The document provides commentary on Hebrews chapter 9 from multiple scholars. It discusses how the author of Hebrews aims to show that the old Mosaic covenant and its ordinances of worship through the tabernacle and sacrifices were typical and preparatory for the new covenant established by Christ. The first covenant had regulations for worship and services connected to an earthly tabernacle and sanctuary, which were physical representations pointing to spiritual realities, whereas the new covenant provides the actual spiritual realities through Christ.

1. HEBREWS 9 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
INTRODUCTION
PINK, “The principal design of the apostle in this epistle was to prove and make manifest that the "old
covenant" which Jehovah made with Israel at Sinai, with all the ordinances of worship and the privileges
connected therewith, had been Divinely annulled. This involved a complete change in the church-state of
the Hebrews, but so far from this being a thing to deplore, it was to their unspeakable advantage. A "new
covenant" had been inaugurated, and the blessings connected with it so far excelled those which had
belonged to the old dispensation, that nothing but blind prejudice and perverse unbelief could refuse the
true light which now shone, and prefer in its stead the dark shadows of a previous night. God never asks
anybody to give up any thing without proffering something far better in return; and they who despise His
offer are the losers. But prejudice is strong, and never harder to overcome than in connection with
religious customs. Therefore does the Spirit labor so patiently in His argument throughout these chapters.
The chief obstacle in the way of the Hebrews’ faith was their failure to perceive that every thing connected
with the ceremonial law—the tabernacle, priesthood, sacrifices—was typical in its significance and value.
Because it was typical, it was only preparatory and transient, for once the Antitype materialized its
purpose was served. The shadows were no longer needed when the Substance was manifested. The
scaffolding is dispensed with, taken away, as soon as the finished building appears. The toys of the
nursery become obsolete when manhood is reached. Everything is beautiful in its proper season. Heavy
garments are needed when the cold of winter is upon us, but they would be troublesome in summer’s
sunshine. Once we recognize that God Himself has acted on this principle in His dispensational dealings
with His people, much becomes plain which otherwise would be quite obscure.
The apostle had closed the 8th chapter by pointing out, "Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is
ready to vanish away." In those words the Spirit had intimated the unescapable inference which must be
drawn from the oracle given through Jeremiah. He had predicted a "new covenant," which received its
fulfillment in the establishing of Christianity. The ushering in of the new order of Divine worship
necessarily denoted that the previous economy was "old," and if so, its end must be nigh. The force of
Hebrews 8:13 is as follows: "In that He says a ‘new’": God would not have done so unless He had made
the first "old." The "He hath made the first old" has an active significance and denotes an authoritative act
of God upon the old economy, whereby the calling of the other "new" was the sign and evidence. God did
not call the Christian dispensation "another covenant," or a "second covenant," but a "new" one, thereby
declaring that the Judaic covenant was obsolete.
The connecting link between the closing verses of chapter 8 and the opening verses of Hebrews chapter
9 may perhaps be set forth thus: although the old covenant or Mosaic economy was "ready to vanish
away," nevertheless, it yields, even for Christians, important and valuable teachings. It is full of most
blessed typical import, the record of which has been preserved both for the glory of its Author and the
edification and joy of His saints. Wonderful indeed were the pictorial fore-shadowings which the Lord
gave in the days of Israel’s kindergarten. The importance of them was more than hinted at by God when,
though He took but six days to make heaven and earth, He spent no less than forty days when instructing
Moses concerning the making of the tabernacle. That clearly denoted that the work of redemptive grace,
which was prefigured in Jehovah’s earthly dwelling place, was far more glorious than the work of creation.
Thereby are we taught to look away from the things which are seen, and fix our minds and affections
upon that sphere where the Son of God reigns in light and love.
"The general design of this chapter is the same as the two preceding, to show that Christ as High Priest is
superior to the Jewish high priest. This the apostle had already shown to be true in regard to His rank,
and to the dispensation of which He was the Mediator. He proceeds now to show that this was also true
in reference to the efficacy of the sacrifice which He made: and in order to do this, he gives an account of
the ancient Jewish sacrifices, and compares them with that made by the Redeemer. The essential point
is, that the former dispensation was mere shadow, type, or figure, and that the latter was real and
efficacious."—(A. Barnes).
“In the prior chapter, the author explains that the problem with the old covenant rested not with the

2. covenant but with the people. When the perfect law of God crossed the path of the sinful heart of man, it
produced sin not righteousness. As we discussed then, God had no intention of this covenant being the
means by which righteousness was imparted. The law was given that sin might increase, that is, that we
might know what sin was. The reason why the new covenant is superior is that it is able to change the
heart and produce righteousness by making us a new creation and giving us the righteousness of
another. He concluded the prior section by warning the readers that the old is ready to vanish. Most
scholars will take this as a warning regarding the pending destruction of Jerusalem and its temple.
As we have been considering may different aspects of the Old Covenant and how they are types or
shadows of those things to come, it is imperative that we do not make the error of the dispensationalists.
Dispensationalism - The primary tenant of this school of thought is that God has dealt with His people in
diffferent ways at different times (dispensations) throughout history. At one particular time, God had one
plan in mind and then as time moved on God changed the plan and moved onto another even to the point
of conflicting with the prior plan. It is very true that God has progressively revealed things to His people
and unrolled His plan of salvation. But the primary point is this: There has only been one plan of salvation
in the mind of God from first to last - the just shall live by faith.
Worship in the Earthly Tabernacle
1 Now the first covenant had regulations for worship
and also an earthly sanctuary.
1. BARNES, "Then verily - Or, moreover. The object is to describe the tabernacle in which
the service of God was celebrated under the former dispensation, and to show that it had a
reference to what was future, and was only an imperfect representation of the reality. It was
important to show this, as the Jews regarded the ordinances of the tabernacle and of the whole
Levitical service as of divine appointment, and of perpetual obligation. The object of Paul is to
prove that they were to give place to a more perfect system, and hence, it was necessary to
discuss their real nature.
The first covenant - The word “covenant” is not in the Greek, but is not improperly
supplied. The meaning is, that the former arrangement or dispensation had religious rites and
services connected with it.
Had also ordinances - Margin, “Ceremonies.” The Greek word means “laws, precepts,
ordinances;” and the idea is, that there were laws regulating the worship of God. The Jewish
institutions abounded with such laws.
And a worldly sanctuary - The word “sanctuary” means a holy place, and is applied to a
house of worship, or a temple. Here it may refer either to the temple or to the tabernacle. As the
temple was constructed after the same form as the tabernacle, and had the same furniture, the
description of the apostle may be regarded as applicable to either of them, and it is difficult to
determine which he had in his eye. The term “worldly,” applied to “sanctuary,” here means that
it pertained to this world; it was contradistinguished from the heavenly sanctuary not made with
hands where Christ was now gone; compare Heb_9:11-24. It does not mean that it was “worldly”
in the sense in which that word is now used as denoting the opposite of spiritual, serious,

3. religious; but worldly in the sense that it belonged to the earth rather than to heaven; it was
made by human hands, not directly by the hands of God.
2. CLARKE, "The first covenant had also ordinances - Our translators have
introduced the word covenant, as if διαθηκη had been, if not originally in the text, yet in the
apostle’s mind. Several MSS., but not of good note, as well as printed editions, with the Coptic
version, have σκηνη tabernacle; but this is omitted by ABDE, several others, both the Syriac,
Ethiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, and several of the Greek fathers; it is in all
probability a spurious reading, the whole context showing that covenant is that to which the
apostle refers, as that was the subject in the preceding chapter, and this is a continuation of the
same discourse.
Ordinances - ∆ικαιωµατα· Rites and ceremonies.
A worldly sanctuary - ᅓγιον κοσµικον. It is supposed that the term worldly, here, is
opposed to the term heavenly, Heb_8:5; and that the whole should be referred to the carnality
or secular nature of the tabernacle service. But I think there is nothing plainer than that the
apostle is speaking here in praise of this sublimely emblematic service, and hence he proceeds to
enumerate the various things contained in the first tabernacle, which added vastly to its
splendor and importance; such as the table of the show-bread, the golden candlestick, the
golden censer, the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, in which was the golden
pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the two tables which God had written
with his own finger: hence I am led to believe that κοσµικος is here taken in its proper, natural
meaning, and signifies adorned, embellished, splendid; and hence κοσµος, the world: Tota hujus
universi machina, coelum et terram complectens et quicquid utroque contineter, κοσµος
dicitur, quod nihil ea est mundius, pulchrius, et ornatius. “The whole machine of this universe,
comprehending the heavens and the earth, and whatsoever is contained in both, is called κοσµος
, because nothing is more beautiful, more fair, and more elegant.” So Pliny, Hist. Nat., l. ii. c. 5:
Nam quem κοσµον Graeci nomine ornamenti appellaverunt, eum nos a perfecta absolutaque
elegantia, Mundum. “That which the Greeks call κοσµος, ornament, we, (the Latins), from its
perfect and absolute elegance call mundum, world.” See on Gen_2:1 (note).
The Jews believe that the tabernacle was an epitome of the world; and it is remarkable, when
speaking of their city, that they express this sentiment by the same Greek word, in Hebrew
letters, which the apostle uses here: so in Bereshith Rabba, s. 19, fol. 19: ‫כל‬‫קוזמיקון‬‫שלו‬‫שם‬‫הוא‬ col
kozmikon (κοσµικον) shelo sham hu. “All his world is placed there.” Philo says much to the same
purpose.
If my exposition be not admitted, the next most likely is, that God has a worldly tabernacle as
well as a heavenly one; that he as truly dwelt in the Jewish tabernacle as he did in the heaven of
heavens; the one being his worldly house, the other his heavenly house.
3. GILL, "Then verily the first covenant had ordinances of divine service,.... The
design of the apostle in this chapter, as it stands in connection with what goes before, is to show
the pre-eminence of Christ, from the tabernacle, and the things in it; as well as from the

4. priesthood and covenant; and as also the abrogation of the Levitical ceremonies in particular, as
well as the first covenant in general; and that they were all types and figures of Christ, and had
their fulfilment in him: the word "first", here used, designs not the tabernacle, but the covenant;
therefore it is rightly thus supplied in our version, as it is in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions:
which is said to have "ordinances of divine service"; belonging to the service of God, which was
performed both by the priests, and by the people; and these ordinances were no other than the
carnal ordinances, or rites of the ceremonial law: the word used signifies "righteousnesses"; and
they are so called, because they were appointed by a righteous God; and were imposed on the
people of the Jews in a righteous way; and by them men became externally and typically
righteous; for they were figures and types of justification by the righteousness of Christ, though
no complete, perfect, real righteousness, came by them.
And a worldly sanctuary. Philo the Jew says (l), it was a type of the world, and of the various
things in it; though it was rather either a type of the church, or of heaven, or of Christ's human
nature: the better reason of its being so called is, because it consisted of earthly matter, and
worldly things; it was in the world, and only had its use in the world, and so is opposed to the
heavenly sanctuary; for the Jews often speak of ‫מקדש‬‫שלמעלה‬ , "a sanctuary above", and ‫מקדש‬
‫,שלמטה‬ "a sanctuary below" (m), and of ‫משכנא‬‫דלעילא‬ , "a tabernacle above", and ‫משכנא‬‫דלתתא‬ , "a
tabernacle below" (n); which answered to one another: the words may be rendered "a beautiful
sanctuary", a well adorned one; and such especially was the temple, or sanctuary built by
Solomon, rebuilt by Zerubbabel, and repaired and adorned by Herod, Luk_21:5. And the Jews
say, that he that never saw Herod's building, meaning the temple, never saw a beautiful
building; see Luk_21:5.
4. HENRY, "Here, I. The apostle gives an account of the tabernacle, that place of worship
which God appointed to be pitched on earth; it is called a worldly sanctuary, wholly of this
world, as to the materials of which it was built, and a building that must be taken down; it is
called a worldly sanctuary, because it was the court and palace of the King of Israel. God was
their King, and, as other kings, had his court or place of residence, and attendants, furniture,
and provision, suitable thereto. This tabernacle (of which we have the model, Ex. 25-27) was a
moving temple, shadowing forth the unsettled state of the church militant, and the human
nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. Now of this
tabernacle it is said that it was divided into two parts, called a first and a second tabernacle, an
inner and an outer part, representing the two states of the church militant and triumphant, and
the two natures of Christ, human and divine. We are also told what was placed in each part of
the tabernacle.
5. JAMISON, "Heb_9:1-28. Inferiority of the Old to the New Covenant in the means of
access to God: The blood of bulls and goats of no real avail: The Blood of Christ all-sufficient to
purge away sin, whence flows our hope of His appearing again for our perfect salvation.
Then verily — Greek, “Accordingly then.” Resuming the subject from Heb_8:5. In
accordance with the command given to Moses, “the first covenant had,” etc.
had — not “has,” for as a covenant it no longer existed, though its rites were observed till the
destruction of Jerusalem.
ordinances — of divine right and institution.
service — worship.

5. a worldly sanctuary — Greek, “its (literally, ‘the’) sanctuary worldly,” mundane; consisting
of the elements of the visible world. Contrasted with the heavenly sanctuary. Compare
Heb_9:11, Heb_9:12, “not of this building,” Heb_9:24. Material, outward, perishing (however
precious its materials were), and also defective religiously. In Heb_9:2-5, “the worldly
sanctuary” is discussed; in Heb_9:6, etc., the “ordinances of worship.” The outer tabernacle the
Jews believed, signified this world; the Holy of Holies, heaven. Josephus calls the outer, divided
into two parts, “a secular and common place,” answering to “the earth and sea”; and the inner
holiest place, the third part, appropriated to God and not accessible to men.
6. CALVIN, "Then verily the first, etc [138] After having spoken generally of the
abrogation of the old covenant, he now refers specially to the
ceremonies. His object is to show that there was nothing practiced then
to which Christ's coming has not put an end. He says first, that under
the old covenant there was a specific form of divine worship, and that
it was peculiarly adapted to that time. It will hereafter appear by the
comparison what kind of things were those rituals prescribed under the
Law.
Some copies read, prote skene the first tabernacle; but I suspect that
there is a mistake as to the word "tabernacle;" nor do I doubt but that
some unlearned reader, not finding a noun to the adjective, and in his
ignorance applying to the tabernacle what had been said of the
covenant, unwisely added the word skene tabernacle. I indeed greatly
wonder that the mistake had so prevailed, that it is found in the Greek
copies almost universally. [139] But necessity constrains me to follow
the ancient reading. For the Apostle, as I have said, had been speaking
of the old covenant; he now comes to ceremonies, which were additions,
as it were, to it. He then intimates that all the rites of the Mosaic
Law were a part of the old covenant, and that they partook of the same
ancientness, and were therefore to perish.
Many take the word latreias as an accusative plural. I agree with those
who connect the two words together, dikaiomata latreias for institutes
or rites, which the Hebrews call chvqym, and the Greeks have rendered
by the word dikaiomata ordinances. The sense is, that the whole form or
manner of worshipping God was annexed to the old covenant, and that it
consisted of sacrifices, ablutions, and other symbols, together with
the sanctuary. And he calls it a worldly sanctuary, because there was
no heavenly truth or reality in those rites; for though the sanctuary
was the effigy of the original pattern which had been shown to Moses;
yet an effigy or image is a different thing from the reality, and
especially when they are compared, as here, as things opposed to each
other. Hence the sanctuary in itself was indeed earthly, and is rightly
classed among the elements of the world, it was yet heavenly as to what
it signified.

6. 6B. PINK, “"Then verily the first had also ordinances of the Divine service, and a worldly
sanctuary" (verse 1). Having in the former chapter given further proof of the excellency of
Christ’s sacerdotal office, by describing the superior covenant that was ratified thereby,
the apostle now prepares the way to set forth the execution of that office, following the
same method of procedure in so doing. Just as he had drawn a comparison between Aaron
and Christ, so he now sets the ministrations of the one over against the Other, and this in
order to prove that that of Christ’s was most certainly to be preferred. He first approaches
the execution of the Levitical priests’ office by mentioning several rites and types which
appertained thereto.
"Then verily the first had also ordinances of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." The
apostle here begins the comparison which he draws between the old covenant and the new
with respect to the services and sacrifices whereby the one and the other was established
and confirmed. In so doing he is still dealing with what was to all pious Israelites a most
tender consideration. It was in the services and sacrifices which belonged to the priestly
office in the tabernacle that they had been taught to place all their confidence for
reconciliation with God. If the apostle’s previous contention respecting the abolition of the
legal priesthood was granted, then it necessarily followed that the sanctuary in which they
served and all the offerings which Moses had so solemnly appointed, became useless too. It
calls for our closest attention and deepest admiration to observe how the Spirit led the
apostle to approach an issue so startling and momentous.
First, he is so far from denying that the ritual of Judaism was of human invention, that he
declares, "verily (of truth) the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine service." Thus
he follows the same method employed in the preceding chapters. In drawing his
comparisons between Israel’s prophets and Christ, the angels and Christ, Moses and
Christ, Joshua and Christ, Aaron and Christ, he had said nothing whatever in
disparagement of the inferior. So far from reviling the first member in each comparison, he
had dwelt upon that which was in its favor: the more they could be legitimately magnified,
the greater the glory accruing to Christ when it was proved how far He excelled them. So
here: the apostle granted the principal point which an objector would make—why should
the first covenant be annulled if God Himself had made it? Before giving answer to this
(seemingly) most difficult question, he allows and affirms that the service of Judaism was of
Divine institution. Thus, in the earliest ages of human history God had graciously
appointed means for His people to use.
The expression "ordinances of divine service" calls for a word or two by way of
explanation. The word which is here rendered "ordinances’’ (margin "ceremonies")
signifies rites, statutes, institutions. They were the appointments of God, which He alone
had the right to prescribe, and which His people were under solemn bonds of observing,
and that without any alteration or deviation. These "ordinances" were of "divine service"
which is a single word in the original. In its verbal form it is found in Hebrews 8:5, "to
serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things." In the New Testament it is always
found in connection with religious or divine service: in Acts 24:14, Philippians 3:3 it is
translated "worship." It signifies to serve in godly fear or trembling, thus implying an holy
awe and reverence for the One served—cf. Hebrews 12:28. Thus, the complete clause
means that under the Mosaic economy God gave His people authoritative enactments to
direct their worship of Him. This law of worship was a hedge which Jehovah placed
around Israel to keep them from the abominations of the heathen. It was concerning this

7. very thing that God had so many controversies with His people under the old covenant.
Care needs to be duly paid to the tense which the apostle here used: he said not "verily the
first covenant has also ordinances, of divine service," but "had". He is obviously referring
to the past. The Mosaic economy had those ordinances from the time God covenanted with
Israel at Sinai. But that covenant was no longer in force; it had been Divinely annulled. The
"verily the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine worship," clearly intimates that the
new covenant too has Divine "ordinances." We press this because there are some who now
affirm that even Christian baptism and the Lord’s supper are "Jewish" ceremonies, which
belong not to this present dispensation. But this error is sufficiently refuted by this word
"also"—found in the very epistle which was written to prove that Judaism has given place
to Christianity!
"And a worldly sanctuary." The reference is (as the next verse plainly shows) to the
Tabernacle, which Moses made in all things according to the pattern shown him in the
mount. Many have been sorely puzzled as to why the Holy Spirit should designate the holy
sanctuary of Jehovah a "worldly" one. Yet this adjective should not present any difficulty.
It is not used invidiously, still less as denoting anything which is evil. "Worldly" is not here
opposed to "spiritual,’’ but as that which belongs to the earth rather than to the heavens.
Thus the force of "worldly" here emphasizes the fact that the Mosaic economy was but a
transient one, and not eternal. The tabernacle was made here in this world, out of perishing
materials found in the world, and was but a portable tent, which might at pleasure be
taken down and set up again; while the efficacy of its services extended only unto worldly
things, and procured not that which was vital and eternal. Note how in Hebrews 9:24 the
"holy places made with hands" are set in antithesis from "heaven itself."
We cannot but admire the wisdom given to the apostle in handling a matter so delicate and
difficult. While his object was to show the immeasurable superiority of that which has been
brought in by Christ over that which Judaism had enjoyed, at the same time he would own
that which was of God in it. Thus, on the one hand, he acknowledges the service of the
Levitical priests as "divine," yet, to pave the way for his further proof that Christ is a
Minister of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 8:1, 2), he points out that the tabernacle of
Judaism was but a "worldly" one. "The antithesis to worldly is heavenly, uncreated,
eternal. Thus in the epistle to the Galatians, the apostle, speaking of the legal parenthetical
dispensation, says we were then in bondage under the ‘elements of the world’ (Heb. 4:3);
and in the epistle to the Colossians he contrasts with the ‘rudiments of the world’ (Heb.
2:20) the heavenly position of the believer who has died with Christ, and ‘is no longer living
in the world,’ but seeking the things above" (Adolph Saphir).
7. SBC, “The Simplicity of Christian Ritual.
The simplicity of worship in the Christian Church is a sign of spiritual advancement—
I. Inasmuch as it arises, in some measure, from the fact that the Gospel rites are
commemorative, whilst those of the former dispensation were anticipative.
II. Inasmuch as it arises from the fact that, whilst the rites of Judaism were mainly disciplinary,
those of Christianity are spontaneous and expressive.
III. The simplicity of the Christian rites affords a safeguard against those obvious dangers which
are incident to all ritual worship. (1) The first of these is the tendency of the unspiritual mind to

8. stop short at the symbol; (2) the next is the too common tendency to mistake aesthetic emotion
for religious feeling.
J. Caird, Sermons, p. 272.
Hebrews 9:1-5
Worship in Spirit and Truth.
I. Apart from revelation men have not the idea of God as Lord, Spirit, Father; and even after the
light of Scripture has appeared, God is to many only an abstract word, by which they designate a
complex of perfections rather than a real, living, loving, ever-present Lord, to whom we speak
and of whom we ask the blessings that we need. Without revelation prayer is regarded not so
much as asking God in order to receive from Him, but as an exercise of mind which elevates,
ennobles, and comforts. It is a monologue.
II. Unto the Gentiles God never gave an Aaronic priesthood, an earthly tabernacle, a symbolical
service. From the very commencement He taught them, as Jesus taught the woman of Samaria,
that now all places are alike sacred; that the element in which God is worshipped is spirit and
truth; that believers are children who call God Father; that they are a royal priesthood who
through Jesus are brought nigh unto God, who enter into the holy of holies which is above. How
difficult it is to rise from the spirit of paganism to the clear and bright atmosphere of the gospel!
Priesthood, vestments, consecrated buildings, symbols, and observances all place Christ at a
great distance, and cover the true, sinful, and guilty state of the heart which has not been
brought nigh by the blood of Christ. The sinner believes, and as a child he is brought by Jesus
unto the Father. High above all space, high above all created heavens, before the very throne of
God, is the sanctuary in which we worship. Jesus presents us to the Father. We are beloved
children, clothed in white robes, the garments of salvation, and the robes of righteousness. We
are priests unto God.
A. Saphir, Lectures on Hebrews, vol. ii., p. 76.
8. BI, “The ancient tabernacle
The writer now proceeds to compare the old and the new covenants with reference to their
respective provisions for religious communion between man and God, his purpose being to
show the superiority of the priestly ministry of Christ over that of the Levitical priesthood.
In the first five verses he gives an inventory of the furniture of the tabernacle pitched in the
wilderness; in the next five he describes the religious services there carried on. “Now [our
leading back to Heb_8:5] the first [covenant] had ordinances of Divine service and its mundane
sanctuary.” The epithet κοσµικόν here applied to the tabernacle evidently signifies belonging to
this material world, in opposition to the heavenly sanctuary (Heb_8:11) not made with hands
out of things visible and tangible. The purpose of the writer is to point out that the tabernacle
belonged to this earth, and therefore possessed the attributes of all things earthly, materiality
and perishableness. The materials might be fine and costly; still they were material, and as such
were liable to wax old and vanish away. In Heb_8:2-5 is given a detailed description of the
arrangements and furniture of this cosmic sanctuary. No valuator could be more careful to make
an inventory of household furniture perfectly accurate than our author is to give an exhaustive

9. list of the articles to be found in the Jewish tabernacle, whether in the holy place or in the most
holy. Indeed, so careful is he to make the list complete, not only in his own judgment, but in the
judgment of his readers, that he includes things which had no connection with religious
worship, bat were merely put into the tabernacle for safe custody, as valuable mementos of
incidents in Israel’s history—e.g., the golden pot of manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded. It is
further to be noted in regard to these articles, that they are: represented as being within the ark
of the covenant, though it is nowhere in the Old Testament said that they were, the direction
given being merely that they should be placed before the testimony, and it being expressly stated
in regard to the ark in Solomon’s temple that there was nothing in it save the two tables on
which the ten commandments were inscribed. Whether these things ever had been in the ark we
do not know. The fact that they are here represented to have been does not settle the point.
While his doctrine is that the ancient tabernacle was at best but a poor, shadowy affair, he takes
pains to show that in his judgment it was as good as it was possible for a cosmic sanctuary to be.
Its articles of furniture were of the best material; the ark of fine wood covered all over with gold,
the altar of incense of similar materials, the pot with manna of pure gold. He feels he can afford
to describe in generous terms the furniture of the tabernacle, because, after all, he will have no
difficulty in showing the immeasurable superiority of the “true” tabernacle wherein Christ
ministers. One single phrase settles the point χειροποίητος (Heb_8:11). The old tabernacle and
all its furniture were made by the hands of men out of perishable materials. The “ gold, and
silver, and brass,” &c., were all liable to destruction by the devouring tooth of time, that spares
nothing visible and tangible. This eulogistic style of describing the furniture of the cosmic
tabernacle was not only generous, but politic. The more the furniture ,was praised, the more the
religious service carried on in the tent so furnished was in effect depreciated by the contrast
inevitably suggested. The emphasis laid on the excellent quality of these really signifies the
inferiority of the whole Levitical system. Looking now at the inventory distributively, let us note
what articles are placed in either compartment of the tabernacle respectively. In the first are
located the candlestick, the table, and the shewbread, which was arranged in two rows on the
table; to the second are assigned what is called the θυµιατήριον, and the ark of the covenant,
containing, as is said, the manna pot, Aaron’s rod, and the tables of the covenant, and
surmounted by the Cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat, or lid of the ark. The only
article of which there is any need to speak “particularly” is the θυµιατήριον, concerning which
there are two questions to be considered: What is it? and with what propriety is it assigned to
the most holy place? As to the former, the word θυµιατήριον may mean either “the altar of
incense,” as I have rendered it, or “the golden censer,” as translated in the Authorised and
Revised Versions. I do not suppose there would be any hesitation on the subject, were it not for
the consideration, that by deciding that the altar of incense is intended we seem to make the
writer guilty of an inaccuracy in assigning it to the inner shrine of the tabernacle. I have little
doubt that this consideration had its own weight with our Revisers in leading them to retain the
old rendering, “the golden censer”; and the fact detracts from the value of their judgment, as
based, not on the merits of the question, but on the ground of theological prudence. A clearer
insight into the mind of the writer would have shown them that this well-meant solicitude for
his infallibility was uncalled for. This brings us to the question as to the propriety of placing the
altar of incense among the things belonging to the most holy place. The fact is, that the altar of
incense was a puzzle to one who was called on to state to which part of the tabernacle it
belonged. Hence the peculiar manner in which the writer expresses himself in reference to the
things assigned to the most holy place. He does not say, as in connection with the first division,
“in which were” (ᅚν η), but represents it as “ having” (ᅞχουσα) certain things. The phrase is
chosen with special reference to the altar of incense. Of all the other articles it might have been
said “in which were,” but not of it. Nothing more could be said than that it belonged to the

10. second division. The question is, whether even so much could be said, and why the writer
preferred to say this rather than to say that the altar of incense stood outside the veil in the first
division. Now as to the former part of the question, in so putting the matter cur author was only
following an Old Testament precedent, the altar of incense being in 1Ki_6:22 called the altar
“that was by the oracle,” or more correctly, as in the Revised Version, the altar “that belonged to
the oracle.” Then the directions given for fixing its position, as recorded in Exo_30:6, are very
significant. The purport of this directory seems to be: outside the veil for daily use (for within it
could not be used save once a year), but tending inwards, indicating by its very situation a wish
to get in, standing there, so to speak, at the door of the most holy place, petitioning for
admission. So the eloquent eulogist of the better ministry of the new covenant appears to have
understood it. He thinks of the altar of incense as praying for admission into the inner shrine,
and waiting for the removal of the envious veil which forbad entrance. And he so far
sympathises with its silent prayer as to admit it within the veil before the time, or at least to
acknowledge that, while materially without, it belonged in spirit and function to the most holy
place. In stating the case as he does our author was not only following usage, but utilising the
double relations of the altar of incense for the purpose of his apologetic. He wanted to make it
felt that the position of that altar was difficult to define, that it was both without and within the
veil, that you could not place it exclusively in either position without leaving out something that
should be added to make the account complete. And he wished to press home the question,
What was the cause of the difficulty? The radical evil, he would suggest, was the existence of the
veil. It was the symbol of an imperfect religion, which denied men free access to God, and so was
the parent of this anomaly, that the altar of incense had to be in two places at the same time:
within the veil, as there were the mercy-seat and the Hearer of prayer; without the veil, because
the incense of prayer must be offered daily, and yet no one might go within save the high priest,
and he only once a year. How thankful, then, should we be that the veil is done away, so that the
distinction of without and within no longer exists, and we may come daily to offer the incense of
our prayers in the presence of God, without fear of evil, with perfect “assurance to be heard”!
After the inventory of its furniture comes an account of the ministry carried on in the Jewish
sanctuary (verses 6-10); the description of which, coming after the former, has all the effect of
an anticlimax. One can hardly fail to say to himself, What a fall is here! The furniture was
precious, but the worship how poor f Every one capable of reflection feels that a religious system
in which the vessels of the sanctuary are so much superior to the service cannot be the final and
permanent form of man’s communion with God, but only a type or parable for the time of better
things to come, that could last only till the era of reformation arrived. This truth, however, the
writer does not leave to be inferred, but expressly points out and proves. On two things he
insists, as tending to show the insufficiency and therefore the transitiveness of the Levitical
system, and all that pertained to it. First, he asserts that the mere division of the tabernacle into
an accessible holy place and an inaccessible most holy place proved the imperfection of the
worship there carried on; and, secondly, he points out the disproportion between the great end
of religion and the means employed for reaching it under the Levitical system. (A. B. Bruce, D.
D.)
The earthly sanctuary
I. EVERY COVENANT OF GOD HAD ITS PROPER PRIVILEGES AND ADVANTAGES. Even
the first covenant had so, and those such as were excellent in themselves, though not
comparable with them of the new. For to make any covenant with men is an eminent fruit of
grace and condescension in God, whereon He will annex such privileges thereunto as may evince
it so to be.

11. II. THERE WAS NEVER ANY COVENANT BETWEEN GOD AND MAN BUT IT HAD SOME
ORDINANCES, OR ARBITRARY INSTITUTIONS OF EXTERNAL DIVINE WORSHIP
ANNEXED UNTO IT. The original covenant of works had the ordinances of the tree of life, and
of the knowledge of good and evil, the laws whereof belonged not unto that of natural light and
reason. The covenant of Sinai, whereof the apostle speaks, had a multiplication of them. Nor is
the new covenant destitute of them or of their necessary observance. All public worship and the
sacraments of the Church are of this nature.
III. IT IS A HARD AND RARE THING TO HAVE THE MINDS OF MEN KEPT UPRIGHT
WITH GOD IN THE OBSERVANCE OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF DIVINE WORSHIP. By some
they are neglected, by some corrupted, and by some they are exalted above their proper place
and use, and are turning into an occasion of neglecting more important duties. And the reason
of this difficulty is, because faith hath not that assistance from innate principles of reason, and
sensible experience of this kind of obedience, as it hath in that which is moral, internal, and
spiritual.
IV. THAT THESE ORDINANCES OF DIVINE WORSHIP MIGHT BE DULY OBSERVED AND
RIGHTLY PERFORMED UNDER THE FIRST COVENANT, THERE WAS A PLACE
APPOINTED OF GOD FOR THEIR SOLEMNISATION.
1. This tabernacle with what belonged thereunto was a visible pledge of the presence of God
among the people, owning, blessing, and protecting them. And it was a pledge of God’s own
institution, in imitation whereof the superstitious heathens invented ways of obliging their
idol-gods, to be present among them for the same ends.
2. It was the pledge and means of God’s dwelling among them, which expresseth the
peculiar manner of His presence mentioned in general before.
3. It was a fixed seat of all Divine worship, wherein the truth and purity of it was to be
preserved.
4. It was principally the privilege and glory of the Church of Israel, in that it was a continual
representation of the incarnation of the Son of God; a type of His coming in the flesh to dwell
among us, and by the one sacrifice of Himself to make reconciliation with God, and
atonement for sins. It was such an expression of the idea of the mind of God, concerning the
person and meditation of Christ, as in His wisdom and grace He thought meet to intrust the
Church withal. Hence was that severe injunction, that all things concerning it should be
made according unto the pattern shown in the Mount. For what could the wisdom of men do
in the prefiguration of that mystery, of which they had no comprehension? But yet the
sanctuary the apostle calls κοσµικον, “worldly.”
(1) The place of it was on the earth in this world, in opposition whereunto the sanctuary
of the new covenant is in heaven (Heb_8:2).
(2) Although the materials of it were as durable as anything in that kind could be
procured, as gold and Shittim wood, yet were they worldly; that is, perishing things, as
are all things of the world, God intimating thereby that they were not to have an
everlasting continuance. Gold, and wood, and silk, and hair, however curiously wrought
and carefully preserved, are but for a time.
(3) All the services of it, all its sacrifices in themselves, separated from their typical
representative use, were all worldly; and their efficacy extended only unto worldly things,
as the apostle proves in this chapter.
(4) On these accounts the apostle calls it “worldly”; yet not absolutely so, but in
opposition unto that which is heavenly. All things in the ministration of the new

12. covenant are heavenly. So is the priest, his sacrifice, tabernacle, and altar, as we shall see
in the process of the apostle’s discourse. And we may observe from the whole
V. THAT DIVINE INSTITUTION ALONE IS THAT WHICH RENDERS ANYTHING
ACCEPTABLE UNTO GOD. Although the things that belonged unto the sanctuary, and the
sanctuary itself, were in themselves but worldly, yet being Divine ordinances, they had a glory in
them, and were in their season accepted with God.
VI. GOD CAN ANIMATE OUTWARD CARNAL THINGS WITH A HIDDEN INVISIBLE
SPRING OF GLORY AND EFFICACY. SO He did their sanctuary with its relation unto Christ;
which was an object of faith which no eye of flesh could behold. (John Owens, D. D.)
The simplicity of Christian ritual
The language of sign or symbol enters very largely into all the affairs of life. The human spirit
craves and finds embodiment for its impalpable, evanescent ideas and emotions, not merely in
sounds that die away upon the ear, but in acts and observances that arrest the eye, and stamp
themselves upon the memory, or in shapes and forms and symbols that possess a material and
palpable continuity. The superiority of sign or symbol as a vehicle of thought is in some sort
implied in the very fact that it is the language of nature, the first which man learns, or rather
which, with instinctive and universal intelligence, he employs. There is something, again, in a
visible and tangible sign, or in a significant or symbolic act, which, by its very nature, appeals
more impressively to the mind than mere vocables that vibrate for a moment on the organ of
hearing and then pass away. Embody thought in a material representation or memorial, and it
stands before you with a distinct and palpable continuity; it can become the object of prolonged
contemplation; it is permanently embalmed to the senses. Moreover, it deserves to be
considered that the language of symbol lies nearer to thought than that of verbal expression. As
no man can look into another’s mind and have direct cognisance of another’s thoughts, we can
only convey to others what is passing in our own minds, by selecting and pointing out some
object or phenomenon of the outward world that bears an analogy to the thought or feeling
within our breasts. And if further proof of the utility and importance of symbol were wanting, it
might he found in the fact that all nature is but one grand symbol by which God shadows forth
His own invisible Being and character. The principle on which symbolic language depends being
thus deeply seated in man’s nature, it might be anticipated that its influence would be apparent
in that religion which is so marvellously adapted to his sympathies and wants. But when we turn
to that religious economy under which we live, by nothing are we so much struck as by the
simplicity of its external worship—the scantiness, unobtrusiveness, and seeming poverty of its
ritual observances. And this absence of symbol in the Christian worship becomes all the more
singular when contrasted with the sensuous beauty and splendour of the heathen religions
amidst which Christianity was developed, and with the imposing ceremonial, the elaborate
symbolism, of that earlier dispensation from which it took its rise.
I. The simplicity of worship in the Christian Church is a sign of spiritual advancement,
inasmuch as it arises, in some measure, from the fact THAT THE GOSPEL RITES ARE
COMMEMORATIVE, WHILST THOSE OF THE FORMER DISPENSATION WERE
ANTICIPATIVE. TO THE Hebrew in ancient times Christ was a Being of whose person and
character and work he had but the most vague and undefined conceptions; to the Christian
worshipper He is no shadowy dream of the future, no vague and visionary personage of a distant
age, but the best beloved of friends, whose beautiful life stands forth before the mind with all the
distinctness of history—whose glorious person and mission is the treasured and familiar
contemplation of his secret thoughts. The former, accordingly, needed all the elaborate formality
of type and ceremony, of temple and altar and sacrifice—of symbolic persons and objects and

13. actions, to help out his idea of the Messiah and of His mighty work and mission. But to enable
the latter to recall his Lord, no more is required than a few drops of water, a bit of broken bread,
or a cup of wine. Around these simplest outward memorials, a host of thoughts, reflections,
remembrances, are ready to gather. Deity incarnate, infinite self-sacrifice, reconciliation with
God, pardon, purity, peace, eternal life through the blood of Jesus, union with Christ, and in
Him with all good and holy beings,—these are some of the great Christian ideas already lodged
in each devout worshipper’s mind, and which awake at the suggestive touch of the sacramental
symbols to invest them with a value altogether incommensurate with their outward worth. The
very simplicity of these material symbols implies that the senses have less and the mind far more
to do in the process of spiritual conception than in a system of more imposing and obtrusive
materialism.
II. The simple and unimposing character of the Christian ritual is an indication of spiritual
advancement again, inasmuch as it arises from the fact, THAT WHILST THE RIGHTS OF
JUDAISM WERE MAINLY DISCIPLINARY, THOSE OF CHRISTIANITY ARE SPONTANEOUS
AND EXPRESSIVE. The Jew could not eat or drink, or dress, or sow or reap, or buy or sell,
arrange his household, hold intercourse with neighbour or friend, perform any one function of
individual or social life, without being met by restrictions, forms, observances, which forced
religious impression upon him, and, in combination with the more solemn ceremonial of the
temple, left a constant deposit of spiritual thought upon the mind, and drilled the worshipper
into religious habits. In a more spiritual and reflective age, on the other hand, in which the
spiritual perceptions have become developed, and the mind has become receptive of direct
religious instruction, such sensible helps to the formation of thought are no longer necessary.
The mind in which truth has become an intuition needs no longer to spell out its conviction by
the aid of a picture-book. The avenue of spirit thrown open to the worshipper, he no more
requires to climb slowly up to the presence-chamber of the king by the circuitous route of sense.
But if ritual may in such an age be dispensed with in great measure as a means of instruction, it
still performs an important function as a means of expression. No longer necessary as a mould
for the shaping of thought, it has still its use as a form in which religious thought and feeling
may find vent. If the necessity for a visible temple and sanctuary to symbolise God’s residence
with man has ceased, now that He who is “the brightness of the Father’s glory and the express
image of His person” has dwelt amongst us-if to prompt our minds in conceiving of sin and
sacrifice, no scenic show of victims slain and life’s blood drenching earthly altars be needed, now
that the stainless, sinless, all-holy One hath once for all offered up the sacrifice of a perfect life to
God—still there is in the Christian heart the demand for outward forms andrites to embody the
reverence, the gratitude, the devotion, the love of which it is inwardly conscious. The soul, in its
relation to an unseen Father, still craves for some outer medium of expression that shall give
form to feeling—that shall tell forth its devotion to the heavenly Friend as the smile, the look, the
grasp of the hand, the meeting at the festive board, the gifts and tokens of affection, externalise
and express our sentiments towards those we love on earth. And the conclusion to which, from
this argument, we are led is obviously this, that the glory of our Christian ritual lies in its very
simplicity. For the manifestation of our common life in God, and of our common faith in Christ,
the mind craves some outward badge or symbol; and so, in gracious condescension to our needs,
our Lord has instituted the two sacramental rites; but even these He has prescribed but in
outline, leaving all accessories to be filled in, as the varied needs of His people, in different times
and places and circumstances, should dictate. And in this lies the very grandeur of its worship,
that in the “chartered freedom” of our Christian ritual, each nation and community, each
separate society and church and individual, lifting up its own note of adoration, all axe found to
blend in the one accordant anthem, the one manifold yet harmonious tribute of the universal
Church’s praise. I conclude with the remark, that the simplicity of the Christian rites serves as a
safeguard against those obvious dangers which are incident to all ritual worship.

14. 1. The chief of these is the tendency in the unspiritual mind to stop short at the symbol—in
other words, to transfer to the visible sign feelings appropriate only to the things signified, or
to rest content with the performance of outward ceremonial acts, apart from the exercise of
those devout feelings which lend to such acts any real value. A religion in which ritual holds
a prominent place is notoriously liable to degenerate into formalism. The true way to avoid
this error is, obviously, to remove as much as possible its cause. Let there be no arbitrary and
needless intervention between the soul of the worshipper and the Divine object of its
homage. Let the eye of faith gaze on the Invisible through the simplest and purest
medium-Deprive it of all excuse to trifle curiously with the telescope, instead of using it in
order to see. And forasmuch as, to earthly worship, formal aids are indispensable, let it ever
be remembered that that form is the best which least diverts attention to itself, and best
helps the soul to hold fellowship with God.
2. Moreover, the danger thus incident to an elaborate ceremonial, of substituting ritual for
religion, is increased by the too common tendency to mistake aesthetic emotion for religious
feeling. Awe, reverence, rapt contemplation, the kindling of heart and swelling of soul, which
the grand objects of faith are adapted to excite, may, in a man of sensitive mind or delicate
organisation, find a close imitation in the feelings called forth by a tasteful and splendid
ceremonial. The soul that is devoid of true reverence towards God may be rapt into a
spurious elation, while in rich and solemn tones the loud-voiced organ peals forth His
praise. The heart that never felt one throb of love to Christ may thrill with an ecstasy of
sentimental tenderness, whilst soft voices, now blending, now dividing, in combined or
responsive strains, celebrate the glories of redeeming love. It is easy to admire the sheen of
the sapphire throne, while we leave its glorious Occupant unreverenced and unrecognised.
Banish from the service of God all coarseness and rudeness—all that would distract by
offending the taste of the worshipper, just as much as all that would disturb by subjecting
him to bodily discomfort, and you leave the spirit free for its own pure and glorious exercise.
But too studiously adorn the sanctuary and its services; obtrude an artificial beauty on the
eye and sense of the worshipper, and you will surely lead to formalism and self-deception. (J.
Caird, D. D.)
Christian sanctuaries material, but not worldly:
I. THE ERECTION OF THE WORLDLY SANCTUARY. In contemplating the character of their
“worldly sanctuary” whether in the wilderness or on Mount Zion—we behold God dealing with
men in a manner accordant with the character of the covenant under which He saw fit to place
them. For whether we review the history of our world at large, or the history of God’s dealings
with His Church, we find it to be a law of the Divine Procedure, that, in civilisation and scientific
discovery, and in the attainments of knowledge and of arts, no less than in matters directly
spiritual, He allows period of lengthened infancy and childhood. In no respect does He allow
men to attain at once to maturity. Thus, in mere secular things, how old was our world ere
printing was invented, ere the powers of steam were discovered! Railways and electric
telegraphs are but of yesterday, it is with the world at large and with individual nations,
intellectually and socially, as with the individual man physically. We are born, not men and
women, but babes; we speak, and think, and understand as children; we attain manhood slowly.
It has been so with human society: it has been so with our own favoured land, where once
savages swarmed, and Druids offered their bloody rites. The history of man in every country had
been different had not this principle pervaded God’s designs and government—intellectual and
social infancy—growth from infancy to childhood—from childhood to manhood—the manhood
of intellect, and science and art, and civilisation; from the Rome of Romulus and Numa to the
Rome of Augustus from the Gauls of Caesar’s day to the French of the nineteenth century; from

15. the England of Roman conquest and Saxon rule and Norman triumph to the England of our
birth. Apply this principle to the subject before us. Israel, long familiarised with material
temples and carnal rites in Egypt, was spiritually a nation of children: their worship was wisely
and mercifully adapted to their spiritual age and attainment. For the simple worship of the more
spiritual dispensation they were wholly unprepared. Form and ceremony—material and
sensuous splendour—were needful. To have elevated and simplified their minds and tastes for
our simpler worship would have been, in fact, to have forstalled the progress of ages, and
changed the whole course of God’s procedure with His Church and with our world.
II. THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE WORLDLY SANCTUARY AND THE SPIRITUAL
WORSHIP OF THE GOSPEL DISPENSATION. The blessed truth, that He who was at once the
sacrificial Victim and the sacrificing Priest, by His one offering of Himself, hath made an end of
sacrifice, and for ever perfected His people, as touching their justification—these truths
discerned, experienced, bring with them true spirituality of mind and heart and life. The
believer, while he rejoices in Christ Jesus, and has “no confidence in the flesh,” exhibits also the
other feature of the apostle’s portraiture—he worships “God in the Spirit.” The temple with
which his eye and heart are filled is the spiritual temple, in which himself is a lively stone—the
Chinch of the Father’s election, of the Spirit’s sanctifying. The glory of Christianity is not in
tabernacles or temples, in carnal ordinances. The glory of Christianity is Christ; the glory of the
gospel, its message, “God is love!” And in accordance with the spirit of simplicity which
characterises its doctrines should be the spirit of its worship. (J. C. Miller, M. A.)
The candlestick
The gospel of the golden candlestick:
I. A type of the CHURCH (Rev_1:20).
1. The end and use of the Church is to give light, and to hold forth the Php_2:15; 1Ti_3:15).
2. The matter of the Church. As the candlestick was of gold, so the matter of the Church is
saints.
3. The discipline of the Church as the golden snuffers (Exo_25:38) did cut off the snuff of
the candle, so discipline and censures cut off corruption and corrupt members.
4. The union and distinction of Churches. Several branches and seven lamps—therefore
distinct; but all growing on one shaft—therefore one.
II. A type of the MINISTRY. As the candlestick supports the lamp and the light., so does the
Church the ministry; and as the lamp or candle shines in the candlestick, so does the ministry in
the Church.
III. A type of the WORD (Psa_119:105; Psa_19:10; 2Pe_1:19).
IV. A type of the SPIRIT (Rev_4:5).
1. The lamps of the candlestick did shine and give light. So the Holy Spirit is a Spirit of light
and illumination (Eph_1:19).
2. The lamps were fed with off (Exo_27:20). Now this oil is the Spirit (Isa_61:1; Act_10:38).
Of a softening and healing nature.
3. The sacred lamps were ever burning, and never went out (Ex Lev_24:3). So it is with the
Spirit of God in the hearts of His people. The true believer cannot fall away totally and
finally.

16. 4. The dressing and trimming of the lamps signified the revivings of the work of the Spirit, in
the hearts of His people, when it begins, or is in danger to decline. This teaches us both the
Lord’s goodness and our duty Mat_12:20; 2Ti_1:6). Also Church discipline and
mortification are taught us hereby (Mat_25:7).
Lessons:
1. Learn to prize and see the worth and excellency of Church society.
2. Prize the ministry.
3. Prize the Word.
4. Labour to find the Spirit burning and working in your hearts.
(1) Get fresh supplies of oil (Psa_92:10). Jesus Christ is the Fountain, and the Holy
Ghost the immediate Dispenser of it Zec_4:12).
(2) Stir up that which you have (2Ti_1:6; Rev_3:2).
(3) Snuff the wick (Jas_1:23). (S. Mather.)
The candlestick:
If the priests had had any duties to discharge at night in the holy place, I should have felt no
necessity to make any inquiry at all about the significance of the seven lights; the impossibility of
performing the sacred functions in total darkness would have been an adequate explanation. But
there was no midnight ritual; why then, when the curtain, which was thrown aside during the
day to admit the light of heaven, was closed for the night, was not the holy place left in
darkness? There seems to me to be a perfectly obvious and natural answer. The holy place was in
the thoughts of every devout Jew when he longed for the mercy of God to forgive his sin, or cried
to Him for consolation in time of trouble. It was there that, day by day, the priest offered the
incense, which was the visible symbol of all supplication and worship. That was the chamber in
which the Lord received the prayers and homage of the nation, as the most holy place was His
secret shine. And would not the lamps that burnt there during the darkness, and filled it with
light, seem to say to every troubled soul, that God never slumbered nor slept; that the darkness
and light are both alike to Him, and that at all times He is waiting to listen to the prayers of His
people? (R. W. Dale, LL. D.)
The tabernacle.
The tabernacle, and its three antitypes
The tabernacle, of course, was a type. What did it typify? Some say that it typified Christ, and,
particularly, that it typified His incarnation (Joh_1:14). Others hold that the tabernacle
represented the Christian Church. Yet a third opinion is that the tabernacle signified heaven.
Which of these opinions shall we choose? We shall not choose any one of them to the exclusion
of the others. We incline to adopt all three, and to hold that the tabernacle was a type of Christ,
and of the Church, and of heaven. The Man Christ Jesus is God’s tabernacle; so is the Church; so
is heaven. God dwells most wondrously in Christ: He dwells most graciously in the Church; and
He dwells most gloriously in heaven. Christ is God’s tabernacle to the eye of the Church; the
Church is God’s tabernacle before the world; heaven is, and, with the gathered company of the
redeemed set round the throne for ever will be God’s tabernacle before the universe. (Andrew
Gray.)

17. The golden censer
The golden censer:
You will have noticed the peculiarity of the expression at the commencement of the Heb_9:4;
“which”—i.e., the Holiest of all, “had the golden censer,” or rather, “the golden altar of incense.”
Of the holy place it is said, in Heb_9:2, “Wherein was the candlestick and the table,” &c. The
change of expression is significant. The writer does not mean to say that the altar of incense was
within the holy of holies, but that the altar of incense belonged to it. The altar actually stood in
the holy place, but more truly belonged to the holy of holies itself. It is very wonderful that any
man who had read this Epistle intelligently could imagine for a moment that it was possible for
the writer to have been so ill-informed as to have believed that the altar was actually within the
most sacred inclosure. Apart altogether from inspiration, the intimate and profound knowledge
of the Jewish system which the whole of the Epistle indicates, renders it absurd to suppose that
on such a simple matter as the.position of the altar of incense the writer could have blundered. It
would, to my mind, be just as reasonable to infer from some peculiarity of expression in Lord
Macaulay, that the great historian had erroneously imagined that the Spanish Armada came
against this country in the reign of Charles I., or to infer on similar grounds that Dr. Livingstone
was under the impression that the island of Madagascar formed part of the African continent.
(R. W. Dale, LL. D.)
The ark of the covenant
Christ typified by the ark of the covenant
I. THE ARK TYPIFIED THE DIGNITY AND PURITY OF CHRIST’S PERSON. It was made of
incorruptible wood; was overlaid with pure gold; and had crowns of gold wrought round about
it. Here is distinctly pointed out to us
1. The holiness and incorruptibility of Christ’s human nature.
2. The divinity of Jesus.
3. The regal glory of Jesus.
II. THE CONTENTS OF THE ARK TYPIFIED THE FULNESS AND WORK OF CHRIST.
1. In it were the two tables of the law. In Jesus these laws were embodied. He had them in
His heart. He exemplified them in their fullest extent.
2. In it was the golden pot of manna. So in Jesus is the bread of life. “His flesh is meat
indeed.” He is the soul’s satisfying portion.
3. In it was Aaron’s rod that budded. Typifying Christ’s exalted and abiding priesthood.
III. THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE ARK TYPIFIED THE VICTORIES OF CHRIST.
1. The ark opened a passage through Jordan to the promised land. So by Christ a way has
been opened through the grave to the heavenly Canaan.
2. By the ark’s compassing the walls of Jericho they were thrown down. So Jesus by His
Divine power spoiled the powers of darkness, and He shall finally overthrow all the bulwarks
of Satan’s empire.

18. 3. The presence of the ark broke the idol Dagon to pieces. So shall the Saviour cast down all
the idols of the heathen.
IV. THE MOVEMENTS OF THE ARK TYPIFIED THE PROGRESS AND CONSUMMATION OF
CHRIST’S KINGDOM. The ark was possessed by the Israelites, then it was in the hands of the
Philistines, and finally it was laid up in Solomon’s temple. Thus Christ was first preached to the
Jews, the gospel kingdom was first set up among them, afterwards it was extended to the
Gentiles; and when consummated, it shall consist of all nations in the heavenly temple, there to
be permanently glourious for ever and ever. Application: Learn
1. The privilege you possess in having Christ the true ark with you. In it you have treasured
up a fulness of all spiritual blessings.
2. With believing reverence draw near to it, and receive mercy, enjoy fellowship with God,
and obtain grace to help you in every time of need.
3. Despisers of Christ must inevitably perish. (J. Burns, D. D.)
The holy chest:
What was the lesson taught by this wonderful article of tabernacle furniture? Are we not to look
upon it as a picture of Jesus?
I. Let us consider the OUTSIDE. What do we see? a chest most likely about three feet long, by
eighteen inches wide, and eighteen inches deep. It is a box made of common wood, but covered
with fine gold; and is not our Jesus both human and Divine? Both are there, and you cannot
separate them; just as the ark was not perfect, though the right shape and size, till it was covered
with fine gold, so Christ could not be Jesus without the gold of divinity. Still we do not overlook
the wood, though it is covered with gold. It is sweet to know that Christ shares our nature. He
passed over the cedar of angelic life, and took the common shittim, the tree of the wilderness.
When we think of our sins, we are thankful that our Saviour was Divine, and therefore able to
save to the uttermost; but when we think of our future, we are glad that we are to spend our
eternity with the Man Christ Jesus. He is one of ourselves. Do you notice that at each corner
there is a ring of gold? What are these rings for? To receive the staves which are passed through
the rings. By these gold-covered staves the Levites carried the ark on their shoulders. The holy
thing was portable; it went before, and led the people on their march. They were sure to be safe
if they went where the ark led them. It would be a blessed thing if” the Church of God would be
persuaded to go only where Christ would have gone. But what are these figures which stand at
each end of the ark—winged creatures, whose faces are looking with such earnestness at the gold
oh the top of the ark? These are the cherubim, the representatives of the angelic world. They
gaze with interest upon the mercy-seat. Is it not Jesus who links heaven to earth? Upon what are
the cherubim gazing so intently? Follow the direction of their eyes, and what see you? There is a
spot of blood! Blood? Yes, blood. Blood on the pure gold? Yes, this ark is the meeting-place
between God and man—the only place where the Holy God can be approached by Him who
represents sinners.
II. We will now lift the lid of the ark and look INSIDE. What do we see? “The golden pot.” A
vessel of gold filled with manna! Does not this teach that in Christ we have spiritual food? Just
as the manna fell all the time the children of Israel were in the wilderness, so Jesus is the bread
of life to us, all the time we are on this side Jordan. Have another peep inside, and what meets
your gaze? “The rod that budded” (Num_17:1-13.). What does this teach us? That in Christ is the
true, God-chosen, God-honoured, God-prevalent priesthood. Look again. What see you now?
“The tables of the covenant.” The stones upon which God wrote the law. Not the first tables: they
were broken. Moses did not pick up the fragments and patch them together and put them in the

19. ark. No, it was the new, unbroken tables which were put in the ark. And is not Christ Jesus our
righteousness? Do we not glory in the fact that our Substitute was sinless? We have no
righteousness to plead, but we have a perfect Saviour. Our efforts at reformation are but a
clumsy piecing of the broken tables, but in Christ we have a perfect law. (T. Champness.)
The golden pot
The pot of manna
I. THE MANNA (Exo_16:11).
II. THE GOLDEN POT IN WHICH IT WAS CONTAINED may be applied
1. To the Divine Word; which is more precious than gold, and which is the “Word of Christ,”
every part of which is full of Him.
2. To the holy ordinances; where He is so strikingly exhibited.
3. To the preached gospel; where Christ is the Alpha and Omega.
4. To the believer’s heart.
5. To the holiest place; where He ever dwells in all His glory, as the infinite source of all the
blessedness of the heavenly world. Application:
(1) Be thankful for this heavenly bread.
(2) Receive it with all cordiality and joy.
(3) Constantly seek it in those means where His presence and blessing are promised.
(4) Despisers of Christ must starve and die. (J. Burns, D. D.)
The cherubims of glory.—The cherubim and the mercy-seat
I. We are taught by this sacred symbol, an ark thus constructed and accompanied, that THERE
IS NOW, UNDER THE EVANGELICAL DISPENSATION, A RELATION BETWIXT LAW AND
GRACE.
1. The law was there because it is eternal, and must therefore harmonise with every
dispensation of religion to man.
2. The tables of the law are there in the ark, and connected with evangelical symbols
representing the dispensation of mercy to mankind, because it was the violation of the law
by which the dispensation of mercy was rendered necessary.
3. But we see the tables of the law thus connected with evangelical symbols, to intimate to us
another truth, that the grand end of the administration of grace to man is the
re-establishment of the law’s dominion over him.
4. This connection between the law and the mercy-seat indicates, finally, that the
administration of grace is in every part consistent with law.
II. There was not only a connection between the tables of the law and the mercy-seat, but over
this mercy-seat the cherubims of glory were placed. We are therefore instructed in the fact, that
THERE IS AN HARMONIOUS RELATION BETWIXT THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE TO
MAN AND THE HEAVENLY WORLD.

20. 1. We may, therefore, observe, with respect to the angelic powers, of whom the cherubim
were the emblems, that “they have an intellectual interest in this great subject.
2. We may go farther, and say, that we have evidence from Scripture that the connection of
the angelic world with the Christian system is not one of mere intellectual curiosity and
gratification, but likewise of large and important moral benefit.
3. There is another view in which we may regard the connection between the angelic world
and the Church: they are angels and ministers; ministers to the Church, and ministers to
individuals.
III. THERE WAS THE PRESENCE OF GOD CROWNING THE WHOLE. In the sanctuary you
have not only the ark of the covenant, the tables of the law, the mercy-seat, and the cherubim
shadowing it, but the visible symbol of the Divine presence. God was there. And thus are we
shown that all things are of Him, and by Him, and for Him. The tables of the law declared His
will; the covenant sprang from His everlasting wisdom and love; the mercy-seat was His throne;
the cherubim were His servants; the holiest of all was His “resting-place” (2Ch_6:41). The
people came to worship Him, and were dismissed with His blessing. As creation itself is from the
will of God, so is redemption. All is the result of His benevolence. The whole plan of mercy
sprang from the depths of His eternal love, and all its arrangements were fixed according to the
treasures of His own knowledge and wisdom. This indicates, too, the necessity of Divine agency.
As He originated the whole scheme of redemption, so must He be present with it to give it power
and efficacy. (R. Watson.)
Of which we cannot now speak particularly
The inexpediency of dwelling on curious questions:
Sundry other things there were about the tabernacle, the narration whereof might have
delighted the reader. But St. Paul here is a moderator to himself: you are desirous to hear more,
but it is expedient to cut them off. Wherein he may be a precedent to all teachers. Though the
discussing of curious and intricate questions would more delight the auditory, yet we must not
feed their humour that way. Let us give them but a taste of them, and a whole mouthful of sound
and wholesome food. Some, peradventure, in this place would have said, Oh, Paul, why dost
thou so slightly handle the things belonging to the tabernacle? Repeat, I pray thee, every
particular to us; it doth us good to hear of them. Yet he doth not satisfy their itching ears in that.
St. Paul hath more necessary matter. Let us especially be desirous to hear of Christ our High
Priest and Bishop of our souls, of repentance, of faith in Him, of making our calling sure by good
works, of the true sanctuary of heaven, than of those earthly things: these are more profitable for
us. The Spirit of God passeth over sundry other things about the tabernacle, because He had
more substantial points in hand tending to our salvation by Christ. (W. Jones, D. D.)
9. MURRAY, THE HOLY PLACE AND THE MOST HOLY. 1-7
IN chap. vii. the eternal priesthood of Jesus has been revealed
to us. In chap. viii. we have seen Him, as Priest seated on the
throne of heaven in His twofold work. He is the Minister of
the sanctuary in the heavens. He is the Mediator of the covenant

21. in the heart of man on earth. We thus know the Priest and the
sanctuary in which He ministers ; we are now invited in this
chapter to look at the blood which He presents, and what it
ffects. The word Blood has not yet been used : in this chapter
we have it twelve times. In the first half (1-14) we have its
efficacy in opening the most holy place, and in sprinkling our
conscience to enter there; then (15-22) in dedicating the cove
nant, and cleansing all connected with it ; and after that again in
opening heaven and putting away all sin (23-28).
The first portion begins with a description of the worldly
sanctuary, the tabernacle and its furniture, of which things, the
writer says, we cannot now speak severally. Just as he said, in chap.
viii. I, This is the chief point: we have such an High Priest,
so here too, in speaking of the sanctuary, he has one great thought
which he wishes to press home. The tabernacle was so con
structed by Moses, after the heavenly pattern, as specially to
shadow forth one great truth. In that truth lies the mystery
and the glory of the New Testament, the power and joy of the
Christian life. That truth is the opening of the way into the
Holiest, the access into the presence of God.
We read: There was a tabernacle prepared, the first,
which is called the Holy Place. And after the second veil, the
tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies. The priests
go in continually into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the
service ; but into the second, the high priest alone, once in the
year, not without blood. The one thing the writer wishes to
direct our attention to is the difference and the relation between
the two compartments into which the tabernacle was divided,
and the meaning of the veil that separated them.
The inner sanctuary was called the Holiest of All, or, as it is
in Hebrew, the Holiness of Holinesses. It was the highest em
bodiment there could be of holiness ; it was the place where

22. God Most Holy dwelt. His holy presence filled it. No man
might enter there on pain of death but the high priest, and
even he only once a year. In the Holy Place, separated from
the Most Holy by a heavy veil, the priests entered and served.
The truths embodied in the house thus made after a heavenly
pattern were very simple. In the Most Holy God dwelt, but man
might not enter. In the Holy Place man might enter to serve
God, but God dwelt not there. The veil was the symbol of
separation between a holy God and sinful man : they cannot
dwell together. The tabernacle thus expressed the union of two
apparently conflicting truths. God called man to come and
worship and serve Him, and yet he might not come too near :
the veil kept him at a distance. His worship in the tabernacle
testified to his longing for the restoration to the fellowship with
God he had lost in paradise, but also to his unfitness for it, and
his inability to attain it. The two truths find their reason and
their harmony in the holiness of God, that highest attribute of
the divine Being. In it righteousness and love are combined.
Love calls the sinner near ; righteousness keeps him back. The
Holy One bids Israel build Him a house in which He will
dwell, but forbids them entering His presence there. The
entrance of the high priest once a year for a few moments was
a faint foreshadowing that the time would come when access to
the Holiest would be given. In the fulness of time righteousness
and love would be revealed in their perfect harmony in Him, in
whom those types and shadows would find their fulfilment.
The first and second tabernacles are the symbols of two
degrees of the divine nearness, two stages of access to God s
presence, two modes of fellowship with God, two ways of serving
Him. The one, to which the High Priest had access only once
a year, is the promise of what would one day be in Christ : the
nearer, the more direct and immediate approach into the pre
sence and fellowship of God. The other is the symbol of the
service of God as at a distance with a veil between, without the

23. full light of His countenance. The one thing the writer wants
us to learn is the difference between the two stages, and the way
by which God leads us from the lower to the higher.
1. Of which things we cannot now speak severally, one by one. There is a time for
doing this too. But when souls are to be led on into the perfection of Christ and His work, we
must turn then from the multiplicity of truths to the simplicity and unity of one truth, that
Christ has opened heaven. Let this be our one question, What has the heavenly High Priest
effected for me ?
2. I know what Christ has done. I need to know what He had to do. There was a Holy Place
into which man might enter. There was a Most Holy into which he might not enter. The veil shut
him out. And Christ s one work was to tear down that veil, and give us the right and the fitness
to enter, yea to dwell always in that heretofore inaccessible place. The mystery of the rent
veil, of the opened entrance Into the Holiest, is the one thing we need to learn.
2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the
lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this
was called the Holy Place.
1. BARNES, "For there was a tabernacle made - The word “tabernacle” properly means
a tent, a booth, or a hut, and was then given by way of eminence to the tent for public worship
made by Moses in the wilderness. For a description of this, see Exo. 26. In this place the word
means the “outer sanctuary” or “room” in the tabernacle; that is, the “first” room which was
entered - called here “the first.” The same word - σκηνή skene - is used in Heb_9:3 to denote
the “inner” sanctuary, or holy of holies. The tabernacle, like the temple afterward, was divided
into two parts by the veil Exo_26:31, Exo_26:33, one of which was called “the holy place,” and
the other “the holy of holies.” The exact size of the two rooms in the tabernacle is not specified in
the Scriptures, but it is commonly supposed that the tabernacle was divided in the same manner
as the temple was afterward; that is, two-thirds of the interior constituted the holy place, and
one-third the holy of holies. According to this, the holy place, or “first tabernacle” was twenty

24. cubits long by ten broad, and the most holy place was ten cubits square. The whole length of the
tabernacle was about fifty-five feet, the breadth eighteen, and the height eighteen. In the temple,
the two rooms, though of the same relative proportions, were of course much larger. See a
description of the temple in the notes on Mat_21:12. In both cases, the holy place was at the
east, and the Holy of Holies at the west end of the sacred edifice.
The first - The first room on entering the sacred edifice, here called the “first tabernacle.”
The apostle proceeds now to enumerate the various articles of furniture which were in the two
rooms of the tabernacle and temple. His object seems to be, not for information, for it could not
be supposed that they to whom he was writing were ignorant on this point, but partly to show
that it could not be said that he spoke of that of which he had no information, or that he
undervalued it; and partly to show the real nature of the institution, and to prove that it was of
an imperfect and typical character, and had a designed reference to something that was to come.
It is remarkable that though he maintains that the whole institution was a “figure” of what was
to come, and though he specifies by name all the furniture of the tabernacle, he does not attempt
to explain their particular typical character, nor does he affirm that they had such a character.
He does not say that the candlestick, and the table of show-bread, and the ark, and the
cherubim were designed to adumbrate some particular truth or fact of the future dispensation,
or had a designed spiritual meaning. It would have been happy if all expositors had followed the
example of Paul, and had been content, as he was, to state the facts about the tabernacle, and the
general truth that the dispensation was intended to introduce a more perfect economy, without
endeavoring to explain the typical import of every pin and pillar of the ancient place of worship.
If those things had such a designed typical reference, it is remarkable that Paul did not go into
an explanation of that fact in the Epistle before us. Never could a better opportunity for doing it
occur than was furnished here. Yet it was not done. Paul is silent where many expositors have
found occasion for admiration. Where they have seen the profoundest wisdom, he saw none;
where they have found spiritual instruction in the various implements of divine service in the
sanctuary, he found none.
Why should we be more wise than he was? Why attempt to hunt for types and shadows where
he found none? And why should we not be limited to the views which he actually expressed in
regard to the design and import of the ancient dispensation? Following an inspired example we
are on solid ground, and are not in danger. But the moment we leave that, and attempt to
spiritualize everything in the ancient economy, we are in an open sea without compass or chart,
and no one knows to what fairy lands he may be drifted. As there are frequent allusions in the
New Testament to the different parts of the tabernacle furniture here specified, it may be a
matter of interest and profit to furnish an illustration of the most material of them.
(Without attempting to explain the typical import of every pin and pillar of the tabernacle, one
may be excused for thinking, that such prominent parts of its furniture, as the ark, the
candlestick, and the cherubim, were designed as types. Nor can it be wrong to inquire into the
spiritual significancy of them, under such guidance as the light of Scripture, here or affords
elsewhere. This has been done by a host of most sober and learned commentators. It is of no use
to allege, that the apostle himself has given no particular explanation of these matters, since this
would have kept him back too long from his main object; and is, therefore, expressly declined by
him. “Yet,” says McLean, his manner of declining it implies, that each of these sacred utensils
had a mystical signification. They were all constructed according to particular divine directions,
Exo. 25. The apostle terms them, “the example and shadow of heavenly things,” Heb_8:5; “the
patterns of things in the heavens, Heb_9:23; and these typical patterns included not only the
tabernacle and its services, but every article of its furniture, as is plain from the words of Moses,
Exo_25:8-9. There are also other passages which seem to allude to, and even to explain, some of
these articles, such as the golden candlestick, with its seven lamps, Rev_1:12-13, Rev_1:20; the
golden censer, Rev_8:3-4; the vail, Heb_10:20; the mercy-seat, Rom_3:25; Heb_4:16; and,

25. perhaps, the angelic cherubim, 1Pe_1:12.” It must, however, be acknowledged that too great care
and caution cannot be used in investigating such subjects.)
The candlestick - For an account of the candlestick, see Exo_25:31-37. It was made of pure
gold, and had seven branches, that is, three on each side and one in the center. These branches
had on the extremities seven golden lamps, which were fed with pure olive oil, and which were
lighted “to give light over against it;” that is, they shed light on the altar of incense, the table of
show-bread, and generally on the furniture of the holy place. These branches were made with
three “bowls,” “knops,” and “flowers” occurring alternately on each one of the six branches;
while on the center or upright shaft there were four “bowls,” “knops” and “flowers” of this kind.
These ornaments were probably taken from the almond, and represented the flower of that tree
in various stages. The “bowls” on the branches of the candlestick probably meant the calyx or
cup of that plant from which the flower springs.
The “knops” probably referred to some ornament on the candlestick mingled with the “bowls”
and the “flowers,” perhaps designed as an imitation of the nut or fruit of the almond. The
“flowers” were evidently ornaments resembling the flowers on the almond-tree, wrought, as all
the rest were, in pure gold. See Bush’s notes on Exodus 25. The candlestick was undoubtedly
designed to furnish light in the dark room of the tabernacle and temple; and in accordance with
the general plan of those edifices, was ornamented after the most chaste and pure views of
ornamental architecture of those times - but there is no evidence that its branches, and bowls,
and knops, and flowers each had a special typical significance. The sacred writers are wholly
silent as to any such reference, and it is not well to attempt to be “wise above that which is
written.” An expositor of the Scripture cannot have a safer guide than the sacred writers
themselves.
How should any uninspired man know that these things had such a special typical
signification? The candlestick was placed on the south, or lefthand side of the holy place as one
entered, the row of lamps being probably parallel with the wall. It was at first placed in the
tabernacle, and afterward removed into the temple built by Solomon. Its subsequent history is
unknown. Probably it was destroyed when the temple was taken by the Chaldeans. The form of
the candlestick in the second temple, whose figure is preserved on the “Arch of Titus” in Rome,
was of somewhat different construction. But it is to be remembered that the articles taken away
from the temple by Vespasian were not the same as those made by Moses, and Josephus says
expressly that the candlestick was altered from its original form.
And the table - That is, the table on which the showbread was placed. This table was made
of shittim-wood, overlaid with gold. It was two cubits long, and one cubit broad, and a cubit and
a half high; that is, about three feet and a half in length, one foot and nine inches wide, and two
feet and a half in height. It was furnished with rings or staples, through which were passed
staves, by which it was carried. These staves, we are informed by Josephus, were removed when
the table was at rest, so that they might not be in the way of the priest as they officiated in the
tabernacle. It stood lengthwise east and west, on the north side of the holy place.
And the show-bread - On the table just described. This bread consisted of twelve loaves,
placed on the table, every Sabbath. The Hebrews affirm that they were square loaves, having the
four sides covered with leaves of gold. They were arranged in two piles, of course with six in a
pile; Lev_24:5-9. The number twelve was selected with reference to the twelve tribes of Israel.
They were made without leaven; were renewed each Sabbath, when the old loaves were then
taken away to be eaten by the priests only. The Hebrew phrase rendered “show-bread” means
properly “bread of faces,” or “bread of presence.” The Septuagint render it ᅎρτους ᅚνώπιους
artous enopious - foreplaced loaves. In the New Testament it is, ᅧ πρόθεσις τራν ᅎρτων he
prothesis ton arton - “the placing of bread;” and in Symmachus, “bread of proposition,” or placing.

26. Why it was called “bread of presence” has been a subject on which expositors have been much
divided.
Some have held that it was because it was “before,” or in the presence of the symbol of the
divine presence in the tabernacle, though in another department; some that it was because it
was set there to be seen by people, rather than to be seen by God. Others that it had an
emblematic design, looking forward to the Messiah as the food or nourishment of the soul, and
was substantially the same as the table spread with the symbols of the Saviour’s body and blood.
See Bush, in loc. But of this last-mentioned opinion, it may be asked where is the proof? It is not
found in the account of it in the Old Testament, and there is not the slightest intimation in the
New Testament that it had any such design. The object for which it was placed there can be only
a matter of conjecture, as it is not explained in the Bible, and it is more difficult to ascertain the
use and design of the show-bread than of almost any other emblem of the Jewish economy.”
Calmet. Perhaps the true idea, after all that has been written and conjectured is, that the table
and the bread were for the sake of carrying out the idea that the tabernacle was the
dwelling-place of God, and that there was a propriety that it should be prepared with the usual
appurtenances of a dwelling. Hence, there was a candlestick and a table, because these were the
common and ordinary furniture of a room; and the idea was to be kept up constantly that that
was the dwelling-place of the Most High by lighting and trimming the lamps every day, and by
renewing the bread on the table periodically. The most simple explanation of the phrase “bread
of faces,” or “bread of presence” is, that it was so called because it was set before the “face” or in
the “presence” of God in the tabernacle. The various forms which it has been supposed would
represent the table of showbread may be seen in Calmet’s Large Dictionary. The Jews say that
they were separated by plates of gold.
Which is called the sanctuary - Margin, “Or, holy.” That is, “the holy place.” The name
sanctuary was commonly given to the whole edifice, but with strict propriety appertained only to
this first room.
2. CLARKE, "For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein - The sense is here
very obscure, and the construction involved: leaving out all punctuation, which is the case with
all the very ancient MSS., the verse stands thus: Σκηνη γαρ κατεσκευασθη ᅧ πρωτη εν ᇌ ᅧ τε
λυχνια, κ. τ. λ. which I suppose an indifferent person, who understood the language, would
without hesitation render, For, there was the first tabernacle constructed, in which were the
candlestick, etc. And this tabernacle or dwelling may be called the first dwelling place which God
had among men, to distinguish it from the second dwelling place, the temple built by Solomon;
for tabernacle here is to be considered in its general sense, as implying a dwelling.
To have a proper understanding of what the apostle relates here, we should endeavor to take a
concise view of the tabernacle erected by Moses in the wilderness. This tabernacle was the
epitome of the Jewish temple; or rather, according to this as a model was the Jewish temple
built. It comprised,
1. The court where the people might enter.
2. In this was contained the altar of burnt-offerings, on which were offered the sacrifices in
general, besides offerings of bread, wine, and other things.
3. At the bottom or lower end of this court was the tent of the covenant; the two principal
parts of the tabernacle were, the holy place and the holy of holies.

27. In the temple built by Solomon there was a court for the Levites, different from that of the
people; and, at the entrance of the holy place, a vestibule. But in the tabernacle built by Moses
these parts were not found, nor does the apostle mention them here.
In the holy place, as the apostle observes, there were,
1. The golden candlestick of seven branches, on the south.
2. The golden altar, or altar of incense, on the north.
3. The altar, or table of the show-bread; or where the twelve loaves, representing the twelve
tribes, were laid before the Lord.
1. In each branch of the golden candlestick was a lamp; these were lighted every evening, and
extinguished every morning. They were intended to give light by night.
2. The altar of incense was of gold; and a priest, chosen by lot each week, offered incense
every morning and evening in a golden censer, which he probably left on the altar after the
completion of the offering.
3. The table of the show-bread was covered with plates of gold; and on this, every Sabbath,
they placed twelve loaves in two piles, six in each, which continued there all the week till
the next Sabbath, when they were removed, and fresh loaves put in their place. The whole
of this may be seen in all its details in the book of Exodus, from chap. 35 to Exo_40:1. See
Calmet also.
Which is called the sanctuary - ᅯτις λεγεται ᅋγια· This is called holy. This clause may
apply to any of the nouns in this verse, in the nominative case, which are all of the feminine
gender; and the adjective ᅋγια, holy, may be considered here as the nominative singular
feminine, agreeing with ᅧτις. Several editions accent the words in reference to this construction.
The word σκηνη, tabernacle, may be the proper antecedent; and then we may read ᅋγία, instead
of ᅏγια: but these niceties belong chiefly to grammarians.
3. GILL, "For there was a tabernacle made,.... By the direction of Moses, according to the
pattern showed him in the Mount:
the first; that is, the first part of the tabernacle, called the holy place, in distinction from the
holy of holies, which was the second part of the tabernacle; for otherwise there were not a first
and a second tabernacle; there never was but one tabernacle:
wherein was the candlestick; that this was in the tabernacle, and on the south side of it, and
without the vail, where the apostle has placed it, is plain from Exo_26:35. This was wanting in
the second temple (o): it was a type of Christ mystical, or the church; in the general use of it, to
hold forth light, so the church holds forth the light of the Gospel, being put into it by Christ; in
the matter of it, which was pure gold, denoting the purity, worth, splendour, glory, and duration
of the church; in the parts of it, it had one shaft in the middle of it, in which all the parts met and
cemented, typical of Christ the principal, and head of the church, whose situation is in the midst
of the church, and who unites all together, and is but one: the six branches of it may intend all
the members of the church, and especially the ministers of the word; the seven lamps with oil in
them, may have a respect to the seven spirits of God, or the Spirit of God with his gifts and

28. graces, and a profession of religion with grace along with it: and it was typical of the church in
its ornaments and decorations; its bowls, knops, and flowers, may signify the various gifts of the
Spirit, beautifying ministers, and fitting them for usefulness; and in the appurtenances of it, the
tongs and snuff dishes may signify church discipline, censures, and excommunications.
And the table and the shewbread; the table, with the shewbread on it, was also in the
tabernacle, on the north side of it, and without the vail, Exo_26:35. This was also wanting in the
second temple (p): the table was typical of Christ, and of communion with him; of the person of
Christ; in the matter of it, which was Shittim wood overlaid with gold, whereby were signified
the two natures of Christ in one person; the human nature by the Shittim wood, which is
incorruptible, for though he died he saw no corruption, and is risen again, and lives for ever; and
the divine nature by the gold, all the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him; and in the
decorations of it, as the border, golden crown, &c. which may respect the fulness of his grace,
and the honour and glory he is crowned with, which render him exceeding valuable and
precious: and it may be typical of communion with him, either hereafter, when the saints shall
sit with him as at a table, and eat and drink with him in the kingdom of his Father; or here, to
which Christ admits them, and than which nothing is more honourable, comfortable, and
desirable; and it may be significative of the ministration of the word and ordinances, of which
Christ is the sum and substance, and in which he grants his people fellowship with him: to this
table belonged rings and bars to carry it from place to place, which was done by the priests;
where the church is, there Christ is, and there is the ministration of his word and ordinances;
and which are sometimes moved from one place to another, by the ministers of the word,
according to divine direction. The "shewbread", on the table, was typical either of the church of
Christ, the saints, who may be signified by the unleavened cakes, being true and sincere, and
without the leaven of malice and hypocrisy; and by twelve of them, which may represent the
twelve tribes of Israel, the whole spiritual Israel of God; and by bread of faces, as the word for
shewbread may be rendered, since they are always before the Lord, and his eyes are continually
upon them; they are set upon the pure table, Christ, on whom they are safe, and by whom they
are accepted with God: and the shewbread being set in rows, may denote their order and
harmony; and their being removed every sabbath day, may signify the succession of saints in the
church, as one is removed, another is brought in; and the frankincense put upon each row,
shows them to be a sweet savour to God: or else the shewbread was typical of Christ himself,
who is the bread of life, the food of his people; and may be signified by the shewbread for its
fineness and purity, being made of fine flour, Christ is the finest of the wheat, bread from
heaven, and angels' food; for its quantity, twelve cakes, with Christ, is bread enough, and to
spare, for all the elect; for its continuance, Christ always abides, and such as feed upon him live
for ever; for its gratefulness, Christ's flesh is meat indeed, and his blood drink indeed; and for its
being only for the priests, as only such who are made priests to God, live by faith on Christ; see
Lev_25:5. Moreover, the intercession of Christ may be prefigured by the shewbread, or bread of
faces, he being the angel of God's presence or face, who appears in the presence of God for his
people; and this consisting of twelve loaves, according to the number of the tribes of Israel,
shows that Christ represents the whole Israel of God in heaven, and intercedes for them; and
whereas the shewbread always continued, no sooner was one set of loaves removed, but another
was put in their room; this may point at the continual intercession of Christ for his people; and
the frankincense may denote the acceptableness of it to God.
Which is called the sanctuary; or "holy"; this refers either to the first part of the tabernacle,
which was called the holy place, in which the priests in common ministered; or else to the things
which were in it, now mentioned, the candlestick table, and shewbread; to which the Ethiopic
version adds, and the golden censer, which it leaves out in the fourth verse; which version
renders these words, "and these they call holy"; and so the Arabic version, "which are called holy

29. things", as they were, as well as the place in which they were; so the candlestick is called the holy
candlestick in the Apocrypha,
"As the clear light is upon the holy candlestick; so is the beauty of the face in ripe age.'' (Sirach
26:17)
and the ark, candlestick, table, censer, and altar, are called σκευη ιερα, "holy vessels", by Philo
the Jew (q); but the former sense seems best, when compared with the following verse.
4. HENRY, " In the outer part: and there were several things, of which you have here a sort
of schedule. (1.) The candlestick; doubtless not an empty and unlighted one, but where the
lamps were always burning. And there was need of it, for there were no windows in the
sanctuary; and this was to convince the Jews of the darkness and the mysterious nature of that
dispensation. Their light was only candle-light, in comparison of the fullness of light which
Christ, the Sun of righteousness, would bring along with him, and communicate to his people;
for all our light is derived from him the fountain of light. (2.) The table and the show-bread set
upon it. This table was set directly opposite to the candlestick, which shows that by light from
Christ we must have communion with him and with one another. We must not come in the dark
to his table, but by light from Christ must discern the Lord's body. On this table were placed
twelve loaves for the twelve tribes of Israel, a loaf for a tribe, which stood from sabbath to
sabbath, and on that day were renewed. This show-bread may be considered either as the
provision of the palace (though the King of Israel needed it not, yet, in resemblance of the
palaces of earthly kings, there must be this provision laid in weekly), or the provision made in
Christ for the souls of his people, suitable to the wants and to the relief of their souls. He is the
bread of life; in our Father's house there is bread enough and to spare; we may have fresh
supplies from Christ, especially every Lord's day. This outer part is called the sanctuary or holy,
because erected to the worship of a holy God, to represent a holy Jesus, and to entertain a holy
people, for their further improvement in holiness.
5. JAMISON, "Defining “the worldly tabernacle.”
a tabernacle — “the tabernacle.”
made — built and furnished.
the first — the anterior tabernacle.
candlestick ... table — typifying light and life (Exo_25:31-39). The candlestick consisted of
a shaft and six branches of gold, seven in all, the bowls made like almonds, with a knop and a
flower in one branch. It was carried in Vespasian’s triumph, and the figure is to be seen on Titus’
arch at Rome. The table of shittim wood, covered with gold, was for the showbread
(Exo_25:23-30).
showbread — literally, “the setting forth of the loaves,” that is, the loaves set forth: “the
show of the bread” [Alford]. In the outer holy place: so the Eucharist continues until our
entrance into the heavenly Holy of Holies (1Co_11:26).
which, etc. — “which (tabernacle) is called the holy place,” as distinguished from “the Holy
of Holies.”
5B. COFFMAN, “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

30. 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 40:22,24,26). 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 CANDLESTICK
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. F1
A glance at the candlestick shows that its two longest arms, on the right and
on the left, make the longest projection in the things represented, the left
branch (Torah) going all the way back to creation, and the right (Revelation)
reaching all the way to the judgment and eternity. Implicit also in the duality
of the candlestick, being symmetrical with two corresponding sections, and
in the scriptural emphasis on this double characteristic, is the suggestion of
two major divisions of God's word. Thus, Zechariah called attention to the

31. two olive trees and the two pipes to supply oil, etc. (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 25:3ff). 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 SHOWBREAD
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. F2
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

32. 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, F3
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 ALTAR
From Exo. 40:22,24,26, 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,

33. (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. F4
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.
6. CALVIN, "For there was a tabernacle, etc. As the Apostle here touches but
lightly on the structure of the tabernacle, that he might not be
detained beyond what his subject required; so will I also designedly
abstain from any refined explanation of it. It is then sufficient for
our present purpose to consider the tabernacle in its three parts, --
the first was the court of the people; the middle was commonly called
the sanctuary; and the last was the inner sanctuary, which they called,
by way of eminence, the holy of holies. [141]
As to the first sanctuary, which was contiguous to the court of the
people, he says that there were the candlestick and the table on which
the shewbread was set: he calls this place, in the plural number, the
holies. Then, after this is mentioned, the most secret place, which
they called the holy of holies, still more remote from the view of the
people, and it was even hid from the priests who ministered in the
first sanctuary; for as by a veil the sanctuary was closed up to the
people, so another veil kept the priests from the holy of holies.
There, the Apostle says, was the thumiaterion by which name I
understand the altar of incense, or fumigation, rather than the censer;
[142] then the ark of the covenant, with its covering, the two
cherubim, the golden pot filled with manna, the rod of Aaron, and the
two tables. Thus far the Apostle proceeds in describing the tabernacle.
But he says that the pot in which Moses had deposited the manna, and
Aaron's rod which had budded, were in the ark with the two tables; but
this seems inconsistent with sacred history, which in 1 King s 8:9,
relates that there was nothing in the ark but the two tables. But it is
easy to reconcile these two passages: God had commanded the pot and
Aaron's rod to be laid up before the testimony; it is hence probable
that they were deposited in the ark, together with the tables. But when
the Temple was built, these things were arranged in a different order,
and certain history relates it as a thing new that the ark had nothing
else but the two tables
7. PINK, “"For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, And

34. the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary" (verse 2). "The subject spoken
of is the tabernacle: that which is in general affirmed of it is that it was ‘made.’ There is a
distribution of it into two parts in this and the following verse. These parts are described
and distinguished by, first, their names; second, their situation with respect unto one
another; third, their contents or sacred utensils. The one is described in this verse, by its
situation: it was the ‘first,’ that which was first entered into; then by its utensils, which
were three; then by its name; it was called the sanctuary" (John Owen).
"For there was a tabernacle made." A full description of it is to be found in the book of
Exodus. The "tent" proper was thirty cubits, or forty-five feet in length, ten cubits, or
fifteen feet in breadth, and the same in height. In shape it formed an oblong square. It was
divided by a veil into two parts of unequal size. This continued to form God’s house of
worship until the days of Solomon, when it was replaced by the more permanent and
magnificent temple. It is pertinent to ask at this point, Why should the Holy Spirit here
refer to the "tabernacle" rather than to the temple, which was still standing at the time the
apostle was writing? The word "tabernacle" is found ten times in this epistle, but the
"temple" is not mentioned once. This is the more remarkable because Paul, more than any
of the apostles, emphasized the resurrection of Christ, and the temple particularly
foreshadowed Him in His resurrection and eternal glory; whereas the tabernacle
principally prefigured Christ in His humiliation and lowliness. Yet the difficulty is easily
solved: the temple was not erected till after Israel were thoroughly settled in their
inheritance, and the Holy Spirit is here addressing a people who were yet in the wilderness!
The Holy Spirit now makes a bare allusion to the holy vessels which occupied the two
compartments of the tabernacle. But what rule has been given us to guide in and fix with
certainty the interpretation of the mystical signification of these things? Certainly God has
not left His people to the worthless devisings of their own imaginations. No, in this very
epistle, He has graciously informed us that the tabernacle, and all contained in it, were
typical of Christ, yet not as He may be considered absolutely, but as the Church is in
mystical union with Him, for throughout Hebrews He is viewed in the discharge of His
mediatory office. Thus the tabernacle, its holy vessels and services, supplied a
representation of the person, work, offices and glories of Christ as the Head of His people.
That it did so is clear from Hebrews 8:2—see our comments thereon. The "true
tabernacle" there mentioned (our Lord’s humanity) is not opposed to what is false and
erroneous (the shrines of the heathen), but to the tabernacle of Moses, which was but
figurative and transitory. In the Lord Jesus we have the substance of what Israel had only
the shadow.
"For there was a tabernacle made: the first (compartment) wherein was the candlestick."
It is to be noted that no mention is here made of the outer court. In this omission, as in so
many others, the anointed eye may clearly discern the absolute control of the Spirit over
the sacred writers, moving and guiding them in every detail. In our articles upon Exodus
(1926, etc.) we have attempted a much fuller exposition than can here be given. Suffice it
now to say that everything connected with the outer court was fulfilled by Christ in the
days of His flesh. The very fact that it was the "outer" court, accessible to all the people
and unroofed, at once denotes to us Christ here in the world, openly manifested before
men. Its brazen altar spoke of the cross, where God publicly dealt with the sins of His
people. Its fine linen hangings spoke of Christ meeting the claims of God’s righteousness
and holiness. Its sixty pillars tell of the strength and power of Christ, "mighty to save." Its

35. laver foreshadowed Christ cleansing His Church with the washing of water by the Word
(John 13).
Now as the outer court viewed Christ on earth, so the holy places pointed to Him in heaven.
The holy place was a chamber which was entered by none save the priestly family, where
those favored servants of Jehovah ministered before Him. It was therefore the place of
communion. In perfect keeping with this, each of the three vessels that stood therein spoke
of fellowship. The lampstand foreshadowed Christ as the power for fellowship, as
supplying the light necessary to it. The table with its twelve loaves, prefigured Christ as the
substance of our fellowship, the One on whom we feast. The incense altar typified Christ as
the maintainer of fellowship, by His intercession securing our continued acceptance before
the Father. The reason why the "incense altar" is not mentioned here in Hebrews 9 will be
taken up when we come to verse 4.
"For there was a tabernacle made: the first (compartment) wherein was the candlestick,"
or better, "lampstand." There was no window in the tabernacle, for the light of nature
cannot reveal spiritual things. It was therefore illuminated from this holy vessel, which was
placed on the south side, near the veil which concealed the holy of holies. A full description
of it is given in Exodus 25:31-36. It was made of beaten gold, all of one piece, with all its
lamps and ornamentations, so that it was without either joints or screws. Pure olive oil was
provided for it.
The very fact that the lampstand stood in the holy place, at once shows that it is not Christ
as "the Light of the world" which is typified. It is strange that many of the commentators
have erred here. The words of Christ on this point are clear enough: "as long as I am in the
world, I am the light of the world" (John 9:5 and cf. Hebrews 12:35, 36): only then was He
manifested here as such. But men loved darkness rather than light. They rejected the
Light, and so far as they were concerned, extinguished it. Since Christ was put to death by
wicked hands, the world has never again gazed on the Light. He is now hidden from their
eyes. But He who was slain by the world, rose again, and then ascended on high; it is there
in the Holy Place in God’s presence, that the Light now dwells. And while there—O
marvelous privilege—the saints have access to Him.
Black shadows rest upon the world which has cast out the Light of Life: "the way of the
wicked is as darkness" (Prov. 4:19). It is now night-time, for the "Dayspring from on high"
is absent. The lampstand tells of the gracious provision which God has made for His own
beloved people during the interval of darkness, ere the Sun of righteousness shall rise once
more, and usher in for this earth that morning without clouds. Its seven branches and
lamps constantly fed by oil, represented the fullness of light that is in Christ Jesus, and
which by Him is communicated to His whole Church. The "oil" was poured into its lamps
and then shed forth light from them. Such was and is the economical relation of the Spirit
unto the Mediator. First, Christ was "anointed" with the Spirit "above His fellows" (Ps.
45:7 and cf. John 3:34), and then He sent forth the Spirit (Acts 2:33). Objectively the Spirit
conveys light to us through the Word; subjectively, by inward and supernatural
illumination.
"And the table and shewbread" (verse 2). Though intimately connected, yet these two
objects may be distinguished in their typical significance. The natural relation of the one to
the other, helps us to perceive their spiritual meaning: the bread was placed upon and thus
was supported by the table. The "table" speaks of communion. A beautiful picture of this is
found in 2 Samuel 9. There David asks, "Is there yet any that is left of the house of Saul,

36. that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’s sake?" (verse 1). A lovely illustration was this
of the wondrous grace of God, showing kindness to those who belong to the house of His
enemy, and that for the sake of His Beloved. There was one, even Mephibosheth, lame on
his feet; him David "sent and fetched" unto himself. And then, to show he is fully
reconciled to this grandson of his foe, David said, "but Mephibosheth thy master’s son
shall eat bread always at my table" (verse 10)—evidencing that he had been brought into
the place of most intimate fellowship. 1 Corinthians 10:20, 21 also shows the spiritual
significance of the "table."
The "shewbread," or twelve loaves on the table, also spoke of Christ. "My Father giveth
you the true bread from heaven" (John 6:32). The word "shewbread" is literally "bread of
faces," faces being put by a figure for presence—pointing to the Divine presence in which
the bread stood; "shewbread before Me always" (Ex. 25:30). The twelve loaves, like the
twelve precious stones in the high priest’s breastplate, pictured the twelve tribes of Israel
being represented before God. Thus, in type, it was the Lord Jesus identifying Himself with
His covenant people.
• • the lampstand - (Ex. 25:31-39; 37:17-25; 39:37) The Lampstand appears in Zech. 4:2
with two olive trees on each side. In Rev. 11 the two olive trees are two witnesses (see also
Rom. 11 on two olive trees). The lampstand in Zech. 4 may correspond to "the branch" in
Zech. 3:8, its seven branches may correspond to the seven eyes in Zech. 3:9. In Rev. 1:12,
20 seven lampstands are seven assemblies which have seven angels corresponding to seven
stars. In Rev. 4:5 seven lamps before the throne are the Seven Spirits of G-d. The central
stalk of the lampstand may represent the Messiah, the seven candles as the seven Spirits of
G-d. These may be the seven spirits which rest upon the Branch (Messiah) in Is. 11:1-2 or
the seven angels with seven trumpets (compare Rev. 4:5 & Rev. 8:2). The lampstand gives
light, just as Messiah is the "light of the world" (Jn. 1:1-9; 8:12).
• • the table - (Ex. 25:23-29; 37:10-16) Unfortunately Paul does not tell us its meaning,
and the scriptures are silent.
• • the showbread - (Ex. 25:30; Lev. 24:5-10) Again Paul does not tell us its meaning, and
the scriptures are silent. However the twelve loaves may represent the twelve tribes being
offered up and dedicated to YHWH.
• • the golden alter of incense - (Ex. 30:1-10; 37:25-29; 30:34-38) The incense represents
the prayers of all the holy ones (Rev. 8:3-5). The fire of the alter seems to represent the
demand for justice. In Rev. 8:3-5 the fire of the alter is cast to the earth as a judgement.
The parallel passage in Ezkl. 10:2 has a similar meaning. In Is. 6:6-7, Isaiah's lips are
purified by contact with a coal from its fire. (see note to Heb. 12:24)
• • the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold - (Ex. 25:10-22; 37:1-9) The ark
is also pictured in the heavenly temple in Rev. 11:19. It seems to represent the covenant.
The apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus (sometimes called the Acts of Pilate) claims that the
dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant revealed that Messiah would come to earth 5,500
years after creation which it places around the first century (Nicodemus 12:11-20). While
the first century was not the year 5,500 from creation, there may be some hidden meaning
in the dimensions of the ark.
• • the golden pot that had the manna - (Ex. 16:11-33; Num. 11:1-9; Ps. 78:24-25; John
6:31-38; Rev. 2:17) The manna represents Messiah who "...comes down from heaven and
gives life to the world."(John. 6:31-38).

37. • • Aaron's rod that budded - (Num. 16 & 17) Aaron's rod budded to demonstrate that
YHWH had chosen Levites as priests. This may represent G-d's choice of the Levites, G-d's
will in general, or G-d's authority.
• • the tablets of the covenant - (Ex. 19; 20:1-17; 34:1-4, 28-29; Deut. 10:1-5) These
contained the ten commandments, the heart of the Mosaic Covenant. Their counterpart of
the book of the Covenant in the heavenly Temple is the New Covenant/sealed book (see
notes on Heb. 8:1f).
• • the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat - (Ex. 25:18-22; 37:7-9; Num.
7:89) YHWH's presence rested above the mercy seat, between the cherubim (Num. 7:89;
1Sam. 4:4; Is. 37:16; Psalms 80:1; 99:1) This was the place where the Priest would meet
with YHWH on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:2). From Ezekiel's throne vision of Ezekiel
1:4-3:6 & Ezekiel 10) it seems that this position between the cherubim represents the
throne of YHWH.
The writer of Hebrews gives us an idea of what the Tabernacle used to look like. If you
walked through the gates of the tabernacle, you would be in the court. The court area was
about 172' by 86' and fenced in by acacia wood. (Exodus 27:18)
As you walked into the court, directly in front would be the bronze altar. This was used for
the burnt offerings. (Exodus 30:28, 39:39) Behind the bronze altar was the laver. This was
used by the priests for washing. (Exodus 30:18 38:8)
Behind the bronze altar was the tabernacle. The tabernacle was divided into two parts, the
Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. Inside the Holy Place you would find on your right the
showbread, which was to the left the lampstand and directly in front the altar of incense.
Now what separated the holy place and the Holy of Holies was a curtain.
The arc of the covenant contained the golden jar of manna (Exodus 16:31-32, Aaron's rod
which budded (Numbers 17:1-11) and the 10 commandments (Exodus 25:16, Deuteronomy
10:2) The arc of the covenant was covered by a lid called the mercy seat. The mercy seat
acted as the meeting place between God and man.
Here are some examples of how the tabernacle represented the coming of Jesus.
Aaron's budded rod is an example of Jesus as the Resurrection and the Life.
The showbread is an example as Jesus as the Bread of Life.
The lampstand is an example of Jesus as the Light of the world.
The altar of incense is an example of Jesus as our Intercessor.
The laver is an example of Jesus cleansing us from our sin.
STUDY OF THE TABERNACLE
The Veil.
Ex. 26:31 and 36:35 God loves color and not drabness.
Blue is the color of heaven from earth and God loves this color and used it for his biggest
canvas, which is the sky. First use is in Ex. 25:4 and from there to 39:31 it is used 33 times.
It is used only 16 times in all the rest of the Bible. Ex. Is the blue book of God’s Word. Blue
was the royal color in Esther 1:6 and 8:15. White clouds in a blue sky was God’s idea. Blue
was also the color of military uniforms and I use to wear one as chaplain. Ezek. 23:6, 27:7,
24. It was special for God Num 4:1-12. Blue for memory-Num. 15:38-41
Tabernacle Ex. 26:1,4,31,36, 27:16

38. Garments of priests in Ex. 28:1-6,8, 15,28,31-38, 35:23,25,35, 36:8,11,35,37, 38:18,23,
39:1-5,21,24,29-31
Blue is associated with boys because it was considered the most powerful of colors, and that
it represented heavenly power and so because boys were the source of future warriors and
defense it was blue that was associated with the boys. It kept the evil spirits away. Pink for
girls came centuries later because of a legend that they came from inside pink roses.
It was in 1882 that Robert Koch, the German doctor, finally was able to identify the
tubercle bacilli that killed 30 millions people. It was identified because it could be stained
with blue die, when other colors would not stain it.
The Bowerbird has a mania for blue and paints all and covets all that is blue. Makes its
nest blue and will steal and even kill to get blue object and feathers form other creatures.
Fine twined linen is God’s favorite and he wants his bride in it in heaven-Rev. 19:8
Purple is used 36 times in O.T. 25 are in Ex.
Scarlet used 40 times and 25 in Ex. It is the most colorful of books.
3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the
Most Holy Place,
1. BARNES, "And after the second veil - There were two “veils” to the tabernacle. The
one which is described in Exo_26:36-37, was called “the hanging for the door of the tent,” and
was made of “blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen,” and was suspended on five
pillars of shittim-wood, overlaid with gold. This answered for a door to the whole tabernacle.
The second or inner veil, here referred to, divided the holy from the most holy place. This is
described in Exo_26:31-33. It was made of the same materials as the other, though it would
seem in a more costly manner, and with more embroidered work. On this veil the figures of the
cherubim were curiously wrought. The design of this veil was to separate the holy from the most
holy place; and in regard to its symbolical meaning we can be at no loss, for the apostle Paul has
himself explained it in this chapter; see notes on Heb_9:8-14. “The tabernacle.” That is, the
inner tabernacle; or what more properly was called the tabernacle. The name was given to either
of the two rooms into which it was divided, or to the whole structure.
Which is called the Holiest of all - It was called “the Most Holy place;” “the Holy of
Holies;” or “the Holiest of all.” It was so called because the symbol of the divine presence - the
“Shekinah” - dwelt there between the Cherubim.
2. CLARKE, "And after the second veil - The first veil, of which the apostle has not yet
spoken, was at the entrance of the holy place, and separated the temple from the court, and
prevented the people, and even the Levites, from seeing what was in the holy place.

