables of the covenant were there too, but laid up in the ark which was in that place: see 1Ki 8:9 2Ch 5:10 . Oters think the preposition en is to be read, by which, or about, near which ark, as it is used of Christ’ s sitting en dezia , Heb 1:3 ; and so notes, as to the pot of manna and Aaron’ s rod, an apposition of them to or by the ark, when the tables of the covenant were undeniably put into it.

Poole: Heb 9:5

And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy-seat on the cover of the ark at each end was a cherub of beaten gold; these and the cover of the ark were all of one piece, they had their feet on the ledge of the cover, or its crown, at each end; their faces looked towards each other, and their wings touched each other in the extreme part of them, and so on the cover formed the mercy seat see Exo 25:17-22 : and Exo 37:6-9 40:20 . Their form is described by Ezekiel, Eze 1:1-28 and Eze 10:1-22 . They were glorious for matter and service, God in his glory manifesting himself over them, gave propitious answers unto Moses about his church, Exo 25:22 Lev 16:2 . These cherubims typified the ministry of angels to our Lord Jesus, especially in his great work of rendering God propitious to his church, and saving it, Heb 1:14 . Standing on the two ends of the ark’ s cover, they showed Christ to be the basis of their own standing, when others fell: they spread out their wings, to show their readiness for serving him in all; with their faces opposite to each other, and looking down on the mercy-seat and ark, typifying what the apostle saith of them, 1Pe 1:10-12 , desirous to pry into the mystery of this great Propitiator, the Surety and Mediator of God’ s testament, and on his propitiation and its effects, which is admirable and astonishing, not to sinners only, but to angels, Eph 3:10 .

Of which we cannot now speak particularly the apostle apologizeth for his but mentioning these mysterious things now, that it was not to eclipse the glory of that administration, but because the matters were well known to them already, only in this they were defective, that they reached not after Christ, the truth and substance of all these types; and therefore he proceeds from the places, to treat of the services to be performed by the Aaronical priesthood in them.

Poole: Heb 9:6

The Spirit now proceeds to the second adjunct of the Mosaical administration, having stated the places of them, even the Aaronical priests’ services in them.

Now when these things were thus ordained when the tabernacles were made and reared, and the utensils rightly disposed in them, and all things set in God’ s own order, now

the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God into the holy place or sanctuary within the first veil, described, Heb 9:2 . Not only the high priest, but all the common priests, consecrated by God’ s order to their work; every one in his daily course, constantly performing, and completely acting, all the services enjoined on them by God to be done there, as to put on the shew-bread, and to eat what they took off, Exo 25:30 Lev 24:5-9 ; to keep the lights in the candlestick, supplying it with oil, and clearing the lights, Exo 25:37,38 Ex 27:20,21 30:1,8 Nu 8:2,3 ; to burn incense on the golden altar before the ark: the priests took a censer, and filled it with fire from the altar of burnt sacrifice, and then came to the altar of incense before the veil, and there put the incense on the fire in the censer; during the evaporating of which, the people in the court were pouring out their prayers for pardon, each person by himself; see Exo 30:1-9,34-36 40:26,27 Lu 1:9,10 ; even all the ordinances of worship commanded by God, did the priests perform in it. All which services in the holy place do but typify the true services in the gospel church, of all made priests by the blood of Christ, 1Pe 2:5,9 Re 1:5,6 5:9,10 ; offering prayers and praises to God continually in the name of Christ, perfumed with the incense of his merits, Mal 1:11 ; compare Rev 8:3 ; obtaining thereby the light of his grace through his Spirit, and the bread of life, till they are perfected by their great High Priest, and carried into the holy of holiest, there to be praising and enjoying God in him for ever, as he hath prayed for them, and promised to them, Joh 14:2,3 17:20,21 .

Poole: Heb 9:7

This verse contains the special anniversary of the high priest alone in the inward tabernacle, the holy of holiest, of which you have the law, Exo 30:14 Lev 16:2 , &c.

But into the second went the high priest alone once every year into this place the high priest was to enter once a year only, and every year to repeat it, as Exo 30:10 , upon the atonement day, being the tenth day of the month Tisri, the seventh month in their ecclesiastical year, and the first of their civil: that day was he to enter several times into that place, first for himself, Lev 16:11-14 , and then for the people, Lev 16:15,16 , &c., carrying in the blood first within the veil, and then coming out again, and carrying in the incense on the golden censer: none of the other priests were to enter into the holy place while he was ministering, but him alone, as Lev 16:17 .

Not without blood: when he first entered into the holiest of all, it was with the blood of a young bull, of a ram, Lev 16:3,14 , with the blood of the he-goat, Heb 9:15,27 . After he had offered the incense on his golden censer, Heb 9:4 , he must sprinkle the blood upon the mercy-seat and before it, by which expiatory blood there was made an atonement, Heb 9:12-14 .

Which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people first, for his sinful self and family, Lev 16:11 , and then for the ignorances, incogitancies, errors, and all sorts of sins committed by the people, Heb 9:16 Heb 7:27 ; all of them being committed with some error of the understanding. Which type, in all its parts, was perfectly fulfilled in Christ, the gospel High Priest, as is shown in the following verses; whereby not only his office, but his services, are transcendently set above, and preferred to, all the Aaronical ones.

Poole: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost this signifying God the Spirit himself, the third relation in the Deity, the author of all the Mosaical institutions, who commanded all these ritual, ceremonial services in this tabernacle to be performed, who revealed all this to Moses, and who inspired him with it, Lev 16:1,2 , the most infallible interpreter of his own institutions, declared by these signals and types, and demonstrated by the frame of ordinances, then given to the church, in these expressions, Exo 30:10 Lev 16:2,12-15,17 : the veil ever covering the holy of holiest, but only on the day of expiation, when it was drawn aside, and that laid open.

That the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest the true and very means to God’ s presence in heaven itself, which is only by Christ the great High Priest, through whose blood we can come to the throne of his grace there boldly, Heb 10:19-22 , and by the perfect work of his Spirit on us, can enter with him into the holy of holiest in heaven; this was not so plainly, clearly, fully, universally known as afterwards by the shedding of Christ’ s blood, and the revelation of it in the gospel to all the world. Christ was revealed to the Hebrews, and all these ceremonial ordinances did hold him out, and by him only the saints under that covenant administration got to heaven; yet the manifestation of it was obscure in comparison of what it is since.

While as the first tabernacle was yet standing while the Mosaical covenant administration was to continue, till the coming of Christ in the flesh, and perfecting the work by his death, for the space of near one thousand five hundred years, was the true, right, and proper way for entering into heaven, darkly, and obscurely, and typically revealed unto the church; when by the death of Christ the veil of the holy of holiest was rent asunder, heaven laid open to be seen, and entered into by all penitent believing sinners through Christ, every day in their duties, and then in their persons, Mat 27:51 .

Poole: Heb 9:9

Which was a figure for the time then present: the tabernacle in all its parts, and the whole economy of it, was parabolh , 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 God’ s 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.

Poole: Heb 9:10

Having shown the typicalness, weakness of the Mosaical covenant administration; in respect of the tabernacles, services, and ordinances, he closeth his description of them in this verse, by showing their carnality and mortality. As they were external things, they could reach no further than the flesh only, as appears by particular instances, and therefore could not quiet the conscience, considered without Christ, nor justify, sanctify, or save the sinner. For meat and drink offerings, and meats clean and unclean, and drinks prohibited by God, in which the Jews placed much of their religion, separate from what they signified, commended no man unto God, 1Co 8:8 .

Which stood only in meats and drinks: as to meats, see Lev 11:1-47 Deu 14:3-21 . As to drinks, forbidden the priests, Lev 10:9 , and the Nazarites, Num 6:2,3 ; the jealousy water, Num 5:24 , and the paschal cup, Psa 116:13 , and cup of thank-offerings; see Lev 1:1-17 and Lev 2:1-16 .

And divers washings which were many for the priests in their services, and for others in performing theirs by them; some by sprinkling with blood, Exo 29:20,21 , with water, Num 8:7 19:9-19 ; some by washing at the brazen laver, as the priests, Exo 29:4 30:17-21 ; so the sprinkling of healed lepers, Lev 14:4-9 , and the purification of the unclean. All these were of God’ s own instituting, but still reach no further than the flesh or body of the sinner: see Heb 9:13 .

And carnal ordinances: other carnal rites and ceremonies, such as could not reach the conscience, as they used them, yet were to be used by them in obedience to God’ s will, and to discriminate them from others, which were various in the ceremonial law.

Imposed on themepikeimena , imposed, may agree with dwra , Heb 9:9 , gifts imposed; or may have the whole sentence for its substantive, as, being matters imposed or settled in meats and drinks. All these things were not the inventions of Moses, but God’ s own institutions, enjoined by his own authority on the Jewish church, to lead them by a regular use of them to life by Christ, but by their own corruptions were made burdens to them. The Divine precept obliged them to an observation of them, and to the serving God in, by, and through them.

Until the time as they were outward, bodily, and carnal things, so they were mortal; as to their being and continuance enjoined by God, they were mecri kairou until is a term settled and limited, and not indefinite, and its limit is a singular time, even that point of time wherein Christ, having finished the work of redemption, ascended and sat down on the right hand of God, and powerfully thence breathed forth the Spirit, of infallibility on his apostles, for guiding them in laying the foundation of his church, by preaching the gospel throughout the world, and perfecting of it, and no other. This the Jews and others expected from the Messiah, Joh 4:25 , in his time. All the New Testament perfecting was by them, and therefore they give a charge against the least alteration of the gospel, truth, and law, which they left as a rule for ordering of Christ’ s church to his last coming: see Mat 28:20 .

Of reformationdiorywsewv , of putting things to rights by the law, rule, and ordinance of Christ, the work of this special point of time. He, the great church reformer, thoroughly righteth things to God-ward, by removing and taking away what was faulty, not in itself, but by man’ s abuse of it, even all the Mosaical economy and church-frame, which carried men about to God, by opening and making that to be seen with open face, which was well veiled, and so mistaken, even the mystery of Christ hid from ages, by manifesting and establishing that which was the truth itself, instead of the shadows that did but represent it; even that true churchframe intended first by God, and now fully revealed and settled by his Son as a standing rule and pattern to all for ever; which unmovable kingdom of his is described further, Heb 12:22-28 .

Poole: Heb 9:11

But the Spirit, by this adversative But, opposeth and applieth the truth to the type, and brings in view the antitype, the office, tabernacle, sacrifice, and ministration of Christ, which vastly exceedeth the Mosaical one.

Christ being come an High Priest of good things to come the High Priest preferred is no less person than God the Son manifested in the flesh, and anointed to his office with the Holy Ghost and power, Act 10:38 . In the fulness of time, before the antiquating and removing the former order, was he exhibited and consecrated the true High Priest, of which all the other were but types, and bringing with him all those good things which were figured and promised under that economy, all pardon, reconciliation, righteousness, holiness, adoption, and glorious salvation, which were under that dispensation to come, being present and exhibited with, as effected by, this High Priest at his first coming, but to be completed and perfected at his second, which is intimated, Heb 9:26,28 .

By a greater and more perfect tabernacle the anti-type of the Mesaical sanctuary and tabernacle, where there was the holy place, and the holy of holiest, correspondent to, and figured out by, these, was the more glorious sanctuary of this High Priest; he passeth through the tabernacle of his church on earth, of which he is the minister, as hath been cleared, Heb 9:10 , and Heb 8:2 , and so enters into the heaven of heavens, the holiest of all, Heb 9:24 , where God sits on his throne of grace.

Tabernacle here cannot signify the body of Christ, for that is the sacrifice that answereth to the legal ones offered in the court, and without the gate, Heb 13:11-13 , and with the blood of which he enters the holy of holiest as the high priest did, and he doth not pass through his flesh there, but carrieth it with him. The word eskhnwsen , Joh 1:14 , may not only refer to the Godhead’ s tabernacling in flesh, but that God the Son incarnate tabernacled in his church; those with whom Christ dwelt while on earth, for his human nature dwelt or had a tabernacle in this world as well as his Deity; and this is such a tabernacle where he in his whole person and his church may meet and communicate together. This tabernacle is greater than the Mosaical for quantity, as it refers to earth the place, even the whole world, where his church is dispersed, beyond all comparison larger than its type, which was a little limited and confined place; and more perfect than that, which was only made of boards, gold, silver, brass, silk, linen, skins, &c. This being a spiritual temple and tent, in which God will inhabit and dwell for ever, 1Co 3:9,16,17 2Co 6:16 Eph 2:12,20-22 1Pe 2:5 ; it is far more glorious than that tabernacle, Hag 2:7-9 .

Not made with hands what is hand wrought, or made by men, is at the best mouldering and decaying; but this was wrought by the Spirit of God himself, most excellent for the quality, permanency of the materials, and work, Eph 2:22 . Man had neither power nor skill to form, polish, frame, or pitch this, Heb 8:2 . Creation work is God’ s work, as to the old and new creation. Hands may frame and pitch the other, and pluck it up; but he that worketh, frameth, raiseth, createth this, is God, 2Co 5:5 Eph 2:20 .

Poole: Heb 9:12

From his office and sanctuary he proceeds to clear up his service.

Neither by the blood of goats and calves it was not about weak, typical, vanishing sacrifices, the blood of goats or young bulls, that he was concerned, as the Aaronical priests were, Lev 16:14,15 , opened before, Heb 9:7 ; and this annually on the expiatory day, Lev 16:29,34 ; which could not satisfy injured justice, nor expiate sin, nor purge nor quiet the conscience of the offender, Heb 10:1-5 .

But by his own blood but with his own pure, precious, and unspotted blood, 1Pe 1:19 . Not a drop or few drops must go for it; then what dropped from his body in his agony, from his head pierced by thorns, from his back when whipped, from his hands and feet when nailed on the cross, might have done; but it must be his own life-blood, the blood of the Second Adam dying by it for the first, Rom 5:8-20 Phi 2:6,8 . And as it is the blood of Adam, that it may have value enough and worth, it must be the blood of him who is God too, with his own blood, Act 20:28 . This price surmounts all treasures, Joh 6:51 10:11,15 .

He entered in once into the holy place with this blood of the covenant he entered, immediately upon the breathing out of his soul on the cross, (the veil of the temple being rent asunder, and room made for the great High Priest to fulfil his type), into the holy of holiest in heaven, where never angel came, nor any but himself, till his now piercing through, rending the veil, and laying it open, Heb 10:19 ; compare Isa 57:15 ; and came with it to God’ s throne of justice there, and made the everlasting atonement for sin, and so turned it into a throne of grace, fulfilling his type, and as the high priest did before the sacrifice was burnt or consumed, Lev 16:1-34 . For the expiation of sin was not deferred by Christ to his ascension, forty-five days after his death, but was immediately on his giving up the Ghost by him performed; and in this he fulfilled all righteousness, Mat 3:15 . This is the

once that he entered heaven for expiation, satisfying the injured justice of God by sin, fulfilled the law, and then publicly appeared at God’ s throne, to show all was complete, Luk 23:43,45,46 Joh 19:30 . This once he did that which the high priest did annually typify, but could never accomplish for so many hundred years together, Heb 9:26,28 10:10,12,14 . By which it is evident that one, and once, refers to the shedding of his blood as a sacrifice, and presenting of it to the Father, as completing propitiation work at that once for ever.

Having obtained eternal redemption for us when he with the incense of his merit and prayer to the just and merciful Judge, even God his Father, sued for, found, obtained, and fully received eternal redemption for sinners; i.e. deliverance of their guilty persons from eternal death, full remission of all their sins, Rom 3:25,26 , full reconciliation to God, 2Co 5:18,19,21 , with an instating them into all spiritual good. This work is styled

eternal because its virtue is of perpetual continuance, which freeth the duly qualified subjects Col 1:21,23from the guilt and punishment of all sins for ever.

Poole: Heb 9:13

This service of Christ in his sanctuary exceeds the Aaronical, not only for reconciling souls to God, but purifying of them, as cleared in this and Heb 9:14 .

For if the blood of bulls and of goats: the blood is the same as spoken of Heb 9:12 .

Bulls, here put for calves, are but to distinguish the sex; and it is to be noted, where our translators read oxen, as to sacrifices in the Old Testament, as particularly Num 7:87 , they mean bulls, for no oxen were by the law to be offered to God at all as sacrifices; see Lev 22:17-23 ; because they could not be true types of the true sacrifice, which was to perfect them. This blood was sprinkled on the mercy-seat and before it, and on the altar, Lev 16:14,19 , &c., expiating sins, and taking away the guilt and legal punishment.

And the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean: the rite of preparing it, read in Num 19:1-10 . A red heifer was by the people given to the priest; he was to bring her without the camp, and order her to be slain, and then take the blood with his finger, and sprinkle it towards the tabernacle seven times; after which she was to be wholly burnt in his sight, with cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet, the ashes of which were reserved; when they used them, they took them in a vessel, and put running water to them, and then sprinkled them with a bunch of hyssop on persons legally unclean, Heb 9:18-20 , and so they purified them from their ceremonial filth and pollution; but none of these could purify an unclean soul, that was left unholy and unclean still.

Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh these sprinklings did sanctify those who were legally unclean, and did procure a legal purity and acceptance of them the service of the sanctuary, from which else they were excluded; by this they were looked on as externally holy with the congregation, their flesh and outward man being made pure by it for their external worship.

Poole: Heb 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ? The question supposeth an unexpressible difference between Christ’ s purifying and the legal sacrifices. The blood with which he pierced within the veil to the throne in the highest heavens, on which sat the just God, the proper, precious, powerful blood of God the Son incarnate.

Who through the eternal Spirit who in his immortal soul obeying all God’ s will in suffering, did, through his own eternal God-head, to which both body and soul were united, and which sanctified the body offered, as the altar the sacrifice, Mat 23:19 , which is called the spirit of holiness, Rom 1:4 , and gave value and virtue to the sacrifice, offered up his body a sacrifice for sin, when he died on the cross. Not sheep, bulls, goats, turtles, pigeons, &c., not man, nor the life of angels, were his sacrifice; but himself, pure, holy, and unpolluted, an innocent, harmless person, 2Co 5:21 . How much beyond his types for innocency and purity! Lev 22:20,21 Nu 19:2 .

Offered himself without spot to God: the offended, injured Creator and Judge of sinners, who constituted him to this whole work; and was by this most perfect sacrifice propitiated; his justice was satisfied, his law obeyed, and himself set fully free to pardon and forgive sinners without injustice; and to be just, as well as gracious and merciful, in doing of it, Rom 3:25,26 ; and they might be put in possession of his favour, presence, and person again, as their own God, 1Pe 3:18 .

Purge your conscience though the sacrifice be over, the virtue and excellent causality of it doth abide, purging now as ever, not only justifying and absolving of a penitent believing sinner, but purifying and sanctifying the soul, procuring the Holy Spirit to renew it, and take away inherent corruption and infuse holiness into it, Eph 4:24 , and making willing in the beauties of it, Psa 110:3 1Co 6:11 Tit 3:5,6 ; making body, soul, and spirit one frame of holiness to God, 1Th 5:23 . So as the most quick, lively, and sensible part of the immortal soul, conscious of sin, is freed from the guilt, filth, and fears of sin that did cleave to it; this thus purged, no consciousness of guilt remains, nor fear of punishment, but it is filled, from the interest it hath in this blood, and the work on it of this Spirit, full of joy and peace and righteousness by believing, Rom 5:1,2,5,11 .

From dead works all operations of sin, which come from spiritually dead souls, and work eternal death, Eph 2:1 , of which they are as insensible as dead men; all sorts of sin which do taint, pollute, and defile the soul, much more contagious, pestilent, and polluting the soul, than any of those things forbidden to be touched by Moses’ s law could the flesh, Num 19:18 : they are as offensive to God, and more, than carcasses are to us, and pestilential things, though themselves keeping souls from any communion with him.

To serve the living God as under the law there was no coming to the congregation of the tabernacle without legal purifying, Num 19:13,20 ; so by this purifying correspondent to the type, souls are quickened, have boldness and confidence God-ward in point of duty, present themselves living sacrifices, Rom 12:1 , aim at him through their whole life; that he delights to keep up communion with them proportioned to himself, till he fit them for their complete serving and enjoying of him in the holy of holiest in heaven.

Poole: Heb 9:15

And for this cause he is the Mediator of the new testament: as Christ’ s priesthood and service, his sacrifice and purifying, so the testamental covenant, and his administration of it, did incomparably exceed all those of Aaron’ s; so that for what was spoken, Heb 9:14 , even the effects of his sacrifice, the justification and sanctification of sinners, is he the great gospel High Priest, the mediating person between God and sinners, confirming and making effectual by his death God’ s testamental covenant to them, which is for the administration of it the very best and last, in which God bequeatheth pardon, reconciliation, righteousness, holiness, adoption, and heirship to an eternal inheritance to penitent, believing sinners.

That by means of death the death of Christ himself, God-man, the most excellent sacrifice, without which there could be no remission, Heb 9:22 , nor the testament of God about it put in force; for which cause he was the Mediator of it, that they should value him so much the more for his death, fulfilling therein all his types, and reach that which was unattainable by these, both for their fathers and themselves.

For the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament for the satisfying the justice of God for the wrong their sins had done it, paying that price without which they could not be expiated, by which they were remissible, and to the duty qualified, actually forgiven, even the sins of those who were under the Mosaical administration of the covenant. Aaron, Samuel, David, and the saints, believers in that time, had their transgressions pardoned by virtue of the death of Christ to come, shadowed by these sacrifices typifying him and his death in their own times. What the death of beasts or birds could do for them, his did, delivering them from the guilt and punishment of their transgressions, under which otherwise they must have perished for ever: this Peter publisheth, Act 15:11 . This virtue of Christ’ s death is not mentioned exclusive of New Testament sins being remitted by it; but if it did expiate those old ones, reaching so much backward, even to Aaron, it will much more expiate those under the New Testament to penitent, believing, praying sinners for it, as those Old Testament transgressors were.

They which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance: such as on God’ s call repent and believe on the Lord Jesus, that Angel of the covenant then revealed to them, and enter into covenant with him, Exo 23:20-23 ; compare 1Co 10:3,4,9 Joh 5:45-47 ; such as by it have sins expiated, consciences purged, so as to have a title to and fitness by the work of the Spirit for the heavenly Canaan, Rom 4:16,24,25 ; may be put into the possession of that eternal inheritance made over to them by promise, and which the Spirit gave them an earnest of here, Heb 12:10,14,16 ; compare Eph 1:13,14 1Pe 1:3,4 . All this is confirmed to these by Christ’ s death.

Poole: Heb 9:16

For where a testament is : for gives the reason of the Mediator’ s death, even the putting the called into the possession of the bequeathed inheritance, demonstrated by a common, natural law in all nations of the testament’ s effect on the testator’ s death; a testament being a disposition by will nuncupative, or written, of either goods or lands, which are the person’ s own, to be the right and possession of others after his death, whom he nominateth in it: such in proportion is the new covenant, where God gives freely all spiritual good things with a heavenly inheritance, as legacies to all his called ones in Christ, by this last and best will and testament of his, written in his Scripture instrument, witnessed by the prophets and apostles, sealed by the two sacraments, especially the Lord’ s supper, Luk 22:20 .

There must also of necessity be the death of the testator he who maketh a testament by the law of nature, as of nations, must die before the legatees have any profit by the will; the son and heir inherits not but on the father’ s death; then is the testament firm and valid, the time being come for the heir’ s inheriting, and for the will’ s execution, it being now unalterable; the necessity of which is cleared, Heb 9:17 .

Poole: Heb 9:17

For a testament is of force after men are dead: the testator being by death disseised of his goods and lands, the right takes place of the legatees, and the time of their challenging it; such a sacred tie there is upon the surviving, that none can of right add to it, alter, or disannul it.

Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth it is of no force while the maker of it liveth, because they have need of the things bequeathed; they can alter and change it, and by the will itself it is declared none shall have any right to the things bequeathed in it till the testator be dead. The consequent of all this is, that the Testator of the new testament must put it in force by death; and his death is of greater force to confirm his testament than that of men, because his will can never be violated, it being a Divine constitution, but the human testament may. Christ, God-man, after dieth, as Testator, and puts the testament in force; and by breaking the bonds of death, doth gloriously effect that the legatees perform the conditions required in the will, to fit them for receiving their legacies; and then faithfully distributeth them to them by his grand executor the Holy Spirit, who applieth the virtue of it to the legatees under the Old Testament, as well as these under the New; he being the Testator, as well as the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world.

Poole: Heb 9:18

Forasmuch as all testaments are put in force by the death of the testator, and all covenants are most strongly confirmed by death and blood in God’ s own judgment, thence it is that the Mosaical covenant was confirmed by them.

Dedicatedegkekainistai , strictly taken, signifieth made new, or renewed. It is not used in the New Testament but in this place, and Heb 10:20 : the Syriac translate it here confirmed, or ratified. In the Old Testament the Septuagint use it to express the Hebrew wknh Deu 20:5 . In which law, for a man who had built a house, and was called out to the wars, to return and dedicate it, was to take possession of it, and secure it from the claim of another. Here it is properly used to make sure, firm, and inviolable; and that by blood, typical of Christ’ s, which is the highest and most solemn ratification. So were the covenants before ratified, but especially under the law, and the Mosaical covenant itself, as appears by instance, Gen 15:9,10,17,18 31:44,54 ; compare Exo 24:5,7,8 .

Poole: Heb 9:19

For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law: that the Old Testament was ratified by blood the Spirit proveth by instance, Moses as mediator having spoken every command, promise, and article of the covenant to all Israel, who came out of Egypt, according to God’ s charge, reading all to them out of the book, wherein by God’ s order he had written it; and the people declaring their assent and consent unto this covenant, as Exo 24:3,4,7 , as God covenanted and bound himself to his part of it.

He took the blood of calves, &c.: the Mediator then took, according to the common rite in such ratifying acts, a sprinkling bush made of scarlet wool, cedar wood, and hyssop, Lev 14:4,6 Nu 19:6,18 ; to which David alludeth, Psa 51:7 ; and with this bunch sprinkles the blood and water (which he had received into basons from the sacrifices, killed by the first-born, for burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, and there mixed, Exo 24:5,6 Le 9:3,4 14:51 ) on the altar, book of the covenant, and all Israel, Exo 24:6-8 , confirming and ratifying the covenant on God’ s part and theirs, as the words annexed, Heb 9:20 , and Exo 24:8 , affirm: Behold the blood by which this covenant is made firm and inviolable. All this is but a shadow and type of the ratification of the new covenant with sinners by the death of Christ; he is the Mediator that brings God’ s testamental covenant to them; he dieth and puts it in force; by his blood ratifieth it on God’ s part and theirs, by his Spirit applying it to them, and sprinkling it on them; he brings home the testamental blessings to them, Heb 10:22 11:28 12:24 Isa 52:15 Eze 36:25 1Pe 1:2 .

Poole: Heb 9:20

Moses, after his sprinkling the altar, book of the covenant, and all Israel, taught them the meaning of it; saying: This that is the blood wherewith I have sprinkled you, is a sign or a seal of the testament, the blood by which it is ratified and confirmed. The blood typified and represented by it, was that of Christ the Testator, by which all the new testament is ratified to all penitent, believing sinners that look to it, without which it could never have been made good. The blood of Christ is the immovable foundation of this testament, Exo 24:8 ; compare 1Co 11:25 ; even the testamental covenant which Jehovah had made with them, and which he enjoined them by such a rite as this to ratify and confirm.

Poole: Heb 9:21

Moses did not only sprinkle the book of the covenant with blood, but the tabernacle itself, yearly, on the atonement day, as is charged, Lev 16:14,16,17 . For as the altar and persons were to be atoned for, so was the tabernacle itself, Heb 9:18,20 . First they were sprinkled, and then anointed, Lev 8:10,11 , as the gospel tabernacle was in the truth of it, 1Co 6:11 . All the garments and vessels of that priesthood were thus to be purified, typifying how unclean all the persons ministering with them, and atoned for in and by them, were; and how polluting all things, and polluted by them, till they were purified by the blood of Christ.

Poole: Heb 9:22

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood all such things as are capable of purifying, and which were not to be so by the water of separation, or by fire, as Lev 16:28 Num 31:23 , were ceremonially purged by blood.

And without shedding of blood is no remission and without the death of some living creature as a sacrifice, and the blood of it not only shed, but sprinkled, there could be neither legal pardon of guilt, nor purging of ceremonial filth. By this God signified to Israel, that without the blood of Christ his Son, and the Testator of his testament, shed as a sacrifice, to purchase and procure both remission and the Spirit, there could be neither pardon of the guilt of sin, and removal of the punishment, nor purging the filth, or renewing the nature of the sinner, his blood being the inestimable price purchasing both for them.

Poole: Heb 9:23

It was therefore necessary: this conclusion the Spirit draweth from the antecedent, Heb 9:18 , proved in the following verses, therefore is it here rehearsed. The illative particle therefore, is but to sum up the use of blood about the first tabernacle, and that Testament dispensation. It is positively necessary by the will of God, expressively enjoining them, to point out better, and that there might be an agreement of the type with the truth.

That the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these: the tabernacles in all their parts, the book of the covenant, vessels, services, &c., being types, signs, examples, shadows of things in heaven, must be ceremonially purged and separated from common use to Divine, by those external, ritual sprinklings and lustrations, especially with beasts’ blood, mystically representing better blood and purifications of persons and things than these.

But the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these but things more excellent and glorious than earthly ones, the gospel tabernacle in its parts, testament, and services, about which Christ ministereth, which are heavenly for their descent, agreeableness with, and tendency to it; they are spiritual and incorruptible, Heb 9:11,12 Heb 9:8:2 12:22 Gal 4:26 Rev 21:1-27 ; are to be dedicated, set apart, put in force, and sanctified to God by the one sacrifice of Christ, of more value, worth, and virtue than all the legal sacrifices together. It is expressed plurally, to answer the opposite term, and to set out its excellency, being far above all others; the blood of it being that of God by personal union, and which is only efficacious for eternal good, and available with him; so ought it to be esteemed as it was in truth, and not quarrelled with by these Hebrews.

Poole: Heb 9:24

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands : for shows this to be a rational proof of the transcendency of Christ’ s death and sacrifice; and this he demonstrates from the place of his ministry, far exceeding that of his type. The gospel High Priest did not, like Aaron, enter with his blood into the holy of holiest of an earthly tabernacle, frail and movable, and appear before the mercy-seat on the ark there, Heb 9:9 .

Which are the figures of the true all these were but like and correspondent figures and resemblances of the true, holy, and glorious place of God’ s residence.

But into heaven itself but he, as our High Priest, did enter with his atoning blood, after the sacrificing of himself on the cross, into the heaven of heavens, and approached the throne of justice, and propitiated it, making it a mercy-seat and true throne of grace unto penitent, believing sinners; and then perfected the work of propitiation and redemption: afterwards at his triumphant ascension, he entered in his whole person immortal, and laid open a way for our entering there.

Now to appear in the presence of God for us where he now appears as our advocating Mediator, pleading his merit for the remission of our sins, and rendering of God’ s face smiling on and favouring his clients, which was terrifying and affrighting to guilty Adam before: see Heb 7:25 10:19 Rom 8:34 1Jo 2:1,2 Re 5:6 . Here he represents our persons to God’ s face, fitting in the mean while us beneath for our seeing him face to face, and being blessed in the enjoyment of that prospect for ever.

Poole: Heb 9:25

The excellency of Christ’ s sacrifice beyond the Aaronical is argued here from its singularity; it needs no repetition, as their multiplied sacrifices did.

Noroude , introducing it, is but inferring this excellency of Christ’ s sacrifice, by denying in it that weakness which was annexed to the legal ones; there was no need that he should die yearly, to fulfil the type of the often yearly sacrifices of the legal high priest, who entered with the blood of bulls and goats, strange blood to him, and not his own, into the holy of holiest in the tabernacle, and entered so every year once, to show the virtue of his sacrifice to be only signal, typical, and passing, to make room for a better, that single, individual one of Christ, in respect of sacrifice and oblation.

Poole: Heb 9:26

For then must he often have sufferedepei the consequent is drawn ab impossibili; if he had often offered himself, he must have often suffered, but he could not suffer often. For where there was offering, there must be a sacrifice, and so suffering. Now that Christ should do so in his own person, was impossible and absurd, for God to have put his Son on suffering so cruel a death so often.

Since the foundation of the world from the fall of Adam at the beginning of the world, ever since sin needed a sacrifice: but his once suffering as a sacrifice for it was of eternal virtue in God’ s purpose, answering and satisfying God’ s justice; one death of the Second Adam for the sin said penalty of the first, in the efficacy and virtue of his death, which was everlasting. The often and annual sacrificing of the Aaronical priests, and entering of the holy of holiest with the blood of beasts, was to show the Jews their weakness, and to instruct them in, and lead them to, this one sacrifice once to be offered, of eternal avail, as is subjoined.

But now: but Christ the gospel High Priest was not only God-man, manifested to be so, and exhibited as such an officer by his work, but was manifested to be such by promise, and in types and figures from Adam’ s fall; but now showed it clearly in his suffering work, 1Ti 3:16 .

Once in the end of the world the days of Christ’ s ministry on earth under the fourth monarchy, called the last time, 1Jo 2:18 , the ends of the world, 1Co 10:11 , the fulness of the time, Gal 4:4 , God’ s set and best time for his appearance; and it was but once that he appeared in these days, performing this work.

Hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself then he sacrificed himself, offered up his blood to God within the veil, taking away by his own blood, which God required, the guilt, stain, and power of all sin, justifying believers from any condemnation by it, by what he did and suffered in their stead for their good, who fly from it for refuge to him, Isa 53:1-12 Dan 9:24 Rom 7:24,25 1Jo 3:5 .

Poole: Heb 9:27

And as it is appointed unto men once to die: the proof of the necessity of Christ’ s suffering death but once, is introduced in this verse by the conjunction And. It was according to God’ s decreed and published statute of men’ s but once dying; for God the Supreme Lord, Governor, and Judge of them, set, constituted, and appointed by an unalterable and irrevocable decree, as Lawgiver, and sentence, as Judge, to all of the sinful human race, the corrupt seed of apostate Adam, their grand representative, whom God threatened with this penalty upon his sinning and transgressing his law, Gen 2:17 ; which sentence was denounced upon him, Gen 3:19 ; compare Rom 5:12,14 Ro 6:23 . This sentence was but

once to be undergone by himself and all his sinful offspring, and by their Surety, and no more; so that the Second Adam needed but once to die by this statute. No man can keep himself from this, it being the general rule of God’ s proceeding with all persons. The Supreme Legislator may make what exceptions and provisos to his law he pleaseth. Those that were translated by him, did suffer a change proportionable to death, as Enoch, Heb 11:5 Gen 5:24 , and Elijah, 2Ki 2:11,12 ; and those that shall be changed at Christ’ s coming must undergo the like, as 1Co 15:51-54 1Th 4:17 . Those that were raised from death by Christ, Peter and Paul, &c., God might glorify his name by reiterating it; but whether they did die again, is not certain. This is to be the general settled law and rule of God.

But after this the judgment: in order, after souls by death are separated from their bodies, they come to judgment: and thus every particular one is handed over by death to the bar of God, the great Judge, and so is despatched by his sentence to its particular state and place with its respective people, Rom 14:12 . At the great and general assize, the day of judgment, shall the general and universal one take place, Act 17:31 , when all sinners in their entire persons, bodies and souls united, shall be adjudged to their final, unalterable, and eternal state, Rom 14:10 2Co 5:10 Jud 1:6 Rev 20:11-15 .

Poole: Heb 9:28

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many: outwv kai is an illative connection between the antecedent Heb 9:27 , and this consequent; As it was appointed to men once to die, so it was appointed to Christ once to offer himself. God’ s statute determineth both of these; Christ the High Priest, opposed to men, Heb 9:27 , having died once as a sacrifice for sins, and offered his blood to God to expiate them, bearing their punishment which God laid on him, Isa 53:6 ; and so took away sins, guilt, filth, power and condemnation from many, whom the Father gave to him, and he undertook for, in it, Mat 20:28 26:28 Joh 10:15,16 .

And unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin and to his believing, penitent expectants, such as long for his coming, Phi 3:20 Tit 2:13 , stretching out their heads, as the mother of Sisera, Jud 5:28 , with a holy impatience of seeing him, such as by faith and prayer are hastening it, Rom 8:23 2Co 5:1-10 1Pe 1:3-9 , shall he once more visibly appear to them and the world, Act 1:11 Rev 1:7 , gloriously, without need to suffer or die again for them, having at his departure after his first coming, carried all their sins into the land of forgetfulness.

Unto salvation and to their persons will he bring entire and complete salvation, raising and uniting bodies and souls together, Phi 3:21 ; and then take them as assistants to himself in the judgment-work on men and angels in the air; and having despatched that work, return with them to the holy of holiest in heaven, there to be completely blessed, in praising, serving, glorifying, and enjoying God in Christ, and the blessedness that attends that state, for ever and ever, as 1Co 6:2,3 1Th 4:17 .

PBC: Heb 9:1

The book of Hebrews legitimizes a view of the Old Testament law, particularly the worshipping rituals of priesthood and sacrifice as a legitimate type of the Lord Jesus Christ and His priesthood. If you follow the theme of this reading {Heb 9:1-14} and the remainer of Hebrews you can make a strong case from biblical instruction that every piece of furniture and that every act of the priest was a symbol that pointed specifically and uniquely to the work of the Lord Jesus Christ who is yet to come.

Frequently when we read this passage, immediately we start delving into all the details and plunged ourselves hopelessly into the details of symbolic meaning, rituals, and furnishings related to Levitical worship. There is perhaps occasion where these details are profitable. What the writer of Hebrews does is the very opposite. If we are going to follow the text, rather than plunging into minute detail, we’re going to run at almost break-neck speed across a big-picture view of what happened under the Old Testament ritual. The first five verses {Heb 9:1-5} give you the details of the furnishing. For 2 chapters the Hebrew writer has dealt with the person of our Priest (Heb 7:1-28, the priest after the order of Melchisedec; Heb 8:1-13, the priest who takes the Melchisedec order and expands it into something far greater in His function and His eternal priesthood). A good consolation we have in Christ is the hope that links and secures us to the works of God because of our sins. With Heb 9:1-28 a major transition will occur. We move from emphasis on the priest to emphasis on his work, the work the Lord Jesus Christ, our heavenly priest is to accomplish.

390

PBC: Heb 9:7

The priests went into these outer areas of the tabernacle daily, a morning and evening sacrifice. They offered incidental, or what we should call occasional sacrifices. You commit a sin in ignorance; you come to the realization of that sin; the law prescribes that you bring a certain kind of animal for that particular sin to the priest; you kill it and prepare it; you take it, ready to be sacrificed, to the priest at the gate or door of the temple. You give it to the priest, put your hand of the head of the animal, and confess your sin. Anyone who says that we should confess to God but never to man needs to go back and read Leviticus. The priest received that animal, took it into the tabernacle, and offered it for that person who brought his confession forward.

Vegetable sacrifices, sheep, turtledoves- various animals were sacrificed on different occasions- but the annual sacrifice offered for all Israel by the high priest in the holy of holies was prescribed to be a goat- actually 2 goats, one was sacrificed, one was treated differently; a goat, not a sheep. A goat was less precious to a Jew in the Jewish economy than a sheep. In Mt 25:1-46 Jesus subjects the symbolism of sheep and goats to a fairly powerful theological point- a goat is to represent a sacrifice for the whole nation? Yes! In Heb 9:9 we find that all the individual sacrifices could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience. In Heb 9:11 Christ is not just an ordinary priest (Occasionally in Hebrews interpretation, he is an ordinary priest.) but this text depicts Him specifically in the role of High Priest. It is Christ, our High Priest, who becomes both priest and sacrifice -He becomes God’s goat (He actually becomes both of God’s goats) -the one sacrificed and offered in the the tabernacle and, as well, the one on whose head our sins were confessed before he was sent away into the wilderness never to be allowed back into the camp. In this symbolism of Levitical worship the Lord Jesus Christ is our priest and both goat sacrifices.

391

PBC: Heb 9:8

Primarily the inspired Hebrew writer has dealt with the furnishings and the arrangement of the tabernacle, not the later temple constructed by Solomon. Hebrews consistently deals with the tabernacle that God directed Moses to construct in the wilderness, not to the temple Solomon later erected in Jerusalem. It appears that the tabernacle gives us a closer replica of what Moses saw on Mount Sinai and that’s the point Hebrews reminds us to follow.

392

PBC: Heb 9:11

This passage refers to the festival known as the Day of Atonement, the one day each year when the high priest entered into the Holiest of All with the sin offering. {Heb 9:1-10} That event, our writer says, was the shadow of which Christ’s entry into the Holy of Holies (or, if you please, heaven itself-,) {Heb 9:24} was the reality. What sin offering die our Great High Priest make? His own blood. {Heb 9:12}

Christ’s blood sacrifice and atoning work ratified the New Covenant and formed the basis from which all covenant blessings flow. That’s why the author of Hebrews develops the concept of blood redemption so thoroughly in this passage. {Heb 9:11-22} The key thought of the passage is expressed in the familiar words of Heb 9:22: " Without the shedding of blood there is no remission." Sin cannot be removed by a bloodless offering. Why? Because sin is such a serious offence against the Creator, in terms of the fact that it is a violation of the very purpose for which man was made, that it requires the sacrifice of the sinner’s life. Such is the demerit of sin and the righteousness of God.

Blood, in other words, is the essence of " life." Le 17:11 says, " For the life of the flesh is in the blood- for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul" (Cf. Heb 9:14 and Ge 9:4). The reference to " blood," then, in Hebrews, is a synonym for " death," as Heb 12:4 indicates. The shedding of blood, consequently, is a symbol of sacrificial death. Sin is so heinous that it could be removed by nothing but the blood of Jesus. {Mt 20:28}

The passage before us specifies at least two ways that the blood of Christ, or His sacrificial death, is superior to the animal sacrifices under the Old Covenant.

(1)  It has an eternal, not merely a temporal benefit. Notice the threefold repetition of the word " eternal" in the passage. {Heb 9:12,14-15} Ceremonial sacrifices, like the blood of bulls and of goats, benefited those represented by the sacrifice by releasing them from temporal penalties. But the blood of Christ " obtained eternal redemption for us" .{Heb 9:12} The aorist participle " having obtained eternal redemption" means " after He had secured an eternal redemption." In other words, the sacrifice of Christ actually saved all for whom it was intended; consequently, He has the right, by virtue of His own blood sacrifice, to " enter into the" Holiest and administer His priestly office in Heaven. His entrance into the true Sanctuary of God’s presence guarantees the salvation of His people, for God’s acceptance of the High Priest is indisputable proof of the efficacy of His sacrifice on their behalf.

The superiority of Christ’s sacrifice is further demonstrated by the fact that this blood not only atoned for the sins of His people under the New Covenant, but even for " the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant"{Heb 9:15} It cancelled the guilt of " the called"{Heb 9:15} under the Old Covenant. {Ro 3:25} The " fountain opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and uncleanness"{Zec 13:1} flowed freely and effectually to cleanse the sins of the elect both before and after the cross. {Zec 14:8}

Furthermore, Christ’s sacrificial death ratified the everlasting covenant, God’s " last will and testament," guaranteeing our eternal inheritance. {Heb 9:15-17} Interestingly, the mention of the concept of " inheritance" in Heb 9:15 leads the writer to make a slight transition from the sense of " covenant" to the sense of " testament" ,both of which concepts are included in the Greek word diatheke. A covenant, in other words, did not necessarily involve death before it was in force (e.g. the covenant between David/Jonathan; the covenant of marriage, etc.). A testament, though, in the sense of " a last will and testament," is not operative until the " testator," i.e. the one who made it, dies. The sacrificial death of Christ, consequently, is of eternal benefit to the elect in terms of the fact that (a) it has secured redemption, and (b) it has guaranteed the disposition of God’s covenant estate to all of his heirs.

(2)  It has an internal, not merely an external, benefit. The blood of Christ is superior to the blood of animal sacrifices not only because it actually secured eternal redemption, but also because it actually purifies the conscience of the worshippers. {Heb 9:14} In other words, it removes both legal guilt and personal guilt feelings.

The best that the blood of goats and calves could do was " sanctify to the purifying of the flesh [i.e. body]." It could only remove ceremonial disqualifications, such as the prohibition attached to worship when a person physically contacted a dead body. Such a person was ceremonially unclean, until the ashes of the red heifer were sprinkled upon him. {Nu 19:1-22} But the blood of Christ can cleanse the conscience from it’s awareness of sin and corruption.

In other words, the blood of Christ makes us fit to worship God now by purifying the conscience from " dead works." What does the phrase " dead works" mean? It means that until one is cleansed by the blood of Christ, his works or efforts can never be pleasing or acceptable to God. Christ’s blood sacrifice, however, liberates the conscience so that we can satisfy the very purpose of our existence- " to serve the living God" (Heb 9:14; see also 1Jo 1:7; Ps 51:2,7,13). What can wash away my sin, you ask? Scripture answers, " Nothing but the blood of Jesus!"

      " Not all the blood of beasts,

       On Jewish altars slain,

       Could give the guilty conscience peace,

       Or wash away the stain.

       But Christ, the heavenly Lamb,

       Takes all our sins away;

       A sacrifice of nobler Name,

       And richer blood than they."

       Isaac Watts

       393

PBC: Heb 9:14

" purge your conscience from dead works"

He’s going, with a panoramic, breakneck speed from a depiction of our eternal sin problem and God’s way of fixing it to your daily and my daily sin problem and how that could be fixed. Stop and think a minute! If you had to stack up the weight of the sins which you have committed in the last seven days as God views those sins on your conscience, you wouldn’t be here this morning. You would be so overwhelmed with conviction that you would be ashamed to show your face at church to worship God. There must be some value in this that relates to you right now that brought you here despite your sins.

41

PBC: Heb 9:22

Inside the camp, the high priest takes the blood of the sacrificial goat and begins sprinkling it on all the furnishings of the tabernacle. Everything is sprinkled. The golden incense altar, a likely symbol of prayer, is even sprinkled. Your prayers must be sanctified by the blood of Jesus, or God will not accept them. You can’t be whole enough; you can’t be devout enough; you can’t be repentant enough; you can’t be contrite enough for your sins to make your prayers acceptable to God. Your prayers must be sanctified by the blood of Christ. If you don’t feel the conviction of sin and the blackness of what sin does to your conscience, you won’t appreciate Hebrews and you won’t appreciate your priest. If you come before God as a sinner, sensibly feeling the sting of sin in your life, you’ll appreciate Hebrews like you never thought possible.

394

PBC: Heb 9:23

What Did the Death of Christ Accomplish? Heb 9:23-28

This section continues the writer’s proposition that the New Covenant is better than the Old because it is premised upon a better sacrifice -the blood of Christ. In contrast to the Old Covenant, whose sacrifices could not make people perfect, {Heb 9:9} the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ is the sole means of forgiveness. {Heb 9:22}

To whom did Jesus offer Himself? To the sinner? No, Jesus " offered himself without spot to God."  {Heb 9:14} It was God who had been offended by man’s sin, and it was God who must be propitiated. {cf. 2Co 5:19}

What then was achieved by the work of Christ on the cross? What did the blood of Jesus accomplish? The answer is threefold.

(1)  It guaranteed access into the presence of God- " For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us."  {Heb 9:24} Christ’s priestly function did not conclude with His sacrifice at Calvary. On the contrary, He continues His heavenly ministry for us even now as our Intercessor. Because He is there, in the very presence of God, for us, we now have access into " the holiest of all."  {Heb 9:8} His sacrifice has purchased for us that right and privilege.

(2)  It expiated sin, once and for all - " ... but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."  { Heb 9:26} Reflecting on Heb 9:12, the writer returns to the thought that the death of the Lord Jesus actually secured eternal redemption. Jesus did not merely make men savable, contingent on their ultimate decision or effort. Rather, He actually saved His people from their sins. {Mt 1:21} What was accomplished by the cross? Sin was " put away...by the sacrifice of himself." The sufficiency of his offering is proved by its finality. He made a complete offering for his people in every generation. {Heb 9:15} This " once for all" sacrifice was made " in the end of the world" in the sense that it closed the period of symbolism and expectation under the Old Covenant and marked the beginning of the age of reality in the history of redemption, a dispensation known as the New Covenant.

The finished work of Christ is the very heart of the gospel. {Joh 19:30} To understand the achievement of the cross, it is first necessary to understand the purpose of the cross? Why did Jesus come into the world? 1Ti 1:15 says he came " to save sinners." Mt 20:28 says he came " to give His life a ransom for many." Ga 4:5 says he came to " redeem them that were under the law." Our text says he came " to put away sin." The obvious question then is, Did He achieve His objective? The successful work of Christ is categorically established by the testimony of scriptures such as Ro 5:19; Heb 1:3, and Ro 4:25. He was not a failure. He satisfied the Father (propitiation), removed sin (expiation), and defeated the Devil. " It is finished" is not the triumphant note of the gospel.

(3)  It secured our release from final judgment- " As it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." Heb 9:27-28 The judgment of all who were represented by Christ in His sacrificial death has already been. In the last and general judgment, all whose names are found written in the Lamb’s Book of Life will be declared just through the offering of the Lord Jesus. Re 20:11 ff Mt 25:31ff Like the Exodus centuries before, when the Judge sees the blood, He will pass over.

Did you notice the three ‘appearings’ in the passage. Christ ‘hath appeared to put away sin’ (past tense- Heb 9:26); he " now appears in presence of God for us;" {present- Heb 9:24} he " shall appear the second time without sin unto salvation." {future Heb 9:28} These three " tenses of salvation" present the true Biblical picture of the benefits of Christ’s atoning death. {cf. 2Co 1:10} We have been saved, once and for all, from the penalty of sin. His intercessory ministry, furthermore, saves us now from the power of sin. One day, He will return to consummate His grand drama of salvation by saving us from the very presence of sin. Hallelujah! What a Savior!

395

PBC: Heb 9:24

"now" - I love that three letter word, now.  Did you know that at this very instant the Lord Jesus Christ is "now" in the presence of God for us?  Appearing for us?  He's there for you - taking my name into His lips, pleading your case before the Father in heaven.  You have a heavenly representative, a helper, a friend, an ally - one on your side at the Fathers right hand at this very instant. 

I'm glad to tell you my friends that Jesus Christ after He left this earth did not assume a passive, non-chelant, and inactive role but He continues to minister to His children at the Father's right hand in heaven.  In other words, He's still actively involved in the lives of His people.  He's not in heaven folding His hands saying "well I've done my part, now the rest is up to you."  No my friends, the One who saved us from our sins continues to mediate, and to intercede on our behalf in heaven.  Now, that's good news!

You have not been abandoned and left alone in this world.  It's not up to you, it's not all on your shoulders, you're not by yourself in this world.  You have one in heaven who now appears in the presence of God for us.

15

PBC: Heb 9:26

" to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself"

The death of Christ, the manner of his death, and the object of it, were the subjects of prophecy, and according to the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. He was the seed of the woman, that was to bruise the serpent’s head, and by death destroy him that had the power of death, and deliver those, who through fear of death, were subject to bondage, and were the slaves of sin and death. It was not a mere voluntary offering, for there was a needs be for it, for without it there was no redemption. " And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Heb 9:15. The first testament was not dedicated without blood. " 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 and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you." And under this testament without the shedding of blood is no re-remission, for almost every thing under the law was purged by blood. All the offerings and sacrifices under the law were typical, or a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of things, and these sacrifices and offerings, which were made continually every year, can not put away sin, or make the comers thereto perfect. Where sin is put away, there is no further remembrance of sin, or no further offering for sin, but in the repetition of these offerings there is a remembrance of sin again every year. " The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing." Under the law the priest standeth daily ministering, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never put away sin. Christ, by his one offering, has made an end of sin, has perfected forever them that were sanctified, and hath obtained for us eternal redemption. His blood is the blood of the New Testament, or covenant; by it sin is put away, and freely forgiven. " Now, where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." The atonement is made, the redemption price is paid, the debt of his redeemed is paid, and they are purchased by his blood; Ac 20:28.

Eld. Gregg Thompson

PBC: Heb 9:28

" without sin unto salvation"

Without the necessity of making a sin offering, for that was already done- He did that the first time. But, He’s coming back the second time without reference to the sin (suffering?) but it’s going to be with reference to salvation- deliverance of the body and fashioning it like unto the glory of His own body. Eld. Wiley Flanagan

Haydock: Heb 9:1

The former. [1] In the ordinary Greek copies is expressed the former tabernacle; but even the Protestant translators have abandoned that reading, and understand the former testament or covenant, which they have put in a different character. ---

Worldly sanctuary, or a temporal sanctuary, to last only for a time, like the things of this world. (Witham) -- The word ordinances ( Greek: dikaiomata ) is frequently used for the laws and ordinances of God, because the observance of the laws is the justification of man; see particularly in the 118th Psalm, the legal rites justified in regard to the outward policy of the Jews.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Habuit & prius, Greek: eiche e prote. Though almost all Greek copies have Greek: skene, tabernacle: yet even the Protestant translators add in a different print, covenant, as if Greek: diatheke was understood. Ibid. [Ver. 1.] Sanctum sæculare, Greek: kosmikon. This Greek word is only found in one other place in the New Testament, Titus ii. 12. sæcularia desideria.

Haydock: Heb 9:2

First tabernacle. By this word is signified, the sanctuary or place for worshipping God, ordained by Moses, which was an oratory to be moved from place to place with the Israelites, which they kept afterwards, and had a resemblance of it in the temple. This tabernacle consisted of two parts, which St. Paul here calls the first and second. The first part was called the holy, which was separated from the rest of the temple by a veil. In this first part were the candlesticks, i.e. one candlestick, as it is called, Exodus xxv. 37. having seven branches in which were placed lamps; and a table, on which were placed twelve loaves, according to the number of the Jewish tribes, to be changed every week. (Witham)

Haydock: Heb 9:3

And after the second veil, or partition, was the second or inward part, or that part called the holy of holies. (Witham) ---

The first veil was at the entrance of the holy place, and separated it from the outward court; the second veil separated the holy place from the holy of holies.

Haydock: Heb 9:4

Having the golden censer. What is meant by this is uncertain, no mention being made of a golden censer in either part of the tabernacle made by the order of Moses, which the apostle here speaks of. Some say that the high priest, when he entered once a year into the holy of holies, made use of a golden censer, which he left there: but this is merely a conjecture. Others think that by the golden censer is meat the altar of perfumes, or where perfumes were burnt, which was, as it were a large censer, and is called by the same Greek word by Josephus, the historian; but then there occurs a difficulty, that this altar was in that first part called the holy, not in the holy of holies, to which the same interpreters answer, that this altar was placed just at the entrance into the holy of holies, and so may be looked upon as belonging to the holy of holies: not does the text say it was in the holy of holies, but only having, &c. as a town may be said to have fortifications which are not within the town itself. ---

And the tables of the testament, or covenant. The ark was certainly in the holy of holies, in which[2] was the golden urn, with a measure of manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the testament, or the tables of stone, on which were engraven the ten commandments. Noting but these tables were within the ark: (see 3 Kings viii. and 2 Paralipomenon v. 10.) so that when it is said, in which was the golden urn and the rod of Aaron, the meaning seems to be, that they were indeed in the holy of holies with the ark, but not within the ark. (Witham) ---

In the Greek it is easy to confound the word Greek: thusiasterion, which signifies altar, with Greek: thumiaterion, which means censer. It was placed adjoining the inward veil, so that the clouds of the incense filled the holy of holies; and hence it is mentioned by St. Paul as contained therein. ---

The apostle describes these things as they were in the tabernacle of Moses constructed in the desert. (Bible de Vence) ---

We see with what great and continued respect and veneration the manna and Aaron's rod, &c. were kept by the Jews, and shall not Christians be allowed to preserve with equal respect the monuments of God's mercies, and tokens of Christ's passion? See St. Cyril, (lib. iv. cont. Julianum) where he defends against the apostate, the keeping and honouring the cross on which Christ died. See also in St. Jerome (ep. xvii. chap. 5.) and in St. Paulinus, (ep. 11.) what reverence the faithful in those early periods of the Church paid to the sepulchres of Christ and his martyrs, as also to their relics. "We reverence and worship [honour]," says the latter, "the sepulchres of the martyrs; and, if we can, we apply the holy ashes to our eyes and mouth."

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Habens thuribulum aureum, Greek: chrusoun echousa thumiaterion. Josephus useth the same word for the altar of perfumes, lib. 6. The Jewish War , chap. vi. and lib. 3. Jewish Antiquities, chap. vii. Ibid. [Ver. 4.] In qua, Greek: en e. It may signify the same as cum qua.

Haydock: Heb 9:5

And over it (the ark) were cherubims of glory or glorious cherubims, (in what shape they were represented, is not certain) overshadowing the propitiatory, or seat of mercy, which was all of gold, of the same size as the ark, and like a cover to it. Just over this propitiatory were placed the two cherubs, spreading their wings looking towards one another, and upon the propitiatory. See Exodus xxxvi. and xxxvii. From this place God made known his presence, and the effects of his mercy to this people. Here he was said to be seated on the cherubims, and that the ark was his footstool. Psalm xcviii. Adore his footstool; i.e. prostrate before his ark. These two images of cherubs, shew that God did not absolutely forbid images at that time, when the people were so addicted to idolatry, but only to adore them. (Witham) ---

How futile is it to object from the commandment that it is forbidden to use holy images in the Church, when we here behold even amongst the people most prone to idolatry, most gross in their ideas of spiritual things, and to whom the precept was specially given not to make any graven idols, the same God commanding these images of angels to be made and set in the most holy place of the tabernacle or temple.

Haydock: Heb 9:6

The rites of the sacrifices. The priests, as the tells us, entered every day, that is, by turns, (see Luke i. 5.) to make the offering of incense morning and night, also to change the loaves, take care of the lamps, &c. But we must not think that they offered in that place victims or holocausts of sheep, lambs, oxen, &c. This was not done in any part of the sanctuary, neither before nor after the building of the temple, but in a place or court adjoining the tabernacle, upon a large altar of five cubits long and as many broad. See Exodus xxvii. and xxxviii. (Witham)

Haydock: Heb 9:7

Into the second part of the sanctuary, (i.e. the holy of holies) no one entered but the high priest, and he but once a year, on the feast called of expiation, to make an aspersion of blood upon the ark and round about, which he offereth for his own and the people's ignorance, or ignorances, as in the Greek; that is, for all his and their sins. See Leviticus x. (Witham) ---

He offered that blood of a calf for his own sins and those of his family, and the blood of a goat for the sins of the people. (Leviticus xvi.)

Haydock: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost signifying this. Here the apostle begins to tell us in what manner the sanctuary was a figure of things in the new law of Christ. The holy of holies was a figure of heaven, and this prohibition of any one going into it, was to signify that the way to heaven was not to be made manifest, nor to be opened, as long as the former tabernacle and law subsisted; that it was not to be opened till Christ, the high priest of the new testament, first entered, by shedding his blood on the cross, and by his glorious ascension. (Witham) ---

But when Christ expired, the veil of temple was rent asunder, to shew that the way to heaven was now laid open to mankind.

Haydock: Heb 9:9-10

Which is a parable of the time then present; or, unto the present time, as in the Greek. By the present time, according to the common exposition, is not meant the time of the new law, as some would have it, but the time of the former law; so that the sense is, which parable or type was a representation of things as they were to be performed, and to last during the time of the law, which was before present. ---

According to which. Some understand, according to which time; others, according to which parable, type, or typical worship of the former law, gifts and sacrifices are (i.e. were, and are) still offered by those who adhere to the Jewish law and ceremonies, which cannot of themselves make such worshippers perfect in conscience; i.e. can never give true interior sanctification, being only in meats, and drinks, and baptisms, &c. These words must not be referred to gifts and sacrifices, but to the worshipper; (literally, server) and the sense is, that to the priests, who worshipped and served God in the sanctuary and in offering sacrifices, was not prescribed an interior purity and sanctity, as in the new law, but only that legal sanctity which consisted in abstaining from such meats or drinks as were called unclean, or made them unclean. See Leviticus x. 9. where the priests are forbidden to drink wine when they were to enter into the tabernacle of the testimony. ---

In divers washings, &c. These precepts and ceremonies were only to last till the time of their correction, by the coming of Christ under the new and better law and testament. (Witham) ---

Of correction; viz. when Christ should correct and settle all things. (Challoner)

Haydock: Heb 9:11

Christ coming [3] is a high priest of the good things to come; of things which we hope for in heaven. ---

He has entered by a more perfect tabernacle; i.e. not passing, like the priests of the former law, into a tabernacle made by human art and hands, but by the tabernacle of his own body or flesh, says St. John Chrysostom, framed by the Holy Ghost. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Christus assistens, Greek: paragenomenos, which may signify being come, and present. Ibid. [Ver. 11.] Tabernaculum, Greek: skenes, by which St. John Chrysostom expounds his body or flesh, Greek: ten sarka entautha legei log. ie. p. 513 .

Haydock: Heb 9:12

By the blood of goats, &c. This is another difference and pre-eminence of Christ above the priests of the law of Moses, that they could only offer the blood of beasts; but Christ entered into heaven by the effusion of his own precious blood in his sufferings, and on the cross, by this having found an eternal redemption for mankind, having satisfied for the sins of all men in the sight of God, which the former priests, with all their sacrifices, could not do. (Witham) ---

Eternal redemption. By that one sacrifice of his blood, once offered on the cross, Christ our Lord paid and exhibited, once for all, the general price and ransom of all mankind; which no other priest could do. (Challoner) ---

The force of the apostle's reasoning is to convince the Jews of the inefficacy of the legal sacrifices, and of the virtue of the Christian sacrifice.

Haydock: Heb 9:13-14

For if the blood of goats, &c. Another main difference betwixt the sacrifices in the old, and that of Christ in the new law. Those imperfect carnal sacrifices could only make the priests and the people reputed clean, so that they were no longer to be treated as transgressors, and liable to punishments, prescribed and inflicted by the law: but the sacrifice of Christ has made our consciences interiorly clean, and sanctified them even in the sight of God. Having offered himself unspotted to God by the Holy Ghost, the divine Spirit of the Holy Ghost moving Christ as man to make this oblation of himself, though free from all sin, and incapable of sinning. And being this oblation, made by him, who was God as well as man, it was an oblation of infinite value, which repaired the injury done to God by sin, and redeemed mankind from the slavery of sin. (Witham) ---

Here we have an abstract of the passion of Jesus Christ, or of the sacrifice of the cross. We see who is the priest, and who is the victim; we seethe virtue and efficacy of this sacrifice, and why it was offered; also by what signs we may know whether we partake of it, viz. if dying to sin and to the world, we live to God, and serve him in spirit and truth. Calvin makes Jesus Christ a priest and mediator, according to his divinity; but in that case Christ would be inferior to his Father, not only as man, but according to his divinity: for the priest is inferior to the God to whom he offers sacrifice, which is an expression of supreme excellence. See Dr. Kellison's survey of the Protestant religion.

Haydock: Heb 9:15

And therefore he is the mediator of the new testament. [4] The mediator, so as to be our Redeemer, which applies only to our Saviour, Christ. Moses is called a mediator betwixt God and his people. See Galatians iii. 19. and 1 Timothy ii. 5. &c. The saints in heaven, and men on earth, may be called mediators in an inferior and different sense: but Christ alone is the mediator who reconciled God to men, by satisfying for their sins, and by a redemption from the slavery of sin. This sense, in which Christ is the mediator of the New Testament is expressed in these following words: that by means of his death, for the redemption of those transgressions which were under the former testament, they who are called may receive the promise of eternal inheritance; that is, Christ by his death, redeemed all men. He names in particular the sins of those under the former testament, to shew them that the sacrifices of the Mosaical law could not of themselves obtain a remission of sins, so that all saved from Adam, or that shall be saved to the end of the world, have their sins forgiven, and obtain salvation by virtue of Christ's sacrifice upon the cross. He paid the ransom of their sins, and is the Redeemer of all. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Novi Testamenti, Greek: diathekes kaines. The Protestant translators here found it necessary to put, not covenant, as in other places, but testament, even when the apostle speaks of the first, or old Greek: diatheke, (Ver. 18. and 20.) might they not then as well have translated Testament in the last chapter, especially when mention was there made of the New Testament in the prophecy of Jeremias? might they not as well have translated, (Galatians iv. 24.) for these are two testaments, as these are two covenants? and so in other places, where there is the same Greek word Greek: diatheke. Mr. N. has followed the Protestant translation. The Septuagint put Greek: diatheke for the Hebrew word Berith, which indeed is expounded to signify fœdus or pactum; that is, any agreement, alliance, or covenant, which in the Greek is rather Greek: sutheke than Greek: diatheke. See Scapula. We may, I believe, safely say that Berith also signifies testament, or a last will and testament, till they who are translating it by covenant, can show us some other Hebrew word for testamentum, which I think they have not hitherto done. I find that Mr. Legh, in his Crit. Sac. on the primitive Hebrew words, writes thus: Berith signifieth both Greek: suntheken, a compact or covenant between parties, as Aquila translateth; and Greek: diatheke, a testament or disposition of one's last will, as the Septuagint translate. He cites in the Margin Drusius and Mercerus.

====================

Haydock: Heb 9:16

For where there is a testament, the death of the testator, &c. The same Greek word, corresponding to the Hebrew word Berith, is often used both in the books of the old and new Scriptures. The ancient Latin interpreter puts for it testamentum, a testament: but others would rather have the Hebrew and Greek word to signify any agreement, bargain, alliance, or covenant, which last word is generally put in the English Protestant translations, followed also by Mr. N. We do not deny but the Hebrew and Greek word have this signification, but not exclusively: this place of St. Paul shews evidently that they also signify what both in Latin and English is called a testament or last will, which is only of force by the death of the testator. The Protestants, therefore, here find themselves obliged to translate testament, contrary to their custom, and to apply this word not only to the promises and blessings God made to Christians, of which Christ is the mediator, and which were confirmed by his blood and by his death, but also to the former alliance and promises or blessings God made to the Israelites, when he chose them to be his elect people, and gave them his law and his commandments under Moses. It is true God is immortal in his own nature, cannot die, and therefore cannot make a testament that shall be confirmed by his own death. But as for the new alliance, or New Testament, as here it must be called, it was confirmed by the death of the Son of God; that is, of God made man, by which it is true to say that God died for us, though he did not die, nor could die, as God. And as for the former alliance, or first testament, as it is called here, (ver. 18.) that, says St. Paul, (which was only a figure of the second or new testament ) was not made nor ratified without the blood of so many victims as used to be offered and sacrificed. (Witham)

Haydock: Heb 9:20

This is the blood of the testament, which God hath enjoined unto you; (Exodus xxiv.) that is, this is to confirm that testament. Christ made use of the like words, when he bequeathed us the divine legacy of his Body and Blood, at his last supper, saying: (Matthew xxvi. 28.) This is my blood of the new testament. And as the words of Exodus were understood of the true blood of the victims offered, so the words of Christ signify the true blood of Christ, there really present in the sacrament, in a spiritual manner, and to be shed in a bloody manner upon the cross. (Witham) ---

The correspondence of words, in dedicating both testaments, proveth the real presence of blood in the cup or chalice.

