Bible Commentary
Read chapter-by-chapter commentary from classic Bible scholars.
Hebrews 7 β Commentary
4
Listen
Click Play to listen
Illustrator
Melchisedec, king of Salem. Hebrews 7:1-10 Melchisedec A. S. Patterson. I. MELCHISEDEC WAS "KING OF SALEM." 1. Salem was certainly in Canaan β the land where Melchisedec and Abraham met.(1) It is not a matter of course that Canaan was already wholly given up to idolatry and crime; and therefore Melchisedec may have been himself a Canaanite, and may also have found a body of worshippers of the true God among whom he could discharge his functions.(2) Even if Canaan was more idolatrous than we have sufficient reason to believe that it now was, Melchisedec, who was, perhaps, of the Japhetian stock, may have been raised up by Heaven as "a light in a dark place," and a harbinger and representative of the future ingathering of the Gentiles to Christ. 2. Two places of the name of Salem are mentioned in the Old Testament. The one is Salem in the land of Shechem ( Genesis 33:18 ) β the same, perhaps, as John 3:23 . The other is Jerusalem itself ( Psalm 76:1, 2 ).(1) The situation of the great metropolis of Palestine was one likely to be early fixed upon for a town in the colonisation of the land.(2) That point lay near to the route which Abraham may be supposed to have taken on his homeward way "from the slaughter of the kings."(3) If Jerusalem was the place of which Melchisedec was king, he was thus the more strikingly representative of Christ ( Psalm 2:6 )." 3. It is certainly in respect chiefly of the priesthood that Melchisedec is compared to Christ. But, considering the object and design of the present specification of particulars, it must be understood that the royalty of the former has a typical, or at least a figurative, application to the latter. With Salem, both in the literal and figurative application of the name, Christ as King has especially to do. It was through Jerusalem that, "in the days of His flesh," He rode in lowly, but royal stateliness" ( Zechariah 9:9 ; Matthew 21:1-11 ). To Israel and her great metropolis was Messiah promised as a Sovereign Prince, ere ever the Magi came to welcome the regal visitor; and as He was, in His birth, saluted as Israel's King ( Matthew 2:1-6 ), so, over His cross on the heights of Salem, the unchangeable inscription bore that He was "King of the Jews" ( John 19:19-22 ). And there is another Zion on which His throne is set β another Salem in which He reigns β the Zion, the Salem, of the Church. Amidst hostile arms and quaking dynasties, "let the children of Zion be joyful in their King." II. MELCHISEDEC WAS "PRIEST OF THE MOST HIGH GOD." 1. The phrase "of the most high God" serves two ends.(1) It contra-distinguishes Melchisedec and his priesthood from priests of " the gods many and lords many" of Paganism, and from the functions, often gross and cruel, which these performed.(2) It suggests the solemnity and importance of the sacerdotal work which Melchisedec performed, and the reverence and awe with which not only ministers, but private believers, should maintain intercourse with that glorious One into whose presence they are called to enter, and whose business they are called to do. 2. The priesthood of the King of Salem, in all probability, comprehended the two functions of sacrifice and intercession. III. MELCHISEDEC "MET ABRAHAM RETURNING FROM THE SLAUGHTER OF THE KINGS AND BLESSED HIM." To a spiritual warfare we have all been called; and while Christ is the Captain of the host, the better Abraham leading on His followers to battle and to victory, He, as the anointed Priest, the better Melchizedec, blesses His conquering, and even His struggling, troops. With His priestly hands extended, in generous benediction, over His first disciples, He left the world. In the same attitude, as it were, He stilt is standing, as Be looks down from His heavenly throne on the earthly charge which He loves so well. The good which on their behalf He seeks, it is His own prerogative and office to bestow. Nor can it be withheld. What is wanted for the fight β wisdom, strength, courage, hope β He d, lights, when His soldier looks to Him in faith and earnestness, to give. At length comes victory. Nor is that promise obsolete ( Revelation 3:21 ). IV. TO MELCHISEDEC ABRAHAM GAVE A TENTH PART OF ALL THE SPOILS. The contribution of gold and treasures to the cause of the kingdom of Messiah is one of the facts recorded respecting Him in Hebrew prophecy ( Psalm 72:10, 15 ). Since the day when the Magi cast their gold, and frankincense, and myrrh at His blessed feet, thousands and tens of thousands have laid a like tribute on His altar. Christ deserves, and Christianity needs, it all. That, independently of any money of ours, He could work successfully is, of course, in some sense true. But, in unswerving wisdom and condescending mercy, He chooses to work by means; and among the appointed means is money. By ministers and missionaries, who are dependent on money for support β by Bibles and other practical and precious books, which must be printed and circulated at the cost of money β by places of worship, which it requires money to erect β and by other ordinances and institutions, which it is for money to establish and maintain β Christ upholds His cause and extends His kingdom. V. MELCHISEDEC WAS BY INTERPRETATION "KING OF RIGHTEOUSNESS AND KING OF PEACE." This statement refers to the import of the names Melchisedec and Salem. Melchi means, king; Sedec, righteousness; and Salem, peace. It is probable that Melchisedec was a righteous and pacific king. At any rate, the name he bore, and that of the city where he dwelt, involved the ideas of righteousness and peace. And it is here distinctly intimated that, in this respect, he was fitted to represent the character and government of Christ. Christ in very deed is "King of righteousness." His soul, how pure! His life, how undefiled! His laws, how just! His administration, how upright! The issues and outgoings of His sufferings and His glory, of His humiliation on the earth and His triumphs in the heavens, how suffused and fraught with righteousness! Nor is He less truly "King of peace." His personal ministry was neither the earthquake nor the thunder, but the "still, small voice." Peace He bequeathed to His disciples as a legacy of love ( John 14:27 ). He "made peace through the blood of His cross" ( Colossians 1:20 ). His gospel breathes of peace. They who believe it enter into peace. Theirs is peace with God; theirs, too, is peace with man; and a " peace which passeth understanding" keeps their ,"hearts and minds by Christ Jesus" Under the sceptre of Messiah, the wars which so long have wrought desolations in the earth shall pass away VI. MELCHISEDEC WAS "WITHOUT FATHER, WITHOUT MOTHER, WITHOUT DESCENT," &c. By the series of particulars it is manifestly meant to intimate that the parents, the ancestry, the birth, and the death, of this royal priest are all unrecorded in the sacred narrative β that, in this respect, there is a remarkable difference between him and the priests of the house of Levi β and that, in so far as the record is concerned, he comes before us as the priest of unlimited existence, who had no predecessor and no successor in the sacred line. He was thus, it is still further intended to suggest, a meet representative of that " great high-priest" who, as God, had no mother β as man, had no human father β as Divine, never began to be, and never died β as Mediator, carries on His priesthood still, interceding for believers in the heavens, even as, on earth, He made atonement for their sins, and wrought out redemption for their souls. ( A. S. Patterson. )
Benson
