Hebrews 9

Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 9 SECTION EIGHT Heb 9: 1-28 and Hebrews 10:1-18 The Apostle having sufficiently considered the superiority of the New Covenant, proceeds now to demonstrate more fully and par­ticularly the superiority of Christ’ s ministry and sacrifice. I. He begins the discussion by referring to the structure and furniture of the Jewish Tabernacle. (Heb 9: 1-5.) The first covenant, he says, had ordinances of Divine service and a worldly Sanctuary. This consisted of two apartments, each of which was also called a Sanctuary, in the first of which, commonly called the Holy Place, were the Candlestick, the Table of Shewbread, and the Altar of Incense; and in the second, known as the Most Holy Place, was the Ark of the Covenant, wherein were the golden vase that had manna, Aaron’ s rod that budded, and the Tables of the Covenant; and over the Ark were the Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Mercy-seat. II. He notices, in the second place, the services which were performed in these two apartments, and also the typical and transi­tory nature of the several ordinances which appertained to the Old Economy (verses 6-10).

1. The priests went into the Holy Place every day, performing the required services.
2. But into the Most Holy Place, the High Priest went alone, once every year, to make an atonement for himself and for the er­rors of the people, by which arrangement was divinely indicated the comparative darkness of that dispensation. For
3. The Tabernacle was but a figure for the time being, reaching down to the period of renovation, according to which were per­formed many carnal rites and ceremonies which never could purify the conscience of any one. For (1.) Reason could perceive no moral or natural connection be­tween the means and the ends. (2.) God had not yet given to mankind any satisfactory expla­nation of these matters. And hence the necessity of the Inner Vail during that dispensation, to indicate that the way into heaven was not yet made manifest. II. But Christ having appeared as the High Priest of the New Economy, entered through a greater and more perfect tabernacle into the heavenly Sanctuary, not with the blood of bulls and of goats, but with his own blood, thereby procuring eternal redemp­tion for us, and purifying our consciences also from dead works (verses 11-14). Thus is indicated the superiority of Christ’ s min­istry in several ways. For
4. On his way into the heavenly Sanctuary, he passed through, not a material structure, such as the Holy Place of the Tabernacle and Temple, but through the true and spiritual Tabernacle of the new creation.
5. He went into heaven itself, and not into a mere symbol of it.
6. He went by means of his own blood, rendered infinitely effi­cacious by the eternal Spirit through which it was offered.
7. By means of this one offering he has procured for us eternal redemption, and purified our consciences from dead works, thereby qualifying us for the service of the living God. The Apostle next contemplates Christ as the Mediator of the New Covenant, procuring, by means of his death, full forgive­ness for all the faithful of the Old Covenant, and securing at the first of these points forms the scope of his argument in 10: 1-4. The Law, he says, having but a shadow, and not the exact image, of the good things to come, could never with its bloody sacrifices and carnal ordinances take away sins. This he proves from the fact that even those sins for which the daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices had been offered, were again brought into remem­brance on the Day of Atonement. III. But the sacrifice of Christ, fulfilling as it does the perfect will of God, enables him to be just in justifying every true believer. And hence it procures for all such free, full, and everlasting for­giveness (verses 5-18). This section may be divided into the seven following para­graphs : I. 9: 1-5. The structure, arrangement, and furniture of the an­cient Tabernacle. II. 9: 6-10. Symbolical services of the Tabernacle, indicating the comparative darkness of the Jewish age, and the insufficiency of its carnal rites and ordinances. III. 9: 11-14. The higher, purer, and more perfect services of Christ. IV. 9: 15-24. The eternal inheritance secured for the called and faithful of all ages, through the death and mediation of the Lord Jesus. V. 9: 25-28. Further illustrations of the differences be­tween the Levitical services and those rendered by Christ as the high priest of our confession. VI. 10: 1-4. The utter moral inefficacy of the Levitical offer­ings. VII. 10: 5-18. The all-sufficiency of the one offering of Christ shown (1) in its fulfilling the will of God; and (2) in the full and complete forgiveness which it procures for every obedient believer.

THE , AND OF THE JEWISH Heb_9:1-5 Hebrews 9:1 —Then verily the first covenant— The Apostle returns here to the line of argument from which he was led off in the sixth verse of the eighth chapter by a comparison of the two covenants. In the fifth verse of the same chapter he speaks of the high priest under the first covenant serving the Tabernacle of Moses, which, he says, was but a shadowy representation of the heavenly things belonging to the second covenant. And now he simply concedes what is really implied in 8: 5, that the first covenant had its “ ordi­nances of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” His object is not in any way to disparage the Old Covenant, but to honor it as far as truth will permit. And hence he readily grants that it, as well as the New Covenant, was of Divine origin; that it had the ordinances of Divine service appointed by God himself, and a worldly sanctuary framed in every respect according to the pattern which God showed to Moses in the Mount.

The word covenant (diatheke) is not expressed in the original; but is manifestly implied, as may be seen from both what precedes and what follows. And it is, therefore, now generally conceded that the word covenant, and not tabernacle (skene), should be sup­plied in our English text. The word rendered ordinances (di- kaiomata) is a verbal noun, and means (1) a righteous action, an act by which righteousness is fulfilled (Romans 5:18) ; (2) a righ­teous judgment, indicating that a sinner is made righteous through the righteousness of Christ (Romans 5:16) ; (3) a righteous decree or appointment, an ordinance, law, rule, or regulation relating to the worship of God. In this last sense, the word is manifestly used in our text and also in the tenth verse of this chapter. The word sanctuary (hagion) means here, as in Exodus 25:8, a holy dwelling place, referring to the entire Tabernacle. It is called a worldly (kosmikon) sanctuary in contrast with the heavenly (epouranion) sanctuary of the New Covenant. (8:2; 9:23.) It was a material perishable structure made with hands, and pertained wholly to this perishable world.

But not so with the heavenly sanctuary. It, in­cluding both apartments, is “ a building of God, a house not made with hands,” and it will endure forever.

Hebrews 9:2 —For there was a tabernacle made;— Our author now pro­ceeds to illustrate and amplify the general statement made in the first verse; viz.: that ‘‘ the first covenant had ordinances of Divine service and a worldly sanctuary.” This, he insists, is true; for there was a tabernacle prepared (katcskcusthe) ; that is, framed and furnished according to the pattern which was showed to Moses in the Mount. For particulars see Exodus 26:1-30. The word tabernacle (skene) as used here is but a synonym of sanctu­ary in the first verse. It includes both the Holy Place and the Most Holy, each of which is also called a tabernacle in what fol­lows.

Hebrews 9:2 —The first, wherein was the candlestick,— That is, the first or east room of the Tabernacle, called the Holy Place. It stood first in position, because the high priest had always to pass through it on his way into the Holy of Holies. On the south side of this apartment stood the candlestick made out of a talent of gold. (Exodus 25:31-40.) It consisted of an upright shaft (which the rabbis say was four cubits high) and six branches, all ornamented with “ bowls, knops and flowers.” On the top of the main stem and each branch there was a lamp in which pure olive oil was kept con­stantly burning. (Exodus 27:20-21; Leviticus 24:1-4.)

This candlestick was a type of the Church of Christ not as a dwellingplace like the Tabernacle, but as God’ s appointed means for perpetuating and dispensing the light of the Gospel. (Zechariah 4:1-14; Revelation 1:20.) And hence every Christian congregation should be a light-supporter and a light-dispenser. (1 Timothy 3:15.) But observe, the candlestick served only to support and dispense the light. It was the oil, not the candlestick, that produced it; and throughout the Bible oil is used as the appropriate symbol of the Holy Spirit. See, for example, Isaiah 16:1; Acts 10:38; Hebrews 1:9; 1 John 2:20 1 John 2:27. The seven lamps seem to be symbolical of the perfect light of the Gospel.

Hebrews 9:2 —And the table and the shewbread,— On the north side of the Holy Place, opposite the candlestick, stood the table of shewbread, or bread of the face, so called because it always stood in the pres­ence or before the face of Jehovah. This table was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was two cubits long, one cubit broad, and a cubit and a half high. Around its upper edge was a cornice of gold, and on its sides were fastened four rings through which were placed two staves of acacia wood covered with gold, for the purpose of bearing it conveniently from place to place. Its dishes and cups were all of gold. (Exodus 25:23-30.) TABLE OF On this table were placed every Sabbath day by the high priest twelve cakes of fine flour, six in a row, and on each row a cup of frankincense. (Leviticus 24:5-9.) Each cake was made of two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, consisting of about seven quarts. These cakes were eaten by the priests, and were symbolical of the spiri­tual food of Christians, all of whom are made priests to God through Christ. (1 Peter 2:5 1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6 Revelation 5:10.) The frankin­cense seems to have been emblematical of praise and thanksgiving. (Revelation 5:8.) In the Holy Place immediately before the vail stood the altar of incense. It, too, was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, and was two cubits high, and one cubit in length and breadth. Like the table, it had a cornice of gold around its upper edge. It had also four rings of gold through which were placed two staves of acacia wood overlaid with gold, by means of which it was carried by the Kohathites. It had also four horns, or projecting corners, on which the high priest made an atonement once every year. (Exodus 30:1-10.) ALTAR OF INCENSEOn this altar the priests every morning and evening burned sweet incense made out of equal parts of stacte, onycha, galbanum, and frankincense. (Exodus 30:34-38.) This incense when burned sent forth a delightful perfume, and seems to have been typical of the prayers of the saints. See Psalms 141:2; Luke 1:9-10; Revelation 5:8 Revelation 8:3-4. And hence we see the propriety of placing this altar of prayer directly before the Ark of the Covenant, which in con­nection with the Mercy Seat was a symbol of God’ s throne. (Jer. 3: 16. 17; Hebrews 4:16.) Every priest in offering incense on this altar drew near to the throne of grace.

Hebrews 9:3 —And after the second vail,— The first vail (kalumma) was suspended at the doorway on the east end of the Tabernacle, from golden hooks attached to five pillars overlaid with gold, each of which rested on a socket of brass. (Exodus 26:36-37.) But the sec­ond or partition vail (katapetasma) divided the whole Tabernacle into two apartments: that on the east was called the Holy Place; and that on the west, the Most Holy. This vail, like the inner curtain of the Tabernacle, was beautifully variegated with colors of blue, purple, and scarlet; and curiously embroidered all over with figures of cherubim. It was suspended directly under the golden clasps of the inner curtain, from hooks of gold attached to four pil­lars of acacia wood overlaid with gold and resting on four sockets of silver. (Exodus 26:31-34.) The Rabbis say that this vail was made of thread six double; and that after the erection of the Temple it was renewed regularly year by year.

Hebrews 9:4 —Which had the golden censer,— It is still a question with the critics, whether the word which is here rendered censer (thumi- aterion from thumiao to burn incense) is used by our author to de­note the Golden Censer on which, according to the Mishna, the High Priest burned incense once a year in the Holy of holies (Leviticus 16:12), or the Golden Altar on which he burned incense every morning and evening (Exodus 30:7-8). In favor of the former rendering, it is alleged by Luther, Michaelis, Bengel, Bohme, Reland, and many others, (1) that this is more in har­mony with Greek usage. The word commonly used in the Septua- gint for the altar of incense is thusiasterion. Indeed the word thu- miaterion occurs but twice in this entire work (2 Chronicles 26:19; Ezekiel 8:11), in both of which cases it evidently means a censer. It is, however, frequently used by later writers, as Joseph and Philo, for the Altar of Incense. (2) It is alleged that the con struction of our text favors the same hypothesis. For, from such passages as Exodus 30:6-8, it is perfectly obvious that the Altar of Incense stood before the Vail in the Holy Place, and that incense was burned on it daily; but the thumiaterion of our text is classi­fied with the Ark of the Covenant, and seems to be located behind the Vail in the Most Holy Place.

In reply to this it is urged by Olshausen, Ebrard, Delitzsch, and others, that the Apostle does not say that the golden thumiaterion was in the Most Holy Place; but only that it belonged to it. He simply affirms that the Holiest of all had a golden thumiaterion and the Ark of the Covenant. But behind the second Vail, he says [was], the tabernacle which is called The Holiest of all, having (echousa) a golden thumiaterion, and the Ark of the Covenant overlaid on all sides with gold; which was the golden vase containing the manna, and the rod of Aaron which had budded, and the tables of the covenant. Now, as a house may be said to have many things which are really not in it, such as a sign, an awning, etc., it is alleged by some that our au­thor means nothing more in the above expression than simply this: that though the Golden Altar was located in the Holy Place before the Vail, it was, nevertheless, in its significance more properly con­nected with the Most Holy. And this view is thought to be sup­ported by 1 Kings 6:22, which may be literally rendered as fol­lows : And the whole house he overlaid with gold, until he had fin­ished all the house; also the whole altar which [pertains] to the Oracle, he overlaid with gold.

The main reason alleged in support of the second rendering is found in what would otherwise seem to be an unaccountable omis­sion by the author, in speaking of the symbolical furniture of the Tabernacle. It is urged that the Apostle would certainly not have overlooked so important an article as the Altar of Incense, and name one that is not even referred to in the Law of Moses, unless it be in Leviticus 16:12. But here, the vessel used for carrying the coals of fire from the Brazen Altar, is not called in the Septuagint a golden thumiaterion, but simply a pureion, a fire-pan. In the Hebrew it is called a machtah which also means a fire-pan; but the golden censer spoken of in the Mishna is called a kaph; that is a curved vessel, as a dish or a pan.

This objection to the common rendering is certainly not without force. The omission, if indeed it is such, is certainly a very re markable one, and one that is not easily accounted for. It should, however, be remembered (1) that it was not the purpose of our au­thor to enter into minute details in describing the furniture of the Tabernacle (9: 4) ; but only to give a general outline of its divi­sions, apparatus, etc. (2) In the discussions which follow these introductory remarks, he has reference chiefly to the solemn ser­vices of the Day of Atonement; and as on that day, the most sol­emn and important part of the incense offering was made in the Most Holy Place, and in the Golden Censer, the Apostle may have deemed it unnecessary to speak further in detail of the less impos­ing services of the same kind that were performed in the Holy Place and on the Golden Altar. (3) It is remarkable that Jose­phus makes the same omission both in his Jewish War and in his Antiquities. In speaking of the conquest of Judea and Jerusalem by the Romans, he says, “ Pompey and those that were about him went into the Temple itself, whither it was not lawful for any to enter but the High Priest, and saw what was deposited therein: viz., the Candlestick with its lamps, and the Table, and the pouring vessels, and the censers, all made entirely of gold; as also a great quantity of spices heaped together, with two thousand talents of sa­cred money” (J. War. b. 1, 7, 6).

On the whole I agree with Alford, and I might say with the ma­jority of commentators both ancient and modern, that “ the balance inclines toward the censer interpretation; though I do not feel by any means that the difficulty is wholly removed; and I would hail with pleasure any new solution which might clear it still further.”

Hebrews 9:4 —And the ark of the covenant— This was a sort of chest, two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half broad, and a cubit and a half high. It was made of acacia wood, overlaid on all sides with pure gold. Around the upper edge, was a cornice of gold; and on each side there were two rings of gold, through which were in­serted two staves, for the purpose of bearing the Ark from place to place. (Exodus 25:10-16.)