Haydock: Heb 9:22

St. Paul speaks here of legal purifications and remissions, which (ver. 10.) he calls carnal justices and ordinances, (ver. 13.) purifying the flesh. How then, it may be asked, were sins remitted under the law? I answer, by true repentance, joined with faith and hope in the promised Messias. As to the cleansings and expiations of the Mosaic law, they were generally effected by water and animal blood, and were typical of the real cleansing of the conscience by the water of baptism, and by the blood of Jesus Christ. The flowing, therefore, of the pure water and blood from the wound in Christ's side, denoted that the real expiation was now complete, and the cleansing font set open; and on this account, they are appealed to by St. John, as two of the three terrestrial witnesses, whose testimony is so efficacious for the confirmation of our faith, that the crucified Jesus was the Christ foretold by the prophets. [John xix. 34; 1 John v. 6, 8.] And thus "the old law confirms the new, and the new fulfils the old." (St. Paulinus)

Haydock: Heb 9:23

It is, or was necessary that the patterns of heavenly things (i.e. the former tabernacle and sanctuary) should be cleansed with these; that is, by the blood of such victims then offered. ---

But the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices. By the heavenly things, may be understood the faithful, who are the members of Christ's Church, to whom heaven is prepared, and who must be cleansed by better sacrifices; that is, by the blood of Christ, and by his sacrifice on the cross. (Witham)

Haydock: Heb 9:25

Should offer himself, &c. He takes notice that Christ, by virtue of his sacrifice, and his dying once on the cross, satisfied for the sins of all men that even were from the beginning of the world. It was decreed from eternity that the Son of God should come to redeem mankind: the ransom that was not yet paid was accepted; and all might be saved who believed in their Redeemer, who was to come, and who, by the graces that God offered and gave them, lived well. (Witham) ---

Christ shall never more offer himself in sacrifice, in that violent, painful, and bloody manner, nor can there be any occasion for it; since by that one sacrifice upon the cross, he has furnished the full ransom, redemption, and remedy for all the sins of the world. But this hinders not that he may offer himself in the sacred mysteries in an unbloody manner, for the daily application of that one sacrifice of redemption to our souls. (Challoner)

Haydock: Heb 9:26

He came at the end of the ages, as it were in the last age of the world, to the putting away or abrogating of sin. (Witham) ---

Though less, viz. a single tear, might have satisfied the justice of God, nothing less than his own precious blood could satisfy the charity of Jesus Christ. By his death, as St. Augustine observes, Christ has bound the devil in a chain, so that he can tempt us no further than we are able to resist: he may bark, he may tempt, he may solicit us; but he can bite none, except those that wilfully cast themselves within his reach. (Serm. 1. post Trin.)

Haydock: Heb 9:28

To exhaust the sins of many. That is, of all, according to the style of the Scriptures. When he came first, he took upon him the load of our sins; but at his second coming, at the end of the world, he will come in a quite different manner, not as laden with our sins, not after the similitude of a sinful man, not to redeem us, but with great power and majesty to judge all men. (Witham) ---

To exhaust. That is, to empty or draw out to the very bottom, by a plentiful and perfect redemption. (Challoner)

Gill: Heb 9:1

Then verily the first covenant had ordinances of divine service,.... The design of the apostle in this chapter, as it stands in connection with what goes before, is to show the pre-eminence of Christ, from the tabernacle, and the things in it; as well as from the priesthood and covenant; and as also the abrogation of the Levitical ceremonies in particular, as well as the first covenant in general; and that they were all types and figures of Christ, and had their fulfilment in him: the word "first", here used, designs not the tabernacle, but the covenant; therefore it is rightly thus supplied in our version, as it is in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions: which is said to have "ordinances of divine service"; belonging to the service of God, which was performed both by the priests, and by the people; and these ordinances were no other than the carnal ordinances, or rites of the ceremonial law: the word used signifies "righteousnesses"; and they are so called, because they were appointed by a righteous God; and were imposed on the people of the Jews in a righteous way; and by them men became externally and typically righteous; for they were figures and types of justification by the righteousness of Christ, though no complete, perfect, real righteousness, came by them.

And a worldly sanctuary. Philo the Jew says ^l, it was a type of the world, and of the various things in it; though it was rather either a type of the church, or of heaven, or of Christ's human nature: the better reason of its being so called is, because it consisted of earthly matter, and worldly things; it was in the world, and only had its use in the world, and so is opposed to the heavenly sanctuary; for the Jews often speak of מקדש שלמעלה, "a sanctuary above", and מקדש שלמטה, "a sanctuary below" ^m, and of משכנא דלעילא, "a tabernacle above", and משכנא דלתתא, "a tabernacle below" ⁿ; which answered to one another: the words may be rendered "a beautiful sanctuary", a well adorned one; and such especially was the temple, or sanctuary built by Solomon, rebuilt by Zerubbabel, and repaired and adorned by Herod, Luk 21:5. And the Jews say, that he that never saw Herod's building, meaning the temple, never saw a beautiful building; see Luk 21:5.

Gill: Heb 9:2

For there was a tabernacle made,.... By the direction of Moses, according to the pattern showed him in the Mount:

the first; that is, the first part of the tabernacle, called the holy place, in distinction from the holy of holies, which was the second part of the tabernacle; for otherwise there were not a first and a second tabernacle; there never was but one tabernacle:

wherein was the candlestick; that this was in the tabernacle, and on the south side of it, and without the vail, where the apostle has placed it, is plain from Exo 26:35. This was wanting in the second temple ^o: it was a type of Christ mystical, or the church; in the general use of it, to hold forth light, so the church holds forth the light of the Gospel, being put into it by Christ; in the matter of it, which was pure gold, denoting the purity, worth, splendour, glory, and duration of the church; in the parts of it, it had one shaft in the middle of it, in which all the parts met and cemented, typical of Christ the principal, and head of the church, whose situation is in the midst of the church, and who unites all together, and is but one: the six branches of it may intend all the members of the church, and especially the ministers of the word; the seven lamps with oil in them, may have a respect to the seven spirits of God, or the Spirit of God with his gifts and graces, and a profession of religion with grace along with it: and it was typical of the church in its ornaments and decorations; its bowls, knops, and flowers, may signify the various gifts of the Spirit, beautifying ministers, and fitting them for usefulness; and in the appurtenances of it, the tongs and snuff dishes may signify church discipline, censures, and excommunications.

And the table and the shewbread; the table, with the shewbread on it, was also in the tabernacle, on the north side of it, and without the vail, Exo 26:35. This was also wanting in the second temple ^p: the table was typical of Christ, and of communion with him; of the person of Christ; in the matter of it, which was Shittim wood overlaid with gold, whereby were signified the two natures of Christ in one person; the human nature by the Shittim wood, which is incorruptible, for though he died he saw no corruption, and is risen again, and lives for ever; and the divine nature by the gold, all the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him; and in the decorations of it, as the border, golden crown, &c. which may respect the fulness of his grace, and the honour and glory he is crowned with, which render him exceeding valuable and precious: and it may be typical of communion with him, either hereafter, when the saints shall sit with him as at a table, and eat and drink with him in the kingdom of his Father; or here, to which Christ admits them, and than which nothing is more honourable, comfortable, and desirable; and it may be significative of the ministration of the word and ordinances, of which Christ is the sum and substance, and in which he grants his people fellowship with him: to this table belonged rings and bars to carry it from place to place, which was done by the priests; where the church is, there Christ is, and there is the ministration of his word and ordinances; and which are sometimes moved from one place to another, by the ministers of the word, according to divine direction. The "shewbread", on the table, was typical either of the church of Christ, the saints, who may be signified by the unleavened cakes, being true and sincere, and without the leaven of malice and hypocrisy; and by twelve of them, which may represent the twelve tribes of Israel, the whole spiritual Israel of God; and by bread of faces, as the word for shewbread may be rendered, since they are always before the Lord, and his eyes are continually upon them; they are set upon the pure table, Christ, on whom they are safe, and by whom they are accepted with God: and the shewbread being set in rows, may denote their order and harmony; and their being removed every sabbath day, may signify the succession of saints in the church, as one is removed, another is brought in; and the frankincense put upon each row, shows them to be a sweet savour to God: or else the shewbread was typical of Christ himself, who is the bread of life, the food of his people; and may be signified by the shewbread for its fineness and purity, being made of fine flour, Christ is the finest of the wheat, bread from heaven, and angels' food; for its quantity, twelve cakes, with Christ, is bread enough, and to spare, for all the elect; for its continuance, Christ always abides, and such as feed upon him live for ever; for its gratefulness, Christ's flesh is meat indeed, and his blood drink indeed; and for its being only for the priests, as only such who are made priests to God, live by faith on Christ; see Lev 25:5. Moreover, the intercession of Christ may be prefigured by the shewbread, or bread of faces, he being the angel of God's presence or face, who appears in the presence of God for his people; and this consisting of twelve loaves, according to the number of the tribes of Israel, shows that Christ represents the whole Israel of God in heaven, and intercedes for them; and whereas the shewbread always continued, no sooner was one set of loaves removed, but another was put in their room; this may point at the continual intercession of Christ for his people; and the frankincense may denote the acceptableness of it to God.

Which is called the sanctuary; or "holy"; this refers either to the first part of the tabernacle, which was called the holy place, in which the priests in common ministered; or else to the things which were in it, now mentioned, the candlestick table, and shewbread; to which the Ethiopic version adds, and the golden censer, which it leaves out in the fourth verse; which version renders these words, "and these they call holy"; and so the Arabic version, "which are called holy things", as they were, as well as the place in which they were; so the candlestick is called the holy candlestick in the Apocrypha,

"As the clear light is upon the holy candlestick; so is the beauty of the face in ripe age.'' (Sirach 26:17)

and the ark, candlestick, table, censer, and altar, are called σκευη ιερα, "holy vessels", by Philo the Jew ^q; but the former sense seems best, when compared with the following verse.

Gill: Heb 9:3

And after the second vail,.... Were there more vails than one? the Scripture speaks but of one, Exo 26:31 there was indeed an hanging for the door of the tent, but that is not called a vail; nor was there more than one vail in the tabernacle, nor in the temple of Solomon; but in the second temple, under which the apostle lived, there were two vails, which divided between the holy place, and the holy of holies; and the innermost of these the apostle means: and so the Jewish writers ^r constantly affirm, that there were two vails between the said places, and that two new ones were made every year ^s. So on the day of atonement, when the high priest went into the most holy place, with the incense, it is said ^t, that

"he walked in the temple till he came between שתי הפרוכות, "the two vails", which divide between the holy, and holy of holies, and there was the space of a cubit between them.''

The reason of these two vails may be seen in the account Maimonides gives of this matter ^u:

"in the first temple there was a wall which divided between the holy, and holy of holies, the thickness of a cubit; but when they built the second temple, it was doubted by them, whether the thickness of the wall was of the measure of the holy place, or of the measure of the holy of holies; wherefore they made the holy of holies twenty cubits complete, and the holy place forty cubits complete, and they left the space of a cubit between the holy, and the holy of holies; and they did not build a wall in the second temple, but they made שתי פרוכות, "two vails", one on the side of the holy of holies, and the other on the side of the holy place, and between them a cubit answerable to the thickness of the wall, which was in the first temple; but in the first temple there was but one vail only, as it is said, Exo 26:33 and the vail shall divide unto you, &c.''

And to this account other Jewish writers ^w agree; and the space between the two vails is called by them טרקסין ^x, ταραξις, from the trouble and perplexity this affair gave them. This vail, or vails, might represent the sin of man, which separates between God and men, excludes from heaven; but is removed by the death of Christ, when the vail was rent in twain; so that now there is an open way to heaven; Christ has entered into it by his own blood; and saints have boldness to enter there by faith and hope now, and shall hereafter personally enter into it: or else this vail may signify the ceremonial law, which separated between Jew and Gentile, and is abolished by the death of Christ: or rather it was typical of the flesh, or human nature of Christ, called the vail of his flesh, Heb 10:20. Now within this second vail was

the tabernacle, or that part of it, the second part,

which is called the holiest of all; which was either typical of Christ, who is called the most Holy, Dan 9:24 he being so in both natures, divine and human; or of heaven, for the holy places, made with hands, were figures of heaven, Heb 9:24 for its holiness, it being the habitation of the holy God, holy angels, and spirits of just men made perfect; and for its invisibility, and the unseen things which faith and hope, which enter within the vail, are the evidence of; and for the things that are in it, typified by the following ones.

Gill: Heb 9:4

Which had the golden censer,.... There were various censers used by the priests in the daily service, but this was a peculiar one, which was used by the high priest on the day of atonement; on other days he used a silver censer, but on that day a golden one, and with it he entered into the holy of holies ^y; and though Moses does not call it a golden one, Lev 16:12 yet Josephus does ^z; and so do the Jewish doctors in the place referred to, with whom the apostle agrees, and to this the allusion is in Rev 8:3 but here a difficulty arises, how this can be said to have been in the holy of holies, and within the vail, when, according to Moses, it was without the vail, and was only carried within on the day of atonement; and so Philo the Jew ^a places it in the other part of the tabernacle; and it seems as if it was to avoid this difficulty, that the Ethiopic version has removed it from this verse to verse the second, and put it among the things that were in the holy place; but there is no need of this, nor to say that the altar of incense is intended, for that is never so called, and, besides, was without the vail too. It should be observed, that the apostle does not say, that the golden censer was laid up in the holy of holies, and kept there, but that it "had" it; as it had it on the day of atonement, when it was carried in there by the high priest, who there made use of it; and it was for the use of it in that place, that it was peculiarly designed. What was done by it was this, burning coals were with it taken off from the altar before the Lord, and were brought in within the vail, where incense was put upon them, which covered the mercy seat, that so the high priest died not. The burning coals signify the very great sufferings of Christ, not only the sufferings of his body, which were very painful, but those of his soul, when the wrath and hot displeasure of God was poured out upon him; and those coals being taken off from the altar before the Lord, show that the sufferings of Christ were according to the will of God, were grateful to him, and always before him; and their being brought within the vail, does not denote that Christ is now in a suffering state, though he is in the midst of the throne, as a lamb that had been slain; but the continued virtue and efficacy of his sufferings, and that our faith and hope, which enter within the vail, have to do with his blood and sacrifice thither carried. And the incense, which was carried in with those coals, typified the intercession of Christ in heaven, which is pure and holy, sweet, fragrant, and perpetual; and the priest having his hands full of it, expresses the fulness of Christ's intercession for all his elect, and for all things for them, and his fulness of merit to plead, which makes his intercession efficacious and prevalent; and hence, through his much incense, the prayers of his people become odorous and acceptable: and the incense being put upon the burning coals in the censer, shows that Christ's intercession proceeds upon the foot of his blood and sacrifice, his sufferings and death; and hence it becomes grateful, and has its influence; the smoke of it covers the mercy seat, or throne of grace, and makes that accessible; and as the priest, who offers it, never dies, so none of those for whom he intercedes.

And the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold; this is called the ark of the covenant, because the tables of the covenant, afterwards mentioned, were put into it; and that it was overlaid with gold round about, is certain from Exo 25:11 where it is said to be overlaid with pure gold, within and without; and that the ark was within the vail, and in the most holy place, is manifest from Exo 40:21 that this was wanting in the second temple, is generally agreed ^b; but who took it away, where it was put, or what became of it various are the sentiments of the Jewish writers: some say ^c, it was carried away by Nebuchadnezzar into Babylon, and is meant by the goodly vessels of the house of the Lord, 2Ch 36:10 others say ^d, that Jeremiah the prophet took it, and hid it in a cave on Mount Nebo; but the more generally received opinion is, that it was hid by King Josiah in some hidden and deep place, which Solomon had built for that purpose under ground, knowing, that the temple would be destroyed ^e; and it is often said, that it was hid under the pavement of a room in the temple, called לשכת דיר העצים, "the wood room" ^f. The ark is, by some, thought to be a type of the church, which is the ark of God, of his building, and where he dwells; the ark of the covenant, or testimony, where the oracles of God, his word and ordinances, are: its being made of Shittim wood may denote the incorruption and duration of it: and its being covered with gold within and without is expressive of its glory; and its being portable, and carried from place to place, shows that the church is not always in one place; its rings, staves, and priests that bore it, may point at the Gospel, and the ministers of it, the instruments of moving it; and its moving from place to place, and falling into the hands of enemies, were emblematical of the church's afflictions; as its rest at last, in Solomon's temple, may signify the church's rest here and hereafter: but the ark is rather to be considered as a type of Christ; its various names agree with Christ, as the ark of God, the ark of his strength, the glory of God, the face of God, the holy ark, the ark of the covenant, or testimony, yea, Jehovah, and God himself: the time of its making is observable, it was made before the tabernacle, and the tabernacle for the sake of it; Christ is before all creatures, and was set up as Mediator before anything existed, and all things are for his sake; it being made of Shittim wood, covered with gold, may denote both the incorruption and glory of Christ; and its several decorations, the graces with which he was adorned, as man and Mediator; its staves and rings may design the word, ordinances, and ministers, whereby he is carried into the several places of the world; here God granted his presence, and counsel was asked of him, and it was brought forth in time of war, as a security from enemies, all which is applicable to Christ; by it wonders were done, as the dividing of Jordan for the Israelites to pass into the land of Canaan, the falling of the walls of Jericho, and the fall of Dagon; so Christ has opened the way for his people to heaven, has spoiled principalities and powers, and his Gospel is powerful to the pulling down the strongholds of sin and Satan; the moving of the ark from place to place, and its rest in the temple, may signify the rest of Christ, after his many fatigues in this world.

Wherein was the golden pot that had manna; which Aaron filled with manna by the direction of Moses, who gave it at the appointment of God, that it might be preserved to future ages, as a memorial of the goodness, care, and power of God in feeding the Israelites with it in the wilderness, Exo 16:33. This pot held an omer, which was more than three pints and a half; some say six pints: and though Moses does not call it a golden pot, yet it is so called, not only by the Septuagint in Exo 16:33 but also by Philo the Jew ^g; nor is it reasonable to think, with some Jewish writers ^h, that it should be made of earth, which was to continue for ages to come: this also was wanting in the second temple ⁱ; and this, with Aaron's rod, after mentioned, and other things, is said to be hid when the ark was, and along with it ^k: but how this pot, as well as Aaron's rod, can be said to be in the ark, when it is asserted, at the bringing of the ark into the temple, at the dedication of it by Solomon, that there was nothing in it but two tables of stone, 1Ki 8:9 and both the pot of "manna", and Aaron's rod, are said to be before the testimony, Exo 16:34 and not in it, is a difficulty. Some, in order to remove it, observe, that the phrase, "wherein", refers not to the ark, but to the tabernacle; but since the tables of the covenant were in the ark, and these are mentioned with it, and the phrase, "over it", in the next verse, cannot be understood of the tabernacle, but of the ark, this solution is not satisfactory. Others have observed, that they might be in the ark in Moses's time and in Jeremiah's time, when they are said to be hid, though they were not in Solomon's: and others have taken notice, that the preposition εν sometimes signifies "at", or "with", as in Col 3:1 and so the sense is, that these were near unto it in the most holy place, and might be in the sides of it, though not within it; for there were places in the sides of the ark to put things into, Deu 31:26. And certain it is from the above account from Scripture, that they were near it; and so, by the Jewish writers, they are always mentioned along with it: when that was carried away, and hid, they were hid with it; but what a certain Jewish commentator ^l observes on 1Ki 8:9 is so express, as if it was designed to vindicate our apostle: his remark is this:

"the intention of this is not to deny that there were not the things mentioned in the law, for they were מונחים בו, "left in it", as Aaron's "rod", and "the pot of manna", only to deny, hereby, that there was not anything of the law, save the decalogue.''

And it should be observed, that it is not said of these, that they were put before the ark, but "before the testimony"; that is, before the tables of the covenant, which were within the ark. The "manna", in this pot, was typical of Christ; in the signification of its name, whether it comes from מנה, "manah", which signifies to appoint, prepare, and distribute, Christ being appointed, prepared, and distributed, as food for his people; or from מן הו, "man hu", what is it? the words said by the Israelites, when they first saw it, not knowing what it was; so Christ is unknown to his people until revealed to them, and remains unknown to all natural and unregenerate men: the manna came from heaven, from God, and was a free gift of his, and so Christ: it was round in form, and may be expressive of Christ's perfection, and eternity: it was in colour white, which may signify his purity and innocence; it was sweet in taste, and so is Christ, his fruits, his word and ordinances: it was small in quantity, which may denote the meanness and despicableness of Christ in the eyes of the world: the people went out and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or beat it in mortars, and baked it, and ate, which may be typical of the apprehension, sufferings, and death of Christ, in order to be fit food for the faith of believers. The persons that were fed by it were the Israelites, who were brought out of Egypt, and then in the wilderness, a large number, and men of all sorts, rich, and poor, and who had an equal portion, though very undeserving; so those who are fed by Christ, and nourished with him, the bread of life, are the spiritual Israel of God, whom Christ has redeemed from worse than Egyptian bondage and darkness, though they are yet in the wilderness of this world; and they are a large number, the whole family of God, who receive out of Christ's fulness grace for grace; and there is no difference of high and low, rich and poor, bond or free, male or female; they are all one in Christ, and Christ is all in all; and they have all a whole Christ, though they are very undeserving, being by nature children of wrath as others. And as the Israelites had the manna every day, and all the while they were in the wilderness, so Christ is the daily bread of believers; by him, in his word and ordinances, is his church nourished in the wilderness, to whom he gives to eat of the hidden manna, the food of the wilderness. The "pot", in which this manna was kept, was typical of the ordinances of the Gospel; in its matter, being made of gold, denoting the preciousness and duration of them; in the size of it, holding an "omer", showing that these contain plenty of good things to satisfaction; in the situation of it before the ark, signifying the presence of Christ with his ordinances; and in its use to hold manna, and be a memorial of it to ages to come, as the ordinances have in them food for souls, and are the means of remembering Christ in future generations, till his second coming.

And Aaron's rod that budded; and not only budded, but bloomed; blossomed, and yielded almonds, Num 17:8. This also was laid before the ark of the testimony, Heb 9:10, and may be said to be in it, or with it, in the same sense as the pot of manna was; it was likewise wanting in the second temple ^m, and is said to be hid with the pot of manna, and other things, as before observed: it was a type of Christ: it is affirmed by the Jews, that in the days of the Messiah, the priesthood shall return, and the rod of Aaron shall flourish ⁿ; it was, very probably, as some have thought ^o, an almond tree stick, as that in Jer 1:11. The almond tree has its name, in Hebrew, from a word which signifies haste and vigilance; it being, as Pliny says ^p, the first of trees that buds and blossoms, and is very hasty in putting them forth. An almond tree rod may be a proper emblem of Christ's speedy incarnation in the fulness of time; and Aaron's almond tree rod, of his right to the priesthood, and his vigilance in it: this was first a dry rod or stick, and may design the mean descent and appearance of Christ, being born of mean parents, living a mean and obscure life; his entrance on his public ministry, and continuance in it, were without any pomp or grandeur; he was as a root out of a dry ground; and though he did many miracles, these were treated with contempt; and he was at last apprehended, arraigned, and condemned as a malefactor, and died a shameful and an accursed death: it looked very unlikely and unpromising, that he should be the King Messiah; that he should have all power in heaven and in earth; that he should have the wisdom he had, and do the miracles he did; and that he should be the author of eternal salvation; and that such fruits of grace, peace, pardon, and righteousness, should spring from him, as that Aaron's dry rod should bud, blossom, and bear almonds, in which it was a lively figure of Christ; that lying among other rods, and perhaps being like them, may denote Christ's assuming the common nature of men, or an individual of human nature in all things like to man: and this being cut off from the tree, and being a dry stick, may represent the death of Christ; and its budding and blossoming may point at the resurrection of Christ from the dead; and as Aaron's priesthood was confirmed by the budding and blossoming of his rod, so the deity and Messiahship of Christ are confirmed by his resurrection; and its bringing forth almonds may design the fruits of Christ's death and resurrection; and moreover, the almond tree being, as Philo the Jew says ^q the first of trees that buds and blossoms in the spring, and the last that casts its leaves, it may be, as he observes, a symbol of the priestly tribe; and it may be a figure of the perpetuity of Christ, and his priesthood:

and the tables of the covenant; the same with the testimony which was ordered to be put into the ark, and accordingly was, Exo 25:16. About this there is no controversy; though it is a matter of dispute with the Jews, whether the book of the law was in the ark or not: some say it was in the side of it, and others within it ^r; but Maimonides ^s says, that Moses wrote the whole law with his own hand before he died, and gave a book (or copy) to every tribe, and one copy he put בארון, "in the ark": so Jarchi says ^t, that the book of the law of Moses was put into the midst of the ark, and the ark was glorious and beautiful by that which was בתוכו, "within it". These tables were made of stone, an emblem of the hardness of man's heart, which is destitute of spiritual life and motion, senseless and stupid, impenitent, stubborn, and inflexible, and on which no impressions can be made but by powerful and efficacious grace; and also of the stability and duration of the law, as moral, which is not antiquated by another, nor made void by the Gospel, nor altered in its nature and terms, but remains the same as to the matter of it; though it is now no covenant of works to believers, and they are freed from the curse and condemnation of it: the number of these tables is two; the whole law is reduced by our Lord to two grand precepts of it, Mat 22:37 and the fleshly tables, on which it is reinscribed in regeneration, are the heart and mind, 2Co 3:3. The place where these tables were put is the ark, which was typical of the law being in Christ, not only in his hands, but in his heart, Psa 40:8 and in his keeping of which he is the fulfilling end; for he being the surety of his people, and becoming man, answered every part of the law; in the holiness of his nature, in the perfect obedience of his life, and in his sufferings and death, in which he bore the penalty of it: and these tables are called the tables of the covenant, because the law on Mount Sinai was a covenant made with the people of Israel; and was typical of the covenant, of which Christ is the surety and Mediator, and which is ratified by his blood.

Gill: Heb 9:5

And over it the cherubim of glory,.... Or "glorious cherubim", where the Shechinah, or divine glory, dwelt, Psa 80:1. These were over the ark, and were in number two, as were the cherubim which God placed at the garden of Eden, Gen 3:24 according to the opinion of the ancient Jews ^u; and very likely these were made after the form of them. Some have thought them to be birds of a very terrible aspect, which were set there to deter Adam and Eve from coming to the tree of life; and both Philo ^w and Josephus ^x say, they were winged fowls; but the generality of the Jewish writers take them for angels ^y; and some of them say they were destroying angels, or noxious spirits ^z, which is not probable; but why angels should be so called, and what was their appearance, there are different opinions. Jerom says ^a the word signifies a multitude of knowledge; and indeed Philo the Jew ^b observes, that the Greeks would interpret the Hebrew word, much knowledge and understanding; and another Jewish writer ^c affirms, that the word "cherubim" is a name for separate intelligences, as if angels were so called from their great knowledge, and that the word is the same as "cerabbim", as "Rabbins", doctors, or teachers; but for the most part they interpret it, "as young men" ^d, because that angels have appeared in the form of young men. So in the Talmud ^e it is asked,

"what does cherub signify?" says R. Abhu, כרביא, "as a young man", for so in Babylon they call a young man רביא.''

Some think that the word "cherub" is the same with רכוב, "Recub", the letters transposed, which signifies "a chariot", because God is said to ride upon a "cherub" and the angels are called the chariots of the Lord, Psa 18:10 to which may be added, that Ezekiel's vision of the "cherubim" is frequently, by the Jews ^f, called מרכבה, "Mercabah", or "the chariot"; and mention is made of the chariot of the cherubim, in 1Ch 28:18 to which reference may be had in Hab 3:8 though I rather think, with others, that the word is derived from כרב, "Carab", which in the Syriac and Arabic languages signifies "to plough", and so in the Talmud ^g; and a cherub took its name from hence, because of the ox, whose face it had, that being a creature made use of in ploughing; and that the face of an ox, and the face of a cherub, is the same, may easily be concluded from Eze 1:10. And now because that Ezekiel's cherubim had four faces, the face of a man, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle; and the "cherubim" in the temple were in the same form, as may be gathered from Eze 41:18 those that were placed at the garden of Eden may be thought to be in the same form also: and some of late have fancied, that they were an hieroglyphic of the trinity of persons in the Godhead, signified by the ox, the lion, and eagle; and of the incarnation of the Son of God, the face of a man being added to them; to support which notion it is further observed, that the word כרובים should be pronounced "ce-rubbim", and interpreted, "as the mighty ones". But it should be known, that the word is also used in the singular number, Psa 18:10 and every single cherub had these four faces, so that each of them must be a representative of the Trinity, and of the incarnate Saviour, of which only the word in the singular number can be used; and then it can only be said of it, "cerub", as "the mighty one" which observation greatly weakens what is brought to support the fancy: besides, if the cherubim were an emblem of a plurality of persons in the Godhead, they would rather be an emblem of a quaternity, and not of a trinity of persons, since each had four faces, and those distinct from each other; for the face of a man is as much a distinct face as any of the rest. Now the human nature of Christ is no distinct person, much less one in the Godhead; and besides is the inferior nature of Christ, whereas the face of the man, in the "cherubim", is superior to the rest, which are the faces of irrational animals. Moreover, this would give us a similitude of the divine Being, and of that in him which is most incomprehensible by us, the trinity of persons in the Godhead; and so an answer may be given to such questions, the sense of which suggests, that no answer can be returned to them, Isa 40:18 and though the second Person often appeared in human form, and in the fulness of time became incarnate, and the Holy Ghost once descended as a dove, yet the Father's shape was never seen at any time, Joh 5:37 to which may be added, that this notion seems contrary to the second command, "thou shall not make unto thee any likeness of anything that is in heaven above", Exo 20:4 for allowing that the cherubim at the garden of Eden were figures made by the Lord himself, it is not credible he should make such, he afterwards forbid others to make; besides, the "cherubim" in the tabernacle and temple were the same figures with those in Eden, as is owned; and these were ordered of God to be made by men, and therefore surely cannot be thought to be figures, emblems, and representations of God himself in his three divine persons; likewise the cherubim are not only distinguished from him, but instead of being figures of him, they are always represented as vehicles on which he sits or rides, Exo 25:22. Once more, it may deserve some little consideration, that the prince of Tyre, a type of antichrist, the man of sin, is called a "cherub", Eze 28:14 which surely cannot be in allusion to the divine Being, and the persons in the Godhead, but very well in allusion to angels, the sons of God, as civil magistrates, good and bad, are sometimes called. No doubt there was something signified by the "cherubim" in the tabernacle and temple; but that this should be the mystery of them, is not easy of belief. Philo the Jew makes the "cherubim" to signify the two powers of God, his creative and governing powers ^h; and the Jews frequently speak of רזא דכרובים, "the mystery of the cherubim" ⁱ: the "cherubim" over the ark, here spoken of, are sometimes allegorized of the two Testaments, the Old and New; the matter of them being of gold may denote the excellency, purity, simplicity, and duration of them; their number is two, as were the "cherubim"; and as they were alike, and of one measure and size, this may intend the agreement between them; the doctrines, promises, prophecies, types, and figures of the Old Testament agree with the New; and the account that the one gives of the person and offices, and grace of Christ, agrees with the other; their situation and position, being placed at the two ends of the mercy seat, and looking towards it, may denote their being full of Christ, from one end to the other, and their pointing at him, and bearing witness to him; here God also reveals himself, as he did between the "cherubim"; and these are glorious as they were, full of glory, containing the glorious Gospel of the blessed God: though rather the "cherubim" on the mercy seat were symbols and representations of angels, since to these the Apostle Peter seems to allude, in 1Pe 1:12, their being made of gold may denote their excellency, purity, and simplicity; their being on the mercy seat shows their dependence on Christ, their confirmation by him, and ministration to him; their having wings, expresses their readiness to do his will; and their looking one to another, signifies their unity and concord among themselves; and their looking to the mercy seat, their inspection into the mysteries of grace; and their being over the ark, and God being in the midst of them, declares the presence of God with them, whose face they always behold; and as these "cherubim" of glory, they are very glorious creatures, and in the glory of them will Christ come a second time:

shadowing the mercy seat; that is, with their wings, as in Exo 25:20 which was typical of Christ; its name agrees with him, a mercy seat; for in him God shows himself merciful to his people; all the stores of mercy are laid up in him; the mission of him into this world is owing to the mercy of God; and the mercy of God was glorified by him in the redemption of his people; and he himself is the way through which they obtain and receive mercy; and he is also a merciful high priest to them: the Hebrew word for the mercy seat, כפורת, signifies "a covering": nor is our English word in sound very different from it; and it was so called, as Kimchi ^k observes, because it covered the ark: Christ is a covering to his people; their persons are clothed with his righteousness, and all their sins are covered by it; and they are secured from the curse and condemnation of the law, and wrath to come: the Septuagint interpreters render it by ιλαστηριον, the word used here by the Apostle Paul, in Rom 3:25, there rendered "propitiation", and applied to Christ, who has made reconciliation for sin, and through whom God is propitious to his people. The matter, of which the mercy seat was made, was pure gold, denoting the excellency and preciousness of Christ; the make of it, in its length and breadth, was just the same with the ark, in which the two tables were, Exo 25:10. Christ is the fulfilling end of the law, and exactly answers to all its requirements; his nature, to the holiness and spirituality of it; his righteousness, to all the obedience it commands; and his sufferings and death, to the penalty it enjoins: its situation above the ark shows that there is no mercy but in a way of righteousness, and that Christ stands between God and the law, and, by fulfilling it, covers all the transgressions of it; and being above it, is able to suppress all its accusations and charges: from off the mercy seat, God communed with his people; the way to communion with God is by Christ; the encouragement to go to God is from him; and the enjoyment of him is through him: on the day of atonement the mercy seat was sprinkled with blood, typical of the blood of Christ, whereby peace is made, and a way opened into the holiest of all:

of which we cannot now speak particularly; not only of the mercy seat, but of all the things before mentioned; for the word "which" is in the plural number, and refers to all the preceding things; to discourse of which, largely and particularly, required more time than the apostle had, and must have exceeded the bounds of an epistle. The Ethiopic version renders it in the singular number; "of this".

Gill: Heb 9:6

Now when these things were thus ordained,.... Or prepared and got ready; that is, when the tabernacle was finished, and set up, and provided with all its vessels and furniture:

the priests went always into the first tabernacle; the first part of the tabernacle, which was called the holy place, Heb 9:2 here the common priests went continually every day, morning and evening; the Syriac and Ethiopic versions read, "the outward tabernacle", in distinction from the innermost part of the tabernacle, or the most holy place:

accomplishing the service of God; by offering sacrifices, burning incense, and trimming the lamps, which they did every day: the priests entered into the holy place every day for service; but they might not go in at any other time but the time of service ^l the phrase, "of God", is not in the text, but is a supplement; and it was usual with the Jews to call the worship of the temple, and especially that part of it which lay in sacrifices, עבודה, "the service": Simeon the just used to say, the world stands upon three things; upon the law, ועל העבודה, "and upon the service", and upon beneficence ^m; by "the service", the commentators ⁿ on the passage understand sacrifices; and again it is said ^o, no man enters into the court לעבודה, "for service", though he is clean, until he has dipped himself: the word here used in the Greek text is in the plural number, and may be rendered the services, because there were several sorts of services performed every day, as before observed, and several sacrifices offered; and the Vulgate Latin version renders it, "the offices of sacrifices"; and the Ethiopic version, "their offerings"; and the Arabic version, "offices": and the service which the high priest performed in the holiest of all once a year, was divers, which is mentioned in the following verses, and is called "service", Heb 9:8 it is said, that on the day of atonement there were five עבודות, "services" of the morning daily sacrifice ^p, in which the high priest ministered in his golden garments: but here the service of the common priests is meant, which was every day; and it becomes such who are employed in sacred service; both to be constant in it, and to do it fully and completely.

Gill: Heb 9:7

Though this is not expressed in so many words in Lev 16:2 only it is said that "Aaron came not at all times into the holy place within the vail"; yet it is the constant and generally received sense of the Jewish writers, in agreement with the apostle here, that the high priest went into the holy of holies but once a year ^q, on the day of atonement, which was on the tenth of the month Tisri, and answers to part of September; not but that he went in more than once on that day, for he went in no less than four times ^r; the first time he went in to offer incense; the second time with the blood of the bullock, to sprinkle it; the third time with the blood of the goat; and the fourth time to bring out the censer ^s; and if he entered a fifth time, they say he was worthy of death; wherefore Philo the Jew ^t seems to be mistaken when he affirms that, if he went in three or four times on the same day, he suffered death, nor was there any pardon for him; and as it was but one day in a year he might enter, so when he did, no other man, either Israelite or priest, might go in along with him; he went in alone without any attendance: the Jews say ^u, that a cord or thong was bound to the feet of the high priest when he went into the holy of holies, that if he died there, the rest might be able to draw him out; for it was not lawful for another priest to go in, no, not an high priest, none besides him on the day of atonement. Pausanias ^w makes mention of a temple of Minerva into which the priests entered once every year; which very likely was observed in imitation of this custom of the Jewish high priest; who in it was a type of Christ, and of his entrance into heaven, and of his constant and continued intercession there:

not without blood; for he went in with the blood of the bullock and the blood of the goat; which was typical of the blood of Christ, by which he entered in once into the holy place, into heaven, when he had obtained eternal redemption by it, Heb 9:12 which he offered for himself and for the errors of the people; the bullock was offered by the high priest for himself and his family; and the goat for the sins of the people of Israel, even all their iniquities, transgressions, and sins, Lev 16:11, but Christ the antitype having no sin, had no need to offer for himself, only for the sins of the people; See Gill on Heb 7:27.

Gill: Heb 9:8

The Holy Ghost this signifying,.... This shows that the Holy Ghost existed under the Old Testament; that he is a distinct person in the Godhead, a personal act being here ascribed to him; that he is truly and properly God, the God whose service the priests accomplished in the tabernacle; and by whom Moses was admonished to make all things in it according to the pattern, and by whom the high priest was warned not to come at all times within the vail; moreover, that the Levitical ordinances were of God, and that they had a spiritual signification; that the Old Testament saints were not without some knowledge of the spiritual meaning of them; and that the Holy Ghost was the author of that knowledge; particularly by enjoining the high priest to enter within the vail but once a year, he gave a plain and strong intimation,

that the way into the holiest of all was not yet manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing; by which is meant, not only the first part of the tabernacle, as in Heb 9:2 but the whole of it; and not only that, but the temple built in its room, and also the whole Levitical service is included; and the sense is, that while the tabernacle and tabernacle worship, the temple and temple service, were in being, "the way into the holiest of all was not yet manifest": the Vulgate Latin and all the Oriental versions render it, "the way of the saints"; of the priests who ministered in holy things, and were holy to the Lord, and of all the saints that lived before Christ; not that they did not go to heaven, but their way to it was not so manifestly known; life and immortality were not so clearly brought to light, as now by the Gospel; though rather it designs holy places, even heaven itself, which was typified by the holy place within the vail; and may be called the holiest of all, it being the residence of the holy God, holy angels, and holy men, and is sanctified by the presence of Christ, for his people, and where perfect holiness will be the glory of it: the way to it is not by works of righteousness done by men, which being imperfect cannot justify, and so not save, though this is the way men naturally seek and take; but Christ is the only way, and he is the plain, pleasant, and safe one: now let it be observed, that heaven was not shut to the Old Testament saints; there was a way into it for them, and they went the same way New Testament saints do; and that way was in some measure known, but it was not fully manifested; it lay hid in obscure prophecies, types, shadows, and sacrifices; hence being more clearly revealed under the Gospel dispensation, in comparison, of its former obscurity, and with respect to the manifestation of it, it is called a "new way".

Gill: Heb 9:9

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 καθ' ην, "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.

Gill: Heb 9:10

Which stood only in meats and drinks,.... That is, along with the gifts and sacrifices offered, there only were meat offerings and drink offerings; things which only respect the body, and cannot therefore make perfect, as to the conscience; to which may be added, that while the tabernacle was standing, and typical service was in being, there was a prohibition of certain meats, as unclean, and an allowance of others, as clean, Lev 11:2 and there were certain drinks which were unlawful to certain persons, at certain times, as to the priests and Nazarites, Lev 10:9 and which, for the above reason, could make no man perfect:

and divers washings or "baptisms": the doctrine of which, the apostle would not have laid again, Heb 6:2 these were the washings of the priests and of the Israelites, and of sacrifices, and of garments, and of vessels and other things; and which, because they were performed by immersion, they are called "baptisms": and now since these only sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, or what was outward, they could not reach the conscience, or make perfect with respect to that: and

carnal ordinances: which belonged to the flesh, and not the spirit or soul, and therefore could not affect that; besides, these were only

imposed on them until the time of reformation; they were enjoined the Jews only, though by God himself; and were put upon them as a burden, or a yoke, and which was on some accounts intolerable, but were not to continue any longer than the time of the Gospel, here called "the time of reformation", or of "correction", and emendation; in which, things that were faulty and deficient are amended and perfected, and in which burdensome rites and ceremonies are removed, and better ordinances introduced: or rather of direction: in which saints are directed to Christ, the sum and substance of all types, shadows, and sacrifices, and in whom alone perfection is.

Gill: Heb 9:11

But Christ being come an high priest,.... Christ is come, as appears from the cessation of civil government among the Jews, which was not to be till Shiloh came; from the destruction of the second temple, into which the Messiah was to come, and did; from the expiration of Daniel's weeks, at which he was to appear, and be cut off; from the coming of John the Baptist, his forerunner, and from the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles, and the calling and conversion of them, and the effusion of the Spirit upon them: and he is come an high priest; he was called to be one, and was constituted as such in the council and covenant of peace; and he agreed to do the work of one; he was typified by the high priest under the law; and he came as such into this world, and has done the work of an high priest, by offering himself a sacrifice for sin, and by his entrance into the holiest of all, with his own blood: and he is come an high priest of good things to come; such as peace, reconciliation, and atonement, a justifying righteousness, pardon of sin, eternal life and salvation, which the law was a shadow and figure of; and which under the former dispensation were to come, as to the actual impetration of them by Christ; who is called the high priest of them, to distinguish him from the high priests under the law, who could not bring in these good things, nor make the comers to them and to their offerings perfect; but Christ is the author and administrator of them; and these things are owing to the performance of his priestly office; and such rob Christ of his glory, as a priest, who ascribe these good things to their own merits, or the merits of others: and the way in which he is come is,

by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; meaning the human body of Christ, which was greater than tabernacle of Moses; not in bulk and quantity, but in value, worth, and dignity; and was more perfect than that, that being only an example, figure, shadow, and type, this being the antitype, the sum and substance of that; and by it things and persons are brought to perfection, which could not be, in and by that; and this is a tabernacle which God pitched, and not man; which was reared up without the help, of man: Christ was not begotten by man, but was conceived in the womb of a virgin, under the power of the Holy Ghost; he came not into the world in the way of ordinary generation, but in a supernatural manner; and so his human body is a tabernacle, not of the common building, or creation, as the word may be rendered, as other human bodies are.

Gill: Heb 9:12

Neither by the blood of goats and calves,.... With which the high priest entered into the holy place, within the vail, on the day of atonement, Lev 16:14 for Christ was not an high priest of the order of Aaron, nor could the blood of these creatures take away sin, nor would God accept of such sacrifices any longer:

but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place; which shows the truth of his human nature, and the virtue of its blood, as in union with his divine Person; by which he opened the way into the holiest of all, as the surety of his people, and gives them boldness and liberty to follow him there; he carried his blood not in a basin, as the high priest carried the blood of goats and calves, but in his veins; and by it, having been shed by him, he entered not into the holy place made with hands, but into heaven itself; and that not every year, as the high priest, but "once" for all, having done his work; or as follows,

having obtained eternal redemption; for us, from sin, Satan, the law, and death, to which his people were in bondage, and which he obtained by paying a ransom price for them; which was not corruptible things, as silver and gold but his precious, blood: in the original text it is, "having found eternal redemption"; there seems to be an allusion to Job 33:24. This was what was sought for long ago by the, Old Testament saints, who were wishing, waiting, and longing for this salvation; it is a thing very precious and difficult to find; it is to be had nowhere but in Christ, and when found in him, is matter of great joy to sensible sinners; God found it in him, and found him to be a proper person to effect it; and Christ has found it by being the author of it: this is called an eternal redemption, because it extends to the saints in all ages; backwards and forwards; it includes eternal life and happiness; and such as are sharers in it shall never perish, but shall be saved with an everlasting salvation; it is so called in opposition to the carnal expiations of the high priests, and in distinction from temporal redemptions, deliverances, and salvations. Remarkable is the paraphrase of Jonathan ben Uzziel on Gen 49:18.

"Jacob said, when he saw Gideon the son of Joash, and Samson the son of Manoah, who should be redeemers; not for the redemption of Gideon am I waiting, nor for the redemption of Samson am I looking, for their redemption is a temporal redemption; but for thy redemption am I waiting and looking, O Lord, because thy redemption is פורקן עלמין, "an everlasting redemption":''

another copy reads, for the redemption of Messiah the son of David; and to the same purpose is the Jerusalem paraphrase on the place; in Talmudic language it would be called פדייה עולמית ^x.

Gill: Heb 9:13

For if the blood of bulls and of goats,.... Shed either on the day of atonement, or at any other time: the former of thee, Pausanias ^y relates, was drank by certain priestesses among the Grecians, whereby they were tried, whether they spoke truth or no if not, they were immediately punished; and the latter, he says ^z, will dissolve an adamant stone; but neither of them can purge from sin:

and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean; the apostle refers to the red heifer, Num 19:1 which being burnt, its ashes were gathered up and put into a vessel, and water poured upon them, which was sprinkled with a bunch of hyssop on unclean persons; the ashes and the water mixed together made the water of separation, or of sprinkling; for so it is called by the Septuagint, υδωρ ραντισμου, "the water of sprinkling", and in the Targum in a following citation: this was the purification for sin, though it only

sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; the body, or only in an external and typical way, but did not really sanctify the heart, or purify and cleanse the soul from sin. The Jews say, that the waters of purification for sin were not waters of purification for sin, without the ashes ^a; and to this the Targumist, on Eze 36:25 and on Zec 13:1 refers, paraphrasing both texts thus;

"I will forgive their sins as they are cleansed with the water of sprinkling, and with the ashes of the heifer, which is a purification for sin.''

Gill: Heb 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ,.... Which is not the blood of a mere man, but the blood of the Son of God; and the argument is from the lesser to the greater; that if the ashes of the burnt heifer, which was a type of Christ in his sufferings, mixed with water, typically sanctified to the purifying of men externally, in a ceremonial way, then much more virtue must there be in the blood of Christ, to cleanse the soul inwardly:

who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God; Christ is a priest, and the sacrifice he has offend up is "himself"; not his divine nature, but his human nature, soul and body, as in union with his divine person; which gives his sacrifice the preference to all others; and is the reason of its virtue and efficacy, and is expressive of his great love to man: and this sacrifice was offered up "to God", against whom his people had sinned, and whose justice must be satisfied, and which is of a sweet smelling savour to him; besides, he called him to this work, and engaged him in it, and is well pleased with this offering, as he must needs be, since it is offered up "without spot"; which expresses the purity of Christ's nature and sacrifice, and the perfection of it, which is such, that no fault can be found in it by the justice of God; and hence, the saints, for whom it is offered, are unblamable and irreprovable, There is an allusion in the clause, both to the priests and to their sacrifices, which were neither of them to have any spot or blemish on them; and this unblemished sacrifice was offered unto God by Christ,

through the eternal Spirit; not the human soul of Christ; for though that is a spirit, yet not eternal, and besides, was a part of the sacrifice; but rather the divine nature of Christ, which is a spirit, and may be so called in distinction from the flesh, or human nature, as it sometimes is, and this is eternal; it was from everlasting, as well as is to everlasting; and this supported him under all his sufferings, and carried him through them, and put virtue unto them; and Christ was a priest, in the divine, as well as human nature: though by it may be better understood "the Holy Ghost"; and so the Vulgate Latin version reads, and also several copies; since the divine nature rather acts by the human nature, than the human nature by the divine; and Christ is often said to do such and such things by the Holy Spirit; and as the Holy Ghost formed and filled the human nature of Christ, so he assisted and supported it under sufferings. This whole clause is inserted by way of parenthesis, showing the efficacy of Christ's blood, and from whence it is:

to purge your conscience from dead works; that is, "from the works of sin", as the Ethiopic version renders it; which are performed by dead men, separate and alienated from the life of God, are the cause of the death of the soul, and expose to eternal death, and are like dead carcasses, nauseous and infectious; and even duties themselves, performed without faith and love, are dead works; nor can they procure life, and being depended on, issue in death; and even the works of believers themselves are sometimes performed in a very lifeless manner, and are attended with sin and pollution, and need purging: the allusion is to the pollution by the touch of dead bodies; and there may be some respect to the sacrifices of slain beasts, after the sacrifice and death of Christ, by believing Jews, who were sticklers for the ceremonies of the law, and thereby contracted guilt; but immoralities are chiefly designed, and with these the conscience of man is defiled; and nothing short of the blood of Christ can remove the pollution of sin; as that being shed procures atonement, and so purges away the guilt of sin, or makes reconciliation for it, so being sprinkled on the conscience by the Spirit of God, it speaks peace and pardon, and pacifies and purges it, and removes every incumbrance from it: the Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions, read, "our conscience". The end and use of such purgation is, "to serve the living God"; so called to distinguish him from the idols of the Gentiles, and in opposition to dead works; and because he has life in himself, essentially and independently, and is the author and giver of life to others; and it is but the reasonable service of his people, to present their souls and bodies as a living sacrifice to him; and who ought to serve him in a lively manner, in faith, and with fervency, and not with a slavish, but a godly filial fear; and one that has his conscience purged by the blood of Christ, and is sensibly impressed with a discovery of pardoning grace, is in the best capacity for such service. The Alexandrian copy reads, "the living and true God".

Gill: Heb 9:15

And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament,.... See Gill on Heb 7:22, See Gill on Heb 8:6, See Gill on Heb 8:8. This may refer both to what goes before, and what follows after; for Christ, that he might offer himself to God, and by his blood purge the consciences of his people from dead works, that so they might serve the living God, became the Mediator of the New Testament, or covenant; and also he took upon him this character and office,

that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance; Christ became the Mediator of the New Testament, and assumed human nature that he might die, and by dying might obtain redemption for his people; not only for those that were then in the world, or should be in it, but also for all those that had been in it. "The first testament" is the first dispensation of the covenant of grace, reaching from the first promulgation of it to Adam after the fall, to the death of Christ; "the transgressions" that were under it are the sins of the saints who lived under that dispensation, froth Adam to Moses, and from Moses to Christ, and takes in all their iniquities of every kind: and the "redemption" of these, or from these, by Christ, at and through his death, does not suppose that there was no remission of sins, or justification from them, under that dispensation; or that the Old Testament saints did not go to heaven, but were detained in a prison, till redeemed by the death of Christ; or that their sins were only redeemed, not their persons; for transgressions may stand for transgressors; and so the Syriac version renders it, "that by his death he might be a redemption for them who transgressed the first testament"; so the Jews say, that the Messiah must die לפדות את אבות "to redeem the fathers" ^b: but the sense is, that though legal sacrifices could not atone for sin, nor ceremonial ablutions cleanse from them; yet the sins of Old Testament saints were expiated, their iniquities pardoned, and they justified and saved, through the blood of Christ, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world; whose death is a redemption from transgressions past, present, and to come; whose blood is the ransom price for them, and was shed for the remission of them, even of sins that are past through the forbearance of God; who took the surety's word for the performance of all this, which in the fulness of time he strictly fulfilled, to the satisfaction of law and justice; see Rom 3:25 and the ultimate end of Christ's being a Mediator, and dying for such purposes, was, that called ones might receive the promised inheritance: by the "eternal inheritance", is meant heaven, which is by gift and bequest, belongs to children only, and comes through the death of Christ; and is a very substantial, plentiful, and glorious one; it is incorruptible and undefiled, and that fades not away, and as here, "eternal"; it was prepared from the foundation of the world, and will continue for ever; and it may be so called, to distinguish it from the inheritance of the land of Canaan, or any temporal one: "the promise" of this was made before the world began, and was put into the hands of Christ, the surety of the better testament, by whose death the heirs of it come to enjoy both the promise, and the thing promised; and they are such who are "called", not merely externally, but internally and effectually; by whom were meant, not Abraham and his natural seed, nor the Old Testament saints only, but all that are called with an holy calling, whether Jews or Gentiles, and who will enjoy both the promise of the inheritance, and that itself, in a way of "receiving": every word shows this affair to be all of grace; it is an "inheritance", and therefore the Father's gift; it is by "promise", and so of grace; and it is "received", and so freely given, and not merited; and only such who are "called" by grace possess it; and yet it is through the death of Christ, that so it might be received in a way consistent with the justice of God.

Gill: Heb 9:16

For where a testament is,.... The covenant of grace, as administered under the Gospel dispensation, is a testament or will. The Jews have adopted the Greek word, here used, into their language, and pronounce it דייתיקי, and by it understand a dying man's last will and testament ^d. Some of them make it to be of Hebrew derivation; as if it was said, דא תהי למיקם, "this shall be to confirm" ^e, or this shall be stable and firm; though others own it to be the same with this Greek word διαθηκη ^f. The covenant of grace, is properly a covenant to Christ, and a testament or will to his people: it is his and their Father's will, concerning giving them both grace and glory; it consists of many gifts and legacies; in it Christ is made heir of all things, and his people are made joint heirs with him; they are given to him as his portion; and they have all things pertaining to life and godliness bequeathed to them, even all spiritual blessings; the witnesses of it are Father, Son, and Spirit; and the seals of it are the blood of Christ, and the grace of the Spirit; and this is registered in the Scriptures by holy men as notaries; and is unalterable and immutable: and this being made,

there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; who is Christ; he has various parts in this will or testament; he is the surety and Mediator of it; and he is the executor of it; what is given in it, is first given to him, in order to be given to others; all things are put into his hands, and he has a power to give them to as many as the Father has given him; and here he is called the "testator": Christ, as God, has an equal right to dispose of the inheritance, both of grace and glory; and as Mediator, nothing is given without his consent; and whatever is given, is given with a view to his "death", and comes through it, and by virtue of it: hence there is a "necessity" of that, and that on the account of the divine perfections; particularly for the declaration of God's righteousness, or by reason of his justice; and also because of his purposes and decrees, which have fixed it, and of his promises, which are yea and amen in Christ, and are ratified by his blood, called therefore the blood of the covenant; and likewise on account of the engagements of Christ to suffer and die; as well as for the accomplishment of Scripture prophecies concerning it; and moreover, on account of the blessings which were to come to the saints through it, as a justifying righteousness, pardon of sin, peace and reconciliation, adoption and eternal life.

Gill: Heb 9:17

For a testament is of force after men are dead,.... The necessity of Christ's death is here urged, from the nature and force of a testament or will, among men, which does not take place, and cannot be executed, till a man is dead.

Otherwise it is of no strength at all whilst the testator liveth; no claim can be made by the legatees for the part they have in it, nor can any disposition be made by the executor of it; not that hereby is suggested, that the testament or will of God was uncertain and precarious till the death of Christ, and subject to change and alteration as men's wills are till they die; nor that the inheritance could not be enjoyed by the Old Testament saints; for it is certain, it was entered upon by them before the death of Christ; but the sense is, that there was a necessity of it, that the saints right unto it, upon the foot of justice, might be evident by it.

Gill: Heb 9:18

Whereupon neither the first testament,.... Or the first administration of the covenant of grace under the law:

was dedicated without blood; or "confirmed" without it, that dispensation being a typical one; and that blood was typical of the blood of Christ, by which the new covenant or testament is ratified; see Exo 24:7.

Gill: Heb 9:19

For when Moses had spoken every precept,.... Contained in the decalogue, in the book of the covenant, everyone of the precepts in Exo 22:1 for this is to be understood of the written law, and not of the oral law the Jews talk of, which they say Moses first delivered by word of mouth to Aaron, then to his two sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, then to the seventy elders of Israel, and then to the whole congregation; so that Aaron heard it four times, his sons thrice, the seventy elders twice, and all Israel once ^g: but this is the written law which he spoke audibly, and in a known language,

to all the people according to the law; which God gave him on the Mount: this may instruct persons concerned in the public ministry, to speak out plainly and clearly the whole counsel of God, to all to whom they are sent, according to the word of God, which is the rule of faith and practice:

he took the blood of calves, and of goats; in the relation of this affair in Exo 24:5 which is referred to, only mention is made of oxen, bullocks, or heifers, here called calves, which were sacrificed for peace offerings, and not of goats; though perhaps they may be intended by the burnt offerings there spoken of, since they were sometimes used for burnt offerings, Lev 1:10. The Syriac version only reads, "he took the blood of an heifer"; and the Arabic version, "he took the blood of calves"; but all the copies, and other versions, read both. "With water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop"; neither of these are mentioned in Exo 24:1, but since sprinkling is there said to be used, and blood and water mixed together, and scarlet and hyssop were used in sprinkling, as in sprinkling the leper, and the unclean house, Lev 14:5 the apostle justly concludes the use of them here; the blood, with water, was typical of the blood and water which sprung from the side of Christ pierced on the cross, the one signifying justification by him, the other sanctification; the scarlet wool, which is originally white, but becomes scarlet by being dyed, may denote the native purity of Christ, and his bloody sufferings and death; the hyssop may signify his humility, and the purging virtue of his blood, and the sweet smelling savour of his person, righteousness, and sacrifice. The apostle calls scarlet, scarlet wool; though whenever the word is used in the Jewish laws of the Old Testament, wool is not expressed, but it is always intended; for it is a rule with the Jews ^h, that

"the blue, which is spoken of in every place, is wool dyed of a sky colour; purple is wool dyed red, and scarlet is wool dyed in scarlet.''

And sprinkled both the book, and all the people. In Exo 24:8 no mention is made of the sprinkling of the former, only of the latter, which the apostle either concludes from the sprinkling of the blood upon the altar, upon which the book might lie, or from tradition, or from divine revelation: some think it does not necessarily follow from the text, that the book was sprinkled; and repeating the word λαβων, "he took", read the words, "and he took the book and sprinkled all the people"; but this seems not natural, but forced; and besides, all the Oriental versions are express for the sprinkling of the book: the book of the law was sprinkled, not because of any impurity in it, but to show the imperfection of it, and its insufficiency to justify men; or rather the imperfection of man's obedience to it, and to point out what the law requires in case of disobedience, even the blood and life of men; and what it would be, was it not sprinkled with blood, or satisfied by the blood of Christ, namely, an accusing, cursing, and condemning law: the people, all of them, being sprinkled with the blood, were typical of God's peculiar people, even all the elect of God, being sprinkled with the blood of Christ, called the blood of sprinkling, by which they are redeemed, and which speaks peace and pardon to them. Some have thought only the seventy elders were sprinkled, as representing the whole congregation; and others, that the twelve pillars were only sprinkled, as representing the twelve tribes of Israel; but Moses and the apostle agree, that they were the people that were sprinkled.

Gill: Heb 9:20

Saying, this is the blood of the testament,.... The first testament or covenant; this proves what the apostle had asserted in Heb 9:18 that it was dedicated with blood, or confirmed by it; compare with this Mat 26:28

which God hath enjoined unto you; the people of Israel, to observe, and which they promised to do; see Exo 24:7.

Gill: Heb 9:21

Moreover, he sprinkled likewise both the tabernacle,.... Not at the same time that he sprinkled the book and the people, for then there was no tabernacle; but afterwards, at the time that it was set up, when it was anointed with oil, Exo 40:9 and though no mention is there made of blood, yet Josephus, in agreement with the apostle, asserts ⁱ, that the tabernacle, and its vessels, were not only anointed with oil, but sprinkled with the blood of bulls and goats, as well as the garments of Aaron, and his sons: the tabernacle was typical of the church, in which God dwells, being purified and cleansed by the blood of Christ; and this shows, that there is no coming into the presence of God, the place where he dwells, without blood.

And all the vessels of the ministry; which were used in the service of the tabernacle these may denote the vessels of grace and mercy, the elect of God, whose hearts are sprinkled by the blood of Christ from an evil conscience, and whose garments are washed in it, and made white by it.

Gill: Heb 9:22

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood,.... All "except a few things", as the Arabic version renders it; for some things were cleansed by water, and others purged by fire, Num 31:23. Some join the word almost with the word purged, as if the sense was, that all things were purged by blood, but not perfectly, only almost; but the former sense is best.

And without shedding of blood is no remission; that is, of sin; there was no typical remission without it; and there can be no real remission but by, the blood of Christ; no instance can be given of pardon without it; if it could have been otherwise, the blood of Christ had not been shed; for so it would seem to be shed in vain, and his satisfaction to be unnecessary; nor is it agreeable to the justice of God to forgive sin without satisfaction; nor is it consistent with his veracity, and faithfulness to his word, Gen 2:17. It is a common saying with the Jews, and often to be met with in their writings, אין כפרה אלא בדם, "there is no atonement but by blood" ^k; by the shedding of blood; not by the shedding of it, as it flows out of the body of the sacrifice, but as it is poured out on the altar; for the pouring of the blood at the four corners, and at the bottom of the altar, were the chief rites required in sacrifices; nor did they reckon expiation to be expiation, unless the altar was moistened by the blood of the sacrifice ^l.

Gill: Heb 9:23

It was therefore necessary,.... On account of the divine appointment, and that types and antitypes might correspond; and especially it was necessary with respect to the Messiah, the substance and body of all types. So Jonathan ben Uzziel paraphrases the text in Exo 40:9,

"and thou shalt take the anointing oil, and thou shalt anoint the tabernacle, and all that is in it; and thou shall sanctify it, מטול, because of the crown of the kingdom of the house of Judah, and the King Messiah, who shall redeem Israel in the latter days.''

Upon his account it was necessary,

that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; that is, that all the people, and the book of the covenant, and the tabernacle, and its vessels, which were types and patterns of persons and things in Gospel churches, should be purified with blood and water, and with scarlet wool and hyssop.

But the heavenly things themselves, with better sacrifices than these; the sum and substance of the above patterns, shadows, and examples, such as heaven itself; which though not impure in itself, yet some think it, may be said to be purified, because saints are made meet for it, by being purged with the blood of Christ; others observe, that sin reaches to heaven, and provokes God that dwells there; hence atonement for it may be called a purification of heaven: but rather this may be said of it, inasmuch as by the blood of Christ an entrance and preparation is made for the saints into it. Likewise, the human nature of Christ is among these heavenly things; not that it is heavenly, as to the matter and substance of it, but may be so called, because of its wonderful formation; and which has been purified, not from any real internal pollution that was in it, but from what was imputed to it, the sin of his people. Also the whole church, triumphant and militant, may be intended by heavenly things: the Old Testament saints went to heaven before Christ came; and though they were not impure, but were the spirits of just men made perfect, yet their iniquities were purged by the blood and sacrifice of Christ, after they were gone to heaven; see Heb 9:15. The church militant, or believers on earth, may be said to be heavenly, since they are partakers of an heavenly birth and calling; their head is in heaven, and their conversation is there; and they have a right unto it, and are making meet for it; and they are in themselves defiled with sin, and are purified by the blood of Christ, and sanctified by the offering up of his body once for all: to which may be added, that spiritual blessings are heavenly things; they are from heaven, and saints are blessed with them in heavenly places and these come to them through the blood and sacrifice of Christ; yea, the Gospel, which is from heaven, and the doctrines of it, are sealed and confirmed by the blood of Christ: his sacrifice is expressed in the plural number; not that there has been a repetition of it, for it is but one sacrifice, and but once offered up, and will never be reiterated; but to show the excellency of it, being usual with the Jews to use the plural number of things the most excellent; so Christ is called "Wisdoms", Pro 1:20 besides, respect may be had to the many sacrifices under the law, which were types of it, and were answered and fulfilled by it; and to the many persons on whose account it was offered; and to the parts of it, the soul and body of Christ: and this is a better sacrifice than the legal ones, in its own nature and in its use and efficacy to take away sin, and make perfect, which they could not.

Gill: Heb 9:24

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands,.... The most holy place in the tabernacle of Moses, or in the temple built by Solomon, and rebuilt by Zerubbabel, and repaired by Herod,

which are the figures of the true; that is, the most holy place in the tabernacle and temple, was a figure of the truth of that type; see Heb 9:9 as follows. Josephus ^m suggests the same, when speaking of the most holy place; he says, that it was inaccessible to the priests, that it might be as heaven to God.

But into heaven itself; not the visible heavens, the airy and starry ones, through which he passed, but the third heaven, the habitation of God, angels, and glorified saints: this shows that heaven is a place; that Christ, as man, was out of it when on earth; and that at his ascension he entered into it, having done the work he came about, and that with acceptance: the end of his entrance was

now to appear in the presence of God for us; Christ, as God, was always in his presence, from everlasting; as Mediator, he was with him in the council of peace; while he was here on earth his Father was with him, he was not alone; but now in his human nature he is at his right hand, where he appears before him, as a favourite before his Prince, on the behalf of another, or as an advocate on the behalf of his client: Christ appears in the court of heaven for his elect, by representing their persons; by presenting himself, his blood, sacrifice, and righteousness, before God on their account; by introducing them into the presence of God, and offering up their prayers with the incense of his mediation; by presenting them to himself, and to his Father, and obtaining every blessing for them. And this he does "now", since his entrance; not that he did not appear before God for the saints of the Old Testament, for he was the angel of God's presence then, though he did not appear then in the manner he does now, as the Lamb in the midst of the throne, as if it had been slain; but it denotes the continuance and perpetuity of his appearance for his people; he is ever interceding for them.

Gill: Heb 9:25

Nor yet that he should offer himself often,.... Or at all again; which shows the perfection of his sacrifice, for justice was satisfied, the law fulfilled, sin done away, and complete salvation obtained at once; which lies against the errors of the Socinians, who say he offers himself now in heaven; and of the Papists, who pretend to offer the body of Christ daily in their mass:

as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; not his own, nor other men's, but the blood of goats and calves; but Christ entered into heaven with his own blood, he having been altar, priest, and sacrifice: the high priest went into the most holy place every year, but Christ has entered into heaven once for all, where he sits down and continues, having done his work effectually.