39. The second veil, of which the apostle speaks here, separated the holy place from the holy of
holies.
The tabernacle, which is called the Holiest of all - That is, that part of the tabernacle
which is called the holy of holies.
3. GILL, "And after the second vail,.... Were there more vails than one? the Scripture
speaks but of one, Exo_26:31 there was indeed an hanging for the door of the tent, but that is
not called a vail; nor was there more than one vail in the tabernacle, nor in the temple of
Solomon; but in the second temple, under which the apostle lived, there were two vails, which
divided between the holy place, and the holy of holies; and the innermost of these the apostle
means: and so the Jewish writers (r) constantly affirm, that there were two vails between the
said places, and that two new ones were made every year (s). So on the day of atonement, when
the high priest went into the most holy place, with the incense, it is said (t), that
"he walked in the temple till he came between ‫שתי‬‫הפרוכות‬ , "the two vails", which divide between
the holy, and holy of holies, and there was the space of a cubit between them.''
The reason of these two vails may be seen in the account Maimonides gives of this matter (u):
"in the first temple there was a wall which divided between the holy, and holy of holies, the
thickness of a cubit; but when they built the second temple, it was doubted by them, whether the
thickness of the wall was of the measure of the holy place, or of the measure of the holy of holies;
wherefore they made the holy of holies twenty cubits complete, and the holy place forty cubits
complete, and they left the space of a cubit between the holy, and the holy of holies; and they did
not build a wall in the second temple, but they made ‫שתי‬‫פרוכות‬ , "two vails", one on the side of
the holy of holies, and the other on the side of the holy place, and between them a cubit
answerable to the thickness of the wall, which was in the first temple; but in the first temple
there was but one vail only, as it is said, Exo_26:33 and the vail shall divide unto you, &c.''
And to this account other Jewish writers (w) agree; and the space between the two vails is called
by them ‫טרקסין‬ (x), ταραξις, from the trouble and perplexity this affair gave them. This vail, or
vails, might represent the sin of man, which separates between God and men, excludes from
heaven; but is removed by the death of Christ, when the vail was rent in twain; so that now there
is an open way to heaven; Christ has entered into it by his own blood; and saints have boldness
to enter there by faith and hope now, and shall hereafter personally enter into it: or else this vail
may signify the ceremonial law, which separated between Jew and Gentile, and is abolished by
the death of Christ: or rather it was typical of the flesh, or human nature of Christ, called the vail
of his flesh, Heb_10:20. Now within this second vail was
the tabernacle, or that part of it, the second part,
which is called the holiest of all; which was either typical of Christ, who is called the most
Holy, Dan_9:24 he being so in both natures, divine and human; or of heaven, for the holy
places, made with hands, were figures of heaven, Heb_9:24 for its holiness, it being the
habitation of the holy God, holy angels, and spirits of just men made perfect; and for its
invisibility, and the unseen things which faith and hope, which enter within the vail, are the
evidence of; and for the things that are in it, typified by the following ones.

40. 4. HENRY, "We have an account of what was in the inner part of the sanctuary, which was
within the second veil, and is called the holiest of all. This second veil, which divided between
the holy and the most holy place, was a type of the body of Christ, by the rending whereof not
only a view, but a way, was opened for us into the holiest of all, the type of heaven itself. Now in
this part were, (1.) The golden censer, which was to hold the incense, or the golden altar set up
to burn the incense upon; both the one and the other were typical of Christ, of his pleasing and
prevailing intercession which he makes in heaven, grounded upon the merits and satisfaction of
his sacrifice, upon which we are to depend for acceptance and the blessing from God.
5. JAMISON, "And — Greek, “But.”
after — behind; within.
second veil — There were two veils or curtains, one before the Holy of Holies (catapetasma),
here alluded to, the other before the tabernacle door (calumma).
called — as opposed to “the true.”
5B. COFFMAN, “The only access to that Holy of Holies was through the veil, a
description of which is afforded by Exo. 26:31ff. 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 TEMPLE
The three colors of the veil (Exodus 26:31ff), 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

41. 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).

42. 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 Heb. 9:3 is discussed as a type of heaven
in Heb. 10.
6. William Most, “Nothing certain is found about the Ark of the Covenant after 587 BC,
the fall of Jerusalem. It seems that the postexilic temple had nothing in the Holy of Holies,
so that when Pompey the Roman conqueror forced his way into it in 63 BC. (Tacitus
Histories 5. 9), he was surprised to find nothing there. The spot for the ark was marked by
a slab called the "stone of foundation".
In Second Maccabees 2. 4-8 we read that Jeremiah hid the ark and the altar of incense in a
cave on Mount Nebo ( Dt 34. 1) where Moses had gone up and seen the inheritance of God.
Later some followers of Jeremiah came and tried to find the place, but were unable.
Jeremiah told them the place was to remain unknown until God would again gather His
people together and show them mercy. The problem is that Scripture does not guarantee
this account, for in 2. 1 it merely says, "you will find this in the records", that is, in secular
records, not in Scripture.
7. DREW WORTHEN, “This was meant to show the temporal nature of this old covenant.

43. F.F. Bruce points out: "the sanctuary of the old covenant, in its very furnishings and
sacrificial arrangements, proclaimed its own temporary character;..."
It wasn't meant to be the eternal seat of God's throne. In fact, there is a great deal of irony
in this arrangement which was always meant to show God's people the character of this
first covenant.
Andrew Murray in his commentary on Hebrews, when discussing the tent of meeting and
the two compartments, the holy place and the most holy place says, "In the Most Holy
(Place) God dwelt, but man might not enter. In the Holy Place man might enter to serve
God, but God dwelt not there. The veil was the symbol of separation between a holy God
and sinful man: they cannot dwell together. The tabernacle thus expressed the union of two
apparently conflicting truths. God called man to come and worship and serve Him, and yet
he might not come too near: the veil kept Him at a distance..... Love calls the sinner near;
righteousness keeps him back.......
....... The Holy One bids Israel build Him a house in which He will dwell, but forbids them
entering His presence there. The entrance of the High Priest once a year for a few moments
was a faint foreshadowing that the time would come when access to the Holiest would be
given. In the fullness of time righteousness and love would be revealed in their perfect
harmony in Him (Christ), in whom those types and shadows would find their fulfillment."
8. THE HOLY PLACE, OR THE MOST HOLY PLACE? By Wayne Jackson, M.A.
In Exodus 40:26, the Bible states that the “golden altar” was in the holy place of the
tabernacle, in front of the veil. On the other hand, the book of Hebrews (9:3-4) indicates
that the altar of incense was in the most holy place. How can these passages be
harmonized?
In responding to this question, some background information is in order. When the
children of Israel came into the desolate region of Sinai following their exodus from Egypt,
Jehovah ordained a regulated system of worship that was designed to accommodate their
sojourn in that wilderness. A part of that order was the tabernacle-a movable, tent-like
structure that was to serve as the house of the Lord under those temporary conditions. In
the construction of the tabernacle, Moses was “warned of God” that he make all things
“according to the pattern” that was shown to him at Mt. Sinai (Hebrews 8:5).
The tabernacle was divided into two rooms, the holy place and the most holy place (or holy
of holies). Within the former, according to the account in Exodus 40, three items of
furniture were located. On the northern side was the table of showbread, while the golden
lampstand was on the south. Finally, to the west, just “before the veil” that separated the
holy place from the holy of holies, was the golden altar of incense (Exodus 30:6; 40:26).
Here, then, as indicated above, is the problem. In the book of Hebrews, the writer, in
describing the same circumstance, stated that “behind the second veil” there was a
compartment “called the holy of holies; having a golden altar of incense...” (Hebrews
9:3-4).
Some critics have not hesitated to declare that the author of Hebrews made a mistake.
James Moffatt observed that “the irregularity of placing it [the golden altar-WJ] on the
wrong side of the curtain is simply another of his inaccuracies” (1957, p. 115). Such a
declaration, however, not only is inconsistent with a respectable view of biblical inspiration,
but also is wholly unnecessary.
As I have emphasized in previous discussions (Jackson, 1986, 2:51ff.), no legitimate

44. contradiction can be charged against statements that superficially appear to conflict unless
every conceivable possibility of reconciliation has been exhausted. One must approach the
controversial text(s) and ask: Is there any feasible way to harmonize these passages? If
there is, no allegation of a real discrepancy can be made. Now, what are the facts of this
case? Several solutions to the difficulty have been proposed. Some of these, however, are
less than totally convincing. Let us reflect upon a few of them.
(1) Some have argued that the golden altar of incense was not in the holy place, as evinced
by the fact that in Exodus 26:35 only the table of showbread and the lampstand are
mentioned as items of furniture in that room. The conclusion thus is drawn that the altar of
incense must have been in the holy of holies. This logic is not persuasive. First, neither is
the altar of incense mentioned in Exodus 26:33-34 as being found in the most holy place.
Hence, silence cannot be the deciding factor. Second, the golden altar clearly is located in
the holy place in other passages (Exodus 30:6; 40:26). Besides that, if the golden altar was
in the holy of holies, how could the priests burn incense thereupon each day (cf. Luke 1:9),
since the most holy place could be entered only yearly-on the day of atonement-and then by
the high priest alone (Hebrews 9:7)?
(2) The Greek text of Hebrews 9:4 speaks of a golden thumiaterion for the burning of
incense. The original word denotes either a place, or a vessel, used in burning incense.
Thus, thumiaterion is rendered “censer” (KJV) or “altar” (ASV). Some argue, therefore,
that the inspired writer of this passage did not allude to the altar of incense, but rather to a
censer that was kept within the holy of holies, but which was employed annually to convey
coals from the altar into the most holy place according to the instructions of Leviticus
16:12-13. This represents the view of scholars like Albert Barnes, James MacKnight, and
S.T. Bloomfield. An objection to this theory would be that if the writer refers only to a
censer, then there is no mention at all of the golden altar. True, but then there is no
reference to the laver or brazen altar that stood just before the tabernacle, and that
likewise were an integral part of the priestly service. It is possible that only the censer was
mentioned “because it was the principal part of the furniture which the high priest used on
the day of expiation” (Bengal, 1877, 3:418). Still, it seems odd that the lesser object, the
censer, would be mentioned, while the greater, the golden altar, was ignored completely.
On the other hand, there is no mention at all in the Old Testament of a “golden” censer.
Moreover, when the high priest entered the holy of holies on the day of atonement, he took
the censer with him, thus implying that it was not already within the most holy place. A
defense of this view appears to require considerable speculation.
(3) The most popular opinion among conservative scholars argues that Hebrews 9:4 refers
not to a censer, but to the golden altar of incense. It is carefully pointed out, though, that
this passage does not actually say that the altar was within the most holy place. The text
literally reads: “...behind the second veil was a room which is called the holy of holies,
having [echousa, present participle] a golden altar of incense.” The verb echo can be
employed in the sense of “belonging to,” i.e., in close “association with” something (cf.
Hebrews 6:9). Marcus Dods observed that “the change from en he [within] of ver. 2 to
echousa [having] is significant, and indicates that it was not precisely its local relations he
had in view, but rather its ritual associations” (1956, 4:328). Theodor Zahn stated that the
Hebrew writer was describing an “ideal relation” of the altar to the holy place (1973,
2:364). John Ebrard contended that one is not required to interpret echousa “in a local
sense” in this verse. As an example, he cited verse 1 of this very chapter: “Now even the

45. first covenant had [echein] ordinances...” (1859, 6:492).
That there was a very strong connection between the altar of incense and the most holy
place is evinced by several suggestions in the Old Testament. Note the following. (1) There
was a ritualistic association between the ark of the covenant and the altar of incense in that
the high priest sprinkled blood upon both of them on the annual day of atonement (Exodus
30:10). (2) Also, on the day of atonement, the high priest carried live coals from the golden
altar, along with incense, into the holy of holies (Leviticus 16:10). Thus, on that day, once a
year, the firepan, in which the coals were transported, became an extension of the altar. In
that sense, it might be said that the altar “belonged to” the most holy place. (3) In a
religious sense, the altar of incense actually was said to stand “before the Lord” (Leviticus
16:12) and “before the ark of the testimony” (Exodus 40:5). In fact, the author of Kings
states that the altar of gold “belonged to” the oracle, i.e., the inner sanctuary (see 1 Kings
6:22). Of this passage, R.D. Patterson noted that even though the altar was materially in
the holy place, “functionally and symbolically it was associated with the Most Holy Place”
(1988, 4:67). Another scholar observed that while the altar was locally situated in the holy
place, “in its nature and idea” it pertained to the most holy place (Kay, 1981, 10:69).
Professor William Milligan argued, on the basis of inference, that on the day of atonement
the veil between the holy and most holy places was opened so that the altar of incense and
the ark of the covenant stood in close proximity, and that it was from this vantage point
that the author of Hebrews wrote (n.d., 3:230).
Thus, a strong case can be made for the fact that the writer of Hebrews (9:3-4) was not
stressing the location of the altar of incense; rather, he was emphasizing its theological
connection with the most holy place of the tabernacle.
In view of this, let us remind ourselves of the Law of Contradiction. This logical maxim
affirms that a thing cannot both be, and not be, if one is speaking of the same thing,
employing the same time reference, and using his terms in an identical sense. In the case
before us, one should not charge that there is a contradiction between Exodus 30:6 and
Hebrews 9:3-4, for the distinct possibility exists that: (a) two different objects are in view,
i.e., the golden altar and a censer; or (b) what is more likely, two different senses are
employed, i.e., the altar was described in a spatial sense in the Exodus passage, and a
theological sense in the Hebrews context. It is thus wholly unwarranted to suggest that a
biblical contradiction must exist with reference to the location of the golden altar of
incense.
9. The Tabernacle in the Wilderness by Keith Cook
The Most Holy Place
Exodus 25:10-22; 26:1-6; 37:1-9
"Having therefore, brethren, liberty to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new
and living way which he hath consecrated for us" (Heb. 10:19-20).
BEYOND the Veil was located the very centre of Yahweh's dwelling place with His Ecclesia
in the wilderness: the Most Holy. Our illustration on p.89 depicts the Most Holy Place, its
structure and furniture. The structure formed a perfect cube, being 10 cubits wide by 10
cubits long by 10 cubits high (that is, approx. l5 feet x l5 feet x l5 feet). It therefore was only
half the area and cubic size of the Holy Place. It was a continuation of the Holy Place

46. structure.
The Holiest of all was constructed of walls on the North, South and West sides consisting of
Shittim wood boards, gold covered, as were seen in the walls of the Holy Place. The Eastern
Wall and opening was the beautiful Veil which separated it from the Holy Place. Its roof or
covering was comprised of the fine-twined linen curtains (earlier studied) skillfully
embroidered in blue, purple and scarlet.
Inside the Most Holy was to be seen one article of furniture only: the Ark of the Covenant
which was covered by the Mercy Seat and the Cherubim (Exod. 25:10-22; 37:1-9).
There was no provision for the entrance of light from outside, nor by such means as the
Lampstand that illuminated the Holy Place. The only light was that which shone from
above the Mercy Seat and between the two golden Cherubic figures: a light which indicated
the presence of Yahweh for it was here, He said, that He would meet with His people (Exod.
25:21 ,22). This was the Shekinah glory (Psa. 80:1).
Two people only, of all the sons of the tribes of Israel, entered the Most Holy Place. They
were Moses and Aaron.
• Moses brought out from thence the commands and instructions which Yahweh
communicated to His people via him as His representative (e.g. Exod. 25:22; Numb. 17:4-9)
• Aaron, the High Priest, entered each year on the Day of Atonement, with the blood
of the atonement. He was the representative of the members of the Ecclesia in the presence
of Yahweh.
The Significance of the Most Holy Place "Whither the forerunner is for us entered" (Heb.
6:19,20)
Yahweh's plan for this earth and for His chosen creatures, will introduce a condition of
perfection. This central place of the Divine dwelling place, being avube, conveyed that idea
to Israel. Its ultimate provision still belongs to the future.
The Apostle Paul draws upon the concept, writing:
"Ye being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is
the breadth, and length, and depth and height: and to know the love of Christ, which
passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God" (Eph. 3:17-19).
The Lord Jesus Christ, after his resurrection, entered into the perfect state when he
ascended to His Father in His dwelling place in the heavens (Heb. 8:1:9:12; Acts 7:55). He
had manifested Divine characteristics, truth and faith during his probation. That
manifestation became the basis for the Divine nature now shared with its Giver. There he is
continuing the life and work for which, by grace, he was provided.
Having entered as the "forerunner" he has opened the way into the holiest (Heb. 10:2t)) as
our High Priest (Heb. 6:20), our "hope" (v.19) and our intercessor (Heb. 7:25). He
figuratively took his blood of the Atonement to the Mercy Seat, the Throne of his Father,
and now he awaits the set time to he given the Kingdom when he shall return as Ruler (cp.
Luke 19:12).
Into this future state comparatively few of the human race will enter; fewer even, than the
many who have entered into God's purpose (i.e. the first entrance into the Sanctuary);
fewer also than those who have entered the Ecclesia through Christ, the door. Though
many served in the Ecclesial Holy Place, two only entered The Most Holy. The Lord's
parable (Matt. 25:2,3) of the five wise and five foolish virgins gives a dramatic illustration
of this aspect of the matter. The five foolish had it in their power to have sufficient oil of the
knowledge of the Word of God but, at the coming of Christ, were found to be without it.

47. Therefore they will not be able to gain an entrance into the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.
Those who will obtain an entrance into the future state of perfection will have done so
because they will have progressed acceptably through the stages of personal and spiritual
development typified by the Tabernacle, after the following pattern:
Attracted by God's righteousness, they separated themselves and approached Him through
Christ by baptism; figuratively, they entered the Outer Court;
Here they submitted to mental changes in their thinking and attitude concerning the things
of Yahweh and His truth, by offering themselves as a sacrifice, and by being cleansed in
His Word of Truth.
Entering into a condition of dedication, they underwent moral changes in life and character
to the degree to which they ate of the true Bread of Life; understood the Word of Light and
manifested it; offered up pleasing and acceptable service in the Ecclesia; figuratively they
progressed through the Holy Place.
The Apostle Paul used this pattern in Romans 5:1-2, where he explains our present
progress towards perfection thus: -
"Justified by faith" -- The Outer Court.
"Access... into this grace" -- Holy Place/Ecclesia (Eph. 1:3; 2:6).
"In hope of the Glory of God" -- Most Holy Place/the Perfect glorious future. See also 2
Pet. 1:4-8; 1 Cor. 15:50-54; 1 John 3:1-3; Rev. 3:12.
A Lesson that the Tabernacle teaches is found as a theme that runs through its structure: -
Outer Court Holy Place Most Holy Place
Mental preparation then Moral application before Physical perfection
Changed minds then Changed characters before Changed bodies
Separation then Dedication before Glorification
Reconciliation then Reformation before Exaltation
That people will be granted an entrance into the perfect state of the future, is one of the
lessons of hope and grace associated with the Most Holy Place. Therein will be seen the
same kind of "boards" making up the structure of that place as are to be seen in the Holy
Place of the Ecclesia. The shittim wood of selected human nature, shaped according to the
divine pattern, and clothed upon with the gold of a tried faith. Their Godlike characters
and their silver foundation of redemption, make them a fit Dwelling Place of the Deity. In
that setting they will be "beyond the veil", each one a "pillar" in the Kingdom (Rev. 3:12).
The eventual removal of the veil of the flesh will result in the Holy Place becoming the Most
Holy of the Kingdom.
The Prophecy Of The Most Holy Place
When the Apostle John penned the words of Rev. 4:1-5, "a door was opened in heaven",
the spirit surely was expressing in slightly different terms, a symbolic counterpart of the
idea of an entrance into the Most Holy Place of the future Kingdom of God via the Veil,
"Seven lamps...burning before the throne".
At that time, the saints will have replaced the veil of human nature with Divine glory. The
throne of Yahweh's Kingdom will be established in the midst of the encampment of the
elect (Rev. 20:9), which will then comprise the Most Holy Place. The multitude of the
redeemed will be gathered into One (Christ our mediator), and they will comprise the
throne of Yahweh's glory, the Cherubic messengers of His realm, and the King-priests of
the age. They will have attained the state of perfection, being sharers of the divine nature
(cp. 2 Pet. 1:3,4).

48. The four-square encampment of the saints (Rev. 7:9-11), will comprise the Temple,
Tabernacle, or Dwelling Place of Yahweh (Rev. 11:1915:5-8) from whence will be
manifested His presence, glory and truth.
Inside The Most Holy Place
Within the Most Holy, beyond the Veil, there stood only one item of furniture: the Ark of
the Covenant. It contained the two tables of the Testimony (or the 10 commandments).
Later the Golden pot of Manna and Aaron's Rod that budded, were added.
IT is proposed to first study the physical details and characteristics of each item; then
examine their significance in relation to their application to the Kingdom age (i.e. the
future Most Holy state).
Ark of the Covenant (Exod. 25:10-16; 37:1-5)
The Ark (Heb. Arown - "gathering") was made of five pieces of shittim wood overlaid
within and without with pure gold (v. 11). It measured 39 inches (1.143m) long, 23 inches
(.685m) high by 2 feet 3 inches wide (v.10); Its sides appeared to he held together by a gold
wreathen crown (Heb. Zare – "border binding" v. 11).
At each of the four corners there was a foot. The R.V. renders "corners" (v.12) as feet (cp.
Psa. 74:1-3 with its reference to the tabernacle with Ezek. 43:7 and its reference to the
future Temple, and Isa. 60:13).
Each foot was fastened to the corner or side of the Ark by means of a ring (v.12); Heb -
Tabaath, a seal or a sinking into. No doubt they were first cast in the earth. This would
require the piercing of the feet and sides for the purpose of securing the one to the other.
It had staves, also made of gold-covered shittim wood (vv. 13-15). These were left in
permanently (Exod. 25:15). They were adjusted for use when the Ark was to be conveyed
from place to place (Num. 4:5-6,11). By this means the bearers became connected with the
Ark for that brief period.
There is some evidence to suggest that two Arks had been made. In Deut. 10:1-5 Moses
recounts to Israel the experiences associated with the giving of the commandments upon
the two tables of stone: v.3 records that he made an ark; in v.5 he draws their attention to
the fact that he put the tables into the ark as commanded, and then states "and there they
be". But the two tables, at that moment, were in the gold covered Ark of the Covenant
within the Most Holy Place.
On the other hand, Exod. 27:1 shows that Bezaleel (Heb. In the shadow, or under the
covering of Au) made the Ark that answers the description contained in Exod. 25:10-16.
Into that Ark were placed the tables of the Testimony, which, apparently, were housed in
two arks one inside the other, no measurements being given for the ark made by Moses.
Antitype
The Lord Jesus Christ is now within the Most Holy Place of his Father's presence, as our
Ark of the Covenant that was made through him. This necessitated his sacrifice and the
piercing of his feet and side (John 19:18,34; Psa. 22:16). All that work was provided by
Divine Grace (represented by the numeral 5). In him, inferior human nature was covered
by the gold of faith, for it had been tried "in all points like unto his brethren", and is now,
by grace, covered by the "golden" Divine nature of his Father.
• Though he had manifested Divine Truth and Light (Lampstand);
• Though he was the Bread of Life (Shewbread),

49. • Though he had offered acceptable service and prayers (Incense Altar);
• Though he had passed through the rent veil of his flesh;
• Yet he entered into perfection by the GRACE of Yahweh.
Many other humans are being gathered into him by grace (Eph. 2:8) + They are expected
to put off fleshly carnality in favour of a Christ-like faith that covers them with a richness
of character that is pleasing to Yahweh. Their lives are hid with Christ in God (Col. 3:3;
Heb. 2:10), as they await the full manifestation of glory (Rom. 8:23).
Provision is made for members of the body of Christ, the Ecclesia, to be held together by
the bonds of faith (i.e. the crown of gold). The principle has been, for many, one of practical
experience during present Ecclesial times. It has been found in our fellowship (the golden
crown upon the Table of Shewbread). Fellowship can only exist properly where proved and
tried faith is evident. It is again found in our service and prayers (the golden crown upon
the Incense Altar). Acceptable service and prayer must also evidence faith that has been
tested and proved in these areas.
The crown was of "wreathen work", suggesting that a struggle was involved. The bonds
with which men and women of differing dispositions are bound together in unity, are not
automatic so as to take everyone into its embrace. Rather they must be worked at earnestly
by all who are affected by them. Paul, in Eph. 4:16, emphasized the contribution which
each member takes towards the effectiveness of those bonds. In Col. 2:19 he explains it as
being "knit together" (as a weathen band would be). In these references "band" is a word
that denotes a uniting principle as a band of union. But it also denotes an impediment to
individual freedom (Col. 2:19 "bands" Gk - Sundesmos).
Not only are we bound together by faith in the oneness of the body of Christ, but we are
attached to him, and identified with him, by a kind of "seal" (Exod. 25:12 "rings" Heb.
Tabaath "seal" (see John 6:27; 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:13; 4:30). Upon the basis of, and by
virtue of, the Lord's sacrifice, we become related to Christ and become bearers of his truth
and character, In the Kingdom age of the Most Holy state, many will become permanently
associated with him as bearers of his name and nature.
As we have seen, the Ark of the Covenant contained three articles (Heb. 9:4):
The Two Tables of the Testimony;
The Golden Pot of Manna;
Aaron's Rod that budded.
It is now proposed to study each item separately and then relate them to the Lord Jesus
Christ and to the Kingdom age; that being their significant context.
The Contents of The Ark
The three sections of the Tabernacle (Court, Holy Place and Most Holy) represented three
stages in the life of the believer: Preparation, Walking in the Light, Sharing the Glory. In
order to attain unto the latter it is necessary to consider and apply the principles set forth
in its furniture, including the contents of the Ark.
The Tables of the Law (Exodus 25:16; 31:18)
THE ten basic commandments of the Law were inscribed on two tablets of stone, and
delivered unto Moses (Exod. 34. See also the Law of Moses by R. Roberts, pp.103-104).
They were also known as The Testimony" (Heb. eduwth, "witness"), or the "Tables of the
covenant" (Heb. 9:15; ep. Exod. 34:10).

50. The Law was designed to make manifest the reality of sin, and to educate and discipline the
people in preparation for the future inheritance promised in the covenant made with
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Mosaic covenant was accepted by the nation in the terms:
"All that Yahweh hath spoken we will do and be obedient" (Exod. 24:7). It therefore
governed the relationship between Yahweh and His people; and also between the members
of His family
The Tables of the Commandments were the first items to be placed inside the Ark, thus
indicating that the Divine Laws and Precepts are of first importance. The original stones
were Divinely provided and engraved by the hand of Yahweh (Exod. 24:12).
Later there was given to Israel another manifestation of Divine Law and Truth-The Word
made flesh (John 1:14; 14:16; 15:1; 17:26). He was the "Logos", the mind, thought,
intelligence of Deity (Read Eureka Vol.1 p.314). The stones given to Moses pointed forward
to him whom Yahweh provided, being His only begotten son obedient in all things, his
character engraven by his Father's hand (Zech. 3:9). Therefore he displayed his Father's
truth, law and character. He became the basis of the "new covenant" by which a true,
faithful family is being gathered together and developed, to the honour of Yahweh.
But the Israel of Christ's day rejected the "chief cornerstone," even though he had been
engraven by Yahweh's hand.
The significance of the Tables of the Law extend still further. Paul (see 2 Cor. 3:3)
contrasted them with the effect of Yahweh's Word upon the fleshy "tables of the heart" (or
mind), a reference drawn from Prov. 3:1-4 and Icr. 31:33. The constant passage of Divine
truth, read, heard, understood, believed and repeated, passing through the brain tissue,
becomes a law in the thought processes of our mind that flows out in words and actions (cp.
Psa. 119:97,99); a manifestation in us of the revealed mind of Yahweh.
Furthermore the Tables of the Testimony were a prophecy of the kind of people who, in the
future time of their inheritance, will become the revealed Word of Yahweh's Truth
throughout the world. They are described in Rev. 12:17; 19:10 as those who did "keep the
commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ". They are described in the
day of their exaltation, as those who have "his Father's name written in their foreheads"
(Rev. 14:1; 22:4). They were "sealed doctrinal" in such a manner that the truth,
understood and believed, was faithfully practiced.
The Golden Pot of Manna - Exod. 16:32-34
"He gave them the bread from heaven to eat" John 6:31
The Manna was small and round - as small as the hoar frost (Exod. 16:14), as the coriander
seed; its color (or eye) as the color of bdellium (Num. 11:7)
Into a Golden Pot for which neither size, capacity nor dimensions are given, was placed a
measured amount of manna. It was a selected quantity taken from the food with which
Yahweh daily fed His people in the wilderness (Exod. 16:12-22). It was Yahweh's food (Psa.
78:24,25), the food of angels, but Israel needed it each day and they were given very explicit
instructions concerning its gathering and use. When these were nor strictly observed they
either hungered, or the manna corrupted.
It was first provided after the glory had been seen (Exod. 16:10), and flesh had been eaten
in the evening (vv. 12,13).
Moses later explained to the Israelites that the manna was given to them so that they would
know that "man doth not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the
mouth of Yahweh" (Deut. 8:3). And that "word" needed to be partaken of every day: "in

51. the morning" after the rising sun had drawn up its covering dew. It was food for the
morning of the new day. It was from this food that the measured omer (approx. 1 pint) was
placed in the Golden Pot which was later placed in the Ark (Heb. 9:4). It was preserved
throughout the wilderness journeyings and possibly for some time afterwards.
A Type of Christ
Jesus declared: "My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven" (John 6:32). The
manna and the golden vessel point forward to the Lord Jesus Christ. He was a "vessel"
truly "meet" for his Father's use. His faith was tried in every way; his love was such as to
east out every fear; his perfect obedience unto death ensured his resurrection. One of the
results of all this has been that Yahweh continues to gather into him as many as He chooses
so as to have them enter the perfect "Most Holy" state of the future age.
Jesus declared of himself in John 6:57, "As the living Father bath sent me... so he that
eateth me, even he shall live by me". He was given to Israel to "eat" in the "evening" of the
Mosaic age, after they had seen Yahweh's "Glory" manifest in the flesh (John 1:14). He
was the "true bread" out of heaven (John 6:50,51,58). He was the "Logos", the spirit of
Deity, the true bread given as life-imparting spiritual food (see Eureka vol.1 p.311). He
declared: "ifanyman eat thisbread, he shall live in the Aion" (John 6:51). His teachings are
food that will produce eternal life (John 6:47-53). He was corruptible like the daily
wilderness manna; but he is now incorruptible like the ArkIManna, being hid in God (at
the right hand of power), concealed from human eyes.
He is waiting to be revealed in the morning of the new day, sent forth as Yahweh's food in
the Kingdom. That apocalypse will be associated with a numberless host which the rising
sun of righteousness will draw to himself in resurrection as the dew of the morning.
Meanwhile, his word (his expression of his Father's truth) has been preserved and is
incorruptible for it "liveth and abideth for ever".
Those who, responding to the Grace of the Divine calling, have entered into the body of
Christ (Col. 3:3,4) will, after the intervening night, be as dew upon the ground in the
resurrection morning (Isa. 26:19). They will have seen Yahweh's manifested Glory in His
son and will have "eaten" of his "flesh". This manna is now concealed, sleeping through
the night of death, waiting to be revealed in the "morning" when the Sun of Righteousness
shall arise with healing in his beams (Mal 4:2-See Eureka Vol. I, pp. 309-3l4). That
"manna" will be like the bread which Israel was given to eat: it was concealed in the
watery substance which evaporated as the result of the sun's warmth. But when it will be
apocalyptically revealed in the new day it will be as food for the nations, as the people
partake of the teachings of the incorruptible bread (the saints). It will be the food of faith
that will result in eternal life for the "ages of the ages
The "prophecy" of the manna also relates to those who, today, form part of the
multitudinous host who are members of the One Body of Christ. They all wait in faithful
patience for the Sun's rising so that, by his coming and presence, he will reveal them in
glorious splendor by acting upon them with the healing beams of immortality (Phil.
3:20,2~; 1 Cor. 15:45 in which the words "a quickening spirit" are also rendered, "a
life-giving spirit"). Those who "eat" of him today, will then partake of spiritual food which
is incorruptible (John 6:57; Rev. 2:17). It is therefore necessary for us to eat daily of the
"manna" of the Word of Truth. That which we partake of today will not "keep" until the
morrow. We need to "eat" again tomorrow to sustain the spiritual man during this
wilderness experience.

52. To neglect, or refuse, to eat of the Lord's life-giving truth, is to perish, as Israel would have
done had they refused it in the wilderness. Later they did reject Christ's teachings and, for
this rejection of the Divine "food ", they perished both individually and nationally in the
retribution of AD 70 (see Hosea 4:6).
Aaron's Rod that Budded (Num. 17:2-11)
Following the rebels' challenge against the position and authority of Aaron, Yahweh
instructed Moses to implement a procedure that was designed to show the people that
Aaron was His choice as High Priest. This was through the budding of an almond rod, the
symbol of death and resurrection, the token of Divine selection (cp. Rom. 1:3-4).
The rod (Heb. mattah, a branch or extension) has been considered to be a branch of the
almond tree which is the first to awaken after the long night of winter. It was a branch
which Yahweh had made and which He later caused to live again and to produce fruit.
An "ecclesial" dispute had developed in Israel and the issue was whether the High
Priesthood was an appointment based upon human selection or upon God manifestation.
So that an authoritative answer should be given, Yahweh called together the Levites, as the
symbols of all the firstfruits in the nation (Num. 17:2-4,6,7). During the night, Yahweh
indicated His choice and made judgment in the matter that had troubled Israel. His power
operated upon Aaron's Rod, granting it new life so that, miraculously, it blossomed and
brought forth fruit. ln the morning His judgment and selection were manifested before the
nation (vv. 5,8,9). That revelation dispelled the murmurings of God's people. Under the
circumstances His authority could not be challenged.
This branch was then taken (v.10) and placed again within the Most Holy Place, in the Ark
(Heb. 9:4). It constituted a token for the remembrance of the people. As Aaron typified the
High Priest, the rod pointed forward to the confirmation of his appointment by his
resurrection. Inside the Most Holy Place in heaven there is one who was raised up as the
"Branch", or "the rod of the stem of Jesse". Heis Yahweh's firstborn, the "only begotten"
(John 3:16), who was brought into His Father's house at 12 years of age (Luke 2:49).
Israel was in rebellion against its God Who displayed His wilt and word before thcm in the
very name that Jesus bore. Yet they rejected him, declaring "We have no king but
Caesar." But he was made "the firstfruits" of the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:20-23) and was
displayed before Israel in power. The power that had caused Aaron's rod to bud now
caused this Branch to bring forth fruit. The Branch which Yahweh had "made strong for
Himself" (Psa. 80:15), had now become the "man of His right hand".
This choice by Yahweh of High Priest for His people, was confirmed by his resurrection
(Acts 2:24; 10:40; Phil. 2:8,9; Heb. 7:15,16; 8:1). He was raised from the dead as "the Rod,
the Branch" (Isa. 11:1); and then elevated to the right hand of Yahweh (Psa. 110: 1,2). But
as the branch of Aaron produced flower and fruit, sobas Christ (Acts. 15:14; 1 Pet. 2:9).
His people "were once dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1) but have been "quickened
together with Christ" (v.5). Now "hidden with Christ" (Col. 3:3), they await the revelation
at the judgment seat when divine power will be manifested in them in the bestowal of
eternal life
While we await the "morning" of the new day, there is to be developed in each saint the
"fruit of the spirit" (Gal. 5:22,23). However, the fullness of its beauty will not be fully seen
until the light of the New Day shines upon it.

53. 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the
gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained
the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded,
and the stone tablets of the covenant.
1. BARNES, "Which had the golden censer - The censer was a “fire-pan,” made for the
purpose of carrying fire, in order to burn incense on it in the place of worship. The forms of the
censer were various. Some difficulty has been felt respecting the statement of Paul here that the
“golden censer” was in the most holy place, from the fact that no such utensil is mentioned by
Moses as pertaining to the tabernacle, nor in the description of Solomon’s temple, which was
modelled after the tabernacle, is there any account of it given. But the following considerations
will probably remove the difficulty.
(1) Paul was a Jew, and was familiar with what pertained to the temple, and gave such a
description of it as would be in accordance with what actually existed in his time. The fact that
Moses does not expressly mention it, does not prove that in fact no such censer was laid up in
the most holy place.
(2) Aaron and his successors were expressly commanded to burn incense in a “censer” in the
most holy place before the mercy-seat. This was to be done on the great day of atonement, and
but once in a year; Lev_16:12-13.
(3) There is every probability that the censer that was used on such an occasion was made of
gold. All the implements that were employed in the most holy place were made of gold, or
overlaid with gold, and it is in the highest degree improbable that the high priest would use any
other on so solemn an occasion; compare 1Ki_7:50.
(4) As the golden censer was to be used only once in a year, it would naturally be laid away in
some secure situation, and none would so obviously occur as the most holy place. There it would
be perfectly safe. No one was permitted to enter there but the high priest, and being preserved
there it would be always ready for his use. The statement of Paul, therefore, has the highest
probability, and undoubtedly accords with what actually occurred in the tabernacle and the
temple. The object of the incense burned in worship was to produce an agreeable fragrance or
smell; see notes on Luk_1:9.
And the ark of the covenant - This ark or chest was made of shittim-wood, was two cubits
and a half long, a cubit and a half broad, and the same in height; Exo_25:10. It was completely
covered with gold, and had a “lid,” which was called the “mercy-seat,” on which rested the
Shekinah, the symbol of the divine presence, between the outstretched wings of the cherubim. It
was called “the ark of the covenant,” because within it were the two tables of the covenant, or the
Law of God written on tables of stone. It was a simple “chest, coffer, or box,” with little
ornament, though rich in its materials. A golden crown or molding ran around the top, and it

54. had rings and staves in its sides by which it might be borne; Exo_25:12-16. This ark was
regarded as the most sacred of all the appendages of the tabernacle. Containing the Law, and
being the place where the symbol of the divine presence was manifested, it was regarded as
especially holy, and in the various wars and revolutions in the Hebrew commonwealth, it was
guarded with special care.
After the passage over the Jordan it remained for some time at Gilgal Jos_4:19, whence it was
removed to Shiloh; 1Sa_1:3. From hence, the Israelites took it to their camp, apparently to
animate them in battle, but it was taken by the Philistines; 1 Sam. 4. The Philistines, however,
oppressed by the hand of God, resolved to return it, and sent it to Kirjath-Jearim; 1Sa_7:1. In
the reign of Saul it was at Nob. David conveyed it to the house of Obededom, and thence to his
palace on Mount Zion; 2 Sam. 6. At the dedication of the temple it was placed in the Holy of
Holies by Solomon, where it remained for many years. Subsequently, it is said, the wicked kings
of Judah, abandoning themselves to idolatry, established idols in the most holy place itself, and
the priests removed the ark, and bore it from place to place to secure it from profanation.
“Calmet.” When Josiah ascended the throne he commanded the priests to restore the ark to its
place in the sanctuary, and forbade them to carry it about from one place to another as they had
before done; 2Ch_35:3. The subsequent history of the ark is unknown. It is probable that it was
either destroyed when the city of Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, or that it was carried
with other spoils to Babylon, There is no good reason to suppose that it was ever in the second
temple, and it is generally admitted by the Jews that the ark of the covenant was one of the
things that were wanting there. Abarbanel says, that the Jews flatter themselves that it will be
restored by the Messiah.
Wherein - That is, in the ark - for so the construction naturally requires. In 1Ki_8:9,
however, it is said that there was nothing in the ark, “save the two tables of stone which Moses
put there at Horeb,” and it has been supposed by some that the pot of manna and the rod of
Aaron were not in the ark, but that they were in capsules, or ledges made on its sides for their
safe keeping, and that this should be rendered “by the ark.” But the apostle uses the same
language respecting the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron which he does about the two tables
of stone, and as they were certainly in the ark, the fair construction here is that the pot of manna
and the rod of Aaron were in it also. The account in Exo_16:32-34; Num_17:10, is, that they
were laid up in the most holy place, “before the testimony,” and there is no improbability
whatever in the supposition that they were in the ark. Indeed, that would be the most safe place
to keep them, as the tabernacle was often taken down and removed from place to place. It is
clear from the passage in 1Ki_8:9, that they were not in the ark in the temple, but there is no
improbability in the supposition that before the temple was built they might have been removed
from the ark and lost. When the ark was carried from place to place, or during its captivity by
the Philistines, it is probable that they were lost, as we never hear of them afterward.
The golden pot - In Exo_16:33, it is simply “a pot,” without specifying the material. In the
Septuagint it is rendered “golden pot,” and as the other utensils of the sanctuary were of gold, it
may be fairly presumed that this was also.
That had manna - A small quantity of manna which was to be preserved as a perpetual
remembrancer of the food which they had eaten in their long journey in the wilderness, and of
the goodness of God in miraculously supplying their wants. As the manna, also, would not of
itself keep, Exo_16:20, the fact that this was to be laid up to be preserved from age to age, was a
perpetual miracle in proof of the presence and faithfulness of God. On the subject of the manna,
see Bush’s notes on Exo_16:15.
And Aaron’s rod that budded - That budded and blossomed as a proof that God had
chosen him to minister to him. The princes of the tribes were disposed to rebel, and to call in
question the authority of Aaron. To settle the matter, each one was required to take a rod or staff
of office, and to bring it to Moses with the name of the tribe to which it appertained written on

55. it. These were laid up by Moses in the tabernacle, and it was found on the next day that the rod
marked with the name of Levi had budded and blossomed, and produced almonds. In perpetual
remembrance of this miracle, the rod was preserved in the ark; Num_17:1-13. Its subsequent
history is unknown. It was not in the ark when the temple was built, nor is there any reason to
suppose that it was preserved to that time.
And the tables of the covenant - The two tables of stone on which the ten commandments
were written. They were expressly called “the words of the covenant” in Exo_34:28. On the word
“covenant”; see notes on Heb_9:16 and 17 of this chapter. These two tables were in the ark at the
time the temple was dedicated. 1Ki_8:9. Their subsequent history is unknown. It is probable
that they shared the fate of the ark, and were either carried to Babylon, or were destroyed when
the city was taken by Nebuchadnezzar.
2. CLARKE, "Which had the golden censer - It is evident that the apostle speaks here of
the tabernacle built by Moses, and of the state and contents of that tabernacle as they were
during the lifetime of Moses. For, as Calmet remarks, in the temple which was afterwards built
there were many things added which were not in the tabernacle, and several things left out. The
ark of the covenant and the two tables of the law were never found after the return from the
Babylonish captivity. We have no proof that, even in the time of Solomon, the golden pot of
manna, or the rod of Aaron, was either in or near the ark. In Solomon’s temple the holy place
was separated from the holy of holies by a solid wall, instead of a veil, and by strong wooden
doors, 1Ki_6:31-33. In the same temple there was a large vestibule before the holy place; and
round about this and the holy of holies there were many chambers in three stories, 1Ki_6:5,
1Ki_6:6. But there was nothing of all this in the Mosaic tabernacle; therefore, says Calmet, we
need not trouble ourselves to reconcile the various scriptures which mention this subject; some
of which refer to the tabernacle, others to Solomon’s temple, and others to the temple built by
Zorobabel; which places were very different from each other.
The apostle says that the golden censer was in the holy of holies; but this is nowhere
mentioned by Moses. But he tells us that the high priest went in, once every year, with the
golden censer to burn incense; and Calmet thinks this censer was left there all the year, and that
its place was supplied by a new one, brought in by the priest the year following. Others think it
was left just within the veil, so that the priest, by putting his hand under the curtain, could take
it out, and prepare it for his next entrance into the holiest.
The ark of the covenant - This was a sort of chest overlaid with plates of gold, in which the
two tables of the law, Aaron’s rod, the pot of manna, etc., were deposited. Its top, or lid, was the
propitiatory or mercy-seat.
3. GILL, "Which had the golden censer,.... There were various censers used by the priests
in the daily service, but this was a peculiar one, which was used by the high priest on the day of
atonement; on other days he used a silver censer, but on that day a golden one, and with it he
entered into the holy of holies (y); and though Moses does not call it a golden one, Lev_16:12 yet
Josephus does (z); and so do the Jewish doctors in the place referred to, with whom the apostle
agrees, and to this the allusion is in Rev_8:3 but here a difficulty arises, how this can be said to
have been in the holy of holies, and within the vail, when, according to Moses, it was without the
vail, and was only carried within on the day of atonement; and so Philo the Jew (a) places it in
the other part of the tabernacle; and it seems as if it was to avoid this difficulty, that the Ethiopic
version has removed it from this verse to verse the second, and put it among the things that were
in the holy place; but there is no need of this, nor to say that the altar of incense is intended, for

56. that is never so called, and, besides, was without the vail too. It should be observed, that the
apostle does not say, that the golden censer was laid up in the holy of holies, and kept there, but
that it "had" it; as it had it on the day of atonement, when it was carried in there by the high
priest, who there made use of it; and it was for the use of it in that place, that it was peculiarly
designed. What was done by it was this, burning coals were with it taken off from the altar
before the Lord, and were brought in within the vail, where incense was put upon them, which
covered the mercy seat, that so the high priest died not. The burning coals signify the very great
sufferings of Christ, not only the sufferings of his body, which were very painful, but those of his
soul, when the wrath and hot displeasure of God was poured out upon him; and those coals
being taken off from the altar before the Lord, show that the sufferings of Christ were according
to the will of God, were grateful to him, and always before him; and their being brought within
the vail, does not denote that Christ is now in a suffering state, though he is in the midst of the
throne, as a lamb that had been slain; but the continued virtue and efficacy of his sufferings, and
that our faith and hope, which enter within the vail, have to do with his blood and sacrifice
thither carried. And the incense, which was carried in with those coals, typified the intercession
of Christ in heaven, which is pure and holy, sweet, fragrant, and perpetual; and the priest having
his hands full of it, expresses the fulness of Christ's intercession for all his elect, and for all
things for them, and his fulness of merit to plead, which makes his intercession efficacious and
prevalent; and hence, through his much incense, the prayers of his people become odorous and
acceptable: and the incense being put upon the burning coals in the censer, shows that Christ's
intercession proceeds upon the foot of his blood and sacrifice, his sufferings and death; and
hence it becomes grateful, and has its influence; the smoke of it covers the mercy seat, or throne
of grace, and makes that accessible; and as the priest, who offers it, never dies, so none of those
for whom he intercedes.
And the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold; this is called the ark of the
covenant, because the tables of the covenant, afterwards mentioned, were put into it; and that it
was overlaid with gold round about, is certain from Exo_25:11 where it is said to be overlaid
with pure gold, within and without; and that the ark was within the vail, and in the most holy
place, is manifest from Exo_40:21 that this was wanting in the second temple, is generally
agreed (b); but who took it away, where it was put, or what became of it various are the
sentiments of the Jewish writers: some say (c), it was carried away by Nebuchadnezzar into
Babylon, and is meant by the goodly vessels of the house of the Lord, 2Ch_36:10 others say
(d), that Jeremiah the prophet took it, and hid it in a cave on Mount Nebo; but the more
generally received opinion is, that it was hid by King Josiah in some hidden and deep place,
which Solomon had built for that purpose under ground, knowing, that the temple would be
destroyed (e); and it is often said, that it was hid under the pavement of a room in the temple,
called ‫לשכת‬‫דיר‬‫העצים‬ , "the wood room" (f). The ark is, by some, thought to be a type of the
church, which is the ark of God, of his building, and where he dwells; the ark of the covenant, or
testimony, where the oracles of God, his word and ordinances, are: its being made of Shittim
wood may denote the incorruption and duration of it: and its being covered with gold within and
without is expressive of its glory; and its being portable, and carried from place to place, shows
that the church is not always in one place; its rings, staves, and priests that bore it, may point at
the Gospel, and the ministers of it, the instruments of moving it; and its moving from place to
place, and falling into the hands of enemies, were emblematical of the church's afflictions; as its
rest at last, in Solomon's temple, may signify the church's rest here and hereafter: but the ark is
rather to be considered as a type of Christ; its various names agree with Christ, as the ark of
God, the ark of his strength, the glory of God, the face of God, the holy ark, the ark of the
covenant, or testimony, yea, Jehovah, and God himself: the time of its making is observable, it
was made before the tabernacle, and the tabernacle for the sake of it; Christ is before all
creatures, and was set up as Mediator before anything existed, and all things are for his sake; it

57. being made of Shittim wood, covered with gold, may denote both the incorruption and glory of
Christ; and its several decorations, the graces with which he was adorned, as man and Mediator;
its staves and rings may design the word, ordinances, and ministers, whereby he is carried into
the several places of the world; here God granted his presence, and counsel was asked of him,
and it was brought forth in time of war, as a security from enemies, all which is applicable to
Christ; by it wonders were done, as the dividing of Jordan for the Israelites to pass into the land
of Canaan, the falling of the walls of Jericho, and the fall of Dagon; so Christ has opened the way
for his people to heaven, has spoiled principalities and powers, and his Gospel is powerful to the
pulling down the strongholds of sin and Satan; the moving of the ark from place to place, and its
rest in the temple, may signify the rest of Christ, after his many fatigues in this world.
Wherein was the golden pot that had manna; which Aaron filled with manna by the
direction of Moses, who gave it at the appointment of God, that it might be preserved to future
ages, as a memorial of the goodness, care, and power of God in feeding the Israelites with it in
the wilderness, Exo_16:33. This pot held an omer, which was more than three pints and a half;
some say six pints: and though Moses does not call it a golden pot, yet it is so called, not only by
the Septuagint in Exo_16:33 but also by Philo the Jew (g); nor is it reasonable to think, with
some Jewish writers (h), that it should be made of earth, which was to continue for ages to
come: this also was wanting in the second temple (i); and this, with Aaron's rod, after
mentioned, and other things, is said to be hid when the ark was, and along with it (k): but how
this pot, as well as Aaron's rod, can be said to be in the ark, when it is asserted, at the bringing of
the ark into the temple, at the dedication of it by Solomon, that there was nothing in it but two
tables of stone, 1Ki_8:9 and both the pot of "manna", and Aaron's rod, are said to be before the
testimony, Exo_16:34 and not in it, is a difficulty. Some, in order to remove it, observe, that the
phrase, "wherein", refers not to the ark, but to the tabernacle; but since the tables of the
covenant were in the ark, and these are mentioned with it, and the phrase, "over it", in the next
verse, cannot be understood of the tabernacle, but of the ark, this solution is not satisfactory.
Others have observed, that they might be in the ark in Moses's time and in Jeremiah's time,
when they are said to be hid, though they were not in Solomon's: and others have taken notice,
that the preposition εν sometimes signifies "at", or "with", as in Col_3:1 and so the sense is, that
these were near unto it in the most holy place, and might be in the sides of it, though not within
it; for there were places in the sides of the ark to put things into, Deu_31:26. And certain it is
from the above account from Scripture, that they were near it; and so, by the Jewish writers,
they are always mentioned along with it: when that was carried away, and hid, they were hid
with it; but what a certain Jewish commentator (l) observes on 1Ki_8:9 is so express, as if it was
designed to vindicate our apostle: his remark is this:
"the intention of this is not to deny that there were not the things mentioned in the law, for they
were ‫מונחים‬‫בו‬ , "left in it", as Aaron's "rod", and "the pot of manna", only to deny, hereby, that
there was not anything of the law, save the decalogue.''
And it should be observed, that it is not said of these, that they were put before the ark, but
"before the testimony"; that is, before the tables of the covenant, which were within the ark. The
"manna", in this pot, was typical of Christ; in the signification of its name, whether it comes
from ‫,מנה‬ "manah", which signifies to appoint, prepare, and distribute, Christ being appointed,
prepared, and distributed, as food for his people; or from ‫מן‬‫הו‬ , "man hu", what is it? the words
said by the Israelites, when they first saw it, not knowing what it was; so Christ is unknown to
his people until revealed to them, and remains unknown to all natural and unregenerate men:
the manna came from heaven, from God, and was a free gift of his, and so Christ: it was round in

58. form, and may be expressive of Christ's perfection, and eternity: it was in colour white, which
may signify his purity and innocence; it was sweet in taste, and so is Christ, his fruits, his word
and ordinances: it was small in quantity, which may denote the meanness and despicableness of
Christ in the eyes of the world: the people went out and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or
beat it in mortars, and baked it, and ate, which may be typical of the apprehension, sufferings,
and death of Christ, in order to be fit food for the faith of believers. The persons that were fed by
it were the Israelites, who were brought out of Egypt, and then in the wilderness, a large
number, and men of all sorts, rich, and poor, and who had an equal portion, though very
undeserving; so those who are fed by Christ, and nourished with him, the bread of life, are the
spiritual Israel of God, whom Christ has redeemed from worse than Egyptian bondage and
darkness, though they are yet in the wilderness of this world; and they are a large number, the
whole family of God, who receive out of Christ's fulness grace for grace; and there is no
difference of high and low, rich and poor, bond or free, male or female; they are all one in Christ,
and Christ is all in all; and they have all a whole Christ, though they are very undeserving, being
by nature children of wrath as others. And as the Israelites had the manna every day, and all the
while they were in the wilderness, so Christ is the daily bread of believers; by him, in his word
and ordinances, is his church nourished in the wilderness, to whom he gives to eat of the hidden
manna, the food of the wilderness. The "pot", in which this manna was kept, was typical of the
ordinances of the Gospel; in its matter, being made of gold, denoting the preciousness and
duration of them; in the size of it, holding an "omer", showing that these contain plenty of good
things to satisfaction; in the situation of it before the ark, signifying the presence of Christ with
his ordinances; and in its use to hold manna, and be a memorial of it to ages to come, as the
ordinances have in them food for souls, and are the means of remembering Christ in future
generations, till his second coming.
And Aaron's rod that budded; and not only budded, but bloomed; blossomed, and yielded
almonds, Num_17:8. This also was laid before the ark of the testimony, Heb_9:10, and may be
said to be in it, or with it, in the same sense as the pot of manna was; it was likewise wanting in
the second temple (m), and is said to be hid with the pot of manna, and other things, as before
observed: it was a type of Christ: it is affirmed by the Jews, that in the days of the Messiah, the
priesthood shall return, and the rod of Aaron shall flourish (n); it was, very probably, as some
have thought (o), an almond tree stick, as that in Jer_1:11. The almond tree has its name, in
Hebrew, from a word which signifies haste and vigilance; it being, as Pliny says (p), the first of
trees that buds and blossoms, and is very hasty in putting them forth. An almond tree rod may
be a proper emblem of Christ's speedy incarnation in the fulness of time; and Aaron's almond
tree rod, of his right to the priesthood, and his vigilance in it: this was first a dry rod or stick, and
may design the mean descent and appearance of Christ, being born of mean parents, living a
mean and obscure life; his entrance on his public ministry, and continuance in it, were without
any pomp or grandeur; he was as a root out of a dry ground; and though he did many miracles,
these were treated with contempt; and he was at last apprehended, arraigned, and condemned
as a malefactor, and died a shameful and an accursed death: it looked very unlikely and
unpromising, that he should be the King Messiah; that he should have all power in heaven and
in earth; that he should have the wisdom he had, and do the miracles he did; and that he should
be the author of eternal salvation; and that such fruits of grace, peace, pardon, and
righteousness, should spring from him, as that Aaron's dry rod should bud, blossom, and bear
almonds, in which it was a lively figure of Christ; that lying among other rods, and perhaps
being like them, may denote Christ's assuming the common nature of men, or an individual of
human nature in all things like to man: and this being cut off from the tree, and being a dry
stick, may represent the death of Christ; and its budding and blossoming may point at the
resurrection of Christ from the dead; and as Aaron's priesthood was confirmed by the budding
and blossoming of his rod, so the deity and Messiahship of Christ are confirmed by his

59. resurrection; and its bringing forth almonds may design the fruits of Christ's death and
resurrection; and moreover, the almond tree being, as Philo the Jew says (q) the first of trees
that buds and blossoms in the spring, and the last that casts its leaves, it may be, as he observes,
a symbol of the priestly tribe; and it may be a figure of the perpetuity of Christ, and his
priesthood:
and the tables of the covenant; the same with the testimony which was ordered to be put
into the ark, and accordingly was, Exo_25:16. About this there is no controversy; though it is a
matter of dispute with the Jews, whether the book of the law was in the ark or not: some say it
was in the side of it, and others within it (r); but Maimonides (s) says, that Moses wrote the
whole law with his own hand before he died, and gave a book (or copy) to every tribe, and one
copy he put ‫,בארון‬ "in the ark": so Jarchi says (t), that the book of the law of Moses was put into
the midst of the ark, and the ark was glorious and beautiful by that which was ‫,בתוכו‬ "within it".
These tables were made of stone, an emblem of the hardness of man's heart, which is destitute of
spiritual life and motion, senseless and stupid, impenitent, stubborn, and inflexible, and on
which no impressions can be made but by powerful and efficacious grace; and also of the
stability and duration of the law, as moral, which is not antiquated by another, nor made void by
the Gospel, nor altered in its nature and terms, but remains the same as to the matter of it;
though it is now no covenant of works to believers, and they are freed from the curse and
condemnation of it: the number of these tables is two; the whole law is reduced by our Lord to
two grand precepts of it, Mat_22:37 and the fleshly tables, on which it is reinscribed in
regeneration, are the heart and mind, 2Co_3:3. The place where these tables were put is the ark,
which was typical of the law being in Christ, not only in his hands, but in his heart, Psa_40:8
and in his keeping of which he is the fulfilling end; for he being the surety of his people, and
becoming man, answered every part of the law; in the holiness of his nature, in the perfect
obedience of his life, and in his sufferings and death, in which he bore the penalty of it: and
these tables are called the tables of the covenant, because the law on Mount Sinai was a covenant
made with the people of Israel; and was typical of the covenant, of which Christ is the surety and
Mediator, and which is ratified by his blood.
4. HENRY, " The ark of the covenant overlaid round about with pure gold, Heb_9:4. This
typified Christ, his perfect obedience to the law and his fulfilling of all righteousness for us. Now
here we are told both what was in this ark and what was over it. [1.] What was in it. First, The
golden pot that had manna, which, when preserved by the Israelites in their own houses,
contrary to the command of God, presently putrefied; but now, being by God's appointment
deposited here in this house, was kept from putrefaction, always pure and sweet; and this to
teach us that it is only in Christ that our persons, our graces, our performances are kept pure. It
was also a type of the bread of life we have in Christ, the true ambrosia that gives immortality.
This was also a memorial of God's miraculously feeding his people in the wilderness, that they
might never forget such signal favour, nor distrust God for the time to come. Secondly, Aaron's
rod that budded, and thereby showed that God had chosen him of the tribe of Levi to minister
before him of all the tribes of Israel, and so an end was put to the murmuring of the people, and
to their attempt to invade the priest's office, Num_17:1-13. This was that rod of God with which
Moses and Aaron wrought such wonders; and this was a type of Christ, who is styled the man,
the branch (Zec_6:12), by whom God has wrought wonders for the spiritual deliverance,
defence, and supply of his people, and for the destruction of their enemies. It was a type of
divine justice, by which Christ the Rock was smitten, and from whom the cool refreshing waters
of life flow into our souls. Thirdly, The tables of the covenant, in which the moral law was
written, signifying the regard God has to the preservation of his holy law, and the care we all

60. ought to have that we keep the law of God - that this we can only do in and through Christ, by
strength from him nor can our obedience by accepted but through him.
5. JAMISON, "golden censer — The Greek, must not be translated “altar of incense,” for it
was not in “the holiest” place “after the second veil,” but in “the holy place”; but as in
2Ch_26:19, and Eze_8:11, “censer”: so Vulgate and Syriac. This GOLDEN censer was only used
on the day of atonement (other kinds of censers on other days), and is therefore associated with
the holiest place, as being taken into it on that anniversary by the high priest. The expression
“which had,” does not mean that the golden censer was deposited there, for in that case the high
priest would have had to go in and bring it out before burning incense in it; but that the golden
censer was one of the articles belonging to, and used for, the yearly service in the holiest place.
He virtually supposes (without specifying) the existence of the “altar of incense” in the anterior
holy place, by mentioning the golden censer filled with incense from it: the incense answers to
the prayers of the saints; and the altar though outside the holiest place, is connected with it
(standing close by the second veil, directly before the ark of the covenant), even as we find an
antitypical altar in heaven. The rending of the veil by Christ has brought the antitypes to the
altar, candlestick, and showbread of the anterior holy place into the holiest place, heaven. In
1Ki_6:22, Hebrew, “the altar” is said to belong to the oracle, or holiest place (compare
Exo_30:6).
ark — of shittim wood, that is, acacia. Not in the second temple, but in its stead was a stone
basement (called “the stone of foundation”), three fingers high.
pot — “golden,” added in the Septuagint, and sanctioned by Paul.
manna — an omer, each man’s daily portion. In 1Ki_8:9; 2Ch_5:10, it is said there was
nothing in the ark of Solomon’s temple save the two stone tables of the law put in by Moses. But
the expression that there was nothing THEN therein save the two tables, leaves the inference to
be drawn that formerly there were the other things mentioned by the Rabbis and by Paul here,
the pot of manna (the memorial of God’s providential care of Israel) and the rod of Aaron, the
memorial of the lawful priesthood (Num_17:3, Num_17:5, Num_17:7, Num_17:10). The
expressions “before the Lord” (Exo_16:32), and “before the testimony” (Num_17:10) thus mean,
“IN the ark.” “In,” however, may be used here (as the corresponding Hebrew word) as to things
attached to the ark as appendages, as the book of the law was put “in the side of the ark,” and so
the golden jewels offered by the Philistines (1Sa_6:8).
tables of the covenant — (Deu_9:9; Deu_10:2).
5B. “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

61. Christ and the apostles, that Jewish historian related that there was nothing
whatever behind the veil within the Holy of Holies. F5
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 COVENANT
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 Heb. 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.
6. STEDMAN, "9:4 The manna would remind Israel of God's miraculous and loving care

62. of them in the wilderness; the rod of Aaron would mark the Levitical priesthood as divinely
instituted and far more important than any human provision; and the stone tablets of the
covenant would speak of the holy character which God's people must continually measure
themselves against. Together they spoke of God's love, God's redemption and God's
holiness. These find their counterpart in Christian experience: God's love for us initiates
his redemptive activity (Jn 3:16); God's provision for us goes far beyond what any amount
of human counseling or control can achieve (2 Cor 5:17); and God's sanctifying work
within us produces at last a Christlike character that is fully acceptable to a holy God (2
Cor 3:18).
7. The manna would remind Israel of God's miraculous and loving care of them in the
wilderness; the rod of Aaron would mark the Levitical priesthood as divinely instituted and
far more important than any human provision; and the stone tablets of the covenant would
speak of the holy character which God's people must continually measure themselves
against. Together they spoke of God's love, God's redemption and God's holiness. These
find their counterpart in Christian experience: God's love for us initiates his redemptive
activity (Jn 3:16); God's provision for us goes far beyond what any amount of human
counseling or control can achieve (2 Cor 5:17); and God's sanctifying work within us
produces at last a Christlike character that is fully acceptable to a holy God (2 Cor 3:18).
8. PINK, “"Which had the golden censer" (verse 4). First, we would note the minute
accuracy of the wording here. In verse 2 it was said "Wherein was the candlestick," etc.,
for the objects there mentioned belonged properly to the first compartment. But here it is,
"which had the golden censer." Why? Because this utensil did not form part of the
furniture of the holy of holies. To what then is the reference? Plainly to what is recorded in
Leviticus 16:12, 13, "And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the
(brazen) altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring
within the veil: And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of
the incense may cover the mercy-seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not."
For three hundred and fifty-nine days in the year Aaron ministered at the golden or
incense altar, which stood in the holy place; but on the remaining day, the annual "Day of
Atonement," he did not. Instead, he used the "golden censer" of incense, passing with it
within the veil. It is this which explains why there is no mention of the "golden altar" in
verse 2, for the Holy Spirit is here treating (see the later verses) of the Judaic ritual on the
Day of Atonement, and the fulfillment of the type by the Lord Jesus. That which was
represented by the "golden censer" was the acceptability of Christ’s person to God and the
efficacy of His intercession. The beautiful type of Leviticus 16:12, 13 denotes that, in
consequence of the satisfaction which Christ made unto God, completed at the cross, His
mediatory intercession is a sweet savor unto the Father, and effective unto the salvation of
His Church. The fact that the smoke of this perfume covered the ark and the mercy-seat,
wherein was the law, and over which the symbol of the Divine presence abode, denoted that
Christ has magnified the law, met its every requirement, and is the end of the law for
righteousness unto everybody that believeth.
"And the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot
that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant" (verse 4).
The ark, with the mercy-seat which formed its lid or cover, was the most glorious and

63. mysterious vessel of the tabernacle. It was the first thing made (Ex. 25:10, 11), yea, the
whole sanctuary was built for no other end but to be, as it were, a house and habitation for
the ark (Ex. 26:33). The ark was the outstanding symbol that God Himself was present
among His people and that His covenant-blessing was resting upon them. It was the coffer
in which the tables of the law were preserved. Its pre-eminence above all the other vessels
was shown in the days of Solomon, for the ark alone was transferred from the tabernacle to
the temple.
The ark was an outstanding figure of the incarnate Son of God. The wood of which it was
made, typified His sinless humanity. "Shittim" wood never rotted, and the Septuagint
translation of the Old Testament renders it "incorruptible wood." The wood was overlaid,
within and without, with gold, prefiguring Christ’s Divine glory. The two materials of
which the ark was made symbolized the union of the two natures in the God-man-"God
manifest in flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16). The ark formed God’s throne in Israel: "Thou that
dwellest between the cherubim" (Ps. 80:1). Christ is the only One who perfectly enthroned
God, honoring His government in all things. Each of the seven names given to the ark in
the Old Testament sets forth some excellency in the person of Christ. Everything connected
with its most remarkable history, as in Numbers 10:33, 14:44, Joshua 3:5-17, 6:4-20, etc.,
received its antitypical fulfillment in the God-man.
"Wherein was the golden pot that had manna." Some have imagined a contradiction
between this statement and what is said in 1 Kings 8:9, "There was nothing in the ark save
the two tables of stone." But there is no conflict between the two passages, for they are not
treating of the same point in time. Hebrews 9:4 is speaking of what was in the ark during
the days when it was lodged in the tabernacle, whereas 1 Kings 8:9 tells of what comprised
its contents after it came to rest in the temple. It is important to note this distinction, for it
supplies the key to the spiritual interpretation of our verse: Hebrews 9:4 makes known
God’s provisions in Christ for His people while they are journeying through the wilderness.
Thus the "manna" was Israel’s food from Egypt to Canaan: type of Christ as the heavenly
sustenance for our souls. The preservation of the manna in the golden pot, speaks of Christ
in glory at God’s right hand.
"And Aaron’s rod that budded." The reference is to what is recorded in Numbers 17. In
the preceding chapter we read of a revolt against Moses and Aaron, occasioned by jealousy
at the authority which God had delegated to His two servants. The revolt of Korah and his
company was visited by summary judgment from on high, and was followed by a manifest
vindication of Aaron. The form that vindication took is most instructive. The Lord bade
Moses take the twelve tribal rods, writing the name of Aaron on Levi’s, laying them up
before the ark, and affirming that the one which should be made to blossom would indicate
which had been chosen of God to the priestly tribe. Next morning it was found that Aaron’s
rod had "brought forth buds, and blossomed blossoms, and yielded almonds." Afterwards
God ordered Moses to place Aaron’s rod before the ark "to be kept for a token against the
rebels." The lifeless rod being made to blossom was a figure of God’s vindication of His
rejected Son by raising Him from the dead. Thus it speaks of the resurrection-power of our
great High Priest.
"And the tables of the covenant." The reference is to Deuteronomy 10:1-5. The
preservation of the two tables of stone (on which were inscribed the ten commandments) in
the ark, foreshadowed Christ magnifying the law and making it honorable (Isa. 42:21). The
fulfillment of this type is stated in Psalm 40:7, 8, where we hear the Mediator saying, "Lo, I

64. come: in the volume of the book it is written of Me: I delight to do Thy will, O My God;
Yea, Thy law is within My heart." The Representative of God’s people was "made under
the law" (Gal. 4:4), and perfectly did He "fulfill" it (Matthew 5:17). Therefore is it written,
"by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous" (Rom. 5:19). Thus may each
believer exclaim, "In the Lord have I righteousness and strength" (Isa. 45:24).
"And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy-seat: of which we cannot now
speak particularly" (verse 5). At either end of the mercy-seat was the form of a cherub with
outstretched wings, meeting in the center, thus overshadowing and as it were protecting
God’s throne. That there is some profound significance connected with their figures is clear
from the prominent place which they occupy in connection with the description of the
mercy-seat given in Exodus 25:17-22: mention is there made of the cherubim, in either the
singular or plural number, no less than seven times. The mention of them in Genesis 3:24
suggests that they are associated with the administration of God’s judicial authority. In
Revelation 4:6-8 (cf. Ezekiel 1:5-10) they are related to God’s throne. Here in Hebrews 9
they are called the "cherubim of glory" because the Skekinah abode between them.
The mercy-seat, or better, "propitiatory," was the throne upon which the high priest
placed the expiatory blood. It was not the place where propitiation was made-that was at
the brazen altar-but where its abiding value was borne witness to before God. Romans 3:25
gives us the antitype: by the Gospel God now "sets forth" (Gal. 3:1) Christ as the One by
whom He has been placated, as the One by whom His holy wrath against the sins of His
people has been pacified, as the One by whom the righteous demands of His law were
satisfied, as the One by whom every attribute of Deity was glorified. Christ Himself is
God’s resting-place in whom He now meets poor sinners in all the fullness of His grace
because of the propitiation made by Him on the cross.
The last clause of the verse is translated more literally in Bagster’s Interlinear thus:
"concerning which it is not now (the time) to speak in detail"-the "concerning which" is
not to be restricted to that which is found here in verse 5, but takes in all that has been
mentioned in verses 2-5. It would have led the apostle too far away from his subject of the
high priest’s service, to give an interpretation of the spiritual meaning of the tabernacle
and everything in it. Nevertheless, he plainly intimates that every part of it had a specific
significance as typical of the Lord Jesus and His ministry.
9. THE HOLY OF HOLIES OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT
The Bible tells us that Yahweh told Moses:
'You must make me an ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits long, one and a half cubits
wide and one and a half cubits high. You will overlay it, inside and out, with pure gold and
make a gold moulding all round it. You will cast four gold rings for it and fix them to its
four supports: two rings on one side and tow rings on the other. You will also make shafts
of acacia wood and overlay them with gold and pass the shafts through the rings on the
sides of the ark, by which to carry it. The shafts will stay in the rings of the ark and not be
withdrawn. Inside the ark you will put the Testimony which I am about to give you.
You will also make a mercy-seat of pure gold, two and a half cubits long and one and a half
cubits wide, and you will model two great winged creatures of beaten gold, you will make
them at the two ends of the mercy-seat. Model one of the winged creatures at one end and
the other winged creature at the other end; you will model the winged creatures of a piece

65. with the mercy- seat at either end. The winged creatures must have their wings spread
upwards, protecting the mercy-seat with their wings and facing each other, their faces
being towards the mercy-seat. You will put the mercy-seat on top of the ark, and inside the
ark you will put the Testimony which I am about to give you. There I shall come to meet
you; from above the mercy-seat, from between the two winged creatures which are on the
ark of the Testimony, I shall give you all my orders for the Israelites (Exodus 25:10-22).
Called the Ark of the Covenant (Numbers 10:33), the Ark of the Testimony (Exodus 30:6),
the Ark of the Lord (Joshua 4:11), the Ark of God (1 Samuel 3:3), and the Ark of God's
Strength (2 Chronicles 6:41) (this is an incomplete list and is compiled from Nave, pgs.
74-75), this Ark was subsequently built by the craftsman Bezalel (Exodus 37:1-9), and was
kept first in the Tent of Meeting (Ex. 40:1-2), and eventually it was installed in the Holy of
Holies in the Temple of Solomon (1 Kings 8:6).
The mystery surrounding the Ark of the Covenant is its subsequent disappearance
following the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. (Burrows, 1957, pg.
213), or, as some believe, its removal from the Temple prior to this event. While the Bible
tells us that, according to a non-extant apocryphal work, the Ark was concealed along with
the Tent of Meeting in a cave by the Prophet Jeremiah (2 Maccabees 2:4-5), this is in a
Deuterocanonical book, one of the books in the Protestant Apocrypha, and is not
considered inspired by Protestant or Jewish authorities. The footnotes to the Catholic New
Jerusalem Bible tell us:
This description is not historical: the Tent of Meeting did not exist after the building of
Solomon's Temple, the ark disappeared when the Temple was destroyed, and the historical
Jeremiah did not regret it, Jr 3:16. The purpose of the narrative, however, is to assert the
continuity of orthodox worship . . . (The New Jerusalem Bible, 1985, pg. 721, note a to ch.
2).
According to archeological authorities, the Ark was probably stripped of its gold and
destroyed by the Babylonians. For information on this theory, see pages 213-214 of:
Burrows, Millar, Ph. D. 1957. What Mean These Stones? The Significance of Archeology
for Biblical Studies New York: Meridian Books.
Other accounts claim that the Ark was moved to Ethiopia by King Menelik I, the legendary
son of the Queen of Sheba by King Solomon. Indeed, this is the official view of the
Ethiopian Orthodox Church. (See for example, the numerous accounts of interviews with
Ethiopian priests in Hancock's book, or see the Unofficial Ethiopian Orthodox Webpage
<http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/user/r/e/redingtn/www/yared/eth.html>.) The tale
of the abduction of the Ark is told in the Kebra Nagast, which is published in two English
editions, as follows:
The Queen of Sheba and Her Only Son Menyelek (I): Being the "Book of the Glory of
Kings" (Kebra Nagast). Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, trans. 1932. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
(This book has been reprinted, with additional editing by Al I. Obaba, although I have
incomplete bibliographical information on this edition.)
Kebra Nagast: The Glory of Kings. Miguel F. Brooks, Ed. 1996. Lawrenceville, N.J.: Red
Sea Press.
In 1992, following nearly ten years of research, Graham Hancock published a book
discussing the Ethiopian theory in great detail. While he does no small amount of
speculating, Mr. Hancock has also done a rather admirable job in his research. The

66. bibliographical information for this book is as follows:
Hancock, Graham. The Sign and the Seal: The Quest for the Lost Ark of the Covenant.
1992. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc. Mr. Hancock has also prepared a
magazine-length article (with lots of pretty pictures not available in the book) for the online
OneWorld Magazine, as follows:
Hancock, Graham. "The Sign and the Seal."
<http://www.envirolink.org/oneworld/focus/etiopia/ark.html> OneWorld Magazine
<http://www.envirolink.org/oneworld/>
This is located remotely at the EnviroLink Network.
<http://www.envirolink.org/envirohome.html>
You may also read the following Omni article about Mr. Hancock's book:
Killheffer, Robert K.J. 1994, October. "Finder of the Lost Ark?" Omni, v. 17, n. 1, p. 29
(1).
Mr. Grant R Jeffrey, in his book Armageddon, discussing Biblical prophecy, backs up the
Ethiopian theory, and goes so far as to claim Mussolini attempted to seize the ark during
his invasion of Ethiopia, although he cites no source for this and I have so far been unable
to find anyone else making the same claim. His accounts of the setup of the Church
containing the Ark being divided into seven parts (232-233), differs considerably from Mr.
Hancock's discussion of Ethiopian Catholic Churches being divided into three parts based
on the Temple, (Hancock, 1992, 254-255), and this mistake added onto the fact that he
repeatedly refers to St. Mary of Zion Church as being the Church of Zion of Mary makes
one question some of his research. His discussion of the Ark is concentrated in chapters
eight (pgs. 108-127) and sixteen (pgs. 221-235) of his book:
Jeffrey, Grant R. 1990. Armageddon: Appointment with Destiny. New York, Toronto,
London, Sydney, and Auckland: Bantam Books.
Based on their Sun Pictures television series Ancient Secrets of the Bible, Mr. Charles E.
Sellier and Mr. Brian Russell have also released a book discussing the Ark and its possible
whereabouts. Their theories are discussed in chapters thirteen through fourteen (pgs.
249-293) of their book:
Sellier, Charles E. and Brian Russell. 1994. Ancient Secrets of the Bible New York: Dell.
For more information on the Ark in general, you may read online:
Johnson, Stephen L. (1984, November.) "The Ark of the Covenant: Whether is still exists is
speculation. What it signified is solemn truth."
<http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/9587/bbark.html> The Baptist Bulletin.
I took this file from The Indiana Jones WWW Page
<http://www.indyfan.com/notable.html>.
Souvay, Charles L. 1907-1914. "The Ark of the Covenant."
<http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/9587/ceark.html> The Catholic Encyclopedia.
(Page numbers and bibliographical information will be added to this shortly.)
This file comes from the New Advent Web Page <http://www.knight.org/advent>, which is
currently transcribing the entire Catholic Encyclopedia to the web.
Mary has long been linked with the Ark of the Covenant in Catholic tradition. You may
read online:
Bakh, Antoine, Fr. "Mary the Ark of the New Covenant in the Gospel of Saint Luke."
<http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/9587/maryark.html>

67. 10.Ark Of the Covanent
Ex 25:10-16; 371-5
The Ark was made of shittim wood which is a very strong, durable wood. This represents
the incorruptibility of Jesus
It was overlaid with gold within and without to show that Jesus retained full deity in union
with His humanity. The golden crown announces Jesus as King of Kings and Lord of
Lords.
The length was 2 1/2 Cubits= 5 half cubits: 5=grace
The breadth and height were 1 1/2 cubits=3 half cubits: 3=Triune Godhead
Contents:
1. The tables of stone with the Ten Commandments were kept in the Ark (Ex. 25:16). This
shows that God's law was KEPT (i.e. observed and preserved) by Christ.
2. The Golden Pot of Manna (Ex 16:32,33) typifies Christ as the Bread of Life.
3. Aaron's Rod that budded (Nu. 17:10)depicts Christ's ressurection(Life out of death).
Other arks also typified Christ
1. Noah's Ark-Universal death sentence would not be reversed but grace provided a way of
escape for those inside!
2. Ark of Bulrushes(Ex. 2:3)-Provided safety and deliverance on the very waters in which
Moses had been sentenced to die. The sentence was unchanged. Christ is our Ark of safety!
Mercy Seat
Ex. 25:17-22; 37:6-9
The Ark typifies the PERSON of Christ. The Mercy Seat emphasizes His PURPOSE.
The Mercy Seat was pure gold. No wood. Nothing but pure diety could offer saving mercy.
The length and breadth were identical with the Ark. This shows that mercy will one day
cover ONLY those IN Christ.
The thickness is not mentioned. Unnamed dimensions represent something infinite. That is
certainly true of God's mercy!
The Mercy Seat is where God met with Moses. This typifies Christ, where "mercy and
truth are met together." (Ps. 85:10)
A seat is a place to rest. Christ, our Mercy seat, is a place of rest. "Come unto me all ye that
labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." (Mt. 11:28)
In the Tabernacle:
The most holy place of the tabernacle in the wilderness (Exodus 26:31-33
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=ex+26:31-33>) was a small cube of 10 cubits
(15 ft.) every way. It was divided from the holy Ceiled by curtains which bore cherubic
figures embroidered in blue and purple and scarlet (Exodus 26:1
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=ex+26:1>), it contained no furniture but the
Ark of the Covenant, covered by a slab of gold called the MERCY-SEAT (which see), and
having within it only the two stone tables of the Law (see TABERNACLE; ARK OF THE
COVENANT). Only the high priest, and he but once a year, on the great @@clothed in
penitential garments, amid a cloud of incense, and with blood of sacrifice (Leviticus 16
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=le+16>; compare Hebrews 9:7
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=heb+9:7>).
2. In the Temple of Solomon:

68. The proportions of the most holy place in the first temple were the same as in the
tabernacle, but the dimensions were doubled. The sacred chamber was enlarged to 20
cubits (30 ft.) each way. We now meet with the word debhir, "oracle" (1 Kings 6:16
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=1ki+6:16>, etc.), which with the exception
of Psalms 28:2 <http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=ps+28:2>, belonging
perhaps to the same age, is met with in Scripture only in the period of Solomon's reign.
This sanctum, like its predecessor, contained but one piece of furniture--the Ark of the
Covenant. It had, however, one new conspicuous feature in the two large figures of
cherubim of olive wood, covered with gold, with wings stretching from wall to wall,
beneath which the ark was now placed (1 Kings 6:23-28
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=1ki+6:23-28>; 2 Chronicles 3:10-13
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=2ch+3:10-13>; see TEMPLE).
3. In Later Times:
In Ezekiel's temple plans, which in many things may have been those of the temple of
Zerubbabel, the prophet gives 20 cubits as the length and breadth of the most holy place,
showing that these figures were regarded as too sacred to undergo change (Ezekiel 41:4
<http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=eze+41:4>). There was then no Ark of the
Covenant, but Jewish tradition relates that the blood of the great Day of Atonement was
sprinkled on an unhewn stone that stood in its place. In Herod's temple, the dimensions of
the two holy chambers remained the same--at least in length and breadth (see TEMPLE,
HEROD'S). The holiest place continued empty. In the spoils of the temple depicted on the
Arch of Titus there is no representation of the Ark of the Covenant; only of the furniture of
the outer chamber or holy place.
4. Figurative:
In the Epistle to the Hebrews we are taught that the true holy of holies is the heaven into
which Jesus has now entered to appear in virtue of His own sacrifice in the presence of God
for us (Hebrews 9:11 <http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=heb+9:11>).
Restriction is now removed, and the way into the holiest is made open for all His people
(Hebrews 10:19,20 <http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=heb+10:19,20>).
W. Shaw Caldecott
5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory,
overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot
discuss these things in detail now.

69. 1. BARNES, "And over it - That is, over the ark.
The cherubim of glory - A Hebrew mode of expression, meaning “the glorious cherubim.”
The word “cherubim” is the Hebrew form of the plural, of which cherub is the singular. The
word “glory” used here in connection with “cherubim,” refers to the splendor, or magnificence of
the image, as being carved with great skill, and covered with gold. There were two cherubim on
the ark, placed on the lid in such a manner that their faces looked inward toward each other, and
downward toward the mercy-seat. They stretched out their wings “on high,” and covered the
mercy-seat, or the lid of the ark; Exo_25:18-20; compare 1Ki_8:6-7; 1Ch_28:18. In the temple,
the cherubim were made of the olive tree, and were ten cubits high. They were overlaid with
gold, and were so placed that the wing of one touched the wall on one side of the Holy of Holies,
and that of the other the other side, and their wings met together over the ark; 1Ki_6:23-28.
It is not probable, however, that this was the form used in the tabernacle, as wings thus
expanded would have rendered it inconvenient to carry them from place to place. Of the form
and design of the cherubim much has been written, and much that is the mere creation of fancy,
and the fruit of wild conjecture. Their design is not explained in the Bible, and silence in regard
to it would have been wisdom. If they were intended to be symbolical, as is certainly possible,
(compare Eze_10:20-22), it is impossible now to determine the object of the symbol. Who is
authorized to explain it? Who can give to his speculations anything more than the authority of
“pious conjecture?” And of what advantage, therefore, can speculation be, where the volume of
inspiration says nothing? They who wish to examine this subject more fully, with the various
opinions that have been formed on it, may consult the following works, namely, Calmet’s
Dictionary, Fragment No. 152, with the numerous illustrations; Bush’s notes on Exo_25:18; and
the Quarterly Christian Spectator, vol. viii. pp. 368-388. Drawings resembling the cherubim
were not uncommon on ancient sculptures.
Shadowing - Stretching out its wings so as to cover the mercy-seat.
The mercy-seat - The cover of the ark on which rested the cloud or visible symbol of the
divine presence. It was called “mercy-seat,” or “propitiatory” - ᅷλαστήριον hilasterion - because
it was this which was sprinkled over with the blood of atonement or propitiation, and because it
was from this place, on which the symbol of the deity rested, that God manifested himself as
propitious to sinners. The blood of the atonement was that through or by means of which he
declared his mercy to the guilty. Here God was supposed to be seated, and from this place he
was supposed to dispense mercy to man when the blood of the atonement was sprinkled there.
This was undoubtedly designed to be a symbol of his dispensing mercy to people in virtue of the
blood which the Saviour shed as the great sacrifice for guilt; see Heb_9:13-14.
Of which we cannot now speak particularly - That is, it is not my present design to
speak particularly of these things. These matters were well understood by those to whom he
wrote, and his object did not require him to go into a fuller explanation.
2. CLARKE, "And over it the cherubims of glory - Cherubim is the plural of cherub,
and it is absurd to add our plural termination (s) to the plural termination of the Hebrew. The
glory here signifies the shechinah or symbol of the Divine presence.
Shadowing the mercy-seat - One at each end of the ark, with their faces turned toward
each other, but looking down on the cover or propitiatory, ᅷλαστηριον, here called the
mercy-seat.
Of which we cannot now speak particularly - The apostle did not judge any farther
account of these to be necessary; and I may be excused from considering them particularly here,
having said so much on each in the places where they occur in the Pentateuch. What these point

70. out or signify is thus explained by St. Cyril: Christus licet unus sit, multifariam tamen a nobis
intelligitur: Ipse est Tabernaculum propter carnis tegumenturn: Ipse est Mensa, quia noster
cibus est et vita: Ipse est Arca habens legem Dei reconditam, quia est Verbum Patris: Ipse est
Candelabrum, quia est lux spiritualis: Ipse est Altare incensi, quia est odor suavitatis in
sanctificationem: Ipse est Altare holocausti, quia est hostia pro totius mundi vita in cruce
oblata. “Although Christ be but one, yet he is understood by us under a variety of forms. He is
the Tabernacle, on account of the human body in which he dwelt. He is the Table, because he is
our Bread of life. He is the Ark which has the law of God enclosed within, because he is the Word
of the Father. He is the Candlestick, because he is our spiritual light. He is the Altar of incense,
because he is the sweet-smelling odour of sanctification. He is the Altar of burnt-offering,
because he is the victim, by death on the cross, for the sins of the whole world.” This father has
said, in a few words, what others have employed whole volumes on, by refining, spiritualizing,
and allegorizing.
3. GILL, "And over it the cherubim of glory,.... Or "glorious cherubim", where the
Shechinah, or divine glory, dwelt, Psa_80:1. These were over the ark, and were in number two,
as were the cherubim which God placed at the garden of Eden, Gen_3:24 according to the
opinion of the ancient Jews (u); and very likely these were made after the form of them. Some
have thought them to be birds of a very terrible aspect, which were set there to deter Adam and
Eve from coming to the tree of life; and both Philo (w) and Josephus (x) say, they were winged
fowls; but the generality of the Jewish writers take them for angels (y); and some of them say
they were destroying angels, or noxious spirits (z), which is not probable; but why angels should
be so called, and what was their appearance, there are different opinions. Jerom says (a) the
word signifies a multitude of knowledge; and indeed Philo the Jew (b) observes, that the Greeks
would interpret the Hebrew word, much knowledge and understanding; and another Jewish
writer (c) affirms, that the word "cherubim" is a name for separate intelligences, as if angels
were so called from their great knowledge, and that the word is the same as "cerabbim", as
"Rabbins", doctors, or teachers; but for the most part they interpret it, "as young men" (d),
because that angels have appeared in the form of young men. So in the Talmud (e) it is asked,
"what does cherub signify?" says R. Abhu, ‫,כרביא‬ "as a young man", for so in Babylon they call a
young man ‫''.רביא‬
Some think that the word "cherub" is the same with ‫,רכוב‬ "Recub", the letters transposed, which
signifies "a chariot", because God is said to ride upon a "cherub" and the angels are called the
chariots of the Lord, Psa_18:10 to which may be added, that Ezekiel's vision of the "cherubim" is
frequently, by the Jews (f), called ‫,מרכבה‬ "Mercabah", or "the chariot"; and mention is made of
the chariot of the cherubim, in 1Ch_28:18 to which reference may be had in Hab_3:8 though I
rather think, with others, that the word is derived from ‫,כרב‬ "Carab", which in the Syriac and
Arabic languages signifies "to plough", and so in the Talmud (g); and a cherub took its name
from hence, because of the ox, whose face it had, that being a creature made use of in ploughing;
and that the face of an ox, and the face of a cherub, is the same, may easily be concluded from
Eze_1:10. And now because that Ezekiel's cherubim had four faces, the face of a man, the face of
a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle; and the "cherubim" in the temple were in the
same form, as may be gathered from Eze_41:18 those that were placed at the garden of Eden
may be thought to be in the same form also: and some of late have fancied, that they were an
hieroglyphic of the trinity of persons in the Godhead, signified by the ox, the lion, and eagle; and

71. of the incarnation of the Son of God, the face of a man being added to them; to support which
notion it is further observed, that the word ‫כרובים‬ should be pronounced "ce-rubbim", and
interpreted, "as the mighty ones". But it should be known, that the word is also used in the
singular number, Psa_18:10 and every single cherub had these four faces, so that each of them
must be a representative of the Trinity, and of the incarnate Saviour, of which only the word in
the singular number can be used; and then it can only be said of it, "cerub", as "the mighty one"
which observation greatly weakens what is brought to support the fancy: besides, if the
cherubim were an emblem of a plurality of persons in the Godhead, they would rather be an
emblem of a quaternity, and not of a trinity of persons, since each had four faces, and those
distinct from each other; for the face of a man is as much a distinct face as any of the rest. Now
the human nature of Christ is no distinct person, much less one in the Godhead; and besides is
the inferior nature of Christ, whereas the face of the man, in the "cherubim", is superior to the
rest, which are the faces of irrational animals. Moreover, this would give us a similitude of the
divine Being, and of that in him which is most incomprehensible by us, the trinity of persons in
the Godhead; and so an answer may be given to such questions, the sense of which suggests, that
no answer can be returned to them, Isa_40:18 and though the second Person often appeared in
human form, and in the fulness of time became incarnate, and the Holy Ghost once descended
as a dove, yet the Father's shape was never seen at any time, Joh_5:37 to which may be added,
that this notion seems contrary to the second command, "thou shall not make unto thee any
likeness of anything that is in heaven above", Exo_20:4 for allowing that the cherubim at the
garden of Eden were figures made by the Lord himself, it is not credible he should make such, he
afterwards forbid others to make; besides, the "cherubim" in the tabernacle and temple were the
same figures with those in Eden, as is owned; and these were ordered of God to be made by men,
and therefore surely cannot be thought to be figures, emblems, and representations of God
himself in his three divine persons; likewise the cherubim are not only distinguished from him,
but instead of being figures of him, they are always represented as vehicles on which he sits or
rides, Exo_25:22. Once more, it may deserve some little consideration, that the prince of Tyre, a
type of antichrist, the man of sin, is called a "cherub", Eze_28:14 which surely cannot be in
allusion to the divine Being, and the persons in the Godhead, but very well in allusion to angels,
the sons of God, as civil magistrates, good and bad, are sometimes called. No doubt there was
something signified by the "cherubim" in the tabernacle and temple; but that this should be the
mystery of them, is not easy of belief. Philo the Jew makes the "cherubim" to signify the two
powers of God, his creative and governing powers (h); and the Jews frequently speak of ‫רזא‬
‫,דכרובים‬ "the mystery of the cherubim" (i): the "cherubim" over the ark, here spoken of, are
sometimes allegorized of the two Testaments, the Old and New; the matter of them being of gold
may denote the excellency, purity, simplicity, and duration of them; their number is two, as were
the "cherubim"; and as they were alike, and of one measure and size, this may intend the
agreement between them; the doctrines, promises, prophecies, types, and figures of the Old
Testament agree with the New; and the account that the one gives of the person and offices, and
grace of Christ, agrees with the other; their situation and position, being placed at the two ends
of the mercy seat, and looking towards it, may denote their being full of Christ, from one end to
the other, and their pointing at him, and bearing witness to him; here God also reveals himself,
as he did between the "cherubim"; and these are glorious as they were, full of glory, containing
the glorious Gospel of the blessed God: though rather the "cherubim" on the mercy seat were
symbols and representations of angels, since to these the Apostle Peter seems to allude, in
1Pe_1:12, their being made of gold may denote their excellency, purity, and simplicity; their
being on the mercy seat shows their dependence on Christ, their confirmation by him, and
ministration to him; their having wings, expresses their readiness to do his will; and their
looking one to another, signifies their unity and concord among themselves; and their looking to
the mercy seat, their inspection into the mysteries of grace; and their being over the ark, and

72. God being in the midst of them, declares the presence of God with them, whose face they always
behold; and as these "cherubim" of glory, they are very glorious creatures, and in the glory of
them will Christ come a second time:
shadowing the mercy seat; that is, with their wings, as in Exo_25:20 which was typical of
Christ; its name agrees with him, a mercy seat; for in him God shows himself merciful to his
people; all the stores of mercy are laid up in him; the mission of him into this world is owing to
the mercy of God; and the mercy of God was glorified by him in the redemption of his people;
and he himself is the way through which they obtain and receive mercy; and he is also a merciful
high priest to them: the Hebrew word for the mercy seat, ‫,כפורת‬ signifies "a covering": nor is
our English word in sound very different from it; and it was so called, as Kimchi (k) observes,
because it covered the ark: Christ is a covering to his people; their persons are clothed with his
righteousness, and all their sins are covered by it; and they are secured from the curse and
condemnation of the law, and wrath to come: the Septuagint interpreters render it by ιλαστηριον
, the word used here by the Apostle Paul, in Rom_3:25, there rendered "propitiation", and
applied to Christ, who has made reconciliation for sin, and through whom God is propitious to
his people. The matter, of which the mercy seat was made, was pure gold, denoting the
excellency and preciousness of Christ; the make of it, in its length and breadth, was just the
same with the ark, in which the two tables were, Exo_25:10. Christ is the fulfilling end of the
law, and exactly answers to all its requirements; his nature, to the holiness and spirituality of it;
his righteousness, to all the obedience it commands; and his sufferings and death, to the penalty
it enjoins: its situation above the ark shows that there is no mercy but in a way of righteousness,
and that Christ stands between God and the law, and, by fulfilling it, covers all the
transgressions of it; and being above it, is able to suppress all its accusations and charges: from
off the mercy seat, God communed with his people; the way to communion with God is by
Christ; the encouragement to go to God is from him; and the enjoyment of him is through him:
on the day of atonement the mercy seat was sprinkled with blood, typical of the blood of Christ,
whereby peace is made, and a way opened into the holiest of all:
of which we cannot now speak particularly; not only of the mercy seat, but of all the
things before mentioned; for the word "which" is in the plural number, and refers to all the
preceding things; to discourse of which, largely and particularly, required more time than the
apostle had, and must have exceeded the bounds of an epistle. The Ethiopic version renders it in
the singular number; "of this".
4. HENRY, "What was over the ark (Heb_9:5): Over it the cherubim of glory shadowing the
mercy-seat. First, The mercy-seat, which was the covering of the ark; it was called the
propitiatory, and it was of pure gold, as long and as broad as the ark in which the tables of the
law were laid. It was an eminent type of Christ, and of his perfect righteousness, ever adequate
to the dimensions of the law of God, and covering all our transgressions, interposing between
the Shechinah, or symbol of God's presence, and our sinful failures, and covering them.
Secondly, The cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat, representing the holy angels of
God, who take pleasure in looking into the great work of our redemption by Christ, and are
ready to perform every good office, under the Redeemer, for those who are the heirs of salvation.
The angels attended Christ at his birth, in his temptation, under his agonies, at his resurrection,
and in his ascension, and will attend his second coming. God manifest in the flesh was seen,
observed, visited, by the angels.
5. JAMISON, "over it — over “the ark of the covenant.”

73. cherubim — representing the ruling powers by which God acts in the moral and natural
world. (See on Eze_1:6; see on Eze_10:1). Hence sometimes they answer to the ministering
angels; but mostly to the elect redeemed, by whom God shall hereafter rule the world and set
forth His manifold wisdom: redeemed humanity, combining in, and with itself, the highest
forms of subordinate creaturely life; not angels. They stand on the mercy seat, and on that
ground become the habitation of God, from which His glory is to shine upon the world. They
expressly say, Rev_5:8-10, “Thou hast redeemed us.” They are there distinguished from the
angels, and associated with the elders. They were of one piece with the mercy seat, even as the
Church is one with Christ: their sole standing is on the blood-sprinkled mercy seat; they gaze
down at it as the redeemed shall for ever; they are “the habitation of God through the Spirit.”
of glory — The cherubim were bearers of the divine glory, whence, perhaps, they derive their
name. The Shekinah, or cloud of glory, in which Jehovah appeared between the cherubim over
the mercy seat, the lid of the ark, is doubtless the reference. Tholuck thinks the twelve loaves of
the showbread represent the twelve tribes of the nation, presented as a community before God
consecrated to Him (just as in the Lord’s Supper believers, the spiritual Israel, all partaking of
the one bread, and becoming one bread and one body, present themselves before the Lord as
consecrated to Him, 1Co_10:16, 1Co_10:17); the oil and light, the pure knowledge of the Lord, in
which the covenant people are to shine (the seven (lights), implying perfection); the ark of the
covenant, the symbol of God’s kingdom in the old covenant, and representing God dwelling
among His own; the ten commandments in the ark, the law as the basis of union between God
and man; the mercy seat covering the law and sprinkled with the blood of atonement for the
collective sin of the people, God’s mercy [in Christ] stronger than the law; the cherubim, the
personified [redeemed] creation, looking down on the mercy seat, where God’s mercy, and God’s
law, are set forth as the basis of creation.
mercy seat — Greek, “the propitiatory”: the golden cover of the ark, on which was sprinkled
the blood of the propitiatory sacrifice on the day of atonement; the footstool of Jehovah, the
meeting place of Him and His people.
we cannot — conveniently: besides what met the eye in the sanctuary, there were spiritual
realities symbolized which it would take too long to discuss in detail, our chief subject at present
being the priesthood and the sacrifices. “Which” refers not merely to the cherubim, but to all the
contents of the sanctuary enumerated in Heb_9:2-5.
5B. COFFMAN, “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 SEAT
We 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 25:17ff) 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

74. COVENANT! 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.
6. CALVIN, "Of which we cannot now, etc. As nothing can satisfy, curious men,
the apostle cuts off every occasion for refinements unsuitable to his
present purpose, and lest a longer discussion of these things should
break off the thread of his argument. If, therefore, any one should
disregard the Apostle's example, and dwell more minutely on the
subject, he would be acting very unreasonably. There might be, indeed,
an occasion for doing this elsewhere; but it is now better to attend to
the subject of which he treats: it may further be said, that to
philosophize beyond just limits, which some do, is not only useless,
but also dangerous. There are some things which are not obscure and
fitted for the edification of faith; but discretion and sobriety ought
to be observed, lest we seek to be wise above what God has been pleased
to reveal.
__________________________________________________________________
[138] Rather, "Yet even the first," etc. It is connected with the last
verse of the preceding chapter; as though he had said, -- "Though the
covenant is become antiquated, yet it had many things divinely
appointed connected with it." Men oun mean "yet," or however. See Art.
8:4. Macknight has "Now verily;" and Stuart, "Moreover." -- Ed
[139] It has since been discovered that it is not found in many of the
best MSS., and is dismissed from the text by Griesbach and all modern
critics. The noun understood is evidently "covenant," spoken of in the
preceding chapter. -- Ed.