Hebrews 9:4 —Wherein was the golden pot, etc.— In the Ark were placed a golden vase containing an omer (about seven pints) of manna (Exodus 16:32-34) ; Aaron’ s rod that budded and brought forth al­monds (Numbers 17:1-11); and the two tables of the covenant (Deuteronomy 10:1-5). It seems from 1 Kings 8:9, that both the vase of manna and Aaron’ s rod had been removed from the Ark and most likely lost, before the building of the Temple; but our author speaks here of the original order and disposition of matters in the time of Moses. The Ark itself was in some way lost during the Chaldean catastrophe. It was never restored after the Babylonian captivity; but in its stead, there was placed in the second Temple a stone slab of three fingers in thickness, called by the Rabbis Eben Sh’ theyah which means a stone of drinking. Hebrews 9:5 —And over it, the cherubim of glory— On the Ark was placed a cover (hilasterion) of pure gold; two cubits and a half long, a cubit and a half wide, and of unknown thickness. The original word kapporeth means simply a cover. But as from it, God was wont to give forth his gracious responses (Numbers 7:89), it hence obtained the name Propitiatory or Mercy Seat. On the ends of it were formed out of the same piece of solid gold from which the Propitiatory was made, two cherubim with wings extended, and having each his face turned toward the other, and also toward the Mercy Seat, as if anxious to look into the profound mysteries of the Ark upon which rested the Shekinah. (1 Peter 1:12.) The word cherub means a keeper, a guardian. These figures, as well as the cherubim of the vail and the linen curtain, were most likely symbolical of the angels who are sent to minister to the heirs of salvation. (Hebrews 1:14.)

But of these matters, as our author says, it is not now necessary to speak particularly. I trust that enough has already been said on the general structure and the furniture of the Tabernacle to pre­pare the reader for the more profound and interesting themes which are discussed in the following paragraphs. OF THE THE OF THE JEWISH AGE, AND THE OF ITS CARNAL RITES AND Heb_9:6-10 Hebrews 9:6 —Now when these things were thus ordained,— The Apostle having described the Tabernacle with sufficient minuteness, pro­ceeds now to show what was done in it. These things, he says, being thus arranged, the Priests enter constantly [every day] into the first tabernacle [the Holy Place] accomplishing [there] the ser­vices [of their order]. These services consisted in dressing the lamps and offering the incense every morning and evening; and of the change of the presence-bread on every Sabbath. The present tense (eisiasin) may be used here as the historical present, indicat­ing merely what was customary; or it may denote that these ser­vices were still performed in the Temple when this Epistle was written in A.D. 63.

Hebrews 9:7 —But into the second went the high priest alone, once every year,— That is, into the second apartment, the Most Holy Place, of the Tabernacle. Into this, none but the High Priest was allowed to enter; and he only once a year, on the tenth day of the seventh month. But on that day he entered the Most Holy Place at least three times, perhaps four. This will be best explained by indicating briefly the varied services of that most solemn of all the days of the year, as given in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus. After the usual morning services and the offering of the sacrifices prescribed in Numbers 29:7-11, the High Priest was required (1) tokill the bullock which he has provided for a sin-offering for himself and for his house (Leviticus 16:11) ; (2) to carry a pan of coals from the Brazen Altar and also a portion of sweet-incense into the Most Holy Place, and there to burn the incense before the Lord (verses 12, 13) ; (3) to enter the second time with the blood of the bul­lock, and to sprinkle it seven times on and before the Mercy Seat (verse 14) ; (4) to slay the goat of the sin-offering for the people (verse 15) ; (5) to go the third time within the Vail, with the blood of this goat, and to do with it as he had done with the blood of the bullock; (6) to make an atonement for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of the congregation, as he had done for the Most Holy, by smearing with the blood of the two victims the horns of the Golden Altar (Exodus 30:10), and also most likely by sprinkling the blood seven times with his finger on and before the Altar, as he had before sprinkled it on and before the Mercy seat (verse 16, compare Josephus Ant. iii. 10, 3) ; (7) to make an atonement for the altar of burnt-offerings, by smearing its horns with the mingled blood of the two victims, and by sprinkling of the mixture seven times on it, as he had on the Altar of Incense (verses 18, 19). The Rabbis say that for this purpose the blood of the two victims was mingled in a basin. (8) After this the High Priest was re­quired to send away the live goat to asasel, which means a state of complete separation (verses 20-22) ; (9) to bathe himself and put on his golden garments, which he had put off before entering the Most Holy Place (verses 23, 24) ; and (10) to offer the burnt-of­ferings for himself and the people, and the fat of the sin-offerings; and then to cause their flesh to be burned without the camp (verses 24, 25). After this, according to the Mishna (Yoma v. 1; viii. 4), he again put off his golden garments, and entering the Most Holy Place the fourth time, he brought out “ the bowl and the censer.”

When, therefore, the Apostle says that the high priest went into the Most Holy Place, “ not without blood,” he does not mean that he was required to carry blood with him every time that he entered it; but only that he had to do this on the day on which he went in to make an atonement for himself and for the errors of the people. The word rendered errors (agnoemata) means ignorance, involun­tary error, etc. But it here includes all sins, save those only which were committed “ with a high hand,” and in open defiance and contempt of God’ s law. For such sins, no sacrifice was to be offered. (Numbers 15:30-31; Hebrews 10:28.) See notes on Hebrews 5:2.

Hebrews 9:8 —The Holy Spirit this signifying,— The Holy Spirit is here acknowledged to be the designer, as well as the interpreter of the Old Economy. It not only moved the ancient prophets to speak to the people the words and thoughts of God (see references), but it also breathed into the inanimate types of the Old Covenant a lan­guage which shows that they are all of God, and are designed to shadow forth and illustrate the sublime mysteries of redemption. And not only so,— not only were these types made shadows of good things to come, but they were moreover so framed as to indi­cate also in various ways the comparative darkness of the Jewish age. The fact, for instance, that none but the high priest was al­lowed to go behind the Vail, and that even he was allowed to do this but once a year, and then not without blood which he was re­quired to offer for his own sins and for the sins of the people,— all this served to demonstrate that the way into Heaven, the antitype of the Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle (verses 12, 24), was still a mystery, a matter that was not fully understood by anyone but God himself while the Tabernacle and Temple worship was continued. That God did, in anticipation of the shedding of Christ’ s blood, justify and save believers, under both the Patriar­chal and the Jewish age, is of course conceded. See Exodus 3:6; 2 Kings 2:1 2 Kings 2:11; Daniel 12:13; Luke 16:22 Luke 23:43; Romans 3:25-26; Hebrews 6:15 Hebrews 11:13-16, etc.

But the ground on which they were so justified and made happy, was yet a mystery to men and angels; for none, it seems, but the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit yet understood that Christ must suffer and rise from the dead, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached to all nations through him, as the way, the truth, the resurrection, and the life. See references under.2 But when Christ’ s body was broken for our sins according to the Scriptures, then also was the Vail of the Temple “ rent in twain from the top to the bottom” (Matthew 27:51) ; and henceforth the way into Heaven, through the torn flesh of Jesus, was made manifest. Then also the Old Tabernacle, with all that pertained to it fell to the ground; and on its ruins was erected the true Tabernacle of which Christ has become the prime Minister. (Hebrews 8:2 Hebrews 9:11.)

Hebrews 9:8 —While as the first tabernacle was standing:— First in what respect? Does the Apostle mean first in time, or first in place? First in place or position say Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others. These able critics insist that the word “ first” is used here, as in verse sixth, to denote simply the Holy Place, standing as it did in front of the Most Holy. So long as it stood in that position, it served of course to obscure the way leading through the Vail into the Most Holy Place, which in the second verse is called the second tabernacle. All this is of course conceded as a matter of fact.

But is this the meaning of the passage? I think not. It seems to me that the Apostle has reference here to the entire Jew­ish Tabernacle, which however, he uses symbolically for the whole system of Jewish worship, begun in the Tabernacle and continued in the Temple; and that the second Tabernacle, with which the first is contrasted, is the “ greater and more perfect Tabernacle” of the eleventh verse, together perhaps with the heavenly Sanctuary into which Christ has for us entered. Previous to Christ’ s entry, the way into the Holiest of all was not made manifest to anyone. Until the vail of Christ’ s flesh was rent (Hebrews 10:20), no man, and perhaps no angel (1 Peter 1:12), understood how God could be just in justifying any of Adam’ s race, and receiving them into glory. But when Christ died for our sins according to the Scrip­tures, then all was made manifest. (Romans 3:25-26.) Henceforth Jesus was everywhere proclaimed as the way into the Holiest of all.

See references.

Hebrews 9:9===Which was a figure for the time then present,— Or rather, Which [tabernacle] was a figure [reaching down] to the present time. The idea of the Apostle seems to be this: that the Jewish Tabernacle with all its rites was made a symbol (parabole) of the good things of the kingdom of heaven; and that as the Law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ (Galatians 3:24), even so the symbolic worship of the Tabernacle was designed to continue until the beginning of the new dispensation under the reign of Christ. But no longer; for since the coming of Christ, we are no longer under the schoolmaster. (Galatians 3:25.)

Hebrews 9:9 —In which were offered— (kathen) according to which [fig­ure] are offered both gifts and sacrifices. The present tense (prospherontai) seems to denote that the Levitical sacrifices were still offered by the Jews, according to the laws and ordinances of the ancient Tabernacle.

Hebrews 9:9 —That could not, etc.— These bloody sacrifices procured for those who offered them a good relative standing with respect to the honors, rights, and privileges of the Old Covenant; but nothing more. They had no power to perfect anyone with respect to his own moral consciousness. They were, in fact, but shadows of the sacrifice of Christ (10: 1), and could therefore procure for neither priest nor people anything more than a mere symbolical pardon of sins.

Hebrews 9:10 —Which stood only in meats, etc.— The construction of this sentence is somewhat obscure; and hence several different render­ings have been proposed. The main trouble is to determine the proper antecedent member of the relation expressed by the prepo­sition epi, the usual meaning of which is on, upon, or in addition to. What was on, upon, or in addition to meats, and drinks, and divers washings? “ Gifts and sacrifices,” say Delitzsch, Alford, etc.; “ The service,” say Luther and some of the more ancient com­mentators; “ Carnal ordinances” representing gifts and sacrifices, say Green and Liinemann; “ Perfect,” say Ebrard and some of the Christian fathers: that is, they say, the gifts and sacrifices offered could not perfect anyone with respect to his conscience, but only with respect to meats, and drinks, and divers washings. On the whole, I agree in the main with Alford and Delitzsch. The object of the Apostle seems to be to connect the offering of sacrifices with certain other matters relating to meats, and drinks, and divers washings,— all of which he characterizes as carnal ordinances, im­posed on the people till the coming of Christ.

Hebrews 9:10 —And divers washings:—(diaphorois baptisinois) washings which were performed by immersing in water whatever was to be cleansed. These had reference (1) to the washing of the whole body (louo) ; as, for instance, the body of every Priest at the time of his consecration (Exodus 29:4) ; of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:4 Leviticus 16:24) ; of a Priest defiled with any unclean­ness (Leviticus 22:6) ; of the Priest who officiated at the services of the red heifer (Numbers 19:7) ; of the man who burned the red hei­fer (Numbers 19:8) ; of the person cleansed with the water of purifi­cation (Numbers 19:19) ; of the healed leper (Leviticus 14:8-9) ; of any one who had eaten the flesh of an animal dead of disease (Leviticus 17:15) ; of the conductor of the scape-goat (Leviticus 16:26) ; of the man who burned the sin-offering without the camp on the day of atone­ment (Leviticus 16:28) ; of a person unclean from a running issue (Leviticus 15:13) ; of a person rendered unclean by coming in contact with anything defiled by a running issue (Leviticus 15:8) ; of a per­son defiled by semen virile (Leviticus 15:16 Leviticus 15:18) ; of a person defiled by female uncleanness (Leviticus 15:22 Leviticus 15:27) : (2) to the washing of the hands and feet (nipto) ; as of the Priests (Exodus 30:19-20) ; of the Elders of the congregation (Deuteronomy 21:6): (3) to the washing of garments (pluno) ; as of the Levites at the time of their conse­cration (Numbers 8:7) ; of the Priest who officiated at the sacrifice of the red heifer (Numbers 19:7) ; of the man who burned the red heifer (Numbers 19:8): (4) to the washing of the inwards and legs of the burnt-offerings (pluno); see, for instance, Exodus 29:7; Leviticus 1:9 Leviticus 1:13 : (5) to the washing of wooden vessels (nipto) ; see Leviticus 15:12 : and (6) to such spoils of war as could not be made to pass through the fire (Numbers 31:21-23). These washings were all but carnal ordinances, and had in themselves no efficacy beyond the purifying of the flesh; but in that age of types and shadows, these were all necessary to indicate and illustrate the moral purity that is required of all who would enjoy the benefits of the New Covenant.

Hebrews 9:10 —Until the time of reformation.— That is, until the coming of Christ and the inauguration of the New Covenant. Then old things were to pass away, and all things become new. And hence the new era is called the period of the regeneration. (Matthew 19:28.) THE HIGHER, PURER AND MORE OF CHRIST AS THE HIGH OF THE NEW ECONOMYHeb_9:11-14 Hebrews 9:11 — But Christ being come— (paragenomenos) having come forward as a historical person. (Matthew 3:1.) The Apostle makes the appearance of Christ (not his incarnation, but his historical manifestation) the grand turning point in the economy of redemp tion. Previous to his coming it was fit and right that all the Levit- ical ordinances should be carefully observed, and particularly that the high priest should go once every year into the most Holy Place to make a symbolical atonement for the people. But when Christ came forward as the high priest of the new institution, types and shadows were no longer necessary; and he, therefore, took them all out of the way, nailing them to his cross. (Col. 2; 14.)

Hebrews 9:11 —Through a greater and more perfect tabernacle,— There is here, as well as in the following verses, a manifest reference to the services of the first Tabernacle. As the high priest passed through the Holy Place of this symbolic edifice on his way into the Most Holy; so also Christ passed through a greater and more perfect Tabernacle than the Holy Place of the ancient Tabernacle on his way into heaven.

But what is this greater and more perfect Tabernacle? The whole earth, says Macknight; the human nature of Christ, says Chrysostom; the holy life of Christ, says Ebrard; the glorified body of Christ, says Hofmann; the aerial and siderial heavens, says Bleek; the heaven of angels and of the just made perfect, says Delitzsch. The Apostle says here but little concerning it; he merely tells us that it is “ a greater and more perfect Tabernacle” than was that of Moses; and furthermore that it is “ not made with hands; that is, not of this creation” (tautes tes ktiseos). The Old Covenant had a wordly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:1) ; but the Sanctuary of the New Covenant is not of this world (John 18:36) ; it is heavenly. Its most Holy Place is heaven itself (Hebrews 9:23-24) ; and its Holy Place is the house which God has established on earth for his peo­ple, and in which he himself condescends to dwell with them through his Spirit (Eph. 2: 20-22). It therefore manifestly in­cludes the Church of Christ.