Gill: Heb 9:26

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world,.... For if it was necessary that he should often offer up himself now, which is the same as to suffer, since the sacrifice of himself, the same was necessary before; seeing sin was in the world from the beginning, and the saints from the foundation of the world had their sins expiated by the sacrifice of Christ; but the truth is, Christ's sufferings were but once, though the virtue of them is always, both before and after; nor can he suffer more, or again, because of his power over death and the grave, and because he has effectually obtained what he suffered for:

but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself; this is to be understood, not of his appearance in heaven, of which mention is made in Heb 9:24 but of his incarnation on earth, called an appearance; not as though his human nature was a mere phantom or apparition, for it was a real thing; or as if he was then manifested to be what he really was before; for before his incarnation he was not truly and actually man; but this is said with respect to the manifestation of his invisible deity; or of him as the Son of God in human nature; and in regard to the types of the old law, under which he was hid; and with respect to the prophecies of his coming; and it designs the same thing with his descent from heaven, and coming into this world, in which he appeared in fashion as a man, as a mean man, as an afflicted one; yea, he looked like a sinful man, bearing the infirmities and sins of his people; his appearance was but to a very few, and for a little time; and the time of it was, "in the end of the world"; the same with the last days; the last age of the world; the end of the Jewish economy; at the close of their civil and ecclesiastical state, according to Hab 2:3 & so the Jews expect their Messiah לקץ הימים, "at the end of days" ⁿ: and this appearance was but "once"; there were many appearances of him in an human form, under the Old Testament dispensation; and there were many after his resurrection; but this is said to be but once, in opposition to the many types and sacrifices under the law, and agrees with his one oblation, and once suffering: the end of his appearance was, to put away sin; the filth of it, by his blood; the guilt of it, by his atoning sacrifice; and the punishment of it, by his sufferings and death, the penalty of the law; and in consequence of all this, the dominion of it by the power of his grace, and the very being of it hereafter: and this putting it away is signified by his bearing, carrying, and taking it away; by removing it as far as the east is from the west; by finishing and making an end of it; by crucifying the old man, destroying the body of sin, and by an utter disannulling and abolishing it, as a debt, and as a law; and all this is done by the sacrifice of himself; by the offering up of his body and soul an offering for sin; as in Heb 9:14.

Gill: Heb 9:27

And as it is appointed unto men once to die,.... Not a moral, or what is commonly called a spiritual death, nor an eternal one, but a corporeal one; which does not arise from the constitution of nature, but from the sin of man, and God's decree on account of it; by which it is fixed that men shall die, and how long they shall live, and when they shall die; so that they cannot die sooner nor later; all things antecedent to death, which lead on to it, and issue in it, are appointed by God, and so is death itself, with all its circumstances; men's days can neither be lengthened nor shortened, either by Christ himself, or others: and this statute and appointment of God concerns men, not angels, and reaches to all men, wicked and righteous; and though there have been some exceptions, as Enoch and Elijah; and all will not sleep, or die, some will be found alive at Christ's appearing; yet such will undergo a change which is equivalent to death, as Enoch and Elijah have done: and generally speaking men die but once; it is not usual for men to die, and live again, and then die again; there have been some extraordinary instances of this kind, but they are rare; it is the statute law of heaven in common for men to die and that but once; so Cicero ^o the Heathen says, "omnibus definitam esse mortem": Christ died once, he will die no more; and it is the comfort of the saints, that though they die the first death, they shall not be hurt of the second death; and the consideration of this decree should excite to diligence and industry: death is certain to God, but uncertain to us, as to the time, nor should we curiously inquire into it, but patiently wait for it, and quietly submit unto it:

but after this the judgment; the last and general judgment, which will reach to all men, quick and dead, righteous and wicked, and in which Christ will be Judge. There is a particular judgment which is immediately after death; by virtue of which, the souls of men are condemned to their proper state of happiness or woe; and there is an universal judgment, which will be after the resurrection of the dead, and is called eternal judgment, and to come; this is appointed by God, though the time when is unknown to men; yet nothing is more certain, and it will be a righteous one.

Gill: Heb 9:28

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many,.... As man dies but once, Christ was offered but once, or he suffered and died but once; and that was not on his own account, or for his own sins, "but to bear the sins of many": not of angels but of men, and these not a few, but "many"; which is said to magnify the grace of God, to exalt the satisfaction and righteousness of Christ, and to encourage souls to hope in him: hence many are brought to believe in him, and many are justified by him, have their sins forgiven them, and are glorified; though Christ bore not the sins of all men; for as all men have not faith, all are not justified, pardoned, and saved: what he bore were "sins"; all kind of sin, every act of sin, and all that belongs to it; its filth, guilt, and punishment, even the iniquity of all his people; which must be a prodigious weight, and than which nothing could be more nauseous: his bearing them supposes they were upon him, though not in him, imputed, though not inherent; that he did not sink under them; that he made an entire satisfaction for them, and bore them wholly away, both from the persons of his people, and from the sight of justice. The way in which he came to bear them was this; he became a surety for all the elect; his Father imputed to him all their sins, and he voluntarily took them upon himself; where justice found them, and demanded satisfaction of him for them, and he gave it; which is an instance both of his great love, and of his great strength:

and unto them that look for him: with affection, faith and patience:

shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation; this is to be understood of Christ's visible and personal appearance on earth, which will be a glorious one; he will appear in his own glory, and in his Father's glory, and in the glory of the holy angels, and in the glory of his power, to the joy of saints, and to the terror of the wicked; for every eye shall see him: and this is said to be "the second time"; that is, that he appears on earth, and personally; for though he often appears to his people, it is in a spiritual way; and though he appeared to Stephen and to Paul, yet not on earth, but in heaven; and this is called the second time, with reference to his first appearance in human nature at his incarnation, and after that he ascended to heaven; and as this will be the second, it will be the last: the manner in which he will appear, will be, "without sin"; without sin itself; without any thing like it: without any infirmities, which though not sinful are the effects of sin; without sin imputed to him, with which he appeared before; without being a sacrifice for sin; and without sin upon his people that come with him, or he shall meet whom he shall raise, or change, and take to himself: and the end of his appearance with respect to them, will be "unto salvation"; the end of his first appearance was to obtain salvation for his people, and he has obtained it, and there is a comfortable application of it made unto them by the Spirit of God; but the full possession of it will be hereafter, and into this will Christ put them, when he shall appear: the Alexandrian copy adds, "by faith", and also some other copies.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Heb 9:1

¹ tn Grk “the first” (referring to the covenant described in Heb 8:7, 13). In the translation the referent (covenant) has been specified for clarity.

NET Notes: Heb 9:2

¹ tn Grk “the first,” in order of approach in the ritual.

² tn Grk “in which [were].”

³ tn Grk “which,” describing the outer tent.

NET Notes: Heb 9:4

¹ tn Grk “in which”; in the translation the referent (the ark) has been specified for clarity.

NET Notes: Heb 9:5

¹ tn Grk “above it”; in the translation the referent (the ark) has been specified for clarity.

² sn The cherubim (pl.) were an order of angels mentioned repeatedly in the OT but only here in the NT. They were associated with God’s presence, glory, and holiness. Their images that sat on top of the ark of the covenant are described in Exod 25:18-20.

NET Notes: Heb 9:6

¹ tn Grk “the first tent.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:7

¹ tn Grk “the second tent.”

² tn Or perhaps “the unintentional sins of the people”; Grk “the ignorances of the people.” Cf. BDAG 13 s.v. ἀγνόημα, “sin committed in ignorance/unintentionally.” This term seems to be simply a synonym for “sins” (cf. Heb 5:2) and does not pick up the distinction made in Num 15:22-31 between unwitting sin and “high-handed” sin. The Day of Atonement ritual in Lev 16 covered all the sins of the people, not just the unwitting ones.

NET Notes: Heb 9:8

¹ tn Grk “the first tent.” The literal phrase “the first tent” refers to either (1) the outer chamber of the tabernacle in the wilderness (as in vv. 2, 6) or (2) the entire tabernacle as a symbol of the OT system of approaching God. The second is more likely given the contrast that follows in vv. 11-12.

NET Notes: Heb 9:10

¹ tn Grk “only for foods and drinks.”

² tc Most witnesses (D¹ Ï) have “various washings, and external regulations” (βαπτισμοῖς καὶ δικαιώμασιν, baptismoi" kai dikaiwmasin), with both nouns in the dative. The translation “washings; they are… regulations” renders βαπτισμοῖς, δικαιώματα (baptismoi", dikaiwmata; found in such important mss as Ì⁴⁶ א* A I P 0278 33 1739 1881 al sa) in which case δικαιώματα is taken as the nominative subject of the participle ἐπικείμενα (epikeimena). It seems far more likely that scribes would conform δικαιώματα to the immediately preceding datives and join it to them by καί than they would to the following nominative participle. Both on external and internal evidence the text is thus secure as reading βαπτισμοῖς, δικαιώματα.

³ tn Grk “until the time of setting things right.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:11

¹ tn Grk “But Christ, when he came,” introducing a sentence that includes all of Heb 9:11-12. The main construction is “Christ, having come…, entered…, having secured…,” and everything else describes his entrance.

NET Notes: Heb 9:12

¹ tn This verb occurs in the Greek middle voice, which here intensifies the role of the subject, Christ, in accomplishing the action: “he alone secured”; “he and no other secured.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:13

¹ tn Grk “for the purifying of the flesh.” The “flesh” here is symbolic of outward or ritual purity in contrast to inner purity, that of the conscience (cf. Heb 9:9).

NET Notes: Heb 9:14

¹ tc The reading adopted by the translation is attested by many authorities (A D* K P 365 1739* al). But many others (א D² 0278 33 1739^c 1881 Ï lat sa) read “your” instead of “our.” The diversity of evidence makes this a difficult case to decide from external evidence alone. The first and second person pronouns differ by only one letter in Greek, as in English, also making this problem difficult to decide based on internal evidence and transcriptional probability. In the context, the author’s description of sacrificial activities seems to invite the reader to compare his own possible participation in OT liturgy as over against the completed work of Christ, so the second person pronoun “your” might make more sense. On the other hand, TCGNT 599 argues that “our” is preferable because the author of Hebrews uses direct address (i.e., the second person) only in the hortatory sections. What is more, the author seems to prefer the first person in explanatory remarks or when giving the logical grounds for an assertion (cf. Heb 4:15; 7:14). It is hard to reach a definitive conclusion in this case, but the data lean slightly in favor of the first person pronoun.

NET Notes: Heb 9:15

¹ tn The Greek word μεσίτης (mesith", “mediator”) in this context does not imply that Jesus was a mediator in the contemporary sense of the word, i.e., he worked for compromise between opposing parties. Here the term describes his function as the one who was used by God to enact a new covenant which established a new relationship between God and his people, but entirely on God’s terms.

² tn Grk “the promise of the eternal inheritance.”

³ tn Grk “a death having occurred.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:16

¹ tn Grk “there is a necessity for the death of the one who made it to be proven.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:18

¹ sn The Greek text reinforces this by negating the opposite (“not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood”), but this double negation is not used in contemporary English.

NET Notes: Heb 9:20

¹ tn Grk “which God commanded for you (or in your case).”

sn A quotation from Exod 24:8.

NET Notes: Heb 9:23

¹ tn Or “prototypes,” “outlines,” referring to the earthly sanctuary. See Heb 8:5 above for the prior use of this term.

² tn Grk “with these”; in the translation the referent (sacrifices) has been specified for clarity.

³ tn Grk “the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:24

¹ tn Or “prefiguration.”

² tn The word “sanctuary” is not in the Greek text at this point, but has been supplied for clarity.

NET Notes: Heb 9:25

¹ tn Grk “and not that he might offer,” continuing the previous construction.

NET Notes: Heb 9:27

¹ tn Here ἀνθρώποις (anqrwpoi") has been translated as a generic noun (“people”).

² tn Grk “and after this – judgment.”

NET Notes: Heb 9:28

¹ sn An allusion to Isa 53:12.

² tn Grk “without sin,” but in context this does not refer to Christ’s sinlessness (as in Heb 4:15) but to the fact that sin is already dealt with by his first coming.

³ tn Grk “for salvation.” This may be construed with the verb “await” (those who wait for him to bring them salvation), but the connection with “appear” (as in the translation) is more likely.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:1

Then verily ^{( 1 )} the first [covenant] had also ordinances of divine service, and a ^{( a )} worldly sanctuary.

^{( 1 )} A division of the first tabernacle which he calls worldly, that is to say, transitory, and earthly, into two parts, that is, into the holy places, and the Holiest of all.

^{( a )} An earthy and a fleeting.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:3

And after ^{( b )} the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the ^{( c )} Holiest of all;

^{( b )} He calls it the second veil, not because there were two veils, but because it was behind the sanctuary or the first tabernacle.

^{( c )} The holiest sanctuary.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:5

And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the ^{( d )} mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.

^{( d )} The Hebrews call the cover of the ark of the covenant the mercy seat, which both the Greeks and we do also.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:6

^{( 2 )} Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service [of God].

^{( 2 )} Now he comes to the sacrifices which he divides into those daily sacrifices and that yearly and solemn sacrifice with which the high priest only but once every year entering into the Holiest of all with blood, offered for himself and the people.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:7

But into the second [went] the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and [for] the ^{( e )} errors of the people:

^{( e )} For the sins, see (Heb 5:2).

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:8

^{( 3 )} The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

^{( 3 )} Of that yearly rite and the ceremony, he gathers that the way into heaven was not opened by such sacrifices, which was shadowed by the Holiest of all. For why did only the high priest enter in, excluding all others, to offer sacrifices there both for himself and for others, and after, shut the Holiest of all again?

Geneva Bible: Heb 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.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:10

^{( 5 )} [Which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, ^{( g )} imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.

^{( 5 )} Another reason why they could not clear the conscience of the worshipper is because they were outward and carnal or material things.

^{( g )} For they were as you would say, a burden, from which Christ delivered us.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:11

^{( 6 )} But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, ^{( 7 )} by a ^{( h )} greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

^{( 6 )} Now he enters into the declaration of the types, and first of all comparing the Levitical high priest with Christ, (that is to say, the figure with the thing itself) he attributes to Christ the administration of good things to come, that is, everlasting, which those carnal things had respect to. ^{( 7 )} Another comparison of the first corrupt tabernacle with the latter, (that is to say, with the human nature of Christ) which is the true incorruptible temple of God, into which the Son of God entered, as the Levitical high priests into the other which was frail and transitory.

^{( h )} By a more excellent and better.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:12

^{( 8 )} Neither by the blood of ^{( i )} goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].

^{( 8 )} Another comparison of the blood of the sacrifices with Christ, the Levitical high priests entering by their holy places into the sanctuary, offered corruptible blood for one year only: but Christ entering into that holy body of his, entered by it into heaven itself, offering his own most pure blood for an everlasting redemption: for Christ is both the High Priest, Tabernacle, Sacrifices and Offerings themselves, indeed all those both truly and for ever.

^{( i )} For in this yearly sacrifice of reconciliation, there were two kinds of sacrifices, the one a goat, the other a heifer, or calf.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:13

^{( 9 )} For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the ^{( k )} purifying of the flesh:

^{( 9 )} If the outward sprinkling of blood and ashes of beasts was a true and effectual sign of purifying and cleansing, how much more shall the thing itself and the truth being present which in times past was shadowed by those external sacraments do it? That is to say, his blood, which is man's blood and also the blood of the Son of God, and therefore has an everlasting power of purifying and cleansing.

^{( k )} He considers the signs separately, being separate from the thing itself.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from ^{( l )} dead works to serve the living God?

^{( l )} From sins which proceed from death, and bring forth nothing but death.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:15

^{( 10 )} And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

^{( 10 )} The conclusion of the former argument: therefore seeing the blood of beasts did not purge sins, the new Testament which was promised before, to which those outward things had respect, is now indeed established by the power by which all transgressions might be taken away, and heaven indeed opened to us. It follows that Christ shed his blood also for the fathers, for he was foreshadowed by these old ceremonies, otherwise, unless they served to represent him, they were not at all profitable. Therefore this Testament is called the latter, not concerning the power of it, (that is to say, remission of sins) but in respect of that time in which the thing itself was finished, that is to say, in which Christ was exhibited to the world, and fulfilled all things necessary for our salvation.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:16

^{( 11 )} For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

^{( 11 )} A reason why the testament must be established by the death of the Mediator, because this testament has the condition of a testament or gift, which is made effective by death, and therefore that it might be effective, it must be that he that made the Testament, should die.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:18

^{( 12 )} Whereupon neither the first [testament] was dedicated without blood.

^{( 12 )} There must be a proportion between those things which purify and those which are purified: Under the law all those figures were earthly, the tabernacle, the book, the vessels, the sacrifices, although they were the signs of heavenly things. Therefore it was required that all those should be purified with some matter and ceremony of the same nature, that is, with the blood of beasts, with water, wool, hyssop. But under Christ all things are heavenly, a heavenly tabernacle, heavenly sacrifice, heavenly people, heavenly doctrine, and heaven itself is set open before us for an eternal home. Therefore all these things are sanctified in a similar way, that is, with the everlasting offering of the quickening blood of Christ.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:19

For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people ^{( m )} according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and ^{( n )} sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

^{( m )} As the Lord had commanded.

^{( n )} He used to sprinkle.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:23

[It was] therefore necessary that the ^{( o )} patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

^{( o )} The counterparts of heavenly things were earthly, and therefore they were to be set forth with earthly things, as with the blood of beasts, wool and hyssop. But under Christ all things are heavenly, and therefore they could not be sanctified with the offering of his living blood.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:24

^{( 13 )} For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, [which are] the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

^{( 13 )} Another twofold comparison: the Levitical high priest entered into the sanctuary, which was made indeed by the commandment of God, but yet with men's hands, that it might be a pattern of another more excellent, that is, of the heavenly place, but Christ entered into heaven itself. Again he appeared before the ark, but Christ before God the Father himself.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:25

^{( 14 )} Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

^{( 14 )} Another double comparison: the Levitical high priest offered other blood, but Christ offered his own: he every year once repeated his offering: Christ offering himself but once, abolished sin altogether, both of the former ages and of the ages to come.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:26

^{( 15 )} For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the ^{( p )} end of the world hath he appeared to put away ^{( q )} sin by the sacrifice of himself.

^{( 15 )} An argument to prove that Christ's offering should not be repeated: seeing that sins were to be purged from the beginning of the world, and it is proved that sins cannot be purged, but by the blood of Christ: he would have needed to have died repeatedly, since the beginning of the world. But a man can die only once: therefore Christ's sacrifice which was once done in the later days, neither could nor can be repeated. Seeing that it is so, surely the power of it extends both to sins that were before, and to sins that are after his coming.

^{( p )} In the later days.

^{( q )} That whole root of sin.

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:27

And as it is appointed unto men ^{( r )} once to die, but after this the judgment:

^{( r )} He speaks of the natural state and condition of man: For though Lazarus and certain others died twice, that was no usual thing, but extraordinary: and as for them that shall be changed, their changing is a kind of death. See 1Co 15:51

Geneva Bible: Heb 9:28

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of ^{( s )} many; ^{( 16 )} and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

^{( s )} Thus the general promise is restrained to the elect only: and we have to seek the testimony of our election, not in the secret counsel of God, but in the effects that our faith works, and so we must climb up from the lowest step to the highest, there to find such comfort as is most certain, and shall never be moved.

^{( 16 )} Shortly by the way he sets Christ as Judge, partly to terrify those who are not trusting in the only sacrifice of Christ once made, and partly to keep the faithful in their duty, so that they will not go back.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Heb 9:1-28

1 The description of the rites and bloody sacrifices of the law;

11 which are far inferior to the dignity and perfection of the blood and sacrifice of Christ.

Combined Bible: Heb 9:1-5

Typical Tabernacle   

(Hebrews 9:1-5)   

The principal design of the apostle in this epistle was to prove and make manifest that the "old covenant" which Jehovah made with Israel at Sinai, with all the ordinances of worship and the privileges connected therewith, had been Divinely annulled. This involved a complete change in the church-state of the Hebrews, but so far from this being a thing to deplore, it was to their unspeakable advantage. A "new covenant" had been inaugurated, and the blessings connected with it so far excelled those which had belonged to the old dispensation, that nothing but blind prejudice and perverse unbelief could refuse the true light which now shone, and prefer in its stead the dark shadows of a previous night. God never asks anybody to give up any thing without proffering something far better in return; and they who despise His offer are the losers. But prejudice is strong, and never harder to overcome than in connection with religious customs. Therefore does the Spirit labor so patiently in His argument throughout these chapters.  

The chief obstacle in the way of the Hebrews’ faith was their failure to perceive that every thing connected with the ceremonial law— the tabernacle, priesthood, sacrifices— was typical in its significance and value. Because it was typical, it was only preparatory and transient, for once the Antitype materialized its purpose was served. The shadows were no longer needed when the Substance was manifested. The scaffolding is dispensed with, taken away, as soon as the finished building appears. The toys of the nursery become obsolete when manhood is reached. Everything is beautiful in its proper season. Heavy garments are needed when the cold of winter is upon us, but they would be troublesome in summer’ s sunshine. Once we recognize that God Himself has acted on this principle in His dispensational dealings with His people, much becomes plain which otherwise would be quite obscure.  

The apostle had closed the 8th chapter by pointing out, "Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." In those words the Spirit had intimated the unescapable inference which must be drawn from the oracle given through Jeremiah. He had predicted a "new covenant," which received its fulfillment in the establishing of Christianity. The ushering in of the new order of Divine worship necessarily denoted that the previous economy was "old," and if so, its end must be nigh. The force of Hebrews 8:13 is as follows: "In that He says a ‘ new’ ": God would not have done so unless He had made the first "old." The "He hath made the first old" has an active significance and denotes an authoritative act of God upon the old economy, whereby the calling of the other "new" was the sign and evidence. God did not call the Christian dispensation "another covenant," or a "second covenant," but a "new" one, thereby declaring that the Judaic covenant was obsolete.  

The connecting link between the closing verses of chapter 8 and the opening verses of Hebrews chapter 9 may perhaps be set forth thus: although the old covenant or Mosaic economy was "ready to vanish away," nevertheless, it yields, even for Christians, important and valuable teachings. It is full of most blessed typical import, the record of which has been preserved both for the glory of its Author and the edification and joy of His saints. Wonderful indeed were the pictorial fore-shadowings which the Lord gave in the days of Israel’ s kindergarten. The importance of them was more than hinted at by God when, though He took but six days to make heaven and earth, He spent no less than forty days when instructing Moses concerning the making of the tabernacle. That clearly denoted that the work of redemptive grace, which was prefigured in Jehovah’ s earthly dwelling place, was far more glorious than the work of creation. Thereby are we taught to look away from the things which are seen, and fix our minds and affections upon that sphere where the Son of God reigns in light and love.  

"The general design of this chapter is the same as the two preceding, to show that Christ as High Priest is superior to the Jewish high priest. This the apostle had already shown to be true in regard to His rank, and to the dispensation of which He was the Mediator. He proceeds now to show that this was also true in reference to the efficacy of the sacrifice which He made: and in order to do this, he gives an account of the ancient Jewish sacrifices, and compares them with that made by the Redeemer. The essential point is, that the former dispensation was mere shadow, type, or figure, and that the latter was real and efficacious."— (A. Barnes).  

"Then verily the first had also ordinances of the Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary" (verse 1). Having in the former chapter given further proof of the excellency of Christ’ s sacerdotal office, by describing the superior covenant that was ratified thereby, the apostle now prepares the way to set forth the execution of that office, following the same method of procedure in so doing. Just as he had drawn a comparison between Aaron and Christ, so he now sets the ministrations of the one over against the Other, and this in order to prove that that of Christ’ s was most certainly to be preferred. He first approaches the execution of the Levitical priests’ office by mentioning several rites and types which appertained thereto.  

"Then verily the first had also ordinances of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." The apostle here begins the comparison which he draws between the old covenant and the new with respect to the services and sacrifices whereby the one and the other was established and confirmed. In so doing he is still dealing with what was to all pious Israelites a most tender consideration. It was in the services and sacrifices which belonged to the priestly office in the tabernacle that they had been taught to place all their confidence for reconciliation with God. If the apostle’ s previous contention respecting the abolition of the legal priesthood was granted, then it necessarily followed that the sanctuary in which they served and all the offerings which Moses had so solemnly appointed, became useless too. It calls for our closest attention and deepest admiration to observe how the Spirit led the apostle to approach an issue so startling and momentous.  

First, he is so far from denying that the ritual of Judaism was of human invention, that he declares, "verily (of truth) the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine service." Thus he follows the same method employed in the preceding chapters. In drawing his comparisons between Israel’ s prophets and Christ, the angels and Christ, Moses and Christ, Joshua and Christ, Aaron and Christ, he had said nothing whatever in disparagement of the inferior. So far from reviling the first member in each comparison, he had dwelt upon that which was in its favor: the more they could be legitimately magnified, the greater the glory accruing to Christ when it was proved how far He excelled them. So here: the apostle granted the principal point which an objector would make— why should the first covenant be annulled if God Himself had made it? Before giving answer to this (seemingly) most difficult question, he allows and affirms that the service of Judaism was of Divine institution. Thus, in the earliest ages of human history God had graciously appointed means for His people to use.  

The expression "ordinances of divine service" calls for a word or two by way of explanation. The word which is here rendered "ordinances’’ (margin "ceremonies") signifies rites, statutes, institutions. They were the appointments of God, which He alone had the right to prescribe, and which His people were under solemn bonds of observing, and that without any alteration or deviation. These "ordinances" were of "divine service" which is a single word in the original. In its verbal form it is found in Hebrews 8:5, "to serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things." In the New Testament it is always found in connection with religious or divine service: in Acts 24:14, Philippians 3:3 it is translated "worship." It signifies to serve in godly fear or trembling, thus implying an holy awe and reverence for the One served— cf. Hebrews 12:28. Thus, the complete clause means that under the Mosaic economy God gave His people authoritative enactments to direct their worship of Him. This law of worship was a hedge which Jehovah placed around Israel to keep them from the abominations of the heathen. It was concerning this very thing that God had so many controversies with His people under the old covenant.  

Care needs to be duly paid to the tense which the apostle here used: he said not "verily the first covenant has also ordinances, of divine service," but "had". He is obviously referring to the past. The Mosaic economy had those ordinances from the time God covenanted with Israel at Sinai. But that covenant was no longer in force; it had been Divinely annulled. The "verily the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine worship," clearly intimates that the new covenant too has Divine "ordinances." We press this because there are some who now affirm that even Christian baptism and the Lord’ s supper are "Jewish" ceremonies, which belong not to this present dispensation. But this error is sufficiently refuted by this word "also"— found in the very epistle which was written to prove that Judaism has given place to Christianity!  

"And a worldly sanctuary." The reference is (as the next verse plainly shows) to the Tabernacle, which Moses made in all things according to the pattern shown him in the mount. Many have been sorely puzzled as to why the Holy Spirit should designate the holy sanctuary of Jehovah a "worldly" one. Yet this adjective should not present any difficulty. It is not used invidiously, still less as denoting anything which is evil. "Worldly" is not here opposed to "spiritual,’’ but as that which belongs to the earth rather than to the heavens. Thus the force of "worldly" here emphasizes the fact that the Mosaic economy was but a transient one, and not eternal. The tabernacle was made here in this world, out of perishing materials found in the world, and was but a portable tent, which might at pleasure be taken down and set up again; while the efficacy of its services extended only unto worldly things, and procured not that which was vital and eternal. Note how in Hebrews 9:24 the "holy places made with hands" are set in antithesis from "heaven itself."  

We cannot but admire the wisdom given to the apostle in handling a matter so delicate and difficult. While his object was to show the immeasurable superiority of that which has been brought in by Christ over that which Judaism had enjoyed, at the same time he would own that which was of God in it. Thus, on the one hand, he acknowledges the service of the Levitical priests as "divine," yet, to pave the way for his further proof that Christ is a Minister of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 8:1, 2), he points out that the tabernacle of Judaism was but a "worldly" one. "The antithesis to worldly is heavenly, uncreated, eternal. Thus in the epistle to the Galatians, the apostle, speaking of the legal parenthetical dispensation, says we were then in bondage under the ‘ elements of the world’ (Heb. 4:3); and in the epistle to the Colossians he contrasts with the ‘ rudiments of the world’ (Heb. 2:20) the heavenly position of the believer who has died with Christ, and ‘ is no longer living in the world,’ but seeking the things above" (Adolph Saphir).  

"For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, And the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary" (verse 2). "The subject spoken of is the tabernacle: that which is in general affirmed of it is that it was ‘ made.’ There is a distribution of it into two parts in this and the following verse. These parts are described and distinguished by, first, their names; second, their situation with respect unto one another; third, their contents or sacred utensils. The one is described in this verse, by its situation: it was the ‘ first,’ that which was first entered into; then by its utensils, which were three; then by its name; it was called the sanctuary" (John Owen).  

"For there was a tabernacle made." A full description of it is to be found in the book of Exodus. The "tent" proper was thirty cubits, or forty-five feet in length, ten cubits, or fifteen feet in breadth, and the same in height. In shape it formed an oblong square. It was divided by a veil into two parts of unequal size. This continued to form God’ s house of worship until the days of Solomon, when it was replaced by the more permanent and magnificent temple. It is pertinent to ask at this point, Why should the Holy Spirit here refer to the "tabernacle" rather than to the temple, which was still standing at the time the apostle was writing? The word "tabernacle" is found ten times in this epistle, but the "temple" is not mentioned once. This is the more remarkable because Paul, more than any of the apostles, emphasized the resurrection of Christ, and the temple particularly foreshadowed Him in His resurrection and eternal glory; whereas the tabernacle principally prefigured Christ in His humiliation and lowliness. Yet the difficulty is easily solved: the temple was not erected till after Israel were thoroughly settled in their inheritance, and the Holy Spirit is here addressing a people who were yet in the wilderness!  

The Holy Spirit now makes a bare allusion to the holy vessels which occupied the two compartments of the tabernacle. But what rule has been given us to guide in and fix with certainty the interpretation of the mystical signification of these things? Certainly God has not left His people to the worthless devisings of their own imaginations. No, in this very epistle, He has graciously informed us that the tabernacle, and all contained in it, were typical of Christ, yet not as He may be considered absolutely, but as the Church is in mystical union with Him, for throughout Hebrews He is viewed in the discharge of His mediatory office. Thus the tabernacle, its holy vessels and services, supplied a representation of the person, work, offices and glories of Christ as the Head of His people. That it did so is clear from Hebrews 8:2— see our comments thereon. The "true tabernacle" there mentioned (our Lord’ s humanity) is not opposed to what is false and erroneous (the shrines of the heathen), but to the tabernacle of Moses, which was but figurative and transitory. In the Lord Jesus we have the substance of what Israel had only the shadow.  

"For there was a tabernacle made: the first (compartment) wherein was the candlestick." It is to be noted that no mention is here made of the outer court. In this omission, as in so many others, the anointed eye may clearly discern the absolute control of the Spirit over the sacred writers, moving and guiding them in every detail. In our articles upon Exodus (1926, etc.) we have attempted a much fuller exposition than can here be given. Suffice it now to say that everything connected with the outer court was fulfilled by Christ in the days of His flesh. The very fact that it was the "outer" court, accessible to all the people and unroofed, at once denotes to us Christ here in the world, openly manifested before men. Its brazen altar spoke of the cross, where God publicly dealt with the sins of His people. Its fine linen hangings spoke of Christ meeting the claims of God’ s righteousness and holiness. Its sixty pillars tell of the strength and power of Christ, "mighty to save." Its laver foreshadowed Christ cleansing His Church with the washing of water by the Word (John 13).  

Now as the outer court viewed Christ on earth, so the holy places pointed to Him in heaven. The holy place was a chamber which was entered by none save the priestly family, where those favored servants of Jehovah ministered before Him. It was therefore the place of communion. In perfect keeping with this, each of the three vessels that stood therein spoke of fellowship. The lampstand foreshadowed Christ as the power for fellowship, as supplying the light necessary to it. The table with its twelve loaves, prefigured Christ as the substance of our fellowship, the One on whom we feast. The incense altar typified Christ as the maintainer of fellowship, by His intercession securing our continued acceptance before the Father. The reason why the "incense altar" is not mentioned here in Hebrews 9 will be taken up when we come to verse 4.  

"For there was a tabernacle made: the first (compartment) wherein was the candlestick," or better, "lampstand." There was no window in the tabernacle, for the light of nature cannot reveal spiritual things. It was therefore illuminated from this holy vessel, which was placed on the south side, near the veil which concealed the holy of holies. A full description of it is given in Exodus 25:31-36. It was made of beaten gold, all of one piece, with all its lamps and ornamentations, so that it was without either joints or screws. Pure olive oil was provided for it.  

The very fact that the lampstand stood in the holy place, at once shows that it is not Christ as "the Light of the world" which is typified. It is strange that many of the commentators have erred here. The words of Christ on this point are clear enough: "as long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world" (John 9:5 and cf. Hebrews 12:35, 36): only then was He manifested here as such. But men loved darkness rather than light. They rejected the Light, and so far as they were concerned, extinguished it. Since Christ was put to death by wicked hands, the world has never again gazed on the Light. He is now hidden from their eyes. But He who was slain by the world, rose again, and then ascended on high; it is there in the Holy Place in God’ s presence, that the Light now dwells. And while there— O marvelous privilege— the saints have access to Him.  

Black shadows rest upon the world which has cast out the Light of Life: "the way of the wicked is as darkness" (Prov. 4:19). It is now night-time, for the "Dayspring from on high" is absent. The lampstand tells of the gracious provision which God has made for His own beloved people during the interval of darkness, ere the Sun of righteousness shall rise once more, and usher in for this earth that morning without clouds. Its seven branches and lamps constantly fed by oil, represented the fullness of light that is in Christ Jesus, and which by Him is communicated to His whole Church. The "oil" was poured into its lamps and then shed forth light from them. Such was and is the economical relation of the Spirit unto the Mediator. First, Christ was "anointed" with the Spirit "above His fellows" (Ps. 45:7 and cf. John 3:34), and then He sent forth the Spirit (Acts 2:33). Objectively the Spirit conveys light to us through the Word; subjectively, by inward and supernatural illumination.  

"And the table and shewbread" (verse 2). Though intimately connected, yet these two objects may be distinguished in their typical significance. The natural relation of the one to the other, helps us to perceive their spiritual meaning: the bread was placed upon and thus was supported by the table. The "table" speaks of communion. A beautiful picture of this is found in 2 Samuel 9. There David asks, "Is there yet any that is left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’ s sake?" (verse 1). A lovely illustration was this of the wondrous grace of God, showing kindness to those who belong to the house of His enemy, and that for the sake of His Beloved. There was one, even Mephibosheth, lame on his feet; him David "sent and fetched" unto himself. And then, to show he is fully reconciled to this grandson of his foe, David said, "but Mephibosheth thy master’ s son shall eat bread always at my table" (verse 10)— evidencing that he had been brought into the place of most intimate fellowship. 1 Corinthians 10:20, 21 also shows the spiritual significance of the "table."  

The "shewbread," or twelve loaves on the table, also spoke of Christ. "My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven" (John 6:32). The word "shewbread" is literally "bread of faces," faces being put by a figure for presence— pointing to the Divine presence in which the bread stood; "shewbread before Me always" (Ex. 25:30). The twelve loaves, like the twelve precious stones in the high priest’ s breastplate, pictured the twelve tribes of Israel being represented before God. Thus, in type, it was the Lord Jesus identifying Himself with His covenant people.  

"And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the holiest of all" (verse 3). The first veil was the "hanging" over the entrance into the tabernacle, shutting off from view what was inside from those who were in the outer court. It is described in Exodus 26:36, 37. The second veil, described in Exodus 26:31-33 and explained in Hebrews 10:20, was a heavy curtain which concealed the contents of the holy of holies from those in the holy place. The Levitical family ministered in the holy place, but none save the holiest of all, and he only one day in the year. Three things have been mentioned as occupying a place in the first tabernacle; seven objects are now mentioned in connection with the holiest of all.  

"Which had the golden censer" (verse 4). First, we would note the minute accuracy of the wording here. In verse 2 it was said "Wherein was the candlestick," etc., for the objects there mentioned belonged properly to the first compartment. But here it is, "which had the golden censer." Why? Because this utensil did not form part of the furniture of the holy of holies. To what then is the reference? Plainly to what is recorded in Leviticus 16:12, 13, "And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the (brazen) altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring within the veil: And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy-seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not."  

For three hundred and fifty-nine days in the year Aaron ministered at the golden or incense altar, which stood in the holy place; but on the remaining day, the annual "Day of Atonement," he did not. Instead, he used the "golden censer" of incense, passing with it within the veil. It is this which explains why there is no mention of the "golden altar" in verse 2, for the Holy Spirit is here treating (see the later verses) of the Judaic ritual on the Day of Atonement, and the fulfillment of the type by the Lord Jesus. That which was represented by the "golden censer" was the acceptability of Christ’ s person to God and the efficacy of His intercession. The beautiful type of Leviticus 16:12, 13 denotes that, in consequence of the satisfaction which Christ made unto God, completed at the cross, His mediatory intercession is a sweet savor unto the Father, and effective unto the salvation of His Church. The fact that the smoke of this perfume covered the ark and the mercy-seat, wherein was the law, and over which the symbol of the Divine presence abode, denoted that Christ has magnified the law, met its every requirement, and is the end of the law for righteousness unto everybody that believeth.  

"And the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’ s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant" (verse 4). The ark, with the mercy-seat which formed its lid or cover, was the most glorious and mysterious vessel of the tabernacle. It was the first thing made (Ex. 25:10, 11), yea, the whole sanctuary was built for no other end but to be, as it were, a house and habitation for the ark (Ex. 26:33). The ark was the outstanding symbol that God Himself was present among His people and that His covenant-blessing was resting upon them. It was the coffer in which the tables of the law were preserved. Its pre-eminence above all the other vessels was shown in the days of Solomon, for the ark alone was transferred from the tabernacle to the temple.  

The ark was an outstanding figure of the incarnate Son of God. The wood of which it was made, typified His sinless humanity. "Shittim" wood never rotted, and the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament renders it "incorruptible wood." The wood was overlaid, within and without, with gold, prefiguring Christ’ s Divine glory. The two materials of which the ark was made symbolized the union of the two natures in the God-man— "God manifest in flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16). The ark formed God’ s throne in Israel: "Thou that dwellest between the cherubim" (Ps. 80:1). Christ is the only One who perfectly enthroned God, honoring His government in all things. Each of the seven names given to the ark in the Old Testament sets forth some excellency in the person of Christ. Everything connected with its most remarkable history, as in Numbers 10:33, 14:44, Joshua 3:5-17, 6:4-20, etc., received its antitypical fulfillment in the God-man.  

"Wherein was the golden pot that had manna." Some have imagined a contradiction between this statement and what is said in 1 Kings 8:9, "There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone." But there is no conflict between the two passages, for they are not treating of the same point in time. Hebrews 9:4 is speaking of what was in the ark during the days when it was lodged in the tabernacle, whereas 1 Kings 8:9 tells of what comprised its contents after it came to rest in the temple. It is important to note this distinction, for it supplies the key to the spiritual interpretation of our verse: Hebrews 9:4 makes known God’ s provisions in Christ for His people while they are journeying through the wilderness. Thus the "manna" was Israel’ s food from Egypt to Canaan: type of Christ as the heavenly sustenance for our souls. The preservation of the manna in the golden pot, speaks of Christ in glory at God’ s right hand.  

"And Aaron’ s rod that budded." The reference is to what is recorded in Numbers 17. In the preceding chapter we read of a revolt against Moses and Aaron, occasioned by jealousy at the authority which God had delegated to His two servants. The revolt of Korah and his company was visited by summary judgment from on high, and was followed by a manifest vindication of Aaron. The form that vindication took is most instructive. The Lord bade Moses take the twelve tribal rods, writing the name of Aaron on Levi’ s, laying them up before the ark, and affirming that the one which should be made to blossom would indicate which had been chosen of God to the priestly tribe. Next morning it was found that Aaron’ s rod had "brought forth buds, and blossomed blossoms, and yielded almonds." Afterwards God ordered Moses to place Aaron’ s rod before the ark "to be kept for a token against the rebels." The lifeless rod being made to blossom was a figure of God’ s vindication of His rejected Son by raising Him from the dead. Thus it speaks of the resurrection-power of our great High Priest.  

"And the tables of the covenant." The reference is to Deuteronomy 10:1-5. The preservation of the two tables of stone (on which were inscribed the ten commandments) in the ark, foreshadowed Christ magnifying the law and making it honorable (Isa. 42:21). The fulfillment of this type is stated in Psalm 40:7, 8, where we hear the Mediator saying, "Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of Me: I delight to do Thy will, O My God; Yea, Thy law is within My heart." The Representative of God’ s people was "made under the law" (Gal. 4:4), and perfectly did He "fulfill" it (Matthew 5:17). Therefore is it written, "by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous" (Rom. 5:19). Thus may each believer exclaim, "In the Lord have I righteousness and strength" (Isa. 45:24).  

"And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy-seat: of which we cannot now speak particularly" (verse 5). At either end of the mercy-seat was the form of a cherub with outstretched wings, meeting in the center, thus overshadowing and as it were protecting God’ s throne. That there is some profound significance connected with their figures is clear from the prominent place which they occupy in connection with the description of the mercy-seat given in Exodus 25:17-22: mention is there made of the cherubim, in either the singular or plural number, no less than seven times. The mention of them in Genesis 3:24 suggests that they are associated with the administration of God’ s judicial authority. In Revelation 4:6-8 (cf. Ezekiel 1:5-10) they are related to God’ s throne. Here in Hebrews 9 they are called the "cherubim of glory" because the Skekinah abode between them.  

The mercy-seat, or better, "propitiatory," was the throne upon which the high priest placed the expiatory blood. It was not the place where propitiation was made— that was at the brazen altar— but where its abiding value was borne witness to before God. Romans 3:25 gives us the antitype: by the Gospel God now "sets forth" (Gal. 3:1) Christ as the One by whom He has been placated, as the One by whom His holy wrath against the sins of His people has been pacified, as the One by whom the righteous demands of His law were satisfied, as the One by whom every attribute of Deity was glorified. Christ Himself is God’ s resting-place in whom He now meets poor sinners in all the fullness of His grace because of the propitiation made by Him on the cross.  

The last clause of the verse is translated more literally in Bagster’ s Interlinear thus: "concerning which it is not now (the time) to speak in detail"— the "concerning which" is not to be restricted to that which is found here in verse 5, but takes in all that has been mentioned in verses 2-5. It would have led the apostle too far away from his subject of the high priest’ s service, to give an interpretation of the spiritual meaning of the tabernacle and everything in it. Nevertheless, he plainly intimates that every part of it had a specific significance as typical of the Lord Jesus and His ministry.  

  

  

Combined Bible: Heb 9:6-10

Contrasted Priests   

(Hebrews 9:6-10)   

At the commencement of our last article we stated that, the principal design of the apostle in this epistle was to prove and make manifest that the "old covenant" which Jehovah made with Israel at Sinai, with all the ordinances of worship and privileges connected therewith had been Divinely annulled. This involved a complete change in the church-state of the Hebrews, but so far from this being a thing to be deplored, it was to their unspeakable advantage. In prosecuting this design, the Holy Spirit through Paul does, as it were, remove the veil from off the face of Moses. In 2 Corinthians 3:13 we read, "And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished." These words direct attention to a profound spiritual truth which God (in keeping with His dispensational ways) caused to be mystically adumbrated or shadowed forth by a material and visible object.  

In 2 Corinthians 3:7 the apostle had spoken of the brightness of Moses’ face as a symbol of his ministry: the revelation which he received was a divine and glorious one. But because the truth communicated through Moses was in an obscure form (by types and emblems) he veiled himself. Paul, as a minister of the "new covenant" used "great plainness of speech" (2 Cor. 3:12), i.e., employing no "dark parables" or enigmatic prophecies, still less mysterious ceremonies. Moses wore a veil "that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished" (Heb. 3:7), i.e., to prevent their seeing the termination or fading away of the celestial brightness of his countenance. The mystical meaning of this was, God would not allow Israel to know at that time that the dispensation of the Levitical or legal ministry would ultimately cease. The publication of that fact was reserved for a much later date.  

"But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old covenant; which veil is done away in Christ" (2 Cor. 3:14). Yes, that "veil" which lay so heavily over the Mosaic types is now "done away in Christ," for He is that Antitype, the key which unlocks them, the sun which illuminates them. This, it is the great purpose of the Hebrews’ epistle to demonstrate. Here is doctrinally removed the "veil" from off the Mosaic institutions. Here the Spirit makes known the nature and purpose of the "old covenant." Here He declares the significance and temporal efficacy of all institutions and ordinances of Israel’ s worship. Here He announces that the Levitical rites and ceremonies made a representation of heavenly things, but insists that those heavenly things could not themselves be introduced and established without the removal of what had adumbrated them. Here He shows that the glory of God shines in the face of Jesus Christ.  

Three things there were which constituted the glory of the old covenant, and which the Jews so rested in they refused the Gospel out of an adherence unto them: the priestly office; the tabernacle with all its furniture, wherein that office was exercised; the duties and worship of the priests in that tabernacle by sacrifices, especially those wherein there was a solemn expiation of the sins of the whole congregation. In reference to them, the apostle proves: first, that none of them could make perfect the state of the Church, nor really effect assured peace and confidence between God and the worshippers. Second, that they were but typical, ordained to represent that which was far more sublime and excellent than themselves. Third, that the Lord Jesus Christ, in His person and mediation, was really and substantially, all that they did but prefigure, and that He was and did what they could only direct unto an expectation of.  

In Hebrews 7 the apostle has fully evidenced this in connection with the priestly office. In the 8th chapter he has done the same in general unto the tabernacle, confirming this by that great collateral argument taken from the nature and excellency of that covenant whereby the incarnate Son was the Surety and Mediator. Here in the 9th chapter, he takes up the services and sacrifices which belonged unto the priestly office in the tabernacle. It was in them that the Jews placed their greatest confidence for reconciliation with God, and concerning which they boasted of the excellency of their Church-state and worship. Because this was the chief point of difference between the Gospel-proclamation and those who repudiated it, and because it was that whereon the whole doctrine of the justification of sinners before God did depend, the apostle enters into minute detail, declaring the nature, use and efficacy of the sacrifices of the law, and manifesting the nature, glory and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ, whereby those others had been put an end to (condensed from John Owen).  

"Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God" (verse 6). Having made a brief reference to the structure of the tabernacle in its two compartments, and the furniture belonging to each of them respectively, the apostle now turns to consider the uses for which they were designed unto in the service of God. First, he says "these things were thus ordained," or as the Revised Version more correctly renders it, "thus prepared," for the Greek word (translated "made" in verse 2), signifies to dispose and arrange. When the things mentioned in verses 2-5 had been made and duly ordered, they stood not for a magnificent show, but were designed for constant use in the service of God. Hereby we are taught that, for any service to be acceptable to God, it must be in strict accord with the pattern He has given us in His Word: carefully ponder (1 Chron. 15:12, 13). Everything was duly prepared for Divine service before that service was performed. So in public service or Divine worship today there must be fit persons who, under the Spirit, are to lead it ‘‘ able ministers of the new testament" (2 Cor. 3:6); fit arrangements and order (1 Cor. 14:40), not mere human tradition (Matthew 15:9); a fit message unto edification (1 Cor. 14:26).  

"The priests went always into the first tabernacle." They only were allowed in the holy place that were the sons of Aaron; but even these were suffered to penetrate no farther, being barred from entrance into the holy of holies. This was in contrast from the high priest who entered the inner sanctuary, yet only on one day in the year. The word "always" is translated "continually" in Hebrews 13:15. It signifies constantly, at all times as occasion did require. Christians have been made "kings and priests unto God" (Rev. 1:6), and they are bidden to "give thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 5:20); to "rejoice evermore" and "pray without ceasing" (1 Thess. 5:16, 17).  

"Accomplishing the service of God." The translators have rightly added the last two words, for the "service" here is a Divine one. "Accomplishing the service of God" means that they officiated in the ministry of the sacred ceremonies. The daily services of the priests were two: the dressing of the lamps of the candlestick: supplying them with the holy oil, trimming their wicks, etc.; this was done every evening and morning. Second, the service of the golden altar, whereon they burned incense every day, with fire taken from off the brazen altar, and this immediately after the offering of the evening and morning sacrifices. Whilst this service was being performed, the people without gave themselves unto prayer (Luke 1:10). Their weekly service was to change the shewbread on the table, which was done every Sabbath, in the morning. All of this was typical of the continual application of the benefits of the sacrifice and mediation of Christ unto His people here in the world.  

The practical application to Christians now of what has just been before us, should be obvious. There ought to be family worship, both in the morning and in the evening. The replenishing of the oil in the lamps for continuous light, should find its counterpart in the daily looking to God for needed light from His Word, to direct our steps in the ordering of home and business life to His acceptance and praise. God has declared, "Them that honor Me I will honor, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed" (1 Sam. 2:30). If God be not honored in the home by the family "altar," then we cannot count upon Him blessing our homes! The burning of the incense should receive its antitype in morning and evening praise and prayer unto God: owning Him as the Giver of every good and every perfect gift, thanking Him for spiritual and temporal mercies, casting all our care upon Him, pleading His promises, and trusting Him for a continuance of His favors. The Greek word here for "accomplishing" is a compound, which signifies to "completely finish"— rendered "perfecting" in 2 Corinthians 7:1— denoting their service was not done by halves. May we too serve God wholeheartedly.  

"But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and the errors of the people" (verse 7). That to which the apostle here refers is the great anniversary- sacrifice of expiation, whose institution and solemnities are described at length in Leviticus 16. On the tenth day of the seventh month (which corresponds to our September) Israel’ s high priest, unattended and unassisted by his subordinates, entered within the holy of holies, there to present propitiating sacrifices before Jehovah. Divested of his garments of "glory and beauty" (Ex. 28:2, etc.) and clad only in "the holy linen" (Lev. 16:4), he first entered the sacred precincts bearing a censer full of burning coals and his hands full of incense, which was to be placed upon the coals, so that a cloud of incense should cover the mercy-seat (Lev. 16:12, 13); which spoke of the fragrant excellency of Christ’ s person unto God, when He offered Himself an atoning sacrifice. Second, he took of the blood of the bullock, which had been killed for a sin-offering for himself and his house (Lev. 16:11), and sprinkled its blood upon and before the mercy-seat (Heb. 16:14). Third, he went out and killed the goat which was a sin-offering for the people, and did with its blood as he had with that of the bullocks (Heb. 16:15).  

When the high priest’ s work within the veil had been completed, he came forth and laid both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confessed over him "all of the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat," which was then sent away "unto a land not inhabited" (Lev. 16:21, 22); all of which was typical of the Atonement made by the Lord Jesus, and of the plenary remission of sins through His blood. In the shedding of the victims’ blood and offering it by fire on the altar, there was a representation made of the vicarious imputation of guilt to the sacrifice, and the expiation of it through death. In the carrying of the blood into the presence of Jehovah and the sprinkling of it upon His throne, witness was borne to His acceptance of the atonement which had been made. In the placing of the sins of Israel upon the live goat and its carrying of them away into a land uninhabited, there was a foreshadowing of the blessed truth that, as far as the east is from the west so far hath God removed the transgressions of His people from before Him.  

"Into the second veil went the high priest alone: There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement" (Lev. 16:17). This denoted that Christ alone was qualified to appear before God on behalf of His people: none other was fit to mediate for them. "Once every year," to foreshadow the fact that Christ entered heaven for His people once for all: Hebrews 9:12. "Which he offered for himself," for he too was a sinner, and therefore incompetent to make real, efficacious and acceptable atonement for others; thereby intimating that he must yet give place to Another. "And for the errors of the people," which is to be interpreted in the light of the Old Testament expression "sins of ignorance" (Lev. 4:2; 5:15; Numbers 15:22-29), which are contrasted from deliberate or presumptuous sins (see Numbers 15:30, 31). Under the dispensation of law God graciously made provision for the infirmities of His people, granting them sacrifices for sins committed unwillingly and unwittingly. But for determined and open rebellion against His laws, no atoning sacrifice was available: see Hebrews 10:26.  

The distinction pointed out above is the key to Psalm 51:16, "For Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it." There is no room for doubt that David knew full well the terrible character of the sins which he committed against Uriah and his wife. Later, when he was convicted of this, he realized that the law made no provision for forgiveness. What, then, did he do? Psalm 51:1-3 tells us: he laid hold on God Himself and said, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise" (verse 17). It was faith, penitently, appropriating the mercy of God in Christ.  

"The Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing" (verse 8). The apostle now makes known the use which he intended to make of the description which had been given of the tabernacle and its furniture in verses 2-5: from the structure and order of its services he would prove the pre-eminency of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ above those which had belonged to the tabernacle. He points out that the Holy Spirit had provided instruction for Israel in the very disposal of their ancient institutions. Inasmuch as none but the high priest was permitted to pass within the veil, it was plainly intimated that under the Mosaic dispensation the people were barred from the very presence of God. Such a state of affairs could not be the ultimate and ideal, and therefore must be set aside before that which was perfect could be introduced.  

"The Holy Spirit this signifying:" the reference is to the arrangements which obtained in the tabernacle, as specified in the preceding verses. Here we learn that the third person of the blessed Trinity was immediately concerned in the original instructions given to Israel. This intimates in a most striking way the perfect union, unison and cooperation of the persons of the Godhead in all that They do. 2 Peter 1:21 declares that, "holy men of old spake, moved by the Holy Spirit," prominent among whom was Moses. In Exodus 35:1 we read, "Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of Israel together, and said unto them, These are the words which the Lord hath commanded"— the Holy Spirit moving Him to give an accurate record of all that he had heard from the Lord.  

"The Holy Spirit this signifying," or making evident, that "the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest." How did He thus "signify" this fact? By the very framework of the tabernacle: that is, by allowing the people to go no farther than the outer court, and the priests themselves only into the first compartment. "For things in His wisdom were thus disposed, that there should be the first tabernacle whereinto the priests did enter every day, accomplishing the Divine services that God required. Howbeit in that tabernacle there were not the pledges of the gracious presence of God. It was not the especial residence of His glory. But the peculiar habitation of God was separated from it by a veil, and no person living might so much as look into it on pain of death. But yet, lest the church should apprehend, that indeed there was no approach, here, nor hereafter, for any person into the gracious presence of God; He ordained that once a year the high priest, and he alone, should enter into that holy place with blood. Hereby he plainly signified, that an entrance there was to be, and that with boldness, thereinto. For unto what end else did He allow and appoint, that once a year there should be an entrance into it by the high priest, in the name of and for the service of the church? But this entrance being only once a year, by the high priest only, and that with the blood of the covenant, which was always to be observed whilst that tabernacle continued, he did manifest that the access represented was not to be obtained during that season; for all believers in their own persons were utterly excluded from it" (John Owen).  

"The way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest." The apostle is not now speaking of the second compartment in the tabernacle (as in verse 3), but of that which was typified by it. "Now, in that most holy place, were all the signs and pledges of the gracious presence of God; the testimonies of our reconciliation by the blood of the atonement, and of our peace with Him thereby. Wherefore, to enter into these holies is nothing but to have an access with liberty, freedom and boldness, into the gracious presence of God on the account of reconciliation and peace made with Him. This the apostle doth so plainly and positively declare in Hebrews 10:19-22 that I somewhat wonder so many learned expositors could utterly miss of his meaning in this place. The holies then is the gracious presence of God, whereunto believers draw nigh, in the confidence of the atonement made for them, and acceptance thereon: see Romans 5:1-3, Ephesians 2:14-18, Hebrews 4:14, 15’ (John Owen).  

But let us observe more closely this expression "the way into the holiest of all." This way is no other but the sacrifice of Christ, the true High Priest of the Church: as He Himself declared, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me" (John 14:6). Thus the ultimate reference here in "the holiest of all" is to Heaven itself, yet having a present and spiritual application unto access to and communion with God. The "way" into this is through faith in the sacrifice of Christ. Marvelously was this adumbrated here on earth at the moment of His death, for then the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom (Matthew 27:51), thereby opening a way into the holy of holies.  

But this access to God, or way into the holiest of all, "was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing." It is to be very carefully noted that the apostle did not say that there was then no way "provided" or "made use of," but only that it was not, during Old Testament times, "made manifest." There was an entrance into the presence of God, both unto grace and glory, for His elect, from the days of Abel and onwards, but that "way" was not openly and publicly displayed. By virtue of the everlasting covenant (the agreement between the Father and the Son), and in view of Christ’ s satisfaction in the fullness of time, salvation was applied to saints then, and they were saved by faith as we are now, for the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. But the open manifestation of these things waited for the actual exhibition of Christ in the flesh, the full declaration of His person and mediation by the Gospel, and the introduction and establishment of all the privileges of Gospel worship.  

"While as the first tabernacle was yet standing." The reference here is not to the first compartment or holy place, into which the priests entered and where they served, but is used synecdochially (a part put for the whole) for the entire legal system, which included the temples of Solomon and Zerubbabel. The "first tabernacle" is here spoken of in contrast from the "true tabernacle" of Hebrews 8:2, namely, the humanity of Christ, which was the antitype and succeeded in the room of the type— cf. Revelation 13:6! The apostle is here treating of what had its standing before God whilst the "first covenant" and Aaronic priesthood remained valid. He cannot be here referring to the "first tabernacle" as a building, for that had become a thing of the past, long centuries before he wrote this epistle. Yet the temples that succeeded it had their standing on the basis of the old covenant. This had now been annulled, and with it the whole system of worship which had so long obtained in Judaism.  

"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" (verse 9). Having briefly pointed out the emblematic significance of the two compartments of the tabernacle, the apostle now approaches his leading object in this paragraph, namely, to demonstrate that Christ had "obtained a more excellent ministry" than that which had belonged to the Levitical priesthood. This he does by giving a brief summary of the imperfections of the tabernacle and all its services, wherein the administration of the old covenant did consist. By calling attention to the defects of inadequacy of the Judaic system, the apostle adopted the most effective method of exposing the unreasonableness of the rejection of the more glorious Gospel by the majority of the Jews, and at the same time showed what folly and wickedness it would be for the believing Hebrews to return to that system.  

The apostle’ s design in verses 9, 10 is to show that, notwithstanding the outward excellency and glory of the tabernacle-system (through Divine appointment), yet, in the will and wisdom of God, that system was only designed to continue for a season, and that the time of its expiation had now arrived. That the Levitical priesthood and their services were never intended by God to occupy a perpetual place in the worship of His church, was evident from the fact that they were utterly unable to effect for His saints that which He had purposed and promised. Not only did the presence of the veil, which excluded all save Aaron from the presence-chamber of Jehovah, intimate that the ideal state had not yet come; not only did the annual repetition of the great atoning-sacrifice indicate that, as yet, the all-efficacious Sacrifice had not yet been offered; but all the gifts and sacrifices combined failed to "perfect as pertaining to the conscience." They were only "a figure for the time then present," an institution and provision of God "until the time of reformation."  

"Which was a figure for the time then present." The "which was" includes the tabernacle in both its parts, with all its vessels and services. The Greek word for "figure" here is not the same as the one rendered "type" in Romans 5:14 and "examples" in 1 Corinthians 10:6, 11, but is the term commonly translated "parable," as in Matthew 13:3, 10 etc. It is used here for one thing representing another. It signifies "figurative instruction." By means of obscure mystical signs and symbols God taught the ancient church. The great mystery of our redemption by Christ was principally made known by a parable, which was addressed to the eyes rather than to the ears. That was the method which God was pleased to employ, the means He used under the law, of making known things to come. "Which was a figure," is the Holy Spirit’ s affirmation that the structure, fabric, furniture and rites of the tabernacle were all vested with a Divine and spiritual significance. That the truly regenerate among Israel were acquainted with this fact is illustrated by the prayer of David, "Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law" (Ps. 119:18).  

"Which was a figure for the time then present." The verb here is of the preter-imperfect tense, signifying a time that was then present, but is now past. The reference is to what had preceded the establishment of the new covenant, before the full Gospel revelation had been made. The figurative instruction which God gave to the early Church was not designed to be of permanent duration. Nevertheless, a sovereign God saw fit to continue that obscure and figurative representation of spiritual mysteries for no less than fifteen hundred years. His ways are ever the opposite of man’ s. "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing" (Prov. 25:2)! But how thankful we should be that "the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth" (1 John 2:8). Still, let it not be overlooked that the revelation God made through the tabernacle was sufficient for the faith and obedience of Israel had it been diligently attended unto.  

"In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices." The Greek word for "sacrifices" is derived from a verb which means to kill, thus the reference here is to those oblations which were slaughtered. As distinguished from these, "gifts" were without life and sense, such as the meal-offering, oil, frankincense and salt which were mingled therewith (Lev. 2), the first-fruits, tithes, and all free-will offerings, which were presented by the priests. These were "offered" unto God, and that in the tabernacle, for there alone was it meet to offer them. So also was the "tabernacle" (Heb. 8:2) of Christ alone suited for its designed end. And what is the particular message this should have for the Christian heart? Surely to remind him of that word, "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service" (Rom. 12:1).  

"That could not make him perfect as pertaining to the conscience." These words are not to be understood as restricted to the officiating priest, rather do they look more directly to the person in whose stead he presented the offering to God. Here the apostle points out the imperfection of the whole tabernacle-order of things, and its impotency unto the great end that might be expected from it. To "perfect" a worshipper is to fit him, legally and experimentally, for communion with God, and for this there must be both justification and sanctification, and neither of these could the Levitical priests procure. They could neither remit guilt from before God, nor remove the stains of it from the soul. Where those are lacking, there can be no peace or assurance in the heart, and then the real spirit of worship is absent. As this (D.V.) comes before us again in Hebrews 10:2, we will not here further enlarge.  

Ere passing on to the next verse, it may be enquired, If then the Levitical sacrifices failed at this vital point, why were they ever appointed by God at all? To this question two answers may be returned. First, those sacrifices availed to remove the temporal governmental consequence of Israel’ s sins; when rightly offered, they freed from political and external punishment, so that continuance in the land of Canaan was preserved; but they cancelled not the wages of sin, removed not the eternal punishment which was due unto every sin by the law. Second, they directed the faith of the regenerate forward to the perfect sacrifice of Christ (which the Levitical offerings typically represented), the virtue and value of which was available to faith’ s appropriation from the beginning.  

"Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed until the time of reformation" (verse 10). To convince those to whom he was writing that the Levitical ceremonies were incapable of perfecting the conscience, the apostle here demonstrates the truth of this by pointing out their inadequate nature and character. The ordinances of Judaism corresponded closely with the old covenant, which was made with man in the flesh: its sanctuary and furniture were material— things of sight and sense; its ministry was not spiritual, but had to do only with external rites; its ablutions effected nothing more than a ceremonial cleansing, and entirely failed to purify the heart, as faith does (Acts 15:9).  

The "service" of the tabernacle-system "stood only in meats and drinks." This expression refers to the sacrifices and libations, which consisted of flesh and bread, oil and wine. "And divers washings": first, that of the priests themselves (Ex. 29:4, etc.), for whose use the "laver" was chiefly intended (Ex. 30:18, 31:9, etc.); second, of the various parts of the burnt-offering sacrifice (Lev. 1:9, 13); third, of the people themselves when they had contracted defilement (Lev. 15:8,16, etc.). "And carnal ordinances" which refers, most probably, to the whole system of laws pertaining to diet and manner of life. "Which stood only in," this is emphatic; the rites of Judaism were solely external and fleshly, there being nothing spiritual joined with them. Thus their insufficiency to procure spiritual and eternal blessings was evident: legal meats and drinks could not nourish the soul; ceremonial washings could not purify the heart.  

"Imposed until the time of reformation." "The word for ‘ imposed’ is properly ‘ 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 (Acts 15:10). And if the imposition of them be principally intended, as we render the word ‘ impose,’ 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 to the Galatians. And it was impossible that those things should perfect a church-state, which in themselves were such a burden, and effective of such a bondage" (John Owen).  

The institutions of the Levitical service possessed a general character of externality and materialty: as verse 13 of our chapter says, they sanctified "to the purifying of the flesh," but they reached not the dire needs of the soul. Therefore they were not designed to continue forever, but for a determined and limited season, namely, "unto the time of reformation," which expression respected the appearing of the promised Messiah to inaugurate the new and better covenant: see Luke 1:68-74. "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law; to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Gal. 4:4, 5).  

  

  

Combined Bible: Heb 9:11-14

Redemption   

(Hebrews 9:11-14)   

In Hebrews 8:6 the apostle had affirmed, "He is the Mediator of a better covenant." Such a declaration would raise a number of important issues which are here anticipated and settled. Who is the High Priest of the new covenant? What is the tabernacle wherein He administered His office? What are the particular services He performed, answering to those which God appointed unto Aaron and His successors? Wherein do the services of the new High Priest excel those of the Levitical? These were pressing questions, and it was necessary for them to be Divinely answered, not only for the silencing of objectors, but that the faith of believing Jews might be established. Thus, in Hebrews 9:11, 12 we have the actual ministry of Christ declared, in verses 13,14 the proofs that it was "more excellent."  

The 9th chapter of Hebrews contains a particular exemplification of this general proposition: Christ is the substance of the Levitical shadows. The general proposition was stated in Hebrews 8:1, 2: Christians have an High Priest who is a Minister of the true tabernacle. Here in chapter 9 confirmation is given of what was pointed out at the close of chapter 8, namely, that Christ’ s bringing in of the new covenant did abrogate the old. In exemplifying this fact mention is made in Hebrews 9:1-10 of sundry shadows of the law, in verse 11 and onwards it is shown that the antitypical accomplishment of them was in and by Jesus Christ. The contents of verses 1-10 may be reduced to two heads: ordinances of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary in which they were observed. In verses 11-28 the Spirit magnifies the excellency of Christ’ s priesthood by showing that He brought in what the Aaronic rites were unable to secure (condensed from W. Gouge, 1650).  

The contents of these verses which are now to be before us set forth the ministry of Christ as "the Mediator of the new covenant." They describe His initial work as the High Priest of His people. They set forth the inestimable value of His sacrifice, and what it procured. They magnify His precious blood and the character of that redemption which was purchased thereby. Each verse calls for a separate article, and every clause in them demands our closest and most reverent attention. May the Spirit of God deign to open unto us something of their blessed contents, and apply them in power to our hearts. We purposely cut down our introductory comments that more space may be reserved for the exposition.  

"But Christ being come an high priest of goods things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood, He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us" (verses 11, 12). "These words naturally call attention to two things: The official character with which our Lord is invested, and the ministry which He has performed in that official character. His official character: He is ‘ come an high priest of good things to come.’ His ministry in that official character: ‘ He has obtained eternal redemption for His people,’ " (John Brown).  

