Text -- Hebrews 9:1-4 (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.

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).

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.

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.

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).

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.

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

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)."

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.  

  

  

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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