Indeed the building was never com­plete until the Church was established as a distinct and indepen­dent body on Pentecost A.D. 34, ten days after Christ’ s ascension. We know, however, that God has been the dwelling-place of his people in all generations. (Psalms 90:1.) He has always had a place of refuge and shelter for those who trust in him. Under the shadow of his wings the faithful have always reposed with confi­dence. But as the covenant concerning Christ was, for a time, in but an incipient state (see notes on 8: 8), so also it was with the house of God which is from heaven. For a long time it was but little more than a curtain, designed for the protection and shelter of those who reposed under it. But when our Solomon (peace­able), the Prince of Peace, became king, he converted the tent into a magnificent temple.

See notes on Hebrews 8:2.

Hebrews 9:12 —Neither by the blood of goats, etc.— The Apostle is still keeping up a comparison between the services of the high priest on the Day of Atonement and the services of Christ, when he, as our High Priest, entered for us “ into that within the vail.” The former gained admittance into the earthly sanctuary by means of (dia) the blood of a calf or young bullock (Sept, moschos) and that of a goat (Sept, chimaros) ; but Christ entered heaven itself as the high priest of the New Covenant by means of his own blood. It was, so to speak, the key by means of which the heavenly Sanc­tuary was opened, and Christ was allowed to enter, once for all in our behalf, into the immediate presence of the King eternal, im­mortal and invisible.

Hebrews 9:12 —Having obtained eternal redemption for us, or rather, obtain­ing eternal redemption for us. That is, he obtained it by means of the offering which he then and there made. The verb entered (ei- selthen) and the participle obtaining (heurantenos) are both aorists, and express contemporaneous acts; so that it was not merely by means of his death, but by the offering of his blood in connection with his death, that he paid the ransom price of our redemption. The high priest under the Law first slew the victim and then car­ried its blood into the most Holy Place, where he offered it for the sins of the people, thereby procuring for them a sort of typical and relative pardon. But Christ, by means of his own blood offered in heaven itself, has procured for his people absolute and eternal re­demption.

The word redemption (lutrosis or apolutrosis) involves the idea (1) of a ransom price (lutron) paid for the release of a slave or captive; and (2) the deliverance procured by means of the price that is paid for this purpose. In this case the price paid was the precious blood of Christ, in consequence of which God can now be just in justifying every true believer. See Matthew 20:28; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 1:7; 1 Timothy 2:6; Titus 2:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19. But in our text it is the deliverance that is made prominent, and that is said to be eternal; for “ their sins and their iniquities,” says God, “ I will remember no more.”

Hebrews 9:13 —For if the blood of bulls, etc.—In this verse and the follow­ing our author proceeds to develop still further the amazing effi­cacy of the blood of Christ. For this purpose he again refers to the symbolical effects of the blood of bulls and goats by means of which purification was made for the sins of the people on the Day of Atonement.

Hebrews 9:13 —And the ashes of an heifer—These ashes, as we learn from Numbers 19, were prepared by burning without the camp of Israel a red or earth-colored heifer, together with cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. Out of these ashes was prepared the water of purification, by means of which were cleansed all who were symbolically defiled by the touch of a dead body, or by being in the same tent with a dead body. This was a solemn ordinance of Divine appointment, and as such had an efficacy, as well as the sprinkling of the blood of bulls and of goats, in symbolically cleansing the people and securing to them the continued enjoyment of their rights and privi­leges as members of a typical and carnal institution.

Hebrews 9:14 —How much more, etc.—The form of the argument, used here by the Apostle is what is technically called a minori ad majus, from the less to the greater. He concedes that the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of an heifer did secure for the members of the Old Covenant a certain kind of purification; they sanctified to the purifying of the flesh. But now he says, “ How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge [purify] your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” The meaning evidently is that the blood of Christ is far more efficacious in cleansing the moral nature of man from all spiritual defilement than were the aforesaid carnal ordinances in cleansing the flesh. For the latter cleansing was only temporary and symbolical. There was no real­ity in it. It served only to demonstrate the extremely polluting na­ture of sin, and the great necessity of that real spiritual cleansing which can be effected only through the infinitely precious blood of Christ. (1 John 1:7.) This is a matter, however, which belongs more properly to faith than to philosophy.

Nothing short of infi­nite knowledge would enable us to fully trace out and explain the influence of the blood of Christ on the government of God, and on the nature, character and destiny of mankind. Without then at­tempting to be wise above what is written on this profound theme, let us simply and joyfully accept the unequivocal declaration of the Holy Spirit, that the blood of Christ is sufficient to cleanse our consciences from all the works of the flesh leading to death (Hebrews 6:2), and so to fit us for the service of God who is himself infinitely holy.

But what is meant by “the eternal Spirit” through which Christ offered himself without spot to God ? In reply to this query, we have given the following hypotheses: (1) that the expression denotes the Divine nature of Christ (Beza,Ernesti, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford) ; (2) that it means the Holy Spirit (Bleek, Tholuck, Moll) ; (3) that it signifies the endless and immortal life of Christ (Grotius, Limborch, Schleusner) ; (4) that it has reference to the glorified and exalted person of Christ (Doderlein, Storr) ; (5) that it represents the Divine influence by which Christ was moved to offer himself up as a sacrifice for the sins of the world (Kuinoel, Winzer, Stuart). That something may be said in favor of each of these hypotheses, is manifest from the names by which they are supported. But that the first is the true one seems most probable for the following reasons: (1) It is manifestly the design of the Apostle, in using this expression, to heighten and intensify the value of Christ’ s offering. And this he could do in no more effectual way than by telling us that the offer­ing was made and rendered perfect by means of his own Divine nature. It was the sacrifice of his perfect humanity, sustained and supported by his own Divinity, that gave to his offering its infinite value. That it was made in some respect through the will and agency of the Father himself, is proved by the fact that “ the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14) ; and that it was made also through the agency of the Holy Spirit, is equally manifest from the fact that it was through the Spirit that the Word became incarnate (Luke 1:35), and that Christ afterward performed his miracles (Matthew 12:28 Matthew 12:31-32).

God bestowed on him the gift of the Spirit without measure (John 3:34), so that it may be truthfully said that under its influence he went to the cross, rose from the dead, ascended to the heavens, and there made an offering for the sins of the world. All this is of course conceded. But it is not to any extraneous influence, but to the personal dignity, glory, and Divinity of Christ himself that the infinite value of his offering is to be ascribed. (2) This seems to be further indicated by the form of the expression. It is not “ through the Holy Spirit,” as we have given in a few manuscripts (D, A, B, F, H, etc.) ; nor is it “ through the eternal Spirit,” as in our English Version, but it is according to our best authorities (B, D, K, L, etc.), simply, “ through eternal Spirit,” that Christ offered himself without spot to God. The eternal Spirit that is here spo­ken of, as Alford justly observes, “ is Spirit absolute; Divine Spirit; and thus it is self-conscious, laying down its own course, purely of itself, unbounded by conditions. The animals which were offered had no will, no spirit (pneuma) of their own which could concur with the act of sacrifice.

Theirs was a transitory life, of no potency or value. They were offered through law (dia notnou) rather than through any consent or agency or countera­gency of their own. But Christ offered himself, with his own con­sent assisting and empowering the sacrifice. And what was that consent? The consent of what? Of the spirit of a man, such as yours or mine, given in and through our finite spirit, whose acts are bounded by its own allotted space and time, and its own re­sponsibilities?

No: but the consenting act of his Divine personal­ity— his eternal Spirit (pneuma aionion), his Godhead, which from before time acquiesced in, and wrought with the purpose of the Father.” THE ETERNAL SECURED FOR THE CALLED AND OF ALL AGES, THROUGH THE DEATH AND OF THE LORD JESUSHeb_9:15-24 Hebrews 9:15 —And for this cause—(kai dia tonto) on this account; viz., that the blood of Christ has an inherent power and efficacy, such as the legal sacrifices had not: a power to purify the conscience from dead works, and to fit all who are purified and sanctified by it for the service and enjoyment of the living God for this very reason.

Hebrews 9:15 —he is the mediator of the new testament,—This clause is ex­plained with sufficient fullness in our notes on Hebrews 8:6 Hebrews 8:8, to which the reader is referred. The word rendered testament (diatheke) means here a covenant, and the “ new testament” of this verse is the same as the New Covenant of Heb 8:8.

Hebrews 9:15 —that by means of death, etc.— Or more literally, so that [his] death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions grounded on the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance. The Apostle here plainly declares that the death of Christ was necessary in order to the redemption of the transgressions which were commit­ted under the Old Covenant during the Jewish age. But what was then true in this respect of the Jewish age, was also equally true of all previous ages. For as Hofmann says, our author here “ regards the history of God’ s relations to mankind as one great whole, of which the religious history of Israel forms a typical part, exhibit­ing in one crucial instance the incapacity of the whole human race to satisfy the requirements of the Divine will. From this point of view, atonement for transgressions under the law will mean the same thing as the atonement of the sins of men in general, re­garded as violations of the revealed will of God; and the death of Christ will be an atonement, not merely for sins in the abstract, but especially for sin in its most aggravated form, as conscious trans­gression of that revealed will. The special reference here made to transgressions under the covenant of Sinai has its ground not only in this, that that covenant had a real significance for mankind in general, but also that the point which the sacred writer has here mainly in view, is the transition from it and its failures to the sav­ing dispensation of the Gospel. That transition could not take place without a death which would annihilate the transgressions of the former covenant.” But the death of bulls and goats was wholly unavailing for the purpose. (Hebrews 10:4.) And hence the neces­sity that Christ should die for the people, before the “ called” of any age could have an absolute right to the free and full enjoyment of the eternal inheritance.

But does it follow from this, as many suppose, that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and other faithful men of the Patriarchal and Jewish ages were still “ under the dominion of sin and death,” until Christ came, and by his death and alleged descent into Hades procured their deliverance? I think not, for the Scriptures everywhere teach that these holy men of old were justified by faith and obedi­ence as well as we (Romans 4:4; James 2:21-23, etc.), and this of course implies that they were received and treated by God as just persons, and that after their death they were immediately trans­lated, if not directly to heaven, at least to a place and state of high spiritual enjoyment (Exodus 3:6; Daniel 12:13; Luke 16:23-26, etc.). And this is manifestly Paul’ s idea in Romans 3:25-26, where he says in substance that God had, as it were, passed by the sins of those faithful men for a time, and that in the end of the ages he had set forth Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for a demon­stration of his administrative justice in doing so. That no sin was ever forgiven absolutely, without the blood of Christ, is of course conceded, and so also no debt was ever paid absolutely by a mere paper currency. But nevertheless we know that thousands of obli­gations have been practically cancelled by notes, bonds, and other like documents. And just so God seems to have administered the affairs of his government during the Patriarchal and Jewish ages.

He, too, so to speak, issued in the meantime a sort of promissory notes, based on the infinite value of the blood of Christ, which he knew was to be shed in due time. By means of these notes he was enabled (if I may say it with reverence) to meet, for the time being, all the claims of justice, and still to treat as just and righ­teous all who like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, became loyal sub­jects of his government. But no one could read his “ title clear to mansions in the skies,” until by the blood of Christ his sins were all cancelled absolutely, and the notes and bonds that had been is­sued in behalf of the sinner were all redeemed by the one great atoning sacrifice. See notes on Hebrews 11:39-40.

Hebrews 9:15 —they who are called—That is, all in every age who by faith and obedience have become the children of God, “ and heirs according to the promise.” For all such, God has provided “ an inheritance which is incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away.” (1 Peter 1:4.) But before any could rightfully inherit it and claim it as their own, the covenant through which it has been provided had to be sealed and ratified with the blood of Jesus. The neces­sity of this the Apostle now proceeds to illustrate (1) by the anal­ogous case of a will of testament; and (2) by example of the Old Covenant.

Hebrews 9:16 —For where a testament is, etc.—That is, before a testament can have any legal force, the death of the testator must be known and publicly acknowledged as a fact. The reference which our au­thor makes to “ the eternal inheritance” at the close of the preced­ing verse, suggested to his mind the case of a testament, and this thought he now takes up, not for the purpose of proving, but sim­ply of illustrating the necessity of Christ’ s death. Hebrews 9:17 —For a testament is of force after men are dead:— This is a well known law of all civilized nations. So long as the testator lives, it is his privilege to change his will as he pleases, and nothing but his death can therefore immutably fix and ratify its various stipulations. Previous to this indeed, his intended heirs may be al­lowed to enjoy to any extent the benefits of his estate. But not until the will is ratified by his death, can they claim a legal right to the inheritance as their own. And so it was with respect to the eternal inheritance. “ After Abraham had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.” (Hebrews 6:15.) That is, immediately after his death he was received into the enjoyment of the promised rest, as one of God’ s elect, and henceforth he was allowed to partake of the benefits of the inheritance so far as he was capable of enjoying them. (Hebrews 11:10 Hebrews 11:16.) And he also doubtless looked forward to the time when he and his children would be constituted the rightful owners of all things (Romans 4:13; 1 Corinthians 3:21-23), not excepting the redeemed and renovated earth. See notes onHeb_2:5-9. But it was not until the New Covenant was inaugurated by the death of Christ and ratified by his blood, that any one could claim, as we now claim, an absolute right to the eternal inheritance.

I see no reason for the protracted controversy that critics have kept up with respect to the meaning of the word diatheke in the sixteenth and seventeenth verses. It is quite evident that the dia- themenos of these verses is the maker of the diatheke, and that his death must of necessity take place before the diatheke can have any legal force. This is not true in the case of a covenant, but only in the case of a will or testament. And hence, beyond all doubt, the word diatheke in these verses means a will or testament. But on the other hand, it is equally obvious that this word cannot in this sense be literally applied to any of God’ s arrangements with men, nor does our author so intend to apply it. He refers to the well- known law of a will as an analogous case, merely for the purpose of illustrating his point, and of so impressing more deeply on the mind of his readers the necessity of Christ’ s death, before God could consistently bestow on the heirs of the promise a right in fee-simple to the eternal inheritance.

The word diathemenos means both a covenanter and a testator, and the word diatheke means in like manner both a covenant and a testament. And hence it was perfectly natural and legitimate that our author should, in this in­stance, pass from the first meaning of diatheke to the second, with­out however intending to apply the word to any of God’ s arrange­ments in a sense which would be altogether inapposite.

Hebrews 9:18 —Whereupon neither was the first testament dedicated without blood.— Or more literally, Wherefore neither was the first covenant inaugurated without blood. The sixteenth and sev­enteenth verses are but an illustration of the fundamental principle submitted in the fifteenth, viz., that the death of Christ was neces­sary in order to redemption from the sins committed under the Old Covenant, and also to the rightful inauguration of the New Cove­nant, so that all the redeemed might have a legal right to the eter­nal inheritance. This thought the Apostle now proceeds to illus­trate still further by referring to the way in which the Old Cove­nant was inaugurated. Since therefore it is thus and so in the case of a will, it is also analogically true of all the diathekai of God; they, too, must be inaugurated and ratified by means of death and the sprinkling of blood. And hence even the Old Covenant, which was but a type of the New, was not inaugurated without blood.