"But Christ being come an High Priest." The opening word emphasizes a contrast: the legal high priest "could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience" (verse 9): "But Christ"— could. The title here given the Savior deserves particular notice. He is referred to in a considerable variety of ways in this epistle, and many different designations are there accorded Him. Each one is used with fine discrimination, and the reader loses much by failing to distinguish the force of "Jesus," "Christ," "Jesus Christ," "our Lord," "The Son," etc. Here (and also in Hebrews 3:6, 14; 5:5; 6:1; 9:14, 24, 28; 11:26) it is "Christ," the Messiah (John 1:41), His official designation, a term that means "The Anointed," see Psalm 2:2 and cf. Acts 4:26. Great emphasis is placed by the Holy Spirit upon this title: "the Christ" (John 20:31), "that Christ" (John 6:69), "very Christ" (Acts 9:22), "The Lord’ s Christ" (Luke 2:26), "The Christ of God" (Luke 9:20).  

"But Christ being come an High Priest." Under the name of the Messiah or Anointed One, He had been promised unto Israel for many centuries, and now the accomplishment had arrived. In a moment of doubt, His forerunner, in prison, sent unto Him asking, "Art Thou He that should come?" (Matthew 11:3). Upon the fulfillment of God’ s promise that He would send the Messiah, give a perfect revelation of His will, and bring in "perfection," the faith of the Jewish church was built. And now God’ s Word was verified, the true Light shone. The awaited One had come: "in the character in which He was promised, having done all that it was promised He should do" (John Brown). Therefore does the Holy Spirit here give the Redeemer His official, and distinctively Hebrew, title. "But Christ being come" no doubt looks back, especially to Psalm 40:7.  

"But Christ being come an High Priest." True, He came also as Prophet (Deut. 18:15, 18), and as King (Matthew 2:2), but here the Holy Spirit especially emphasizes the sacerdotal office of Christ, because it was in the exercise of that He offered Himself as a sacrifice unto God. The words which we are now considering begin a new division of this Epistle, though it is intimately related to what has gone before. In Hebrews 9:11endash 10:22 the Holy Spirit sets before us the antitype of Leviticus 16, which records the work of Israel’ s high priest on the annual day of atonement. There we behold Aaron officiating both outside the veil and within it. So the priestly functions of Christ fall into two great divisions, as they were performed on earth and as they are now continued in heaven. Before our great High Priest could enter the Holiest on high and there make intercession before God, He had first to make an atonement for the sins of those He represented, which was accomplished in His state of abjection here below, being consummated by His offering Himself a sacrifice unto God: 7:27, 8:3, 9:26.  

A priest is one who officiates in the name of others, who approaches to God in order to make atonement for them by sacrifice. The design of his ministry is to render the Object of their worship propitious, to avert His wrath from men, to procure their restoration to His favor: see Leviticus 16. Thus, the work of the priest is mediatory. Since the fact of sin is a cardinal one in the case of man, the function of a mediating priest for man must be mainly expiatory and reconciling: Hebrews 8:3. It should serve as a most solemn warning unto all today that, while the Jews believed their Messiah would be both a prophet and king, they had no expectation of His also being priest, who should redeem sinners unto God. One who should go forth in the terror of His power, subjugating the nations and restoring the kingdom to Israel, appealed to their carnality; but for One to minister at the altar, employ His interest with God on behalf of transgressors, draw near to the Divine Majesty in their name, and mediate peace between them and an offended Creator, seems to have had no place in their thoughts. Hence it is that the priesthood of Christ is given such a prominent place in this epistle to the Hebrews.  

"But Christ being come an High Priest." As to the time of His investiture with this office, it was clearly co-incident to the general office of Mediator. At the same moment that God appointed His Son "Mediator," He was constituted the Prophet, the Priest, and the Potentate of His Church. Prospectively, that took place in the eternal councils of the blessed Trinity, when in the "everlasting covenant" the Father appointed the Son and the Son agreed to be the Mediator between Him and His people. Historically, the Son became the Mediator at the moment of His incarnation: there is "one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5); as soon as He was born, He was hailed as "Christ, the Lord" (Luke 2:11). Formally, He was officially consecrated to this office at His baptism, when He was "anointed (Christed) with the Holy Spirit and with power" (Acts 10:38).  

"But Christ being come an High Priest," and this according to the eternal oath of the Father, which "oath" was afterwards made known to the sons of men in time. This was before us when we considered Hebrews 7:20-25. It was "by the word of the oath" that the Son is consecrated to His priestly office (Heb. 7:28), the "oath" denoting God’ s eternal purpose and unchanging decree. In Psalm 2:7 we read that God said, "I will declare the decree," and accordingly in Psalm 110:4 we are told, "The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek"— there it was openly published. That God’ s "oath" preceded Christ’ s entrance upon and discharge of His sacerdotal office is clear from Hebrews 7:20-25, otherwise the force of the apostle’ s reasoning there would be completely overthrown.  

"But Christ being come an High Priest," otherwise He could not have "offered" Himself a sacrifice to God. As we saw when pondering Hebrews 5:6,7, Christ was exercising His sacerdotal functions in "the days of His flesh," i.e., the time of His humiliation. So too it was as "a merciful and faithful High Priest" that Christ "made propitiation for the sins of the people" (Heb. 2:17). The types foreshadowed the same thing, especially Leviticus 16. Aaron was not constituted a priest by entering the holy of holies; he was such before, or otherwise he could not have passed within the veil. Every passage which speaks of Christ’ s one oblation or His "offering" Himself once are conclusive as His being a priest on earth, for that word "once" cannot possibly be understood of what He is now doing in heaven; it must refer to His death as an historical fact, completed and finished here below: it is in designed contrast from His continuous intercession which is based upon it. The priestly sacrifice which He offered is emphatically described as co-incident with His death: Hebrews 9:26. Any one of the common people could slay the sin-offering (Lev. 4:27-29), but none save the priest could offer it to God (Lev. 4:30)! Thus, every verse which speaks of Christ "offering" Himself to God emphasizes the priestly character of His sacrifice.  

"An high priest of good things to come." The reference here is to that more excellent dispensation which the Messiah was to inaugurate. Old Testament prophecy had announced many blessings and privileges which He would bring in, and accordingly the Jews had looked forward to better things than they had enjoyed under the old economy. The apostle here announces that this time had actually arrived, that the promised blessings had been procured by the High Priest of Christianity. As the result of Christ’ s advent, life and death, righteousness had been established, peace had been made, and a new and living way opened, which gave access to the very presence of God. Different far were these blessings from what the carnal Jews of Christ’ s day desired. Of course the "good things to come" are not to be restricted to those blessings which God’ s people already enjoy, but include as well those which yet await them. The "good things" are summed up in "grace and glory," and are in contrast from "the wrath to come" (Matthew 3:7).  

"By a greater and more perfect tabernacle." This repeats what was said in Hebrews 8:2. The reference is to the human nature which the Son of God took unto Himself. "The Word became flesh and (Greek) tabernacled among us" (John 1:14). Christ officiated in a much more glorious habitation than any in which Aaron and his successors served. Most appropriately was the humanity of the Savior called a "tabernacle" for "in Him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9). Additional confirmation that the "greater and more perfect tabernacle" here referred to Christ’ s body, is supplied by Hebrews 10:20, where the Holy Spirit again applies to Him the language of the Mosaic tabernacle and shows that in the Lord Jesus is found the antitype— "through the veil, that is to say His flesh."  

"By a greater and more perfect tabernacle." There is both a comparison and a contrast between the tent which Moses pitched and the human habitat in which the Son of God abides: for the comparison we refer the reader to our comments upon Hebrews 8:2. The contrast is first pointed by the word "greater," the Antitype far surpassing the type both in dignity and worth. The humanity of Christ, in its conception, its framing, its gracious endowments by the Holy Spirit, and particularly because of its union to and subsistence in the divine person of the Son, was far more excellent and glorious than any earthly fabric could be. "The human nature of Christ doth thus more excel the old tabernacle, than the sun does the meanest star" (John Owen). Of old God declared, "I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir" (Isa. 13:12)— a prophecy which obviously had its fulfillment in the Man Christ Jesus.  

"And more perfect tabernacle": this points the second contrast between the type and the Antitype. As the word "greater" refers to the superior dignity and excellency of the humanity of Christ over the materials which comprised the tabernacle of Moses, so the "more perfect" respects its sacred use. The body of Christ was "more perfectly fitted and suited unto the end of a tabernacle, both for the inhabitation of the divine nature, and the means of exercising the sacerdotal office in making atonement for sin, than the other was. So it is expressed in Hebrews 10:5, ‘ Sacrifice and burnt-offering Thou wouldst not, but a body hast Thou prepared Me.’ This was that which God accepted, wherewith He was well pleased, when He rejected the other to that end" (John Owen). Probably the Holy Spirit has used this expression "more perfect" here because it was also through Christ’ s service in this "tabernacle" that His people had been "perfected forever."  

"Not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building." Further reference is here made to the humanity of Christ by a double negation: "Not made with hands" is set in opposition to the Jewish tabernacle, which was made by the hands of men (Ex. 36:1-8). The humanity of Christ was the product of Him that hath no hands, even God Himself. Thus the expression here is the same as "which the Lord pitched, and not man" in Hebrews 8:2. Then how much "greater" was the "more perfect Tabernacle"! The temple of Solomon was a most sumptuous and costly building, yet was it erected by human workmen, and therefore was it an act of infinite condescension for the great God to dwell therein: "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee; how much less this house that I have builded?" (1 Kings 8:27). Reference to the supernatural humanity of Christ was made in Daniel 2:45: He was to be a "Stone," cut out of the same quarry with us, yet "without hands," i.e., without the help of nature, begotten by a man.  

"That is to say, not of this building," words added to further define the preceding clause— the term rendered "building" is translated "creature" in Hebrews 4:13. The humanity of Christ belonged to a totally different order of things than ours: there is no parallel in the whole range of creation. "Although the substance of His human nature was of the same kind with ours, yet the production of it in the world, was such an act of Divine power, as excels all other Divine operations whatever. Wherefore, God speaking of it, saith ‘ The Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a Man’ (Jer. 31:22) or conceive Him without natural generation" (John Owen). How blessed to see that God is so far from being confined to natural means for the effecting of His holy counsels, that He can, when He pleases, dispense with all the ordinary methods and "laws" by which He works, and act contrary to them.  

"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us" (verse 12). Having shown that in Christ’ s person we have the antitype of the tabernacle, the apostle now proceeds to set forth that which was foreshadowed by the entrance of Israel’ s high priest into the holy of holies on the day of atonement: this he does both negatively and positively, that the difference between the shadow and the substance might more evidently appear. The design of this verse is to display the pre-eminence of Christ in the discharge of His priestly office above the legal high priest. This is seen, first, in the excellency of His sacrifice, which was His own blood; second, in the holy place whereinto He entered by virtue of it, which was Heaven itself; third in the effect of it, in that by it He procured "eternal redemption."  

"Neither by the blood of goats and calves": it was by means of these that Aaron entered the holy of holies on the day of atonement (Lev. 16:14,15)— the apostle here uses the plural number because of the annual repetition of the same sacrifice. In Leviticus 16, the "calf" or young bullock (of one year old) is mentioned first; perhaps the order is here reversed because the "goat" was specifically for the people, and it is Christ redeeming His people which is the dominant thought. It was by virtue of the blood of these animals that Aaron entered so as to be accepted with God. The reference here is not directly to what the high priest brought with him into the holiest— or the "incense" too had been mentioned— but to the title which the sacrifices gave him to approach unto the Holy One of Israel.  

"But by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place." Here we are brought directly unto the great mystery of the priestly work of Christ, especially as to the sacrifice which He offered unto (God to make an atonement for the sins of His people. The "holy place"— called in Hebrews 9:8 "the Holiest of all"— signifying Heaven itself, the dwelling-place of God. This is unequivocally established by Hebrews 9:24 "into heaven itself." There never was any place to which this title of "holy place" so suitably belonged: thus it is designated in Psalm 20:6 "His holy heaven." And when was it that Christ entered Heaven by virtue of the merits of His own blood? Almost all of the commentators take the reference here as being to His ascension. But this we deem to be a mistake, and one from which erroneous conclusions of a most serious nature have been drawn. The writer is fully satisfied that what is affirmed in this verse took place immediately after Christ, on the cross, triumphantly cried "It is finished." Some of our reasons for believing this we give below.  

First , the typical priest’ s entrance within the veil took place immediately after the victim’ s death: its body being carried without the camp to be burned in a public place, its blood being taken into the holiest, to be sprinkled on the propitiatory, covering the ark. Those closely-connected acts in the ritual were so related that, the burning followed last in order. Now Hebrews 13:11 clearly establishes the fact that that typical action coincided with Christ’ s sacrifice outside Jerusalem: therefore, to make Christ’ s entrance into heaven occur forty days after His death, destroys the type. In pouring out His blood on the cross and surrendering His spirit into the hands of the Father, Christ expiated sin, and at that very moment the veil of the temple was rent, to denote His entrance into the presence of God. No sooner had He expired, than He entered Heaven, claiming it for Himself and His seed. His resurrection testified to the fact that God had accepted His sacrifice, that justice had been fully satisfied, and that He was now entitled to the reward of His obedience. His resurrection was the antitype of Aaron’ s return from the holy of holies unto the people, which was designed as a proof that Divine wrath had been averted and forgiveness secured.  

Second , Aaron began by laying aside his robes of glory (Lev. 16:4), putting on only linen garments: that was far more in keeping with Christ’ s abasement at the cross, than His triumph and glory at His ascension. Third , when Aaron entered the holy of holies, atonement was not yet completed: that awaited his sprinkling of the blood upon the propitiatory. Therefore, if the antitype of this occurred not until the ascension of Christ, His sacrifice waited forty days for God’ s acceptance of it. Fourth , while Aaron was within the veil, the people without were full of fear for the high priest, lest he fail to appease God. Similar was the state of Christ’ s disciples during the interval between His death and resurrection: they remained in a state of suspense and doubt, dejection and dread. But far different were they immediately after His ascension: contrast Luke 24:21 and 24:52, 53! Fifth , God’ s rending of the veil at the moment of Christ’ s death was deeply significant: it was the Divine imprimature upon the Son’ s "It is finished." It was the outward adumbration in the visible realm to image forth what had taken place in the spiritual— Christ’ s entrance into heaven. In like manner, Christ’ s appearance to the disciples after His death, and His "peace be unto you," evidenced that peace had been made, that the atonement was completed.  

"By His own blood He entered in," entered heaven as the Surety of His people, as their "Forerunner" (Heb. 6:20). That which gave Him the right to do so was the perfect satisfaction which He had made, a satisfaction which honored God more than all our sins dishonored Him, which magnified the law and made it honorable. It was not the shedding of His blood alone which constituted His satisfaction or atonement, any more than a heart-belief in His resurrection (Rom. 10:9) without "faith in His blood" (Rom. 3:25) would save a sinner. He "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:8), and what He there voluntarily endured was the climax and consummation of His redemptive work. "His own blood" emphasises its inestimable value. It was the blood of the "Son" (Heb. 1:2, 3). It was the blood of "God" incarnate (Acts 20:28). Well might the Holy Spirit call it "precious" (1 Pet. 1:19). No greater price could have been paid for our redemption. How vile and accursed, then, must sin be, seeing it can only be expiated by so costly a sacrifice! What claims Christ has upon His own! Well might He say, "Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:33).  

"He entered in once into the holy place." The word "once" is that which has led so many to conclude that the reference was to the Savior’ s ascension. But this, we have endeavored to show above, is a mistake. As we shall (D.V.) yet see, Hebrews chapters 9 and 10 contemplate a double entrance of Christ into heaven in fulfillment of the double type— Aaron and Melchizedek. That Christ did enter heaven at death is clear from His words to the thief (Luke 23:43); 2 Corinthians 12:2, 4 places "paradise" in the third heaven. In every other passage where the term "once" occurs concerning the atoning work of Christ, it is always used contrastively with the frequent repetitions of the Old Testament sacrifices: see Hebrews 7:27; 9:7, 25, 26; 10:11, 12. That which is contemplated is Christ’ s presenting His satisfaction unto God. His ascension was for the purpose of intercession, which is continuous, and not completed.  

"Having obtained eternal redemption," and this before He entered Heaven. To "redeem" is to deliver a person from a state of bondage, and that by the payment of an adequate ransom-price. Four things were required unto our redemption. It must be effected by the expiating of our sins. It must be by such an expiation that God, as the supreme Ruler and Judge should accept. It must be by rendering such a satisfaction to the Law, that its precepts are fulfilled and its penalty endured, so that its curse is removed. It must annul the power of Satan over us. How all of this was accomplished by the Redeemer, we have shown in our articles upon His "Satisfaction." This "redemption" is eternal, which is in contrast from Israel’ s of old— after their deliverance from Egypt they became in bondage to the Philistines and others. As the blood of Christ can never lose its efficacy, so none redeemed by Him can ever again be brought under sin’ s dominion.  

"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ" (verses 13, 14). Having again demonstrated the pre-eminency of our Priest in verses 11, 12, the apostle now exhibits the superior efficacy of His sacrifice. By a synecdoche all sacrifices of expiation and all ordinances of purification appointed under the law are here summarized: the blood of lambs, etc., being included. The particular reference in the "ashes of an heifer" being to Numbers 19:2-17, with which should be carefully compared John 13:1-15. It is principally the use of the ordinance of Numbers 19 which is here in view. An heifer having been burned, its ashes were preserved, that, being mixed with pure water, they might be sprinkled on persons who had become legally unclean. When an Israelite, through contact with death, became ceremonially defiled, he was cut off from all the public worship of Jehovah; but when he carried out the instructions of Numbers 19 he was restored.  

Those "ashes," then, were a most merciful provision of God; without them, all acceptable worship had soon ceased. They had an efficacy, for they availed to the purifying of the flesh, which was a temporary, external and ceremonial cleansing. Typically, they pointed to that spiritual, inward and eternal cleansing which the blood of Christ provides. "The defilements which befall believers are many, and some of them unavoidable whilst they live in this world: yea, the best of their services have defilements adhering to them. Were it not that the blood of Christ, in its purifying virtue, is in a continual readiness unto faith, that God therein had opened a fountain for sin and uncleanness, the worship of the church would not be acceptable unto Him. In a constant application thereunto, doth the exercise of faith much consist" (John Owen).  

"How much more shall the blood of Christ," etc. If the blood and ashes of beasts, under the appointment of God, were efficacious unto an external and temporary justification and sanctification— that is, the removal of both guilt and ceremonial pollution— how much more shall the sacrifice of Him who was promised of old, was the Anointed and therefore the One ordained and accepted of God, effectually and eternally cleanse those to whom it is applied  

"The blood of Christ is comprehensive of all that He did and suffered in order unto our redemption, inasmuch as the shedding of it was the way and means whereby He offered Himself (in and by it) unto God" (John Owen).  

"Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself." There has been considerable difference of opinion as to whether the "eternal Spirit" has reference to the Divine nature of Christ animating and sustaining His humanity, or to the third Person of the Trinity. That which settles the point for us is this: Christ "offered Himself" to God: that is, in His entire person, while acting in His mediatorial office. As the Mediator, He took upon Him the "form of a servant," and therefore was He filled and energized by the Spirit in all that He did. Christ was "obedient unto death:" as He was subject to the Spirit in going into the wilderness (Matthew 4:1), so the Spirit led Him a willing victim to the cross. This wondrous statement shows us the perfect cooperation of the Eternal Three, concurring in the great work of redemption.  

Christ offered Himself "without spot," to God. There is a double reference in these words: unto the purity of His person, and to the holiness of His life. There is both a moral and a legal sense to the expression. It speaks of Christ’ s fitness and meetness to be a sacrifice for our sins. Not only was there no blemish in His nature and no defect in His character, but there was every moral excellence. He had fulfilled the law in thought, word and deed, having loved the Lord His God with all His heart and His neighbor as Himself. Therefore was He fully qualified to act for His people.  

"Purge your conscience from dead works." This is one of the effects produced by Christ’ s sacrifice, an effect which the legal ordinances were incapable of securing. Because Christ’ s sacrifice has expiated our sins, when the Spirit applies its virtues to the heart, that is, when He gives faith to appropriate them, our sense of guilt is removed, peace is communicated, and we are enabled to approach God not only without dread, but as joyous worshippers. The "conscience" is here specially singled out (cf. Hebrews 10:22 for the larger meaning) because it is the proper seat of the guilt of sin, charging it on the soul, and hindering an approach unto God. By "dead works" are meant our sins as unto their guilt and defilement— cf. our comments on Hebrews 6:1. True believers are delivered from the curse of the law, which is death.  

"To serve the living God," not simply in outward form but in sincerity and in truth. This is the advantage and blessing which we receive from our conscience being purged. Christians have both the right and the liberty to "serve God." The "living God" cannot be served by those who are dead in sins, and therefore alienated from Him. But the sacrifice of Christ has purchased the gift of the Spirit unto all for whom He died, and the Spirit renews and equips the saint for acceptable worship. "This is the end of our purgation: for we are not washed by Christ that we may plunge ourselves again into new filth, but that our purity may serve to glorify God" (John Calvin). Under the word "serve" is comprised all the duties which we owe unto God, not only as His creatures, but as His children. Then let us earnestly seek grace to put Romans 12:1 into daily practice.  

  

  

Combined Bible: Heb 9:15

Mediator   

(Hebrews 9:15)   

The proposition which the apostle is occupied with proving and illustrating in this section of the epistle is that which was laid down in Hebrews 8:6, "But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises." In the verses which were before us in the last article, the superiority of Christ over Aaron was brought out in the following respects. First, in that He officiated in a more excellent tabernacle (verse 11). Second, in that He offered to God a superior sacrifice (verses 11, 14). Third, in that He has entered a more glorious sanctuary (verse 12). Fourth, in that He secured a more efficacious redemption (verse 12). Fifth, in that He was moved by a more excellent Spirit (verse 14). Sixth, in that He obtained for His people a better cleansing (verse 14). Seventh, in that He made possible for them a nobler service (verse 14).  

Christ has "obtained eternal redemption" for His people. As we pointed out in our last article, to "redeem" signifies to liberate by the paying of a ransom-price: "If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed" (John 8:36). The freedom which the Christian has is, first, a legal one: he has been "redeemed from the curse of the law" (Gal. 3:13). Because of this, second, he enjoys an experimental freedom from the power of sin: "sin shall not have dominion over you" (Rom. 6:14). Justification and sanctification are never separated: where God imputes the righteousness of Christ. He also imparts a principle of holiness, the latter being the fruit or consequence of the former; both being necessary before we can be admitted into heaven. Because the blood of Christ has fully met every claim of God upon and against His people, its virtues and purifying effects are applied to them by the Spirit. Both of these were foreshadowed under the Levitical types of the old economy, and are seen in Hebrews 9:13.  

"The blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean" sanctified "to the purifying of the flesh." There is here both a comparison and a contrast. The comparison is between the type and the Antitype; the contrast, between what the one and what the other effected. Those typical rites procured only a temporary "redemption" from the governmental consequences of sin; Christ’ s sacrifice has secured an "eternal redemption" from all the consequences of sin. A double type is referred to in Hebrews 9:13. No single sacrifice could adequately represent the power and efficacy of the blood of Christ. By the "blood of bulls and goats" the guilt of Israel’ s sins were temporarily removed; by the sprinkling of the "ashes of an heifer" they were ceremonially purified from the defilements of the wilderness. We quote below a valuable footnote from Adolph Saphir:  

"The ashes of an heifer. It was to take away the defilement of death. The institution is recorded in the book of Numbers as relating to the provision God makes for His people in their wilderness journey. As no blood of the slain victim was ‘ incorruptible,’ it was necessary, in order to show the cleansing by blood from defilement through contact with death to have as it were the essential principle of blood, presented in a permanent and available form. The red heifer, which had never been under the yoke, symbolizes life in its most vigorous, perfect, and fruitful form. She was slain without the camp (Heb. 13:11, Numbers 19:3, 4). She was wholly burnt, flesh, skin, and blood, the priest casting cedar-wood, hyssop, and scarlet into the fire. The ashes of the burnt heifer, put into flowing water, were then sprinkled with hyssop for ceremonial purification . . . Christ is the fulfillment. For the blood of Christ is not merely, so to speak, the key unlocking the holy of holies to Him as our High Priest and Redeemer, it is not merely our ransom by which we are delivered out of bondage, and, freed from the curse, are brought nigh unto God; but it also separates us from death and sin. It is incorruptible, always cleansing and vivifying; through this blood we are separated from this evil world, and overcome; by this blood we keep our garments white (John 6:53, Revelation 7:14).  

"What had necessarily to be separated in the types, is here in unity and perfection. Likewise, what really and potentially is given to us when we are first brought into the state of reconciliation and access, of justification and sanctification, is in our actual experience continually repeated. We have been cleansed and sanctified once and forever; the same blood, remembered and believed in, cleanseth us continually. The difference between this continual cleansing and the first (according to John 13:10) must never be forgotten, or we fall into a legal condition, going back from the holy of holies into the holy place. But, on the other hand we must not forget the living character of the blood, which by the Spirit is continually applied to us, and by which we have peace, renewal of the sense of pardon, and strength for service (1 Pet. 1:2)."  

Having pointed out what God’ s people are redeemed from, the Holy Spirit next makes a brief notice of what Christ has redeemed unto. He has delivered us from the curse of the law and the bondage of sin; He has also procured for us an "eternal inheritance": His satisfaction has merited for us the favor and image of God and everlasting bliss in His presence. In referring to this, the Spirit also takes occasion to bring out the fact that the sacrifice of Christ was necessary in order for God to make good His promises of old. Herein too He once more meets the Jewish prejudice— why must this great High Priest die? The death of Christ was requisite in order to the accomplishing of God’ s engagements to Abraham and his (spiritual) seed, to confirm His covenant-pledges, which, once more, brings into view the relation which Christ sustains to the everlasting covenant.  

"And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" (verse 15). Each word in this verse requires to be duly weighed and carefully considered both in the light of what immediately precedes and follows, otherwise we are certain to err. The opening "And" is plain intimation that no new subject begins here, which at once disposes of the figment that this and the next verses require to he placed in a parenthesis. The apostle continues to treat of what was before him in the verses which we considered in the last article. He is still showing the excellency of our High Priest and the superior efficacy of His sacrifice. That the contents of this verse are by no means free from difficulty is readily allowed, yet its leading thoughts are plain enough.  

"And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament." The Greek words for "for this cause" are rendered "therefore" in Hebrews 1:9 and other places. They signify, because of this, or for this reason. There has been a great deal of discussion as to precisely what is referred to in "for this cause": some insisting that it looks back to what has been affirmed in the previous verses, others contending that it points forward to that which is declared in the second half of this verse. Personally, we believe that both are included. There is a fullness to God’ s words which is not to be found in man’ s, and whenever an expression is capable of two or more meanings, warranted by the context and the analogy of faith, both should be retained. Let us then look at the two thoughts here brought together.  

"For this cause": because of the superior nature and efficacy of the sacrifice which Christ was to offer, God appointed Him to be the Mediator of the new covenant. It was out of (prospective) regard unto the fitness of Christ’ s person and the excellency of His offering, that God ordained Him to make mediation between Himself and His fallen people. Because He should make an effectual atonement for their sins and provide a way whereby their troubled consciences might have peace, God decreed that His Son, becoming incarnate, should interpose between poor sinners and the awful Majesty they have offended. "For this cause": and also, because it was only by means of death that the transgressions under the first testament could be redeemed and the called receive the promise of eternal inheritance, Christ was appointed Mediator of the new covenant.  

With his usual sagacity John Owen combined both ideas: "It is evident there is a reason rendered in these words, of the necessity of the death and sacrifice of Christ, by which alone our consciences may be purged from dead works. And this reason is intended in these words, ‘ For this cause.’ And this necessity of the death of Christ, the apostle proves both from the nature of His office, namely, that He was to be the Mediator of the new covenant, which, being a testament, required the death of the testator; and from what was to be effected thereby, namely, the redemption of transgressions, and the purchase of an eternal inheritance. Wherefore, these are the things which he hath respect unto in these words."  

"He is the Mediator of the new testament." It seems strange that some of the best of the expositors understand this to mean that after Christ had "offered Himself without spot to God" he became "the Mediator," which is indeed a turning of things upside down and a putting an effect for a cause. A mediator is one who stands between two parties, and two parties at variance, and that with the object of settling the difference between them, that is, of effecting a reconciliation. Hence we read, "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1 Tim. 2:5, 6). The second half of our verse ought to have prevented such a blunder: "He is the Mediator of the new testament, that by means of death they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."  

As we pointed out in our comments upon Hebrews 8:6, it is most important to recognize that Christ is a sacerdotal Mediator, that is, one who has interposed His sacrifice and intercession between God and His people in order to their reconciliation. In voluntarily undertaking to serve as Mediator between God and His people considered as fallen creatures, two things were required from Christ. First, that He should completely remove that which kept the covenanters at a distance, that is, take away the cause of enmity between them. Second, that He should purchase and procure, in a way suited unto the glory of God, the actual communication of all the good things— summed up in "grace and glory" (Ps. 84:11)— which belong to those whose Surety He was. This is the foundation of the "merits" of Christ and of the grant of all blessings unto us for His sake.  

In what has just been pointed out, we may perceive an additional signification to the opening "And" of our verse. Christ is not only "High Priest" (verses 11-14), but "Mediator" too. He undertook office upon office in order to our greater good. Christ is, in the "new covenant" or "testament," the Mediator, Surety, Priest and Sacrifice, all in His own person. In order that we may have something like a definite conception of these, let us consider, separately, the various relations which our blessed Redeemer sustains to the everlasting covenant. First, He is the Surety of it: Hebrews 7:22. As such He engaged to render full satisfaction to God on behalf of His people, to do and suffer for them all that the law required. He transferred to Himself all their obligations, undertaking to pay all their debts. In other words, He substituted Himself in their place and stead, in consequence of which there was a double imputation: God reckoning to Christ all their liabilities, God imputing to them His perfect righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21).  

As the "Surety" Christ most blessedly fulfilled the type of Genesis 43:9, being Sponsor to His Father for all His beloved Benjamins, Hebrews 2:13, Isaiah 49:5, 6, John 10:16. Second, as the Mediator of the covenant (Heb. 12:24), He took His place between God and His people, undertaking to maintain the interests and secure the honor of both parties, by perfectly reconciling the one to the other. As the "Mediator" Christ has blessedly fulfilled the type of Jacob’ s "ladder," uniting heaven and earth. Third, as the Messenger (Mal. 3:1) or "Angel" of the covenant (Rev. 8:3-5) He makes known God’ s purpose and will to His people, and presents their requests and worship to Him. Fourth, as the Testator of the covenant (Heb. 9:16) He has ratified it and made bequests and gifts to His people. Finally, and really first, as the Head of the whole election of grace, the covenant was made with Him by God: Psalm 89:3, etc.  

"For this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament." Here again there has been an almost endless controversy as to whether this last word should be rendered "covenant" or "testament," that is, "will." The same Greek word has been translated by both these English terms, some think wrongly so, for a "covenant" is, strictly speaking, an agreement or contract between two parties: the one promising to do certain things upon the fulfillment of certain conditions by the other; whereas a "testament" or "will" is where one bequeaths certain things as gifts. Thus there seems to be little or nothing in common between the two concepts, in fact, that which is quite contrary. Nevertheless, our English translators have rendered the Greek word both ways, and we believe, rightly so. Nevertheless it remains for us to enquire, why should the same term be rendered "covenant" in Hebrews 8:6 and "testament" in Hebrews 9:15? Briefly, the facts are as follows.  

First, the word "diatheke" occurs in the Greek New Testament thirty-three times, having been translated (in the A.V.) "covenant" twenty times (twice in the plural number) and "testament" thirteen times, four of the latter being used in connection with the Lord’ s supper. Second, in the Sept. version (the translation of the Hebrews Old Testament into Greek) this word "diatheke" occurs just over two hundred and fifty times, where, in the great majority of instances, it is used to translate "berith." Third, the Greek word "diatheke" is not that which properly denotes a covenant, compact, or agreement; instead, the technical terms for that is "syntheke," but the Spirit never once uses this word in the New Testament. Fourth, on the other hand, it should be noted that the Hebrew language has no distinctive word which means a will or testament. Fifth, the most common use of the term "diatheke" in the New Testament, particularly in 2 Corinthians 3 and in Hebrews, neither denotes a "covenant" proper (a stipulated agreement) nor a "will," but instead, an economy, a dispensational arrangement or ordering of things.  

Now it needs to be very carefully noted that from Hebrews 9:15 to the end of the chapter, the apostle argues from the nature of a will or "testament" among men, as he distinctly affirms in verse 16. His manifest object in so doing was to confirm the Christian’ s faith in the expectation of the benefits of this "covenant" or "testament." Nor did he violate the rules of language in this, straining neither the meaning of the Hebrews "berith" nor the Greek "diatheke," for there is, actually, a close affinity between the two things. There are "covenants" which have in them free grants or donations, which is of the nature of a "testament"; and there are "testaments" whose force is resolved into conditions and agreements— as when a man wills an estate to his wife on the stipulation that she remains a widow— which is borrowed from the nature of a "covenant."  

If we go back to the Old Testament and study the various "covenants" which God made with men, it will be found again and again that they were merely declarations whereby He would communicate good things unto them, which has more of the nature of a "testament" in it. Sometimes the word "covenant" was used simply to express a free promise, with an effectual donation and communication of the thing promised, which also has more of the nature of a "testament’’ than of a "covenant." Thus, once more, we perceive a fullness in the words of the Holy Spirit which definitions from human dictionaries do not include. That which was a "covenant," has become to us a testament. The "covenant" was made by God with Christ. By His death that which God pledged Himself to do unto the heirs of promise in return for the work which Christ was to perform, is now bequeathed to us as a free gift: what was a legal stipulation between the Father and the Mediator, comes to us purely as a matter of grace.  

Some have insisted that "the Mediator of the new covenant" is understandable, but that "Mediator of the new testament" is no more intelligible than the "testator of a covenant" would be. Our answer is that, the Spirit of God is not tied by the artificial rules which bind human grammarians. Romans 8:17 tells us that Christians are "heirs of God," that is of the Father, yet He has not died! No figure must be pressed too far. Some have argued that because the Church is the Body of Christ, it cannot also be His "Bride," but such carnal reasoning is altogether inadmissible upon spiritual and Divine things; as well might we argue that because Christ calls us "brethren" (Heb. 2:12), therefore we cannot be His "children" (Heb. 2:13); or that because Christ is the "everlasting Father" of Israel (Isa. 9:6), He cannot also be their "Husband" (Isa. 54:5). The truth is, that Christ is both the Mediator of the new covenant, and the Mediator of the new testament, looking at the same office from two different angles. God has so confirmed the promises in Christ (2 Cor. 1:20), that at His death He made a legacy of them and bequeathed them to His people in a testamentary form.  

To sum up what has been said on this difficult but important subject: throughout the New Testament the Holy Spirit has intentionally used only the one word "diatheke"— though there was another in the Greek language ("syntheke") which more exactly expressed a "covenant"— because it was capable of a double application, and that, because the Son of God is not only the Mediator of a new covenant, but also the Testator of His own gifts. Thereby God would fix our gaze on the cross of Christ and see there that what had up to that day existed as a "covenant," then ,became for the first time, a "testament"; and that while the covenant between the Father and the Son is from everlasting, the "new testament" dates only from Calvary.  

"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament." This states one of the principal ends which God had in view when appointing Christ to be the "Mediator," namely, to deliver His people from all the bondage they were subject to as the result of their violations of His law, and that by the payment of a satisfactory price. But, it may be asked, why not "the redemption of the transgressors" rather than "transgressions"? Did Christ purchase sins? The reference is to His expiation of His people’ s iniquities, and they were "debts," and Christ’ s death was a discharge of that debt. "The discharge of a debt is a buying it out. Thus to redeem sins is no more harsh a phrase than to be ‘ delivered for our offenses’ (Rom. 4:25), or ‘ who gave Himself for our sins’ (Gal. 1:4), or to be ‘ merciful to their unrighteousness,’ Hebrews 8:12’ (William Gouge).  

"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament.’’ In these words the Spirit makes a further exhibition of the virtue and efficacy of Christ’ s death, by affirming that it paid the price of remitting the sins of the Old Testament saints. Here again the apostle is countering the Jewish prejudice. The death of Christ was necessary not only if sinners of New Testament times should be fitted to serve the living God (verse 14), but also to meet the claims which God had against the Old Testament saints. The efficacy of Christ’ s atonement was retrospective as well as prospective: cf. Romans 3:25. The true (in contrast from the typical), spiritual (in contrast from the ceremonial), and eternal (in contrast from the temporal), "redemption’’ of the Old Testament saints was effected by the sacrifice of Christ. The same thing is clearly implied in Hebrews 9:26: had not the one offering of Christ— as the Lamb "foreordained before the foundation of the world" (1 Pet. 1:19, 20)— been of perpetual efficacy from the days of Abel onwards, then it had been necessary to repeat it constantly in order to redeem believers of each generation. It was God’ s eternal purpose that Christ’ s atonement, settled in the "everlasting covenant," should be available to faith from the beginning. Hence, the apostle said. "Through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins (cf. Galatians 3:8, Hebrews 4:2), and by Him all that believe— Old Testament saints as truly as the New Testament— are justified from all things" (Acts 13:38, 39).  

"Now, if any one asks, whether sins under the Law were remitted to the fathers, we must bear in mind the solution already stated,— that they were remitted; but remitted through Christ. Then notwithstanding their external expiations, they were always held guilty. For this reason Paul says that the law was a handwriting against us (Col. 2:14). For when the sinner came forward and openly confessed that he was guilty before God, and acknowledged by sacrificing an innocent animal that he was worthy, of eternal death, what did he obtain by his victim, except that he sealed his own death as it were by this handwriting? In short, even then they only reposed in the remission of sins, when they looked to Christ. But if only a regard to Christ took away sins, they could never have been freed from them, had they continued to rest in the law" (John Calvin).  

"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament.’’ It remains for us to ask, Why this limitation? for Christ atoned for the sins of those who were to believe as much as for those who had, before He became incarnate, looked in faith to Him. First, because a measure of doubt or uncertainty could exist only concerning them. Some have taught, and possibly some in the apostle’ s day thought, that naught but earthly blessings would be the portion of those who died before the present dispensation. Therefore to remove such a doubt, it is affirmed that Old Testament believers too were redeemed by Christ’ s blood. Second, because the apostle had pressed so hard the fact that the Levitical sacrifices could not remove moral guilt from those who lived under the Mosaic economy, he shows Christ’ s sacrifice had. Third, because by just consequence it follows that, if those who trusted Christ of old had redemption of their transgressions through Him, much more they who are under the new testament. "The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin" (1 John 1:7): it was just as efficacious in taking away the transgressions of believers before it was actually shed, as it is of cleansing believers today, nineteen centuries after it was shed.  

"They which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.’’ Here the "heirs" are designated by character rather than by name, by this qualification (Greek) "they which have been called," that is, effectually so, or truly converted to God. In John 1:12 this privilege of heir-ship is settled upon "believers," such as do heartily accept of Christ and His grace. In Acts 26:18 and Colossians 1:12 the heirs are described as "sanctified," that is, as personally dedicated to God and set apart to live unto Him. This expression "the called" is a descriptive appellation of the true spiritual people of God, and looks back to the "call" of Abraham (Heb. 11:8), who, in consequence of the mighty workings of divine grace in his heart, turned his back upon the world and the things of the flesh (Gen. 12:1), and entered the path of faith’ s obedience to God. Only those possessing these marks are the spiritual "children" of Abraham, such as have been "called with a holy calling" (2 Tim. 1:9).  

"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." This is the goal toward which the apostle has been steadily moving, as he has passed from clause to clause in this verse. That the called of God might receive the promise of eternal inheritance was the grand ultimate object of the "everlasting covenant" so far as men are concerned, and the chief design of the new testament. But an obstacle stood in the way, namely, the transgressions or sins of those who should be "called." In order to the removal of that obstacle, Christ must die that death which was due unto those transgressions. For the Son of God to die, He must be appointed unto a mediatorial position and become incarnate. Because He was so appointed, because He did so die, because He has redeemed from all transgressions, the "eternal inheritance" is sure unto all His people, His heirs, the "called" of God.  

"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." The children of Israel received from God an external call which separated them from the heathen, and when they were redeemed from Egypt they received promise of a temporal or earthly inheritance. But inside that Nation was "a remnant according to the election of grace," and they, individually, received from God an inward call, which made them the heirs of an eternal inheritance. It is of these latter that our verse speaks, yet as including also the saints of the present dispensation. Promise of an "eternal inheritance" had the Old Testament saints. They had the Gospel preached unto them (Heb. 4:2). They were saved through "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 15:11) as well as we. They "did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink," even Christ (1 Cor. 10:3, 4). And therefore did they "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly" (Heb. 11:16). How all of this sets aside the preposterous figment of the modern "dispensationalists," who relegate "Israel" to an inferior inheritance from that which belongs to "the Church"!  

"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." What is meant by the first four words here? First, let us very briefly define the "eternal inheritance." By it we understand God’ s "great salvation" (Heb. 2:3), considering it in its most comprehensive sense, as including justification, sanctification and glorification. It is that blessed estate which Christ has purchased for "His own," here called an "inheritance" to remind us that the way whereby we come unto it is by a gratuitous adoption, and not by any merits of our own. Now as the state of those who are to receive it is twofold, namely, in this life and in that which is to come, so there are two parts of this inheritance: "grace and glory." Even now "eternal life" is communicated to those who are called according to God’ s purpose. But "grace" is only "glory" begun: the best "wine" is reserved for the time to come. For the future aspect of the "eternal inheritance" see 1 Peter 1:3-5.  

The way whereby God conveys this "eternal inheritance" is by "promise": see Galatians 3:18 and Hebrews 6:15-18. And this for a threefold reason at least. First, to manifest the absolute freeness of the grant of it: the "promise" is everywhere opposed unto everything of "works" or desert in ourselves: Romans 4:14, etc. Second, to give security unto all the heirs of it, for the very veracity and faithfulness of God is behind the promise: Titus 1:1, etc. Since God has "promised" to bestow the "inheritance," nothing in, of, or from the heirs can possibly be an occasion of their forefeiting it: 1 Thessalonians 5:24. Third, that it might be by faith, for what God promises necessarily requires faith, and faith only, unto its reception: Romans 4:16. The "receive the promise" has a double force. First, it is to "mix faith" with it (Heb. 4:2), to appropriate it (Heb. 11:13, 17), so as not to stagger at it in unbelief (Rom. 4:20, 21). Second, it is to receive the fulfillment of it. As unto the foundation of the whole inheritance, in the sacrifice of Christ, and all the grace, mercy and love, with the fruits thereof, these are communicated to believers in this life: Galatians 3:14. As unto the consummation, the future state in glory, we "receive the promise" by faith, rest thereon, and live in the joyous expectation of it: Hebrews 11:13.  

In conclusion, let us sum up the contents of this remarkable verse, adopting the analysis of John Owen. 1. God has designed an "eternal inheritance" unto certain persons. 2. The way in which a right or title is conveyed thereunto is by "promise." 3. The persons unto whom this inheritance is designed, are the "called." 4. The obstacle which stood in the way of their enjoyment of this inheritance was their "transgressions." 5. That this obstacle might be removed, and the inheritance enjoyed, God made a "new covenant,’’ because none of the sacrifices under the first covenant, could expiate sins. 6. The ground of the efficacy of the "new covenant" unto this end was, that it had a Mediator, a great High Priest. 7. The means whereby the Mediator of the new covenant did expiate the sins against the first testament was by "death," and this of necessity, seeing that this new covenant, being also a "testament," required the death of the Testator. 8. The death of this Mediator has taken away sins by "the redemption of transgressions." Thus, the promise is sure unto all the seed.  

  

  

Combined Bible: Heb 9:16-22

New Testament   

(Hebrews 9:16-22)   

Having affirmed (Heb. 9:12, 14) that the blood of Christ is the means of the believer’ s redemption, in verse 15, the apostle proceeds to make further proof of this basic and vital truth. His argument here is taken from the design and object of Christ’ s priesthood, which was to confirm the covenant God had made with His people, and which could only be done by blood. First, he affirms that the Savior was "the Mediator of the new testament." Many functions were undertaken by Him. Just as one type could not set forth all that the Lord Jesus did and suffered, so no single office could display all the relations which He sustained and all the benefits He procured for us. That which is done by a prophet, by a priest, by a king, by a surety, by a mediator, by a husband, by a father, that and more has been done by Christ. And the more dearly we observe in Scripture the many undertakings of Christ for us, as seen in His varied relations, the more will He be endeared to our hearts, and the more will faith be strengthened.  

Christ’ s undertaking to be a "Mediator" both procured a covenant to pass between God and men, and also engaged Himself for the performance thereof on both parts. This could only be by a full satisfaction being rendered to Divine justice, by the shedding of blood infinitely valuable as His was. To assure His people of their partaking of the benefits of God’ s covenant, the cross of Christ has turned that covenant into a testament, so that the conditions of the covenant on God’ s part (its requirements: namely, perfect obedience rendered to His law, and thus "everlasting righteousness’’ being brought in: Daniel 9:24; and full satisfaction being taken by the law for the sins of His people) might be so many legacies, which being ratified by the death of the Testator, none might disannul.  

Unspeakably blessed as are the truths expressed (so freely) above, there is another which is still more precious for faith to apprehend and rest on, and that is, that behind all offices (so to speak), lying at the foundation of the whole dispensation of God’ s grace toward His people, is the mystical oneness of Christ and His Church: a legal oneness, which ultimates by the Spirit’ s work in a vital union, so that Christ is the Head and believers are the members of one Person (1 Cor. 12:12, 13). This, and this alone, constituted the just ground for God to impute to Christ all the sins of His people, and to impute to them the righteousness of Christ for their justification of life. What Christ did in obeying the law is reckoned to them as though that obedience had been performed by them; and in like manner, what they deserved on account of their sins was charged to and endured by Him, as though they themselves had suffered it: see 2 Corinthians 5:21.  

The first spring of the union between Christ and His Church lay in that eternal compact between the Father and the Son respecting the salvation of His people contemplated as fallen in Adam. In view of the human nature which He was to assume, the Lord Christ was "predestinated" or "foreordained" (1 Pet. 1:20) unto grace and glory, and that by virtue of the union of flesh unto His Godhead. This grace and glory of the God-man was the exemplary cause and pattern of our predestination: Romans 8:29, Philippians 3:21. It was also the cause and means of the communicating of all grace and glory unto us, for we were "chosen in Him before the foundation of the world" (Eph. 1:4). Christ was thus elected (Isa. 42:1) as Head of the Church, His mystical body. All the elect of God were then committed unto Him, to be delivered from sin and death, and brought unto the enjoyment of God: John 17:6, Revelation 1:5, 6.  

In the prosecution of this design of God, and to effect the accomplishment of the "everlasting covenant" (Heb. 13:20), Christ undertook to be the "Surety" of that covenant (Heb. 7:22), engaging to answer for all the liabilities of His people and to discharge all their legal responsibilities. Yet was it as Priest that Christ acted as Surety: God’ s "Priest," our "Surety." That is to say, all the activities of Christ were of a sacerdotal character, having God for their immediate object; but as these activities were all performed on our behalf, He was a Surety or Sponsor for us also. As the "Surety" of the covenant, Christ undertook to discharge all the debts of those who are made partakers of its benefits. As our Surety He also merited and procured from God the Holy Spirit, to communicate to His people all needful supplies of grace to make them new creatures, which enables them to yield obedience to God from a new principle of spiritual life, and that faithfully unto the end.  

When considering the administration of the "everlasting covenant’’ in time, we contemplate the actual application of the grace, benefits and privileges of it unto those for whose sakes it was devised and drawn up. For this the death of the Mediator was required, for only through His blood-shedding is the whole grace of the covenant made effectual unto us. This it is which is affirmed in Hebrews 9:15, and which we considered at length in our last article. In the passage which is now to be before us, the apostle does two things: first, he refers to a well known fact which is everywhere recognized among men, namely, that a will or testament requires the death of the testator to give it validity. Second, he refers to an Old Testament type which exemplifies the principle which he is here setting before us.  

"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (verses 16, 17). That which is found in verses 16-23 is really of the nature of a parenthesis, brought in for the purpose of showing why it was necessary for the incarnate Son to die. In verse 24 the apostle returns to his proofs for the superiority of the ministry of Christ over Aaron’ s. What we have in verses 16, 17, is brought in to show both the need for and the purpose of the death of Christ, the argument being drawn from the character and design of that covenant of which He is the Mediator. Because that covenant was also to be a "testament" it was confirmed by the death of the Testator. Appeal is made to the only use of a will or testament among men.  

The method by which the apostle here demonstrates the necessity of Christ’ s death as He was "the mediator of the new testament’’ is not merely from the signification of the word "diatheke" (though we must not lose sight of its force), but as he is speaking principally of the two "covenants" (i.e., the two forms under which the "everlasting covenant" has been administered), it is the affinity which there is between a solemn covenant, and a testament, that he has respect unto. For it is to be carefully noted that the apostle speaks not of the death of Christ merely as it was a death, which is all that is required of a "testament" as such, without any consideration of the nature of the testator’ s death; but he speaks of it also (and primarily) as it was a sacrifice by the shedding of His blood (verses 12, 14, 18-23), which belongs to a Divine covenant, and is in no way required by a "testament." Thus, we see again the needs-be for retaining the double meaning and force of the Greek word here.  

There has been much needless wrangling over the Divine person alluded to under the word "Testator," some insisting it is Christ, some the Father, others arguing the impossibility of the latter because the Father has never died. We believe that, in this case, Saphir was right when he said, "The testator is, properly speaking, God; for we are God’ s heirs; but it is God in Christ." Had he referred the reader to 2 Corinthians 5:19 his statement had been given scriptural confirmation. The "everlasting covenant" or Covenant of Grace has the nature of a "testament" from these four considerations or facts. First, it proceeded from the will of God: He freely made it (Heb. 6:17). Second, it contained various legacies or gifts: to Christ, God bequeathed the elect as His inheritance (Deut. 32:9, Psalm 16:6, Luke 22:29); to the elect themselves, that they should be joint-heirs with Him (Rom. 8:17, Revelation 3:21). Third, it is unalterable (Gal. 3:15), "ordered in all things and sure" (2 Sam. 23:5); having been duly witnessed to (1 John 5:7), hence, being of the nature of a "testament" there are no stipulations for men to fulfill (Gal. 3:18). Fourth, the death of Christ has secured the administration of it.  

A deed is not valid without a seal; a will cannot be probated until the legatee dies, nor were God’ s covenants with men (the historical adumbrations of the "everlasting covenant") ratified except by blood-shedding. Thus it was with His covenant with Abraham (Gen. 15:9, 18); thus it was with His covenant with Israel at Sinai (Ex. 24:6). Thus, unto the confirmation of a "testament" there must be the death of the testator; unto the ratification of a "covenant" the blood of a sacrifice was required. Thereby does the apostle prove conclusively the necessity for the sacrificial death of Christ as the Mediator, both as the Mediator of a "covenant" and as the Mediator of a "testament": for through His sacrificial death, both the promises contained in the "covenant" and the bequeathments of the "testament," are made irrevocably sure to all His seed. We trust, then that we have been enabled to clear up the great difficulty which the word "diatheke" has caused so many, and shown that it has a double meaning and force in this passage.  

It remains for us to point out that the Old Testament supplies us with a most striking type which blessedly illustrates the principle enunciated in this 16th verse. But note first of all that verse 15 opens with "For" and that this comes right after the mention of "the Mediator of the new testament," and the promise of "eternal inheritance" in verse 15. Now the "mediator" of the "Old Testament" was Moses, and it was not until his death, though immediately after it, that Israel entered their inheritance, the land of Canaan! Looked at from the standpoint of God’ s government, the death of Moses was because of his sin (Num. 20:10-12); but considered in relation to his official position, as "the servant over the house of God," it had another and deeper meaning as Deuteronomy 3:26 shows, "the Lord was wroth with me for your sakes"— how blessedly did this foreshadow the reason why God’ s wrath was visited upon Christ: Christ, as Moses, must die before the inheritance could be ours.  

In verse 17 it is not of the making of a testament which is referred to, but its execution: its efficacy depends solely on the testator’ s death. The words "is of force" mean, is firm and cannot be annulled; it must be executed according to the mind of the one who devised it. The reason why it is of "no strength" during his lifetime, is because it is then subject to alteration, according to the pleasure of him who made it. All the blessings of "grace and glory" were the property of Christ, for He was "appointed Heir of all things" (Heb. 1:2): but in His death, He made a bequeathment of them unto all the elect. Another analogy between a human testament and the testamentary character of Christ’ s death is that, an absolute grant is made without any conditions. So is the kingdom of heaven bequeathed to all the elect, so that nothing can defeat His will. Whatever there is in the Gospel which prescribes conditions, that belongs to it as it is a "covenant" and not as a "testament." Finally, the testator assigns the time when his heirs shall be admitted into the actual possession of his goods; so too has Christ determined the season when each shall enter both into grace and glory.  

Perhaps a brief word should be added by way of amplification to the bare statement made above respecting the conditions which the Gospel prescribes unto those who are the beneficiaries of Christ’ s "testament." Repentance and faith are required by the Gospel; yet, strictly speaking they are not "conditions" of our entering into the enjoyment of Christ’ s gifts. Faith is a means to receive and partake of the things promised, repentance is a qualification whereby we may know that we are the persons to whom such promises belong. Nevertheless, it is to be remembered that He who has made the promises works in His elect these graces of repentance and faith: Acts 5:31, Philippians 1:29.  

"It is a great and gracious condescension in the Holy Spirit to give encouragement and confirmation unto our faith, by a representation of the truth and reality of spiritual things, in those which are temporal and agreeing with them in their general nature, whereby they are presented unto the common understandings of men. This way of proceeding the apostle calls, a speaking ‘ after the manner of men’ (Gal. 3:15). Of the same kind were all the parables used by our Savior; for it is all one whether these representations be taken from things real, or from those which, according unto the same rule of reason and right, are framed on purpose for that end" (John Owen).  

"Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission" (verses 18-22).  

In these verses the apostle is still pressing upon the Hebrews the necessity for the blood-shedding of Christ. Their national history witnessed to the fact that when God entered into covenant with their fathers, that covenant was confirmed by solemn sacrifice. In the verses upon which we are now to comment, the apostle is not merely proving that the old covenant or testament was confirmed with blood, for had that been his only object, he could have dispatched it in very few words; rather does he also declare what was the use of blood in sacrifices on all occasions under the law, and thereby he demonstrates the use and efficacy of Christ’ s blood as unto the ends of the new covenant. The ends of the blood under the old covenant were two, namely, purification and pardon, both of which were confirmed in the expiation of sin. Unless the main design of the Spirit in these verses be steadily kept in view, we miss the deeper meaning of many of their details.  

What has just been said above, supplies the explanation of what has seemed a problem to some, namely that in these verses the apostle mentions five or six details which are not found in the historical narrative of Exodus 24. But the Holy Spirit is not here limiting our view to Exodus 24, but gathers up what is found in various places of the law; and that, because He not only designed to prove the dedication of the covenant by blood, but also to show the whole use of the blood under the law, as unto purification and remission of sin. And He does this with the purpose of declaring the virtue and efficacy of the blood of Christ under the new testament, whereunto He makes an application of all the things in the verses which follow. The "Moreover" at the beginning of verse 21 is plain intimation that the Spirit is here contemplating something in addition to that which is found in Exodus 24.  

Verse 18. The opening word is usually rendered "therefore" or "wherefore": it denotes the drawing of an inference; it confirms a general rule by a special instance. In verse 16 the general rule is stated; now, says the apostle, think it not strange that the new testament was confirmed by the death of the Testator, for this is so necessary that, the first one also was confirmed in the same manner; and that, not only by death, but not "without blood," which was required for the ratification of a solemn covenant. That to which reference is made is the "first" testament or covenant. Here the apostle makes clear what he intended by the first or old covenant, on which he had discoursed at large in chapter 8: it was the covenant made with Israel at Horeb. Just a few words on the character of it.  

Its terms had all the nature of a formal covenant. These were the things written in the book (Ex. 24:4, 7) which were an epitome of the whole law, as contained in Exodus 20-23. The revelation of its terms were made by Jehovah Himself, speaking with awful voice from the summit of Sinai: Exodus chapters 19, 20. Following the fundamental rule of the covenant, as contained in the Ten Commandments, were other statutes and rites, given for the directing of their walking with God. The same was solemnly delivered to Israel by Moses, and proposed unto them for their acceptation. Upon their approbation of it, the book was read in the hearing of all the people after it had been duly sprinkled with the blood of the covenant (Ex. 24:7). Thereupon, for the first time, Jehovah was called "The God of Israel" (Ex. 24:10), and that by virtue of the covenant. This formed the foundation of His consequent dealings with them: all His chastening judgments upon Israel were due to their breaking of His covenant.  

While there is a contrast, sharp and clear, between the Old Testament and the new, yet it should not be overlooked that there was also that which bound them together. This was ably expressed by Adolph Saphir: "The promise given to Abraham, and not to Moses, was not superseded or forgotten in the giving of the law. When God dealt with Israel in the wilderness, He gave them the promise that they should be a peculiar treasure unto Him above all people: ‘ for all the earth is Mine’ ; and that they should possess the land as an inheritance (Ex. 19:5, 6; 23:30; Deuteronomy 15:4). Based upon this promise, and corresponding with the Divine election and favor, is the law which God gave to His people. As He had chosen and redeemed them so that they were to be a holy people, and to walk before Him, even as in the Ten Commandments the gospel of election and redemption came first: ‘ I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of Egypt.’ Hence this covenant or dispensation, although it was a covenant, not of grace and Divine gifts and enablings, but of works, was connected with and based upon redemption, and it was dedicated, as the apostle emphatically says, not without blood.  

"Both the book, or record of the covenant, and all the people, were sprinkled with the blood of typical sacrifices. For without blood is no remission of sins, and the promises of God can only be obtained through atonement. But we know that this is a figure of the one great Sacrifice, and that therefore all the promises and blessings under the old dispensation, underlying and sustaining it, were through the prospective death of the true Mediator. When therefore the spiritual Israelite was convinced by the law of sin, both as guilt and as a condition of impurity and strengthlessness, he was confronted by the promise of the inheritance, which always was of grace, unconditional and sure, and in a righteous and holy manner through expiation."  

Verse 19. The one made use of for the dedication of the covenant was Moses. On God’ s part he was immediately called unto this employment: Exodus 3. On the part of the people, he was desired and chosen to transact all things between God and them, because they were not able to bear the effects of His immediate presence: Exodus 19:19, Deuteronomy 5:22-27; and this choice of a spokesman on their part, God approved (verse 27). Thus Moses became in a general way a "mediator" between God and men in the giving of the law (Gal. 3:19). Thereby we are shown that there can be no covenant between God and sinful men, but in the hands of a Mediator, for man has neither meetness, merits, nor ability to be an undertaker of the terms of God’ s covenant in his own person.  

Moses spake "every precept unto the people." This intimates the particular character of the Old Testament. It consisted primarily of commandments of obedience (Eph. 2:15), promising no assistance for the performance of them. The "new testament" is of another nature: it is one of promises, and although it also has precepts requiring obedience, yet is it (as a covenant) wholly founded in the promise, whereby strength and assistance for the performance of that obedience are given to us. Moses’ reading "every precept unto the people" emphasizes the fact that all the good things they were to receive by virtue of the covenant, depended on their observance of all that was commanded them; for a curse was denounced against every one that "continued not in all things written in the law to do them" (Deut. 27:26). Obviously, such a "covenant" was never ordained for the saving of sinners: its insufficiency for that end is what the apostle demonstrates in the sequel.  

We are again indebted to the exposition of John Owen for much of the above, and now give in condensed form some of his observations on the contents of verse 19. Here, for the first time, was any part of God’ s Word committed to writing. This book of the law was written that it might be read to all the people: it was not to be restricted to the priests, as containing mysteries unlawful to ,be divulged. It was written and read in the language which the people understood and spake, which condemns Rome’ s use of the Latin in her public services. Again; God never required the observance of any rites or duties of worship, without a previous warrant from His Word. How thankful should we be for the written Word!  

That which Moses performed on this occasion was to sprinkle the blood. Exodus 24:6 informs us that he took "half of the blood" and sprinkled it "on the altar" (on which was the book); the other half on the people. The one was God’ s part; the other theirs. Thereby the mutual agreement of Jehovah and the people was indicated. Typically, this foreshadowed the twofold efficacy of Christ’ s blood, to make salvation God-wards and to save man-wards; or, to the remission of our sins unto justification, and the purification of our persons unto sanctification. The "scarlet wool," probably bound around the "hyssop" (which was a common weed), was employed as a sprinkler, as that which served to apply the blood in the basons upon the people; "water" being mixed with the blood to keep it fluid and aspersible. In like manner, the communication of the benefits of Christ’ s death unto sanctification, is called the "sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 1:2). To avail us, the blood must not only be "shed," but "sprinkled."  

The mingling of the "water" with the "blood" was to represent the "blood and water" which flowed from the pierced side of the Savior (John 19:34,35), the spiritual "mystery" and meaning of which is profound and blessed. In 1 John 5:6 the Holy Spirit has particularly emphasized the fact that the Christ came "by water and blood." He came not only to make atonement for our sins by His blood that we might be justified, but also to sprinkle us with the efficacy of His blood in the communication of the Spirit unto sanctification, which is compared unto "water": see John 7:38, 39, Titus 3:5. The application of the blood to the "book" of the covenant was an intimation that atonement could be made by blood for the sins against its precepts, and the application of the "water" to it told of its purity. The sprinkler pointed to the humanity of Christ, through which all grace is communicated to us: the "scarlet wool" speaking of His personal glory (Dan. 5:7 etc.), and the "hyssop," the meanest of plant-life (1 Kings 4:33), being a figure of His lowly outward appearance.  

Verse 20. In these words Moses reminded Israel of the foundation of their acceptance of the covenant, which foundation was the authority of God requiring them so to do; the word "enjoined" also emphasized the nature of the covenant itself: it consisted principally not of promises which had been given to them, but of "precepts" which called for hearty obedience. By quoting here these words of Moses "this is the blood of the testament," the apostle proves that not only death, but a sacrificial death, was required in order to the consecration and establishment of the first covenant. The blood was the confirmatory sign, the token between God and the people of their mutual engagements in that covenant. Thus did God from earliest times teach His people, by type and shadow, the supreme value of the blood of His Son. These words of Moses were plainly alluded to by the Savior in the institution of His "supper": "This is My blood of the new testament" (Matthew 26:28) i.e., this represents My blood, by the shedding of which the new testament is confirmed.  

Verse 21. The apostle now reminds the Hebrews that, not only was the Old Testament itself dedicated with blood, but that also all the ways and means of solemn worship were purified by the same. His purpose in bringing in this additional fact was to prove that not only was the blood of Christ in sacrifice necessary, but also to demonstrate its efficacy in the removing of sins and thereby qualifying sinners to be worshippers of the most holy God. The historical reference here is to what is found in Leviticus 16:14, 16, 18. The spiritual meaning of the tabernacle’ s furniture being sprinkled with blood was at least twofold: first, in themselves those vessels were holy by God’ s institution, yet in the use of them by polluted men, they became defiled, and needed purging. Second, to teach the Israelites and us that, the very means of grace which we use, are only made acceptable to God through the merits of Christ’ s sacrifice.  

What we have just sought to point out above, brings before us a most important and humbling truth. In all those things wherein we have to do with God, and whereby we approach unto Him, nothing but the blood of Christ and the Spirit’ s application of it unto our consciences, gives us a gracious acceptance with Him. The best of our performances are defiled by the flesh; our very prayers and repentances are unclean, and cannot be received by God except as we plead before Him the precious blood of Christ. "The people were hereby taught that, God could not be looked to for salvation, nor rightly worshipped, except faith in every case looked to an intervening blood. For the majesty of God is justly to be dreaded by us, and the way to His presence is nothing to us but a dangerous labyrinth, until we know that He is pacified towards us through the blood of Christ, and that this blood affords to us a free access. All kinds of worship are then faulty and impure until, Christ cleanses them by the sprinkling of His blood . . . If this thought only came to our mind, that what we read is not written so much with ink as with the blood of Christ, that when the Gospel is preached, His sacred blood distils together with the voice, there would be far greater attention as well as reverence on our part" (John Calvin).  

Verse 22. "By the law" signifies "according unto the law," that is, according to its institution and rule, in that way of faith and obedience which the people were obligated unto. This has been shown by the apostle in the verses preceding. His design being to prove both the necessity for the death of Christ and the efficacy of His blood unto the purging of sins, whereof the legal institutions were types. The qualifying "almost" takes into consideration the exceptions of "fire" (Num. 31:23) and "water" (Lev. 22:6, 7, etc.): but let it be carefully noted that these exceptions were of such things as wherein the worship of God was not immediately concerned, nor where the conscience was defiled; they were only of external pollutions, by things in their own nature indifferent, having nothing of sin in them; yet were they designed as warnings against things which did defile. The "almost" also takes note of the exception in Leviticus 5:11.  

The last clause of verse 22 enunciates an axiom universally true, and in every age. The curse of the law was, and still is, "the soul that sinneth it shall die" (Ezek. 18:20). But whereas there is no man "that sinneth not" (Ecclesiastes 7:20), God, in His grace, provided that there should be a testification of the remission of sins, and that the curse of the law should not be immediately executed on them that sinned. This He did by allowing the people to make atonement for those sins by the blood of sacrifices: Leviticus 17:11. Thereby God made known two things. First, to the Israelites that, by the blood of animals there should be a political or temporal remission of their sins granted, so that they should not die under the sentence of that law which was the rule of government over their nation. Second, that a real spiritual and eternal forgiveness should be granted unto faith in the sacrifice of Christ, which was represented by the slain animals. The present application of this verse is that, no salvation is possible for any soul that rejects the sacrifice of Christ.  

  

  

Combined Bible: Heb 9:23-28

Great Sacrifice   

(Hebrews 9:23-28)   

Our present passage is so exceeding full that it is expedient we should reduce our introductory remarks. Perhaps about all it is necessary to say is, that here in Hebrews the apostle is treating of the priestly ministry of Christ, and demonstrating the immeasurable superiority of His sacerdotal functions over those of the legal priests. In the verses which are now to be before us, the apostle makes a definite application of that which has been treated of in the preceding section. A contrast is now drawn between the types and their Antitype. Therein we are shown that inasmuch as the Great Sacrifice which Christ offered unto God was the substance of all the Old Testament shadows, it was efficacious, all-sufficient, final.  

