The Christadelphian 1933, John Carter

“The Letter to the Hebrews” 

An Analysis and Exposition

Xi.—The Priesthood of Christ

JESUS is the high priest whom God has appointed; he is also the surety of a better covenant. As a high priest he must have a ministry, and a place of service. The tabernacle, in connection with which he serves, is not the Mosaic, which was but a typical tabernacle; Jesus serves in the true, the antitypical tabernacle. The Mosaic, like the covenant with which it was connected, was only for a time; the prophets foretold another covenant to be established. These are the matters discussed in chapter 8.

(d) A Summary (verses 1–2)

The A.V. suggests the idea of a summary. “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum.” Generally, the R.V. receives the support of scholars. “Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is this.” The difference is in the view of the word translated “sum.” It is connected with the word “head,” and denotes the “sum” from the practice of adding up a column and putting the total at the head. It is also used of a “capital, chief, or crowning particular, a main point.” The verse has been thus paraphrased: “As a capital point upon the things which are being said.”

The older translators, Tyndall and Coverdale, give “of the things we have spoken this is the pith.” Similarly Moffatt: “the point of all this.” But as it has been truly said, “if an argument is well knit, its capital point is also the sum of it.”

We notice the apostle says “of the things we are saying,” not “have said.” His reference to the High Priest looks back to preceding chapters; the reference to the sanctuary and the tabernacle looks forward, for he discusses them in chapter 9. His capital point is the sum of it. He says: “We have such a priest who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.”

“We have such a high priest as became us,” he had said just before (7:26). And he “is such a high priest who is sat down on God’s right hand” in fulfilment of Psa. 110. This high priest so much needed is one highly exalted. What a possession was now theirs, to be represented no longer by a mortal man, with weakness and infirmity, but by an exalted immortal ever-availing Son of God. And we Gentiles share in the intercessions of the same high priest as they.

His service pertains to the “true” tabernacle. “True” in English” does duty for two ideas, one of which was formerly expressed by “very.” We have “true” in contrast to false. We have also “true” in contrast to that which is typical—the real in contrast to the shadow. In this sense Christ is the true bread and the true vine. When Paul says that Christ is a minister of the true tabernacle he suggests by the word “true” that the Mosaic tabernacle was merely typical, and therefore not the perfect.

The tabernacle was God’s dwelling place, and the place of meeting between Himself and man. “Let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.” “And there (over the mercy seat, in the most holy) will I meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel” (Ex. 25:8, 22). This is the type.

The true tabernacle is the place of meeting in fellowship with the Father. Jesus has gone into the Father’s presence; now “one” with the Father in every sense, by the transformation of his physical nature. But distance is no barrier to perfect fellowship; it is more a matter of state than place in the antitype. Anticipating the end of the Mosaic age and worship, while yet admitting its divine origin, Jesus said that the true worship would be independent of an appointed centre such as Jerusalem, when the “true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth” (John 4:22–24). In this language Jesus disclosed to the Samaritan woman that which is being argued at length and demonstrated from the type by Paul in this letter.

The true tabernacle is essentially that state of true worship and fellowship with God. The type foreshadows present and future aspects of this, as becomes clear in the next chapter. Therefore it is written of Jesus, that the word was made flesh and tabernacled among us, full of grace and truth (John 1:14). He spake himself of the temple, which is his body, (John 3:21). And of him in his exaltation it is affirmed that “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Col. 2:9).

Jesus, in whom we see the first application of the idea of the true dwelling place of God, was the Son of God; and so it might be said of him, in the language of figure taken from the type, “whom the Lord pitched, not man.” Man could make the wilderness copy, but only God could make the true tabernacle. Many men have served as types of the redeemer, but only the Son of God could redeem us. Israel provided the material, voluntarily offered, for the tabernacle which they pitched, and God is using the men and women who offer themselves for the tabernacle which He is setting up. The Son of God was also son of man.

The believers are sons of God in Christ, begotten by the word of God. Introduced into Christ, they become part of the true tabernacle. While their begettal is different in kind from that of Jesus, it is, nevertheless, a divine work. God visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for Himself, that He might dwell in them; and it can also be said of them, as of Jesus, “whom the Lord pitched, not man.” They are built up a spiritual house; they are the temple of God, “even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Pet. 2:5).

A More Excellent Ministry (verses 3–6).

Having become a high priest, what is the service of the Son of God? He must have a ministry to perform, and there must be a place of service. The latter could not be on earth, in the Mosaic tabernacle, because there were already priests of the house of Levi doing service. The law provided for them, but only for them. There was no provision for Christ serving there; it was as impossible for him as for Uzziah, who suffered for his presumption.

But while God had arranged the service of Aaron and his sons, yet the place where they served was, like their service, of a representative character. The tabernacle itself was “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things.” Paul finds the proof for this in the fact that Moses was shewn a pattern in the mount, and the tabernacle was a copy of it; by this being indicated that there were “heavenly things,” of which the tabernacle was only a “copy and shadow.”

“For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that this high priest also have somewhat to offer. Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the law; who serve that which is a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern that was shewed thee in the mount” (verses 3–5).

Christ as priest had somewhat to offer. The high priest took into the holiest the blood of the sacrifice offered without (Lev. 16:14, 15) and sprinkled it upon the mercy seat (Lev. 16:14, 15). The taking into the holy place indicated the means to be employed for opening the way therein. The ritual of the law provides the apostles with the language by which they explain the redemptive work of Christ. “In Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ (Eph. 2:13). “Elect . . . through sanctification of the spirit and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1:2). “Unto him that washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Rev. 1:5). We see this form of words expressly connected with the ritual in this epistle. “By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place” (9:12). “Having therefore boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus” (10:19).

He presented to the Father the life’s work of complete obedience unto death. By virtue of this he also presents the offerings of his people made “in his name,” and “for his sake.” Their prayers and praises ascend acceptably to the throne of God through him (4:6: 13:15). Paul even employs the language of the type to indicate that the good deeds of his people are as acceptable sacrifices (13:16). They present themselves as living sacrifices (Rom. 6:13: 12:1) through the high priest in heaven.

This is a better ministry than the presenting of the blood of animal sacrifices. It is better because it pertains to a better covenant, which is founded upon better promises. “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” (8:6).

In 7:22 Paul shewed that Jesus had a better priesthood, which established a better covenant. Here he shews that God contemplated a better covenant, and that Christ’s ministry, which included the work of mediator of the covenant, is therefore greater than that of Aaron. Previously Jesus had been spoken of as surety. This denotes his undertaking to fulfil the covenant. His mediatorship indicates his work of negotiating it. “There is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” Jesus can mediate, because he has made possible the fulfilment of the new covenant in that men can have sins forgiven through him. This is essential for the everlasting possession of the earth, promised to Abraham and his seed. Here are better promises because of this; the prophets witnessing that it was God’s intention to introduce a new covenant, of which the forgiveness of sins was an essential part.

A New Covenant Divinely Arranged (verses 7–13)

Why another covenant? Because the first was ineffective for ultimate purposes. It was “added” for a time. The very fact of a second being contemplated shews this. “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt: for they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and on their heart also will I write them: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their iniquities, and their sins will I remember no more” (verses 8–12).

Four things might be noticed in this quotation.

The new covenant is unlike the old. Although it was established in connection with a divine deliverance from Egypt in which God exhibited His power by a series of wonders unparalleled in the history of any nation, yet it had to be said, “They continued not in my covenant.” They were not constant in their worship, and were at last taken off the land, and carried into captivity. Jeremiah was contemporary with this, and his message of a new covenant must have been a great source of hope and comfort to discerning Israelites of those tragic times. Then God had ceased to “regard” them.

Contrasted with this, in new covenant times the laws of God will be written in the hearts of the people of Israel; God’s law will be in their mind. The laws given through Moses were written on stone, and Paul in 2 Cor. 3. interestingly draws out the contrast between the two writing materials, and also between the transient glory of the old as manifested in the face of Moses and the abiding glory of the new covenant as exhibited in Jesus, the Lord of Glory. As the result of heart-inscribed laws, God “will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.” There will not be declension to other gods, and it will not have to be written again, “not my people” (Hos. 1:9).

Then “all shall know” God; one will not have to teach his neighbour. The priesthood had the custody of the Oracles of God. They knew the law and proclaimed it to their fellows. The passage seems to suggest that what in times past was the privilege of the priesthood will be the lot of all, not as an external possession, but as a transforming influence within them. “All thy people shall be taught of God.”

Lastly, the new covenant, in keeping with the other contrasts with the old, provides for the forgiveness of sins. This is its outstanding difference; and this result, as we have repeatedly seen, could only be procured by “such an high priest” as Jesus has been shewn to be.

“A new covenant”—then the old was doomed; this decision had been made. But the working out of the decision took time, so that God’s purpose might be fulfilled in the birth of the Seed among this people of Israel dwelling in their land. Although the times of the Gentiles had begun a partial restoration was necessary that the Ruler might be born in Bethlehem, that he might be the Messenger of the Covenant rejected and “cut off,’ and that all that had been written of him in connection with his first advent might be accomplished. The new covenant having been confirmed in his blood, there only remained the passing away of the old, as a garment to be folded up and put away. They were witnessing this folding away. “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away” (verse 13).

What an exhortation to those first readers is here. Why hold on to that which God had seen fit to put away? It were better to take hold of the new with its better hope, its better promises, its better priesthood.

John Carter.