8. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 1 (8:1–13)

Outline

8:1–2	A. The Heavenly Sanctuary
	B. Jesus the Mediator
8:3	1. High Priest
8:4–6	2. Service
8:7–13	C. God’s New Covenant

A. The Heavenly Sanctuary

8:1–2

8 1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.

The claims to Jesus’ priesthood the author expounded in chapter 7. In Hebrews 8, he explains the task of the high priest, Jesus Christ, and alludes to Psalm 110:1.

1. The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2. and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.

The preceding chapter delineates the surpassing excellence of Christ’s priesthood in the order of Melchizedek. The author of Hebrews provides the readers with a lucid exposition of Psalm 110:4. However, he does not want them to lose sight of the first verse of that psalm. That verse portrays Jesus as king. Jesus, therefore, is the king-priest, as Psalm 110 clearly teaches. Although the writer has stressed the importance of Jesus’ priesthood in the Melchizedekian order, he desires his readers to recognize Jesus’ kingship, too. Hence, he writes the introductory clause, “the point of what we are saying is this,” and asserts that our high priest sat down at the right hand of God and serves in the true tabernacle.¹

In the introduction of the Epistle to the Hebrews the author implicitly mentions the priesthood and the kingship of the Son (1:3; also see 1:13). After completing his priestly duties, Jesus “sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” In Hebrews 10:12 and 12:2 the writer returns to this same theme: Jesus is priest and king.

In typical Hebraic form, the writer’s choice of the phrase of the Majesty in heaven is a substitute for the word God. Jesus sat down in the place of honor: at the right hand of God.

The verb to sit down is significant. “Sitting was often a mark of honour or authority in the ancient world: a king sat to receive his subjects, a court to give judgment, and a teacher to teach.”² The Book of Revelation in particular describes God, who sits on the throne (4:2, 10; 5:1, 7, 13; 6:16; 7:10, 15; 19:4; 21:5), and Jesus, who shares that throne (1:4–5; 3:21; 7:15–17; 12:5).

The throne of God and the sanctuary (the true tabernacle) bring king and high priest together into one place. This is not at all surprising if we think of the tabernacle in the desert, where God placed his throne in the Most Holy Place (Lev. 16:2). God took up residence behind the veil in the Tent of Meeting. In Revelation 16:17, temple and throne are mentioned together: “… out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, ‘It is done!’ ” Justice and mercy flow forth from the throne and the sanctuary, from the king and the high priest.

By his sacrificial death, Jesus finished his atoning work on earth. Upon his ascension, he entered the presence of God (the sanctuary) and sat down at God’s right hand. Says the writer of Hebrews, Jesus “serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.”

Three matters come to mind when we consider Hebrews 8:2.

a. Jesus is serving in the sanctuary. His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary is superior to the priestly service on earth (8:5–6) because he is the only high priest who has ascended to heaven. God did not need to descend to earth to accept a sacrifice offered by priests. God had appointed the heavenly high priest by oath to serve eternally in God’s sanctuary. Jesus brought his once-for-all offering and, entering the true sanctuary, began his priestly ministry in the presence of God.³

b. Jesus serves in the sanctuary that is the true tabernacle. The writer of Hebrews does not leave the reader in doubt regarding the identity of tabernacle and sanctuary and their place. In the next chapter he explains the term tabernacle: Christ “went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation” (9:11). And he adds: “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” (9:24).⁴ Tabernacle and sanctuary are the same.

c. Jesus serves as high priest in the true tabernacle. This true tabernacle has been set up by the Lord, as the writer reminds us. What he means is that God gave Moses a copy of the tabernacle which the Lord God showed him (Exod. 25:9, 40). The copy was on earth; the true tabernacle is in heaven. Does Scripture mention a tabernacle in heaven? Yes, Isaiah says that he saw “the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple” (Isa. 6:1; see also Mic. 1:2). That sanctuary has not been erected by man, but by God. God would never have set it up if he had not appointed Christ to serve in that tabernacle. After his atoning work was accomplished, Jesus entered God’s sanctuary and there represents the interests of all his people. From God’s tabernacle flow blessings that surpass any blessings from the Levitical sacrificial system.

B. Jesus the Mediator

8:3–6

3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

3. Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4. If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law.

An effective teacher repeats his lesson often in the same words. The writer of Hebrews is no exception, for 8:3 is a virtual repetition of 5:1. Besides, the author continues his descriptive method of teaching by presenting contrast. Note the contrast in 8:3.

1. High Priest

8:3

for	—	and so
every high priest	—	for this one also
is appointed	—	it was necessary
to offer	—	to have to offer
both gifts and sacrifices	—	something

The New International Version omits the first word for that has its counterpart in and so. Although the term high priest is qualified by the adjective every, the text conveys the implication that there had been a long succession of high priests. Over against the numerous high priests stands Jesus. The author of Hebrews does not refer to him by name; he says “this one” in order to remind the reader of the priest-king serving in the heavenly sanctuary.

The contrast between the continual offerings of the high priest in the form of “both gifts and sacrifices” and the single offering, simply mentioned as “something,” is significant. What this “something” consists of the author does not specify in 8:3, but in 9:14 he elaborates. Also, in the original Greek the two verbs to offer delineate the difference, in that the first one, pertaining to every high priest, indicates continuous occurrence. The second to offer verb, used with reference to Jesus, shows a single event.

2. Service

8:4–6

In 8:4 the author continues his use of contrasts with a conditional sentence that is contrary to fact. That is, the two parts of the sentence demand counterparts which are implied.

“If he were on earth”	—	but he is in heaven
“he would not be a priest”	—	but he is our priest

The sanctuary in which Christ serves as high priest is in heaven, not on earth. During his ministry on earth he could not be priest at all because he belonged to the tribe of Judah, rather than the tribe of Levi. However, the writer of the epistle does not state or imply that Christ could not bring his once-for-all offering on Calvary’s cross.⁵ He only notes that those who are part of the Levitical priesthood offer gifts that are “prescribed by the law.” Jesus did not belong to the priestly clan of Levi and therefore could not serve at the altar. Instead, he serves in the true tabernacle, in the presence of God.

5. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”

The contrast continues. This verse explains the service, the building, and the pattern of the tabernacle on earth; the next verse portrays Jesus as the mediator of a better covenant. Hebrews 8:5 describes the construction of the earthly sanctuary. Three main points stand out.

a. “Copy and shadow.” Jesus entered the heavenly sanctuary in God’s presence, but the priests served God in the tabernacle that the Israelites constructed in the time of Moses.⁶

The two words copy and shadow, although different in meaning, complement each other; one provides what the other lacks. The term copy denotes substance, and the noun shadow may be understood as a “reflection … of the heavenly original.”⁷ We receive the mental picture of the heavenly original casting a shadow on the earth. But this shadow has form and substance.

The writer of Hebrews intends to say that the priests who served in the sanctuary had to realize the limitations: the tabernacle structure was but a copy and the sacrifices were only a shadow. In the following chapter, where he elucidates the significance of sacrifices, the author explains the meaning of 8:5. Says he: “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. 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” (9:23–24; also see 10:1).

b. “Build the tabernacle.” If Moses built a tabernacle according to a copy of a heavenly original, what then is the appearance and the function of the heavenly sanctuary? Speculation about a heavenly sanctuary originated with, and at the same time fascinated, Jewish teachers in the time of the apostles and afterward.⁸ They speculated on what Moses was permitted to observe when God instructed him. Did Moses see more than what is recorded in Exodus 33:18–23 (when God showed him the glory of the Lord)?⁹

No tabernacle of the same proportions as Moses built exists in heaven. Scripture fails to give any dimensions of the celestial tabernacle. Nor do we have the liberty to say that the heavenly tabernacle exists only in the mind of God. Avoiding either extreme, we ought to take note of the following Scripture passages where God instructed Moses to build the tabernacle:

1. “See that you make them according to the pattern shown you on the mountain” (Exod. 25:40).

2. “Set up the tabernacle according to the plan shown you on the mountain” (Exod. 26:30).

3. “Make the altar hollow, out of boards. It is to be made just as you were shown on the mountain” (Exod. 27:8).

4. “The lampstand was made exactly like the pattern the Lord had shown Moses” (Num. 8:4).¹⁰

Because the Bible is a book about man’s redemption and not a revelation about heaven, we ought to let the Scripture speak. Where the Scriptures are silent, we must be reticent. All we know is that Christ entered the heavenly sanctuary that is not manmade (Heb. 9:24). Its earthly counterpart was the ancient tabernacle that Moses erected according to the pattern God showed him.

c. “The pattern.” Moses received from God the blueprints for the construction of the tabernacle and was repeatedly told to follow the instructions carefully (Exod. 25:40; also see Acts 7:44).

What precisely did Moses see when God gave him the pattern? To put it differently: Did Moses receive only the pattern, or did he see the original? If he were given the blueprint of the tabernacle, then he received, in effect, a plan from which he had to build a model—the tabernacle in the desert.¹¹

We do not know what Moses saw when God gave him the pattern for the earthly tabernacle. Scripture tells us that our high priest Jesus Christ has gone “through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not manmade, that is to say, not a part of this creation” (Heb. 9:11). This information is a source of comfort for us because we know that as our heavenly high priest, Jesus intercedes for us. He is our mediator.

6. But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

This verse is actually a continuation of 8:4, with the pronoun he (i.e., Jesus) as the subject of the sentence. Although the author of Hebrews contrasts Jesus with the Levitical priests, in 8:6 the primary emphasis is upon the difference in covenants rather than the difference in ministry. The author somewhat abruptly introduces the concept of covenant that he mentioned in 7:22. He is ready now to explain the implications of the new covenant that is superior to the old covenant. And he shows that the Christ is the mediator of this new covenant.

Twice in this verse the word superior occurs: the ministry Jesus has obtained is superior to that of the priests, and the new covenant is superior to the old one.

What is the ministry Christ has received?¹² The word ministry relates to the work in the tabernacle or sanctuary. If Jesus had merely fulfilled the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood with his personal sacrifice, his work would be incomplete. Jesus fulfilled the obligations of the Levitical priesthood and ushered in the era of the high priest in the order of Melchizedek. The old system has yielded its place to the new, and in that new covenant Jesus has become the mediator.

In Old Testament times, high priests served as mediators between God and man. They were mediators on the basis of the old covenant God had made with his people, but this covenant has become obsolete (8:13) because the new one has taken its place. In succeeding verses the author explains why the new covenant is superior to the old one.

However, the author gives a preliminary reason as to why the new covenant is better than the old. Says he, “It is founded on better promises.” By implication, the promises given by God to his people in earlier days were inadequate. The promises of the old covenant went together with the law of Moses; new covenant promises include God’s law put in the minds and written on the hearts of his people, the teaching of knowledge of the Lord, and the forgiving of sin (8:10–12).

Doctrinal Considerations in 8:1–6

When Jesus told the disciples in the upper room on the eve of his death, “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am” (John 14:3), his promise included sitting with Christ on his throne (Rev. 3:21). Christ “has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father” (Rev. 1:6). Believers are kings and priests with Christ. What a glorious promise!

Christ’s divine kingship differs from that of earthly kings. His kingship is one of service: he intercedes for his people; that is, he presents the prayers and praises of his people before the throne of God.¹³ He guarantees a place for his people in his Father’s house. Christ is the king-priest who rules and serves his people.

The Levitical priests served God in the sanctuary erected by man. Incidentally, the writer of the epistle consistently quotes from and alludes to passages of the Old Testament that mention the tabernacle. Never does he mention the temple in Jerusalem. Even in Hebrews 13, where he continually exhorts the readers and addresses his contemporaries, he refers to the tabernacle (13:10), the high priest who takes animal blood into the Most Holy Place (“but the bodies are burned outside the camp” [13:11]), and to Jesus, who “suffered outside the city gate” (13:12). The context for the author’s teaching is the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness. That means the writer refers to the beginning of the nation Israel when God made a covenant with the Israelites at Mount Sinai, gave his people the law, and instituted the Levitical priesthood.

Jesus, having fulfilled the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood, serves God eternally in “the true tabernacle” as high priest in the order of Melchizedek. Thus his priesthood is superior to that of the sons of Levi. Jesus by his sacrificial death fulfilled the demands of the Old Testament law and therefore made the old covenant obsolete. The new covenant, sealed with the blood of Christ, is superior to the old one (Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; I Cor. 11:25).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:1–6

Verse 1

κεφάλαιον—this neuter substantivized adjective, without the definite article, means “the main point” or “the summary.” The first meaning is preferred.

ἐπὶ τοῖς λεγομένοις—the preposition ἐπί followed by the dative case may be translated “about”¹⁴ or “in addition to.”¹⁵ The definite article τοῖς and the present passive participle λεγομένοις are in the neuter dative plural case. The author uses the present tense to stress the significance of his discussion—“the things that are being said.”

Verse 2

τῶν ἁγίων—the neuter genitive plural adjective with the definite article is substantivized and refers to the sanctuary. The author does not distinguish between tabernacle and Most Holy Place (but see 9:3).

λειτουργός—the difference between the two word groups represented by the verbs λειτουργέω (I serve in a public office or religious ministry) and λατρεύω (I serve) is not very pronounced in the Epistle to the Hebrews, because both word groups relate to the worship of God.¹⁶

Verse 3

δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίας—the phrase is a repetition of Hebrews 5:1.

προσενέγκῃ—the aorist tense signifies single occurrence. The verb is the aorist subjunctive active of προσφέρω (I offer). The use of the subjunctive is futuristic.¹⁷

Verse 5

κεχρημάτισται—the perfect passive indicative of the verb χρηματίζω (I admonish, instruct) denotes instruction given by God to man in the form of revelation. This divine revelation often was conveyed as a warning. The perfect tense implies lasting validity.

ὅρα ποιήσεις—the present active imperative ὅρα and the future active indicative are placed next to each other without the use of καί. The words, as a quotation, are from Exodus 25:40, with minor variation.

Verse 6

τέτυχεν—the verb τυγχάνω means “I hit the mark” and, more generally, “I attain.” The use of the perfect indicates duration.

ὅσῳ—this relative adjective lacks the corresponding adjective τοσούτῳ. Compare Hebrews 1:4.

ἥτις—the indefinite relative pronoun takes the place of the simple relative pronoun. It denotes cause and thus gives the reason why the new covenant is superior to the old one.

νενομοθέτηται—see Hebrews 7:11.

C. God’s New Covenant

8:7–13

7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said:

“The time is coming, declares the Lord,

when I will make a new covenant

with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah.

9 It will not be like the covenant I made with

their forefathers

when I took them by the hand

to lead them out of Egypt,

because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,

and I turned away from them,

declares the Lord.

10 This is the covenant I will make with the

house of Israel

after that time, declares the Lord.

I will put my laws in their minds

and write them on their hearts.

I will be their God,

and they will be my people.

11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,

or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’

because they will all know me,

from the least of them to the greatest.

12 For I will forgive their wickedness

and will remember their sins no more.”

13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

One of the author’s characteristics is to quote lengthy passages from the Old Testament (for example, in 2:6–8 [Ps. 8:4–6]; 3:7–11 [Ps. 95:7–11]; and 10:5–7 [Ps. 40:6–8]). Usually he explains and applies these passages in the succeeding context. However, when he quotes Jeremiah 31:31–34 in 8:8–12, he refrains from giving an explanation in the following chapter—instead, he quotes the passage again, in 10:16–17. The author puts the quotation in the present context to prove his point that God has revealed the replacement of the old covenant by the new.

7. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8a. But God found fault with the people and said …

Unfulfilled conditional sentences appear repeatedly in the Epistle to the Hebrews (see among others 4:8, 7:11, and 8:4). Also in 8:7 the sentence is conditional. The argument demands an implied response: “if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant” (but there was, for it was inadequate), then “no place would have been sought for another” (but God indeed confirmed the new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31–34).

For the author of the epistle, the Old Testament had not lost its validity when New Testament revelation overshadowed it. Not at all. For him, the Old Testament remained the living Word of God (1:1). But the coming of Christ and his ministry brought fulfillment to promise and prophecy. Therefore the writer explains the passage from Jeremiah 31 in the light of Jesus’ coming. When Christ came into the world, he abolished the old and established the new. The author employs the terms first and second (“another” in the NIV).¹⁸

Speaking through David, in Psalm 110:4 God revealed the superiority of Melchizedek’s priesthood; this superiority is also revealed through Jeremiah’s prophecy. In this prophecy God also revealed the superiority of a new covenant. God himself instructed his people in the Old Testament Scriptures, but these truths remained hidden until the author of Hebrews employed them in his teachings.

Did God make a mistake when he established a covenant that had to be replaced in later years? No, God’s word is true and without error. The fault in the first covenant did not lie with God but with the people who were God’s covenant partners. They did not keep the conditions stipulated in the covenant, and therefore “God found fault with the people.”¹⁹ However, if the people were to blame for not keeping the covenant stipulations, the covenant itself could still be faultless. But in quoting Jeremiah 31:31–34, the author of the epistle shows the weakness of the first covenant: it was not put in the minds or written on the hearts of the people (8:10).²⁰ Therefore, the old covenant had to be replaced by the new.

8b. “The time is coming, declares the Lord,

when I will make a new covenant

with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah.

9. It will not be like the covenant

I made with their forefathers

when I took them by the hand

to lead them out of Egypt,

because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,

and I turned away from them,

declares the Lord.”

A covenant is drawn up when two parties agree on a contract. The contract spells out stipulations that the parties must honor and a condition that, in case either party fails to meet the requirements of the contract, the contract loses its binding force.

In 8:8b–9, a description of the old covenant is given: the two parties are mentioned; the stipulations of the covenant are implied; and the condition is applied.

a. Two parties

Twice in the first part of the quotation the prophet Jeremiah uses the phrase declares the Lord. The Lord God of Israel made a covenant with his people when he led them out of Egypt and had them stand at the foot of Mount Sinai to receive his law (Exod. 20:1–17). The first party in the covenant is God. He initiated it; he addressed the people of Israel at the beginning of their nationhood; and he turned away from them when they failed to remain faithful to the Sinaitic covenant.

God declared that he would “make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,” but he did not disclose when the new contract would be signed. The reference the time is coming is decidedly indefinite. In historical perspective, the prophecy of Jeremiah could not have been directed to Israel’s restoration after the exile, because the Old Testament indicates that the old covenant was in force after the exile.²¹ The prophecy, therefore, heralds the coming of the Messiah and the establishing of the new covenant in his blood (see Matt. 26:28 and parallels).

The phrases house of Israel and house of Judah call attention to the reunification of the nation Israel; however, because the ten tribes of Israel failed to return after the exile, the phrases ought to be understood in a more universalistic sense to include both Jews and Gentiles.

b. Implied stipulations

The old covenant God made with the people of Israel was God’s promise that he would be their king. As king, God demanded obedience from his people. For this reason he gave them the law at Sinai and told them that they would be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6).

The Israelites were asked to obey God’s law with heart, soul, and strength (Deut. 6:5) and thus to demonstrate their constant love for God. They listened to God’s commandments but neglected to obey him. The law remained something external, for it was not written on their hearts. Consequently, they refused to remain faithful to God’s covenant.

c. Applied condition

God’s response to the rebellious Israelites was to turn away from them. The relation between God and his people at first had been intimate. God said, “I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt.” God wanted his people to walk with him hand in hand, in full assurance and confidence. But when the Israelites decided to walk alone, to disobey God’s law, and to ignore his voice calling them to himself, he “turned away from them.”²² That is, God neglected them by leaving them to their own willful ways. Instead of demonstrating tender loving care for his covenant people, God assumed an attitude of unconcern for obstinate covenant breakers. By turning away from them God made it known that the time for a new covenant would come. He remains a covenant God.

10. “This is the covenant I will make with the

house of Israel

after that time, declares the Lord.

I will put my laws in their minds

and write them on their hearts.

I will be their God,

and they will be my people.

11. No longer will a man teach his neighbor,

or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’

because they will all know me,

from the least of them to the greatest.

12. For I will forgive their wickedness

and will remember their sins no more.”

The description of the new covenant is positive; the stipulations are not implied but clearly stated in the form of four promises (8:6).

a. Written law

For the third time in this lengthy quotation Jeremiah writes “declares the Lord.” God himself makes the new covenant with the people who belong to the messianic age. That is, Jew and Gentile as believers make up “the house of Israel.” The era of the old covenant, characterized by the exclusiveness of the nation Israel, has made way for a new age in which all nations are included (Matt. 28:19).

Who belongs to the house of Israel? All those people, says God, in whose minds I will put my laws and upon whose hearts I will write them. The expressions minds and hearts (parallel terms) represent man’s inner being. God’s people experience the permeating power of God’s Word, so that his law becomes a part of their conscience. That conscience is directed to the law of God, much the same as a compass needle invariably points north.

b. Covenant God

Throughout Scripture God’s recurring message to his people is the promise: “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see, for example, Exod. 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Jer. 7:23; 11:4; II Cor. 6:16; Rev. 21:3). God wanted to make the Israelite nation his special people; they were his “treasured possession.” However, Israel could lose this favored status if the people refused to keep the law of God. The covenant stipulated that God’s people would live a life of obedience.

In New Testament times, too, God addresses the believers in Jesus Christ and gives them the covenant promise: “I will be [your] God, and [you] will be my people.” In this new covenant, God is inseparably united with his people because God’s law has been inscribed on their hearts. He communicates with his people through his revelation, and they communicate with him through prayer. He encourages them to approach the throne of grace with confidence (Heb. 4:16), and he makes it known that his name has been written on their foreheads (Rev. 14:1; 22:4). He wants to have them address him as Father, for they are his children.

Ye children of God’s covenant,

Who of His grace have heard,

Forget not all His wondrous deeds

And judgments of His word.

The Lord our God is God alone,

All lands His judgments know;

His promise He remembers still,

While generations go.

—Psalter Hymnal

c. Universal knowledge

The next promise flows from the preceding promises. The knowledge of the Lord shall be universal. In the history of Israel, God’s revelation came piecemeal “through the prophets at many times and in various ways” (Heb. 1:1), and in one instance the Book of the Law was discovered in the temple of the Lord. While the Book of the Law gathered dust, the people lived in ignorance (II Kings 22; II Chron. 34:14–28). Ignorance of God’s revelation was appalling, and God’s prophets repeatedly registered their complaints (see Isa. 1:3; Jer. 4:22; Hos. 4:6).

What a difference in New Testament times! Knowledge of the Lord will be universal, covering the earth “as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:9; Hab. 2:14). The need for individual teaching—“a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother,” “from the least of them to the greatest”—will disappear because all people will know the Lord. Filled with the knowledge of the Lord, even novices in the faith are able and equipped to witness for him. All those who have the law of God in their hearts and minds acknowledge God’s grace and mercy. They know that their sins have been forgiven and that their record has been wiped clean.

d. Complete remission

When God forgives sin, he does so by never remembering man’s sin again. That means that when forgiven, man is like Adam and Eve in Paradise: without sin. Man, forgiven by God, is accepted as if he had never sinned at all. God says, “I will remember [his] sins no more.” In the new covenant, grace and mercy are freely given to all God’s children. God gives these blessings in the name of his Son, who is the mediator of a new covenant. This new covenant established through the death of Jesus on the cross is the believer’s guarantee that his sins are forgiven and forgotten.

13. By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

God himself introduced the word new when he said, “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” (8:8). In Christ the new covenant has become reality; consequently, the old covenant has become obsolete. God himself told his people, at first through the prophecy of Jeremiah and then in New Testament times through the writer of Hebrews. The Jew of the first century, therefore, had to realize that the era of the covenant God made with his people at Sinai had ended.

Already in the days of Jeremiah, approximately six hundred years before the birth of Christ, God spoke of a new covenant. By implication, the existing covenant was then already “obsolete and aging.”²³

What then is the difference between the old and the new? For one thing, in the days of the old covenant the sinner repeatedly had to present animal offerings to the Lord God to obtain remission of sin. In the new covenant sinners are forgiven through the one-time sacrifice of Jesus. Their offerings consist of dedicated lives that express gratitude to God and joyfully keep his commands.

The old covenant was rather restrictive; it was made with Israel, God’s special people. The new covenant embraces all nations; all those who believe in Jesus Christ are his “treasured possession.” Therefore, with the coming of Pentecost, the new covenant made its presence felt. The old covenant had to be put away.

The writer of Hebrews, however, does not specify a time or describe circumstances when the old covenant will disappear. His conclusion to chapter 8 is rather general: “and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.”

Doctrinal Considerations in 8:7–13

The old covenant was based on the law of God given to the Israelites during the first part of their wilderness journey. Although the law which was basic to the covenant was perfect, it could not make man perfect (Heb. 7:11, 19). Because of the inherent weakness—not in the covenant, as such, but in man—God inaugurated a new covenant. The new came forth out of the old and for a while both covenants existed side by side: the new took over when the old began to disappear (8:13).

The inadequacy of the old covenant was completely overshadowed by the adequacy of Christ. Christ became the mediator of this new covenant that was superior to the old covenant. The writer of Hebrews employs comparative adjectives to indicate the difference between old and new: Christ’s superior ministry, the superior covenant, and the better promises (8:6). Jesus is “the guarantee of a better covenant” (7:22; italics added).

Whereas the old covenant was an external manifestation of God’s grace, the new covenant involves the individual believer. God made the old covenant with the nation Israel and gave the people his laws written on tablets of stone. He establishes the new covenant with the believer in Christ and writes God’s law on the believer’s heart. With this law written on his inmost being, the believer has an intimate relationship with God through Christ.

The new covenant has two parties: God and his people. To be precise, the people of God are the true believers who have experienced genuine repentance and who demonstrate saving faith in Christ. God gives his people the promise: “I will be [your] God, and [you] will be my people” (8:10). God assumes that his people will keep the demands of his law written on their hearts, that they will always show their love and obedience to him, and that they will grow in their knowledge of salvation. God will not forget his promise. In fact, “He cannot and may not break His covenant; He has committed Himself to maintaining it with a freely given and precious oath: His name, His honor, His reputation depends on it.”²⁴

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:7–13

Verse 7

εἰ—this conditional particle, followed by the imperfect indicative ῆ̓ν in the protasis and οὐκ ἄν in the apodosis, introduces the contrary-to-fact condition.

τόπος—the word place refers to the history of redemption.

Verse 8

μεμφόμενος—together with ἄμεμπτος (blameless) in 8:7, the present middle participle derives from μέμφομαι (I find fault). The participle can take either αὐτούς as direct object or αὐτοῖς. The external manuscript evidence for either reading is about equally divided. The reading αὐτοῖς can also be connected with the verb λέγει (he said to them).

συντελέσω—the future active indicative from συντελέω (I fulfill) differs from the Septuagint text (Jer. 38:31), which reads διαθήσομαι (from διατίθημι, I decree, ordain). In this rather lengthy citation—the longest in the entire New Testament—numerous variations from the Septuagint text appear. Whether these variations originated during the process of copying the text or because of liturgical usage in the church is difficult to determine.²⁵

καινήν—the adjective is used with διαθήκη in I Corinthians 11:25 and II Corinthians 3:6, in addition to Hebrews 8:8. The adjective conveys the idea of newness that comes forth out of the old and may even exist alongside the old: the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Verse 9

ἐπιλαβομένου μου τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν—the genitive absolute construction consists of the aorist middle participle from ἐπιλαμβάνομαι (I take hold of) and the personal pronoun μου from ἐγώ (I). The participle governs the genitive case of τῆς χειρός (the hand); the pronoun αὐτῶν is possessive. The construction of this phrase is somewhat unusual.²⁶

ἠμέλησα—the aorist active indicative of ἀμελέω (I neglect, disregard), derived from ἀ (not) and μέλω (I care for). The verb is expressive. See also Matthew 22:5, I Timothy 4:14, and Hebrews 2:3.

Verse 11

γνῶθι τὸν κύριον—the second aorist active imperative of γινώσκω (I know) expresses the concept of learning the commandments of God. The verb is followed by εἰδήσουσιν, the future perfect of οἶδα (I know), understood as a simple future indicative. The contrast between γινώσκω and οἶδα is significant in this verse. The first means acquiring knowledge, the second possessing knowledge.

Verse 13

ἐν τῷ λέγειν—the articular present infinitive with the preposition ἐν is in the dative case. The dative expresses time; that is, “while he is saying.”

πεπαλαίωκεν—from the verb παλαιόω (I make old), the perfect active suggests action with lasting result. The active, not the passive, is used to indicate that God has declared the covenant old.

ἀφανισμοῦ—this noun, translated as “disappearance,” derives from the verb ἀφανίζω (I make invisible), which is a compound of ἀ (not) and φαίνω (I appear). The genitive case is dependent on the adverb ἐγγύς (near), which is pressed into service as a preposition.

Summary of Chapter 8

In some ways chapter 8 is an extended commentary on 7:22, where the author introduces the concept covenant. He explains the word by quoting at length from a prophetic passage in the Book of Jeremiah. Yet he fails to interpret the term covenant. He does that in the following chapter (9:15–22). The quotation from Jeremiah 31:31–34, however, serves the purpose of showing the readers that God himself in the days of Jeremiah had already declared the covenant made with Israel to be obsolete.

The author, as a careful teacher of theology, utilizes the Old Testament Scriptures to show that God revealed the appearance of the new covenant centuries before the birth of Christ. Just as God himself appointed Christ as high priest in the order of Melchizedek, so he established a new covenant of which Christ would be the high priest.

The old order of the Levitical priesthood eventually had to come to an end. The sanctuary at which the priests served was “a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.” By contrast, the sanctuary at which Jesus serves as high priest is the true tabernacle in the presence of God himself. The earthly sanctuary was temporal; the heavenly sanctuary is eternal.

As the heavenly tabernacle is superior to the earthly sanctuary, so the new covenant, of which Jesus is the mediator, is superior to the old covenant. The new covenant is better because of the promises God gives to his people. And Jesus, who is the mediator of this new covenant, guarantees these promises: to know God, to treasure his revelation, and to experience complete forgiveness of sin.

¹ Most translations use the word point (with variations) in Heb. 8:1. Thus RV and ASV have “chief point”; the NAB, NASB, NEB, NKJV, MLB, and R. C. H. Lenski have “main point”; JB has “great point”; GNB, “whole point”; and NIV, Moffatt, and R.S.V. simply “point.” However, the KJV features the term the sum; and Phillips, “to sum up.”

² Richard Thomas France, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 588. Also see Carl Schneider, TDNT, vol. 3, p. 442.

³ Leopold Sabourin, “Liturge du sanctuaire et de la tente véritable (Héb. VIII 2),” NTS 18 (1971): 87–90.

⁴ For a systematic presentation of the various interpretations of the expression the true tabernacle, see Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 283–90. See also the same material published under the title “The Blood of Jesus and His Heavenly Priesthood in Hebrews. Part III: The Meaning of ‘The True Tent’ and ‘The Greater and More Perfect Tent,’ ” BS 130 (1973): 305–14.

⁵ Geerhardus Vos, The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), p. 113.

⁶ Throughout his epistle the writer directs the reader’s attention to the period that the nation Israel spent in the desert. The temple he never mentions; rather, the tabernacle is for him the place of worship (Heb. 8:2, 5; 9:2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 21; 13:10).

⁷ Heinrich Schlier, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 33. Also see Ralph P. Martin, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 291.

⁸ For instance, see the writings of Philo, Life of Moses 2.76; Allegorical Interpretation 3.102. And the Talmud, Kodashim, vol. 1, relates a saying from Rabbi Jose ben Judah: “An ark of fire and a table of fire and a candlestick of fire came down from heaven; and these Moses saw and reproduced, as it is written, ‘And see that thou make them after their pattern, which is being shown thee in the mount’ ” (Menachoth 29a). Also see SB, vol. 3, pp. 702–4.

⁹ John Owen, in his Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace, 1960), vol. 6, pp. 44–45, remarks: “Whether this representation were made to Moses by the way of internal vision, as the temple was represented unto Ezekiel, or whether there were an ethereal fabric proposed unto his bodily senses, is hard to determine.”

¹⁰ The construction of the temple of Solomon followed a plan David gave Solomon in writing. “ ‘All this,’ David said, ‘I have in writing from the hand of the Lord upon me, and he gave me understanding in all the details of the plan’ ” (I Chron. 28:19; also see v. 12).

¹¹ F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok, 1955), p. 189. See also Leonhard Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 9, p. 258.

¹² The term ministry belongs to a word group that includes, in the original Greek, the verb to serve (10:11), the noun ministry (8:6; 9:21), the noun servant (1:7; 8:2), and the adjective serving (1:14).

¹³ B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950), p. 229.

¹⁴ A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 605.

¹⁵ Bauer, p. 287. Also see Harvey E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: Macmillan, 1957), p. 107.

¹⁶ R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 126. See also Klaus Hess, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 549–53; and Hermann Strathmann, TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 58–65 and 215–22.

¹⁷ Robertson, Grammar, p. 928.

NIV New International Version

¹⁸ The author has a penchant for the use of the adjective first. See 8:7, 13; 9:1, 2, 8, 15, 18; 10:9.

¹⁹ “The context does not seem to indicate that the intrinsic nature of the commandments was changed, but rather the mode of reception of the covenant,” says Thomas McComiskey in NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 145.

²⁰ John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 187.

²¹ Gerhard Charles Aalders, De Profeet Jeremia, Korte Verklaring, 2 vols. (Kampen: Kok, 1954), vol. 2, p. 88.

²² The translation of Jer. 31:32b in the Hebrew text (“because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, declares the Lord”) differs from the reading in Heb. 8:9b, which is based on the Septuagint.

²³ Hughes ventures the idea that 8:13 is an oblique reference to the temple services prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. He sees this reference, then, as a silent witness to the time when the epistle was written—before a.d. 70.

²⁴ Herman Bavinck, Our Reasonable Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), pp. 274–75.

²⁵ Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van Soest, 1961), pp. 41–42.

Robertson,

Grammar

, p. 514.

↑ Back to top