In Hebrews 9:1-10 a declaration is made of sundry types and shadows of the law. In Hebrews 9:11-28 a manifestation of the accomplishment of them is seen in the person and work of the Lord Jesus. In this second section we are shown the excellency of Christ’ s priesthood in the effecting of those things and the securing of those blessings which Aaron and his sacrificing of animals could not effect and secure. First, the affirmation is made that Christ has entered into the true tabernacle, Heaven itself; that He did so on the ground of His own infinitely meritorious blood, the value of which is evidenced by the fact that it has "obtained eternal redemption" (verses 11,12). Second, confirmation of this is then made: inasmuch as the blood of beasts purified the flesh, much more can the blood of Christ purge the conscience (verses 13,14). Moreover the Mediatorial office which Christ undertook guaranteed our salvation (verse 15). So too the validity of the covenant-testament insured the same (verses 16, 17); as also the types pledged it (verses 19-22).  

In Hebrews 9:23 (which properly belonged to our last section) the apostle concludes the main point he has been discussing, namely, that the typical things being purged with animal’ s blood, there must needs be a more excellent way of purifying and consecrating heavenly things, and that was by the precious blood of the incarnate Son of God Himself. Having established this fact, he now returns to the other points of difference between the legal priests and Christ. Those priests entered only an earthly tabernacle, but Christ has gone into Heaven itself (verses 24, 25). The entrance of Israel’ s high priest into the holy of holies was repeated year by year, but Christ entered once for all (verses 25, 26). This is confirmed by the fact that men die but once, still less could the God-man suffer death repeatedly (verses 27, 28). Hence the blessed issue to all who rest upon the Great Sacrifice is, that He shall appear unto them "without sin unto salvation" (verse 28).  

"Therefore (it was) necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these" (verse 23). The opening word denotes that a conclusion is now drawn from the premises just established, a conclusion which has respect unto both parts of the assertion made. In this verse the apostle brings to a head, or sums up, his previous argument concerning the typical purification of all things under the law, and the spiritual purification which has been effected by the sacrifice of Christ. "The general principle involved in these words is, plainly, that in expiation the victim must correspond in dignity to the nature of the offenses expiated, and the value of the blessings secured. Animal blood might expiate ceremonial guilt and secure temporary blessings, but in order to secure the expiation of moral guilt and the attainment of eternal blessings, a nobler victim must bleed" (John Brown).  

"Therefore necessary (it was)": the reference is both to the type and the Antitype. It was so from God’ s institution and appointment. There was nothing in the nature of the typical objects themselves which demanded a purgation by sacrifice, but, inasmuch as God designed to foreshadow heavenly things by them, it was requisite that they should be purged with blood. Likewise, inasmuch as God ordained that the heavenly things should be purified, it was necessary that a superior sacrifice should be made, for the typical offerings were altogether inadequate to such an end. Such "necessity’’ was relative, and not absolute, for God was never under any compulsion. His infinite wisdom deemed such a method fitting and suited to His glory and the good of His elect.  

The "patterns" or "figures" (verse 23) were the things which the apostle had been treating of, namely, the covenant, the book, the people, the tabernacle and all its vessels of ministry. The "things in the heavens" were the everlasting covenant, the Church, and its redemption by Jesus Christ. The "heavenly things" had been designed in the mind of God in all their order, causes, beauty, and tendency unto His own glory, from all eternity; but they were "hid" in Himself (Eph. 3:8-10). Of these was God pleased to grant a typical resemblance, a shadowy similitude, an earthly adumbration, in the calling of Israel, His covenant with them, and the appointing of the tabernacle with its priesthood. By this means He deigned to instruct the early Church, and in their conformity to that typical order of things did their faith and obedience consist; the spiritual meaning of which the Old Testament saints did, in measure, understand (Ps. 119:18).  

"The heavenly things." "By heavenly things, I understand all the effects of the counsel of God in Christ, in the redemption, salvation, worship, and eternal glory of the Church; that is, Christ Himself in all His offices, with all the spiritual and eternal effects of them on the souls and consciences of men, with all the worship of God by Him according unto the Gospel. For of all these things, those of the law were the patterns. God did in and by them give a representation of all these things" (John Owen). More specifically Christ Himself and His sacrifice were typified by the legal rites. So also all the spiritual blessings which His mediation has secured are "heavenly things": see John 3:12, Ephesians 1:3, Hebrews 3:1. The Church too (Phil. 3:20) and Heaven itself as the abode of Christ and His redeemed are included (John 14:1-3). But here a difficulty presents itself: how could such objects as those be said to be "purified"?  

Of all the things mentioned above not one of them is capable of real purification from uncleanness excepting the Church, that is, the souls and consciences of its members. Yet the difficulty is more seeming than real. The term "purification" has a twofold sense, namely, of external dedication unto God and internal purification, both of which are, generally included in the term "sanctification" as it is used in Scripture. Thus, the covenant, the book of the covenant, the tabernacle, and all its vessels were "purified" in the first sense, that is, solemnly dedicated unto God and His service. In like manner were all the "heavenly things" themselves "purified.’’ Christ was consecrated, dedicated unto God in His own blood: John 17:19, Hebrews 2:10, etc. Heaven itself was dedicated to be an habitation forever unto the mystical body of Christ, in perfect peace with the angels who never sinned: Ephesians 1:10, Hebrews 12:22-24.  

Yet there was also an internal "purification" of most of these "heavenly things." The souls and consciences of the members of the Church were really cleansed, purified and sanctified with an inward and spiritual purification: Ephesians 5:25,26, Titus 2:14. It has been "washed" in the blood of Christ (Rev. 1:5) and is thereby cleansed from all sin (1 John 1:7). And Heaven itself, was in some sense purified— as the tabernacle was, because of the sins of the people in whose midst it stood (Lev. 16:16). When the angels apostatized, sin entered Heaven itself, and therefore was not pure in the sight of God (see Job 15:15). And upon the sin of man, a breach was made, enmity ensued, between the holy angels above and fallen men below; so that Heaven was no meet place for an habitation unto them both, until they were reconciled, which was only accomplished in the sacrifice of Christ (Eph. 1:10, Colossians 1:20).  

One other detail needs to be considered: "But the heavenly things with better sacrifices." It is the use of the plural number here in connection with the sacrifice of Christ which has occasioned difficulty to some. It is a figure of speech known as an "enallage," the plural being put for the singular by way of emphasis. It is so expressed because the great sacrifice not only confirmed the signification, virtue, and benefits of all others, but exceeded in dignity, design and efficacy all others. Again; under the law there were five chief offerings appointed unto Israel: the burnt, the meal, the peace, the sin, the trespass (see Leviticus 1-5), and in Christ’ s great Sacrifice we have the antitype of all five, and hence His has superseded theirs. Thus, the plural, "sacrifices" here emphasizes the one offering of Christ, expresses its superlative excellency, and denotes that it provides the substance of the many shadows under the law.  

If the reader will read straight on through Hebrews 9:18-23 he will then be in a position to appreciate the lovely sequel which is recorded in Exodus 24:8-11. A most glorious type was that. There we have a scene for which there is nothing approaching a parallel on all the pages of inspiration until the incarnation of the Son of God be reached. What we have there in Exodus 24 might well be termed the Old Testament Mount of Transfiguration. There we see not only Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, but also seventy "elders" (representatives of the people) in the very presence of God, perfectly at ease, eating and drinking there. The key-word to that marvelous incident is the "Then" at the beginning of verse 9, which brings out the inestimable value of the blood which had been sprinkled, and shows the grand privilege which it had procured, even making possible communion with God. The antitype of this is presented in Hebrews 10:22.  

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us" (verse 24). The opening "For" denotes that a further reason is being advanced to demonstrate the superiority of Christ’ s sacrifice over those which were offered under the law. In verse 23 this was shown by its power to "purify" better objects than the typical offerings could dedicate or cleanse. Here the proof is drawn from the place which Christ entered after He had offered Himself a sacrifice unto God, namely, into Heaven itself. That which was the peculiar dignity of the high priest of Israel, and wherein the principal discharge of his duty did consist, was that he entered that sacred abode where the typical and visible representation of the presence of God was made. The antitype of this is what is here before us.  

"For Christ." The Mediator is again denominated by His official title. In addition to our notes thereon under verse 14, we may point out that this title "The Anointed" imports three things. First, the offices or functions which the Son of God undertook for the salvation of His people. These were three in number and each was foreshadowed of old: the prophetic (1 Kings 19:16, Psalm 105:15), the priestly (Lev. 8:12,30; Psalm 133:2), the kingly (1 Sam. 10:1, 16:13). Second, the right which He has to undertake those functions: He who "anointed" Christ was the Father (Acts 10:38), thereby appointing and authorizing Him (Heb. 5:5). Third, His ability to perform those functions whereunto He was anointed: therefore did He declare "the Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me to preach" etc. (Luke 4:18). That expression "the Spirit of the Lord is upon Me" referred to that Divine enduement which had been conferred upon Him: cf. John 3:34.  

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, the figures of the true." The negative is first expressed in order to emphasize the contrast which follows. Three things are here said of respect to its institution, it was the "holy of holies," and that, because it had been dedicated as the chamber where the special pledges of God’ s presence were given. Second, as to its fabric, though framed by Divine command, it was but of human workmanship, "made with hands." Third, as to its principal end or design, it was a resemblance or figure of heavenly things. From the Sept. translation of "holy of holies" by "the holy places," it seems that they used the plural number to supply the lack in the Greek language of a suitable superlative.  

"But into Heaven itself." This entrance of Christ into the celestial Sanctuary is to be distinguished from His entering "once into the holy place" of verse 12. In our exposition of that verse we sought to show at some length that the reference there is to what took place immediately after the Savior expired upon the cross, when, in fulfillment of the type of Leviticus 16:14, He appeared before the Father to present to Him the memorial of His completed satisfaction. Aaron’ s entrance into the holy of holies was not for the purpose of making atonement— that was effected outside (Lev. 16:11)— but to present to God an atonement already accomplished. Nor could Aaron’ s passing within the veil, clad only in his "linen" garments (Lev. 16:4 and contrast Exodus 28:2— etc.), possibly be a figure of Christ’ s triumphant admission into heaven with all the jubilation belonging to a coronation day. We must constantly distinguish between Christ as the antitype of Aaron, and Christ as the antitype of Melchizedek. Aaron pointed to nothing after Christ’ s resurrection; Melchizedek did. The "once" of Hebrews 9:12 emphasizes the finality of Christ’ s sacrifice. His "entrance" here in Hebrews 9:24 was for the purpose of intercession, which is continuous: Hebrews 7:25.  

The entrance of our royal High Priest into heaven was necessary for rendering His sacrifice effective in the application of the benefits of it to the Church. As John Owen pointed out, the entrance of Christ into heaven on His ascension, may be considered two ways. "1. As it was regal, glorious and triumphant; so it belonged to His kingly office, as that wherein He triumphed over all the enemies of the Church: see it described in Ephesians 4:8-10 from Psalm 68:18. Satan, the world, death and hell being conquered, and all power committed to Him, He entered triumphantly into heaven. So it was regal. 2. As it was sacerdotal. Peace and reconciliation being made by the blood of the cross, the covenant being confirmed, eternal redemption obtained, He entered as our High Priest into the holy place, the temple of God above, to make His sacrifice effectual to His Church, and to apply the benefits of it thereunto."  

Christ entered Heaven as the great High Priest of His Church, as the Mediator of the new covenant, as the "Forerunner" of His people (Heb. 6:20), as their "Advocate" (1 John 2:1), and the "Firstborn of many brethren." His design in so doing was "to appear in the presence of God for us." This He does "now," at the present season, and always. What the typical priest did was of no continuance. But this "now" is expressive of the whole season and duration of time from the entrance of Christ into heaven to the consummation of all things. Absolutely, His entrance into Heaven had other ends in view (John 17:5, Hebrews 1:3— "upholding" etc.), but to appear before God for His people as their High Priest, was the only end or object of His entering Heaven, considered as God’ s "Temple," where is the "throne of grace." How this manifests Christ’ s full assurance of the success of His undertaking, His complete discharge from all that guilt which had been imputed to Him. Had He not made a full end of our sins, He could not have appeared with confidence as our Surety in the presence of God!  

"To appear in the presence of God for us." This is an act of His sacerdotal office. Not only is it our High Priest who does so "appear," but He doth so as the High Priest of His Church. Nevertheless, it is such an act as necessarily implies the offering of Himself as a sacrifice for sin antecedent thereto, for it was with the blood of the atoning sacrifice that Aaron entered into the holy place (Lev. 16) as the head and representative of the people. In this appearance Christ presents Himself to God "as a lamb that had been slain" (Rev. 5:6)! It is that which gives validity and efficacy to His "appearing." The word "appear" is a forensic one, as of an Attorney before the Judge. He has gone there to seek from God and dispense to His people those blessings which He purchased for them. He has gone there to plead the infinite merits of His sacrifice, as a permanent reason why they should be saved: Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25. This supplies the great testimony to the continuance of Christ’ s love, care and compassion toward the Church: it is their interests which He promotes.  

"Nor yet that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others" (verse 25). In this verse the apostle does two things: meets an objection which might be made, and continues to demonstrate the superior excellency of the Great Sacrifice. The objection could be framed thus: If Aaron’ s entrance into the holy of holies was a type of Christ’ s entering heaven, then must He, like the legal high priest, enter oft. This the apostle here denies. Such a conclusion by no means follows, in fact, is utterly erroneous. God did not require this from Christ, there was no need of it, and, as he shows in the next verse, it was impossible that He should.  

Such is the absolute perfection of the one offering of Christ, that it stands in need of, that it will admit of, no repetition in any kind. Therefore does the apostle declare that if it be despised or neglected, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10:26). This absolute perfection of the one offering of Christ arises from, first, the dignity of His person: Acts 20:28. It was the God-man who obeyed, suffered and died: nothing superior, nothing equal, could again be offered. Second, from the nature of the sacrifice itself. In the internal gracious workings of Christ, grace and obedience could never be more glorified than they had been by Immanuel Himself. So too, in the punishment He underwent: He suffered to the full, the whole curse of the law; hence, any further offering or atonement would be highly blasphemous. Third, from the love of the Father unto Him and delight in Him. In His one offering God was well pleased, and in it He rests. Hence the impossibility of any repetition— condensed from John Owen.  

"Nor yet that He should offer Himself often." In these positive and pointed words the Holy Spirit has plainly anticipated and repudiated the blasphemous practice of the Papists, who in their daily "mass" pretend to sacrifice Christ afresh, and by their "priests" present Him as an offering to God, claiming that the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the real flesh and blood of Christ. Therefore are they guilty of the unspeakably dreadful sin of crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame (Heb. 6:6), for by their pretended "real sacrifice of Christ" they, through their daily repetition of it, deny its sufficiency and finality (Heb. 10:2), degrading it below that of the annual atonement of Israel, which was made by the blood of beasts.  

"As the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others." On these words William Gouge beautifully pointed out that, "Herein we have an evidence of God’ s tender respect to man in sparing his blood. Though man were ordained a priest to typify Christ’ s priesthood, though man in that function were to appear before God, though he were to bear their names, yea, and their sins (Ex. 28:38), all of which Christ did, yet when it came to the shedding of his blood, as Christ did His, God spared him, and accepted the blood of beasts, as He accepted the ram for Isaac (Gen. 22:13). How this magnifies God’ s love to us, who was so tender of man, and yet spared not His own Son (Rom. 8:32)!"  

"For then must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (verse 26). This verse consists of two parts. First, a reason is given confirming the assertion made in verse 25: had Christ been obliged to "offer Himself often" to God, then must He have "suffered" afresh "from the foundation of the world," that is, died afresh in each generation of human history. Second, a confirmation of that reason taken from the appointment of God: only once, and that in the fullness of time, did Christ come to earth to be a sacrifice for the sins of His people. Thus the apostle exposes the gross absurdity of the objection he met in verse 25: to admit that, would be to say Christ’ s blood had no more efficacy than that which the Jewish high priest offered.  

The force of the apostle’ s argument rests upon two evident suppositions. First, that the "offering" (verse 25) and "suffering" (verse 26) of Christ are inseparable. It was in and by His suffering that the Lord Jesus offered Himself unto God, and that because He was Himself both the Priest and the Sacrifice. Aaron "offered" repeatedly, yet he never once "suffered," for he was not the sacrifice itself. It was the bullock which was slain, that suffered. But Christ being both Priest and Sacrifice could not "offer" without "suffering," and herein does the force of the argument principally consist. The very especial nature of Christ’ s offering or sacrifice, which was by the shedding of His blood in death, precluded a repetition thereof.  

Second, the apostle’ s argument here is also built on the fact that there was a necessity for the expiation of the sin of all that were to be saved from the foundation of the world. Sin entered the world immediately after it was founded, by the apostasy of our first parents. Notwithstanding, numbers of sinners, as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and the spiritual remnant in Israel had their sins pardoned and were eternally saved; yet no sacrifice which they offered could remit moral guilt or redeem their souls. No; their salvation was also effected by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ. Hence it follows unavoidably that unless the merits of His own one offering extended unto the taking away of all their sins, then either He must have suffered often, or they perish. Contrariwise, seeing that elect sinners were saved through Christ "from the foundation of the world," much more will the virtues of the Great Sacrifice extend unto the end of the world.  

"But now," not at the beginning of human history; "once," that is, once for all, never to be repeated; "in the end of the world," or in "the fullness of time" (Gal. 4:4). This expression "end of the world" or more literally, "consummation of the ages" is here used antithetically from "since the foundation of the world" which usually has reference to the first entrance of sin into the world. and God’ s dispensation of grace in Christ thereon; as "before the foundation of the world" (Eph. 1:4, etc.) expresses eternity and God’ s counsels therein. The Divine distinctions of time with respect to God’ s grace toward His Church, may be referred to three general heads: that before the law, during the law, and since the incarnation of Christ unto the end of the world. This last season, absolutely considered, is called the "fullness of times" (Eph. 1:10), when all that God had designed in the dispensation of His grace was come to a head, and wherein no alteration should be made till the earth was no more.  

"Hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." He "appeared" here on earth (the Greek word is quite different from the one used in verse 24): of old He had been obscurely shadowed forth in types, but now He was "manifest in flesh" (1 Tim. 3:10). The end or purpose of this appearing of Christ was to "put away sin"— the Greek word is a very strong one, and is rendered "disannuling" in Hebrews 7:18. Let it be carefully noted that this declaration is made only as it respects the Church of Christ. He made a complete atonement for all the sin of all His people, receiving its wages, expiating its guilt, destroying its dominion. The results are that, when God applies to the penitent believer the virtues of Christ’ s sacrifice, all condemnation is removed (Rom. 8:1), and its reigning power is destroyed (Rom. 6:14).  

"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation" (verses 27, 28). In these verses the apostle concludes his exposition of the causes, nature, designs and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ, wherewith the new covenant was dedicated and confirmed. In them a three-fold confirmation is made of the uniqueness and sufficiency of the Savior’ s atonement. First a comparison is drawn: pointed by the "as" and "so". Second a declaration is made as to why Christ died: it was to "bear the sins of many." Third, the resultant consequence of this is stated at the end of verse 28.  

First, the comparison. This is between the death of men by the decretory sentence of God, and the offering of Christ by God’ s appointment. "It is appointed unto men once to die." That "appointment" was a penal one, being the sentence and curse of the broken law (Gen. 2:17), consisting of two parts: temporal death and eternal judgment. Death is not the result of chance, nor is it a "debt of nature," a condition to which man was made subject by the law of his creation. Death is something more than the result of physiological law: the same God who sustained Methusalah for well nigh a thousand years, would have sustained Adam’ s body for all eternity had he never fallen. Sinless angels are immortal. Death is the wages of sin (Rom. 6:23). The case of Enoch and Elijah, Lazarus and that generation of believers alive on earth at the return of Christ (1 Cor. 15:51), are only exceptions to the common rule, by mere acts of Divine sovereignty.  

"After this the judgment." This, by the same Divine, unalterable constitution, is also "appointed" unto all: Acts 17:31. Death does not make an end of man, but is subservient to something else, which is equally certain and inevitable in its own season. As death leaves men, so shall judgment find them. This "judgment" is here opposed to the "salvation" of believers at the second appearing of Christ. It is the judgment of the wicked at the last great day: Romans 2:5. It will be the executing upon them of the condemnatory sentence of the law, the irrevocable curse of God— eternal banishment from Him, for indescribable and eternal torments to be inflicted upon them.  

"So Christ was once offered." As the death-sentence, as a penal infliction, was passed upon all of Adam’ s descendants (Rom. 5:12) viewed as criminals, as having broken the law in the person of their federal head, so Christ was "appointed" or sentenced by God, the Judge of all, to undergo the curse of the law, on the behalf and in the stead of those whom He represented. "So Christ was once offered to bear the sin of many." Here we see that deliverance from the curse which the wisdom and grace of God provided for His elect. The Anointed One, as the High Priest of His people, presented to God an all-sufficient and final satisfaction for all the sins of all who have been, from eternity, given to Him by the Father. Thus verses 27, 28 present the antithesis of the Law and the Gospel, as it relates to "men" indefinitely, and to the "many" specifically. The sins of many He "bare"— had imputed to Him, received the punishment of, and fully expiated— in His own body on the tree (1 Pet. 2:24).  

"And unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation." This needs to be interpreted in harmony with its context, and as furnishing the antitype of what is found in Leviticus 16. The word for "appear" here is not the one commonly used for the return of Christ— it means "to be seen." When Aaron disappeared within the veil, the people waited with eager expectation until he came out again to bless them. So Christ, having made atonement, and gone into heaven, shall yet re-appear and be seen by those who wait for Him. As men after death, must yet appear the "second time" in their body, to undergo condemnation therein; so Christ shall appear the second time, to bestow on God’ s elect eternal salvation.  

"Unto them that look for Him:" that is, all the redeemed, the "many" whose sins He bore. Though the vision tarry, they wait for it (Hab. 2:3). Five things are included in this word "look for." First, the steadfast faith of His appearing, resting with implicit confidence on His promise in John 14:2, 3. Second, a real love unto it: 2 Timothy 4:8. Third, an ardent longing after it, so that they cry, "Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev. 22:20). Fourth, a patient waiting for it, in the midst of many discouragements: James 5:7, 8. Fifth, a personal preparation for it: Matthew 25:10, Luke 12:35-37.  

"Without (imputed) sin, unto salvation." Hereby Christ’ s second advent is contrasted from His first. When he appeared the first time, it was with "sin" upon Him (John 1:29) as the Surety of sinners. Therefore was He the Man of sorrows, and afflicted from His youth up (Ps. 88:15). But He will re-appear in a very different state: as the Conqueror of sin and Satan, the Savior of His people, the King of kings and Lord of lords. At His return, the efficacy of His once-for-all offering will be openly manifested. The question of His peoples’ sins having been finally settled at the cross, He will then glorify His redeemed. "For our conversation is in heaven: from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile ,body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself" (Phil. 3:20, 21).  

  

  

Maclaren: Heb 9:11-14

The Priest In The Holy Place

But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to 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, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 24. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands,which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25. Nor yet that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others: 26. (For then must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world:) but now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, bus after this the judgment: 28. So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time, without sin, unto salvation.'--Heb. 9:11-14, 24-28.

SPACE forbids attempting full treatment of these pregnant verses. We can only sum up generally their teaching on the priesthood of Jesus.

Maclaren: Heb 9:14

I. Christ, As The High Priest Of The World, Offers Himself.

Obviously Heb. 9:14 refers to Christ's sacrificial death, and in Heb. 9:26 His sacrifice of Himself' is equivalent to His having suffered.' The contention that the priestly office of Jesus begins with His entrance into the presence of God is set aside by the plain teaching of this passage, which regards His death as the beginning of His priestly work. What, then, are the characteristics of that offering, according to this writer? The point dwelt on most emphatically is that He is both priest and sacrifice. That great thought opens a wide field of meditation, for adoring thankfulness and love. It implies the voluntariness of His death. No necessity bound Him to the Cross. Not the naris, but His love, fastened Him there. Himself He would not save, because others He would save. The offering was through the Eternal Spirit,' the divine personality in Himself, which as it were, took the knife and slew the human life. That sacrifice was' without blemish,' fulfilling in perfect moral purity the prescriptions of the ceremonial law, which but clothe in outward form the universal consciousness that nothing stained or faulty is worthy to be given to God. What are the blessings brought to us by that wondrous self. sacrifice? They are stated most generally in verse 26 as the putting away of sin, and again in verse 28 as being the bearing of the sins of many, and again in verse 14 as cleansing conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Now the first of these expressions includes the other two, and expresses the blessed truth that, by His death, Jesus has made an end of sin, in all its shapes and powers, whether it is regarded as guilt or burden, or taint and tendency paralysing and disabling. Sin is guilt, and Christ's death deals with our past, taking away the burden of condemnation. Thus verse 28 presents Him as bearing the sins of many, as the scapegoat bore the sins of the congregation into a land not inhabited, as the Lord made to meet' on the head of the Servant the iniquities of us all.' The best commentary on the words here is,' He bare our sins in His own body on the tree.' But sin has an effect in the future as in the past, and the death of Christ deals with that. So verse 14 parallels it not only with the sacrifice which made access to God possible, but with the ceremonial of the red heifer,' by which pollution from touching a corpse was removed. A conscience which has been in contact with dead works' (and all works which are not done from the life' are so) is unfit to serve God, as well as lacking in wish to serve; and the only way to set it free from the nightmare which fetters it is to touch it with the blood,' and then it will spring up to a waking life of glad service. The blood' is shed to take away guilt; the blood' is the life, and, being shed in the death, it can be transfused into our veins, and so will cleanse us from all sin. Thus, in regard both to past and future, sin is put away by the sacrifice of Himself. The completeness of His priestly work" is further attested by the fact, triumphantly dwelt on in the lesson, that it is done once for all, and needs no repetition, and is incapable of repetition, while the world lasts.

II. Christ, As The High Priest Of The World, Passes Into Heaven For Us.

The priest's office of old culminated in his entrance into the Holy of Holies, to present the blood of sacrifice. Christ's priesthood is completed by His ascension and heavenly intercession. We necessarily attach local ideas to this, but the reality is deeper than all notions of place. The passage speaks of Jesus as entering into the holy place,' and again as entering heaven itself for us.' It also speaks of His having entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle,' the meaning of which phrase depends on the force attached to' through.' If it is taken locally, the meaning is as in Heb. 4:14, that He has passed through the [lower] heavens to heaven itself'; if it is taken instrumentally (as in following clause), the meaning is that Jesus used the greater tabernacle' in the discharge of His office of priest. The great truth underlying both the ascension and the representations of this context is, as Heb. 9:24 puts it, that He appears before the face of God,' and there carries on His work, preparing a place for us. Further, we note that Jesus, as priest representing humanity, and being Himself man, can stand before the face of God, by virtue of His sacrifice, in which man is reconciled to God. His sinless manhood needed no such sacrifice, but, as our representative, He could not appear there without the blood of sacrifice. That blood, as shed on earth, avails to put away sin'; as presented in heaven, it avails for us,' being ever present before the divine eye, and influencing the divine dealings. That entrance is the climax of the process by which He obtained' eternal redemption' for us. Initial redemption is obtained through His death, but the full, perfect unending deliverance from all sin and evil is obtained, indeed, by His passing into the Holy Place above, but possessed in fact only when we follow Him thither. We need Him who became dead' for pardon and cleansing; we need Him who is alive for evermore' for present participation in His life and present sitting with Him in the heavenly places, and for the ultimate and eternal entrance there, whence we shall go no more out.

III. Christ, As The High Priest Of The World, Will Come Forth From The Holy Place.

The ascension cannot end His connection with the world. It carries in itself the prophecy of a return. If I go, I will come again.' The high priest came forth to the people waiting for him, so our High Priest will come. Men have to die, and' after death,' not merely as following in time, but as necessarily following in idea and fact, a judgment in which each man's work shall be infallibly estimated and manifested. Jesus has died to bear the sins of many.' There must follow for Him, too, an estimate and manifestation of His work. What for others is judgment,' for Him is manifestation of His sinlessness and saving power. He shall be seen, no longer stooping under the weight of a world's sins, but apart from sin.' He shall be seen unto salvation,' for the vision will bring with it assimilation to His sinless likeness. He shall be thus seen by those that wait for Him, looking through the shows of time to the far-off shining of His coming, and meanwhile having their loins girt and their lamps burning.

MHCC: Heb 9:1-5

The apostle shows to the Hebrews the typical reference of their ceremonies to Christ. The tabernacle was a movable temple, shadowing forth the unsettled state of the church upon earth, and the human nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. The typical meaning of these things has been shown in former remarks, and the ordinances and articles of the Mosaic covenant point out Christ as our Light, and as the Bread of life to our souls; and remind us of his Divine Person, his holy priesthood, perfect righteousness, and all-prevailing intercession. Thus was the Lord Jesus Christ, all and in all, from the beginning. And as interpreted by the gospel, these things are a glorious representation of the wisdom of God, and confirm faith in Him who was prefigured by them.

MHCC: Heb 9:6-10

The apostle goes on to speak of the Old Testament services. Christ, having undertaken to be our High Priest, could not enter into heaven till he had shed his blood for us; and none of us can enter, either into God's gracious presence here, or his glorious presence hereafter, but by the blood of Jesus. Sins are errors, great errors, both in judgment and practice; and who can understand all his errors? They leave guilt upon the conscience, not to be washed away but by the blood of Christ. We must plead this blood on earth, while he is pleading it for us in heaven. A few believers, under the Divine teaching, saw something of the way of access to God, of communion with him, and of admission into heaven through the promised Redeemer, but the Israelites in general looked no further than the outward forms. These could not take away the defilement or dominion of sin. They could neither discharge the debts, nor resolve the doubts, of him who did the service. Gospel times are, and should be, times of reformation, of clearer light as to all things needful to be known, and of greater love, causing us to bear ill-will to none, but good-will to all. We have greater freedom, both of spirit and speech, in the gospel, and greater obligations to a more holy living.

MHCC: Heb 9:11-14

All good things past, present, and to come, were and are founded upon the priestly office of Christ, and come to us from thence. Our High Priest entered into heaven once for all, and has obtained eternal redemption. The Holy Ghost further signified and showed that the Old Testament sacrifices only freed the outward man from ceremonial uncleanness, and fitted him for some outward privileges. What gave such power to the blood of Christ? It was Christ's offering himself without any sinful stain in his nature or life. This cleanses the most guilty conscience from dead, or deadly, works to serve the living God; from sinful works, such as pollute the soul, as dead bodies did the persons of the Jews who touched them; while the grace that seals pardon, new-creates the polluted soul. Nothing more destroys the faith of the gospel, than by any means to weaken the direct power of the blood of Christ. The depth of the mystery of the sacrifice of Christ, we cannot dive into, the height we cannot comprehend. We cannot search out the greatness of it, or the wisdom, the love, the grace that is in it. But in considering the sacrifice of Christ, faith finds life, food, and refreshment.

MHCC: Heb 9:15-22

The solemn transactions between God and man, are sometimes called a covenant, here a testament, which is a willing deed of a person, bestowing legacies on such persons as are described, and it only takes effect upon his death. Thus Christ died, not only to obtain the blessings of salvation for us, but to give power to the disposal of them. All, by sin, were become guilty before God, had forfeited every thing that is good; but God, willing to show the greatness of his mercy, proclaimed a covenant of grace. Nothing could be clean to a sinner, not even his religious duties; except as his guilt was done away by the death of a sacrifice, of value sufficient for that end, and unless he continually depended upon it. May we ascribe all real good works to the same all-procuring cause, and offer our spiritual sacrifices as sprinkled with Christ's blood, and so purified from their defilement.

MHCC: Heb 9:23-28

It is evident that the sacrifices of Christ are infinitely better than those of the law, which could neither procure pardon for sin, nor impart power against it. Sin would still have been upon us, and have had dominion over us; but Jesus Christ, by one sacrifice, has destroyed the works of the devil, that believers may be made righteous, holy, and happy. As no wisdom, learning, virtue, wealth, or power, can keep one of the human race from death, so nothing can deliver a sinner from being condemned at the day of judgment, except the atoning sacrifice of Christ; nor will one be saved from eternal punishment who despises or neglects this great salvation. The believer knows that his Redeemer liveth, and that he shall see him. Here is the faith and patience of the church, of all sincere believers. Hence is their continual prayer as the fruit and expression of their faith, Even so come, Lord Jesus.

Matthew Henry: Heb 9:1-7

Here, I. The apostle gives an account of the tabernacle, that place of worship which God appointed to be pitched on earth; it is called a worldly sanctuary, wholly of this world, as to the materials of which it was built, and a building that must be taken down; it is called a worldly sanctuary, because it was the court and palace of the King of Israel. God was their King, and, as other kings, had his court or place of residence, and attendants, furniture, and provision, suitable thereto. This tabernacle (of which we have the model, Ex. 25-27) was a moving temple, shadowing forth the unsettled state of the church militant, and the human nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. Now of this tabernacle it is said that it was divided into two parts, called a first and a second tabernacle, an inner and an outer part, representing the two states of the church militant and triumphant, and the two natures of Christ, human and divine. We are also told what was placed in each part of the tabernacle.

1. In the outer part: and there were several things, of which you have here a sort of schedule. (1.) The candlestick; doubtless not an empty and unlighted one, but where the lamps were always burning. And there was need of it, for there were no windows in the sanctuary; and this was to convince the Jews of the darkness and the mysterious nature of that dispensation. Their light was only candle-light, in comparison of the fullness of light which Christ, the Sun of righteousness, would bring along with him, and communicate to his people; for all our light is derived from him the fountain of light. (2.) The table and the show-bread set upon it. This table was set directly opposite to the candlestick, which shows that by light from Christ we must have communion with him and with one another. We must not come in the dark to his table, but by light from Christ must discern the Lord's body. On this table were placed twelve loaves for the twelve tribes of Israel, a loaf for a tribe, which stood from sabbath to sabbath, and on that day were renewed. This show-bread may be considered either as the provision of the palace (though the King of Israel needed it not, yet, in resemblance of the palaces of earthly kings, there must be this provision laid in weekly), or the provision made in Christ for the souls of his people, suitable to the wants and to the relief of their souls. He is the bread of life; in our Father's house there is bread enough and to spare; we may have fresh supplies from Christ, especially every Lord's day. This outer part is called the sanctuary or holy, because erected to the worship of a holy God, to represent a holy Jesus, and to entertain a holy people, for their further improvement in holiness.

2. We have an account of what was in the inner part of the sanctuary, which was within the second veil, and is called the holiest of all. This second veil, which divided between the holy and the most holy place, was a type of the body of Christ, by the rending whereof not only a view, but a way, was opened for us into the holiest of all, the type of heaven itself. Now in this part were, (1.) The golden censer, which was to hold the incense, or the golden altar set up to burn the incense upon; both the one and the other were typical of Christ, of his pleasing and prevailing intercession which he makes in heaven, grounded upon the merits and satisfaction of his sacrifice, upon which we are to depend for acceptance and the blessing from God. (2.) The ark of the covenant overlaid round about with pure gold, Heb 9:4. This typified Christ, his perfect obedience to the law and his fulfilling of all righteousness for us. Now here we are told both what was in this ark and what was over it. [1.] What was in it. First, The golden pot that had manna, which, when preserved by the Israelites in their own houses, contrary to the command of God, presently putrefied; but now, being by God's appointment deposited here in this house, was kept from putrefaction, always pure and sweet; and this to teach us that it is only in Christ that our persons, our graces, our performances are kept pure. It was also a type of the bread of life we have in Christ, the true ambrosia that gives immortality. This was also a memorial of God's miraculously feeding his people in the wilderness, that they might never forget such signal favour, nor distrust God for the time to come. Secondly, Aaron's rod that budded, and thereby showed that God had chosen him of the tribe of Levi to minister before him of all the tribes of Israel, and so an end was put to the murmuring of the people, and to their attempt to invade the priest's office, Num 17:1-13. This was that rod of God with which Moses and Aaron wrought such wonders; and this was a type of Christ, who is styled the man, the branch (Zec 6:12), by whom God has wrought wonders for the spiritual deliverance, defence, and supply of his people, and for the destruction of their enemies. It was a type of divine justice, by which Christ the Rock was smitten, and from whom the cool refreshing waters of life flow into our souls. Thirdly, The tables of the covenant, in which the moral law was written, signifying the regard God has to the preservation of his holy law, and the care we all ought to have that we keep the law of God - that this we can only do in and through Christ, by strength from him nor can our obedience by accepted but through him. [2.] What was over the ark (Heb 9:5): Over it the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat. First, The mercy-seat, which was the covering of the ark; it was called the propitiatory, and it was of pure gold, as long and as broad as the ark in which the tables of the law were laid. It was an eminent type of Christ, and of his perfect righteousness, ever adequate to the dimensions of the law of God, and covering all our transgressions, interposing between the Shechinah, or symbol of God's presence, and our sinful failures, and covering them. Secondly, The cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat, representing the holy angels of God, who take pleasure in looking into the great work of our redemption by Christ, and are ready to perform every good office, under the Redeemer, for those who are the heirs of salvation. The angels attended Christ at his birth, in his temptation, under his agonies, at his resurrection, and in his ascension, and will attend his second coming. God manifest in the flesh was seen, observed, visited, by the angels.

II. From the description of the place of worship in the Old Testament dispensation, the apostle proceeds to speak of the duties and services performed in those places, Heb 9:6. When the several parts and furniture of the tabernacle were thus settled, then what was to be done there?

1. The ordinary priests went always into the first tabernacle, to accomplish the service of God. Observe, (1.) None but priests were to enter into the first part of the tabernacle, and this to teach us all that persons not qualified, not called of God, must not intrude into the office and work of the ministry. (2.) The ordinary priests were only to enter into the first part of the tabernacle, it would have been fatal presumption in them to have gone into the holiest of all; and this teaches us that even ministers themselves must know and keep in their proper stations, and not presume to usurp the prerogative of Christ, by offering up incense of their own, or adding their own inventions to the ordinances of Christ, or lording it over men's consciences. (3.) These ordinary priests were to enter into the first tabernacle always; that is, they were to devote themselves and all their time to the work of their office, and not alienate themselves at any time from it; they were to be in an habitual readiness for the discharge of their office, and at all stated appointed times were actually to attend to their work. (4.) The ordinary priests must enter into the first tabernacle, that they might there accomplish the service of God. They must not do the work of God partially or by halves, but stand complete in the whole of his will and counsel; not only beginning well, but proceeding well, and persevering to the end, fulfilling the ministry they had received.

2. Into the second, the interior part, went the high priest along, Heb 9:7. This part was an emblem of heaven, and Christ's ascension thither. Here observe, (1.) None but the high priest must go into the holiest; so none but Christ could enter into heaven in his own name, by his own right, and by his own merits. (2.) In entering into the holiest, the high priest must first go through the outer sanctuary, and through the veil, signifying that Christ went to heaven through a holy life and a violent death; the veil of his flesh was rent asunder. (3.) The high priest entered but once a year into the holiest, and in this the antitype excels the type (as in every thing else), for he has entered once for all, during the whole dispensation of the gospel. (4.) The high priest must not enter without blood, signifying that Christ, having undertaken to be our high priest, could not have been admitted into heaven without shedding his blood for us, and that none of us can enter either into God's gracious presence here or his glorious presence hereafter, but by the blood of Jesus. (5.) The high priest, under the law, entering into the holiest, offered up that blood for himself and his own errors first, and then for the errors of the people, Heb 9:7. This teaches us that Christ is a more excellent person and high priest than any under the law, for he has no errors of his own to offer for. And it teaches us that ministers, when in the name of Christ they intercede for others, must first apply the blood of Christ to themselves for their pardon. (6.) When the legal high priest had offered for himself, he must not stop there, but must also offer for the errors of the people. Our high priest, though he needs not to offer for himself, yet forgets not to offer for his people; he pleads the merit of his sufferings for the benefit of his people on earth. Observe, [1.] Sins are errors, and great errors, both in judgment and practice. We greatly err when we sin against God; and who can understand all his errors? [2.] They are such errors as leave guilt upon the conscience, not to be washed away but by the blood of Christ; and the sinful errors of priests and people must be all done away by the same means, the application of the blood of Christ; we must plead this blood on earth, while he is pleading it in heaven for us.

Matthew Henry: Heb 9:8-14

In these verses the apostle undertakes to deliver to us the mind and meaning of the Holy Ghost in all the ordinances of the tabernacle and legal economy, comprehending both place and worship. The scriptures of the Old Testament were given by inspiration of God; holy men of old spoke and wrote as the Holy Ghost directed them. And these Old Testament records are of great use and significancy, not only to those who first received them, but even to Christians, who ought not to satisfy themselves with reading the institutes of the Levitical law, but should learn what the Holy Ghost signifies and suggests to them thereby. Now here are several things mentioned as the things that the Holy Ghost signified and certified to his people hereby.

I. That the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle was standing, Heb 9:8. This was one lesson the Holy Ghost would teach us by these types; the way to heaven was not so clear and plain, nor so much frequented, under the Old Testament as under the New. It is the honour of Christ and the gospel, and the happiness of those who live under it, that now life and immortality are brought to light. There was not that free access to God then that there is now; God has now opened a wider door; and there is room for more, yea, even for as many as are truly willing to return unto him by Christ.

II. That the first tabernacle was only a figure for the time then present, Heb 9:9. It was a dark dispensation, and but of short continuance, only designed for awhile to typify the great things of Christ and the gospel, that were in due time to shine forth in their own brightness, and thereby cause all the shadows to flee away and disappear, as the stars before the rising sun.

III. That none of the gifts and sacrifices there offered could make the offerers perfect as pertaining to conscience (Heb 9:9); that is, they could not take away the desert, or defilement, or dominion, of sin; they could not deliver conscience from a dread of the wrath of God; they could neither discharge the debts, nor resolve the doubts, of him who did the service. A man might run through them all in their several orders and frequent returns, and continue to do so all his days, and yet not find his conscience either pacified or purified by them; he might thereby be saved from corporal and temporal punishments that were threatened against the non-observers, but he could not be saved by them from sin or hell, as all those are who believe in Christ.

IV. The Holy Ghost hereby signifies that the Old Testament institutions were by external carnal ordinances imposed upon them until the time of reformation, Heb 9:10. Their imperfection lay in three things: - 1. Their nature. They were but external and carnal meats and drinks, and divers washings. All these were bodily exercises, which profit little; they could only satisfy the flesh, or at best sanctify to the purifying of the flesh. 2. They were not such as were left indifferent to them to use or disuse, but they were imposed upon them by grievous corporal punishments, and this was ordered on purpose to make them look more to the promised Seed, and long more for him. 3. These were never designed for a perpetuity, but only to continue till the time of reformation, till the better things provided for them were actually bestowed upon them. Gospel times are and should be times of reformation, - of clearer light as to all things necessary to be known, - of greater love, inducing us to bear ill-will to none, but good-will to all, and to have complacency in all that are like God, - of greater liberty and freedom both of spirit and speech - and of a more holy living according to the rule of the gospel. We have far greater advantages under the gospel than they had under the law; and either we must be better or we shall be worse. A conversation becoming the gospel is an excellent way of living; nothing mean, foolish, vain, or servile becomes the gospel.

V. The Holy Ghost signifies to us hereby that we never make the right use of types but when we apply them to the antitype; and, whenever we do so, it will be very evident that the antitype (as in reason it should) greatly excels the type, which is the main drift and design of all that is said. And, as he writes to those who believed that Christ had come and that Jesus was the Christ, so he very justly infers that he is infinitely above all legal high priests (Heb 9:11, Heb 9:12), and he illustrates it very fully. For,

1. Christ is a high priest of good things to come, by which may be understood, (1.) All the good things that were to come during the Old Testament, and now have come under the New. All the spiritual and eternal blessings the Old Testament saints had in their day and under their dispensation were owing to the Messiah to come, on whom they believed. The Old Testament set forth in shadows what was to come; the New Testament is the accomplishment of the Old. (2.) All the good things yet to come and to be enjoyed in a gospel state, when the promises and prophecies made to the gospel church in the latter days shall be accomplished; all these depend upon Christ and his priesthood, and shall be fulfilled. (3.) Of all the good things to come in the heavenly state, which will perfect both the Testaments; as the state of glory will perfect the state of grace, this state will be in a much higher sense the perfection of the New Testament than the New Testament was the perfection of the Old. Observe, All things past, present, and to come, were, and are, founded upon, and flowing fRom. the priestly office of Christ.

2. Christ is a high priest by a greater and more perfect tabernacle (Heb 9:11), a tabernacle not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building, but his own body, or rather human nature, conceived by the Holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed virgin. This was a new fabric, a new order of building, infinitely superior to all earthly structures, not excepting the tabernacle of the temple itself.

3. Christ, our high priest, has entered into heaven, not as their high priest entered into the holiest, with the blood of bulls and of goats, but by his own blood, typified by theirs, and infinitely more precious. And this,

4. Not for one year only, which showed the imperfection of that priesthood, that it did but typically obtain a year's reprieve or pardon. But our high priest entered into heaven once for all, and has obtained not a yearly respite, but eternal redemption, and so needs not to make an annual entrance. In each of the types there was something that showed it was a type, and resembled the antitype, and something that showed it was but a type, and fell short of the antitype, and therefore ought by no means to be set up in competition with the antitype.

5. The Holy Ghost further signified and showed what was the efficacy of the blood of the Old Testament sacrifices, and thence is inferred the much greater efficacy of the blood of Christ. (1.) The efficacy of the blood of the legal sacrifices extended to the purifying of the flesh (Heb 9:13): it freed the outward man from ceremonial uncleanness and from temporal punishment, and entitled him to, and fitted him for, some external privileges. (2.) He infers very justly hence the far greater efficacy of the blood of Christ (Heb 9:14): How much more shall the blood of Christ, etc. Here observe, [1.] What it was that gave such efficacy to the blood of Christ. First, It was his offering himself to God, the human nature upon the altar of his divine nature, he being priest, altar, and sacrifice, his divine nature serving for the two former, and his human nature for the last; now such a priest, altar, and sacrifice, could not but be propitiatory. Secondly, It was Christ's offering up himself to God through the eternal Spirit, not only as the divine nature supported the human, but the Holy Ghost, which he had without measure, helping him in all, and in this great act of obedience offering himself. Thirdly, It was Christ's offering himself to God without spot, without any sinful stain either in his nature or life; this was conformable to the law of sacrifices, which required them to be without blemish. Now further observe, [2.] What the efficacy of Christ's blood is; it is very great. For, First, It is sufficient to purge the conscience from dead works, it reaches to the very soul and conscience, the defiled soul, defiled with sin, which is a dead work, proceeds from spiritual death, and tends to death eternal. As the touching of a dead body gave a legal uncleanness, so meddling with sin gives a moral and real defilement, fixes it in the very soul; but the blood of Christ has efficacy to purge it out. Secondly, It is sufficient to enable us to serve the living God, not only by purging away that guilt which separates between God and sinners, but by sanctifying and renewing the soul through the gracious influences of the Holy Spirit, purchased by Christ for this purpose, that we might be enabled to serve the living God in a lively manner.

Matthew Henry: Heb 9:15-22

In these verses the apostle considers the gospel under the notion of a will or testament, the new or last will and testament of Christ, and shows the necessity and efficacy of the blood of Christ to make this testament valid and effectual.

I. The gospel is here considered as a testament, the new and last will and testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It is observable that the solemn transactions that pass between God and man are sometimes called a covenant, here a testament. A covenant is an agreement between two or more parties about things that are in their own power, or may be so, and this either with or without a mediator; this agreement takes effect at such time and in such manner as therein declared. A testament is a voluntary act and deed of a single person, duly executed and witnessed, bestowing legacies on such legatees as are described and characterized by the testator, and which can only take effect upon his death. Now observe, Christ is the Mediator of a New Testament (Heb 9:15); and he is so for several ends and purposes here mentioned. 1. To redeem persons from their transgressions committed against the law or first testament, which makes every transgression a forfeiture of liberty, and makes men debtors, and slaves or prisoners, who need to be redeemed. 2. To qualify all those that are effectually called to receive the promise of an eternal inheritance. These are the great legacies that Christ by his last will and testament has bequeathed to the truly characterized legatees.

II. To make this New Testament effectual, it was necessary that Christ should die; the legacies accrue by means of death. This he proves by two arguments: - 1. From the general nature of every will or testamentary disposition, Heb 9:16. Where a testament is, where it acts and operates, there must of necessity by the death of the testator; till then the property is still in the testator's hand, and he has power to revoke, cancel, or alter, his will as he pleases; so that no estate, no right, is conveyed by will, till the testator's death has made it unalterable and effectual. 2. From the particular method that was taken by Moses in the ratification of the first testament, which was not done without blood, Heb 9:18, Heb 9:19, etc. All men by sin had become guilty before God, had forfeited their inheritance, their liberties, and their very lives, into the hands of divine justice; but God, being willing to show the greatness of his mercy, proclaimed a covenant of grace, and ordered it to be typically administered under the Old Testament, but not without the blood and life of the creature; and God accepted the blood of bulls and goats, as typifying the blood of Christ; and by these means the covenant of grace was ratified under the former dispensation. The method taken by Moses, according to the direction he had received from God, is here particularly related (1.) Moses spoke every precept to all the people, according to the law, Heb 9:19. He published to them the tenour of the covenant, the duties required, the rewards promised to those who did their duty, and the punishment threatened against the transgressors, and he called for their consent to the terms of the covenant; and this in an express manner. (2.) Then he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and applied this blood by sprinkling it. This blood and water signified the blood and water that came out of our Saviour's pierced side, for justification and sanctification, and also shadowed forth the two sacraments of the New Testament, baptism and the Lord's supper, with scarlet wool, signifying the righteousness of Christ with which we must be clothed, the hyssop signifying that faith by which we must apply all. Now with these Moses sprinkled, [1.] The book of the law and covenant, to show that the covenant of grace is confirmed by the blood of Christ and made effectual to our good. [2.] The people, intimating that the shedding of the blood of Christ will be no advantage to us if it be not applied to us. And the sprinkling of both the book and the people signified the mutual consent of both parties, God and man, and their mutual engagements to each other in this covenant through Christ, Moses at the same time using these words, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. This blood, typifying the blood of Christ, is the ratification of the covenant of grace to all true believers. [3.] He sprinkled the tabernacle and all the utensils of it, intimating that all the sacrifices offered up and services performed there were accepted only through the blood of Christ, which procures the remission of that iniquity that cleaves to our holy things, which could not have been remitted but by that atoning blood.

Matthew Henry: Heb 9:23-28

In this last part of the chapter, the apostle goes on to tell us what the Holy Ghost has signified to us by the legal purifications of the patterns of the things in heaven, inferring thence the necessity of better sacrifices to consecrate the heavenly things themselves.

I. The necessity of purifying the patterns of the things in heaven, Heb 9:23. This necessity arises both from the divine appointment, which must always be obeyed, and from the reason of that appointment, which was to preserve a proper resemblance between the things typifying and the things typified. It is observable here that the sanctuary of God on earth is a pattern of heaven, and communion with God in his sanctuary is to his people a heaven upon earth.

II. The necessity that the heavenly things themselves should be purified with better sacrifices than of bulls and goats; the things themselves are better than the patterns, and must therefore be consecrated with better sacrifices. These heavenly things are the privileges of the gospel state, begun in grace, perfected in glory. These must be ratified by a suitable sanction or consecration; and this was the blood of Christ. Now it is very evident that the sacrifice of Christ is infinitely better than those of the law. 1. From the places in which the sacrifices under the law, and that under the gospel, were offered. Those under the law were the holy places made with hands, which are but figures of the true sanctuary, Heb 9:24. Christ's sacrifice, though offered upon earth, was by himself carried up into heaven, and is there presented in a way of daily intercession; for he appears in the presence of God for us. He has gone to heaven, not only to enjoy the rest and receive the honour due to him, but to appear in the presence of God for us, to present our persons and our performances, to answer and rebuke our adversary and accuser, to secure our interest, to perfect all our affairs, and to prepare a place for us. 2. From the sacrifices themselves, Heb 9:26. Those under the law were the lives and blood of other creatures of a different nature from the offerers - the blood of beasts, a thing of small value, and which would have been of none at all in this matter had it not had a typical respect to the blood of Christ; but the sacrifice of Christ was the oblation of himself; he offered his own blood, truly called, by virtue of the hypostatical union, the blood of God; and therefore of infinite value. 3. From the frequent repetition of the legal sacrifices. This showed the imperfection of that law; but it is the honour and perfection of Christ's sacrifice that, being once offered, it was sufficient to all the ends of it; and indeed the contrary would have been absurd, for then he must have been still dying and rising again, and ascending and then again descending and dying; and the great work had been always in fieri - always doing, and always to do, but never finished, which would be as contrary to reason as it is to revelation, and to the dignity of his person: But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. The gospel is the last dispensation of the grace of God to men. 4. From the inefficacy of the legal sacrifices, and the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice. The legal sacrifices could not of themselves put away sin, neither procure pardon for it now power against it. Sin would still have lain upon us, and had dominion over us; but Jesus Christ by one sacrifice has made an end of sin, he has destroyed the works of the devil.

III. The apostle illustrates the argument from the appointment of God concerning men (Heb 9:27, Heb 9:28), and observes something like it in the appointment of God concerning Christ.

1. The appointment of God concerning men contains in it two things: - (1.) That they must once die, or, at least, undergo a change equivalent to death. It is an awful thing to die, to have the vital knot loosed or cut asunder, all relations here dropped at once, an end put to our probation and preparation state, and to enter into another world. It is a great work, and it is a work that can be but once done, and therefore had need to be well done. This is matter of comfort to the godly, that they shall die well and die but once; but it is matter of terror to the wicked, who die in their sins, that they cannot return again to do that great work better. (2.) It is appointed to men that after death they shall come to judgment, to a particular judgment immediately after death; for the soul returns to God as to its judge, to be determined to its eternal state; and men shall be brought to the general judgment, at the end of the world. This is the unalterable decree of God concerning men - they must die, and they must be judged. It is appointed for them, and it is to be believed and seriously considered by them.

2. The appointment of God concerning Christ, bearing some resemblance to the other. (1.) He must be once offered, to bear the sins of many, of all the Father had given to him, of all who should believe in his name. He was not offered for any sin of his own; he was wounded for our transgressions. God laid on him the iniquity of all his people; and these are many, though not so many as the rest of mankind; yet, when they are all gathered to him, he will be the first-born among many brethren. (2.) It is appointed that Christ shall appear the second time without sin, to the salvation of those who look for him. [1.] He will then appear without sin; at his first appearance, though he had no sin of his own, yet he stood charged with the sins of many; he was the Lamb of God that bore upon him the sins of the world, and then he appeared in the form of sinful flesh; but his second appearance will be without any such charge upon him, he having fully discharged it before, and then his visage shall not be marred, but shall be exceedingly glorious. [2.] This will be to the salvation of all who look for him; he will then perfect their holiness, their happiness; their number shall then be accomplished, and their salvation completed. Observe, It is the distinguishing character of true believers that they are looking for Christ; they look to him by faith; they look for him by hope and holy desires. They look for him in every duty, in every ordinance, in every providence now; and they expect his second coming, and are preparing for it; and though it will be sudden destruction to the rest of the world, who scoff at the report of it, it will be eternal salvation to those who look for it.

Barclay: Heb 9:1-5

The writer to the Hebrews has just been thinking of Jesus as the one who leads us into reality. He has been using the idea that in this world we have only pale copies of what is truly real. The worship that men can offer is only a ghost-like shadow of the real worship which Jesus, the real High Priest, alone can offer. But even as he thinks of that his mind goes back to the Tabernacle (the Tabernacle, remember, not the Temple). Lovingly he remembers its beauty; lovingly he lingers on its priceless possessions. And the thought in his mind is this--if earthly worship was as beautiful as this, what must the true worship be like? If all the loveliness of the Tabernacle was only a shadow of reality, how surpassingly lovely the reality must be. He does not tell of the Tabernacle in detail; he only alludes to certain of its treasures. This was all he needed to do because his readers knew its glories and had them printed on their memories. But we do not know them; therefore, let us see what the beauty of the earthly Tabernacle was like, always remembering that it was only a pale copy of reality.

The main description of the Tabernacle in the wilderness is in Exo 25-31 and Exo 35-40. God said to Moses: "Make me a sanctuary that I may dwell in their midst" (Exo 25:8). It was constructed out of the freewill offerings of the people (Exo 25:1-7), who gave with such lavish generosity that a halt had to be called to their giving (Exo 36:5-7).

The Court of the Tabernacle was 150 feet long and 75 feet wide. It was surrounded by a curtain-like fence of fine, twined linen 7 1/2 feet high. The white linen stood for the wall of holiness that surrounds the presence of God. The curtain was supported by twenty pillars on the north and south sides, and by ten on the east and west sides; and the pillars were set in sockets of brass and had tops of silver. There was only one gate. It was on the east side and it was 30 feet wide and 7 1/2 feet high. It was made of fine, twined linen wrought with blue and purple and scarlet. In the court there were two things. There was the Brazen Altar, 7 1/2 feet square and 4 1/2 feet high and made of acacia wood sheathed in brass. Its top was a brazen grating on which the sacrifice was laid; and it had four horns to which the offering was bound. There was The Laver. The laver was made from the brass mirrors of the women (glass mirrors did not exist at that time) but its dimensions are not given. The priests bathed themselves in the water in it before they carried out their sacred duties.

The Tabernacle itself was constructed of forty-eight acacia beams, 15 feet high and 2 feet 3 inches wide. They were overlaid with pure gold and rested in sockets of silver. They were bound together by outside connecting rods and by a wooden tie-beam which ran through their centre. The Tabernacle was divided into two parts. The first--two-thirds of the whole--was The Holy Place; the inner part--one-third of the whole--a cube 15 feet on each side, was The Holy of Holies. The curtain which hung in front of The Holy Place was supported on five brass pillars and made of fine linen wrought in blue, purple and scarlet.

The Holy Place contained three things. (i) There was The Golden Lampstand. It stood on the south side; it was beaten out of a talent of solid gold; the lamps were fed with pure olive oil, and were always lit. (ii) On the north side stood The Table of the Shewbread. It was made of acacia wood covered with gold; it was 3 feet long, 1 1/2 feet wide and 2 feet 3 inches high. On it there were laid every Sabbath twelve loaves made of the finest flour, in two rows of six. Only the priests could eat these loaves when they were removed. They were changed every Sabbath. (iii) There was The Altar of Incense. It was of acacia wood sheathed in gold; it was 1 1/2 feet square and 3 feet high. On it incense, symbolising the prayers of the people rising to God, was burned every morning and evening.

In front of The Holy of Holies there was The Veil which was made of fine, twined linen, embroidered in scarlet and purple and blue, and with the cherubim upon it. Into The Holy of Holies no one but the High Priest might enter, and he only once a year, on the Day of Atonement, and only after the most elaborate preparations. Within The Holy of Holies stood The Ark of the Covenant. It contained three things--the golden pot of the manna, Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the law. It was made of acacia wood sheathed outside and lined inside with gold. It was 3 feet 9 inches long, 2 feet 3 inches wide, and 2 feet 3 inches high. Its lid was called The Mercy Seat. On The Mercy Seat there were two cherubim of solid gold with overarching wings. It was there that the very presence of God rested, for he had said: "There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are upon the ark of the testimony" (Exo 25:22).

It was of all this beauty that the writer to the Hebrews was thinking--and yet it was only a shadow of reality. In his mind there was another thing of which he was to speak again--the ordinary Israelite could come only to the gate of the Tabernacle court; the priests and the Levites might enter the court; the priests alone might enter the Holy Place; and none but the High Priest might enter the Holy of Holies. There was beauty but it was a beauty in which the common man was barred from the inner presence of God. Jesus Christ took the barrier away and opened wide the way to God's presence for every man.

Barclay: Heb 9:6-10

Only the High Priest could enter into the Holy of Holies and that only on The Day of Atonement. It is of the ceremonies of that day that the writer to the Hebrews is here thinking. He did not need to describe them to his readers for they knew them. To them they were the most sacred religious ceremonies in all the world. If we are to understand the thought of the writer to the Hebrews we must have a picture of them in our minds. The main description is in Lev 16 .

First, we must ask, what was the idea behind The Day of Atonement? As we have seen, the relationship between Israel and God was a covenant relationship. Sin on Israel's part broke that relationship, and the whole system of sacrifice existed to make atonement for sin and to restore the broken relationship. But what if there were some sins still not atoned for? What if there were some sins of which a man was not conscious? What if by some chance the altar itself had become defiled? That is to say, what if the sacrificial system was not performing the function it should?

The summary of the Day of Atonement is given in Lev 16:33:

And he shall make atonement for the sanctuary; and he shall

make atonement for the tent of meeting, and for the altar,

and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the

people of the assembly.

It was one great comprehensive act of atonement for all sin. It was one grand day in which all things and all people were cleansed, so that the relationship between Israel and God should continue unbroken. To that end it was a day of humiliation. "You shall afflict yourselves" (Lev 16:29). It was not a feast but a fast. The whole nation fasted all day, even the boys and girls; and the really devout Jew prepared himself for it by fasting for the ten days which went before. The Day of Atonement comes ten days after the opening of the Jewish New Year, about the beginning of September in our calendar. It was the greatest of all days in the life of the High Priest.

Let us then see what happened. Very early in the morning the High Priest cleansed himself by washing. He donned his gorgeous robes of office, worn only on that day. There were the white linen breeches and the long white undergarment reaching down to the feet, woven in one piece. There was The Robe of the Ephod. It was dark blue and was a long robe with at the foot a fringe of blue, purple and scarlet tassels made in the form of pomegranates, interspersed with an equal number of little golden bells. Over this robe he put The Ephod itself The Ephod was probably a kind of linen tunic, embroidered in scarlet and purple and gold, with an elaborate girdle. On its shoulders were two onyx stones. The names of six of the tribes were engraved on one and six on the other. On the tunic was The Breastplate, a span square. On it were twelve precious stones with the names of the twelve tribes engraved upon them. So the High Priest carried the people to God on his shoulders and on his heart. In the breastplate there was the Urim and the Thummim, which means lights and perfections (Exo 28:30). What exactly the Urim and the Thummim was is not known. It is known that the High Priest consulted it when he wished to know the will of God. It may be that it was a precious diamond inscribed with the consonants Y-H-W-H which are the consonants of Yahweh (03068 and 03069), the name of God. On his head the High Priest put the tall mitre, of fine linen; and on the mitre there was a gold plate bound by a band of blue ribbon, and on the plate were the words: "Holiness unto the Lord." It is easy to imagine what a dazzling figure the High Priest must have presented on this his greatest day.

The High Priest began by doing the things that were done every day. He burned the morning incense, made the morning sacrifice, and attended to the trimming of the lamps on the seven-branched lampstand. Then came the first part of the special ritual of the day. Still dressed in his gorgeous robes, he sacrificed a bullock and seven lambs and one ram (Num 29:7). Then he removed his gorgeous robes, cleansed himself again in water, and dressed himself in the simple purity of white linen. There was brought to him a bullock bought with his own resources. He placed his hands on its head and, standing there in the full sight of the people, confessed his own sin and the sin of his house:

"Ah, Lord God, I have committed iniquity: I have transgressed: I have sinned--I and my house. O Lord, I entreat thee, cover over (atone for) the iniquities, the transgressions, and the sins, which I have committed, transgressed, and sinned before thee, I and my house, even as it is written in the law of Moses, thy servant, 'For in that day, he will cover over (atone) for you to make you clean. From all your transgressions before the Lord you shall be cleansed.' "

For the moment the bullock was left before the altar. And then followed one of the unique ceremonies of the Day of Atonement. Two goats were standing by, and beside the goats an urn with two lots in it. One lot was marked For Jehovah; the other was marked For Azazel, which is the phrase the King James Version translates The Scapegoat. The lots were drawn and laid one on the head of each goat. A tongue-shaped piece of scarlet was tied to the horn of the scapegoat. And for the moment the goats were left. Then the High Priest turned to the bullock which was beside the altar and killed it. its throat was slit and the blood caught by a priest in a basin. The basin was kept in motion so that the blood would not coagulate for soon it was to be used. Then came the first of the great moments. The High Priest took coals from the altar and put them in a censer; he took incense and put it in a special dish; and then he walked into the Holy of Holies to burn incense in the very presence of God. It was laid down that he must not stay too long "lest he put Israel in terror." The people literally watched with bated breath; and when he came out from the presence of God still alive, there went up a sigh of relief like a gust of wind.

When the High Priest came out from the Holy of Holies, he took the basin of the bullock's blood, went back into the Holy of Holies and sprinkled it seven times up and seven times down. He came out, killed the goat that was marked For Jehovah, with its blood re-entered the Holy of Holies and sprinkled again. Then he came out and mingled together the blood of the bullock and the goat and seven times sprinkled the horns of the altar of the incense and the altar itself. What remained of the blood was laid at the foot of the altar of the burnt offering. Thus the Holy of Holies and the altar were cleansed by blood from any defilement that might be on them.

Then came the most vivid ceremony. The scapegoat was brought forward. The High Priest laid his hands on it and confessed his own sin and the sin of the people; and the goat was led forth into the desert, "into a land not inhabited," laden with the sins of the people and there it was killed.

The priest turned to the slain bullock and goat and prepared them for sacrifice. Still in his linen garments he read scripture--Lev 16 ; Lev 23:27-32, and repeated by heart Num 29:7-11. He then prayed for the priesthood and the people. Once again he cleansed himself in water and rearrayed himself in his gorgeous robes. He sacrificed, first, a kid of the goats for the sins of the people; then he made the normal evening sacrifice; then he sacrificed the already prepared parts of the bullock and the goat. Then once again he cleansed himself, took off his robes, and put on the white linen; and for the fourth and last time he entered the Holy of Holies to remove the censer of incense which still burned there. Once again he cleansed himself in water; once again he put on his vivid robes; then he burned the evening offering of incense, trimmed the lamps on the golden lampstand, and his work was done. In the evening he held a feast because he had been in the presence of God and had come out alive.

Such was the ritual of the Day of Atonement, the day designed to cleanse all things and all people from sin. That was the picture in the mind of the writer to the Hebrews and he was to make much of it. But there were certain things of which he was thinking at the moment.

Every year this ceremony had to be gone through again. Everyone but the High Priest was barred from the presence and even he entered in terror. The cleansing was a purely external one by baths of water. The sacrifice was that of bulls and goats and animal blood. The whole thing failed because such things cannot atone for sin. In it all the writer to the Hebrews sees a pale copy of the reality, a ghostly pattern of the one true sacrifice--the sacrifice of Christ. It was a noble ritual, a thing of dignity and beauty; but it was only an unavailing shadow. The only priest and the only sacrifice which can open the way to God for all men is Jesus Christ.

Barclay: Heb 9:11-14

When we try to understand this passage, we must remember three things which are basic to the thought of the writer to the Hebrews. (i) Religion is access to God. Its function is to bring a man into God's presence. (ii) This is a world of pale shadows and imperfect copies; beyond is the world of realities. The function of all worship is to bring men into contact with the eternal realities. That was what the worship of the Tabernacle was meant to do; but the earthly Tabernacle and its worship are pale copies of the real Tabernacle and its worship; and only the real Tabernacle and the real worship can give access to reality. (iii) There can be no religion without sacrifice. Purity is a costly thing; access to God demands purity; somehow man's sin must be atoned for and his uncleanness cleansed. With these ideas in his mind the writer to the Hebrews goes on to show that Jesus is the only High Priest who brings a sacrifice that can open the way to God and that that sacrifice is himself.