75. [140] Many, such as Grotius, Beza, etc., consider that "ordinances" and
"services" (not service) are distinct, and both in the objective case,
and render the words "rituals, services, and a wordly sanctuary." And
if the sequel is duly examined, it will be found that this is the right
construction. The Apostle, according to the manner of the prophet,
reverses the order, and speaks distinctly of these three particulars,
-- first, "the wordly sanctuary" -- the tabernacle in verses 2, 3, 4,
and 5; secondly, "the services" in verses 6 and 7; and thirdly, "the
rituals" in verse 10, where the word "ordinances" again occur. There
can therefore be hardly a doubt as to the construction of the first
verse. The sanctuary is called worldly in contrast with what is
heavenly or divine, not made with hands: see verse 11. -- Ed.
[141] See [33]Appendix F 2.
[142] This is evidently a mistake, for the altar of incense was in the
sanctuary -- the first tabernacle. See Exodus 30:1-6. The word is used
in the Sept., for "censer," 2 Chronicles 26:19. There were many censors
made, as it is supposed, of brass; for they were daily used in the
sanctuary for incense; but this golden censor was probably used only on
the day of expiation, when the chief priest entered the holiest place;
and the probability is, though there is no account of this in the Old
Testament, that it was laid up or deposited, as Stuart suggests, in the
holy of holies. -- Ed.
[143] Stuart observes, "Our author is speaking of the tabernacle, and
not of the temple; still less of the second temple, which must have
lacked even the tables of testimony. The probability is, that the ark,
during its many removals, and in particular during its captivity by the
Philistines, was deprived of those sacred deposits; for we hear no more
concerning them." -- Ed.
6 When everything had been arranged like this, the
priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry
on their ministry.

76. 1. BARNES, "When these things were thus ordained - Thus arranged or appointed.
Having shown what the tabernacle was, the apostle proceeds to show what was done in it. “The
priests went always into the first tabernacle.” The outer tabernacle called the holy place. They
were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies, that being entered only once in a year by the
High Priest. The holy place was entered every day to make the morning and evening oblation.
Accomplishing the service of God - Performing the acts of worship which God had
appointed - burning incense, etc.; Luk_1:9.
2. CLARKE, "When these thing were thus ordained - When the tabernacle was made,
and its furniture placed in it, according to the Divine direction.
The priests went always into the first Tabernacle - That is, into the first part of the
tabernacle, or holy place, into which he went every day twice, accomplishing the services, τας λα
τρειας επιτελουντες, which included his burning the incense at the morning and evening
sacrifice, dressing the lamps, removing the old show-bread and laying on the new, and
sprinkling the blood of the sin-offerings before the veil Lev_4:6 : and for these works he must
have constant access to the place.
3. GILL, "Now when these things were thus ordained,.... Or prepared and got ready;
that is, when the tabernacle was finished, and set up, and provided with all its vessels and
furniture:
the priests went always into the first tabernacle; the first part of the tabernacle, which
was called the holy place, Heb_9:2 here the common priests went continually every day,
morning and evening; the Syriac and Ethiopic versions read, "the outward tabernacle", in
distinction from the innermost part of the tabernacle, or the most holy place:
accomplishing the service of God; by offering sacrifices, burning incense, and trimming the
lamps, which they did every day: the priests entered into the holy place every day for service; but
they might not go in at any other time but the time of service (l) the phrase, "of God", is not in
the text, but is a supplement; and it was usual with the Jews to call the worship of the temple,
and especially that part of it which lay in sacrifices, ‫,עבודה‬ "the service": Simeon the just used to
say, the world stands upon three things; upon the law, ‫ועל‬‫העבודה‬ , "and upon the service", and
upon beneficence (m); by "the service", the commentators (n) on the passage understand
sacrifices; and again it is said (o), no man enters into the court ‫,לעבודה‬ "for service", though he is
clean, until he has dipped himself: the word here used in the Greek text is in the plural number,
and may be rendered the services, because there were several sorts of services performed every
day, as before observed, and several sacrifices offered; and the Vulgate Latin version renders it,
"the offices of sacrifices"; and the Ethiopic version, "their offerings"; and the Arabic version,
"offices": and the service which the high priest performed in the holiest of all once a year, was
divers, which is mentioned in the following verses, and is called "service", Heb_9:8 it is said,
that on the day of atonement there were five ‫,עבודות‬ "services" of the morning daily sacrifice (p),
in which the high priest ministered in his golden garments: but here the service of the common

77. priests is meant, which was every day; and it becomes such who are employed in sacred service;
both to be constant in it, and to do it fully and completely.
4. HENRY, " From the description of the place of worship in the Old Testament
dispensation, the apostle proceeds to speak of the duties and services performed in those places,
Heb_9:6. When the several parts and furniture of the tabernacle were thus settled, then what
was to be done there?
1. The ordinary priests went always into the first tabernacle, to accomplish the service of God.
Observe, (1.) None but priests were to enter into the first part of the tabernacle, and this to teach
us all that persons not qualified, not called of God, must not intrude into the office and work of
the ministry. (2.) The ordinary priests were only to enter into the first part of the tabernacle, it
would have been fatal presumption in them to have gone into the holiest of all; and this teaches
us that even ministers themselves must know and keep in their proper stations, and not
presume to usurp the prerogative of Christ, by offering up incense of their own, or adding their
own inventions to the ordinances of Christ, or lording it over men's consciences. (3.) These
ordinary priests were to enter into the first tabernacle always; that is, they were to devote
themselves and all their time to the work of their office, and not alienate themselves at any time
from it; they were to be in an habitual readiness for the discharge of their office, and at all stated
appointed times were actually to attend to their work. (4.) The ordinary priests must enter into
the first tabernacle, that they might there accomplish the service of God. They must not do the
work of God partially or by halves, but stand complete in the whole of his will and counsel; not
only beginning well, but proceeding well, and persevering to the end, fulfilling the ministry they
had received.
5. JAMISON, "The use made of the sanctuary so furnished by the high priest on the
anniversary of atonement.
ordained — arranged.
always — twice at the least every day, for the morning and evening care of the lamps, and
offering of incense (Exo_30:7, Exo_30:8).
went — Greek, “enter”: present tense.
6. CALVIN, "Now, when these things were thus ordained, etc. Omitting other
things, he undertakes to handle the chief point in dispute: he says
that the priests who performed sacred rites were wont to enter the
first tabernacle daily, but that the chief priest entered the holy of
holies only yearly with the appointed sacrifice. He hence concludes,
that while the tabernacle under the Law was standing, the sanctuary was
closed up, and that only through that being removed could the way be
open for us to the kingdom of God. We see that the very form of the
ancient tabernacle reminded the Jews that they were to look for
something else. Then foolishly did they act who, by retaining the
shadows of the Law, willfully obstructed their own way.
He mentions proten skenen the first tabernacle, in ver. 2, in a
different sense from what it has here, for here it means the first
sanctuary, but there the whole tabernacle; for he sets it in opposition

78. to the spiritual sanctuary of Christ, which he presently mentions. He
contends that this had fallen for our great benefit, for through its
fall a more familiar access to God has been obtained for us.
7. PINK, “At the commencement of our last article we stated that, the principal design of
the apostle in this epistle was to prove and make manifest that the "old covenant" which
Jehovah made with Israel at Sinai, with all the ordinances of worship and privileges
connected therewith had been Divinely annulled. This involved a complete change in the
church-state of the Hebrews, but so far from this being a thing to be deplored, it was to
their unspeakable advantage. In prosecuting this design, the Holy Spirit through Paul does,
as it were, remove the veil from off the face of Moses. In 2 Corinthians 3:13 we read, "And
not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly
look to the end of that which is abolished." These words direct attention to a profound
spiritual truth which God (in keeping with His dispensational ways) caused to be mystically
adumbrated or shadowed forth by a material and visible object.
In 2 Corinthians 3:7 the apostle had spoken of the brightness of Moses’ face as a symbol of
his ministry: the revelation which he received was a divine and glorious one. But because
the truth communicated through Moses was in an obscure form (by types and emblems) he
veiled himself. Paul, as a minister of the "new covenant" used "great plainness of speech"
(2 Cor. 3:12), i.e., employing no "dark parables" or enigmatic prophecies, still less
mysterious ceremonies. Moses wore a veil "that the children of Israel could not steadfastly
look to the end of that which is abolished" (Heb. 3:7), i.e., to prevent their seeing the
termination or fading away of the celestial brightness of his countenance. The mystical
meaning of this was, God would not allow Israel to know at that time that the dispensation
of the Levitical or legal ministry would ultimately cease. The publication of that fact was
reserved for a much later date.
"But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in
the reading of the old covenant; which veil is done away in Christ" (2 Cor. 3:14). Yes, that
"veil" which lay so heavily over the Mosaic types is now "done away in Christ," for He is
that Antitype, the key which unlocks them, the sun which illuminates them. This, it is the
great purpose of the Hebrews’ epistle to demonstrate. Here is doctrinally removed the
"veil" from off the Mosaic institutions. Here the Spirit makes known the nature and
purpose of the "old covenant." Here He declares the significance and temporal efficacy of
all institutions and ordinances of Israel’s worship. Here He announces that the Levitical
rites and ceremonies made a representation of heavenly things, but insists that those
heavenly things could not themselves be introduced and established without the removal of
what had adumbrated them. Here He shows that the glory of God shines in the face of
Jesus Christ.
Three things there were which constituted the glory of the old covenant, and which the
Jews so rested in they refused the Gospel out of an adherence unto them: the priestly office;
the tabernacle with all its furniture, wherein that office was exercised; the duties and
worship of the priests in that tabernacle by sacrifices, especially those wherein there was a
solemn expiation of the sins of the whole congregation. In reference to them, the apostle
proves: first, that none of them could make perfect the state of the Church, nor really effect
assured peace and confidence between God and the worshippers. Second, that they were

79. but typical, ordained to represent that which was far more sublime and excellent than
themselves. Third, that the Lord Jesus Christ, in His person and mediation, was really and
substantially, all that they did but prefigure, and that He was and did what they could only
direct unto an expectation of.
In Hebrews 7 the apostle has fully evidenced this in connection with the priestly office. In
the 8th chapter he has done the same in general unto the tabernacle, confirming this by
that great collateral argument taken from the nature and excellency of that covenant
whereby the incarnate Son was the Surety and Mediator. Here in the 9th chapter, he takes
up the services and sacrifices which belonged unto the priestly office in the tabernacle. It
was in them that the Jews placed their greatest confidence for reconciliation with God, and
concerning which they boasted of the excellency of their Church-state and worship.
Because this was the chief point of difference between the Gospel-proclamation and those
who repudiated it, and because it was that whereon the whole doctrine of the justification
of sinners before God did depend, the apostle enters into minute detail, declaring the
nature, use and efficacy of the sacrifices of the law, and manifesting the nature, glory and
efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ, whereby those others had been put an end to (condensed
from John Owen).
"Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first
tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God" (verse 6). Having made a brief reference to
the structure of the tabernacle in its two compartments, and the furniture belonging to
each of them respectively, the apostle now turns to consider the uses for which they were
designed unto in the service of God. First, he says "these things were thus ordained," or as
the Revised Version more correctly renders it, "thus prepared," for the Greek word
(translated "made" in verse 2), signifies to dispose and arrange. When the things
mentioned in verses 2-5 had been made and duly ordered, they stood not for a magnificent
show, but were designed for constant use in the service of God. Hereby we are taught that,
for any service to be acceptable to God, it must be in strict accord with the pattern He has
given us in His Word: carefully ponder (1 Chron. 15:12, 13). Everything was duly prepared
for Divine service before that service was performed. So in public service or Divine worship
today there must be fit persons who, under the Spirit, are to lead it ‘‘able ministers of the
new testament" (2 Cor. 3:6); fit arrangements and order (1 Cor. 14:40), not mere human
tradition (Matthew 15:9); a fit message unto edification (1 Cor. 14:26).
"The priests went always into the first tabernacle." They only were allowed in the holy
place that were the sons of Aaron; but even these were suffered to penetrate no farther,
being barred from entrance into the holy of holies. This was in contrast from the high
priest who entered the inner sanctuary, yet only on one day in the year. The word "always"
is translated "continually" in Hebrews 13:15. It signifies constantly, at all times as occasion
did require. Christians have been made "kings and priests unto God" (Rev. 1:6), and they
are bidden to "give thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 5:20); to "rejoice evermore" and "pray without ceasing" (1
Thess. 5:16, 17).
"Accomplishing the service of God." The translators have rightly added the last two words,
for the "service" here is a Divine one. "Accomplishing the service of God" means that they
officiated in the ministry of the sacred ceremonies. The daily services of the priests were
two: the dressing of the lamps of the candlestick: supplying them with the holy oil,
trimming their wicks, etc.; this was done every evening and morning. Second, the service of

80. the golden altar, whereon they burned incense every day, with fire taken from off the
brazen altar, and this immediately after the offering of the evening and morning sacrifices.
Whilst this service was being performed, the people without gave themselves unto prayer
(Luke 1:10). Their weekly service was to change the shewbread on the table, which was
done every Sabbath, in the morning. All of this was typical of the continual application of
the benefits of the sacrifice and mediation of Christ unto His people here in the world.
The practical application to Christians now of what has just been before us, should be
obvious. There ought to be family worship, both in the morning and in the evening. The
replenishing of the oil in the lamps for continuous light, should find its counterpart in the
daily looking to God for needed light from His Word, to direct our steps in the ordering of
home and business life to His acceptance and praise. God has declared, "Them that honor
Me I will honor, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed" (1 Sam. 2:30). If God
be not honored in the home by the family "altar," then we cannot count upon Him blessing
our homes! The burning of the incense should receive its antitype in morning and evening
praise and prayer unto God: owning Him as the Giver of every good and every perfect gift,
thanking Him for spiritual and temporal mercies, casting all our care upon Him, pleading
His promises, and trusting Him for a continuance of His favors. The Greek word here for
"accomplishing" is a compound, which signifies to "completely finish"—rendered
"perfecting" in 2 Corinthians 7:1—denoting their service was not done by halves. May we
too serve God wholeheartedly.
7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and
that only once a year, and never without blood, which
he offered for himself and for the sins the people had
committed in ignorance.
1. BARNES, "But into the second - The second apartment or room, called the most holy
place; Heb_9:3.
Went the high priest alone once every year - On the great day of atonement;
Exo_30:10. On that day he probably entered the Holy of Holies three or four times, first to burn
incense, Lev_16:12; then to sprinkle the blood of the bullock on the mercy-seat, Lev_16:14; then
he was to kill the goat of the sin-offering, and bring that blood within the Veil and sprinkle it
also on the mercy-seat, and then, perhaps, he entered again to bring out the golden censer. The
Jewish tradition is, that he entered the Holy of Holies four times on that day. After all, however,
the number of times is not certain, nor is it material, the only important point being that he
entered it only on one day of the year, while the holy place was entered every day.

81. Not without blood - That is, he bare with him blood to sprinkle on the mercy-seat. This was
the blood of the bullock and of the goat - borne in at two different times.
Which he offered for himself - The blood of the bullock was offered for himself and for
his house or family - thus keeping impressively before his own mind and the mind of the people
the fact that the priests even of the highest order were sinners, and needed expiation like others;
Lev_9:7.
And for the errors of the people - The blood of the goat was offered for them; Lev_16:15.
The word rendered “errors” - ᅊγνόηµα agnoema - denotes properly “ignorance, involuntary
error;” and then error or fault in general - the same as the Hebrew ‫משׁגה‬ mishgeh - from ‫שׁגה‬
shaagah - “to err.” The object was to make expiation for all the errors and sins of the people, and
this occurred once in the year. The repetition of these sacrifices was a constant remembrancer of
sin, and the design was that neither the priests nor the people should lose sight of the fact that
they were violators of the Law of God.
2. CLARKE, "But into the second - That is, the holy of holies, or second part of the
tabernacle, the high priest alone, once every year, that is, on one day in the year only, which was
the day on which the general atonement was made. The high priest could enter into this place
only on one day in the year; but on that day he might enter several times. See Lev. 16.
Not without blood - The day prescribed by the law for this great solemnity was the tenth of
the month Tisri, in which the high priest brought in the incense or perfumes, which he placed on
the golden censer; he brought also the blood of the bullock; and sprinkled some portion of it
seven times before the ark, and the veil which separated the holy place from the holy of holies.
See Lev_16:14. He then came out, and, taking some of the blood of the goat which had been
sacrificed, he sprinkled it between the veil and the ark of the covenant, Lev_16:15.
Which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people - ᆙπερ των του λαο
υ αγνοηµατων· For transgressions of which they were not conscious: there were so many
niceties in the ritual worship of the Jews, and so many ways in which they might offend against
the law and incur guilt, that it was found necessary to institute sacrifices to atone for these sins
of ignorance. And as the high priest was also clothed with infirmity, he required to have an
interest in the same sacrifice, on the same account. This was a national sacrifice; and by it the
people understood that they were absolved from all the errors of the past year, and that they
now had a renewed right of access to the mercy-seat.
3. GILL, "Though this is not expressed in so many words in Lev_16:2 only it is said that
"Aaron came not at all times into the holy place within the vail"; yet it is the constant and
generally received sense of the Jewish writers, in agreement with the apostle here, that the high
priest went into the holy of holies but once a year (q), on the day of atonement, which was on the
tenth of the month Tisri, and answers to part of September; not but that he went in more than
once on that day, for he went in no less than four times (r); the first time he went in to offer
incense; the second time with the blood of the bullock, to sprinkle it; the third time with the
blood of the goat; and the fourth time to bring out the censer (s); and if he entered a fifth time,
they say he was worthy of death; wherefore Philo the Jew (t) seems to be mistaken when he
affirms that, if he went in three or four times on the same day, he suffered death, nor was there
any pardon for him; and as it was but one day in a year he might enter, so when he did, no other
man, either Israelite or priest, might go in along with him; he went in alone without any

82. attendance: the Jews say (u), that a cord or thong was bound to the feet of the high priest when
he went into the holy of holies, that if he died there, the rest might be able to draw him out; for it
was not lawful for another priest to go in, no, not an high priest, none besides him on the day of
atonement. Pausanias (w) makes mention of a temple of Minerva into which the priests entered
once every year; which very likely was observed in imitation of this custom of the Jewish high
priest; who in it was a type of Christ, and of his entrance into heaven, and of his constant and
continued intercession there:
not without blood; for he went in with the blood of the bullock and the blood of the goat;
which was typical of the blood of Christ, by which he entered in once into the holy place, into
heaven, when he had obtained eternal redemption by it, Heb_9:12 which he offered for himself
and for the errors of the people; the bullock was offered by the high priest for himself and his
family; and the goat for the sins of the people of Israel, even all their iniquities, transgressions,
and sins, Lev_16:11, but Christ the antitype having no sin, had no need to offer for himself, only
for the sins of the people; See Gill on Heb_7:27.
4. HENRY, "Into the second, the interior part, went the high priest along, Heb_9:7. This part
was an emblem of heaven, and Christ's ascension thither. Here observe, (1.) None but the high
priest must go into the holiest; so none but Christ could enter into heaven in his own name, by
his own right, and by his own merits. (2.) In entering into the holiest, the high priest must first
go through the outer sanctuary, and through the veil, signifying that Christ went to heaven
through a holy life and a violent death; the veil of his flesh was rent asunder. (3.) The high priest
entered but once a year into the holiest, and in this the antitype excels the type (as in every thing
else), for he has entered once for all, during the whole dispensation of the gospel. (4.) The high
priest must not enter without blood, signifying that Christ, having undertaken to be our high
priest, could not have been admitted into heaven without shedding his blood for us, and that
none of us can enter either into God's gracious presence here or his glorious presence hereafter,
but by the blood of Jesus. (5.) The high priest, under the law, entering into the holiest, offered
up that blood for himself and his own errors first, and then for the errors of the people,
Heb_9:7. This teaches us that Christ is a more excellent person and high priest than any under
the law, for he has no errors of his own to offer for. And it teaches us that ministers, when in the
name of Christ they intercede for others, must first apply the blood of Christ to themselves for
their pardon. (6.) When the legal high priest had offered for himself, he must not stop there, but
must also offer for the errors of the people. Our high priest, though he needs not to offer for
himself, yet forgets not to offer for his people; he pleads the merit of his sufferings for the
benefit of his people on earth. Observe, [1.] Sins are errors, and great errors, both in judgment
and practice. We greatly err when we sin against God; and who can understand all his errors?
[2.] They are such errors as leave guilt upon the conscience, not to be washed away but by the
blood of Christ; and the sinful errors of priests and people must be all done away by the same
means, the application of the blood of Christ; we must plead this blood on earth, while he is
pleading it in heaven for us.
5. JAMISON, "once every year — the tenth day of the seventh month. He entered within
the veil on that day twice at least. Thus “once” means here on the one occasion only. The two, or
possibly more, entrances on that one day were regarded as parts of the one whole.
not without blood — (Heb_8:3).
offered — Greek, “offers.”
errors — Greek, “ignorances”: “inadvertent errors.” They might have known, as the law was
clearly promulgated, and they were bound to study it; so that their ignorance was culpable

83. (compare Act_3:17; Eph_4:18; 1Pe_1:14). Though one’s ignorance may mitigate one’s
punishment (Luk_12:48), it does not wholly exempt from punishment.
5B. COFFMAN, “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 ATONEMENT
Lev. 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

84. 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 SIGNIFICANCE OF THOSE SERVICES
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. F6
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

85. up "the new and living way, through the veil, that is to say his flesh"
(Hebrews 10:20).
6. CALVIN, "For himself and for the errors of the people, or for his own and the
ignorances of the people. As the verb |shagag|, means in Hebrew to err,
to mistake, so |shgagah|, derived from it, properly denotes error, or
mistake; but yet it is generally taken for any kind of sin; and
doubtless we never sin except when deceived by the allurements of
Satan. The Apostle does not understand by it mere ignorance, as they
say, but, on the contrary, he includes also voluntary sins; but as I
have already said, no sin is free from error or ignorance; for however
knowingly and willfully any one may sin, yet it must be that he is
blinded by his lust, so that he does not judge rightly, or rather he
forgets himself and God; for men never deliberately rush headlong into
ruin, but being entangled in the deceptions of Satan, they lose the
power of judging rightly.
7. PINK, “"But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without
blood, which he offered for himself, and the errors of the people" (verse 7). That to which
the apostle here refers is the great anniversary- sacrifice of expiation, whose institution and
solemnities are described at length in Leviticus 16. On the tenth day of the seventh month
(which corresponds to our September) Israel’s high priest, unattended and unassisted by
his subordinates, entered within the holy of holies, there to present propitiating sacrifices
before Jehovah. Divested of his garments of "glory and beauty" (Ex. 28:2, etc.) and clad
only in "the holy linen" (Lev. 16:4), he first entered the sacred precincts bearing a censer
full of burning coals and his hands full of incense, which was to be placed upon the coals, so
that a cloud of incense should cover the mercy-seat (Lev. 16:12, 13); which spoke of the
fragrant excellency of Christ’s person unto God, when He offered Himself an atoning
sacrifice. Second, he took of the blood of the bullock, which had been killed for a
sin-offering for himself and his house (Lev. 16:11), and sprinkled its blood upon and before
the mercy-seat (Heb. 16:14). Third, he went out and killed the goat which was a sin-offering
for the people, and did with its blood as he had with that of the bullocks (Heb. 16:15).
When the high priest’s work within the veil had been completed, he came forth and laid
both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confessed over him "all of the iniquities of
the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the
head of the goat," which was then sent away "unto a land not inhabited" (Lev. 16:21, 22);
all of which was typical of the Atonement made by the Lord Jesus, and of the plenary
remission of sins through His blood. In the shedding of the victims’ blood and offering it by
fire on the altar, there was a representation made of the vicarious imputation of guilt to the
sacrifice, and the expiation of it through death. In the carrying of the blood into the
presence of Jehovah and the sprinkling of it upon His throne, witness was borne to His
acceptance of the atonement which had been made. In the placing of the sins of Israel upon
the live goat and its carrying of them away into a land uninhabited, there was a
foreshadowing of the blessed truth that, as far as the east is from the west so far hath God

86. removed the transgressions of His people from before Him.
"Into the second veil went the high priest alone: There shall be no man in the tabernacle of
the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement" (Lev. 16:17). This denoted that
Christ alone was qualified to appear before God on behalf of His people: none other was fit
to mediate for them. "Once every year," to foreshadow the fact that Christ entered heaven
for His people once for all: Hebrews 9:12. "Which he offered for himself," for he too was a
sinner, and therefore incompetent to make real, efficacious and acceptable atonement for
others; thereby intimating that he must yet give place to Another. "And for the errors of
the people," which is to be interpreted in the light of the Old Testament expression "sins of
ignorance" (Lev. 4:2; 5:15; Numbers 15:22-29), which are contrasted from deliberate or
presumptuous sins (see Numbers 15:30, 31). Under the dispensation of law God graciously
made provision for the infirmities of His people, granting them sacrifices for sins
committed unwillingly and unwittingly. But for determined and open rebellion against His
laws, no atoning sacrifice was available: see Hebrews 10:26.
The distinction pointed out above is the key to Psalm 51:16, "For Thou desirest not
sacrifice, else would I give it." There is no room for doubt that David knew full well the
terrible character of the sins which he committed against Uriah and his wife. Later, when
he was convicted of this, he realized that the law made no provision for forgiveness. What,
then, did he do? Psalm 51:1-3 tells us: he laid hold on God Himself and said, "The
sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not
despise" (verse 17). It was faith, penitently, appropriating the mercy of God in Christ.
8. DREW WORTHEN, “The High Priest had to have blood shed for himself before he
could bring the blood before God on behalf of the nation of Israel. This spoke of the
inadequacy of the Levitical priesthood. You see they too, like the rest of Israel, were sinners
in need of a Savior.
Their sins had to be covered just like everyone else's. By the way, when Scripture speaks of
the shedding of blood it's assumed that a death takes place to get that blood. I was once told
by a former seminary student who had evidently thought long and hard about this issue of
the shedding of blood, who told me that theoretically, Christ needed only to prick His
finger and that one drop of His blood was sufficient to atone for the sins of the world.
This sounds good in theory, but it is counter to everything God has taught in His word.
Remember, back in the garden ,God told Adam and Eve that if they rebelled they would
surely die. That was the penalty for rebellion against God.
Paul tells us the wages of sin is death. That is the just penalty God established for sin. And
so to suggest that the Son of God, who became a man specifically to take that penalty for
men, only had to prick His finger to shed some blood for us misses the point of what
atonement is all about. Only the death of a perfectly innocent man could satisfy God's
judgment for all men. And only Jesus Christ is that perfect, sinless sacrifice which could
redeem us. (Some seminary students think too hard.)
8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way

87. into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as
long as the first tabernacle was still standing.
1. BARNES, "The Holy Ghost - Who appointed all this. The whole arrangement in the
service of the tabernacle is represented as having been under the direction of the Holy Spirit, or
this was one of his methods of teaching the great truths of religion, and of keeping them before
the minds of people. Sometimes that Spirit taught by direct revelation; sometimes by the written
word, and sometimes by symbols. The tabernacle, with its different apartments, utensils, and
services, was a permanent means of keeping important truths before the minds of the ancient
people of God.
This signifying - That is, showing this truth, or making use of this arrangement to impress
this truth on the minds of people that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest.
That the way into the holiest of all - Into heaven - of which the Most Holy place in the
tabernacle was undoubtedly designed to be an emblem. It was the place where the visible
symbol of God - the Shekinah - dwelt; where the blood of propitiation was sprinkled, and was,
therefore, an appropriate emblem of that holy heaven where God dwells, and whence pardon is
obtained by the blood of the atonement.
Was not yet made manifest - The way to heaven was not opened or fully understood. It
was not known how people could appear before God, or how they could come with the hope of
pardon. That way has now been opened by the ascension of the Redeemer to heaven, and by the
assurance that all who will may come in his name.
While as the first tabernacle was yet standing - As long as it stood, and the appointed
services were held in it. The idea is, that until it was superseded by a more perfect system, it was
a “proof” that the way to heaven was not yet fully and freely optioned, and that the Holy Spirit
“designed” that it should be such a proof. The apostle does not specify in what the proof
consisted, but it may have been in something like the following.
(1) It was a mere “symbol,” and not the “reality” - showing that the true way was not yet fully
understood.
(2) It was entered but once a year - showing that there was not access at all times.
(3) It was entered only by the High Priest - showing that there was not free end full access to
all the people.
(4) It was accessible only by Jews - showing that the way in which all men might be saved was
not then fully revealed.
The sense is, that it was a system of types and shadows, in which there were many
burdensome rites and many things to prevent people from coming before the symbol of the
divinity, and was, therefore, an “imperfect system.” All these obstructions are now removed; the
Saviour - the great High Priest of his people - has entered heaven and “opened it to all true
believers,” and all of every nation may now have free access to God; see Heb_9:12; compare
Heb_10:19-22.
2. CLARKE, "The Holy Ghost this signifying - These services were divinely appointed,
and by each of them the Holy Spirit of God is supposed to speak.

88. The way into the holiest - That full access to God was not the common privilege of the
people, while the Mosaic economy subsisted. That the apostle means that it is only by Christ that
any man and every man can approach God, is evident from Heb_10:19-22, and it is about this,
and not about the tabernacle of this world, that he is here discoursing.
I have already observed that the apostle appears to use the word σκηνη, or tabernacle, in the
general sense of a dwelling place; and therefore applies it to the temple, which was reputed the
house or dwelling place of God, as well as the ancient tabernacle. Therefore, what he speaks here
concerning the first tabernacle, may be understood as applying with propriety to the then Jewish
temple, as well as to the ancient tabernacle, which, even with all their sacrifices and ceremonies,
could not make the way of holiness plain, nor the way to God’s favor possible.
3. GILL, "The Holy Ghost this signifying,.... This shows that the Holy Ghost existed under
the Old Testament; that he is a distinct person in the Godhead, a personal act being here
ascribed to him; that he is truly and properly God, the God whose service the priests
accomplished in the tabernacle; and by whom Moses was admonished to make all things in it
according to the pattern, and by whom the high priest was warned not to come at all times
within the vail; moreover, that the Levitical ordinances were of God, and that they had a
spiritual signification; that the Old Testament saints were not without some knowledge of the
spiritual meaning of them; and that the Holy Ghost was the author of that knowledge;
particularly by enjoining the high priest to enter within the vail but once a year, he gave a plain
and strong intimation,
that the way into the holiest of all was not yet manifest, while as the first
tabernacle was yet standing; by which is meant, not only the first part of the tabernacle, as
in Heb_9:2 but the whole of it; and not only that, but the temple built in its room, and also the
whole Levitical service is included; and the sense is, that while the tabernacle and tabernacle
worship, the temple and temple service, were in being, "the way into the holiest of all was not yet
manifest": the Vulgate Latin and all the Oriental versions render it, "the way of the saints"; of
the priests who ministered in holy things, and were holy to the Lord, and of all the saints that
lived before Christ; not that they did not go to heaven, but their way to it was not so manifestly
known; life and immortality were not so clearly brought to light, as now by the Gospel; though
rather it designs holy places, even heaven itself, which was typified by the holy place within the
vail; and may be called the holiest of all, it being the residence of the holy God, holy angels, and
holy men, and is sanctified by the presence of Christ, for his people, and where perfect holiness
will be the glory of it: the way to it is not by works of righteousness done by men, which being
imperfect cannot justify, and so not save, though this is the way men naturally seek and take;
but Christ is the only way, and he is the plain, pleasant, and safe one: now let it be observed, that
heaven was not shut to the Old Testament saints; there was a way into it for them, and they went
the same way New Testament saints do; and that way was in some measure known, but it was
not fully manifested; it lay hid in obscure prophecies, types, shadows, and sacrifices; hence
being more clearly revealed under the Gospel dispensation, in comparison, of its former
obscurity, and with respect to the manifestation of it, it is called a "new way".
4. HENRY, "In these verses the apostle undertakes to deliver to us the mind and meaning of
the Holy Ghost in all the ordinances of the tabernacle and legal economy, comprehending both
place and worship. The scriptures of the Old Testament were given by inspiration of God; holy
men of old spoke and wrote as the Holy Ghost directed them. And these Old Testament records
are of great use and significancy, not only to those who first received them, but even to
Christians, who ought not to satisfy themselves with reading the institutes of the Levitical law,

89. but should learn what the Holy Ghost signifies and suggests to them thereby. Now here are
several things mentioned as the things that the Holy Ghost signified and certified to his people
hereby.
I. That the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle was
standing, Heb_9:8. This was one lesson the Holy Ghost would teach us by these types; the way
to heaven was not so clear and plain, nor so much frequented, under the Old Testament as
under the New. It is the honour of Christ and the gospel, and the happiness of those who live
under it, that now life and immortality are brought to light. There was not that free access to
God then that there is now; God has now opened a wider door; and there is room for more, yea,
even for as many as are truly willing to return unto him by Christ.
5. JAMISON, "The Holy Ghost — Moses himself did not comprehend the typical meaning
(1Pe_1:11, 1Pe_1:12).
signifying — by the typical exclusion of all from the holiest, save the high priest once a year.
the holiest of all — heaven, the antitype.
the first tabernacle — the anterior tabernacle, representative of the whole Levitical system.
While it (the first tabernacle, and that which represents the Levitical system) as yet “has a
standing” (so the Greek, that is, “has continuance”: “lasts”), the way to heaven (the antitypical
“holiest place”) is not yet made manifest (compare Heb_10:19, Heb_10:20). The Old Testament
economy is represented by the holy place, the New Testament economy by the Holy of Holies.
Redemption, by Christ, has opened the Holy of Holies (access to heaven by faith now, Heb_4:16;
Heb_7:19, Heb_7:25; Heb_10:19, Heb_10:22; by sight hereafter, Isa_33:24; Rev_11:19;
Rev_21:2, Rev_21:3) to all mankind. The Greek for “not yet” (me po) refers to the mind of the
Spirit: the Spirit intimating that men should not think the way was yet opened [Tittmann]. The
Greek negative, “ou po,” would deny the fact objectively; “me po” denies the thing subjectively.
6. MURRAY, THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE WAY INTO THE HOLIEST. 8-10
WE said that the Holiest of All, or, as it is literally, the Holiness
of Holinesses, was the very embodiment of the holiness of God,
the place of His presence. The Holy Spirit specially bears the
epithet Holy, because He is the bearer of the divine holiness to
impart it to man He is the Spirit of holiness. It will appear
no more than natural that there should be a close connection
between the sanctuary as the revelation of God s holiness, and
the Holy Spirit as the revealer. This is what we are taught
here : the whole construction of the tabernacle and the
appointment of the high priest s entrance once a year was
so ordered by the Holy Spirit as to be a great object-lesson
in which the truth was taught that so long as the veil hung
there, the way into the Holiest was not yet open. The Holy
Spirit signifying that the way into the Holiest was not
yet opened. The words teach us that the truth about the
way into the Holiest was entirely in charge of the Holy
Spirit. It was He who devised and revealed to Moses the

90. heavenly pattern. It was He who ordered the veil as the
token that the way was not open. It was He who, by the yearly
entrance of the high priest, gave the prophecy that it would one
day be opened. It was He who prepared a body for Him, and
later on rilled Him who was to be the opener of the way. It
was He, the Eternal Spirit, through whom Christ offered Him
self as the sacrifice with whose blood He might enter in. It
was He, the Spirit of holiness (Rom. i. 4), through whom Christ
was raised from the dead and exalted to the throne of God. It
was the Holy Spirit who, when the way had been opened, came
out from the Holiest of All on the day of Pentecost, to impart to
men the life and the power of the glorified Christ. It is He
who to-day still presides over the way into the Holiest, leading
in all who are willing to dwell there.
The lesson for our spiritual life is one of deep suggestiveness.
The Holy Spirit has charge of the way into the Holiest ; both
while that way is not yet manifest and when it is opened up.
He alone hath the knowledge and the power to reveal this
mystery. For it is still a spiritual mystery. Though everything
that Scripture reveals of it can be studied and understood by
any man of intelligence, and a clear conception can be formed,
or an exposition given of what it means, the living power of the
truth, the actual experience of entering in through the opened
veil into the presence of God, can only be communicated and
wrought in the life within by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit
alone can reveal in the heart what the way means, both where
it is not yet made manifest, and where it is. He can work in
a man the deep conviction that he does, or does not know, the
true nearness of God in his own experience.
We have seen that the two compartments of the taber
nacle represent two degrees of nearness to God, two dis-
pensations of God s grace, or two stages in the Christian life,
a lower and a higher. Into the Holy Place every priest
might come daily to do there the service God had appointed.
Into the Most Holy he might not enter till Christ had opened
it for all believers. Many believers never in experience
enter into this life of the inner sanctuary, the more complete
and abiding nearness to God. They have, in the outer court,
seen the altar, and received the pardon of sin ; they have entered
upon the service of God, they seek to do His will, but the joy of
His presence as their abiding portion they know not. And very
often they do not know that there is a better life, that there is
an entering within the veil, a real dwelling in the secret of God s
presence ; the need that the Holy Spirit signify to them, work

91. in them the conviction that to them the way into the Holiest
hath not yet been made manifest. They need oh let us, if we
have not yet entered in, let us give ourselves to pray for the
discovery that there is an inner chamber ; that there is still the
veil of the flesh, the life of the carnal Christian, that prevents
the access ; that only the possession of the Pentecostal blessing,
the Spirit that came from the throne when Jesus had rent the
veil, that reveals Him and links to Him, is what will bring us in.
When He has signified this to us, and we yield ourselves to
the full conviction that we are still without the veil, and strong
desire has been awakened at any cost to enter in, the same
Spirit who at Pentecost, when our High Priest had just entered
with His blood, came forth from the Holiest of All, will come to
us in power and bring us in too. As He reveals Jesus Himself
as having gone in for us ; as He makes us willing for that
perfect surrender, in which nothing less than the direct and
continual fellowship with God can satisfy us; our hearts will
open to the wondrous mystery, that what is impossible to men
is possible with God, and that God of His free grace and in His
mighty power does indeed grant it to His child, even now in
Christ, to dwell with Him in unbroken communion.
O God ! let the Holy Spirit witness to every reader who
needs it, that to him the way into the Holiest hath not yet been
made manifest ; and to everyone who is ready for it, that in
Christ the way into the Holiest is indeed open. With Pentecost,
and the participation it brought of the Spirit of the glorified
Jesus, began true Christianity, as a ministration of the Spirit.
The enjoyment of the Pentecostal gift, as the communication of
the heavenly life and the abiding presence of Jesus the glorified
One, in all its Pentecostal freshness and fulness, is the only power
that can enable us to live within the veil, in the living experience
that the way into the Holiest has now been opened. It is the
Spirit dwelling in us will fit us for dwelling in God s presence.
1. Shall we any longer fear and doubt? The Father in heaven beckoning us into His
presence; the Son, our Brother, Prophet, Priest, and King, pointing to the way He opened
for us and the Holy Spirit within us to be our light and strength, to enable us to walk in
that way shall we fear? No, let us hear the voice that gives the power: Rise up and walk.
Enter in.
2. Do get it very clear that the two compartments are two stages in religious life and
worship and seruice. The one when the power of the rent veil is not yet understood ; the
other where the Holy Spirit has brought us In.
7. PINK, “"The Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet

92. made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing" (verse 8). The apostle now
makes known the use which he intended to make of the description which had been given
of the tabernacle and its furniture in verses 2-5: from the structure and order of its services
he would prove the pre-eminency of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ above those
which had belonged to the tabernacle. He points out that the Holy Spirit had provided
instruction for Israel in the very disposal of their ancient institutions. Inasmuch as none
but the high priest was permitted to pass within the veil, it was plainly intimated that under
the Mosaic dispensation the people were barred from the very presence of God. Such a
state of affairs could not be the ultimate and ideal, and therefore must be set aside before
that which was perfect could be introduced.
"The Holy Spirit this signifying:" the reference is to the arrangements which obtained in
the tabernacle, as specified in the preceding verses. Here we learn that the third person of
the blessed Trinity was immediately concerned in the original instructions given to Israel.
This intimates in a most striking way the perfect union, unison and cooperation of the
persons of the Godhead in all that They do. 2 Peter 1:21 declares that, "holy men of old
spake, moved by the Holy Spirit," prominent among whom was Moses. In Exodus 35:1 we
read, "Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of Israel together, and said unto
them, These are the words which the Lord hath commanded"—the Holy Spirit moving
Him to give an accurate record of all that he had heard from the Lord.
"The Holy Spirit this signifying," or making evident, that "the way into the holiest of all
was not yet made manifest." How did He thus "signify" this fact? By the very framework
of the tabernacle: that is, by allowing the people to go no farther than the outer court, and
the priests themselves only into the first compartment. "For things in His wisdom were
thus disposed, that there should be the first tabernacle whereinto the priests did enter
every day, accomplishing the Divine services that God required. Howbeit in that tabernacle
there were not the pledges of the gracious presence of God. It was not the especial residence
of His glory. But the peculiar habitation of God was separated from it by a veil, and no
person living might so much as look into it on pain of death. But yet, lest the church should
apprehend, that indeed there was no approach, here, nor hereafter, for any person into the
gracious presence of God; He ordained that once a year the high priest, and he alone,
should enter into that holy place with blood. Hereby he plainly signified, that an entrance
there was to be, and that with boldness, thereinto. For unto what end else did He allow and
appoint, that once a year there should be an entrance into it by the high priest, in the name
of and for the service of the church? But this entrance being only once a year, by the high
priest only, and that with the blood of the covenant, which was always to be observed
whilst that tabernacle continued, he did manifest that the access represented was not to be
obtained during that season; for all believers in their own persons were utterly excluded
from it" (John Owen).
"The way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest." The apostle is not now
speaking of the second compartment in the tabernacle (as in verse 3), but of that which was
typified by it. "Now, in that most holy place, were all the signs and pledges of the gracious
presence of God; the testimonies of our reconciliation by the blood of the atonement, and of
our peace with Him thereby. Wherefore, to enter into these holies is nothing but to have an
access with liberty, freedom and boldness, into the gracious presence of God on the account
of reconciliation and peace made with Him. This the apostle doth so plainly and positively
declare in Hebrews 10:19-22 that I somewhat wonder so many learned expositors could

93. utterly miss of his meaning in this place. The holies then is the gracious presence of God,
whereunto believers draw nigh, in the confidence of the atonement made for them, and
acceptance thereon: see Romans 5:1-3, Ephesians 2:14-18, Hebrews 4:14, 15’ (John Owen).
But let us observe more closely this expression "the way into the holiest of all." This way is
no other but the sacrifice of Christ, the true High Priest of the Church: as He Himself
declared, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father but by
Me" (John 14:6). Thus the ultimate reference here in "the holiest of all" is to Heaven itself,
yet having a present and spiritual application unto access to and communion with God.
The "way" into this is through faith in the sacrifice of Christ. Marvelously was this
adumbrated here on earth at the moment of His death, for then the veil of the temple was
rent in twain from the top to the bottom (Matthew 27:51), thereby opening a way into the
holy of holies.
But this access to God, or way into the holiest of all, "was not yet made manifest, while as
the first tabernacle was yet standing." It is to be very carefully noted that the apostle did
not say that there was then no way "provided" or "made use of," but only that it was not,
during Old Testament times, "made manifest." There was an entrance into the presence of
God, both unto grace and glory, for His elect, from the days of Abel and onwards, but that
"way" was not openly and publicly displayed. By virtue of the everlasting covenant (the
agreement between the Father and the Son), and in view of Christ’s satisfaction in the
fullness of time, salvation was applied to saints then, and they were saved by faith as we are
now, for the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. But the open manifestation
of these things waited for the actual exhibition of Christ in the flesh, the full declaration of
His person and mediation by the Gospel, and the introduction and establishment of all the
privileges of Gospel worship.
"While as the first tabernacle was yet standing." The reference here is not to the first
compartment or holy place, into which the priests entered and where they served, but is
used synecdochially (a part put for the whole) for the entire legal system, which included
the temples of Solomon and Zerubbabel. The "first tabernacle" is here spoken of in
contrast from the "true tabernacle" of Hebrews 8:2, namely, the humanity of Christ, which
was the antitype and succeeded in the room of the type—cf. Revelation 13:6! The apostle is
here treating of what had its standing before God whilst the "first covenant" and Aaronic
priesthood remained valid. He cannot be here referring to the "first tabernacle" as a
building, for that had become a thing of the past, long centuries before he wrote this epistle.
Yet the temples that succeeded it had their standing on the basis of the old covenant. This
had now been annulled, and with it the whole system of worship which had so long
obtained in Judaism.
8. DREW WORTHEN, “Notice first of all that it is the Holy Spirit who illumines the
meaning of the Old Covenant sacrificial system. The Holy Spirit of God is the One who
teaches us things we can learn from the Old covenant.
This is one reason we study the O.T. It was the Holy Spirit who inspired all of Scripture,
both O.T. and N.T. And it only makes sense that it is the Holy Spirit who gives us insight
into His word, both Old and New Testament.
There are those who profess to be Christians who actually deny the Old Testament as a
present active and inspired word for the church today. It's true that we don't live according
to the Old Testament as it relates to the means of our salvation. Christ has fulfilled that.

94. But to suggest that we can't grow in our faith or that the O.T. is irrelevant today is to take
away from the word of God.
The apostle John had some things to say about this in the book of Revelation. And though
some would say the warning applied only to the Revelation he received from Christ, it must
be pointed out that the same Holy Spirit who inspired that book also inspired all of the
O.T.
And so we must conclude that we have no business taking anything away which the Spirit
of God has given for our instruction and edification. I can't imagine the Psalms, for
example, being something N.T. believers should exclude from their daily lives, or Proverbs,
or any other O.T. book. God speaks to us in it all.
We are a N.T. church, but the Holy Spirit has spoken and continues to speak through
everything He has given us in the entire word of God. As it has been pointed out by so
many, the O.T. is the New Testament concealed, while the N.T. is the Old Testament
revealed.
One other point about the Holy Spirit which is worth noting. The designation Holy carries
with it the idea that God's character is Holy and nothing short of perfection can dwell with
Him. This is another reason the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle was only allowed to be
entered into once a year for a short time. It was not meant to be a permanent dwelling
place where man tabernacled with God.
Andrew Murray points out: "The Holy Spirit specially bears the epithet Holy, because He
is the bearer of divine holiness to impart it to man -- He is the Spirit of holiness. It will
appear no more than natural that there should be a close connection between the sanctuary
as the revelation of God's holiness, and the Holy Spirit as the revealer. This is what we are
taught here: the whole construction of the tabernacle and the appointment of the high
priest's entrance once a year was so ordered by the Holy Spirit as to be a great
object-lesson in which the truth was taught, so long as the veil hung there, the way into the
Holiest was not yet open."
As long as the veil is separating the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies men would know
that they do not have unimpeded access to the presence of the Lord. This is what is meant
by HEB 9:8 "The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place
had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing."
Dr. Donald Guthrie puts it this way: "The words "as long as the first tabernacle was still
standing" seem to mean 'as long as approach is dependent on Levitical-type ceremonies
which barred all but the high priest from access to the presence of God, and even him for
all but one day a year. It is not without significance that the words 'is still standing' could
be more literally translated 'has standing', ie., a place or status. Under the New Covenant
this status ceases."
9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating
that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able

95. to clear the conscience of the worshiper.
1. BARNES, "Which was a figure for the time then present - That is, as long as the
tabernacle stood. The word rendered “figure” - παραβολᆱ parabole - is not the same as type - τύ
πος tupos - (Rom_5:14; Act_7:13, Act_7:44; Joh_20:25; 1Co_10:6, 1Co_10:11; Phi_3:17, et al.)
- but is the word commonly rendered “parable;” Mat_13:3, Mat_13:10, Mat_13:13, Mat_13:18,
Mat_13:24, Mat_13:31, Mat_13:33-36, Mat_13:53; Mat_15:15, “et soepe,” and means properly
“a placing side by side;” then a “comparison, or similitude.” Here it is used in the sense of
“image, or symbol” - something to “represent” other things. The idea is, that the arrangements
and services of the tabernacle were a representation of important realities, and of things which
were more fully to be revealed at a future period. There can be no doubt that Paul meant to say
that this service in general was symbolical or typical, though this will not authorize us to attempt
to spiritualize every minute arrangement of it. Some of the things in which it was typical are
specified by the apostle himself, and wisdom and safety in explaining the arrangements of the
tabernacle and its services consist in adhering very closely to the explanations furnished by the
inspired writers. An interpreter is on an open sea, to be driven he knows not whither, when he
takes leave of these safe pilots.
Both gifts - Thank-offerings.
And sacrifices - Bloody offerings. The idea is, that all kinds of offerings to God were made
there.
That could not make him that did the service perfect - That could not take away sin,
and remove the stains of guilt on the soul; note, Heb_7:11; compare Heb_8:7; Heb_7:27;
Heb_10:1, Heb_10:11.
As pertaining to the conscience - They related mainly to outward and ceremonial rites,
and even when offerings were made for sin the conscience was not relieved. They could not
expiate guilt; they could not make the soul pure; they could not of themselves impart peace to
the soul by reconciling it to God. They could not fully accomplish what the conscience needed to
have done in order to give it peace. Nothing will do this but the blood of the Redeemer.
2. CLARKE, "Which - Tabernacle and its services, was a figure, παραβολη, a dark
enigmatical representation, for the time then present - for that age and dispensation, and for all
those who lived under it.
In which, καθ’ ᆇν, during which, time or dispensation were offered both gifts and sacrifices -
eucharistic offerings and victims for sin, that could not make him that did the service, whether
the priest who made the offering, or the person who brought it in the behalf of his soul, perfect
as pertaining to the conscience - could not take away guilt from the mind, nor purify the
conscience from dead works. The whole was a figure, or dark representation, of a spiritual and
more glorious system: and although a sinner, who made these offerings and sacrifices according
to the law, might be considered as having done his duty, and thus he would be exempted from
many ecclesiastical and legal disabilities and punishments; yet his conscience would ever tell
him that the guilt of sin was still remaining, and that it was impossible for the blood of bulls and
goats to take it away. Thus even he that did the service best continued to be imperfect - had a
guilty conscience, and an unholy heart.

96. The words καθ’ ᆇν, in which, referred in the above paraphrase to τον καιρον, the time, are
read καθ’ ᅧν by ABD, and several others, one copy of the Slavonic, the Vulgate, and some of the
fathers, and thus refer to την σκηνην, the tabernacle; and this is the reading which our
translators appear to have followed. Griesbach places it in his margin, as a very probable
reading; but I prefer the other.
3. GILL, "Which was a figure for the time then present,.... The tabernacle in general was
a figure of Christ's human nature, Heb_8:2 and the most holy part of it was a figure of heaven
itself, Heb_9:24 the whole service of it was typical and shadowy; but it was but a temporary
figure; it was for that present time only; the things of it were suited to that dispensation, and are
now abolished, and ought not to be revived, the ordinances of the Gospel being greatly
preferable to them; and while it did continue, it was only a parable, as the word here used
signifies; it was like a dark saying; it had much obscurity and darkness in it; or as the Vulgate
Latin version renders it, it was a "figure of the present time"; that is, of the Gospel dispensation;
it was a shadow of good things to come under that; it prefigured what is now accomplished; or
rather it was a "figure unto, or until the present time"; till Christ came, when all figures, types,
and shadows fled away, and were of no more real use and service:
in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices; that is, in which tabernacle, or at which
then present time, or καθ' ην, "according to which figure or parable", as the Alexandrian copy
and Vulgate Latin version read, gifts and sacrifices were offered by the priests; see Heb_5:1,
that could not make him that did the service perfect; neither the priest that offered
them, nor the people whom he represented, and for whom he did the service; they could not
make real and perfect expiation for sin, nor justify from it, nor cleanse and sanctify; the spiritual
worshippers had their sins expiated by the sacrifice of Christ; and their persons were justified by
his righteousness, and they were cleansed by his blood: the particular instance in which, legal
sacrifices did not make perfect is, "pertaining to the conscience"; there is in every man a
conscience, and when sin is charged home upon it, that is filled with a sense of divine wrath; nor
can it be pacified with anything short of what will answer the law and justice of God, and which
is only done by the blood and righteousness of Christ.
4. HENRY, "That the first tabernacle was only a figure for the time then present, Heb_9:9. It
was a dark dispensation, and but of short continuance, only designed for awhile to typify the
great things of Christ and the gospel, that were in due time to shine forth in their own
brightness, and thereby cause all the shadows to flee away and disappear, as the stars before the
rising sun.
III. That none of the gifts and sacrifices there offered could make the offerers perfect as
pertaining to conscience (Heb_9:9); that is, they could not take away the desert, or defilement,
or dominion, of sin; they could not deliver conscience from a dread of the wrath of God; they
could neither discharge the debts, nor resolve the doubts, of him who did the service. A man
might run through them all in their several orders and frequent returns, and continue to do so
all his days, and yet not find his conscience either pacified or purified by them; he might thereby
be saved from corporal and temporal punishments that were threatened against the
non-observers, but he could not be saved by them from sin or hell, as all those are who believe in
Christ.

97. 5. JAMISON, "Which — “The which,” namely, anterior tabernacle: “as being that which
was” [Alford].
figure — Greek, “parable”: a parabolic setting forth of the character of the Old Testament.
for — “in reference to the existing time.” The time of the temple-worship really belonged to
the Old Testament, but continued still in Paul’s time and that of his Hebrew readers. “The time
of reformation” (Heb_9:10) stands in contrast to this, “the existing time”; though, in reality, “the
time of reformation,” the New Testament time, was now present and existing. So “the age to
come,” is the phrase applied to the Gospel, because it was present only to believers, and its
fullness even to them is still to come. Compare Heb_9:11, “good things to come.”
in which — tabernacle, not time, according to the reading of the oldest manuscripts. Or
translate, “according to which” parabolic representation, or figure.
were — Greek, “are.”
gifts — unbloody oblations.
could not — Greek, “cannot”: are not able.
him that did the service — any worshipper. The Greek is “latreuein,” serve God, which is all
men’s duty; not “leitourgein,” to serve in a ministerial office.
make ... perfect — perfectly remove the sense of guilt, and sanctify inwardly through love.
as pertaining to the conscience — “in respect to the (moral-religious) consciousness.”
They can only reach as far as the outward flesh (compare “carnal ordinances,” Heb_9:10,
Heb_9:13, Heb_9:14).
6. CALVIN, "Which was a figure, etc. The word parathole, used here, signifies,
as I think, the same thing with antitupos, antitype; for he means that
that tabernacle was a second pattern which corresponded with the first.
For the portrait of a man ought to be so like the man himself, that
when seen, it ought immediately to remind us of him whom it represents.
He says further, that it was a figure, or likeness, for the time then
present, that is, as long as the external observance was in force; and
he says this in order to confine its use and duration to the time of
the Law; for it means the same with what he afterwards adds, that all
the ceremonies were imposed until the time of reformation; nor is it
any objection that he uses the present tense in saying, gifts are
offered; for as he had to do with the Jews, he speaks by way of
concession, as though he were one of those who sacrificed. Gifts and
sacrifices differ, as the first is a general term, and the other is
particular.
That could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to
the conscience; that is, they did not reach the soul so as to confer
true holiness. I do not reject the words, make perfect, and yet I
prefer the term sanctify, as being more suitable to the context. But
that readers may better understand the meaning of the Apostle, let the
contrast between the flesh and the conscience be noticed; he denies
that worshippers could be spiritually and inwardly cleansed by the

98. sacrifices of the Law. It is added as a reason, that all these rites
were of the flesh or carnal. What then does he allow them to be? It is
commonly supposed, that they were useful only as means of training to
men, conducive to virtue and decorum. But they who thus think do not
sufficiently consider the promises which are added. This gloss,
therefore, ought to be wholly repudiated. Absurdly and ignorantly too
do they interpret the ordinances of the flesh, as being such as
cleansed or sanctified only the body; for the Apostle understands by
these words that they were earthly symbols, which did not reach the
soul; for though they were true testimonies of perfect holiness, yet
they by no means contained it in themselves, nor could they convey it
to men; for the faithful were by such helps led, as it were, by the
hand to Christ, that they might obtain from him what was wanting in the
symbols.
Were any one to ask why the Apostle speaks with so little respect and
even with contempt of Sacraments divinely instituted, and extenuates
their efficacy? This he does, because he separates them from Christ;
and we know that when viewed in themselves they are but beggarly
elements, as Paul calls them. (Galatians 4:9.)
7. PINK, "Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts
and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the
conscience" (verse 9). Having briefly pointed out the emblematic significance of the two
compartments of the tabernacle, the apostle now approaches his leading object in this
paragraph, namely, to demonstrate that Christ had "obtained a more excellent ministry"
than that which had belonged to the Levitical priesthood. This he does by giving a brief
summary of the imperfections of the tabernacle and all its services, wherein the
administration of the old covenant did consist. By calling attention to the defects of
inadequacy of the Judaic system, the apostle adopted the most effective method of exposing
the unreasonableness of the rejection of the more glorious Gospel by the majority of the
Jews, and at the same time showed what folly and wickedness it would be for the believing
Hebrews to return to that system.
The apostle’s design in verses 9, 10 is to show that, notwithstanding the outward excellency
and glory of the tabernacle-system (through Divine appointment), yet, in the will and
wisdom of God, that system was only designed to continue for a season, and that the time of
its expiation had now arrived. That the Levitical priesthood and their services were never
intended by God to occupy a perpetual place in the worship of His church, was evident
from the fact that they were utterly unable to effect for His saints that which He had
purposed and promised. Not only did the presence of the veil, which excluded all save
Aaron from the presence-chamber of Jehovah, intimate that the ideal state had not yet
come; not only did the annual repetition of the great atoning-sacrifice indicate that, as yet,
the all-efficacious Sacrifice had not yet been offered; but all the gifts and sacrifices
combined failed to "perfect as pertaining to the conscience." They were only "a figure for
the time then present," an institution and provision of God "until the time of reformation."
"Which was a figure for the time then present." The "which was" includes the tabernacle

99. in both its parts, with all its vessels and services. The Greek word for "figure" here is not
the same as the one rendered "type" in Romans 5:14 and "examples" in 1 Corinthians
10:6, 11, but is the term commonly translated "parable," as in Matthew 13:3, 10 etc. It is
used here for one thing representing another. It signifies "figurative instruction." By
means of obscure mystical signs and symbols God taught the ancient church. The great
mystery of our redemption by Christ was principally made known by a parable, which was
addressed to the eyes rather than to the ears. That was the method which God was pleased
to employ, the means He used under the law, of making known things to come. "Which was
a figure," is the Holy Spirit’s affirmation that the structure, fabric, furniture and rites of
the tabernacle were all vested with a Divine and spiritual significance. That the truly
regenerate among Israel were acquainted with this fact is illustrated by the prayer of
David, "Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law" (Ps.
119:18).
"Which was a figure for the time then present." The verb here is of the preter-imperfect
tense, signifying a time that was then present, but is now past. The reference is to what had
preceded the establishment of the new covenant, before the full Gospel revelation had been
made. The figurative instruction which God gave to the early Church was not designed to
be of permanent duration. Nevertheless, a sovereign God saw fit to continue that obscure
and figurative representation of spiritual mysteries for no less than fifteen hundred years.
His ways are ever the opposite of man’s. "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing" (Prov.
25:2)! But how thankful we should be that "the darkness is past, and the true light now
shineth" (1 John 2:8). Still, let it not be overlooked that the revelation God made through
the tabernacle was sufficient for the faith and obedience of Israel had it been diligently
attended unto.
"In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices." The Greek word for "sacrifices" is
derived from a verb which means to kill, thus the reference here is to those oblations which
were slaughtered. As distinguished from these, "gifts" were without life and sense, such as
the meal-offering, oil, frankincense and salt which were mingled therewith (Lev. 2), the
first-fruits, tithes, and all free-will offerings, which were presented by the priests. These
were "offered" unto God, and that in the tabernacle, for there alone was it meet to offer
them. So also was the "tabernacle" (Heb. 8:2) of Christ alone suited for its designed end.
And what is the particular message this should have for the Christian heart? Surely to
remind him of that word, "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God that ye
present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable
service" (Rom. 12:1).
"That could not make him perfect as pertaining to the conscience." These words are not to
be understood as restricted to the officiating priest, rather do they look more directly to the
person in whose stead he presented the offering to God. Here the apostle points out the
imperfection of the whole tabernacle-order of things, and its impotency unto the great end
that might be expected from it. To "perfect" a worshipper is to fit him, legally and
experimentally, for communion with God, and for this there must be both justification and
sanctification, and neither of these could the Levitical priests procure. They could neither
remit guilt from before God, nor remove the stains of it from the soul. Where those are
lacking, there can be no peace or assurance in the heart, and then the real spirit of worship
is absent. As this (D.V.) comes before us again in Hebrews 10:2, we will not here further
enlarge.

100. Ere passing on to the next verse, it may be enquired, If then the Levitical sacrifices failed at
this vital point, why were they ever appointed by God at all? To this question two answers
may be returned. First, those sacrifices availed to remove the temporal governmental
consequence of Israel’s sins; when rightly offered, they freed from political and external
punishment, so that continuance in the land of Canaan was preserved; but they cancelled
not the wages of sin, removed not the eternal punishment which was due unto every sin by
the law. Second, they directed the faith of the regenerate forward to the perfect sacrifice of
Christ (which the Levitical offerings typically represented), the virtue and value of which
was available to faith’s appropriation from the beginning.
"Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances,
imposed until the time of reformation" (verse 10). To convince those to whom he was
writing that the Levitical ceremonies were incapable of perfecting the conscience, the
apostle here demonstrates the truth of this by pointing out their inadequate nature and
character. The ordinances of Judaism corresponded closely with the old covenant, which
was made with man in the flesh: its sanctuary and furniture were material—things of sight
and sense; its ministry was not spiritual, but had to do only with external rites; its ablutions
effected nothing more than a ceremonial cleansing, and entirely failed to purify the heart,
as faith does (Acts 15:9).
The "service" of the tabernacle-system "stood only in meats and drinks." This expression
refers to the sacrifices and libations, which consisted of flesh and bread, oil and wine. "And
divers washings": first, that of the priests themselves (Ex. 29:4, etc.), for whose use the
"laver" was chiefly intended (Ex. 30:18, 31:9, etc.); second, of the various parts of the
burnt-offering sacrifice (Lev. 1:9, 13); third, of the people themselves when they had
contracted defilement (Lev. 15:8,16, etc.). "And carnal ordinances" which refers, most
probably, to the whole system of laws pertaining to diet and manner of life. "Which stood
only in," this is emphatic; the rites of Judaism were solely external and fleshly, there being
nothing spiritual joined with them. Thus their insufficiency to procure spiritual and eternal
blessings was evident: legal meats and drinks could not nourish the soul; ceremonial
washings could not purify the heart.
"Imposed until the time of reformation." "The word for ‘imposed’ is properly ‘lying on
them,’ that is, as a burden. There was a weight in all these legal rites and ceremonies,
which is called a yoke, and too heavy for the people to bear (Acts 15:10). And if the
imposition of them be principally intended, as we render the word ‘impose,’ it respects the
bondage they were brought into by them. Men may have a weight lying on them, and yet
not be brought into bondage thereby. But these things were so ‘imposed’ on them, as that
they might feel their weight and groan under the burden of it. Of this bondage the apostle
treats at large in the epistle to the Galatians. And it was impossible that those things should
perfect a church-state, which in themselves were such a burden, and effective of such a
bondage" (John Owen).
The institutions of the Levitical service possessed a general character of externality and
materialty: as verse 13 of our chapter says, they sanctified "to the purifying of the flesh,"
but they reached not the dire needs of the soul. Therefore they were not designed to
continue forever, but for a determined and limited season, namely, "unto the time of
reformation," which expression respected the appearing of the promised Messiah to
inaugurate the new and better covenant: see Luke 1:68-74. "But when the fullness of the
time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law; to redeem

101. them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Gal. 4:4, 5).
10 They are only a matter of food and drink and
various ceremonial washings--external regulations
applying until the time of the new order.
1. BARNES, "Which stood only in meats and drinks - The idea is, that the ordinances
of the Jews, in connection with the services of religion, consisted much of laws pertaining to
what was lawful to eat and drink, etc. A considerable part of those laws related to the distinction
between clean and unclean beasts, and to such arrangements as were designed to keep them
externally distinct from other nations. It is possible also that there may be a reference here to
meat and drink offerings. On the grammatical difficulties of this verse, see Stuart on the
Hebrews, in loc.
And divers washings - The various ablutions which were required in the service of the
tabernacle and the temple - washing of the hands, of the victim that was to be offered, etc. It was
for this purpose that the laver was erected in front of the tabernacle Exo_30:18; Exo_31:9;
Exo_35:16, and that the brass sea and the lavers were constructed in connection with the temple
of Solomon; 2Ch_4:2-5; 1Ki_7:26. The Greek word here is “baptisms.” On its meaning, see
Mat_3:6 note; Mar_7:4 note.
And carnal ordinances - Margin, “Or, rites, or ceremonies.” Greek “Ordinances of the
flesh;” that is, which pertained to the flesh or to external ceremonies. The object was rather to
keep them “externally” pure than to cleanse the conscience and make them holy in heart.
Imposed on them - “Laid on them” - ᅚπικέιµενα epikeimena. It does not mean that there
was any “oppression” or “injustice” in regard to these ordinances, but that they were appointed
for a temporary purpose.
Until the time of reformation - The word rendered here “reformation” - διόρθωσις
diorthosis - means properly “emendation, improvement, reform.” It refers to putting a thing in a
right condition; making it better; or raising up and restoring what is fallen down. Passow. Here
the reference is undoubtedly to the gospel as being a better system - “a putting things where they
ought to be;” compare notes on Act_3:21. The idea here is, that those ordinances were only
temporary in their nature, and were designed to endure until a more perfect system should be
introduced. They were of value “to introduce” that better system; they were not adapted to
purify the conscience and remove the stains of guilt from the soul.

102. 2. CLARKE, "In meats and drinks, and divers washings - He had already mentioned
eucharistic and sacrificial offerings, and nothing properly remained but the different kinds of
clean and unclean animals which were used, or forbidden to be used, as articles of food; together
with the different kinds or drinks, washings, βαπτισµοις, baptisms, immersions, sprinklings and
washings of the body and the clothes, and carnal ordinances, or things which had respect merely
to the body, and could have no moral influence upon the soul, unless considered in reference to
that of which they were the similitudes, or figures.
Carnal ordinances - ∆ικαιωµατα σαρκος· Rites and ceremonies pertaining merely to the
body. The word carnal is not used here, nor scarcely in any part of the New Testament, in that
catachrestical or degrading sense in which many preachers and professors of Christianity take
the liberty to use it.
Imposed on them until the time of reformation - These rites and ceremonies were
enacted, by Divine authority, as proper representations of the Gospel system, which should
reform and rectify all things.
The time of reformation, καιρος διορθωσεως, the time of rectifying, signifies the Gospel
dispensation, under which every thing is set straight; every thing referred to its proper purpose
and end; the ceremonial law fulfilled and abrogated; the moral law exhibited and more strictly
enjoined; (see our Lord’s sermon upon the mount); and the spiritual nature of God’s worship
taught, and grace promised to purify the heart: so that, through the power of the eternal Spirit,
all that was wrong in the soul is rectified; the affections, passions, and appetites purified; the
understanding enlightened; the judgment corrected; the will refined; in a word, all things made
new.
3. GILL, "Which stood only in meats and drinks,.... That is, along with the gifts and
sacrifices offered, there only were meat offerings and drink offerings; things which only respect
the body, and cannot therefore make perfect, as to the conscience; to which may be added, that
while the tabernacle was standing, and typical service was in being, there was a prohibition of
certain meats, as unclean, and an allowance of others, as clean, Lev_11:2 and there were certain
drinks which were unlawful to certain persons, at certain times, as to the priests and Nazarites,
Lev_10:9 and which, for the above reason, could make no man perfect:
and divers washings or "baptisms": the doctrine of which, the apostle would not have laid
again, Heb_6:2 these were the washings of the priests and of the Israelites, and of sacrifices, and
of garments, and of vessels and other things; and which, because they were performed by
immersion, they are called "baptisms": and now since these only sanctified to the purifying of
the flesh, or what was outward, they could not reach the conscience, or make perfect with
respect to that: and
carnal ordinances: which belonged to the flesh, and not the spirit or soul, and therefore could
not affect that; besides, these were only
imposed on them until the time of reformation; they were enjoined the Jews only,
though by God himself; and were put upon them as a burden, or a yoke, and which was on some
accounts intolerable, but were not to continue any longer than the time of the Gospel, here
called "the time of reformation", or of "correction", and emendation; in which, things that were
faulty and deficient are amended and perfected, and in which burdensome rites and ceremonies
are removed, and better ordinances introduced: or rather of direction: in which saints are

103. directed to Christ, the sum and substance of all types, shadows, and sacrifices, and in whom
alone perfection is.
4. HENRY, "The Holy Ghost hereby signifies that the Old Testament institutions were by
external carnal ordinances imposed upon them until the time of reformation, Heb_9:10. Their
imperfection lay in three things: - 1. Their nature. They were but external and carnal meats and
drinks, and divers washings. All these were bodily exercises, which profit little; they could only
satisfy the flesh, or at best sanctify to the purifying of the flesh. 2. They were not such as were
left indifferent to them to use or disuse, but they were imposed upon them by grievous corporal
punishments, and this was ordered on purpose to make them look more to the promised Seed,
and long more for him. 3. These were never designed for a perpetuity, but only to continue till
the time of reformation, till the better things provided for them were actually bestowed upon
them. Gospel times are and should be times of reformation, - of clearer light as to all things
necessary to be known, - of greater love, inducing us to bear ill-will to none, but good-will to all,
and to have complacency in all that are like God, - of greater liberty and freedom both of spirit
and speech - and of a more holy living according to the rule of the gospel. We have far greater
advantages under the gospel than they had under the law; and either we must be better or we
shall be worse. A conversation becoming the gospel is an excellent way of living; nothing mean,
foolish, vain, or servile becomes the gospel.
5. JAMISON, "Which - sacrifices.
stood - consisted in [Alford]; or, “have attached to them” only things which appertain to the
use of foods, etc. The rites of meats, etc., go side by side with the sacrifices [Tholuck and Wahl];
compare Col_2:16.
drinks — (Lev_10:9; Lev_11:4). Usage subsequently to the law added many observances as to
meats and drinks.
washings — (Exo_29:4).
and carnal ordinances — One oldest manuscript, Syriac and Coptic, omit “and.” “Carnal
ordinances” stand in apposition to “sacrifices” (Heb_9:9). Carnal (outward, affecting only the
flesh) is opposed to spiritual. Contrast “flesh” with “conscience” (Heb_9:13, Heb_9:14).
imposed — as a burden (Act_15:10, Act_15:28) continually pressing heavy.
until the time of reformation — Greek, “the season of rectification,” when the reality
should supersede the type (Heb_8:8-12). Compare “better,” Heb_9:23.
6. CALVIN, "Until the time of reformation, etc. Here he alludes to the prophecy
of Jeremiah. (Jeremiah 31:31.) [145] The new covenant succeeded the old
as a reformation. He expressly mentions meats and drinks, and other
things of minor importance, because by these trifling observances a
more certain opinion may be formed how far short was the Law of the
perfection of the Gospel.

104. The Blood of Christ
11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things
that are already here, he went through the greater and
more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is
to say, not a part of this creation.
1. BARNES, "But Christ being come - Now that the Messiah has come, a more perfect
system is introduced by which the conscience may be made free from guilt.
An high priest of good things to come - see Heb_10:1. The apostle having described the
tabernacle, and shown wherein it was defective in regard to the real wants of sinners, proceeds
now to describe the Christian system, and to show how that met the real condition of man, and
especially how it was adapted to remove sin from the soul. The phrase “high priest of good
things to come,” seems to refer to those “good things” which belonged to the dispensation that
was to come; that is, the dispensation under the Messiah. The Jews anticipated great blessings
in that time. They looked forward to better things than they enjoyed under the old dispensation.
They expected more signal proofs of the divine favor; a clearer knowledge of the way of pardon;
and more eminent spiritual enjoyments. Of these, the apostle says that Christ, who had come,
was now the high priest. It was he by whom they were procured; and the time had actually
arrived when they might enjoy the long-anticipated good things under the Messiah.
By a greater and more perfect tabernacle - The meaning is, that Christ officiated as
high priest in a much more magnificent and perfect temple than either the tabernacle or the
temple under the old dispensation. He performed the great functions of his priestly office - the
sprinkling of the blood of the atonement - in heaven itself, of which the most holy place in the
tabernacle was but the emblem. The Jewish high priest entered the sanctuary made with hands
to minister before God; Christ entered into heaven itself. The word “by” here - διᆭ dia - means
probably through, and the idea is, that Christ passed through a more perfect tabernacle on his
way to the mercy-seat in heaven than the Jewish high priest did when he passed through the
outer tabernacle Heb_9:2 and through the veil into the most holy place. Probably the idea in the
mind of the writer was that of the Saviour passing through the “visible heavens” above us, to
which the veil, dividing the holy from the most holy place in the temple, bore some resemblance.
Many, however, have understood the word “tabernacle” here as denoting the “body of Christ”
(see Grotius and Bloomfield in loc.); and according to this the idea is, that Christ, by means of
his own body and blood offered as a sacrifice, entered into the most holy place in heaven. But it
seems to me that the whole scope of the passage requires us to understand it of the more perfect
temple in heaven where Christ performs his ministry, and of which the tabernacle of the
Hebrews was but the emblem. Christ did not belong to the tribe of Levi; he was not an high
priest of the order of Aaron; he did not enter the holy place on earth, but he entered the heavens,
and perfects the work of his ministry there.
Not made with hands - A phrase that properly describes heaven as being prepared by God
himself; see notes on 2Co_5:1.
Not of this building - Greek “of this “creation” - κτίσεως ktiseos. The meaning is, that the
place where he officiates is not made by human power and art, but is the work of God. The

105. object is to show that his ministry is altogether more perfect than what could be rendered by a
Jewish priest, and performed in a temple which could not have been reared by human skill and
power.
2. CLARKE, "But Christ being come a high priest of good things - I think this and
the succeeding verses not happily translated: indeed, the division of them has led to a wrong
translation; therefore they must be taken together, thus: But the Christ, the high priest of those
good things (or services) which were to come, through a greater and more perfect tabernacle,
not made with hands, that is, not of the same workmanship, entered once for all into the
sanctuary; having obtained eternal redemption for us, not by the blood of goats and calves, but
by his own blood, Heb_9:13. For if the blood of Goats, and bulls, and calves, and a heifer’s ashes,
sprinkled on the unclean, sanctifieth to the cleansing of the flesh, (Heb_9:14), how much more
shall the blood of Christ, who, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God,
cleanse your consciences from dead works, in order to worship (or that ye may worship) the
living God?
In the above translation I have added, in Heb_9:13, τραγων, of goats, on the authority of
ABDE, three others, the Syriac, the Arabic of Erpen, Coptic, Vulgate, two copies of the Itala, and
Theodoret. And I have rendered εις το λατρευειν, (Heb_9:14), In Order to worship, or That Ye
May worship; for this is the meaning of these particles εις το in many parts of the New
Testament. I shall now make a few observations on some of the principal expressions.
High priest of good things - Or services, to come, των µελλοντων αγαθων. He is the High
Priest of Christianity; he officiates in the behalf of all mankind; for by him are all the prayers,
praises, and services of mankind offered to God; and he ever appears in the presence of God for
us.
A greater and more perfect tabernacle - This appears to mean our Lord’s human nature.
That, in which dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, was fitly typified by the tabernacle
and temple, in both of which the majesty of God dwelt.
Not made with hands - Though our Lord’s body was a perfect human body, yet it did not
come in the way of natural generation; his miraculous conception will sufficiently justify the
expressions used here by the apostle.
3. GILL, "But Christ being come an high priest,.... Christ is come, as appears from the
cessation of civil government among the Jews, which was not to be till Shiloh came; from the
destruction of the second temple, into which the Messiah was to come, and did; from the
expiration of Daniel's weeks, at which he was to appear, and be cut off; from the coming of John
the Baptist, his forerunner, and from the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles, and the calling
and conversion of them, and the effusion of the Spirit upon them: and he is come an high priest;
he was called to be one, and was constituted as such in the council and covenant of peace; and
he agreed to do the work of one; he was typified by the high priest under the law; and he came as
such into this world, and has done the work of an high priest, by offering himself a sacrifice for
sin, and by his entrance into the holiest of all, with his own blood: and he is come an high priest
of good things to come; such as peace, reconciliation, and atonement, a justifying righteousness,
pardon of sin, eternal life and salvation, which the law was a shadow and figure of; and which
under the former dispensation were to come, as to the actual impetration of them by Christ; who
is called the high priest of them, to distinguish him from the high priests under the law, who

106. could not bring in these good things, nor make the comers to them and to their offerings perfect;
but Christ is the author and administrator of them; and these things are owing to the
performance of his priestly office; and such rob Christ of his glory, as a priest, who ascribe these
good things to their own merits, or the merits of others: and the way in which he is come is,
by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not
of this building; meaning the human body of Christ, which was greater than tabernacle of
Moses; not in bulk and quantity, but in value, worth, and dignity; and was more perfect than
that, that being only an example, figure, shadow, and type, this being the antitype, the sum and
substance of that; and by it things and persons are brought to perfection, which could not be, in
and by that; and this is a tabernacle which God pitched, and not man; which was reared up
without the help, of man: Christ was not begotten by man, but was conceived in the womb of a
virgin, under the power of the Holy Ghost; he came not into the world in the way of ordinary
generation, but in a supernatural manner; and so his human body is a tabernacle, not of the
common building, or creation, as the word may be rendered, as other human bodies are.
4. HENRY, "The Holy Ghost signifies to us hereby that we never make the right use of types
but when we apply them to the antitype; and, whenever we do so, it will be very evident that the
antitype (as in reason it should) greatly excels the type, which is the main drift and design of all
that is said. And, as he writes to those who believed that Christ had come and that Jesus was the
Christ, so he very justly infers that he is infinitely above all legal high priests (Heb_9:11,
Heb_9:12), and he illustrates it very fully. For,
1. Christ is a high priest of good things to come, by which may be understood, (1.) All the good
things that were to come during the Old Testament, and now have come under the New. All the
spiritual and eternal blessings the Old Testament saints had in their day and under their
dispensation were owing to the Messiah to come, on whom they believed. The Old Testament set
forth in shadows what was to come; the New Testament is the accomplishment of the Old. (2.)
All the good things yet to come and to be enjoyed in a gospel state, when the promises and
prophecies made to the gospel church in the latter days shall be accomplished; all these depend
upon Christ and his priesthood, and shall be fulfilled. (3.) Of all the good things to come in the
heavenly state, which will perfect both the Testaments; as the state of glory will perfect the state
of grace, this state will be in a much higher sense the perfection of the New Testament than the
New Testament was the perfection of the Old. Observe, All things past, present, and to come,
were, and are, founded upon, and flowing fRom. the priestly office of Christ.
2. Christ is a high priest by a greater and more perfect tabernacle (Heb_9:11), a tabernacle
not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building, but his own body, or rather human
nature, conceived by the Holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed virgin. This was a new fabric, a
new order of building, infinitely superior to all earthly structures, not excepting the tabernacle of
the temple itself.
3. Christ, our high priest, has entered into heaven, not as their high priest entered into the
holiest, with the blood of bulls and of goats, but by his own blood, typified by theirs, and
infinitely more precious. And this,
4. Not for one year only, which showed the imperfection of that priesthood, that it did but
typically obtain a year's reprieve or pardon. But our high priest entered into heaven once for all,
and has obtained not a yearly respite, but eternal redemption, and so needs not to make an
annual entrance. In each of the types there was something that showed it was a type, and
resembled the antitype, and something that showed it was but a type, and fell short of the
antitype, and therefore ought by no means to be set up in competition with the antitype.
5. JAMISON, "But — in contrast to “could not make ... perfect” (Heb_9:9).

107. Christ — The Messiah, of whom all the prophets foretold; not “Jesus” here. From whom the
“reformation” (Heb_9:10), or rectification, emanates, which frees from the yoke of carnal
ordinances, and which is being realized gradually now, and shall be perfectly in the
consummation of “the age (world) to come.” “Christ ... High Priest,” exactly answers to Lev_4:5,
“the priest that is anointed.”
being come an, etc. — rather, “having come forward (compare Heb_10:7, a different Greek
word, picturesquely presenting Him before us) as High Priest.” The Levitical priests must
therefore retire. Just as on the day of atonement, no work was done, no sacrifice was offered, or
priest was allowed to be in the tabernacle while the high priest went into the holiest place to
make atonement (Lev_16:17, Lev_16:29). So not our righteousness, nor any other priest’s
sacrifice, but Christ alone atones; and as the high priest before offering incense had on common
garments of a priest, but after it wore his holy garments of “glory and beauty” (Exo_28:2,
Exo_28:40) in entering the holiest, so Christ entered the heavenly holiest in His glorified body.
good things to come — Greek, “the good things to come,” Heb_10:1; “better promises,”
(Heb_8:6; the “eternal inheritance,” Heb_9:15; 1Pe_1:4; the “things hoped for,” Heb_11:1).
by a ... tabernacle — joined with “He entered.” Translate, “Through the ... tabernacle” (of
which we know) [Alford]. As the Jewish high priest passed through the anterior tabernacle into
the holiest place, so Christ passed through heaven into the inner abode of the unseen and
unapproachable God. Thus, “the tabernacle” here is the heavens through which He passed (see
on Heb_4:14). But “the tabernacle” is also the glorified body of Christ (see on Heb_8:2), “not of
this building” (not of the mere natural “creation, but of the spiritual and heavenly, the new
creation”), the Head of the mystical body, the Church. Through this glorified body He passes
into the heavenly holiest place (Heb_9:24), the immaterial, unapproachable presence of God,
where He intercedes for us. His glorified body, as the meeting place of God and all Christ’s
redeemed, and the angels, answers to the heavens through which He passed, and passes. His
body is opposed to the tabernacle, as His blood to the blood of goats, etc.
greater — as contrasted with the small dimensions of the earthly anterior tabernacle.
more perfect — effective in giving pardon, peace, sanctification, and access to closest
communion with God (compare Heb_9:9; Heb_10:1).
not made with hands — but by the Lord Himself (Heb_8:2).
5B. STEDMAN, ). 9:11. In equating the human spirit with heaven, I do not mean to imply that
the human spirit in which the Spirit of Christ dwells is equivalent with all that Scripture includes in the
word heaven. I simply mean that there is an obvious correspondence between the two and that in the
spirit we are in some sense living in heaven now (Eph 2:6).
Moses saw, of course, the whole person---body, soul and spirit (Gen 2:7; 1 Thess 5:23). This would
explain the threefold division of the tabernacle. The outer court corresponds to the body; the Holy
Place, to the soul; and the Most Holy Place, to the spirit. Even the furniture of the tabernacle
corresponds to elements in us. For instance, the furniture of the Holy Place was the lampstand, the
table of bread, and the altar of incense. If the Holy Place is the soul of man, these pieces would
suggest the mind (lampstand), the emotions (bread as a symbol of social intercourse) and the will
(altar of incense, which reflects the choices God approves). But Moses was shown that though God
dwells in the human spirit and makes us different from the animals, we have no access to him because
of sin. We are described as "dead in trespasses and sins" and said to be "alienated from God,"
"without God in the world." But Paul states the great truth of Hebrews 9 in these words "But now in
Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ" (Eph
2:13).

108. 5C. COFFMAN, “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
manscripts; 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. F7
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. F8
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.

109. 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.), F9
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." F10
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."
6. CALVIN, "But Christ being come, etc. He now sets before us the reality of
the things under the Law, that it may turn our eyes from them to
itself; for he who believes that the things then shadowed forth under
the Law have been really found in Christ, will no longer cleave to the
shadows, but will embrace the substance and the genuine reality.
But the particulars of the comparison between Christ and the ancient
high priest, ought to be carefully noticed. He had said that the high
priest alone entered the sanctuary once a year with blood to expiate
sins. Christ is in this life the ancient high priests for he alone
possesses the dignity and the office of a high priest; but he differs
from him in this respect, that he brings with him eternal blessings
which secure a perpetuity to his priesthood. Secondly, there is this
likeness between the ancient high priest and ours, that both entered
the holy of holies through the sanctuary; but they differ in this, that
Christ alone entered into heaven through the temple of his own body.
That the holy of holies was once every year opened to the high priest
to make the appointed expiation -- this obscurely prefigured the one
true sacrifice of Christ. To enter once then was common to both, but to
the earthly it was every year, while it was to the heavenly forever,
even to the end of the world. The offering of blood was common to both;
but there was a great difference as to the blood; for Christ offered,
not the blood of beasts, but his own blood. Expiation was common to
both; but that according to the Law, as it was inefficacious, was
repeated every year; but the expiation made by Christ is always

110. effectual and is the cause of eternal salvation to us. Thus, there is
great importance almost in every word. Some render the words, "But
Christ standing by," or asking; but the meaning of the Apostle is not
thus expressed; for he intimates that when the Levitical priests had
for the prefixed time performed their office, Christ came in their
place, according to what we found in the seventh chapter. [147]
Of good things to come, etc. Take these for eternal things; for as
mellon kairos, time to come, is set in opposition to the present to
enestekoti; so future blessings are to the present. The meaning is,
that we are led by Christ's priesthood into the celestial kingdom of
God, and that we are made partakers of spiritual righteousness and of
eternal life, so that it is not right to desire anything better. Christ
alone, then, has that by which he can retain and satisfy us in himself.
[148]
By a greater and more perfect tabernacle, etc. Though this passage is
variously explained, yet I have no doubt but that he means the body of
Christ; for as there was formerly an access for the Levitical high
priest to the holy of holies through the sanctuary, so Christ through
his own body entered into the glory of heaven; for as he had put on our
flesh and in it suffered, he obtained for himself this privilege, that
he should appear before God as a Mediator for us. In the first place,
the word sanctuary is fitly and suitably applied to the body of Christ,
for it is the temple in which the whole majesty of God dwells. He is
further said to have made a way for us by his body to ascend into
heaven, because in that body he consecrated himself to God, he became
in it sanctified to be our true righteousness, he prepared himself in
it to offer a sacrifice; in a word, he made himself in it of no
reputation, and suffered the death of the cross; therefore, the Father
highly exalted him and gave him a name above every name, that every
knee should bow to him. (Philippians 2:8-10.) He then entered into
heaven through his own body, because on this account it is that he now
sits at the Father's right hand; he for this reason intercedes for us
in heaven, because he had put on our flesh, and consecrated it as a
temple to God the Father, and in it sanctified himself to obtain for us
an eternal righteousness, having made an expiation for our sins. [149]
It may however seem strange, that he denies the body of Christ to be of
this building; for doubtless he proceeded from the seed of Abraham, and
was liable to sufferings and to death. To this I reply, that he speaks
not here of his material body, or of what belongs to the body as such,
but of the spiritual efficacy which emanates from it to us. For as far
as Christ's flesh is quickening, and is a heavenly food to nourish
souls, as far as his blood is a spiritual drink and has a cleansing
power, we are not to imagine anything earthly or material as being in

111. them. And then we must remember that this is said in allusion to the
ancient tabernacle, which was made of wood, brass, skins, silver, and
gold, which were all dead things; but the power of God made the flesh
of Christ to be a living and spiritual temple.
7. BI, “The Lord Jesus as a High Priest
God never destroys for the sake of destroying, nor pulls down the old to leave a void in its place.
The Divine method is to overcome evil by uplifting that which is good, and to remove the good,
after it has served its purpose, by introducing that which is more excellent.
I. Jesus Christ as a High Priest much excels in the GREATNESS AND PERFECTNESS OF THE
TABERNACLE. Jesus Christ entered “by a greater and more perfect tabernacle.” By the
tabernacle here we are to understand, say some, the expanse above, the stellar firmament,
through which Christ entered into the holy place. But the ablest commentators understand by it
the body of Jesus Christ. And the author of this Epistle furnishes a strong ground for that
interpretation in Heb_10:20. A hint to the same purport is to be found in the text, for it is
averred of this tabernacle that “it is not of this building,” that is, not of this creation. The
humanity of the Lord Jesus is the beginning of a new creation. But it is not the visible body in
itself that is intended by the tabernacle, as it is not the visible blood in itself that is meant by the
“blood”; but human nature in the person of the Son of God, in which the Word has “tabernacled”
among us, and by which He is the “beginning of the creation of God.”
II. Jesus Christ as a High Priest much excels in the GREATNESS OF THE HOLY PLACE. There
was no need for a special word in this place to denote the greatness of the holy place, as it
follows naturally from the preceding words. “Christ, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle,
entered in once into the holy place”; and if the tabernacle were “greater and more perfect,” it
follows of necessity that the holy place was so likewise. The same thought belongs to both. Christ
entered through the tabernacle of His untainted humanity to a corresponding holy place; He
went into the holy place of the eternal world; He entered into the holy of holies of the universe.
But God never does anything hurriedly; so Christ, after receiving the keys of the invisible world,
took forty days to appear to His disciples at different times, in order to assure their minds that
all power is given unto Him in heaven and on earth, and that a clear way, which no one may
block, is opened unto them from earth to heaven. Then He ascended, in quiet unruffled glory, to
take His proper place as the minister of the sanctuary, and sat down on the right hand of
Majesty on high. There is not a higher place in all heaven than where Jesus Christ is to-day in
our nature. He is as high as God Himself could raise Him.
III. Christ as a high priest excels in the PRECIOUSNESS OF THE BLOOD. The worth of the
blood was owing to the worth of the life, and the worth of the life to the greatness of the Person.
When a man is martyred, the soul does not die; nevertheless, the soul imparts worth to the life
of the body, and confers immeasurably more importance on the death of a man than the death
of a beast. But notwithstanding the greatness of the difference between man and an animal, it is
only a difference of degrees. Man is but a creature as well as the animal. But the difference
between man and God is as great as that between a creature and the Creator. And yet, in the
person of Jesus Christ, the Creator has come into closer union with humanity than that between
our souls and our bodies. Though, perhaps, it be not proper to say that God died, yet the one
who died was God. The infinite Person of the Son was in the obedience; the infinite Person was
in the suffering; the infinite Person was in the death: imparting boundless worth and merit to
all, so as to be a “propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole
world.” Because the Person is so great, the preciousness of the blood has filled all heaven, and
has converted the throne of Majesty into a mercy-seat.

112. IV. Jesus Christ excels as High Priest in the PERFECTNESS OF HIS WORK. The Jewish high
priest was obliged to go to the holy place every year, because there was no effectual
reconciliation; only the surface was a little washed, only temporal forgiveness was administered.
But the sacrifice of Christ effected a thorough reconciliation—there is no need for a second
attempt.
V. Jesus Christ excels as High Priest in the NATURE AND EFFICACY OF THE REDEMPTION.
He obtained eternal redemption or deliverance for us. This follows necessarily from the other
part of the verse. As He went to the holy place in heaven, it must be that the redemption is
eternal. There is not a higher court ever to reverse the verdict. The acquittal is from the throne of
God Himself. (Lewis Edwards, D. D.)
The superiority of Christ’s priesthood:
The object of right worship has ever been the same, but its mode has undergone two great
changes:
1. From no sacrifice to many sacrifices.
2. From many sacrifices to one—from the many mediations of
Moses to the one mediation of Christ.
I. CHRIST INTRODUCED HIGHER THINGS.
1. A higher system of teaching. More spiritual, clear, and diffusive.
2. A higher form of worship. More simple, personal, attractive, and free.
3. A higher state of union. Marked by broader views, higher aims, more expansive
benevolence.
II. CHRIST OFFICIATES IN A HIGHER SANCTUARY.
1. Heaven is a more extensive sanctuary. “Greater.” For all kindreds, &c.
2. A more Divine sanctuary. “Not made with hands.”
III. CHRIST PRESENTED A HIGHER SACRIFICE. His own life—the most precious of all.
IV. CHRIST ACCOMPLISHED A HIGHER WORK. “Redemption” of forfeited rights and
paralysed powers; redemption from guilt and spiritual influence of sin; impartation of pardon
and purity to the condemned and corrupt; and all this eternal. (Homilist.)
The priesthood of Christ
I. CONSIDER THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST IN RELATION TO THE PAST—AND THE
RETROSPECTIVE EFFICACY OF HIS WORK IN BEHALF OF THE WORSHIPPERS OF A
FORMER AGE. To this view we are led by the whole course of the apostle’s argument in this
chapter, and the various allusions to sacrificial rites contained in the Old Testament. The
doctrine of propitiation is the harmonising doctrine of the whole Bible. It makes the narrative of
patriarchal, Levitical, and prophetical life one history. The men who lived under these
dispensations all felt their need of mercy, and with certain differences of outward circumstances,
all sought for mercy in the same way. The fundamental articles of religion have been the same in
every age of the world. Such is the antiquity of Christ’s priesthood. It reaches far back through
all the religious economies under which fallen man has ever lived. Christ is that true

113. Melchisedec who has neither beginning of life nor end of days. “He has obtained for us,” says the
apostle, “eternal redemption.” Rolling ages impair not the earnestness of His intercession, nor
multitudinous offences the worth of the plea He brings. “He ever liveth.” “He abideth a priest
continually.”
II. CONSIDER THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST AS FULFILLING AND ANSWERING THE
INDISPENSABLE CONDITIONS IN ORDER TO THE COVENANT OF FORGIVENESS BEING
PERFECT. The priest, in the Levitical sense, is a public person who deals with an offended God
in the name of the guilty, by offering an appointed sacrifice for sin upon the altar.
1. According to this definition, we see that in order to the desired reconciliation three things
are necessary—a priest, a sacrifice, and an altar.
(1) First, there must be a priest. There was no priest under the covenant with Adam
upright, for this reason, there was no sacrifice. Man then was dealt with as innocent; he
could come to God of himself. But the covenant with man fallen was altogether different;
this was entered into with persons in a different moral state, and made for a totally
different end. It was a covenant with sinners, with persons who had offended God and
cast the words of the first covenant behind them. Hence the design of this new compact
was to make peace, to reinstate man in the friendship of his Maker, and to repair the
dishonour done to the Divine government. But to give effect to this covenant a mediating
party was necessary. The prophet Zechariah expresses this necessity in that fine passage,
“He shall be a priest upon His throne, and the council of peace shall be between them
both.”
(2) But, secondly, there must in effecting this sublime negotiation be also a sacrifice.
“Gather My sons together to Me,” says the Psalmist, “those that have made a covenant
with Me by sacrifice.” The importance of this element of the priesthood will appear to
you, if you consider that if a sinless mediator had been all that was required, there seems
nothing to forbid that our high priest should have been an angel. But this appended
condition of sacrifice, the irrevocable necessity of bloodshed in order to remitted guilt
made the mediation of angels impossible; for are they not all spirits?—therefore, having
no blood to shed. Hence, while there was blood to be shed which shut out angels, it must
be sinless blood which shut out men. And yet the dictates of natural equity would suggest
that the blood should be that of a man, and that he who should bear the penalties of a
broken covenant should be of the same nature with the covenant breaker.
(3) And then, again, in order to a perfect priesthood there must of necessity be an
altar—an altar too of such infinite worth and preciousness that it should both sanctify
and enhance the gift. Now, considering that the sacrifice offered up was nothing else
than the human nature of Christ, consisting of a body rent, broken, and a pure, holy soul,
agonised, bruised, smitten of God and afflicted, the only thing there could be to sanctify a
gift in itself so sanctified is the Divine nature with which this holy sacrifice was united,
2. Here, then, we have satisfactorily provided for the three pre-requisites for a perfect
priesthood, namely, a priest, a sacrifice, and an altar. It should not lessen our confidence in
this gospel priesthood, to find that all its constituent elements centre in the same glorious
person—that the victim to be sacrificed is Christ, that the altar on which it is laid is Christ,
that the priest who is to slay and offer and carry the blood into the most holy place is Christ;
for if all these several parts be necessary to a perfect priesthood, how would it have vitiated
the whole oblation to have encountered at any stage of its preparation a mixture of infirmity.
If, for instance, a perfect sacrifice had been offered on a blemished altar, or if though the
altar were unblemished, the offering must pass through the hands of a frail and erring priest.
No, Christ will have none to lay hands on His work, none to join Him in it. The wine-press of

114. humiliation shall be trodden by Himself alone. “By one offering He hath perfected for ever
them that are sanctified.”
III. CONSIDER THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST IN RELATION TO ITS MORAL EFFICACY.
The apostle, as you perceive, takes as the basis of his comparison the two principal functions of
the priestly office under the old economy, namely, the oblation, or the offering of the sacrifice in
a part outside the precincts of the temple, and the presentation, or the carrying of blood once a
year into the holy of holies to he exhibited and sprinkled upon the mercy-seat. Our Lord
suffering without the camp exactly corresponds to the first feature of this Levitical system,
whilst His appearing for us continually in the presence of God as plainly answers to the second.
And in both, argues the apostle, you cannot fail to discern the measureless superiority of the
gospel priesthood. Look at the character of the sacrifice itself. “Not by the blood of goats, but by
His own blood.” Two verses further he puts the contrast still more strongly—“If the blood of
bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling,” &c. The sacrifices of the law had a
double use; the one real, and the other typical; the one ceremonial, and the other spiritual; the
one actual, as conferring upon the worshipper certain church rights and privileges, the other
contingent as requiring a definite act of faith in the promise of the Mediator. Well, the
ceremonial efficiency of this it was no part of the apostle’s argument to disparage. While the
ancient ritual remained it served useful ends. They did sanctify to the purifying of the flesh. They
enabled the excommunicated to join in public worship again, reinstated the sinner into the
privileges and immunities of church fellowship, and as types reminded the worshipper of that
higher union and fellowship from which he had become excluded by sin, and restoration to
which would evidently require a nobler sacrifice and better blood; for how could the blood of
bulls and goats ever take away sin? Hence the force of the apostle’s distinction in the text just
quoted, between purifying the flesh and purging the conscience. Temple blood may admit you to
temple worship, and an outward cleansing may get you an outward interest in the covenant; but
if you aspire to peace, to a realised fellowship with God, to anything of the tranquillity or joy of
service—in a word, if you desire to get a cleansing and a peace within, any rest for the smitten
troubled heart, you will feel that something better than blood of bulls and goats is needed, and
with adoring thankfulness will look up to that great High Priest, who, carrying with Him His
own all-cleansing blood, hath entered into the most holy place. And this is the second point of
contrast on which the apostle insists—on Christ passed into the holy place, that is into heaven,
as distinguished from that part of the tabernacle which was within the veil. As one of the
patterns of things in the heavens, this inner part into which the priest went was guarded with
zealous sacredness. The people were not allowed to follow even with their eyes whilst he was in
the act of passing through the veil. Directly he had passed the curtains were drawn as close as
possible that even the most curious might not see what was going on within; whilst enshrined in
the most sacred part of the holy place itself were preserved time-honoured pledges of the
presence and protecting power of God. But Christ, argues the apostle, has passed into a place far
holier than your holiest. The curtain which separates Him from human sight is the cloud spread
before the eternal throne. Ask we a pledge of the Divine protection—a pledge that He will not
forget His holy covenant—a pledge that no penitent and believing sinners are ever to be turned
away—we have it in the fact that our Melchisedec stands before the throne, that He combines in
Himself all the functions of an everlasting priesthood, being Himself the tabernacle of witness,
Himself the altar of sacrifice, Himself the Priest to offer, Himself the Lamb to die; and in the
exercise of this priesthood He stands in the midst of the throne, exhibits the sacrificial blood
openly that God may see it and pardon, that angels may see it and wonder, that redeemed ones
may see it and adore, that the trembling sinner may see it and trust. Consider then, says the
apostle, consider Him in all the dignity of His nature, in all the perfections of His sacrifice, in all
the mightiness of His pleadings before the everlasting throne, and you will feel that you have, as
you ought to have, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, you have, and should
feel that you should have, a merciful and faithful High Priest over the house of God, so that if

115. you will draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, in humble but joyous hope, in
childlike and tranquil confidence, in and through the merits of the crucified, you shall both
obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need: (D. Moore, M. A.)
The high priesthood of Christ
The high priesthood of our Lord is a matter full of important consequences to us relating to His
sacred Person and His work in our redemption. Of course the term is one derived from the
Jewish ceremonial worship: and it is to the books in which that worship is ordained, that we
must look for its explanation. I find the first ordinances respecting the high priest’s office in
Exo_28:1-43. There Moses is ordered to take to him Aaron his brother, and with many
prescribed ceremonies and adornments to consecrate him as priest; i.e., as afterwards
abundantly appears, as chief, or high priest. We need not follow these prescribed ceremonies,
further than to cull out from them the general character of each portion of them, as applying to
the office of our blessed Lord. As they were to be without blemish or deformity, as they were to
be clothed in holy garments for glory and beauty, as they were not to defile themselves with any
uncleanness, so was He, as the very first condition of this His office, holy, harmless, undefiled,
and separate from sinners. They, these priests of Israel, were like their brethren in outward
form, but, unlike them, were not to be made unclean by things which rendered others unclean.
And so Christ took on Him the likeness of sinful flesh, but did not become sinful: He partook of
the infirmities of our nature to the full, but did not partake of its pollution. But, when the high
priest is thus constituted and apparelled, what is the first matter of which we read, belonging to
his special duty and office? Precious stones are to be taken, two sets: upon both the sets are to be
graven the names of the tribes of the children of Israel: once, on two onyx stones, which are to
be worn on the shoulders of the high priest: the other time, on twelve separate stones, whose
names are specially detailed; and this last tablet is to be worn on his heart. We have here a
double-feature of the office. The high priest is judge; the high priest is intercessor. And this too
belongs to the reality of the high priesthood of Christ. All judgment is committed to Him. And
thus judging, thus ordering His Church, He bears His people written on His heart. He can never
forget them, for He represents them, and He loves them as Himself, and He bears them on
Himself as a memorial before God continually. The next point which requires our notice is
important, as introducing a whole class of duties which mainly constituted the high priest’s
office (see Exo_28:36-38). Here we have the high priest in a new character: that of one bearing
the iniquity of others, who are made acceptable to God by that his hearing of their iniquity. The
plate of pure gold—the “Holiness of the Lord” inscribed on it—must of course be taken as
indicating, in connection with his bearing their iniquity, the acceptance before God, as holy, of
the people of the Lord whom he represents. It will be enough at this part to say, that our blessed
Redeemer here also fulfils the reality of which these high priests were a shadow. Not only does
He carry His people engraven on His heart before God, but He presents them to God as holiness
to Him, by virtue of His having Himself borne their iniquities.
Take the apostle’s testimony to this in Eph_5:25. Then come, in the book of Exodus, the rites
and ceremonies of the consecration, or setting apart of the priests to minister before God.
Concerning these, one remark before all is suggested to us by the writer of this Epistle to the
Hebrews:—viz., that no man took the office unto himself, but only those who were selected and
consecrated by God, as was Aaron. The very name of the Lord by which we call Him, Messiah or
Christ, signifies the Anointed. But we now come to that which was by far the larger portion of
the duty of the priests of old, and of which we shall have much to say as concerning our great
High Priest Himself. “Every high priest,” says our Epistle, “is ordained to offer gifts and
sacrifices.” This was the priest’s especial office; to minister for the people in the things
concerning God, and to offer sacrifices for sin. Now almost every particular is explained by the

116. writer of this Epistle to have immediate reference to our Lord: and of those not so mentioned
several are so obvious as to be unmistakable by any intelligent Christian.
1. First of all why all these ordinances of sacrifice at all? Why all this taking away of animal
life, and this sprinkling of blood, ceremonies of a kind painful and revolting now to our
minds and habits? All these sacrifices, thus divinely appointed, were ordained to signify
greater and spiritual truths: “the Holy Ghost thus signifying,” as we have it written here: God
having a matter to make known in His good time, which should be no type or shadow, but
His own very truth: and that matter being, the death and satisfaction of our blessed Lord,
His eternal Son. But let us follow this out, considering Him as our High Priest. “If He be a
Priest,” says the writer of our epistle, “He must of necessity have something to offer.” And
here we have God’s High Priest, whom He hath consecrated and sent into the world. By what
offering shall He propitiate God towards those His people? Who shall shed the blood that
may sprinkle our holy things and make them pure? Who shall go far, far away, bearing upon
his head the iniquities of us all? Hear His answer—“Lo I come to do Thy will, O God.” He is
spotless. He unites in Himself our whole nature: strike Him, and we are stricken: let His
sacrifice be accepted, and we are cleared from guilt: let that blood of His be carried into the
holy place of God’s presence in heaven, and an atonement is made for us. There are several
ether, apparently minor, but really not less interesting points of comparison, between the
high priests of old and our blessed High Priest and Redeemer. Their sacrifices were
imperfect, and of no intrinsic value or avail. They therefore needed renewing continually,
day by day. But His is perfect and all-sufficing. It needs only to be believed in, and applied by
the obedience of living faith to the heart., Again: those high priests, by reason of their being
mortal men, were continually renewed from time to time. None of them was permanent:
they came as shadows, and so departed: theirs was no abiding priesthood, to which all men
might look for atonement and acceptance. But the Son of God abideth for ever: “He dieth no
more, death hath no more dominion over Him: in that He died, He died for sin once: in that
He liveth, He liveth unto God.” For ever does the virtue of His blood endure: for ever does
His holy priesthood avail. There is with Him no wearing out, no forgetting, no failure of
earnestness, no vacillating affection, no exhausted pleading. He is for all, He is over all, He is
sufficient for all, He cares for all. So then, once more—inasmuch as they were human high
priests, they were fellows with their brethren. Was then theirs any advantage over Him? In
that land of Judaea, under the shade of those walls of Jerusalem, you might perchance see
the high priest holding conference with the erring or the penitent: might see the venerable
man of God, on whose brow was His anointing, with the hand of the young offender laid in
his, pleading eye to eye till the tears chased one another down the cheek glowing with
shame: and then might trace the judge of Israel watching, reminding, building up the
returning sinner in holiness. Shall we envy them? Were they better off than we? Ah no! The
sympathising high priest on earth, what is he to the sympathising High Priest in heaven?
Few indeed, and interrupted could be such interviews: narrow indeed and partial such
sympathies. But our High Priest is not one who lacks leisure or power to receive all who
come to Him at any time. It is for us, for the least among us, that the eternal Son of God is
thus constituted a High Priest: for our sins, for our wants, for our daily feeling, and obeying,
and approaching to God. It is to purge our conscience from dead works to serve the living
God, that His holy blood was offered: to make us pure, upright, clear in purpose, and like to
our God and Father. (Dean Alford.)
Good things brought by Christ:
Here we may see what they be that in truth deserve the name and title of good things, Not silver
and gold, houses and lands. Christ at His coming brought none of these, yet He brought good

117. things with Him, namely, remission of sins, faith and other graces of the Spirit. These indeed are
worthy the name of good things. Forasmuch as our Priest bringeth such excellent things with
Him, let Him be most welcome to us. David said of Ahimaaz, “he is a good man, and bringeth
good tidings.” Much more let us say of Christ our High Priest, “He is a good man, He bringeth
good tidings,” that by the blood of His Cross He hath reconciled us to God the Father, hath
obtained a general pardon for all our sins, He hath prepared a place for us in His own kingdom;
therefore let us receive Him with all joy. (W. Jones, D. D.)
The body likened to a tabernacle
As Christ’s body is a tabernacle, so is 2Pe_1:14; 2Co_5:1).
1. The name of a tent or tabernacle imports warfare. Soldiers have their tents.
2. There is a between a tabernacle and a house; for a house is made of solid matter, wood,
stone, &c. A tent is made of old clothes patched together. So our bodies are not made of the
sun, of the stars, of the firmament, but of the earth, which is a brittle thing.
3. A tent is weak, easily pierced through. So our body. A knife, a pin may prick it, a fly may
choke it. A tent is quickly up and quickly down. So is our body. We come suddenly, and we
are gone again in the turning of an hand, though it be the body of a wise Solomon, of a
strong Samson, a fair Absolom, yet remember it is but a tent or tabernacle. The time is at
hand, says St. Peter, when I must lay down this tabernacle. Now as the tabernacle in the time
of the Law was kept neat, clean, and handsome, it might not be polluted with anything. So
let us keep our bodies from all pollutions. (W. Jones, D. D.)
He entered in once
Our Lord’s entrance within the veil
I. THE SACRIFICE OF HIS ENTERING.
1. Unique.
2. Substitutionary.
3. Personal.
4. Of transcendent value.
II. THE MANNER OF HIS ENTRANCE.
1. Once.
2. Only once.
3. In the fullest and most complete manner.
III. THE OBJECTS OF HIS ENTRANCE.
1. He made atonement within the veil.
2. He enters there to appear for us.
3. He is there to perfect us.
4. He has entered in once that He may abide there.
5. He is there to admit us to the same nearness.