Benson Commentary Hebrews 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; Hebrews 7:1 . For, &c. β The apostle having promised to lead the believing Hebrews forward to the perfection of Christian knowledge, ( Hebrews 6:1-4 ,) particularly with regard to the high-priesthood of Christ as typified by that of Melchisedec, which he had repeatedly mentioned, (namely, Hebrews 5:6 ; Hebrews 5:10 ; Hebrews 6:20 ,) as a figure of it he proceeds now to fulfil his promise; and, in order thereto, points out the deep meaning of the oath recorded Psalm 110:4 . And by accurately examining the particulars concerning Melchisedec, related in the Mosaic history, he shows that Melchisedec was a far more excellent priest than Aaron and all his sons, and consequently that Jesus, whom God had made a High-Priest for ever after the similitude of Melchisedec, exercised a priesthood both more acceptable to God, and more effectual for procuring the pardon of sin, than the priesthood which the sons of Aaron exercised under the law. For the design of the apostle in this chapter is not to declare the nature or the exercise of the priesthood of Christ, though occasionally mentioned; having spoken of the former, chap. 5., and intending to treat of the latter at large afterward, which he does chap. 9. But it is of its excellence and dignity that he discourses here, and yet not absolutely, but in comparison with the Levitical priesthood, which method was both necessary, and directly conducive to his end. For if the priesthood of Christ were not so excellent as that of Aaron, it was to no purpose to persuade them to embrace the former, and reject the latter. This, therefore, he designs to prove upon principles avowed among themselves, by arguments taken from what had been received and acknowledged in the Jewish Church from the first foundation of it. To this end he shows, that antecedently to the giving of the law, and the institution of the Levitical priesthood, God had, without any respect thereto, given a typical prefiguration of this priesthood of Christ, in one who was on all accounts superior to the future Levitical priests. This sacred truth, which had been hid for so many ages in the church, and which undeniably manifests the certain future introduction of another and better priesthood, is here brought to light by the apostle and improved. For this Melchisedec β Of whom Moses speaks, Genesis 14:18 , &c., (the passage to which David refers,) was king of Salem β βAccording to Josephus, ( Antiq. lib. 1. cap. 11,) Salem, the city of Melchisedec, was Jerusalem. But according to Jerome, who says he received his information from some learned Jews, it was the town which is mentioned Genesis 33:18 , as a city of Shechem, and which is spoken of ( John 3:23 ) as near to Enon, where John baptized. This city being in Abrahamβs way, as he returned from Damascus to Sodom, after the slaughter of the kings, many are of Jeromeβs opinion, that the northern Salem was Melchisedecβs city rather than Jerusalem, which was situated farther to the south.β Priest of the most high God β This title given him by Moses, and here taken notice of by the apostle, implies that he had been appointed to that office in a solemn and public manner; and, of consequence, βthat there was a priest divinely appointed to officiate for the worshippers of the true God in Canaan, long before the days of Aaron, and before God formed to himself a visible church from any particular family or nation of mankind. The Hebrew word, indeed, translated a priest, sometimes signifies a prince, but the historian hath removed the ambiguity by adding the words, of the most high God.β Who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings β Who had taken Lot prisoner, with the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the neighbouring cities of the plain; and blessed him β Pronounced on him a blessing in the name of God, to whom he ministered; and in his manner of blessing him showed himself to be a priest of the only true God, his words being, Blessed be Abraham of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth. Hebrews 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Hebrews 7:2-3 . To whom also Abraham gave a tenth of all β Namely, of all the spoils of the vanquished kings, ( Hebrews 7:4 ,) but not a tenth also of the goods that had been taken from the king of Sodom and from Lot; for of these Abraham took nothing to himself. By paying tithes to Melchisedec, Abraham acknowledged him to be a priest of the true God. It seems, indeed, his being supernaturally appointed a priest by God, was known through all that country. Being first β According to the meaning of his own name; king of righteousness; and after that also β According to the name of his city; king of peace β So that in him, as in Christ, righteousness and peace were joined. And so they are in all that believe in him. βIn ancient times, it was usual to give names to persons and places expressive of their qualities, or in commemoration of some remarkable events. Thus Abramβs name was changed into Abraham, to signify that he was made the father of many nations; and Sarai was named Sarah, because she was made the mother of nations; and Jacob obtained the name of Israel, because he had power with God. Viewed in the light of this ancient practice, the apostleβs argument, from these names, is conclusive, to show what an excellent person Melchisedec was, and how fit to be made a type of the Son of God. Without father, without mother β Without any mention of his parents; without descent β Or rather, without genealogy, or pedigree, recorded; for so the word here used, ????????????? , signifies; not a person who hath no descent or genealogy, but one whose descent and pedigree is nowhere entered on record. This was the case with Melchisedec. He was assuredly born, and did no less certainly die than other men; but neither his birth nor his death are recorded. Or the apostleβs principal meaning may be, that there is no account of his being descended from any ancestors of the priestly order, and that therefore he did not derive his priesthood from his parents, but was a priest of the most high God by a particular appointment. Having neither beginning of days nor end of life β Mentioned by Moses. But whence was it that Moses should introduce so great and excellent a person as Melchisedec, without making any mention of his race or stock, of his parents or progenitors, of his rise or fall, contrary to his own custom in other cases, and contrary to all rules of useful history? The true cause of the omission of all these things was the same with that of the institution of his priesthood, and the introduction of his person in the story. And this was that he might be a more express and signal representative of the Lord Christ in his priesthood. But in all these respects, made like the Son of God β Who was really without father as to his human nature, without mother as to his divine; and in this also, without pedigree; and not descending, even in human nature, from any ancestors of the priestly order; abideth a priest continually β That is, no mention is made of the end of the priesthood of his order, nor of the termination of his own personal administration of his office by death; and so he stands in the story as a kind of immortal priest, without any successor being mentioned. And this is that which the apostle chiefly designed to confirm from hence, namely, that there was in the Scripture, before the institution of the Aaronical priesthood, a representation of an eternal, unchangeable one, namely, that of Christ, who, as he was without beginning of days, alone does really remain without death and without successor. Hebrews 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. Hebrews 7:4 Now consider how great this man was , unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. Hebrews 7:4-7 . Consider how great this man was β The greatness of Melchisedec is described in all the preceding and following particulars. But the most manifest proof of it was, that Abraham gave him tithes as a priest of God, and a superior; though he was himself a patriarch, greater than a king, and a progenitor of many kings. The sons of Levi take tithes of their brethren β Sprung from Abraham as well as themselves. The Levites, therefore, are greater than they; but the priests are greater than the Levites; the patriarch Abraham than the priests, and Melchisedec than him. But he whose descent is not counted from them β From that people who come out of the loins of Abraham, not only received tithes of Abraham, but blessed him β Another proof of Melchisedecβs superiority; even him that had the promises β With whom God made the covenant of grace, as with the Father of all the blessed seed. Thus Galatians 3:16 : To Abraham and his seed were the promises made. And without all contradiction β Without all question; the less is blessed authoritatively of the better β Or greater; that is, when a man does, in Godβs name and stead, and by his authority, declare and pronounce another to be blessed, he that gives the blessing is, in that respect, greater than he who receives it. Hebrews 7:5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: Hebrews 7:6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises. Hebrews 7:7 And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better. Hebrews 7:8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them , of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. Hebrews 7:8-10 . And here β In the Levitical priesthood; men that die, receive tithes, but there β In the case of Melchisedec; he of whom it is witnessed that he liveth β Who is not spoken of as one that died for another to succeed him, but is represented only as living, being mentioned in such a way as if he lived for ever. And even Levi, who received tithes β Not in person, but in his successors, as it were, paid tithes in the person of Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father β βThis might justly be said of Levi, who descended from Abraham in the ordinary course of generation. But it cannot be said of Christ, who was born in a miraculous manner, without any human father. While, therefore, the apostleβs argument, taken from Abrahamβs paying tithes to Melchisedec, and his receiving the blessing from him, proves that both Abraham and the Levitical priests, his natural descendants, were inferior to Melchisedec, it does not apply to Christ at all.β β Macknight. Hebrews 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. Hebrews 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. Hebrews 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? Hebrews 7:11 . The apostle, having cleared his way from objections, now enters on his principal argument concerning the priesthood of Christ, and all the consequences of it with respect to righteousness, salvation, and the worship of God which depend thereon. If, therefore, or, now if perfection were by the Levitical priesthood β If it perfectly answered all Godβs designs and manβs wants; what further need was there that another priest β A priest of a new order; should rise β Or be set up; and not one after the order of Aaron? β As if he had said, Since by what has been advanced it appears from Scripture that another priesthood was to arise after Aaronβs, of another order, it follows hence that perfection could not be attained by that of Aaron; for if it could, that certainly would not have been removed, and another substituted in its place. In other words, the prediction of the rising up of a priest of a different order from that of Aaron, is a declaration of the inefficacy of the Levitical priesthood, and of Godβs intention to change it. Instead of the clause, for under it, (namely, the Levitical priesthood,) Macknight reads, on account of it, the people received the law β Observing that the law βwas prior to the priesthood, being given for the purpose of forming and establishing the priesthood; and that the Jewish people themselves were separated from the rest of mankind, and made a people by the law, merely that they might, as a nation, worship the only true God according to the Levitical ritual, in settling which most of the precepts of the law were employed. This being the case, is it any wonder that such of the Jews as looked no farther than the outside of the priesthood and law, imagined that perfection, in respect of pardon and acceptance with God, was to be obtained by the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices, and in that persuasion believed they never would be abolished? Nevertheless, if they had understood the true meaning of the law, they would have known that it was a typical oracle, in which, by its services, the priesthood and sacrifice of the Son of God were prefigured, and that by calling his Son a priest, not after the order of Aaron, but after that of Melchisedec, God declared that his services as a High-Priest, and the sacrifice of himself which he was to offer, were entirely different, both in their nature and effects, from the Levitical services and sacrifices, and that they were to be substituted in the room of these services, for which there was no occasion after the priest and sacrifices which they prefigured, were come.β Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. Hebrews 7:12-14 . For, or, wherefore, the priesthood β On account of which the law was given; being changed, of necessity there must be a change also of the law β As if he had said, Since there is such a near relation between the priesthood and the law, and since the whole administration of the law, as the rule of worship, depended absolutely on the Aaronical priesthood, therefore the one being changed, the other must be changed also. βUnder the law the offices of the priesthood consisted in offering the sacrifices of beasts, and in performing various rites for purifying the bodies of the worshippers from ceremonial defilement, that they might be fit to join the congregation in the public worship of God. But when the priesthood was changed by raising up from another tribe a priest after the order of Melchisedec, whose services had for their object to purify the conscience of the worshippers, not by the sacrifice of beasts, but by the sacrifice of himself,β and to sanctify their souls by the influences of the Holy Spirit; βthe whole law concerning the sacrifices of beasts, and the sanctifying of the flesh of the Israelites by washing, was of necessity entirely abolished.β For he of whom β Or, to whom; these things are spoken β That is, he to whom it was said, Thou art a priest for ever, &c., was of a different tribe, namely, that of Judah; of which no man gave attendance at the altar β Or, was suffered by the law to minister there, so that the priesthood is manifestly changed from one order to another, and from one tribe to another. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah β βThat the Messiah was to spring up from Judah is plain from the prophecies concerning his descent: and it is likewise plain that this part of his character was verified in our Lord, whose genealogy Matthew and Luke have traced up to King David from the public tables. For that such tables of their descent were kept by the Jews Josephus testifies, (section 1. of his Life, at the end,) saying, βI give you these successions of our family as I find them written in the public tables.