Hebrews 9:19 —For when Moses had spoken, etc.— There is reference here to the solemn transactions that are recorded in Exodus 24:1-8. When Moses had received from God the laws and ordinances re­corded in Exodus 20-23, he recited them to the people, and they all answered with one voice and said, “ All the words which the Lord hath said we will do.” After this; he wrote all the words and commandments of the Lord in a book; and when he had again re­cited them to the people, and had received their second response, he then proceeded, as our author says, to ratify the covenant, by taking “ the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop,” with which he “ sprinkled both the book and all the people.” The account of these transactions, as given by both Moses and Paul, is very brief, each of them writing under the in­fluence of plenary inspiration, like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, selected only such particulars as best served to accomplish his purpose. Moses makes no mention of the blood of goats, nor of the water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, which were used on the occasion, nor does he speak of the sprinkling of the book of the covenant. And Paul, on the other hand, says nothing about build­ing the altar and the twelve pillars, nor does he specify the particu­lar kinds of offerings which were offered by the young men at the bidding of Moses. Like the Gospel narratives, however, these ac­counts are both true so far as they go, for on no fair principle of interpretation can mere omissions be construed as inconsistencies or discrepancies. The hyssop and scarlet wool were used on other occasions for the sprinkling of blood and water.

See Exodus 12:22; Leviticus 14:4-7; Numbers 19:18-19, etc. Usually the bunch of hyssop was fastened to a stick of cedar wood, by means of a scarlet band, and then wrapped round with scarlet wool for the purpose of ab­sorbing the blood and the water that were to be sprinkled.

Hebrews 9:20 —Saying, This is the blood of the testament— That is, This is^the blood by means of which the covenant is ratified, and you yourselves purified and consecrated to God, as his peculiar people. This shows that without the shedding and sprinkling of blood, the people could not be received into covenant relation with God: nay more, that without this blood, the covenant itself could have no va­lidity.

Hebrews 9:20 —Which God hath enjoined unto you.— The use of the word en­joined (eneteilato) shows very clearly that the Sinaitic Covenant was not a mere compact or agreement (suntheke), as made be­tween equals. On the contrary, it was a solemn arrangement (dia- theke) proposed by God himself to the people for their acceptance; and which when accepted unconditionally on their part, had to be ratified with blood.

Hebrews 9:21 —Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, etc.— This cannot have reference to the occasion spoken of in Exodus 24:1-8; for the Tabernacle was not then constructed. But the Apostle must refer here to the consecration of the Tabernacle ac­cording to the directions given in Exodus 40:9-11. True indeed there is no explicit mention made in these about the sprinkling of blood. God simply says to Moses, “ Thou shalt take the anointing oil, and anoint the Tabernacle and all that is therein, and thou shalt hallow it and all the vessels thereof; and it shall be holy. And thou shalt anoint the altar of burnt-offerings and all its vessels, and sanctify the altar; and it shall be an altar most holy. And thou shalt anoint the laver and its foot, and sanctify it.” In all this, there is nothing said about the sprinkling of blood on either the Tabernacle or its furniture.

But neither is there anything said in the following verses (12-16) of the same chapter, about sprinkling blood on Aaron and his sons: and yet we know from Leviticus 8:30, that blood, as well as oil, was sprinkled on the Priests at the time of their con­secration. The mere silence of Moses is therefore no evidence that the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry were not purified with blood, as well as anointed with oil.

We all believe on the tes­timony of Paul (Acts 20:35), that Christ said on one occasion, “ It is more blessed to give than to receive” ; though this saying is not recorded in any of the Gospel narratives. And just so we rea­son in the case under consideration. The statement of Paul is quite sufficient on this point, without further evidence; though it is worthy of notice that the testimony of Josephus is to the same ef­fect as that of Paul. Speaking of the consecration of the Priests he says, “ And when Moses had sprinkled Aaron’ s vestments, himself, and his sons, with the blood of the beasts that were slain, and had purified them with spring water and ointment, they became God’ s Priests. After this manner did he consecrate them and their gar­ments for seven days together. The same did he to the Tabernacle and the vessels thereto belonging,— both with oil first incensed, as I said, and with blood of bulls and rams slain day by day, one, according to its kind.” (Ant. iii. 8, 6.) From this statement of Jo, as well as from the narrative of Moses (Ex. 40: 9-16), it seems most likely that the consecration of the Tabernacle and that of the Priest took place at the same time.

Hebrews 9:22 —And almost all things are by the law purged with blood: — That is, the Law required that almost everything defiled in any way, should be purified by means of blood. In some cases, indeed, purification was made by means of water (Leviticus 16:26 Leviticus 16:28; Numbers 31:24) ; and in others, by fire and water (Numbers 31:22-23) ; but the exceptions to the general rule of purification by blood, were but few. Hebrews 9:22 —And without the shedding of blood is no remission.— To this law, there was no exception. Every sin required an atonement; and no atonement could be made without blood. The only appar­ent exception given in the Law is in the case of one who was too poor to bring “ two turtle-doves or two young pigeons for a sin- offering.” (Leviticus 5:11-13.) In that event, he was required to bring to the Priest the tenth part of a ephah (about seven pints) of fine flour, without oil or frankincense, a handful of which, the Priest was to burn as a memorial upon the altar. But that even in this case, the sin of the poor man was not forgiven without the shed­ding of blood, seems evident from what follows in the next verse of the same chapter, where it is said, “ And the priest shall make an atonement for him for the sin which he hath sinned, and it shall be forgiven him.” This atonement, it seems, could not be made with­out blood; for God says (Leviticus 17:11), “ I have given it [the blood] to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” This law was regarded by the Jews as universal in its application: for in the Talmud it is said, “ There is no atonement except in blood” (Yoma 51). It is most likely therefore that in this case, the Priest was required to make an atonement for the sin of the poor man, at the public expense. The memorial was made with flour; but the atonement with blood. Hebrews 9:23 —It was therefore necessary, etc.— Without these sacrifices required by the Law, the Tabernacle and all its furniture would have been unclean; and the Priests themselves would have been unclean; so that no acceptable service could have been rendered to God in either the court or the Tabernacle. Nay more, without these sacrifices, the book of the covenant would have been unclean, and the covenant itself would never have been ratified. The very existence of the Theocracy depended, therefore, on the shedding and sprinkling of blood, without which the whole nation of Israel would have been cast off as an unclean thing.

Hebrews 9:23 —But the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these;— This profoundly significant phrase naturally sug­gests to our minds the following queries: (1) What are the “ better sacrifices” with which the heavenly things are cleansed? (2) What are the heavenly things that are cleansed by means of these sacrifices? And (3) what is meant by the sacrificial cleansing of these heavenly things?

(1) By the better sacrifices is evidently meant the sacrifice of Christ himself. The plural is put for the singular by synecdoche, because of the plurality of the Levitical sacrifices which are spoken of in the same verse. See a similar case in Luke 16:9.

(2) “ The heavenly things” include all the antitypes of the Jew­ish Tabernacle, etc. The Holy Place had to be cleansed with the blood of bulls and goats, and so also had the Most Holy Place. (Leviticus 16:11-20; Hebrews 9:21.) But the former was a type of the Church, as God’ s dwelling-place on Earth; and the latter was a type of Heaven itself where God ever dwells with the spirits of the just made perfect. See notes on Hebrews 8:2, and also on Hebrews 9:11-12. It is evident therefore that in the “ heavenly things” are included both the Church on earth and the Church of the redeemed in Heaven. For as our author says, Christ has not entered into holy places made with hands, counterparts of the true, but into Heaven itself, now to be manifested in the presence of God in our behalf.

(3) The third query is confessedly one of great difficulty: and it may perhaps be entirely above our present very limited attain­ments in the knowledge of Divine things. That the Church on Earth with all that pertains to it, needs the cleansing influence of the blood of Christ in order to make it a fit temple for the Holy Spirit, and to qualify its members severally for a place in the upper Sanctuary, is obvious enough. On this point, therefore, discussion is wholly unnecessary. But why should Heaven itself, or anything belonging to it, need to be cleansed by the atoning blood of the Lord Jesus? In reply to this question it is alleged (1) that the necessity arises from the sin of those angels who kept not their first estate, but who in consequence of their rebellion were cast down to Tartarus. (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6.) But angels are not em­braced in our premises; and must not therefore be forced into our conclusions. See note on 2: 16. (2) It is supposed that “ in con­sequence of the presence of sin in us, the Holy of holies in the heavenly world could not be reopened for our approach, until it was itself anointed with the blood of atonement” (Stier).

In the verb purified (katharisesthai), says Bloomfield, “ there is a meton­ymy, such as we often find when things partly similar and partly dissimilar are compared. For by the legal purifications, an en­trance was afforded to the Sanctuary; so, by taking the effect as standing for the cause, Heaven is said to be purified or consecrated by the service of Christ, instead of saying that an entrance by it is given to that Heaven. So Rosenmuller and others. This is plau­sible ; but to my mind it is not altogether satisfactory. It looks too much like making the substance conform to the shadow, rather than the shadow to the substance.

Nothing short of a real purifi­cation of “ the heavenly things” will, it seems to me, fairly meet the requirements of the text. And I am therefore inclined to think that for the present, at least, this is for us rather a matter of faith than of philosophy. When we can fully comprehend and explain how much more holy God is than any of the holy angels (Revelation 15:4), and how it is that the very heavens are not clean in his sight (Job 15:15), we may then perhaps understand more clearly than we do now, how it is that “ the heavenly things,” embracing even the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, should need to be purified with the atoning blood of the Lord Jesus. The fact it­self seems to be clearly revealed in our text; but the reason of it is not so obvious. Can it be owing to the fact, that many of the saints were admitted into Heaven in anticipation of the death of Christ, and that though justified by faith, through the grace and forbearance of God, they nevertheless required the purifying appli­cation of the blood of Christ when shed, in order to make them absolutely holy. See notes on Hebrews 9:15.

Hebrews 9:24 —For Christ is not entered, etc.— In this verse the Apostle brings to a close the argument begun in the fifteenth, showing the necessity of Christ’ s death in order that the called might have an absolute right to the eternal inheritance. The services of the “ wordly sanctuary” required the blood of bulls and of goats, with­out which the high priest could not enter the Holy of holies to intercede for the people. But now the sphere and object of Christ’ s ministry require better sacrifices than these. “ For Christ,” as our author says, “ did not enter into holy places made with hands, mere counterparts of the true, but into heaven itself, now to be mani­fested in the presence of God in our behalf.” And hence the neces­sity that he should have to offer a sacrifice sufficient to meet, to the fullest extent, all that is required by infinite Justice.