118. IV. THE GLORIES OF THIS ENTRANCE. “Having obtained eternal redemption.” When Aaron
went in with the blood of bulls and goats, he had not obtained “eternal redemption”; he had only
obtained a symbolic and temporary purification for the people, and that was all.
1. Our Lord enters in because His work is all done.
2. That which He had obtained was redemption. We do not fully know what the word “
redemption “ means, for we were born free; but if we could go back a few years, and mix with
the negro slaves of America, they could have told us what redemption meant, if ever, by any
good fortune, any one of them was able to buy his freedom. You that have groaned under the
tyranny of sin, you know what redemption means in its spiritual sense, and you prize the
ransom by which you have been made free. We are to-day redeemed from our far-off
condition in reference to the Lord God: we do not now stand outside the veil. This is a great
redemption. We are also delivered from guilt, for “He hath washed us from our sins in His
own blood.” Also from the power of sin, its curse, its bondage, &c.
3. And now think of the nature of that redemption; for here is a grand point. He has
obtained “eternal” redemption. If you carefully study the verses around the text, you will find
the word “ eternal” three times: there is “eternal redemption,” the “eternal Spirit,” and an
“eternal inheritance.” Why is redemption said to be eternal? He has obtained eternal
redemption—a redemption which entered into eternal consideration. Redemption isthe drift
of creation, and the hinge of providence.
4. When our Lord entered in, He had by His sacrifice also dealt with eternal things, and not
with matters of merely passing importance. Sin, death, hell—these are not temporary things:
the atonement deals with these, and hence it is an eternal redemption.
5. Now, look forward into eternity. Behold the vista which has no end! Eternal redemption
covers all the peril of this mortal life, and every danger beyond, if such there be. (C. H.
Spurgeon.)
The entrance of Christ into heaven
I. The entrance of our Lord Jesus Christ as our High Priest into heaven, to appear in the
presence of God for us, and to save us thereby unto the uttermost, was a thing so great and
glorious, As COULD NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED BUT BY HIS OWN BLOOD. No other sacrifice
was sufficient unto this end.
II. Whatever difficulties lay in the way of Christ, as unto the accomplishment and perfection of
the work of our redemption, HE WOULD NOW DECLINE THEM, NOR DESIST FROM HIS
UNDERTAKING, WHATEVER IT COST HIM.
III. THERE WAS A HOLY PLACE MEET TO RECEIVE THE LORD CHRIST, AFTER THE
SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF; and a suitable reception for such a person, after so glorious a
performance.
IV. If the Lord Christ entered not into the holy place until he had finished His work, WE MAY
NOT EXPECT AN ENTRANCE THEREINTO UNTIL WE HAVE FINISHED OURS. He fainted
not until all was finished; and it is our duty to arm ourselves with the same mind.
V. IT MUST BE A GLORIOUS EFFECT WHICH HAD SO GLORIOUS A CAUSE; and so it was,
even “eternal redemption.”
VI. THE NATURE OF OUR REDEMPTION, THE WAY OF ITS PROCUREMENT, WITH THE
DUTIES REQUIRED OF US WITH RESPECT THEREUNTO, ARE GREATLY TO RE
CONSIDERED BY US. (John Owen, D. D.)

119. Christ’s work on earth and in heaven
I. HIS WORK ON EARTH. “He obtained eternal redemption for us.”
1. The blessing in question.
(1) Redemption by our Lord Jesus Christ, or deliverance from the sentence of
condemnation.
(2) Redemption by power from the dominion of sin, from the vassalage of the world, and
from the power of darkness.
2. The extensiveness of the attribute. “Eternal redemption.”
(1) Completely.
(2) Absolutely.
(3) Emphatically.
3. Eternal in its procuring.
4. Eternity of the benefit.
(1) For men, in distinction from angels.
(2) For believers.
II. His APPEARANCE IN HEAVEN.
1. Where did He enter? “Into the holy place”—heaven.
2. With what did He enter? “With His own blood.
3. How often did He enter? “Once.” (W. Jay.)
Having obtained eternal redemption for us
Redemption by Christ:
Calvary is the central point to which, as all former ages, with a vague expectancy, had looked
onward, so all subsequent ages look back, with hearts filled to the full with gratitude and love. In
the redemption there won for us there are various points for us to notice.
1. Firstly, it was by His own blood that Christ entered in once into the holy place. It was a
sacrifice centring absolutely in Himself. Christ trod the winepress alone. His own blood was
shed for the salvation of the world; none other could mingle with it.
2. And Christ entered once into the holy place. We should mark this well. His death was the
single act of One who need never repeat it.
3. And the redemption thus won is as eternal for us as it is for Him who won it. This side of
the grave we have to struggle, to do battle as soldiers of the Cross, “not as though we had
already attained, either were already perfect” (Php_3:12). But we may have sure and certain
hope of eternal life, and in this confidence may go forth conquering and to conquer. The
redemption, as far as Christ’s work is concerned, has been made; and if we will but take the
crown from Him who offers it to us, no power of earth, nor of hell, shall be able to wrest it
from our keeping without our consent.

120. 4. And, lastly, Christ has obtained this eternal redemption for us. Without boastfulness or
self-assertion, we may lay stress on that word, and remember that in it Christ associates with
Himself the whole human family. We look back down the stream of time which has flowed
on to the present. We think of all the lives that have been for a longer or shorter period borne
upon that mighty river—lives known and unknown, a blessing or a curse to their generation.
In all of these redemption has played its part. It has had an influence and a power on those
lives, whether it has been accepted or not. It has been either their hope and encouragement,
or it has been a solemn witness rising up to protest against every deed of sin and shame.
Man cannot live in the knowledge and light of immortality won for him by Christ, and be the
same as if he knew it not. For that knowledge he must be either infinitely the better or
infinitely the worse. And, for our great and endless comfort, let us never forget that the
redemption is offered to each individual soul; for Christ by His death made each one of us
His own, having paid the price which our salvation costs. And that act of surpassing love has
been performed as though no other soul but thine required this tremendous sacrifice. Will
you, then, reject so great salvation? will you refuse the eternal redemption Christ has
obtained for you? (C. W. H. Kenrick, M. A.)
Our redemption
I. Our redemption from captivity is effected by our Lord in two ways: BY PRICE AND BY
POWER. By price paid into the hand of God as the moral Governor; by power exercised on
Satan, sin, the world, and death.
II. Our Lord obtained eternal redemption for us BY SACRIFICE. This implies reconciliation
(Col_1:20-22; 2Co_5:18-21).
III. Our Lord obtained eternal redemption for us BY SUFFERING PUNISHMENT. This refers
to law and justice. (James Kidd, D. D.)
Redemption:
Once when I was revisiting my native village, I was going to a neighbouring town to preach, and
saw a young man coming from a house with a waggon, in which was seated an old woman. I felt
interested in them, and asked my companion who they were. I was told to look at the adjoining
meadow and pasture, and at the great barns that were on the farm, as well as a good house.
“Well,” said my companion, “that young man’s father drank that all up, and left his wife in the
poorhouse. The young man went away and worked until he had got money enough to redeem
that farm, and now it is his own, and he is taking his mother to church.” That is an illustration of
redemption. In the first Adam we have lost all, but the second Adam has redeemed everything
by His death. (D. L. Moody.)
Release
In the debtors’ prison at Sheffield, Howard found a cutler plying his trade who was in jail for
thirty cents. The fees of the court amounted to over a pound, and this sum he had been for
several years trying to earn. In another jail there was a man with a wife and five children,
confined for court-fees of about five shillings, and jailer’s fees of about eightpence. This man was
confined in the same apartment as robbers. All such debtors—and they were numerous in
England—Howard released by paying their debts. (Cycloaedia of Biography.)

121. 8. MURRAY, THE OPENING UP OF THE HOLIEST. 11-12
IN studying the meaning of the Mosaic ritual, there are specially
four things, through which the Holy Spirit shadows forth to us
the mysteries of redemption, the good things to come of the new
dispensation that Israel was to look for. These are THE PRIEST,
THE SANCTUARY, THE BLOOD, and THE WAY INTO THE
HOLIEST. We have these four things here together. There is
Christ the High Priest of the good things to come, there is the
greater and more perfect tabernacle, there is His own blood,
and there is His entering in into the Holiest. As we apprehend
the power of these things, we shall know the meaning of His
having obtained eternal redemption. Let us hear what the
Holy Spirit speaks of the opening up the Holiest, and the
wonderful path in which that was effected.
The writer uses a very remarkable expression, Christ through
the greater and more perfect tabernacle, entered into the
Holiest. The two compartments of the sanctuary are the sym
bols of two states of life, two degrees of fellowship with God.
The Epistle teaches us that Christ knew this difference in His
own life experience, and, in entering into and opening up the
higher one for us, passed through the lower. He entered into
the Holiest through the greater and more perfect tabernacle,
through the experience of that spiritual reality of which the

122. tabernacle was the shadow. The Holiest is God s immediate
presence, the Holy Place a drawing nigh to God with a veil
between. The flesh, man s fallen nature in its weakness and its
exposure to all the consequences of sin, is the veil. Christ has
dedicated for us a new and living way through the veil, that
is to say, His flesh. When He came in the likeness of sinful
flesh, that life in flesh, with its liability to temptation, and its
weakness, with its possibility of suffering and death, with its life
of faith and prayer and tears, with its need of learning obedience
and being made perfect, with its subjection to the law and its
curse, was the Holy Place, the first tabernacle, through which He
had to pass to have the veil rent in His death, so to enter in and
appear before God. Christ lived with His people in the Old
Testament; He passed through the first tabernacle as a spiritual
experience in perfect reality ; it was only with His resurrection
and ascension the New Testament began.
Yes, Christ passed from the Holy Place into the Holiest of All.
When He died the veil was rent in twain ; the two compartments
were made one. The priest who was in the Holy Place could
see, could enter into the Holiest. All that was in the Holiest, the
light of God s presence between the cherubim, could shine
unhindered into the Holy Place. In Christ the veil of the flesh
was rent asunder and taken away. The free access to God was
opened up, not only as a thing of right and title in virtue

123. of our pardon, but as a thing of power and living reality. Ye
are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be the Spirit of Christ
dwelleth in you. When the veil was rent and Christ entered in,
the two abodes, what had been the dwelling of God, and what
had been the dwelling of the priests, were thrown into one.
The eyes and the hearts of men might freely and boldly look
up and rise up and greet their God and Father ; in Christ they
had their place before Him. All the light and love and holiness
of the Most Holy shone into the Holy Place. The Spirit of God,
as He was received by Christ from God the Father on His
ascension, passed down into the worshippers. The Pentecostal
gift brought down, from above, the higher life into which the
blessed Son had entered ; the Holy Spirit made the light and
love and holiness of the inner sanctuary not only a vision, a
revelation, but a possession and an experience.
The veil of the flesh has been rent ; Christ has entered once
for all, having obtained everlasting redemption ; the dwelling of
God and man has been thrown into one ; the Spirit of heaven has
been given to signify to us, and to give us the living experience,
that the way into the Holiest has been made manifest. Our
entering in, our dwelling in God s presence in the light and nearness
and holiness of the Most Holy, is a spiritual, a heavenly reality It
can only be apprehended by the tender, by the perfect conscience,
which the Holy Spirit gives to him who is willing to give up all

124. to be saved completely, by the perfect whose senses are exer
cised to discern good and evil. But to all who are willing to pass
through the rent veil of Christ s flesh, to die with Him as He
died, and live with Him as He lived, the Holy Spirit will show
it ; the way into the Holiest is opened up.
Christ having come, entered in once for all. Four thousand
years after man s loss of fellowship with God in paradise had to
pass. Fifteen hundred years the veil had to hang with its
solemn injunction not to draw near. Thirty-three years the Son
of God Himself had to live on this side of the veil. But at
length, once for all and for ever, the way was opened. Fear
not, O Christian, to whom these things appear too high, fear
not. Be thou faithful, through faith and longsuffering we
inherit the promises. Persevere in the faith of what Christ has
accomplished once for all. He entered in, the Second Adam, in
whom our life is, whose members we are. Persevere in the faith
of the infinite meaning of that great transaction. And to thee,
too, will come a day when, in thy experience, thou shalt enter,
and go out no more for ever.
1. This entering In and opening up of the Holiest was solely and entirely on our behalf, that
we might live and serve there. Therefore the practical part of the Epistle commences at once,
therefore, having boldness to enter into the Holiest, let us draw nigh. That is the summing up
of the whole Epistle. God is not content that we should serve Him with a veil between. Let us
know clearly which of the two positions we occupy as Christians within or still without the veil.

125. 2. "After I had lived for thirteen years in the Holy Place, seeking to serve God there, it
pleased Him, who dwelleth between the cherubim, to call me to pass through the veil, and to enter
the Holiest of All, through the blood of Jesus."
9. PINK, “In Hebrews 8:6 the apostle had affirmed, "He is the Mediator of a better
covenant." Such a declaration would raise a number of important issues which are here
anticipated and settled. Who is the High Priest of the new covenant? What is the tabernacle
wherein He administered His office? What are the particular services He performed,
answering to those which God appointed unto Aaron and His successors? Wherein do the
services of the new High Priest excel those of the Levitical? These were pressing questions,
and it was necessary for them to be Divinely answered, not only for the silencing of
objectors, but that the faith of believing Jews might be established. Thus, in Hebrews 9:11,
12 we have the actual ministry of Christ declared, in verses 13,14 the proofs that it was
"more excellent."
The 9th chapter of Hebrews contains a particular exemplification of this general
proposition: Christ is the substance of the Levitical shadows. The general proposition was
stated in Hebrews 8:1, 2: Christians have an High Priest who is a Minister of the true
tabernacle. Here in chapter 9 confirmation is given of what was pointed out at the close of
chapter 8, namely, that Christ’s bringing in of the new covenant did abrogate the old. In
exemplifying this fact mention is made in Hebrews 9:1-10 of sundry shadows of the law, in
verse 11 and onwards it is shown that the antitypical accomplishment of them was in and
by Jesus Christ. The contents of verses 1-10 may be reduced to two heads: ordinances of
Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary in which they were observed. In verses 11-28 the
Spirit magnifies the excellency of Christ’s priesthood by showing that He brought in what
the Aaronic rites were unable to secure (condensed from W. Gouge, 1650).
The contents of these verses which are now to be before us set forth the ministry of Christ
as "the Mediator of the new covenant." They describe His initial work as the High Priest of
His people. They set forth the inestimable value of His sacrifice, and what it procured. They
magnify His precious blood and the character of that redemption which was purchased
thereby. Each verse calls for a separate article, and every clause in them demands our
closest and most reverent attention. May the Spirit of God deign to open unto us something
of their blessed contents, and apply them in power to our hearts. We purposely cut down
our introductory comments that more space may be reserved for the exposition.
"But Christ being come an high priest of goods things to come, by a greater and more
perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the
blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood, He entered in once into the holy place,
having obtained eternal redemption for us" (verses 11, 12). "These words naturally call
attention to two things: The official character with which our Lord is invested, and the
ministry which He has performed in that official character. His official character: He is

126. ‘come an high priest of good things to come.’ His ministry in that official character: ‘He
has obtained eternal redemption for His people,’" (John Brown).
"But Christ being come an High Priest." The opening word emphasizes a contrast: the
legal high priest "could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the
conscience" (verse 9): "But Christ"—could. The title here given the Savior deserves
particular notice. He is referred to in a considerable variety of ways in this epistle, and
many different designations are there accorded Him. Each one is used with fine
discrimination, and the reader loses much by failing to distinguish the force of "Jesus,"
"Christ," "Jesus Christ," "our Lord," "The Son," etc. Here (and also in Hebrews 3:6, 14;
5:5; 6:1; 9:14, 24, 28; 11:26) it is "Christ," the Messiah (John 1:41), His official designation,
a term that means "The Anointed," see Psalm 2:2 and cf. Acts 4:26. Great emphasis is
placed by the Holy Spirit upon this title: "the Christ" (John 20:31), "that Christ" (John
6:69), "very Christ" (Acts 9:22), "The Lord’s Christ" (Luke 2:26), "The Christ of God"
(Luke 9:20).
"But Christ being come an High Priest." Under the name of the Messiah or Anointed One,
He had been promised unto Israel for many centuries, and now the accomplishment had
arrived. In a moment of doubt, His forerunner, in prison, sent unto Him asking, "Art Thou
He that should come?" (Matthew 11:3). Upon the fulfillment of God’s promise that He
would send the Messiah, give a perfect revelation of His will, and bring in "perfection," the
faith of the Jewish church was built. And now God’s Word was verified, the true Light
shone. The awaited One had come: "in the character in which He was promised, having
done all that it was promised He should do" (John Brown). Therefore does the Holy Spirit
here give the Redeemer His official, and distinctively Hebrew, title. "But Christ being
come" no doubt looks back, especially to Psalm 40:7.
"But Christ being come an High Priest." True, He came also as Prophet (Deut. 18:15, 18),
and as King (Matthew 2:2), but here the Holy Spirit especially emphasizes the sacerdotal
office of Christ, because it was in the exercise of that He offered Himself as a sacrifice unto
God. The words which we are now considering begin a new division of this Epistle, though
it is intimately related to what has gone before. In Hebrews 9:11–10:22 the Holy Spirit sets
before us the antitype of Leviticus 16, which records the work of Israel’s high priest on the
annual day of atonement. There we behold Aaron officiating both outside the veil and
within it. So the priestly functions of Christ fall into two great divisions, as they were
performed on earth and as they are now continued in heaven. Before our great High Priest
could enter the Holiest on high and there make intercession before God, He had first to
make an atonement for the sins of those He represented, which was accomplished in His
state of abjection here below, being consummated by His offering Himself a sacrifice unto
God: 7:27, 8:3, 9:26.
A priest is one who officiates in the name of others, who approaches to God in order to
make atonement for them by sacrifice. The design of his ministry is to render the Object of
their worship propitious, to avert His wrath from men, to procure their restoration to His
favor: see Leviticus 16. Thus, the work of the priest is mediatory. Since the fact of sin is a
cardinal one in the case of man, the function of a mediating priest for man must be mainly
expiatory and reconciling: Hebrews 8:3. It should serve as a most solemn warning unto all

127. today that, while the Jews believed their Messiah would be both a prophet and king, they
had no expectation of His also being priest, who should redeem sinners unto God. One who
should go forth in the terror of His power, subjugating the nations and restoring the
kingdom to Israel, appealed to their carnality; but for One to minister at the altar, employ
His interest with God on behalf of transgressors, draw near to the Divine Majesty in their
name, and mediate peace between them and an offended Creator, seems to have had no
place in their thoughts. Hence it is that the priesthood of Christ is given such a prominent
place in this epistle to the Hebrews.
"But Christ being come an High Priest." As to the time of His investiture with this office, it
was clearly co-incident to the general office of Mediator. At the same moment that God
appointed His Son "Mediator," He was constituted the Prophet, the Priest, and the
Potentate of His Church. Prospectively, that took place in the eternal councils of the blessed
Trinity, when in the "everlasting covenant" the Father appointed the Son and the Son
agreed to be the Mediator between Him and His people. Historically, the Son became the
Mediator at the moment of His incarnation: there is "one Mediator between God and men,
the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5); as soon as He was born, He was hailed as "Christ, the
Lord" (Luke 2:11). Formally, He was officially consecrated to this office at His baptism,
when He was "anointed (Christed) with the Holy Spirit and with power" (Acts 10:38).
"But Christ being come an High Priest," and this according to the eternal oath of the
Father, which "oath" was afterwards made known to the sons of men in time. This was
before us when we considered Hebrews 7:20-25. It was "by the word of the oath" that the
Son is consecrated to His priestly office (Heb. 7:28), the "oath" denoting God’s eternal
purpose and unchanging decree. In Psalm 2:7 we read that God said, "I will declare the
decree," and accordingly in Psalm 110:4 we are told, "The Lord hath sworn, and will not
repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek"—there it was openly
published. That God’s "oath" preceded Christ’s entrance upon and discharge of His
sacerdotal office is clear from Hebrews 7:20-25, otherwise the force of the apostle’s
reasoning there would be completely overthrown.
"But Christ being come an High Priest," otherwise He could not have "offered" Himself a
sacrifice to God. As we saw when pondering Hebrews 5:6,7, Christ was exercising His
sacerdotal functions in "the days of His flesh," i.e., the time of His humiliation. So too it
was as "a merciful and faithful High Priest" that Christ "made propitiation for the sins of
the people" (Heb. 2:17). The types foreshadowed the same thing, especially Leviticus 16.
Aaron was not constituted a priest by entering the holy of holies; he was such before, or
otherwise he could not have passed within the veil. Every passage which speaks of Christ’s
one oblation or His "offering" Himself once are conclusive as His being a priest on earth,
for that word "once" cannot possibly be understood of what He is now doing in heaven; it
must refer to His death as an historical fact, completed and finished here below: it is in
designed contrast from His continuous intercession which is based upon it. The priestly
sacrifice which He offered is emphatically described as co-incident with His death:
Hebrews 9:26. Any one of the common people could slay the sin-offering (Lev. 4:27-29), but
none save the priest could offer it to God (Lev. 4:30)! Thus, every verse which speaks of
Christ "offering" Himself to God emphasizes the priestly character of His sacrifice.

128. "An high priest of good things to come." The reference here is to that more excellent
dispensation which the Messiah was to inaugurate. Old Testament prophecy had
announced many blessings and privileges which He would bring in, and accordingly the
Jews had looked forward to better things than they had enjoyed under the old economy.
The apostle here announces that this time had actually arrived, that the promised blessings
had been procured by the High Priest of Christianity. As the result of Christ’s advent, life
and death, righteousness had been established, peace had been made, and a new and living
way opened, which gave access to the very presence of God. Different far were these
blessings from what the carnal Jews of Christ’s day desired. Of course the "good things to
come" are not to be restricted to those blessings which God’s people already enjoy, but
include as well those which yet await them. The "good things" are summed up in "grace
and glory," and are in contrast from "the wrath to come" (Matthew 3:7).
"By a greater and more perfect tabernacle." This repeats what was said in Hebrews 8:2.
The reference is to the human nature which the Son of God took unto Himself. "The Word
became flesh and (Greek) tabernacled among us" (John 1:14). Christ officiated in a much
more glorious habitation than any in which Aaron and his successors served. Most
appropriately was the humanity of the Savior called a "tabernacle" for "in Him dwelleth
all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9). Additional confirmation that the "greater
and more perfect tabernacle" here referred to Christ’s body, is supplied by Hebrews 10:20,
where the Holy Spirit again applies to Him the language of the Mosaic tabernacle and
shows that in the Lord Jesus is found the antitype—"through the veil, that is to say His
flesh."
"By a greater and more perfect tabernacle." There is both a comparison and a contrast
between the tent which Moses pitched and the human habitat in which the Son of God
abides: for the comparison we refer the reader to our comments upon Hebrews 8:2. The
contrast is first pointed by the word "greater," the Antitype far surpassing the type both in
dignity and worth. The humanity of Christ, in its conception, its framing, its gracious
endowments by the Holy Spirit, and particularly because of its union to and subsistence in
the divine person of the Son, was far more excellent and glorious than any earthly fabric
could be. "The human nature of Christ doth thus more excel the old tabernacle, than the
sun does the meanest star" (John Owen). Of old God declared, "I will make a man more
precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir" (Isa. 13:12)—a
prophecy which obviously had its fulfillment in the Man Christ Jesus.
"And more perfect tabernacle": this points the second contrast between the type and the
Antitype. As the word "greater" refers to the superior dignity and excellency of the
humanity of Christ over the materials which comprised the tabernacle of Moses, so the
"more perfect" respects its sacred use. The body of Christ was "more perfectly fitted and
suited unto the end of a tabernacle, both for the inhabitation of the divine nature, and the
means of exercising the sacerdotal office in making atonement for sin, than the other was.
So it is expressed in Hebrews 10:5, ‘Sacrifice and burnt-offering Thou wouldst not, but a
body hast Thou prepared Me.’ This was that which God accepted, wherewith He was well
pleased, when He rejected the other to that end" (John Owen). Probably the Holy Spirit
has used this expression "more perfect" here because it was also through Christ’s service
in this "tabernacle" that His people had been "perfected forever."

129. "Not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building." Further reference is here made
to the humanity of Christ by a double negation: "Not made with hands" is set in opposition
to the Jewish tabernacle, which was made by the hands of men (Ex. 36:1-8). The humanity
of Christ was the product of Him that hath no hands, even God Himself. Thus the
expression here is the same as "which the Lord pitched, and not man" in Hebrews 8:2.
Then how much "greater" was the "more perfect Tabernacle"! The temple of Solomon
was a most sumptuous and costly building, yet was it erected by human workmen, and
therefore was it an act of infinite condescension for the great God to dwell therein: "But
will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot
contain Thee; how much less this house that I have builded?" (1 Kings 8:27). Reference to
the supernatural humanity of Christ was made in Daniel 2:45: He was to be a "Stone," cut
out of the same quarry with us, yet "without hands," i.e., without the help of nature,
begotten by a man.
"That is to say, not of this building," words added to further define the preceding
clause—the term rendered "building" is translated "creature" in Hebrews 4:13. The
humanity of Christ belonged to a totally different order of things than ours: there is no
parallel in the whole range of creation. "Although the substance of His human nature was
of the same kind with ours, yet the production of it in the world, was such an act of Divine
power, as excels all other Divine operations whatever. Wherefore, God speaking of it, saith
‘The Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a Man’ (Jer.
31:22) or conceive Him without natural generation" (John Owen). How blessed to see that
God is so far from being confined to natural means for the effecting of His holy counsels,
that He can, when He pleases, dispense with all the ordinary methods and "laws" by which
He works, and act contrary to them.
Good things already here includes the goodness of God that is ever present. 10: refers to
the good things coming, for there is no end to the goodness of God toward His people. It is
the goodness of God that leads us to repentance says Paul.
10. Peter Wade, The riches of His goodness
"Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not
knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?" (Romans 2:4). Just think
about the statement this verse makes about God: "the riches of his goodness." How good is
God? God is totally good; the devil is totally bad. There is no badness in God and no
goodness in the devil. It would have been accurate enough just to say "his goodness,"
without adding any superlative. But to say "the riches of his goodness" shows the
greatness, the unlimited goodness that there is in our God and Father.
The verse concludes, "... not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to
repentance?" I was always taught that godly sorrow led to repentance, and that we had to
come down to the mourners bench or altar or the prayer room with weeping and tears. I
was taught that if we didn't feel sorry enough God would not bless us. How much better to
set before people the goodness of God: that God is a great God, and that He wants the best

130. for us. This verse speaks of the riches of His goodness or, as it is also translated, the wealth
of His goodness.
The people were despising the goodness of God because to them it seemed to be
exhaustless. He is talking here about people who are not sons and daughters of God. They
say, "God is always good and it doesn't matter what I do wrong: I'll just whisper a prayer
and everything will be taken care of." One translation reads: "Despiseth thou the goodness
of God because it seems exhaustless, it seems there is no end to it." Thank God "there is no
end to it" for the children of God. But God has certain conditions set in His Word
concerning the enjoyment of His goodness.
"For if by one man's offence death reigned by one: much more they which receive
abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ"
(Romans 5:17). Here it speaks of an abundance of grace; not just grace but an abundance,
something that is over and beyond. God's grace in itself is great, but for us to comprehend
it the superlative term "abundance of grace" is used. Those who receive the
over-and-above measure of grace shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. "The measureless
overflowings of the fountain of the grace of God" is a beautiful paraphrase of this
statement.
The grandeur of God
"For even that which was made more glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the
glory that excelleth" (I Corinthians 3:10). We have here something much better than the
old covenant. To many of the people in the Old Testament God was great and wonderful in
His dealings with them. To them it was glorious to know and to be able to worship God.
They were just servants; you and I are sons and daughters of God; we have the glory that
excelleth. If the old administration looked glorious, what is the new like? "The
overwhelming glory that exceeds and excels" is how the Amplified Bible translates this
wonderful verse. It is a glory that is transcendent, a glory that excelleth, and it only
transcends and excels because it is the glory of God.
In I Corinthians 4:7 Paul makes this strong statement: "We have this treasure in
earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us." The word
"excellency" is the same Greek word as "excelleth" in I Corinthians 3:10. We should know
that the grandeur, the exceeding greatness of the power in our lives is of God and not of us.
We are earthen vessels, but when we have God's power in our lives things really start to
move. It is God at work, but it is according to the power that worketh in us (Ephesians
3:20). The glory and praise for the results belong to God.
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to
the riches of his grace" (Ephesians 1:7). It is not just according to His grace but according
to the riches of His grace. Some modern translations have "out of the riches of His grace."
If the text said "out of" then God could run out! By the time you and I believe in the 20th
or 21st century, He might be running a little short. But the Word is clear when it states

131. "according to." Our remission of sins is on the same great level as the riches of His grace
which He lavishes on us. In the next verse it says, "Wherein he hath abounded toward us
[which He lavishes upon us] ..."
The riches of our inheritance
In verse 18 of this same chapter the word "riches" is used again: "The eyes of your
understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and
what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints." Not what is the inheritance of
the saints. That alone would be tremendous. But the Word says, "What [is] the riches of
the glory of his inheritance in the saints." How magnificent the inheritance is that God has
for you and me! Do you realize that you became a partaker of all this when you confessed
Jesus as Lord and believed in your heart that God raised Him from the dead? It may take a
lifetime to discover from the Word all that happened at that moment.
In verse 19 another tremendous statement is made, "And what is the exceeding
greatness of his power." Not just what is His power, or what is the greatness of His power,
but what is the exceeding greatness of His power. The superlative is used so we can
understand the immeasurable, unlimited, and surpassing greatness of the power of God.
God gives us an insight by saying it is "according to the working [the energy] of his mighty
power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his
own right hand in the heavenly places" (verses 19, 20). Stop and think: raising Christ from
the dead and setting Him at His own right hand was a tremendous event. But how great is
the power of God? Was that the very limit of His power? Everything about our God is
great.
Ephesians 2:4 is another example of the usage of the superlative in connection with
God: "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us." Why did it
not just say "God who is merciful." That would have blessed me mightily. But again to
bring out the tremendous magnitude of the mercy of God, the word "rich" is used.
"That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his
kindness toward us through [in] Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:7). Not just the riches of His
grace but the "exceeding" riches: that He might show how immense are the resources of
His grace.
The law of standard
"That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with
might [dunamis] by his Spirit in the inner man" (Ephesians 3:16). The rich treasury of His
glory is the standard by which we can measure His strengthening in the inner man.
Wouldn't it be great to take inventory of the riches of His glory? Any earthly language is
such a poor vehicle of expression to catalog the greatness of our God.
"But my God shall [absolutely] supply all your need according to his riches in glory by
[in] Christ Jesus (Philippians 4:19). "According to his riches" is the law of standard again,
comparing the supply of God for my need on the basis of the greatness of His riches in
glory.

132. The riches of the mystery
"To whom [the saints, verse 26] God would make known what is the riches of the glory of
this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Colossians
1:27). Notice again the tremendous expressiveness. It would be sufficient to say, "To whom
God would make known this mystery..." But to show how great is our God, and how great
is the mystery, the added superlative words are given: He says to make known "the riches
of the glory of this mystery." To a believer, it is "out of this world" to know it is "Christ in
you, the hope [expectation] of glory." And yet God always goes that one step more. There
are riches of the glory of this mystery that God would have us to know. Do you know them?
In Colossians 2:2, the same truth is stated regarding the mystery: "That their hearts
might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of
understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God." There are riches of the full
assurance of understanding the mystery, Christ in you. You and I may take a lifetime of
working the Word to find out and convince ourselves of how great is this mystery.
In Timothy, 2:14 Paul makes a statement about the grace of God coming into his life at
the new birth. "And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love
which is in Christ Jesus." The Amplified Bible says, "The grace of our Lord flowed out
super-abundantly and beyond measure for me." This is what Paul says happened to him at
the time of the new birth. He felt that wonderful grace of God that was lavished upon him.
The riches of our enjoyment
"Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in
uncertain riches, but in the living God who giveth us richly all things to enjoy" (Timothy
6:17). It would be great enough if He had given us all things to enjoy. But God does not just
give, He gives us richly all things to enjoy. What is the definition of a rich man? It is
somebody who has sufficient to supply everything he needs and have some left over. Our
God is a rich God. He is not only our God but our Father. The Word tells us we will share
with Christ the wonderful inheritance that our Father has for us. I am thankful that am in
the family. I am rich; I have all things to enjoy.
"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he
saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of [by] the Holy Ghost, Which he
shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour" (Titus 3: 5, 6). The new birth is
the subject of this section. The magnitude of God's gift to us is emphasized by the word
"abundantly." This is the same Greek word we have seen in many verses translated
"riches". God is not a respecter of persons, thus every believer has received richly of God's
gift.
"That in every thing ye are enriched in him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge"
(Corinthians 1:5). It is an established fact that the believer is "enriched." The word refers
to the act of being made rich. It is unfortunate that the word is used of the additives in a
loaf of bread, thus we speak of "enriched" bread. This is an extremely poor usage of the

133. word, since the baker is merely attempting to replace the nutritional value lost through
processing. Enriched in this verse is used to mean "over and above".
The riches of God's gift
We are made rich by God's gift of eternal life. "...The grace of God which is given you by
Jesus Christ" (verse 4). This gift is complete richness in everything in the realm in which it
is given, the spiritual realm. By the act of making us rich, God placed the responsibility in
our hands to manifest and enjoy this richness in our daily life.
"Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in
faith and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?" (James
2:5). The believer is described as one who is "rich in faith". It doesn't matter if he has only
one coin in his pocket or if he has ten million dollars in the bank. The great truth is that he
is spiritually rich. It is regrettable that some Christians have only one coin in their pocket.
This could be changed by right teaching, for the Word promises prosperity. But people
who are poor are still richer than anybody else in the world when they are enriched in Him.
In I Corinthians 8:9 there is another wonderful verse: "For ye know the grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye
through his poverty might be rich." There is no other way to understand this verse except
in the light of what God in Christ Jesus did for us on the cross of Calvary. Jesus Christ
being born as a baby could not save me. It was when He died on the cross and rose from
the dead that salvation became possible. Christ certainly manifested a spiritual richness in
His walk and teaching. His poverty was the voluntary laying down of His life to satisfy the
demands of eternal justice, in order that we might become rich. You became rich the
moment you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour, as we have already noted in
many verses.
"Being enriched in every thing to all bountifulness, which causeth through us
thanksgiving to God" (I Corinthians 9:11). The believer is not poverty stricken but
enriched in everything to all bountifulness. The "bountifulness" is our manifestation of the
richness of God's gift.
Sharing the superlatives
Having seen that God is a great God and that the riches of God have become ours, there is
one other aspect we need to examine. We are to share what we have with other people. I
Corinthians 1:12 states: "For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in
simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have
had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward."
In other passages Paul has taught us how great is the fellowship which we have with the
Father, how great are the riches of God's grace, and how we are enriched in Him.
However, in this verse the truth is expressed that we live this life and we are to express it
towards others. One aspect of the greatness of the Christ-life is the sharing of it with other
people. It is your privilege and responsibility to share the goodness of God and what He has
done for you. Even the writing of a letter or a quick telephone call will help in this regard.

134. Notice I Corinthians 2:4: "For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you
with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which have
more abundantly unto you."
"As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing,
and yet possessing all things" (I Corinthians 6:10). These statements are part of a list of
items concerning Paul's ministry. He knew that God was a great, big, wonderful God, and
had done great things for him. Therefore Paul went about making many rich; sharing
great, big, wonderful truths with other people.
The foundation of any real, vibrant Christian life has to be the fact of who God is. I
have shared with you some verses regarding this great truth. The riches of God became
available to us by the finished work of Christ. In conclusion, the words recorded in
Revelation 5:12 would be fitting words of praise from our lips also: "...Worthy is the Lamb
that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and
glory, and blessing."
11. Kate Kotfila
It flowed from 75 feet on high. The thick, billowing fabric was made from the richest
thread; blue, purple, scarlet and white thread, seamlessly woven together to create a cloth
of unprecedented beauty and value. It hung from four tall pillars of wood on fifty golden
clasps, each one hand hewn. It was an imposing barrier that the children of Israel had
learned to honor. Behind it, within the room it defined, The Master of the Universe, the
God of Israel, the Almighty God's presence was focused with laser-like intensity. This veil,
that separated the Most Holy Place from the rest of Israel, cried out, "Do Not Enter". Not
like a teenager, protecting her privacy who posts "Do Not Enter" signs on her bedroom
door. Not because like a father reading his morning paper, God didn't want to be
disturbed. But rather, the cry of the veil was like the cry of a mother stopping her child
from entering a busy street.
“In equating the human spirit with heaven, I do not mean to imply that the human spirit in
which the Spirit of Christ dwells is equivalent with all that Scripture includes in the word
heaven. I simply mean that there is an obvious correspondence between the two and that in
the spirit we are in some sense living in heaven now (Eph 2:6).
Moses saw, of course, the whole person---body, soul and spirit (Gen 2:7; 1 Thess 5:23). This
would explain the threefold division of the tabernacle. The outer court corresponds to the
body; the Holy Place, to the soul; and the Most Holy Place, to the spirit. Even the furniture
of the tabernacle corresponds to elements in us. For instance, the furniture of the Holy
Place was the lampstand, the table of bread, and the altar of incense. If the Holy Place is
the soul of man, these pieces would suggest the mind (lampstand), the emotions (bread as a
symbol of social intercourse) and the will (altar of incense, which reflects the choices God
approves). But Moses was shown that though God dwells in the human spirit and makes us

135. different from the animals, we have no access to him because of sin. We are described as
"dead in trespasses and sins" and said to be "alienated from God," "without God in the
world." But Paul states the great truth of Hebrews 9 in these words "But now in Christ
Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ"
(Eph 2:13).”
12. The "Executable Outlines" Series, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 1999
The Superior Sanctuary (9:11-28)
INTRODUCTION
1. In the current section of "The Epistle To The Hebrews", the focus
is on the superiority of the New Covenant which provides...
a. Better promises - He 8:7-13
b. A better sanctuary - He 9:1-28
c. A better sacrifice - He 10:1-18
2. Our previous study considered "The Earthly Sanctuary" of the Old
Covenant, that tabernacle which...
a. Served as copy and shadow of the heavenly things - He 9:9; 8:5
b. Involved fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation
- He 9:10
...and was therefore limited in its ability to provide what man
truly needed! - He 9:9b
3. In the second half of the ninth chapter, we are now introduced to
"The Heavenly Sanctuary" of the New Covenant...
a. The true tabernacle in which Christ is a minister - He 8:2
b. The true tabernacle "which the Lord erected, and not man" - He

136. 8:2
[As such it is "The Superior Sanctuary", which becomes apparent as we
make our way through the rest of the ninth chapter...]
I. IT IS HEAVENLY (11,24)
A. A GREATER AND MORE PERFECT TABERNACLE...
1. A tabernacle "not made with hands"
2. A tabernacle "not of this creation"
-- Where then is this tabernacle? Look ahead to verse 24...
B. IN HEAVEN ITSELF...
1. Christ has not entered the earthly tabernacle "made with
hands"
2. It is "into heaven itself" that Christ has entered!
3. He now appears "in the presence of God"
-- Therefore "The Superior Sanctuary" is none other than heaven,
where God dwells!
[In this heavenly sanctuary Christ serves as "High Priest of the good
things to come". The "good things" likely includes the promises of
Jer 31:31-34, especially the one pertaining to forgiveness of sin, for
the author explains how with "The Superior Sanctuary"...]

137. II. ITS MINISTRY EFFECTIVELY DEALS WITH SIN (12-15)
A. ETERNAL REDEMPTION IS PROVIDED (12)
1. Christ entered the "Most Holy Place" (heaven)
a. Just as the high priest entered the Most Holy Place in the
earthly sanctuary
b. With these two major differences:
1) Jesus took not the blood of goats and calves, but His
own blood
2) Jesus entered "once for all", not once a year
2. With His blood, He "obtained eternal redemption"
a. This is why He does not need to offer His blood every year
- cf. He 10:10-12
b. But His redemption is "eternal" in another sense, as seen
later in verse 15
B. THE CONSCIENCE IS PURGED OF SIN (13-14)
1. The blood of animals was able to purify the flesh of an
unclean person
2. But the blood of Christ is able to purge the conscience from
dead works (i.e., sin) to serve the living God
a. The animal sacrifices could not do this - He 9:9-10; 10:1-2
b. For the daily and annual sacrifices constantly reminded
them of sin - He 10:3
c. Therefore Christ not only removes the "legal" guilt of sin,

138. but also the "inward" (or emotional) guilt of sin!
C. THERE IS REDEMPTION FOR SINS UNDER THE FIRST COVENANT (15)
1. His role as Mediator of the New Covenant is not limited to
those who lived after it became of force
2. His death covers not only sinners since His death, but also
those who lived under the first covenant, who were called to
receive the promise of eternal inheritance!
-- In providing atonement for those before and after His death,
Jesus has truly "obtained eternal redemption"
[The service rendered by its High Priest certainly makes the "heavenly
sanctuary" a superior one!
As one contemplates the meaning of Christ's death in its relation to
the heavenly sanctuary, there is much to consider, and the author
proceeds to explain further why...]
III. ITS MINISTRY NECESSITATED A COSTLY SACRIFICE (16-22)
A. TO INITIATE A NEW TESTAMENT (16-17)
1. A testament, or will, requires the death of the one who makes
it
2. It does not become of force until the testator dies
-- The New Covenant with its heavenly sanctuary is like a

139. testament, requiring Jesus' death for it to become of force
B. TO DEDICATE A NEW COVENANT (18-23)
1. Consider what was done with the first covenant...
a. It was dedicated with the blood of calves and goats
b. Its tabernacle and furniture were purified with the
sprinkling of such blood
2. Should the new covenant require any less?
a. The first covenant contained only "copies of the things in
the heavens"
b. Therefore the heavenly things required purification by
"better sacrifices" (i.e., Jesus' own blood)
c. Exactly what is meant by "heavenly things" is unclear
1) Some point to passages like Co 1:20, where even "things
in heaven" are reconciled to God by Jesus' blood
2) Some believe it has reference to the church, of which
the Holy Place in the earthly tabernacle was typical
3) B. W. Johnson comments: "By the heavenly things are
meant all of which the tabernacle was typical. The holy
place was a type of the church, which is cleansed with
the blood of Christ. Perhaps, too, there is a reference
to the redeemed church above, in the heavens, which
eternally praises him who cleansed it with his blood."
(The People's New Testament)

140. [It was the "better sacrifices" (i.e., Jesus' blood) that initiated the
new covenant and made the heavenly sanctuary superior to the earthly
one. More will be said about Christ's sacrifice in chapter ten, but we
finally note concerning "The Superior Sanctuary" that...]
IV. ITS MINISTRY IS FINAL AND COMPLETE (24-28)
A. CHRIST IS NOW IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD FOR US...
1. No longer is a high priest serving in a tabernacle "made with
hands"
2. No longer is one serving in what was only a "copy"
-- In God's presence, Jesus is ministering as High Priest in that
which is the "true" holy place!
B. HE ONLY NEEDED TO OFFER HIMSELF ONCE...
1. The all-sufficiency of His sacrifice is seen that He only
needed to offer Himself once
a. Otherwise, He would have needed to "suffer often from the
foundation of the world"
b. Like the high priests of old, who entered the Most Holy
Place each year
2. Therefore, at the "end of the ages", He came to put away sin
once for all!
a. The phrase "end of the ages" is equivalent to the "last
days" - He 1:2

141. b. I.e., the final period of the world's history - 1 Co 10:11;
1 Pe 1:20
3. Just as man dies only once, so Jesus needed to be offered for
sin only once
C. WHEN HE COMES AGAIN, IT WILL BE FOR SALVATION, NOT SIN...
1. With His first coming, He was primarily the "sin-bearer"
a. He came "to bear the sins of many"
b. Which He did by dying on the cross for our sins - 1 Pe 2:24
2. His second coming will be "apart from sin"
a. To bring salvation (from the wrath of God to come - Ro 5:9)
b. To those who eagerly await for Him - cf. 1 Th 1:9-10
CONCLUSION
1. How is the sanctuary of the New Covenant superior?
a. By virtue of its nature: heavenly, not physical
b. By virtue of its ministry:
1) Dealing effectively with sin
2) Providing complete and final deliverance
2. Why should we be interested in the ministry of "The Superior
Sanctuary"?
a. Because death is our appointed lot (unless Christ comes first)
- He 9:27

142. b. And then comes the judgment - cf. 2 Co 5:10
-- The ministry of Christ prepares us for that coming judgment!
3. Are you prepared to stand before the judgment seat of Christ?
a. Preparation involves obedience, for Jesus is "the author of
eternal salvation to all who obey Him" - He 5:9
b. Preparation involves allowing the blood of Christ to "purge your
conscience from dead works to serve the living God" - He 9:14
Through obedience to the precious gospel of Christ, we can "eagerly
wait for Him", knowing that for us He is coming to bring salvation
and not condemnation! - cf. 1 Th 1:10
13. DREW WORTHEN, “The High Priests of Israel entered the Inner Sanctuary once a
year; a sanctuary made with the hands of men. A sanctuary which symbolized the presence
of God who dwells in no earthly tabernacle. ACT 17:24 "The God who made the world and
everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands.
25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives
all men life and breath and everything else."
ACT 7:48 "However, the Most High does not live in houses made by men. As the prophet
says:
49 "'Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build
for me? says the Lord. Or where will my resting place be?"
The Son of God left His throne of glory and fulfilled His anointed role as our Redeemer. In
fact when our writer uses the word Christ here in our text in Hebrews he uses the word
Christos in the Greek which is translated "anointed".
Our Lord was anointed to be our High Priest. And since He did not come to dwell in
tabernacles made by men we see that He ...... "went through the greater and more perfect
tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. (HEB 9:11)

143. If it's not a part of this creation then it is not temporal in nature. Therefore, if it's eternal in
nature, the results are eternal as well. And so the life which He gives issues from His very
life which is eternal. This is our hope. This is our life in Him.
14. MACLAREN, “THE PRIEST IN THE HOLY PLACE
Heb_9:11-14, Heb_9:24-28
SPACE forbids attempting full treatment of these pregnant verses. We can only sum up
generally their teaching on the priesthood of Jesus.
I. Christ, as the high priest of the world, offers Himself. Obviously verse 14 refers
to Christ’s sacrificial death, and in verse 26 His ‘sacrifice of Himself’ is equivalent
to His ‘having suffered.’
The contention that the priestly office of Jesus begins with His entrance into the presence of
God is set aside by the plain teaching of this passage, which regards His death as the beginning
of His priestly work. What, then, are the characteristics of that offering, according to this
Writer? The point dwelt on most emphatically is that He is both priest and sacrifice. That great
thought opens a wide field of meditation, for adoring thankfulness and love. It implies the
voluntariness of His death. No necessity bound Him to the Cross. Not the nails, but His, love;
fastened Him there. Himself He would not save, because others He would save. The offering was
‘through the Eternal Spirit,’ the divine personality in Himself, which as it were, took the knife
and slew the human life. That sacrifice was ‘without blemish,’ fulfilling in perfect moral purity
the prescriptions of the ceremonial law, which but clothe in outward form the universal
consciousness that nothing stained or faulty is worthy to be given to God. What are the blessings
brought to us by that wondrous self-sacrifice? They are stated most generally in verse 26 as the
putting away of sin, and again in verse 28 as being the bearing of the sins of many, and again in
verse 14 as cleansing conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Now the first of these
expressions includes the other two, and expresses the blessed truth that, by His death, Jesus has
made an end of sin, in all its shapes and powers, whether it is regarded as guilt or burden, or
taint and tendency paralysing and disabling. Sin is guilt, and Christ’s death deals with our past,
taking away the burden of condemnation. Thus verse 28 presents Him as bearing the sins of
many, as the scapegoat bore the sins of the congregation into a land not inhabited, as ‘the Lord
made to meet’ on the head of the Servant ‘the iniquities of us all.’ The best commentary on the
words here is, ‘He bare our sins in His own body on the tree.’ But sin has an effect in the future
as in the past, and the death of Christ deals with that, So verse 14 parallels it not only with the
sacrifice which made access to God possible, but with the ceremonial of the red heifer,’ by which
pollution from touching a corpse was removed. A conscience which has been in contact with
‘dead works’ (and all works which are not done from ‘the life’ are so) is unfit to serve God, as
well as lacking in wish to serve; and the only way to set it free from the nightmare which fetters
it is to touch it with ‘the blood,’ and then it will spring up to a waking life of glad service. ‘The
blood’ is shed to take away guilt; ‘the blood’ is the life, and, being shed in the death, it can be
transfused into our veins, and so will. cleanse us from all sin. Thus, in regard both to past and
future, sin is put away by the sacrifice of Himself. The completeness of His priestly work is
further attested by the fact, triumphantly dwelt on in the lesson, that it is done once for all, and
needs no repetition, and is incapable of repetition, while the world lasts.
II. Christ, as the high priest of the world, passes into heaven for us.

144. The priest’s office of old culminated in his entrance into the Holy of Holies, to present the blood
of sacrifice. Christ’s priesthood is completed by His ascension and heavenly intercession. We
necessarily attach local ideas to this, but the reality is deeper than all notions of place. The
passage speaks of Jesus as ‘entering into the holy place,’ and again as entering ‘heaven itself for
us.’ It also speaks of His having entered ‘through the greater and more perfect tabernacle,’ the
meaning of which phrase depends on the force attached to ‘through.’ If it is taken locally, the
meaning is as in chapter 4:14, that He has passed through the [lower] heavens to ‘heaven itself’;
if it is taken instrumentally (as in following clause), the meaning is that Jesus used the ‘greater
tabernacle’ in the discharge of His office of priest. The great truth underlying both the ascension
and the representations of this context is, as verse 24 puts it, that He appears ‘before the face of
God,’ and there carries on His work, preparing a place for us. Further. we note that Jesus, as
priest representing humanity, end being Himself man, can stand before the face of God, by
virtue of His sacrifice, in which man is reconciled to God. His sinless manhood needed no such
sacrifice, but, as our representative, He could not appear there without the blood of sacrifice.
That blood, as shed on earth, avails to ‘put away sin’; as presented in heaven, it avails ‘for us,’
being ever present before the divine eye, and influencing the divine dealings. That entrance is
the climax of the process by which He obtained ‘eternal redemption’ for us. Initial redemption is
obtained through His death, but the full, perfect unending deliverance from all sin and evil is
obtained, indeed, by His passing into the Holy Place above, but possessed in fact only when we
follow Him thither. We need Him who ‘became dead’ for pardon and cleansing; we need Him
who is ‘alive for evermore’ for present participation in His life and present sitting with Him in
the heavenly places, and for the ultimate and eternal entrance there, whence we shall go no
more out.
III. Christ, as the high priest of the world, will come forth from the holy place.
The ascension cannot end His connection with the world. It carries in itself the prophecy of a
return. ‘If I go,... I will come again.’ The high priest came forth to the people waiting for him, so
our High Priest will come. Men have to die, and ‘after death,’ not merely as following in time,
but as necessarily following in idea and fact, a judgment in which each man’s work shall be
infallibly estimated and manifested. Jesus has died ‘to bear the sins of many.’ There must follow
for Him, too, an estimate and manifestation of His work. What for others is a judgment,’ for
Him is manifestation of His sinlessness and saving power. He shall be seen, no longer stooping
under the weight of a world’s sins, but ‘apart from sir,’ He shall be seen ‘unto salvation,’ for the
vision will bring with it assimilation to His sinless likeness. He shall be thus seen by those that
wait for Him, looking through the shows of time to the far-off shining of His coming, and
meanwhile having their loins girt and their lamps burning.
12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and
calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all
by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.

145. 1. BARNES, "Neither by the blood of goats and calves - The Jewish sacrifice consisted
of the shedding of the blood of animals. On the great day of the atonement the high priest took
with him into the most holy place:
(1) The blood of a young bullock Lev_16:3, Lev_16:11, which is here called the blood of a
“calf,” which he offered for his own sin; and,
(2) The blood of a goat, as a sin-offering for others; Lev_16:9, Lev_16:15. It was “by,” or “by
means of” - διᆭ dia - blood thus sprinkled on the mercyseat, that the high priest sought
the forgiveness of his own sins and the sins of the people.
But by his own blood - That is, by his own blood shed for the remission of sins. The
meaning is, that it was in virtue of his own blood, or “by means” of that, that he sought the
pardon of his people. That blood was not shed for himself - for he had no sin - and consequently
there was a material difference between his offering and that of the Jewish high priest. The
difference related to such points as these.
(1) The offering which Christ made was wholly for others; that of the Jewish priest for himself
as well as for them.
(2) The blood offered by the Jewish priest was that of animals; that offered by the Saviour was
his own.
(3) That offered by the Jewish priest was only an emblem or type - for it could not take away
sin; that offered by Christ had a real efficacy, and removes transgression from the soul.
He entered into the holy place - Heaven. The meaning is, that as the Jewish high priest
bore the blood of the animal into the Holy of Holies, and sprinkled it there as the means of
expiation, so the offering which Christ has to make in heaven, or the consideration on which he
pleads for the pardon of his people, is the blood which he shed on Calvary. Having made the
atonement, he now pleads the merit of it as a “reason” why sinners should be saved. It is not of
course meant that he literally bore his own blood into heaven - as the high priest did the blood of
the bullock and the goat into the sanctuary; or that he literally “sprinkled” it on the mercy-seat
there, but that that blood, having been shed for sin, is now the ground of his pleading and
intercession for the pardon of sin - as the sprinkled blood of the Jewish sacrifice was the ground
of the pleading of the Jewish high priest for the pardon of himself and the people.
Having obtained eternal redemption for us - That is, by the shedding of his blood. On
the meaning of the word “redemption,” see notes on Gal_3:13. The redemption which the Lord
Jesus effected for his people is eternal. It will continue forever. It is not a temporary deliverance
leaving the redeemed in danger of falling into sin and ruin, but it makes salvation secure, and in
its effects extends through eternity. Who can estimate the extent of that love which purchased
for us “such” a redemption? Who can be sufficiently grateful that he is thus redeemed? The
doctrine in this verse is, that the blood of Christ is the means of redemption, or atones for sin. In
the following verses the apostle shows that it not only makes atonement for sin, but that it is the
means of sanctifying or purifying the soul.
2. CLARKE, "But by his own blood - Here the redemption of man is attributed to the
blood of Christ; and this blood is stated to be shed in a sacrificial way, precisely as the blood of
bulls, goats and calves was shed under the law.
Once - Once for all, εφαπαξ, in opposition to the annual entering of the high priest into the
holiest, with the blood of the annual victim.

146. The holy place - Or sanctuary, τα ᅋγιᇮ, signifies heaven, into which Jesus entered with his
own blood, as the high priest entered into the holy of holies with the blood of the victims which
he had sacrificed.
Eternal redemption - Αιωνιαν λυτρωσιν· A redemption price which should stand good for
ever, when once offered; and an endless redemption from sin, in reference to the pardon of
which, and reconciliation to God, there needs no other sacrifice: it is eternal in its merit and
efficacy.
3. GILL, "Neither by the blood of goats and calves,.... With which the high priest entered
into the holy place, within the vail, on the day of atonement, Lev_16:14 for Christ was not an
high priest of the order of Aaron, nor could the blood of these creatures take away sin, nor would
God accept of such sacrifices any longer:
but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place; which shows the truth of
his human nature, and the virtue of its blood, as in union with his divine Person; by which he
opened the way into the holiest of all, as the surety of his people, and gives them boldness and
liberty to follow him there; he carried his blood not in a basin, as the high priest carried the
blood of goats and calves, but in his veins; and by it, having been shed by him, he entered not
into the holy place made with hands, but into heaven itself; and that not every year, as the high
priest, but "once" for all, having done his work; or as follows,
having obtained eternal redemption; for us, from sin, Satan, the law, and death, to which
his people were in bondage, and which he obtained by paying a ransom price for them; which
was not corruptible things, as silver and gold but his precious, blood: in the original text it is,
"having found eternal redemption"; there seems to be an allusion to Job_33:24. This was what
was sought for long ago by the, Old Testament saints, who were wishing, waiting, and longing
for this salvation; it is a thing very precious and difficult to find; it is to be had nowhere but in
Christ, and when found in him, is matter of great joy to sensible sinners; God found it in him,
and found him to be a proper person to effect it; and Christ has found it by being the author of
it: this is called an eternal redemption, because it extends to the saints in all ages; backwards
and forwards; it includes eternal life and happiness; and such as are sharers in it shall never
perish, but shall be saved with an everlasting salvation; it is so called in opposition to the carnal
expiations of the high priests, and in distinction from temporal redemptions, deliverances, and
salvations. Remarkable is the paraphrase of Jonathan ben Uzziel on Gen_49:18.
"Jacob said, when he saw Gideon the son of Joash, and Samson the son of Manoah, who should
be redeemers; not for the redemption of Gideon am I waiting, nor for the redemption of Samson
am I looking, for their redemption is a temporal redemption; but for thy redemption am I
waiting and looking, O Lord, because thy redemption is ‫פורקן‬‫עלמין‬ , "an everlasting
redemption":''
another copy reads, for the redemption of Messiah the son of David; and to the same purpose is
the Jerusalem paraphrase on the place; in Talmudic language it would be called ‫פדייה‬‫עולמית‬ (x).
4. HENRY, " Christ, our high priest, has entered into heaven, not as their high priest entered
into the holiest, with the blood of bulls and of goats, but by his own blood, typified by theirs, and
infinitely more precious. And this,

147. 4. Not for one year only, which showed the imperfection of that priesthood, that it did but
typically obtain a year's reprieve or pardon. But our high priest entered into heaven once for all,
and has obtained not a yearly respite, but eternal redemption, and so needs not to make an
annual entrance. In each of the types there was something that showed it was a type, and
resembled the antitype, and something that showed it was but a type, and fell short of the
antitype, and therefore ought by no means to be set up in competition with the antitype.
5. JAMISON, "Neither — “Nor yet.”
by — “through”; as the means of His approach.
goats ... calves — not a bullock, such as the Levitical high priest offered for himself, and a
goat for the people, on the day of atonement (Lev_16:6, Lev_16:15), year by year, whence the
plural is used, goats ... calves. Besides the goat offered for the people the blood of which was
sprinkled before the mercy seat, the high priest led forth a second goat, namely, the scapegoat;
over it he confessed the people’s sins, putting them on the head of the goat, which was sent as
the sin-bearer into the wilderness out of sight, implying that the atonement effected by the goat
sin offering (of which the ceremony of the scapegoat is a part, and not distinct from the sin
offering) consisted in the transfer of the people’s sins on the goat, and their consequent removal
out of sight. The translation of sins on the victim usual in other expiatory sacrifices being
omitted in the case of the slain goat, but employed in the case of the goat sent away, proved the
two goats were regarded as one offering [Archbishop Magee]. Christ’s death is symbolized by the
slain goat; His resurrection to life by the living goat sent away. Modern Jews substitute in some
places a cock for the goat as an expiation, the sins of the offerers being transferred to the
entrails, and exposed on the housetop for the birds to carry out of sight, as the scapegoat did; the
Hebrew for “man” and “cock” being similar, gebher [Buxtorf].
by — “through,” as the means of His entrance; the key unlocking the heavenly Holy of Holies
to Him. The Greek is forcible, “through THE blood of His own” (compare Heb_9:23).
once — “once for all.”
having obtained — having thereby obtained; literally, “found for Himself,” as a thing of
insuperable difficulty to all save Divine Omnipotence, self-devoting zeal, and love, to find. The
access of Christ to the Father was arduous (Heb_5:7). None before had trodden the path.
eternal — The entrance of our Redeemer, once for all, into the heavenly holiest place, secures
eternal redemption to us; whereas the Jewish high priest’s entrance was repeated year by year,
and the effect temporary and partial, “On redemption,” compare Mat_20:28; Eph_1:7;
Col_1:14; 1Ti_2:5; Tit_2:14; 1Pe_1:19.
6. MURRAY, THE POWEB OF CHRIST S BLOOD TO OPEN THE HOLIEST. 12
IX. 12. But Christ, through his own blood, entered in once for all into
the Holy Place, having obtained eternal redemption.
Through His own blood. We have seen our great High Priest
on the throne of God, a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, in
the power of an endless life. When He rose from the dead and
ascended into heaven, it was according to that working of the
strength of His might, whereby God had raised Him from the
dead and set Him at His own right hand. He entered God s

148. presence as the living One who was dead, and behold, He lives
for evermore. And yet, strange to say, it was not enough that
He should present Himself at the gate of heaven as the con
queror of death and hell, and ask admission. He had to take
with Him His own blood, as it had been shed upon earth, as the
power by which alone, as the surety of sinners, He could claim
access to the presence of God. Through His own blood Christ
entered the Holiest of All.
And what does this word, His own blood, mean ? To Moses
God had said that He gave the blood upon the altar to be an
atonement, because the blood is the life. That is, the living
blood in the body is the life. And the shed blood? That
means death. More than that, it means an unnatural, a violent
death. There are only two ways in which this unnatural blood-
shedding comes : by malice or by justice. We have the two to
gether in the words : Whoso sheddeth mans blood, by man
shall his blood be shed. In the death of Christ the malice of
men and the righteousness of God met. He was slain, a sacri
fice to the evil passions of men, because He resisted unto blood,
striving against sin. He was slain, a sacrifice unto God, be
cause He was the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the
world. Death is inseparably connected with sin, and the curse
which God pronounced upon it. When Jesus, as the Second
Adam, tasted death for all ; when, in Gethsemane, He with strong
crying and tears besought His Father that the cup might pass
from Him; when on the cross He cried, My God! My God!
why hast thou forsaken Me ? He tasted death in all its bitter
ness, both as the terrible fruit of sin, the revelation of what sin
is in its very nature, and as the penalty God had attached to it.
He died, as Scripture says, the just for the unjust ; He bore our
sins ; His blood was shed for us ; He gave His life a ransom
for many. And the word " blood " in this Epistle includes all that
is meant by the death of Christ ; the blood is the expression
and embodiment of His obedience unto death, of His death for
our sins, of the atonement which He made for us as the victim
on the altar, as our Substitute.
It is this blood now, of whose power our Epistle says such
wondrous things. It was in the blood of the eternal covenant
that God brought again our Lord Jesus from the dead; the
blood was the power of the resurrection. It was through His
blood He cleansed the heavenly things themselves and entered
the Holiest on our behalf. In those heavenly places our sins
were in God s book, our sins had as a thick cloud darkened
God s presence ; for the sake of the blood the sin was blotted

149. out, and access given to Him, and in Him to us, to appear
before the very face of God. And now, in the vision of the
heavenly glory to which he has given us access, as we have it
later in the Epistle, we find in heaven not only God the Judge
of all, and Christ the Mediator of the new covenant, but also
the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that
of Abel. Everywhere we see, besides and along with Jesus Christ,
the living One Himself, in His resurrection, in His entering
heaven, in His sitting on the throne, as a separate existence and
power, the blood, the symbol of the death in which we have our
ransom and redemption.
Through His own blood. Let us specially note how the
blood is connected with the heavenly priesthood of Christ. We
are too apt to think only of the fulfilment of the type of Aaron,
the blood-shedding on earth. The Epistle does not speak of
it. Where it mentions the blood, it is in connection with the
resurrection and the entrance into heaven, as it works in the
power of an endless life. It is as the Holy Spirit reveals this to
the soul, the heavenly power of the blood, as ministered by our
Melchizedek, the minister of the heavenly sanctuary, that we
see what a power that blood must have, as so sprinkled on us
from heaven, in the power of the Holy Spirit, at once to give us
a real, actual, living access into the presence of God.
His own blood. I know of no word in the Bible or in human
speech that contains such mysteries ! In it are concentrated the
mysteries of the incarnation, in which our God took flesh and
blood ; of the obedience unto death, in which the blood was shed ;
of the love that passeth knowledge, that purchased us with His
own blood ; of the victory over every enemy, and the everlasting
redemption ; of the resurrection and the entrance into heaven ;
of the atonement and the reconciliation and the justification
that came through it ; of the cleansing and perfecting of the
conscience, of the sprinkling of the heart and the sanctifying
the people. Through that blood Christ entered once for all into
heaven ; through that blood we enter too, and have our home in
the Holiest of All. As the Holy Spirit from heaven, dwelling
in us, imparts to us the boldness the blood gives, and the love
into which it opens the way, our whole inner being will be
brought under its power, and the cleansing of the blood in its
full extent be our experience.
1. "As in heaven so in earth." Thou hast more interest than thou thinhest In knowing what
the blood hath wrought in heaven. As thou enterest by the Spirit into its power there, will thy
faith receiue its power within thee.

150. 2. The inner sanctuary deeper, nearer in to God. He that seeks after this will have the inner
sanctuary opened within Himself. The inner life, the law within the heart, in the inward parts, a
deepening sense of the life of God in the soul will be given to such a one.
3. There are in Scripture two aspects of Christ s deaththat of atonement and that of fellow
ship. He died for us, for our sin, that we might not die. What our Substitute did in bearing the
curse of sin, we cannot do, we need not do. He died to sin, and we died with Him and in Him.
The blood is the divine expression for the former aspect : His own blood is the power and the
worth of His death taken up and presented and for ever preserved in its energy and action before
God. The sprinkling with the blood includes the transition to the second aspect. As the blood,
as a heavenly reality, through the Holy Spirit works in us, the very disposition that animated
Jesus in the shedding of it will be imparted to us.
4. Christ can bring us into the Holiest In no other way than He went in Himself, through His
own blood. Oh, seek to know the power of Christ s blood.
7. CALVIN, "Neither by the blood of goats, etc. All these things tend to show
that the things of Christ so far excel the shadows of the Law, that
they justly reduce them all to nothing. For what is the value of
Christ's blood, if it be deemed no better than the blood of beasts?
What sort of expiation was made by his death, if the purgations
according to the Law be still retained? As soon then as Christ came
forth with the efficacious influence of his death, all the typical
observances must necessarily have ceased.
__________________________________________________________________
[144] It is said that the high priest entered the holiest place "once
every year," that is, on one day, the day of expiation, every year; but
on that day he went in at least three times. See Leviticus 16:12-15;
and probably four times, according to the Jewish tradition; and one of
the times, as supposed by Stuart, was for the purpose of bringing out
the golden censer. The word rendered "errors," literally means
"ignorances," and so some render it "sins of ignorance;" but it is used
in the Apocrypha as designating sins in general; and Grotius refers to
Tob. 3:3; Judith 5:20; Sirach 23:2, 1 Macc. 13:39. And that it means
sins of all kinds is evident from the account given in Leviticus 16 of
the atonement made on the annual man, says Estius, "is ignorant; and
all sins proceed from error in judgement." Hence it seems, sins were
called ignorances. -- Ed.
[145] Although the original text in the book refers to Jer 31:37, which
warns of an ultimate rejection of Israel; it would seem that Jer 31:31
is more appropriate in the current context of reformation. -- fj.
[146] See [34]Appendix G 2.
[147] See commentary on [35]Chapter 7 .

151. [148] "Good things (or blessings) to come," may have a reference to the
blessings promised in the Old Testament as the blessings of the kingdom
of Christ, included in "the eternal redemption" mentioned in the next
verse. -- Ed.
[149] There is no other view that is satisfactory. The idea that has
been by some suggested, that the "better tabernacle" is the visible
heaven through which he entered into the heaven of heavens, has no
evidence in its support. Some of the Ancients, such as Ambrose, and
also Doddridge and Scott consider heaven as intended, as in chapter
8:2, (but "tabernacle" in that passage means the whole structure,
especially the holy of holies.) According to this view dia is rendered
in -- "in a greater and more perfect tabernacle." But Chrysostom,
Theophylact, Grotius, Beza, etc., agree with Calvin in regarding
Christ's human nature as signified by the "tabernacle;" and what
confirms this exposition is what we find in chapter 10:5, 10, and 20.
"Not made with hands," and "not of this creation," for no objection;
for Christ's body was supernaturally formed; and the contrast is with
the material tabernacle, a human structure, made by men and made of
earthly materials. It is, however, better to connect "tabernacle" with
the preceding than with the following words, -- But Christ, having come
the high priest of the good things to come by means of a better and
more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is, not of this
creation, has entered once for all into the holiest, not indeed with
(or by) the blood of goats and calves but (or by) his own blood, having
obtained an eternal redemption. "Creation" here means the world; it was
not made of worldy materials. See verse 1. -- Ed.
8. PINK, “"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in
once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us" (verse 12). Having
shown that in Christ’s person we have the antitype of the tabernacle, the apostle now
proceeds to set forth that which was foreshadowed by the entrance of Israel’s high priest
into the holy of holies on the day of atonement: this he does both negatively and positively,
that the difference between the shadow and the substance might more evidently appear.
The design of this verse is to display the pre-eminence of Christ in the discharge of His
priestly office above the legal high priest. This is seen, first, in the excellency of His
sacrifice, which was His own blood; second, in the holy place whereinto He entered by
virtue of it, which was Heaven itself; third in the effect of it, in that by it He procured
"eternal redemption."
"Neither by the blood of goats and calves": it was by means of these that Aaron entered the
holy of holies on the day of atonement (Lev. 16:14,15)—the apostle here uses the plural
number because of the annual repetition of the same sacrifice. In Leviticus 16, the "calf" or
young bullock (of one year old) is mentioned first; perhaps the order is here reversed
because the "goat" was specifically for the people, and it is Christ redeeming His people
which is the dominant thought. It was by virtue of the blood of these animals that Aaron

152. entered so as to be accepted with God. The reference here is not directly to what the high
priest brought with him into the holiest—or the "incense" too had been mentioned—but to
the title which the sacrifices gave him to approach unto the Holy One of Israel.
"But by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place." Here we are brought
directly unto the great mystery of the priestly work of Christ, especially as to the sacrifice
which He offered unto (God to make an atonement for the sins of His people. The "holy
place"—called in Hebrews 9:8 "the Holiest of all"—signifying Heaven itself, the
dwelling-place of God. This is unequivocally established by Hebrews 9:24 "into heaven
itself." There never was any place to which this title of "holy place" so suitably belonged:
thus it is designated in Psalm 20:6 "His holy heaven." And when was it that Christ entered
Heaven by virtue of the merits of His own blood? Almost all of the commentators take the
reference here as being to His ascension. But this we deem to be a mistake, and one from
which erroneous conclusions of a most serious nature have been drawn. The writer is fully
satisfied that what is affirmed in this verse took place immediately after Christ, on the
cross, triumphantly cried "It is finished." Some of our reasons for believing this we give
below.
First, the typical priest’s entrance within the veil took place immediately after the victim’s
death: its body being carried without the camp to be burned in a public place, its blood
being taken into the holiest, to be sprinkled on the propitiatory, covering the ark. Those
closely-connected acts in the ritual were so related that, the burning followed last in order.
Now Hebrews 13:11 clearly establishes the fact that that typical action coincided with
Christ’s sacrifice outside Jerusalem: therefore, to make Christ’s entrance into heaven
occur forty days after His death, destroys the type. In pouring out His blood on the cross
and surrendering His spirit into the hands of the Father, Christ expiated sin, and at that
very moment the veil of the temple was rent, to denote His entrance into the presence of
God. No sooner had He expired, than He entered Heaven, claiming it for Himself and His
seed. His resurrection testified to the fact that God had accepted His sacrifice, that justice
had been fully satisfied, and that He was now entitled to the reward of His obedience. His
resurrection was the antitype of Aaron’s return from the holy of holies unto the people,
which was designed as a proof that Divine wrath had been averted and forgiveness secured.
Second, Aaron began by laying aside his robes of glory (Lev. 16:4), putting on only linen
garments: that was far more in keeping with Christ’s abasement at the cross, than His
triumph and glory at His ascension. Third, when Aaron entered the holy of holies,
atonement was not yet completed: that awaited his sprinkling of the blood upon the
propitiatory. Therefore, if the antitype of this occurred not until the ascension of Christ,
His sacrifice waited forty days for God’s acceptance of it. Fourth, while Aaron was within
the veil, the people without were full of fear for the high priest, lest he fail to appease God.
Similar was the state of Christ’s disciples during the interval between His death and
resurrection: they remained in a state of suspense and doubt, dejection and dread. But far
different were they immediately after His ascension: contrast Luke 24:21 and 24:52, 53!
Fifth, God’s rending of the veil at the moment of Christ’s death was deeply significant: it
was the Divine imprimature upon the Son’s "It is finished." It was the outward
adumbration in the visible realm to image forth what had taken place in the
spiritual—Christ’s entrance into heaven. In like manner, Christ’s appearance to the
disciples after His death, and His "peace be unto you," evidenced that peace had been
made, that the atonement was completed.

153. "By His own blood He entered in," entered heaven as the Surety of His people, as their
"Forerunner" (Heb. 6:20). That which gave Him the right to do so was the perfect
satisfaction which He had made, a satisfaction which honored God more than all our sins
dishonored Him, which magnified the law and made it honorable. It was not the shedding
of His blood alone which constituted His satisfaction or atonement, any more than a
heart-belief in His resurrection (Rom. 10:9) without "faith in His blood" (Rom. 3:25)
would save a sinner. He "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Phil.
2:8), and what He there voluntarily endured was the climax and consummation of His
redemptive work. "His own blood" emphasises its inestimable value. It was the blood of the
"Son" (Heb. 1:2, 3). It was the blood of "God" incarnate (Acts 20:28). Well might the Holy
Spirit call it "precious" (1 Pet. 1:19). No greater price could have been paid for our
redemption. How vile and accursed, then, must sin be, seeing it can only be expiated by so
costly a sacrifice! What claims Christ has upon His own! Well might He say, "Whosoever
he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:33).
"He entered in once into the holy place." The word "once" is that which has led so many to
conclude that the reference was to the Savior’s ascension. But this, we have endeavored to
show above, is a mistake. As we shall (D.V.) yet see, Hebrews chapters 9 and 10
contemplate a double entrance of Christ into heaven in fulfillment of the double
type—Aaron and Melchizedek. That Christ did enter heaven at death is clear from His
words to the thief (Luke 23:43); 2 Corinthians 12:2, 4 places "paradise" in the third
heaven. In every other passage where the term "once" occurs concerning the atoning work
of Christ, it is always used contrastively with the frequent repetitions of the Old Testament
sacrifices: see Hebrews 7:27; 9:7, 25, 26; 10:11, 12. That which is contemplated is Christ’s
presenting His satisfaction unto God. His ascension was for the purpose of intercession,
which is continuous, and not completed.
"Having obtained eternal redemption," and this before He entered Heaven. To "redeem"
is to deliver a person from a state of bondage, and that by the payment of an adequate
ransom-price. Four things were required unto our redemption. It must be effected by the
expiating of our sins. It must be by such an expiation that God, as the supreme Ruler and
Judge should accept. It must be by rendering such a satisfaction to the Law, that its
precepts are fulfilled and its penalty endured, so that its curse is removed. It must annul
the power of Satan over us. How all of this was accomplished by the Redeemer, we have
shown in our articles upon His "Satisfaction." This "redemption" is eternal, which is in
contrast from Israel’s of old—after their deliverance from Egypt they became in bondage
to the Philistines and others. As the blood of Christ can never lose its efficacy, so none
redeemed by Him can ever again be brought under sin’s dominion.
The writer then makes his strongest point for the better priesthood of Jesus, saying he did
not go into the heavenly tabernacle "by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood
he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us." (vs.12)
The text doesn't say Jesus went in with his own blood, but by it. "With" would indicate he
took something with him to give him access to the Father, but "by" declares he entered the
presence of God for us on the merit of his own life's blood. The argument is that if the
blood of goats and calves (going in "with" their blood) could open the way for the Levitical
priesthood to enter the holiest part of the temporary tabernacle, "how much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge

154. your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (vs.14)
Jesus "offered" himself - he was not sacrificed. Every offering under the law was a sacrifice
because the substitute could not offer itself. But Jesus offered himself, and contrary to
anything that had ever been offered to God before, his offering was so perfect that death
couldn't hold him. Consequently, his offering was gloriously validated three days later by
his resurrection! The only conclusion one can draw from this marvelous truth is that Jesus'
offering was so perfect it would never need to be repeated, as did the continual sacrifices
under the law.
The second validation of Christ's perfect offering was that "this man, after he had offered
one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth
expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for
ever them that are sanctified." (Heb.10:12-14)
One piece of furniture conspicuously absent from the wilderness tabernacle was a place for
the officiating priests to sit down. Its absence indicated the priests could never "rest" from
their work because their service was never "finished." But when Jesus was ushered into
heaven and seated at the right hand of God, his conciliatory mission was forever finished.
Consequently, the promise God made that he'd write his laws in the heart of man, and
remember their sins and iniquities no more, was initiated and available to all.
Having now irrevocably established that the better priesthood of Christ provided the way
for man to forever be cleansed from his sin, the writer closed that section of Hebrews,
saying, "Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin" [i.e., no further
offering needed]. (Heb.10:18)
9. HIS BOAT
He built himself a little boat,
This lad who was quite shy;
And every day he watched it float,
Upon a stream nearby.
The wind was strong one blustery day,
And much to his surprise,
The little boat was swept away,
And tears flowed from his eyes.
The days passed by and then, behold!
He spied his little gem,
Inside a store where he was told,
It didn't belong to him.
He knew the job would be real tough,
But he decided then,
To save until he had enough,
To own that boat again.
When he went back into the store,
He had a tidy sum,
And as he walked out through the door,
The boat was 'neath his arm.

155. So softly he was heard to say,
"Not once, but twice you're mine,
I gave you up, but then today,
I bought you back, we're fine."
Isn't that the way it is with God?
He lost us once to sin,
Then through His Son, with His own blood,
He purchased us again. BRATS DIAMOND SIGS
10. G. Franklin Allee, “In the New Testament there are 290 references to the love of God,
290 times when God had declared His love for man. But in the same chapters and the same
verses there are more than 1,300 references to the atonement, 1300 assurances that
salvation can be had through the blood of Christ.
—~ Nothing But The Blood
At a great parliament of religions, held in Chicago many years ago, practically every
known religion was represented.
During one session, Dr. Joseph Cook, of Boston, suddenly rose and said: “Gentlemen, I
beg to introduce to you a woman with a great sorrow. Bloodstains are on her hands, and
nothing she has tried will remove them. The blood is that of murder. She has been driven to
desperation in her distress. Is there anything in your religion that will remove her sin and
give her peace?” A hush fell upon the gathering. Not one of the company replied.
Raising his eyes heavenwards, Dr. Cook then cried out, “John, can you tell this woman
how to get rid of her awful sin?” The great preacher waited, as if listening for a reply.
Suddenly he cried, “Listen. John speaks: ’The blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanseth us
from all sins’ (I John 1:7).”
Not a soul broke the silence: the representatives of Eastern religions and Western cults sat
dumb. In the face of human need, the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone could meet the need.
The sin of the race demanded the blood of Calvary.
—Frederick A. Tatford
~ Devil And Martin Luther
There is a legend of Martin Luther, that, during a serious illness, the Evil One entered his
sickroom and, looking at him with a triumphant smile, unrolled a big scroll which he
carried in his arms.
As the fiend threw one end of it on the floor, it unwound by itself. Luther’s eyes read the
long, fearful record of his own sins, one by one. That stout heart quailed before the ghastly
roll.
Suddenly it flashed into Luther’s mind that there was one thing not written there. He
cried aloud: “One thing you have forgotten. The rest is all true, but one thing you have
forgotten: ’The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. ’ “ And as he said
this, the Accuser of the Brethren and his heavy roll disappeared.
~How Can Blood Cleanse Sin?
A preacher was speaking from the text, “The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us
from all sin.” Suddenly he was interrupted by an atheist who asked, “How can blood
cleanse sin?”
For a moment the preacher was silent; then he countered, “How can water quench

156. thirst?”
“I do not know,” replied the infidel, “but I know that it does.”
“Neither do I know how the blood of Jesus cleanses sin,” answered the preacher, “but I
know that it does.”
—Sunday School Times
~ House Of A Thousand Terrors
In the market place of Rotterdam, Holland, stood for many years an old cornerhouse
known as “The House of a Thousand Terrors.” The story:
During the 16th century, the Dutch people rose in revolt against the cruel King Philip II of
Spain. Philip sent a great army under the Duke of Alva to suppress the rebellion.
Rotterdam held out for a time but finally capitulated.
From house to house the victors went, searching out citizens and then killing them in their
houses. A group of men, women, and children were hiding in a cornerhouse when they
heard soldiers approaching. A thousand terrors griped their hearts. Then a young man had
an idea. He took a goat in the house, killed it, and with a broom swept the blood under the
doorway out to the street.
The soldiers reached the house and began to batter down the door. Noticing the blood
coming out from under the door, one soldier said: “Come away, the work is already done
here. Look at the blood beneath the door.” And the people inside the house escaped.
To sustain your physical life, you need certain basic items such as water, oxygen, food,
clothing, and shelter. In addition, your body requires a certain amount of protein,
vitamins, and minerals. Without all these, your physical life would die, or at least suffer
greatly.
It is the same with your spiritual life. Your spiritual life, just like your physical life,
requires certain basic elements. These are essential. Without them, you will find it difficult
to survive as a Christian in a world that does not know Christ. One of these basic elements
is the blood of Christ.
Why do you need the blood of Christ? Because, essentially, fallen man has three basic
problems. Even as a Christian, you still carry around the fallen human life. So day after
day, you may still be plagued with these three problems.
These three problems involve three parties: God, yourself, and Satan. Toward God, you
often sense separation. Within yourself, you often sense guilt. And from Satan, you often
sense accusation. These three—separation from God, feelings of guilt, and accusation from
Satan—can be three big problems in your Christian life. How can these be overcome? Only
by the blood of Christ.
Separation from God
When Adam sinned in the garden of Eden, he immediately hid from God. Before Adam
sinned, he enjoyed God and was in His presence all the time. Yet after he sinned, he hid.
Sin always results in separation from God.
Even as a Christian you may experience this. After committing some little sin, you sense a
great gulf between you and God. Because God is righteous, He cannot tolerate sins. This is
what the prophet Isaiah said: "No, Jehovah's hand is not so short that it cannot save; / Nor
is His ear so heavy that it cannot hear. / But your iniquities have become a separation /
Between you and your God, / And your sins have hidden His face / From you so that He
does not hear" (Isa. 59:1-2).

157. After Adam sinned, God did not say, "Adam, what have you done?" Rather, God said,
"Adam, where are you?" In other words, God is not as much concerned with what sins you
may commit, as He is with the fact that your sins separate you from Him. God loves you,
but He abhors your sins. As long as your sins remain, God must stay away. In this
condition, you feel far from God. For God to come, sins must go.
There is only one thing in the entire universe that can take away sins—the precious blood
of Christ. No amount of prayer, no amount of weeping, no ritual, no penance, no promise
to do better, no guilty feeling, no period of waiting—no, nothing but the precious blood of
Christ—can remove sins. Hebrews 9:22 says that "without shedding of blood is no
forgiveness."
This is illustrated in Exodus. Some of the children of Israel may have been as sinful as the
Egyptians. Yet when God sent His angel to slay all the firstborn children in the land of
Egypt, He did not say, "When I see your good behavior, I will pass over you." God did not
require that the children of Israel pray, do penance, or promise to behave. No, God
commanded them to slay the Passover lamb and to sprinkle its blood on their doorposts.
He said, "When I see the blood, I will pass over you" (Exo. 12:13). God never looked to see
what kind of people were in the house; when He saw the blood, He simply passed over.
That Passover lamb was a picture of Christ. When John the Baptist first saw the Lord he
proclaimed, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29).
Jesus is the Lamb of God. By His precious blood all your sins have been taken away.
What then should you do when you have sinned and feel far from God? You should simply
confess that sin to God and believe that the blood of Jesus has taken that sin away. First
John 1:9 says, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins
and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." When you confess your sins, immediately all
distance between you and God is gone.
Don't worry about any feeling or lack of feeling at this point. The blood of Christ is
primarily for God's satisfaction, not for yours. Remember, God said, "When I (not you) see
the blood...." On the night of the Passover, the children of Israel were within the house
while the blood of the lamb was without. Within the house, they could not see the blood;
nevertheless, they had peace through knowing that God was satisfied with that blood.
Once a year, on the day of atonement, the high priest went alone into the Holy of Holies to
sprinkle the blood on the expiation cover of the ark (Lev. 16:11-17). No one was allowed to
watch. This is a shadow of Christ who, after His resurrection, went into the heavenly
tabernacle and sprinkled His own blood before God as the propitiation for your sins (Heb.
9:12). No one today can look into heaven and see that blood. Yet it is there. It is there
speaking for you (Heb. 12:24) and satisfying God on your behalf. Even though you cannot
see the blood, you can believe in its effectiveness. This blood solves your problem toward
God.
If God esteems the blood of Christ sufficient to remove your sins, can you do the same? Or
do you require some good feeling besides? Can your requirement be higher than God's?
No, you must simply confess, "O God, thank You that the blood of Christ has taken away
all my sins. If You are happy with the blood, then I am happy also."
Guilt in Your Conscience
Man's second crucial problem is with himself. Within him, in his conscience, there is a
heavy load of guilt. How many young people today are burdened by guilt! Guilt is a big
problem to man.

