Hebrews 8

Hebrews 8:1

B. Christ’s Ministry Superior to Aaron’s (Chap. 8) 8:1 In the verses that follow, Christ’s ministry is shown to be superior to Aaron’s because He officiates in a better sanctuary (vv. 1-5) and in connection with a better covenant (vv. 7-13). Now the writer has come to the main point of his argument. He is not summarizing what has been said but stating the main thesis to which he has been leading in the Epistle. We have such a High Priest. There is a triumphant note in the words we have. They are an answer to those Jewish people who taunted the early Christians with the words, We have the tabernacle; we have the priesthood; we have the offerings; we have the ceremonies; we have the temple; we have the beautiful priestly garments. The believers’ confident answer is, Yes, you have the shadows but we have the fulfillment. You have the ceremonies but we have Christ. You have the pictures but we have the Person.

And our High Priest is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. No other high priest ever sat down in recognition of a finished work, and none ever held such a place of honor and power.8:2 He serves the people in the sanctuary of heaven. This is the true tent, of which the earthly tabernacle was a mere copy or representation. The true tabernacle was erected by the Lord and not man, as was the earthly tent. 8:3 Since one of the principal functions of a high priest is to offer both gifts and sacrifices, it follows that our High Priest must do this also. Gifts is a general term covering all types of offerings presented to God. Sacrifices were gifts in which an animal was slain. What does Christ offer? The question is not answered directly until chapter 9. 8:4 This verse skips over the question of what Christ offers, and simply reminds us that on earth He would not be eligible to offer gifts in the tabernacle or temple. Our Lord was descended from Judah and not from the tribe of Levi or the family of Aaron. For this reason He was not qualified to serve in the earthly sanctuary. When we read in the Gospels that Jesus went into the temple (see Luk_19:45), we must understand that He went only into the area surrounding it, and not into the Holy Place or the Holy of Holies. This of course raises the question whether Christ performed any high priestly functions when he was on earth, or was it only after He ascended that He began His priestly work? The point of verse 4 is that He was not qualified on earth as a Levitical priest, and could not serve in the temple in Jerusalem. But this does not mean that He could not perform the functions of a Melchizedekan priest. After all, His prayer in John 17 is a high priestly prayer, and His offering of Himself as the one perfect sacrifice at Calvary was certainly a priestly act (see Heb_2:17). 8:5 The tabernacle on earth was a replica of the heavenly sanctuary. Its layout depicted the manner in which God’s covenant people could approach Him in worship. First there was the door of the outer court, then the altar of burnt offering, then the laver. After that the priests entered the Holy Place and the high priest entered the Most Holy Place where God manifested himself. The tabernacle was never intended to be the ultimate sanctuary. It was only a copy and shadow. When God called Moses up to Mount Sinai and told him to build the tabernacle, He gave him a definite blueprint to follow. This pattern was a type of a higher, heavenly, spiritual reality. Why does the writer emphasize this so forcefully? Simply to impress on the minds of any who might be tempted to go back to Judaism that they were leaving the substance for the shadows when they should be going on from shadow to substance. Verse 5 clearly teaches that the OT institutions were types of heavenly realities; therefore it justifies the teaching of typology when it is done in consonance with Scripture and without becoming fanciful. 8:6 This verse forms a transition between the subject of the superior sanctuary and the discussion of the better covenant. First, there is a comparison. Christ’s ministry is as superior to the ministry of the Aaronic priests as the covenant He meditates is superior to the old one. Second, a reason is given: the covenant is better because it is enacted on better promises. Christ’s ministry is infinitely better. He offered Himself, not an animal. He presented the value of His own blood, not the blood of bulls and goats. He put away sins, not merely covered them. He gave believers a perfect conscience, not an annual reminder of sins. He opened the way for us to enter into the presence of God, not to stand outside at a distance. He is also Mediator of a better covenant. As Mediator He stands between God and man to bridge the gap of estrangement. Griffith Thomas compares the covenants succinctly: The covenant is better because it is absolute not conditional, spiritual not carnal, universal not local, eternal not temporal, individual not national, internal not external. It is a better covenant because it is founded on better promises. The covenant of law promised blessing for obedience but threatened death for disobedience. It required righteousness but did not give the ability to produce it. The New Covenant is an unconditional covenant of grace. It imputes righteousness where there is none. It teaches men to live righteously, empowers them to do so, and rewards them when they do. 8:7 That first covenant was not perfect, that is, it was not successful in achieving an ideal relationship between man and God. It was never intended to be the final covenant, but was preparatory to the coming of Christ. The fact that a second covenant is mentioned later shows that the first was not the ideal. 8:8 Actually the trouble was not with the first covenant itself: the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good (Rom_7:12). The trouble was with the people to whom it was given; the law had poor raw materials to work with. This is stated here: Because finding fault with them, He says … . He did not find fault with the covenant but with His covenant people. The first covenant was based on man’s promise to obey (Exo_19:8; Exo_24:7), and therefore it was not destined to last very long. The New Covenant is a recital, from beginning to end, of what God agrees to do; this is its strength. The writer now quotes Jer_31:31-34 to show that in the Jewish Scriptures God had promised a New Covenant. The whole argument revolves around the word new. If the old was sufficient and satisfactory, why introduce a new one? Yet God specifically promised to make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. As mentioned previously, the new covenant has to do primarily with the nation of Israel and not with the church. It will find its complete fulfillment when Christ comes back to reign over the repentant and redeemed nation. In the meantime some of the blessings of the covenant are enjoyed by all believers. Thus when the Savior passed the cup of wine to His disciples, He said, This is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me (1Co_11:25). Henderson quotes the following: And so we distinguish between the primary interpretation to Israel, and the secondary, spiritual application to the Church today. We now enjoy in the power of the Holy Spirit the blessings of the new covenant, and yet there will be still further and future manifestations for Israel according to God’s promise. 8:9 God specifically promised that the New Covenant would not be like the covenant that He made with them when He took them by the hand out of Egypt. How would it be different? He does not say, but perhaps the answer is implied in the remainder of the verse, because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. The covenant of the law failed because was conditional; it called for obedience from a people who did not produce it. By making the New Covenant an unconditional covenant of grace, God avoids any possibility of failure since fulfillment depends on Himself alone and He cannot fail. The quotation from Jeremiah contains a radical change. The words in the Hebrew text of Jer_31:32 are though I was a husband to them. Some early translations of Jeremiah read, so I disregarded (or turned away from) them. The Holy Spirit, who inspired the words of Jeremiah and superintended the preservation of the Bible, directed the writer to the Hebrews to select this alternate reading. 8:10 Notice the repetition of the words I will. The Old Covenant tells what man must do; the New Covenant tells what God will do. After the it days of Israel’s disobedience are past, He will put His laws in their mind so that they will know them, and on their hearts so that they will love them. They will want to obey, not through fear of punishment but through love for Him. The laws will no longer be written in stone but on the fleshly tables of the heart. I will be their God, and they shall be My people. This speaks of nearness. The OT told man to stand at a distance; grace tells him to come near. It also speaks of an unbroken relationship and unconditional security. Nothing will ever interrupt this blood-bought tie. 8:11 The New Covenant also includes universal knowledge of the Lord. During Christ’s Glorious Reign, it will not be necessary for a man to teach his neighbor or his brother to know the Lord. Everyone will have an inward consciousness of Him, from the least … to the greatest: The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isa_11:9). 8:12 Best of all, the New Covenant promises mercy for an unrighteous people and eternal forgetfulness of their sins. The law was inflexible and unbending: Every transgression and disobedience received a just reward (Heb_2:2). Furthermore, the law could not deal effectively with sins. It provided for the atonement of sins but not for their removal. (The Hebrew word for atonement comes from the verb meaning cover.) The sacrifices prescribed in the law made a man ceremonially clean, that is, they qualified him to engage in the religious life of the nation. But this ritual cleansing was external; it did not touch a man’s inward life. It did not provide moral cleansing or give him a clear conscience. 8:13 The fact that God introduces a New Covenant means that the first is obsolete. Since this is so, there should be no thought of going back to the law. Yet that is exactly what some of the professing believers were tempted to do. The author warns them that the legal covenant is outmoded; a better covenant has been introduced. They should get in step with God.