To begin with, he refers to certain of the great sacrifices which the Jews were in the habit of making under the old covenant with God. (i) There was the sacrifice of bullocks and of goats. In this he is referring to two of the great sacrifices on The Day of Atonement--of the bullock which the High Priest offered for his own sins and of the scapegoat which was led away to the wilderness bearing the sins of the people (Lev 16:15; Lev 16:21-22). (ii) There was the sacrifice of the red heifer. This strange ritual is described in Num 19 . Under Jewish ceremonial law, if a man touched a dead body, he was unclean. He was barred from the worship of God, and everything and everyone he touched also became unclean. To deal with this there was a prescribed method of cleansing. A red heifer was slaughtered outside the camp. The priest sprinkled the blood of the heifer before the Tabernacle seven times. The body of the beast was then burned, together with cedar and hyssop and a piece of red cloth. The resulting ashes were laid up outside the camp in a clean place and constituted a purification for sin. This ritual must have been very ancient for both its origin and its meaning are wrapped in obscurity. The Jews themselves told that once a Gentile questioned Rabbi Jochanan ben Zakkai on the meaning of this rite, declaring that it sounded like pure superstition. The Rabbi's answer was that it had been appointed by the Holy One and that men must not enquire into his reasons but should leave the matter there without explanation. In any event, the fact remains that it was one of the great rites of the Jews.

The writer to the Hebrews tells of these sacrifices and then declares that the sacrifice that Jesus brings is far greater and far more effective. We must first ask what he means by the greater and more effective tabernacle not made with hands? That is a question to which no one can give an answer which is beyond dispute. But the ancient scholars nearly all took it in one way and said that this new tabernacle which brought men into the very presence of God was nothing else than the body of Jesus. It would be another way of saying what John said: "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (Joh 14:9). The worship of the ancient tabernacle was designed to bring men into the presence of God. That it could do only in the most shadowy and imperfect way. The coming of Jesus really brought men into the presence of God, because in him God entered this world of space and time in a human form and to see Jesus is to see what God is like.

The great superiority of the sacrifice Jesus brought lay in three things. (i) The ancient sacrifices cleansed a man's body from ceremonial uncleanness; the sacrifice of Jesus cleansed his soul. We must always remember this--in theory all sacrifice cleansed from transgressions of the ritual law; it did not cleanse from sins of the presumptuous heart and the high hand. Take the case of the red heifer. It was not moral uncleanness that its sacrifice wiped out but the ceremonial uncleanness consequent upon touching a dead body. A man's body might be clean ceremonially and yet his heart be torn with remorse. He might feel able to enter the tabernacle and yet far away from the presence of God. The sacrifice of Jesus takes the load of guilt from a man's conscience. The animal sacrifices of the old covenant might well leave a man in estrangement from God; the sacrifice of Jesus shows us a God whose arms are always outstretched and in whose heart is only love.

(ii) The sacrifice of Jesus brought eternal redemption. The idea was that men were under the dominion of sin; and just as the purchase price had to be paid to free a man from slavery, so the purchase price had to be paid to free a man from sin.

(iii) The sacrifice of Christ enabled a man to leave the deeds of death and to become the servant of the living God. That is to say, he did not only win forgiveness for a man's past sin, he enabled him in the future to live a godly life. The sacrifice of Jesus was not only the paying of a debt; it was the giving of a victory. What Jesus did puts a man right with God and what he does enables a man to stay right with God. The act of the Cross brings to men the love of God in a way that takes their terror of him away; the presence of the living Christ brings to them the power of God so that they can win a daily victory over sin.

Westcott outlines four ways in which Jesus' sacrifice of himself differs from the animal sacrifices of the old covenant.

(i) The sacrifice of Jesus was voluntary. The animal's life was taken from it; Jesus gave his life. He willingly laid it down for his friends.

(ii) The sacrifice of Jesus was spontaneous. Animal sacrifice was entirely the product of law; the sacrifice of Jesus was entirely the product of love. We pay our debts to a tradesman because we have to; we give a gift to our loved ones because we want to. It was not law but love that lay behind the sacrifice of Christ.

(iii) The sacrifice of Jesus was rational. The animal victim did not know what was happening; Jesus all the time knew what he was doing. He died, not as an ignorant victim caught up in circumstances over which he had no control and did not understand but with eyes wide open.

(iv) The sacrifice of Jesus was moral. Animal sacrifice was mechanical; but Jesus' sacrifice was made, through the eternal Spirit. This thing on Calvary was not a matter of prescribed ritual mechanically carried out; it was a matter of Jesus obeying the will of God for the sake of men. Behind it there was not the mechanism of law but the choice of love.

Barclay: Heb 9:15-22

This is one of the most difficult passages in the whole letter, although it would not be difficult to those who read the letter for the first time, for its methods of argument and expression and categories of thought would be familiar to them.

As we have seen, the idea of the covenant is basic to the thought of the writer, by which he meant a relationship between God and man. The first covenant was dependent on man's keeping of the law; as soon as he broke the law the covenant became ineffective. Let us remember that to our writer religion means access to God. Therefore, the basic meaning of the new covenant, which Jesus inaugurated, is that men should have access to God or, to put it another way, have fellowship with him. But here is the difficulty. Men come to the new covenant already stained with the sins committed under the old covenant, for which the old sacrificial system was powerless to atone. So, the writer to the Hebrews has a tremendous thought and says that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is retroactive. That is to say, it is effective to wipe out the sins of men committed under the old covenant and to inaugurate the fellowship promised under the new.

All that seems very complicated but at the back of it there are two great eternal truths. First, the sacrifice of Jesus gains forgiveness for past sins. We ought to be punished for what we have done and shut out from God; but because of what Jesus did the debt is wiped out, the breach is forgiven and the barrier is taken away. Second, the sacrifice of Jesus opens a new life for the future. It opens the way to fellowship with God. The God whom our sins had made a stranger, the sacrifice of Christ has made a friend. Because of what he did the burden of the past is rolled away and life becomes life with God.

It is the next step in the argument which appears to us a fantastic way in which to argue. The question in the mind of the writer is why this new relationship with God should involve the death of Christ. He answers it in two ways.

(i) His first answer is--to us almost incredibly--founded on nothing other than a play on words. We have seen that the use of the word diatheke (1242) in the sense of covenant is characteristically Christian, and that its normal secular use was in the sense of will or testament. Up to Heb 9:16the writer to the Hebrews has been using diatheke (1242) in the normal Christian sense of covenant; then, suddenly and without warning or explanation, he switches to the sense of will. Now a will does not become operative until the testator dies; so the writer to the Hebrews says that no diatheke (1242), will, can be operative until the death of the testator so that the new diatheke (1242), covenant, cannot become operative apart from the death of Christ. That is a merely verbal argument and is quite unconvincing to a modern mind; but it must be remembered that this founding of an argument on a play between two meanings of a word was a favourite method of the Alexandrian scholars in the time when this letter was written. In fact this very argument would have been considered in the days when the letter to the Hebrews was written an exceedingly clever piece of exposition.

(ii) His second answer goes back to the Hebrew sacrificial system and to Lev 17:11: "The life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement." "Without the shedding of blood there can be no atonement for sin," was actually a well-known Hebrew principle. So the writer to the Hebrews goes back to the inauguration of the first covenant under Moses, the occasion when the people accepted the law as the condition of their special relationship with God. We are told how sacrifice was made and how Moses "took half of the blood and put it in basins; and half of the blood he threw against the altar." After the book of the law had been read and the people had signified their acceptance of it, Moses "took the blood and threw it upon the people, and said, 'Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words' " (Exo 24:1-8). It is true that the memory of the writer to the Hebrews of that passage is not strictly accurate. He introduces calves and goats and scarlet and hyssop which come from the ritual of The Day of Atonement and he talks about the sprinkling of the Tabernacle, which at that time had not yet been built; but the reason is that these things are so much in his mind. His basic idea is that there can be no cleansing and no ratification of any covenant without the shedding of blood. Why that should be so he does not need to know. Scripture says it is so and that is enough for him. The probable reason is that blood is life, as the Hebrew saw it, and life is the most precious thing in the world; and man must offer his most precious thing to God.

All that goes back to a ritual which is only of antiquarian interest. But behind it there is an eternal principle--Forgiveness is a costly thing. Human forgiveness is costly. A son or a daughter may go wrong and a father or a mother may forgive; but that forgiveness brings tears, whiteness to the hair, lines to the face, a cutting anguish and then a long dull ache to the heart. It does not cost nothing. Divine forgiveness is costly. God is love but he is also holiness. He least of all can break the great moral laws on which the universe is built. Sin must have its punishment or the very structure of life disintegrates. And God alone can pay the terrible price that is necessary before men can be forgiven. Forgiveness is never a case of saying: "It's all right; it doesn't matter." It is the most costly thing in the world. Without the shedding of heart's blood there can be no forgiveness of sins. Nothing brings a man to his senses with such arresting violence as to see the effect of his sin on someone who loves him in this world or on the God who loves him for ever, and to say to himself: "It cost that to forgive my sin." Where there is forgiveness someone must be crucified.

Barclay: Heb 9:23-28

The writer to the Hebrews, still thinking of the supreme efficacy of the sacrifice which Jesus made, begins with a flight of thought which, even for so adventurous a writer as he, is amazing. Let us remember again the letter's basic thought that the worship of this world is a pale copy of the real worship. The writer to the Hebrews says that in this world the Levitical sacrifices were designed to purify the means of worship. For instance, the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement purified the tabernacle and the altar and the Holy Place. Now he goes on to say that the work of Christ purifies not only earth but heaven. He has the tremendous thought of a kind of cosmic redemption that purified the whole universe, seen and unseen.

So he goes on to stress again the way in which the work and the sacrifice of Christ are supreme.

(i) Christ entered into no man-made Holy Place; he entered into the presence of God. We are to think of Christianity not in terms of Church membership but in terms of intimate fellowship with God.

(ii) Christ entered into the presence of God not only for his own sake but for ours. It was to open the way for us and plead our cause. In Christ there is the greatest paradox in the world, the paradox of the greatest glory and the greatest service, the paradox of one for whom the world exists and who exists for the world, the paradox of the eternal King and the eternal Servant.

(iii) The sacrifice of Christ never needs to be made again. Year after year the ritual of the Day of Atonement had to go on and the things that blocked the road to God had to be atoned for; but through Christ's sacrifice the road to God is for ever open. Men were always sinners and always will be but that does not mean that Christ must go on offering himself again and again. The road is open once and for all. We can have a faint analogy of that. For long a certain surgical operation may be impossible. Then some surgeon finds a way round the difficulties. From that day that same road is open to all surgeons. We may put it this way--nothing need ever be added to what Jesus Christ has done to keep open the way to God's love for sinning men.

Finally, the writer to the Hebrews draws a parallel between the life of man and the life of Christ.

(i) Man dies and then comes the judgment. That itself was a shock to the Greek for he tended to believe that death was final. "When earth once drinks the blood of a man," said Aeschylus, "there is death once and for all and there is no resurrection." Euripides says: "It cannot be the dead to light shall come." "For the one loss is this that never mortal maketh good again the life of man--though wealth may be re-won." Homer makes Achilles say when he reaches the shades: "Rather would I live upon the soil as the hireling of another, with a landless man whose livelihood was small, than bear sway among all the dead who are no more." Mimnermus writes with a kind of despair:

"O Golden love, what life, what joy but thine?

Come death, when thou art gone, and make an end!"

There is a simple Greek epitaph:

"Farewell, tomb of Melite; the best of women lies here, who loved

her loving husband, Onesimus; thou wert most excellent, wherefore

he longs for thee after thy death, for thou wert the best of

wives. Farewell thou too, dearest husband, only love my children."

As G. Lowes Dickinson points out, in the Greek, the first and the last word of that epitaph is "Farewell!" Death was the end. When Tacitus is writing the tribute of biography to the great Agricola all he can finish with is an "if."

"If there be any habitation for the spirits of just men, if, as the

sages will have it, great souls perish not with the body, mayest

thou rest in peace."

"If" is the only word. Marcus Aurelius can say that when a man dies and his spark goes back to be lost in God, all that is left is "dust, ashes, bones, and stench." The significant thing about this passage of Hebrews is its basic assumption that a man will rise again. That is part of the certainty of the Christian creed; and the basic warning is that he rises to judgment.

(ii) With Christ it is different--he dies and rises and comes again, and he comes not to be judged but to judge. The early Church never forgot the hope of the Second Coming. It throbbed through their belief. But for the unbeliever that was a day of terror. As Enoch had it of the Day of the Lord, before Christ came: "For all you who are sinners there is no salvation, but upon you all will come destruction and a curse." In some way the consummation must come. If in that day Christ comes as a friend, it can be only a day of glory; if he comes as a stranger or as one whom we have regarded as an enemy, it can be only a day of judgment. A man may look to the end of things with joyous expectation or with shuddering terror. What makes the difference is how his heart is with Christ.

Constable: Heb 5:11--11:1

III. The High Priestly Office of the Son 5:11--10:39

The transition from exposition (4:15-5:10) to exhortation (5:11-6:20) marks the beginning of a new division in this sermon. The structure of this division is as follows.¹⁵⁸

a Preliminary exhortation (5:11-6:20)

A The priest like Melchizedek (7:1-28)

B The single, personal sacrifice for sins (8:1-9:28)

C The achievement of eternal salvation (10:1-18)

a' Concluding exhortation (10:19-39)

A central theme of Hebrews, redemptive sacrifice, comes into prominence in this section of the text.

Constable: Heb 7:1--10:19

C. The Son's High Priestly Ministry 7:1-10:18

The great resource of Christians when tempted to apostatize is our high priest, Jesus Christ. The writer therefore spent considerable time and space expounding His high priesthood to enable his readers to benefit from their resource. This section of the book continues to glorify Jesus Christ so the readers would appreciate Him sufficiently and not turn from. Him.

"In Hebrews 7, the writer argued that Christ's priesthood, like Melchizedek's, is superior in its order. In Hebrews 8, the emphasis is on Christ's better covenant; in Hebrews 9, it is His better sanctuary; and Hebrews 10 concludes the section by arguing for Christ's better sacrifice."²¹¹

Constable: Heb 8:1--9:28

2. The work of our high priest chs. 8-9

The writer developed in this new section of the text topics that he had announced thematically in 7:26-28.

"The unit introduced in 8:1-2 consists entirely of exposition. Its limits are indicated by an inclusio: corresponding to the statement in 8:3 that every high priest is appointed to offer (prospherein) gifts and sacrifices is the complementary declaration that Christ was offered (prosenechtheis) once to take away the sins of the people in 9:28. These limits are confirmed by the observation that the theme of Christ's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary, which is announced in 8:1-2, is actually developed in 9:11-28. The new unit extends from 8:1-9:28 and constitutes the central section within the compositional structure of the sermon. Its place at the center indicates the importance that the writer ascribed to this facet of his message . . ."²³⁵

The ministry of Jesus Christ as our High Priest involves a particular kind of service that includes a covenant, a sanctuary, and a sacrifice. The writer explained the service that Jesus Christ renders to help his readers understand His adequacy as our High Priest. The writer moved from explaining the person of our great High Priest to expounding His work. In all this he was contrasting the superiority of Christianity with the inferiority of Judaism.

One writer observed a chiastic structure in 8:1-9:28.²³⁶

A The old worship, earthly and figurative (8:1-6)

B The first covenant, imperfect and provisioned (8:7-13)

C The old and powerless institution of worship (9:1-10)

C' The new, efficacious institutions (9:11-14)

B' The new covenant (9:15-23)

A' The entrance to heaven (9:24-28)

Constable: Heb 9:1-10

The heavenly sanctuary 9:1-10

In this pericope the writer concentrated on the tabernacle and its provisions for cultic worship.²⁵⁴ The word "first" (Gr. prote) links this section with the former one (cf. 8:13). The writer introduced two subjects in the first verse: regulations of divine worship, and the earthly sanctuary. He then proceeded to expound them in reverse order, as he often did in this homily (vv. 2-5 and 6-10).

"The writer is most concerned to stress that the disposition of the tabernacle and its cultic regulations expressed symbolically the imperfect and provisional character of the old Sinaitic covenant. His description emphasizes limited access and the inadequacy of the offerings."²⁵⁵

"The descriptions are based, not on the author's personal involvement in worship at Jerusalem . . ., but on scripture."²⁵⁶

It was natural for the writer to use the tabernacle for his lesson rather than the temple because he proceeded to associate this sanctuary with the giving of the Old Covenant at Sinai (cf. 8:5).

9:1-5 The "first covenant" was the Mosaic Covenant. The writer compared it first to the New Covenant that replaced it. The outer tabernacle (lit. dwelling place) was the holy place (v. 2) and the inner tabernacle the holy of holies (v. 3). "The table and the sacred bread" (v. 2) is a hendiadys for "the table of sacred bread."²⁵⁷

Many readers have understood verse 4 as saying that the altar of incense was in the holy of holies in the tabernacle. This seems to be a contradiction since the Old Testament located this altar in the holy place (Exod. 30:6; 40:3-5, 21-27).²⁵⁸ The writer of Hebrews probably meant that the veil, not the holy of holies, had the altar of incense and the ark of the covenant connected with it (v. 3). These pieces of furniture were on either side of the veil. Describing it this way clarified that the writer meant the veil that hung between the holy place and the holy of holies.

A second problem is that this writer described the ark as having a golden jar of manna and Aaron's rod that budded in it. The Old Testament says that these items were beside the ark in the holy of holies (Exod. 16:32-34; Num. 17:10-11).

"It would at least seem reasonable to suppose that if the urn and the rod were originally placed in front of the ark, yet subsequently, for the sake of convenience (for example, when carrying the ark from one place to another), they were placed inside it."²⁵⁹

"According to the rabbis, the ark disappeared at the time of the early prophets (Mishnah, Yoma 5:2; Shekalim 6:1f.); and there was a tradition that Jeremiah hid it (2 Macc. 2:4ff.)."²⁶⁰

The writer declined to speak of the tabernacle furnishings in more detail (v. 5) because his main purpose was to contrast the two rituals and the two covenants.

9:6-10 He passed on to the "regulations of divine service" (v. 1) in the Old Covenant to show its inferiority further. The "outer tabernacle" is the holy place (v. 6), and "the second" is the holy of holies (v. 7). The high priest entered the holy of holies only once a year on the Day of Atonement to offer the special sacrifices for that day (Lev. 16:2). His offering then covered those sins of the people that they committed ignorantly as opposed to those they committed in deliberate apostasy (cf. Lev. 4:1-2; 5:17-19). Some ignorance is culpable; sins of this kind do matter. In Israel the punishment for deliberate rebellion against the Mosaic Covenant was death. It is about this apostasy that the writer warned his audience. He also comforted them with the assurance that their High Priest would deal gently with the misguided who sin ignorantly (5:2).

The writer clarified that the Holy Spirit intended to communicate the fact that the Levitical system did not provide access for the ordinary believer. The "holy place" is God's throne room in heaven, and the "outer [lit. first] tabernacle" refers to the earthly tabernacle and its successors, namely, the temples in Israel (v. 8).

"The front compartment' (he prote skene) becomes a spatial metaphor for the time when the first covenant' (he prote diatheke) was in force. As an illustration for the old age, which is now in process of dissolution (8:13), it symbolizes the total first covenant order with its daily and annual cultic ritual (9:6, 7). Once the first has been invalidated, the second becomes operative (see 10:9). In the figurative language of the writer, the front compartment of the tabernacle was symbolic of the present age (ton kaipon ton enestekota), which through the intrusion of the kairos diorthoseos, the time of correction' (v 10), has been superseded . . ."²⁶¹

The Old Covenant system of worship did not meet the deepest need of God's people, namely, intimate personal relationship with God. Its rites and ceremonies extended mainly to external matters until God would provide a better system at "a time of reformation" (v. 10).

This comparison helps us keep externals in their proper perspective as secondary to inward reality with God. Relationship with God purifies the conscience. It is possible to fulfill all the outward obligations of religion and still have a conscience that is not right with God (v. 9). This is one of the tragic inadequacies of religion that does not involve relationship with God.

"The necessity of a cleansed conscience is insisted upon throughout the letter [9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 13:18]. A conscience stained with sin is the one effective barrier to man's fellowship with God . . ."²⁶²

"The reasons for detailing the arrangement of the tabernacle and its furnishings in 9:2-5 is manifestly to show the lack of access to God under the old cultus. This, in turn, provides a framework for the development of certain deficiencies in the cultic regulations that had been imposed under the terms of the Sinaitic covenant in 9:6-10."²⁶³

"The greatest festival of the Jewish year paradoxically shows most clearly the limitations of the old dispensation and its high priesthood."²⁶⁴

The Old Covenant sanctuary was inferior for five reasons. It was an earthly sanctuary (v. 1), it was a type of something greater (vv. 2-5), and it was inaccessible to the people (vv. 6-7). Furthermore it was only temporary (v. 8) and its ministry was external rather than internal (vv. 9-10).²⁶⁵

Constable: Heb 9:11-28

The final purging of sin 9:11-28

The writer now focused on the issue of sacrifice.

"The argument moves a stage further as the author turns specifically to what Christ has done. The sacrifices of the old covenant were ineffectual. But in strong contrast Christ made an offering that secures a redemption valid for all eternity. In the sacrifices, a good deal pertained to the use of blood. So in accord with this, the author considers the significance of the blood of animals and that of Christ."²⁶⁶

In verses 11-14 the writer introduced Christ's high priestly ministry, which climaxes in verse 15. Verses 16-22 are parenthetical explaining verse 15. Then verses 23-28 resume the discussion of Jesus' priestly ministry in heaven.

"The conception of Christ's death as a liturgical high priestly action is developed as a major argument in 9:11-28. Prior to this point in the homily, the high priesthood tended to be linked with Christ's present activity as heavenly intercessor (cf. 2:18; 4:15-16; 7:25; 8:1-2)."²⁶⁷

9:11 A better translation might be, "He entered in connection with the greater . . . tabernacle." Jesus Christ did not pass through heaven in the sense of going on to some other place. He is there now.

9:12 Blood is a symbol of life (Lev. 17:11). The point is that the lives of innocent animal substitutes were sufficient only to cover sin temporarily. However the life of Jesus Christ because He was a perfect human substitute adequately paid for the redemption of all people forever. Having died "once for all" (7:27; 10:10) He was able to enter God's presence "once for all."

"There have been expositors who, pressing the analogy of the Day of Atonement beyond the limits observed by our author, have argued that the expiatory work of Christ was not completed on the cross--not completed, indeed, until He ascended from earth and made atonement "for us" in the heavenly holy of holies by the presentation of His efficacious blood'."²⁶⁸

9:13-14 Old Covenant sacrifices for sin on the Day of Atonement only provided temporary cleansing, but the sacrifice of Jesus Christ provided permanent cleansing. The reference to "the eternal Spirit" is unique in Scripture. The Holy Spirit had empowered and sustained Jesus in His office.

"It seems that the writer has chosen this unusual way of referring to the Holy Spirit to bring out the truth that there is an eternal aspect to Christ's saving work."²⁶⁹

Notice that all three persons of the Trinity had a part in redemption (v. 14). The "dead works" in view are evidently those of the Mosaic Covenant (cf. 6:1), though some commentators take them as referring to works that result in spiritual defilement.²⁷⁰ They are dead in that they did not impart spiritual life but only covered sin. Thus there is a contrast between ceremonial and conscience cleansing as well as between temporary and permanent cleansing in these verses. We should not feel conscience-bound to follow the Old Covenant in view of Jesus Christ's perfect sacrifice but should serve God under the terms of the New Covenant.

". . . for the author of Hebrews syneidesis [conscience] is the internal faculty within man that causes him to be painfully aware of his sinfulness and, as a result, to experience a sense of guilt."²⁷¹

"The sacrifice that inaugurated the new covenant achieved the cleansing of the conscience that all worshipers lacked under the former covenant and that all had sought through prescribed gifts and offerings (10:1-2 . . .).²⁷²

9:15 Since we have obtained "eternal redemption" (v. 12) through the death of our Mediator and the "eternal [Holy] Spirit" (v. 14), we can have hope in an "eternal inheritance." In contrast, believers under the Old Covenant enjoyed mainly temporary blessings.

"With a play on the double meaning of diatheke (both a covenant' and a testament'), the author goes on to bring out the necessity for the death of Christ just as the death of the testator is required if a will is to come into force."²⁷³

The readers should not feel guilty about abstaining from the rituals of the Old Covenant. Instead they should appreciate the accomplishments of Jesus Christ's death.²⁷⁴ They should also turn their attention to obtaining what God had promised them as a future inheritance and continue to follow the Lord faithfully and patiently (6:12).

The New Testament revelation concerning the inheritance that believers can merit by faithful perseverance in the faith and good works is extensive. Some passages indicate that it involves participation in the wedding banquet at the beginning of the messianic kingdom (e.g., Matt. 25:1-13; et al.). Others describe it as prizes that overcomers will receive (Rev. 2-3). Some present it as involving a specially honorable resurrection (Luke 20:35; Phil. 3:10-14). Still other passages speak of it as reigning with Christ (Matt. 19:27-28; Luke 19:17-19; 22:28-30; Rom. 8:17-21) or as treasure in heaven (Matt. 6:19-21, 29; 19:21; Luke 12:32-33; 1 Tim. 6:17-19). It also involves receiving praise and honor from Jesus Christ and the Father (Matt. 6:1, 5, 16; 25:21; John 12:26; 1 Cor. 4:5; 1 Pet. 1:6-7; 2 Pet. 1:10-11). These honors are sometimes spoken of as crowns (Phil. 4:1; 1 Cor. 9:24-27; 1 Thess. 2:19; 2 Tim. 4:6-8; James 1:12; 1 Pet. 5:1-4; Rev. 2:10; 4:9-10).²⁷⁵

9:16-17 In certain respects the covenants God made with humankind are similar to wills. As is true with all wills, the person who made the will must die before the beneficiaries experience any effects of the will.

9:18-21 The Old Covenant went into effect when the Levitical priests shed the blood of animal substitutes and applied that blood to the covenant beneficiaries. The beneficiaries were the Israelites (Exod. 24:6-8) and the tabernacle (cf. Exod. 40:9-15). The New Covenant went into effect when God shed Jesus Christ's blood and applied it to its beneficiaries spiritually (cf. Matt. 26:28).

"The central thrust of the argument is that there is an intimate relationship between covenant and sacrificial blood."²⁷⁶

9:22 The exception to which the writer alluded was God's provision for the poor in Israel. He allowed them to bring a flour offering in place of an animal if they could not afford two doves (Lev. 5:11; cf. Num. 16:46; 31:22-23; 31:50). As a principle, God required the shedding of blood for forgiveness under the Mosaic Law. The Israelites saw this most clearly on the Day of Atonement. The principle expressed is true of the New Covenant as well. Blood is essential for decisive purgation.

9:23 Whereas animal blood adequately cleansed the prototype on earth under the Old Covenant, a better sacrifice was necessary to cleanse the realities in heaven (cf. 8:5; 9:24). Thus Jesus Christ's death was essential. The "heavenly things" may refer to the consciences of men and women.²⁷⁷ It seems more likely, however, that they refer to the things connected with the heavenly tabernacle. This may include angels that need cleansing (cf. Job 4:18; 15:15)²⁷⁸ and or "wickedness beyond this earth"²⁷⁹ (cf. Rom. 8:38-39; 1 Cor. 2:8; Eph. 6:12; Col. 1:20; 2:15).

"As sinful pilgrims on their way to the heavenly city, God's people defile all they touch, even their meeting place' with God, and they need the constant efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ their High Priest to remove that defilement."²⁸⁰

9:24-26 Jesus Christ's ministry required a once-for-all, sufficient sacrifice. The "consummation" refers to the end of the Old Covenant. Jesus Christ entered the presence of God rather than an earthly tabernacle (v. 24). He made His offering only once rather than repeatedly (v. 25). Furthermore He put away sins forever rather than covering them only temporarily (v. 26; cf. 1 Pet. 1:20).

"Copy" (v. 24) is the Greek word typos ("type"). The writer identified a type (a divinely intended illustration) here. The holy place in the tabernacle and temple was a type of heaven.²⁸¹

"At His ascension Christ was formally installed as High Priest and began His present high priestly work. In the heavenly tabernacle today He represents His people (i.e., He secures their acceptance with God); obtains free access for them into God's presence; intercedes in prayer for them and grants them help; mediates their prayers to God and God's strength to them; anticipates His return to earth to reign; and, at the end of the present session, will bless His people by bringing them deliverance into the kingdom."²⁸²

9:27-28 Because Jesus Christ died for our sins we do not need to fear condemnation after death (v. 27; cf. Rom. 8:1), but we can look forward to ultimate deliverance (v. 28). He provided the first benefit of salvation, deliverance from the penalty of sin, at the end of His first advent. He will provide the second, deliverance from the presence of sin, at the end of His second advent.

"There is a finality about it [death] that is not to be disputed. But if it is the complete and final end to life on earth, it is not, as so many in the ancient world thought, the complete and final end. Death is more serious than that because it is followed by judgment. Men are accountable, and after death they will render account to God."²⁸³

This is one of only two references to sin-bearing in the New Testament (cf. 1 Pet. 2:24), but the concept is common in the Old Testament (cf. Num. 14:34; Isa. 53:11-12; Ezek. 18:20).

"Reference to the many' is not . . . to be understood as limiting the effects of Christ's sacrifice to those who accept it in faith. The implied contrast, as in Is. 52:12; Heb. 2:10; Mk. 10:45; 14:24||, is rather between the one sacrifice and the great number of those who benefit from it."²⁸⁴

When the Lord returns at the Rapture all Christians will enter into His presence, but only believers who have remained faithful to Him will enter into their full inheritance (cf. 1:14; 3:14; 9:15). "Those who eagerly await Him" (v. 28) evidently refers to faithful believers.²⁸⁵ Specifically what will take place is that at the Rapture all believers will go to be with Christ. However only those who have not apostatized will receive a full reward at the judgment seat of Christ (1 Cor. 3:14-15; cf. 1 Thess. 5:9-10).²⁸⁶

". . . his appearance will confirm that his sacrifice has been accepted and that he has secured the blessings of salvation for those whom he represented. For those who are the heirs of salvation (1:14; cf. 2:3, 10; 5:9; 6:9), it will mean full enjoyment of their inheritance. The parousia is thus the key event in the realization of salvation."²⁸⁷

"On one day of the year alone only the high priest could pass through the curtain to appear before God (9:7). That he must do so year after year indicated that the atonement he secured was merely provisional in character. The sacrifices he offered were inadequate to accomplish a decisive purgation of the defilement of sin. Against this backdrop the writer contrasts the efficacy of the unrepeatable action of Christ, whose single offering secured eschatological salvation and provided access to the inaccessible presence of God. The key to the typological exposition of salvation in 9:11-28 is that entrance into the heavenly sanctuary pertains to an eschatological and eternal order of salvation.

"The writer's primary concern in this section is with objective salvation. The exposition is focused upon the saving work of Christ in relation to God in behalf of the redeemed community rather than upon salvation realized subjectively in Christians."²⁸⁸

The New Covenant sanctuary is superior for five reasons. It is heavenly (v. 11), and its ministry is effective in dealing with sin (vv. 12-15). Its ministry also rests on a more costly sacrifice (vv. 16-23), represents fulfillment (v. 24), and is final and complete (vv. 25-28).²⁸⁹

College: Heb 9:1-28

HEBREWS 9

VI. JESUS' SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF IS SUPERIOR TO THE SACRIFICES OF THE OLD COVENANT AND SETS US FREE FROM SIN (9:1-10:39)

The new covenant, which is superior to the old covenant, stands at the center of Hebrews (ch. 8). Its two main features, according to Hebrews, are its superior high priest (chs. 5-7) and its superior sacrifice (chs. 9-10). The sacrifice of the new covenant is discussed in three stages. First, the old covenant system at the tabernacle is presented as a background picture to help explain what Jesus did in the new covenant (9:1-10). Second, the effectiveness of the blood of Christ is described in detail (9:11-28). Finally, the sacrifice of Christ is exhibited as being made once, but effective for all time (10:1-18). The "therefore" of 10:19 introduces a section of exhortation based on this three staged discussion of Christ's sacrifice.

The central Old Testament quotation for this section is found in 10:5-7 and is taken from Psalm 40:6-8. Most sections of Hebrews place the major Old Testament quotation at the beginning of the section. Only the discussion of the covenant in chapter 8 and this discussion of the sacrifice in chapters 9-10 place the Old Testament quotation near the end.

A. THE TABERNACLE AND ITS TOOLS (9:1-5)

¹ Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. ² A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. ³ Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, ⁴ which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. ⁵ Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. ^a But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.

^a 5 Traditionally the mercy seat

9:1 Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary.

Our author explains that "the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary." He discusses them in the reverse order, beginning with the tabernacle and its tools (vv. 1-5), and then proceeding to the central ceremony and its meaning (vv. 6-10). The Greek text ties this section closely to chapter eight by using the conjunction ou ( oun , "therefore"). The NIV does not translate this word in six of its thirteen appearances in Hebrews. This is in keeping with Bauer's suggestion that "at times it may be left untranslated." The KJV may be more satisfactory on this point by translating the word each time it is used.

9:2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place.

In a table below we will describe the major utensils of worship in the tabernacle. The plans and construction of the tabernacle and its furnishings are recorded in Exodus 25-40. Hebrews only lists the lampstand and the table with its bread in "the Holy Place" and the altar of incense and the ark in "the Most Holy Place." Detailed descriptions of other items can be found in Exodus: the upright boards for the sides of the tabernacle and the various curtains covering it; the courtyard with its altar of burnt offering, its wash basin and the numerous posts and curtains surrounding it; oil; incense; and priests' clothing. To carry on the worship as described in the Old Testament would have required many other items not named. There would have been facilities for cooking, dining and sleeping inside the courtyard; storage compartments for wood, incense, salt, wine and water; storage for knives, hooks, basins and carts. These items were all holy and whatever touched them became holy (Exod 30:22-29).

Before our author describes the main ceremony of "the Day of Atonement" ( Yom Kippur ) and its unique entrance into the Most Holy Place, he reviews the layout and furniture of the tabernacle for his readers. The tabernacle had two rooms. The first room was "called the Holy Place" and housed the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread. They are presented as three separate items, although the bread was placed on the table.

The "lampstand" was on the south side, opposite the table (Exod 26:35). It was solid gold (Exod 25:31; 37:22-23). The table and the altar of incense were completely overlaid with gold (Exod 25:24; 20:3). The lampstand was made of one talent of gold, i.e., about 65 pounds. God wanted the best for his worship. It must have been an impressive sight. Since only a small amount of light would penetrate the thick coverings and the cracks around the edges of the curtains, the seven lamps of the lampstand provided the primary source of light. Its lamps were "tended continually" (Lev 24:4). In the days of Rehoboam the ten lampstands of Solomon's temple were lit every evening (2 Chr 13:11). A solid gold lampstand with oil supplied continuously from two trees formed one of Zechariah's night visions (Zech 4) to show that God's plans would not be achieved by might or power "but by my Spirit."

The "table" was on the north side opposite the lampstand. When the tabernacle was erected, this table was put in it first, then the lampstand, and then the altar of incense (Exod 40:4, 22-27). On this table, twelve fresh loaves of "consecrated bread" were placed each Sabbath, one for each of the twelve tribes of Israel. The priests were to eat the old bread "in a holy place' (Exod 25:30; Lev 24:5-9). It was left on the table even when the people were on the move at God's direction (Num 4:7). This table was evidently used for nothing but holding these loaves. It came to be called "the table for setting out the consecrated bread" (2 Chr 29:18). It is not difficult to see a connection between this weekly replenishing of bread and the weekly observance of the Lord's Supper in the early church (Luke 22:14-20; 1 Cor 11:23-34; Acts 2:42; 20:7).

These items were housed in "the Holy Place." The terms for various places in the tabernacle are a bit confusing. The whole tabernacle is called the "earthly sanctuary" (tov a{gion kosmikovn , to hagion kosmikon ) in 9:1 and "the first tent" (th'" prwvth" skhnh'" , tçs prôtçs skçnçs ) in 9:8. "First" (in v. 8) contrasts the old and new covenants just as "first" and "second" do in 10:9. Konig says,

This sanctuary of YHWH (Ex. xxv.8) was in the nature of things called the "dwelling" par excellence ( ha-mishkan ) and the "tent" par excellence ( ha-ohel ); but its most frequent designation is ohel mo'ed ( ib . xxvii.21 et seq. ). This term means "tent of mutual appointment," that is "place of meeting [of God with Moses and his successors]" ( ib .xxv.22).

The two components of the tent of worship are called "the outer room" (9:6, tçn prôtçn skçnçn , lit., "the first tent") and "the inner room" (9:7, thΙn deutevran , tçn deuteran , lit., "the second [tent]"). With curtains rather than wooden doors, each of the two parts of the tent would look like a separate tent (see 9:3, 6). The outer room was also called "the Holy Place" (a{gia , hagia , in 9:2).

9:3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place,

The inner room ("the second [tent]," 9:7) was "behind the second veil" (9:3). It was also known as "the Holy of Holies" (a{gia a{giwn , hagia hagiôn ), i.e., "the Most Holy Place" (9:3). In 9:8 the designation is shortened to "the holies" (tw'n aJgivwn ) in the phrase "the way of holies" (thΙn tw'n aJgivwn oJdoΙn , tçn tôn hagiôn hodon , NIV "the way into the Most Holy Place"). Its counterpart, which Jesus entered in heaven, is designated in 9:12 as "the Most Holy Place" ( ta hagia ).

A summary look at the layout of the tabernacle might be as follows:

9:4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 9:5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.

Two items of furniture are associated with the inner room: the altar of incense and the ark of the covenant. The ark of the covenant was located within the Most Holy Place and behind the curtain. The altar was placed in front of the curtain that was before the ark (Exod 30:6). Both glistened with their golden overlay. Bauer suggests that qumiathvrian (thymiatçrian ) refers to "a place or vessel for the burning of incense . . . a censer" although he suggests the translation "altar of incense" for 9:4. In the LXX, both 2 Chronicles 26:29 and Ezekiel 8:11 use the word of a censer held in someone's hand. However, the ordinary word for censer in the LXX was purei'on ( pyreion ), a word which does not appear in the New Testament, and which may be understood as a firepot of some sort (Lev 10:1; 16:12; Num 16:6, 17-18; etc.). Liddell and Scott suggest "firesticks" for the plural form or "an earthen pan for coals" for the singular. Gooding and Wiseman explain:

Its form was usually . . . a bowl mounted on a pedestal . . . Small stone incense altars with concave bowls on legs are commonly found, or depicted in ancient art . . . Some censers were portable and made of bronze . . . or gold . . . and used for carrying a few burning coals.

In giving the original plan for this altar, Exodus 30:1-10 used a different word (LXX qusiasthvrion qumiavmato" , thysiastçrion thymiamato s , "an altar of incense"). Later, when it was constructed, the LXX says that Bezalel "made the copper altar (toΙ qusiasthvrion toΙ calkou'n , to thysiastçrion to chalkoun ) out of the copper censers (tw'n purei'wn tw'n cavlkwn , tôn pyreiôn tôn chalkôn ), which belonged to the men who rebelled with the assembly of Core" (Exod 38:22).

Three items were in the "ark of the covenant": the jar of manna, Aaron's rod and the stone tablets which contained the ten commandments. The lid with its cherubim rested on top.

The NIV says the ark "contained" (ejn h|/ , en hç , lit., "in which were") the jar, the rod and the tablets. Numbers 17:10 says that Aaron's rod was put "in front of the [ark of the] Testimony." The ark was about 4.5¥ 2.25¥ 2.25 feet in size (Exod 25:10). Was Aaron's rod, including its budded branches, short enough to fit inside the ark, or did it simply lay in front of it? The Old Testament also reports that Aaron put the jar of manna "in front of the Testimony" (Exod 16:34), whereas Hebrews locates it "in" the ark. Both Deuteronomy 10:5 and Hebrews 9:4 indicate that the tablets of stone were "in" the ark but Deuteronomy 31:26 says they were "beside the ark of the covenant." When Solomon placed the ark in the newly completed temple, the Scripture reports that "there was nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb" (1 Kgs 8:9).

The phrase en hç ("in which") is used in 9:2 to describe the outer room "in which" were the lampstand, the table and the bread (the NIV reads, "In its first room were"). The altar of incense is not named among these items, but is listed among those in the inner room. What might the word "in" imply? Bauer defines ejn ( en , "in") with a range of meanings that point to close relationship as well as physical location. Thus Aaron's rod may be "in" the ark in the sense that it has a close relationship to the ark, though not physically located inside of it. Likewise, the altar of incense may be "in" the inner room by being associated with it, while not being actually "in" its physical space. This seems to make sense even though the inner room is described in 9:3 as "behind the curtain." Accompanying his article on the tabernacle in the Jewish Encyclopedia , Konig has printed the title page from a Hebrew book by Yom-Tob Zahalon, She'elot u-Teshubot ("Questions and Answers"), published in Venice in 1691 in which the altar of incense is placed just inside the door of the tabernacle at the opposite end of the room from the curtain concealing the Most Holy Place. The conceptual location appears to be more important to Zahalon than the physical location.

The table below lists the major items in the tabernacle and a possible New Testament counterpart for each. It may be misleading to talk about a "tabernacle item" and its "New Testament counterpart" since Hebrews calls the old covenant a "copy" or "shadow" of that which is under Christ (8:5; 9:24; 10:1), not an "allegory" or a "parable." Nevertheless, our author's method would appear to be typlogical. It is probably also worth noting that, although some see the influence of Philo here, Hebrews actually parts company with Philo who appears to extend many of the features of the old covenant sacrificial system into a much more fully described heavenly counterpart.

Tabernacle Item New Testament Counterpart altar of burnt offerings the cross and death of Jesus basin baptism and daily cleansing Holy Place the church lamp the Bible and the Holy Spirit table fellowship with God and man bread Lord's Supper altar of incense prayers veil Body of Christ ark presence of God manna provision of God staff leaders of God's choice tablets laws of God cherubim ministering angels of God atonement cover reconciliation to God B. THE DAY OF ATONEMENT (9:6-10)

⁶ When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. ⁷ But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. ⁸ The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing. ⁹ This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. ¹⁰ They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings - external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

9:6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry.

Now that he has described the tabernacle and its furnishings, our writer turns his attention to the second element of that first covenant mentioned in 9:1 - the "regulations for worship" in the tabernacle. Yet he is not particularly interested in the day to day rituals for he summarizes them in short order (v. 6) and then devotes his attention to the central ceremony of tabernacle worship which also happens to form the heart of his description of Jesus' sacrifice: the annual Day of Atonement. The main activities of that ceremony are described in v. 7 and its significance in vv. 8-10. Nevertheless, this is a tightly integrated section for it represents one very long and extremely complicated sentence in the Greek text.

9:7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance.

The author focuses on those parts of the ceremony which are relevant for his argument, and many of the other, related activities are not expounded upon in any New Testament description of the atoning work of Christ. The rituals of the Day of Atonement ( Yom Kippur ), however, are fully described in Leviticus and can be summarized as follows:

Ritual of the Day of Atonement according to Leviticus 16

General Requirements

The high priest may only enter the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement (v. 2)

No one is to be in the Tent when the high priest enters the Most Holy Place (v. 17)

On this day all Israelites must fast and do no work ( vv. 29-31)

Clothes

Remove ordinary priestly garb

Bathe (v. 4)

Put on special attire for the day of atonement (v. 4)

Linen tunic, linen undergarments, linen sash, linen turban (v. 4)

Present offerings for the day : two goats for sin offering and ram for burnt offering (v. 5)

Offer bull as a sin offering for himself (vv. 6, 11-14)

Slaughter it (and catch its blood; v. 11)

Take censer with two handfuls of incense behind the curtain (vv. 12-13)

Sprinkle bull's blood on and in front of the atonement cover (v. 14)

Two goat ceremony (vv. 7-8)

Cast lots to choose: one for the Lord, one for a scapegoat (v. 8)

Offer goat as a sin offering for the people (v. 15)

Slaughter it (and catch its blood; v. 15)

Do as with bull's blood (take censer with incense, etc.; v. 15)

Sprinkle goat's blood on and in front of the atonement cover (v. 15)

(Explanation of the significance of these rituals - vv. 16, 17)

Cleansing of the sanctuary (vv. 16-19)

Cleanse the tent of meeting with blood (v. 16)

Cleanse the main altar with blood (vv. 18-19)

Scapegoat ceremony (vv. 20-22)

Lay hands on the goat and confess all Israel's sins (v. 21)

Send the goat away into the desert (v. 21)

The chosen man shall release the goat in the desert (v. 22)

Clothes

Remove special attire for the day of atonement (v. 23)

Bathe (v. 24)

Put on ordinary priestly garb (v. 24)

Present burnt offering for self and then for people (vv. 24, 25)

Hides, flesh and offal are taken outside the camp and burned (v. 27)

Finishing (vv. 26-28)

The man who released the scapegoat must wash clothes and self (v. 26)

The man who burned hides, flesh and offal must wash clothes and self (v. 28)

These two verses (9:6-7) are organized around a series of contrasts:

Day-to-Day Rituals Day of Atonement

priests (plural) the high priest only (singular)

regularly once a year

outer room (lit., "first tent") inner room (lit., "second [tent]")

Each of these contrasts can be seen as prefiguring the priestly ministry of Jesus: (1) he is unrivaled in his superiority, the one and only high priest of the believer (4:14; 7:26; 8:1), (2) his work is "once for all" (7:27; 9:12, 18), and (3) he takes us behind the curtain into the presence of God (4:14, 16; 6:20). Yet the final feature of our writer's description, which has no counterpart in the series of contrasts, will become the most significant feature in the parallel with Christ - it was "never without blood" that the high priest entered the inner room. We now read for the third time in the letter that the high priest had to offer sacrifices "first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people" (5:3; 7:27; cf. Lev 9:7; 16:6). We have also read that, unlike previous high priests, Jesus had no need to offer a sacrifice for himself (7:27). However, this is the first explicit reference to "blood" (ai{ma , haima ) in this connection.

Haima appears no less than eighteen times in this letter - eight times in 9:7-25 alone. The significant role of blood in both covenants will be described in subsequent verses and our writer's choice of the word here anticipates the approaching discussion. Two important observations can be made here nonetheless.

First, we see that the shedding of blood is a condition for any human to enter into the presence of God. The phrase "never without blood" translates a double negative - a particularly strong expression - in the Greek text. It was between the two cherubim, above the cover of the ark, where God had promised to meet his people (Exod 25:22).

Second, we see that the blood was shed for sin. =Agnohvma (agnoçma , "sins committed in ignorance") occurs only here in the New Testament. In the papyri, it is used in the sense of an "error" which is distinguished from a "crime" (e.g., in a proclamation of amnesty). Our author has used the verb form in 5:2 (see comments on 5:2). The noun here (just as the verb in 5:2) probably refers to the "unintentional sin" described in Leviticus 4. The idea is probably not so much that any isolated instance of deliberate sin (since many of our sins involve an element of choice) cannot be covered by the blood sacrifice ("weakness" is accounted for in the sacrifice, 5:2-3) but that the kind of consistent, perpetual choice of a lifestyle of sin (such as the sort described by the customary present tense of 10:26) which indicates a deliberate disregard and disrespect for the sacrifice (10:29) removes one from the protection of his covenant relationship with God. For such, repentance is the missing element (6:1, 6).

9:8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.

Having described the unique dimensions of the priestly ministry on the Day of Atonement, our writer now proceeds to explain their greater significance. The "Holy Spirit" was responsible for the pattern provided by the old covenant. The similarities are no accident, no mere coincidence. God had planned them and made them in order to "show" us something. Dhlovw (dçloô , "make clear, show,") is also used in 12:27 ("indicate"). In both instances our author uses it of what can be "shown" from an Old Testament passage.

What the Spirit has shown us is that "the way into the Most Holy Place had not been disclosed." Even after the rituals performed on the Day of Atonement, the curtain would remain, separating the inner and outer rooms. No one would be permitted to enter. A year later, more sacrifices would be offered, yet the curtain would still remain. Nothing permanent was accomplished.

This was true "so long as the first tabernacle was still standing." Here, "first tabernacle" translates the identical phrase (tçs prôtçs skçnçs ) translated "outer room" in v. 6. In verses 6-7, however, it was clear that our writer was describing the two different rooms inside of the old tabernacle ("outer" and "inner"). It is difficult to see how the phrase could carry the same meaning in the present context, however - the destruction of only the outer room would not remove the curtain which separated the Holy and Most Holy Places, even less affect any real change in our ability to enter God's presence. Here the phrase is best taken as the NIV renders it, as the earthly representation of the "true" tabernacle in heaven (8:1-2; 9:1). This is a sign argument: the need for and the continuation of both the tabernacle (and later the temple) and its ritual are proof that these are not enough to enable us to approach God.

9:9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 9:10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings - external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Rather than providing a solution for our need, it served as "an illustration for the present time." "This" refers to "tabernacle" (v. 8) and we read that it is a parabovlh (parabolç , "comparison." Our writer also uses this word in 11:19 to describe the "figurative" sense in which Abraham received Isaac back from the dead and the sense of "type" or "figure" seems to best describe our writer's method here as well. Elsewhere in the New Testament, the term is used (with one exception) only in the Gospels of the parables told by Jesus. The term itself is used quite broadly, taking in a wide variety of comparative sayings - narrative parables, allegories, similitudes, types, symbols, proverbs, riddles and various figures of speech.

The phrase "for the present time" translates a perfect participle which is somewhat ambiguous (KJV, "the time then present"). The NIV, RSV ("for the present age") and NASB ("for the present time") all represent a rendering more natural to the syntax of the sentence.

How the phrase is rendered may make little difference, however, for the point indicated remains clear. The "gifts and sacrifices" (see comments on 5:1) offered under the old covenant were "not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper." The word translated "clear" is teleiovw (teleioô ), usually translated "perfect." Its significance here must be understood in light of the key role the term plays throughout the letter (see comments on 6:1; 7:11, 19, 28). Most recently, in chapter seven, our writer elaborated upon how neither the Levitical priesthood nor the Law could make anything perfect, how the perfection of Jesus in his role as priest makes possible the perfection of believers, and the subsequent difference this makes in our ability to "draw near to God" (7:19). Here we see that the real barrier to our access to God has never been "external" (v. 10) but internal ("conscience," v. 9). The use of suneivdhsi" (syneidçsis , "moral consciousness") anticipates 9:14 (where we read that the blood of Christ can accomplish precisely what the old gifts and sacrifices could not) but here the word functions opposite "external." Its use with teleioô indicates that it is not merely the removal of our subjective feelings of guilt which enables our access to God, but the removal of that guilt which is an objective state, incurred by our sin ("acts that lead to death," cf. 9:14; Rom 6:23). Our "justification," made possible by the cross, can also set us free from the burden of guilty feelings. But, as we will read, it is the change in our standing before God accomplished by Jesus' sacrifice which enables us to draw near to God. This is the "new order" (diorqwvsi" , diorthôsis , "improvement," "reformation") ushered in by the cross.

C. JESUS' SACRIFICE CLEANSES OUR CONSCIENCE (9:11-14)

¹¹ When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, ^a he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. ¹² He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. ¹³ The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. ¹⁴ How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, ^b so that we may serve the living God!

^a 11 Some early manuscripts are to come ^b 14 Or from useless rituals

Now that our author has described that which is an "illustration for the present time" (9:9) - the tabernacle and rituals of the first covenant (9:1) - he now proceeds, in that light, to describe the superiority of Jesus' blood sacrifice. The remainder of the chapter is devoted to three major accomplishments of the shed blood of Christ: (1) the cleansing of our conscience (vv. 11-14), (2) the inauguration of the new covenant (vv. 15-22), and (3) our complete purification from sin (vv. 23-28).

9:11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation.

The KJV, RSV and NASB all begin with a conjunction - "But" - which is present in the Greek text but not translated by the NIV. What happened "when Christ came as high priest," then, is compared to what the other priests and high priests did "when everything had been arranged" in the earthly tabernacle (9:6).

It is difficult to say whether our writer refers to "good things that are already here" (NIV, cf. RSV "that have come") or to "good things to come" (KJV, NASB) since these different translations reflect a variant in the Greek text for which the manuscript evidence is not clear. Metzger defends the choice of that reading which is rendered by the NIV and RSV on the basis of (1) the age and diversity of the manuscripts which support it and (2) the likelihood that the variant rendered by the KJV and NASB was a copyist error influenced by the appearance of the same phrase in 10:1. Just what the "good things" are is not clear but most probably this is a general reference to the superior accomplishments of the new covenant.

Jesus, too, entered the Most Holy Place through a tabernacle, but his was "not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation." Ceiropoivhto" (cheiropoiçtos ) is a compound word (ceivr , cheir , "hand" and poievw , poieô , "make" hence, "made with hands," KJV, RSV, NASB) which echoes 8:2 ("not [set up] by man") just as ktivsew" (ktiseôs , "creation") echoes 9:1 (kosmikov" , kosmikos , "earthly"). Earlier we read that Jesus was "a great high priest who has gone through the heavens" where "the throne of grace" is (4:14, 16) and who "sat down at the right hand of the throne of the majesty in heaven" (8:1). This is where he "serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle" (8:2) and thus it is in this sense that his tabernacle is "greater" (9:11). It is also "more perfect," a phrase which applies to the true tabernacle the same term so prominent in our writer's description of the believer's perfection (in a salvific sense) and the perfection of Jesus himself in his vocation as our high priest. The perfect high priest serves in a perfect tabernacle to make perfect those who believe in him.

The use of the title "Christ" may be more than a stylistic variation here since it appears more frequently in this chapter than in any other and is the exclusive manner of referring to Jesus in this chapter. Throughout, the Messianic expectation was an important dimension of our writer's exposition of Psalm 110:4 (see notes on 7:1-3, especially 7:2) and it may be that our writer considers the Messianic title most appropriate for his explanation of the role which Christ's death played in putting the new covenant into effect.

9:12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.

Following his description of the true and heavenly tabernacle, our writer turns to Christ's means of entry. On the Day of Atonement, before the high priest could enter the Most Holy Place where God himself appeared in the cloud over the atonement cover, he had to offer two sacrifices: a young bull for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering (Lev 16:3). The bull was sacrificed to make atonement for the high priest and his household (Lev 16:6). Two goats were taken from the Israelite community (Lev 16:5). Lots were cast to choose one to be offered as a sin offering for the people (Lev 16:15) while the other was also used for making atonement in a different way - by being sent into the desert as a scapegoat (Lev 16:10). Hebrews says nothing about the scapegoat but the focus of our writer here is upon the use to which the blood was put. The blood of the bull, and then later that of the goat, were both to be taken into the Most Holy Place and sprinkled on and in front of the atonement cover (Lev 16:14). The blood was then to be applied to the tent itself and to the altar (Lev 16:16, 18-19). Even as the high priest entered the Most Holy Place to make atonement for his own sins, he was to enter with burning incense so that its smoke would conceal the atonement cover, lest he die (Lev 16:13). The blood of atonement was the difference between life and death when entering the presence of God.

Under the old covenant, the high priest entered the Most Holy Place "only once a year" (9:7) but Christ enters it "once for all" (9:12). Although it is true that he offered his life for all people (Rom 5:15-19; Heb 9:27), ejfavpax ( ephapax ) denotes "once for all time." The point of our writer is that Christ's single sacrifice was completely sufficient and did not need to be repeated as did those offered by the other priests (9:25-27; 10:11-12). The reason, of course, is that he presented "his own blood" and subsequent verses will explain the significance of the difference.

The RSV suggests that "eternal redemption" followed as a result ("thus securing an eternal redemption") whereas the KJV, NASB and NIV all suggest that it had been obtained previously ("having obtained"). The adverbial participle describes the relationship of "obtaining" to the act of "entering" rather than to the offering of the blood, and its tense (aorist) indicates that it preceded this act. Just as with the high priest on the Day of Atonement, the blood made atonement prior to the entry. Luvtrwsi" (lytrôsis ) means "ransom," "release" or "redeem." In the papyri, this word and its cognates were used of the purchase money for manumitting slaves or for the redemption of property. Our writer uses apolytrôsis in 11:35 to describe the "release" of those Old Testament heroes who were tortured for their faith. However, its use in the immediate context, where the NIV renders it with two terms ("ransom" and "set free," 9:15), is more determinative here. Christ's blood was a ransom price, paid to set us free from sin's guilt - finally and forever.

9:13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.

The thrust of the chapter to this point is now summed up in this lesser to greater argument. Verse 13 actually begins with eij ( ei , "if") which is not translated by the NIV. The "how much more" of v. 14 provides the conclusion and completes the thought.

According to Numbers 19, the ashes of a heifer were to be mixed as needed with the water of cleansing which was applied to those who were unclean for their purification from sin (Num 19:9ff.). People became unclean by what they touched and made anything else they touched unclean as well (Num 19:22). The unclean person was to be sprinkled on the third and seventh days and then washed and bathed for cleansing on the seventh (Num 19:19). It is in this sense that they were cleansed "ceremonially" and "outwardly" (lit., "of the flesh," Heb 9:13).

ΤAgiavzw (hagaizô , "sanctify") is sometimes translated "make holy" in the NIV and is usually reserved for what could only be accomplished by the sacrifice of the blood of Jesus (in which "purify" could also be an acceptable translation). Only here in Hebrews is it used in reference to the sacrifices of the old covenant and, for the sake of his lesser to greater argument, our writer admits that such rituals were effective for their intended purpose (outward and cermonial purity).

9:14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

But "how much more" was accomplished by the blood of Christ! His sacrifice was able to do what the others could not (9:9) - "cleanse our consciences." Kaqarivzw (katharizô ) is capable of a stronger translation, "purge" (KJV), but the object of the verb is the real point of contrast here. The effects of Christ's sacrifice were not merely "outward." It removed, in truth and fact, sin's guilt from our lives so that we now live with clean consciences. We no longer have to fear the consequences of "acts that lead to death" (lit., "dead works," see also the comments on 6:1). A footnote in the NIV offers "useless rituals" as an alternative translation but this does not fit the context. It is difficult to explain why one would have needed to be "cleansed from" these. They may have been ineffectual for the plight of the sinner yet created no guilt themselves for they had been commanded by God for their intended purpose.

What Jesus offered for our cleansing was "himself unblemished." "Amwmo" (amômos ) is the same word used in the LXX to describe "the absence of defects in sacrificial animals" (Num 6:14; 19:2; etc.; see also Lev 22:19ff. where the defects which make a sacrifice unacceptable are described). It is used nowhere else in Hebrews but Peter uses it in the same sense that our writer does here when he refers to "the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect" (1 Pet 1:19). Of course, the "unblemished" character of Jesus' sacrifice is of even greater significance since he was the only one who could have ever presented himself as an acceptable sacrifice. We know that he was without sin (4:15) while no other human has ever been (Rom 3:23) yet "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor 5:21).

D. JESUS' DEATH INAUGURATES THE NEW COVENANT (9:15-22)

¹⁵ For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

¹⁶ In the case of a will, ^a it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, ¹⁷ because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. ¹⁸ This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. ¹⁹ When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. ²⁰ He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep." ^{b 21} In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. ²² In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

^a 16 Same Greek word as covenant ; also in verse 17 ^b 20 Exodus 24:8

9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

We now read about the second of the three major accomplishments of the shed blood of Christ: the inauguration of the new covenant (vv. 15-22). Some suggest that "for this reason" may look backwards, i.e., grounding Christ's mediatorship in the thrust of vv. 11-14 - the ability of his shed blood to cleanse our conscience. There is no reason to protest this as a matter of fact, but the syntax of the sentence suggests that the phrase probably anticipates what will follow, since the phrase "that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance" is a clause of purpose rather than result.

On Christ as the mediator of the new covenant, see comments on 8:6. The remainder of the verse describes what we can receive under the new covenant, why we are able to receive it, and who is able to receive it.

Within the new covenant we "receive the promised eternal inheritance." As we have noted, inheritance terminology is frequent in Hebrews . It last appeared in 6:17 as part of the forensic/legal terminology employed in our writer's description of the encouragement offered to believers by God's oath. Here, it anticipates the legal analogy of vv. 16-18, employed to demonstrate the necessity of Jesus' death for inaugurating the new covenant. Since the inheritance is described here as "eternal," the eschatological dimension of the believer's hope is probably more pronounced here than elsewhere (see comments on 6:17). In Hebrews, promise terminology is also prominent and encompasses the full scope of God's redemptive plan which began with his promises to Abraham as well as their typological, soteriological and eschatological significance for believers (see comments on "what is promised" in 8:6).

We are able to receive our promised eternal inheritance because Jesus "has died as a ransom" so that we might be "set free" from sin. The KJV ("by means of death") and the RSV, NASB ("since a death has occurred/taken place") offer slightly different readings of the adverbial participle (the former interprets it as modal, the latter as causal). The NIV offers the least interpretive rendering, indicating only the antecedent time relationship suggested by the aorist tense of the participle ("now that he has died"). There seems to be little difference between the modal and causal senses in the context, however, for it is clear from the preceding discussion that men can now receive what they formerly could not, and the difference is the death of Christ. Though our writer uses the word "death" rather than "blood" as in 9:12, the word here rendered "ransom" and "set free" by the NIV (ajpoluvtrwsin , apolytrôsin ) is a cognate of the same word rendered "redemption" (lytrôsin ) in that verse and the idea is the same (see comments on 9:12 for a discussion of these words).

Finally, this verse indicates that Christ's death makes it possible for the entire community of faith, old and new, to receive this inheritance. Those whose sins were "committed under the first covenant" were set free not by the sacrifices and gifts of that covenant but only by the sacrifice of Jesus. Yet the inheritance can also yet be received by "those who are called" - the NIV employs the present tense to stress the abiding dimension of the Greek perfect tense which describes a past action continuing into the present.

9:16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it,

We have read that Christ's death makes it possible for us to receive the promised eternal inheritance. Now we read why his death was necessary to make it possible. For proof of the absolute necessity of Christ's death to inaugurate the new covenant, our writer first advances a parallel case argument and then returns to the Old Testament type for scriptural authority.

It is quite natural that the new covenant should be compared to a "will," since the word elsewhere translated "covenant" (diaqhvkh , diathçkç , as recently as 9:15) was also the word used of a will (as it is translated here) in legal contexts. It can mean "last will and testament," "ordinance," "decree," "compact" or "contract." In Hebrews it is used exclusively of God's redemptive covenants with men and an extensive discussion of its key role in the letter can be read in the comments on 8:6. The only exception is the present case in which it is nevertheless used to introduce an analogy to explain the relationship between the death of Christ and the new covenant.

9:17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living.

In addition to diathçkç , the parallel case employs other terms frequent in legal contexts (bebaivo" , bebaios , "in force" - see 6:16 comments - and ijscuvw , ischyô , "take effect"). The central point of the comparison is still clear in the light of practices in our own day. A person might prepare and sign a legally binding will which names benefactors and assigns an inheritance. Unless changed, it is a promise which will be enforced by law. Until the testator dies, however, it remains no more than a promise for the future. Only the death of the testator changes the promised inheritance into a legal possession. Until then the will is only a piece of paper. Only then is it "put into force."

9:18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood.

To supplement the analogy of vv. 16-17, our writer turns to the example provided by the first covenant and the tabernacle which has been expounded as a type of Christ's ministry as high priest. Whereas he employed the term "death" in vv. 15-16, he now returns to the term "blood" introduced in v. 12. The rituals commanded for consecration of the tabernacle used the blood of the sacrifices and a cleansing power is accorded to blood (v. 22).

9:19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 9:20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep."

Exodus 24 records the inauguration of the first covenant. When "Moses went and told the people all the Lord's words and laws" which had been told to him on Mt. Sinai, they agreed to do everything the Lord had said (v. 3). Burnt offerings were made and young bulls were sacrificed as fellowship offerings (v. 5). Moses then read the Book of the Covenant to the people and when they again pledged their obedience, Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people. Exodus makes no mention of the use of water or hyssop mentioned here or of Moses sprinkling the scroll. The silence does not prohibit the possibility, however, and there is thus no reason to question the accuracy of our writer's description. In Numbers 19 we read that the blood used for cleansing was mixed with water and hyssop and so this may well have been the customary practice.

9:21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 9:22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

Some suggest that the Old Testament does not refer to the sprinkling of blood upon all the things mentioned by our writer in v. 21. However, "in the same way" must anticipate an event which took place at a later time since the tabernacle did not yet exist when the events of Exodus 24 transpired. When the tabernacle was set up, the tabernacle and everything in it was anointed with oil (Exod 40:6). Yet the Lord also commanded Moses to "consecrate it and all its furnishings and it will be holy" (Exod 440:9). Earlier, when the priests were consecrated, both blood and anointing oil were sprinkled upon them (Exod 429:21) and it is reasonable to assume that the rituals would have been similar.

The Exod 2quote contained in verse 20 was echoed by the words of Jesus in the Gospels ("This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins," Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20). The precise significance of the genitive ("of") here is suggested by the context. Ellingworth suggests that is not merely "the blood associated with the covenant" but "the blood which seals" (TEV), "constitutes, or establishes the covenant, by virtue of the life poured out in sacrifice." As to the relationship between blood, covenant and forgiveness suggested by Jesus himself, our writer describes it in a climactic expression: "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness." ΤAimatekcusiva ( haimatekchysia ) is a compound word (ai|ma , haima , "blood" and ejkcuvnnw , ekchynnô , "to pour out") which may have been coined by our writer to express "the surpassing potency of blood . . . for dealing with defilement." Lane suggest that the term a[fesi" ( aphesis ), used alternatively with kaqarivzw (katharizô , "cleanse," v. 22a and then again in v. 23, "purified"), "signals a definitive putting away of defilement or a decisive purgation" and "is a comprehensive term covering both the 'subjective' and 'objective' benefits of Christ's blood."

E. JESUS' SACRIFICE WAS ONCE AND FOR ALL (9:23-28)

²³ It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. ²⁴ For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. ²⁵ Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. ²⁶ Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. ²⁷ Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, ²⁸ so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

9:23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

The word ou ( oun , "then") is capable of being translated "therefore" (KJV, NASB) and serves to continue the parallel case begun in vv. 16ff., yet it also marks the transition from the other case (will) and the older example (old testament) to the new and present covenant. Once again, the tabernacle and its tools are described as "copies" (uJpovdeigma , hypodeigma ) of what is in heaven (cf. 8:5). As before, it is an appropriate metaphor for describing his typological exegesis. The word translated "purified" (kaqarivzw , katharizô ) is the same word translated "cleanse" in both v. 14 and v. 22. The repetition of the verbs makes the parallel more obvious in the Greek text. The better hope (7:7) offered by the better covenant (7:22; 8:6) looks forward to receiving better promises (8:6) because it was inaugurated by a better sacrifice (9:23).