158. Sins offend God on the one hand and defile us on the other. What is guilt? Guilt is the stain
of sins on your conscience. When you are young, your conscience is only stained a little. But
as you grow older, these stains accumulate. Like a window which is never washed, the
conscience grows darker and darker until eventually little light can penetrate.
No detergent, no chemical, no acid can wash the stain of guilt from your conscience. Not
even a nuclear bomb can dislodge this stain; no, your conscience demands something more
powerful than that. Your conscience needs the precious blood of Christ.
Hebrews 9:14 says, "How much more will the blood of Christ…purify our conscience from
dead works to serve the living God?" The blood of Christ is powerful enough to purge, or
cleanse, your conscience from every guilty stain.
How does the blood of Christ purge guilt from your conscience? Suppose you receive a
traffic ticket for parking on the sidewalk. You have three problems: first, you broke the
law; second, you owe the government a fine; and third, you have a copy of the traffic ticket
to remind you of the fine. Now suppose you are penniless and find it impossible to pay the
fine. You cannot just throw away the ticket, because the police hold a copy, and they will
prosecute you if you do not pay. You have a real problem.
This is a picture of what happens whenever you sin. First, you have broken God's law; that
is, you have done something that offends God. Second, you owe God's law something.
Romans 6:23 says that the wages of sin is death. This is a rather stiff fine, impossible for
you to pay. And third, you have guilt in your conscience, like the traffic ticket in your
pocket, as a nagging reminder of your offense.
Now here is the good news. When Jesus Christ died on the cross, His death fully met all the
requirements of God's law for you. In other words, your debt of sin has been paid. Praise
the Lord! Jesus Christ, through His death on the cross, paid it all!
So now, the first two problems have been solved: God is no longer offended, and the debt of
sin has been fully paid. But what about your conscience? The stain of guilt, like the traffic
ticket, remains as a record of your sin.
This is where the blood of Christ cleanses your conscience. Because Christ's death has paid
the debt of sin, His blood may now wipe out the record of that debt. Just as when the fine is
paid, the traffic ticket may be torn up and thrown away, so also any guilt on your
conscience may be wiped out.
This is so easy to experience. Whenever you sin and sense guilt within, you may simply
open to God and pray something like this: "O God, forgive me for what I did today. Thank
You, Lord, on the cross You died for me and paid for this sin that I have committed. Lord,
I believe that this sin has been forgiven by You. Right now I claim Your precious blood to
cleanse my conscience from any stain of guilt." Remember 1 John 1:9: "If we confess our
sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all
unrighteousness." And as Psalm 103:12 says, "As far as the east is from the west, / So far
has He removed our transgressions from us." Who can say how far east is from west? In
the same way, when you confess your sins, God removes them infinitely far away from you.
They are not associated with you anymore. Because of this, you may have rest in your
conscience.
When God forgives, He forgets. Do not think that after God has forgiven your sins, He may
one day come back and remind you of them again. No, when it comes to your forgiven sins,
God has a very short memory. Sometimes you may have a better memory than God. Can
God really forget? This is what Jeremiah 31:34 says: "I will forgive their iniquity, and their

159. sin I will remember no more." If God forgets your sins, you may forget them also. Don't
remind God of something He has already forgotten.
Christ died nearly two thousand years ago. His blood has already been shed and is
available twenty-four hours a day to cleanse your conscience. Whenever you sin, there is no
need to wait. Waiting does not improve the power of the blood. The blood is all-powerful.
Wherever you are, any time of day, if you sense guilt in your conscience, just claim the
precious blood. "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven;… / Blessed is the man to
whom / Jehovah does not impute iniquity" (Psa. 32:1-2). Through the precious blood of
Christ, the problem of guilt is solved.
Accusation from Satan
However, sometimes after you confess and apply the blood you may continue to have some
bad feeling within. Does this indicate that your sin is not forgiven? Or that the blood of
Christ does not work? Or that something further is needed? You must answer, "Absolutely
not!"
Where, then, do these bad feelings come from after you have confessed and applied the
blood? Their source is God's enemy, Satan. To understand this we must see who Satan is
and what he does.
Satan in the original language of the Bible means "Accuser." So Revelation 12:10 refers to
him as "the accuser of our brothers,…who accuses them before our God day and night."
Satan, God's enemy, spends most of his time day and night accusing God's people. This is
his job. Of course, God did not ask him to do this. Rather, he has taken it upon himself to
accuse God's people incessantly.
This is revealed in the story of Job. Job was a righteous man, and feared God (Job 1:1). Yet
it is recorded that Satan appeared before God to accuse Job before Him. He said, "Does
Job fear God without cause?…You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions
are spread throughout the land. But stretch forth Your hand and touch all that he has, and
he will surely curse You to Your face" (Job 1:9-11). In other words, Satan accused Job of
only fearing God because God had blessed him. Satan claimed that God bribed Job and
that if God took away all Job's riches, Job would curse God. This illustrates Satan's
accusing in the spiritual realm.
In the book of Zechariah, the high priest, Joshua, stood before God and Satan stood at his
right hand "to be his adversary" (3:1). Joshua was "clothed with filthy garments" (v. 3).
This speaks of his poor, sinful condition. How often your poor condition gives Satan the
opportunity to accuse you. This implies that Satan is not only God's enemy, but he is your
enemy as well. Whenever you come to God, Satan resists your coming by accusing you.
Nothing cripples a Christian spiritually more than accusation. Whenever you listen to
Satan's accusation, you are powerless. It is as if all the strength is drained from your spirit.
A Christian under accusation finds it hard to fellowship with others and even harder to
pray. He feels as though he cannot approach God.
This is the enemy's subtlety. He never appears in a red suit with a pitchfork crying, "I am
the devil! Now I am going to condemn you!" He is more clever than that. He accuses you
inwardly and even tricks you into thinking that his accusations are God's speaking.
How can you distinguish between God's true enlightening in your conscience and Satan's
accusation? Sometimes it is difficult, but there are three ways:
First, God's light supplies you, whereas Satan's accusation drains you. When God speaks
concerning your sins, you may feel very exposed and wounded. Nevertheless, you are also

160. supplied and encouraged to draw close to God and apply the precious blood of Christ.
Satan's accusations, on the other hand, are totally negative. The more you listen, the harder
it is to pray. You feel empty and discouraged.
Second, God's speaking is always specific, whereas Satan's condemnation is quite often
(though not always) general. Sometimes you may be tricked into thinking that you are just
tired, or that you have had a rough day. Other times, you may just have a general
impression that you are not right with God. But when you search your conscience, you find
no specific sin that would cause you to be separated from God. Or you may wake up with a
general feeling of depression or a feeling of uneasiness toward God. All these general
feelings of condemnation that have no apparent source in sin are of Satan and should be
rejected. When God speaks, He is specific and positive. But when Satan speaks, he is often
general and negative.
Third, any uneasy feeling which remains after you confess and claim the blood is of Satan.
There is never a need to confess and claim the blood again. God's demand is at once
satisfied by the blood. But Satan is never satisfied. He would like to see you confess again
and again. Proverbs 27:15 says, "A continual dripping on a very rainy day / And a
contentious woman are alike." Satan's accusations are like that—like a dripping faucet, or
like a nagging wife—they will not let you go to sleep. But God's speaking is different. When
you confess and claim the cleansing of the blood, God is instantly satisfied. Any further
voice is Satan's.
If you confess your sin and claim the precious blood, yet some uneasiness continues to tug
at you within, you should stop praying immediately. Do not confess anymore. Rather, turn
to the source of the accusation and say something like this: "Satan, I have confessed my sin
to God. He has forgiven my sin, and the blood of Jesus Christ has cleansed me from it. This
uneasiness that I sense right now is not from God; it is from you, and I reject it! Satan, now
you must look at the blood of Christ. That blood answers every one of your accusations."
Try speaking to Satan in this way. When you use the blood in this way, Satan is defeated
and he knows it. Revelation 12:10-11 says, "The accuser of our brothers has been cast
down.…And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word
of their testimony." The word of your testimony is just your declaration that the blood of
Jesus Christ has cleansed you from every sin and that this blood has defeated Satan. When
you speak boldly in this way, Satan's accusations are overcome.
The Christian life is a kind of warfare. Satan, "your adversary…as a roaring lion, walks
about, seeking someone to devour" (1 Pet. 5:8). For this warfare, you need the proper
weapons. One important weapon which you must utilize is the blood of Christ.
A Daily Life Full of God's Presence
By the power of the precious blood of Christ, it is possible for a Christian to live moment
by moment in God's presence. Whenever any little sin would come to frustrate your
fellowship with God, you may instantly confess and claim the Lord's prevailing blood.
Immediately the fellowship is restored. Why should you waste time? The blood of Christ is
available moment by moment, day after day. You can never exhaust the cleansing power of
the blood of Christ. His blood is not only able to cleanse every past sin, but also every sin
that you could ever commit.
By the power of the precious blood of Christ, you may enjoy a conscience free from the
stain of guilt. Because of this, you can come boldly to God. "Let us come forward—with a
true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience"

161. (Heb. 10:22). By the blood of Christ, your conscience can be free from guilt. Like a freshly
washed window, it can be clear, bright, and full of light.
Finally, by the power of the precious blood of Christ, you can overcome every accusation of
Satan. Though his accusations may be strong, the blood of Christ is stronger. It answers
them, every one. This blood is your weapon. With this weapon you could never be defeated
by Satan; rather, he will be defeated by you.
How dear and how precious is the blood of Christ! By this blood you can live in God's
presence day after day.
"If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the
blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from every sin" (1 John 1:7).
Taken from the booklet entitled The Precious Blood of Christ, Witness Lee
11. DREW WORTHEN, “But this life comes from a death. Not just a death for the sake of
death, but a death which was sacrificed for a specific purpose. HEB 9:12 "He did not enter
by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all
by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption."
Redemption, which can be translated "a ransoming", is defined, in theological terms, as a
purchasing, as of something sold. Redemption has to do with you and I who have been sold
into the bondage of sin, suffering its consequences. Paul touches on this in ROM 7:14 "We
know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin."
Adam essentially sold us into that bondage by choosing to align himself with the desires of
Satan. Being sold into that bondage produces what God said it would produce when He
said to Adam and Eve, "in the day that you eat of the fruit you will surely die."
That's the only thing that sin can produce; death. Wouldn't it be nice if someone could
come along and buy us back and place us into a family where death is not what we have to
look forward to?
That's what Christ's redemption is all about. He purchased us. But He didn't do it with
things like the blood of goats and calves. He did it with His own blood. Jesus Christ was
truly man and truly God. But as man He came to do what the first Adam failed to do.
Jesus, the Son of man, fulfilled perfectly all things and was eligible to stand before the
Father to buy us back.
1CO 6:19 "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you,
whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body."
His blood for ours. His death became ours. His life is now ours as His resurrection secured
that very life which we claim with confidence by faith in the only Savior.
ROM 6:4 "We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that,
just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a
new life.
5 If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united
with him in his resurrection."
In His resurrection "He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having
obtained eternal redemption." That Most Holy Place is in the very presence of the Most
High God whose Kingdom is not of this world.
We are no longer a slave to the world or to the life leading to death. We serve a new Master
who has purchased us and has full authority over us. And yet this same Master and Lord

162. calls us friends in Christ. His life now becomes ours.
Our writer in Hebrews would challenge these Christians to whom he is writing, as well as
you and I, to consider the vast difference between the temporal blessings found in Judaism,
to which they had become familiar, and in some cases comfortable, and place them beside
the eternal and then live accordingly. In other words, challenging them to live in the Spirit
and not in the flesh or the things of the world.
We don't have to live in fear wondering if we have to repeat this process over and over
again as did the Jews who looked to the Day of Atonement each year. Our salvation has
been secured once for all time, "once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal
redemption." (Heb.9:12)
13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a
heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially
unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly
clean.
1. BARNES, "For if the blood of bulls and of goats - Referring still to the great day of
atonement, when the offering made was the sacrifice of a bullock and a goat.
And the ashes of an heifer - For an account of this, see Num_19:2-10. In ver. 9, it is said
that the ashes of the heifer, after it was burnt, should be kept “for a water of separation; it is a
purification for sin.” That is, the ashes were to be carefully preserved, and being mixed with
water were sprinkled on those who were from any cause ceremonially impure. The “reason” for
this appears to have been that the heifer was considered as a sacrifice whose blood has been
offered, and the application of the ashes to which she had been burnt was regarded as an
evidence of participation in that sacrifice. It was needful, where the laws were so numerous
respecting external pollutions, or where the members of the Jewish community were regarded
as so frequently “unclean” by contact with dead bodies, and in various other ways, that there
should be some method in which they could be declared to be cleansed from their
“uncleanness.” The nature of these institutions also required that this should be in connection
with “sacrifice,” and in order to this, it was arranged that there should be this “permanent
sacrifice” - the ashes of the heifer that had been sacrificed - of which they could avail themselves
at any time, without the expense and delay of making a bloody offering specifically for the
occasion. It was, therefore, a provision of convenience, and at the same time was designed to
keep up the idea, that all purification was somehow connected with the shedding of blood.
Sprinkling the unclean - Mingled with water, and sprinkled on the unclean. The word
“unclean” here refers to such as had been defiled by contact with dead bodies, or when one had
died in the family, etc.; see Num_19:11-22.
Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh - Makes holy so far as the flesh or body is
concerned. The uncleanness here referred to related to the body only, and of course the means
of cleansing extended only to that. It was not designed to give peace to the conscience, or to
expiate moral offences. The offering thus made removed the obstructions to the worship of God

163. so far as to allow him who had been defiled to approach him in a regular manner. Thus, much
the apostle allows was accomplished by the Jewish rites. They had an efficacy in removing
ceremonial uncleanness, and in rendering it proper that he who had been polluted should be
permitted again to approach and worship God. The apostle goes on to argue that if they had
such an efficacy, it was fair to presume that the blood of Christ would have far greater efficacy,
and would reach to the conscience itself, and make that pure.
2. CLARKE, "Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh - Answers the end proposed by
the law; namely, to remove legal disabilities and punishments, having the body and its interests
particularly in view, though adumbrating or typifying the soul and its concerns.
3. GILL, "For if the blood of bulls and of goats,.... Shed either on the day of atonement, or
at any other time: the former of thee, Pausanias (y) relates, was drank by certain priestesses
among the Grecians, whereby they were tried, whether they spoke truth or no if not, they were
immediately punished; and the latter, he says (z), will dissolve an adamant stone; but neither of
them can purge from sin:
and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean; the apostle refers to the red heifer,
Num_19:1 which being burnt, its ashes were gathered up and put into a vessel, and water
poured upon them, which was sprinkled with a bunch of hyssop on unclean persons; the ashes
and the water mixed together made the water of separation, or of sprinkling; for so it is called by
the Septuagint, υδωρ ραντισµου, "the water of sprinkling", and in the Targum in a following
citation: this was the purification for sin, though it only
sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; the body, or only in an external and typical way,
but did not really sanctify the heart, or purify and cleanse the soul from sin. The Jews say, that
the waters of purification for sin were not waters of purification for sin, without the ashes (a);
and to this the Targumist, on Eze_36:25 and on Zec_13:1 refers, paraphrasing both texts thus;
"I will forgive their sins as they are cleansed with the water of sprinkling, and with the ashes of
the heifer, which is a purification for sin.''
4. HENRY, " The Holy Ghost further signified and showed what was the efficacy of the blood of
the Old Testament sacrifices, and thence is inferred the much greater efficacy of the blood of
Christ. (1.) The efficacy of the blood of the legal sacrifices extended to the purifying of the flesh
(Heb_9:13): it freed the outward man from ceremonial uncleanness and from temporal
punishment, and entitled him to, and fitted him for, some external privileges.
5. JAMISON, "Heb_9:13-28. Proof of and enlargement on, the “eternal redemption”
mentioned in Heb_9:12.
For His blood, offered by Himself, purifies not only outwardly, as the Levitical sacrifices on
the day of atonement, but inwardly unto the service of the living God (Heb_9:13, Heb_9:14). His
death is the inaugurating act of the new covenant, and of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb_9:15-23).
His entrance into the true Holy of Holies is the consummation of His once-for-all-offered
sacrifice of atonement (Heb_9:24, Heb_9:26); henceforth, His reappearance alone remains to
complete our redemption (Heb_9:27, Heb_9:28).

164. if — as we know is the case; so the Greek indicative means. Argument from the less to the
greater. If the blood of mere brutes could purify in any, however small a degree, how much more
shall inward purification, and complete and eternal salvation, be wrought by the blood of Christ,
in whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead?
ashes of an heifer — (Num_19:16-18). The type is full of comfort for us. The water of
separation, made of the ashes of the red heifer, was the provision for removing ceremonial
defilement whenever incurred by contact with the dead. As she was slain without the camp, so
Christ (compare Heb_13:11; Num_19:3, Num_19:4). The ashes were laid by for constant use; so
the continually cleansing effects of Christ’s blood, once for all shed. In our wilderness journey
we are continually contracting defilement by contact with the spiritually dead, and with dead
works, and need therefore continual application to the antitypical life-giving cleansing blood of
Christ, whereby we are afresh restored to peace and living communion with God in the heavenly
holy place.
the unclean — Greek, “those defiled” on any particular occasion.
purifying — Greek, “purity.”
the flesh — Their effect in themselves extended no further. The law had a carnal and a
spiritual aspect; carnal, as an instrument of the Hebrew polity, God, their King, accepting, in
minor offenses, expiatory victims instead of the sinner, otherwise doomed to death; spiritual, as
the shadow of good things to come (Heb_10:1). The spiritual Israelite derived, in partaking of
these legal rights, spiritual blessings not flowing from them, but from the great antitype.
Ceremonial sacrifices released from temporal penalties and ceremonial disqualifications;
Christ’s sacrifice releases from everlasting penalties (Heb_9:12), and moral impurities on the
conscience disqualifying from access to God (Heb_9:14). The purification of the flesh (the mere
outward man) was by “sprinkling”; the washing followed by inseparable connection
(Num_19:19). So justification is followed by renewing.
5B. COFFMAN 13-14, “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 Num. 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, Rom. 1:3,4; 1 Tim. 3:16;
and 1 Pet. 3:18. Barmby's note on this reads:

165. 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. F12
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 Heb. 6:1
and Heb. 3:12. Particular attention is now directed to the consicience and
how it may be cleansed.
CONCERNING THE CONSCIENCE
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

166. 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 Pet. 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."

167. 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.
6. CALVIN, "For if the blood of bulls, etc. This passage has given to many all
occasion to go astray, because they did not consider that sacraments
are spoken of, which had a spiritual import. The cleansing of the flesh
they leave explained of what avails among men, as the heathens had
their expiations to blot out the infamy of crimes. But this explanation
is indeed very heathenish; for wrong is done to God's promises, if we
restrict the effect to civil matters only. Often does this declaration
occur in the writings of Moses, that iniquity was expiated when a
sacrifice was duly offered. This is no doubt the spiritual teaching of
faith. Besides, all the sacrifices were destined for this end, that
they might lead men to Christ; as the eternal salvation of the soul is
through Christ, so these were true witnesses of this salvation.
What then does the Apostle mean when he speaks of the purgations of the
flesh? He means what is symbolical or sacramental, as follows, -- If
the blood of beasts was a true symbol of purgation, so that it cleansed
in a sacramental manner, how much more shall Christ who is himself the
truth, not only bear witness to a purgation by an external rite, but
also really perform this for consciences? The argument then is from the
signs to the thing signified; for the effect by a long time preceded
the reality of the signs.

168. 8. MURRAY, THE POWER OF CHRIST'S BLOOD TO CLEANSE THE
CONSCIENCE.13-14
THE High Priest went into the Holiest once a year, not
without blood. Christ, the High Priest of good things to
come, entered the greater and more perfect Holiest of All
through His own blood, opening up to us in very deed the
way into God s presence. The entrance of the high priest on
earth effected a certain external and temporary cleansing and
liberty of access. The blood of Christ which had power to
open heaven, is able to effect, in its heavenly, eternal power, a
heavenly, a divine cleansing in the heart.
To illustrate this, we are referred to Numb. xix. and the
cleansing with the ashes of the heifer. Anyone who had
touched a dead body was unclean, and had to be excluded
from the camp. To meet the need, the ashes of a heifer that
had been sacrificed, and of which the blood had been sprinkled
towards the tabernacle, were mingled with water, and sprinkled
on the one who had been defiled. The sprinkling restored him
to his place and privileges ; with a clear conscience he could
now take part in the life and worship of God s people. And
the question is asked If the blood of a sacrifice had such
power, how much more shall the blood of Christ cleanse
your conscience to serve the living God? The infinite
efficacy of Christ s blood, and the infinite blessedness of the
cleansing it effects, can only be measured by what that blood
really is.
The power of Christ s blood consists in two things. The
one element that gives the blood its value is, the holy obedience
of which its outpouring was the proof; the blood of Christ who
offered Himself without spot unto God. He came to live the
life of man, such as God had meant Him to be, in creating
Him. He gave up His will to God, He pleased not Himself
but sought only God s pleasure, He yielded His whole life that
God might reveal Himself in it as He pleased : He offered
Himself unto God. He took and filled the place the creature
was meant to fill. And that without spot. His self-sacrifice
was complete and perfect, and His blood, even as the blood of
a man, was, in God s sight, inexpressibly precious. It was the
embodiment of a perfect obedience. The other element is, that
the Eternal Spirit was in the life of that blood. It was through
the Eternal Spirit He offered Himself. It was the Word that

169. became flesh, the Eternal Son of God who was made man. It
was the life of God that dwelt in Him. That life gave His
blood, each drop of it, an infinite value. The blood of a man
is of more worth than that of a sheep. The blood of a king or
a great general is counted of more value than hundreds of
common soldiers. The blood of the Son of God ! it is in vain
the mind seeks for some expression of its value ; all we can say
is, it is His own blood, the precious blood of the Son of God !
It was this twofold infinite worth of the blood that gave it
such mighty power first, in opening the grave, and then in
opening heaven. It was this gave it the victory over all the
powers of death and hell beneath, and gave Him the victor s
place on high on the throne of God. And now, when that
blood, from out of the heavenly sanctuary, is sprinkled on the
conscience by the heavenly High Priest how much more
with what an infinitely effectual cleansing, must not our
conscience be cleansed.
We know what conscience is. It tells us what we are.
Conscience deals not only with past merit or guilt but specially
with present integrity or falsehood. A conscience fully cleansed
with the blood of Christ, fully conscious of its cleansing power,
has the sense of guilt and demerit removed to an infinite
distance. And no less is it delivered from that haunting
sense of insincerity and double-heartedness, which renders
boldness of access to God an impossibility. It can look up to
God without the shadow of a cloud. The light of God s face,
to which the blood gave our Surety access, shines clear on the
conscience, and through it on the heart. The conscience is not
a separate part of our heart or inner nature, and which can be
in a different state from what the whole is. By no means.
Just as a sensibility to bodily evil pervades the whole body,
so the conscience is the sense which pervades our whole
spiritual nature, and at once notices and reports what is wrong
or right in our state. Hence it is when the conscience is
cleansed or perfected, the heart is cleansed and perfected too.
And so it is in the heart that the power the blood had in heaven
is communicated here on earth. The blood that brought Christ
into God s presence, brings us, and our whole inner being, there
too.
Oh, let us realise it. The power of the blood in which
Christ entered heaven, is the power in which He enters our
hearts. The infinite sufficiency it has with God, to meet His
holy requirements, is its sufficiency to meet the requirements of

170. our heart and life. It is the blood of the covenant. Its three
great promises pardon and peace in God s forgetting sin ; purity
and power in having the law of life in our heart ; the presence
of God set open to us, are not only secured to us by the blood,
but the blood has its part too in communicating them. In the
power of the Holy Spirit the blood effects a mighty, divine
cleansing, full of heavenly life and energy. The Spirit that was
in Christ, when He shed the blood, makes us partakers of its
power. His victory over sin, His perfect obedience, His access
to the Father, the soul that fully knows the cleansing of the
blood in its power will know these blessings too.
1. The blood that cleanses my conscience is the blood that gave Christ access into the
Holiest. If I truly desire, if I know and honour and trust the blood, it will give me access too.
2. How completely every vestige of an evil conscience can be taken away and hept away
by the redeeming power of this precious blood! Let us believe that our High Priest, whose
entrance into the sanctuary and whose ministry there, is all In the power of the blood, will
make it true to us.
3. This cleansing is what is elsewhere spoken of as Christ s washing us in His blood. A piece
of linen that is to be washed is steeped and saturated until every stain be taken out. As we in
faith and patience allow the blood to possess our whole inner being, we shall know what it means
that it washes whiter than snow.
9. Author unknown, “It is interesting to consider the reference in verse 13 where the ashes of a heifer are used
for the purifying of the flesh. In Numbers 19:1-10, these ashes are stored outside the camp for the people of
Israel to bathe and cleanse themselves. It is believed that this combination of heifer ashes (tallow) and the
cedar ashes combined to make soap and this combination is what they used to clean their bodies. The author
then moves on to his a fortiori argument which states that if this mixture was able to cleanse the body, how
much more will the blood of Christ cleanse our consciences from dead works.
Here is a tremendously important understanding that the author provides. Given that we have now learned
that the sacrifices offered by the Priests and High Priests were not able to make the people perfect and that
the cleansings only washed the people with regard to their flesh what is to be said of the spiritual condition of
the people? How could they be saved with such ineffective sacrifices? Clearly this questions would have
greatly raised the emotions of the readers for fear of the condemnation of the faithful saints under the old
covenant. He provides us the answer. The sacrifice of Christ was retroactive. The other sacrifices were just a
picture or a type of the one to come. When the perfect sacrifice came, its effectiveness reached backwards and
forwards to save the elect.
10. “PINK, “"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean,
sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ" (verses 13, 14). Having
again demonstrated the pre-eminency of our Priest in verses 11, 12, the apostle now exhibits the superior
efficacy of His sacrifice. By a synecdoche all sacrifices of expiation and all ordinances of purification
appointed under the law are here summarized: the blood of lambs, etc., being included. The particular
reference in the "ashes of an heifer" being to Numbers 19:2-17, with which should be carefully compared
John 13:1-15. It is principally the use of the ordinance of Numbers 19 which is here in view. An heifer having
been burned, its ashes were preserved, that, being mixed with pure water, they might be sprinkled on persons
who had become legally unclean. When an Israelite, through contact with death, became ceremonially defiled,
he was cut off from all the public worship of Jehovah; but when he carried out the instructions of Numbers
19 he was restored.
Those "ashes," then, were a most merciful provision of God; without them, all acceptable worship had soon

171. ceased. They had an efficacy, for they availed to the purifying of the flesh, which was a temporary, external
and ceremonial cleansing. Typically, they pointed to that spiritual, inward and eternal cleansing which the
blood of Christ provides. "The defilements which befall believers are many, and some of them unavoidable
whilst they live in this world: yea, the best of their services have defilements adhering to them. Were it not
that the blood of Christ, in its purifying virtue, is in a continual readiness unto faith, that God therein had
opened a fountain for sin and uncleanness, the worship of the church would not be acceptable unto Him. In a
constant application thereunto, doth the exercise of faith much consist" (John Owen).
"How much more shall the blood of Christ," etc. If the blood and ashes of beasts, under the appointment of
God, were efficacious unto an external and temporary justification and sanctification—that is, the removal of
both guilt and ceremonial pollution—how much more shall the sacrifice of Him who was promised of old, was
the Anointed and therefore the One ordained and accepted of God, effectually and eternally cleanse those to
whom it is applied
"The blood of Christ is comprehensive of all that He did and suffered in order unto our redemption,
inasmuch as the shedding of it was the way and means whereby He offered Himself (in and by it) unto God"
(John Owen).
"Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself." There has been considerable difference of opinion as to
whether the "eternal Spirit" has reference to the Divine nature of Christ animating and sustaining His
humanity, or to the third Person of the Trinity. That which settles the point for us is this: Christ "offered
Himself" to God: that is, in His entire person, while acting in His mediatorial office. As the Mediator, He took
upon Him the "form of a servant," and therefore was He filled and energized by the Spirit in all that He did.
Christ was "obedient unto death:" as He was subject to the Spirit in going into the wilderness (Matthew 4:1),
so the Spirit led Him a willing victim to the cross. This wondrous statement shows us the perfect cooperation
of the Eternal Three, concurring in the great work of redemption.
Christ offered Himself "without spot," to God. There is a double reference in these words: unto the purity of
His person, and to the holiness of His life. There is both a moral and a legal sense to the expression. It speaks
of Christ’s fitness and meetness to be a sacrifice for our sins. Not only was there no blemish in His nature and
no defect in His character, but there was every moral excellence. He had fulfilled the law in thought, word
and deed, having loved the Lord His God with all His heart and His neighbor as Himself. Therefore was He
fully qualified to act for His people.
"Purge your conscience from dead works." This is one of the effects produced by Christ’s sacrifice, an effect
which the legal ordinances were incapable of securing. Because Christ’s sacrifice has expiated our sins, when
the Spirit applies its virtues to the heart, that is, when He gives faith to appropriate them, our sense of guilt is
removed, peace is communicated, and we are enabled to approach God not only without dread, but as joyous
worshippers. The "conscience" is here specially singled out (cf. Hebrews 10:22 for the larger meaning)
because it is the proper seat of the guilt of sin, charging it on the soul, and hindering an approach unto God.
By "dead works" are meant our sins as unto their guilt and defilement—cf. our comments on Hebrews 6:1.
True believers are delivered from the curse of the law, which is death.
"To serve the living God," not simply in outward form but in sincerity and in truth. This is the advantage
and blessing which we receive from our conscience being purged. Christians have both the right and the
liberty to "serve God." The "living God" cannot be served by those who are dead in sins, and therefore
alienated from Him. But the sacrifice of Christ has purchased the gift of the Spirit unto all for whom He died,
and the Spirit renews and equips the saint for acceptable worship. "This is the end of our purgation: for we
are not washed by Christ that we may plunge ourselves again into new filth, but that our purity may serve to
glorify God" (John Calvin). Under the word "serve" is comprised all the duties which we owe unto God, not
only as His creatures, but as His children. Then let us earnestly seek grace to put Romans 12:1 into daily
practice.
• “It is interesting to consider the reference in verse 13 where the ashes of a heifer are used for the
purifying of the flesh. In Numbers 19:1-10, these ashes are stored outside the camp for the people of Israel to
bathe and cleanse themselves. It is believed that this combination of heifer ashes (tallow) and the cedar ashes
combined to make soap and this combination is what they used to clean their bodies. The author then moves
on to his a fortiori argument which states that if this mixture was able to cleanse the body, how much more
will the blood of Christ cleanse our consciences from dead works.
• Here is a tremendously important understanding that the author provides. Given that we have now
learned that the sacrifices offered by the Priests and High Priests were not able to make the people perfect
and that the cleansings only washed the people with regard to their flesh what is to be said of the spiritual

172. condition of the people? How could they be saved with such ineffective sacrifices? Clearly this questions
would have greatly raised the emotions of the readers for fear of the condemnation of the faithful saints
under the old covenant. He provides us the answer. The sacrifice of Christ was retroactive. The other
sacrifices were just a picture or a type of the one to come. When the perfect sacrifice came, its effectiveness
reached backwards and forwards to save the elect.
Dr. Donald Guthrie makes this comment on verses 13 and 14. "Two examples are chosen from the Levitical
sacrifices to be representative of the general provisions of the Mosaic law to provide for purification of sin.
The first -- the blood of goats and bulls -- probably as reference to the offerings of the Day of Atonement
(Lv.16), and the second -- the ashes of a heifer -- could refer to the occasional offering of a heifer (Num.19).
One of the most important contrasts is between the external nature of the Levitical offerings and the
essentially spiritual character of the offering of Christ. The Levitical offerings could and did provide
ceremonial purity on a temporary basis, but the offering which Christ made could purify your conscience, i.e.
it was an inner and spiritual cleansing."
Andrew Murray also notes that Numbers 19 referred to in our text, regarding the ashes of a heifer, showed
"that anyone who had touched a dead body was unclean, and had to be excluded from the camp. To meet the
need, the ashes of a heifer that had been sacrificed, and of which the blood had been sprinkled towards the
tabernacle, were mingled with water, and sprinkled on the one who has been defiled. The sprinkling restored
him to his place and privileges; with a clear conscience he could now take part in the life and the worship of
God's people."
These references which we see in our text were known to the readers and they would have immediately seen
that it was true that God made provision to ceremonially clean those who had been defiled in Israel. But if
that was the extent of fellowship with God what a sad state of affairs. For the next time you became
ceremonially unclean, as did a woman every month because of her menstrual flow (Lev.15:25), you would
always have to be looking to the next ceremony to make yourself clean in the sight of God and men.
14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who
through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished
to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to
death, so that we may serve the living God!
1. BARNES, "How much more shall the blood of Christ - As being infinitely more
precious than the blood of an animal could possibly be. If the blood of an animal had any
efficacy at all, even in removing ceremonial pollutions, how much more is it reasonable to
suppose may be effected by the blood of the Son of God!
Who through the eternal Spirit - This expression is very difficult, and has given rise to a
great variety of interpretation. - Some mss. instead of “eternal” here, read “holy,” making it refer
directly to the Holy Spirit; see “Wetstein.” These various readings, however, are not regarded as
of sufficient authority to lead to a change in the text, and are of importance only as showing that
it was an early opinion that the Holy Spirit is here referred to. The principal opinions which have
been entertained of the meaning of this phrase, are the following.

173. (1) That which regards it as referring to the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity. This
was the opinion of Owen, Doddridge, and archbishop Tillotson.
(2) That which refers it to the “divine nature” of Christ. Among those who have maintained
this opinion, are Beza, Ernesti, Wolf, Vitringa, Storr, and the late Dr. John P. Wilson. mss.
Notes.
(3) Others, as Grotius, Rosenmuller, Koppe, understand it as meaning “endless” or “immortal
life,” in contradistinction from the Jewish sacrifices which were of a perishable nature, and
which needed so often to be repeated.
(4) Others regard it as referring to the glorified person of the Saviour, meaning that in his
exalted, or spiritual station in heaven, he presents the efficacy of his blood.
(5) Others suppose that it means “divine influence,” and that the idea is, that Christ was
actuated and filled with a divine influence when he offered up himself as a sacrifice; an influence
which was not of a temporal and fleeting nature, but which was eternal in its efficacy. This is the
interpretation preferred by Prof. Stuart.
For an examination of these various opinions, see his “Excursus, xviii.” on this Epistle. It is
difficult, if not impossible, to decide what is the true meaning of the passage amidst this
diversity of opinion; but there are some reasons which seem to me to make it probable that the
Holy Spirit is intended, and that the idea is, that Christ made his great sacrifice under “the
extraordinary influences of that Eternal Spirit.” The reasons which lead me to this opinion, are
the following:
(1) It is what would occur to the great mass of the readers of the New Testament. It is
presumed that the great body of sober, plain, and intelligent readers of the Bible, on
perusing the passage, suppose that it refers to the Holy Spirit, the third person of the
Trinity. There are few better and safer rules for the interpretation of a volume designed
like the Bible for the mass of mankind, than to abide by the sense in which they
understand it.
(2) This interpretation is one which is most naturally conveyed by the language of the original.
The phrase “the spirit” - τᆵ πνέυµα to pneuma - has so far a technical and established
meaning in the New Testament as to denote the Holy Spirit, unless there is something in
the connection which renders such an application improper. In this case there is nothing
certainly which “necessarily” forbids such an application. The high names and Classical
authority of those who have held this opinion, are a sufficient guarantee of this.
(3) This interpretation accords with the fact that the Lord Jesus is represented as having been
eminently endowed with the influences of the Holy Spirit; compare notes on Joh_3:34.
Though he was divine, yet he was also a man, and as such was under influences similar to
those of other pious people. The Holy Spirit is the source and sustainer of all piety in the
soul, and it is not improper to suppose that the man Christ Jesus was in a remarkable
manner influenced by the Holy Spirit in his readiness to obey God and to suffer according
to his will.
(4) If there was ever any occasion on which we may suppose he was influenced by the Holy
Spirit, that of his sufferings and death here referred to may be supposed eminently to have
been such an one. It was expressive of the highest state of piety - of the purest love to God
and man - which has ever existed in the human bosom; it was the most trying time of his
own life; it was the period when there would be the most strong temptation to abandon his
work; and as the redemption of the whole world was dependent on that act, it is
reasonable to suppose that the richest heavenly grace would be there imparted to him, and
that he would then be eminently under the influence of that Spirit which was granted not
“by measure unto him.” notes, Joh_3:34.

174. (5) This representation is not inconsistent with the belief that the sufferings and death of the
Redeemer were “voluntary,” and had all the merit which belongs to a voluntary
transaction. Piety in the heart of a Christian now is not less voluntary because it is
produced and cherished by the Holy Spirit, nor is there less excellence in it because the
Holy Spirit imparts strong faith in the time of temptation and trial. It seems to me,
therefore, that the meaning of this expression is, that the Lord Jesus was led by the strong
influences of the Spirit of God to devote himself as a sacrifice for sin. It was not by any
temporary influence; not by mere excitement; it was by the influence of the “Eternal”
Spirit of God, and the sacrifice thus offered could, therefore, accomplish effects which
would be eternal in their character. It was not like the offering made by the Jewish high
priest which was necessarily renewed every year, but it was under the influence of one who
was “eternal,” and the effects of whose influence might be everlasting. It may be added,
that if this is a correct exposition, it follows that the Holy Spirit is eternal, and must,
therefore, be divine.
Offered himself - That is, as a sacrifice. He did not offer a bullock or a goat, but he offered
“himself.” The sacrifice of oneself is the highest offering which he can make; in this case it was
the highest which the universe had to make.
Without spot - Margin, “Or fault.” The animal that was offered in the Jewish sacrifices was
to be without blemish; see Lev_1:10; Lev_22:17-22. It was not to be lame, or blind, or diseased.
The word which is used here and rendered “without spot” ᅎµωµος amomos - refers to this fact -
that there was no defect or blemish. The idea is, that the Lord Jesus, the great sacrifice, was
“perfect;” see Heb_7:26.
Purge your conscience - That is, cleanse, purify, or sanctify your conscience. The idea is,
that this offering would take away whatever rendered the conscience defiled or sinful. The
offerings of the Jews related in the main to external purification, and were not adapted to give
peace to a troubled conscience. They could render the worshipper externally pure so that he
might draw near to God and not be excluded by any ceremonial pollution or defilement; but the
mind, the heart, the conscience, they could not make pure. They could not remove what troubles
a man when he recollects that he has violated a holy law and has offended God, and when he
looks forward to an awful judgment-bar. The word “conscience” here is not to be understood as
a distinct and independent faculty of the soul, but as the soul or mind itself reflecting and
pronouncing on its own acts. The whole expression refers to a mind alarmed by the recollection
of guilt - for it is guilt only that disturbs a man’s conscience.
Guilt originates in the soul remorse and despair; guilt makes a man troubled when he thinks
of death and the judgment; it is guilt only which alarms a man when he thinks of a holy God;
and it is nothing but guilt that makes the entrance into another world terrible and awful. If a
man had no guilt he would never dread his Maker, nor would the presence of his God be ever
painful to him (compare Gen_3:6-10); if a man had no guilt he would not fear to die - for what
have the innocent to fear anywhere? The universe is under the government of a God of goodness
and truth, and, under such a government, how can those who have done no wrong have
anything to dread? The fear of death, the apprehension of the judgment to come, and “the dread
of God,” are strong and irrefragable proofs that every man is a sinner. The only thing, therefore,
which ever disturbs the conscience, and makes death dreadful, and God an object of aversion,
and eternity awful, is guilt. If that is removed, man is calm and peaceful; if not, he is the victim
of wretchedness and despair.
From dead works - From works that are deadly in their nature, or that lead to death. Or it
may mean from works that have no spirituality and no life. By “works” here the apostle does not
refer to their outward religious acts particularly, but to the conduct of the life, to what people do;
and the idea is, that their acts are not spiritual and saving but such as lead to death; see note,
Heb_6:1.

175. To serve the living God - Not in outward form, but in sincerity and in truth; to be his true
friends and worshippers. The phrase “the living God” is commonly used in the Scriptures to
describe the true God as distinguished from idols, which are represented as “dead,” or without
life; Psa_115:4-7. The idea in this verse is, that it is only the sacrifice made by Christ which can
remove the stain of guilt from the soul. It could not be done by the blood of bulls and of goats -
for that did not furnish relief to a guilty conscience, but it could be done by the blood of Christ.
The sacrifice which he made for sin was so pure and of such value, that God can consistently
pardon the offender and restore him to his favor. That blood too can give peace - for Christ
poured it out in behalf of the guilty. It is not that he took part with the sinner against God; it is
not that he endeavors to convince him who has a troubled conscience that he is needlessly
alarmed, or that sin is not as bad as it is represented to be, or that it does not expose the soul to
danger. Christ never took the part of the sinner against God; he never taught that sin was a small
matter, or that it did not expose to danger. He admitted all that is said of its evil. But he provides
for giving peace to the guilty conscience by shedding his blood that it may be forgiven, and by
revealing a God of mercy who is willing to receive the offender into favor, and to treat him as
though he had never sinned. Thus, the troubled conscience may find peace; and thus, though
guilty, man may be delivered from the dread of the wrath to come.
2. CLARKE, "Who through the eternal Spirit - This expression is understood two ways:
1. Of the Holy Ghost himself. As Christ’s miraculous conception was by the Holy Spirit, and
he wrought all his miracles by the Spirit of God, so his death or final offering was made
through or by the eternal Spirit; and by that Spirit he was raised from the dead, 1Pe_3:18.
Indeed, through the whole of his life be was justified by the Spirit; and we find that in this
great work of human redemption, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were
continually employed: therefore the words may be understood of the Holy Spirit properly.
2. Of the eternal Logos or Deity which dwelt in the man Christ Jesus, through the energy of
which the offering of his humanity became an infinitely meritorious victim; therefore the
Deity of Christ is here intended.
But we cannot well consider one of these distinct from the other; and hence probably arose
the various readings in the MSS. and versions on this article. Instead of δια Πνευµατος αιωνιου,
by the Eternal Spirit, δια Πνευµατος ᅓγιου, by the Holy Spirit, is the reading of D*, and more
than twenty others of good note, besides the Coptic, Slavonic, Vulgate, two copies of the Itala,
Cyril, Athanasius sometimes, Damascenus, Chrysostom, and some others. But the common
reading is supported by ABD**, and others, besides the Syriac, all the Arabic, Armenian,
Ethiopic, Athanasius generally, Theodoret, Theophylact, and Ambrosius. This, therefore, is the
reading that should he preferred, as it is probable that the Holy Ghost, not the Logos, is what the
apostle had more immediately in view. But still we must say, that the Holy Spirit, with the
eternal Logos, and the almighty Father, equally concurred in offering up the sacrifice of the
human nature of Christ, in order to make atonement for the sin of the world.
Purge your conscience - Καθαριει την συνειδησιν· Purify your conscience. The term
purify should be everywhere, both in the translation of the Scriptures, and in preaching the
Gospel, preferred to the word purge, which, at present, is scarcely ever used in the sense in
which our translators have employed it.
Dead works - Sin in general, or acts to which the penalty of death is annexed by the law. See
the phrase explained, Heb_6:1 (note).

176. 3. GILL, "How much more shall the blood of Christ,.... Which is not the blood of a mere
man, but the blood of the Son of God; and the argument is from the lesser to the greater; that if
the ashes of the burnt heifer, which was a type of Christ in his sufferings, mixed with water,
typically sanctified to the purifying of men externally, in a ceremonial way, then much more
virtue must there be in the blood of Christ, to cleanse the soul inwardly:
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God; Christ is a priest,
and the sacrifice he has offend up is "himself"; not his divine nature, but his human nature, soul
and body, as in union with his divine person; which gives his sacrifice the preference to all
others; and is the reason of its virtue and efficacy, and is expressive of his great love to man: and
this sacrifice was offered up "to God", against whom his people had sinned, and whose justice
must be satisfied, and which is of a sweet smelling savour to him; besides, he called him to this
work, and engaged him in it, and is well pleased with this offering, as he must needs be, since it
is offered up "without spot"; which expresses the purity of Christ's nature and sacrifice, and the
perfection of it, which is such, that no fault can be found in it by the justice of God; and hence,
the saints, for whom it is offered, are unblamable and irreprovable, There is an allusion in the
clause, both to the priests and to their sacrifices, which were neither of them to have any spot or
blemish on them; and this unblemished sacrifice was offered unto God by Christ,
through the eternal Spirit; not the human soul of Christ; for though that is a spirit, yet not
eternal, and besides, was a part of the sacrifice; but rather the divine nature of Christ, which is a
spirit, and may be so called in distinction from the flesh, or human nature, as it sometimes is,
and this is eternal; it was from everlasting, as well as is to everlasting; and this supported him
under all his sufferings, and carried him through them, and put virtue unto them; and Christ
was a priest, in the divine, as well as human nature: though by it may be better understood "the
Holy Ghost"; and so the Vulgate Latin version reads, and also several copies; since the divine
nature rather acts by the human nature, than the human nature by the divine; and Christ is
often said to do such and such things by the Holy Spirit; and as the Holy Ghost formed and filled
the human nature of Christ, so he assisted and supported it under sufferings. This whole clause
is inserted by way of parenthesis, showing the efficacy of Christ's blood, and from whence it is:
to purge your conscience from dead works; that is, "from the works of sin", as the
Ethiopic version renders it; which are performed by dead men, separate and alienated from the
life of God, are the cause of the death of the soul, and expose to eternal death, and are like dead
carcasses, nauseous and infectious; and even duties themselves, performed without faith and
love, are dead works; nor can they procure life, and being depended on, issue in death; and even
the works of believers themselves are sometimes performed in a very lifeless manner, and are
attended with sin and pollution, and need purging: the allusion is to the pollution by the touch
of dead bodies; and there may be some respect to the sacrifices of slain beasts, after the sacrifice
and death of Christ, by believing Jews, who were sticklers for the ceremonies of the law, and
thereby contracted guilt; but immoralities are chiefly designed, and with these the conscience of
man is defiled; and nothing short of the blood of Christ can remove the pollution of sin; as that
being shed procures atonement, and so purges away the guilt of sin, or makes reconciliation for
it, so being sprinkled on the conscience by the Spirit of God, it speaks peace and pardon, and
pacifies and purges it, and removes every incumbrance from it: the Alexandrian copy, the
Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions, read, "our conscience". The end and use of such purgation is,
"to serve the living God"; so called to distinguish him from the idols of the Gentiles, and in
opposition to dead works; and because he has life in himself, essentially and independently, and
is the author and giver of life to others; and it is but the reasonable service of his people, to

177. present their souls and bodies as a living sacrifice to him; and who ought to serve him in a lively
manner, in faith, and with fervency, and not with a slavish, but a godly filial fear; and one that
has his conscience purged by the blood of Christ, and is sensibly impressed with a discovery of
pardoning grace, is in the best capacity for such service. The Alexandrian copy reads, "the living
and true God".
4. HENRY, "He infers very justly hence the far greater efficacy of the blood of Christ
(Heb_9:14): How much more shall the blood of Christ, etc. Here observe, [1.] What it was that
gave such efficacy to the blood of Christ. First, It was his offering himself to God, the human
nature upon the altar of his divine nature, he being priest, altar, and sacrifice, his divine nature
serving for the two former, and his human nature for the last; now such a priest, altar, and
sacrifice, could not but be propitiatory. Secondly, It was Christ's offering up himself to God
through the eternal Spirit, not only as the divine nature supported the human, but the Holy
Ghost, which he had without measure, helping him in all, and in this great act of obedience
offering himself. Thirdly, It was Christ's offering himself to God without spot, without any sinful
stain either in his nature or life; this was conformable to the law of sacrifices, which required
them to be without blemish. Now further observe, [2.] What the efficacy of Christ's blood is; it is
very great. For, First, It is sufficient to purge the conscience from dead works, it reaches to the
very soul and conscience, the defiled soul, defiled with sin, which is a dead work, proceeds from
spiritual death, and tends to death eternal. As the touching of a dead body gave a legal
uncleanness, so meddling with sin gives a moral and real defilement, fixes it in the very soul; but
the blood of Christ has efficacy to purge it out. Secondly, It is sufficient to enable us to serve the
living God, not only by purging away that guilt which separates between God and sinners, but by
sanctifying and renewing the soul through the gracious influences of the Holy Spirit, purchased
by Christ for this purpose, that we might be enabled to serve the living God in a lively manner.
5. JAMISON, "offered himself — The voluntary nature of the offering gives it especial
efficacy. He “through the eternal Spirit,” that is, His divine Spirit (Rom_1:4, in contrast to His
“flesh,” Heb_9:3; His Godhead, 1Ti_3:16; 1Pe_3:18), “His inner personality” [Alford], which
gave a free consent to the act, offered Himself. The animals offered had no spirit or will to
consent in the act of sacrifice; they were offered according to the law; they had a life neither
enduring, nor of any intrinsic efficacy. But He from eternity, with His divine and everlasting
Spirit, concurred with the Father’s will of redemption by Him. His offering began on the altar of
the cross, and was completed in His entering the holiest place with His blood. The eternity and
infinitude of His divine Spirit (compare Heb_7:16) gives eternal (“eternal redemption,”
Heb_9:12, also compare Heb_9:15) and infinite merit to His offering, so that not even the
infinite justice of God has any exception to take against it. It was “through His most burning
love, flowing from His eternal Spirit,” that He offered Himself [Oecolampadius].
without spot — The animal victims had to be without outward blemish; Christ on the cross
was a victim inwardly and essentially stainless (1Pe_1:19).
purge — purify from fear, guilt, alienation from Him, and selfishness, the source of dead
works (Heb_9:22, Heb_9:23).
your — The oldest manuscripts read “our.” The Vulgate, however, supports English Version
reading.
conscience — moral religious consciousness.
dead works — All works done in the natural state, which is a state of sin, are dead; for they
come not from living faith in, and love to, “the living God” (Heb_11:6). As contact with a dead

178. body defiled ceremonially (compare the allusion, “ashes of an heifer,” Heb_9:13), so dead works
defile the inner consciousness spiritually.
to serve — so as to serve. The ceremonially unclean could not serve God in the outward
communion of His people; so the unrenewed cannot serve God in spiritual communion. Man’s
works before justification, however lifelike they look, are dead, and cannot therefore be accepted
before the living God. To have offered a dead animal to God would have been an insult (compare
Mal_1:8); much more for a man not justified by Christ’s blood to offer dead works. But those
purified by Christ’s blood in living faith do serve (Rom_12:1), and shall more fully serve God
(Rev_22:3).
living God — therefore requiring living spiritual service (Joh_4:24).
6. CALVIN, "Who through the eternal Spirit, etc. He now clearly shows how
Christ's death is to be estimated, not by the external act, but by the
power of the Spirit. For Christ suffered as man; but that death becomes
saving to us through the efficacious power of the Spirit; for a
sacrifice, which was to be an eternal expiation, was a work more than
human. And he calls the Spirit eternal for this reason, that we may
know that the reconciliation, of which he is the worker or effecter, is
eternal. [150] By saying, without spot, or unblamable, though he
alludes to the victims under the Law, which were not to have a blemish
or defect, he yet means, that Christ alone was the lawful victim and
capable of appeasing God; for there was always in others something that
might be justly deemed wanting; and hence he said before that the
covenant of the Law was not amempton, blameless.
From dead works, etc. Understand by these either such works as produce
death, or such as are the fruits or effects of death; for as the life
of the soul is our union with God, so they who are alienated from him
through sin may be justly deemed to be dead.
To serve the living God. This, we must observe, is the end of our
purgation; for we are not washed by Christ, that we may plunge
ourselves again into new filth, but that our purity may serve to
glorify God. Besides, he teaches us, that nothing can proceed from us
that can be pleasing to God until we are purified by the blood of
Christ; for as we are all enemies to God before our reconciliation, so
he regards as abominable all our works; hence the beginning of
acceptable service is reconciliation. And then, as no work is so pure
and so free from stains, that it can of itself please God, it is
necessary that the purgation through the blood of Christ should
intervene, which alone can efface all stains. And there is a striking
contrast between the living God and dead works.
7. MURRAY, THROUGH THE ETERNAL SPIRIT. 14
ONE might well ask for the reason why the blood of Christ,

179. which hath had such infinite power in conquering sin and death
and in opening heaven to Christ and to us, does not exercise a
mightier influence even in earnest Christians, in cleansing our
heart and lifting us into a life in the joy of God s presence. The
first answer must be, that we seek too little for a real insight
into its divine and infinite worth. The blood of the heavenly
Son, shed in the power of the Eternal Spirit, could not but again
return heavenward : as God s Spirit leads us by faith to gaze
on its power in heaven, and to see how through all heaven its
power is manifest, we shall learn to expect and to receive its
working to keep us in God s presence, in a power above all
that thought can conceive. The same Eternal Spirit, through
whom the blood-shedding took place, will effect in us the
blood-sprinkling too, and make us indeed partakers of what it
has accomplished in God s presence above.
This is a lesson of the utmost consequence. If the blood is
His who offered Himself to God through the Eternal Spirit,
if it is in the power and life of that Spirit that the blood was
brought into heaven, and now has its place there, we may be
sure that that Spirit will ever work with and in that blood.
There are three that bear witness on earth : the Spirit and the
water and the blood. The Spirit and the blood must and will
ever go together. We must not limit our faith in the power
of the blood in our heart to what we can understand. Our
faith must ever be enlarging, to expect that the Holy Spirit,
according to His hidden but almighty and uninterrupted work
ing, can maintain the heavenly efficacy of the blood in a way
to us inconceivable. Just as Christ is the visible revelation on
earth and in heaven of the invisible God, so the Holy Spirit
again is the communication of the life and redemption of the
unseen Christ. The Holy Spirit is the power of the inner life.
Within us, down in the to ourselves inaccessible depths of our
being, He is able, as the Eternal Spirit, to maintain, in them
that yield to Him, the divine power of the blood to cleanse
from sin and to give abiding access to the presence of God. Let
him who would know to the full the mighty, the divine, the
inexpressible power and blessing the blood each moment can
bring in Him, remember, it was through the Eternal Spirit it
was shed.
In connection with this there is still another lesson. The
Spirit not only applies the power of the blood, but in doing so
He reveals its spiritual meaning. The blood has its value, not
from the mere act of physical suffering and death, but from the
inner life and disposition that animated Christ in shedding it.

180. It is the blood of the Lamb who offered Himself without
blemish unto God, with which our heart is brought into a divine
and living contact. Self-offering, self-sacrifice, was the dis
position of which the blood was the expression, and from which
alone it had its worth. Where the Eternal Spirit communicates
the power of the blood, He communicates this disposition.
Christ humbled Himself and became obedient to death. There
fore^ as the Lamb of God, who gave His blood, He was the
embodiment of meekness, and humility, and submissive surrender
to God s will. It was our pride and self-will that was the very
root and life of sin in us : as we are washed in the blood
of the Lamb, His spirit of meekness and submissiveness
and obedience will work in us, because the same Eternal Spirit,
through which the blood was shed, applies it in our hearts.
We know what it means to wash our clothes in water, how
they are plunged into it and saturated with it, until the
water carries off all defilement. The blood of Jesus Christ
cleanses from all sin, because the Eternal Spirit imparts the
very life and power of which that precious blood-shedding was
the outcome and the fruit. This is the power that cleanses
the conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Not
the blood only, as shed upon earth, as the first object of our
faith for pardon, but the blood as shed through the Eternal
Spirit, and glorified in the spirit life of heaven, brings us truly
into the inner sanctuary, and empowers us to serve Him as the
living God. "As nothing but the Eternal Spirit could have
overcome or redeemed fallen nature, as Christ took it upon
Him, so nothing can possibly overcome or redeem the fallen
soul or body of any child of Adam, but that same overcoming
and redeeming Spirit, really living and acting in it, in the
same manner as it did in the humanity of Christ."
We live in the dispensation of the Spirit the Spirit of God s
Son, who hath been sent for this into our heart. It is the
dispensation of the inner life, in which we are brought into the
inner sanctuary, the secret of His presence, and the inner
sanctuary is found within us, in that secret inner place which
none but God s Spirit can search out. In that hidden depth is
the house God hath prepared for Himself; there, in the inner
man, the Holy Spirit will reveal, in a way that sense and reason
cannot apprehend, the power of Christ s blood to cleanse and
bring God nigh. Oh let us believe the infinite mysteries with
which we are surrounded. And above all, this mystery too,
that within us, the blood of Christ, the Lamb of God that
mystery of mysteries is being applied and kept in full action
by the Eternal Spirit, cleansing us and revealing God s presence

181. in us.
1. What a mystery I what blessedness I a heart sprinkled with the blood of the Son of God I
To walk before God day by day with the blood of His Son upon us I To know that the Lamb of God
sees us washed In His own blood I Oh, we need, let us ash, the Eternal Spirit to make all this
clear to us.
2. If our faith Is only to belieue what our reason can make clear to us no wonder the power
of the blood effects so little. Let us have faith, not In what we understand, but let us haue faith
In God, and the heavenly, the Inexpressibly glorious realities, of the blood and Spirit of the Son.
3. What a tender, careful, holy fear comes upon a soul that Hues In the full and living
consciousness of the blessed reality a heart sprinkled with the blood of the Lamb.
4. Beware of trying to comprehend all the blood means, or of being discouraged when you fail
of doing so. The blood in heaven is a divine and inscrutable mystery : be content to believe in Its
efficacy. When the Holy Spirit comes Into the heart in power, He applies the blood in a power far
beyond what we can think or understand.
8. MURRAY, THE POWER OF THE BLOOD TO FIT FOR THE SERVICE OF THE LIVING GOD.
IX. 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ cleanse your con
science from dead works to serve the living God.
WE must not regard the cleansing in the blood of Christ as the
end, the final aim, of redemption. It is only the beginning, the
means to a higher end the fitness for the service of the living
God. It is the restoration to the fellowship of Him who has
life and gives life. The blood gives cleansing from dead works,
the works of the law and of self, with its own efforts ; it brings
into a living relation to the living God. God and His fellow
ship, a life in His love and service, the living God and the
enjoyment of His presence, this is the aim of redemption.
The living God ! This name was used in the Old Testa
ment as a contrast to the dead idols of the heathen. In the
New Testament it points us to the danger of our forming an
image of God, not in wood or stone, but in our mind and
imagination athought-image, in which there is neither life nor
truth. What we need first of all in religion is that we believe
that God is, that our faith realise Him as the living One, who is
all that He is, in the power of an infinite life and energy. He is
the living God! He speaks and hears. He feels and acts.
He has the power to make us know that He is near to us, and
that He receives us when we come near to Him. The know-
ledge of the living God is the ground of a living faith, a living
fellowship, a living service. As the living God, He is all, and
does all and fills all the ever-present, ever-working God.
To serve the living God ! The glory of the creature is to
serve God, to be a vessel in which He can pour His fulness,
a channel through which He can show forth His glory, an
instrument for working out His purposes. This was what
man was created for in the image of God. The whole object of
redemption is to bring us back to a life in the living service of

182. God. It is for this the Holiest of All was opened to us by the
blood as the place of service. It is for this our conscience is
cleansed in the blood, as the fitness for service. A life in the
Holiest of All is a life in which everything is done under the
sense of God s glory and presence, and to His glory ; a life that
has no object but the service of God.
It was thus with the priests in Israel. They were set apart
by the sprinkling of blood (Ex. xxix. 19, 20). The object of
this was (Deut. x. 8) to fit them to stand before the Lord, to
minister unto Him, to bless in His name. One great reason
why many Christians never enter into the full joy and power of
redemption, into the life within the veil, is that they seek it for
themselves. Let us beware lest we seek the access into the
Holiest, the joy of unclouded fellowship with God, the power of
the blood to cleanse, only for the sake of our advance in holiness
or in happiness. The whole appointment of the sanctuary and
the priests was that there might be men who could come before
God to minister to Him, and then go out and bless their fellow-
men. Christ entered through His blood within the veil, to go
and serve ; to be a minister of the sanctuary in the power of the
blood, by which He could cleanse others and admit them too
within the veil. To know the power of the blood to cleanse and
admit within the veil, and give us part in the priests ministry of
blessing men : this will come as we seek it as fitness to serve
the living God.
How much more shall the blood of Christ cleanse your
conscience from dead works to serve the living God ? The
cleansing is for service. There was a great difference between
the people in the outer court and the priests within the taber
nacle. The former saw the blood sprinkled on the altar, and
trusted for forgiveness ; the blood was not applied to their
persons. The priests were sprinkled with the blood ; that gave
them access to the sanctuary to serve God there. We still have
outer-court Christians, who look at Calvary, and trust for forgive
ness, but know nothing of the access to God which the more
direct and powerful application of the blood from heaven by the
Holy Spirit gives. Oh let us give ourselves to be priests, wholly
separated to the service of God, wholly given up to God, for
Him to work in us and through us what perishing men need,
our consecration to this service will urge us mightily to claim an
ever mightier experience of the blood, because we shall feel that
nothing less than a full entrance into, and a true abiding in God s
presence, can fit us for doing God s work. The more we see
and approve that the object of the cleansing must only be for
service, the more shall we see and experience that the power for
service is only in the cleansing. 1
How much more shall the blood cleanse from dead works
1 "The blood contains that which makes white (Rev. vii. 14). Not only the man,
but his garments are made white. This is more than cleansing. It is the word used
regarding Christ s transfiguration garments (Matt. xvii. 2) ; the angel robes
(Matt, xxviii. 3) ; the heavenly clothing (Rev. iv. 4) ; the judgment throne (Rev.
xx. n), whiter than snow, white as the garments of Christ. What potency, what

183. excellency, what virtue does this blood contain ! How it beautifies ! How it glorifies ! " H. BONAR.
to serve the living God ! If we experience in ourselves, or in
those around us, that there is little of the power and presence
of the living God in our religious service, we have here the
reason. If we find that in that service dead works still prevail,
and that in prayer and preaching, in home life and work around
us, the duties of the religious life are performed without the
power of the life and Spirit of God, let us learn the lesson
it is only the effectual cleansing, through the Eternal Spirit, of
the blood that has been taken into the Holiest, that can fit us to
serve the living God. That blood, witnessed to by the Holy
Spirit, brings us into the Holiest, and makes God to us a living
God ! That blood brings the life of the Holiest into our hearts,
cleanses our conscience from every dead work, from every
attempt and every hope to do anything in our own strength,
gives the consciousness that we are now ransomed and set free
and empowered from heaven to serve the God of heaven in the
power of a life that comes from heaven. The blood of Christ
doth indeed cleanse us to serve the living God !
1. How vain it would have been for anyone to seek the priestly consecration with blood, and
the entrance into the sanctuary, if he were not to do the priest s service. Let us give up the vain
attempt. Let us seek the power of the blood to serve the living God, as His ministers to our
fellow-men, The whole inward life of our High Priest, which He imparts to us, consisted of these
two things : it was a life in the will of God, and in self-sacrificing hue to men.
2. The priests honoured the blood sprinkled on them by boldly entering the tabernacle. Oh
let us honour the blood of the Lamb by believing that it gives the power for a life in the Holiest, in
the service of the living God I
3. Conscience tells me what I must think of myself . The blood tells me what God thinks of
me. A conscience cleansed with the blood is a conscience that glories in this, that in holiness
and In sincerity of God we behave ourselves in the world.
4. Oh to realise it I Christ went Into the Holiest, not for Himself, but for us. And we go in,
too, by His blood and in His Spirit, not only for ourselves but for others.
9. DREW WORTHEN, “Our consciences have been cleansed once and for all as we rejoice in the final act of
Christ's redemption. We stand before our God as "not guilty" as we place our faith in Christ. And because of
that position before our heavenly Father we may serve Him, not in a fear which makes us recoil at His
presence, but in an awesome reverence which, out of gratitude, enables us to approach His throne with joy
and thankfulness knowing that He will not go back on His word.
Speaking of Christ Luke says in LUK 1:72 [He came] "to show mercy to our fathers and to remember his
holy covenant,
73 the oath he swore to our father Abraham:
74 to rescue us from the hand of our enemies, and to enable us to serve him without fear
75 in holiness and righteousness before him all our days."
Because we are new creatures in Christ we not only rejoice in His salvation for us, but we are called out, as
Luke says, and as our writer says in verse 14, to serve the living God.
This is an aspect of Christianity today which seems to be often overlooked. There's a great deal being said of
rejoicing and enjoying this new life and getting as much from God as you deserve simply by calling on His
name. You would thing we had been called to live in a spiritual Disney World.
No, we've been called to live in an eternal world with our King and Lord whose Kingdom is not of this world.
But our service to God should be something which we do in His grace and strength as we seek to please Him

184. and use the gifts He gives for the edification of the Body of Christ.
Service to Him is a great privilege as well as a great responsibility. The apostle Paul was a man who labored
hard for the work of Christ. He knew good times as well as bad and yet he learned to be content in all of
them. This is why he could say in ROM 15:17 "Therefore I glory in Christ Jesus in my service to God."
But his service to Christ was in his service to the Church. ROM 15:31 "Pray that I may be rescued from the
unbelievers in Judea and that my service in Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints there,
32 so that by God's will I may come to you with joy and together with you be refreshed.
33 The God of peace be with you all. Amen."
Paul even commends other believers in their service as an integral part of their worship of God. 2CO 9:12
"This service that you perform is not only supplying the needs of God's people but is also overflowing in
many expressions of thanks to God.
13 Because of the service by which you have proved yourselves, men will praise God for the obedience that
accompanies your confession of the gospel of Christ, and for your generosity in sharing with them and with
everyone else."
We've been called by God to worship Him in Spirit and in truth through our service unto Him. And this has
all been accomplished by our eternal God and Savior. It's not simply going through the motions which pleases
God and is considered true worship or service. Dr. Donald Guthrie puts it this way: "True worship
necessarily involves whole-hearted commitment to God. It involves considerably more than ceremonial
correctness."
10. ABSTRACT: "'THROUGH AN ETERNAL SPIRIT' (HEB 9:14): DID ALEXANDRIAN
PRESUPPOSITIONS FACILITATE THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY CHRISTOLOGY?"
Kenneth Schenck
Hebrews 2:10 is striking in that it makes an implicit distinction between the earthly Jesus and God as the one
'through whom' the universe was made. Since this latter function is predicated of Christ in 1:3, 2:10 requires
us to see at least a minor hiatus in the author's thinking between the pre-existent Christ and the earthly Jesus.
The common element of both, it would seem, was Christ's 'eternal spirit', referred to in 9:14. Given the
frequent suggestion that Hebrews was influenced by Philonism, the question arises as to whether the Platonic
doctrine of the immortality of the soul, as seems to be found in both the book of Wisdom and Philo, played a
role in the development of early Christology. In particular, could the assimilation of a more 'Hellenistic' view
of the immortality of the soul have catalysed a move toward the identification of Jesus with a pre-existent
divine figure, perhaps already present in background traditions?
The paper begins by comparing traditions in Hebrews relating to the earthly Jesus from those involving the
pre- and post-existent Christ. It argues that the same metaphysical dualism which pertains to the earthly and
heavenly realms in Hebrews also seems to entail a psychological dualism of body and spirit. It is Christ's
eternal spirit (9:14) and indestructible life (7:16) which makes his sacrifice efficacious. As Christ, he is
'without beginning of days or end of life' (7:3) and can virtually be equated with the logos of God, the image
of God's substance (the form of God!). Yet as Jesus, he struggles (5:7) to do that which he unequivocally
embraces before entering a body (10:7). He is tempted like all humans and yet is without sin (4:15). As the
sons learn obedience through God's discipline, so Christ also learns obedience through his sufferings (5:8).
It is difficult to compare the two traditions and not be left with some sense of embodiment as an
encumberance to spiritual existence, with the physical realm as the locus of the Devil's power (2:14). If this is
the case, then the similarity to Alexandrian tradition is unmistakable. Such a tradition included the notion of
the pre-existence of the soul, as can easily be attested in Wisdom and Philo. To speak of Christ (or of humans,
for that matter, cf. 2:14) as pre-existent would thus be par for the course.
It is arguable, however, that the earliest Christian traditions, including the earliest letters of Paul, did not
conceive of Christ's pre- or post-existence in this way. Paul the Pharisee would not likely have held such a
view, nor does such a notion appear to be present in 1 Cor. 15, which is usually tied to a notion of the
resurrection of the dead. Nevertheless, the influence of such a perspective on early Christian thought might
explain the increasing reference to Christ's pre-existence in the New Testament period, as well as to a more
continuous sense of human post-existence. Such a transition can at least be argued throughout the course of
Paul's own writing. Compare 1 Cor. 15 with 2 Cor. 5:8 and Phil. 1:23. Similarly, Christ's pre-existence is
ambiguous in the Pauline corpus until the hymn of Christ in Phil. 2:6ff.
One can at least argue, therefore, that the question of identifying the earthly Jesus with a pre-existent
heavenly power arose in conjunction with a belief in the immortality of the soul. If this notion was not held

185. originally throughout early Christianity, then it is not difficult to see how it could have served as a major
catalyst in the development of Christology.
11. M.F. Blume, THE PURPOSE OF CONSCIENCE
Anyhow, conscience warns us to return to a place of safety. As nerves urge you to remove your finger from
danger to safety, conscience urges you to a place of righteousness.
There is only one place of safety to which conscience directs you. And you will not know what that place is
unless you hear God's Word. God sends ministers to relay truths, which complement our consciences' cries,
to the lost world. Without these truths, conscience will do little good for us. We will see our need of being in a
better position, but we will not know how to get there and what that position is. But together with these
truths, the urges of the conscience that tells us to go to a place of safety are satisfied. By way of these truths
we know WHERE TO GO FOR SAFETY. Everybody knows what is right and wrong. And the preaching of
the goodness we should share with one another agrees perfectly with this inbred message from the conscience.
Yet the conscience does not tell us where to go for safety.
Your nerves inform you of severe damage in your body when you break an arm. Yet they do not supply the
remedy. They shout, "Find remedy!"
This is similar to the conscience. It shouts for us to go to a position where we won't do wrong any more!
Education teaches us that a hospital will provide remedy for a broken arm. And likewise the ministry informs
of where to find remedy for sinful failure.
In Christ there is no condemnation! That is the place that Gospel preaching and teaching informs us to go for
safety.
Paul heard the shoutings of his conscience as he sinned. He heard God's law say that certain acts were sinful.
And his conscience agreed with the law (Romans 7:16).
Roma 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that [it is] good.
Paul did not want to sin as his conscience reprimanded his wrongfulness. And God's Word likewise
condemned that sin. So when Paul did not desire to sin, He was in agreement with the law. Yet the law only
told him to get right. How was this possible? The law did not answer that.
IN CHRIST - THE FULLNESS
Paul was in misery wondering where to find remedy for his failing flesh. He found it in Christ (Romans 8:1),
as if Christ was a place you could enter. Note the vocabulary he used when he said "In" Christ.
Roma 8:1 [There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after
the flesh, but after the Spirit.
The law was a schoolmaster to bring you to Christ. You knew there had to be a place of righteous living if
there was a police force scolding your wrongfulness. But you didn't know where it was. Yet it did obviously
exist. And the law was teaching you to find a place of righteousness. It had to exist. Only, it did not exist until
a certain time period. That period arrived when Jesus died on the cross.
Your nerves teach you a lesson. If we had no nerves we would kill ourselves. Suicide would be rampant in our
world, though unintentional.
Conscience teaches us a lesson. Law taught Israel a lesson.
"Find a place of righteousness, or you'll find a place in hell."
Jesus is the answer.
"In" Christ there is no condemnation, IF one does not depend upon the flesh. The problem is the flesh. Paul
sought deliverance from the pest called flesh. To enter Christ you must not depend upon your own energy to
overcome obstacles. You must appease conscience by putting forth good works. You need to depend upon
God's divine influence to cause you to do good works. He will get you to the top!
Hold onto the power of God! Hold up the blood! There is power in the blood because your faith in Jesus'
death allows God's power to work for you! God is looking for the blood alone to instigate Him to work for
you. Throw out all the ritual and ceremony that attempts to attract God. He looks only for the blood. Nothing
else will urge Him to work for you.
Abandon fleshly effort when you confront fears. You failed to overcome a thing in the past. Now you fear
condemnation to return as it did the first time you failed. Yet this time you march on anyhow, for you depend
now upon something greater - God's Power! Thus, we overcome by faith! Not by human energy.
This causes a circumcision. The flesh that hindered is removed. Flesh is not needed since one depends upon
the Spirit's abilities now. So it is cast away. Conscience sees no need to condemn, since God deals with the

186. hardships we face.
Finally the conscience has rested. Never before could it rest. Never since Eden's fall could it rest! Biblically
speaking, one has now abandoned the route of "walking after the flesh" to live right and free of
condemnation.
Conscience has caused us to search out safety. We find it in Christ.
Unless we learn about Christ, our conscience will ever condemn us. One will never find rest.
Christian believer, do you trust in the Lord to take you through your fearful barriers? Or do you learn to live
with them and with the condemnation that tags along behind? You are living so far below your privileges!
RETURNING TO THE GARDEN OF COMPLETE UNION WITH GOD
Man left God in the garden. It was then that conscience began functioning. Man knew the difference between
good and evil. That kicked conscience into effect. Since we then know what is good and evil, when we commit
evil, our conscience torments us. Therefore, to stop the condemnation of conscience, one must return to God.
Getting back to God will bring you face to face with the cherubim veil. These fearful creatures will bar your
entrance. They represent the barriers within your own flesh. The reason these creatures were sent to guard
paradise, was the existence of sinful flesh which man began carrying about. Without fallen flesh, there would
be no guardians of Heaven's blessings.
Therefore, these creatures coincide with man's own veiling of flesh.
The veil in the tabernacle and temple was embroidered with figures of cherubim. It reminded us of the
barrier. It stopped the way to the holiest.
Only once a year could a man enter. And that, only after a lifetime of dedication in training - training that
involved ceremonial cleansing and washing. Training that involved the blood of a sinless lamb. Only with that
blood could the high priest enter the glorious presence of God, and sprinkle the mercy seat with atoning
blood.
Jesus went past the veil with His own blood. And likewise must we take that same blood if we want to pass the
veil. The spirit in us wants to get back to God. It craves God. The spirit's desire alone is not sufficient. We
have flesh that is weak. It cannot fulfil the desire of the spirit to be back in touch with God. It can't fight the
giants nor free itself of fear of those giants.
There's no condemnation to those in the garden, for they have no sin to be condemned by their consciences.
And in Christ, there is likewise no condemnation.
We will not be free of condemnation until we hold up faith in the blood. This alone will remove the veil.
Jordan will rend. The cherubim need not bar one who leans upon God's energy in daily dilemmas and fears
in life. Such people are already feeding from the life of God! They have eaten of the tree of Life! They have
that element that has been diseased by the knowledge of good and evil circumcised!
With sin in man's flesh, man was barred from the garden. Yet when sin is circumcised along with its host,
flesh, we need no longer be barred.
This circumcision is not experienced by all believers. Too many believers live in fear. Too many believers fail
to walk after the Spirit. They continue to depend upon their fleshly abilities, and continue to be condemned.
And it is often due to lack of understanding. Thus they are their worst enemies, banning the,selves from this
liberating circumcision of the heart!
The cherubim continue to shout, "No entry" to them. Their consciences have not been circumcised, or purged
from dead works. Dead works are efforts we use to appease our consciences which fail to do relieve them.
Dead works are acts of the tainted flesh which simply fall short of accomplishing anything of spiritual benefit.
RED SEA, YES - JORDAN, NOT YET
Many have crossed the Red Sea and experienced the pillar of cloud, as Paul writes of in 1 Corinthians 10:1-2.
1Cor 10:1-2 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under
the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
That corresponds to water and Spirit baptism in this New Testament age. But how many have traversed the
wilderness miles? How many have approached their personal Jordan River of fleshly veiling? How many
have rent that swelling barrier of flesh?
Not many.
Anybody can get saved. That's easy and very common. But it has not been so common to see believers rend
their Jordans. Many backslide before they reach that point, due to incomprehension of the further truths
necesary after being saved. They do not know enough about the blood. They do not realize they are not meant
to tackle the flesh with their own abilities. So they approach Jordan and look on in bewilderment. "How do I
rend this flesh? How do I enter my rest in Christ? How do I obtain all the promises that are in this higher
place?"

187. Much teaching concerning the finishing of our journeys is necessary today. We all know how to get saved. We
know Jesus as the Author of our salvation. What about His title as "Finisher" of our faith? Not many realize
that Jesus must also strengthen us to WALK after we are saved. We are saved by faith. That's commonly
understood. But what about "walking by faith," or "living by faith?" Most people think they must fend for
themselves when it comes to fleshly battles. And when "living by faith" is mentioned, it is misunderstood as a
life of believing God to, for example, supply our food supernaturally. They think materialistically and do not
consider the daily living by faith in commmon circumstance. They feel there is no need to live by faith until
we have no food on our tables! They do not truly understand what it really is to live by faith.
Living by faith is defined as living a life that is freed from fleshly failures. And living by faith is a life of
victory by way of repeatedly calling upon God for strength. And it is, after that, believing that God will move
in and take control to free you from whatever binds you down.
We are meant to go to God for the deliverance from fleshly battles. We cannot be delivered from flesh, itself.
But we can be delivered from the battles of the flesh - only if we call on God for help, though. This is how we
"believe" our way to victory. This is how we overcome our weaknesses.
Moses and the Jews came to the Red Sea. Joshua and the Jews came to Jordan. Both times the barriers were
breached by God's power, not their own. Moses said, "Stand still and see the salvation of the Lord." Too
many people can't stand still because they have never learned to wait on God to see the miracle after they
pray. Their flesh is too fidgety. In fact many don't know they're supposed to call on God and wait for
deliverance. There's too much unbelief. It's hard to stand still and wait for God when we have taken things
into hand so many times, ourselves. We are not accustomed to letting another do the work.
This is what is meant when Isaiah wrote, "They that WAIT upon the Lord shall renew their strength..."
After you submit to God by putting the battle into His hands, you then feel the energizing of His Spirit. It
takes FAITH for you to do that. And you can then move on to resisting the devil. First submit. Then resist.
"Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you." James 4:7
Without submission to God we are bait for the devil.
Then we read, after this verse, "Draw nigh unto God and He will draw nigh unto you." James 4:8
Go on in to victory!
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new
covenant, that those who are called may receive the
promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as
a ransom to set them free from the sins committed
under the first covenant.
1. BARNES, "And for this cause - With this view; that is, to make an effectual atonement
for sin, and to provide a way by which the troubled conscience may have peace.
He is the Mediator - see notes on Gal_3:19-20. He is the Mediator between God and man
in respect to that new covenant which he has made, or that new dispensation by which people
are to be saved. He stands between God and man - the parties at variance - and undertakes the
work of mediation and reconciliation.

188. Of the New Testament - Not “testament” - for a “testament,” or “will,” needs no mediator;
but of the “new covenant,” or the new “arrangement” or “disposition” of things under which he
proposes to pardon and save the guilty; see notes on Heb_9:16-17.
That by means of death - His own death as a sacrifice for sin. The “old” covenant or
arrangement also contemplated “death” - but it was the death of an “animal.” The purposes of
this were to be effected by the death of the Mediator himself; or this covenant was to be ratified
in his blood.
For the redemption of the transgression that were “under the first testament -
The covenant or arrangement under Moses. The general idea here is, that these were offences
for which no expiation could be made by the sacrifices under that dispensation, or from which
the blood then shed could not redeem. This general idea may include two particulars.
(1) That they who had committed transgressions under that covenant, and who could not be
fully pardoned by the imperfect sacrifices then made, would receive a full forgiveness of all their
sins in the great day of account through the blood of Christ. Though the blood of bulls and goats
could not expiate, yet they offered that blood in faith; they relied on the promised mercy of God;
they looked forward to a perfect sacrifice - and now the blood of the great atonement offered as a
“full” expiation for all their sins, would be the ground of their acquittal in the last day.
(2) That the blood of Christ would now avail for the remission of all those sins which could not
be expiated by the sacrifices offered under the Law. It not only contemplated the remission of all
the offences committed by the truly pious under that Law, but would now avail to put away sin
entirely. No sacrifice which people could offer would avail, but the blood of Christ would remove
all that guilt.
That they which are called - Alike under the old covenant and the new.
Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance - That is, the fulfillment of the
promise; or that they might be made partakers of eternal blessings. That blood is effectual alike
to save those under the ancient covenant and the new - so that they will be saved in the same
manner, and unite in the same song of redeeming love.
2. CLARKE, "And for this cause - Some translate δια τουτο, on account of this (blood.)
Perhaps it means no more than a mere inference, such as therefore, or wherefore.
He is the Mediator of the new testament - There was no proper reason why our
translators should render διαθηκη by testament here, when in almost every other case they
render it covenant, which is its proper ecclesiastical meaning, as answering to the Hebrew ‫ברית‬
berith, which see largely explained, Gen_15:10, and in other places of the Pentateuch.
Very few persons are satisfied with the translation of the following verses to the 20th,
particularly the 16th and 17th; at all events the word covenant must be retained. He - Jesus
Christ, is Mediator; the µεσιτης, or mediator, was the person who witnessed the contract made
between the two contracting parties, slew the victim, and sprinkled each with its blood.
Of the new testament - The new contract betwixt God and the whole human race, by Christ
Jesus the Mediator, distinguished here from the old covenant between God and the Israelites, in
which Moses was the mediator.
That by means of death - His own death upon the cross.
For the redemption of the transgressions - To make atonement for the transgressions
which were committed under the old covenant, which the blood of bulls and calves could not do;

189. so the death of Jesus had respect to all the time antecedent to it, as well as to all the time
afterward till the conclusion of the world.
They which are called - The Gentiles, might receive the promise - might, by being brought
into a covenant with God, have an equal right with the Jews, not merely to an inheritance such
as the promised land, but to an eternal inheritance, and consequently infinitely superior to that
of the Jews, inasmuch as the new covenant is superior in every point of view to the old.
How frequently the Gentiles are termed οᅷ κλητοι and οᅷ κεκληµενοι, the called, all St. Paul’s
writings show. And they were thus termed because they were called and elected in the place of
the Jews, the ancient called and elect, who were now divorced and reprobated because of their
disobedience.
3. GILL, "And for this cause - Some translate δια τουτο, on account of this (blood.)
Perhaps it means no more than a mere inference, such as therefore, or wherefore.
He is the Mediator of the new testament - There was no proper reason why our
translators should render διαθηκη by testament here, when in almost every other case they
render it covenant, which is its proper ecclesiastical meaning, as answering to the Hebrew ‫ברית‬
berith, which see largely explained, Gen_15:10, and in other places of the Pentateuch.
Very few persons are satisfied with the translation of the following verses to the 20th,
particularly the 16th and 17th; at all events the word covenant must be retained. He - Jesus
Christ, is Mediator; the µεσιτης, or mediator, was the person who witnessed the contract made
between the two contracting parties, slew the victim, and sprinkled each with its blood.
Of the new testament - The new contract betwixt God and the whole human race, by Christ
Jesus the Mediator, distinguished here from the old covenant between God and the Israelites, in
which Moses was the mediator.
That by means of death - His own death upon the cross.
For the redemption of the transgressions - To make atonement for the transgressions
which were committed under the old covenant, which the blood of bulls and calves could not do;
so the death of Jesus had respect to all the time antecedent to it, as well as to all the time
afterward till the conclusion of the world.
They which are called - The Gentiles, might receive the promise - might, by being brought
into a covenant with God, have an equal right with the Jews, not merely to an inheritance such
as the promised land, but to an eternal inheritance, and consequently infinitely superior to that
of the Jews, inasmuch as the new covenant is superior in every point of view to the old.
How frequently the Gentiles are termed οᅷ κλητοι and οᅷ κεκληµενοι, the called, all St. Paul’s
writings show. And they were thus termed because they were called and elected in the place of
the Jews, the ancient called and elect, who were now divorced and reprobated because of their
disobedience.
4. HENRY, "In these verses the apostle considers the gospel under the notion of a will or
testament, the new or last will and testament of Christ, and shows the necessity and efficacy of
the blood of Christ to make this testament valid and effectual.

190. I. The gospel is here considered as a testament, the new and last will and testament of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It is observable that the solemn transactions that pass between
God and man are sometimes called a covenant, here a testament. A covenant is an agreement
between two or more parties about things that are in their own power, or may be so, and this
either with or without a mediator; this agreement takes effect at such time and in such manner
as therein declared. A testament is a voluntary act and deed of a single person, duly executed
and witnessed, bestowing legacies on such legatees as are described and characterized by the
testator, and which can only take effect upon his death. Now observe, Christ is the Mediator of a
New Testament (Heb_9:15); and he is so for several ends and purposes here mentioned. 1. To
redeem persons from their transgressions committed against the law or first testament, which
makes every transgression a forfeiture of liberty, and makes men debtors, and slaves or
prisoners, who need to be redeemed. 2. To qualify all those that are effectually called to receive
the promise of an eternal inheritance. These are the great legacies that Christ by his last will and
testament has bequeathed to the truly characterized legatees.
5. JAMISON, "for this cause — Because of the all-cleansing power of His blood, this fits
Him to be Mediator (Heb_8:6, ensuring to both parties, God and us, the ratification) of the new
covenant, which secures both forgiveness for the sins not covered by the former imperfect
covenant or testament, and also an eternal inheritance to the called.
by means of death — rather, as Greek, “death having taken place.” At the moment that His
death took place, the necessary effect is, “the called receive the (fulfillment of the) promise” (so
Luk_24:49 uses “promise”; Heb_6:15; Act_1:4); that moment divides the Old from the New
Testament. The “called” are the elect “heirs,” “partakers of the heavenly calling” (Heb_3:1).
redemption of ... transgressions ... under ... first testament — the transgressions of
all men from Adam to Christ, first against the primitive revelation, then against the revelations
to the patriarchs, then against the law given to Israel, the representative people of the world. The
“first testament” thus includes the whole period from Adam to Christ, and not merely that of the
covenant with Israel, which was a concentrated representation of the covenant made with (or
the first testament given to) mankind by sacrifice, down from the fall to redemption. Before the
inheritance by the New Testament (for here the idea of the “INHERITANCE,” following as the
result of Christ’s “death,” being introduced, requires the Greek to be translated “testament,” as it
was before covenant) could come in, there must be redemption of (that is, deliverance from the
penalties incurred by) the transgressions committed under the first testament, for the
propitiatory sacrifices under the first testament reached only as far as removing outward
ceremonial defilement. But in order to obtain the inheritance which is a reality, there must be a
real propitiation, since God could not enter into covenant relation with us so long as past sins
were unexpiated; Rom_3:24, Rom_3:25, “a propitiation ... His righteousness for the remission
of sins that are past.”
might — Greek, “may receive,” which previously they could not (Heb_11:39, Heb_11:40).
the promise — to Abraham.
5B. William Most, “Now, at 9. 15, our Epistle begins to speak of the new covenant. The old
covenant was that of Sinai; the new was foretold by Jeremiah 31. 31-33. We wonder if Jeremiah
had been given a special light or revelation to see that the essential obedience of the new
covenant was that of Jesus - at Sinai it had been the obedience of the people. Now in the new,
Jesus is the "guarantor" of the covenant (cf. 7. 23 above and comments there): Vatican II,
Lumen gentium 9, said on the first Holy Thursday night Jesus inaugurated this new covenant,
making Jew and gentile into one people of God (cf. Ephesians 3. 6).

191. Even though Jesus is the guarantor of the new covenant, the obedience of His people is still
required, as shown by the syn Christo theme (cf. again the continuation of comments on 7. 23
above).
Now our author begins to make use of the fact that in the NT the word diatheke can mean either
covenant or last will and testament. It clearly means last will and testament here, and also in
Galatians 3. 15ff. But ordinarily in the NT it means covenant.
But then there is much debate about the sense of the word covenant. Many authors want to
make it a unilateral thing, in which God, the sovereign, simply imposes on people His own will
and requirements, without taking on Himself any obligation at all.
Yet it is not true that He undertakes no obligation at all, when at Sinai as in Exodus 19. 5 He
said: "If you really hearken to my voice and keep my covenant, you will be my special people". In
other words, if you obey, you will get special favor. Once He has given His word, on a condition,
if humans fulfill the condition, God is not free to simply pay no attention and ignore it all. He
has given His word, and His word cannot be violated once He has given it. Hence in Romans 2. 6
Paul speaking of covenant (cf. Wm. Most, The Thought of St. Paul, pp. 292-93) can speak of
"repayment" under the covenant. So if we ask why God gives good things within the covenant
framework, there are two answers, on two levels. On the basic level: all is mercy, for no creature
by its own power can establish a claim on God. Thus there is justification without earning it, by
faith. But on the secondary level, i.e., given the fact that He has freely entered into a covenant,
then if humans observe the condition, He owes it to Himself to do what He says. Hence In
Romans 2. 6. St. Paul can speak of repayment, while citing Psalm 62. 12.
Yes, it is true that technically God cannot owe anything to a creature. But He can owe things to
Himself, and His fidelity, once pledged does bind Him. So we often find paired hesed,
observance of the covenant, with "faithfulness" to the covenant (Hebrew emeth or emunah) e.g.,
Psalm 25. 10 "All the ways of the Lord are hesed and emeth for those who keep his covenant and
demands, ." and Ps. 57. 4: "God sends His hesed and emeth," and Ps. 89. 25: "My hesed and my
enumah will be with him."
We suspect that is the influence of Lutheran ideas that want to insist the covenant of Sinai was
only unilateral, i.e. that God has no obligation and that human responses have no role in
salvation. Lutheranism wants to insist there is no condition at all that we place that affects our
salvation. But that can have dreadful logical consequences: If there is nothing in a human that
can make a difference, then God would seem to predestine blindly, without regard to anything .
Luther did actually hold this (cf. his Bondage of the Will (tr. J. J. Packer & O. R. Johnston, F. H.
Revell Co. Old Tappan. N. J. 1957, pp. 273 & 103-04) and Calvin did so too. In line with this
belief the Missouri Synod of Lutherans, in their Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the
Missouri Synod, Concordia, St. Louis 1932, #14 asked: Since all are equally and totally corrupt,
and grace is everywhere, why are not all saved? They replied: "We do not know". No wonder.
They did not dare face the consequence. If there is no difference at all in people, then God would
have no recourse but to predestine entirely blindly. Luther himself (op. cit. pp. 103-04) did say
that we have nothing at all to say about whether we are saved or lost eternally. And he added
that God saves so few and damns so many (p. 101) and that they go to hell "undeserving" (p.
314). Cf. R. Garrigou-Lagrange, De Deo Uno, Desclée de Brouwer, 1938, p. 525, who thinks this
conclusion is inevitable from St. Paul 1 Cor 4. 7.
Those who make this error have argued there is no difference in people, since everything good is
the gift of God. That is true. Cf. 1 Cor 4. 7, and the reference to Garrigou-Lagrange above. But
there is another factor they have overlooked: resistance to grace, leading to sin. People are very
different in this matter. Therefore God can take into account sin, and if someone persistently
throws away His grace by sinning, God will not predestine Him to heaven, though He had
wanted to do so. The man is blocking Him. So as to salvation: "You cannot earn it, but you can
blow it", as one student of mine once said. On this matter cf. Wm. G. Most, New Answers to Old

192. Questions (London, 1971), summarized briefly in Our Father's Plan, (Christendom College Press,
1988), chapter 12.
To return to the matter of whether or not God takes on an obligation in the covenant: there are
many Psalm lines in which by Hebrew parallelism it is clear that it is a matter of sedaqah, moral
rightness, for God to observe His covenant. For example in Psalm 36. 10: "Keep up your
covenant fidelity [hesed] to those who love you, your moral righteousness [sedaqah] to the
upright of heart." Similarly Psalm 103. 17 Says "The covenant fidelity [hesed] of the Lord is from
age to age on those who fear Him, and His moral rightness [sedaqah] on children's children." So
sedaqah and hesed are put in parallelism: it is a matter of moral rightness for God to keep His
covenant.
Similarly, the prophets, especially Hosea compares God's relation to His people to marriage, in
which there are rights and obligations on both sides. And in Deuteronomy 26. 17-18, if we read
the Hebrew (the usual versions gloss over this): "This day you have caused (hiphil perfect) God
to say He will be a God to you, and He has caused you (hiphil perfect) to say you will keep His
decrees and His commands." We notice the almost bold familiarity in putting God Himself in
the same situation as His people: each causing the other to say.
Cf the blood ceremony at Sinai, in which they became His blood relatives, so He would be their
goel, the next of kin with the right and duty of recusing his kinsman who had fallen into dire
straits. So in Isaiah 63. 16 God is called their goel. Cf 60. 16;49. 26
F. F. Bruce in commenting on 9. 26 strongly rejects the idea that Jesus offers Himself in the
Eucharist, saying His offering was once-for-all, and is not renewed. But Bruce misses two things
in saying this: 1) In the Mass, His will is not changing at all, it is continuous from first the
instant of conception as we read in 10. 7. In Mass only the outward sign is multiplied, by the
priest to whom has come down the command of Jesus: "Do this in memory of me". 2) The Mass
is simply the application, the giving out of fruits, by the means He Himself ordered: Do this in
memory of me". And he missed the import of Hebrews 13. 10 on the altar.
Yet the Mass is correctly called a sacrifice, since in it are found the two elements of which Isaiah
speaks in 29. 13: The outward sign, and the interior disposition. The outward sign is indeed
multiplied, but the interior, the attitude of obedience of the Heart of Jesus is not multiplied, but
continuous from the first instant of His human conception as in 10. 7.
Why have this Mass since in the once-for-all sacrifice all forgiveness and grace was bought and
paid for by the infinite price of redemption? There are two reasons: 1) God in His love of good
order, loves to have a title for giving out that which was already earned. Of course that title does
not move Him, He cannot be moved, does not need to be moved, but in His love of good order
He is pleased to have it: cf. Summa I. 19. 5. c. 2) So we may join our obedience to that of Christ,
to form the obedience of the whole Christ. We do this by way of the syn Christo theme, cf.
Romans 8. 17: "We are heirs of God, fellow heirs of Christ, provided that we suffer with Him, so
we may also be glorified with Him."
PINK, “The proposition which the apostle is occupied with proving and illustrating in this
section of the epistle is that which was laid down in Hebrews 8:6, "But now hath He obtained a
more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was
established upon better promises." In the verses which were before us in the last article, the
superiority of Christ over Aaron was brought out in the following respects. First, in that He
officiated in a more excellent tabernacle (verse 11). Second, in that He offered to God a superior
sacrifice (verses 11, 14). Third, in that He has entered a more glorious sanctuary (verse 12).
Fourth, in that He secured a more efficacious redemption (verse 12). Fifth, in that He was
moved by a more excellent Spirit (verse 14). Sixth, in that He obtained for His people a better
cleansing (verse 14). Seventh, in that He made possible for them a nobler service (verse 14).

193. Christ has "obtained eternal redemption" for His people. As we pointed out in our last article, to
"redeem" signifies to liberate by the paying of a ransom-price: "If the Son shall make you free, ye
shall be free indeed" (John 8:36). The freedom which the Christian has is, first, a legal one: he
has been "redeemed from the curse of the law" (Gal. 3:13). Because of this, second, he enjoys an
experimental freedom from the power of sin: "sin shall not have dominion over you" (Rom.
6:14). Justification and sanctification are never separated: where God imputes the righteousness
of Christ. He also imparts a principle of holiness, the latter being the fruit or consequence of the
former; both being necessary before we can be admitted into heaven. Because the blood of
Christ has fully met every claim of God upon and against His people, its virtues and purifying
effects are applied to them by the Spirit. Both of these were foreshadowed under the Levitical
types of the old economy, and are seen in Hebrews 9:13.
"The blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean" sanctified "to
the purifying of the flesh." There is here both a comparison and a contrast. The comparison is
between the type and the Antitype; the contrast, between what the one and what the other
effected. Those typical rites procured only a temporary "redemption" from the governmental
consequences of sin; Christ’s sacrifice has secured an "eternal redemption" from all the
consequences of sin. A double type is referred to in Hebrews 9:13. No single sacrifice could
adequately represent the power and efficacy of the blood of Christ. By the "blood of bulls and
goats" the guilt of Israel’s sins were temporarily removed; by the sprinkling of the "ashes of an
heifer" they were ceremonially purified from the defilements of the wilderness. We quote below
a valuable footnote from Adolph Saphir:
"The ashes of an heifer. It was to take away the defilement of death. The institution is recorded
in the book of Numbers as relating to the provision God makes for His people in their wilderness
journey. As no blood of the slain victim was ‘incorruptible,’ it was necessary, in order to show
the cleansing by blood from defilement through contact with death to have as it were the
essential principle of blood, presented in a permanent and available form. The red heifer, which
had never been under the yoke, symbolizes life in its most vigorous, perfect, and fruitful form.
She was slain without the camp (Heb. 13:11, Numbers 19:3, 4). She was wholly burnt, flesh, skin,
and blood, the priest casting cedar-wood, hyssop, and scarlet into the fire. The ashes of the
burnt heifer, put into flowing water, were then sprinkled with hyssop for ceremonial purification
. . . Christ is the fulfillment. For the blood of Christ is not merely, so to speak, the key unlocking
the holy of holies to Him as our High Priest and Redeemer, it is not merely our ransom by which
we are delivered out of bondage, and, freed from the curse, are brought nigh unto God; but it
also separates us from death and sin. It is incorruptible, always cleansing and vivifying; through
this blood we are separated from this evil world, and overcome; by this blood we keep our
garments white (John 6:53, Revelation 7:14).
"What had necessarily to be separated in the types, is here in unity and perfection. Likewise,
what really and potentially is given to us when we are first brought into the state of
reconciliation and access, of justification and sanctification, is in our actual experience
continually repeated. We have been cleansed and sanctified once and forever; the same blood,
remembered and believed in, cleanseth us continually. The difference between this continual
cleansing and the first (according to John 13:10) must never be forgotten, or we fall into a legal
condition, going back from the holy of holies into the holy place. But, on the other hand we must
not forget the living character of the blood, which by the Spirit is continually applied to us, and
by which we have peace, renewal of the sense of pardon, and strength for service (1 Pet. 1:2)."
Having pointed out what God’s people are redeemed from, the Holy Spirit next makes a brief
notice of what Christ has redeemed unto. He has delivered us from the curse of the law and the
bondage of sin; He has also procured for us an "eternal inheritance": His satisfaction has
merited for us the favor and image of God and everlasting bliss in His presence. In referring to
this, the Spirit also takes occasion to bring out the fact that the sacrifice of Christ was necessary

194. in order for God to make good His promises of old. Herein too He once more meets the Jewish
prejudice—why must this great High Priest die? The death of Christ was requisite in order to the
accomplishing of God’s engagements to Abraham and his (spiritual) seed, to confirm His
covenant-pledges, which, once more, brings into view the relation which Christ sustains to the
everlasting covenant.
"And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the
redemption of the transgressions under the first testament, they which are called might receive
the promise of eternal inheritance" (verse 15). Each word in this verse requires to be duly
weighed and carefully considered both in the light of what immediately precedes and follows,
otherwise we are certain to err. The opening "And" is plain intimation that no new subject
begins here, which at once disposes of the figment that this and the next verses require to he
placed in a parenthesis. The apostle continues to treat of what was before him in the verses
which we considered in the last article. He is still showing the excellency of our High Priest and
the superior efficacy of His sacrifice. That the contents of this verse are by no means free from
difficulty is readily allowed, yet its leading thoughts are plain enough.
"And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament." The Greek words for "for this
cause" are rendered "therefore" in Hebrews 1:9 and other places. They signify, because of this, or
for this reason. There has been a great deal of discussion as to precisely what is referred to in
"for this cause": some insisting that it looks back to what has been affirmed in the previous
verses, others contending that it points forward to that which is declared in the second half of
this verse. Personally, we believe that both are included. There is a fullness to God’s words which
is not to be found in man’s, and whenever an expression is capable of two or more meanings,
warranted by the context and the analogy of faith, both should be retained. Let us then look at
the two thoughts here brought together.
"For this cause": because of the superior nature and efficacy of the sacrifice which Christ was to
offer, God appointed Him to be the Mediator of the new covenant. It was out of (prospective)
regard unto the fitness of Christ’s person and the excellency of His offering, that God ordained
Him to make mediation between Himself and His fallen people. Because He should make an
effectual atonement for their sins and provide a way whereby their troubled consciences might
have peace, God decreed that His Son, becoming incarnate, should interpose between poor
sinners and the awful Majesty they have offended. "For this cause": and also, because it was only
by means of death that the transgressions under the first testament could be redeemed and the
called receive the promise of eternal inheritance, Christ was appointed Mediator of the new
covenant.
With his usual sagacity John Owen combined both ideas: "It is evident there is a reason
rendered in these words, of the necessity of the death and sacrifice of Christ, by which alone our
consciences may be purged from dead works. And this reason is intended in these words, ‘For
this cause.’ And this necessity of the death of Christ, the apostle proves both from the nature of
His office, namely, that He was to be the Mediator of the new covenant, which, being a
testament, required the death of the testator; and from what was to be effected thereby, namely,
the redemption of transgressions, and the purchase of an eternal inheritance. Wherefore, these
are the things which he hath respect unto in these words."
"He is the Mediator of the new testament." It seems strange that some of the best of the
expositors understand this to mean that after Christ had "offered Himself without spot to God"
he became "the Mediator," which is indeed a turning of things upside down and a putting an
effect for a cause. A mediator is one who stands between two parties, and two parties at
variance, and that with the object of settling the difference between them, that is, of effecting a
reconciliation. Hence we read, "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus; Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1 Tim. 2:5,
6). The second half of our verse ought to have prevented such a blunder: "He is the Mediator of

195. the new testament, that by means of death they which are called might receive the promise of
eternal inheritance."
As we pointed out in our comments upon Hebrews 8:6, it is most important to recognize that
Christ is a sacerdotal Mediator, that is, one who has interposed His sacrifice and intercession
between God and His people in order to their reconciliation. In voluntarily undertaking to serve
as Mediator between God and His people considered as fallen creatures, two things were
required from Christ. First, that He should completely remove that which kept the covenanters
at a distance, that is, take away the cause of enmity between them. Second, that He should
purchase and procure, in a way suited unto the glory of God, the actual communication of all the
good things—summed up in "grace and glory" (Ps. 84:11)—which belong to those whose Surety
He was. This is the foundation of the "merits" of Christ and of the grant of all blessings unto us
for His sake.
In what has just been pointed out, we may perceive an additional signification to the opening
"And" of our verse. Christ is not only "High Priest" (verses 11-14), but "Mediator" too. He
undertook office upon office in order to our greater good. Christ is, in the "new covenant" or
"testament," the Mediator, Surety, Priest and Sacrifice, all in His own person. In order that we
may have something like a definite conception of these, let us consider, separately, the various
relations which our blessed Redeemer sustains to the everlasting covenant. First, He is the
Surety of it: Hebrews 7:22. As such He engaged to render full satisfaction to God on behalf of
His people, to do and suffer for them all that the law required. He transferred to Himself all
their obligations, undertaking to pay all their debts. In other words, He substituted Himself in
their place and stead, in consequence of which there was a double imputation: God reckoning to
Christ all their liabilities, God imputing to them His perfect righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21).
As the "Surety" Christ most blessedly fulfilled the type of Genesis 43:9, being Sponsor to His
Father for all His beloved Benjamins, Hebrews 2:13, Isaiah 49:5, 6, John 10:16. Second, as the
Mediator of the covenant (Heb. 12:24), He took His place between God and His people,
undertaking to maintain the interests and secure the honor of both parties, by perfectly
reconciling the one to the other. As the "Mediator" Christ has blessedly fulfilled the type of
Jacob’s "ladder," uniting heaven and earth. Third, as the Messenger (Mal. 3:1) or "Angel" of the
covenant (Rev. 8:3-5) He makes known God’s purpose and will to His people, and presents their
requests and worship to Him. Fourth, as the Testator of the covenant (Heb. 9:16) He has ratified
it and made bequests and gifts to His people. Finally, and really first, as the Head of the whole
election of grace, the covenant was made with Him by God: Psalm 89:3, etc.
"For this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament." Here again there has been an almost
endless controversy as to whether this last word should be rendered "covenant" or "testament,"
that is, "will." The same Greek word has been translated by both these English terms, some
think wrongly so, for a "covenant" is, strictly speaking, an agreement or contract between two
parties: the one promising to do certain things upon the fulfillment of certain conditions by the
other; whereas a "testament" or "will" is where one bequeaths certain things as gifts. Thus there
seems to be little or nothing in common between the two concepts, in fact, that which is quite
contrary. Nevertheless, our English translators have rendered the Greek word both ways, and we
believe, rightly so. Nevertheless it remains for us to enquire, why should the same term be
rendered "covenant" in Hebrews 8:6 and "testament" in Hebrews 9:15? Briefly, the facts are as
follows.
First, the word "diatheke" occurs in the Greek New Testament thirty-three times, having been
translated (in the A.V.) "covenant" twenty times (twice in the plural number) and "testament"
thirteen times, four of the latter being used in connection with the Lord’s supper. Second, in the
Sept. version (the translation of the Hebrews Old Testament into Greek) this word "diatheke"
occurs just over two hundred and fifty times, where, in the great majority of instances, it is used
to translate "berith." Third, the Greek word "diatheke" is not that which properly denotes a

196. covenant, compact, or agreement; instead, the technical terms for that is "syntheke," but the
Spirit never once uses this word in the New Testament. Fourth, on the other hand, it should be
noted that the Hebrew language has no distinctive word which means a will or testament. Fifth,
the most common use of the term "diatheke" in the New Testament, particularly in 2
Corinthians 3 and in Hebrews, neither denotes a "covenant" proper (a stipulated agreement) nor
a "will," but instead, an economy, a dispensational arrangement or ordering of things.
Now it needs to be very carefully noted that from Hebrews 9:15 to the end of the chapter, the
apostle argues from the nature of a will or "testament" among men, as he distinctly affirms in
verse 16. His manifest object in so doing was to confirm the Christian’s faith in the expectation
of the benefits of this "covenant" or "testament." Nor did he violate the rules of language in this,
straining neither the meaning of the Hebrews "berith" nor the Greek "diatheke," for there is,
actually, a close affinity between the two things. There are "covenants" which have in them free
grants or donations, which is of the nature of a "testament"; and there are "testaments" whose
force is resolved into conditions and agreements—as when a man wills an estate to his wife on
the stipulation that she remains a widow—which is borrowed from the nature of a "covenant."
If we go back to the Old Testament and study the various "covenants" which God made with
men, it will be found again and again that they were merely declarations whereby He would
communicate good things unto them, which has more of the nature of a "testament" in it.
Sometimes the word "covenant" was used simply to express a free promise, with an effectual
donation and communication of the thing promised, which also has more of the nature of a
"testament’’ than of a "covenant." Thus, once more, we perceive a fullness in the words of the
Holy Spirit which definitions from human dictionaries do not include. That which was a
"covenant," has become to us a testament. The "covenant" was made by God with Christ. By His
death that which God pledged Himself to do unto the heirs of promise in return for the work
which Christ was to perform, is now bequeathed to us as a free gift: what was a legal stipulation
between the Father and the Mediator, comes to us purely as a matter of grace.
Some have insisted that "the Mediator of the new covenant" is understandable, but that
"Mediator of the new testament" is no more intelligible than the "testator of a covenant" would
be. Our answer is that, the Spirit of God is not tied by the artificial rules which bind human
grammarians. Romans 8:17 tells us that Christians are "heirs of God," that is of the Father, yet
He has not died! No figure must be pressed too far. Some have argued that because the Church
is the Body of Christ, it cannot also be His "Bride," but such carnal reasoning is altogether
inadmissible upon spiritual and Divine things; as well might we argue that because Christ calls
us "brethren" (Heb. 2:12), therefore we cannot be His "children" (Heb. 2:13); or that because
Christ is the "everlasting Father" of Israel (Isa. 9:6), He cannot also be their "Husband" (Isa.
54:5). The truth is, that Christ is both the Mediator of the new covenant, and the Mediator of the
new testament, looking at the same office from two different angles. God has so confirmed the
promises in Christ (2 Cor. 1:20), that at His death He made a legacy of them and bequeathed
them to His people in a testamentary form.
To sum up what has been said on this difficult but important subject: throughout the New
Testament the Holy Spirit has intentionally used only the one word "diatheke"—though there
was another in the Greek language ("syntheke") which more exactly expressed a
"covenant"—because it was capable of a double application, and that, because the Son of God is
not only the Mediator of a new covenant, but also the Testator of His own gifts. Thereby God
would fix our gaze on the cross of Christ and see there that what had up to that day existed as a
"covenant," then ,became for the first time, a "testament"; and that while the covenant between
the Father and the Son is from everlasting, the "new testament" dates only from Calvary.
"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament." This states one of the
principal ends which God had in view when appointing Christ to be the "Mediator," namely, to
deliver His people from all the bondage they were subject to as the result of their violations of

197. His law, and that by the payment of a satisfactory price. But, it may be asked, why not "the
redemption of the transgressors" rather than "transgressions"? Did Christ purchase sins? The
reference is to His expiation of His people’s iniquities, and they were "debts," and Christ’s death
was a discharge of that debt. "The discharge of a debt is a buying it out. Thus to redeem sins is
no more harsh a phrase than to be ‘delivered for our offenses’ (Rom. 4:25), or ‘who gave Himself
for our sins’ (Gal. 1:4), or to be ‘merciful to their unrighteousness,’ Hebrews 8:12’ (William
Gouge).
"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament.’’ In these words the Spirit
makes a further exhibition of the virtue and efficacy of Christ’s death, by affirming that it paid
the price of remitting the sins of the Old Testament saints. Here again the apostle is countering
the Jewish prejudice. The death of Christ was necessary not only if sinners of New Testament
times should be fitted to serve the living God (verse 14), but also to meet the claims which God
had against the Old Testament saints. The efficacy of Christ’s atonement was retrospective as
well as prospective: cf. Romans 3:25. The true (in contrast from the typical), spiritual (in
contrast from the ceremonial), and eternal (in contrast from the temporal), "redemption’’ of the
Old Testament saints was effected by the sacrifice of Christ. The same thing is clearly implied in
Hebrews 9:26: had not the one offering of Christ—as the Lamb "foreordained before the
foundation of the world" (1 Pet. 1:19, 20)—been of perpetual efficacy from the days of Abel
onwards, then it had been necessary to repeat it constantly in order to redeem believers of each
generation. It was God’s eternal purpose that Christ’s atonement, settled in the "everlasting
covenant," should be available to faith from the beginning. Hence, the apostle said. "Through
this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins (cf. Galatians 3:8, Hebrews 4:2), and by
Him all that believe—Old Testament saints as truly as the New Testament—are justified from all
things" (Acts 13:38, 39).
"Now, if any one asks, whether sins under the Law were remitted to the fathers, we must bear in
mind the solution already stated,—that they were remitted; but remitted through Christ. Then
notwithstanding their external expiations, they were always held guilty. For this reason Paul
says that the law was a handwriting against us (Col. 2:14). For when the sinner came forward
and openly confessed that he was guilty before God, and acknowledged by sacrificing an
innocent animal that he was worthy, of eternal death, what did he obtain by his victim, except
that he sealed his own death as it were by this handwriting? In short, even then they only
reposed in the remission of sins, when they looked to Christ. But if only a regard to Christ took
away sins, they could never have been freed from them, had they continued to rest in the law"
(John Calvin).
"For the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament.’’ It remains for us to ask,
Why this limitation? for Christ atoned for the sins of those who were to believe as much as for
those who had, before He became incarnate, looked in faith to Him. First, because a measure of
doubt or uncertainty could exist only concerning them. Some have taught, and possibly some in
the apostle’s day thought, that naught but earthly blessings would be the portion of those who
died before the present dispensation. Therefore to remove such a doubt, it is affirmed that Old
Testament believers too were redeemed by Christ’s blood. Second, because the apostle had
pressed so hard the fact that the Levitical sacrifices could not remove moral guilt from those
who lived under the Mosaic economy, he shows Christ’s sacrifice had. Third, because by just
consequence it follows that, if those who trusted Christ of old had redemption of their
transgressions through Him, much more they who are under the new testament. "The blood of
Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin" (1 John 1:7): it was just as efficacious in taking
away the transgressions of believers before it was actually shed, as it is of cleansing believers
today, nineteen centuries after it was shed.
"They which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.’’ Here the "heirs" are
designated by character rather than by name, by this qualification (Greek) "they which have

198. been called," that is, effectually so, or truly converted to God. In John 1:12 this privilege of
heir-ship is settled upon "believers," such as do heartily accept of Christ and His grace. In Acts
26:18 and Colossians 1:12 the heirs are described as "sanctified," that is, as personally dedicated
to God and set apart to live unto Him. This expression "the called" is a descriptive appellation of
the true spiritual people of God, and looks back to the "call" of Abraham (Heb. 11:8), who, in
consequence of the mighty workings of divine grace in his heart, turned his back upon the world
and the things of the flesh (Gen. 12:1), and entered the path of faith’s obedience to God. Only
those possessing these marks are the spiritual "children" of Abraham, such as have been "called
with a holy calling" (2 Tim. 1:9).
"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." This is the goal toward which the apostle has
been steadily moving, as he has passed from clause to clause in this verse. That the called of God
might receive the promise of eternal inheritance was the grand ultimate object of the
"everlasting covenant" so far as men are concerned, and the chief design of the new testament.
But an obstacle stood in the way, namely, the transgressions or sins of those who should be
"called." In order to the removal of that obstacle, Christ must die that death which was due unto
those transgressions. For the Son of God to die, He must be appointed unto a mediatorial
position and become incarnate. Because He was so appointed, because He did so die, because
He has redeemed from all transgressions, the "eternal inheritance" is sure unto all His people,
His heirs, the "called" of God.
"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." The children of Israel received from God an
external call which separated them from the heathen, and when they were redeemed from Egypt
they received promise of a temporal or earthly inheritance. But inside that Nation was "a
remnant according to the election of grace," and they, individually, received from God an inward
call, which made them the heirs of an eternal inheritance. It is of these latter that our verse
speaks, yet as including also the saints of the present dispensation. Promise of an "eternal
inheritance" had the Old Testament saints. They had the Gospel preached unto them (Heb. 4:2).
They were saved through "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 15:11) as well as we. They
"did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink," even Christ (1
Cor. 10:3, 4). And therefore did they "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly" (Heb. 11:16).
How all of this sets aside the preposterous figment of the modern "dispensationalists," who
relegate "Israel" to an inferior inheritance from that which belongs to "the Church"!
"Might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." What is meant by the first four words here?
First, let us very briefly define the "eternal inheritance." By it we understand God’s "great
salvation" (Heb. 2:3), considering it in its most comprehensive sense, as including justification,
sanctification and glorification. It is that blessed estate which Christ has purchased for "His
own," here called an "inheritance" to remind us that the way whereby we come unto it is by a
gratuitous adoption, and not by any merits of our own. Now as the state of those who are to
receive it is twofold, namely, in this life and in that which is to come, so there are two parts of
this inheritance: "grace and glory." Even now "eternal life" is communicated to those who are
called according to God’s purpose. But "grace" is only "glory" begun: the best "wine" is reserved
for the time to come. For the future aspect of the "eternal inheritance" see 1 Peter 1:3-5.
The way whereby God conveys this "eternal inheritance" is by "promise": see Galatians 3:18 and
Hebrews 6:15-18. And this for a threefold reason at least. First, to manifest the absolute freeness
of the grant of it: the "promise" is everywhere opposed unto everything of "works" or desert in
ourselves: Romans 4:14, etc. Second, to give security unto all the heirs of it, for the very veracity
and faithfulness of God is behind the promise: Titus 1:1, etc. Since God has "promised" to bestow
the "inheritance," nothing in, of, or from the heirs can possibly be an occasion of their forefeiting
it: 1 Thessalonians 5:24. Third, that it might be by faith, for what God promises necessarily
requires faith, and faith only, unto its reception: Romans 4:16. The "receive the promise" has a
double force. First, it is to "mix faith" with it (Heb. 4:2), to appropriate it (Heb. 11:13, 17), so as

199. not to stagger at it in unbelief (Rom. 4:20, 21). Second, it is to receive the fulfillment of it. As
unto the foundation of the whole inheritance, in the sacrifice of Christ, and all the grace, mercy
and love, with the fruits thereof, these are communicated to believers in this life: Galatians 3:14.
As unto the consummation, the future state in glory, we "receive the promise" by faith, rest
thereon, and live in the joyous expectation of it: Hebrews 11:13.
In conclusion, let us sum up the contents of this remarkable verse, adopting the analysis of John
Owen. 1. God has designed an "eternal inheritance" unto certain persons. 2. The way in which a
right or title is conveyed thereunto is by "promise." 3. The persons unto whom this inheritance is
designed, are the "called." 4. The obstacle which stood in the way of their enjoyment of this
inheritance was their "transgressions." 5. That this obstacle might be removed, and the
inheritance enjoyed, God made a "new covenant,’’ because none of the sacrifices under the first
covenant, could expiate sins. 6. The ground of the efficacy of the "new covenant" unto this end
was, that it had a Mediator, a great High Priest. 7. The means whereby the Mediator of the new
covenant did expiate the sins against the first testament was by "death," and this of necessity,
seeing that this new covenant, being also a "testament," required the death of the Testator. 8.
The death of this Mediator has taken away sins by "the redemption of transgressions." Thus, the
promise is sure unto all the seed.
The New Covenant is to be made with "The House of Israel and the House of Judah" (Jer. 31:31)
with whom the Mosaic Covenants had been made. If Israel did not keep the Mosaic Covenants
they were to have the New Covenant to look forward to (compare Jer. 31:31-34 & Deut. 30:1-10).
5C. WORTHEN, “HEB 9:15 "For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those
who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that he has died as a ransom
to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."
You and I have been given an eternal inheritance that cannot be taken away. Christ is the One
who has gained the victory and given us this inheritance which is eternal, not only in duration,
but in quality.
But notice that in verse 15 our writer speaks of a new covenant. In this verse the word covenant
speaks of a legal arrangement in which God promised to be our God and that we would be His
people through the shed blood of Christ, as we received Him by faith. It fulfilled the first
covenant with regard to foreshadowing the promise of a Savior.
But as we come to verse 16 we see that the same word used for covenant in verse 15, which in the
Greek is diatheke, is the same word in verse 16 and yet they do not carry the exact same
meaning. Now the question might be raised, if the same word is used why then would they not
mean the same? For the same reason in the English the word "club", for example, could have a
variety of meanings.
It could be a noun and mean an instrument for striking things. It could be a verb and explain
what you could do to something as in clubbing something. It could also denote a place where
people gather to party, i.e. a night club.
What determines what it is is the context. So, too in the Greek. And this is why the meaning is
somewhat changed from the two verses. The context differentiates the two. F.F. Bruce says, " the
Greek word is diatheke, which has the comprehensive sense of settlement."
So, whether a covenant or a testament, as in last will and testament, they both have the sense of
settlement. An arrangement has been made and it is settled according to that arrangement.
Verse 15 speaks of a covenant fulfilled in Christ, verse 16 speaks of a will or testament which is
why we read in the NIV....