By the “ holy places” (hagia) of our text are meant such as those into which the Jewish high priest entered in performing the services of the ancient Tabernacle. The word rendered figures (antitupa) means properly copies taken from a given pattern (tupos) ; such as counterfeit bills, etc. According to Scripture usage, the original heavenly realities are properly called archetypes (archetupa) ; the patterns shown to Moses in the Mount, the types (tupos) ; and the counterparts of these constructed by Moses, anti­types (antitupa). But in our modern usage we are wont to call the last of these types; and to apply both the names archetypes and antitypes to the original heavenly realities which the types were made to represent. The verb appear (emphanisthenai) is used in a forensic sense to denote that Christ is now manifested in the pres­ence of God as our Advocate. “ The whole comparison,” says Prof. Stuart, “ is taken from the custom of the Jewish high priest, who when he entered the most Holy Place was said to appear be­fore God or to draw near to God, because the presence of God was manifested over the Mercy Seat in the Holy of holies; and God was represented, and was conceived of by the Jews as sitting en­throned upon the Mercy Seat. Now as the high priest appeared before God in the Jewish Temple and offered the blood of beasts for expiation on the great Day of Atonement in behalf of the Jew­ish nation, so Christ in the heavenly Temple enters the most Holy Place with his own blood to procure pardon (aionon lutrosin) for us.”FURTHER OF THE GREAT BETWEEN THE AND THOSE THAT ARE BY CHRIST AS THE HIGH PRIEST OF OUR Heb_9:25-28 Hebrews 9:25 —Nor yet that he should offer himself often,— In the preceding paragraph our author has forcibly proved and illustrated the necessity of Christ’ s death as the only ground of redemption from sin. In doing this he reasons mainly from the analogies of the Old and New Covenant. Under the Old Covenant there was no remission of sins without blood; and so he argues there can be none under the New Covenant. But between these two institu­tions there are also many important points of contrast as well as of similarity, one of which the Apostle has already stated in the twenty- fourth verse; viz.: that Christ has not entered into the sanctuary made with hands like that into which Aaron and his successors en­tered ; on the contrary, he has gone into heaven itself, henceforth to appear in the presence of God for us. In the twenty-fifth verse he goes on to state another point of difference between the work of Christ and that of the Levitical high priests. These had to offer the same sacrifices year by year, but not so with Christ. Hebrews 9:26 —For then must he often have suffered, etc.—Every offering of himself in heaven would of course imply an antecedent sacri­ficial death on earth. If, then, an annual offering were necessary, an annual sacrificial death would also be necessary. But in that event he must have often suffered since the foundation of the world (apo kataboles kosmou) ; that is, since the epoch of the Adamic renovation. But this he has not done. He has suffered but one death, and has, therefore, made but one offering. Hebrews 9:26 —But now once in the end of the world, etc.— Or more liter­ally: But now once in the end of the ages (epi suntcleia ton aio- non), he has been manifested for the putting away of sin by the sacrifice of himself: thus demonstrating that the one offering of himself is sufficient to meet all the requirements of the case; and that it is not, therefore, necessary to repeat the offering as the high priests were required to do under the Old Economy. The one of­fering of Christ, therefore, reaches back in its meritorious effects to the fall of man and forward to the end of time. Another point of contrast made here by the Apostle consists in this, that the high priest under the Law went into the Holy of Ho­lies with alien blood (en haimati allotrioi) ; that is, invested, as it were, with the blood of a young bullock and a goat; but Christ went into heaven invested with his own blood, by means of which he has paid the immense debt that was due to Divine Justice, and so obtained eternal redemption for all who love and obey him. Hebrews 9:27 —And as it is appointed unto men once to die,— The Apos­tle still keeps up the contrast between Christ and the Jewish high priest. The latter, as we have seen, went once a year with the blood of an innocent victim into the Holy of Holies, and there having made an offering for himself and for the sins of the peo­ple, he came out of the sanctuary still defiled by sin; and he had, therefore, to repeat the same offerings year by year continually. But not so with Christ. His case, on the contrary, rather resem­bles, in some respects, the lot of all men. They are all by the Di­vine sentence (Genesis 3:19) appointed to die once. Hebrews 9:27 —But after this the judgment: or, rather, “ But after this, judg­ment” (krisis without the article). The Apostle seems to refer here more particularly to the judgment which is virtually pro­nounced on every man immediately after death than to the general judgment which will take place at the close of Christ’ s mediatorial reign, though both of these may be included in his remark. But as every one goes to his own proper place after death (Daniel 12:13; Luke 16:22-23; Acts 1:25; 2 Corinthians 5:1 2 Corinthians 5:8, etc.), it follows, of course, that the true character of every individual is determined on his exit from this world; and that his destiny is then also virtually determined. And just so it was in the case of Christ, as our au­thor now proceeds to show. Hebrews 9:28 —So Christ [also] was once offered to bear the sins of many;—That is, he died once under the fearful load of human guilt, for Jehovah laid on him the iniquities of us all. (Isaiah 53:4-6.) But no sooner did he die than he was justified. The unrighteous decision of Pilate and the Jewish Sanhedrin was immediately reversed in the Supreme Court of the universe. God himself then acknowl­edged him as his Son, raised his body from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly realms, angels, and authori­ties, and powers being made subject to him. (Ephesians 1:20-22; 1 Peter 3:22, etc.) Hebrews 9:28 —And unto them that look for him, etc.—This refers to the sec­ond personal advent of Christ, when he shall come out of the Holy of Holies, as did the High Priest under the Law, to bless those who are anxiously waiting for his appearing. But he will not then come like the High Priest still laden with sin. Once, indeed, he bore the iniquity of us all; and so very great was the burden of our guilt as we have seen (notes Hebrews 5:7), that it even crushed the blood from his veins, and finally ruptured his heart. But the blood which then flowed from his heart, under the tremendous pressure of human guilt, has washed away from him, as well as from us, all our iniquities, so that when he comes the second time there will not be a trace of sin about his person. But robed in the habiliments of righteousness, he will come in power and glory to redeem his saints, and to take vengeance on them who know not God, and who obey not the Gospel. Then we too will “ be made the righ­teousness of God in him.” (2 Corinthians 5:21.) Hebrews Chapter NineVerse 1 VCHRIST BETTER (Hebrews 9:1 to Hebrews 10:39); OF THE RITES AND OF THE LAW; THEIR TO THE DIGNITY AND THE OF CHRIST AND HIS BLOOD AND Now even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service, and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world. (Hebrews 9:1) The mundane sanctuary mentioned here is doubtless the tabernacle constructed and erected in the wilderness by Moses upon instructions of God; and the fact that the more ancient tabernacle, rather than the Herodian temple, comes to view here should not be viewed as an indication that the temple was not then standing, or that the recipients of this epistle were not Jewish. It is precisely in line with the author’s thesis that he should go back to the original tabernacle, erected according to the pattern God gave Moses, rather than appeal to the temple then standing, which, after all, had been copied from the tabernacle in all its essential details. The word “ordinances” in this place means “regulations.” Beginning here is a detailed and extensive contrast between that worldly sanctuary, whether the tabernacle or the temple, which was the center of the Jewish religious institution, with the heavenly counterpart of it which is the grand theater of the redemptive ministry of Jesus. “Divine service” is an implication that God is recognized as the author of all those things in the “sanctuary of this world.” Verse 2 For there was a tabernacle prepared the first wherein were the candlestick, and the table and the showbread; which is called the Holy place.For a diagram of the three compartments, the court, the holy place, and the most holy place, see in the tenth chapter. The “first” tabernacle in this verse is identified by the articles of furniture in it as the holy place. In it there were the golden candlestick on the south, the table of showbread on the north, and the golden altar of incense near the curtain, or veil (Exodus 40:22 Exodus 40:24 Exodus 40:26). Such is the importance of these objects, as being the patterns of great spiritual realities which they typified, that some particular attention is due each of them. THE GOLDEN History, through the overruling providence of God, has preserved a likeness of the golden candlestick that was in the Herodian temple destroyed by Vespasian and Titus in 70 A.D. The candlestick, along with other treasures, was looted and carried in the triumphal procession in Rome; and, when the Arch of Titus was constructed to memorialize the victory, both the table of showbread and the candlestick were detailed in the carvings decorating the arch and may still be seen there in the excavated ruins of ancient Rome. Plaster casts of those carvings are exhibited in the Metropolitan Museum, New York; and from these is evident the immense weight of those golden treasures, several men being necessary to bear each of them. The golden candlestick was the only source of light in the holy place, symbolizing the truth that the only light of the church is the word of God, thus making the candlestick also a symbol of the Bible, or type of it. Zechariah’s question of the meaning of the seven golden candlesticks (Zechariah 4:1-6) evoked this response from the angel, “This is the word of the Lord”; and although limited as “unto Zerubbabel” in that reference, there can be little doubt that it stands for all the word of the Lord in the whole Bible; and, as such, it is a fantastically accurate and instructive type of it. Its seven branches stand for the seven divisions of the Bible: (1) the Law of Moses; (2) and the Prophets; (3) and the Psalms (Luke 24:44) in the Old Testament; and the other four divisions; (4) the Gospels; (5) the Book of Acts; (6) the Epistles; and (7) Revelation, in the New Testament, the latter four divisions being implicit by the inherent nature of the books themselves, and from the revelation of three Old Testament divisions enunciated by the Lord himself. Other and more elaborate divisions of the Bible are sometimes given; but the divisions noted here have the authority of Jesus’ own acceptance of them. The three Old Testament divisions are called by the Hebrews, Torah, Nebhiim, and Kethubhim.Zechariah 4:12). The Old Testament and New Testament are typified. The candlestick required constant care, twice a day, or oftener, when the lamps were trimmed and supplied with oil, the same being eloquently typical of the constant care, meditation, reading and study of the Bible. Also, note the centrality of the division representing the Four Gospels, standing exactly where it should, with the three branches on the left descending (as through history) and flowing into it, and the three branches on the right rising and coming up out of it. The Old Testament looks forward to the gospel; the New Testament looks back to it. In the centrality of the branch representing the Gospels is also the explanation of the ten golden candlesticks (1 Kings 7:49), which, in all probability, were made by extending the central branch upward into four separate divisions elevated above the other six, thus making five on each side, but which must not be thought of as a deviation from the number of seven golden candlesticks so emphatically required (Exodus 25:3 ff). The only way to get any EVEN NUMBER of candlesticks would involve dividing and extending the central stem. Thus those four divisions were essentially one, just as the Four Gospels are one; and that ancient Hebrew variation was an unconscious emphasis upon that part of the candlestick especially representative of Christ and his Gospels. THE TABLE OF On the north side of the holy place, the table of showbread balanced the golden candlestick on the south side, and itself was typical of momentous truth in the new covenant. Twelve loaves of bread were kept fresh on the table and were arranged in two rows, suggesting the providence of God in the provisions made for his people, the two rows reminding one of the two Israels, the fleshly Israel and the spiritual Israel. This table is likewise not without its reference to the table in the kingdom of Christ (Luke 22:29-30). In this table, no less than in the case of the candlestick, there were also examples of Jewish decorative variations being providentially overruled to provide even more startling symbolism of true spiritual realities. Josephus described the decorations of the table of showbread made by Ptolemy. It was elaborately covered with a grapevine, described thus, (It had) tendrils of the vine, sending forth clusters of grapes, that you would guess were nowise different from real tendrils; for they were so very thin, and so very far extended at their extremities, that they were moved by the wind, and made one believe that they were the product of nature, and not the representation of art.[2]How strange indeed that Christ, the true vine, and the “fruit of the vine” so sacred to his disciples should thus have been so gloriously depicted upon the ancient table of showbread; and that, it seems, not by reason of any divine instruction, but merely after the fancy of men. Surely God was in those things pertaining to the ordinances of his divine service. Of course, the bread also, as exhibited on that table, has its counterpart in the bread of the Lord’s Supper, itself symbolical of that bread which came down from God out of heaven, the bread of life, of which, if a man eat, he shall never die; and God shall raise him up at the last day. The reader should be aware that many things have been said to be represented by such things as the candlestick and the table. Macknight’s suggestion that the candlestick represented “the seven planets (!)” and that the table represented the provision available from the earth for man and beast,[3] is an example. It is the view here that those marvelous objects plainly said to be “copies of the things of heaven” are worthy of being received as types of that entire spiritual system which they symbolized. THE GOLDEN ALTARFrom Exodus 40:22 Exodus 40:24 Exodus 40:26, the placement of the golden altar appears to have been near the veil through which the high priest entered the most holy place; and from the fact of its being an altar of incense, it should be understood as a type or symbol of the prayers of God’s people (Revelation 5:8), the incense representing the prayers, and the altar the institution of prayer itself. Many of the pioneer preachers of the Restoration, on whose memory may God’s blessing rest, made a great deal of the symbolism in the location of the altar within the holy place typifying the church, and not in the court typifying the world, thus making prayer to be a special privilege of the Christian within the church, and not a privilege pertaining to all people indiscriminately. Such does not deny that God may answer prayer from anyone, as for example when Christ granted the request of the demons (Matthew 8:31-32), if such should correspond to the divine will; but there cannot be any doubt that, at least, generally, prayer is the privilege within, not without, the covenant relationship with God. It should not be confusing that the golden altar of incense is said to pertain to the Holy of Holies (Hebrews 9:4), because, situated as it was, so near to the entrance through the veil, it did indeed pertain to the most holy place of all, but it was not located within the holiest place but without in the holy place. Therefore, it is discussed here in connection with the holy place, along with the candlestick, and the table of showbread. In its use, the altar was significantly associated with the solemn ritual on the day of atonement, when the high priest made two or three excursions within the Holy of Holies with this altar as the pivot around which his activities revolved. Thus, it is no violation of truth to speak of it as pertaining to the Holy of Holies, especially since it is not said that the altar was “in” the Holy of Holies, but that the Holy of Holies “had” a golden altar (Hebrews 9:4) Barmby said, (The altar) was an appendage of the Holy of Holies, though not actually inside it, in the same way (to use a homely illustration by Delitzsch) as the signboard of a shop belongs to the shop and not to the street.[4]The location of the golden altar near the veil which typified, among, other things, the curtain of death, calls attention to the special urgency of prayers as one draws near to death, or as he may be brought into the contemplation of it. See article on the veil of the temple, below. [2] Josephus, Life and Works of, translated by William Whiston (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston), p. 351. [3] James Macknight, Apostolic Epistles (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1960), p. 546. [4] J. Barmby, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 21, Hebrews, p. 227. Verse 3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies.The only access to that Holy of Holies was through the veil, a description of which is afforded by Exodus 26:31 ff. It was this veil which was parted in twain from the top to the bottom at the time of our Lord’s crucifixion (Matthew 27:51), thus being brought into focus to reveal an astonishing weight of symbolism. THE VEIL OF THE TEMPLEThe three colors of the veil (Exodus 26:31 ff), blue above, scarlet beneath, and purple between, formed by the perfect blending of the other colors, suggest the doctrine of the Trinity, and particularly the person of Christ whose heavenly nature (the blue) was perfectly blended with his earthly nature (the scarlet) to form the perfect co-mingling of the two (the purple) in his person as the unique God-man. The spiritual and heavenly nature of the things typified by the veil is typified by the embroidered cherubim upon it. According to the scriptures, that ancient veil stands typical of a number of things.

1. It is a symbol of the mysteries of the Old Testament. Paul said of Israel, Their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth, it not being revealed to them that it is done away in Christ. But unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart. But whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away (2 Corinthians 3:14-16). Only in Christ can the Old Testament be understood, even by Israel. Christ is the “seed” of Abraham, “the Son of David,” the “Lion of the tribe of Judah,” “that Prophet like unto Moses,” the suffering “servant” of Isaiah, the priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, and so on and on. His resurrection was the “sign of the prophet Jonah,” and his herald, John the Baptist, was “that Elijah which was to come.”
2. It is a symbol of death and Christ’s triumph over death. Isaiah said, And he (God) will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces (Isaiah 25:7-8). In this passage, death is plainly called the veil that is spread over all nations, thus the destruction of that veil symbolizes the triumph of Christ over death; and, previously to that, the veil stood for centuries as a type of death itself, appropriately attested by its strategic location between the sanctuary (the church) and the most holy place (heaven). The scriptural authority for such a view of the veil is seen in the reference to Christ’s entering heaven for us as “entering into that which is within the veil” (Hebrews 6:19).
3. The veil also typified the flesh of Christ, or his person, and the fact of his person’s being rent, at the very moment of the Lord’s death, for our sins. It is therefore “through the veil, that is to say his flesh,” that one draws near to God (Hebrews 10:19-22).
4. There is a double symbolism in the veil as a type of the law of Moses, being the pivotal instrument in the entire system, and also upon the annulment that fell on the law when Christ died and the veil was rent in twain (Colossians 2:14).
5. It was a symbol of the chief function of the law of Moses which was actually one of concealment, specifically, the concealment of the ministrations of the high priest on the day of atonement, and is therefore typical of the office of the Jewish high priest, and in its being rent, a symbol of the removal of that office. No earthly high priest is now needed; there is only “one mediator between God and man, himself also man, Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5-6).
6. The veil was symbolical of the separation between God and man, it being the prime function of the veil, as of the whole Mosaic institution, to keep men away from God and to emphasize the unbridgeable gulf that separated them; again, the double symbolism is continued in the rending of the veil being made, in the New Testament, to be the opening up of a “new and living way” through Christ for people to draw near to God (Hebrews 10:20).
7. Most emphatically, the veil is a symbol of the equality among God’s children. The old covenant had its lesser priests, and high priest, who alone might enter the holiest place of all; but all such distinctions are removed in Christ’s kingdom. “All of you are brethren” is the way Jesus expressed it (Matthew 23:8). Peter denominated all of God’s children as a “holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5), and even as a “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9). To be sure, the veil did not symbolize such an equality until after it was rent in twain, being prior to that time a symbol of their inequality; and from this, it appears that the most important thing anyone can know about that old veil is that it was rent asunder by God himself. Therefore, every time a human being gets between God and one of his holy and royal priests (Christians) and tries to be something of a higher priest to perform some intercessory or mediatorial or judicial service, such a man is only trying to patch up that old veil which was destroyed by the hand of God when Christ was crucified. Let no man, therefore, hide behind a veil to hear another’s confession, or to pass sentence, or to prescribe penalties, or perform any function whatsoever. It is only that old veil trying to come back. Remember that God took it away. Tear it down therefore and trample upon it. Take it away forever.