β By these tables Paul knew himself to be of the tribe of Benjamin.β Hebrews 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Hebrews 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Hebrews 7:15-17 . And it is yet far more evident β That both the priesthood and the law are changed, because the priest now raised up is not only of another tribe, and of a quite different order, but is made a priest; not after the law of a carnal commandment β With such carnal rites and outward solemnities as the law prescribed for those priests, which reached no further than to the purifying of the flesh; but after the power of an endless life β Which he has in himself as the eternal Son of God. Being a sacrifice, as well as a priest, it was indeed necessary that he, as a man, should die; but as he continued only a short while in the state of the dead, and arose to die no more, he may justly be said to have an endless life, even as to his human nature. Besides, it should be considered that his life, as a priest, did not begin till after his ascension, when he passed through the heavens into the holiest of all, with the sacrifice of his crucified body. And having offered that body there, he sat down at the right hand of the throne of his Fatherβs majesty, where he remains the minister of that true tabernacle, making continual intercession for his people. Hebrews 7:16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. Hebrews 7:17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. Hebrews 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. Hebrews 7:18-19 . For there is verily β Implied in this new and everlasting priesthood, and in the new dispensation connected therewith; a disannulling of the preceding commandment β An abrogation of the Mosaic law; for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof β In comparison of the new priesthood and dispensation. See on Romans 8:3 . For the law β The dispensation of Moses, taken by itself, separate from the light and grace of the gospel: made nothing perfect β Either as to the state of Godβs church, (which was then in its minority, Galatians 4:1-3 ,) or the religion of its members. The institutions of divine worship were imperfect, being mere shadowy representations of good things to come; the promises made to Abraham were but imperfectly fulfilled, and divine revelation was very incomplete, and in many respects obscure. Therefore that dispensation did not perfect the illumination of the people of God in things spiritual or divine, but they were still in comparative darkness as to divers particulars of great importance. See on Luke 1:76 ; Luke 1:79 . It did not perfect their justification and reconciliation with God, or remove their guilt before God, or a sense of it in their own consciences; it only did this typically and figuratively, Hebrews 9:9 ; Hebrews 10:1-4 . It did not perfect their sanctification and conformity to God, Romans 7:5 , &c. For the truths, precepts, and promises which it revealed, were chiefly of a worldly and carnal nature, and not calculated to sanctify the minds and hearts of those that received them, or to render them heavenly and holy. And the sanctifying Spirit, and the salvation consequent thereon, were not so largely given as under the gospel, John 7:37-38 ; 1 Peter 1:10-12 . But the bringing in of a better hope β The Christian dispensation, or the priesthood of Christ and the promises of the gospel, which afford more solid grounds for hope, did, or does; making full provision both for our justification and sanctification, and for our living in the practice of universal holiness and righteousness, and therefore furnishing us with a title to, and a meetness for, eternal life. βPromissa terrestria non operantur mortis contemptum, sed eum operantur spes melior vitΓ¦ eternΓ¦, atque celestis. Inde tam crebra martyria.β Earthly promises do not produce a contempt of death, but the better hope of a heavenly and eternal life produces it. Hence so many martyrdoms, namely, in the first church. β Grotius. The word ?????????? , rendered the bringing in, literally means, the introduction of a thing after, or upon, another. The priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, and the dispensation thereupon, were brought in after the law, upon it, in the room of it, to effect what the law could not do. This, therefore, says Dr. Owen, is the sense of the words: βThe introduction of the better hope after and upon the law, when a sufficient discovery had been made of its weakness and insufficiency as to this end, made all things perfect, or hath brought the church to that state of consummation which was designed for it. It is called better with respect to the law, and all it contained, or could effect.β By which we draw nigh unto God β Have free liberty to draw nigh in faith and prayer, through the sacrifice and intercession of our ever-living and glorious High-Priest and Mediator. It is an expression, says Grotius, βproperly sacerdotal, denoting the approach of the priests to God and his worship.β Under the Levitical priesthood the priests, in their sacrifices and solemn services, drew nigh to God: the same liberty is now granted to all true believers, under the sacerdotal ministration of the Lord Jesus; through him they have access by one Spirit unto the Father, at all times, and particularly in their prayers and praises, and all acts of worship; and may draw so nigh as to become one spirit with him, which is true Christian perfection. Hebrews 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did ; by the which we draw nigh unto God. Hebrews 7:20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest : Hebrews 7:20-22 . And inasmuch as, &c. β Here is another argument from the words of the psalmist, to prove the appointment of a new priesthood, the removal of the old, and the superior excellence of the new to the old; not without an oath β Which argues the weightiness of the matter, and the eternal continuance of Christβs priesthood. βThe apostleβs reasoning here is founded on this, that God never interposed his oath except to show the certainty and immutability of the thing sworn. Thus he sware to Abraham, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed, Genesis 22:16-18 ; and to the rebellious Israelites, that they should not enter into his rest, Deuteronomy 1:34-35 ; and to Moses, that he should not go into Canaan, Deuteronomy 4:21 ; and to David, that his seed should endure for ever, and his throne unto all generations, Psalm 89:4 . Wherefore, since Christ was made a priest not without an oath, that he should be a priest for ever, &c., that circumstance showed Godβs immutable resolution never to change or abolish his priesthood, or the covenant established thereon. Whereas the Levitical priesthood and the law of Moses being established without an oath were thereby declared to be changeable at Godβs pleasure.β β Macknight. The Lord sware and will not repent β Hence also it appears that his priesthood is unchangeable. God not only sware that he would make him a priest for ever, but sware also that he would never repent of doing it. By so much, &c. β By how much the priesthood of Christ was better than the former, by so much the testament, or rather covenant, of which he was to be surety, was better also. The word covenant frequently occurs in the remaining part of this epistle. The original word means either a covenant, or a last will and testament. St. Paul takes it sometimes in the former, sometimes in the latter sense; sometimes he includes both. The word surety or sponsor, may here mean one who has undertaken, on our behalf, to satisfy divine justice for our sins, making atonement for them; and to give to all that sincerely, earnestly, and perseveringly ask it, grace sufficient to enable them to perform the conditions of the covenant, and thereupon to receive its blessings. But it is proper to observe, that the Greek commentators explain the word ?????? , here rendered a surety, by ??????? , a mediator, which is its etymological meaning. βFor it comes from ????? , near, and signifies one who draws near, or who causes another to draw near. Now, as in this passage a comparison is stated between Jesus, as a High-Priest, and the Levitical high-priests; and as these were justly considered by the apostle as the mediators of the Sinai covenant, because through their mediation the Israelites worshipped God with sacrifices, and received from him, as their king, a political pardon, in consequence of the sacrifices offered by the high-priest on the day of atonement, it is evident that the apostle, in this passage, calls Jesus the High-Priest, or Mediator, of the better covenant, because through his mediation believers receive all the blessings of the better covenant. And, as the apostle had said, ( Hebrews 7:19 ,) that, by the introduction of a better hope, ????????? , we draw near to God, he, in this verse, very properly called Jesus ?????? , rather than ??????? , to denote the effect of his mediation. See Hebrews 7:25 . Our translators, indeed, following the Vulgate and Beza, have rendered the word surety, a sense which it hath, Sir 29:16 , and which naturally enough follows from its etymological meaning. For the person who becomes surety for the good behaviour of another, or for his performing something stipulated, brings that other near to the party to whom he gives the security; he reconciles the two. But in this sense, the word ?????? , is not applicable to the Jewish high-priests. For to be a proper surety, one must either have power to compel the party to perform that for which he hath become his surety, or, in case of his not performing it, he must be able to perform it himself. As little is the appellation, surety of the new covenant, applicable to Jesus. For since the new covenant doth not require perfect obedience, but only the obedience of faith; if the obedience of faith is not given by men themselves, it cannot be given by another in their room, unless we suppose that men can be saved without personal faith; I therefore infer, that they who speak of Jesus as the surety of the new covenant, must hold that it requires perfect obedience, which not being in the power of believers to give, Jesus hath performed it for them. But is not this to make the covenant of grace a covenant of works, contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture? For these reasons, I think the Greek commentators have given the true meaning of the word ?????? in this passage, when they explain it by ??????? , Mediator.β β Macknight. Hebrews 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:) Hebrews 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. Hebrews 7:23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: Hebrews 7:23-25 . And there were many priests β One after another, because they were hindered by death from continuing in the perpetual execution of their office. But this man, because he continueth ever β In life and in his office; hath an unchangeable priesthood β One that passes not from one to another. Wherefore β From whence it appears; that he is able to save to the uttermost β From sin and its consequences, into the favour and image of God, and to preserve to eternal life, all that by faith and prayer come to God through him β As their priest; seeing he ever liveth to make intercession β That is, he lives and intercedes, in every circumstance of their respective lives, through all successive ages and generations. He died once, he intercedes perpetually. βThe nature of the apostleβs argument requires that by Christβs always living we understand his always living in the body: for it is thus that he is a sympathizing High-Priest, who in his intercession pleads the merit of his death to procure the salvation of all who come unto God through him. Agreeably to this account of Christβs intercession, the apostle ( Hebrews 7:27 ) mentions the sacrifice of himself, which Christ offered as the foundation of his intercession. Now, as he offered that sacrifice in heaven, ( Hebrews 8:2-3 ,) by presenting his crucified body there, and as he continually resides there in the body, some of the ancients were of opinion that his continual intercession consists in the continual presentation of his humanity before his Father, because it is a continual declaration of his earnest desire of the salvation of men, and of his having, in obedience to his Fatherβs will, made himself flesh, and suffered death to accomplish it. This opinion is confirmed by the manner in which the Jewish high-priest made intercession for the people on the day of atonement, and which was a type of Christβs intercession in heaven. He made it not [merely or chiefly] by offering prayers for them in the most holy place, but by sprinkling the blood of the sacrifices on the mercy-seat, in token of their death. And as by that action he opened the earthly holy places to the prayers and worship of the Israelites during the ensuing year; so Jesus, by presenting his humanity continually before the presence of his Father, opens heaven to the prayers of his people in the present life, and to their persons after the resurrection.β See Macknight. Hebrews 7:24 But this man , because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Hebrews 7:25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Hebrews 7:26-28 . Such a High-Priest became us β Or rather, was suited to us, who are unholy, mischievous, defiled sinners; who is holy β With respect to God; harmless β With respect to men; undefiled β In himself by any sin; separate from sinners β That is, from all defiling society of sinners, though mercifully conversant among them; and, to complete all, made higher β Even in his human nature, than the heavens, and than all their inhabitants; being far more superior to the noblest of them than Aaron was to the meanest Levite who ministered in the temple. Who needeth not daily β That is, on every yearly day of expiation; as those high-priests, to offer sacrifice, first for his own sins β For he had no sins of his own; and then for the peopleβs β Which last he did once for all, when he offered up himself β A spotless and acceptable sacrifice to God. βIn this passage,β says Macknight, βthe apostle notices three particulars, which distinguish the sacrifice offered by Christ from those offered by the Jewish high- priests: 1st, He offered no sacrifice for himself, but only for the people. 2d, He did not offer that sacrifice annually, but once for all. 3d, The sacrifice which he offered was not of calves and goats, but of himself.β For the law maketh men high-priests which have infirmity β Who are weak, sinful, and mortal; but the oath which was since the law β Namely, in the time of David; maketh the Son β A priest; who is consecrated β Or perfected, as ????????????? properly signifies; see note on Hebrews 5:9 ; for evermore β Who, having finished his whole process, undertaken and accomplished to effect the work of our redemption, and being without blemish, and perfectly free from every natural and moral infirmity, and invested with all authority and power in heaven and on earth, remaineth a priest for ever. Hebrews 7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. Hebrews 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore. Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.
Expositors
Expositor's Bible Commentary Hebrews 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; CHAPTER VII. THE ALLEGORY OF MELCHIZEDEK. Hebrews 7:1-28 (R.V.). "For this Melchizedek, King of Salem, priest of God Most High, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him, to whom also Abraham divided a tenth part of all (being first, by interpretation, King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God), abideth a priest continually. Now consider how great this man was, unto whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth out of the chief spoils. And they indeed of the sons of Levi that receive the priest's office have commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though these have come out of the loins of Abraham: but he whose genealogy is not counted from them hath taken tithes of Abraham, and hath blessed him that hath the promises. But without any dispute the less is blessed of the better. And here men that die receive tithes; but there one, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. And, so to say, through Abraham even Levi, who receiveth tithes, hath paid tithes; for he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him. Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the Law), what further need was there that another Priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For He of Whom these things are said belongeth to another tribe, from which no man hath given attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord hath sprung out of Judah; as to which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priests. And what we say is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there ariseth another Priest, Who hath been made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life: for it is witnessed of Him, Thou art a Priest for ever After the order of Melchizedek. For there is a disannulling of a foregoing commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and a bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw nigh unto God. And inasmuch as it is not without the taking of an oath (for they indeed have been made priests without an oath; but He with an oath by Him that saith of Him, The Lord sware and will not repent Himself, Thou art a Priest for ever); by so much also hath Jesus become the Surety of a better covenant. And they indeed have been made priests many in number, because that by death they are hindered from continuing: but He, because He abideth for ever, hath His priesthood unchangeable. Wherefore also He is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such a High-priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Who needeth not daily, like those high-priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people: for this He did once for all, when He offered up Himself. For the Law appointeth men high-priests, having infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was after the Law, appointeth a Son, perfected for evermore." Jesus has entered heaven as our Forerunner, in virtue of His eternal priesthood. The endless duration and heavenly power of His priesthood is the "hard saying" which the Hebrew Christians would not easily receive, inasmuch as it involves the setting aside of the old covenant. But it rests on the words of the inspired Psalmist. Once already an inference has been drawn from the Psalmist's prophecy. The meaning of the Sabbath rest has not been exhausted in the Sabbath of Judaism; for David, so long after the time of Moses, speaks of another and better day. Similarly in the seventh chapter the Apostle finds an argument in the mysterious words of the Psalm, "The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek."[117] The words are remarkable because they imply that in the heart of Judaism there lurked a yearning for another and different kind of priesthood from that of Aaron's order. It may be compared to the strange intrusion now and again of other gods than the deities of Olympus into the religion of the Greeks, either by the introduction of a new deity or by way of return to a condition of things that existed before the young gods of the court of Zeus began to hold sway. But, to add to the mysterious character of the Psalm, it gives utterance to a desire for another King also, Who should be greater than a mere son of David: "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool." Yet the Psalmist is David himself, and Christ silenced the Pharisees by asking them to explain the paradox: "If David then call Him Lord, how is He his Son?"[118] Delitzsch observes "that in no other psalm does David distinguish between himself and Messiah;" that is, in all his other predictions Messiah is David himself idealised, but in this Psalm He is David's Lord as well as his Son. The Psalmist desires a better priesthood and a better kingship. These aspirations are alien to the nature of Judaism. The Mosaic dispensation pointed indeed to a coming priest, and the Jews might expect Messiah to be a King. But the Priest would be the antitype of Aaron, and the King would be only the Son of David. The Psalm speaks of a Priest after the order, not of Aaron, but of Melchizedek, and of a King Who would be David's Lord. To increase the difficulty, the Priest and the King would be one and the same Person. Yet the Psalmist's mysterious conception comes to the surface now and again. In the Book of Zechariah the Lord commands the prophet to set crowns upon the head of Joshua the high-priest, and proclamation is made "that he shall be a priest upon his throne."[119] The MaccabΓ¦an princes are invested with priestly garments. Philo[120] has actually anticipated the Apostle in his reference to the union of the priesthood and kingship in the person of Melchizedek. We need not hesitate to say that the Apostle borrows his allegory from Philo, and finds his conception of the Priest-King in the religious insight of the profounder men, or at least in their earnest groping for better things. All this notwithstanding, his use of the allegory is original and most felicitous. He adds an idea, fraught with consequences to his argument. For the central thought of the passage is the endless duration of the priesthood of Melchizedek. The Priest-King is Priest for ever. We have spoken of Melchizedek's story as an allegory, not to insinuate doubt of its historical truth, but because it cannot be intended by the Apostle to have direct inferential force. It is an instance of the allegorical interpretation of Old Testament events, similar to what we constantly find in Philo, and once at least in St. Paul. Allegorical use of history has just as much force as a parable drawn from nature, and comes just as near a demonstration as the types, if it is so used by an inspired prophet in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. This is precisely the difference between our author and Philo. The latter invents allegories and lets his fancy run wild in weaving new coincidences, which Scripture does not even suggest. But the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews keeps strictly within the lines of the Psalm. We must also bear in mind that the story of Melchizedek sets forth a feature of Christ's priesthood which cannot be figured by a type of the ordinary form. Philo infers from the history of Melchizedek the sovereignty of God. The Psalmist and the Apostle teach from it the eternal duration of Christ's priesthood. But how can any type represent such a truth? How can the fleeting shadow symbolise the notion of abiding substance? The type by its very nature is transitory. That Christ is Priest for ever can be symbolically taught only by negations, by the absence of a beginning and of an end, in some such way as the hieroglyphics represent eternity by a line turning back upon itself. In this negative fashion, Melchizedek has been assimilated to the Son of God. His history was intentionally so related by God's Spirit that the sacred writer's silence even is significant. For Melchizedek suddenly appears on the scene, and as suddenly vanishes, never to return. Hitherto in the Bible story every man's descent is carefully noted, from the sons of Adam to Noah, from Noah down to Abraham. Now, however, for the first time, a man stands before us of whose genealogy and birth nothing is said. Even his death is not mentioned. What is known of him wonderfully helps the allegorical significance of the intentional silence of Scripture. He is king and priest, and the one act of his life is to bestow his priestly benediction on the heir of the promises. No more appropriate or more striking symbol of Christ's priesthood can be imagined. His name even is symbolical. He is "King of righteousness." By a happy coincidence, the name of his city is no less expressive of the truth to be represented. He is King of Salem, which means "King of peace." The two notions of righteousness and peace combined make up the idea of priesthood. Righteousness without peace punishes the transgressor. Peace without righteousness condones the transgression. The kingship of Melchizedek, it appears, involves that he is priest. This king-priest is a monotheist, though he is not of the family of Abraham. He is even priest of the Most High God, though he is outside the pale of the priesthood afterwards founded in the line of Aaron. Judaism, therefore, enjoys no monopoly of truth. As St. Paul argues that the promise is independent of the Law, because it was given four hundred years before, so our author hints at the existence of a priesthood distinct from the Levitical. What existed before Aaron may also survive him. Further, these two men, Melchizedek and Abraham, were mutually drawn each to the other by the force of their common piety. Melchizedek went out to meet Abraham on his return from the slaughter of the kings, apparently not because he was indebted to him for his life and the safety of his city (for the kings had gone their way as far as Dan after pillaging the Cities of the Plain), but because he felt a strong impulse to bestow his blessing on the man of faith. He met him, not as king, but as priest. Would it be too fanciful to conjecture that Abraham had that mysterious power, which some men possess and some do not, of attracting to himself and becoming a centre, around which others almost unconsciously gather? It is suggested by his entire history. Whether it was so or not, Melchizedek blessed him, and Abraham accepted the blessing, and acknowledged its priestly character by giving him the priest's portion, the tenth of the best spoils. How great must this man have been, who blessed even Abraham, and to whom Abraham, the patriarch, paid even the tenth! But the less is blessed of the greater. In Abraham the Levitical priesthood itself may be said to acknowledge the superiority of Melchizedek.[121] Wherein lay his greatness? He was not in the priestly line. Neither do we read that he was appointed of God. Yet no man taketh this honour unto himself. God had made him king and priest by conferring upon him the gift of innate spiritual greatness. He was one of nature's kings, born to rule, not because he was his father's son, but because he had a great soul. It is not in record that he bequeathed to his race a great idea. He created no school, and had no following. So seldom is mention made of him in the Old Testament, that the Psalmist's passing reference to his name attracts the Apostle's special notice. He became a priest in virtue of what he was as man. His authority as king sprang from character. Such men appear on earth now and again. But they are never accounted for. All we can say of them is that they have neither father nor mother nor genealogy. They resemble those who are born of the Spirit, of whom we know neither whence they come nor whither they go. It is only from the greatest one among these kings and priests of men that the veil is lifted. In Him we see the Son of God. In Christ we recognise the ideal greatness of sheer personality, and we at once say of all the others, as the Apostle says of Melchizedek, that they have been "made like," not unto ancestors or predecessors, but unto Him Who is Himself like His Divine Father. Such priests remain priests for ever. They live on by the vitality of their priesthood. They have no beginning of days or end of life. They have never been set apart with outward ritual to an official distinction, marked by days and years. Their acts are not ceremonial, and wait not on the calendar. They bless men, and the blessing abides. They pray, and the prayer dies not. If their prayer lives for ever, can we suppose that they themselves pass away? The king-priest is heir of immortality, whoever else may perish. He at least has the power of an endless life. If he dies in the flesh, he lives on in the spirit. An eternal heaven must be found or made for such men with God. Now this is the gist and kernel of the Apostle's beautiful allegory. The argument points to the Son of God, and leads up to the conception of His eternal priesthood in the sanctuary of heaven. Let us see how the parable is interpreted and applied. That Jesus is a great High-priest has been proved by argument after argument from the beginning of the Epistle. But this is not enough to show that the priesthood after the order of Aaron has passed away. The Hebrew Christians may still maintain that the Messiah perfected the Aaronic priesthood and added to it the glory of kingship. Transference of the priesthood must be proved; and it is symbolised in the history of Melchizedek. But transference of the priesthood involves much more than what has hitherto been mentioned. It implies, not merely that the priesthood after the order of Aaron has come to an end, but that the entire dispensation of law, the old covenant, is replaced by a new covenant and a better one, inasmuch as the Law was erected on the foundation[122] of the priesthood. It was a religious economy. The fundamental conceptions of the religion were guilt and forgiveness.[123] The essential fact of the dispensation was sacrifice offered for the sinner to God by a priest. The priesthood was the article of a standing or a falling Church under the Old Testament. Change of the priesthood of itself abrogates the covenant. What, then, is the truth in this matter? Has the priesthood been transferred? Let the story of Melchizedek, interpreted by the inspired Psalmist, supply the answer. First, Jesus sprang from the royal tribe of Judah, not from the sacerdotal tribe of Levi. The Apostle intentionally uses a term[124] that glances at the prophet Zechariah's prediction concerning Him Who shall arise as the dawn, and be a Priest upon His throne. We shall, therefore, entitle Him "Lord," and say that "our Lord" has risen out of Judah.[125] He is Lord and King by right of birth. But this circumstance, that He belongs to the tribe of Judah, hints, to say the least, at a transference of the priesthood. For Moses said nothing of this tribe in reference to priests, however great it became in its kings. The kingship of our Lord is foreshadowed in Melchizedek. Second, it is still more evident that the Aaronic priesthood has been set aside if we recall another feature in the allegory of Melchizedek. For Jesus is like Melchizedek as Priest, not as King only. The priesthood of Melchizedek sprang from the man's inherent greatness. How much more is it true of Jesus Christ that His greatness is personal! He became what He is, not by force of law, which could create only an external, carnal commandment, but by innate power, in virtue of which He will live on and His life will be indestructible.[126] The commandment that constituted Aaron priest has not indeed been violently abrogated; but it has been thrust aside in consequence of its own inner feebleness and uselessness.[127] That it has been weak and unprofitable to men is evident from the inability of the Law, as a system erected upon that priesthood, to satisfy conscience.[128] Yet this carnal, decayed priesthood was permitted to linger on and work itself out. The better hope, through which we do actually come near unto God, did not forcibly put an end to it, but was super-added.[129] Christ never formally abolished the old covenant. We cannot date its extinction. We must not say that it ceased to exist when the Supper was instituted, or when the true Passover was slain, or when the Spirit descended. The Epistle to the Hebrews is intended to awaken men to the fact that it is gone. They can hardly realise that it is dead. It has been lost, like the light of a star, in the spreading "dawn" of day. The sun of that eternal day is the infinitely great personality of Jesus Christ, born a crownless King; crowned at His death, but with thorns. Yet what mighty power He has wielded! The GalilΓ¦an has conquered. Since He has passed through the heavens from the eyes of men, thousands in every age have been ready to die for Him. Even today the Christianity of the greatest part of His followers consists more in profound loyalty to a personal King than in any intellectual comprehension of the Teacher's dogmatic system. Such kingly power cannot perish. Untouched by the downfall of kingdoms and the revolutions of thought, such a King will sit upon His moral throne from age to age, yesterday and today the same, and for ever. Third, the entire system or covenant based on the Aaronic priesthood has passed away and given place to a better covenant,--better in proportion to the firmer foundation on which the priesthood of Jesus rests.[130] Beyond question, the promises of God were steadfast. But men could not realise the glorious hope of their fulfilment, and that for two reasons. First, difficult conditions were imposed on fallible men. The worshipper might transgress in many points of ritual. His mediator, the priest, might err where error would be fatal to the result. Worshipper and priest, if they were thoughtful and pious men, would be haunted with the dread of having done wrong they knew not how or where, and be filled with dark forebodings. Confidence, especially full assurance, was not to be thought of. Second, Christ found it necessary to urge His disciples to believe in God. The misery of distrusting God Himself exists. Men think that He is such as they are; and, as they do not believe in themselves, their faith in God is a reed shaken by the wind. These wants were not adequately met by the old covenant. The conditions imposed perplexed men, and the revelation of God's moral character and Fatherhood was not sufficiently clear to remove distrust. The Apostle directs attention to the strange absence of any swearing of an oath on the part of God when He instituted the Aaronic priesthood, or on the part of the priest at his consecration. Yet the kingship was confirmed by oath to David. In the new covenant, on the other hand, all such fears may be dismissed. For the only condition imposed is faith. In order to make faith easy and inspire men with courage, God appoints a Surety[131] for Himself. He offers His Son as Hostage, and thus guarantees the fulfilment of His promise. As the Man Jesus, the Son of God was delivered into the hands of men. "Of the better covenant Jesus is the Surety." This will explain a word in the sixth chapter, which we were compelled at the time to put aside. For it is there said that God "mediated" with an oath.[132] We now understand that this means the appointment of Christ to be Surety of the fulfilment of God's promises. The old covenant could offer no guarantee. It is true that it was ordained in the hands of a mediator. But it is also true that the mediator was no surety, inasmuch as those priests were made without an oath. Christ has been made Priest with an oath. Therefore He is, as Jesus, the Surety of a better covenant. In what respects the covenant is better, the Apostle will soon tell us. For the present, we only know that the foundation is stronger in proportion as the oath of God reveals more fully His sincerity and love, and renders it an easier thing for men laden with guilt to trust the promise. Before we dismiss the subject, it may be well to remind the reader that this mention of a Surety by our author is the locus classicus of the Federalist school of divines. Cocceius and his followers present the whole range of theological doctrines under the form of covenant. They explain the words "Surety of a better covenant" to mean that Christ is appointed by God to be a Surety on behalf of men, not on behalf of God. The course of thought in the passage is, we think, decisive against this interpretation. At the same time, we readily admit that their doctrine is a just theological inference from the passage. If God swears that His gracious purposes will be fulfilled and ordains Jesus to be His Surety to men, and if also the fulfilment of the Divine promise depends on the fulfilment of certain conditions on the part of men, the oath of God will involve His enabling men to fulfil those conditions, and the Surety will become in eventual fact a Surety on behalf of men. But this is only an inference. It is not the meaning of the Apostle's words, who only speaks of the Surety on the part of God. The validity of the inference now mentioned depends on other considerations extraneous to this passage. With those considerations, therefore, we have at present nothing to do. Fourth, the climax of the argument is reached when the Apostle infers the endless duration of Christ's one priesthood.[133] The number of men who had been successively high-priests of the old covenant increased from age to age. Dying one after another, they were prevented from continuing as high-priests. But Melchizedek had no successor; and the Jews themselves admitted that the Christ would abide for ever. The ascending argument of the Apostle proves that He ever liveth, and has, therefore, an immutable priesthood. For, first, He is of the royal tribe, and the oath of God to David guarantees that of his kingdom there shall be no end. Again, in the greatness of His personality, He is endowed with the power of an endless life. Moreover, as Priest He has been established in His office by oath. He is, therefore, Priest for ever. A question suggests itself. Why is the endless life of one high-priest more effective than a succession, conceivably an endless succession, of high-priests? The eternal priesthood involves two distinct, but mutually dependent, conceptions,--power to save and intercession. In the case of any man, to live for ever means power. Even the body of our humiliation will be raised in power. Can the spirit, therefore, in the risen life, its own native home, be subject to weakness? What, then, shall we say of the risen and glorified Christ? The difference between Him and the high-priests of earth is like the difference between the body that is raised and the body that dies. In Aaron priesthood is sown in corruption, dishonour, weakness; in Christ priesthood is raised in incorruption, in glory, in power. In Aaron it is sown a natural priesthood; in Christ it is raised a spiritual priesthood. It must be that the High-priest in heaven has power to save continually and completely. Whenever help is needed, He is living. But He ever lives that He may intercede.[134] Apart from intercession on behalf of men, His power is not moral. It has no greatness or joy, or meaning. Intercession is the moral content of His powerful existence. Whenever help is needed, He is living, and is mighty[135] to save from sin, to rescue from death, to deliver from its fear. To prove that Christ's eternal priesthood involves power and intercession is the purpose of the next verses.[136] Such a High-priest, powerful to save and ever living to intercede, is the only One befitting us, who are at once helpless and guilty. The Apostle triumphantly unfolds the glory of this conception of a high-priest. He means Christ. But he is too triumphant to name Him. "Such a high-priest befits us." The power of His heavenly life implies the highest development of moral condition. He will address God with holy reverence.[137] He will succour men without a tinge of malice,[138] which is but another way of saying that He wishes them well from the depth of His heart. He must not be sullied by a spot of moral defilement[139] (for purity only can face God or love men). He must be set apart for His lofty function from the sinners for whom He intercedes. He must enter the true holiest place and stand in awful solitariness above the heavens of worlds and angels in the immediate presence of God. Further, He must not be under the necessity of leaving the holiest place to renew His sacrifice, as the high-priests of the old covenant had need to offer, through the priests, new sacrifices every day through the year for themselves and for the people--yea, for themselves first, then for the people--before they dared re-enter within the veil.[140] For Christ offered Himself. Such a sacrifice, once offered, was sufficient for ever. To sum up.[141] The Law appoints men high-priests; the word, which God has spoken unto us in His Son, appoints the Son Himself High-priest. The Law appoints men high-priests in their weakness; the word appoints the Son in His final and complete attainment of all perfection. But the Law will yield to the word. For the word, which had gone before the Law in the promise made to Abraham, was not superseded by the Law, but came also after it in the stronger form of an oath, of which the old covenant knew nothing. FOOTNOTES: [117] Psalm 110:4 . [118] Matthew 22:45 . [119] Zechariah 6:11 ; Zechariah 6:13 . [120] SS. Legg. Alleg., 3: (vol. 1:, p. 103. Mang.). [121] Hebrews 7:6-10 . [122] ep' autΓͺs ( Hebrews 7:11 ). [123] Cf. Hebrews 6:1 . [124] Anatetalken . Cf. Zechariah 6:12 . AnatolΓͺ , dawn. The citation, as usual, is from the Septuagint. [125] Hebrews 7:14 . [126] Hebrews 7:16 . [127] athetΓͺsis , a setting aside ( Hebrews 7:18 ). [128] ouden eteleiΓ΄sen ( Hebrews 7:19 ). [129] epeisagΓ΄gΓͺ . [130] Hebrews 7:20-22 . [131] engyos . [132] emesiteusen ( Hebrews 6:17 ) [133] Hebrews 7:23-25 . [134] Hebrews 7:25 . [135] dynatai , the emphatic word in the passage. [136] Hebrews 7:26 . [137] hosios . [138] akakos . [139] amiantos . [140] Hebrews 7:27 . [141] Hebrews 7:28 . The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.
Matthew Henry