200. 6. CALVIN, "And for this cause he is Mediator of the New Testament, etc. He
concludes that there is no more need of another priest, for Christ
fulfills the office under the New Testament; for he claims not for
Christ the honor of a Mediator, so that others may at the same time
remain as such with him; but he maintains that all others were
repudiated when Christ undertook the office. But that he might more
fully confirm this fact, he mentions how he commenced to discharge his
office of a Mediator; even through death intervening. Since this is
found alone in Christ, being wanting in all others, it follows that he
alone can be justly deemed a Mediator. [151]
He further records the virtue and efficacy of his death by saying that
he paid the price for sins under the first covenant or testament, which
could not be blotted out by the blood of beasts; by which words he was
seeking draw away the Jews from the Law to Christ. For, if the Law was
so weak that all the remedies it applied for expiating sins did by no
means accomplish what they represented, who could rest in it as in a
safe harbor? This one thing, then, ought to have been enough to
stimulate them to seek for something better than the law; for they
could not but be in perpetual anxiety. On the other hand, when we come
to Christ, as we obtain in him a full redemption, there is nothing
which can any more distress us. Then, in these words he shows that the
Law is weak, that the Jews might no longer recumb on it; and he teaches
them to rely on Christ, for in him is found whatever can be desired for
pacifying consciences.
Now, if any one asks, whether sins under the Law where remitted to the
fathers, we must bear in mind the solution already stated, -- that they
were remitted, but remitted through Christ. Then notwithstanding their
external expiations, they were always held guilty. For this reason Paul
says, that the Law was a handwriting against us. (Colossians 2:14.) For
when the sinner came forward and openly confessed that he was guilty
before God, and acknowledged by sacrificing an innocent animal that he
was worthy of eternal death, what did he obtain by his victim, except
that he sealed his own death as it were by this handwriting? In short,
even then they only reposed in the remission of sins, when they looked
to Christ. But if only a regard to Christ took away sins, they could
never have been freed from them, had they continued to rest in the Law.
David indeed declares, that blessed is the man to whom sins are not
imputed, (Psalm 32:2;) but that he might be a partaker of this
blessedness, it was necessary for him to leave the Law, and to have his
eyes fixed on Christ; for if he rested in the Law, he could never have
been freed from guilt.

201. They who are called, etc. The object of the divine covenant is, that
having been adopted as children, we may at length be made heirs of
eternal life. The Apostle teaches us that we obtain this by Christ. It
is hence evident, that in him is the fulfillment of the covenant. But
the promise of the inheritance is to be taken for the promised
inheritance, as though he had said, "The promise of eternal life is not
otherwise made to us to be enjoined, than through the death of Christ."
Life, indeed, was formerly promised to the fathers, and the same has
been the inheritance of God's children from the beginning, but we do
not otherwise enter into the possession of it, than through the blood
of Christ previously shed.
But he speaks of the called, that he might the more influence the Jews
who were made partakers of this calling; for it is a singular favor,
when we have the gift of the knowledge of Christ bestowed on us. We
ought then to take the more heed, lest we neglect so valuable a
treasure, and our thoughts should wander elsewhere. Some regard the
called to be the elect, but incorrectly in my judgment; for the Apostle
teaches here the same thing as we find in Romans 3:25, that
righteousness and salvation have been procured by the blood of Christ,
but that we become partakers of them by faith.
7. MURRAY, “THE POWER OF CHRIST'S DEATH RATIFYING THE COVENANT.
You remember how in chap. viii. we found two names given to
our Lord Jesus, indicating the twofold work He does, with God
in heaven and in our heart on earth. As a Minister of the
sanctuary, He is in God s presence, ministering the grace of the
sanctuary to us, and giving us the enjoyment of that presence.
As Mediator of the new covenant, He works in our heart on
earth, giving God s law within us, as the law of the Spirit of His
own life, and fitting us for the worship and fellowship of the
sanctuary. In the first half of this chapter we have had the
exposition of how Christ, as Minister of the sanctuary, opened
and entered into it through His own blood, and there ministers
the everlasting redemption. He does it by cleansing our
conscience, in the power of that blood that has prevailed to open
heaven, to enter in boldly and freely to serve the living God. In
the second half of the chapter He now proceeds to speak of

202. Christ as the Mediator of the new covenant. With the same
blood with which He dedicated the sanctuary He has dedicated
the covenant too.
And for this cause he is the Mediator of a new covenant,
that they that have been called may receive the promise of
the eternal inheritance. The word promise reminds of what
was said of the better covenant, enacted upon better promises.
The word inheritance of the oath of God and the inheriting
the promise through faith. The word eternal of all we have
heard of our Melchizedek, as a Priest for ever, who does all
His work in the power of an endless life. Christ has become
a Mediator of this new covenant, that the promise of the eternal
inheritance, that blessed heritage of eternal life even now made
manifest in the promises of the law written in the heart and full
personal fellowship with God, might be our portion ; it is the work
of the Mediator to ensure our inheriting the promises. But this
could not be till a death had taken place for the redemption of
the transgressions that were under the first covenant. The
first covenant had its sanction in God s appointment ; the new
covenant could not take its place until the first had met with
full satisfaction for its claims. There was no way for this, for
the redemption of the transgressions it had seen and condemned,
but by a death. All the writer had meant in speaking of the
blood, he now includes in the expression, a death. The change
of the expression reminds us how the two are one. The blood
is through the death ; the death is for the blood. The blood-
shedding and the death are the redemption, the ransom, that
by sin-bearing and atonement deliver from transgressions and
their power. All the transgressions of the old covenant had
been treasured up ; the death of Christ gave satisfaction to all
that that covenant could claim, and brought release. So the
Mediator of the new covenant begins an entirely new economy,

203. with sin put away by the sacrifice of Himself, and an open
path to the beginning of a new life in the favour and power of
God.
Now follow two verses which have caused no little difficulty.
In English we have for one word in Greek two words of entirely
different meaning. The word "covenant," a treaty between two
parties, and " testament," the last will by which one party leaves
his property to another, are the same in Greek. Through the
whole of Scripture the word may always best be translated
"covenant," with the exception of the two following verses. Here
the argument renders the meaning "testament" or "will" necessary.
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 doth it ever avail while he that made
it liveth ? It is as if the author turns aside for a moment, led
to it by what he had just said of them who receive the eternal
inheritance, to use the other meaning of the Greek word in
order to prove how, in every connection, a death is indispens
able. He had spoken of Christ s death as the sacrifice by which
the covenant was ratified. To confirm the thought he adds :
" When one who has made a testament dies, he passes away, and
the heir takes his place, even so Jesus, the Heir of all things,
in His death gave up all, that we might stand in His place, and
inherit all."
Would God that our hearts might take it in. A death having
taken place ! Now the covenant is sure. The redemption of past
transgressions is sure ; we may now claim and take the promise
of the eternal inheritance. A death having taken place I Now
the testament avails. The maker of the testament has died, to
put us in complete possession of all He had and all He won for
us. And, praise God ! He lives again, as no other maker of a

204. testament ever lives, to put us in full possession of the inherit
ance, and to be Himself its chiefest measure and joy; as Minister
of the true sanctuary to keep us in God s presence ; as Mediator
of the new covenant to keep our heart in the full enjoyment
of all its blessings.
1. Everyone can understand houi absolutely a last will or testament needs a death. This
must help us to believe that a covenant needs It as much for the redemption of transgres
sions. As sure as the death of a maker of a testament puts the heir In complete possession
of the promise, so surely has the death of the Mediator made a perfect redemption from all
transgression.
2. Let us get firmly hold of this : In virtue of His death the first covenant could be set
aside and the second dedicated uiith His blood. The second covenant has entirely to do with
keeping our heart and life In a right state for entering the sanctuary and abiding there. Let
me believe It can and shall be fulfilled.
8. THE MEDIATION OF THE NEW COVENANT
(HEB. 9:15-22)
Dr. S.L. Johnson (1993)
Tape 14B
Opening Prayer
Father, we turn again to Thee in appreciation for the Word of God and for the marvelous
way in which we have it in our hands so we can read it and ponder it. We know that we
have a teacher, the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Holy Trinity to teach us the things
which He inspired the prophets and the apostles to write.
We thank Thee for the experiences of life in which the Word of God has sustained us,
helped us, and comforted and consoled us. We seek Thy blessing upon those studying this
lecture and we pray Thy blessing on our time together centered on Thy Word. May we be
guided into the truth as Thou would have us to hear it and understand it. We pray these
things in Jesus name, Amen.
EXODUS 24:1-18: THE FIRST COVENANT
Exodus 24:1 Now He said to Moses, “Come up to the Lord, you and Aaron, Nadab and
Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship from afar. [For under the Mosaic
Age one could not enter into the presence of God.]

205. Exodus 24:2-7
2 And Moses alone shall come near the Lord, but they shall not come near; nor shall the
people go up with him.” 3 So Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and
all the judgments. And all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words
which the Lord has said we will do.” 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. And he
rose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars
according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 5 Then he sent young men of the children of Israel,
who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the Lord. 6 And
Moses took half the blood and put it in basins, and half the blood he sprinkled on the
altar.7 Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read in the hearing of the people. And
they said, “All that the Lord has said we will do, and be obedient.”[How ignorant they were
of themselves.]
Exodus 24:8-18
8 And Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, “This is the blood of the
covenant which the Lord has made with you according to all these words.” 9 Then Moses
went up, also Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, 10 and they
saw the God of Israel. And there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire
stone, and it was like the very heavens in its clarity. 11 But on the nobles of the children of
Israel He did not lay His hand. So they saw God, and they ate and drank. 12 Then the Lord
said to Moses, “Come up to Me on the mountain and be there; and I will give you tablets of
stone, and the law and commandments which I have written, that you may teach them.” 13
So Moses arose with his assistant Joshua, and Moses went up to the mountain of God. 14
And he said to the elders, “Wait here for us until we come back to you. Indeed, Aaron and
Hur are with you. If any man has a difficulty, let him go to them.” 15 Then Moses went up
into the mountain, and a cloud covered the mountain. 16 Now the glory of the Lord rested
on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day He called to
Moses out of the midst of the cloud. 17 The sight of the glory of the Lord was like a
consuming fire on the top of the mountain in the eyes of the children of Israel. 18 So Moses
went into the midst of the cloud and went up into the mountain. And Moses was on the
mountain forty days and forty nights.
INTRODUCTION
You can see there were various levels of approach to the Lord God. The people themselves,
were worshipping from afar, and then Moses, Aaron, Nadam, Abihu and seventy of those
elders of Israel were closer and they saw the God of Israel. There is no indication
specifically here of what they saw. Of course they did not see Him in His essence because
that produced death. They saw some representation of Him, but that is as far as we are
able to go. Then we see that Moses and Joshua drew a little closer to the Lord. Finally, we
have Moses who went into the midst of the cloud and went up into the mountain for forty
days and forty nights. You may remember that when he came down the glory of the LORD
shown on his face. (See 2 Corinthian 3 for Paul's explanation of this.)
HEBREWS 9:15-18
15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the
redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may

206. receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where there is a testament, there
must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17 For a testament is in force after men
are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives. 18 Therefore not even the first
covenant was dedicated without blood. (Hebrews 9:15-18)
EXPOSITION
Now I must stop for a moment to explain our terms. Some of you have the word
"covenant" in place of "testament" in your Bible. The reason for this is that verse 17
suggests that "a testament is in force after men are dead". That would suggest a "will and
a testament." Thus, commentators have thought that this is the proper translation of verse
16 and 17, that is the word "testament". I do not think that this is correct and I want to
tell you why.
In the first place, the Greek word "diatheke" which is used here never means "testament"
anywhere else in the New Testament. It is always "covenant". In this context, (verse 15) we
already have "covenant", and Christ is the mediator of a new covenant. I want you to know
how carefully coordinated these verses are with one another. In verse 18, most everyone in
is agreement that because the word "πρώτη" is usedwhich isa feminine, singular adjective
and thus is grammatically in agreement with the Greek noun for covenant ("diatheke"),
that the context justifies inserting the word "covenant" [in the English translation] for
clarity (although in verse 18 "diatheke" is not in the original text).
So it is clear that "the first" is referring to a "covenant", and now we have "a new
covenant" as is noted in verse 15. So the question is, "why should we translate diatheke as
"testament" in verses 16 and 17? In verse 15 we are told that Christ is the mediator of the
New Covenant. Now both verse 16 and 17 are connected to verse 15 by the use of the word
"for." Everything is closely reasoned. Even verse 18 begins with a "therefore" and refers
back to the manner in which the "first covenant" was dedicated. For these reasons, we will
understand all of these occurrences of "diatheke" to be translated as "covenant."
HEBREWS 9:19-22
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took
the blood of calves and goats, with water, scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the
book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God has
commanded you.” [Mosaic Covenant] 21 Then likewise he sprinkled with blood both the
tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. 22 And according to the law almost all things
are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission. (Hebrews
9:19-22)
TYPOLOGY IN SCRIPTURE
Typology is grounded in the fact that "the God referred to in the Old testament" is "the
same God of the New Testament." He acts according to the same principles in ancient
times, New Testament times and today also! So in typology we have historicity. It is very
important to understand that biblical typology is NOT allegory because we are talking
about historical things, and we have "correspondence." So then the actions that we find in
one part of Scripture correspond in some significant way to another part of Scripture.
Now we have come to a place in this epistle where we find "typology."

207. The language of Hebrews is the language of the Pentateuch (God's "kindergarten"). If you
are going to understand the Bible you must believe that the writers of Scripture believed in
typology! Now the author has been talking about the ways in which the Lord Jesus Christ
fulfills the Old Testament in regard to priesthood (chapter 7) and the covenant (chapter 8).
Now he comes to the topic of "sacrifice" which will take him all the way to Hebrews 10:18.
So the ongoing theme will be "the sacrifice that the priest must make" in order that the
covenant may be ratified! For there must be a priesthood by which individuals are brought
to the knowledge of the Lord and ultimately to perfection. He has already shown the
validity of the better tabernacle in verse 11 and will show a better sacrifice in verse 14.
That tabernacle in heaven is indeed the presence of God!
THE NECESSITY OF THAT BETTER SACRIFICE
The passage of Heb 9:15-22 speaks of "the necessity of that better sacrifice" and then in
verses 9:23-10:18 "the finality of it."
Heb. 9:15. And for this reason he is the mediator of the new covenant, that by means of
death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant (that is
the Mosaic), they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
"For this reason…" For what reason? Verse 14 sets forth the reason.
Heb. 9:14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered Himself without spot to God purge your conscience from dead works to serve the
living God.
For this reason because of the surpassing value of that sacrifice that Christ offered He is
the mediator of a "new covenant." Some false ideas are taught at this point. Some say that
Jesus Christ, when He was here upon the earth, re-confirmed the Ten Commandments, as
if that was the work of the Lord Jesus. Luther once said; "Jesus Christ is no Moses."
Luther is right! Jesus did not come to re-affirm the Ten Commandments. He came to
accomplish the atoning work and for this reason he is the mediator of the new covenant.
The Abrahamic, the Davidic and the New are three unconditional covenants. These are
covenants which God will sovereignly bring to pass. So are we not to do something? Well
yes. The covenant is for a certain people who are in a certain status or relationship before
Him. But fundamental to that is the fact that we are in that "status" because of what God
does for us. So these three covenants have unconditional promises which do not depend
on us in any way. They depend upon the Lord God ultimately.
But don't we have to believe? Yes, the promises are for believers. But the Bible goes on
to say that the only reason we can believe is because God works in our hearts to bring us to
faith. Do you get the point? So faith itself is the gift of God. We know that from
Ephesians 2:8-9 and other passages in the New Testament. Augustine spent many treaties
arguing with the semi-Pelagians. If you think that faith is the product of your life, then
you belong with the semi-Pelagians. Faith is not self - originated. God originates it in our
hearts. No man can come to Christ except the Father, who has sent Me (that is Jesus)
draw them. The blessings are guaranteed by the LORD God.
We know that there is one original covenant that the Bible only alludes to in a few places.
There is no text that says explicitly, this is "the Covenant of Redemption," but it is
demanded by other statements made in the Word of God. (Eph. 1:3, 1 Pet. 1:2-4) This

208. term, "Covenant of Redemption", is used by theologians of that covenant between the
persons of the Trinity in eternity past. So the Covenant of Redemption is the agreement
that:
 The Father will choose those upon whom he sets his distinguishing love. These
are his people for whom he sends his Son to justify and glorify and upon whom he sets a
goal to be like Christ.
 While God The Son agrees in obedience to the Father, becomes incarnate,
fulfills the Law, dies as a propitiatory, penal sacrifice for the elect, and lives as their High
Priest to intercede for them.
 God The Spirit agrees to apply the work of Christ to the hearts of the elect, and
to guide them into all truth, sealing them unto the day of redemption. This is all arranged
in eternity past because it belongs to the eternal counsels of the Lord God.
The New Covenant then is the direct outflow of the promise of the Father that He would
give the Son a multitude of individuals whom no man can number and that the Son has the
power to bring them to the knowledge of salvation (John 17). So then these chosen ones
become the precious jewels of the Triune God. Now in order to carry out this plan, it was
necessary for the Son to come and carry out the redeeming work. So we read in verse 15;
Heb. 9:15. And for this cause He is the mediator of the New Covenant by means of death
for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant.
The Lord Jesus must come and must carry out the fundamental sacrifice that will bring
into application all of the principles and promises of the covenantal program of the Triune
God. Do you see how much hangs upon the obedience of the Son of God to the will of the
Father? My destiny, your destiny, the destiny of all of the redeemed, who are so many
that no man can number them, -- the burden of all these rests on the shoulders of our Lord
as He carried out his atoning work!
How puzzled the Old Testament saints must have been if they saw generations of sinning
men come and go without an affirmative answer to the question, "Does God really punish
sin?" He says He punishes it eternally. But is there any evidence? This spectacle might
have seemed to them to be a "continuous scandal." The whole moral universe did not
seem to be on solid ground because sin was not really being punished. But now we can look
back and see the answer in the glorious gospel! Just read Psalm 73 and you will note the
despair of the believer at the unchecked prosperity of the wicked. Where are the wages of
sin? –he asked Now finally here is the divine answer. So now we see that our Lord came
to die, not only for our sins, but also for those who lived under the first covenant, that is for
the sins of Moses, the sins of Aaron and for all of the Old Testament believers.
The People of God are a Definite Number
"That those who are called by the grace of God may receive the promise of the eternal
inheritance" (Heb. 9:15b) The people of God are a definite number. They are found in the
mind of God in eternity past and they ultimately come into this existence and are called by
the grace of God and brought to the knowledge of the Lord God!
Theology is the Study of God and Therefore Incredibly Practical

209. I am accused of emphasizing theology. I am glad that I do emphasize theology. One
cannot talk biblically without talking theologically. Everything that has to do with the
Word of God is theology. In fact, the Bible is a book full of theological propositions. You
know, it starts out Genesis 1:1, the first proposition: "In the beginning, God created the
heavens and the earth." No matter how things go in your daily experience, you can count
on the fact that the New Covenant has not changed. Whether we are experiencing things
that are pleasant, or things not pleasant, our relationship to the Lord God is stable and
secure.
THE BLOOD OF CHRIST AS EXPLAINED BY THE DEATH
16 For where there is a covenant, there must also be the death of the covenanter. 17 For a
covenant is in force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the
covenanter liveth. (Heb. 9:16-17)
We still find in the Christian church shame over the term "blood". Blood is not a very
happy thing to think about. We naturally shudder at seeing blood flowing out of someone's
body. It reminds us of our sin and the judgment of it. When Cain slew Abel, that was a
horrifying thing to Adam and Eve. So blood and death go together and they go together in
reference to sin. The author gives this human illustration in verse 16 and 17 as quoted
above, but the divine teaching follows in verses 18-21.
Heb. 9:18. Whereupon neither the first covenant was dedicated without blood. 19. For
when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the
blood of calves and of goats, with hyssop and sprinkled both the book and all the people,
(recall Exodus 24)
He sprinkled blood on the people, but first of all he sprinkled blood on the altar. That is
important because it lets us know the character of the Old Mosaic Covenant. It is NOT an
unconditional covenant. It is a conditional covenant. So when a person broke the Mosaic
Covenant, he became eligible for death. Do you understand what this means? Has this
entered into the comprehension of your mind? Remember the Abrahamic, Davidic and
New Covenants are unconditional, but the Mosaic is a conditional covenant. When Israel
broke the covenant, they were under the sentence of death!
Israel was responsible to obey. They took it upon themselves to obey. They said, "All that
the Lord has commanded us we will do". And before Moses came down from the
mountain, they had already made the golden calf and were dancing around in worship of it.
So what a fitting illustration when he says: "Wherefore neither the first covenant was
dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people
according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, and sprinkled both the book
itself and all the people." He sprinkled the book as a reference to the Lord God. God will
carry out all his responsibilities. Then He sprinkled the people as an evidence that they
would obey the Law. This is not a unilateral covenant. It is a bi-lateral covenant. As you
recall there are three unconditional, unilateral covenants, but this is a bi-lateral covenant
which means that men have responsibility. God has responsibilities but the sprinkling of
the altar and the people points to their responsibilities.

210. Heb. 9:21. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the
ministry. 22. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding
of blood is no remission.
So the universality of the blood sacrifice is the climax which he reaches in verse 22. Some
things were purified by incense, and so the meaning of the adverb "almost" in this verse is
"nearly all things."
THREE FAMOUS "WITHOUTS"
This statement "without shedding of blood" is one of the three famous statements in the
Epistle to the Hebrews.
 Heb. 11:6. Without faith it is impossible to please him.
 Heb. 12:14. And pursue peace with all men and holiness without which no one
shall see the Lord.
 Heb. 9:22. and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Theology, Not Psychology is the Best Way to Solve Our Human Problems
The first thing for us to see is that there is such a thing as remission of sins and we can
know that we have remission of sins and that it is an eternal remission. So, we may know
that we have it forever. Not realizing that theology is the best way to solve our human
problems, many pulpits today engage in human psychological thinking to solve human
distresses. They do not realize that psychology is not a teaching that is substantial and
immutable, as is the teaching of the Word of God. Phil. 4:6-7 tells us plainly that we can
count on the peace that we have with the Lord God, and it is something which He gives us
when we turn to Him for it. So we have remission of sins and we may know that we have
it.
Secondly, it is never attained without blood. Men have many "false trusts" these days.
Some men are close to the Bible in their thinking. For example, they trust in repentance.
Now repentance is a precious gift from God and the Bible calls it a gift. But it does not
have any atoning power in itself. In the case of the blood, it has atoning power. Other men
trust their reformation or renewal. It is indeed important to change our lives if our lives
have been contrary to the Word of God. Let me illustrate this point: If a person owes a lot
of money and says to his banker, "Sir, I have been running up debts and having a terrible
time meeting my payments and have determined that I am not going to borrow any more."
The banker would say, "I am glad to hear that, but what about that which you already
owe?" To reform or "change for the better" is very much like that; however, to change
one's actions does not cancel one's past debt.
Prayer is likewise important, but it does not give us remission of our sins. Self-denial
isimportant. Others who are more "mystically inclined" put a lot of hope in the
flagellation of the body or in fasts, but these things as well do not help in the forgiveness of
sins. Then there are religious ceremonies -- they do not help either. There is only one way
by which we receive the forgiveness of our sins and that is through the Lord Jesus Christ
and it is obtained at the foot of the cross!

211. Luther was so anxious to bring to the people the truth that we are justified by faith alone.
He said, "I want to go into the pulpit with my Bible in my hand and throw it at their
heads". He wanted them to understand the Gospel of redemption through faith in the
blood of Jesus Christ. Our author of this epistle has certainly underlined that message
here in speaking about what Christ has done for us.
"without shedding of blood there is no remission"(Hebrews 9:22)
The remission flows out of the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ. I hope that this is the
experience of everyone who is reading this lecture series. That is the experience that you
know your sin, and that Christ died for sin, and that by the Holy Spirit you have been
moved to appeal to Him in your heart, that is your inmost being, for the forgiveness that
He offers in grace, and that you have received it. May God help you to do that.
Closing Prayer
Father, we are grateful to Thee for the word of God, and we thank thee for these marvelous
texts that so exalt the death of Christ. We thank Thee for the redemption of our sins and
that we have been called and we have an eternal inheritance. May Thy blessing go with us
as we close the hour, for Jesus sake, Amen.
I AM NOT WORTHY
I am not worthy the least of His favor,
But Jesus left heaven for me,
The Word became flesh and He died as my Savior
Forsaken on dark Calvary.
II
I am not worthy the least of His favor,
But in the beloved I stand;
Now I'm an heir with my wonderful Savior
And all things are mine at his hand.
III
I am not worthy the least of His favor,
But He is preparing a place,
Where I shall dwell with my glorified Savior
Forever to look on His face.
CHORUS

212. I am not worthy! this dull tongue repeats it.
I am not worthy! This heart gladly beats it.
Jesus left heaven to die in my place -
What mercy, what love and what grace!
9. BI, “The two mediators:
I.
Is WHAT RESPECTS JESUS AND MOSES ARE MEDIATORIALLY ALIKE.
1. Both of Divine appointment.
2. Both give to the world the notion of a covenant with God.
3. Both proposed a covenant that was fundamentally the same.
II. IN WHAT RESPECTS JESUS AND MOSES ARE MEDIATORIALLY DIFFERENT.
1. There is a difference of natures.
2. Jesus is a Mediator with individuals.
3. Jesus is a Mediator giving to man the fullest possible knowledge of God.
4. Jesus is a Mediator giving to man sufficiency of power. (D. Young, B. A.)
The old and the new
It was a part of the mission of the apostles not to transfer the allegiance of the Jews from one
God to another, but to teach them how to serve the same God in a higher dispensation, under a
noble disclosure of His character, and by new and better methods. It was to be the same heart
and the same God; but there was a new and living way opened. The old was good, the new was
better. The new was not an antagonism of the old, but only its outgrowth, related to it as the
blossom and the fruit are to the root and the stalk. The old was local and national in its prime
intents, and in its results. The new was for all ages. The old was a system of practices. It aimed at
conduct—of course implying a good cause for conduct. The new is a system of principles, and yet
not principles in a rigid philosphical sense, but principles that are great moral impulses or
tendencies of the heart. The old built men for this world. Therefore it hardly looked beyond this
world. The whole force of the new dispensation is derived from that which scarcely appeared at
all in the old—its supereminent doctrine of the future. That is its very enginery. The aims of
Christianity are supramundane. The motives are drawn from immortality-its joys, honours,
promises, rewards. The old addressed the conscience through fear, and soon overreached its
aim, losing some by under-action, and others—and the better natures—by over-action. What the
law could not do, in that it was weak, it is declared, God sent His own Son to do. The new aims at
the very springs of moral power in the soul, and that through love. It is a total change, it is an
absolute difference, in this regard. The old was a dispensation of secular morals. It lived in the
past. The new is a system of aspirations. It lives in the future. We are the children of the new
testament, and not of the old. Woe be to us if, living in these later days, we find ourselves
groping in the imperfections of the old testament, instead of springing up with all the vitality

213. and supereminent manhood which belongs to the new testament. We are the children of a living
Saviour. We are a brood over which He stretches His wings. We ought to have more than a creed
which is only a modern representation of an old ordinance or institution. We ought to have
something more than an ordinance. To be a disciple of the new testament is to have a living
Head. It is to have a vital connection with that Head. It is to be conscious, while all nature
speaks of God, and while all the exercises of religion assist indirectly, that the main power of a
true religion in the soul is the soul’s connection with a living God. Ye are the children of the new
and not of the old. Let your life mount up toward God. (H. W. Beecher.)
They which are called
Called
To every one of you I say, you are called. You are called because you were baptized as infants,
dedicated to the service of the gospel, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost. You are called because you have been instructed from the days of childhood to the
present hour to believe in the Lord Jesus. You are called because you are in a Christian land,
surrounded by those who own that the gospel is the word of God, and having also many within
your sight or hearing, who live according to the will of Christ. You are called by the ordinances of
the Christian Church, by the voice of the Christian ministry; by the word and sacraments of
Christ, and by the preaching of those pastors who address you by His commission, and in His
name. This day, this hour I call you in His behalf; therefore you are called. This is your calling.
May God give you grace to hear! May God help you to believe His promise! May God make you
to enjoy His glory. (C. Girdlestone, M. A.)
Effectual calling:
God draws His people, not with force, as mere machines, but “with the cords of a man and with
the bands of love.” The subject may be best unfolded by a familiar illustration. How was it that
Jacob was drawn into Egypt? He was made to feel the pressure of a grievous famine; he was
informed that there was plenty of corn in Egypt, and that his dearly-beloved Joseph was the lord
of all that land, and that he disposed of the good things to whomsoever he would. He was told,
moreover, that Joseph had expressly invited him, and had sent waggons for the conveyance of
his family, together with abundant provisions for the way; and, finally, he was assured that, at
the end of this journey, all the good of the land of Egypt should be his. Did he need, after this, to
have a chain fastened round him m be dragged into Egypt? No; all that he needed was faith to
believe the tidings; and when once he was persuaded of the truth of these things he was willing
of himself to go into that good land. Thus God draws sinners. He causes them to feel their need
of mercy; He informs them that Jesus Christ has all heaven at His disposal; that He has sent to
invite them, assuring them of all that is needful by the way, and all the glory of heaven at the
end. Thus a thorough belief of these truths bends the most stubborn heart, and overcomes the
most reluctant mind. (C. Simeon.)
A testament is of force after men are dead
Christ’s testament
I. CHRIST’S WILL IS EMBODIED IN A WRITTEN RECORD.
1. The record gives a definite meaning and fixed character to the mind of Christ.

214. 2. The record gives to the mind of Christ an abiding existence among us.
3. The written Word renders the will of Christ accessible to all.
II. CHRIST’S WILL IS EMBODIED IN AN AUTHENTIC RECORD.
III. CHRIST’S TESTAMENT IS A WRITTEN AND AUTHENTIC RECORD OF WHAT HE HAS
BEQUEATHED TO MEN. There are great bequests for each of us. We are guilty—Christ has
willed our forgiveness. We are enslaved—Christ has willed our freedom. We are
sorrowful—Christ has willed our peace. We are dying—Christ has willed us life for ever.
IV. CHRIST’S TESTAMENT HAS BEEN RATIFIED AND BROUGHT INTO FULL AND
EVERLASTING OPERATION BY HIS OWN DEATH. (John Davies.)
Christ’s testamentary covenant:
It seems to us that St. Paul took advantage of the double meaning of the Greek word which he
uses, and illustrates his subject the more copiously by employing it in one place for a “covenant,”
and in another for a “testament”; and we shall possibly, as we advance, find reason to conclude,
that the full sense of the passage is only to be evolved by our attaching to the word its double
signification—by bearing in mind that a “covenant” and “testament” are alike designated by the
word which the apostle employs. After all, there is not the wide difference which, at the first
sight, we may suppose between a covenant and a testament. If I make a will, I may, in one sense,
be said to covenant and agree to give certain things to certain parties upon the condition of my
death; so that a testament is virtually a species of covenant. And if, on the other hand, two
parties enter into a covenant, and the terms of this covenant require that one of them should die,
you all see that, without any great forcing of language, the covenant may be considered as the
testament or will of the sacrificed individual. God made a covenant with the Israelites, but then
this covenant was ratified by the shedding of blood; in other words, there must be death to give
the covenant its validity; and the covenant which required death in order to its completeness,
might, as we have shown you, without anything overstrained in language, be designated a
“testament.” So that under these limitations, and under these conditions, we can attach the
name of a “testament” to that covenant which God made with Israel at Sinai. The exhibition
which we are called upon to survey is that of our Saviour under the character of a testator; as the
maker, that is, of a will, which could only become valid by the death of the party who made it.
Now you will see at once that there is a peculiarity in this exhibition which marks it off from
other representations of the scheme of human salvation. If Christ Jesus is displayed as
bequeathing to the world legacies, which legacies could not be paid except after His death, then
it may be said that it was the fact, the simple historical fact of His death, and not any merit
which there was in that death, which entailed the large blessings on the race of mankind. And if
by parity of reasoning the Redeemer is to be considered as a testator, or will-maker, does not the
representation take away from the meritoriousness of His death, and, at least, show that it was
not because His sufferings were expiatory and precious that such and such blessings have been
obtained for us? A few words will suffice for the removal of this objection. If a man is worth
£1,000 he may bequeath me that £1,000; and thus his death, considered as the mere separation
of his soul from his body, will make me the owner of the money. But take the following case
which is perfectly supposable: a criminal is sentenced to die, but is allowed, if he can, to find a
substitute. He offers £1,000 for a substitute, and an individual comes forward and agrees on
these terms to die in his stead. Now certainly this substitute may will away the £1,000, and yet
nothing but his death entitles him to the £1,000. He might, for example, have long striven in
vain to earn a livelihood for his family; he might then, calculating that his family would be more
benefited by his death than his life, determine to sacrifice himself in order to procure for them

215. the proper remuneration; and, without question, he might make a will which would secure to his
children the property to which the value o! his death would alone give him right. He would thus
unite the character of a testator and of a man who purchases, by dying, the goods which he
bequeathes. Now this supposed case finds its precise counterpart in the matter of our
redemption. “The blessings of the gospel could only be procured by the sufferings and death of
the Mediator. Hence, unquestionably, the blessings which Christ bequeathed were blessings
which His death, and nothing but His death, could give Him right to bestow; but, nevertheless,
He might still be a testator, or still make a will. In dying He might bequeath what He was to
obtain by dying; and thus real inconsistency, after all, there is none, between regarding Christ as
the maker of the will, and at the same time as procuring by His death the blessings which He
made over to His people. In what sense, then, did Christ make a testament or will, or what
fidelity is there in such an account of the scheme of our redemption? Now we would, first of all,
remark that there is nothing more frequent in Scripture than the speaking of true believers “as
heirs of God,” or as brought into such a relationship to the Almighty that heaven becomes theirs
by the rights of inheritance. Yon cannot fall immediately to observe that the correspondence is
most exact between this account of the believer as an heir and the representation of Christ as a
testator. In dying Christ made us heirs. But this is exactly what would have been done by a
testament; and, therefore, it is not possible that the effects of Christ’s death should be more
clearly represented than by the figure of Christ as a testator. But is there then, indeed, no
registered will, no document to which we can refer as the testament of the Mediator? We shall
not hesitate to say that there is not a single promise in the New Testament which ought not to be
regarded as a line or codicil in the will of the Redeemer. If you ask us for a written testament we
carry you along with us to the archives of the Bible, and we take cut of it declarations which
ensure to the faithful the crown and the rapture, and we join them into one continuous
discourse, and we say to you, Behold the last will of the Saviour. What, we further ask, is this but
an exact parallel to that which would take place in the case of a testament? Suppose you were
permitted to read a will made in your own favour; there might be the bequeathment of a rich
and noble estate, there might be the coffers of wealth and the caskets of jewellery consigned to
your possession; but you would never think that you had a right to the domain, and you would
never be bold enough to put forward a claim to the gold and the pearl, unless you knew that the
testator was dead, and that thereby a force had been given to the testament. So that the
correspondence is most accurate between the promises of Scripture and the consignments of a
will. Had Christ (if we may bring forward such an idea) while suspended on the Cross, and
exhausting the wrath which had gone forth against a disloyal creation, dictated a testamentary
document enumerating the blessings which He bequeathed to all who believe on His name, not
until He had bowed the head, and yielded up the ghost, would this register of the legacy have
lived, overpassing in its wealth all the thoughts of created intelligences, and given right to a
single child of our race to look and hope for the heritage of the redeemed. A testament is but a
combination of promises becoming valid by the death of the promiser, we give the truest
description of the promises of the Bible when we define them as “the last will and testament of
Christ our Lord.” Now we would refer for a moment to that connection which we show to subsist
between a covenant and testament. The Father and the Son had, from all eternity, entered into a
covenant; the Father engaging, on the performance of certain conditions, that blessings should
be placed at the disposal of the Son for the seed of the apostate. The covenant between the
persons of the Trinity engaged for the pardon and acceptance of all who, in every age, should
believe on the Son. Hence, you must all perceive, that what was the covenant between the Father
and Son was also a document in favour of man; but, certainly, the covenant could only become
valid by death; that in the fulness of time the Son should die, being its grand and fundamental
article. And if as a covenant it could only become valid by death, then as a document in favour of
man it could only become valid by death; but that document in favour of a party, which only
becomes valid by death, is, most strictly, a will or testament. So that by one and the same act

216. Christ Jesus performed His covenant with the Father, and made His testament in favour of man;
that, in short, which was a covenant considered relatively to God, was a testament considered
relatively to man. It obtained blessings from God; it consigned blessings to man, and both
equally through death. You cannot, therefore, view Christ as executing a covenant without also
viewing Him as executing a testament. What tie gained as a covenanter He disposed of as a
testator; and whilst we say of Him, as making an agreement with God, “Where a covenant is,
there must be the death of the covenanter,” we say of Him, as bestowing gifts on men, “where a
testament is, there must be the death of the testator.” (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Christ’s last will and testament
I. We have to inquire IN WHAT SENSE OR SENSES MAY WE SPEAK OF THE LORD JESUS
CHRIST AS A TESTATOR. What is involved in this idea? If a will is made, two things are
implied—that there is something to leave: that there is some measure of interest felt in those
who are mentioned as legatees.
1. Now in the case of our Lord Jesus Christ, we see one who has large and royal possessions,
and who has these absolutely at His own disposal. All things are described as the property of
Christ. All things were made by Him and for Him. Jesus Christ has power and authority to
bestow all gospel blessings and privileges upon His people. He gives them grace here; He
will crown them with glory hereafter.
2. And then, in making His will, Christ has distinctly in view those who are interested in its
provisions—His friends, His relations those for whom, though they had no natural claim
upon Him, the Saviour has bound Himself to provide. And we have the means of
determining very exactly who these are. His friends are those who love Him, and who show
their love by keeping His commandments.
3. A testator, in making his last will and testament, so far as there is in it any different
disposition of property, supersedes, renders null and void, any will that may have been
previously made. So Jesus Christ disannulled the law of the old covenant by establishing the
new. Let us see to it that we put in our claim under the last will and testament of Christ. Let
us not expect to receive under the law what can only come to us as a matter of free grace,
under the gospel.
4. As in the case of a merely human testator, so in the case of Jesus Christ—where a
testament is, for it to have force, for it to take effect, theremust needs be the death of the
testator; “otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.” In this particular
instance there was need for the death of the testator on several different accounts. Among
men it is the death of the testator which renders a testament effectual. And so this testament
was confirmed and ratified by the death of Jesus Christ, and but for that death it could have
had no force at all. And as after death a will may not be altered or revoked by the testator,
but remains the expression of his mind to be carried out as exactly as possible, so it may not
be interfered with by others. You may question its meaning, you may question whether it be
the will of him who is declared to have drawn it up, you may question his right to make it, or
make it in that precise form, yet, admitting it as a will, though it be only a human will, “no
man disannulleth or addeth thereunto.” How much more truly is this the case with the
testament, the will of Christ! And we must bear in mind, in the case of this testament, that
there was a necessity for the death of Christ, which does not exist in the case of any ordinary
testament. The death of Christ not merely rendered His will irrevocable, and afforded the
heirs of promise a way of entering upon the enjoyment of their inheritance, as the death of
every testator does, but there was this peculiarity—the very blessings which were disposed of

217. by the will of Christ were secured and purchased by His death. A testator appoints executors
in trust, who undertake, according to their ability, to see that all the provisions of his will are
faithfully carried out. The Father and the Holy Ghost engage to carry out the will of Christ,
and are ever actually doing so. But there is a high and important sense in which Christ is His
own executor. “He ever liveth” to carry out those gracious designs which find changeless
expression in His last will and testament. In the record of our Saviour’s visible residence
among men, we are told only “ of all that Jesus began, both to do and to teach.”
II. Having considered Christ as the testator, let US NOW LOOK AT THE GOSPEL AS THE
“LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF CHRIST, We are presented with the will of Christ, not as so
much mere hearsay—not as a vague and floating tradition—not as the “lingering echo” of His
much-loved voice—not as a general and unaccredited expression of His intention: we haveit in a
written record, an authentic document. It is necessary that a human will should be written. And
though it has been determined that an oral will, under certain circumstances (as in the case of
soldiers on actual service, or mariners at sea), is valid, if properly attested, yet that even must be
reduced to a written form. And so have we the will of Christ embodied in words of human
speech. Nor can we be too thankful that it has been so handed down to us. It is not enough that a
will and testament be written, it must be attested; it must be proved to be authentic and
genuine. It must be shown to be the will of that very person whose will it purports to be. This
last will and testament of Christ is proved by much concurrent testimony. The gospel of the
great salvation, “which at first began to be spoken by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them
that heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both by signs and wonders, and with divers
miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to His own will.” I feel that I am safe in
affirming that the proof which sustains the testament of Christ is immeasurably stronger and
more convincing than that which sustains any human and earthly will. There has been a
practical proof of a twofold kind. For eighteen hundred years and more this will has been
repeatedly disputed by the enemies of Christ. The wit and wisdom and science of the world have
done all that they could do to invalidate it, but all these attempts have been in vain. For the same
period the will has been proved by Christ’s friends. We might summon a great cloud of
witnesses, all of whom could bear the testimony of personal experience. There is, in every
testament, provision implied or expressed that it should, with all convenient speed, be published
and made known. This is necessary, that the legatees may become aware of that which has been
bequeathed to them, and be in a position to put in their claim. Christ has ordained and provided
that His disciples should publish His will and testament to all the children of men. We are “put
in trust with the gospel.” We are bound to publish the glad tidings in every direction. And we
ought to ask ourselves how far we are discharging this obligation. This will and testament of
Christ informs us of all that is provided for us. All that we enjoy, we enjoy under this will; all
spiritual blessings and privileges come to us as they are bequeathed by the Lord Jesus Christ.
This will of Christ is our sure and sufficient title to all that we possess as Christian believers. The
provisions of a will constitute an absolute title as far as it goes. If you would invalidate my right
to what is bequeathed, you must go back and question the right of him who bequeathed it. And
so, does any one question us as to our right to the spiritual privileges and possessions we enjoy,
we reply by pointing to the last will and testament of Christ, and any further question must be
raised with Christ Himself. We must not look for our title to our own merit—to anything we are,
or have done—but to the will trod testament of the Saviour. (T. M. Morris.)
CHRIST’S WILL:
I. THE ESTATE WHICH HE HAS LEFT BY IT.
1. The pardon of all sin.

218. 2. The merit of His own most glorious righteousness.
3. His own most Holy Spirit.
4. But the most glorious part of the property bequeathed by Jesus to His people is that
“inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away,” which is “reserved for
them in heaven.”
II. THE EVENT BY WHICH IT IS MADE OF FORCE. Because He hath “poured out His soul
unto death,” that His heirs enter into possession of the property which He hath left them.
Indeed, the death of Christ has a bearing on the privileges He has bequeathed among His people
beyond what can be said with reference to man’s bequests. Man’s death must happen before his
will can fake effect because, whilst he lives, he enjoys his property himself. But Christ’s death is,
as it were, the purchase-money of the estate which He bequeaths. His death therefore was as
essential to their enjoyment of these blessings as the payment of the sum demanded is to the
possession of a piece of land.
III. THE PERSONS INTERESTED IN ITS PROVISIONS.
1. Convinced of sin.
2. Men of faith.
3. Men of grace. (A. Roberts, M. A.)
The testament of Christ
I. WHO IS THE TESTATOR? God’s everlasting Son, of the same essence, perfections, and glory
with the Father.
II. WHAT ARE THE LEGACIES CONVEYED BY THIS COVENANT? In their nature and
number they are very great. The sum of them is expressed thus Rev_21:7). They have the noblest
spring and fountain with all its refreshing streams. In few words, the particular bequests in this
great will of the Divine Testator, are complete deliverance from the legal consequences of
sin—redemption from the curse of the law—the regeneration of our moral nature, and adoption
into the household of faith—support under the trials of life—foretastes of eternal glory—and
agood hope through grace which shall issue at length in the full possession of the heavenly
kingdom, where every Divine and moral excellence will be perfected in the soul, and the
rejoicing spirit for ever supremely happy before the throne of God.
III. WHAT ARE THE TERMS ON WHICH THIS DIVINE TESTAMENT BESTOWS ITS
BEQUESTS? In all deeds disposing of property among men, there are certain conditions to be
observed, in order to establish the validity of the claim. In some cases, the estate is conveyed
charged with various encumbrances; in others, the observance of sundry specified acts is
necessary to the legal holding of the property. Some inherit by descent, others by favouritism of
the testator. In the case before us all is of pure mercy and love. There are terms, but they are not
hard. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is the sole condition of eternal life; but that faith is
productive of holiness, of love, of obedience, and of all good works.
IV. WHERE IS THE PROOF OF THE VALIDITY OF THIS TESTAMENT OF LOVE? There must
be attestation in every case of a human will. In the conveyance of property there must be the
seal. If we were to set up a claim to the right of any possession in a court of law, the case would
break down if the seal of the party from whom we plead our title was not appended to the deed
of conveyance. So, likewise, a will is of no effect, till proof be given of the decease of the testator.
Our blessed Lord has made His death, resurrection, and ascension to glory, the seal of His will.
To conclude, Have you any part or portion in this testament? Many are anxious to know if some

219. aged and wealthy relative has remembered them in his will. In this will all are remembered, save
those who wilfully exclude themselves. (Am. Nat. Preacher.)
The dying will of Jesus Christ:
Perhaps a consideration of the legal ideas of the time when the. Epistle to the Hebrews was
written may help to explain this difficult passage. The idea of a will was derived by the Jews
from the Romans, and they probably associated with it the various ideas which had grown up
around the Roman will. Let us see what these were. The origin of the ordinary form of a Roman
will, was the old testament per ms et libram, by which the father of the family (generally when
on his death bed) sold his whole family and estate to some friend in whom he had confidence
(called the heres), on trust to carry out his wishes (an obligation which apparently was not
originally legally enforceable, though afterwards it was recognised by law). This form was still
kept up, though probably at the time when the Epistle was written, the familiae emptor was not
generally the same person as the heres. Still the familiae emptor represented the heres, and
served to keep the theoretical nature of the transaction before all parties concerned, and the
heres was looked upon not merely as a distributor of goods, but as the purchaser and master of
the family. It is therefore suggested that the argument is somewhat as follows. By the first διαθή
κη the Hebrews were purchased and became the bondsmen of the Law (an idea already
rendered familiar to them by Exo_15:16 and Psa_74:2); but by a new διαθήκη our Lord
purchased them with His blood (Act_20:28), as the heres or familiae emptor purchased the
inheritance, and having thus purchased the inheritance of the Law, became the new master of
the bondsmen of the Law, and the mediator, or executor, of a new dispensation. But inasmuch
as the right of the heres can only come into operation after the death of the testator (the Law), it
is evident that, if the new dispensation has begun, the Law is dead and is no longer their master.
In fact, the line of argument seems similar to that in Rom_7:1-4. (H. S. Keating.)
The blood of the testament.
The blood of Christ is the ruby gem of the ring of love. Infinite goodness finds its crown in the
gift of Jesus for sinners. All God’s mercies shine like stars, but the coming of His own Son to
bleed and die for rebel men is as the sun in the heavens of Divine grace, outshining and
illuminating all.
I. Of that death and of that blood we shall speak in a fourfold way; and first, we shall take the
verse as it would most accurately be translated—the blood of Jesus Christ is THE BLOOD OF
THE EVERLASTING COVENANT. There cannot be much doubt that the word rendered “
testament “ should be translated “covenant.” It is the word used for covenant in other passages,
and though our translators have used the word “ testament,” many critics go the length of
questioning whether the word can bear that meaning at all. I think they are too rigid in their
criticism, and that it does bear that meaning in this very chapter; but, still, all must admit that
the first, and most usual meaning of the word, is “covenant.” Therefore, we will begin with that
reading, and consider the blood of Jesus as the blood of the covenant.
1. The blood proves the intense earnestness of God in entering into covenant with man in a
way of grace.
2. It displayed the supreme love of God to man. Seeing that He entered into a contract of
grace with man, He would let man see how His very heart went forth with every word of

220. promise; and, therefore, He gave up that which was the centre of His heart, namely, Jesus
Christ.
3. The blood of the covenant, next, speaks to us and confirms the Divine faithfulness. The
main object of thus sealing the covenant with blood is to cause it to be “ordered in all things
and sure.”
4. The blood of the everlasting covenant is a guarantee to us of its infinite provision. There
can be nothing lacking for a soul redeemed by Christ between here and heaven; for He that
spared not His own Son, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?
5. This blood manifests the depth of the need which the covenant was meant to meet.
II. Now, I take our translators’ own words—“THIS IS THE BLOOD OF THE TESTAMENT.”
1. Jesus Christ has made a will, and He has left to His people large legacies by that will. Now,
wills do not need to be sprinkled with blood, but wills do need that the testator should be
dead, otherwise they are not of force. And so, first of all, the blood of Jesus Christ on Calvary
is the blood of the testament, because it is a proof that He is dead, and therefore the
testament is in force. If Jesus did not die, then the gospel is null and void not without the
sprinkled blood does the promise of salvation become yea and amen.
2. It is the blood of the testament, again, because it is the seal of His being seized and
possessed of those goods which He has bequeathed to us: for, apart from His sacrifice, our
Lord had no spiritual blessings to present to us. His death has filled the treasury of His
grace.
3. The blood of the testament, again, is a direction as to His legatees. We see who are
benefited under His will. He must have left them to the guilty because He has left a will that
is signed and sealed in blood, and blood is for the remission of sin.
III. But now I must speak upon that blood from another point of view. IT WAS THE BLOOD OF
CLEANSING. This blood of the covenant and of the testament is a blood of purification to us.
Wherever it is accepted by faith it takes away all past guilt. And this is but the beginning of our
purification, for that same blood applied by faith takes away from the pardoned sinner the
impurity which had been generated in his nature by habit. He ceases to love the sin which ,once
he delighted in: he begins to loathe that which was formerly his choice joy. A love of purity is
born within his nature; he sighs to be perfect, and he groans to think there should be about him
tendencies towards evil. Temptations which once were welcomed are now resisted; baits which
were once most fascinating are an annoyance to his spirit. The precious blood when it touches
the conscience removes all sense of guilt, and when it touches the heart it kills the ruling power
of sin. The more fully the power of the blood is felt, the more does it kill the power of sin within
the soul.
IV. And then it is THE BLOOD OF DEDICATION. On the day when Moses sprinkled the blood
of the covenant on the people, and on the book, it was meant to signify that they were a chosen
people set apart unto God’s service. The blood made them holiness unto the Lord. Now, unless
the blood is upon you, you are not saved; but if you are saved you are by that very fact set apart
to be God’s servant. “Ye are not your own, ye are bought with a price.” “Ye were not redeemed
with corruptible things as with silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ.” A saved
man is a bought man; the property of Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The blood of sprinkling:

221. This blood sprinkled on the people was a significant type and figure of the blood of our Saviour
Christ, whereby the new testament is confirmed to us.
1. That was the blood of goats and heifers; this of Christ the immaculate Lamb of God.
2. Moses was the sprinkler of that blood: the Holy Ghost is the sprinkler of this.
3. That was sprinkled on the face or garments of the people: this on our hearts and
consciences.
4. The aspertorium, the sprinkling stick, there was made of purple wool and hyssop: the
aspertorium here is faith. With that doth the Spirit of God sprinkle on us the blood of Christ.
5. That sprinkling did but sanctify the outward man: this the hid man of the heart.
6. The force and power of that sprinkling lasted but a while: the efficacy of this sprinkling
continueth for ever. Therefore let us all be desirous of this sprinkling. (W. Jones, D. D.)
16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the
death of the one who made it,
1. BARNES, "For where a testament is - This is the same word - διαθήκη diatheke -
which in Heb_8:6, is rendered “covenant.” For the general signification of the word, see note on
that verse. There is so much depending, however, on the meaning of the word, not only in the
interpretation of this passage, but also of other parts of the Bible, that it may be proper to
explain it here more at length. The word - διαθήκη diatheke - occurs in the New Testament
thirty-three times. It is translated “covenant” in the common version, in Luk_1:72; Act_3:25;
Act_7:8; Rom_9:4; Rom_11:27; Gal_3:15, Gal_3:17; Gal_4:24; Eph_2:12; Heb_8:6, Heb_8:9,
“twice,” Heb_8:10; Heb_9:4, “twice,” Heb_10:16; Heb_12:24; Heb_13:20. In the remaining
places it is rendered “testament;” Mat_26:28; Mar_14:24; Luk_22:20; 1Co_11:25; 2Co_3:6,
2Co_3:14; Heb_7:22; Heb_9:15-17, Heb_9:20; Rev_11:19. In four of those instances
(Mat_26:28; Mar_14:24; Luk_22:20, and 1Co_11:25), it is used with reference to the institution
or celebration of the Lord’s Supper. In the Septuagint it occurs not far from 300 times, in
considerably more than 200 times of which it is the translation of the Hebrew word ‫רית‬ be
riyt.
In one instance Zec_11:14 it is the translation of the word “brotherhood;” once Deu_9:5, of
‫בר‬ daabaar - “word;” once Jer_11:2, of “words of the covenant;” once Lev_26:11), of
“tabernacle;” once Exo_31:7, of “testimony;” it occurs once Eze_20:37, where the reading of the
Greek and Hebrew text is doubtful; and it occurs three times 1Sa_11:2; 1Sa_20:8; 1Ki_8:9,

222. where there is no corresponding word in the Hebrew text. From this use of the word by the
authors of the Septuagint, it is evident that they regarded it as the proper translation of the
Hebrew - ‫רית‬ be
riyt, and as conveying the same sense which that word does. It cannot be
reasonably doubted that the writers of the New Testament were led to the use of the word, in
part, at least, by the fact that they found it occurring so frequently in the version in common use,
but it cannot be doubted also that they regarded it as fairly conveying the sense of the word ‫רית‬
be
riyt. On no principle can it be supposed that inspired and honest people would use a word in
referring to transactions in the Old Testament which did not “fairly” convey the idea which the
writers of the Old Testament meant to express. The use being thus regarded as settled, there are
some “facts” in reference to it which are of great importance in interpreting the New Testament,
and in understanding the nature of the “covenant” which God makes with man. These facts are
the following:
(1) The word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - is not what properly denotes “compact,
agreement,” or “covenant.” That word is συνθήκη suntheke - “syntheke” or in other forms σύνθ
εσις sunthesis and συνθεσίας sunthesias; or if the word “diatheke” is used in that signification it
is only remotely, and as a secondary meaning; see “Passow;” compare the Septuagint in
Isa_28:15; Isa_30:1; Dan_11:6, and Wisdom Dan_1:16; 1 Macc. 10:26; 2 Macc. 13:25; 14:26. It is
not the word which a “Greek” would have employed to denote a “compact” or “covenant.” He
would have employed it to denote a “disposition, ordering,” or “arrangement” of things, whether
of religious rites, civil customs, or property; or if used with reference to a compact, it would have
been with the idea of an “arrangement,” or “ordering” of matters, not with the primary notion of
an agreement with another.
(2) The word properly expressive of a “covenant” or “compact” - συνθήκη suntheke - is
“never” used in the New Testament. In all the allusions to the transactions between God and
man, this word never occurs. From some cause, the writers and speakers in the New Testament
seem to have supposed that the word would leave an impression which they did not wish to
leave. Though it might have been supposed that in speaking of the various transactions between
God and man they would have selected this word, yet with entire uniformity they have avoided
it. No one of them - though the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - has been used by no less
than six of them - has been betrayed in a single instance into the use of the word συνθήκη
suntheke - “syntheke,” or has differed from the other writers in the language employed. This
cannot be supposed to be the result of concert or collusion, but it must have been founded on
some reason which operated equally on all their minds.
(3) In like manner, and with like remarkable uniformity, the word συνθήκη suntheke -
syntheke - is “never” used in the Septuagint with reference to any arrangement or “covenant”
between God and man. Once indeed in the Apocrypha, and but once, it is used in that sense. In
the three only other instances in which it occurs in the Septuagint, it is with reference to
compacts between man and man; Isa_28:15; Isa_30:1; Dan_11:6. This remarkable fact that the
authors of that version never use the word to denote any transaction between God and man,
shows that there must have been some reason for it which acted on their minds with entire
uniformity.
(4) It is no less remarkable that neither in the Septuagint nor the New Testament is the word
διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - “ever” used in the sense of “will” or “testament,” unless it be in
the case before us. This is conceded on all hands, and is expressly admitted by Prof. Stuart;

223. (Com. on Heb. p. 439), though he defends this use of the word in this passage. - A very
important inquiry presents itself here, which has never received a solution generally regarded as
satisfactory. It is, why the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - was selected by the writers of
the New Testament to express the nature of the transaction between God and man in the plan of
salvation. It might be said indeed that they found this word uniformly used in the Septuagint,
and that they employed it as expressing the idea which they wished to convey, with sufficient
accuracy. But this is only removing the difficulty one step further back.
Why did the Septuagint adopt this word? Why did they not rather use the common and
appropriate Greek word to express the notion of a covenant? A suggestion on this subject has
already been made in the notes on Heb_8:6; compare Bib. Repository vol. xx. p. 55. Another
reason may, however, be suggested for this remarkable fact which is liable to no objection. It is,
that in the apprehension of the authors of the Septuagint, and of the writers of the New
Testament, the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - in its original and proper signification
“fairly” conveyed the sense of the Hebrew word ‫רית‬ be
riyt, and that the word συνθήκη sunthe
ke - or “compact, agreement,” would “not” express that; and “that they never meant to be
understood as conveying the idea either that God entered into a compact or covenant with man,
or that he made a will.” They meant to represent; him as making “an arrangement, a disposition,
an ordering” of things, by which his service might be kept up among his people, and by which
people might be saved; but they were equally remote from representing him as making a
“compact,” or a “will.” In support of this there may be alleged.
(1) The remarkable uniformity in which the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - is used,
showing that there was some “settled principle” from which they never departed; and,
(2) It is used mainly as the meaning of the word itself. Prof. Stuart has, undoubtedly, given the
accurate original sense of the word. “The real, genuine, and original meaning of διαθήκη diathe
ke (diatheke) is, “arrangement, disposition,” or “disposal” of a thing.” P. 440. The word from
which it is derived - διατίθηµι diatithemi - means to place apart or asunder; and then to set,
arrange, dispose in a certain order. “Passow.” From this original signification is derived the use
which the word has with singular uniformity in the Scriptures. It denotes the “arrangment,
disposition,” or “ordering” of things which God made in relation to mankind, by which he
designed to keep up his worship on earth, and to save the soul. It means neither covenant nor
will; neither compact nor legacy; neither agreement nor testament. It is an “arrangement” of an
entirely different order from either of them, and the sacred writers with an uniformity which
could have been secured only by the presiding influence of the One Eternal Spirit, have avoided
the suggestion that God made with man either a “compact” or a “will.”
We have no word which precisely expresses this idea, and hence, our conceptions are
constantly floating between a “compact” and a “will,” and the views which we have are as
unsettled as they are. unscriptural. The simple idea is, that God has made an “arrangement” by
which his worship may be celebrated and souls saved. Under the Jewish economy this
arrangement assumed one form; under the Christian another. In neither was it a compact or
covenant between two parties in such a sense that one party would be at liberty to reject the
terms proposed; in neither was it a testament or will, as if God had left a legacy to man, but in
both there were some things in regard to the arrangement such as are found in a covenant or
compact. One of those things - equally appropriate to a compact between man and man and to
this arrangement, the apostle refers to here - that it implied in all cases the death of the victim.
If these remarks are well-founded, they should be allowed materially to shape our views in the
interpretation of the Bible. Whole treatises of divinity have been written on a mistaken view of

224. the meaning of this word - understood as meaning “covenant.” Volumes of angry controversy
have been published on the nature of the “covenant” with Adam, and on its influence on his
posterity. The only literal “covenant” which can he supposed in the plan of redemption is that
between the Father and the Son - though even the existence of such a covenant is rather the
result of devout and learned imagining than of any distinct statement in the volume of
inspiration. The simple statement there is, that God has made an arrangement for salvation, the
execution of which he has entrusted to his Son, and has proposed it to man to be accepted as the
only arrangement by which man can be saved, and which he is not at liberty to disregard.
There has been much difference of opinion in reference to the meaning of the passage here,
and to the design of the illustration introduced. If the word used - διαθήκη diatheke - means
“testament,” in the sense of a “will,” then the sense of that passage is that “a will is of force only
when he who made it dies, for it relates to a disposition of his property after his death.” The
force of the remark of the apostle then would be, that the fact that the Lord Jesus made or
expressed his “will” to mankind, implied that he would die to confirm it; or that since in the
ordinary mode of making a will, it was of force only when he who made it was dead, therefore it
was necessary that the Redeemer should die, in order to confirm and ratify what he made. But
the objections to this, which appears to have been the view of our translators, seem to me to be
insuperable. They are these:
(1) The word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - is not used in this sense in the New Testament
elsewhere; see the remarks above.
(2) The Lord Jesus made no such will. He had no property, and the commandments and
instructions which he gave to his disciples were not of the nature of a will or testament.
(3) Such an illustration would not be pertinent to the design of the apostle, or in keeping with
his argument.
He is comparing the Jewish and Christian dispensations, and the point of comparison in this
chapter relates to the question about the efficacy of sacrifice in the two arrangements. He
showed that the arrangement for blood-shedding by sacrifice entered into both; that the high
priest of both offered blood as an expiation; that the holy place was entered with blood, and that
consequently there was death in both the arrangements, or dispensations. The former
arrangement or dispensation was ratified with blood, and it was equally proper that the new
arrangement should be also. The point of comparison is not that Moses made a will or testament
which could be of force only when he died, and that the same thing was required in the new
dispensation, but it is that the former covenant was “ratified by blood,” or “by the death of a
victim,” and that it might be expected that the new dispensation would be confirmed, and that it
was in fact confirmed in the same manner. In this view of the argument, what pertinency would
there be in introducing an illustration respecting a will, and the manner in which it became
efficient; compare notes on Heb_9:18. It seems clear, therefore, to me, that the word rendered
“testament” here is to be taken in the sense in which it is ordinarily used in the New Testament.
The opinion that the word here means such a divine arrangement as is commonly denoted a
“covenant,” and not testament, is sanctioned by not a few names of eminence in criticism, such
as Pierce, Doddridge, Michaelis, Steudel, and the late Dr. John P. Wilson. Bloomfield says that
the connection here demands this. The principal objections to this view are:
(1) That it is not proved that no covenants or compacts were valid except such as were made
by the intervention of sacrifices.
(2) That the word rendered “testator” - διαθεµενος diathemenos - cannot refer to the death of
an animal slain for the purpose of ratifying a covenant, but must mean either a “testator,”
or a “contractor,” that is, one of two contracting parties.

225. (3) That the word rendered “dead” Heb_9:17 - νεκροሏς nekrois - means only “dead men,” and
never is applied to the dead bodies of animals; (see Stuart on the Hebrew, p. 442.)
These objections to the supposition that the passage refers to a covenant or compact, Prof.
Stuart says are in his view insuperable, and they are certainly entitled to grave consideration.
Whether the view above presented is one which can be sustained, we may be better able to
determine after an examination of the words and phrases which the apostle uses. Those
objections which depend wholly on the “philological” argument derived from the words used,
will be considered of course in such an examination. It is to be remembered at the outset:
(1) That the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - is never used in the New Testament in the
sense of “testament,” or “will,” unless in this place;
(2) That it is never used in this sense in the Septuagint; and,
(3) That the Hebrew word ‫רית‬ be
riyt - “never” has this signification. This is admitted; see
Stuart on the Heb. pp. 439, 440. It must require very strong reasons to prove that it has
this meaning here, and that Paul has employed the word in a sense differing from its
uniform signification elsewhere in the Bible; compare, however, the remarks of Prof.
Stuart in Bib. Repos. vol. xx. p. 364.
There must also of necessity be - ᅊνάγκη anagke - That is, it is necessary in order to
confirm the covenant, or it would not be binding in cases where this did not occur. The
“necessity” in the case is simply to make it valid or obligatory. So we say now there must
“necessarily” be a “seal,” or a deed would not be valid. The fair interpretation of this is, that this
was the common and established custom in making a “covenant” with God, or confirming the
arrangement with him in regard to salvation. To this it is objected (see the first objection above),
that “it is yet to be made out that no covenants were valid execpt those by the intervention of
sacrifices.” In reply to this, we may observe:
(1) That the point to be made out is not that this was a custom in compacts between “man and
man,” but between “man and his Maker.” There is no evidence, as it seems to me, that the
apostle alludes to a compact between man and man. The mistake on this subject has arisen
partly from the use of the word “testament” by our translators, in the sense of “will” - supposing
that it must refer to some transaction relating to man only; and partly from the insertion of the
word “men” in Heb_9:17, in the translation of the phrase - ᅚπᆳ νεκροሏς epi nekrois - “upon the
dead,” or” over the dead.” But it is not necessary to suppose that there is a reference here to any
transaction between man and man at all, as the whole force of the illustration introduced by the
apostle will be retained if we suppose him speaking “only” of a covenant between man and God.
Then his assertion will be simply that in the arrangement between God and man there was a
“necessity” of the death of something, or of the shedding of blood in order to ratify it. This view
will save the necessity of proof that the custom of ratifying compacts between man and man by
sacrifice prevailed. Whether that can be made out or not, the assertion of the apostle may be
true, that in the arrangement which God makes with man, sacrifice was necessary in order to
confirm or ratify it.
(2) The point to be made out is, not that such a custom is or was universal among all nations,
but that it was the known and regular opinion among the Hebrews that a sacrifice was necessary
in a “covenant” with God, in the same way as if we should say that a deed was not valid without a
seal, it would not be necessary to show this in regard to all nations, but only that it is the law or
the custom in the nation where the writer lived, and at the time when he lived. Other nations
may have very different modes of confirming or ratifying a deed, and the same nation may have
different methods at various times. The fact or custom to which I suppose there is allusion here,
is that of sacrificing an animal to ratify the arrangement between man and his Maker, commonly

226. called a “covenant.” In regard to the existence of such a custom, particularly among the
Hebrews, we may make the following observations.
It was the common mode of ratifying the “covenant” between God and man. That was done
over a sacrifice, or by the shedding of blood. So the covenant with Abraham was ratified by
slaying an heifer, a she-goat, a ram, a turtle-dove, and a young pigeon. The animals were divided
and a burning lamp passed between them; Gen_15:9, Gen_15:18. So the covenant made with the
Hebrews in the wilderness was ratified in the same manner; Exo_24:6, seq. Thus, in Jer_34:18,
God speaks of the “men that had transgressed his covenant which they had made before him
when they cut the calf in twain, and passed between the parts thereof;” see also Zec_9:11. Indeed
all the Jewish sacrifices were regarded as a ratification of the covenant. It was never supposed
that it was ratified or confirmed in a proper manner without such a sacrifice. Instances occur,
indeed, in which there was no sacrifice offered when a covenant was made between man and
man (see Gen_23:16; Gen_24:9; Deu_25:7, Deu_25:9; Rth_4:7), but these cases do not
establish the point that the custom did not prevail of ratifying a covenant with God by the blood
of sacrifice.
Further; the terms used in the Hebrew in regard to making a covenant with God, prove that it
was understood to be ratified by sacrifice, or that the death of a victim was necessary ‫רת‬ⅴ‫ברית‬
kaarat be
riyt, “to cut a covenant” - the word ‫כרת‬ kaarat meaning “to cut; to cut off; to cut down,”
and the allusion being to the victims offered in sacrifice, and “cut in pieces” on occasion of
entering into a covenant; see Gen_15:10; Jer_34:18-19. The same idea is expressed in the Greek
phrases ᆋρκια τέµνειν, τέµνειν σπονδάς horkia temnein, temnein spondas, and in the Latin “icere
foedus;” compare Virgil, Aeneid viii. 941.
Et caesa jungebant foedera porca.
These considerations show that it was the common sentiment, alike among the Hebrews and
the pagan, that a covenant with God was to be ratified or sanctioned by sacrifice; and the
statement of Paul here is, that the death of a sacrificial victim was needful to confirm or ratify
such a covenant with God. It was not secure, or confirmed, until blood was thus shed. This was
well understood among the Hebrews, that all their covenant transactions with God were to be
ratified by a sacrifice; and Paul says that the same principle must apply to any arrangement
between God and human beings. Hence, he goes on to show that it was “necessary” that a
sacrificial victim should die in the new covenant which God established by man through the
Mediator; see Heb_9:23. This I understand to be the sum of the argument here. It is not that
every contract made between man and man was to be ratified or confirmed by a sacrifice - for
the apostle is not discussing that point; but it is that every similar transaction with God must be
based on such a sacrifice, and that no covenant with him could be complete without such a
sacrifice. This was provided for in the ancient dispensation by the sacrifices which were
constantly offered in their worship; in the new, by the one great sacrifice offered on the cross.
Hence, all our approaches to God are based on the supposition of such a sacrifice, and are, as it
were, ratified over it. We ratify or confirm such a covenant arrangement, not by offering the
sacrifice anew, but by recalling it in a proper manner when we celebrate the death of Christ, and
when in view of his cross we solemnly pledge ourselves to be the Lord’s.
The death of the testator - According to our common version, “the death of him who
makes a will.” But if the views above expressed are correct, this should be rendered the
“covenanter,” or “the victim set apart to be slain.” The Greek will admit of the translation of the
word διαθέµενος diathemenos, “diathemenos,” by the word “covenanter,” if the word διαθήκη
diatheke - “diatheke” - is rendered “covenant.” To such a translation here as would make the

227. word refer “to a victim slain in order to ratify a covenant,” it is objected that the “word has no
such meaning anywhere else. It must either mean a “testator,” or a “contractor,” that is, one of
two covenanting parties. But where is the death of a person covenanting made necessary in
order to confirm the covenant?” Prof. Stuart, in loc. To this objection I remark respectfully:
(1) That the word is never used in the sense of “testator” either in the New Testament or the
Old, unless it be here. It is admitted of the word διαθήκη diatheke - by Prof. Stuart himself, that
it never means “will,” or “testament,” unless it be here, and it is equally true of the word used
here that it never means one “who makes a will.” If, therefore, it should be that a meaning quite
uncommon, or wholly unknown in the usage of the Scriptures, is to be assigned to the use of the
word here, why should it be “assumed” that that unusual meaning should be that of “making a
will,” and not that of confirming a covenant?
(2) If the apostle used the word διαθήκη diatheke - “diatheke” - in the sense of “a covenant”
in this passage, nothing is more natural than that he should use the corresponding word διαθέµε
νος diathemenos - “diathemenos” - in the sense of that by which a covenant was ratified. He
wished to express the idea that the covenant was always ratified by the death of a victim - a
sacrifice of an animal under the Law, and the sacrifice of the Redeemer under the gospel - and
no word would so naturally convey that idea as the one from which the word “covenant” was
derived. It is to be remembered also that there was no word to express that thought. Neither the
Hebrew nor the Greek furnished such a word; nor have we now any word to express that
thought, but are obliged to use circumlocution to convey the idea. The word “covenanter” would
not do it; nor the words “victim,” or “sacrifice.” We can express the idea only by some phrase like
this - “the victim set apart to be slain to ratify the covenant.” But it was not an unusual thing for
the apostle Paul to make use of a word in a sense quite unique to himself; compare 2Co_4:17.
(3) The word διατίθηµι diatithemi - properly means, “to place apart, to set in order, to
arrange.” It is rendered “appoint” in Luk_22:29; “made,” and “make,” with reference to a
covenant, Act_3:25; Heb_8:10; Heb_10:16. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament,
except in the passage before us. The idea of “placing, laying, disposing, arranging,” etc., enters
into the word - as to place wares or merchandise for sale, to arrange a contract, &c; see
“Passow.” The fair meaning of the word here may be, whatever goes to arrange, dispose, or settle
the covenant, or to make the covenant secure and firm. If the reference be to a compact, it
cannot relate to one of the contracting parties, because the death of neither is necessary to
confirm it. But it may refer to that which was well-known as an established opinion, that a
covenant with God was ratified only by a sacrifice. Still, it must be admitted that this use of the
word is not found elsewhere, and the only material question is, whether it is to be presumed that
the apostle would employ a word in a single instance in a special signification, where the
connection would not render it difficult to be understood. This must be admitted, that he might,
whichever view is taken of the meaning of this passage, for on the supposition that he refers here
to a will, it is conceded that he uses the word in a sense which does not once occur elsewhere
either in the Old Testament or the New. It seems to me, therefore, that the word here may,
without impropriety, be regarded as referring to “the victim that was slain in order to ratify a
covenant with God,” and that the meaning is, that such a covenant was not regarded as
confirmed until the victim was slain. It may be added that the authority of Michaelis, Macknight,
Doddridge, Bloomfield, and Dr. JohnP. Wilson, is a proof that such an interpretation cannot be
a very serious departure from the proper use of a Greek word.

228. 2. CLARKE, "For where a testament is - A learned and judicious friend furnishes me
with the following translation of this and the 17th verse: -
“For where there is a covenant, it is necessary that the death of the appointed victim should be
exhibited, because a covenant is confirmed over dead victims, since it is not at all valid while the
appointed victim is alive.”
He observes, “There is no word signifying testator, or men, in the original. ∆ιαθεµενος is not a
substantive, but a participle, or a participial adjective, derived from the same root as διατηκη,
and must have a substantive understood. I therefore render it the disposed or appointed victim,
alluding to the manner of disposing or setting apart the pieces of the victim, when they were
going to ratify a covenant; and you know well the old custom of ratifying a covenant, to which
the apostle alludes. I refer to your own notes on Gen_6:18 (note), and Gen_15:10 (note). - J. C.”
Mr. Wakefield has translated the passage nearly in the same way.
“For where a covenant is, there must be necessarily introduced the death of that which
establisheth the covenant; because a covenant is confirmed over dead things, and is of no force
at all whilst that which establisheth the covenant is alive.” This is undoubtedly the meaning of
this passage; and we should endeavor to forget that testament and testator were ever
introduced, as they totally change the apostle’s meaning. See the observations at the end of this
chapter.
3. GILL, "For where a testament is,.... The covenant of grace, as administered under the
Gospel dispensation, is a testament or will. The Jews have adopted the Greek word, here used,
into their language, and pronounce it ‫,דייתיקי‬ and by it understand a dying man's last will and
testament (d). Some of them make it to be of Hebrew derivation; as if it was said, ‫דא‬‫תהי‬‫למיקם‬ ,
"this shall be to confirm" (e), or this shall be stable and firm; though others own it to be the
same with this Greek word διαθηκη (f). The covenant of grace, is properly a covenant to Christ,
and a testament or will to his people: it is his and their Father's will, concerning giving them
both grace and glory; it consists of many gifts and legacies; in it Christ is made heir of all things,
and his people are made joint heirs with him; they are given to him as his portion; and they have
all things pertaining to life and godliness bequeathed to them, even all spiritual blessings; the
witnesses of it are Father, Son, and Spirit; and the seals of it are the blood of Christ, and the
grace of the Spirit; and this is registered in the Scriptures by holy men as notaries; and is
unalterable and immutable: and this being made,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; who is Christ; he has various
parts in this will or testament; he is the surety and Mediator of it; and he is the executor of it;
what is given in it, is first given to him, in order to be given to others; all things are put into his
hands, and he has a power to give them to as many as the Father has given him; and here he is
called the "testator": Christ, as God, has an equal right to dispose of the inheritance, both of
grace and glory; and as Mediator, nothing is given without his consent; and whatever is given, is
given with a view to his "death", and comes through it, and by virtue of it: hence there is a
"necessity" of that, and that on the account of the divine perfections; particularly for the
declaration of God's righteousness, or by reason of his justice; and also because of his purposes
and decrees, which have fixed it, and of his promises, which are yea and amen in Christ, and are
ratified by his blood, called therefore the blood of the covenant; and likewise on account of the
engagements of Christ to suffer and die; as well as for the accomplishment of Scripture
prophecies concerning it; and moreover, on account of the blessings which were to come to the

229. saints through it, as a justifying righteousness, pardon of sin, peace and reconciliation, adoption
and eternal life.
4. HENRY, "To make this New Testament effectual, it was necessary that Christ should die; the
legacies accrue by means of death. This he proves by two arguments: - 1. From the general
nature of every will or testamentary disposition, Heb_9:16. Where a testament is, where it acts
and operates, there must of necessity by the death of the testator; till then the property is still in
the testator's hand, and he has power to revoke, cancel, or alter, his will as he pleases; so that no
estate, no right, is conveyed by will, till the testator's death has made it unalterable and effectual.
5. JAMISON, "A general axiomatic truth; it is “a testament”; not the testament. The testator
must die before his testament takes effect (Heb_9:17). This is a common meaning of the Greek
noun diathece. So in Luk_22:29, “I appoint (by testamentary disposition; the cognate Greek verb
diatithemai) unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me.” The need of death
before the testamentary appointment takes effect, holds good in Christ’s relation as MAN to us;
Of course not in God’s relation to Christ.
be — literally, “be borne”: “be involved in the case”; be inferred; or else, “be brought forward
in court,” so as to give effect to the will. This sense (testament) of the Greek “diathece” here does
not exclude its other secondary senses in the other passages of the New Testament: (1) a
covenant between two parties; (2) an arrangement, or disposition, made by God alone in
relation to us. Thus, Mat_26:28 may be translated, “Blood of the covenant”; for a testament
does not require blood shedding. Compare Exo_24:8 (covenant), which Christ quotes, though it
is probable He included in a sense “testament” also under the Greek word diathece
(comprehending both meanings, “covenant” and “testament”), as this designation strictly and
properly applies to the new dispensation, and is rightly applicable to the old also, not in itself,
but when viewed as typifying the new, which is properly a testament. Moses (Exo_24:8) speaks
of the same thing as [Christ and] Paul. Moses, by the term “covenant,” does not mean aught save
one concerning giving the heavenly inheritance typified by Canaan after the death of the
Testator, which he represented by the sprinkling of blood. And Paul, by the term “testament,”
does not mean aught save one having conditions attached to it, one which is at the same time a
covenant [Poli, Synopsis]; the conditions are fulfilled by Christ, not by us, except that we must
believe, but even this God works in His people. Tholuck explains, as elsewhere, “covenant ...
covenant ... mediating victim”; the masculine is used of the victim personified, and regarded as
mediator of the covenant; especially as in the new covenant a MAN (Christ) took the place of the
victim. The covenanting parties used to pass between the divided parts of the sacrificed animals;
but, without reference to this rite, the need of a sacrifice for establishing a covenant sufficiently
explains this verse. Others, also, explaining the Greek as “covenant,” consider that the death of
the sacrificial victim represented in all covenants the death of both parties as unalterably bound
to the covenant. So in the redemption-covenant, the death of Jesus symbolized the death of God
(?) in the person of the mediating victim, and the death of man in the same. But the expression
is not “there must be the death of both parties making the covenant,” but singular, “of Him who
made (aorist, past time; not ‘of Him making’) the testament.” Also, it is “death,” not “sacrifice”
or “slaying.” Plainly, the death is supposed to be past (aorist, “made”); and the fact of the death
is brought (Greek) before court to give effect to the will. These requisites of a will, or testament,
concur here: (1) a testator; (2) heirs; (3) goods; (4) the death of the testator; (5) the fact of the
death brought forward in court. In Mat_26:28 two other requisites appear: witnesses, the
disciples; and a seal, the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, the sign of His blood wherewith the
testament is primarily sealed. It is true the heir is ordinarily the successor of him who dies and

230. so ceases to have the possession. But in this case Christ comes to life again, and is Himself
(including all that He hath), in the power of His now endless life, His people’s inheritance; in
His being Heir (Heb_1:2), they are heirs.
6. CALVIN, "For where a testament is, etc. Even this one passage is a
sufficient proof, that this Epistle was not written in Hebrew; for vryt
means in Hebrew a covenant, but not a testament; but in Greek,
diatheke, includes both ideas; and the Apostle, alluding to its
secondary meaning, holds that the promises should not have been
otherwise ratified and valid, had they not been sealed by the death of
Christ. And this he proves by referring to what is usually the case as
to wills or testaments, the effect of which is suspended until the
death of those whose wills they are.
The Apostle may yet seem to rest on too weak an argument, so that what
he says may be easily disproved. For it may be said, that God made no
testament or will under the Law; but it was a covenant that he made
with the ancient people. Thus, neither from the fact nor from the name,
can it be concluded that Christ's death was necessary. For if he infers
from the fact, that Christ ought to have died, because a testament is
not ratified except by the death of the testator, the answer may be
this, that |berit|, the word ever used by Moses, is a covenant made
between those who are alive, and we cannot think otherwise of the fact
itself. Now, as to the word used, he simply alluded, as I have already
said, to the two meanings it has in Greek; he therefore dwells chiefly
on the thing in itself. Nor is it any objection to say, that it was a
covenant that God made with his people; for that very covenant bore
some likeness to a testament, for it was ratified by blood. [152]
We must ever hold this truth, that no symbols have ever been adopted by
God unnecessarily or unsuitably. And God in establishing the covenant
of the law made use of blood. Then it was not such a contract, as they
say, between the living, as did not require death. Besides, what
rightly belongs to a testament is, that it begins to take effect after
death. If we consider that the Apostle reasons from the thing itself,
and not from the word, and if we bear in mind that he avowedly takes as
granted what I have already stated, that nothing has been instituted in
vain by God, there will be no great difficulty.
If anyone objects and says, that the heathens ratified covenants
according to the other meaning by sacrifices; this indeed I admit to be
true; but God did not borrow the rite of sacrificing from the practice
of the heathens; on the contrary, all the heathen sacrifices were
corruptions, which had derived their origin from the institutions of
God. We must then return to the same point, that the covenant of God

231. which was made with blood, may be fitly compared to a testament, as it
is of the same kind and character.
__________________________________________________________________
[150] Some as Grotius and Schleusner, take "the eternal Spirit" as
meaning the same thing as "endless life" in chapter 7:16, -- "who
having (or in) an eternal spirit," or life, etc.; they give the sense
of "in" to dia. The comparison they represent to be between perishable
victims and the sacrifice of Christ, who possesses a spirit or life
that is eternal. Others, as Junius and Beza, consider Christ's divine
nature as signified by "the eternal Spirit." Beza says, that it was the
Deity united to humanity that consecrated the whole sacrifice and
endued it with vivifying power. The view of Stuart can hardly be
comprehended. But the explanation most commonly adopted is that given
here by Calvin that the Holy Spirit is meant, whose aid and influence
are often mentioned in connection with Christ; see Matthew 12:28; Acts
1:2; 10:38. Some MSS and fathers have "holy" instead of "eternal," but
the greatest number and the best have the last word. Dr. Owen,
Doddridge and Scott take this view. Why the Spirit is called "eternal"
is not very evident. It may have been for the purpose of showing that
the Spirit mentioned before in verse 8 is the same Spirit, he being
eternal, and thus in order to prove that the offering of Christ was
according to the divine will. God is said to be eternal in Romans
16:26, where a reference is made to the past and the present
dispensation, with the view, as it seems, to show that he is the author
of both. But perhaps the explanation of Calvin is the most suitable. --
Ed.
[151] Here begins a new subject, that the covenant, or it may be viewed
as the resumption of what is found in chapter 8:6, 7. "For this cause,"
or for this reason, refers, as it seems, to what follows, "in order
that," hopos, etc. -- And for this reason is he the Mediator of a new
covenant, in order that death being undergone for the redemption of
transgressions under the first covenant, they who were called might
receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. As in Romans 3:25, 26,
the reference is to the retrospective effect of Christ's expiatory
sacrifice. Hence "are called" is not correct; and the participle is in
the past tense. To "receive the promise," means to enjoy its
fulfillment. -- Ed.
6B. COFFMAN 16-17, “THE TESTAMENT (WILL) OF CHRIST
The 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

232. 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 Heb. 9:2,4 and Heb. 9:15 is not repeated and
emphasized for naught. F14
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

233. 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.
7. PINK, “Having affirmed (Heb. 9:12, 14) that the blood of Christ is the means of the
believer’s redemption, in verse 15, the apostle proceeds to make further proof of this basic
and vital truth. His argument here is taken from the design and object of Christ’s
priesthood, which was to confirm the covenant God had made with His people, and which
could only be done by blood. First, he affirms that the Savior was "the Mediator of the new
testament." Many functions were undertaken by Him. Just as one type could not set forth
all that the Lord Jesus did and suffered, so no single office could display all the relations
which He sustained and all the benefits He procured for us. That which is done by a
prophet, by a priest, by a king, by a surety, by a mediator, by a husband, by a father, that
and more has been done by Christ. And the more dearly we observe in Scripture the many
undertakings of Christ for us, as seen in His varied relations, the more will He be endeared
to our hearts, and the more will faith be strengthened.
Christ’s undertaking to be a "Mediator" both procured a covenant to pass between God
and men, and also engaged Himself for the performance thereof on both parts. This could
only be by a full satisfaction being rendered to Divine justice, by the shedding of blood
infinitely valuable as His was. To assure His people of their partaking of the benefits of
God’s covenant, the cross of Christ has turned that covenant into a testament, so that the
conditions of the covenant on God’s part (its requirements: namely, perfect obedience
rendered to His law, and thus "everlasting righteousness’’ being brought in: Daniel 9:24;
and full satisfaction being taken by the law for the sins of His people) might be so many
legacies, which being ratified by the death of the Testator, none might disannul.
Unspeakably blessed as are the truths expressed (so freely) above, there is another which is
still more precious for faith to apprehend and rest on, and that is, that behind all offices (so
to speak), lying at the foundation of the whole dispensation of God’s grace toward His
people, is the mystical oneness of Christ and His Church: a legal oneness, which ultimates
by the Spirit’s work in a vital union, so that Christ is the Head and believers are the
members of one Person (1 Cor. 12:12, 13). This, and this alone, constituted the just ground
for God to impute to Christ all the sins of His people, and to impute to them the
righteousness of Christ for their justification of life. What Christ did in obeying the law is
reckoned to them as though that obedience had been performed by them; and in like
manner, what they deserved on account of their sins was charged to and endured by Him,

234. as though they themselves had suffered it: see 2 Corinthians 5:21.
The first spring of the union between Christ and His Church lay in that eternal compact
between the Father and the Son respecting the salvation of His people contemplated as
fallen in Adam. In view of the human nature which He was to assume, the Lord Christ was
"predestinated" or "foreordained" (1 Pet. 1:20) unto grace and glory, and that by virtue of
the union of flesh unto His Godhead. This grace and glory of the God-man was the
exemplary cause and pattern of our predestination: Romans 8:29, Philippians 3:21. It was
also the cause and means of the communicating of all grace and glory unto us, for we were
"chosen in Him before the foundation of the world" (Eph. 1:4). Christ was thus elected
(Isa. 42:1) as Head of the Church, His mystical body. All the elect of God were then
committed unto Him, to be delivered from sin and death, and brought unto the enjoyment
of God: John 17:6, Revelation 1:5, 6.
In the prosecution of this design of God, and to effect the accomplishment of the
"everlasting covenant" (Heb. 13:20), Christ undertook to be the "Surety" of that covenant
(Heb. 7:22), engaging to answer for all the liabilities of His people and to discharge all their
legal responsibilities. Yet was it as Priest that Christ acted as Surety: God’s "Priest," our
"Surety." That is to say, all the activities of Christ were of a sacerdotal character, having
God for their immediate object; but as these activities were all performed on our behalf, He
was a Surety or Sponsor for us also. As the "Surety" of the covenant, Christ undertook to
discharge all the debts of those who are made partakers of its benefits. As our Surety He
also merited and procured from God the Holy Spirit, to communicate to His people all
needful supplies of grace to make them new creatures, which enables them to yield
obedience to God from a new principle of spiritual life, and that faithfully unto the end.
When considering the administration of the "everlasting covenant’’ in time, we
contemplate the actual application of the grace, benefits and privileges of it unto those for
whose sakes it was devised and drawn up. For this the death of the Mediator was required,
for only through His blood-shedding is the whole grace of the covenant made effectual unto
us. This it is which is affirmed in Hebrews 9:15, and which we considered at length in our
last article. In the passage which is now to be before us, the apostle does two things: first,
he refers to a well known fact which is everywhere recognized among men, namely, that a
will or testament requires the death of the testator to give it validity. Second, he refers to an
Old Testament type which exemplifies the principle which he is here setting before us.
"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a
testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the
testator liveth" (verses 16, 17). That which is found in verses 16-23 is really of the nature of
a parenthesis, brought in for the purpose of showing why it was necessary for the incarnate
Son to die. In verse 24 the apostle returns to his proofs for the superiority of the ministry of
Christ over Aaron’s. What we have in verses 16, 17, is brought in to show both the need for
and the purpose of the death of Christ, the argument being drawn from the character and
design of that covenant of which He is the Mediator. Because that covenant was also to be a
"testament" it was confirmed by the death of the Testator. Appeal is made to the only use
of a will or testament among men.
The method by which the apostle here demonstrates the necessity of Christ’s death as He
was "the mediator of the new testament’’ is not merely from the signification of the word
"diatheke" (though we must not lose sight of its force), but as he is speaking principally of
the two "covenants" (i.e., the two forms under which the "everlasting covenant" has been

235. administered), it is the affinity which there is between a solemn covenant, and a testament,
that he has respect unto. For it is to be carefully noted that the apostle speaks not of the
death of Christ merely as it was a death, which is all that is required of a "testament" as
such, without any consideration of the nature of the testator’s death; but he speaks of it
also (and primarily) as it was a sacrifice by the shedding of His blood (verses 12, 14, 18-23),
which belongs to a Divine covenant, and is in no way required by a "testament." Thus, we
see again the needs-be for retaining the double meaning and force of the Greek word here.
There has been much needless wrangling over the Divine person alluded to under the word
"Testator," some insisting it is Christ, some the Father, others arguing the impossibility of
the latter because the Father has never died. We believe that, in this case, Saphir was right
when he said, "The testator is, properly speaking, God; for we are God’s heirs; but it is
God in Christ." Had he referred the reader to 2 Corinthians 5:19 his statement had been
given scriptural confirmation. The "everlasting covenant" or Covenant of Grace has the
nature of a "testament" from these four considerations or facts. First, it proceeded from
the will of God: He freely made it (Heb. 6:17). Second, it contained various legacies or gifts:
to Christ, God bequeathed the elect as His inheritance (Deut. 32:9, Psalm 16:6, Luke
22:29); to the elect themselves, that they should be joint-heirs with Him (Rom. 8:17,
Revelation 3:21). Third, it is unalterable (Gal. 3:15), "ordered in all things and sure" (2
Sam. 23:5); having been duly witnessed to (1 John 5:7), hence, being of the nature of a
"testament" there are no stipulations for men to fulfill (Gal. 3:18). Fourth, the death of
Christ has secured the administration of it.
A deed is not valid without a seal; a will cannot be probated until the legatee dies, nor were
God’s covenants with men (the historical adumbrations of the "everlasting covenant")
ratified except by blood-shedding. Thus it was with His covenant with Abraham (Gen.
15:9, 18); thus it was with His covenant with Israel at Sinai (Ex. 24:6). Thus, unto the
confirmation of a "testament" there must be the death of the testator; unto the ratification
of a "covenant" the blood of a sacrifice was required. Thereby does the apostle prove
conclusively the necessity for the sacrificial death of Christ as the Mediator, both as the
Mediator of a "covenant" and as the Mediator of a "testament": for through His sacrificial
death, both the promises contained in the "covenant" and the bequeathments of the
"testament," are made irrevocably sure to all His seed. We trust, then that we have been
enabled to clear up the great difficulty which the word "diatheke" has caused so many, and
shown that it has a double meaning and force in this passage.
It remains for us to point out that the Old Testament supplies us with a most striking type
which blessedly illustrates the principle enunciated in this 16th verse. But note first of all
that verse 15 opens with "For" and that this comes right after the mention of "the
Mediator of the new testament," and the promise of "eternal inheritance" in verse 15. Now
the "mediator" of the "Old Testament" was Moses, and it was not until his death, though
immediately after it, that Israel entered their inheritance, the land of Canaan! Looked at
from the standpoint of God’s government, the death of Moses was because of his sin (Num.
20:10-12); but considered in relation to his official position, as "the servant over the house
of God," it had another and deeper meaning as Deuteronomy 3:26 shows, "the Lord was
wroth with me for your sakes"—how blessedly did this foreshadow the reason why God’s
wrath was visited upon Christ: Christ, as Moses, must die before the inheritance could be
ours.