Let it come no more between the person who has been redeemed by the blood of Christ and the presence of God, to which presence every true believer has “access,” not upon the sufferance of any man, clerical or otherwise, but by the will of God through Christ. People are no more children hiding in the folds of an old veil; let them walk in the Light. The “holy of holies” mentioned in Hebrews 9:3 is discussed as a type of heaven in Hebrews 10. Verse 4 Having a golden altar of incense, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was a golden pot holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant.The golden altar was discussed under the preceding verse. From its location, it is more readily identified with the sanctuary than with the Holy of Holies. A more detailed examination of the other things mentioned here and which were in the Holy of Holies will not be attempted. None of the articles described here was ever found in the Herodian temple; and it was perhaps for this very reason that the author of Hebrews elected to draw his illustrations from the tabernacle, rather than from the temple; therefore, the emphasis here on the tabernacle, not the temple, does not mean that the temple had been destroyed when Hebrews was written. The temple of Solomon was said to have all the articles mentioned here, except the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod that budded. Long before New Testament times, the Chaldeans had sacked Jerusalem and carried away the ark of the covenant which they never returned; and, in the times of Josephus, a contemporary of Christ and the apostles, that Jewish historian related that there was nothing whatever behind the veil within the Holy of Holies.[5] Thus there was sound logic in appealing to the tabernacle, rather than to the current temple, to bear the weight of analogy so important to the theme of the book of Hebrews. THE ARK OF THE Taking a cubit as eighteen inches, the ark of the covenant was a gold box, 45 inches long, 27 inches wide, and 27 inches deep; and, in addition to its extravagant cost, its principal glory rested in its location within the Holy of Holies, and in its contents mentioned above, which included the sacred tables of the Decalogue itself. One may feel, therefore, some of the excitement and thrill of Moses who received instructions from God for making the ark and placing it in the most holy place (Exodus 25:10-11). Having a golden crown about its top and inlaid within and without with pure gold, it was indeed a fitting receptacle of the sacred tablets on which God inscribed the commandments of the Decalogue. Moses might very well have thought, “Surely God has gone the limit of making holy things in such an object as the ark of the covenant.” (See under “Mercy Seat,” below.) The golden pot holding the manna and Aaron’s rod that budded were not said in the Pentateuch to have been placed in the ark of the covenant; but no objection can be lodged against the statement in Hebrews to that effect, because such a keeping place would have been perfectly in line with God’s instructions that they were to be “laid up before the Lord” (Exodus 16:33), and “before the testimony” (Numbers 17:10). Rather than attempting a full discussion of these two items and the glorious events memorialized by them, we choose to fall back on the reason alleged by the author of Hebrews himself that these are some of the things of which “we cannot now speak severally,” the reason being that far too much time and space would be required. And the tables of the covenant effectively identify the covenant spoken of in Hebrews as the Decalogue covenant. Jeremiah’s great prophecy of the new covenant, more fully discussed in Hebrews 8, plainly identified the old covenant as the one God made with Israel and Moses at the time of the exodus from Egypt, the one containing the ten commandments, and the one which Israel did not keep. Efforts to dissociate the moral part of that covenant from the annulment that fell upon it fail in the light of such clear identification as this. ENDNOTE: [5] Josephus, op. cit., p. 784. Verse 5 And above it cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy-seat; and of which things we cannot now speak severally.Although the author of Hebrews was in a hurry to move forward to the extensive deductions to be made from the mention of the various sacred things, perhaps it would be well to borrow a little time to glance at the surpassingly marvelous symbolism of the mercy-seat. Compare with note on the ark of the covenant, above. THE MERCY SEATWe have already noted the heavenly emphasis upon the ark of the covenant and the preference that pertained to it, as to location, cost, contents, etc.; and it can only be imagined, therefore, what must have been the astonishment of Moses when he was instructed to make a mercy-seat (Exodus 25:17 ff) of the same lateral dimensions, to adorn it with intricately carved figures of cherubim facing each other with wings arched upward and forward, posing in an attitude of worship, and peering intently downward into the mercy-seat, and to place it ABOVE AND ON TOP OF THE ARK OF THE ! There, in the location of that mercy-seat, was revealed the key fact of all God’s dealings with the race of Adam, namely, that by God’s eternal will, his mercy stands enthroned even above his law; and no more significant truth was ever made apparent under the types and symbols of the old covenant. Generations of people beheld the wonder of God’s mercy-seat above God’s law; but neither men nor angels understood it, nor could they understand it, until the Christ ascended Golgotha. That this typical elevation of mercy above law in the economy of God was a matter of wondering amazement even to the angels is depicted in the symbol itself, in the attitude of the cherubim, peering intently downward and straining their eyes, so to speak, to behold what the mystery was. It was probably of that very thing that Peter spoke these words, “which things the angels desire to look into” (1 Peter 1:12). Every mortal man, prone to sin, mired in the inevitable guilt associated with all human life, and conscious of his own helplessness to save himself - every man should thank God for the Father’s mercy, forever elevated even above his law, and for the salvation provided in that mercy through the blood of the Saviour. Verse 6 Now these things having been thus prepared, the priests go in continually into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the services.The use of the present tense in this verse shows that the services being performed by the priests were still going on which would mean that the Herodian temple was yet standing and certainly dating Hebrews prior to 70 A.D. Here is a partial list of services performed by the priests: (1) They lighted the lamps each evening and trimmed them every morning. (Exodus 27:21 Exodus 30:8). (2) Each sabbath day they renewed the loaves on the table of showbread (Leviticus 24:5). (3) They burned twice daily the incense on the golden altar, this coinciding with the morning and evening sacrifices, and with the trimming and lighting of the lamps (Exodus 30:7-8; Luke 1:10). All of these actions took place in the holy place. Verse 7 But into the second the high priest alone, once in the year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: the Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle is yet standing.The second designates the most holy place, or Holy of Holies, into which only the high priest could enter, and during which entry no lesser priest could ever stand in the sanctuary without, making it impossible to catch even a glimpse of that which was done within; and the high priest himself, far from having a continual access within the veil, could enter only under the strictest rules, and that upon only one day in the whole year, the Day of Atonement. Two points of emphasis appear in these verses: (1) the services of the high priest on the Day of Atonement, and (2) the great lesson so effectively taught by the Holy Spirit in such an arrangement. THE DAY OF Leviticus 16 details the duties of the high priest in making the atonement. He appeared before the door of the tabernacle with no less than four sacrifices, a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, both of these to be offered for the high priest and his family; and then there were two he-goats for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, these being for the whole of Israel. The high priest wore special linen garments for that occasion; and once used, the garments could not be taken out of the sanctuary. Further, he could not attire himself in those holy garments until he had washed himself in water. First, he slew a bullock and proceeded to offer its blood within the veil as an atonement for his own sins; but, before doing so, he took live coals from off the altar of incense, near the veil, in a golden censer, having with him a handful of the finely beaten sweet incense which he burned in the censer in such a way as to cover the mercy seat with smoke. Then he took of the blood of the bullock and sprinkled it seven times upon the eastward portion of the mercy seat. The atonement for himself and his house thus made, the high priest then killed one of the he-goats, selected somewhat earlier by lot, and used its blood to sprinkle on the mercy seat in the same way he had sprinkled the bullock’s blood; and this made the atonement for the errors and sins of the people. Significantly, there were also ceremonies of atonement for the holy place itself, and for the tabernacle, and the altar. It is not clear if there was a third entry within the veil or not; but certainly the high priest entered twice within the veil on that day, and possibly three times. From this, the meaning of “once a year” is actually “upon only one day in the year.” The remaining live he-goat, called the “scapegoat,” was next used in one of the most amazing ceremonies of the old institution. The high priest laid his hands on the goat’s head and confessed the sins of all Israel, after which the goat was driven off into some uninhabited place, thus “bearing away” the sins of the people. After this, the high priest re-entered the sanctuary, took off the sacred linen clothes, dressed himself in his own priestly regalia, after another ceremonial washing, and then came out of the tabernacle and offered the two rams as burnt offerings. The contaminating power of sin was dramatically symbolized in the special arrangements observed when the custodian of the scapegoat, after letting him go, bathed himself and washed his clothes before re-entering the camp. Also, the flesh of the bullock and goat, after their blood was sprinkled, was carried without the camp and burned, not even the hide being saved; and the persons charged with such details could not return to the camp without bathing and washing their clothes. THE OF THOSE The great significance of all that elaborate ceremony and its supporting services is simply this: the way into the Holy Place had not been revealed as long as the tabernacle services continued. The use of “tabernacle” here does not exclude the temple, as observed above, although it was still standing when Hebrews was written. As Milligan said, “It is plain enough that `the tabernacle’ is used here symbolically for the whole system of Jewish worship.[6]The ascription of purpose to the Holy Spirit in these verses shows that God was the author of all those rites, ceremonies, and institutions of the old covenant, and that God had a purpose in their design, a purpose here revealed. The purpose was to show dramatically the darkness of the Jewish institution. The people, even though they were God’s chosen people, could not enter even the sanctuary, to say nothing of the most holy place where God’s presence was symbolized. Only a relatively few priests could enter, and even they were excluded from entering within the veil, where only one of them, the high priest alone, might enter under the most limited circumstances, and upon only one day in the year.

And even when the high priest entered, the mercy seat was first covered with smoke of incense, showing that, even after all the ritual, God would not really look upon the high priest, except as through the smoke that screened his unworthiness from the Lord. Let it be remembered that the Holy of Holies was a type of heaven, eternal redemption, and fellowship with God, and it will appear how far short of redemption were those types and shadows of it in the old institution. This cannot mean that the ancient worthy patriarchs were not saved; it is freely conceded that they were saved; but the HOW of such a salvation could not be known as long as the old system stood. Christ opened up “the new and living way, through the veil, that is to say his flesh” (Hebrews 10:20). ENDNOTE: [6] R. Milligan, New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1962), Vol. 9, p. 250. Verse 9 Which is a figure for the time present; according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshiper perfect, being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation.The use of the present tense in “is a figure” and “are offered” points to the temple and its services as still operative when Hebrews was written. The great weakness of the old covenant was its carnality. To be sure, the worshiper who offered the proper sacrifices, washed himself ceremonially upon required occasions, observed the regulations as to meats and drinks, etc., could have been, and was, admitted into the commonwealth of God during that period; but none of those fleshly, carnal ordinances did anything at all to cleanse the consciences of sinners. The blood of bulls and goats, the sprinkling of altars, the ashes of a red heifer, the burning of incense, the washings, the changing of clothes, etc., none of those things made the slightest change in people’s hearts. That was the mortal weakness of the old covenant. Time would not allow in such a work as this a thorough study of all the rites and ceremonies of Judaism included in this general reference to them; but most of them, even the washings, are illustrated by the Day of Atonement ritual described above. Until a time of reformation designates the times of the Messiah and the new covenant. Christ referred to those times as “the times of regeneration” (Matthew 19:28), and Peter called them “times of refreshing” (Acts 3:19). Verse 11 But Christ having come a high priest of good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation.But Christ having come a high priest shows that the author of Hebrews considered the public ministry of Christ with his passion, death, and resurrection to be the termination of the old order, and not his birth, a truth attested by Christ’s fulfilling the law meticulously during his earthly sojourn. Of the good things to come is made to read “of the good things that have come” in the RSV; and even English Revised Version gives the alternative reading from certain old manuscripts; but there is no problem, because it is true either way. As Robertson said, It is a nice question which is the true text. Both aspects are true, for Christ is a high priest of good things that have already come as well as the glorious future hope.[7]Through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation is easily understood as far as the last two clauses are concerned, since they clearly refer to the spiritual and more heavenly nature of the perfect tabernacle; but it is a little more difficult to determine what the antitypical realities are in Christ, as compared with the ancient high priest. The Jewish high priest first offered the bullock OUTSIDE the sanctuary; the Lord also offered himself outside the city, or camp of Israel. The Jewish high priest then passed through the sanctuary and offered the blood within the veil. Christ also conformed to this pattern, with the additional fact that he was both the victim and the one offering the victim. Christ then passed through the sanctuary and into heaven itself (corresponding to that which is within the veil) and there offered his own blood. The problem is to determine what corresponds to the sanctuary through which the high priest passed to go within the veil; and how is it that Christ also passed through the great antitype of it? Barmby’s thorough exploration of the subject is helpful, although we draw back from accepting his conclusion.

He makes the tabernacle through which Christ passed on the way to heaven the atmospheric heavens and other areas short of entering into the very presence of God on High.[8] He also mentioned the conviction of the Ante-Nicene fathers generally as holding that it refers to Christ’s human nature, which Barmby refutes on the premise that Christ’s human nature was assumed at his birth prior to his offering himself; and the figure calls for the passing through the sanctuary after his sacrifice of himself. If Christ’s human nature, however, is restricted to mean the spiritual and glorified resurrection body, rather than his flesh throughout his earth life, we may escape the weight of Barmby’s refutation, and in addition pick up the most solid support of such a view from a number of other important considerations. Of invaluable aid in understanding this is the fact that the sanctuary is a type of the church of Christ; and the church, of course, is the spiritual body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27). To the objection to the above view (In what sense can it be said that he entered through it? We should say that he ascended WITH it to the right hand of God.),[9] we may only say that the difficulty in this view is far less than that attending any other view. A summary of what various scholars have said about this is taken from Milligan. Macknight says it was “the whole earth”; Chrysostom made it “the human nature of Christ”; Ebrard identified it with “the holy life of Christ”; Hofmann thought it was “the glorified body of Christ”; Bleek called it the “aerial and siderial heavens”; and Delitzsch explained it as “the heaven of angels and of the just made perfect."[10] The view preferred here is that of Hofmann, since whatever view is taken, it must be consistent with the relation of the church itself to the sanctuary; and Christ’s glorified body best suggests and maintains that fact. We strongly agree with Milligan to the effect that whatever the upper and greater tabernacle is, through which Jesus passed, “it manifestly includes the church of Christ."[11][7] A.