9:24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence.

Our writer now proceeds to delineate those differences which distinguish Christ's sacrifice as better. Christ did not enter the "man-made sanctuary" (cheiropoiçtos , as in v. 11, cf. also 8:2), the "copy" (here ajntivtupo" , antitypos , "antitype, representation"), but the "true one" which is nothing less than heaven itself. Even as Solomon prayed for the temple he built, he had said, "But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!" (1 Kgs 8:27). No building could ever contain the presence of God and so there will be no more vain attempts. Christ is now in heaven itself, in the very presence of God.

9:25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own.

Christ is not forced to leave and return again for he is able to remain in God's presence. The difference is in the blood. Each former priest had entered with blood "not his own," a description which echoes the statement of v. 12 that Christ "entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood" and anticipates the statement in v. 26 that "he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself."

9:26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

This is the climactic statement of the chapter. Its argument proceeds from contrary condition and turns on two contrasts: "many times" vs. "once" and "since the creation of the world" vs. "at the end of the ages." If Christ's single sacrifice were not sufficient for atonement, he would have had to do exactly what the other, earthly priests had always done. But it was not required for him to do so. Thus his single sacrifice must have been sufficient.

Bruce suggests that the phrase "end of the ages" should be understood in the sense of "time of fulfilment." It is true that Christ first came when "the time had fully come" for him to be sent (Gal 4:4) and the verb form of the word translated "end" (suntevleia [ synteleia ], verb suntelevw [synteleô ]) can also mean "fulfill." Alternatively, aijwvn can simply mean "a very long time" and could be taken as referring to that period of time during which the old covenant was in effect. Christ put an end to it but lived through the end of it. Yet another possibility is that the phrase is similar in meaning to the nearly identical phrase used by Jesus in his parables about the weeds (Matt 13:39-40) and the net (Matt 13:49), in the Olivet discourse (Matt 24:3) and in the Great Commission (Matt 28:20) - all of which are usually understood in an eschatological sense. In this case, the phrase would reflect (1) the reference to Christ's second appearing in v. 28 and (2) an understanding on the part of the author that the "time" of Christ's coming encompasses both his first and second appearings as well as the interim period.

=Aqevthsi" (athetçsis , "do away with") is a forceful term which appears in the technical legal formula of the papyri, meaning to "annul" or "cancel." The cancellation of sin's debt (our death, Rom 6:23) by the ransom paid (Christ's death) is both forceful and final.

9:27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 9:28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

The "just as . . . so" construction suggests how incomprehensible it is that Christ would have ever suffered as the previous verse theorized. What is true for other men was also the case for Christ - like other men, he was "destined to die once." But this was enough to "take away the sins of many people." The complete sacrifice makes possible a complete salvation. Not only does our salvation reach into our past for the forgiveness of our sins; its consummation lies ahead in our future. He will not then need to bear sin, however. The sacrifice of his first appearing was sufficient for that purpose.

This verse contains both a promise and a warning. As Christians, we say "maranatha!" ("Come, Lord Jesus!" Rev 22:20) for we desire to be with him. Yet it is a matter of utmost importance that, in an age when people rarely expect to be held accountable for how they live their lives, two truths are yet certain. All men die. And all men will face judgment. On that day, only one decision will matter - whether we have embraced the Christ who sacrificed himself for our sins and our salvation.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Heb 9:3

HEBREWS 9:3-4 —Was the altar of incense in the Holy Place or in the Most Holy Place behind the veil?

PROBLEM: According to Exodus 30:6 (cf. 26:33 ; 40:3 ), the altar of incense was in the Holy Place in front of the veil, not in the Most Holy Place behind the veil. However, Hebrews 9:3-4 states that it was “behind the … veil, [in] the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all.”

SOLUTION: Several possible solutions have been suggested to this difficulty. Any one of them would resolve the problem.

1. The text has been corrupted by a copyist mistake. Some scholars note that there is a possible textual dislocation here, that the phrase about the “golden altar” (v. 4 ) really belongs in verse 2 along with the other furniture in the Holy Place. This they note is the way it is in some early manuscripts, such as, Vaticanus ( A.D. 4th century), the Coptic, and the Ethiopic versions.   

Others object that the overwhelming textual evidence and virtually all modern translations oppose these isolated exceptions. They further note that the few texts which disagree leave the impression that they result from an attempt to “correct” the text which they found difficult to understand.

2. The altar was inside the veil. Following Hebrews 9:3-4 , it has been argued that    the Altar of Incense was always inside the Most Holy Place. This view is supported    with the following arguments. First, it is in accord with the clear statement in    Hebrews 9:3-4 . Second, it is implied in other passages which speak of this altar as    “before the ark of the testimony” ( Ex. 40:5 ), which was in the Most Holy Place.    Third, 1 Kings 6:20 speaks of the altar of incense as “belonging to the inner    sanctuary” (Phillip E. Hughes translation).   

Opponents of this view have noted several objections. First, it is contrary to clear    statements in the OT (e.g., Ex. 30:10 ) that place the altar of incense in the Holy    Place, along with the bread and the candles. The priest, who was forbidden to enter    the Most Holy Place (except on the Day of Atonement), served at the altar of incense    daily ( Ex. 30:6-11 ). Second, Philo, Josephus, and other Jewish authorities all placed    it outside the veil in the Holy Place. Finally, the NT locates it outside the veil where    ordinary priests like Zechariah ministered ( Luke 1:5ff ).

3. The Veil was moved on the Day of Atonement. According to this position, the    altar of incense was usually stationed outside the veil in the Holy Place. However,    they believe the veil was moved back on the Day of Atonement so the priest could    have ready access to the altar of incense in order to use it in the Most Holy Place.    Support for this view is derived from the following: First, the Bible usually speaks of    the altar of incense as being separated from the Most Holy Place by a veil (cf. Ex.    30:6 ; Lev. 16:12 , 15 , 17 ). The only time it speaks of this altar being accessible to    the priest in the Most Holy Place is on the Day of Atonement (cf. Lev. 16:2 ; Heb. 9:7    ). Finally, this fits with the typology of the OT high priest who did once a year what    Christ did once for all time (cf. Heb. 10:10-11 ), namely pull back the veil that    separates us from God. In this connection it is noted that Christ has rent the veil (    Matt. 27:5 ) and there is no longer a separation between the Holy Place and the Most    Holy Place.   

The main problems with this view are these: First of all, there is no passage that    actually states the veil was moved back on the Day of Atonement. Second, it may be    pushing a type too far. After all, not everything the OT priest did prefigured Christ.    For example, they continued to offer sacrifices after their Day of Atonement ( Heb.    10:11 ); Christ did not after His. Third, there are passages which clearly imply the    veil was still in place on the Day of Atonement, speaking of the priest going “inside    the veil” to do his work ( Lev. 16:12 ; cf. 15 , 17 , 23 , 27 ).

4. There were two altars of incense. Some scholars posit two altars to resolve the    difficulty, one stationed inside and one outside the veil. This view has the merit of    explaining all the data and of avoiding the difficulties of the two previous views.    However, there are major problems with this position. First, there is no reference    to two altars of incense in either the OT or NT. Second, Jewish authorities (such as    Philo and Josephus) make no reference to any such second altar. Third, if there were    two altars, then the author of Hebrews must be charged with a gross omission, since he makes no reference to the altar of incense in the Holy Place, which was a regular    daily part of the priestly ministry ( Heb. 9:3-4 ). Finally, this suggested solution    seems harmonistic, that is, suggested as a solution without any substantial evidence    for it.

5. The golden censer differs from the golden altar. This position contends that the    Greek word thumiaterion often translated “golden altar” ( Heb. 9:4 ) should be    rendered “golden censer.” This would resolve the difficulty, since the altar of incense    would be outside the veil and the golden censer would be inside the veil where the    priest could use it on the Day of Atonement. In support of this position the following    can be offered: First, “censer” is an acceptable translation of the Greek word    thumiat?rion, which can mean either the place or the instrument of incense. Second,    the same Greek word is used of a censer elsewhere in the Greek translation of the OT    (cf. Ezek. 8:11 ; 2 Chron. 26:19 ). Third, this view is supported by the Jewish    Mishnah which gives a detailed description of this golden censer. Fourth, it avoids a    flat contradiction which involves having one altar in two places. Fifth, it fits with the    fact that the altar of incense is usually mentioned with the bread and candles (which    are always in the Holy Place), whereas the golden censer is used only once a year in    the Most Holy Place ( Lev. 16:2 , 12 , 29 ). Sixth, Aaron the high priest was expressly    commanded to burn incense in a censer before the mercy seat on the Day of    Atonement ( Lev. 16:12-13 ). Seventh, as a Jewish teacher familiar with the law, the    author of Hebrews would have been familiar with the temple furniture and ritual.    Eighth, his message would have had no credibility with his Hebrew readers had he    made a gross mistake in the positioning of the altar of incense. Ninth, since this    instrument for incense was used only once a year in the Most Holy Place, it is only    reasonable that it would be kept in the most sacred place.    As much as there is to commend it, this view is not without objections. First of    all, the Greek word in question is usually translated “golden altar” (e.g., ASV , NASB ,    RSV , NIV , NKJV ), not a “golden censer.” Second, if it is translated “golden censer,”    then the author of Hebrews must be charged with a gross omission of the altar of    incense, which seems unlikely given its importance in the tabernacle furniture and    daily ministry. Third, if “censer” was meant it would not have been made of gold but    of brass to house the hot coals for the incense. Finally, the same term is used by    contemporary Jewish authorities (Philo and Josephus) to refer to the altar of incense.

6. The altar of incense was moved on the Day of Atonement. Other scholars affirm    that Hebrews 9:3-4 is a reference to the “golden altar” of incense which was moved    from its regular location outside the veil on the special occasion of the Day of    Atonement. There are several arguments in favor of this view. First, it resolves the    apparent conflict by holding that there was only one ark which is located in two    different places at the appropriate times. Second, it explains all the data consistently.    Third, it avoids the speculative nature of the two altar theory. Fourth, it seems    inconceivable that the author of Hebrews, writing to Hebrew Christians familiar with    the facts, would place such an important item of tabernacle furniture in the wrong    place. This view avoids such an unlikely situation. Fifth, it explains how the high priest could have used this altar so readily in cleansing the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement, since it was moved there on that occasion. Sixth, it fits with the other references of Scripture which speak of incense being offered in the very presence of a holy God ( Rev. 8:3 ; 9:13 ). Seventh, it is congruent with 1 Kings 6:22 which can be rendered, “the entire altar [of incense] … was in the inner sanctuary.” Eighth, Exodus 30:6 (cf. 40:5 ) may be instructions to move the altar of incense to the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement. Likewise, Hebrews 9:6 may encompass this move when it says, “now when these things had been thus prepared.” Ninth, the Jewish Apocalypse of Baruch (6.7), which belongs to this same period, describes the Most Holy Place as containing the altar of incense.   

It has been suggested that the lack of explicit reference to moving the altar of incense for the Day of atonement makes this view problematic. Likewise, some have queried how the high priest could have moved this heavy altar by himself. But neither of these is telling arguments, since not everything is explicitly noted in Scripture and the other priests were available to make any arrangements necessary for the Day of Atonement.   

7. The altar was “inside” by doctrinal association. Some Bible students have suggested that the altar of incense was actually located outside the veil but that it was listed as “inside” in Hebrews 9:3-4 because of its close association with the ark of the covenant and the atoning sacrifice offered there. In brief, Hebrews is speaking of it being “inside” by doctrinal association but not in its spatial location. In support of this conclusion they cite the fact that the author of Hebrews uses the participle “having” ( echousa ) instead of the expression “in which” ( en h?) which would clearly mean spatial location.

This view, of course, would solve many of the problems associated with other views, but it creates problems of its own. First of all, the same word ( echousa ) translated “having” is used spatially in this very passage (cf. v. 4 ). Furthermore, the two phrases are used interchangeably in this text, indicating that it is more a matter of variation in style than a desire to give a non-spatial relational impression.   

In summary, while any one of these views ispossible and would remove the difficulty, some seem unlikely (1 and 7). Others seem more probable (5 and 6). Whichever is correct, there is certainly no demonstrated error here in the Bible. On the contrary, several plausible solutions are available.   

Critics Ask: Heb 9:4

HEBREWS 9:3-4 —Was the altar of incense in the Holy Place or in the Most Holy Place behind the veil?

PROBLEM: According to Exodus 30:6 (cf. 26:33 ; 40:3 ), the altar of incense was in the Holy Place in front of the veil, not in the Most Holy Place behind the veil. However, Hebrews 9:3-4 states that it was “behind the … veil, [in] the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all.”

SOLUTION: Several possible solutions have been suggested to this difficulty. Any one of them would resolve the problem.

1. The text has been corrupted by a copyist mistake. Some scholars note that there is a possible textual dislocation here, that the phrase about the “golden altar” (v. 4 ) really belongs in verse 2 along with the other furniture in the Holy Place. This they note is the way it is in some early manuscripts, such as, Vaticanus ( A.D. 4th century), the Coptic, and the Ethiopic versions.   

Others object that the overwhelming textual evidence and virtually all modern translations oppose these isolated exceptions. They further note that the few texts which disagree leave the impression that they result from an attempt to “correct” the text which they found difficult to understand.

2. The altar was inside the veil. Following Hebrews 9:3-4 , it has been argued that    the Altar of Incense was always inside the Most Holy Place. This view is supported    with the following arguments. First, it is in accord with the clear statement in    Hebrews 9:3-4 . Second, it is implied in other passages which speak of this altar as    “before the ark of the testimony” ( Ex. 40:5 ), which was in the Most Holy Place.    Third, 1 Kings 6:20 speaks of the altar of incense as “belonging to the inner    sanctuary” (Phillip E. Hughes translation).   

Opponents of this view have noted several objections. First, it is contrary to clear    statements in the OT (e.g., Ex. 30:10 ) that place the altar of incense in the Holy    Place, along with the bread and the candles. The priest, who was forbidden to enter    the Most Holy Place (except on the Day of Atonement), served at the altar of incense    daily ( Ex. 30:6-11 ). Second, Philo, Josephus, and other Jewish authorities all placed    it outside the veil in the Holy Place. Finally, the NT locates it outside the veil where    ordinary priests like Zechariah ministered ( Luke 1:5ff ).

3. The Veil was moved on the Day of Atonement. According to this position, the    altar of incense was usually stationed outside the veil in the Holy Place. However,    they believe the veil was moved back on the Day of Atonement so the priest could    have ready access to the altar of incense in order to use it in the Most Holy Place.    Support for this view is derived from the following: First, the Bible usually speaks of    the altar of incense as being separated from the Most Holy Place by a veil (cf. Ex.    30:6 ; Lev. 16:12 , 15 , 17 ). The only time it speaks of this altar being accessible to    the priest in the Most Holy Place is on the Day of Atonement (cf. Lev. 16:2 ; Heb. 9:7    ). Finally, this fits with the typology of the OT high priest who did once a year what    Christ did once for all time (cf. Heb. 10:10-11 ), namely pull back the veil that    separates us from God. In this connection it is noted that Christ has rent the veil (    Matt. 27:5 ) and there is no longer a separation between the Holy Place and the Most    Holy Place.   

The main problems with this view are these: First of all, there is no passage that    actually states the veil was moved back on the Day of Atonement. Second, it may be    pushing a type too far. After all, not everything the OT priest did prefigured Christ.    For example, they continued to offer sacrifices after their Day of Atonement ( Heb.    10:11 ); Christ did not after His. Third, there are passages which clearly imply the    veil was still in place on the Day of Atonement, speaking of the priest going “inside    the veil” to do his work ( Lev. 16:12 ; cf. 15 , 17 , 23 , 27 ).

4. There were two altars of incense. Some scholars posit two altars to resolve the    difficulty, one stationed inside and one outside the veil. This view has the merit of    explaining all the data and of avoiding the difficulties of the two previous views.    However, there are major problems with this position. First, there is no reference    to two altars of incense in either the OT or NT. Second, Jewish authorities (such as    Philo and Josephus) make no reference to any such second altar. Third, if there were    two altars, then the author of Hebrews must be charged with a gross omission, since he makes no reference to the altar of incense in the Holy Place, which was a regular    daily part of the priestly ministry ( Heb. 9:3-4 ). Finally, this suggested solution    seems harmonistic, that is, suggested as a solution without any substantial evidence    for it.

5. The golden censer differs from the golden altar. This position contends that the    Greek word thumiaterion often translated “golden altar” ( Heb. 9:4 ) should be    rendered “golden censer.” This would resolve the difficulty, since the altar of incense    would be outside the veil and the golden censer would be inside the veil where the    priest could use it on the Day of Atonement. In support of this position the following    can be offered: First, “censer” is an acceptable translation of the Greek word    thumiat?rion, which can mean either the place or the instrument of incense. Second,    the same Greek word is used of a censer elsewhere in the Greek translation of the OT    (cf. Ezek. 8:11 ; 2 Chron. 26:19 ). Third, this view is supported by the Jewish    Mishnah which gives a detailed description of this golden censer. Fourth, it avoids a    flat contradiction which involves having one altar in two places. Fifth, it fits with the    fact that the altar of incense is usually mentioned with the bread and candles (which    are always in the Holy Place), whereas the golden censer is used only once a year in    the Most Holy Place ( Lev. 16:2 , 12 , 29 ). Sixth, Aaron the high priest was expressly    commanded to burn incense in a censer before the mercy seat on the Day of    Atonement ( Lev. 16:12-13 ). Seventh, as a Jewish teacher familiar with the law, the    author of Hebrews would have been familiar with the temple furniture and ritual.    Eighth, his message would have had no credibility with his Hebrew readers had he    made a gross mistake in the positioning of the altar of incense. Ninth, since this    instrument for incense was used only once a year in the Most Holy Place, it is only    reasonable that it would be kept in the most sacred place.    As much as there is to commend it, this view is not without objections. First of    all, the Greek word in question is usually translated “golden altar” (e.g., ASV , NASB ,    RSV , NIV , NKJV ), not a “golden censer.” Second, if it is translated “golden censer,”    then the author of Hebrews must be charged with a gross omission of the altar of    incense, which seems unlikely given its importance in the tabernacle furniture and    daily ministry. Third, if “censer” was meant it would not have been made of gold but    of brass to house the hot coals for the incense. Finally, the same term is used by    contemporary Jewish authorities (Philo and Josephus) to refer to the altar of incense.

6. The altar of incense was moved on the Day of Atonement. Other scholars affirm    that Hebrews 9:3-4 is a reference to the “golden altar” of incense which was moved    from its regular location outside the veil on the special occasion of the Day of    Atonement. There are several arguments in favor of this view. First, it resolves the    apparent conflict by holding that there was only one ark which is located in two    different places at the appropriate times. Second, it explains all the data consistently.    Third, it avoids the speculative nature of the two altar theory. Fourth, it seems    inconceivable that the author of Hebrews, writing to Hebrew Christians familiar with    the facts, would place such an important item of tabernacle furniture in the wrong    place. This view avoids such an unlikely situation. Fifth, it explains how the high priest could have used this altar so readily in cleansing the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement, since it was moved there on that occasion. Sixth, it fits with the other references of Scripture which speak of incense being offered in the very presence of a holy God ( Rev. 8:3 ; 9:13 ). Seventh, it is congruent with 1 Kings 6:22 which can be rendered, “the entire altar [of incense] … was in the inner sanctuary.” Eighth, Exodus 30:6 (cf. 40:5 ) may be instructions to move the altar of incense to the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement. Likewise, Hebrews 9:6 may encompass this move when it says, “now when these things had been thus prepared.” Ninth, the Jewish Apocalypse of Baruch (6.7), which belongs to this same period, describes the Most Holy Place as containing the altar of incense.   

It has been suggested that the lack of explicit reference to moving the altar of incense for the Day of atonement makes this view problematic. Likewise, some have queried how the high priest could have moved this heavy altar by himself. But neither of these is telling arguments, since not everything is explicitly noted in Scripture and the other priests were available to make any arrangements necessary for the Day of Atonement.   

7. The altar was “inside” by doctrinal association. Some Bible students have suggested that the altar of incense was actually located outside the veil but that it was listed as “inside” in Hebrews 9:3-4 because of its close association with the ark of the covenant and the atoning sacrifice offered there. In brief, Hebrews is speaking of it being “inside” by doctrinal association but not in its spatial location. In support of this conclusion they cite the fact that the author of Hebrews uses the participle “having” ( echousa ) instead of the expression “in which” ( en h?) which would clearly mean spatial location.

This view, of course, would solve many of the problems associated with other views, but it creates problems of its own. First of all, the same word ( echousa ) translated “having” is used spatially in this very passage (cf. v. 4 ). Furthermore, the two phrases are used interchangeably in this text, indicating that it is more a matter of variation in style than a desire to give a non-spatial relational impression.   

In summary, while any one of these views ispossible and would remove the difficulty, some seem unlikely (1 and 7). Others seem more probable (5 and 6). Whichever is correct, there is certainly no demonstrated error here in the Bible. On the contrary, several plausible solutions are available.   

H EBREWS 9:4 —Were there three things in the ark or only the tables of stone?

PROBLEM: This passage claims that the ark of the covenant had the golden bowl of manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the two tables of stone. But elsewhere it affirms that only the tables of stone were there ( Ex. 40:20 ; Deut. 10:5 ; 1 Kings 8:9 ). Which is correct?

SOLUTION: The two “tables of stone” (i.e., the Ten Commandments) are not the same as the “book of the law.” The latter was not put in the ark, but was placed along side of it ( Deut. 31:26 ). Originally, all three items (tables of stone, pot of manna, and Aaron’s rod) were in the ark (as Heb. 9:4 says). Subsequently, the last two were removed ( Ex. 40:20 ).   

Evidence: Heb 9:3

" O Lord, Almighty and everlasting God, by Thy holy Word Thou hast created the heaven, and the earth, and the sea; blessed and glorified be Thy name, and praised be Thy majesty, which hath deigned to use us, Thy humble servants, that Thy holy name may be proclaimed in this second part of the earth." Christopher Columbus

Evidence: Heb 9:14

THE FUNCTION OF THE LAW

" You understand that the work of the Law is the revealing of sin. Furthermore, when I speak of sin, I include all kinds of sin—external, internal, hypocrisy, unbelief, love of self, and contempt for or ignorance of God—which are certainly the very roots of all human works. In the justification of sinners the first work of God is to reveal our sin; to confound our conscience, make us tremble, terrify us, briefly, to condemn us.

" The beginning of repentance consists of that work of the Law by which the Spirit of God terrifies and confounds consciences... Just as the Christian life must certainly begin with the knowledge of sin, so Christian doctrine must begin with the function of the Law." Melanchthon

Evidence: Heb 9:22

Forgiveness of sin requires the shedding of blood : God was the first person to kill an animal, as recorded in Gen 3:21 . As Adam and Eve sinned and lost their righteousness, God shed the blood of an innocent animal to provide a covering for them. The fig leaves of self-righteousness will not cover a sinner on the Day of Judgment. God alone can provide the covering through the shed blood of the Savior ( 1Jo 1:7-10 ). See Joh 3:16-17 footnote.

Evidence: Heb 9:27

Judgment Day : For verses that warn of its reality, see 2Pe 2:4-5 ; 2Pe 2:9 .

Reincarnation . This verse shows that there is no such thing as reincarnation. It is merely wishful thinking for guilty sinners. Many of the world’s largest religions teach their adherents that if they don’t " get it right" in this lifetime, they’ll have multiple opportunities in future lives. That people don’t need to trust in Jesus before they die is one of Satan’s greatest lies. See Psa 49:15 footnote.

Evidence: Heb 9:28

Second coming of Jesus : See Heb 10:37 .

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

The Epistle to the Hebrews

By Way of Introduction

Unsettled Problems

Probably no book in the New Testament presents more unsettled problems than does the Epistle to the Hebrews. On that score it ranks with the Fourth Gospel, the Apocalypse of John, and Second Peter. But, in spite of these unsolved matters, the book takes high rank for its intellectual grasp, spiritual power, and its masterful portrayal of Christ as High Priest. It is much briefer than the Fourth Gospel, but in a sense it carries on further the exalted picture of the Risen Christ as the King-Priest who reigns and pleads for us now.

The Picture of Christ

At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Heb_1:1-3), this Son who is God’s Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in Phi_2:5-11; Col_1:13-20; John 1:1-18. This high doctrine of Jesus as God’s Son with the glory and stamp of God’s nature is never lowered, for as God’s Son he is superior to angels (Heb 1:4-2:4), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Heb_2:5-18). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God’s Son over God’s house (Heb 3:1-4:13), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Heb 4:14-12:3). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Heb 4:14-7:28), works under a better covenant of grace (Heb_8:1-13), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Heb_9:1-12), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Heb 9:13-10:18), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Heb 10:19-12:3). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. So W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, High Priesthood and Sacrifice (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mar_10:46; Mat_20:28; Joh_10:17; Mat_26:28; Rom_8:32; 1Pe_1:18.; 1Jo_2:1.; Rev_5:9, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.

The Style

It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: " It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" ( Light from the Ancient East , pp. 70f.). But Blass ( Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa , 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of " a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many " parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of " the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary Koiné rather than to the vernacular. Moulton ( Cambridge Biblical Essays , p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

The Author

Origen bluntly wrote: " Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul’s while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in Heb_11:32 ( me diēgoumenon ) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply Pros Hebraious as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

The Recipients

If the title is allowed to be genuine or a fair interpretation of the Epistle, then it is addressed to Jewish (Hebrew) Christians in a local church somewhere. Dr. James Moffatt in his Commentary (pp. xv to xvii) challenges the title and insists that the book is written for Gentile Christians as truly as First Peter. He argues this largely from the author’s use of the lxx. For myself Dr. Moffatt’s reasons are not convincing. The traditional view that the author is addressing Jewish Christians in a definite locality, whether a large church or a small household church, is true, I believe. The author seems clearly to refer to a definite church in the experiences alluded to in Heb_10:32-34. The church in Jerusalem had undergone sufferings like these, but we really do not know where the church was. Apparently the author is in Italy when he writes (Heb_13:24), though " they of Italy" ( hoi apo tēs Italias ) can mean those who have come from Italy. These Jewish Christians may even have lived in Rome itself.

The Date

Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between a.d. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between a.d. 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written Heb_10:1.: " Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in Heb_8:13 " nigh to vanishing away" ( eggus aphanismou ) is only intelligible with the temple service still going on. The author makes use of the tabernacle instead of the temple because the temple was patterned after the tabernacle. On the other hand, the mention of Timothy in Heb_13:23 as being " set free" ( apolelumenon ) raises an inquiry concerning Paul’s last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Ti_4:11-13). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero’s own death (June 8, a.d. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 a.d. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.

The Purpose

The author states it repeatedly. He urges the Jewish Christians to hold fast the confession which they have made in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour. Their Jewish neighbours have urged them to give up Christ and Christianity and to come back to Judaism. The Judaizers tried to make Jews out of Gentile Christians and to fasten Judaism upon Christianity with a purely sacramental type of religion as the result. Paul won freedom for evangelical and spiritual Christianity against the Judaizers as shown in the Corinthian Epistles, Galatians, and Romans. The Gnostics in subtle fashion tried to dilute Christianity with their philosophy and esoteric mysteries and here again Paul won his fight for the supremacy of Christ over all these imaginary aeons (Colossians and Ephesians). But in Hebrews the author is battling to stop a stampede from Christ back to Judaism, a revolt (apostasy) in truth from the living God. These Jews argued that the prophets were superior to Jesus, the law came by the ministry of angels, Moses was greater than Jesus, and Aaron than Jesus. The author turns the argument on the Jews and boldly champions the Glory of Jesus as superior at every point to all that Judaism had, as God’s Son and man’s Saviour, the crown and glory of the Old Testament prophecy, the hope of mankind. It is the first great apologetic for Christianity and has never been surpassed. Moffatt terms it " a profound homily."

JFB: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP.--CLEMENT OF ROME, at the end of the first century (A.D), copiously uses it, adopting its words just as he does those of the other books of the New Testament; not indeed giving to either the term "Scripture," which he reserves for the Old Testament (the canon of the New Testament not yet having been formally established), but certainly not ranking it below the other New Testament acknowledged Epistles. As our Epistle claims authority on the part of the writer, CLEMENT'S adoption of extracts from it is virtually sanctioning its authority, and this in the apostolic age. JUSTIN MARTYR quotes it as divinely authoritative, to establish the titles "apostle," as well as "angel," as applied to the Son of God. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA refers it expressly to Paul, on the authority of Pantænus, chief of the Catechetical school in Alexandria, in the middle of the second century, saying, that as Jesus is termed in it the "apostle" sent to the Hebrews, Paul, through humility, does not in it call himself apostle of the Hebrews, being apostle to the Gentiles. CLEMENT also says that Paul, as the Hebrews were prejudiced against him, prudently omitted to put forward his name in the beginning; also, that it was originally written in Hebrew for the Hebrews, and that Luke translated it into Greek for the Greeks, whence the style is similar to that of Acts. He, however, quotes frequently the words of the existing Greek Epistle as Paul's words. ORIGEN similarly quotes it as Paul's Epistle. However, in his Homilies, he regards the style as distinct from that of Paul, and as "more Grecian," but the thoughts as the apostle's; adding that the "ancients who have handed down the tradition of its Pauline authorship, must have had good reason for doing so, though God alone knows the certainty who was the actual writer" (that is, probably "transcriber" of the apostle's thoughts). In the African Church, in the beginning of the third century, TERTULLIAN ascribes it to Barnabas. IRENÆUS, bishop of Lyons, is mentioned in EUSEBIUS, as quoting from this Epistle, though without expressly referring it to Paul. About the same period, Caius, the presbyter, in the Church of Rome, mentions only thirteen Epistles of Paul, whereas, if the Epistle to the Hebrews were included, there would be fourteen. So the canon fragment of the end of the second century, or beginning of the third, published by MURATORI, apparently omits mentioning it. And so the Latin Church did not recognize it as Paul's till a considerable time after the beginning of the third century. Thus, also, NOVATIAN OF ROME, CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, and VICTORINUS, also of the Latin Church. But in the fourth century, HILARY OF POITIERS (A.D. 368), LUCIFER OF CAGLIARI (A.D. 371), AMBROSE OF MILAN (A.D. 397) and other Latins, quote it as Paul's; and the fifth Council of Carthage (A.D. 419) formally reckons it among his fourteen Epistles.

As to the similarity of its style to that of Luke's writings, this is due to his having been so long the companion of Paul. CHRYSOSTOM, comparing Luke and Mark, says, "Each imitated his teacher: Luke imitated Paul flowing along with more than river fulness; but Mark imitated Peter, who studied brevity of style." Besides, there is a greater predominance of Jewish feeling and familiarity with the peculiarities of the Jewish schools apparent in this Epistle than in Luke's writings. There is no clear evidence for attributing the authorship to him, or to Apollos, whom ALFORD upholds as the author. The grounds alleged for the latter view are its supposed Alexandrian phraseology and modes of thought. But these are such as any Palestinian Jew might have used; and Paul, from his Hebræo-Hellenistic education at Jerusalem and Tarsus, would be familiar with PHILO'S modes of thought, which are not, as some think, necessarily all derived from his Alexandrian, but also from his Jewish, education. It would be unlikely that the Alexandrian Church should have so undoubtingly asserted the Pauline authorship, if Apollos, their own countryman, had really been the author. The eloquence of its style and rhetoric, a characteristic of Apollos' at Corinth, whereas Paul there spoke in words unadorned by man's wisdom, are doubtless designedly adapted to the minds of those whom Paul in this Epistle addresses. To the Greek Corinthians, who were in danger of idolizing human eloquence and wisdom, he writes in an unadorned style, in order to fix their attention more wholly on the Gospel itself. But the Hebrews were in no such danger. And his Hebræo-Grecian education would enable him to write in a style attractive to the Hebrews at Alexandria, where Greek philosophy had been blended with Judaism. The Septuagint translation framed at Alexandria had formed a connecting link between the latter and the former; and it is remarkable that all the quotations from the Old Testament, excepting two (Heb 10:30; Heb 13:5), are taken from the Septuagint. The fact that the peculiarities of the Septuagint are interwoven into the argument proves that the Greek Epistle is an original, not a translation; had the original been Hebrew, the quotations would have been from the Hebrew Old Testament. The same conclusion follows from the plays on similarly sounding words in the Greek, and alliterations, and rhythmically constructed periods. CALVIN observes, If the Epistle had been written in Hebrew, Heb 9:15-17 would lose all its point, which consists in the play upon the double meaning of the Greek "diathece," a "covenant," or a "testament," whereas the Hebrew "berith" means only "covenant."

Internal evidence favors the Pauline authorship. Thus the topic so fully handled in this Epistle, that Christianity is superior to Judaism, inasmuch as the reality exceeds the type which gives place to it, is a favorite one with Paul (compare 2Co 3:6-18; Gal 3:23-25; Gal 4:1-9, Gal 4:21-31, wherein the allegorical mode of interpretation appears in its divinely sanctioned application--a mode pushed to an unwarrantable excess in the Alexandrian school). So the Divine Son appears in Heb 1:3, &c., as in other Epistles of Paul (Phi 2:6; Col 1:15-20), as the Image, or manifestation of the Deity. His lowering of Himself for man's sake similarly, compare Heb 2:9, with 2Co 8:9; Phi 2:7-8. Also His final exaltation, compare Heb 2:8; Heb 10:13; Heb 12:2, with 1Co 15:25, 1Co 15:27. The word "Mediator" is peculiar to Paul alone, compare Heb 8:6, with Gal 3:19-20. Christ's death is represented as the sacrifice for sin prefigured by the Jewish sacrifices, compare Rom 3:22-26; 1Co 5:7, with Heb. 7:1-10:39. The phrase, "God of Peace," is peculiar to Paul, compare Heb 13:20; Rom 15:33; 1Th 5:23. Also, compare Heb 2:4, Margin, 1Co 12:4. Justification, or "righteousness by faith." appears in Heb 11:7; Heb 10:38, as in Rom 1:17; Rom 4:22; Rom 5:1; Gal 3:11; Phi 3:9. The word of God is the "sword of the Spirit," compare Heb 4:12, with Eph 6:17. Inexperienced Christians are children needing milk, that is, instruction in the elements, whereas riper Christians, as full-grown men, require strong meat, compare Heb 5:12-13; Heb 6:1, with 1Co 3:1-2; 1Co 14:20 Gal 4:9; Col 3:14. Salvation is represented as a boldness of access to God by Christ, compare Heb 10:19, with Rom 5:2; Eph 2:18; Eph 3:12. Afflictions are a fight, Heb 10:32; compare Phi 1:30; Col 2:1. The Christian life is a race, Heb 12:1; compare 1Co 9:24; Phi 3:12-14. The Jewish ritual is a service, Rom 9:4; compare Heb 9:1, Heb 9:6. Compare "subject to bondage," Heb 2:15, with Gal 5:1. Other characteristics of Paul's style appear in this Epistle; namely, a propensity "to go off at a word" and enter on a long parenthesis suggested by that word, a fondness for play upon words of similar sound, and a disposition to repeat some favorite word. Frequent appeals to the Old Testament, and quotations linked by "and again," compare Heb 1:5; Heb 2:12-13, with Rom 15:9-12. Also quotations in a peculiar application, compare Heb 2:8, with 1Co 15:27; Eph 1:22. Also the same passage quoted in a form not agreeing with the Septuagint, and with the addition "saith the Lord," not found in the Hebrew, in Heb 10:30; Rom 12:19.

The supposed Alexandrian (which are rather Philon-like) characteristics of the Epistle are probably due to the fact that the Hebrews were generally then imbued with the Alexandrian modes of thought of Philo, &c., and Paul, without coloring or altering Gospel truth "to the Jews, became (in style) as a Jew, that he might win the Jews" (1Co 9:20). This will account for its being recognized as Paul's Epistle in the Alexandrian and Jerusalem churches unanimously, to the Hebrews of whom probably it was addressed. Not one Greek father ascribes the Epistle to any but Paul, whereas in the Western and Latin churches, which it did not reach for some time, it was for long doubted, owing to its anonymous form, and generally less distinctively Pauline style. Their reason for not accepting it as Paul's, or indeed as canonical, for the first three centuries, was negative, insufficient evidence for it, not positive evidence against it. The positive evidence is generally for its Pauline origin. In the Latin churches, owing to their distance from the churches to whom belonged the Hebrews addressed, there was no generally received tradition on the subject. The Epistle was in fact but little known at all, whence we find it is not mentioned at all in the Canon of Muratori. When at last, in the fourth century, the Latins found that it was received as Pauline and canonical on good grounds in the Greek churches, they universally acknowledged it as such.

The personal notices all favor its Pauline authorship, namely, his intention to visit those addressed, shortly, along with Timothy, styled "our brother," Heb 13:23; his being then in prison, Heb 13:19; his formerly having been imprisoned in Palestine, according to English Version reading, Heb 10:34; the salutations transmitted to them from believers of Italy, Heb 13:24. A reason for not prefixing the name may be the rhetorical character of the Epistle which led the author to waive the usual form of epistolary address.

DESIGN.--His aim is to show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, in that it was introduced by one far higher than the angels or Moses, through whom the Jews received the law, and in that its priesthood and sacrifices are far less perfecting as to salvation than those of Christ; that He is the substance of which the former are but the shadow, and that the type necessarily gives place to the antitype; and that now we no longer are kept at a comparative distance as under the law, but have freedom of access through the opened veil, that is, Christ's flesh; hence he warns them of the danger of apostasy, to which Jewish converts were tempted, when they saw Christians persecuted, while Judaism was tolerated by the Roman authorities. He infers the obligations to a life of faith, of which, even in the less perfect Old Testament dispensation, the Jewish history contained bright examples. He concludes in the usual Pauline mode, with practical exhortations and pious prayers for them.

HIS MODE OF ADDRESS is in it hortatory rather than commanding, just as we might have expected from Paul addressing the Jews. He does not write to the rulers of the Jewish Christians, for in fact there was no exclusively Jewish Church; and his Epistle, though primarily addressed to the Palestinian Jews, was intended to include the Hebrews of all adjoining churches. He inculcates obedience and respect in relation to their rulers (Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17, Heb 13:24); a tacit obviating of the objection that he was by writing this Epistle interfering with the prerogative of Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and James the bishop of Jerusalem. Hence arises his gentle and delicate mode of dealing with them (Heb 13:22). So far from being surprised at discrepancy of style between an Epistle to Hebrews and Epistles to Gentile Christians, it is just what we should expect. The Holy Spirit guided him to choose means best suited to the nature of the ends aimed at. WORDSWORTH notices a peculiar Pauline Greek construction, Rom 12:9, literally, "Let your love be without dissimulation, ye abhorring . . . evil, cleaving to . . . good," which is found nowhere else save Heb 13:5, literally, "Let your conversation be without covetousness, ye being content with," &c. (a noun singular feminine nominative absolute, suddenly passing into a participle masculine nominative plural absolute). So in quoting Old Testament Scripture, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews quotes it as a Jew writing to Jews would, "God spoke to our fathers," not, "it is written." So Heb 13:18, "We trust we have a good conscience" is an altogether Pauline sentiment (Act 23:1; Act 24:16; 2Co 1:12; 2Co 4:2; 2Ti 1:3). Though he has not prefixed his name, he has given at the close his universal token to identify him, namely, his apostolic salutation, "Grace be with you all"; this "salutation with his own hand" he declared (2Th 3:17-18) to be "his token in every Epistle": so 1Co 16:21, 1Co 16:23; Col 4:18. The same prayer of greeting closes every one of his Epistles, and is not found in any one of the Epistles of the other apostles written in Paul's lifetime; but it is found in the last book of the New Testament Revelation, and subsequently in the Epistle of CLEMENT OF ROME. This proves that, by whomsoever the body of the Epistle was committed to writing (whether a mere amanuensis writing by dictation, or a companion of Paul by the Spirit's gift of interpreting tongues, 1Co 12:10, transfusing Paul's Spirit-taught sentiments into his own Spirit-guided diction), Paul at the close sets his seal to the whole as really his, and sanctioned by him as such. The churches of the East, and Jerusalem, their center, to which quarter it was first sent, received it as Paul's from the earliest times according to Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (A.D. 349). JEROME, though bringing with him from Rome the prejudices of the Latins against the Epistle to the Hebrews, aggravated, doubtless, by its seeming sanction of the Novatian heresy (Heb 6:4-6), was constrained by the force of facts to receive it as Paul's, on the almost unanimous testimony of all Greek Christians from the earliest times; and was probably the main instrument in correcting the past error of Rome in rejecting it. The testimony of the Alexandrian Church is peculiarly valuable, for it was founded by Mark, who was with Paul at Rome in his first confinement, when this Epistle seems to have been written (Col 4:10), and who possibly was the bearer of this Epistle, at the same time visiting Colosse on the way to Jerusalem (where Mark's mother lived), and thence to Alexandria. Moreover, 2Pe 3:15-16, written shortly before Peter's death, and like his first Epistle written by him, "the apostle of the circumcision," to the "Hebrew" Christians dispersed in the East, says, "As our beloved brother Paul hath written unto you" (2Pe 3:15), that is, to the Hebrews; also the words added, "As also in all his Epistles" (2Pe 3:16), distinguish the Epistle to the Hebrews from the rest; then he further speaks of it as on a level with "other Scriptures," thus asserting at once its Pauline authorship and divine inspiration. An interesting illustration of the power of Christian faith and love; Peter, who had been openly rebuked by Paul (Gal 2:7-14), fully adopted what Paul wrote; there was no difference in the Gospel of the apostle of the circumcision and that of the apostle of the uncircumcision. It strikingly shows God's sovereignty that He chose as the instrument to confirm the Hebrews, Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13); and on the other hand, Peter to open the Gospel door to the Gentiles (Act 10:1, &c.), though being the apostle of the Jews; thus perfect unity reigns amidst the diversity of agencies.

Rome, in the person of CLEMENT OF ROME, originally received this Epistle. Then followed a period in which it ceased to be received by the Roman churches. Then, in the fourth century, Rome retracted her error. A plain proof she is not unchangeable or infallible. As far as Rome is concerned, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not only lost for three centuries, but never would have been recovered at all but for the Eastern churches; it is therefore a happy thing for Christendom that Rome is not the Catholic Church.

It plainly was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, which would have been mentioned in the Epistle had that event gone before, compare Heb 13:10; and probably to churches in which the Jewish members were the more numerous, as those in Judea, and perhaps Alexandria. In the latter city were the greatest number of resident Jews next to Jerusalem. In Leontopolis, in Egypt, was another temple, with the arrangements of which, WIESELER thinks the notices in this Epistle more nearly corresponded than with those in Jerusalem. It was from Alexandria that the Epistle appears first to have come to the knowledge of Christendom. Moreover, "the Epistle to the Alexandrians," mentioned in the Canon of Muratori, may possibly be this Epistle to the Hebrews. He addresses the Jews as peculiarly "the people of God" (Heb 2:17; Heb 4:9; Heb 13:12), "the seed of Abraham," that is, as the primary stock on which Gentile believers are grafted, to which Rom 11:16-24 corresponds; but he urges them to come out of the carnal earthly Jerusalem and to realize their spiritual union to "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb 12:18-23; Heb 13:13).

The use of Greek rather than Hebrew is doubtless due to the Epistle being intended, not merely for the Hebrew, but for the Hellenistic Jew converts, not only in Palestine, but elsewhere; a view confirmed by the use of the Septuagint. BENGEL thinks, probably (compare 2Pe 3:15-16, explained above), the Jews primarily, though not exclusively, addressed, were those who had left Jerusalem on account of the war and were settled in Asia Minor.

The notion of its having been originally in Hebrew arose probably from its Hebrew tone, method, and topics. It is reckoned among the Epistles, not at first generally acknowledged, along with James, Second Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and Revelation. A beautiful link exists between these Epistles and the universally acknowledged Epistles. Hebrews unites the ordinances of Leviticus with their antitypical Gospel fulfilment. James is the link between the highest doctrines of Christianity and the universal law of moral duty--a commentary on the Sermon on the Mount--harmonizing the decalogue law of Moses, and the revelation to Job and Elias, with the Christian law of liberty. Second Peter links the teaching of Peter with that of Paul. Jude links the earliest unwritten to the latest written Revelation. The two shorter Epistles to John, like Philemon, apply Christianity to the minute details of the Christian life, showing that Christianity can sanctify all earthly relations.

JFB: Hebrews (Outline)

• THE HIGHEST OF ALL REVELATIONS IS GIVEN US NOW IN THE SON OF GOD, WHO IS GREATER THAN THE ANGELS, AND WHO, HAVING COMPLETED REDEMPTION, SITS ENTHRONED AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND. (Heb 1:1-14)
• DANGER OF NEGLECTING SO GREAT SALVATION, FIRST SPOKEN BY CHRIST; TO WHOM, NOT TO ANGELS, THE NEW DISPENSATION WAS SUBJECTED; THOUGH HE WAS FOR A TIME HUMBLED BELOW THE ANGELS: THIS HUMILIATION TOOK PLACE BY DIVINE NECESSITY FOR OUR SALVATION. (Heb. 2:1-18)
• THE SON OF GOD GREATER THAN MOSES, WHEREFORE UNBELIEF TOWARDS HIM WILL INCUR A HEAVIER PUNISHMENT THAN BEFELL UNBELIEVING ISRAEL IN THE WILDERNESS. (Heb. 3:1-19)
• THE PROMISE OF GOD'S REST IS FULLY REALIZED THROUGH CHRIST: LET US STRIVE TO OBTAIN IT BY HIM, OUR SYMPATHIZING HIGH PRIEST. (Heb. 4:1-16)
• CHRIST'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD; NEEDED QUALIFICATIONS; MUST BE A MAN; MUST NOT HAVE ASSUMED THE DIGNITY HIMSELF, BUT HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY GOD; THEIR LOW SPIRITUAL PERCEPTIONS A BAR TO PAUL'S SAYING ALL HE MIGHT ON CHRIST'S MELCHISEDEC-LIKE PRIESTHOOD. (Heb 5:1-14)
• WARNING AGAINST RETROGRADING, WHICH SOON LEADS TO APOSTASY; ENCOURAGEMENT TO STEADFASTNESS FROM GOD'S FAITHFULNESS TO HIS WORD AND OATH. (Heb 6:1-14)
• CHRIST'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC SUPERIOR TO AARON'S. (Heb. 7:1-28)
• CHRIST, THE HIGH PRIEST IN THE TRUE SANCTUARY, SUPERSEDING THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD; THE NEW RENDERS OBSOLETE THE OLD COVENANT. (Heb 8:1-13)
• INFERIORITY OF THE OLD TO THE NEW COVENANT IN THE MEANS OF ACCESS TO GOD: THE BLOOD OF BULLS AND GOATS OF NO REAL AVAIL: THE BLOOD OF CHRIST ALL-SUFFICIENT TO PURGE AWAY SIN, WHENCE FLOWS OUR HOPE OF HIS APPEARING AGAIN FOR OUR PERFECT SALVATION. (Heb. 9:1-28)
• PROOF OF AND ENLARGEMENT ON, THE "ETERNAL REDEMPTION" MENTIONED IN. Heb 9:12 (Heb. 9:13-28)
• CONCLUSION OF THE FOREGOING ARGUMENT. THE YEARLY RECURRING LAW SACRIFICES CANNOT PERFECT THE WORSHIPPER, BUT CHRIST'S ONCE-FOR-ALL OFFERING CAN. (Heb. 10:1-39) Previously the oneness of Christ's offering was shown; now is shown its perfection as contrasted with the law sacrifices.
• DEFINITION OF THE FAITH JUST SPOKEN OF (Heb 10:39): EXAMPLES FROM THE OLD COVENANT FOR OUR PERSEVERANCE IN FAITH. (Heb. 11:1-40) Description of the great things which faith (in its widest sense: not here restricted to faith in the Gospel sense) does for us. Not a full definition of faith in its whole nature, but a description of its great characteristics in relation to the subject of Paul's exhortation here, namely, to perseverance.
• EXHORTATION TO FOLLOW THE WITNESSES OF FAITH JUST MENTIONED: NOT TO FAINT IN TRIALS: TO REMOVE ALL BITTER ROOTS OF SIN: FOR WE ARE UNDER, NOT A LAW OF TERROR, BUT THE GOSPEL OF GRACE, TO DESPISE WHICH WILL BRING THE HEAVIER PENALTIES, IN PROPORTION TO OUR GREATER PRIVILEGES. (Heb. 12:1-29)
• EXHORTATION TO VARIOUS GRACES, ESPECIALLY CONSTANCY IN FAITH, FOLLOWING JESUS AMIDST REPROACHES. CONCLUSION, WITH PIECES OF INTELLIGENCE AND SALUTATIONS. (Heb. 13:1-25)

TSK: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Heb 9:1, The description of the rites and bloody sacrifices of the law; Heb 9:11, which are far inferior to the dignity and perfection of the blood and sacrifice of Christ.

Poole: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 9

MHCC: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

This epistle shows Christ as the end, foundation, body, and truth of the figures of the law, which of themselves were no virtue for the soul. The great truth set forth in this epistle is that Jesus of Nazareth is the true God. The unconverted Jews used many arguments to draw their converted brethren from the Christian faith. They represented the law of Moses as superior to the Christian dispensation, and spoke against every thing connected with the Saviour. The apostle, therefore, shows the superiority of Jesus of Nazareth, as the Son of God, and the benefits from his sufferings and death as the sacrifice for sin, so that the Christian religion is much more excellent and perfect than that of Moses. And the principal design seems to be, to bring the converted Hebrews forward in the knowledge of the gospel, and thus to establish them in the Christian faith, and to prevent their turning from it, against which they are earnestly warned. But while it contains many things suitable to the Hebrews of early times, it also contains many which can never cease to interest the church of God; for the knowledge of Jesus Christ is the very marrow and kernel of all the Scriptures. The ceremonial law is full of Christ, and all the gospel is full of Christ; the blessed lines of both Testaments meet in Him; and how they both agree and sweetly unite in Jesus Christ, is the chief object of the epistle to the Hebrews to discover.

MHCC: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

(Heb 9:1-5) The Jewish tabernacle and its utensils.

(Heb 9:6-10) Their use and meaning.

(Heb 9:11-22) These fulfilled in Christ.

(Heb 9:23-28) The necessity, superior dignity, and power of his priesthood and sacrifice.

Matthew Henry: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Epistle to the Hebrews

Concerning this epistle we must enquire, I. Into the divine authority of it; for this has been questioned by some, whose distempered eyes could not bear the light of it, or whose errors have been confuted by it; such as the Arians, who deny the Godhead and self-existence of Christ; and the Socinians, who deny his satisfaction; but, after all the attempts of such men to disparage this epistle, the divine original of it shines forth with such strong and unclouded rays that he who runs may read it is an eminent part of the canon of scripture. The divinity of the matter, the sublimity of the style, the excellency of the design, the harmony of this with other parts of scripture, and its general reception in the church of God in all ages - these are the evidences of its divine authority. II. As to the divine amanuensis or penman of this epistle, we are not so certain; it does not bear the name of any in the front of it, as the rest of the epistles do, and there has been some dispute among the learned to whom they should ascribe it. Some have assigned it to Clemens of Rome; other to Luke; and many to Barnabas, thinking that the style and manner of expression is very agreeable to the zealous, authoritative, affectionate temper that Barnabas appears to be of, in the account we have of him in the acts of the Apostles; and one ancient father quotes an expression out of this epistle as the words of Barnabas. But it is generally assigned to the apostle Paul; and some later copies and translations have put Paul's name in the title. In the primitive times it was generally ascribed to him, and the style and scope of it very well agree with his spirit, who was a person of a clear head and a warm heart, whose main end and endeavour it was to exalt Christ. Some think that the apostle Peter refers to this epistle, and proves Paul to be the penman of it, by telling the Hebrews, to whom he wrote, of Paul's having written to them, 2Pe 3:15. We read of no other epistle that he ever wrote to them but this. And though it has been objected that, since Paul put his name to all his other epistles, he would not have omitted it here; yet others have well answered that he, being the apostle of the Gentiles, who were odious to the Jews, might think fit to conceal his name, lest their prejudices against him might hinder them from reading and weighing it as they ought to do. III. As to the scope and design of this epistle, it is very evident that it was clearly to inform the minds, and strongly to confirm the judgment, of the Hebrews in the transcendent excellency of the gospel above the law, and so to take them off from the ceremonies of the law, to which they were so wedded, of which they were so fond, that they even doted on them, and those of them who were Christians retained too much of the old leaven, and needed to be purged from it. The design of this epistle was to persuade and press the believing Hebrews to a constant adherence to the Christian faith, and perseverance in it, notwithstanding all the sufferings they might meet with in so doing. In order to this, the apostle speaks much of the excellency of the author of the gospel, the glorious Jesus, whose honour he advances, and whom he justly prefers before all others, showing him to be all in all, and this in lofty strains of holy rhetoric. It must be acknowledged that there are many things in this epistle hard to be understood, but the sweetness we shall find therein will make us abundant amends for all the pains we take to understand it. And indeed, if we compare all the epistles of the New Testament, we shall not find any of them more replenished with divine, heavenly matter than this to the Hebrews.

Matthew Henry: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle, having declared the Old Testament dispensation antiquated and vanishing away, proceeds to let the Hebrews see the correspondence there was between the Old Testament and the New; and that whatever was excellent in the Old was typical and representative of the New, which therefore must as far excel the Old as the substance does the shadow. The Old Testament was never intended to be rested in, but to prepare for the institutions of the gospel. And here he treats, I. Of the tabernacle, the place of worship (Heb 9:1-5). II. Of the worship and services performed in the tabernacle (Heb 9:6, Heb 9:7). III. He delivers the spiritual sense and the main design of all (Heb 9:8 to the end).

Barclay: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTER TO THE HEBREWS

God Fulfils Himself In Many Ways

Religion has never been the same thing to all men. "God," as Tennyson said, "fulfils himself in many ways." George Russell said: "There are as many ways of climbing to the stars as there are people to climb." There is a well-known saying which tells us very truly and very beautifully that "God has his own secret stairway into every heart." Broadly speaking, there have been four great conceptions of religion.

(i) To some men it is inward fellowship with God. It is a union with Christ so close and so intimate that the Christian can be said to live in Christ and Christ to live in him. That was Paulconception of religion. To him it was something which mystically united him with God.

(ii) To some religion is what gives a man a standard for life and a power to reach that standard. On the whole that is what religion was to James and to Peter. It was something which showed them what life ought to be and which enabled them to attain it.

(iii) To some men religion is the highest satisfaction of their minds. Their minds seek and seek until they find that they can rest in God. It was Plato who said that "the unexamined life is the life not worth living." There are some men who must understand or perish. On the whole that is what religion was to John. The first chapter of his gospel is one of the greatest attempts in the world to state religion in a way that really satisfies the mind.

(iv) To some men religion is access to God. It is that which removes the barriers and opens the door to his living presence. That is what religion was to the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews. With that idea his mind was dominated. He found in Christ the one person who could take him into the very presence of God. His whole idea of religion is summed up in the great passage in Heb_10:19-23 .

"Therefore, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith."

If the writer to the Hebrews had one text it was: "Let us draw near."

The Double Background

The writer to the Hebrews had a double background into both of which this idea came. He had a Greek background. Ever since the time of Plato, five hundred years before, the Greeks had been haunted by the contrast between the real and the unreal, the seen and the unseen, the temporal and the eternal. It was the Greek idea that somewhere there was a real world of which this was only a shadowy and imperfect copy. Plato had the idea that somewhere there was a world of perfect forms or ideas or patterns, of which everything in this world was an imperfect copy. To take a simple instance, somewhere there was laid up the pattern of a perfect chair of which all the chairs in this world were inadequate copies. Plato said: "The Creator of the world had designed and carried out his work according to an unchangeable and eternal pattern of which the world is but a copy." Philo, who took his ideas from Plato, said: "God knew from the beginning that a fair copy could never come into being apart from a fair pattern; and that none of the objects perceivable by sense could be flawless which was not modelled after an archetype and spiritual idea, and thus, when he prepared to create this visible world, he shaped beforehand the ideal world in order to constitute the corporeal after the incorporeal and godlike pattern." When Cicero was talking of the laws men know and use on earth, he said: "We have no real and life-like likeness of real law and genuine justice; all we enjoy is a shadow and a sketch."

The thinkers of the ancient world all had this idea that somewhere there is a real world of which this one is only a kind of imperfect copy. Here we can only guess and grope; here we can work only with copies and imperfect things. But in the unseen world there are the real and perfect things. When Newman died they erected a statue to him, and on the pedestal of it are the Latin words: Ab umbris et imaginibus ad veritatem, "Away from the shadows and the semblances to the truth." If that be so, clearly the great task of this life is to get away from the shadows and the imperfections and to reach reality. This is exactly what the writer to the Hebrews claims that Jesus Christ can enable us to do. To the Greek the writer to the Hebrews said: "All your lives you have been trying to get from the shadows to the truth. That is just what Jesus Christ can enable you to do."

The Hebrew Background

But the writer to the Hebrews also had a Jewish background. To the Jew it was always dangerous to come too near to God. "Man," said God to Moses, "shall not see me and live" (Exo_33:20 ). It was Jacobastonished exclamation at Peniel: "I have seen god face to face and yet my life is preserved" (Gen_32:30 ). When Manoah realised who his visitor had been, he said in terror to his wife: "We shall surely die, for we have seen God." The great day of Jewish worship was the Day of Atonement. That was the one day of all the year when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies where the very presence of God was held to dwell. No man ever entered in except the High Priest, and he only on that day. When he did, the law laid it down that he must not linger in the Holy Place for long "lest he put Israel in terror." It was dangerous to enter the presence of God and if a man waited too long he might be struck dead.

In view of this there entered into Jewish thought the idea of a covenant. God, in his grace and in a way that was quite unmerited, approached the nation of Israel and offered them a special relationship with himself. But this unique access to God was conditional on the observance by the people of the law that he gave to them. We can see this relationship being entered into and this law being accepted in the dramatic scene in Exo_24:3-8 .

So then Israel had access to God, but only if she kept the law. To break the law was sin, and sin put up a barrier which stopped the way to God. It was to take away that barrier that the system of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices was constructed. The law was given; man sinned; the barrier was up; the sacrifice was made; and the sacrifice was designed to open the closed way to God. But the experience of life was that this was precisely what sacrifice could not do. It was proof of the ineffectiveness of the whole system that sacrifice had to go on and on and on. It was a losing and ineffective battle to remove the barrier that sin had erected between man and God.

The Perfect Priest And The Perfect Sacrifice

What men needed was a perfect priest and a perfect sacrifice, someone who was such that he could bring to God a sacrifice which once and for all opened the way of access to him. That, said the writer to the Hebrews, is exactly what Christ did. He is the perfect priest because he is at once perfectly man and perfectly God. In his manhood he can take man to God and in his Godhead he can take God to man. He has no sin. The perfect sacrifice he brings is the sacrifice of himself, a sacrifice so perfect that it never needs to be made again. To the Jew the writer to the Hebrews said: "All your lives you have been looking for the perfect priest who can bring the perfect sacrifice and give you access to God. You have him in Jesus Christ and in him alone."

To the Greek the writer to the Hebrews said: "You are looking for the way from the shadows to reality; you will find it in Jesus Christ." To the Jew the writer to the Hebrews said: "You are looking for that perfect sacrifice which will open the way to God which your sins have closed; you will find it in Jesus Christ." Jesus was the one person who gave access to reality and access to God. That is the key-thought of this letter.

The Riddle Of The New Testament

So much is clear but when we turn to the other questions of introduction Hebrews is wrapped in mystery. E. F. Scott wrote: "The Epistle to the Hebrews is in many respects the riddle of the New Testament." When it was written, to whom it was written, and who wrote it are questions at which we can only guess. The very history of the letter shows how its mystery is to be treated with a certain reserve and suspicion. It was a long time before it became an unquestioned New Testament book. The first list of New Testament books, The Muratorian Canon, compiled about A.D. 170, does not mention it at all. The great Alexandrian scholars. Clement and Origen, knew it and loved it but agreed that its place as scripture was disputed. Of the great African fathers, Cyprian never mentions it and Tertullian knows that its place was disputed. Eusebius, the great Church historian, says that it ranked among the disputed books. It was not until the time of Athanasius, in the middle of the fourth century, that Hebrews was definitely accepted as a New Testament book, and even Luther was not too sure about it. It is strange to think how long this great book had to wait for full recognition.

When Was It Written?

The only information we have comes from the letter itself. Clearly it is written for what we might call second generation Christians (Heb_2:3 ). The story was transmitted to its recipients by those who had heard the Lord. The community to whom it was written were not new to the Christian faith; they ought to have been mature (Heb_5:12 ). They must have had a long history for they are summoned to look back on the former days (Heb_10:32 ). They had a great history behind them and heroic martyr figures on which they ought to look back for inspiration (Heb_13:7 ).

The thing that will help us most in dating the letter is its references to persecution. It is clear that at one time their leaders had died for their faith (Heb_13:7 ). It is clear that they themselves had not yet suffered persecution, for they had not yet resisted to the point of shedding their blood (Heb_12:4 ). It is also clear that they have had ill-treatment to suffer for they have had to undergo the pillaging of their goods (Heb_10:32-34 ). And it is clear from the outlook of the letter that there is a risk of persecution about to come. From all that it is safe to say that this letter must have been written between two persecutions, in days when Christians were not actually persecuted, but were none the less unpopular with their fellow-men. Now the first persecution was in the time of Nero in the year A.D. 64; and the next was in the time of Domitian about A.D. 85. Somewhere between these dates this letter was written, more likely nearer to Domitian. If we take the date as A.D. 80 we shall not be far wrong.

To Whom Was It Written?

Once again we have to be dependent on such hints as we get from the letter itself. One thing is certain--it cannot have been written to any of the great Churches or the name of the place could not have so completely vanished. Let us set down what we know. The letter was written to a long-established Church (Heb_5:12 ). It was written to a Church which had at some time in the past suffered persecution (Heb_10:32-34 ). It was written to a Church which had had great days and great teachers and leaders (Heb_13:7 ). It was written to a Church which had not been directly founded by the apostles (Heb_2:3 ). It was written to a Church which had been marked by generosity and liberality (Heb_6:10 ).

We do have one direct hint. Amongst the closing greetings we find the sentence, as the Revised Standard Version translates it: "Those who come from Italy send you greetings" (Heb_13:24 ). Taken by itself that phrase could mean either that the letter was written from Italy or that it was written to Italy, the greater likelihood is that it was written to Italy. Suppose I am in Glasgow and am writing to some place abroad. I would not be likely to say, "All the people from Glasgow greet you." I would be much more likely to say, "All the people in Glasgow greet you." But suppose I am somewhere abroad where there is a little colony of Glaswegians, I might well say, "All the people from Glasgow send you their greetings." So then we may say that the letter was written to Italy; and if it was written to Italy it was almost certainly written to Rome.

But quite certainly it was not written to the Church at Rome as a whole. If it had been it would never have lost its title. Furthermore, it gives the unmistakable impression that it was written to a small body of like-minded persons. Moreover, it was obviously written to a scholarly group. From Heb_5:12 we can see that they had long been under instruction and were preparing themselves to become teachers of the Christian faith. Still further, Hebrews demands such a knowledge of the Old Testament that it must always have been a book written by a scholar for scholars.

When we sum it all up, we can say that Hebrews is a letter written by a great teacher to a little group or college of Christians in Rome. He was their teacher; at the moment he was separated from them and was afraid that they were drifting away from the faith; and so he wrote this letter to them. It is not so much a letter as a talk. It does not begin like Paulletters do, although it ends with greetings as a letter does. The writer himself calls it "a word of exhortation."

By Whom Was It Written?

Perhaps the most insoluble problem of all is the problem of its authorship. It was precisely that uncertainty which kept it so long on the fringes of the New Testament. The title in the earliest days was simply, "To the Hebrews." No authorname was given, no one connected it directly with the name of Paul. Clement of Alexandria used to think that Paul might have written it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it, for the style is quite different from that of Paul. Origen made a famous remark, "who wrote the Letter to the Hebrews only God knows for certain." Tertullian thought that Barnabas wrote it. Jerome said the Latin Church did not receive it as Pauland speaking of the author said, "the writer to the Hebrews whoever he was." Augustine felt the same way about it. Luther declared that Paul could never have written it because the thought was not his. Calvin said that he could not bring himself to think that this letter was a letter of Paul.

At no time in the history of the Church did men ever really think that Paul wrote Hebrews. How then did it get attached to his name? It happened very simply. When the New Testament came into its final form there was of course argument about which books were to be included and which were not. To settle it one test was used. Was a book the work of an apostle or at least the work of one who had been in direct contact with the apostles? By this time Hebrews was known and loved throughout the Church. Most people felt like Origen that God alone knew who wrote it, but they wanted it. They felt it must go into the New Testament and the only way to ensure that was to include it with the thirteen letters of Paul. Hebrews won its way into the New Testament on the grounds of its own greatness, but to get in it had to be included with the letters of Paul and come under his name. People knew quite well that it was not Paulbut they included it among his letters because no man knew who wrote it and yet it must go in.

The Author Of Hebrews

Can we guess who the author was? Many candidates have been put forward. We can only glance at three of the many suggestions.

(i) Tertullian thought that Barnabas wrote it. Barnabas was a native of Cyprus; the people of Cyprus were famous for the excellence of the Greek they spoke; and Hebrews is written in the best Greek in the New Testament. He was a Levite (Act_4:36 ) and of all men in the New Testament he would have had the closest knowledge of the priestly and sacrificial system on which the whole thought of the letter is based. He is called a son of encouragement; the Greek word is paraklesis (G3874); and Hebrews calls itself a word of paraklesis (G3874) (Heb_13:22 ). He was one of the few men acceptable to both Jews and Greeks and at home in both worlds of thought. It might be that Barnabas wrote this letter, but if so it is strange that his name should vanish in connection with it.

(ii) Luther was sure that Apollos was the author. Apollos, according to the New Testament mention of him, was a Jew, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the scriptures (Act_18:24 ; 1Co_1:12 ; 1Co_3:4 ). The man who wrote this letter knew the scriptures; he was eloquent; and he thought and argued in the way that a cultured Alexandrian would. The man who wrote Hebrews was certainly a man like Apollos in thought and in background.

(iii) The most romantic of all conjectures is that of Harnack, the great German scholar. He thought that maybe Aquila and Priscilla wrote it between them. Aquila was a teacher (Act_18:26 ). Their house in Rome was a Church in itself (Rom_16:5 ). Harnack thought that that is why the letter begins with no greetings and why the writername has vanished--because the main author of Hebrews was a woman and a woman was not allowed to teach.