236. 8. WORTHEN, “HEB 9:16 "In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the
one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes
effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put
into effect without blood."
Here the word diatheke is clearly changed to mean a will because even in the days of
Abraham there were covenants and wills. No one was confused to think the two were
exactly the same and everyone understood that only a will was put into effect on the death
of the one who made it. Not so with a covenant.
But what is the point our writer is making in these verses? Just this. If we have been given
an inheritance in Christ then that inheritance can only be put into effect upon the death of
the Testator, who in this case is our Lord Jesus. But it is precisely because of His death that
we can rightfully claim our inheritance as full sons of God.
Being children of Christ we have the promise of this eternal inheritance. It is sure because
the covenant Christ made with us included the inheritance which we receive by faith in the
Messiah who died, but then rose from the dead.
It is only inaugurated through His death, thus the verse HEB 9:16 "In the case of a will, it
is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only
when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living."
But Christ's death was never intended to simply be an expiration of life. People die all the
time from old age, disease and such, and their wills are only then put into effect. But
Christ's death had to be more than that. It had to be a sacrifice. It had to be an atonement
for our sin. It had to be a legal covering for our sin which could only take place in someone
being accused of the crime and paying the penalty for that sin.
This Christ did, even though He committed no sin. But die, He did. And through His death
we are given such an inheritance; it's part of the covenant. And that's why our writer
includes HEB 9:18 "This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without
blood."
The first covenant spoke of the second. And in many ways it foreshadowed it. Therefore it
had to be a copy of it in the way in which a death had to take place for the remission of sin.
This was seen in the sacrificial system with the High Priests of Israel carrying out their
priestly duties.
17 because a will is in force only when somebody has
died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is
living.
1. BARNES, "For a testament - Such an arrangement as God enters into with man; see the
remarks on Heb_9:16.

237. Is of force - Is ratified, or confirmed - in the same way as a deed or compact is confirmed by
affixing a seal.
After men are dead - ᅚπᆳ νεκροሏς epi nekrois. “Over the dead.” That is, in accordance with
the view given above, after the animal is dead; or over the body of the animal slain for sacrifice,
and to confirm the covenant. “For a covenant is completed or confirmed over dead sacrifices,
seeing it is never of force as long as the victim set apart for its ratification is still living.” ms.
notes of Dr. JohnP. Wilson. To this interpretation it is objected, that “νεκροሏς nekrois - “nekrois”
- means only “dead men;” but human beings surely were not sacrificed by the Jews, as a
mediating sacrifice in order to confirm a covenant.” Prof. Stuart in loc. In regard to this
objection, and to the proper meaning of the passage, we may remark:
(1) That the word “men” is not in the Greek, nor is it necessarily implied, unless it be in the
use of the Greek word rendered “dead.” The proper translation is, “upon, or over the dead.” The
use of the word “men” here by our translators would seem to limit it to the making of a will.
(2) It is to be presumed, unless there is positive proof to the contrary, that the Greeks and
Hebrews used the word “dead” as it is used by other people, and that it “might” refer to deceased
animals, or vegetables, as well as to human beings. A sacrifice that had been offered was dead; a
tree that had fallen was dead; an animal that had been torn by other wild animals was dead. It is
“possible” that a people might have one word to refer to “dead men,” and another to “dead
animals,” and another to “dead vegetables:” but what is the evidence that the Hebrews or the
Greeks had such words?
(3) What is the meaning of this very word - νεκρός nekros - “nekros” - in Heb_6:1; Heb_9:14,
of this very Epistle when it is applied to works - “dead works” - if it never refers to anything but
people? compare Jam_2:17, Jam_2:20, Jam_2:26; Eph_2:1, Eph_2:5; Rev_3:1. In Ecc_9:4, it
is applied to a dead lion. I suppose, therefore, that the Greek phrase here will admit of the
interpretation which the “exigency of the place” seems to demand, and that the idea is, that a
covenant with God was ratified over the animals slain in sacrifice, and was not considered as
confirmed until the sacrifice was killed.
Otherwise - Since - ᅚπεί epei. That is, unless this takes place it will be of no force.
It is of no strength - It is not “strong” - ᅶσχύει ischuei - it is not confirmed or ratified.
“While the testator liveth.” Or while the animal selected to confirm the covenant is alive. It can
be confirmed only by its being slain. A full examination of the meaning of this passage
Heb_9:16-17 may be found in an article in the Biblical Repository, vol. 20, pp. 51-71, and in Prof.
Stuart’s reply to that article. Bib. Repos. 20, pp. 356-381.
2. PINK, “In verse 17 it is not of the making of a testament which is referred to, but its
execution: its efficacy depends solely on the testator’s death. The words "is of force" mean,
is firm and cannot be annulled; it must be executed according to the mind of the one who
devised it. The reason why it is of "no strength" during his lifetime, is because it is then
subject to alteration, according to the pleasure of him who made it. All the blessings of
"grace and glory" were the property of Christ, for He was "appointed Heir of all things"
(Heb. 1:2): but in His death, He made a bequeathment of them unto all the elect. Another
analogy between a human testament and the testamentary character of Christ’s death is
that, an absolute grant is made without any conditions. So is the kingdom of heaven
bequeathed to all the elect, so that nothing can defeat His will. Whatever there is in the
Gospel which prescribes conditions, that belongs to it as it is a "covenant" and not as a

238. "testament." Finally, the testator assigns the time when his heirs shall be admitted into the
actual possession of his goods; so too has Christ determined the season when each shall
enter both into grace and glory.
Perhaps a brief word should be added by way of amplification to the bare statement made
above respecting the conditions which the Gospel prescribes unto those who are the
beneficiaries of Christ’s "testament." Repentance and faith are required by the Gospel;
yet, strictly speaking they are not "conditions" of our entering into the enjoyment of
Christ’s gifts. Faith is a means to receive and partake of the things promised, repentance is
a qualification whereby we may know that we are the persons to whom such promises
belong. Nevertheless, it is to be remembered that He who has made the promises works in
His elect these graces of repentance and faith: Acts 5:31, Philippians 1:29.
"It is a great and gracious condescension in the Holy Spirit to give encouragement and
confirmation unto our faith, by a representation of the truth and reality of spiritual things,
in those which are temporal and agreeing with them in their general nature, whereby they
are presented unto the common understandings of men. This way of proceeding the apostle
calls, a speaking ‘after the manner of men’ (Gal. 3:15). Of the same kind were all the
parables used by our Savior; for it is all one whether these representations be taken from
things real, or from those which, according unto the same rule of reason and right, are
framed on purpose for that end" (John Owen).
3. GILL, "For a testament is of force after men are dead,.... The necessity of Christ's
death is here urged, from the nature and force of a testament or will, among men, which does
not take place, and cannot be executed, till a man is dead.
Otherwise it is of no strength at all whilst the testator liveth; no claim can be made by
the legatees for the part they have in it, nor can any disposition be made by the executor of it;
not that hereby is suggested, that the testament or will of God was uncertain and precarious till
the death of Christ, and subject to change and alteration as men's wills are till they die; nor that
the inheritance could not be enjoyed by the Old Testament saints; for it is certain, it was entered
upon by them before the death of Christ; but the sense is, that there was a necessity of it, that
the saints right unto it, upon the foot of justice, might be evident by it.
4. “Paul's subject is inheritance (9:15). He does not here refer to the Hellenistic idea of a
"last will and testament" as it is commonly misunderstood to be. By Jewish law, the
firstborn so inherits a double portion and the other sons inherit otherwise equal portions.
This occurs regardless of what one writes in a "last will and testament." The idea of a
"will" in this sense is completely foreign to Jewish law. However Paul's topic is that of a
blood covenant by which one becomes an heir. When the covenantor dies his covenantor
inherits because covenantors have heirship rights. For this reason David was the legitimate
heir to Saul's throne, by way of his covenant with Jonathan (1Sam. chapters 18-20).”
Author unknown
5. JAMISON, "after — literally, “over,” as we say “upon the death of the testators”; not as
Tholuck, “on the condition that slain sacrifices be there,” which the Greek hardly sanctions.
otherwise — “seeing that it is never availing” [Alford]. Bengel and Lachmann read with an
interrogation, “Since, is it ever in force (surely not) while the testator liveth?”

239. 6. CALVIN, "
18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into
effect without blood.
1. BARNES, "Whereupon - ᆑθεν Hothen - “Whence.” Or since this is a settled principle,
or an indisputable fact, it occurred in accordance with this, that the first covenant was
confirmed by the shedding of blood. The admitted principle which the apostle had stated, that
the death of the victim was necessary to confirm the covenant, was the “reason” why the first
covenant was ratified with blood. If there were any doubt about the correctness of the
interpretation given above, that Heb_9:16-17, refer to a “covenant,” and not a “will,” this verse
would seem to be enough to remove it. For how could the fact that a will is not binding until he
who makes it is dead, be a reason why a “covenant” should be confirmed by blood? What
bearing would such a fact have on the question whether it ought or ought not to be confirmed in
this manner? Or how could that fact, though it is universal, be given as a “reason” to account for
the fact that the covenant made by the instrumentality of Moses was ratified with blood?
No possible connection can be seen in such reasoning. But admit that Paul had stated in
Heb_9:16-17, a general principle that in all covenant transactions with God, the death of a
victim was necessary, and everything is plain. We then see why he offered the sacrifice and
sprinkled the blood. It was not on the basis of such reasoning as this: “The death of a man who
makes a will is indispensable before the will is of binding force, therefore it was that Moses
confirmed the covenant made with our fathers by the blood of a sacrifice;” but by such reasoning
as this: “It is a great principle that in order to ratify a covenant between God and his people a
victim should be slain, therefore it was that Moses ratified the old covenant in this manner, and
“therefore” it was also that the death of a victim was necessary under the new dispensation.”
Here the reasoning of Paul is clear and explicit; but who could see the force of the former?
Prof. Stuart indeed connects this verse with Heb_9:15, and says that the course of thought is,
“The new covenant or redemption from sin was sanctioned by the death of Jesus; consequently,
or wherefore (ᆋθεν hothen) the old covenant, which is a type of the new, was sanctioned by the
blood of victims.” But is this the reasoning of Paul? Does he say that because the blood of a
Mediator was to be shed under the new dispensation, and because the old was a type of this, that
therefore the old was confirmed by blood? Is he not rather accounting for the shedding of blood
at all, and showing that it was “necessary” that the blood of the Mediator should be shed rather
than assuming that, and from that arguing that a typical shedding of blood was needful?
Besides, on this supposition, why is the statement in Heb_9:16-17, introduced? What bearing
have these verses in the train of thought? What are they but an inexplicable obstruction?

240. The first testament - Or rather covenant - the word “testament” being supplied by the
translators.
Was dedicated - Margin, “Purified.” The word used to “ratify,” to “confirm,” to “consecrate,”
to “sanction.” Literally, “to renew.”
Without blood - It was ratified by the blood of the animals that were slain in sacrifice. The
blood was then sprinkled on the principal objects that were regarded as holy under that
dispensation.
2. CLARKE, "Whereupon - ᆍθεν. Wherefore, as a victim was required for the ratification
of every covenant, the first covenant made between God and the Hebrews, by the mediation of
Moses, was not dedicated, εγκεκαινισται, renewed or solemnized, without blood - without the
death of a victim, and the aspersion of its blood.
3. GILL, "Whereupon neither the first testament,.... Or the first administration of the
covenant of grace under the law:
was dedicated without blood; or "confirmed" without it, that dispensation being a typical
one; and that blood was typical of the blood of Christ, by which the new covenant or testament is
ratified; see Exo_24:7.
4. HENRY, "From the particular method that was taken by Moses in the ratification of the first
testament, which was not done without blood, Heb_9:18, Heb_9:19, etc. All men by sin had
become guilty before God, had forfeited their inheritance, their liberties, and their very lives,
into the hands of divine justice; but God, being willing to show the greatness of his mercy,
proclaimed a covenant of grace, and ordered it to be typically administered under the Old
Testament, but not without the blood and life of the creature; and God accepted the blood of
bulls and goats, as typifying the blood of Christ; and by these means the covenant of grace was
ratified under the former dispensation. The method taken by Moses, according to the direction
he had received from God, is here particularly related
5. JAMISON, "Whereupon — rather, “Whence.”
dedicated — “inaugurated.” The Old Testament strictly and formally began on that day of
inauguration. “Where the disposition, or arrangement, is ratified by the blood of another,
namely, of animals, which cannot make a covenant, much less make a testament, it is not
strictly a testament, where it is ratified by the death of him that makes the arrangement, it is
strictly, Greek ‘diathece,’ Hebrew ‘berith,’ taken in a wider sense, a testament” [Bengel]; thus, in
Heb_9:18, referring to the old dispensation, we may translate, “the first (covenant)”: or better,
retain “the first (testament),” not that the old dispensation, regarded by itself, is a testament,
but it is so when regarded as the typical representative of the new, which is strictly a Testament.
6. CALVIN, "Whereupon neither the first, etc. It hence appears that the fact is
what is mainly urged, and that it is not a question about the word,
though the Apostle turned to his own purpose a word presented to his

241. attention in that language in which he wrote, as though one, while
speaking of God's covenant, which is often called in Greek marturia, a
testimony, were to recommend it among other things under that title.
And doubtless that is a testimony, marturia, to which angels from
heaven has borne witness, and of which there have been so many
illustrious witnesses on earth, even all the holy Prophets, Apostles,
and a vast number of martyrs, and of which at last the Son of God
himself became a surety. No one in such a discourse would deem any such
thing as unreasonable. And yet the Hebrew word, tvdh will admit of no
such meaning as a covenant; but as nothing is advanced but what is
consistent with the thing itself, no scrupulous regard is to be paid to
the meaning of a word.
The Apostle then says, that the old testament or covenant was dedicated
with blood. He hence concludes, that men were even then reminded, that
it could not be valid and efficacious except death intervened. For
though the blood of beasts was then shed, yet, he denies that it
availed to confine an everlasting covenant. That this may appear more
clearly, we must notice the custom of sprinkling which he quotes from
Moses. He first teaches us that the covenant was dedicated or
consecrated, not that it had in itself anything profane; but as there
is nothing so holy that men by their uncleanness will not defile,
except God prevents it by making a renewal of all things, therefore the
dedication was made on account of men, who alone wanted it.
He afterwards adds, that the tabernacle and all the vessels, and also
the very book of the law, were sprinkled; by which rite the people were
then taught, that God could not be sought or looked to for salvation,
nor rightly worshipped, except faith in every case looked to an
intervening blood. For the majesty of God is justly to be dreaded by
us, and the way to his presence is nothing to us but a dangerous
labyrinth, until we know that he is pacified towards us through the
blood of Christ, and that this blood affords to us a free access. All
kinds of worship are then faulty and impure until Christ cleanses them
by the sprinkling of his blood. [153]
For the tabernacle was a sort of visible image of God; and as the
vessels for ministering were destined for his service, so they were
symbols of true worship. But since none of these were for salvation to
the people, we hence reasonably conclude, that where Christ does not
appear with his blood, we have nothing to do with God. So doctrine
itself, however unchangeable may be the will of God, cannot be
efficacious for our benefit, unless it be dedicated by blood, as is
plainly set forth in this verse.
I know that others give a different interpretation; for they consider

242. the tabernacle to be the body of the Church, and vessels the faithful,
whose ministry God employs; but what I have stated is much more
appropriate. For whenever God was to be called upon, they turned
themselves to the sanctuary; and it was a common way of speaking to say
that they stood before the Lord when they appeared in the temple.
7. MURRAY, EVEN THE FIRST COVENANT NOT WITHOUT BLOOD. 18-22
THE writer returns here to the idea of the covenant in ver. 15.
He had there said that a death was needed for the redemption
of the transgressions under the first covenant, ere Christ, as
Mediator of the new, could put the heirs in possession of the
promise. In confirmation of this necessity, he reminds us how
even the first covenant was not dedicated without blood.
God has made more than one covenant with man, but ever,
not without blood ! And why ? We know the answer (Lev.
xvii. n) : The life (soul) of the flesh is in the blood ; and I have
given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your
souls : for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of
the life. The life is in the blood. The blood shed is the
token of death, life taken away. Death is always and every
where God s judgment on sin: The sting of death is sin.
The shed blood sprinkled upon the altar, or the person, is the
proof that death has been endured, that the penalty of the
transgressions, for which atonement is being made, has been
borne. In some cases the hands were laid upon the head of
the sacrifice, confessing over it, and laying upon it, the sin to be
atoned for. The shed blood upon the altar was the pledge
that God accepted the death of the substitute : the sins were
covered by the blood, and the guilty one restored to God s
favour. Apart from blood-shedding there is no remission;
in the blood-shedding there is remission, full and everlasting.
Not without blood ! This is the wondrous note that rings
through all Scripture, from Abel s sacrifice at the gate of
paradise to the song of the ransomed in Revelations. God
is willing to receive fallen man back again to His fellowship, to
admit him to His heart and His love, to make a covenant with
him, to give full assurance of all this ; but not without blood.
Even His own Son, the Almighty and All-perfect One, the gift
of His eternal love, even He could only redeem us, and enter
the Father s presence, in submission to the word, not without
blood. But, blessed be God, the blood of the Son of God,
in which there was the life of the Eternal Spirit, has been given,

243. and has now wrought an eternal redemption ! He did, indeed,
bear our sins, and take them away. He put away sin by
the sacrifice of Himself. The life He poured out in His
blood-shedding was a life that had conquered sin, and rendered
a perfect obedience. The blood-shedding as the completion of
that life, in its surrender to God and man, has made a complete
atonement, a covering up, a putting away of sin. And so the
blood of the new covenant, in which God remembers our sins no
more, cleanses our heart to receive His law so into it, that the
spirit of His law is the spirit of our life, and takes us into full
and direct fellowship with Himself. It was in this blood of
the eternal covenant that God brought again from the dead
our Lord Jesus : the blood had so atoned for sin and made an
end of it that, in its power, Christ was raised again. It became
the power of a new life to Him and to us. With it He opened
the way into the Holiest for us ; the way into our hearts for
Himself.
Not without blood ! In earth and heaven, in each moment
of our life, in each thought and act of worship, this word reigns
supreme. There can be no fellowship with God, but in the
blood, in the death, of His blessed Son.
But, praised be His name, in that blood there is an access
and a fellowship, a life and a blessedness, a nearness and a love,
that passeth understanding ! Let us seek to cultivate large
thoughts of what the blood has effected and can effect. Men
have sometimes rejected the word : its associations are so
coarse and at variance with a finer culture. Others do not
reject it, and yet have not been able to sympathise with or
approve the large place it sometimes takes in theology and
devotion. The strange fascination, the irresistible attraction
the word has, is not without reason. There is not a word in
Scripture in which all theology is so easily summed up. All
that Scripture teaches of sin and death, of the incarnation and
the love of Christ, of redemption and salvation, of sin and death
conquered, of heaven opened and the Spirit poured out, of the
new covenant blessings, of a perfect conscience and a clean
heart, and access to God and power to serve Him, personal
attachment to Jesus, and of the joy of eternity, has its root
and its fruit in this alone : the precious blood of Christ ;
the blood of the eternal covenant.
1. Hear what Slelnhofer says: "One drop of that blood, sprinkled out of the sanctuary on
the heart, changes the whole heart, perfects the conscience, sanctifies the soul, mattes the
garments clean and white, so that we are meet for fellowship with God, ready and able to Hue in
His hue. Such a heart, sprin filed and cleansed with the blood of Jesus, is now fitted for all the

244. grace of the new covenant, all the heauenly gifts, all the holy operations of divine love, all the
spiritual blessings of the heauenly places. The blood of the Lamb does indeed make the sinner
pure and holy, worthy and fit to partake of all that the inner sanctuary contains, and to live In
God. Therefore the apostle says : Let us, as those whose hearts are sprinkled from an evil
conscience, boldly draw near before the face of God. To be sprinkled with the blood, to have
the living, cleansing, all-pervading power of the blood of Jesus In the heart, this fits us for
serving God, not In the oldness of the letter but In the newness of the Spirit. "
8. John Lifflander, “Therefore not even the first covenant was dedicated
without blood. Hebrews 9:18 (NKJV)
After Adam and Eve sinned, the Bible tells us in Genesis 3:21 that God made
clothing for them from animal skins. It seems likely that they watched while the
animals were killed and skinned, for they would have to learn the process in
order to teach it to others, and to replace their own garments. What a shock it
must have been for Adam to see the loving creatures that he had named, now
slaughtered and bled. And this occurred concurrent with seeing the world
drastically change due to their disobedience. Nevertheless, the significance of
this matter goes far beyond their utilitarian need for clothing.
In fact, in chapter three, verse seven, we read that Adam and Eve had already
sewn fig leaves for themselves as a covering. Then what was the reason that
animals were killed to clothe them, outside of the practical matter of animal
skins being more durable than fig leaves? The answer is that the covering God
made for them was more than just clothing; it was a spiritual covering for their
sin. The clothing covered their new-found shame in being naked, which was not
shameful to them prior to their disobedience (2:25), but it also covered their
guilt before God, and allowed Him to continue a relationship with them.
The Gravity of Sin
God did not want to see His own creation, His animals, destroyed. Shedding
blood, even that of animals, was a drastic measure, but it was taken because if
man sinned,something had to die, and if it was not the man, then it had to be a
substitute. Not only was this required in God's judicial system, which we only
glimpse since we are still in the flesh, but it was also an object lesson for man.
Sin was so serious, that if man sinned, blood had to be shed. Even as we read in
Hebrews 9:22 (NKJV), "And according to the law almost all things are
purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no
remission." And, in Ezekiel 18:20 (NKJV), "The soul who sins shall
die." Blood is mentioned because it signifies life, and even modern science
teaches us that the life is in the blood.

245. God took no pleasure in seeing animals die. And of course we know that it
caused Him pain to see His Son die upon the cross. But until Jesus made the
ultimate sacrifice, the animals had to die as a temporary covering. Adam and
Eve understood this, and they taught their sons to offer animal sacrifices to the
Lord, even before the law was given in Leviticus. But Cain did not offer a
proper sacrifice; we read in Genesis, chapter four, that he brought vegetables to
God instead of making a living sacrifice. When God did not receive his
sacrifice, Cain was angry, and God rebuked him, saying, "If you do well, will
you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its
desire is for you, but you should rule over it." Genesis 4:7 (NKJV)
Persecution of Those Who Keep the Covenant
We might wonder, why was it that God was so displeased with Cain's sacrifice?
The answers are manifold. First, Cain was disobedient, even though he did keep
up a form of religion. And here we see the beginning of the harlot church. For
Cain acknowledged that God did exist, but he refused to make the sacrifice that
He knew God required, and was in effect touting his disbelief in God's authority
and His promised way of salvation. Therefore, although Cain was willing to
give a sacrifice, he was not willing the give the proper sacrifice. He would not
give what represented life, that is, the blood, for he was not willing to give his
own life to God, as Abel was. And so, jealous of the one who was willing to
serve God properly, he killed Abel.
Here we see a picture of Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees. They wanted to
worship their own way, and when it was pointed out that they were not obeying
God's will, they sought to kill the one who not only pleased God, but also was
God. In 1st Samuel, chapter two, we read of the corrupt priests, Hophni and
Phinehas, who took the best of the sacrifice for themselves, instead of giving it
to the Lord. And we may see from this how some of us today want to also give
the leftovers to the Lord, instead of the best that we have to offer. The sacrifice
that God requires from us is one that requires the giving of life, as we will see as
we continue this study of the covenant.
The Cutting of the Covenant
In Hebrew, the word covenant literally means "to cut". And so we see that when
God made a covenant with Abraham, the sacrificial animals were "cut", and
Abraham's flesh was "cut" in circumcism. But before we study this in detail, let

246. us look at what this custom has meant to other cultures, in the hope of
understanding the gravity and magnitude of it in our own lives as Christians.
Generally, it is not advisable to study a pagan ritual to understand a Christian
truth; but in this case, while we certainly do not in anyway endorse the use of it,
we will find it instructive. This is why it has been mentioned in other books by
authors who have attempted to bring biblical understanding by studying it
among non-believing cultures. Native tribes of Africa, Asia, and many other
countries have practiced some form of the blood covenant for thousands of
years. Satan has distorted the original intent of this biblical concept for these
cultures, and in some of them it has become a gory ritual. Nevertheless, its
practice has had a profound effect on the concept of commitment between
people.
Men have primarily cut the covenant with each other for protection. Two tribes
might be living next to each other, and realize that if they covenant with each
other they will be more formidable against a common enemy. Many times a
weaker tribe will seek to covenant with a stronger tribe because it fears that if it
is attacked no one will come to its aid. In this we might see how the covenant
we make with our Lord is so precious – He being so much stronger and not
needing us, but condescending to help us.
Blood covenants have also been made between two people who are very good
friends and want to use it as a way to seal their friendship. In some cultures,
blood covenants are made between people who are business partners, or have
similar business interests. Whatever the reason, however, the blood covenant
has one universal characteristic – it is representative of the most binding
agreement two people can make with each other, which becomes apparent as we
see how it was used in Africa in the 1800's.
The Blood Covenant in Africa
In 1869, the well-known missionary Dr. David Livingstone had been in Africa
for many years, but little had been heard from him since 1866. Finally, the New
York Heraldcalled upon Henry M. Stanley to find him. Stanley was a journalist
and explorer, and it took him until 1871 to find Livingstone. (He greeted him
with the now famous salutation, "Dr. Livingstone, I presume?".) In the course of
the search, Stanley had several occurrences in which he made a blood covenant
with different African tribes. The first time Stanley was somewhat ill, and he
was under siege by a truculent tribe which he and his men were not able to fight.

247. His interpreter asked him why he did not make a blood covenant with them, and
explained to him what it meant. But Stanley, as we can easily understand, was
horrified at the thought of cutting himself and drinking another man's blood.
However, conditions worsened for him, so he asked what the benefit of a
covenant would be, and was told that it would put everything that the other tribe
owned at his disposal – but it would also put everything he owned at their
disposal. Inherent in the agreement was that neither would exploit the other.
They would not ask for anything unless it was critical, but at the initial making
of the covenant, each would make the other a gift. The negotiations ensued, and
the chieftain asked for Stanley's milk goat. Stanley did not want to give her up,
because the goat's milk was important for his failing health, but since the
chieftain would take nothing else, he finally agreed. In return, the chieftain gave
him his seven-foot copper-wound spear. Stanley did not think much of this gift
at first, but later he found out that the spear represented some evident authority
– everywhere he traveled in Africa people submitted to him because of it.
Stanley was relieved when he found out that he did not have to personally
perform the ritual; the chieftain used a stand-in from the tribe, therefore he was
able to use a young Englishman as a stand-in for himself. Nevertheless, this in
no way lessened the obligatory nature of the covenant. That covenant, we
should understand, meant that if one of the tribes was attacked, every person in
the other tribe and everything it owned, would be put at its disposal. They would
give them weapons, food, and shelter, and they would fight for them, and give
their lives for them, down to their last drop of blood. Hence the
term, blood covenant. It also meant that as familial brothers are said to have the
same "blood" because they share the same parents, those who entered into this
ritual were ostensibly related, hence the term, "blood brothers".
To seal this covenant, the young tribesman from the African tribe cut his arm
and squeezed it until blood ran out of it into a goblet into which wine was
already poured. Then the young Englishman made an incision in his arm and his
blood dripped into the same goblet. The Chieftain's "priest" stirred the bloods
together and then handed the cup to the Englishman, who drank part of it. Then
the young tribesman drank the rest.
Do we cringe at this ritual as we study it? Does it seem repulsive? Perhaps so,
but let us remember the one who said, "He who eats My flesh and drinks My
blood abides in Me, and I in him." John 6:56 (NKJV). In human practice it
may be hideous, but it gives us a reflection of a godly concept that goes far

248. beyond our typical understanding about commitment – the commitment that
God has made to us, and that we have made (whether or not we realize it) to
Him.
Next, the African "priest" pronounced dreadful curses that were to befall
Stanley and his men should they ever break the covenant, and Stanley's
interpreter did the same upon the Africans. Does this also sound strange to us?
Let us consider the curses and blessings that are part of the Old Covenant
recorded in Deuteronomy chapters 11, and 27 and 28, which were shouted from
Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal as the covenant was sealed. Let us also
remember how in Exodus 12:23 the Lord told the Israelites to put the blood on
the lintel and on the doorposts, and the destroyer would pass over them. And in
Joshua 2:18, where Rahab the Harlot is told to put the scarlet thread outside her
window so that she will not be destroyed. All of this represented the power and
protection of the covenant.
These two were now blood brothers, and their agreement was meant to
be indissoluble. But if one of them did break the covenant, the other was then
released from it. However, that was unlikely to happen in Africa, because if a
person broke the covenant his own family would seek to kill him. It simply was
not done. Before this, Stanley's men had to guard all their valuables, but now no
one would touch anything – for the penalty for stealing from a blood brother
was death. The chieftain was now friendly, doing all he could for Stanley, and
Stanley was amazed at how this ritual had so completely changed his attitude
toward him – for he did not quite understand the magnitude of the covenant.
The question is, do we understand the covenant? When we come to the Lord's
table, are we going through a ritual which we think little about, or do we think
mainly about what God has done for us, and what He will do for us. It is not bad
for us to remember what He has done for us, but should we not also realize what
is required of us in this covenant relationship? Is the covenant one-sided? Is it
only about His commitment to us, and not about ours to Him? Why does He say
for us to present our bodies as a living sacrifice if there is no commitment
required on our part? (See Romans 12:1) If there is nothing for us to do, if in
grace He wants nothing from us, then why was Cain not accepted? Is it not
possible that our relationship with God is lacking because we are not fulfilling
the covenant, but we do not realize it because we have not understood the depth
of it?

249. It is not just our physical lives that God wants, for if we have any faith we will
gladly offer that – just to die and go to heaven may not be too difficult. But what
about to obey and stay in this world? God told Cain that he must master sin, but
is that no longer necessary? Under the New Covenant is obedience no longer
required because of grace, meaning that we do not need to concern ourselves
with overcoming sin? If this is truly what we think, indeed we are blinded.
Without an understanding of the covenant, we also fail to understand what God
requires of us, and why He has told us that the path is narrow and the way
difficult (Matthew 7:14).
Our example is Africa in the 1800's, which was a pagan country known to have
almost no Gospel light. And yet neither Livingstone nor Stanley had ever heard
of the blood covenant being broken. It was considered sacred, and it was
honored in that culture. Another reason it was considered unbreakable was that
even in that desperately wicked society, man wanted something to believe in,
and so he attempted to do the best he could to make a godlike commitment.
How much the soul of man thirsts for the commitment only God can make!
Even the world respects the man or woman who cannot be bought, and will not
back down once having identified himself or herself with a worthwhile cause.
The cause of Christ is the most worthwhile of all, and so His followers should
be the most dedicated and committed.
9. PINK, “"Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had
spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and
of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the
people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is
no remission" (verses 18-22).
In these verses the apostle is still pressing upon the Hebrews the necessity for the
blood-shedding of Christ. Their national history witnessed to the fact that when God
entered into covenant with their fathers, that covenant was confirmed by solemn sacrifice.
In the verses upon which we are now to comment, the apostle is not merely proving that the
old covenant or testament was confirmed with blood, for had that been his only object, he
could have dispatched it in very few words; rather does he also declare what was the use of
blood in sacrifices on all occasions under the law, and thereby he demonstrates the use and
efficacy of Christ’s blood as unto the ends of the new covenant. The ends of the blood
under the old covenant were two, namely, purification and pardon, both of which were
confirmed in the expiation of sin. Unless the main design of the Spirit in these verses be
steadily kept in view, we miss the deeper meaning of many of their details.
What has just been said above, supplies the explanation of what has seemed a problem to
some, namely that in these verses the apostle mentions five or six details which are not

250. found in the historical narrative of Exodus 24. But the Holy Spirit is not here limiting our
view to Exodus 24, but gathers up what is found in various places of the law; and that,
because He not only designed to prove the dedication of the covenant by blood, but also to
show the whole use of the blood under the law, as unto purification and remission of sin.
And He does this with the purpose of declaring the virtue and efficacy of the blood of
Christ under the new testament, whereunto He makes an application of all the things in the
verses which follow. The "Moreover" at the beginning of verse 21 is plain intimation that
the Spirit is here contemplating something in addition to that which is found in Exodus 24.
Verse 18. The opening word is usually rendered "therefore" or "wherefore": it denotes the
drawing of an inference; it confirms a general rule by a special instance. In verse 16 the
general rule is stated; now, says the apostle, think it not strange that the new testament was
confirmed by the death of the Testator, for this is so necessary that, the first one also was
confirmed in the same manner; and that, not only by death, but not "without blood,"
which was required for the ratification of a solemn covenant. That to which reference is
made is the "first" testament or covenant. Here the apostle makes clear what he intended
by the first or old covenant, on which he had discoursed at large in chapter 8: it was the
covenant made with Israel at Horeb. Just a few words on the character of it.
Its terms had all the nature of a formal covenant. These were the things written in the book
(Ex. 24:4, 7) which were an epitome of the whole law, as contained in Exodus 20-23. The
revelation of its terms were made by Jehovah Himself, speaking with awful voice from the
summit of Sinai: Exodus chapters 19, 20. Following the fundamental rule of the covenant,
as contained in the Ten Commandments, were other statutes and rites, given for the
directing of their walking with God. The same was solemnly delivered to Israel by Moses,
and proposed unto them for their acceptation. Upon their approbation of it, the book was
read in the hearing of all the people after it had been duly sprinkled with the blood of the
covenant (Ex. 24:7). Thereupon, for the first time, Jehovah was called "The God of Israel"
(Ex. 24:10), and that by virtue of the covenant. This formed the foundation of His
consequent dealings with them: all His chastening judgments upon Israel were due to their
breaking of His covenant.
While there is a contrast, sharp and clear, between the Old Testament and the new, yet it
should not be overlooked that there was also that which bound them together. This was
ably expressed by Adolph Saphir: "The promise given to Abraham, and not to Moses, was
not superseded or forgotten in the giving of the law. When God dealt with Israel in the
wilderness, He gave them the promise that they should be a peculiar treasure unto Him
above all people: ‘for all the earth is Mine’; and that they should possess the land as an
inheritance (Ex. 19:5, 6; 23:30; Deuteronomy 15:4). Based upon this promise, and
corresponding with the Divine election and favor, is the law which God gave to His people.
As He had chosen and redeemed them so that they were to be a holy people, and to walk
before Him, even as in the Ten Commandments the gospel of election and redemption came
first: ‘I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of Egypt.’ Hence this covenant or
dispensation, although it was a covenant, not of grace and Divine gifts and enablings, but of
works, was connected with and based upon redemption, and it was dedicated, as the apostle
emphatically says, not without blood.
"Both the book, or record of the covenant, and all the people, were sprinkled with the
blood of typical sacrifices. For without blood is no remission of sins, and the promises of
God can only be obtained through atonement. But we know that this is a figure of the one

251. great Sacrifice, and that therefore all the promises and blessings under the old
dispensation, underlying and sustaining it, were through the prospective death of the true
Mediator. When therefore the spiritual Israelite was convinced by the law of sin, both as
guilt and as a condition of impurity and strengthlessness, he was confronted by the promise
of the inheritance, which always was of grace, unconditional and sure, and in a righteous
and holy manner through expiation."
19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment
of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves,
together with water, scarlet wool and branches of
hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people.
1. BARNES, "For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people - When
he had recited all the Law, and had given all the commandments entrusted him to deliver;
Exo_24:3.
He took the blood of calves and of goats - This passage has given great perplexity to
commentators from the fact that Moses in his account of the transactions connected with the
ratification of the covenant with the people, Exo. 24, mentions only a part of the circumstances
here referred to. He says nothing of the blood of calves and of goats; nothing of water, and
scarletwool, and hyssop; nothing of sprinkling the book, the tabernacle, or the vessels of the
ministry. It has been made a question, therefore, whence Paul obtained a knowledge of these
circumstances? Since the account is not contained in the Old Testament, it must have been
either by tradition, or by direct inspiration. The latter supposition is hardly probable, because:
(1) The information here can hardly be regarded as of sufficient importance to have required
an original revelation; for the illustration would have had sufficient force to sustain his
conclusion if the literal account in Exodus only had been given, that Moses sprinkled the people,
but
(2) Such an original act of inspiration here would not have been consistent with the object of
the apostle. In that argument it was essential that he should state only the facts about the
ancient dispensation which were admitted by the Hebrews themselves. Any statement of his
own about things which they did not concede to be true, or which was not well understood as a
custom, might have been called in question, and would have done much to invalidate the entire
force of the argument. It is to be presumed, therefore, that the facts here referred to had been
preserved by tradition; and in regard to this, and the authority due to such a tradition, we may
remark:
(1) That it is well known that the Jews had a great number of traditions which they carefully
preserved;

252. (2) That there is no improbability in the supposition that many events in their history would
be preserved in this manner, since in the small compass of a volume like the Old
Testament it cannot be presumed that all the events of their nation had been recorded;
(3) Though they had many traditions of a trifling nature, and many which were false (compare
notes on Mat_15:2), yet they doubtless had many that were true;
(4) In referring to those traditions, there is no impropriety in supposing that Paul may have
been guided by the Spirit of inspiration in selecting only those which were true; and,
(5) Nothing is more probable than what is here stated. If Moses sprinkled “the people;” if he
read “the book of the law” then Exo_24:7, and if this was regarded as a solemn act of
ratifying a covenant with God, nothing would be more natural than that he should sprinkle
the book of the covenant, and even the tabernacle and its various sacred utensils.
We are to remember also, that it was common among the Hebrews to sprinkle blood for the
purpose of consecrating, or as an emblem of purifying. Thus, Aaron and his sons and their
garments were sprinkled with blood when they were consecrated to the office of priests,
Exo_29:19-21; the blood of sacrifices was sprinkled on the altar, Lev_1:5, Lev_1:11; Lev_3:2,
Lev_3:13; and blood was sprinkled before the veil of the sanctuary, Lev_4:10, Lev_4:17;
compare Lev_6:27; Lev_7:14. So Josephus speaks of the garments of Aaron and of his sons
being sprinkled with “the blood of the slain beasts, and with spring water.” “Having consecrated
them and their garments,” he says, “for seven days together, he did the same to the tabernacle,
and the vessels thereto belonging, both with oil and with the blood of bulls and of rams.” Ant.
book iii, chapter 8, section 6. These circumstances show the strong “probability” of the truth of
what is here affirmed by Paul, while it is impossible to prove that Moses did not sprinkle the
book and the tabernacle in the manner stated. The mere omission by Moses cannot demonstrate
that it was not done. On the phrase “the blood of calves and of goats,” see note on Heb_9:12.
With water - Agreeably to the declaration of Josephus that “spring water was used.” In
Lev_14:49-51, it is expressly mentioned that the blood of the bird that was killed to cleanse a
house from the plague of leprosy should be shed over running water, and that the blood and the
water should be sprinkled on the walls. It has been suggested also (see Bloomfield), that the use
of water was necessary in order to prevent the blood from coagulating, or so as to make it
possible to sprinkle it.
And scarlet wool - Margin, “Purple.” The word used here denotes crimson, or deep-scarlet.
The colour was obtained from a small insect which was found adhering to the shoots of a species
of oak in Spain and in Western Asia, of about the size of a pea. It was regarded as the most
valuable of the colours for dyeing, and was very expensive. Why the wool used by Moses was of
this colour is not known, unless it be because it was the most expensive of colours, and thus
accorded with everything employed in the construction of the tabernacle and its utensils. Wool
appears to have been used in order to absorb and retain the blood.
And hyssop - That is, a bunch of hyssop intermingled with the wool, or so connected with it
as to constitute a convenient instrument for sprinkling; compare Lev_14:51. Hyssop is a low
shrub, regarded as one of the smallest of the plants, and hence, put in contrast with the cedar of
Lebanon. It sprung out of the rocks or walls, 1Ki_4:33, and was used for purposes of
purification. The term seems to have comprised not only the common hyssop, but also lavender
and other aromatic plants. Its fragrance, as well as its size, may have suggested the idea of using
it in the sacred services of the tabernacle.
And sprinkled both the book - This circumstance is not mentioned by Moses, but it has
been shown above not to be improbable. Some expositors, however, in order to avoid the
difficulty in the passage, have taken this in connection with the word λαβᆹν labon - rendered
“he took” - meaning “taking the blood, and the book itself;” but the more natural and proper
construction is, that the book was sprinkled with the blood.

253. And all the people - Moses says, “and sprinkled it on the people;” Exo_24:8. We are not to
suppose that either Moses or Paul designs to say that the blood was actually sprinkled on each
one of the three millions of people in the wilderness, but the meaning doubtless is that the blood
was sprinkled over the people, though in fact it might have fallen on a few. So a man now
standing on an elevated place, and surrounded by a large assembly, if he should sprinkle water
over them from the place where he stood, might be said to sprinkle it on the people, though in
fact but few might have been touched by it. The act would be equally significant whether the
emblem fell on few or many.
2. CLARKE, "When Moses had spoken every precept - The place to which the apostle
alludes is Exo_24:4-8, where the reader is requested to consult the notes.
And sprinkled both the book - The sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in the place to
which the apostle refers, (see above), nor did it in fact take place. The words αυτο τε το βιβλιον,
and the book itself, should be referred to λαβων, having taken, and not to ερምαντισε, he
sprinkled; the verse should therefore be read thus: For after every commandment of the law had
been recited by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of the calves, and of the goats, with
water and scarlet wool, and the book itself, and sprinkled all the people. The rite was performed
thus: Having received the blood of the calves and goats into basins, and mingled it with water to
prevent it from coagulating, he then took a bunch of hyssop, and having bound it together with
thread made of scarlet wool, he dipped this in the basin, and sprinkled the blood and water upon
the people who were nearest to him, and who might be considered on this occasion the
representatives of all the rest; for it is impossible that he should have had blood enough to have
sprinkled the whole of the congregation.
Some think that the blood was actually sprinkled upon the book itself, which contained the
written covenant, to signify that the covenant itself was ratified by the blood.
3. GILL, "For when Moses had spoken every precept,.... Contained in the decalogue, in
the book of the covenant, everyone of the precepts in Exo_22:1 for this is to be understood of the
written law, and not of the oral law the Jews talk of, which they say Moses first delivered by
word of mouth to Aaron, then to his two sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, then to the seventy elders of
Israel, and then to the whole congregation; so that Aaron heard it four times, his sons thrice, the
seventy elders twice, and all Israel once (g): but this is the written law which he spoke audibly,
and in a known language,
to all the people according to the law; which God gave him on the Mount: this may instruct
persons concerned in the public ministry, to speak out plainly and clearly the whole counsel of
God, to all to whom they are sent, according to the word of God, which is the rule of faith and
practice:
he took the blood of calves, and of goats; in the relation of this affair in Exo_24:5 which is
referred to, only mention is made of oxen, bullocks, or heifers, here called calves, which were
sacrificed for peace offerings, and not of goats; though perhaps they may be intended by the
burnt offerings there spoken of, since they were sometimes used for burnt offerings, Lev_1:10.
The Syriac version only reads, "he took the blood of an heifer"; and the Arabic version, "he took
the blood of calves"; but all the copies, and other versions, read both. "With water, and scarlet
wool, and hyssop"; neither of these are mentioned in Exo_24:1, but since sprinkling is there said

254. to be used, and blood and water mixed together, and scarlet and hyssop were used in sprinkling,
as in sprinkling the leper, and the unclean house, Lev_14:5 the apostle justly concludes the use
of them here; the blood, with water, was typical of the blood and water which sprung from the
side of Christ pierced on the cross, the one signifying justification by him, the other
sanctification; the scarlet wool, which is originally white, but becomes scarlet by being dyed,
may denote the native purity of Christ, and his bloody sufferings and death; the hyssop may
signify his humility, and the purging virtue of his blood, and the sweet smelling savour of his
person, righteousness, and sacrifice. The apostle calls scarlet, scarlet wool; though whenever the
word is used in the Jewish laws of the Old Testament, wool is not expressed, but it is always
intended; for it is a rule with the Jews (h), that
"the blue, which is spoken of in every place, is wool dyed of a sky colour; purple is wool dyed red,
and scarlet is wool dyed in scarlet.''
And sprinkled both the book, and all the people. In Exo_24:8 no mention is made of the
sprinkling of the former, only of the latter, which the apostle either concludes from the
sprinkling of the blood upon the altar, upon which the book might lie, or from tradition, or from
divine revelation: some think it does not necessarily follow from the text, that the book was
sprinkled; and repeating the word λαβων, "he took", read the words, "and he took the book and
sprinkled all the people"; but this seems not natural, but forced; and besides, all the Oriental
versions are express for the sprinkling of the book: the book of the law was sprinkled, not
because of any impurity in it, but to show the imperfection of it, and its insufficiency to justify
men; or rather the imperfection of man's obedience to it, and to point out what the law requires
in case of disobedience, even the blood and life of men; and what it would be, was it not
sprinkled with blood, or satisfied by the blood of Christ, namely, an accusing, cursing, and
condemning law: the people, all of them, being sprinkled with the blood, were typical of God's
peculiar people, even all the elect of God, being sprinkled with the blood of Christ, called the
blood of sprinkling, by which they are redeemed, and which speaks peace and pardon to them.
Some have thought only the seventy elders were sprinkled, as representing the whole
congregation; and others, that the twelve pillars were only sprinkled, as representing the twelve
tribes of Israel; but Moses and the apostle agree, that they were the people that were sprinkled.
4. HENRY, " Moses spoke every precept to all the people, according to the law, Heb_9:19. He
published to them the tenour of the covenant, the duties required, the rewards promised to
those who did their duty, and the punishment threatened against the transgressors, and he
called for their consent to the terms of the covenant; and this in an express manner. (2.) Then he
took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and applied this
blood by sprinkling it. This blood and water signified the blood and water that came out of our
Saviour's pierced side, for justification and sanctification, and also shadowed forth the two
sacraments of the New Testament, baptism and the Lord's supper, with scarlet wool, signifying
the righteousness of Christ with which we must be clothed, the hyssop signifying that faith by
which we must apply all. Now with these Moses sprinkled, [1.] The book of the law and
covenant, to show that the covenant of grace is confirmed by the blood of Christ and made
effectual to our good. [2.] The people, intimating that the shedding of the blood of Christ will be
no advantage to us if it be not applied to us. And the sprinkling of both the book and the people
signified the mutual consent of both parties, God and man, and their mutual engagements to
each other in this covenant through Christ, Moses at the same time using these words, This is
the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. This blood, typifying the blood of
Christ, is the ratification of the covenant of grace to all true believers. [3.] He sprinkled the
tabernacle and all the utensils of it, intimating that all the sacrifices offered up and services
performed there were accepted only through the blood of Christ, which procures the remission

255. of that iniquity that cleaves to our holy things, which could not have been remitted but by that
atoning blood.
5. JAMISON, "For — confirming the general truth, Heb_9:16.
spoken ... according to the law — strictly adhering to every direction of “the law of
commandments contained in ordinances” (Eph_2:15). Compare Exo_24:3, “Moses told the
people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments; and all the people answered with one
voice,” etc.
the blood of calves — Greek, “the calves,” namely, those sacrificed by the “young men”
whom he sent to do so (Exo_24:5). The “peace offerings” there mentioned were “of oxen”
(Septuagint, “little calves”), and the “burnt offerings” were probably (though this is not
specified), as on the day of atonement, goats. The law in Exodus sanctioned formally many
sacrificial practices in use by tradition, from the primitive revelation long before.
with water — prescribed, though not in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus, yet in other
purifications; for example, of the leper, and the water of separation which contained the ashes of
the red heifer.
scarlet wool, and hyssop — ordinarily used for purification. Scarlet or crimson,
resembling blood: it was thought to be a peculiarly deep, fast dye, whence it typified sin (see on
Isa_1:18). So Jesus wore a scarlet robe, the emblem of the deep-dyed sins He bore on Him,
though He had none in Him. Wool was used as imbibing and retaining water; the hyssop, as a
bushy, tufty plant (wrapt round with the scarlet wool), was used for sprinkling it. The wool was
also a symbol of purity (Isa_1:18). The Hyssopus officinalis grows on walls, with small
lancet-formed woolly leaves, an inch long, with blue and white flowers, and a knotty stalk about
a foot high.
sprinkled ... the book — namely, out of which he had read “every precept”: the book of the
testament or covenant. This sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in the twenty-fourth
chapter of Exodus. Hence Bengel translates, “And (having taken) the book itself (so Exo_24:7),
he both sprinkled all the people, and (Heb_9:21) moreover sprinkled the tabernacle.” But the
Greek supports English Version. Paul, by inspiration, supplies the particular specified here, not
in Exo_24:7. The sprinkling of the roll (so the Greek for “book”) of the covenant, or testament,
as well as of the people, implies that neither can the law be fulfilled, nor the people be purged
from their sins, save by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ (1Pe_1:2). Compare Heb_9:23,
which shows that there is something antitypical to the Bible in heaven itself (compare
Rev_20:12). The Greek, “itself,” distinguishes the book itself from the “precepts” in it which he
“spake.”
6. PINK, “Verse 19. The one made use of for the dedication of the covenant was Moses. On
God’s part he was immediately called unto this employment: Exodus 3. On the part of the
people, he was desired and chosen to transact all things between God and them, because
they were not able to bear the effects of His immediate presence: Exodus 19:19,
Deuteronomy 5:22-27; and this choice of a spokesman on their part, God approved (verse
27). Thus Moses became in a general way a "mediator" between God and men in the giving
of the law (Gal. 3:19). Thereby we are shown that there can be no covenant between God
and sinful men, but in the hands of a Mediator, for man has neither meetness, merits, nor
ability to be an undertaker of the terms of God’s covenant in his own person.
Moses spake "every precept unto the people." This intimates the particular character of

256. the Old Testament. It consisted primarily of commandments of obedience (Eph. 2:15),
promising no assistance for the performance of them. The "new testament" is of another
nature: it is one of promises, and although it also has precepts requiring obedience, yet is it
(as a covenant) wholly founded in the promise, whereby strength and assistance for the
performance of that obedience are given to us. Moses’ reading "every precept unto the
people" emphasizes the fact that all the good things they were to receive by virtue of the
covenant, depended on their observance of all that was commanded them; for a curse was
denounced against every one that "continued not in all things written in the law to do
them" (Deut. 27:26). Obviously, such a "covenant" was never ordained for the saving of
sinners: its insufficiency for that end is what the apostle demonstrates in the sequel.
We are again indebted to the exposition of John Owen for much of the above, and now give
in condensed form some of his observations on the contents of verse 19. Here, for the first
time, was any part of God’s Word committed to writing. This book of the law was written
that it might be read to all the people: it was not to be restricted to the priests, as
containing mysteries unlawful to ,be divulged. It was written and read in the language
which the people understood and spake, which condemns Rome’s use of the Latin in her
public services. Again; God never required the observance of any rites or duties of worship,
without a previous warrant from His Word. How thankful should we be for the written
Word!
That which Moses performed on this occasion was to sprinkle the blood. Exodus 24:6
informs us that he took "half of the blood" and sprinkled it "on the altar" (on which was
the book); the other half on the people. The one was God’s part; the other theirs. Thereby
the mutual agreement of Jehovah and the people was indicated. Typically, this
foreshadowed the twofold efficacy of Christ’s blood, to make salvation God-wards and to
save man-wards; or, to the remission of our sins unto justification, and the purification of
our persons unto sanctification. The "scarlet wool," probably bound around the "hyssop"
(which was a common weed), was employed as a sprinkler, as that which served to apply
the blood in the basons upon the people; "water" being mixed with the blood to keep it
fluid and aspersible. In like manner, the communication of the benefits of Christ’s death
unto sanctification, is called the "sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 1:2). To
avail us, the blood must not only be "shed," but "sprinkled."
The mingling of the "water" with the "blood" was to represent the "blood and water"
which flowed from the pierced side of the Savior (John 19:34,35), the spiritual "mystery"
and meaning of which is profound and blessed. In 1 John 5:6 the Holy Spirit has
particularly emphasized the fact that the Christ came "by water and blood." He came not
only to make atonement for our sins by His blood that we might be justified, but also to
sprinkle us with the efficacy of His blood in the communication of the Spirit unto
sanctification, which is compared unto "water": see John 7:38, 39, Titus 3:5. The
application of the blood to the "book" of the covenant was an intimation that atonement
could be made by blood for the sins against its precepts, and the application of the "water"
to it told of its purity. The sprinkler pointed to the humanity of Christ, through which all
grace is communicated to us: the "scarlet wool" speaking of His personal glory (Dan. 5:7
etc.), and the "hyssop," the meanest of plant-life (1 Kings 4:33), being a figure of His lowly
outward appearance.

257. 7. WORTHEN, “It's the blood which cleanses. In the O.T. the blood was central to the
Levitical system of sacrifice. The blood was sprinkled on practically everything related to
the system, including the people of Israel. Blood was to cover everything as a way of
demonstrating the effects of sin, which touched everything.
To bring something, whether an article of clothing or furniture or someone into the
presence of God, it had to be cleansed. It had to be made pure. Nothing unclean can dwell
in the presence of God. Therefore to become clean one had to adhere to the standard of
cleanliness God instituted, which was full payment for sin.
Sin had to be dealt with. Someone had to pay the price in full. The problem Israel had is
the same problem people have today. No one can fully satisfy God's justice with their own
good works.
And yet, the price had to be paid and the price was always the same. The blood of an
innocent victim must cover those who are guilty. Those animals sacrificed in the Old
covenant did not commit sin. They stood in place of the people who were guilty. But an
animal cannot ultimatley satisfy God's justice for men.
They were simply a picture of One who would come to die for our penalty. They were a
picture of an innocent victim who was not an animal, but a human being undefiled,
spotless, pure and perfect in every respect.
Only the Son of God could have fulfilled this because, after the fall of Adam, there would
be no human being who was perfect, without sin. And so Jesus had to be born of a virgin.
He had to born according to the Law. He had to be born of the line of David according to
prophecy. But He was born to die.
Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. For those who would suggest
that Christ's death was a tragic mistake or interruption of God's perfect will for Jesus is
not to understand where our life comes from. It comes only through His death, the
shedding of His blood.
We see this clearly in LEV 17:11 "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it
to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement
for one's life."
That which is life for you and I, that is the blood, is the very thing God requires of us. The
wages of sin is death. But praise God He covenanted to send His only begotten Son into this
world to die in our place on the cross, an instrument of capital punishment in those days.
He was declared a criminal by the world and even forsaken of the Father as such for us,
though guiltless. He paid the penalty in full. The only thing He asks of you and me and the
whole world is to quit trusting in ourselves and place our total trust and faith in Him and
what He has done for us.
He shed His blood for an atoning work, where He satisfied the penalty demanded of us by
God from the very beginning. ISA 1:18 "Come now, let us reason together," says the
LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are
red as crimson, they shall be like wool."
This is God's promise; that our sins will not come between us and Him, ever. But this will
only be true of those who are cleansed as white as snow under the fountain of Christ's
blood shed on our behalf as they place their faith in Him.
But the shed blood is not the end of the story, which is why we look to our hope as an
everlasting one. That came through the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.
His shed blood and death for us must always be accompanied by the truth that we don't

258. love and serve a dead martyr, but a risen glorious living Savior who lives today making
intercession on our behalf.
Let me end with Paul's encouragement from his letter to the church in Rome. ROM 6:5 "If
we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with
him in his resurrection.
6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be
done away with, (Or be rendered powerless) that we should no longer be slaves to sin -
7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.
8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.
9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no
longer has mastery over him.
10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus."
20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which
God has commanded you to keep."
1. BARNES, "Saying, This is the blood of the testament - Of the covenant; see notes on
Heb_9:16-17. That is, this is the blood by which the covenant is ratified. It was the means used
to confirm it; the sacred and solemn form by which it was made sure. When this was done, the
covenant between God and the people was confirmed - as a covenant between man and man is
when it is sealed.
Which God hath enjoined unto you - In Exo_24:8, “which God hath made with you.”
The language used by Paul, “which God hath enjoined” - ᅚνετείλατο eneteilato - “commanded”
- shows that he did not regard this as strictly of the nature of a “covenant,” or “compact.” When a
compact is made between parties, one does not “enjoin” or “command” the other, but it is a
mutual “agreement.” In the transactions between God and man, though called ‫רית‬ be
riyt, or δι
αθήκη diatheke, the idea of a “covenant” or “compact” is so far excluded that God never loses
his right to “command” or “enjoin.” It is not a transaction between equals, or an “agreement;” it
is a solemn “arrangement” on the part of God which he proposes to mankind, and which he
enjoins them to embrace; which they are not indeed at liberty to disregard, but which when
embraced is appropriately ratified by some solemn act on their part; compare notes on
Heb_8:6.
2. CLARKE, "This is the blood of the testament - (covenant.) Our Lord refers to the
conduct of Moses here, and partly quotes his words in the institution of the eucharist: This is my

259. blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins, Mat_26:28. And by
thus using the words and applying them, he shows that his sacrificial blood was intended by the
blood shed and sprinkled on this occasion, and that by it alone the remission of sins is obtained.
3. GILL, "Saying, this is the blood of the testament,.... The first testament or covenant;
this proves what the apostle had asserted in Heb_9:18 that it was dedicated with blood, or
confirmed by it; compare with this Mat_26:28
which God hath enjoined unto you; the people of Israel, to observe, and which they
promised to do; see Exo_24:7.
4. HENRY, "The people, intimating that the shedding of the blood of Christ will be no
advantage to us if it be not applied to us. And the sprinkling of both the book and the people
signified the mutual consent of both parties, God and man, and their mutual engagements to
each other in this covenant through Christ, Moses at the same time using these words, This is
the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. This blood, typifying the blood of
Christ, is the ratification of the covenant of grace to all true believers. [3.] He sprinkled the
tabernacle and all the utensils of it, intimating that all the sacrifices offered up and services
performed there were accepted only through the blood of Christ, which procures the remission
of that iniquity that cleaves to our holy things, which could not have been remitted but by that
atoning blood.
5. JAMISON, "Exo_24:8, “Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with
you concerning all these words.” The change is here made to accord with Christ’s inauguration
of the new testament, or covenant, as recorded in Luk_22:20, “This cup (is) the new Testament
in My blood, which is shed for you”: the only Gospel in which the “is” has to be supplied. Luke
was Paul’s companion, which accounts for the correspondence, as here too “is” has to be
supplied.
testament — (See on Heb_9:16, Heb_9:17). The Greek “diathece” means both “testament”
and “covenant”: the term “covenant” better suits the old dispensation, though the idea
testament is included, for the old was one in its typical relation to the new dispensation, to
which the term “testament” is better suited. Christ has sealed the testament with His blood, of
which the Lord’s Supper is the sacramental sign. The testator was represented by the animals
slain in the old dispensation. In both dispensations the inheritance was bequeathed: in the new
by One who has come in person and died; in the old by the same one, only typically and
ceremonially present. See Alford’s excellent Note.
enjoined unto you — commissioned me to ratify in relation to you. In the old dispensation
the condition to be fulfilled on the people’s part is implied in the words, Exo_24:8, “(Lord made
with you) concerning all these words.” But here Paul omits this clause, as he includes the
fulfillment of this condition of obedience to “all these words” in the new covenant, as part of
God’s promise, in Heb_8:8, Heb_8:10, Heb_8:12, whereby Christ fulfills all for our justification,
and will enable us by putting His Spirit in us to fulfil all in our now progressive, and finally
complete, sanctification.
6. CALVIN, "Saying, This is the blood of the testament, [154] etc. If that was
the blood of the testament, then neither the testament was without

260. blood ratified, nor the blood without the testament available for
expiation. It is hence necessary that both should be united; and we see
that before the explanation of the Law, no symbol was added, for what
would a sacrament be except the word preceded it? Hence a symbol is a
kind of appendage to the word. And mark, this word was not whispered
like a magic incantation, but pronounced with a clear voice, as it was
destined for the people, according to what the words of the covenant
express, which God hath enjoined unto you. [155] Perverted, then, are
the sacraments, and it is a wicked corruption when there is no
explanation of the commandment given, which is as it were the very soul
of the sacrament. Hence the Papists, who take away the true
understanding of things from signs, retain only dead elements.
This passage reminds us that the promises of God are then only
profitable to us when they are confirmed by the blood of Christ. For
what Paul testifies in 2 Corinthians 1:20, that all God's promises are
yea and amen in Christ -- this happens when his blood like a seal is
engraven on our hearts, or when we not only hear God speaking, but also
see Christ offering himself as a pledge for those things which are
spoken. If this thought only came to our minds, that what we read is
not written so much with ink as with the blood of Christ, that when the
Gospel is preached, his sacred blood distills together with the voice,
there would be far greater attention as well as reverence on our part.
A symbol of this was the sprinkling mentioned by Moses!
At the same time there is more stated here than what is expressed by
Moses; for he does not mention that the book and the people were
sprinkled, nor does he name the goats, nor the scarlet wool, nor the
hyssop. As to the book, that it was sprinkled cannot be clearly shown,
yet the probability is that it was, for Moses is said to have produced
it after he had sacrificed; and he did this when he bound the people to
God by a solemn compact. With regard to the rest, the Apostle seems to
have blended together various kinds of expiations, the reason for which
was the same. Nor indeed was there anything unsuitable in this, since
he was speaking of the general subject Or purgation under the Old
Testament, which was done by means of blood. Now as to the sprinkling
made by hyssop and scarlet wool, it is evident that it represented the
mystical sprinkling made by the Spirit. We know that the hyssop
possesses a singular power to cleanse and to purify; so Christ employs
his Spirit to sprinkle us in order to wash us by his own blood when he
leads us to true repentance, when he purifies us from the depraved
lusts of our flesh, when he imbues us with the precious gift of his own
righteousness. For it was not in vain that God had instituted this
rite. David also alluded to this when he said,
"Thou wilt sprinkle me, O Lord, with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed."

261. (Psalm 51:7.)
These remarks will be sufficient for those who wish to be soberminded
in their speculations.
7. PINK, “Verse 20. In these words Moses reminded Israel of the foundation of their
acceptance of the covenant, which foundation was the authority of God requiring them so
to do; the word "enjoined" also emphasized the nature of the covenant itself: it consisted
principally not of promises which had been given to them, but of "precepts" which called
for hearty obedience. By quoting here these words of Moses "this is the blood of the
testament," the apostle proves that not only death, but a sacrificial death, was required in
order to the consecration and establishment of the first covenant. The blood was the
confirmatory sign, the token between God and the people of their mutual engagements in
that covenant. Thus did God from earliest times teach His people, by type and shadow, the
supreme value of the blood of His Son. These words of Moses were plainly alluded to by the
Savior in the institution of His "supper": "This is My blood of the new testament"
(Matthew 26:28) i.e., this represents My blood, by the shedding of which the new testament
is confirmed.
21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both
the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies.
1. BARNES, "He sprinkled ...both the tabernacle - This circumstance is not stated by
Moses. On the probability that this was done, see notes on Heb_9:19. The account of setting up
the tabernacle occurs in Exo_11:1-10. In that account it is said that Moses “anointed” the
tabernacle with the holy anointing oil; Heb_9:9-11. Josephus (Ant. book iii, chapter 8, section
6), says that he consecrated it and the vessels thereto belonging with the blood of bulls and of
rams. This was undoubtedly the tradition in the time of Paul, and no one can prove that it is not
correct.
And all the vessels of the ministry - Employed in the service of God. The altar, the laver,
Exo_40:10-11, the censers, dishes, bowls, etc., which were used in the tabernacle.

262. 2. CLARKE, "He sprinkled - with blood - all the vessels of the ministry - To
intimate that every thing used by sinful man is polluted, and that nothing can be acceptable in
the sight of a holy God that has not in effect the sprinkling of the atoning blood.
3. GILL, "Moreover, he sprinkled likewise both the tabernacle,.... Not at the same time
that he sprinkled the book and the people, for then there was no tabernacle; but afterwards, at
the time that it was set up, when it was anointed with oil, Exo_40:9 and though no mention is
there made of blood, yet Josephus, in agreement with the apostle, asserts (i), that the tabernacle,
and its vessels, were not only anointed with oil, but sprinkled with the blood of bulls and goats,
as well as the garments of Aaron, and his sons: the tabernacle was typical of the church, in which
God dwells, being purified and cleansed by the blood of Christ; and this shows, that there is no
coming into the presence of God, the place where he dwells, without blood.
And all the vessels of the ministry; which were used in the service of the tabernacle these
may denote the vessels of grace and mercy, the elect of God, whose hearts are sprinkled by the
blood of Christ from an evil conscience, and whose garments are washed in it, and made white
by it.
4. PINK, “Verse 21. The apostle now reminds the Hebrews that, not only was the Old
Testament itself dedicated with blood, but that also all the ways and means of solemn
worship were purified by the same. His purpose in bringing in this additional fact was to
prove that not only was the blood of Christ in sacrifice necessary, but also to demonstrate
its efficacy in the removing of sins and thereby qualifying sinners to be worshippers of the
most holy God. The historical reference here is to what is found in Leviticus 16:14, 16, 18.
The spiritual meaning of the tabernacle’s furniture being sprinkled with blood was at least
twofold: first, in themselves those vessels were holy by God’s institution, yet in the use of
them by polluted men, they became defiled, and needed purging. Second, to teach the
Israelites and us that, the very means of grace which we use, are only made acceptable to
God through the merits of Christ’s sacrifice.
What we have just sought to point out above, brings before us a most important and
humbling truth. In all those things wherein we have to do with God, and whereby we
approach unto Him, nothing but the blood of Christ and the Spirit’s application of it unto
our consciences, gives us a gracious acceptance with Him. The best of our performances are
defiled by the flesh; our very prayers and repentances are unclean, and cannot be received
by God except as we plead before Him the precious blood of Christ. "The people were
hereby taught that, God could not be looked to for salvation, nor rightly worshipped,
except faith in every case looked to an intervening blood. For the majesty of God is justly to
be dreaded by us, and the way to His presence is nothing to us but a dangerous labyrinth,
until we know that He is pacified towards us through the blood of Christ, and that this
blood affords to us a free access. All kinds of worship are then faulty and impure until,
Christ cleanses them by the sprinkling of His blood . . . If this thought only came to our
mind, that what we read is not written so much with ink as with the blood of Christ, that
when the Gospel is preached, His sacred blood distils together with the voice, there would
be far greater attention as well as reverence on our part" (John Calvin).

263. 5. JAMISON, "Greek, “And, moreover, in like manner.” The sprinkling of the tabernacle
with blood is added by inspiration here to the account in Exo_30:25-30; Exo_40:9, Exo_40:10,
which mentions only Moses’ anointing the tabernacle and its vessels. In Lev_8:10, Lev_8:15,
Lev_8:30, the sprinkling of blood upon Aaron and his garments, and upon his sons, and upon
the altar, is mentioned as well as the anointing, so that we might naturally infer, as Josephus has
distinctly stated, that the tabernacle and its vessels were sprinkled with blood as well as being
anointed: Lev_16:16, Lev_16:20, Lev_16:33, virtually sanctions this inference. The tabernacle
and its contents needed purification (2Ch_29:21).
6. CALVIN, "
22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be
cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of
blood there is no forgiveness.
1. BARNES, "And almost all things - It is a general custom to purify everything by blood.
This rule was not universal, for some things were purified by fire and water, Num_31:22-23, and
some by water only; Num_31:24; Lev_16:26, Lev_16:28. But the exceptions to the general rule
were few. Almost everything in the tabernacle and temple service, was consecrated or purified
by blood.
And without shedding of blood is no remission - Remission or forgiveness of sins. That
is, though some things were purified by fire and water, yet when the matter pertained to the
forgiveness of sins, it was “universally” true that no sins were pardoned except by the shedding
of blood. Some impurities might be removed by water and fire, but the stain of “sin” could be
removed only by blood. This declaration referred in its primary meaning, to the Jewish rites,
and the sense is, that under that dispensation it was universally true that in order to the
forgiveness of sin blood must be shed. But it contains a truth of higher order and importance
still. “It is universally true that sin never has been, and never will be forgiven, except in
connection with, and in virtue of the shedding of blood.” It is on this principle that the plan of
salvation by the atonement is based, and on this that God in fact bestows pardon upon people.
There is not the slightest evidence that any man has ever been pardoned except through the
blood shed for the remission of sins. The infidel who rejects the atonement has no evidence that
his sins are pardoned; the man who lives in the neglect of the gospel, though he has abundant
evidence that he is a sinner, furnishes none that his sins are forgiven; and the Mussulman and
the pagan can point to no proof that their sins are blotted out. It remains to be demonstrated
that one single member of the human family has ever had the slightest evidence of pardoned sin,
except through the blood of expiation. In the divine arrangement there is no principle better
established than this, that all sin which is forgiven is remitted through the blood of the

264. atonement; a principle which has never been departed from hitherto, and which never will be. It
follows, therefore:
(1) That no sinner can hope for forgiveness except through the blood of Christ;
(2) That if people are ever saved they must be willing to rely on the merits of that blood;
(3) That all people are on a level in regard to salvation, since all are to be saved in the same
way; and,
(4) That there will be one and the same song in heaven - the song of redeeming love.
2. CLARKE, "And almost all things are - purged with blood - The apostle says
almost, because in some cases certain vessels were purified by water, some by fire, Num_31:23,
and some with the ashes of the red heifer, Num_19:2-10, but it was always understood that
every thing was at first consecrated by the blood of the victim.
And without shedding of blood is no remission - The apostle shows fully here what is
one of his great objects in the whole of this epistle, viz. that there is no salvation but through the
sacrificial death of Christ, and to prefigure this the law itself would not grant any remission of
sin without the blood of a victim. This is a maxim even among the Jews themselves, ‫אין‬‫כפרה‬‫אלא‬
‫בדם‬ ein capparah ella bedam, “There is no expiation but by blood.” Yoma, fol. 5, 1; Menachoth,
fol. 93, 2. Every sinner has forfeited his life by his transgressions, and the law of God requires
his death; the blood of the victim, which is its life, is shed as a substitute for the life of the sinner.
By these victims the sacrifice of Christ was typified. He gave his life for the life of the world;
human life for human life, but a life infinitely dignified by its union with God.
3. GILL, "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood,.... All "except a few
things", as the Arabic version renders it; for some things were cleansed by water, and others
purged by fire, Num_31:23. Some join the word almost with the word purged, as if the sense
was, that all things were purged by blood, but not perfectly, only almost; but the former sense is
best.
And without shedding of blood is no remission; that is, of sin; there was no typical
remission without it; and there can be no real remission but by, the blood of Christ; no instance
can be given of pardon without it; if it could have been otherwise, the blood of Christ had not
been shed; for so it would seem to be shed in vain, and his satisfaction to be unnecessary; nor is
it agreeable to the justice of God to forgive sin without satisfaction; nor is it consistent with his
veracity, and faithfulness to his word, Gen_2:17. It is a common saying with the Jews, and often
to be met with in their writings, ‫אין‬‫כפרה‬‫אלא‬‫בדם‬ , "there is no atonement but by blood" (k); by
the shedding of blood; not by the shedding of it, as it flows out of the body of the sacrifice, but as
it is poured out on the altar; for the pouring of the blood at the four corners, and at the bottom
of the altar, were the chief rites required in sacrifices; nor did they reckon expiation to be
expiation, unless the altar was moistened by the blood of the sacrifice (l).
4. PINK, “Verse 22. "By the law" signifies "according unto the law," that is,
according to its institution and rule, in that way of faith and obedience which the people
were obligated unto. This has been shown by the apostle in the verses preceding. His
design being to prove both the necessity for the death of Christ and the efficacy of His

265. blood unto the purging of sins, whereof the legal institutions were types. The qualifying
"almost" takes into consideration the exceptions of "fire" (Num. 31:23) and "water" (Lev.
22:6, 7, etc.): but let it be carefully noted that these exceptions were of such things as
wherein the worship of God was not immediately concerned, nor where the conscience
was defiled; they were only of external pollutions, by things in their own nature
indifferent, having nothing of sin in them; yet were they designed as warnings against
things which did defile. The "almost" also takes note of the exception in Leviticus 5:11.
The last clause of verse 22 enunciates an axiom universally true, and in every age.
The curse of the law was, and still is, "the soul that sinneth it shall die" (Ezek. 18:20).
But whereas there is no man "that sinneth not" (Ecclesiastes 7:20), God, in His grace,
provided that there should be a testification of the remission of sins, and that the curse
of the law should not be immediately executed on them that sinned. This He did by
allowing the people to make atonement for those sins by the blood of sacrifices:
Leviticus 17:11. Thereby God made known two things. First, to the Israelites that, by the
blood of animals there should be a political or temporal remission of their sins granted,
so that they should not die under the sentence of that law which was the rule of
government over their nation. Second, that a real spiritual and eternal forgiveness
should be granted unto faith in the sacrifice of Christ, which was represented by the
slain animals. The present application of this verse is that, no salvation is possible for
any soul that rejects the sacrifice of Christ.
5. JAMISON, "almost — to be joined with “all things,” namely almost all things under the
old dispensation. The exceptions to all things being purified by blood are, Exo_19:10; Lev_15:5,
etc.; Lev_16:26, Lev_16:28; Lev_22:6; Num_31:22-24.
without — Greek, “apart from.”
shedding of blood — shed in the slaughter of the victim, and poured out at the altar
subsequently. The pouring out of the blood on the altar is the main part of the sacrifice
(Lev_17:11), and it could not have place apart from the previous shedding of the blood in the
slaying. Paul has, perhaps, in mind here, Luk_22:20, “This cup is the new testament in my
blood, which is shed for you.”
is — Greek, “takes place”: comes to pass.
remission — of sins: a favorite expression of Luke, Paul’s companion. Properly used of
remitting a debt (Mat_6:12; Mat_18:27, Mat_18:32); our sins are debts. On the truth here,
compare Lev_5:11-13, an exception because of poverty, confirming the general rule.
6. CALVIN, "And almost all things, etc. By saying almost he seems to imply that
some things were otherwise purified. And doubtless they often washed
themselves and other unclean things with water. But even water itself
derived its power to cleanse from the sacrifices; so that the Apostle
at length truly declares that without blood there was no remission.
[156] Then uncleanness was imputed until it was expiated by a
sacrifice. And as without Christ there is no purity nor salvation, so
nothing without blood can be either pure or saving; for Christ is never
to be separated from the sacrifice of his death. But the Apostle meant

266. only to say that this symbol was almost always made use of. But if at
any time the purgation was not so made, it was nevertheless through
blood, since all the rites derived their efficacy in a manner from the
general expiation. For the people were not each of them sprinkled, (for
how could so small a portion of blood be sufficient for so large a
multitude?) yet the purgation extended to all. Hence the particle
almost signifies the same as though he had said, that the use of this
rite was so common that they seldom omitted it in purgations. For what
Chrysostom says, that unfitness is thus denoted, because these were
only figures under the Law, is inconsistent with the Apostle's design.
No remission, etc. Thus men are prevented from appearing before God;
for as he is justly displeased with them all, there is no ground for
them to promise themselves any favor until he is pacified. But there is
but one way of pacification, and that is by an expiation made by blood:
hence no pardon of sins can be hoped for unless we bring blood, and
this is done when we flee by faith to the death of Christ.
7. SPURGEON, “EVERYWHERE under the old figurative dispensation, blood was sure to
greet your eyes. It was the one most prominent thing under the Jewish economy, scarcely a
ceremony was observed without it. You could not enter into any part of the tabernacle, but
you saw traces of the blood-sprinkling. Sometimes there were bowls of blood cast at the
foot of the altar. The place looked so like a shambles, that to visit it must have been far
from attractive to the natural taste, and to delight in it, a man had need of a spiritual
understanding and a lively faith. The slaughter of animals was the manner of worship; the
effusion of blood was the appointed rite, and the diffusion of that blood on the floor, on the
curtains, and on the vestments of the priests, was the constant memorial. When Paul says
that almost all things were, under the law, purged with blood, he alludes to a few things
that were exempted. Thus you will find in several passages the people were exhorted to
wash their clothes, and certain persons who had been unclean from physical causes were
bidden to wash their clothes with water. Garments worn by men were usually cleansed
with water. After the defeat of the Midianites, of which you read in the book of Numbers,
the spoil, which had been polluted, had to be purified before it was claimed by the
victorious Israelites. According to the ordinance of the law, which the Lord commanded
Moses, some of the goods, such as raiment and articles made of skins or goat's hair, were
purified with water, while other things that were of metal that could abide the fire, were
purified by fire. Still, the apostle refers to a literal fact, when he says that almost all things,
garments being the only exception, were purged, under the law, with blood. Then he refers
to it as a general truth, under the old legal dispensation, that there was never any
pardoning of sin, except by blood. In one case only was there an apparent exception, and
even that goes to prove the universality of the rule, because the reason for the exception is
so fully given. The trespass offering, referred to as an alternative, in Leviticus 5:11, might,
in extreme cases of excessive poverty, be a bloodless offering. If a man was too poor to
bring an offering from the flock, he was to bring two turtle-doves or young pigeons; but if
he was too poor even for that, he might offer the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a
sin offering, without oil or frankincense, and it was cast upon the fire. That is the one

267. solitary exception through all the types. In every place, at every time, in every instance
where sin had to be removed, blood must flow, life must be given. The one exception we
have noticed gives emphasis to the statute that, "without shedding of blood, there is no
remission." Under the gospel there is no exception, not such an isolated one as there was
under the law; no, not even for the extremely poor. Such we all are spiritually. Since we
have not any of us to bring an offering, any more than an offering to bring; but we have all
of us to take the offering which has already been presented, and to accept the sacrifice
which Christ has, of himself, made in our stead; there is now no cause or ground for
exemption to any man or woman born, nor ever shall there be, either in this world or in
that which is to come,—"Without shedding of blood, there is no remission." With great
simplicity, then, as it concerns our salvation, may I ask the attention of each one here
present, to this great matter which intimately concerns our everlasting interests? I gather
from the text, first of all, the encouraging fact that:—
I. THERE IS SUCH A THING AS REMISSION—that is to say, the remission of sins.
"Without shedding of blood there is no remission." Blood has been shed, and there is,
therefore, hope concerning such a thing. Remission, notwithstanding the stern
requirements of the law, is not to be abandoned in sheer despair. The word remission
means the putting away of debts. Just as sin may be regarded as a debt incurred to God, so
that debt may be blotted out, cancelled, and obliterated. The sinner, God's debtor, may
cease to be in debt by compensation, by full acquittance, and may be set free by virtue of
such remission. Such a thing is possible. Glory be to God, the remission of all sin, of which
it is possible to repent, is possible to be obtained. Whatever the transgression of any man
may be, pardon is possible to him if repentance be possible to him. Unrepented sin is
unforgivable sin. If he confess his sin and forsake it, then shall he find mercy. God hath so
declared it, and he will not be unfaithful to his word. "But is there not," saith one, "a sin
which is unto death?" Yea, verily, though I know not what it is; nor do we think that any
who have enquired into the subject have been able to discover what that sin is; this much
seems clear, that practically the sin is unforgivable because it is never repented of. The man
who commits it becomes, to all intents and purposes, dead in sin in a more deep and lasting
sense even than the human race is as a whole, and he is given up case-hardened—his
conscience seared, as it were, with a hot iron, and henceforth he will seek no mercy. But all
manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men. For lust, for robbery, for
adultery—yea, for murder, there is forgiveness with God, that he may be feared. He is the
Lord God, merciful and gracious, passing by transgression, iniquity, and sin.
And this forgiveness which is possible is, according to the Scriptures, complete; that is to
say, when God forgives a man his sin, he does it outright. He blots out the debt without any
back reckoning. He does not put away a part of the man's sin, and have him accountable
for the rest; but in the moment in which a sin is forgiven, his iniquity is as though it had
never been committed; he is received in the Father's house and embraced with the Father's
love as if he had never erred; he is made to stand before God as accepted, and in the same
condition as though he had never transgressed. Blessed be God, believer, there is no sin in
God's Book against thee. If thou hast believed, thou art forgiven— forgiven not partially,
but altogether. The handwriting that was against thee is blotted out, nailed to the cross of
Christ, and can never be pleaded against thee any more for ever. The pardon is complete.
Moreover, this is a present pardon. It is an imagination of some (very derogatory to the
gospel) that you cannot get pardon till you come to die, and, perhaps, then in some

268. mysterious way, in the last few minutes, you may be absolved; but we preach to you, in the
name of Jesus, immediate and present pardon for all transgressions—a pardon given in an
instant—the moment that a sinner believes in Jesus; not as though a disease were healed
gradually and required months and long years of progress. True, the corruption of our
nature is such a disease, and the sin that dwelleth in us must be daily and hourly mortified;
but as for the guilt of our transgressions before God, and the debt incurred to his justice,
the remission thereof is not a thing of progress and degree. The pardon of a sinner is
granted at once; it will be given to any of you tonight who accept it—yea, and given you in
such a way that you shall never lose it. Once forgiven, you shall be forgiven for ever, and
none of the consequences of sin shall be visited upon you. You shall be absolved
unreservedly and eternally, so that when the heavens are on a blaze, and the great white
throne is set up, and the last great assize is held, you may stand boldly before the
judgment-seat and fear no accusation, for the forgiveness which God himself vouchsafes he
will never revoke.
I will add to this one other remark. The man who gets this pardon may know he has it.
Did he merely hope he had it, that hope might often struggle with fear. Did he merely trust
he had it, many a qualm might startle him; but to know that he has it is a sure ground of
peace to the heart. Glory be to God, the privileges of the covenant of grace are not only
matters of hope and surmise, but they are matters of faith, conviction, and assurance.
Count it not presumption for a man to believe God's Word. God's own Word it is that says,
"Whosoever believeth in Jesus Christ is not condemned." If I believe in Jesus Christ, then I
am not condemned. What right have I to think I am? If God says I am not, it would be
presumption on my part to think I am condemned. It cannot be presumption to take God's
Word just as he gives it to me. "Oh!" saith one, "how happy should I be if this might be my
case." Thou hast well spoken, for blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, and whose
sin is covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord doth not impute iniquity. "But," saith
another, "I should hardly think such a great thing could be possible to such an one as I
am." Thou reasonest after the manner of the sons of men. Know then that as high as the
heavens are above the earth, so high are God's ways above your ways, and his thoughts
above your thoughts. It is yours to err; it is God's to forgive. You err like a man, but God
does not pardon like a man; he pardons like a God, so that we burst forth with wonder,
and sing, "Who is a God like unto thee, that passeth by transgression, iniquity, and sin?"
When you make anything, it is some little work suitable to your abilities, but our God made
the heavens. When you forgive, it is some forgiveness suitable to your nature and
circumstances; but when he forgives, he displays the riches of his grace on a grander scale
than your finite mind can comprehend. Ten thousand sins of blackest dye, sins of a hellish
hue he doth in a moment put away, for he delighteth in mercy; and judgment is his strange
work. "As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, but had
rather that he turn unto me and live." This is a joyful note with which my text furnishes
me. There is no remission, except with blood; but there is remission, for the blood has been
shed.
Coming more closely to the text, we have now to insist on its great lesson, that:—
II. THOUGH THERE BE PARDON OF SIN, IT IS NEVER WITHOUT BLOOD.
That is a sweeping sentence, for there are some in this world that are trusting for the
pardon of sin to their repentance. It, beyond question, is your duty to repent of your sin. If
you have disobeyed God, you should be sorry for it. To cease from sin is but the duty of the

269. creature, else sin is not the violation of God's holy law. But be it known unto you, that all
the repentance in the world cannot blot out the smallest sin. If you had only one sinful
thought cross your mind, and you should grieve over that all the days of your life, yet the
stain of that sin could not be removed even by the anguish it cost you. Where repentance is
the work of the Spirit of God, it is a very precious gift, and is a sign of grace; but there is no
atoning power in repentance. In a sea full of penitential tears, there is not the power or the
virtue to wash out one spot of this hideous uncleanness. Without the blood-shedding, there
is no remission. But others suppose that, at any rate, active reformation growing out of
repentance may achieve the task. What if drunkenness be given up, and temperance
become the rule? What if licentiousness be abandoned, and chastity adorn the character?
What if dishonest dealing be relinquished, and integrity be scrupulously maintained in
every action? I say, 'tis well; I would to God such reformations took place everywhere—yet
for all that, debts already incurred are not paid by our not getting into debt further, and
past delinquencies are not condoned by future good behaviour. So sin is not remitted by
reformation. Though you should suddenly become immaculate as angels (not that such a
thing is possible to you, for the Ethiopian cannot change his skin, nor the leopard his spots),
your reformations could make no atonement to God for the sins that are past in the days
that you have transgressed against him. "What then," saith the man, "shall I do?" There
are those who think that now their prayers and their humblings of soul may, perhaps,
effect something for them. Your prayers, if they be sincere, I would not stay; rather do I
hope they may be such prayers as betoken spiritual life. But oh! dear hearer, there is no
efficacy in prayer to blot out sin. I will put it strongly. All the prayers of all the saints on
earth, and, if the saints in heaven could all join, all their prayers could not blot out through
their own natural efficacy the sin of a single evil word. No, there is no deterrent power in
prayer. God has never set it to be a cleanser. It has its uses, and its valuable uses. It is one
of the privileges of the man who prays, that he prays acceptably, but prayer itself can never
blot out the sin without the blood. "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission,"
pray as you may.
There are persons who have thought that self-denial and mortifications of an
extraordinary kind might rid them of their guilt. We do not often come across such people
in our circle, yet there be those who, in order to purge themselves of sin, flagellate their
bodies, observe protracted fasts, wear sackcloth and hair shirts next to their skin, and even
some have gone so far as to imagine that to refrain from ablutions, and to allow their body
to be filthy, was the readiest mode of purifying their soul. A strange infatuation certainly!
Yet today, in Hindostan, you shall find the fakir passing his body through marvellous
sufferings and distortions, in the hope of getting rid of sin. To what purpose is it all?
Methinks I hear the Lord say, "What is this to me that thou didst bow thy head like a
bulrush, and wrapt thyself in sackcloth, and eat ashes with thy bread, and mingle
wormwood with thy drink? Thou hast broken my law; these things cannot repair it; thou
hast done injury to my honour by thy sin; but where is the righteousness that reflects
honour upon my name?" The old cry in the olden days was, "Wherewithal shall we come
before God?" and they said, "Shall we give our firstborn for our transgression, the fruit of
our body for the sin of our soul?" Alas! it was all in vain. Here stands the sentence. Here
for ever must it stand, "Without shedding of blood there is no remission." It is the life God
demands as the penalty due for sin, and nothing but the life indicated in the blood-shedding
will ever satisfy him.

270. Observe, again, how this sweeping text puts away all confidence in ceremony, even the
ceremonies of God's own ordinance. There are some who suppose that sin can be washed
away in baptism. Ah! futile fancy! The expression where it is once used in Scripture implies
nothing of the kind—it has no such meaning as some attach to it, for that very apostle, of
whom it was said, gloried that he had not baptized many persons lest they should suppose
there was some efficacy in his administration of the rite. Baptism is an admirable
ordinance, in which the believer holds fellowship with Christ in his death. It is a symbol; it
is nothing more. Tens of thousands and millions have been baptized and have died in their
sins. Or what profit is there in the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass, as Antichrist puts it? Do
any say it is "an unbloody sacrifice," yet at the same time offer it for a propitiation for
sin—we fling this text in their faces, "Without shedding of blood there is no remission." Do
they reply that the blood is there in the body of Christ? We answer that even were it so,
that would not meet the case, for it is without the shedding of blood—without the
blood-shedding; the blood as distinct from the flesh; without the shedding of blood there is
no remission of sin.
And here I must pass on to make a distinction that will go deeper still. Jesus Christ
himself cannot save us, apart from his blood. It is a supposition which only folly has ever
made, but we must refute even the hypothesis of folly, when it affirms that the example of
Christ can put away human sin, that the holy life of Jesus Christ has put the race on such a
good footing with God that now he can forgive its faults and its transgression. Not so; not
the holiness of Jesus, not the life of Jesus, not the death of Jesus, but the blood of Jesus
only; for "Without shedding of blood there is no remission."
And I have met with some who think so much of the second coming of Christ, that they
seem to have fixed their entire faith upon Christ in his glory. I believe this to be the fault of
Irvingism—that, too much it holds before the sinner's eye Christ on the throne, whereas,
though Christ on the throne is ever the loved and adorable, yet we must see Christ upon the
cross, or we never can be saved. Thy faith must not be placed merely in Christ glorified,
but in Christ crucified. "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus
Christ." "We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks
foolishness." I remember one person who was united with this church (the dear sister may
be present now), that had been for some years a professor, and had never enjoyed peace
with God, nor produced any of the fruits of the Spirit. She said, "I have been in a church
where I was taught to rest upon Christ glorified, and I did so fix my confidence, such as it
was, upon him, that I neither had a sense of sin, nor a sense of pardon, from Christ
crucified! I did not know, and until I had seen him as shedding his blood and making a
propitiation, I never entered into rest." Yes, we will say it again, for the text is vitally
important: "Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission," not even with Christ
himself. It is the sacrifice that he has offered for us, that is the means of putting away our
sin—this, and nothing else. Let us pass on a little further with the same truth:—
III. THIS REMISSION OF SIN IS TO BE FOUND AT THE FOOT OF THE CROSS.
There is remission to be had through Jesus Christ, whose blood was shed. The hymn we
sang at the commencement of the service gave you the marrow of the doctrine. We owe to
God a debt of punishment for sin. Was that debt due or not? If the law was right, the
penalty ought to be exacted. If the penalty was too severe, and the law inaccurate, then God
made a mistake. But it is blasphemy to suppose that. The law, then, being a righteous law,
and the penalty just, shall God do an unjust thing? It will be an unjust thing for him not to

271. carry out the penalty. Would you have him to be unjust? He had declared that the soul that
sinned should die; would you have God to be a liar? Shall he eat his words to save his
creatures? "Let God be true, and every man a liar." The law's sentence must be carried
out. It was inevitable that if God maintained the prerogative of his holiness, he must punish
the sins that men have committed. How, then, should he save us? Behold the plan! His dear
Son, the Lord of glory, takes upon himself human nature, comes into the place of as many
as the Father gave him, stands in their standing, and when the sentence of justice has been
proclaimed, and the sword of vengeance has leaped out of its scabbard, behold the glorious
Substitute bares his arm, and he says, "Strike, O sword, but strike me, and let my people
go." Into the very soul of Jesus the sword of the law pierced, and his blood was shed, the
blood, not of one who was man only, but of One who, by his being an eternal Spirit was
able to offer up himself without spot unto God, in a way which gave infinite efficacy to his
sufferings. He, through the eternal Spirit, we are told, offered himself without spot to God.
Being in his own nature infinitely beyond the nature of man, comprehending all the natures
of man, as it were, within himself, by reason of the majesty of his person, he was able to
offer an atonement to God of infinite, boundless, inconceivable sufficiency.
What our Lord suffered none of us can tell. I am sure of this: I would not disparage or
under-estimate his physical sufferings—the tortures he endured in his body—but I am
equally sure that we can none of us exaggerate or over-value the sufferings of such a soul as
his; they are beyond all conception. So pure and so perfect, so exquisitely sensitive, and so
immaculately holy was he, that to be numbered with transgressors, to be smitten by his
Father, to die (shall I say it?) the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers, was
the very essence of bitterness, the consummation of anguish. "Yet it pleased the Father to
bruise him; he hath put him to grief." His sorrows in themselves were what the Greek
liturgy well calls them, "unknown sufferings, great griefs." Hence, too, their efficacy is
boundless, without limit. Now, therefore, God is able to forgive sin. He has punished the sin
on Christ; it becomes justice, as well as mercy, that God should blot out those debts which
have been paid. It were unjust—I speak with reverence, but yet with holy boldness—it
were unjust on the part of the infinite Majesty, to lay to my charge a single sin which was
laid to the charge of my Substitute. If my Surety took my sin, he released me, and I am
clear. Who shall resuscitate judgment against me when I have been condemned in the
person of my Saviour? Who shall commit me to the flames of Gehenna, when Christ, my
Substitute, has suffered the tantamount of hell for me? Who shall lay anything to my
charge when Christ has had all my crimes laid to his charge, answered for them, expiated
them, and received the token of quittance from them, in that he was raised from the dead
that he might openly vindicate that justification in which by grace I am called and
privileged to share? This is all very simple, it lies in a nutshell, but do we all receive
it—have we all accepted it? Oh! my dear hearers, the text is full of warning to some of you.
You may have an amiable disposition, an excellent character, a serious turn of mind, but
you scruple at accepting Christ; you stumble at this stumbling-stone; you split on this rock.
How can I meet your hapless case? I shall not reason with you. I forbear to enter into any
argument. I ask you one question. Do you believe this Bible to be inspired of God? Look,
then, at that passage, "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission." What say
you? Is it not plain, absolute, conclusive? Allow me to draw the inference. If you have not
an interest in the blood-shedding, which I have briefly endeavoured to describe, is there
any remission for you? Can there be? Your own sins are on your head now. Of your hand

272. shall they be demanded at the coming of the great Judge. You may labour, you may toil,
you may be sincere in your convictions, and quiet in your conscience, or you may be tossed
about with your scruples; but as the Lord liveth, there is no pardon for you, except through
this shedding of blood. Do you reject it? On your own head will lie the peril! God has
spoken. It cannot be said that your ruin is designed by him when your own remedy is
revealed by him.
He bids you take the way which he appoints, and if you reject it, you must die. Your death
is suicide, be it deliberate, accidental, or through error of judgment. Your blood be on your
own head. You are warned.
On the other hand, what a far-reaching consolation the text gives us! "Without shedding
of blood there is no remission," but where there is the blood-shedding, there is remission. If
thou hast come to Christ, thou art saved. If thou canst say from thy very heart:—
"My faith doth lay her hand
On that dear head of thine,
While like a penitent I stand,
And here confess my sin."
Then, your sin is gone. Where is that young man? where is that young woman? where are
those anxious hearts that have been saying, "We would be pardoned now"? Oh! look, look,
look, look to the crucified Saviour, and you are pardoned. Ye may go your way, inasmuch
as you have accepted God's atonement. Daughter, be of good cheer, thy sins, which are
many, are forgiven thee. Son, rejoice, for thy transgressions are blotted out.
My last word shall be this. You that are teachers of others and trying to do good, cleave
fast to this doctrine. Let this be the front, the centre, the pith, and the marrow of all you
have to testify. I often preach it, but there is never a Sabbath in which I go to my bed with
such inward content as when I have preached the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ. Then I
feel, "If sinners are lost, I have none of their blood upon me." This is the soul-saving
doctrine; grip it, and you shall have laid hold of eternal life; reject it, and you reject it to
your confusion. Oh! keep to this. Martin Luther used to say that every sermon ought to
have the doctrine of justification by faith in it. True; but let it have the doctrine of
atonement in it. He says he could not get the doctrine of justification by faith in to the
Wurtembergers' heads, and he felt half inclined to take the book into the pulpit and fling it
at their heads, in order to get it in. I am afraid he would not have succeeded if he had. But
oh! how would I try to hammer again, and again, and again upon this one nail, "The blood
is the life thereof." "When I see the blood, I will pass over you."
Christ giving up his life in pouring out his blood—it is this that gives pardon and peace to
every one of you, if you will but look to him— pardon now, complete pardon; pardon for
ever. Look away from all other confidences, and rely upon the sufferings and the death of
the Incarnate God, who has gone into the heavens, and who lives today to plead before his
Father's throne, the merit of the blood which, on Calvary, he poured forth for sinners. As I
shall meet you all in that great day, when the crucified One shall come as the King and
Lord of all, which day is hastening on apace, as I shall meet you then, I pray you bear me
witness that I have striven to tell you in all simplicity what is the way of salvation; and if
you reject it, do me this favour, to say that at least I have proffered to you in Jehovah's
name this, his gospel, and have earnestly urged you to accept it, that you may be saved. But
the rather I would God that I might meet you there, all covered in the one atonement,

273. clothed in the one righteousness, and accepted in the one Savior, and then together will we
sing, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, and hath redeemed us to God by his blood to
receive honour, and power, and dominion for ever and ever." Amen.
23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the
heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but
the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices
than these.
1. BARNES, "The patterns of things in the heavens - The tabernacle and its various
utensils; see the notes on Heb_8:5.
Be purified with these - With water and blood, and by these ceremonies.
But the heavenly things themselves - The heavenly tabernacle or sanctuary into which
Christ has entered, and where he performs the functions of his ministry. The use of the word
“purified” here applied to heaven, does not imply that heaven was before “unholy,” but it
denotes that it is now made accessible to sinners; or that they may come and worship there in an
acceptable manner. The ancient tabernacle was purified or consecrated by the blood of the
victims slain, so that people might approach with acceptance and worship; the heavens by purer
blood are rendered accessible to the guilty. The necessity for “better sacrifices” in regard to the
latter was, that it was designed to make the conscience pure, and because the service in heaven
is more holy than any rendered on earth.
With better sacrifices than these - To wit, the sacrifice made by the offering of the Lord
Jesus on the cross. This infinitely surpassed in value all that had been offered under the Jewish
dispensation.
2. CLARKE, "The patterns of things in the heavens - That is: The tabernacle and all its
utensils, services, etc., must be purified by these, viz.: The blood of calves and goats, and the
sprinkling of the blood and water with the bunch of hyssop bound about with scarlet wool. These
are called patterns, ᆓποδειγµατα, exemplars, earthly things, which were the representatives of
heavenly things. And there is no doubt that every thing in the tabernacle, its parts, divisions,
utensils, ministry, etc., as appointed by God, were representations of celestial matters; but how
far and in what way we cannot now see.
Purification implies, not only cleansing from defilement, but also dedication or consecration.
All the utensils employed in the tabernacle service were thus purified though incapable of any
moral pollution.
But the heavenly things themselves -

274. 1. Some think this means heaven itself, which, by receiving the sacrificed body of Christ,
which appears in the presence of God for us, may be said to be purified, i.e., set apart for
the reception of the souls of those who have found redemption in his blood.
2. Others think the body of Christ is intended, which is the tabernacle in which his Divinity
dwelt; and that this might be said to be purified by its own sacrifice, as he is said,
Joh_17:19, to sanctify himself; that is, to consecrate himself unto God as a sin-offering for
the redemption of man.
3. Others suppose the Church is intended, which he is to present to the Father without spot
or wrinkle or any such thing.
4. As the entrance to the holy of holies must be made by the sprinkling of the blood of the
sacrifice, and as that holy of holies represented heaven, the apostle’s meaning seems to be
that there was and could be no entrance to the holiest but through his blood; and
therefore, when by a more perfect tabernacle, Heb_9:11, Heb_9:12, he passed into the
heavens, not with the blood of bulls and goats, but by his own blood, he thus purified or
laid open the entrance to the holiest, by a more valuable sacrifice than those required to
open the entrance of the holy of holies. It was necessary, therefore, for God had appointed
it so, that the tabernacle and its parts, etc., which were patterns of things in the heavens,
should be consecrated and entered with such sacrifices as have already been mentioned;
but the heaven of heavens into which Jesus entered, and whither he will bring all his
faithful followers, must be propitiated, consecrated, and entered, by the infinitely better
sacrifice of his own body and blood. That this is the meaning appears from the following
verse.
3. GILL, "It was therefore necessary,.... On account of the divine appointment, and that
types and antitypes might correspond; and especially it was necessary with respect to the
Messiah, the substance and body of all types. So Jonathan ben Uzziel paraphrases the text in
Exo_40:9,
"and thou shalt take the anointing oil, and thou shalt anoint the tabernacle, and all that is in it;
and thou shall sanctify it, ‫,מטול‬ because of the crown of the kingdom of the house of Judah, and
the King Messiah, who shall redeem Israel in the latter days.''
Upon his account it was necessary,
that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; that is, that
all the people, and the book of the covenant, and the tabernacle, and its vessels, which were
types and patterns of persons and things in Gospel churches, should be purified with blood and
water, and with scarlet wool and hyssop.
But the heavenly things themselves, with better sacrifices than these; the sum and
substance of the above patterns, shadows, and examples, such as heaven itself; which though
not impure in itself, yet some think it, may be said to be purified, because saints are made meet
for it, by being purged with the blood of Christ; others observe, that sin reaches to heaven, and
provokes God that dwells there; hence atonement for it may be called a purification of heaven:
but rather this may be said of it, inasmuch as by the blood of Christ an entrance and preparation
is made for the saints into it. Likewise, the human nature of Christ is among these heavenly
things; not that it is heavenly, as to the matter and substance of it, but may be so called, because

275. of its wonderful formation; and which has been purified, not from any real internal pollution
that was in it, but from what was imputed to it, the sin of his people. Also the whole church,
triumphant and militant, may be intended by heavenly things: the Old Testament saints went to
heaven before Christ came; and though they were not impure, but were the spirits of just men
made perfect, yet their iniquities were purged by the blood and sacrifice of Christ, after they
were gone to heaven; see Heb_9:15. The church militant, or believers on earth, may be said to be
heavenly, since they are partakers of an heavenly birth and calling; their head is in heaven, and
their conversation is there; and they have a right unto it, and are making meet for it; and they
are in themselves defiled with sin, and are purified by the blood of Christ, and sanctified by the
offering up of his body once for all: to which may be added, that spiritual blessings are heavenly
things; they are from heaven, and saints are blessed with them in heavenly places and these
come to them through the blood and sacrifice of Christ; yea, the Gospel, which is from heaven,
and the doctrines of it, are sealed and confirmed by the blood of Christ: his sacrifice is expressed
in the plural number; not that there has been a repetition of it, for it is but one sacrifice, and but
once offered up, and will never be reiterated; but to show the excellency of it, being usual with
the Jews to use the plural number of things the most excellent; so Christ is called "Wisdoms",
Pro_1:20 besides, respect may be had to the many sacrifices under the law, which were types of
it, and were answered and fulfilled by it; and to the many persons on whose account it was
offered; and to the parts of it, the soul and body of Christ: and this is a better sacrifice than the
legal ones, in its own nature and in its use and efficacy to take away sin, and make perfect, which
they could not.
4. HENRY, "In this last part of the chapter, the apostle goes on to tell us what the Holy Ghost
has signified to us by the legal purifications of the patterns of the things in heaven, inferring
thence the necessity of better sacrifices to consecrate the heavenly things themselves.
I. The necessity of purifying the patterns of the things in heaven, Heb_9:23. This necessity
arises both from the divine appointment, which must always be obeyed, and from the reason of
that appointment, which was to preserve a proper resemblance between the things typifying and
the things typified. It is observable here that the sanctuary of God on earth is a pattern of
heaven, and communion with God in his sanctuary is to his people a heaven upon earth.
II. The necessity that the heavenly things themselves should be purified with better sacrifices
than of bulls and goats; the things themselves are better than the patterns, and must therefore
be consecrated with better sacrifices. These heavenly things are the privileges of the gospel state,
begun in grace, perfected in glory. These must be ratified by a suitable sanction or consecration;
and this was the blood of Christ. Now it is very evident that the sacrifice of Christ is infinitely
better than those of the law.
5. JAMISON, "patterns — “the suggestive representations”; the typical copies (see on
Heb_8:5).
things in the heavens — the heavenly tabernacle and the things therein.
purified with these — with the blood of bulls and goats.
heavenly things themselves — the archetypes. Man’s sin had introduced an element of
disorder into the relations of God and His holy angels in respect to man. The purification
removes this element of disorder and changes God’s wrath against man in heaven (designed to
be the place of God’s revealing His grace to men and angels) into a smile of reconciliation.
Compare “peace in heaven” (Luk_19:38). “The uncreated heaven of God, though in itself
untroubled light, yet needed a purification in so far as the light of love was obscured by the fire
of wrath against sinful man” [Delitzsch in Alford]. Contrast Rev_12:7-10. Christ’s atonement
had the effect also of casting Satan out of heaven (Luk_10:18; Joh_12:31, compare Heb_2:14).
Christ’s body, the true tabernacle (see on Heb_8:2; see on Heb_9:11), as bearing our imputed

276. sin (2Co_5:21), was consecrated (Joh_17:17, Joh_17:19) and purified by the shedding of His
blood to be the meeting place of God and man.
sacrifices — The plural is used in expressing the general proposition, though strictly
referring to the one sacrifice of Christ once for all. Paul implies that His one sacrifice, by its
matchless excellency, is equivalent to the Levitical many sacrifices. It, though but one, is
manifold in its effects and applicability to many.
6.ALEX PETERSON, What does the phrase “copies of the things in the heavens” imply
(9:23)?
This verse is talking about the earthly tabernacle. It, and the things in it, and the things of
it, are all apparently copies of the things in Heaven. Therefore, there must be a tabernacle
or temple in Heaven. Those earthly things were sanctified by earthly blood, that is, set
apart. But this verse is telling us that it was not possible that those earthly bulls and goats
could satisfy or sanctify the True Elements of the True Tabernacle in Heaven and that that
would require a Better Sacrifice. Therefore, we are talking about Jesus being a Better
Sacrifice, a Perfect Sacrifice, for a Perfect Temple, in a Perfect Place, for a Perfect
God. Our worship, our tabernacles, our Old Testament practices, and many of our New
Testament practices are copies of their True Counterparts in Heaven.
7. CALVIN, "The patterns, or exemplars, etc. Lest any one should object and say
that the blood by which the old testament was dedicated was different
from that of a testator, the Apostle meets this objection, and says
that it was no wonder that the tabernacle which was earthly was
consecrated by the sacrificing of beasts; for there was an analogy and
a likeness between the purification and the things purified. But the
heavenly pattern or exemplar of which he now speaks was to be
consecrated in a very different way; there was here no need of goats or
of calves. It hence follows that the death of the testator was
necessary.
The meaning then is this, -- as under the Law there were only earthly
images of spiritual things, so the rite of expiation was also, so to
speak, carnal and figurative; but as the heavenly pattern allows of
nothing earthly, so it requires another blood than that of beasts, such
as may correspond with its excellency. Thus the death of the testator
is necessary, in order that the testament may be really consecrated.
He calls the kingdom of Christ heavenly things, [157] for it is
spiritual and possesses a full revelation of the truth. Better
sacrifices he mentions instead of "a better sacrifice," for it was only
one; but he uses the plural number for the sake of the antithesis or
contrast.
__________________________________________________________________

277. [153] It is worthy of notice that the Apostle mentions here several
things which are not particularly by Moses in Exodus 24:3-8, where the
account is given; and yet what is there stated sufficiently warrants
the particulars mentioned here. The blood of "goats" is not mentioned,
and yet burnt offerings are said to have been offered, and goats were
so offered; see Leviticus 1:10. Moses says nothing of "scarlet wool and
hyssop;" but he mentions "sprinkling," and this was commonly done
thereby; see Leviticus 14:51. "Blood" only is mentioned by Moses; but
we find that when sprinkled, "water" was often connected with it. See
Leviticus 14:52; Numbers 19:18 The main difficulty is respecting "the
book" being sprinkled, which is not stated by Moses. But as the altar
was sprinkled, there was the same reason for sprinkling the book,
though that is not expressly mentioned. However, it is evident that
this was the general opinion among the Jews, for otherwise the Apostle
would not have mentioned it in an Epistle especially addressed to them.
Then the "tabernacle," it was not expressly mentioned that it was
sprinkled with blood when consecrated; and this was some time after the
covenant was made. The setting up of the tabernacle is mentioned in
Exodus 40:17-33. In the previous verses, 9 and 10, there is a direction
given to anoint the tabernacle, and all its vessels, and also to hallow
them and to anoint the alter, and to sanctify it. The hallowing or
sanctifying was no doubt done by sprinkling them with blood. See as a
proof of this Exodus 29:21. We hence perceive how well acquainted the
writer must have been with the Jewish rituals. -- Ed.
[154] Both Calvin and our verse retain the word "testament" as derived
from verse 17; but as that verse and the preceding are to be viewed as
parenthetic, the word "covenant" is the term used by Moses. The latter
is the word adopted by Beza, Doddridge, Macknight, and Stuart, "This is
the blood of the covenant," etc. -- Ed.
[155] The Apostle here follows neither the Hebrew nor the Septuagint.
The Hebrew is "which the Lord (Jehovah) hath made with you;" and the
Septuagint, "Which the Lord hath covenanted (dietheto) with you." And
instead of "Behold the blood of the covenant," (the same in both) we
have here, "This is the blood of the covenant." But though the words
are different, yet the meaning is essentially the same, -- the main
things regarded by the Apostles in their quotations. -- Ed
[156] Metals were purified by fire, and clothes by being washed in
water, (Numbers 31:22-24;) but these were purifications not accompanied
with remission of sins. So that what is said here is literally true. --
Ed.
[157] By making "heavenly things" to mean things in heaven above, and
not in the kingdom of heaven on earth, commentators have been under the

278. necessity of altering the sense of the word "purified." The tabernacle
represented the whole kingdom of Christ, both on earth and in heaven.
The sanctuary and the court, where the alter of burnt offering was,
represented what Christ has done and is doing on earth; and the holy of
holies was a representation of Christ's kingdom in heaven. The victims
were slain in the court without the vail; the shedding of blood was the
atonement, but its sprinkling was its purifying and sanctifying
effects. All the heavenly things in the Church on earth require
purifying by the sprinkling of the blood of the atoning sacrifice once
offered by Christ; and it is to this the reference is made here. And
having provided means for purification, he as the high priest, by
virtue of his sacrifice, entered into the holiest, heavenly things on
earth, for the Church here below, in order to prepare it for the
holiest above. "In the heavens" may probably refer to two parts of
Christ's kingdom, the one in heaven and the other on earth; and latter,
as things which require a sacrifice; and then in the following verse
the former part is alluded to, the kingdom above, even heaven,
represented by the holy of holies. -- Ed.
8. MURRAY, HEAVEN ITSELF CLEANSED BY THE BLOOD. 23-24
IN the previous verses we saw how, at the dedication of the
first covenant with blood, both the book and the people and,
later on, the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry, were
sprinkled with blood. Even so, the writer tells us, the blood-
shedding on earth was not enough, but there was a needs-be that
the heavenly things themselves be cleansed with the blood of the
better sacrifice, ere heaven could be opened to us, and we obtain
access to a life in the presence of God. There must not a vestige
or sign of sin be left there, to rise up against us. Such is the power
of this better sacrifice and its blood, that the heavenly things
themselves were cleansed by it, and that Christ our surety with
His own blood, entered into heaven itself, now to appear before
the face of God for us. The heavenly things themselves
cleansed, and Christ entered into heaven itself for us, these
are the two aspects of the eternal redemption here put before us.
The heavenly things themselves cleansed. What can this
mean ? We speak of the heavens being dark, black with clouds.
The light of the sun is there, but clouded. When the clouds are
gone the heavens are bright and clear. God s word speaks of
our sins rising up as a cloud, as a smoke before Him. Our sins
are come up before Him, are in His presence, written in His
book of remembrance, calling for vengeance. God says to Israel :
/ have blotted out as a thick cloud thy transgressions, and as
a cloud thy sins. Just as the tabernacle had to be sprinkled

279. and cleansed and hallowed from all the uncleanness of the
children of Israel, so the heavenly things themselves by the
blood of Christ. As the blood was brought in, every vestige of a
thought of sin was removed out of God s presence ; the heavens
were cleansed; the heavens are now clear and bright, and the
love of God can shine out in noonday glory.
And this because Christ is not entered into the Holiest, made
with hands, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the
face of God for us. This is the great consummation to which all
the teaching of the heavenly priesthood of Christ, and the true
sanctuary, and the blood of the covenant leads up. Heaven itself
is now opened up to us. Christ has entered, not simply on His
own behalf, but entirely to appear before the face of God for us.
Yes, for us, His entering in has obtained for us boldness to
enter in. His entering in was through the rent veil ; there is no
veil now between God and us. We are called to draw nigh in
the fulness of faith. We are taught, Ye are come to the heavenly
Jerusalem, and to God. Before the face of God, in the presence
of God, is now the home of the soul. Heaven is not only a
locality, with its limitations, but a state of life, that condition of
spiritual existence in the full enjoyment of God s love and
fellowship, into which Christ entered. Christ passed through
the heavens, was made higher than the heavens. He
ascended far above all the Juavens, that He might fill all things.
Heaven itself, the Holiest of All, into which He entered, the
presence of God, is now the sphere in which He exercises His
heavenly ministry, into which He brings us in as an actual life
and experience, in which we alone can truly serve the living
God.
And what, we may well ask, what is the reason that so few
of God s children can testify to the joy of entering in and having
their abode here in the very presence of God ? There can be
but one answer, There is such a difference between being the
heir of a promise and actually inheriting it. Each of the great
words of our Epistle, as God s gift to each one of His children,
has an infinitude of meaning and blessing and power in it.
Christ a Priest for ever; the power of an endless life; He
is able to sympathise, able to succour, able to save com
pletely ; the true sanctuary, the new covenant, the blood cleans
ing the heavens, cleansing the conscience, all these are divine
realities, with a power and a glory that the heart of man cannot
conceive. It is only by faith and longsuffering that we inherit
the promises. It is as we give up our whole heart and life to
be just one act of faith, looking up and longing, praising and

280. expecting, believing and receiving what God gives and works in
Christ, that this life in the Holiest will be ours. It is as our
faith sees the divine unity of the once for all and the for ever,
that we shall be bold to believe that the for ever, the abiding
continually, has in Christ been made ours once for all, and can
be made ours in an entering within the veil as clear as that of
Christ s. This faith will prove itself in longsuffering. First, as
we diligently, perseveringly hold fast, and gaze and draw nigh
and wait on God to take us within the veil; and then, as
within the veil, in deepest humility and meekness and patience
and resignation to God, we wait upon Him in service, to perfect
us in the work for which we were admitted into His very
presence.
But remember where all this begins, and wherein it all con
sists. Not without blood ! With His own blood ! How much
more shall the blood of Christ ! These words are the key to
this blessed chapter of the opening of the Holiest to us. As
we yield to the Holy Spirit, the Eternal Spirit, to testify to us
how the way into the Holiest has been made manifest, and what
the blood is by which it was done, and what the cleansing of
our conscience in that blood to enter in and serve the living
God, we shall in fulness of faith be bold to draw nigh and enter
in and abide.
1. Think not that It will be too difficult for thee to dwell always with thy heart up yonder in
heaven. When the sun shines on thee, thou dost not think of its distance ; thou rejoicest in its
warmth. It is so near to thee ; thou enterest into it, and it enters into thee. Even so with Jesus
and the heavenly life. Heaven comes down. The kingdom of heaven is come with power; the
Holy Spirit glues and maintains it in thee. The veil Is rent, and the light and life of heaven is
come down here where we serve in the Holy Place.
2. To open the way to heaven and to God, Jesus died to sin. He that hates and loses his life
will find the way to the life of God.
8. Just as the cleansing of the tabernacle was part of the dedicating of the first covenant, so
the sprinkling the heavenly sanctuary, the cleansing of the heavens with the blood of the new
covenant, is our assurance that the sanctuary Is open to us, and that the covenant is sure and uiill
be fulfilled to us.
9. THE LAST LEGITIMATE SACRIFICE FOR SIN
(HEB. 9:23-28)
Dr. S.L. Johnson (1993)
Tape 15A
Opening Prayer
Father, we are indeed grateful to Thee for the privilege of opening the Scriptures, reading the Word of God
and thinking about the things which the writers have written. We thank Thee for the wonderful way in
which the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ is set forth especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
We thank Thee for our Great High Priest and all that He has accomplished and continues to accomplish
through His eternal ministry. We thank Thee, too, for the other blessings of the salvation which He has

281. wrought, the presence of the Holy Spirit, our guide and teacher.
We thank Thee for the providence of God that guides and guards the steps of believers. We thank Thee for
the hope that we have with regard to the future, the coming again of our Lord and the joys of our eternal
home. We know that we have no comprehension of the reality of it for our minds are dimmed by sin, and our
hearts also are affected by the evil which we have inherited by the sentence of Adam. But we are grateful,
Father, for the insight that our Lord and the prophets and apostles have provided for us.
We pray that Thou will guide our thinking as we read and ponder the Word during this lecture and we
commit our time to Thee. We thank Thee for each one present, for their lives, their families, their friends. We
pray especially for those who are suffering, or passing through difficult times in their lives. We remember
them and ask Thy blessing upon them. We pray also for our country and ask Thy blessing upon the it and
upon our president. We ask that Thou will enable us to proclaim the Word of God to a generation that is
largely empty of spiritual reality. May our study this evening glorify our Lord, we pray in His name, Amen.
Introduction
We have come to one of the great paragraphs in this Epistle 9:23-28. Keep in mind that this epistle is written
against the background of the Great Day of Atonement which the children of Israel were required to follow.
HEBREWS 9:23-28
23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but
the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has not entered the holy places
made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God
for us; 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year
with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but
now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is
appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of
many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.
EXPOSITION
This is a passage full of great "biblical words." In verse 26 and 28 the we find the term "sin." Our human
pride would like to forget it, but that would be fatal. All sin tends to be addictive, and the terminal point of
addiction is what is called damnation. In verse 27 we have the term "judgment." "As it is appointed unto men
once to die but after this judgment." Then we have the word "death." All men are appointed to die and we
must face this fact. A great preacher lying on his death bed said, "Now comes the mystery". How true that
is! Unless our Lord comes, most of us will have that experience. The others will not have even the
experience of lying on their death bed.
As Christians we would be looking at a "mystery" (death and life after death) which has a favorable
conclusion, but for others who have no hope it is different. Hobbs once said, "I am taking a fearful leap in
the dark." However, for a man outside of Christ, when he lies on his death bed and thinks about what is
coming, it must be a very, very fearful experience.
Another extremely important term is the word "sacrifice." It is found in verse 23 and then in 26:
Heb. 9:26. For then must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world, but now once in the end of
the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
We also find the word "blood" in verse 25:
Heb. 9:25. Not yet that He should offer Himself often as the high priest enters the holy place every year with
blood of another.
The theme of the blood is a crimson thread from Genesis to the cross and then to the throne as set forth in the
Book of Revelation!
Then there is the beautiful word in verse 28, salvation – "He will appear the second time apart from sin for
salvation." Finally in verses 23-24 we read of, "the copies of the things in the heavens." and of how Christ is
"now to appear in the presence of God for us."
Again, we should keep in mind that the background of this passage is the Great Day of Atonement. It was the
high light of the ceremonial system which gathered around the sacrifice of the bull for Aaron, the high priest
in order that his own sin would be paid for "typically", so that he might carry out his ministry. Then there
was the sacrifice of the two goats. One goat was slain and the blood was taken into the Holy of Holies and
sprinkled on the mercy seat. Then over second goat (the goat of departure or the scapegoat) was confessed the
sins of the children of Israel, and it was sent off into the wilderness. The Hebrew text says that it was sent
"into a land cut off." So it was sent out to a place where "typically" it would not return. This was the Old
Testament way of trying to express the fact that Christ's sacrifice was a final forgiveness. So the sins went off
into a “land not inhabited" and they would not come back and trouble those whose sins had been confessed

282. by the high priest over that goat.
THREE PHASES (POSITIONS) OF THE HIGH PRIEST
Now let's meditate for a while on the service on the Great Day of Atonement. First imagine the brazen altar in
the open place before the tabernacle. The second phase would be that of the High Priest in the Holy of Holies,
as he has passed through the Holy Place past the veil. Then the third phase would be when he appears again,
having finished his work. The children of Israel, by seeing him, should have had confidence, by virtue of his
appearance, that what he had done for them, God had accepted. They were now in covenant relationship with
the Lord God for one full year. That is all that the children of Israel had. They did not have a final
forgiveness. They had a forgiveness that every year had to be renewed on the Day of Atonement. So those
three phases (at the brazen altar of sacrifice, before the ark of the covenant and then his appearing
afterwards to the crowd) are the three great places where our author has built this paragraph in his epistle.
Now you will notice also, that each one of these phases is referred to by the one word "appeared". In verse 24,
"For Christ is not entered into the holy place made with hands, which are the figures of the true, but into
heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." That is referring to the second phase in the Holy
of Holies before the Lord. Then verse 26, "For then he must often have suffered since the foundation of the
world, but now once in the end of the age, hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."
This is a reference to the brazen altar where the animals were slain. That is the first phase of the High
Priest. Finally in verse 28, "So Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, and unto them that look for
Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation." These three appearances set forth the
saving ministry to Abraham's seed. The second of these, where he appears before the brazen altar to
sacrifice Himself, marks the climax of human history.
It is the foundation of the first and third appearances. In fact, some versions read "Now once at the climax of
history." Everything moved up towards the cross, and everything since the cross flows from this climactic
event. The cross is the climax of the Divine Work. So we are, in a sense, going to meditate upon these three
appearances[1].
A LOOK IN THE HISTORICAL ORDER
We want to look at our Lord first at the brazen altar, and then in the holy of holies, and finally we will look at
our Lord having completed the sacrificial work, that is the work inside the holy of holies.
FIRST - THE BRAZEN ALTAR
25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood
of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at
the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. (Hebrews 9:25-26)
This Greek word for "appeared" means to be manifested. So our Lord has been shown openly to "put away
sin" by the sacrifice of Himself. One could have said with reference to the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ
on the cross, "Lord you have kept the best until the hour of the cross." For this was indeed the final climatic
revelation.
Do you remember what Jesus said when Judas went out to betray Him? "So, when he had gone out, Jesus
said, 'Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in Him.'" (John 13:31)
TO PUT AWAY SIN
Our Lord did not come to deny the penalty of sin. He did not come to soften the penalty for sin. Nor did He
come to redefine sin and to simply call sin "mistakes" or "error." We as human beings constantly do that
very thing. We like to call sin a "disease" instead of sin. We prefer to call it a mistake or error and that would
of course never result in an eternal damning fact. Our Lord did not come to lull us into a false sense of
security. He came to "put away sin." But how? By the sacrifice of Himself.
Do you realize that it is very, very difficult to put away sin and is in fact impossible for man? Do you know
why? Religion cannot do it. You can engage in all kinds of religion, but religion does not put away sin. You
may be a regular attendee in your church. You may be confirmed and know your catechisms by heart. You
may have done many religions acts and deeds, but religion does not put away sin. In fact, you may be a very
religious person and a very lost person. Actually, most "religious" people may fall into the category of
"lostness".
What is the greatest liturgical ritual of all?
When I was growing up, the Presbyterian service was very simple. There was the pulpit and the singing of
hymns. The Nicene Creed was not recited, but "the Apostles Creed" was recited, and the "Gloria" was
sung. It was primarily a preaching service. Today, many other things are added to the service. There is a
resurgence of interest in liturgical worship today. Why? Because there is an "emptiness" in many
evangelical churches where the gospel is not preached in the power of the Holy Spirit. So people look for

283. something else. They are attracted to the liturgical type church service. But liturgy does not put away sin.
The most impressive ritual we know in Christianity is that of the Roman Catholic Church[2]. Some of it is
very impressive -- the robes, incense, music, stained glass windows, chanting, choirs etc. But what was the
most impressive of all liturgies? The worship of ancient Israel. Why? Because it was divinely given. The
Roman Catholic and Anglican rituals were not divinely given. But the Aaronic Priest had impressive
garments and even changed their garments on the Day of Atonement.
Everything was designed to be impressive, and it came from God and had specific theological meaning.
However, it did not put away sin. Not one Israelite could ever say, "I was saved by the Mosaic Law". I was
saved by the liturgy of the Great Day of Atonement. It did not save a single person. That is how dead liturgy
is. The human mind, afflicted with sin, becomes impressed with things like elaborate liturgies and rituals and
we say, "How impressive, how spiritual". But these things do not save.
Holy living does not put away sin. Self denial does not put away sin. Death does not put away sin. Nor can
Hell put it away. Even repentance[3], that is not given by God, does not put away sin. A man can be very
sorry for his sin and still be lost. Have you ever noticed David's confession in Psalm 51? It is a great and
marvelous confession of sin. But did you read in this Psalm that David's sin was forgiven because he was so
sorry for his sin? No. The repentance that saves is only that repentance given by God with the knowledge that
it is a gift won by the saving sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. So our Lord was manifested to "put away sin"
by the sacrifice of Himself. What a work! The work of Immanuel is the greatest of works!
Again, how was our Lord the sacrifice for our sin? Not by His life, not by His prayers, not by His good
works, not by His tears, not by His pains, not by His groans, but by the sacrifice of Himself at Calvary. It
was the blood shedding that is the ground of our salvation. Any kind of preaching that does not center on
Calvary is not the preaching that the Bible sets forth! Our Lord has been manifested to put away sin by the
sacrifice of Himself. All Jerusalem knew that Christ was suffering for this event on the cross was the center of
everything in history. Thus, we have the first of the historical appearances.
THE SECOND - HE ENTERED INTO THE PRESENCE OF GOD
The second follows, and if you will think of the Day of Atonement and the ceremonies, you will grasp the
point that our author makes in verse 24.
Heb. 9:24. For Christ has not entered into the holy places made with hands, but into heaven itself, now to
appear in the presence of God for us.
Now the second manifestation is set forth with a verb that means "to appear openly". Remember that when
the high priest had shed the blood, he took it into the Holy of Holies, and sprinkled it before the mercy seat.
But even before the high priest had gone in to sprinkle the holy of holies with blood for himself, he had
already gone in with incense. The incense had been burned and the holy place was filled with clouds of
incense. This fact was designed to say, "Even though you come with the blood of the animal, you do not get a
clear picture of the presence of God!" Thus, the idea Christ appearing "openly" is very significant.
Leviticus 16:11-14
11 “And Aaron shall bring the bull of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself
and for his house, and shall kill the bull as the sin offering which is for himself. 12 Then he shall take a censer
full of burning coals of fire from the altar before the Lord, with his hands full of sweet incense beaten fine,
and bring it inside the veil. 13 And he shall put the incense on the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of
incense may cover the mercy seat that is on the Testimony, lest he die. 14 He shall take some of the blood of
the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the mercy seat on the east side; and before the mercy seat he shall
sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times.
So in this illustrative ceremony we are shown that under the Old Covenant we are still in the shadows looking
forward to the clear picture of the Messianic King and Great High Priest, who will openly and freely enter
into the presence of God. For there was a shrouding of the sprinkling of the blood in the Holy of Holies
because of the clouds of incense. But in the case of our Lord, He appears openly. He is the Second Person of
the Trinity, He is God the Son. He possesses the same deity that the Father possesses for He is the same being.
There was no shrouding of the Son in carrying out His atoning work. On the ground of His sacrifice, our
Lord enters into the presence of God in the fullness of the Oneness that the Eternal Son has with the Eternal
Father.
So our author says, "now to appear into heaven itself for us." "For us" -- that means, my Christian friend,
that at this very moment Jesus Christ is in the presence of God for us - for you and for me. He is our
representative High Priest who stands for us. What assurance that should give us! That my great High Priest
the Son of God is my representative in the presence of God at this very moment. He is my representative –for
that is my standing in Him.. What can give us greater assurance in the possession of eternal life?

284. THE THIRD - HE SHALL APPEAR THE SECOND TIME
The Scripture draws a comparison:
27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to
bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for
salvation. (Hebrews 9:27-28)
Men die once and so the Son of God dies once. Jesus Christ has appeared to put away sin by His sacrifice and
thus, Christ was offered once. In would be incongruous to think of Him dying more than once. Also, it is
appointed to men once to die and after this to face a judgment. For man the appointment is mandatory, but
for our Lord it was voluntary. In Genesis 3:19 we read of the the judgment that was pronounced on Adam
and Eve after they sinned in the Garden.
Genesis 3:19. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread until you return to the ground. For out of it you
were taken, for dust you are, and to dust you shall return.
You should pay close attention to the word, "shall". Daniel Webster heard a country preacher, in great
simplicity, say at the grave side of a funeral, "My friends we can die but once". This makes more of an
impression on me now than it did forty years ago. My friends, we can die but once and it is very important to
bear that in mind.
Epicurus, whom the Greeks knew well, said; "Thus, that which is the most awful of evils - death is nothing to
us, since when we exist, there is no death. And when there is death, we do not exist!" That is very comforting
until you read the Word of God and come across our text, "It is appointed for men once to die and after this
the judgment." Epicurus, of course, did not understand biblical truth. He did not know the clause "after
this, the judgment". But we do and we must face this.
There are different ways in which people die. You can die the wrong way. In 2 Chronicles 21:20, Jehoram's
death is described.
2 Chronicles 21:20. He was 32 years old when he became king. He reigned in Jerusalem 8 years and to no
one's sorrow departed. However, they buried him in the city of David, but not in the tomb of the kings.
Do you know who Jehoram's father was? He was Jehoshaphat's son, who was a godly king. Do you know who
the prophet was who lived at this time? Elijah! Here is a man with a godly father, and a prophet like Elijah,
and he died "to no one's sorrow." What a terrible end! But what about you and me? If you pass out of this
auditorium, and you have never believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, it might be put over your tomb from
heaven's standpoint, "this man heard the Word of God, he heard the Gospel that men are saved by Jesus
Christ, and he heard it from the Epistle to the Hebrews 9:23-28, and he did not respond." That would be a
horrible destiny.
Another example is Absalom, King David’s son. Absolom had the greatest of advantages and was a young
man who stood out in the crowd. However, he wasted his life and brought upon himself and his father much
shame. Absalom was the one over whom David mourned: "Oh my Son Absalom, Oh my son Absalom, if
only I had died in your place. O Absalom my son!" This is the one of whom we read in chapter 24, "Now in
all Israel there is no one who is praised as much as Absalom for his good looks, from the sole of his foot to the
crown of is head, there was no blemish in him." Ah, but there was a blemish in his heart and that was the
significant thing! Yet one can die the right way. Stephen died the right way. It seems that our Lord rose up
from the seat by the side of the Father and welcomed Stephen because of the godly life he had lived. Precious
in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints. Oh my friend, be sure you belong to the company of the
saints.
An Appointment for Salvation
Heb. 9:28. So Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, and unto them that look for Him shall He
appear.
This is our third word and is different from the other two. It means simply "to be seen". The high priest,
after he had sprinkled the blood on the mercy seat, came out of the tabernacle. Then Israel gathered to
express their joy of the sense of the fact that God had responded to the ceremony that He Himself had
instituted which meant that Israel was, for one more year, in right covenant relationship with Him. Thus, the
high priest's reappearing after the sprinkling of the mercy seat, was the sign of the blessing of God upon the
people.
This third appearing corresponds to the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. As the high priest
appeared to those who eagerly waited for Him, so Christ will be seen by the whole of this world a second time,
"apart from sin," and bringing salvation to all of His saints. At that time, the sin question will not be raised
because that question has been taken care of at the cross of Calvary.
Notice the phrase, "to them that look for Him." I think that this refers to all the saints. It is a natural

285. response to look for Him. It is the characteristic as seen in 1 Cor. 1:7.
1 Cor. 1:7. So that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
They were a carnal group in Corinth, however they waited eagerly for the Second Coming of the Lord. So to
all the members of the body He will appear. Then for His own, there will be no more death for death will
give way to eternal life.
SUMMARY
Past Present Future
He has appeared at Calvary's Cross for propitiation of our sins He does appear at the right hand of the
throne of God to carry out intercession for us He shall appear at the Second Advent for the final
deliverance of His elect.
He has appeared for our redemption. He does appear for our representation. He shall appear for our
rewards at His Second Coming.
He has appeared in humiliation. He does appear in exaltation. He shall appear in world wide
manifestation.
He has appeared for atonement. He does appear at the right hand of the Father in priesthood. He shall
appear for salvation.
He has appeared for justification.He does appear for sanctification (which He carries out now on our behalf) .
He shall appear for our glorification.
Two appearings of our Lord have already taken place. In the past, He was manifested at Calvary and at the
present moment He appears openly at the right hand of God as our Great High Priest. One of the
manifestations remains. And the question of course is: Are we really looking for Him? Are we eagerly
looking for Him? Is it part of our Christian life to do what our author refers to as "eagerly waiting for
Him?"
If Israel refused the priest's work, judgment was her experience. The people were required to afflict
themselves on the Day of Atonement. If they did not afflict themselves, they were cut off. The ceremony
was not simply an outward side for Israel. They were to enter into it. The individuals were to enter into
what the High Priest was doing with reference to their own sin before God in heaven.
That is important for us as well. There must be a personal experience of what God is doing. Let us not
think for one moment that because we attend services, because we are a part of the church; because we
engage in "religious exercises", or even experience "religious feelings" that all is well. If there is not a
personal relationship that comes from the recognition of "my sin," and the recognition of Christ's death for
my sin, then all is not well. Christ Jesus appears openly at this very moment for us. Claim that for yourself –
this is my urgent appeal to you.
Closing Prayer
Father, we are grateful to Thee for these marvelous words written by this unknown author of Scripture. We
do not have to know his name for we recognize the hand of God in Scripture. We see the hand of God in the
Old Testament ceremonies pointing forward to the One who is the preeminent One - Jesus Christ. We
worship Him. We praise Thee Father for Him. We desire to know Him better, to love Him more deeply; to be
more effective in our Christian testimony for Jesus sake, Amen.
10. PINK, "A contrast is now drawn between the types and their Antitype. Therein we are shown that
inasmuch as the Great Sacrifice which Christ offered unto God was the substance of all the Old Testament
shadows, it was efficacious, all-sufficient, final.
In Hebrews 9:1-10 a declaration is made of sundry types and shadows of the law. In Hebrews 9:11-28 a
manifestation of the accomplishment of them is seen in the person and work of the Lord Jesus. In this second
section we are shown the excellency of Christ’s priesthood in the effecting of those things and the securing of
those blessings which Aaron and his sacrificing of animals could not effect and secure. First, the affirmation
is made that Christ has entered into the true tabernacle, Heaven itself; that He did so on the ground of His
own infinitely meritorious blood, the value of which is evidenced by the fact that it has "obtained eternal
redemption" (verses 11,12). Second, confirmation of this is then made: inasmuch as the blood of beasts
purified the flesh, much more can the blood of Christ purge the conscience (verses 13,14). Moreover the
Mediatorial office which Christ undertook guaranteed our salvation (verse 15). So too the validity of the
covenant-testament insured the same (verses 16, 17); as also the types pledged it (verses 19-22).
In Hebrews 9:23 (which properly belonged to our last section) the apostle concludes the main point he has
been discussing, namely, that the typical things being purged with animal’s blood, there must needs be a more
excellent way of purifying and consecrating heavenly things, and that was by the precious blood of the

286. incarnate Son of God Himself. Having established this fact, he now returns to the other points of difference
between the legal priests and Christ. Those priests entered only an earthly tabernacle, but Christ has gone
into Heaven itself (verses 24, 25). The entrance of Israel’s high priest into the holy of holies was repeated year
by year, but Christ entered once for all (verses 25, 26). This is confirmed by the fact that men die but once,
still less could the God-man suffer death repeatedly (verses 27, 28). Hence the blessed issue to all who rest
upon the Great Sacrifice is, that He shall appear unto them "without sin unto salvation" (verse 28).
"Therefore (it was) necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the
heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these" (verse 23). The opening word denotes that a
conclusion is now drawn from the premises just established, a conclusion which has respect unto both parts of
the assertion made. In this verse the apostle brings to a head, or sums up, his previous argument concerning
the typical purification of all things under the law, and the spiritual purification which has been effected by
the sacrifice of Christ. "The general principle involved in these words is, plainly, that in expiation the victim
must correspond in dignity to the nature of the offenses expiated, and the value of the blessings secured.
Animal blood might expiate ceremonial guilt and secure temporary blessings, but in order to secure the
expiation of moral guilt and the attainment of eternal blessings, a nobler victim must bleed" (John Brown).
"Therefore necessary (it was)": the reference is both to the type and the Antitype. It was so from God’s
institution and appointment. There was nothing in the nature of the typical objects themselves which
demanded a purgation by sacrifice, but, inasmuch as God designed to foreshadow heavenly things by them, it
was requisite that they should be purged with blood. Likewise, inasmuch as God ordained that the heavenly
things should be purified, it was necessary that a superior sacrifice should be made, for the typical offerings
were altogether inadequate to such an end. Such "necessity’’ was relative, and not absolute, for God was
never under any compulsion. His infinite wisdom deemed such a method fitting and suited to His glory and
the good of His elect.
The "patterns" or "figures" (verse 23) were the things which the apostle had been treating of, namely, the
covenant, the book, the people, the tabernacle and all its vessels of ministry. The "things in the heavens" were
the everlasting covenant, the Church, and its redemption by Jesus Christ. The "heavenly things" had been
designed in the mind of God in all their order, causes, beauty, and tendency unto His own glory, from all
eternity; but they were "hid" in Himself (Eph. 3:8-10). Of these was God pleased to grant a typical
resemblance, a shadowy similitude, an earthly adumbration, in the calling of Israel, His covenant with them,
and the appointing of the tabernacle with its priesthood. By this means He deigned to instruct the early
Church, and in their conformity to that typical order of things did their faith and obedience consist; the
spiritual meaning of which the Old Testament saints did, in measure, understand (Ps. 119:18).
"The heavenly things." "By heavenly things, I understand all the effects of the counsel of God in Christ, in
the redemption, salvation, worship, and eternal glory of the Church; that is, Christ Himself in all His offices,
with all the spiritual and eternal effects of them on the souls and consciences of men, with all the worship of
God by Him according unto the Gospel. For of all these things, those of the law were the patterns. God did in
and by them give a representation of all these things" (John Owen). More specifically Christ Himself and His
sacrifice were typified by the legal rites. So also all the spiritual blessings which His mediation has secured
are "heavenly things": see John 3:12, Ephesians 1:3, Hebrews 3:1. The Church too (Phil. 3:20) and Heaven
itself as the abode of Christ and His redeemed are included (John 14:1-3). But here a difficulty presents itself:
how could such objects as those be said to be "purified"?
Of all the things mentioned above not one of them is capable of real purification from uncleanness excepting
the Church, that is, the souls and consciences of its members. Yet the difficulty is more seeming than real.
The term "purification" has a twofold sense, namely, of external dedication unto God and internal
purification, both of which are, generally included in the term "sanctification" as it is used in Scripture.
Thus, the covenant, the book of the covenant, the tabernacle, and all its vessels were "purified" in the first
sense, that is, solemnly dedicated unto God and His service. In like manner were all the "heavenly things"
themselves "purified.’’ Christ was consecrated, dedicated unto God in His own blood: John 17:19, Hebrews
2:10, etc. Heaven itself was dedicated to be an habitation forever unto the mystical body of Christ, in perfect
peace with the angels who never sinned: Ephesians 1:10, Hebrews 12:22-24.

287. Yet there was also an internal "purification" of most of these "heavenly things." The souls and consciences of
the members of the Church were really cleansed, purified and sanctified with an inward and spiritual
purification: Ephesians 5:25,26, Titus 2:14. It has been "washed" in the blood of Christ (Rev. 1:5) and is
thereby cleansed from all sin (1 John 1:7). And Heaven itself, was in some sense purified-as the tabernacle
was, because of the sins of the people in whose midst it stood (Lev. 16:16). When the angels apostatized, sin
entered Heaven itself, and therefore was not pure in the sight of God (see Job 15:15). And upon the sin of
man, a breach was made, enmity ensued, between the holy angels above and fallen men below; so that Heaven
was no meet place for an habitation unto them both, until they were reconciled, which was only accomplished
in the sacrifice of Christ (Eph. 1:10, Colossians 1:20).
One other detail needs to be considered: "But the heavenly things with better sacrifices." It is the use of the
plural number here in connection with the sacrifice of Christ which has occasioned difficulty to some. It is a
figure of speech known as an "enallage," the plural being put for the singular by way of emphasis. It is so
expressed because the great sacrifice not only confirmed the signification, virtue, and benefits of all others,
but exceeded in dignity, design and efficacy all others. Again; under the law there were five chief offerings
appointed unto Israel: the burnt, the meal, the peace, the sin, the trespass (see Leviticus 1-5), and in Christ’s
great Sacrifice we have the antitype of all five, and hence His has superseded theirs. Thus, the plural,
"sacrifices" here emphasizes the one offering of Christ, expresses its superlative excellency, and denotes that
it provides the substance of the many shadows under the law.
If the reader will read straight on through Hebrews 9:18-23 he will then be in a position to appreciate the
lovely sequel which is recorded in Exodus 24:8-11. A most glorious type was that. There we have a scene for
which there is nothing approaching a parallel on all the pages of inspiration until the incarnation of the Son
of God be reached. What we have there in Exodus 24 might well be termed the Old Testament Mount of
Transfiguration. There we see not only Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, but also seventy "elders"
(representatives of the people) in the very presence of God, perfectly at ease, eating and drinking there. The
key-word to that marvelous incident is the "Then" at the beginning of verse 9, which brings out the
inestimable value of the blood which had been sprinkled, and shows the grand privilege which it had
procured, even making possible communion with God. The antitype of this is presented in Hebrews 10:22.
24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary
that was only a copy of the true one; he entered
heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence.
1. BARNES, "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands - Into
the temple or tabernacle. The Jewish high priest alone entered into the most holy place; and the
other priests into the holy place. Jesus, being of the tribe of Judah, and not of Levi, never
entered the temple proper. He had access only to the courts of the temple, in the same way as
any other Jew had; see the notes on Mat_21:12. He has entered into the true temple - heaven - of
which the earthly tabernacle was the type.
Which are the figures of the true - Literally, “the antitypes” - ᅊντίτυπα antitupa. The
word properly means what is formed after a model, pattern, or type; and then what corresponds
to something or answers to it. The idea here is, that the “type” or “fashion” - the “true” figure or
form - was shown to Moses in the Mount, and then the tabernacle was made after that model, or
corresponded to it. The “true original” figure is heaven itself; the tabernacle was an antitype of

288. that - or was so formed as in some sense to correspond to it. That is, it corresponded in regard to
the matters under consideration - the most holy place denoted heaven; the mercy-seat and the
shekinah were symbols of the presence of God, and of the fact that he shows mercy in heaven;
the entrance of the high priest was emblematical of the entrance of the Redeemer into heaven;
the sprinkling of the blood there was a type of what the Redeemer would do in heaven.
Now to appear in the presence of God for us - As the Jewish high priest appeared
before the shekinah, the symbol of the divine presence in the tabernacle, so Christ appears
before God himself in our behalf in heaven. He has gone to plead for our salvation; to present
the merits of his blood as a permanent reason why we should be saved; Rom_8:34 note;
Heb_7:25 note.
2. CLARKE, "Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands - He is not
gone into the holy of holies of the tabernacle or temple, as the Jewish high priest does once in
the year with the blood of the victim, to sprinkle it before the mercy-seat there; but into heaven
itself, which he has thus opened to all believers, having made the propitiatory offering by which
both he and those whom he represents are entitled to enter and enjoy eternal blessedness. And
hence we may consider that Christ, appearing in his crucified body before the throne, is a real
offering of himself to the Divine justice in behalf of man; and that there he continues in the
constant act of being offered, so that every penitent and believer, coming unto God through him,
find him their ever ready and available sacrifice, officiating as the High Priest of mankind in the
presence of God.
3. GILL, "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands,.... The most
holy place in the tabernacle of Moses, or in the temple built by Solomon, and rebuilt by
Zerubbabel, and repaired by Herod,
which are the figures of the true; that is, the most holy place in the tabernacle and temple,
was a figure of the truth of that type; see Heb_9:9 as follows. Josephus (m) suggests the same,
when speaking of the most holy place; he says, that it was inaccessible to the priests, that it
might be as heaven to God.
But into heaven itself; not the visible heavens, the airy and starry ones, through which he
passed, but the third heaven, the habitation of God, angels, and glorified saints: this shows that
heaven is a place; that Christ, as man, was out of it when on earth; and that at his ascension he
entered into it, having done the work he came about, and that with acceptance: the end of his
entrance was
now to appear in the presence of God for us; Christ, as God, was always in his presence,
from everlasting; as Mediator, he was with him in the council of peace; while he was here on
earth his Father was with him, he was not alone; but now in his human nature he is at his right
hand, where he appears before him, as a favourite before his Prince, on the behalf of another, or
as an advocate on the behalf of his client: Christ appears in the court of heaven for his elect, by
representing their persons; by presenting himself, his blood, sacrifice, and righteousness, before
God on their account; by introducing them into the presence of God, and offering up their
prayers with the incense of his mediation; by presenting them to himself, and to his Father, and
obtaining every blessing for them. And this he does "now", since his entrance; not that he did
not appear before God for the saints of the Old Testament, for he was the angel of God's
presence then, though he did not appear then in the manner he does now, as the Lamb in the

289. midst of the throne, as if it had been slain; but it denotes the continuance and perpetuity of his
appearance for his people; he is ever interceding for them.
4. HENRY, " From the places in which the sacrifices under the law, and that under the gospel,
were offered. Those under the law were the holy places made with hands, which are but figures
of the true sanctuary, Heb_9:24. Christ's sacrifice, though offered upon earth, was by himself
carried up into heaven, and is there presented in a way of daily intercession; for he appears in
the presence of God for us. He has gone to heaven, not only to enjoy the rest and receive the
honour due to him, but to appear in the presence of God for us, to present our persons and our
performances, to answer and rebuke our adversary and accuser, to secure our interest, to perfect
all our affairs, and to prepare a place for us.
5. JAMISON, "Resumption more fully of the thought, “He entered in once into the holy
place,” Heb_9:12. He has in Heb_9:13, Heb_9:14, expanded the words “by his own blood,”
Heb_9:12; and in Heb_9:15-23, he has enlarged on “an High Priest of good things to come.”
not ... into ... holy places made with hands — as was the Holy of Holies in the earthly
tabernacle (see on Heb_9:11).
figures — copies “of the true” holiest place, heaven, the original archetype (Heb_8:5).
into heaven itself — the immediate presence of the invisible God beyond all the created
heavens, through which latter Jesus passed (see on Heb_4:14; see on 1Ti_6:16).
now — ever since His ascension in the present economy (compare Heb_9:26).
to appear — To PRESENT HIMSELF; Greek, “to be made to appear.” Mere man may have a
vision through a medium, or veil, as Moses had (Exo_33:18, Exo_33:20-23). Christ alone
beholds the Father without a veil, and is His perfect image. Through seeing HIM only can we see
the Father.
in the presence of God — Greek, “to the face of God.” The saints shall hereafter see God’s
face in Christ (Rev_22:4): the earnest of which is now given (2Co_3:18). Aaron, the Levitical
high priest for the people, stood before the ark and only saw the cloud, the symbol of God’s glory
(Exo_28:30).
for us — in our behalf as our Advocate and Intercessor (Heb_7:25; Rom_8:34; 1Jo_2:1). “It
is enough that Jesus should show Himself for us to the Father: the sight of Jesus satisfied God
in our behalf. He brings before the face of God no offering which has exhausted itself, and, as
only sufficing for a time, needs renewal; but He himself is in person, by virtue of the eternal
Spirit, that is, the imperishable life of His person, now and for ever freed from death, our
eternally present offering before God” [Delitzsch in Alford].
5B. BILL BRITTON, “In verses 24, 26, and 28 we read that 3 times Jesus appears FOR US. Past,
present, and future. In verse 26 (Amplified) we see that Jesus HAS ALREADY appeared to put
away sin by means of Calvary. “But as it now is, He has once for all at the consummation and
close of the ages appeared to put away and abolish sin by His sacrifice of Himself”. This was His
appearing in a flesh and blood body here on this earth. Living among men, being mocked,
scourged and crucified. He appeared. It was a very real appearance. He was really tempted. He
really suffered pain. He was made like unto us, “made in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:7).
But never again shall He appear in this body of humiliation. For now He has a body of glory.
Once and once for all He poured out His blood and suffered death. Never again. Once was
enough.

290. Now (verse 24) he appears in Heaven, in the very presence of God, for us. “FOR US”! That says
to me that He intends to bring us eventually unto that very place. So until we get there, He is
now appearing there for us. This tells me that the man Jesus was really resurrected, and is really
appearing in His body of glory, there in heaven itself. Glory to God! It confirms without denial
that we, too, shall put on a body of glory and appear with Him in glory (Colossians 3:4). Some
shall come forth from the grave, and others shall pass from this mortal into the immortal. Not
all shall die. Some shall pass from this corruptible dying life into the glorious life of God. And to
insure that this is so, He appears NOW, for us, in the very presence of God.
To Full Salvation
His final appearance shall be when out of the glory of that presence He appears upon earth
again, to bring the Kingdom of God victoriously to earth. Verse 28 in the Amplified makes that
so clear that no one should misunderstand: “Even so it is that Christ having been offered to take
upon Himself and bear as a burden the sins of many once and once for all, WILL APPEAR a
second time, not carrying any burden of sin nor to deal with sin, BUT TO BRING TO FULL
SALVATION those who are eagerly, constantly and patiently waiting for and expecting Him.”
The second time. But didn’t we say this would be the third time He appears? Yes, but only the
second time that He appears on this earth. He did appear on the earth. He does now appear in
heaven. He will yet appear again on the earth. And every time He appears, it’s for us! And this
final appearance is to bring us to full salvation. Full deliverance from every earthly bondage.
This is that “final salvation” spoken of by Peter in 1 Peter 1:5 (Amplified), where it tells us that
there is an inheritance reserved in heaven for you “who are being guarded by God’s power
through your faith till you fully inherit that FINAL SALVATION that is ready to be revealed for
you in the LAST TIME.”
Come Out of her, My People
So chapter 9 starts by showing the glory of the old covenant, then proves that glory has to fade
and be replaced by the permanent order of reality in Christ. Then we close by seeing that the
return of Christ to this earth, His appearance to those who look for Him, is to bring them to full
salvation or deliverance. Not to escort them to a home up in heaven somewhere, but to bring His
salvation, His inheritance, and His reward to them here. (Revelation 22:12).
For those who hear His call and come out, there is a final salvation, a full deliverance. He will
appear to them once again. Glory! Get ready for chapter 10, for here we shall find some strong
warnings and tremendous promises. If you feel we have not done full justice to chapter 9, you
are right. But we are not trying to give a complete commentary or dig out all the revelation in
this great chapter. We are only trying to open some doors, so that you may continue the study
and dug out more glorious truths for yourself. Press on, saints of God! It has been glorious thus
far, but there is much more ahead for us!
6. sbc, “The Threefold Manifestation of the Redeemer.

291. I. The Redeemer’s first appearance in the world was His Incarnation in the fulness of time as a
member of the human race, to endure the death appointed to sinners, and to obtain for us
eternal redemption.
II. The Ascension entrance into the presence of God was the glorious end and consummation of
the Redeemer’s atoning appearance on earth. There is a certain change in the word now
employed by the writer that suggests a boundless difference between the humbled and the
exalted state of our Lord Himself. He appears boldly and gloriously before God. His
manifestation in time was throughout marked, not only by self-abasement, but also by visitation
from above. But now is Christ risen and ascended back to His Father’s bosom. He has returned
from the far country whither His love carried Him to seek and to find the lost. It was a prelude of
this eternal complacency that glorified Him on the Mount of Transfiguration. But though He
received honour and glory there, He saw in the distance that other mount, and descended again
into the valley of humiliation to reach it. He goes up to be glorified eternally. He "appears in the
presence of God to go out no more." The emphasis rests on the words "for us." Our Lord is in
heaven the accepted propitiation for human sin. He pleads the virtue of His atonement, which is
the virtue of His Divine-human self, as the glorious Anti-type of the typical High Priest entering
the holiest on the day of atonement. For all who are His He receives the heavens. His presence
there is the security that they shall be there also.
III. The Redeemer will appear a second time, without sin unto salvation. Here it must be
remembered that a long chapter of the Church’s expectation is omitted. The millennial history
that precedes His advent, the glorious circumstances of His coming, and many and wonderful
events that derive their glory from it, are all passed by. The atonement is consummated, and
that is all; it ends, for He comes without the cross: it is perfected in the salvation of His saints.
Our Lord will appear, to those who have no other desire in heaven or earth but Himself, not for
judgment, but for salvation. They died with Him, and they shall live with Him; they suffered
with Him, and they shall reign with Him. Here, we are saved by hope. In this life, salvation is of
the spirit; and that salvation is perfect, save as the spirit is the soul, encompassed about by the
infirmities of the bodily organ. Many penalties of sin remain untaken away while we live below.
In Paradise these are gone, but there remains the widowhood of the disembodied spirit. Not that
the salvation is incomplete, but it is perfect only in part. When we receive Jesus, and are made
partakers of Him for ever, then will salvation be full, "complete in Him."
W. B. Pope, Sermons and Charges, p. 84.
7. STEDMAN, “). 9:24. Hughes (1977:283-290) has a helpful excursus on the various
interpretations of the terms the true tent and the greater and more perfect tent. These
views include the humanity of Jesus, the human body, the church as the body of Christ, the
souls of God's people, the literal heavens and simply the presence of God. All of these have
elements of truth about them but suffer from the spatial concepts still included in them.
The truth is we do not know very much about the realm of spirit. This is probably what
Paul means by his famous statement in I Corinthians 13:9-10, "For we know in part and
we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears."
(31). 9:24. To adequately picture an event having many implications, such as the cross,
required a multiplication of actions in the Old Testament which would not be necessary to
duplicate in the reality. For instance, the Day of Atonement required two goats: one a
scapegoat to be released into the wilderness, and the other to be slain and its blood
sprinkled within the Most Holy Place. Both actions were needed to depict the death of Jesus

292. as both bearing sin away forever and cleansing believers from its defilement. Similarly, the
dying of Jesus fulfilled both the offering of a sacrifice and the presentation of its blood by
the high priest.
8. ALEX PETERSON, ” What were the holy places made with hands and did Christ ever
Enter them (9:24a)?
The holy places made with hands were those built by men under direction from God, but
still put there by the hand of man. The holiest of holies in the Days of Christ’s Incarnation
was empty because the Ark of the Covenant had been either hidden by Jeremiah before the
captivity, or carried off by Nebuchadnezzar during the captivity of Babylon. Therefore,
the emptiness of the earthly holy place during Christ’s Incarnation was also a picture of the
emptiness of the ministry of the Jews and the Pharisees and the Saducees at this
time. These were the holy places made with hands spoken of in verse 24.
Verse 24 also says that Christ has not entered that holy place. And that is true. If you
review everything we have on the earthly Ministry of Christ, you will not ever once find
where He Entered a holy of holies built by the hand of man.
The question then is: If Christ does not Enter the Holy Place, how is our Salvation
accomplished? Remember, He is both Sacrifice AND High Priest. The Sacrifice was on
the Altar of the Cross. The Holy Place that Christ Entered is indeed a Holy Place not
made with hands, but is rather Made by God Himself.
D.Where are both the True Holy Place and the True Mercy Seat (9:24b)?
That Holy Place is the True Tabernacle, not the copy, which is in Heaven where Christ, our
Present High Priest, is even this moment.
E.Where did Christ Enter the Holy Place (9:24b)?
Of course, Christ Entered the Holy Place in the Temple of Heaven, but then, Shows
Himself as both Equal with God and our Advocate TO God, by sitting down at the Right
Hand of the Father.
9. CALVIN, "For Christ is not entered, etc. This is a confirmation of the
former verse. He had spoken of the true sanctuary, even the heavenly;
he now adds that Christ entered there. It hence follows that a suitable
confirmation is required. The holy places he takes for the sanctuary;
he says that it is not made with hands, because it ought not to be
classed with the created things which are subject to decay; for he does
not mean here the heaven we see, and in which the stars shine, but the
glorious kingdom of God which is above all the heavens. He calls the
old sanctuary the antitupon, the antitype of the true, that is, of the
spiritual; for all the external figures represented as in a mirror what
would have otherwise been above our corporeal senses. Greek writers
sometimes use the same word in speaking of our sacraments, and wisely

293. too and suitably, for every sacrament is a visible image of what is
invisible.
Now to appear, etc. So formerly the Levitical priest stood before God
in the name of the people, but typically; for in Christ is found the
reality and the full accomplishment of what was typified. The ark was
indeed a symbol of the divine presence; But it is Christ who really
presents himself before God, and stands there to obtain favor for us,
so that now there is no reason why we should flee from God's tribunal,
since we have so kind an advocate, through whose faithfulness and
protection we are made secure and safe. Christ was indeed our advocate
when he was on earth; but it was a further concession made to our
infirmity that he ascended into heaven to undertake there the office of
an advocate. So that whenever mention is made of his ascension into
heaven, this benefit ought ever to come to our minds, that he appears
there before God to defend us by his advocacy. Foolishly, then, and
unreasonably the question is asked by some, has he not always appeared
there? For the Apostle speaks here only of his intercession, for the
sake of which he entered the heavenly sanctuary.
10. “Hughes (1977:283-290) has a helpful excursus on the various interpretations of the
terms the true tent and the greater and more perfect tent. These views include the
humanity of Jesus, the human body, the church as the body of Christ, the souls of God's
people, the literal heavens and simply the presence of God. All of these have elements of
truth about them but suffer from the spatial concepts still included in them. The truth is we
do not know very much about the realm of spirit. This is probably what Paul means by his
famous statement in I Corinthians 13:9-10, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears."
To adequately picture an event having many implications, such as the cross, required a
multiplication of actions in the Old Testament which would not be necessary to duplicate in
the reality. For instance, the Day of Atonement required two goats: one a scapegoat to be
released into the wilderness, and the other to be slain and its blood sprinkled within the
Most Holy Place. Both actions were needed to depict the death of Jesus as both bearing sin
away forever and cleansing believers from its defilement. Similarly, the dying of Jesus
fulfilled both the offering of a sacrifice and the presentation of its blood by the high priest.”
11. PINK, “"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, the figures of
the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us" (verse 24).
The opening "For" denotes that a further reason is being advanced to demonstrate the
superiority of Christ’s sacrifice over those which were offered under the law. In verse 23
this was shown by its power to "purify" better objects than the typical offerings could
dedicate or cleanse. Here the proof is drawn from the place which Christ entered after He
had offered Himself a sacrifice unto God, namely, into Heaven itself. That which was the
peculiar dignity of the high priest of Israel, and wherein the principal discharge of his duty

294. did consist, was that he entered that sacred abode where the typical and visible
representation of the presence of God was made. The antitype of this is what is here before
us.
"For Christ." The Mediator is again denominated by His official title. In addition to our
notes thereon under verse 14, we may point out that this title "The Anointed" imports
three things. First, the offices or functions which the Son of God undertook for the
salvation of His people. These were three in number and each was foreshadowed of old: the
prophetic (1 Kings 19:16, Psalm 105:15), the priestly (Lev. 8:12,30; Psalm 133:2), the kingly
(1 Sam. 10:1, 16:13). Second, the right which He has to undertake those functions: He who
"anointed" Christ was the Father (Acts 10:38), thereby appointing and authorizing Him
(Heb. 5:5). Third, His ability to perform those functions whereunto He was anointed:
therefore did He declare "the Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me
to preach" etc. (Luke 4:18). That expression "the Spirit of the Lord is upon Me" referred
to that Divine enduement which had been conferred upon Him: cf. John 3:34.
"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, the figures of the true."
The negative is first expressed in order to emphasize the contrast which follows. Three
things are here said of respect to its institution, it was the "holy of holies," and that,
because it had been dedicated as the chamber where the special pledges of God’s presence
were given. Second, as to its fabric, though framed by Divine command, it was but of
human workmanship, "made with hands." Third, as to its principal end or design, it was a
resemblance or figure of heavenly things. From the Sept. translation of "holy of holies" by
"the holy places," it seems that they used the plural number to supply the lack in the Greek
language of a suitable superlative.
"But into Heaven itself." This entrance of Christ into the celestial Sanctuary is to be
distinguished from His entering "once into the holy place" of verse 12. In our exposition of
that verse we sought to show at some length that the reference there is to what took place
immediately after the Savior expired upon the cross, when, in fulfillment of the type of
Leviticus 16:14, He appeared before the Father to present to Him the memorial of His
completed satisfaction. Aaron’s entrance into the holy of holies was not for the purpose of
making atonement-that was effected outside (Lev. 16:11)-but to present to God an
atonement already accomplished. Nor could Aaron’s passing within the veil, clad only in
his "linen" garments (Lev. 16:4 and contrast Exodus 28:2-etc.), possibly be a figure of
Christ’s triumphant admission into heaven with all the jubilation belonging to a coronation
day. We must constantly distinguish between Christ as the antitype of Aaron, and Christ as
the antitype of Melchizedek. Aaron pointed to nothing after Christ’s resurrection;
Melchizedek did. The "once" of Hebrews 9:12 emphasizes the finality of Christ’s sacrifice.
His "entrance" here in Hebrews 9:24 was for the purpose of intercession, which is
continuous: Hebrews 7:25.
The entrance of our royal High Priest into heaven was necessary for rendering His sacrifice
effective in the application of the benefits of it to the Church. As John Owen pointed out,
the entrance of Christ into heaven on His ascension, may be considered two ways. "1. As it
was regal, glorious and triumphant; so it belonged to His kingly office, as that wherein He
triumphed over all the enemies of the Church: see it described in Ephesians 4:8-10 from
Psalm 68:18. Satan, the world, death and hell being conquered, and all power committed to
Him, He entered triumphantly into heaven. So it was regal. 2. As it was sacerdotal. Peace
and reconciliation being made by the blood of the cross, the covenant being confirmed,

295. eternal redemption obtained, He entered as our High Priest into the holy place, the temple
of God above, to make His sacrifice effectual to His Church, and to apply the benefits of it
thereunto."
Christ entered Heaven as the great High Priest of His Church, as the Mediator of the new
covenant, as the "Forerunner" of His people (Heb. 6:20), as their "Advocate" (1 John 2:1),
and the "Firstborn of many brethren." His design in so doing was "to appear in the
presence of God for us." This He does "now," at the present season, and always. What the
typical priest did was of no continuance. But this "now" is expressive of the whole season
and duration of time from the entrance of Christ into heaven to the consummation of all
things. Absolutely, His entrance into Heaven had other ends in view (John 17:5, Hebrews
1:3-"upholding" etc.), but to appear before God for His people as their High Priest, was the
only end or object of His entering Heaven, considered as God’s "Temple," where is the
"throne of grace." How this manifests Christ’s full assurance of the success of His
undertaking, His complete discharge from all that guilt which had been imputed to Him.
Had He not made a full end of our sins, He could not have appeared with confidence as our
Surety in the presence of God!
"To appear in the presence of God for us." This is an act of His sacerdotal office. Not only
is it our High Priest who does so "appear," but He doth so as the High Priest of His
Church. Nevertheless, it is such an act as necessarily implies the offering of Himself as a
sacrifice for sin antecedent thereto, for it was with the blood of the atoning sacrifice that
Aaron entered into the holy place (Lev. 16) as the head and representative of the people. In
this appearance Christ presents Himself to God "as a lamb that had been slain" (Rev. 5:6)!
It is that which gives validity and efficacy to His "appearing." The word "appear" is a
forensic one, as of an Attorney before the Judge. He has gone there to seek from God and
dispense to His people those blessings which He purchased for them. He has gone there to
plead the infinite merits of His sacrifice, as a permanent reason why they should be saved:
Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25. This supplies the great testimony to the continuance of
Christ’s love, care and compassion toward the Church: it is their interests which He
promotes.
12. Charles Salmon
GOD speaks to us through HIS TABERNACLE in the WILDERNESS
"The Lord said to Moses. . . . Then have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will dwell
among them. Make this Tabernacle and all its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will
show you." - Exodus 25:1, 8, 9 NIV
For over 500 years God’s presence was manifested to Israel through this tent of meeting.
This was demonstrated during their wilderness wanderings by a pillar of fire by night over
the "Most Holy" room of the Tabernacle and a cloud by day. Here Moses would actually
speak with God, and the high priest would learn of God’s judgments through the
mysterious stones, the Urim and Thummim. - Exodus 33:8-14; Numbers 14:10; Exodus
28:30, Leviticus 8:8
As fantastic as that was, it was God’s plan to have the Tabernacle arrangement teach us,
the Christians, many wonderful and important lessons. The Apostle quotes our opening
verse in Hebrews 8:5. Here he states that the Tabernacle and the priests who served it are
but an example or shadow of heavenly (spiritual) things. Continuing this logic in Hebrews

296. 9:6-9, he again relates that the first (physical) Tabernacle was a figure of the spiritually
discerned truths of God’s plan. Further in Hebrews 9:23-25 Paul plainly states that the
physical Tabernacle represented Christ’s sacrificial sufferings, death and subsequent
resurrection and ascension into heaven itself, into the presence of God. With this
understanding we can better appreciate God’s desire for Moses to follow His instructions
exactly.
Let us briefly consider some of the lessons that the Tabernacle symbolically teaches us.
The Tabernacle, with its furniture, priesthood, animal sacrifices
and holy days, represents the way of consecration, the way in which we can approach unto
God, following in Christ’s footsteps. (1 Peter 2:21; Philippians 3:10; 2 Corinthians 4:10, 11)
Furthermore, it demonstrates how the world of mankind might be reconciled unto God
through Jesus Christ and His church. - 1 John 2:2; Revelation 21:1-4; Romans 8:19-22.
Let it be observed that places in the Tabernacle represent conditions of being.
Surrounding the Tabernacle, at a respectful distance, was the camp of Israel. (1) The
Israelites symbolize the world of mankind, separated from God because of sin. They could
not see over the 7 foot tall white linen curtain (2) surrounding the holy things within.
Encamped closer to the Tabernacle was the tribe of Levi (3).
In the Court
The priests were selected from the Levites, and the Levites were their assistants able to
enter into the courtyard (4) which represents the condition of justified believers. The
Levites represent Christian believers who enter the court by the one gate or door (5) which
pictures our belief in Jesus as the one "way" or "door" to God. (John 10:9, 14:6) Once
inside the court, the first piece of furniture was the brazen alter (6) made of wood overlaid
with copper (mistranslated brass). This represents Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, that is, the
sacrifice of his perfect humanity. - Hebrews 13:10; 1 Timothy 2:5,6
The next item was the laver (7) made of polished copper and filled with water from which
the priests washed their hands and feet before doing service. This symbolizes that the
believer has to wash with the water of God’s Word to be clean from earthly defilements.
(Ephesians 5:26) All things in the court were of copper, representing that those in the court
were justified men, for copper pictures the perfect human nature.
In the Holy
The Levites could go no further. Only the priests could enter into the Holy (8) the first
room of the Tabernacle tent. This pictures full consecration to sacrifice in the Lord’s
service. Since only priests could offer sacrifices, so, too, only believers who go on to
consecrate their lives can enter into the condition of being spirit-begotten and fully justified
by the merit of Jesus’ sacrifice. - Romans 5:1, 2; 12:1; Luke 14:25-33; 2 Timothy 2:11, 12;
Matthew 16:24-26; 19:21-30; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23; Hebrews 3:1
Sacrifice directly implies sufferings, especially if it is a "living" sacrifice. (Romans 12:1)
Once inside the Holy, what an awesome display was seen! The walls were wood covered
with gold. The ceiling was beautiful white linen, covered with cherubim, embroidered with
blue, purple and scarlet thread, possibly picturing that those consecrated ones are now
under the protection of God, through His ministering spirits - the angels. - Hebrews 1:13,
14; Matthew 18:10; Psalm 34:7
Only the spirit-begotten Christian can "see" or comprehend spiritual truths. - 1

297. Corinthians 2:7-15
The only source of light in the Holy was that supplied by the 7 lamps fueled with pure olive
oil, sitting atop a solid gold lampstand (9). What an apt picture of the holy Spirit (oil),
enlightening the minds of consecrated Christians. - Revelation 1:12, 13, 20
Another article of furniture was the table of shewbread (10) made of wood covered with
gold. On it sat two piles of "shewbread", 6 cakes each, topped with frankincense. This
symbolizes that Christians are fed from the Word of God (66 books of the Bible) and also
hold it forth unto other spirit-begotten brethren. - Matthew 12:4; John 6:35; Philippians
2:16; Matthew 4:4
The third and last piece of furniture in the Holy was the golden incense altar (11). This, too,
was made of wood covered with gold. It represents the acceptable sacrifice of Jesus and His
church or body members, a sweet odor to God. Our submission to the trials or sufferings of
this life is shown by the incense being consumed on contact with the coals of fire and
yielding its sweet fragrance. - Ephesians 5:1, 2; 2 Corinthians 2:14, 15; 1 Peter 4:12
All things in the Holy were made of, or covered with, gold. Gold pictures the divine nature
and would represent those who are called to be changed to the divine nature upon their
resurrection. (1 Peter 1:4; 2 Peter 1:4) As copper is similar to gold, yet less valuable and
less lustrous, this suggests the similarity between God, the Creator, and man the creature.
In Genesis 1:26 God said, "Let us make man in our image . . . ," and so mankind reflects
the ability to reason, worship and love. Yet, as copper tarnishes with time and needs to be
polished, or maintained, so, too, perfect humanity is mortal and needs sleep, food and
water. However, gold never tarnishes; it needs no maintenance. A divine being has life
within itself, immortality. - John 5:26; 1 Corinthians 15:53, 54
When a priest passed through the first veil or door (12) into the Holy, it represented the
death of his human will to henceforth do the will of God. He is then considered to be
"spirit-begotten," a "new creature," yet still in the flesh. (Romans 6:3-6; 8:9; 2 Corinthians
5:17; Galatians 6:15) When his earthly course is finished, the flesh of the new creature
actually dies, and the new creature character, or personality, is resurrected in a spirit,
divine body. (1 Corinthians 15:40-54) In this condition he will enter heaven itself and
behold the heavenly Father, the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY! This was illustrated when the
high priest stooped under the second veil (13) which separated the Holy room from the
Most Holy room. (14)
In the Most Holy
The ark of the covenant (15) was the only article of furniture in the Most Holy. This ark
was made of wood covered with gold. It had a solid gold lid or "mercy seat" and from
above this mercy seat God communed with Moses. (Exodus 25:22) It was here that the high
priest sprinkled the blood of Atonement once a year, in the pattern of a cross. How
wonderfully this pictured our Lord’s entry into heaven itself, 40 days after his resurrection,
to present the blood (merit) of his ransom sacrifice on our behalf -and not for us alone, but
also for the sins of the whole world. (Hebrews 9:23-26; 1 John 2:2) As the high priest went
twice into the Most Holy on the day of Atonement with blood, it teaches us that we, his
body members (1 Corinthians 12:27), are privileged to follow our Master’s example of
faithfully sacrificing our little all, even unto death. (Revelation 2:10) Having done so, we
will be privileged to follow him into eternal glory and our celestial home, fully prepared to
bless and restore the remainder of mankind in God’s glorious kingdom! - Hebrews 10:19,

298. 20; 1 Corinthians 2:9; Hebrews 13:11-13; Revelation 20:4; Acts 3:19-21
To read further concerning the instructions for the Tabernacle arrangement, see Exodus
25-27. For its construction, read Chapters 35-40.
25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and
again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy
Place every year with blood that is not his own.
1. BARNES, "Nor yet that he should offer himself often - The Jewish high priest
entered the most holy place with blood once every year. In this respect the offering made by
Christ, and the work which he performed, differed from that of the Jewish high priest. It was not
needful that he should enter the holy place but once. Having entered there, he permanently
remains there.
With the blood of others - That is, with the blood of calves, and goats. This is a second
point in which the work of Christ differs from that of the Jewish high priest. Christ entered there
with his own blood; notes on Heb_9:12.
2. CLARKE, "Nor yet that he should offer himself often - The sacrifice of Christ is not
like that of the Jewish high priest; his must be offered every year, Christ has offered himself
once for all: and this sacrificial act has ever the same efficacy, his crucified body being still a
powerful and infinitely meritorious sacrifice before the throne.
3. GILL, "Nor yet that he should offer himself often,.... Or at all again; which shows the
perfection of his sacrifice, for justice was satisfied, the law fulfilled, sin done away, and complete
salvation obtained at once; which lies against the errors of the Socinians, who say he offers
himself now in heaven; and of the Papists, who pretend to offer the body of Christ daily in their
mass:
as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; not
his own, nor other men's, but the blood of goats and calves; but Christ entered into heaven with
his own blood, he having been altar, priest, and sacrifice: the high priest went into the most holy
place every year, but Christ has entered into heaven once for all, where he sits down and
continues, having done his work effectually.

299. 4. MURRAY, SIN PUT AWAY BY THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF. 25-28
IN the previous verses the spiritual and heavenly character of
Christ s work was contrasted with the material and earthly
figures of the old worship. Here the contrast will be between
the unceasing repetition of the old and the once and for ever of
the new. Repetition is the proof of imperfection : what needs
doing only once is finished, is perfect, is for ever. Now once at
the end of the ages hath He been manifested to put away sin
by the sacrifice of Himself. As it is appointed unto men once
to die, and after this the judgment with death, life is finished
and complete, and ripe for judgment ; after that comes the full
revelation of what that death was so Christ also, having been
once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second
time in the full manifestation of what that death accomplished
without sin, to them that wait for Him, unto salvation.
What is done once is done for ever : all it waits for is the ever
lasting manifestation of what is already perfect and complete.
Christ, now once manifested to put away sin byjthe sacri
fice of Himself this is the great lesson of our passage. What
Christ effected by His dying once, is for ever. And what He
did effect was this He put away sin by the sacrifice of Him
self. He was manifested to put it away out of God s presence,
out of His book and His remembrance to put it away from us,
so that it has no more power over us, and we enter upon an
entirely new state of life, with sin removed and God s law
written in our heart.
The question comes up, Is not the expression too strong?
Is not the experience of the Church a proof that it cannot be
meant so literally ? The solution of the difficulty will be found
in a truth that leads us into one of the deepest mysteries of the
spiritual life. As we saw in our last meditation, the words of
God have a divine, an infinite fulness of meaning. They set
before us what is an actual fact, a divine reality, a spiritual truth
in the power of the endless life. But this truth is seldom fully
understood or accepted by believers. And as their knowledge
limits their faith, and their faith their experience, the human
exposition and witness of what God means seldom if ever
reaches to the fulness of what the word contains. We limit the
Holy One of Israel perhaps most when we think we honour Him,
by thinking that we know and hold in our formulas all His word
means. With its divine contents the word infinitely exceeds our
apprehension, and ever invites us to press on to perfection, and

300. prove the deeper and higher truth there is still hidden in the old
familiar words. It is as we yield ourselves to the Holy Spirit,
whose it is to reveal the power of the blood and the opening of
the way into the Holiest, that we shall be led to inherit this
promise too, in all its divine significance sin put away by the
sacrifice of Himself.
By the sacrifice of Himself. The words reveal the inmost
meaning of the death of Christ : it was self-sacrifice. Sin, in its
deepest root, is a turning from God to self; rejecting God to
please self. From the wilderness to the garden this was the
one temptation with which Satan sought to lead Him astray.
By doing not His own will but the will of His Father, by the
sacrifice of Himself to God and His will, He conquered sin in
His own person, and gained a victory over it whereby it was for
ever vanquished and brought to nought. He gave Himself up
to death, as His submittal to it to do its utmost, rather than
yield to its temptation. He gave Himself up to death, as His
submittal to God s righteous judgment upon sin. It was in this
that His death to sin, as the obedient One, that His death for
sin, as our Substitute, had its power, and His atonement its
efficacy. To Him, our Head, death was a personal spiritual
victory, and thereby a vicarious propitiation. In both aspects
He made an end of sin, and of both we are made par
takers.
And how ? By the sacrifice of Himself He put away sin. 1
And now He offers us Himself to take the place of sin. He gives
Himself, the sacrificed One, who has finished redemption, to us
to put away sin within us, too. It is as the Son, the living One,
that He is High Priest ; it is in eternal life power, by a life
working in us, that He brings us to God. And so, by His Spirit,
He, in His self-sacrifice, lives in us, and makes it true in the
i " The putting away of sin. The thought goes beyond the redemption from
transgressions (ver. 15). It is literally for the disannulling of sin (comp. vii. 18). Sin is
vanquished, shown in its weakness, set at nought (Mark vii. 9; Gal. iii. 15)-" Westcott.
experience of each true disciple sin put away by the sacrifice
of self. The law for the Head is the law for every member.
And now the alternative is put before us : Which shall it be ?
Sin and myself or Christ and His Self. Christ has opened for
us a heavenly life-sphere, out of which sin has been put away
the sanctuary of God s presence. Which shall it be self-
pleasing or self-sacrifice a life in self or a life in Christ.
Though we may not always be able to see fully all that Christ s

301. work means, or realise all the riches of blessing it brings, there is
one word not difficult to carry in which all is centred. That
word is Himself. He gave Himself a sacrifice for sin ; He gives
Himself the putter away, the conqueror of sin ; He is Himself
all we can desire or need. Blessed the soul that rests in nothing
less than HIMSELF.
1. Sin is the refusal to sacrifice one s self to God. Self-sacrifice in the fellowship and Spirit
of Jesus Is the way out of sin to God.
2. Christ as our Head Is our Substitute. The value of His work as Substitute rests in His per
sonal character and obedience. The two aspects are inseparable both in Him and in us. We draw
nigh to Him and accept Him, and are saved at once by Him as our Substitute. But then we are at
once implanted into Him, and the spirit in which He worked our salvation is imparted to us. And
so salvation by sacrifice, putting away sin by the sacrifice of self, rules out whole being.
5. JAMISON, "As in Heb_9:24, Paul said, it was not into the typical, but the true sanctuary,
that Christ is entered; so now he says, that His sacrifice needs not, as the Levitical sacrifices did,
to be repeated. Construe, “Nor yet did He enter for this purpose that He may offer Himself
often,” that is, “present Himself in the presence of God, as the high priest does (Paul uses the
present tense, as the legal service was then existing), year by year, on the day of atonement,
entering the Holy of Holies.
with — literally, “in.”
blood of others — not his own, as Christ did.
6. ALEX PETERSON, “How does our Great High Priest differ from old high priests (9:25
– 26)?
The old high priests never got to rest until their dying day. Oh, they may have had
rotation in courses to the Temple, but their work was never done. They were always
slaughtering animals. But Christ, our Great High Priest, Differs greatly from them. He as
Priest offers the Sacrifice, then as the Sacrifice becomes the Sacrifice, and then as Priest,
takes that Sacrifice to God, Who is Supremely and Finally Satisfied with both the Sacrifice
and the High Priest. Because God is Satisfied with Christ as Sacrifice, and Christ as High
Priest, Christ then Sits down at the Right Hand of the Father. By Sitting Down, He
Signifies that all of the Work that ever needed to be Done to Accomplish our Salvation has
been Done. Christ has Entered into the Rest of God after His Work, and we are Seated
with Him, and are therefore presently in That Very Same Rest of God. There is so much
more to say concerning this and so little time to say it. Also, note that our Great High
Priest never Dies, but is Continually Interceding for us before God as our Advocate. Our
Salvation is as Secure as Jesus is because He Never Shall Die Again. We are in Him. He
Intercedes for us and Makes our case. We are Judged on the Righteousness of Jesus our
High Priest and Jesus our Sacrifice, and nothing of our own.
It is not possible that Christ could ever be unsuccessful in Representing us before God the
Father. Therefore it is impossible that He could Lose our case. Therefore it is impossible
that once we are Saved, that we could ever become anything other than Saved. To say that
we could become unsaved after we truly were Saved would be the same thing as saying the

302. Work of Christ was insufficient and that He is a lousy Advocate. That is pure blasphemy.
Jesus Accomplished my Salvation and He did it Right. That is, the paint doesn’t flake and
the boards don’t rot. It’s done.
People who don’t believe in the Eternal Security of God’s Salvation in essence are always
attempting to sign contracts they have no right to sign, on contracts that have already been
signed by the rightful signatories.
7 CALVIN, "Nor yet that he should offer himself often, etc. How, then, is he a
priest, one may say, if he offers no sacrifices? To this I reply that
it is not requited of a priest that he should be continually
sacrificing; for even under the Law there were days appointed for the
chief sacrifices every year; they had also their hours daily morning
and evening. But as that only true sacrifice which Christ offered once
for all is ever efficacious, and thus perpetual in its effects, it is
no wonder that on its virtue, which never fails, Christ's eternal
priesthood should be sustained. And here again he shows how and in what
things Christ differs from the Levitical priest. Of the sanctuary he
had spoken before; but he notices one difference as to the kind of
sacrifice, for Christ offered himself and not an animal; and he adds
another; that he repeated not his sacrifice, as under the Law, for the
repetition there was frequent and even incessant.
8. PINK, “"Nor yet that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the
holy place every year with blood of others" (verse 25). In this verse the apostle does two
things: meets an objection which might be made, and continues to demonstrate the
superior excellency of the Great Sacrifice. The objection could be framed thus: If Aaron’s
entrance into the holy of holies was a type of Christ’s entering heaven, then must He, like
the legal high priest, enter oft. This the apostle here denies. Such a conclusion by no means
follows, in fact, is utterly erroneous. God did not require this from Christ, there was no
need of it, and, as he shows in the next verse, it was impossible that He should.
Such is the absolute perfection of the one offering of Christ, that it stands in need of, that it
will admit of, no repetition in any kind. Therefore does the apostle declare that if it be
despised or neglected, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10:26). This
absolute perfection of the one offering of Christ arises from, first, the dignity of His person:
Acts 20:28. It was the God-man who obeyed, suffered and died: nothing superior, nothing
equal, could again be offered. Second, from the nature of the sacrifice itself. In the internal
gracious workings of Christ, grace and obedience could never be more glorified than they
had been by Immanuel Himself. So too, in the punishment He underwent: He suffered to
the full, the whole curse of the law; hence, any further offering or atonement would be
highly blasphemous. Third, from the love of the Father unto Him and delight in Him. In
His one offering God was well pleased, and in it He rests. Hence the impossibility of any
repetition-condensed from John Owen.
"Nor yet that He should offer Himself often." In these positive and pointed words the Holy

303. Spirit has plainly anticipated and repudiated the blasphemous practice of the Papists, who
in their daily "mass" pretend to sacrifice Christ afresh, and by their "priests" present Him
as an offering to God, claiming that the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the real
flesh and blood of Christ. Therefore are they guilty of the unspeakably dreadful sin of
crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame (Heb.
6:6), for by their pretended "real sacrifice of Christ" they, through their daily repetition of
it, deny its sufficiency and finality (Heb. 10:2), degrading it below that of the annual
atonement of Israel, which was made by the blood of beasts.
"As the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others." On these
words William Gouge beautifully pointed out that, "Herein we have an evidence of God’s
tender respect to man in sparing his blood. Though man were ordained a priest to typify
Christ’s priesthood, though man in that function were to appear before God, though he
were to bear their names, yea, and their sins (Ex. 28:38), all of which Christ did, yet when it
came to the shedding of his blood, as Christ did His, God spared him, and accepted the
blood of beasts, as He accepted the ram for Isaac (Gen. 22:13). How this magnifies God’s
love to us, who was so tender of man, and yet spared not His own Son (Rom. 8:32)!"
26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times
since the creation of the world. But now he has
appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away
with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
1. BARNES, "For then must he often have suffered - That is, if his blood had no more
efficacy than what the Jewish high priest offered, and which was so often repeated, it would have
been necessary that Christ should have often died.
But now once - Once for all; once in the sense that it is not to be repeated again - ᅏπαξ
hapax.
In the end of the world - In the last dispensation or economy; that under which the affairs
of the world will be wound up; see the phrase fully explained in Heb_1:2 note, and Act_2:17
note; 1Co_10:11, and Isa_2:2.
Hath he appeared - He has been manifested in human form.
To put away sin -
(1) To remove the punishment due to sin, or to provide a way of pardon; and,
(2) To remove the stain of sin from the soul; see the notes on Heb_9:14.
By the sacrifice of himself - see the notes on Heb_1:3; Heb_2:14; Heb_7:27.

304. 2. CLARKE, "For then must he often have suffered - In the counsel of God, Christ was
considered the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, Rev_13:8, so that all believers
before his advent were equally interested in his sacrificial death with those who have lived since
his coming. Humanly speaking, the virtue of the annual atonement could not last long, and must
be repeated; Christ’s sacrifice is ever the same; his life’s blood is still considered as in the act of
being continually poured out. See Rev_5:6.
The end of the world - The conclusion of the Jewish dispensation, the Christian
dispensation being that which shall continue till the end of time.
To put away sin - Εις αθετησιν ᅋµαρτιας· To abolish the sin-offerings; i.e. to put an end to
the Mosaic economy by his one offering of himself. It is certain that, after Christ had offered
himself, the typical sin-offerings of the law ceased; and this was expressly foretold by the
Prophet Daniel, Dan_9:24. Some think that the expression should be applied to the putting
away the guilt, power, and being of sin from the souls of believers.
3. GILL, "For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world,....
For if it was necessary that he should often offer up himself now, which is the same as to suffer,
since the sacrifice of himself, the same was necessary before; seeing sin was in the world from
the beginning, and the saints from the foundation of the world had their sins expiated by the
sacrifice of Christ; but the truth is, Christ's sufferings were but once, though the virtue of them is
always, both before and after; nor can he suffer more, or again, because of his power over death
and the grave, and because he has effectually obtained what he suffered for:
but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the
sacrifice of himself; this is to be understood, not of his appearance in heaven, of which
mention is made in Heb_9:24 but of his incarnation on earth, called an appearance; not as
though his human nature was a mere phantom or apparition, for it was a real thing; or as if he
was then manifested to be what he really was before; for before his incarnation he was not truly
and actually man; but this is said with respect to the manifestation of his invisible deity; or of
him as the Son of God in human nature; and in regard to the types of the old law, under which
he was hid; and with respect to the prophecies of his coming; and it designs the same thing with
his descent from heaven, and coming into this world, in which he appeared in fashion as a man,
as a mean man, as an afflicted one; yea, he looked like a sinful man, bearing the infirmities and
sins of his people; his appearance was but to a very few, and for a little time; and the time of it
was, "in the end of the world"; the same with the last days; the last age of the world; the end of
the Jewish economy; at the close of their civil and ecclesiastical state, according to Hab_2:3 & so
the Jews expect their Messiah ‫לקץ‬‫הימים‬ , "at the end of days" (n): and this appearance was but
"once"; there were many appearances of him in an human form, under the Old Testament
dispensation; and there were many after his resurrection; but this is said to be but once, in
opposition to the many types and sacrifices under the law, and agrees with his one oblation, and
once suffering: the end of his appearance was, to put away sin; the filth of it, by his blood; the
guilt of it, by his atoning sacrifice; and the punishment of it, by his sufferings and death, the
penalty of the law; and in consequence of all this, the dominion of it by the power of his grace,
and the very being of it hereafter: and this putting it away is signified by his bearing, carrying,
and taking it away; by removing it as far as the east is from the west; by finishing and making an
end of it; by crucifying the old man, destroying the body of sin, and by an utter disannulling and
abolishing it, as a debt, and as a law; and all this is done by the sacrifice of himself; by the
offering up of his body and soul an offering for sin; as in Heb_9:14.

305. 4. HENRY, " From the sacrifices themselves, Heb_9:26. Those under the law were the lives
and blood of other creatures of a different nature from the offerers - the blood of beasts, a thing
of small value, and which would have been of none at all in this matter had it not had a typical
respect to the blood of Christ; but the sacrifice of Christ was the oblation of himself; he offered
his own blood, truly called, by virtue of the hypostatical union, the blood of God; and therefore
of infinite value. 3. From the frequent repetition of the legal sacrifices. This showed the
imperfection of that law; but it is the honour and perfection of Christ's sacrifice that, being once
offered, it was sufficient to all the ends of it; and indeed the contrary would have been absurd,
for then he must have been still dying and rising again, and ascending and then again
descending and dying; and the great work had been always in fieri - always doing, and always to
do, but never finished, which would be as contrary to reason as it is to revelation, and to the
dignity of his person: But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin
by the sacrifice of himself. The gospel is the last dispensation of the grace of God to men. 4.
From the inefficacy of the legal sacrifices, and the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice. The legal
sacrifices could not of themselves put away sin, neither procure pardon for it now power against
it. Sin would still have lain upon us, and had dominion over us; but Jesus Christ by one sacrifice
has made an end of sin, he has destroyed the works of the devil.
5. JAMISON, "then — in that case.
must ... have suffered — rather as Greek, “It would have been necessary for Him often to
suffer.” In order to “offer” (Heb_9:25), or present Himself often before God in the heavenly
holiest place, like the legal high priests making fresh renewals of this high priestly function. He
would have had, and would have often to suffer. His oblation of Himself before God was once for
all (that is, the bringing in of His blood into the heavenly Holy of Holies), and therefore the
preliminary suffering was once for all.
since the foundation of the world — The continued sins of men, from their first creation,
would entail a continual suffering on earth, and consequent oblation of His blood in the
heavenly holiest place, since the foundation of the world, if the one oblation “in the fullness of
time” were not sufficient. Philo [The Creation of the World, p. 637], shows that the high priest of
the Hebrews offered sacrifices for the whole human race. “If there had been greater efficacy in
the repetition of the oblation, Christ necessarily would not have been so long promised, but
would have been sent immediately after the foundation of the world to suffer, and offer Himself
at successive periods” [Grotius].
now — as the case is,
once — for all; without need of renewal. Rome’s fiction of an UNBLOODY sacrifice in the
mass, contradicts her assertion that the blood of Christ is present in the wine; and also confutes
her assertion that the mass is propitiatory; for, if unbloody, it cannot be propitiatory; for
without shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb_9:22). Moreover, the expression “once”
for all here, and in Heb_9:28, and Heb_10:10, Heb_10:12, proves the falsity of her view that
there is a continually repeated offering of Christ in the Eucharist or mass. The offering of Christ
was a thing once done that it might be thought of for ever (compare Note, see on Heb_10:12).
in the end of the world — Greek, “at the consummation of the ages”; the winding up of all
the previous ages from the foundation of the world; to be followed by a new age (Heb_1:1,
Heb_1:2). The last age, beyond which no further age is to be expected before Christ’s speedy
second coming, which is the complement of the first coming; literally, “the ends of the ages”;
Mat_28:20 is literally, “the consummation of the age,” or world (singular; not as here, plural,
ages). Compare “the fullness of times,” Eph_1:10.

306. appeared — Greek, “been manifested” on earth (1Ti_3:16; 1Pe_1:20). English Version has
confounded three distinct Greek verbs, by translating all alike, Heb_9:24, Heb_9:26, Heb_9:28,
“appear.” But, in Heb_9:24, it is “to present Himself,” namely, before God in the heavenly
sanctuary; in Heb_9:26, “been manifested” on earth: in Heb_9:28, “shall be seen” by all, and
especially believers.
put away — abolish; doing away sin’s power as well by delivering men from its guilt and
penalty, so that it should be powerless to condemn men, as also from its yoke, so that they shall
at last sin no more.
sin — singular number; all the sins of men of every age are regarded as one mass laid on
Christ. He hath not only droned for all actual sins, but destroyed sin itself. Joh_1:29, “Behold
the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin (not merely the sins: singular, not plural) of the
world.”
by the sacrifice of himself — Greek, “by (through) His own sacrifice”; not by “blood of
others” (Heb_9:25). Alford loses this contrast in translating, “by His sacrifice.”
6. OUT WITH THE OLD, IN WITH THE NEW
It's not often we get to enjoy the very best of anything. We can never afford the best
holiday package, we don't have the best job we can imagine, friendships aren't the best
they could be. Yet as Christians, in the things that matter most we have nothing but the
best. Christ, the best priest, offered the best sacrifice in the best temple so that we enjoy the
best possible relationship with God.
7. CALVIN, " For then must he often have suffered, etc. He shows how great an
absurdity follows, if we do not count it enough that an expiation has
been made by the one sacrifice of Christ. For he hence concludes that
he must have died often; for death is connected with sacrifices. How
this latter supposition is most unreasonable; it then follows that the
virtue of the one sacrifice is eternal and extends to all ages. And he
says since the foundation of the world, or from the beginning of the
world [158] for in all ages from the beginning there were sins which
needed expiation. Except then the sacrifice of Christ was efficacious,
no one of the fathers would have obtained salvation; for as they were
exposed to God's wrath, a remedy for deliverance would have failed
them, had not Christ by suffering once suffered so much as was
necessary to reconcile men to God from the beginning of the world even
to the end. Except then we look for many deaths, we must be satisfied
with the one true sacrifice.
And hence it is evident how frivolous is the distinction, in the
acuteness of which the Papists take so much delight; for they say that
the sacrifice of Christ on the cross was bloody, but that the sacrifice
of the mass which they pretend to offer daily to God, is unbloody. Were
this subtle evasion adopted, then the Spirit of God would be accused of
inadvertence, having not thought of such a thing; for the Apostle
assumes it here as an admitted truth, that there is no sacrifice
without death. I care nothing that ancient writers have spoken thus;

307. for it is not in the power of men to invent sacrifices as they please.
Here stands a truth declared by the Holy Spirit, that sins are not
expiated by a sacrifice except blood be shed. Therefore the notion,
that Christ is often offered, is a device of the devil.
But now once in the end of the world, etc. He calls that the end of the
world or the consummation of the ages, which Paul calls "the fullness
of time," (Galatians 4:4;) for it was the maturity of that time which
God had determined in his eternal purpose; and thus cut off is every
occasion for men's curiosity, that they may not dare to inquire why it
was no sooner, or why in that age rather than in another. For it
behooves us to acquiesce in God's secret purpose, the reason for which
appears clear to him, though it may not be evident to us. In short, the
Apostle intimates that Christ's death was in due time, as he was sent
into the world for this end by the Father, in whose power is the lawful
right to regulate all things as well as time, and who ordains their
succession with consummate wisdom, though often hid from us
This consummation is also set in opposition to the imperfection of past
time; for God so held his ancient people in suspense, that it might
have been easily concluded that things had not yet reached a fixed
state. Hence Paul declares that the end of the ages had come upon us,
(1 Corinthians 10:11;) by which he means that the kingdom of Christ
contained the accomplishment of all things. But since it was the
fullness of time when Christ appeared to expiate sins, they are guilty
of offering him an atrocious insult, who seek to renew his sacrifice,
as though all things were not completed by his death. He then appeared
once for all; for had he done so once or twice, there must have been
something defective in the first oblation; but this is inconsistent
with fullness.
To put away, or to destroy sin, etc. [159] This agrees with Daniel's
prophecy, in which the sealing up and the abolition of sins are
promised, and in which it is also declared that there would be an end
to sacrifices, (Daniel 9:24-27;) for to what purpose are expiations
when sins are destroyed? But this destruction is then only effected,
when sins are not imputed to those who flee to the sacrifice of Christ;
for though pardon is to be sought daily, as we daily provoke God's
wrath; yet as we are reconciled to God in no other way than by the one
death of Christ, sin is rightly said to be put away or destroyed by it.
8. PINK, “"For then must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but
now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of
Himself" (verse 26). This verse consists of two parts. First, a reason is given confirming the
assertion made in verse 25: had Christ been obliged to "offer Himself often" to God, then
must He have "suffered" afresh "from the foundation of the world," that is, died afresh in

308. each generation of human history. Second, a confirmation of that reason taken from the
appointment of God: only once, and that in the fullness of time, did Christ come to earth to
be a sacrifice for the sins of His people. Thus the apostle exposes the gross absurdity of the
objection he met in verse 25: to admit that, would be to say Christ’s blood had no more
efficacy than that which the Jewish high priest offered.
The force of the apostle’s argument rests upon two evident suppositions. First, that the
"offering" (verse 25) and "suffering" (verse 26) of Christ are inseparable. It was in and by
His suffering that the Lord Jesus offered Himself unto God, and that because He was
Himself both the Priest and the Sacrifice. Aaron "offered" repeatedly, yet he never once
"suffered," for he was not the sacrifice itself. It was the bullock which was slain, that
suffered. But Christ being both Priest and Sacrifice could not "offer" without "suffering,"
and herein does the force of the argument principally consist. The very especial nature of
Christ’s offering or sacrifice, which was by the shedding of His blood in death, precluded a
repetition thereof.
Second, the apostle’s argument here is also built on the fact that there was a necessity for
the expiation of the sin of all that were to be saved from the foundation of the world. Sin
entered the world immediately after it was founded, by the apostasy of our first parents.
Notwithstanding, numbers of sinners, as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and the spiritual
remnant in Israel had their sins pardoned and were eternally saved; yet no sacrifice which
they offered could remit moral guilt or redeem their souls. No; their salvation was also
effected by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ. Hence it follows unavoidably that unless the
merits of His own one offering extended unto the taking away of all their sins, then either
He must have suffered often, or they perish. Contrariwise, seeing that elect sinners were
saved through Christ "from the foundation of the world," much more will the virtues of
the Great Sacrifice extend unto the end of the world.
"But now," not at the beginning of human history; "once," that is, once for all, never to be
repeated; "in the end of the world," or in "the fullness of time" (Gal. 4:4). This expression
"end of the world" or more literally, "consummation of the ages" is here used
antithetically from "since the foundation of the world" which usually has reference to the
first entrance of sin into the world. and God’s dispensation of grace in Christ thereon; as
"before the foundation of the world" (Eph. 1:4, etc.) expresses eternity and God’s counsels
therein. The Divine distinctions of time with respect to God’s grace toward His Church,
may be referred to three general heads: that before the law, during the law, and since the
incarnation of Christ unto the end of the world. This last season, absolutely considered, is
called the "fullness of times" (Eph. 1:10), when all that God had designed in the
dispensation of His grace was come to a head, and wherein no alteration should be made
till the earth was no more.
"Hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." He "appeared" here on
earth (the Greek word is quite different from the one used in verse 24): of old He had been
obscurely shadowed forth in types, but now He was "manifest in flesh" (1 Tim. 3:10). The
end or purpose of this appearing of Christ was to "put away sin"—the Greek word is a
very strong one, and is rendered "disannuling" in Hebrews 7:18. Let it be carefully noted
that this declaration is made only as it respects the Church of Christ. He made a complete
atonement for all the sin of all His people, receiving its wages, expiating its guilt, destroying
its dominion. The results are that, when God applies to the penitent believer the virtues of
Christ’s sacrifice, all condemnation is removed (Rom. 8:1), and its reigning power is

309. destroyed (Rom. 6:14).
9. Leslie Weatherhead, in his book Key Next Door, told about a benevolent ruler named
Goho who, centuries ago, lived on the island of Taiwan. One ritual he desperately wanted
stopped was the ancient custom of offering humans for sacrifices. He wanted them to
substitute an ox or a pig for their annual offering.
For many years he succeeded. However, after one extremely poor harvest the tribal leaders
complained that the animal sacrifices weren't working and they needed a human sacrifice
to appease the gods whom they believed to be angry at them.
Unfortunately, Goho failed to convince his tribe of the error of their way and finally gave
in to them. He said. "Go into the forest tomorrow morning. There you will find a victim
tied to a tree. He will be wearing a red robe of sacrifice and a red cloth over his face and
head. Strike! For this is your next victim."
The following morning the men went to the forest and found the victim just as Goho said.
In a crazed freauy they rushed in and decapitated him. When they uncovered his head they
realized what they had done. They had killed Goho, their leader!
According to the story, Taiwan has never again had a human sacrifice. Goho accomplished
through his death what his teaching fai