T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1932), Vol. 5, p. 398. [8] J. Barmby, op. cit., p. 230. [9] Ibid. [10] R. Milligan, op. cit., p. 253. [11] Ibid. Verse 12 Nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption.Two points of superiority in the high priesthood of Christ are stressed here, these being: (1) that by a more perfect medium, his own blood contrasted with blood of animals, and (2) that in a more exalted place of the offering, in heaven itself, Christ offered his own blood, not repeatedly, but once for all. The first of these superiorities the author elaborates in the next two verses, and the second beginning at Hebrews 9:25. Verse 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?The use of blood of bulls and goats on the Day of Atonement has already been discussed; and for the ritual with the ashes of a red heifer, see Numbers 19. These were used for ceremonial cleansing from such defilements as were incurred by touching a dead body. The heifer on which no yoke had come was required to be without blemish, and after the ceremonies was burned without the camp. The argument here is that Christ’s offering is superior to that of the old covenant by the same measure which values the blood of a man more than that of an animal; yes, even more, in that Christ was not merely a MAN, but the holy and perfect God-man himself. There are other points of superiority. Whereas animals were sacrificed without their consent, Christ consented to be the victim for man’s sins. Animals were offered by others; Christ offered himself. Moreover, the wonderful offering of Christ was by the purpose and consent of the eternal Spirit, not the Holy Spirit as usually understood, but the pre-existent, eternally divine Spirit of Christ himself which he had before the world was, and which during his earthly ministry was conjoined with his human nature. This distinction between the flesh of Christ and his Spirit appears in three other New Testament references, Romans 1:3-4; 1 Timothy 3:16; and 1 Peter 3:18. Barmby’s note on this reads: In all these passages, THE SPIRIT is that divine element of the life of Christ, distinct from the human nature which he assumed of the seed of David, in virtue of which he rose from the dead.[12]Thus the blood of animals was chosen and offered upon the volition and choice of men, whereas the offering of Christ was by the fiat of the eternal Spirit that was in Christ. Now it is admitted by the author of Hebrews that those animal sacrifices did perform their intended function by sanctifying unto the cleansing of the flesh; and if that was true, so he reasons, how much more shall the blood of Christ avail to the achievement of a clean conscience toward God. Regarding the expressions “dead works” and “the living God,” see notes under Hebrews 6:1 and Hebrews 3:12. Particular attention is now directed to the conscience and how it may be cleansed. THE The value of the human conscience is similar to that of a watch, its utility being determined absolutely by its synchronization with the correct time, not determined by the watch, but by the moment of the sun’s passing over a certain meridian; and like the watch, a man’s conscience can have many things wrong with it. It can be evil (Hebrews 10:22), seared (1 Timothy 4:2), defiled (Titus 1:15), ignorant (1 Timothy 1:13), and choked with dead works (Hebrews 9:14). In spite of the things that may go wrong with it, there is a vast weight of moral authority in the conscience. “If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our hearts and knoweth all things” (1 John 3:20). It is the glorious superiority of the new covenant that God has provided a way by which man’s conscience can be truly cleansed, and the basis of that cleansing is shown in this verse. It is by means of the blood of Christ. But how does the spirit of man come in contact with the blood of Christ? Surely not literally. Therefore, there must be some accommodation in doctrine or ordinance of God that enables that sinful soul to know that he has in fact touched the blood of Christ. If the thesis developed in these lines appears superficial or forced in any degree, let it be remembered that the sole means of obtaining a clean conscience is found in the blood of Christ and that there can be no cleansing apart from that blood. The metaphorical nature of the spiritual truth in this premise would lead us to expect some metaphorical explanation of it, and in this we are not disappointed. Note the following: (1) Take the view that Christ’s blood is in his body. To find contact with the blood, one would therefore have to enter the body of Christ; and how can this be done? Three times the sacred scriptures declare that people are baptized into Christ, that is, into his body (Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27). (2) Or take the view that Christ’s blood was in his death, that being the occasion of its being shed. How does one enter the death of Christ? The scriptural answer is, “All we who were baptized into Christ were baptized into his death” (Romans 6:3). In view of these things, who can doubt that Christian baptism is in some wondrous way related to the believer’s contact with the blood of Christ with its consequent cleansing of the conscience? If such is not the case, how could the apostle Peter have related baptism to the cleansing of the conscience in the manner of these words, “Which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Christ” (1 Peter 3:21)? The connection between baptism and a good conscience is so important that we shall give this verse from 1 Peter 3:21 in the various versions and translations in order for the reader to ascertain for himself what is the most likely meaning of it. The English Revised Version rendition given above is definitely not one of the better ones, as there would seem actually to be an effort to avoid the true meaning by breaking up the clause “baptism now saves you” by placement of the verb first, and by imposition of a five-syllable word “interrogation”! KJV: “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Christ.” RSV: “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Christ.” Emphatic Diaglott: “And immersion, a representation of this, now saves us (not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the seeking of a good conscience towards God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” J. B. Phillips: “What a perfect illustration this is of the way you have been admitted to the safety of the Christian `ark’ by baptism, which means, of course, far more than the washing of a dirty body: it means the ability to face God with a clear conscience. For there is in every true baptism the virtue of Christ’s rising from the dead.” E. J. Goodspeed: “Baptism which corresponds to it, now saves you also, (not as the mere removing of physical stain, but as the craving for a conscience right with God) - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” R. F. Weymouth: “And corresponding to that figure, baptism now saves you - not washing off of material defilement, but the craving of a good conscience after God - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” John Wesley: “The antitype whereof … baptism now saveth us, (not the putting away … the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” In all of these and many others, the unmistakable relationship between the ordinance of baptism and the possession of a good conscience is emphatically plain. Thus, the manner of people’s consciences being cleansed from dead works, although not within the perimeter of the author’s vision in these verses, is a matter of the greatest concern to all people. A good conscience becomes reality upon one’s obeying the gospel of Christ through faith, repentance and baptism, and rising to walk in newness of life. Without doubt, this fact underlies the reason that baptism, the great initiatory rite into the Christian religion, should have been so solemnly enjoined by the Saviour upon the occasions of his giving the great commission as related by Mark and Matthew. It may be added here as a deduction of our own, that wherever there is knowledge of the Lord’s commandment that all people, of all times, of all nations, should be baptized, there never lived a man, and there never will live a man, who can go before God with a good conscience until he has been baptized. ENDNOTE: [12] J. Barmby, op. cit., p. 231. Verse 15 And for this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of eternal inheritance.This shows that the real value of the old types and shadows lay in the perfect realization of them through Christ, their redemption, no less than ours, depending solely upon his atoning death. As Robertson expressed it, “So then the atoning sacrifice of Christ is the basis for the salvation of all who are saved before the cross and since."[13] No sin, in all the history of humanity, was ever forgiven except upon the basis of Christ’s atonement; and this is so mountainous a truth that God was said by Paul to have justified his “passing over the sins done aforetime” through the means of setting forth his Son to be a propitiation (Romans 3:25). The author shows here that Christ made an atoning death for the forgiveness of the sins under the old order, thus actually accomplishing their forgiveness, a thing which the old law could not achieve. This being done, the author continues, God is free to usher in the new covenant as prophesied byJeremiah 31:31ff. The absolute cancellation of the old covenant is implicit in this truth concerning Christ. Since not even the noblest under the law could ever possess true forgiveness apart from Christ, it logically follows that “Jesus only” is the basis of all further drawing near to God. “They that have been called” is not exclusive but relates to the world-wide invitation of the Master that “whosoever will may come.” ENDNOTE: [13] A. T. Robertson, op. cit., p. 401. Verse 16 For where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him that made it. For a testament is of force where there hath been death: for it doth never avail while he that made it liveth.THE (WILL) OF CHRISTThe word “testament” in these two verses comes from the same word translated “covenant” everywhere else in Hebrews; and since there are some facts related to wills that do not relate to covenants, the commentators have generally been at a loss to know how to treat this interjection of a drastically new thought. Of course, the Greek word from which both of these renditions comes means either; and the author of Hebrews is well within his rights to make a digression of the kind noted here. His doing so strongly reminds one of Paul and his custom of seizing upon a word or a phrase for a parenthetical development of it apart from his main line of thought. This appears to be exactly the case here. The parenthetical thought that flashed upon the author’s mind came as a result of that other meaning of the word for “covenant” which he had been using; and it was suggested by the mention of a death that had “taken place” for the redemption of the sins under the law. Then, departing for the moment from his main argument, and seizing upon the alternate meaning of the word, which is “testament,” he made an independent argument for the absolute necessity of Christ’s death within the framework of the alternate meaning. Since Christ is the heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2), people may inherit, therefore, only if Christ died; but he did die. And think of the benefits that accrue to people in this. Lenski has a perceptive paragraph on this subject, as follows: It becomes still clearer here why Christ is called the mediator of a testament. God made him the Heir, and thus through him alone who owns everything, through him and through his death as the testator, do we inherit as heirs. Although all comes from God, none of it reaches us save through Christ as the medium (Mediator), the middle link, the testator for us, whose death gives to us, his heirs, the great eternal inheritance … It is misleading to press these human terms, which convey the divine facts, so that these facts become blurred and distorted. The human testator dies and remains dead, his property is conveyed to heirs who in turn die; successive generations of heirs step into the shoes of their predecessors. Our Mediator-Testator died and thereby made us joint-heirs with him, heirs who never die so that their inheritance might be lost to them.

The word “eternal” which is used in verses Hebrews 9:2 Hebrews 9:4 and Hebrews 9:15 is not repeated and emphasized for naught.[14]The use of the word “testament” in these verses is the source of an incidental revelation for which people may be truly thankful. It furnishes an independent view of the entire concept of eternal life in Christ, a view which makes the eternal inheritance to be, in a sense, on a parity with receiving a bequest from some person who has left it in his will for another.

Such is the import of the word “testament” as used here. The terms of any will become binding only upon the death of the person making it; and they do not limit or impede in any way the free use of the testator’s property BEFORE his death. This sublime fact is precisely the reason why no person may claim forgiveness of his sins through a mere act of faith, as did a certain woman (Luke 7:50), or like the thief on the cross, for example. The testator had not then died; and the conditions under which it was prescribed how all people might inherit were not announced as yet. The value of this in understanding the preconditions of salvation is past all calculation. If people would inherit through Christ, who is the heir of all things, let them discover what his plenary representatives, the apostles of Christ, announced after his death as the binding terms of the testament, and obey them, meet those conditions; nor should they rely upon isolated and individual instances of Christ’s redemptive favor in which, prior to his death, salvation was conferred upon persons such as the thief on the cross and the certain woman already mentioned. To make such prior examples (prior to his death) any solid basis for determining how people are saved now, after Christ’s death, is a very hurtful error. ENDNOTE: [14] R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Augsburg Publishing House, 1938), p. 207. Verse 18 Wherefore even the first covenant hath not been dedicated without blood.If it should appear to any person that the writer’s insistence upon the death of Christ as a prerequisite of eternal life was anything strange or let him take note of the fact that even in the old covenant, there was no binding system until everything had been dedicated through blood. Such would seem to be the meaning of this verse. Verse 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses unto all the people according to the law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to you-ward. Moreover the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry he sprinkled in like manner with the blood. And according to the law, I may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission.The obstinate problem the author of Hebrews was dealing with in these verses was the prejudice of Jewish Christians who found the cross of Christ an offense and who were inclined to stumble at the death of Christ. This mention of all that blood and sprinkling is for the purpose of showing that all of the ancient typical institutions called for bloodshedding, not occasionally, but continually, such things being suggestive and typical of the death of Christ. Again from Lenski, Since there was so much use of blood in connection with the Mosaic testament and all that pertained to that testament, how can any of the readers find fault with Christ’s death and blood in connection with the new testament? They should do the very opposite: appreciate the fact that Christ’s death and blood are infinitely more precious than all the Mosaic sacrifices.[15]ENDNOTE: [15] Ibid., p. 307. Verse 23 It was necessary therefore that the copies of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these; but the heavenly things with better sacrifices than these.This verse concludes an argument the author began back in Hebrews 9:13, to the effect that Christ’s sacrifice is infinitely more wonderful and efficacious than any or all of the Mosaic sacrifices. Bruce’s illuminating comment on this is: Our author does not deny that such ritual cleansing was real and effective as far as it went. What he does deny is that cleansing of this kind could be of any use for the removal of inward and spiritual defilement. The various installations that were cleansed and fitted for the worship of God by the blood of animal sacrifices were but copies of the spiritual realities; where the spiritual realities themselves are concerned, a superior sacrifice and more effective cleansing must be forthcoming. It has frequently been asked in what sense the “heavenly things” required to be cleansed; but our author has provided the answer in the context. What required to be cleansed was the defiled consciences of men and women; this is a cleansing which belongs to the spiritual sphere.[16]ENDNOTE: [16] F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), p. 218. Verse 24 For Christ entered not into a holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us.Here the infinite superiority of Christ is related to the place where the offering of blood took place, not in some carnal, earthly, man-made holy place, but in heaven itself in the very presence of God. The result was a universalization of the benefits thus procured, making them available to all people. Hewitt has a quotation from Tasker, as follows: By entering heaven, the crucified Saviour transferred from an earthly, localized realm into a spiritual universal sphere the benefits of his passion. Therefore, his blood can be thought of as sprinkled in the hearts and consciences of all believers, who are in consequence able to draw nigh unto God through him.[17]ENDNOTE: [17] Thomas Hewitt, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960), p. 152. Verse 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own; else must he have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.For the significance of [@hapax] as used here, see under Hebrews 7:27. Its meaning is “once for all.” The glory of Christ’s sacrifice as set forth here consists of the complete, final, and irrevocable nature of the offering. It was not a repeated thing as were the offerings and sacrifices under Judaism but was a “once for all” accomplishment. As pointed out earlier, this eliminates any notion that the church should have something to offer or sacrifice, in such a thing as the mass, for example; for the one and only efficacious sacrifice has already been offered in heaven, where alone it could do any good and by the only one capable of doing it, Jesus the Lord. Implicit in this place is also the revelation of the true purpose of Jesus’ coming into this world. It was not to begin an earthly kingdom, nor to erect an earthly throne, nor to restore a literal kingdom to Israel, but to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Those who view the crucifixion of Christ as otherwise than something God planned and envisioned from the beginning have failed to grasp the most fundamental fact in all the scriptures. God’s offering of himself in the person of his Son upon the cross is the sine qua non of all human forgiveness and salvation. Verse 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him unto salvation.See under Hebrews 6:2 for notes concerning the “judgment.” It needs only to be added here, in the words of Milligan, that The true character of every individual is determined on his exit from this world; and that his destiny is then virtually determined. And just so it is in the case of Christ, as our author now proceeds to show.[18]On the appointment of death for all people, it may be remembered that there is nothing accidental relative to the universal sentence of death upon humankind. True, accidental death may occur for an individual; but all people are certain to die at last. Statistically, it cannot be viewed otherwise; because, if death had been merely a matter of something accidental, the billions that have lived would certainly have provided an exception. Having been once offered is an intimation of Isa 53:4-6. God indeed did lay upon him the iniquity of us all. The chastisement of our peace was upon him. We did esteem him stricken of God and afflicted. The Jewish hierarchy had their little day with him; they humiliated him and crowned him with every conceivable insult; they inflicted the most terrible punishment that people could devise upon him; he was despised and rejected of men and thus died for the sins of many. But after death, there quickly appeared the judgment of God upon Christ. He rose from the dead. The Supreme Court of the Universe reversed the adverse judgments of the Sanhedrin and the Roman procurator; and Christ was elevated to the right hand of the Majesty on High. The second time apart from sin is a reference to the second advent of Christ when he shall appear in flaming fire taking vengeance upon them that know not God and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). Yes, Christ shall be seen on earth again, not as a humble sufferer, but as the mighty judge before whom all people must give an account. The expression “them that wait for him” is a tender and beautiful suggestion of the necessity of mortal trial and tribulation, and is a directive that Christians should “wait it out,” never be discouraged, and endure to the end. Apart from sin suggests many things, among them being that our Lord shall not be grieved and distressed by the vicious deeds of the ungodly, that he shall have finally disposed of the sins of his disciples, having abolished them forever, even from God’s remembrance, and that the very presence of sin or sinners shall have no further existence before his face. ENDNOTE: [18] R. Milligan, op. cit., p. 266. “THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS”

Chapter Nine To appreciate the difference between the two covenants, their respective sanctuaries and divine services are compared. First the earthly sanctuary and the limitations of its divine services are reviewed (Hebrews 9:1-10); then the greater and more perfect heavenly sanctuary with emphasis on its better sacrifice, the blood of Christ Himself (Hebrews 9:11-28).

POINTS TO PONDER

• The symbolism of the earthly tabernacle and its divine services

• The superiority of the heavenly High Priest and His sacrifice

REVIEW

1. What are the main points of this chapter?- The earthly sanctuary and its service - Hebrews 9:1-10 - The heavenly sanctuary and its sacrifice - Hebrews 9:11-28
2. Describe the two parts of the earthly tabernacle and what they contained (Hebrews 9:2-5)- Holy place: lampstand, table of showbread, altar of incense

• Holiest of All: ark of the covenant, with the items in it, and the mercy seat

3. What were the limitations of the earthly tabernacle and its services? (Hebrews 9:9-10)- Symbolic, and could not make one perfect in regard to the conscience

• Imposed only until the time of reformation

4. Of what was Christ the High Priest? (Hebrews 9:11 Hebrews 9:24)- Of good things to come, of the greater and more perfect tabernacle (heaven)

5. What sacrifice did Jesus offer? (Hebrews 9:12 Hebrews 9:14)- His own blood, offered without spot

6. What does the sacrifice of Christ accomplish? (Hebrews 9:12 Hebrews 9:14-15 Hebrews 9:26 Hebrews 9:28)- Eternal redemption (even for transgressions under the first covenant)

• Cleansing consciences from dead works to serve the living God
• To put away sin, once and for all

7. When did the new covenant (testament) come into force? (Hebrews 9:15-17)- Not until Jesus died on the cross

8. What is appointed for men? (Hebrews 9:27)- To die once, and then the judgment

9. For whom will Christ appear a second time for salvation? (Hebrews 9:28)- Those who eagerly wait for Him Questions by E.M. Zerr On Hebrews 91. What did the first covenant have?

2. In what sense was it a worldly sanctuary?
3. What building was made for that covenant?
4. How many departments?
5. Name the things in the first department.
6. What divided between the departments?
7. State what was in the second ?
8. What was this second department called?
9. For what use was this golden censer ?
10. What was in the ark?
11. State what was on the ark.
12. What priests “ went always into the first” ?
13. For what purpose did they go into this place?
14. Who went into the second ?
15. Who went with him?
16. How frequently did he enter this place?
17. What did he take with him?
18. For what did he offer it ?
19. What did this arrangement signify?
20. To what does the “ holiest of all” here refer?
21. Why was the way into it not manifest then?
22. During what dispensation was this still the case?
23. Continuance of tabernacle service indicates what?
24. What class of teachers was advocating this continuance?
25. At what event was this way made manifest?
26. What was the “ figure” of verse nine ?
27. In the which were offered what?
28. What disability did these gifts have?
29. Then why offer them ?
30. Identify the things of verse ten.
31. For how long were they to be imposed?
32. Of what has Christ come?
33. Of what kind of tabernacle?
34. What is this tabernacle?
35. How about the blood of goats and calves?
36. State how many times he entered the holy place.
37. Compare this with priests of Old Testament.
38. Obtaining what for us ?
39. What did priests of Aaron obtain for the nation?
40. Did the blood of animals accomplish anything?
41. State use made of ashes of a heifer.
42. What blood is to take place of all this?
43. Through what was this blood offered?
44. What works will it purge from the conscience?
45. For what service is this purging done?
46. Of what is Christ mediator? '
47. What event was necessary for the redemption?
48. State whether transgressors or transgressions meant.
49. What had the people done for their transgressions?
50. To what did those sacrifices look?
51. In offering them of what other sacrifice did thy partake?
52. What inheritance is promised?
53. State what is necessary to enforce a testament.
54. What constituted testator of Old Testament?
55. Who appropriated this testator?
56. How general was the blood used?
57. When was the “shedding of blood” of verse 22 ?
58. State the antecedent of “these” verse 23.
59. For what use was this suitable?
60. What about the heavenly things ?
61. Distinguish the place where Christ is entered.
62. For whose sake is he appearing before God?
63. Contrast frequency of his appearing with that of 0. T.
64. This would have required what of him?
65. In end of what world did he offer himself?
66. This was to put away what?
67. State the two appointments of God.
68. This requires how many offerings from Christ?
69. How will he appear the second time?
70. To what class will he thus appear?

Hebrews 9:1

Hebrews 9:1. The apostle now enters into more of the typical features of the Mosaic system. occasionally pointing out some of the places in which it differed from the one under Christ. Ordinances means ceremonies that were ordained to be observed in the service. Worldly sanctuary is used because that part of the tabernacle was a type of the church that is in this world, and not in Heaven where God lives.

Hebrews 9:2

Hebrews 9:2. This verse names what was in the first part of the tabernacle, the part called “worldly sanctuary” in the preceding verse. This room is called the sanctuary because the word means “holy,” a type of the church which is said to be holy (Ephesians 5:27). The placing of the articles named is recorded in Exodus 40:4.

Hebrews 9:3

Hebrews 9:3. After the second vail. The entrance to the tabernacle was enclosed with a vail (Exodus 26:36). That makes the next one the second as it is called here, and it is described in Exodus 26:31-33. The room of the tabernacle enclosed by this vail is called Holiest of all. It is so called because it contained the ark and was a type of Heaven, into which our High Priest (Christ) has gone (chapter 6:19, 20). This service of Christ will be considered further when we come to verse 24 of this chapter.

Hebrews 9:4

Hebrews 9:4. Golden censer. According to Leviticus 16:12 the high priest burned incense in the most holy place on the day of atonement. A censer is a vessel to be carried in the hand and used in the manner of fumigating. This instrument was necessary because the golden altar of incense was in the first room or holy place of the tabernacle. As proof of this we read in Exodus 40:24 that the candlestick was placed in the “tent” of the congregation.

Then in verse 26 it says the golden altar also was in the “tent” or the same place where the candlestick was. Hence, the golden altar of incense was in the holy place or first room of the tabernacle, making it necessary to have this censer in the most holy place. Ark of the covenant is so called because it contained the tables of the covenant (Deuteronomy 10:1-2). For the history of the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod, see Exodus 16:32-34 and Numbers 17:1-11.

Hebrews 9:5

Hebrews 9:5. The mercy seat was made of solid gold and served as a covering for the ark as well as a resting place for the cherubims. (See Exodus 25:17-21.) Cannot speak particularly means he was not ready to enter into detail about the separate services of these parts.

Hebrews 9:6

Hebrews 9:6. Ordained signifies to be prepared or made ready, and refers to the articles in the two rooms of the tabernacle. The priests went always is said in the sense of going daily or frequently, in contrast with “once a year” as in the next verse. First tabernacle refers to the first room or the tabernacle, and the common priests might enter this place any time it was necessary, and they were the ones who did most of the service of that room.

Hebrews 9:7

Hebrews 9:7. The second means the most holy place which was “within the vail” (chapter 6:19, 20), and no one but the high priest was permitted to enter this room while it was in service. Once every year means on the one day only, for he made more than one entrance into the most holy place on that day. (See Leviticus 16.) Not without blood. The passage just cited explains where and how he got the blood. Offered for himself. That was necessary because those priests were all erring creatures (contrary to our High Priest).

The people signifies that the service performed in the most holy place by the high priest was for the sake of the nation as a whole. If any individual was personally indebted to the Lord because of his sin, he was required to attend to that as his own personal duty. (See Leviticus 4:27-35.)

Hebrews 9:8

Hebrews 9:8. The Holy Ghost (or Spirit) inspired the writers of the Bible, and in the present case it signified something by the “setting” of things in the tabernacle. The thing signified was the idea that the way into the holiest–the way by which man could reach the holiest place, or Heaven–was still unrevealed. The vail is what kept the most holy place out of sight, for the high priest only was ever permitted to enter that room, and that on one day of the year only. As long as that tabernacle was standing the vail also was standing between. But the death of Christ and his resurrection, after which He entered Heaven, was equivalent to removing the vail to the extent at least of giving others a glimpse (by the eye of faith) into Heaven.

That is why the vail was rent from top to bottom at the death of Christ (Matthew 27:51). This vail is connected with the flesh of Christ in chapter 10:19, 20.

Hebrews 9:9

Hebrews 9:9. Which was a figure means these things were types of the institutions of Christ. Gifts and sacrifices is explained at chapter 8:3. Not make him . . . perfect. A popular notion is that sins were not forgiven under the Mosaic law. This subject will be dealt with fully when we come to chapter 10:4.

Hebrews 9:10

Hebrews 9:10. Meats and drinks has reference to the regulations under the law of Moses concerning what they were to eat and drink. Washings is explained at chapter 6:2 on the word “baptisms.” Carnal ordinances refers to the outward ceremonies such as animal sacrifices and burning of incense, not that they were “carnal” in the sense of being sinful. Imposed is not used in the sense of forcing something unjustly upon them in the sense that we usually understand the word. Its meaning is that the ordinances were put in force over the people of that dispensation. Time of reformation means the institution of Christ. It is so called because Christ remodeled (reformed) the scheme of human redemption, by bringing into the world the last or final religious plan, of which those in force under the Mosiac system were types or figures, which were to be used until the Lord was ready to set up the completed form.

Hebrews 9:11

Hebrews 9:11. Not made -with hands bas the same meaning as “pitched” in chapter S:2. Good things to come signifies that the greatest values to be obtained from the New Testament institution will be enjoyed in the future. This building refers to the tabernacle all parts of which were on the earth. while that part called the holiest of all typified Heaven which is not on the earth. That is why the institution of Christ is called a greater and more perfect tabernacle.

Hebrews 9:12

Hebrews 9:12. This verse states another of the contrasts between the two dispensations. The first used the blood of dumb animals, while the second used that of the High Priest himself. Eternal redemption contains the special idea of spiritual benefits, and not those that pertain to bodily or fleshly ones. Since this redemption is eternal and hence is endless, it. was necessary for Christ to provide it only once.

Hebrews 9:13

Hebrews 9:13. The cleansing of fleshly or bodily impurities (which might be either physical or “ceremonial” or both), is fully described in Numbers 19 which should be carefully read. With that ceremony as a background it will be easier to appreciate the argument of our verse and the next. one.

Hebrews 9:14

Hebrews 9:14. The Hebrews admitted that the blood of animals could cleanse the bodies of men from outward impurity. That should enable them to believe in the greater sterilizing power of the blood of Christ. The animals used under the old law were required to be without spot. Likewise the sacrifice of Christ was perfect since He had no blemish either in body or mind or spirit. This sacrifice was made possible through the Spirit, which was necessary because the literal blood of Christ was poured out on the ground and never reclaimed.

But the spiritual worth of it was taken into the Most Holy place (Heaven) by Him (verse 12). From dead works means to draw the Christians from the works of the law. (See comments at chapter 6:1.) To serve the living God in this age can be done only by accepting the perfect sacrifice made through the Son.

Hebrews 9:15

Hebrews 9:15. The argument of this verse will receive further attention when we come to chapter 10:4. For the present it is well to state that whenever a man was forgiven under the Mosiac exercises, the sins were charged up against the blood of Christ (not “rolled forward”). Hence when Jesus came into the world in the form of flesh, it was necessary for Him to make all of those instances good by His own blood. Thus Christ was not required merely to give “a pint of blood” but He was made to give it all, and thus assure the whole world of the possibility for eternal inheritance.

Hebrews 9:16-17

Hebrews 9:16-17. This paragraph may-he regarded as a companion passage of chapter 8:4, in that the New Testament which is the covenant or will of Christ was not in force until after His death. This is a rule that is generally recognized concerning testaments (or wills) that men make, in that such wills are not in force during the lifetime of the men who make them.

Hebrews 9:18

Hebrews 9:18. Death is the central idea in this part of Paul’s argument, hence he states that the first testament was dedicated. (consecrated) with blood. Since the shedding of blood requires the death of the creature furnishing it, the circumstance makes the type and antitype complete. The animals died in order to dedicate (or put into force) the Old Testament or covenant, and Christ died and gave his blond to dedicate and render forceful His New Testament. (See Matthew 26:28). Therefore the animals slain In sacrifice under the law constituted the testator of that system.

Hebrews 9:19

Hebrews 9:19. In keeping with the truth just referred to, Moses used blood to put into force the words of the law after he had spoken them. Regardless of the excellence of the words of that law, it required the blood of the testator (the animals) to render them valid. Likewise the words of Christ spoken in his personal ministry and to be spoken by the apostle afterwards, required the blood of Him who was to be the testator of the new law or new covenant.

Hebrews 9:20

Hebrews 9:20. This language is similar to that spoken by Jesus when he was instituting the ceremony that was to symbolize the dedicating virtue of the New Testament. (See Matthew 26:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:25.)

Hebrews 9:21

Hebrews 9:21. The passages in Exodus and Leviticus that record this use of the blood of animals are too numerous even to cite at this place.

Hebrews 9:22

Hebrews 9:22. Paul confirms the remark made in the preceding paragraph, by the general statement that almost all things are by the law purged with blood. He was therefore considering only the blood of animals when he said without the shedding of blood there is no remission. He had no reference to the blood of Christ in this statement. His blood is not even referred to until the latter part of the next verse, and then indirectly only. The statement is frequently quoted by brethren when presiding at the Lord’s table and applied to the blood of Christ. Such a use of the passage is not only a perversion of it, but it destroys the interesting argument the apostle is making.

Hebrews 9:23

Hebrews 9:23. It was therefore necessary, etc. Paul is still speaking about the patterns or types in the Old Testament, that even they had to be purified or dedicated by these, meaning the blood of animal sacrifies. The blood of Christ has not been considered as yet. Then the apostle introduces by inference only the necessity of the blood of Christ. If the patterns or types of heavenly things required such blood (without the shedding of which there was no remission for the Hebrews), then the heavenly things themselves–the things pertaining to the New Testament called for better sacrifices. This is Paul’s introduction for the blood and sacrifice of Christ, which has not been the subject for several verses.

Hebrews 9:24

Hebrews 9:24. Christ never did any official or priestly services in the temple at Jerusalem while on earth, for the priests of the law were still in that service (chapter 8:4). Hence He entered that place of which the one made with hands was a figure or type. He is there to be in the presence of God for us or on our behalf as our High Priest. This is another item in Paul’s reasoning with the Hebrew Christians. He is showing them that in clinging to the service of the Levitical priesthood, the Judaizers are repudiating the One who has actually entered into the presence of God.

Hebrews 9:25

Hebrews 9:25. Another contrast is in the frequency with which the two priests performed their services in the most holy place. The high priests of the Levitical order had to repeat theirs often (every year). Blood of others means that the high priest of that law used the blood of a victim and not his own blood.

Hebrews 9:26

Hebrews 9:26. If the sacrificial service of Christ was exactly like that of the Levitical priests, then He would have been required not to wait so long before beginning it. He would have needed to begin it at the same time the world (inhabitants of the earth) began to exist. Since one time only was necessary because the sacrifices of the old system were taking care of the sins for the time (to be explained at chapter 10:4), He could wait until the end of the world to perform His. World in this place is from AIONION which means age or dispensation. Jesus died in the last weeks of the Jewish Dispensation; fifty days after His death the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles, thus cancelling the Old and ushering in the New Testament Dispensation. Unlike the high priests of the Levitical system, Christ performed his by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 9:27

Hebrews 9:27. The preceding verse maintains that Christ needed to make his sacrifice only once. However, that is on the ground that man will go through death and the judgment but once. Hence this verse proceeds on that principle to affirm that it is appointed unto man to die once, and the judgment will come afterwards.

Hebrews 9:28

Hebrews 9:28. Having but one sacrifice offer, Christ waited until the typical dispensation was at its end before He did it. Bear the sins of many. The sacrifice of Christ was for the sins of the whole world (John 1:29). That means that by His one great sacrifice Christ made provision for the remission of sins for all men who will avail themselves of it under whatever dispensation they live. The rest of the verse is a beautiful likeness drawn from the procedure of the high priest of the Mosaic system.

While he was in the tabernacle (or temple) performing the services for the people, they were on the outside waiting for him. After the services were completed he would come out and bless the waiting throng. (See Leviticus 9:15-24; Numbers 16:15-17; Luke 1:9-10.) Likewise faithful servants of God who are looking (with pleasure 2 Timothy 4:8) for Christ, will see Him come to earth the second time. Without sin means He will not come to make another sacrifice for sin. (One offering was all that was necessary.) When He comes it will be unto salvation; that is to complete the salvation of those who will be faithfully looking for Him.