But when we come to the end of conjecture, we are compelled to say as Origen said seventeen hundred years ago, that only God knows who wrote Hebrews. To us the author must remain a voice and nothing more; but we can be thankful to God for the work of this great nameless one who wrote with incomparable skill and beauty about the Jesus who is the way to reality and the way to God.

FURTHER READING

Hebrews

J. Moffatt, Hebrews (ICC; G)

W. Neil, Hebrews (Tch: E)

J. H. Robinson, Hebrews (MC; E)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

Tch: Torch Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

The Glory Of The Tabernacle (Heb_9:1-5)

The Only Entry To The Presence Of God (Heb_9:6-10)

The Sacrifice Which Opens The Way To God (Heb_9:11-14)

The Only Way In Which Sins Can Be Forgiven (Heb_9:15-22)

The Perfect Purification (Heb_9:23-28)

Constable: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

The writer said that he and those to whom he wrote had come to faith in Jesus Christ through the preaching of others who had heard Jesus (2:3-4). Apparently those preachers had since died (13:7). The original readers had been Christians for an extended period of time (5:12). So probably the earliest possible date of composition was about A.D. 60.

Some scholars believe that the book must have been written before A.D. 70 since the writer spoke of the sacrifices as being offered when he wrote (7:27-28; 8:3-5; 9:7-8, 25; 10:1-3, 8; 13:10-11). However, the writer showed no interest in the temple but spoke of the sacrifices as the Israelites offered them when the tabernacle stood. He evidently used the present tense to give these reference a timeless quality rather than indicating that temple worship was still in practice. Nevertheless a date of composition before A.D. 70 seems probable.¹

"The best argument for the supersession of the old covenant would have been the destruction of the Temple."²

The reference to Timothy's release from imprisonment (13:23) appears to date the book later in the life of that outstanding man.³ No other New Testament writer mentioned his imprisonment. The imprisonment of Christians seems to have been a well-known fact of life (10:34; 13:3). This was true after Nero launched an empire-wide persecution in A.D. 64. All of these factors when taken together seem to point to a writing date near A.D. 68-69.

As to authorship, most students of this subject are not dogmatic or even certain for good reason.⁴ As early as Origen, the Alexandrian church father who died about A.D. 255, no one knew who the writer was for sure. After careful study of the authorship of Hebrews, Origen wrote, "But who it was that really wrote the epistle, God only knows."⁵

"The language of the Epistle is both in vocabulary and style purer and more vigorous than that of any other book of the New Testament.

". . . The vocabulary is singularly copious. It includes a large number of words which are not found elsewhere in the apostolic writings, very many of which occur in this book only among the Greek Scriptures . . ."⁶

"All that can be said with certainty is that Hebrews was composed by a creative theologian who was well trained in the exposition of the Greek Scriptures. . . . He was surely a hellenistic Jewish-Christian."⁷

Commentators have made cases for the writer being Paul, Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, Peter, Jude, Stephen, Silvanus (Silas), Epaphras (Epaphroditus), Philip the Evangelist, Priscilla, Mary the mother of Jesus, Clement of Rome, Aristion, and others.⁸ None of these suggestions has found enthusiastic general reception for various reasons. Probably we should be content to share Origen's agnosticism on this question and look forward to getting the answer in heaven.⁹

The early Christians originally accepted all the New Testament books as inspired by God because they contained apostolic teaching. For this reason the writer was probably either an apostle or a close associate of at least one of the apostles (cf. 13:23).

The original recipients of the epistle are also unknown. The title "The Epistle to the Hebrews" implies that they were Jewish Christians. This title is ancient and is probably a safe guide to the identity of the first readers. References in the epistle also suggest that the original readers were mainly Jewish. The writer assumed that they were very familiar with the institutions of Judaism. The warnings against turning away from Jesus Christ back to the Old Covenant also imply this identity. Other indications are the emphasis on the superior priesthood of Jesus and the many appeals to the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures. However the brand of Judaism in view seems to have been Hellenistic rather than Palestinian.

The reference to the generosity of the readers and their helping other believers (6:10) suggests that the original audience did not live in Palestine. The Palestinian churches had a reputation for needing material assistance rather than for giving it to other Christians (cf. Rom. 15:25-31; 1 Cor. 16:3). Probably they were Jews of the Diaspora therefore. This conclusion has support in the writer's consistent use of the Septuagint Old Testament version. Hellenistic Jews used this translation widely, but Palestinian Jews did not use it as much.¹⁰

In most of the New Testament churches there was a mixture of Jewish and Gentile believers. The appeal of this epistle would certainly have been great to Gentiles tempted to return to paganism as it would have been to Jews facing temptation to return to Judaism. However the writer's primary concern appears to have been that his Jewish readers were failing to appreciate that Christianity is the divinely revealed successor to Judaism. He did not want them to abandon Christianity and return to Judaism.

Probably the letter originally went to a house-church outside Palestine that had a strong Hellenistic Jewish population. This church may have been in or near Galatia in view of conditions that existed there that the Epistle to the Galatians reflects. However they may very well have lived in another area. Many scholars believe that the letter went first to a church in or near Rome.¹¹

In view of 13:24b it has seemed to some scholars that the writer was in Italy when he sent this epistle, perhaps in Rome. However the expression "from Italy" in that verse probably refers to those living outside Italy, such as Priscilla and Aquilla who were Jews forced to leave Rome by Emperor Claudius' edict in A.D. 49 (Acts 18:2).¹² This expression suggests that the writer was not in Italy when he wrote.

Purpose

Many students of the book have observed that Hebrews is more of a sermon in written form than an epistle in the traditional New Testament sense.¹³ The writer even described it as a "word of exhortation" (13:22). He urged the original readers to persevere in their faith rather than turning from Christianity and returning to Judaism. A note of urgency and pastoral concern permeates the whole letter. This tone comes through especially strongly in the five warning passages and in the encouragements that follow these warnings.

". . . the purpose of the writer to the Hebrews is not to give us an interpretation of Old Testament prophecy. . . . Using material not from the prophets but primarily from the Psalms, with other materials added to elaborate the argument, the writer's goal was to establish the superiority of the gospel in contrast to all that went before, particularly the levitical system. The primary evidence of the supremacy of Christianity is presented in its finality. Coming to Christ means final access to God without any barrier."¹⁴

". . . Hebrews is a sermon rooted in actual life. It is addressed to a local gathering of men and women who discovered that they could be penetrated by adverse circumstances over which they exercised no control. It throbs with an awareness of the privilege and the cost of discipleship. It is a sensitive pastoral response to the sagging faith of older and tired individuals who were in danger of relinquishing their Christian commitment. It seeks to strengthen them in the face of a new crisis so that they may stand firm in their faith. It warns them of the judgment of God they would incur if they were to waver in their commitment. Exhortations to covenant fidelity and perseverance are grounded in a fresh understanding of the significance of Jesus and his sacrifice."¹⁵

Message¹⁶

We could summarize the message of this epistle in the following words. We will only realize our full eternal reward as believers if we appreciate the greatness of Jesus Christ and continue to trust God rather than turning away from Him in this life.

The ultimate goal that the writer had in view was our full eternal reward as believers. I do not believe it was the conversion of the unsaved members of his audience. He addressed his readers consistently as believers. He wrote to encourage Christians to persevere faithfully so we will receive all that God wants to give us at the judgment seat of Christ. Our rewards are at issue in this letter. He did not want us to suffer loss but to enter into our full inheritance, our full rest, our full salvation.

To do this he wrote that we must know one thing and do two things, one positive and one negative.

We must know the greatness of Jesus Christ. In this epistle the writer presented Him as the greatest revelation that God has given mankind. God's revelation in His Son is superior to all other revelations He has given in three respects.

1. It supersedes all other revelations: God's revelation through angels (the Mosaic Law), His revelation through humans (the prophets), and His revelation through rituals (the Old Covenant). When Jesus Christ came to reveal God, He brought revelation that superseded what had preceded Him.

2. God's revelation in His Son is sufficient to meet every basic human need. God spoke through His Son, so the need for a prophet (a revealer of God) no longer exists. He established a new Covenant, so the need for a priest (a mediator for man) no longer exists. Moreover He exalted His Son to His right hand, so the need for a king (a righteous ruler) no longer exists.

3. God's revelation in His Son insures final victory in every basic sphere. The individual (the human order) attains perfection through the Son. Society (the social order) will experience perfection through the Son. The universe (the cosmic order) will reach perfection through the Son.

This is what we need to know objectively to do subjectively what is necessary to gain our full reward as believers.

What we must do is continue to trust God. Hebrews places great emphasis on the importance of living by faith. It teaches us three things about faith.

1. Hebrews defines faith. Faith is volitional surrender and obedience to God regardless of appearances. It is not just intellectual conviction. It is the action of the will that expresses intellectual conviction. This epistle regards unbelief as disobedience as does all of Scripture. People in the past who lived by faith made decisions and acted because they believed God in spite of appearances (ch. 11).

2. Hebrews also illustrates faith. It describes faith as doing, as suffering, and as waiting. These are the primary activities of faith that the writer of Hebrews emphasized. They are progressively more difficult. It is harder to suffer persecution for our faith than it is to obey God when obedience does not involve suffering. It is most difficult to keep on trusting God when suffering does not end. Waiting for God to fulfill His promises is hardest of all when our hopes do not materialize (e.g., Christ's return).

3. In addition, Hebrews vindicates faith. It assures us of the ultimate triumph of faith. People in the past who acted in faith achieved. People who suffered for their faith triumphed. People who waited in faith received their reward.

On the positive side we need to continue to trust God to realize our full reward as believers.

What we must not do is turn away from God. This is the negative responsibility that the letter also stresses. If we apostatize, we will lose our full reward. Hebrews teaches us three things about apostasy (as it does about faith).

1. This epistle defines apostasy descriptively. It is the opposite of faith. It consists of disobedience because of appearances (e.g., the 10 spies; cf. Jude). Apostasy for a Christian is turning away from faith having previously embraced faith. An apostate, however, can be a believer or an unbeliever.

2. Hebrews also illustrates apostasy in the same three ways it illustrates faith. Apostasy acts. It involves a deliberate turning away. It also suffers, not now but in the future because of what the apostate loses. It also waits, even though it lives for the present rather than for the future.

3. Likewise Hebrews condemns apostasy. It assures us of the ultimate tragedy of apostasy. Apostates may achieve what they want in the present, namely success, but they lose what is far more valuable in the future. They may avoid suffering now, but later they will be sorry. They may not want to wait for their reward now, but they will wait forever for it later and never get it.

This is the central message of the epistle. We will only realize our full eternal reward as believers if we appreciate the greatness of Jesus Christ and continue to trust God rather than turning away from Him.

The writer urged his readers to persevere in faith by using two appeals, one negative and one positive.

The first appeal is negative: the warnings. There are five warning passages in Hebrews. Each one warns of the danger of apostasy from a different angle.

1. The first passage (2:1-4) warns of the danger of drifting away from the truth (2:1). It pictures a ship dragging its anchor. The tides of our age can draw us away from our moorings. We need to keep on standing firm in faith (cf. Col. 1:23).

2. The second passage (3:7-19) warns of the danger of disbelief (3:12). Disbelief results in heart hardening (3:13). We need to keep on believing rather than ceasing to believe (cf. Luke 17:3).

3. The third passage (5:11-6:12) warns of the danger of immaturity (5:12). When we do not put truth into practice, we do not just remain in the same spiritual state. We regress. Therefore we need to keep on growing (cf. 2 Pet. 3:18).

4. The fourth passage (10:19-39) warns of the danger of willful sinning (10:26-27). If we abandon confidence in the efficacy of Jesus Christ's sacrifice, there is no other sacrifice that can protect us from God's judgment as believers. We need to keep on submitting to God (cf. Rom. 6:16).

5. The fifth passage (12:14-29) warns of the danger of unresponsiveness (12:25). The message of this letter demands positive response. If we do not respond positively, we will lose part of our reward (12:17). We need to keep on obeying God (cf. Titus 3:8).

The second appeal is positive: the encouragements. Accompanying each of the warning passages is at least one word of encouragement. The writer balanced his negative warnings with positive words of encouragement.

1. The first passage (2:1-4) encourages with a reminder of God's confirming His promises with miracles in the apostolic age (2:3b-4).

2. The second passage (3:7-19) encourages by reminding us of Jesus' example of faithfulness (3:1-6) and our resources as believers (4:12-16).

3. The third passage (5:11-6:12) encourages with a reminder of the readers' past faithfulness (6:9-12) and God's firm promises (6:13-20).

4. The fourth passage (10:19-39) also encourages with a reminder of the readers' past perseverance (10:32-39).

5. The fifth passage (12:14-29) encourages by reminding us of Jesus' example of perseverance (12:1-2) and the divine reason for discipline (12:3-11).

By way of application let me make three observations based on the three major revelations in the epistle.

1. An appreciation for Jesus Christ is foundational to faithful perseverance. The reason many Christians turn away from the Lord is that they do not appreciate His greatness. Preach Christ in your ministry.

2. We need to emphasize the Christian's hope more in our ministries. We live in a present oriented culture that values immediate self-gratification. Many Christians are apostatizing because they do not appreciate the reward they will receive if they remain faithful to the Lord. This life is preparation for the next.

3. We need to realize that God will judge Christians who apostatize. We will not lose our salvation, but we will lose much that we will wish we never gave up if we stop walking by faith.

Outline¹⁷

I. The culminating revelation of God 1:1-2:18

A. The agent of God's final revelation 1:1-4

B. The superiority of the Son 1:5-14

C. The danger of negligence (the first warning) 2:1-4

D. The humiliation and glory of God's Son 2:5-9

E. The Son's solidarity with humanity 2:10-18

II. The high priestly character of the Son 3:1-5:10

A. The faithfulness of the Son 3:1-6

B. The danger of disbelief (the second warning) 3:7-19

C. The possibility of rest for God's people 4:1-14

D. The compassion of the Son 4:15-5:10

III. The high priestly office of the Son 5:11-10:39

A. The danger of immaturity (the third warning) 5:11-6:12

1. The readers' condition 5:11-14

2. The needed remedy 6:1-3

3. The dreadful alternative 6:4-8

4. The encouraging prospect 6:9-12

B. The basis for confidence and steadfastness 6:13-20

C. The Son's high priestly ministry 7:1-10:18

1. The person of our high priest ch. 7

2. The work of our high priest chs. 8-9

3. The accomplishment of our high priest 10:1-18

D. The danger of willful sinning (the fourth warning) 10:19-39

1. The three-fold admonition 10:19-25

2. The warning of judgment 10:26-31

3. The encouragement to persevere 10:32-39

IV. The proper response 11:1-12:13

A. Perseverance in faith ch. 11

1. Faith in the antediluvian era 11:1-7

2. Faith in the patriarchal era 11:8-22

3. Faith in the Mosaic era 11:23-31

4. Faith in subsequent eras 11:32-40

B. Demonstrating necessary endurance 12:1-13

1. The example of Jesus 12:1-3

2. The proper view of trials 12:4-11

3. The need for greater strength 12:12-13

V. Life in a hostile world 12:14-13:25

A. The danger of unresponsiveness (the fifth warning) 12:14-29

1. The goal of peace 12:14-17

2. The superiority of the New Covenant 12:18-24

3. The consequences of apostasy 12:25-29

B. Life within the church ch. 13

1. Pastoral reminders 13:1-21

2. Personal explanations 13:22-25

Constable: Hebrews

Hebrews

Bibliography

Andersen, Ward. "The Believer's Rest (Hebrews 4)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):31-38.

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999.

Barclay, William. The Letter to the Hebrews. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1963.

Bateman, Herbert W., IV. "Two First-Century Messianic Uses of the OT: Heb 1:5-13 and 4QFlor 1.1-19." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:1 (March 1995):11-27.

Baylis, Charles P. "The Author of Hebrews' Use of Melchizedek from the Context of Genesis." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1989.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Black, David Alan. "A Note on the Structure of Hebrews 12, 1-2." Biblica 68:4 (1987):543-51.

_____. "The Problem of the Literary Structure of Hebrews: An Evaluation and a Proposal." Grace Theological Journal 7:2 (Fall 1986):163-77.

Blaising, Craig A. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bligh, John. "The Structure of Hebrews." Heythrop Journal 5 (April 1964):170-77.

Blomberg, Craig L. "Degrees of Reward in the Kingdom of Heaven?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 35:2 (June 1992):159-72.

Bornkamm, Gunther. Early Christian Experience. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

_____. "The Kerygma of Hebrews." Interpretation 23:1 (January 1969):3-19.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Casey, J. M. "Eschatology in Heb 12:14-29: An Exegetical Study." Ph.D. dissertation, Catholic University of Leuven, 1977.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-48.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, Okla.: The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

Cockerill, G. L. The Melchizedek Christology in Heb. 7:1-28. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International, 1979.

Cole, Timothy J. "Enoch, a Man Who Walked with God." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:591 (July-September 1991):288-97.

Colijn, Brenda B. "Let Us Approach': Soteriology in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:4 (December 1996):571-86.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

____. "The Substitutionary Death of Christ in Hebrews." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1966.

Cosby, M. R. "The Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11 in Light of Example-lists in Antiquity." Ph.D. dissertation, Emory University, 1985.

Cross, Frank M. "The Tabernacle." Biblical Archaeologist 10:3 (September 1947):45-68.

Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Translated by Shirley C. Guthrie and Charles A. M. Hall. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963.

Custer, Stewart. "The Awfulness of Apostasy (Hebrews 6)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):45-50.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Decker, Rodney J. "The Church's Relationship to the New Covenant." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):290-305; 608 (October-December 1995):431-56.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to the," by F. S. Marsh.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to," by A. B. Bruce.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dodds, E. R. Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety. New York: Norton, 1965.

Dunham, Duane A. "An Exegetical Examination of the Warnings in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Th.D. dissertation, Grace Theological Seminary, 1974.

Dunn, J. D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks series. Translated by Christian Frederick Cruse. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Elliott, J. H. Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981.

English, E. Schuyler. Studies in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1976.

Estes, Daniel J. "Looking for Abraham's City." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:588 (October-December 1990):399-413.

Fanning, Buist M. "A Theology of Hebrews." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 369-415.

Farrar, F. W. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: University Press, 1894.

Filson, Floyd V. "Yesterday": A Study of Hebrews in the Light of Chapter 13. Studies in Biblical Theology 2nd series 4. Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1967.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gleason, Randall C. "The Old Testament Background of Rest in Hebrews 3:7-4:11." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:627 (July-September 2000):281-303.

_____. "The Old Testament Background of the Warning in Hebrews 6:4-8." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-March 1998):62-91.

Glenn, Donald R. "Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2: A Case Study in Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Theology." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 39-51. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Gourgues, M. "Lecture christologique du Psaume CX et fête de la Pentecôte." Revue Biblique 83 (1976):5-24.

Govett, Robert. Entrance into the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Conley and Schoettle, 1978.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. Stand Bold in Grace. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Guthrie, Donald. Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Harrison, Everett F. "The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:484 (October-December 1964):333-40.

Hay, D. M. Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 18. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1973.

Hewitt, Thomas. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

Hodges, Zane C. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "Hebrews." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 777-813. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

Horning, Estella B. "Chiasmus, Creedal Structure, and Christology in Hebrews 12:1-2. Biblical Research 23 (1978):37-48.

Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. "The Blood of Jesus and His Heavenly Priesthood in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):99-109; 519 (July-September 1973):195-212; 520 (October-December 1973):305-14; 131:521 (January-March 1974):26-33.

_____. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Hebrews 6:4-6 and the Peril of Apostasy." Westminster Theological Journal 35 (1973):137-55.

Hughes, R. Kent. Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul. 2 vols. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993.

International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to the," by T. Rees.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "The Promise Theme and the Theology of Rest." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):135-50.

Kendall, R. T. Once Saved, Always Saved. Chicago: Moody Press, 1985.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Lane, William L. Hebrews 1-8. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

_____. Hebrews 9-13. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

Lang, G. H. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Paternoster Press, 1951.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 11: Galatians--Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braume, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starbuck, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and The Epistle of James. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1976.

_____. The Problem of Pain. 1940. Reprint ed. London: Collins Press, Fontana Books, 1959.

Lindars, Barnabas. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Lovelace, Richard F. Dynamics of Spiritual Life: An Evangelical Theology of Renewal. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1979.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. Hebrews. Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.

MacDonald, William. Hebrews from Shadow to Substance. Moody Correspondence Course series. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1962.

Mackay, Cameron. "The Argument of Hebrews." Church Quarterly

Review 168 (1967):325-38.

MacLeod, David J. "The Cleansing of the True Tabernacle." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):60-63.

_____. "The Doctrinal Center of the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:583 (July-September 1989):291-300.

_____. "The Literary Structure of the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):185-97.

_____. "The Present Work of Christ in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):184-200.

_____. "The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews: Introduction, Prolegomena, and Doctrinal Center." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1987.

MacRae, G. W. "Heavenly Temple and Eschatology in the Letter to the Hebrews." Semeia 12 (1978):179-99.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manson, W. The Epistle to the Hebrews: An Historical and Theological Reconsideration. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1951.

Marshall, I. Howard. Kept by the Power of God. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1969.

_____. "New Wine in Old Wine-Skins: V. The Biblical Use of the Word Ekklesia.'" Expository Times 84:12 (1973):359-64.

Master, John R. "The New Covenant." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 93-110. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Mauro, Philip. God's Pilgrims. Revised ed. New York: Gospel Publishing House, n.d.

McCullough, J. C. "The Impossibility of a Second Repentance in Hebrews." Biblical Theology 20 (1974):1-7.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Millar, Merland Ray. "What Is the Literary Form of Hebrews 11?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:4 (December 1986):411-17.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Moffatt, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. International Critical Commentary series. Reprint ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1963.

Montefiore, H. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Black, 1964.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. "Hebrews." In Hebrews-Revelation. Vol. 12 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Mugridge, Alan. "Warnings in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Reformed Theological Review 46:3 (September-December 1987):74-82.

Neal, Marshall. "The New Covenant (Hebrews 8)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):59-65.

Neighbor, R. E. If They Shall Fall Away. Reprint ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Conley and Schoettle, 1984.

Newell, William R. Hebrews Verse by Verse. Chicago: Moody Press, 1947.

Oberholtzer, Thomas Kem. "The Warning Passages in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):83-97; 578 (April-June 1988):185-96; 579 (July-September 1988):319-28; 580 (October-December 1988):410-19; 146:581 (January-March 1989):67-75.

Parsons, Mikael C. "Son and High Priest: A Study in the Christology of Hebrews." Evangelical Quarterly 60:3 (July 1988):195-215.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. A Faith That Endures. Grand Rapids: Discovery House Publishers. 1992.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press, Victor Books, 1990.

Peters, George N. H. The Theocratic Kingdom. 3 vols. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1884; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1972.

Peterson, D. G. "An Examination of the Concept of Perfection' in the Epistle to the Hebrews.'" Ph.D. dissertation, University of Manchester, 1978.

_____. "The Prophecy of the New Covenant in the Argument of Hebrews." Reformed Theological Review 38 (1979):74-81.

Pink, Arthur W. An Exposition of Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Reich, Max I. The Glories of Christ in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Moody Correspondence Course series. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1960.

Rhee, Victor (Sung Yul). "Chiasm and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 11." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:619 (July-September 1998):327-45.

_____. "Christology and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 5:11-6:20." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 2000):83-96.

Rice, George E. "Apostasy As a Motif and Its Effect on the Structure of Hebrews." Andrews University Seminary Studies 23:1 (Spring 1985):29-35.

Ridout, Samuel. Lectures on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 6th ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Robinson, S. E. "The Apocraphal Story of Melchizedek." Journal for the Study of Judaism 18:1 (June 1987):26-39.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):71-84.

Ross, Robert W. "Hebrews." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1401-27. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Ryken, Leland. The Literature of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):239-47.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Scofield, C. I., ed. The Scofield Reference Bible. New ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1909.

Scott, Brett R. "Jesus' Superiority over Moses in Hebrews 3:1-6." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):201-10.

Scott, J. Julius, Jr. "Archegos in the Salvation History of the Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:1 (March 1986):47-54.

Selby, Gary S. "The Meaning and Function of Suneidesis in Hebrews 9 and 10." Restoration Quarterly 28:3 (Third Quarter 1985/86):145-54.

Sharp, Jeffrey R. "Typology and the Message of Hebrews." East Asia Journal of Theology 4:2 (1986):95-103.

Smith, T. C. "An Exegesis of Hebrews 13:1-17." Faith and Mission 7:1 (Fall 1989):70-78.

Soden, John. "The Use of Psalm 45:7-8 (6-7) in Hebrews 1:8-9." Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):51-70.

Spencer, William David. "Christ's Sacrifice as Apologetic: An Application of Heb 10:1-18." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:2 (June 1997):189-97.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Stedman, Ray C. What More Can God Say? Bible Commentary for Laymen series. Reprint ed. Glendale, Calif.: Gospel Light Publications, Regal Books, 1977.

Swete, H. B. The Ascended Christ. London: Macmillan and Co., 1916.

Swetnam, James. "Form and Content in Hebrews 1-6." Biblica 53 (1972):368-85.

_____. "Form and Content in Hebrews 7-13." Biblica 55 (1974):333-48.

Tenney, Merrill C. "A New Approach to the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:491 (July-September 1966):230-36.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Fredrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, 1964-74. S. V. "aphistemi, apostasia, dichostasia," by Heinrich Schlier, 1 (1964):512-14.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. Hebrews: A Devotional Commentary. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Thompson, J. W. The Beginnings of Christian Philosophy: The Epistle to the Hebrews. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 13. Washington: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "The Exchatology of the Warning Passages in the Book of Hebrews." Grace Theological Journal 3:1 (Spring 1982):67-80.

Trotter, Andrew H., Jr. Interpreting the Epistle to the Hebrews. Guides to New Testament Exegesis series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997.

Vanhoye, Albert. A Structureal Translation of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Translated by James Swetnam. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

Walvoord, John F. Major Bible Prophecies. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991.

_____. The Millennial Kingdom. Revised ed. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963.

Ware, Bruce A. "The New Covenant and the People(s) of God." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 68-97. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Wills, L. "The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity." Harvard Theological Review 77 (1984):277-99.

Wright, G. Ernest. "The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East. Part III: The Temple in Palestine-Syria." Biblical Archaeologist 7:4 (December 1944):65-77.

Wuest, Kenneth S. "Hebrews Six in the Greek New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):45-53.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

THE

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE HEBREWS.

INTRODUCTION.

The Catholic Church hath received and declared this Epistle to be part of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, though some doubted of it in the first ages [centuries], especially in the Latin Church, witness St. Jerome on the 8th chap. of Isaias; Luther and most of his followers reject it, but the Calvinists and the Church of England have received it. Others, who received this Epistle in the first ages [centuries], doubted whether it was written by St. Paul, but thought it was written by St. Barnabas, or by St. Clement, or St. Luke, or at least that St. Paul only furnished the matter and the order of it, and that St. Luke wrote it, and St. Paul afterwards read it and approved it. It was doubted again, whether this Epistle was first written in Hebrew (that is, in Syro-Chaldaic, then spoken by the Jews) or in Greek, as Estius pretends. The ancient writers say it was written in Hebrew, but that it was very soon after translated into Greek either by St. Luke or St. Clement, pope and martyr. Cornelius a Lapide thinks the Syriac which we have in the Polyglot to have been the original; but this is commonly rejected. See Tillemont on St. Paul, Art. 46, and note 72; P. Alleman on the first to the Hebrews, &c. St. Paul wrote this letter about the year 63, and either at Rome or in Italy. See Chap. xii. 24. He wrote it to the Christians in Palestine, who had most of them been Jews before. This seems the reason why he puts not his name to it, nor calls himself their apostle, his name being rather odious to the Jews, and because he was chosen to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The main design is to shew that every one's justification and salvation is to be hoped for by the grace and merits of Christ, and not from the law of Moses, as he had shewn in his Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans, where we many observe this kind of difference: To the Galatians he shews, that true justice cannot be had from circumcision and the ceremonies of the law: to the Romans, that even the moral precepts and works of the law were insufficient without the grace of Christ: and in this to the Hebrews, he shews that our justice could not be had from the sacrifices of the old law. As to the chief contents: He exhorts them to the faith of Christ, by shewing his dignity and pre-eminence above the Angels, and above Moses, Chap. i, ii, iii.; that Christ's priesthood was above that of Aaron, from the 4th to the 8th chap. ver. 6; that the new law and testament is preferable to the old, form thence to the middle of chap. x.; he commends faith by the example of the ancient Fathers, Chap. xi. and in the beginning of the twelfth; then he exhorts them to patience, constancy, brotherly love, &c. The like exhortations are mixed in other parts of this Epistle. (Witham) --- We must here remark, that our separated brethren, relying solely upon tradition, admit in general this Epistle into their canon of Scriptures, though they are necessitated to allow that for some centuries great doubts were entertained on the subject. According to Mr. Rogers, in his Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, whilst several among the Protestants have rejected as apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the 2nd and 3rd of John, and Jude, others have as strenuously maintained that they ought to be admitted into the sacred canon. The Catholic Church admits them as deutero-canonical books, and of equal authority with the proto-canonical books....After the arguments had been justly weighed on both sides, they seem to have been admitted by the general consent of the Latin Church, as they had all along been admitted by the Greek Church. The canon, as it now stands, both of the Old and New Testament, we find enumerated in Pope Innocent's letter to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, an. 405 [the year A.D. 405], in St. Augustine, (lib. ii. de doct. christ. chap. viii.) and in the decrees of an African Council, an. 419 [the year A.D. 419], consisting of 217 bishops, who declare that in giving a catalogue of the Holy Scriptures, they only confirm and ratify what they have received from their Fathers. This canon is attributed to the third Council of Carthage, an. 397 [the year A.D. 397]. Dr. Cosin, an eminent Protestant divine, tells us in his canon of Scripture, p. 4, "that to know the books of Scripture, there is no safer course to be taken than to follow the public voice and the universal testimony of the Church." The sixth of the thirty-nine articles gives a similar rule, which excludes private judgment. And "what is this," asks Hooker, "but to acknowledge ecclesiastical tradition?" The mind of man, naturally fickle and unsettled, stands in need of a guide in the road to eternal life. I shall never hesitate, says a spirited author, to take for my guide the Catholic Church, which contains in herself the authority of past and future ages. The Syriac version of the Old and New Testament, which is deservedly allowed to be of greatest antiquity and authority, comprises the same deutero-canonical books as the canon of the Council of Trent; a convincing proof that the Church of Syria, immediately after the times of the apostles, considered them as part of the sacred canon, no less than the Catholics of the present day. For a very satisfactory account respecting the authenticity and inspiration of this Epistle, as also for an excellent commentary with notes moral, doctrinal, and critical, see a late work entitled, An Explanation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, by the Rev. Henry Rutter. --- What can be the reason why Protestants admit the deutero-canonical books of the New and reject those of the Old Testament? --- This Epistle merits the particular attention of Christians of every denomination, since it points out to them their various duties in respect to the necessity of faith and the practice of a holy life. In opposition to the Socinians, it tends to shew not only the divinity of Jesus Christ, but also that his death was a true and real sacrifice of atonement for the sins of mankind. See Chap. i, ver. 5, &c. In opposition to other sectarists, it proves that the bloody sacrifice of Christ, once offered on the cross, though a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice of redemption, does not exclude the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass, by which he is a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech. See Chap. v, &c. It is no less applicable to Catholics, in order to confirm them in the faith once delivered to the saints, and to point out the dreadful consequences of abandoning that religion which Jesus Christ came to establish in the world. The just man lives by faith; but if he draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Let us, therefore, hold fast the confession of our hope, without wavering, or forsaking our assembly, the Catholic Church, as many have done to follow Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and other separatists. But we, says the apostle, are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them who have faith unto the saving of the soul. (Hebrews x. 39.)

====================

Gill: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS

That this epistle was written very early appears from hence, that it was imitated by Clement of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians, who took whole sentences out of it; and therefore it could not be a new work, as Eusebius ^a observes: it has been denied to be authentic by some heretics, as the Marcionites and Arians, but has been generally received as such by the orthodox: some indeed doubted of it, because it was not received by the Roman church, as an epistle of the Apostle Paul ^b; though others, who have thought it was not his, as Origen, yet looked upon it as genuine ^c. It has been ascribed to different persons, as to Barnabas, to Apollos, to Luke the Evangelist, and to Clement of Rome, but without any just reason. Clement of Alexandria, a very ancient writer, asserts it to be the Apostle Paul's ^d; and his name stands in the title of it, in all R. Stephens's exemplars, and in all Beza's copies, excepting one, and so it does in the Vulgate Latin and Arabic versions; and that it is his, is highly probable from the agreement there is between this, and other epistles of his; compare Heb 1:2 with Col 1:15 and Heb 5:12 with 1Co 3:1 and Heb 12:1 with 1Co 9:24 and Heb 13:7 with 1Th 5:11, and Heb 13:9 with Eph 4:14 and Heb 13:18 with 2Co 1:12 and Heb 13:20 with Rom 15:13 and many other places; and also from the order and method of it, first treating of doctrines, and then proceeding to practical exhortations, which is the common form of Paul's epistles: to which may be added various circumstances; as that it was written from Italy, where Paul was a prisoner; and the mention the author of it makes of his bonds, and of Timothy, as well known unto him, who was Paul's companion; besides, the token of his epistles appears in this, namely, his usual salutation to the churches; see Heb 13:23. But above all, the testimony of the Apostle Peter is greatly in favour of its being his, 2Pe 3:15 from whence it clearly appears, that the Apostle Paul did write an epistle to the Hebrews; for to them Peter wrote; see 1Pe 1:1 and what epistle could it be but this? and what Peter refers to is to be found in it; see Heb 10:25 and which is written with great wisdom; in none of Paul's epistles is there a greater discovery of his knowledge of divine mysteries than in this; and in it also are things hard to be understood, Heb 5:11. The common objections to its being his are, its not bearing his name, the diversity of its style, and the author of it seeming to be not an apostle, but a disciple of the apostle's: as to his not setting his name to it, the reasons might be, because he was the apostle of the Gentiles, and not so much of the Jews; and because of the prejudice of the Jews against him, both believers, and unbelievers; wherefore had his name been to it, it might have prevented the usefulness of it to the one, and have stirred up the rage of the other: as to the difference of style, different subjects require a different style; and yet in many things there is a likeness, as before observed: and as to the author's not being an apostle, which is concluded from Heb 2:3 the word "us" there is to be understood of the believing Hebrews, the disciples of the apostle, and not inclusive of the author, by a figurative way of speaking often used by Paul; and besides, the apostle received a confirmation of the Gospel from Ananias, who might have been an hearer of Christ, though he was at first taught it by Christ himself; add to this, that whoever was the writer of it, it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, and when several of the apostles were living, and therefore he could never design by those words to put himself in a succeeding generation. The persons to whom this epistle was written were Hebrews, or Jews; so called, as some think, from the name of Abraham, the father of them; or, as others, from his passing over the river Euphrates, when he came out of Chaldea into Palestine. So Abram the Hebrew, in Gen 14:13 is by the Septuagint rendered, perathv, "one that passes over", taking it to come from the word rbe, which signifies to "pass over"; with this compare Jos 24:3 and this is the opinion of some of the Jewish Rabbins ^e; though it seems rather that they were called so from Heber, who lived at the time of the confusion of languages; see Gen 10:21. And this is the sense of many Jewish writers, ancient and modern, of Josephus ^f, of Jonathan ben Uzziel ^g, of R. Nehemiah ^h, of Aben Ezra ⁱ, and Kimchi ^k, and others; 2Co 11:22. And these were the Hebrews that dwelt in the land of Judea, and particularly at Jerusalem; nor were they the unbelieving inhabitants of those parts, but believers in Christ, who were embodied in a Gospel church state, It was a tradition of the ancients ^l, that this epistle was written originally in Hebrew, and was translated into Greek, either by Luke the Evangelist, or by Clement of Rome. But for this there is no foundation; no Hebrew copy can be produced; Munster's edition of it in Hebrew is a translation from the Greek, in which it was, no doubt, originally written, that being the common language, and well known to the Jews; and which appears from the citations in it out of the Old Testament, which are made, not from the Hebrew text, but from the Greek version; and besides, had it been written in Hebrew, the writer would not have interpreted the Hebrew words, Melchizedek and Salem, as he does, in Heb 7:1. The time of its writing was before the destruction of Jerusalem, which in this book is signified by the coming of the Lord, and the day approaching; and after Timothy was released from prison, and some time within the two years of his own imprisonment at Rome; when he hoped for a release, as his epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon show. Dr. Lightfoot places it in the year 62, and in the eighth of Nero. And the occasion and design of it is, to set forth the superior excellency of Christ to angels and men, to Moses, to Joshua, to Aaron, and his sons, and the preferableness of his priesthood and sacrifice to the Levitical priesthood and its sacrifices; to teach the Hebrews the true knowledge of the mysteries of their law; to point out to them the design, use, and abrogation of its ceremonies; and to prepare them for what afflictions and persecutions they would be called to endure for Christ; and to exhort them to perseverance, and to strengthen them against apostasy, as well as to instruct them in the various duties of religion.

Gill: Hebrews 9 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS 9

The apostle having, in the former chapter, taken notice of the first covenant, in this proceeds to show what belonged to it, that it had service performed under it, and a place in which it was performed, Heb 9:1 and he begins with the latter, which he distinguishes into two parts, and shows what was in each of them; in the first, which was the holy place, were a candlestick, table, and shewbread; in the second, which was the holiest of all, were a golden censer, the ark of the covenant, the golden pot of manna, Aaron's rod, the tables of the covenant, and the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat, Heb 9:2. And next he speaks of the service performed in these places; in the first, the holy place, the common priests entered every day, doing service, as offering sacrifice, &c. Heb 9:6 and in the second, the holy of holies, only the high priest entered into, and that but once a year, with blood of slain beasts, which he offered for his own sins, and the sins of the people, Heb 9:7 and this being shut up, and entered into but once a year, was an indication from the Holy Ghost, that the way into the holiest of all, which this was then a figure of, was not yet made manifest, while the tabernacle or temple was standing, in which sacrifices were offered, which could not perfect the offerer of them, or remove guilt from his conscience, Heb 9:8 which shows the imperfection of that priesthood, it consisting of meats, drinks, baptisms, and carnal ordinances imposed on the Jewish nation until the times of the Messiah, Heb 9:10 which are now come, and in which there is an accomplishment of all those types and figures; Christ was typified by the high priest; and he is come as such, and the good things, the law was a shadow of, are come by him; who came into the world by the assumption of human nature, a more perfect tabernacle than the type of it was; and now having obtained eternal redemption for his people, he is gone into heaven, the most holy place, not as the high priest, with the blood of slain beasts, but with his own blood, Heb 9:11 the efficacy of which blood is argued from the lesser to the greater, that if the blood of beasts, and water of separation, sanctified and purified externally, then much more must the blood of Christ purge the conscience from sin, that it may serve God, since Christ offered himself to God without spot, through the eternal Spirit, Heb 9:13. The necessity of Christ's shedding his blood, or of his death, is proved from his being the Mediator of the new covenant, which required the redemption of transgressions under the first testament, that called ones might have the promise of the eternal inheritance, Heb 9:15. And this is reasoned from the nature of testaments or wills among men, which make the death of the testator necessary, they being of no force while he lives, only after his death, Heb 9:16. And this is further illustrated by the first testament being dedicated by blood, and everything belonging to it purged by it, the book, the people, the tabernacle, and all the vessels of it; nor is there any remission of sin, whether typical or real, without shedding of blood, Heb 9:18 wherefore, as it was necessary that the patterns and types of heavenly things should be purified in this manner; it must be more so, that the antitypes should be purified with better sacrifices, even with the sacrifice of Christ, Heb 9:23 and accordingly Christ is entered into heaven itself, of which the holy places in the tabernacle were figures, there to present and plead his sacrifice on account of his people, Heb 9:24 not that it was necessary that he should offer up himself again, or often, as the high priest, his type, went every year into the holy place with the blood of others; for then he must have often suffered since the world began, of which there was no need, since his appearing once in the end of the world, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, is sufficient, Heb 9:25 for as it is the appointment of God, that men should die but once, and then come to judgment, so it was only necessary that Christ should be offered once to bear the sins of all his people, and then appear a second time without any sin at all upon him, to the salvation of those that look for him, Heb 9:27.

College: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

It is difficult to overestimate the significance of Hebrews for understanding the nature of the new covenant. No other document in the New Testament canon comments as directly and extensively upon this covenant as does Hebrews. Its description of Jesus as the great high priest of the believer is a unique contribution to New Testament Christology.

Yet Hebrews is perhaps as well known for the difficulties it presents as it is for its distinctive contributions to our understanding of the ministry of Jesus and the nature of our salvation. It is difficult to be certain about who wrote it, when and to whom. It is a letter and not quite a letter. Many find its line of argument intricate and complex, its theology abstract and obscure, and its use of the Old Testament puzzling if not problematic. This commentary will begin by addressing some of these considerations.

AUTHORSHIP

Over the years, most of the debate about the authorship of Hebrews has focused on whether or not Paul wrote this letter. Arguments have been made for other possible authors as well. What we can know for certain about the author is best gleaned from the letter itself, but many will want to know how this debate affects our confidence in the authority and inspiration of the letter.

Did Paul write the Letter to the Hebrews?

Though few defend Pauline authorship of Hebrews today, in the past this view has enjoyed the support of significant church leaders and traditions. The earliest extant copy of Hebrews (early third century) has been received as part of a collection of Paul's letters, in which it was placed after Romans. Pauline authorship was defended by notable church fathers in the East, e.g., Clement of Alexandria (c.150-c.215) and Origen (185-253) who, despite reservations, defended it as essentially Pauline, at least in part on the weight of what was then received tradition. Later, Jerome and Augustine helped to shift opinion in the West and the Sixth Synod of Carthage (419) established a tradition of support for Pauline authorship which lasted until the Reformation.

However, the weight of the evidence - both historical and texual - is far from clear. Early church opinion was far from universal. In the West, prior to Jerome and Augustine, such leaders as Irenaeus and Hippolytus of Rome did not accept Hebrews as Pauline. The Muratorian Canon (a list of documents accepted as New Testament Scripture, c. 170) included thirteen letters identified as Pauline but excluded Hebrews. When reformers such as Calvin and Luther reexamined the question centuries later, neither concluded that Paul was its author. Contemporary critics consider Pauline authorship implausible in light of clear differences between the vocabulary and style of Hebrews and epistles known to be Pauline. Further, it has been argued as improbable for Paul to refer to himself as the author does in 2:3 ("This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him") in light of what he says of himself in Galatians 1:11-12 ("I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ").

Who else could have written the letter to the Hebrews?

As early as the second century, Tertullian identified Barnabas as the author of the letter. Barnabas was a Levite (Acts 4:26), and there is much about levitical ritual in the epistle. He was also a Hellenistic Jew, a member of the Jerusalem church and a missionary partner of Paul (Acts 9:27; 11:30; 12:1-14:28). All of this evidence is circumstantial, however, and nothing but Tertullian's opinion connects him to the letter directly.

Clement of Alexandria first suggested that Luke translated a Hebrew text written by Paul. Calvin affirmed this possiblity centuries later. There are some similarities in the Greek style of Luke-Acts and Hebrews. But there is little other evidence and there are also some differences in style. Calvin also suggested Clement of Rome as a possibility. However, Clement of Rome widely quoted from the letter himself. It is unlikely that he would quote himself and his use of the Old Testament is often at variance with that in Hebrews.

Luther was the first to suggest Apollos as the possible author of Hebrews, a view which continues to enjoy some popularity. He was a "learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures" who "vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ" (Acts 18:24-28). Presumably, he would have been capable of the careful handling of the LXX found in Hebrews. Also, he probably had some connection to the Pauline mission (1 Corinthians 1-4). But concluding that he was therefore the author of Hebrews is, at best, conjecture.

Among others, arguments have been made for Peter, Jude, Stephen, Aristion, Priscilla, Silas, Timothy, Epaphras, Philip and Mary the mother of Jesus as possible authors of Hebrews. Two other possibilities remain. An associate of Paul could have written the letter for him (a view first suggested by Origen in 220). It is also possible that Hebrews was written by some other anonymous Christian unknown to us. The letter itself does not clearly identify its author. Perhaps the fairest conclusion is that advanced by Origen, in spite of his inclination to defend Pauline authorship: "who wrote the Epistle, God only knows the truth."

How does the debate about authorship affect our view of the letter?

It is important to note that, although the debate over authorship has extended over the centuries, the question of the letter's canonicity (i.e., its inspiration and authority) has not. Even though church fathers in the East may have had doubts about its authorship, there is no evidence that they ever questioned its canonicity. Though the Muratorian Canon excluded Hebrews (as well as James and 1-2 Peter), all four books were included in the New Testament canon by the Synod of Hippo (393) and the Third (397) and Sixth (419) Synods of Carthage. Subsequent questions about its authorship during the Reformation had no effect at all upon the reformers' view of its authority or inspiration.

It is clear that apostolicity, as well as other issues such as universality and the "rule of faith," were important in the early decisions about the New Testament canon. We must keep in mind, however, that a document's "canonical" status is the result of a human process which does not bestow divine authority or inspiration upon a document but recognizes the authority and inspiration which it inherently possesses because it has been "God-breathed" (2 Tim 3:16). In other words, if it is true that Hebrews is a divinely inspired and authoritative document, its inspiration and authority remain factual in an objective sense apart from our own inability to clearly discern the identity of its author. In his providence, God bore witness to the inspiration and authority of this letter in a manner that left little room for doubt, as Hebrews persistently silenced the questions of men who soon found that it "is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim 3:16-17).

What do we know about the author?

Though the question of authorship is not determinative of either the letter's inspiration or authority, it is significant for our interpretation of Hebrews. Knowing as much as we can about the author can be helpful for discerning the meaning of a text. We may not be able to know the identify of our author with any degree of certainty, but there is much that we can know about him.

He was probably a Hellenistic Jew for he was both steeped in the LXX and possessed of an excellent vocabulary and a polished style for writing in the Greek language. Presumably, then, he was well educated. He was probably a second generation Christian (2:3) but one with direct connection to apostolic influence since he was a companion of Timothy (13:23) and thus possibly an associate of Paul. It is possible that he wrote from Italy, although 13:24 could also be taken to mean that the recipients were in Italy and some in his own party were from there as well. The rhetoric of the letter and his description of it as "my word of exhortation" (13:22) suggest that he was probably a preacher. His "short letter" reveals a compassionate pastor, a keen theologian and a superior logician who applies all the resources of revelation and rhetoric at his command so that his dear friends will "not drift away" (2:1).

DATE, DESTINATION AND PURPOSE

Three important facts suggest at least a general date for the letter. First, Clement of Rome cited Hebrews frequently. 1 Clement was written in A.D. 95 or 96 and thus Hebrews would not only have been completed but well circulated by this date. Second, there is thus little reason to doubt that the Timothy of 13:23 was the associate of Paul referred to elsewhere in the New Testament. Though we do not know how old Timothy was when he joined Paul in his work, it is unlikely that this reference would place the letter very late in the first century. Finally, much is made of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in A.D. 70. Although it is possible that the author would not have referred to this event if it had happened by the time of writing, it seems improbable that he would omit reference to an event that not only had a significant effect on the lives of first-century Jews (including Christians) but would have added great force to his own argument. Further, he refers to old covenant worship rituals in the present tense (8:4-5; 10:1-3).

Other considerations as to the probable date of the letter pertain to the identity and location of its recipients. The title "To the Hebrews" may have been added later and reflect later opinions about its contents but it accompanies the letter in all of the oldest Greek manuscripts and there is no evidence that the letter ever bore any other title. Some suggest that the phrase could be translated "against the Hebrews" but it is the same formula used in Paul's letters which were hardly "against" the Romans, Galatians, etc. The title of the letter thus suggests that its recipients were Jewish, and the content that they were both Jewish and Christian.

The letter itself indicates that its recipients were enduring persecution (10:33-34; 12:4; 13:3, 23). The more natural reading of 13:24 suggests that the author wrote to Italy rather than from Italy (for which the expression "those in Italy send you their greetings" would have been more appropriate). The Edict of Claudius had expelled Jews from Rome in 49 but many had returned by the time of the persecution begun by Nero in 64. Since our earliest quotes of Hebrews come to us from Clement of Rome, its circulation there was likely at an early date. The cumulative evidence thus suggests that the letter was addressed to Jewish Christians in Rome who suffered under the persecutions of Nero.

The combination of these circumstances and statements in the letter suggest its purpose. Though some have suggested that Hebrews was written foremost to combat an early Jewish perversion of Christian doctrine or as a generic tract to demonstrate the superiority of Christianity, key verses in the letter suggest that it was addressed to a particular community with a view to responding to an urgent need. The following verses are all suggestive:

Passage Exhortation End in View

2:1 We must pay more careful attention so that we do not . . . to what we have heard drift away

3:1 fix your thoughts on Jesus (cp. 12:2)

3:6 hold on to our courage and the

3:6 hope of which we boast

3:12 See to it . . . that none of you has a

. . . heart that turns away from the

living God

3:13 encourage one another daily so that none of you

may be hardened by

sin's deceitfulness

3:14 . . . if we hold firmly till the end the We have come to

confidence we had at first share in Christ . . .

4:1 let us be careful that none of you be

found to have fallen

short of it [rest]

4:11 Let us . . . make every effort to enter so that no one will

that rest fall

4:14 let us hold firmly to the faith we

profess

6:11 show this same diligence to the very in order to make your

end hope sure

10:23 Let us hold unswervingly to the

hope we profess

10:35 So do not throw away your it will be richly

confidence rewarded

10:36 You need to persevere so that when you

have done the will of

God, you will receive

what he has promised.

12:1 Let us run with perseverance the

12:1 race marked out for us

12:2 Let us fix our eyes on Jesus (cp. 3:1)

12:3 Consider him who endured such so that you will not

opposition from sinful men grow weary and lose

heart

Hebrews is, without doubt, a theologically valuable document which presents a well arranged argument in defense of the superiority of the new covenant. Yet these verses suggest that the author had an immediate purpose in mind for his theology and his rhetoric - the encouragement of Christian brothers and sisters who, suffering under persecutions which threatened even martyrdom, were tempted to abandon their strength. In the midst of their suffering, our author sends his "short letter" and "word of exhortation" (13:22) that they might fix their eyes on Jesus (3:1; 12:2), whose greatness he demonstrates from their own beloved Scriptures and cherished heritage.

FORM AND STRUCTURE

Since Hebrews includes some of the formal features of an epistle (e.g., personal greetings and closing formula) but not others (e.g., typical introductory greeting or address), there has been much debate as to whether it is more of a letter or a sermon. However, this particular formulation of the genre question probably reads a sharper distinction between written and oral communication back into an era when rhetoric rarely made such a rigid separation. Other epistles in the New Testament were clearly written in the knowledge that they would be read in the presence of congregations. It is thus possible to argue that, though written, they should be viewed primarily as oral documents. Writing lengthy treatises with significant oral features was a typical "rhetorical" practice for the ancients (e.g., the "template" or model speeches of Isocrates and others). Hence, Hebrews could well have been constructed as a "written homily," i.e., a letter with sermonic features.

This is to propose a variation of Deissmann's suggestion that Hebrews could have been an example of Christian literary art (i.e., a kind of treatise). Guthrie's criticism - that the writer's purpose was too serious to be regarded in this light - assumes that literary art cannot be addressed to particular communities and urgent occasions, when in fact, rhetoric is chiefly defined by (1) its "addressed" nature and (2) its "contingent" character. The fact that it is addressed to specific communities, their circumstances and the demands of those circumstances is precisely what, according to Aristotle, distinguishes "rhetoric" from its counterpart "dialect." It is quite in keeping with at least one significant ancient rhetorical tradition to regard Hebrews as a written homily - an extended written treatise with significant oral features, addressed to a particular community with a view to responding to an urgent need.

Of what import is this conclusion? There is little value in examining Hebrews for exact correspondence to any particular classical scheme of rhetoric as some have done for (1) a strong case has been made that there is no single classical tradition of rhetoric and (2) our uncertainty about the identity of the author makes it impossible for us to do anything more than speculate about the possible significance of any such similarities.

There are several values, however, in recognizing the "rhetorical" nature of the document. First, this encourages us to keep in mind that, above all, Hebrews is an attempt to persuade its recipients (to take action, i.e., a case of deliberative rhetoric). Close attention should thus be paid to its argumentative dimensions. Also, as we attempt to follow the writer's development of thought, we should be alert for the use of rhetorical devices which signal transitions from argumentative sections to hortatory sections that address the contingiences of the community's situation. Further, apart from the complexities which separated competing rhetorical traditions in the ancient world, it is not inappropriate to look for evidence of the kinds of topoi (argumentative commonplaces) more widely employed and with which a well educated author was likely to be familiar. This should aid our understanding of the nature of the proofs employed by our author. Finally, it reminds us to seek the relevance of the subject matter of Hebrews in relationship to particular sets of life circumstances (persecution, suffering, temptation, and discouragement among them).

Hebrews is organized around a series of quotations from the Old Testament which are not only presented as argument but also developed with a variety of exegetical procedures (see below). If we use these quotations as a guideline for discerning its structure, the following picture of Hebrews emerges.

Chapter One is an introduction. This chapter is full of Old Testament quotations demonstrating Jesus' superiority over angels.

Chapter Two appeals to Psalm 8. Jesus rescues man by coming down beneath angels, joining man in flesh and blood, dying, and then returning to his place of exaltation above the angels. All who cling to him in faith return with him to the throne.

Chapters Three and Four deal with Psalm 95. God offers rest to all who trust him. The land of Canaan was not that rest, for this Psalm spoke of a rest long after the Israelites who wandered in the desert hardened their hearts and lost the rest which God offered to them. God's rest is still available for all who believe him.

Chapters Five, Six and Seven are organized around Psalm 110. Jesus is a priest like Melchizedek, who was also superior to the priesthood of the old covenant. Jesus, in fact, is a priest forever by God's oath.

Chapter Eight introduces Jeremiah 31. The new covenant, created by Jesus our great high priest, is superior to the old covenant. It is founded on better promises than the old covenant, which was a mere copy and shadow of this new covenant.

Chapters Nine and Ten treat Psalm 40. Jesus' living sacrifice of himself through obedience is far superior to the Old Testament sacrifices of dead bulls and goats repeatedly offered in the old tabernacle. Jesus took this sacrifice into the very presence of God, thus fully taking away sins and cleansing our consciences.

Chapter Eleven develops a theme from Habakkuk 2, that the righteous will live by faith. This principle by which we live is illustrated by numerous examples of people living by faith.

Chapter Twelve treats Proverbs 3. We must accept the discipline God brings upon us, for God disciplines those he loves.

Chapter Thirteen is the conclusion. It is full of exhortations on how to give ourselves to God in the life of faith.

Remove the introductory and concluding chapters for a moment and an interesting picture of the structure of the main body of thought emerges. The new covenant (chapter 8) is central, tying together his priesthood (chapters 5-7) and his sacrifice (chapters 9-10). This is prepared for by the offer of rescue (chapter 2) and rest (chapters 3-4) and followed by the re

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aristotle. The "Art" of Rhetoric . Loeb Classical Library. Translated by J. H. Freese. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926.

____________ . On Rhetoric . Edited and translated by George A. Kennedy. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Attridge, Harold W. Hebrews . Hermeneia Commentaries. Edited by Helmut Koester. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989.

Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Translated by William Arndt and F.W. Gingrich. 2nd ed. Revised and augmented by F.W. Gingrich and F.W. Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. "Baptism." The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . Vol. 1. Edited by Colin Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Bietenhard, H. "Name." The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . Vol. 2. Edited by Colin Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Blowers, Paul. "Patterns of Perfection in Hebrews." Unpublished paper presented to a Fellowship of Professors at Johnson Bible College in Knoxville, Tennessee, September. 21, 1990.

Boatman, Don Earl. Helps From Hebrews . Bible Study Textbook. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1960.

Bromiley, Geoffery, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia . 4 Vols. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Brown, Colin, ed. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . 3 Vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Brown, Francis, et al . The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon . Lafayette, IN: Associated Publishers and Authors, Inc., 1980.

Bruce, F.F. The Epistle to the Hebrews . New International Critical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Calvin, John. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews . Trans. by William B. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963.

Carson, D.A., Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Chamberlain, William. An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1941. Reprinted 1979.

Crouch, Owen. God Has Spoken: Expository Preaching and Teaching - Hebrews . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1983. Reprinted 1990.

Davidson, A.B. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, n.d.

Dods, Marcus. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Vol. IV in The Expositor's Greek Testament. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1910.

Douglas, J.D., ed. The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd. Ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1992.

Ellingworth, Paul. Commentary on Hebrews . New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

Elwell, Walter, ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Enos, Theresa, ed. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication From Ancient Times to the Information Age . New York: Garland Pub., 1996.

Fant, Clyde E. and Pinson, William E., eds. Twenty Centuries of Great Preaching: An Encyclopedia of Preaching . 23 Vols. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1971.

Feinberg, C.L. "Tithe." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 5. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Fensham, F.C. "Oath." International Standard Bible Encyclopedia , Vol. III, ed. by G. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Fiensy, David. New Testament Introduction . The College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1994.

Gooding, D.W. and D.J. Wiseman. "Censer." The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd ed. Edited by J.D. Douglas. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1982.

Gregory, T.M. "Oath." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 4. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Guthrie, Donald. "Epistle to the Hebrews," International Standard Bible Encyclopedia , Vol. 2. Edited by G. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

____________ . Hebrews . Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

____________ . New Testament Introduction . 3rd ed. rev. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1970.

Hatch, Edwin and Henry Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint . Two Volumes including supplement. Graz, Austria: Akademische Druck - Univ. Verlagstalt, 1954.

Héring, Jean. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Epworth Press, 1970.

Josephus. Jewish Antiquities . Books I-IV. Loeb Classical Library. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1930.

____________ . The Jewish War . Books IV-VII. Loeb Classical Library. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928.

Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament . 10 Vols. Translated and edited by Geoffrey Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-76.

Kistemaker, Simon. Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews . New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Konig, Eduard. "Tabernacle." The Jewish Encyclopedia . Ed. by Isadore Singer. New York: KTAV Publishing House, Inc., n.d.

Lane, William L. Hebrews 1-8 . Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A. Edited by David A. Hubbard, John D. W. Watts and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

____________ . Hebrews 9-13 . Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A. Edited by David A. Hubbard, John D.W. Watts and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

Lenski, R.C.H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James . Minneapolis: Augsburg Press, 1966.

Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon . 9th ed. Rev. and augmented by Sir Henry Stuart Jones. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940.

Lindars, Barnabas. "The Rhetorical Structure of Hebrews." New Testament Studies Vol. 35 (1989), pp. 382-406.

Louw, Johannes and Eugene A. Nida, eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains . 2 Vols. New York: United Bible Societies, 1988.

Martin, Ralph P. New Testament Foundations: A Guide for Christian Students . 2 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek Testament . New York, London: United Bible Societies, 1971, corrected edition, 1975.

Meyer, F.B. The Way into the Holiest: Expositions of the Epistle to the Hebrews . Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1982.

Milligan, R. Epistle to the Hebrews . The New Testament Commentary, Vol. IX. Cincinnati: Standard Pub., n.d.

Moffat, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews . The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1924. Reprinted 1968.

Montefiore, Hugh. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1964. Reprinted 1987.

Morris, Leon, et al. The Expositor's Bible Commentary , Volume 12. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Moule, Charles F. Idiom Book of New Testament Greek . 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.

Moulton, James H. and George Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1930. Reprinted 1980.

Moulton, James H., Wilbert F. Howard and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . 4 Vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963-79.

Moulton, W.F. and A.S. Geden. A Concordance to the Greek Testament . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897. 5th ed., 1978.

Nairne, A. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921.

Paterson, J. H. "Sea." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 5. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Rahlfs, Alfred, ed. Septuaginta . 2 vols. in 1. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibel Stiftung, 1935.

Schiappa, Edward. "Protagoras." Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication . ed. by Theresa Enos. New York: Garland Pub., 1996.

Silva, Moises. "Perfection and Eschatology in Hebrews." Westminster Theological Journal . Vol. 39 (1976), pp. 60-71.

Singer, Isadore, ed. The Jewish Encyclopedia . New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., n.d.

Spicq, C. L'Épitre Aux Hebreux . Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1952.

Soulen, Richard. Handbook of Biblical Criticism . 2nd ed. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976, 1981.

Swetnam, J. "Sacrifice and Revelation in the Epistle to the Hebrews: Observations and Surmises on Hebrew 9, 26." Catholic Biblical Quarterly Vol. 30 (1968), pp. 227-254.

Tenney, Merrill C., ed. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . 5 Vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974-76.

Thayer, Joseph. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament . 4th Edition. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1901.

Thompson, James. The Letter to the Hebrews . The Living Word Commentary. Edited by Everett Ferguson. Austin, TX: R.B. Sweet Co., 1971.

Trotter, Andrew H., Jr. Interpeting the Epistle to the Hebrews . Guides to New Testament Exegesis. Edited by Scot McKnight. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.

Waltke, B.K. "Melchizedek." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 4. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-76.

Westcott, B.F. The Epistle to the Hebrews . 2nd Edition. 1892. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1994.

Wiseman, D.J. "Weights and Measures." The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd ed. Ed. By J.D. Douglas. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1982.

Zodhiates, Spiros. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament . Rev. ed. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Press, 1993.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary

BAGD Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich-Danker Greek Lexicon (2nd. ed.)

BDB New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English

Lexicon

BDF Blass-Debrunner-Funk Greek Grammar

ISBE International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Bromiley)

KJV King James Version

LN Louw & Nida's Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains

LSJ Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek Lexicon

LXX Septuagint

MHT Moulton-Howard-Turner Greek Grammar

MM Moulton & Milligan's Vocabulary of Greek Testament

NASB New American Standard Bible

NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament

Theology

NJB New Jerusalem Bible

RSV Revised Standard Version

TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by

Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich

ZPED Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Hebrews (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. JESUS IS SUPERIOR TO THE ANGELS - 1:1-14

A. The Preeminence of the Son - 1:1-4

B. The Son Superior to the Angels - 1:5-14

II. JESUS RESCUES MAN - 2:1-18

A. Warning Not to Ignore Such a Great Salvation - 2:1-4

B. Jesus Became a Man to Bring Men to Glory - 2:5-18

III. GOD OFFERS REST TO ALL WHO TRUST HIM - 3:1-4:16

A. Jesus Is Superior to Moses - 3:1-6

B. Psalm 95:7-11 - 3:7-11

C. Hold Firm to the End - 3:12-15

D. Unbelieving Israelites Fell in the Desert - 3:16-19

E. A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God - 4:1-5

F. A Sabbath-Rest Remains - 4:6-11

G. The Message from God Does Its Part to Save Us - 4:12-13

H. Jesus, the Great High Priest - 4:14-16

IV. JESUS IS SUPERIOR TO THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE OLD COVENANT AND A PRIEST FOREVER BY GOD'S OATH - 5:1-7:28

A. Requirements of the High Priest - 5:1-4

B. Jesus Fulfills the Requirements and Offers Eternal Salvation - 5:5-10

C. [Excursus: Responding to God] - 5:11-6:12

1. Still Infants - 5:11-14

2. On to Maturity - 6:1-3

3. Those Who Fall Away - 6:4-8

4. Confident of Better Things - 6:9-12

D. God's Oath Makes His Purpose Sure - 6:13-20

E. Melchizedek Like the Son of God - 7:1-3

F. Melchizedek Greater than Abraham - 7:4-10

G. Jesus Is High Priest Based on His Resurrection which Introduces a Better Hope - 7:11-19

H. Jesus Is High Priest Based on God's Oath which Produces a Better Covenant - 7:20-22

I. Jesus' Resurrection Creates a Permanent Priesthood - 7:23-25

J. Jesus' Death Provides the Perfect Sacrifice - 7:26-28

V. THE NEW COVENANT BROUGHT BY JESUS OUR HIGH PRIEST IS SUPERIOR TO THE OLD COVENANT - 8:1-13

A. Our High Priest Reigns and Serves in the True Tabernacle, Prefigured by Old Testament Shadows - 8:1-5

B. Our High Priest Is Mediator of the New Covenant, Promised through the Prophet Jeremiah - 8:6-13

VI. JESUS' SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF IS SUPERIOR TO THE SACRIFICES OF THE OLD COVENANT AND SETS US FREE FROM SIN - 9:1-10:39

A. The Tabernacle and Its Tools - 9:1-5

B. The Day of Atonement - 9:6-10

C. Jesus' Sacrifice Cleanses Our Conscience - 9:11-14

D. Jesus' Death Inaugurates the New Covenant - 9:15-22

E. Jesus' Sacrifice Was Once for All - 9:23-28

F. Old Covenant Sacrifices Could Not Take Away Sin - 10:1-4

G. Christ Offered His Body to Make Us Holy - 10:5-10

H. Our High Priest Now Reigns - 10:11-14

I. Witness of the Holy Spirit through Jeremiah - 10:15-18

J. Let Us Draw Near to God and Spur One Another On - 10:19-25

K. The Judgment of God on Those Who Keep Sinning - 10:26-31

L. Reminder of Earlier Suffering - 10:32-34

M. The Need to Persevere - 10:35-39

VII. GOD EXPECTS US TO SHOW FAITH - 11:1-40

A. The Nature of Faith - 11:1-3

B. Faith Illustrated by Abel, Enoch, and Noah - 11:4-7

C. Faith Illustrated by Abraham - 11:8-19

D. Faith Illustrated by Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph- 11:20-22

E. Faith Illustrated by Moses - 11:23-28

F. Faith Illustrated in Israel - 11:29-38

G. God Planned to Make Them Perfect with Us - 11:39-40

VIII. GOD EXPECTS US TO ENDURE DISCIPLINE - 12:1-29

A. A Call to Perseverance - 12:1-3

B. The Word of Encouragement - 12:4-6

C. God Disciplines His Children - 12:7-11

D. Practical Actions - 12:12-17

E. Terrifying Mt. Sinai - 12:18-21

F. Mt. Zion, the Heavenly Jerusalem - 12:22-24

G. A Kingdom which Cannot Be Shaken - 12:25-29

IX. CONCLUDING EXHORTATIONS - 13:1-25

A. Keep Loving Each Other - 13:1-3

B. Stay Pure - 13:4-6

C. Remember Your Leaders - 13:7-8

D. Counterparts to Old Covenant Practices - 13:9-16

E. Obey Your Leaders and Pray for Us - 13:17-19

F. Benediction and Closing Exhortations - 13:20-22

G. Personal Greetings - 13:23-25

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV