The first covenant had also ordinances. Hebrews 9:1-10 The ancient tabernacle A. B. Bruce, D. D. The writer now proceeds to compare the old and the new covenants with reference to their respective provisions for religious communion between man and God, his purpose being to show the superiority of the priestly ministry of Christ over that of the Levitical priesthood. In the first five verses he gives an inventory of the furniture of the tabernacle pitched in the wilderness; in the next five he describes the religious services there carried on. "Now [our leading back to Hebrews 8:5 ] the first [covenant] had ordinances of Divine service and its mundane sanctuary." The epithet ???????? here applied to the tabernacle evidently signifies belonging to this material world, in opposition to the heavenly sanctuary (ver, 11) not made with hands out of things visible and tangible. The purpose of the writer is to point out that the tabernacle belonged to this earth, and therefore possessed the attributes of all things earthly, materiality and perishableness. The materials might be fine and costly; still they were material, and as such were liable to wax old and vanish away. In vers. 2-5 is given a detailed description of the arrangements and furniture of this cosmic sanctuary. No valuator could be more careful to make an inventory of household furniture perfectly accurate than our author is to give an exhaustive list of the articles to be found in the Jewish tabernacle, whether in the holy place or in the most holy. Indeed, so careful is he to make the list complete, not only in his own judgment, but in the judgment of his readers, that he includes things which had no connection with religious worship, bat were merely put into the tabernacle for safe custody, as valuable mementos of incidents in Israel's history — e.g., the golden pot of manna, and Aaron's rod that budded. It is further to be noted in regard to these articles, that they are: represented as being within the ark of the covenant, though it is nowhere in the Old Testament said that they were, the direction given being merely that they should be placed before the testimony, and it being expressly stated in regard to the ark in Solomon's temple that there was nothing in it save the two tables on which the ten commandments were inscribed. Whether these things ever had been in the ark we do not know. The fact that they are here represented to have been does not settle the point. While his doctrine is that the ancient tabernacle was at best but a poor, shadowy affair, he takes pains to show that in his judgment it was as good as it was possible for a cosmic sanctuary to be. Its articles of furniture were of the best material; the ark of fine wood covered all over with gold, the altar of incense of similar materials, the pot with manna of pure gold. He feels he can afford to describe in generous terms the furniture of the tabernacle, because, after all, he will have no difficulty in showing the immeasurable superiority of the "true" tabernacle wherein Christ ministers. One single phrase settles the point — ?? ???????????? (ver. 11). The old tabernacle and all its furniture were made by the hands of men out of perishable materials. The " gold, and silver, and brass," &c., were all liable to destruction by the devouring tooth of time, that spares nothing visible and tangible. This eulogistic style of describing the furniture of the cosmic tabernacle was not only generous, but politic. The more the furniture ,was praised, the more the religious service carried on in the tent. so furnished was in effect depreciated by the contrast inevitably suggested. The emphasis laid on the excellent quality of these really signifies the inferiority of the whole Levitical system. Looking now at the inventory distributively, let us note what articles are placed in either compartment of the tabernacle respectively. In the first are located the candlestick, the table, and the shewbread, which was arranged in two rows on the table; to the second are assigned what is called the ??????????? , and the ark of the covenant, containing, as is said, the manna pot, Aaron's rod, and the tables of the covenant, and surmounted by the Cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat, or lid of the ark. The only article of which there is any need to speak "particularly" is the ??????????? , concerning which there are two questions to be considered: What is it? and with what propriety is it assigned to the most holy place? As to the former, the word ??????????? may mean either "the altar of incense," as I have rendered it, or "the golden censer," as translated in the Authorised and Revised Versions. I do not suppose there would be any hesitation on the subject, were it not for the consideration, that by deciding that the altar of incense is intended we seem to make the writer guilty of an inaccuracy in assigning it to the inner shrine of the tabernacle. I have little doubt that this consideration had its own weight with our Revisers in leading them to retain the old rendering, "the golden censer"; and the fact detracts from the value of their judgment, as based, not on the merits of the question, but on the ground of theological prudence. A clearer insight into the mind of the writer would have shown them that this well-meant solicitude for his infallibility was uncalled for. This brings us to the question as to the propriety of placing the altar of incense among the things belonging to the most holy place. The fact is, that the altar of incense was a puzzle to one who was called on to state to which part of the tabernacle it belonged. Hence the peculiar manner in which the writer expresses himself in reference to the things assigned to the most holy place. He does not say, as in connection with the first division, "in which were" ( ??? ), but represents it as " having" ( ?????? ) certain things. The phrase is chosen with special reference to the altar of incense. Of all the other articles it might have been said "in which were," but not of it. Nothing more could be said than that it belonged to the second division. The question is, whether even so much could be said, and why the writer preferred to say this rather than to say that the altar of incense stood outside the veil in the first division. Now as to the former part of the question, in so putting the matter cur author was only following an Old Testament precedent, the altar of incense being in 1 Kings 6:22 called the altar "that was by the oracle," or more correctly, as in the Revised Version, the altar "' that belonged to the oracle." Then the directions given for fixing its position, as recorded in Exodus 30:6 , are very significant. The purport of this directory seems to be: outside the veil for daily use (for within it could not be used save once a year), but tending inwards, indicating by its very situation a wish to get in, standing there, so to speak, at the door of the most holy place, petitioning for admission. So the eloquent eulogist of the better ministry of the new covenant appears to have understood it. He thinks of the altar of incense as praying for admission into the inner shrine, and waiting for the removal of the envious veil which forbad entrance. And he so far sympathises with its silent prayer as to admit it within the veil before the time, or at least to acknowledge that, while materially without, it belonged in spirit and function to the most holy place. In stating the case as he does our author was not only following usage, but utilising the double relations of the altar of incense for the purpose of his apologetic. He wanted to make it felt that the position of that altar was difficult to define, that it was both without and within the veil, that you could not place it exclusively in either position without leaving out something that should be added to make the account complete. And he wished to press home the question, What was the cause of the difficulty? The radical evil, he would suggest, was the existence of the veil. It was the symbol of an imperfect religion, which denied men free access to God, and so was the parent of this anomaly, that the altar of incense had to be in two places at the same time: within the veil, as there were the mercy-seat and the Hearer of prayer; without the veil, because the incense of prayer must be offered daily, and yet no one might go within save the high priest, and he only once a year. How thankful, then, should we be that the veil is done away, so that the distinction of without and within no longer exists, and we may come daily to offer the incense of our prayers in the presence of God, without fear of evil, with perfect "assurance to be heard"! After the inventory of its furniture comes an account of the ministry carried on in the Jewish sanctuary (vers. 6-10); the description of which, coming after the former, has all the effect of an anticlimax. One can hardly fail to say to himself, What a fall is here! The furniture was precious, but the worship how poor f Every one capable of reflection feels that a religious system in which the vessels of the sanctuary are so much superior to the service cannot be the final and permanent form of man's communion with God, but only a type or parable for the time of better things to come, that could last only till the era of reformation arrived. This truth, however, the writer does not leave to be inferred, but expressly points out and proves. On two things he insists, as tending to show the insufficiency and therefore the transitiveness of the Levitical system, and all that pertained to it. First, he asserts that the mere division of the tabernacle into an accessible holy place and an inaccessible most holy place proved the imperfection of the worship there carried on; and, secondly, he points out the disproportion between the great end of religion and the means employed for reaching it under the Levitical system. ( A. B. Bruce, D. D. )

Benson Commentary Hebrews 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. Hebrews 9:1 . To show that the old covenant was justly laid aside, the apostle judged it necessary to enter into a particular examination of the religious services which it enjoined, and to prove that these were designed not for cleansing the consciences of the worshippers, but to prefigure the services and blessings of the new or gospel covenant: so that the latter being come, there was no longer occasion for continuing the former to prefigure them. This chapter, therefore, is an illustration of chap. Hebrews 8:5 , where the apostle affirms that the priests worshipped God in the tabernacles unto the example or pattern and shadow of heavenly things. And it was proper to explain this matter copiously, because it must have had a great influence in weaning the Hebrews from the Levitical services, and in reconciling them to the abrogation of a form of worship which, though of divine appointment, was now become useless, having accomplished its end. Then verily the first covenant — Many copies read here ????? ????? , the first tabernacle; but as that reading does not agree with Hebrews 9:2 , Beza and Mill prefer the reading of the Alexandrian and other MSS. of good authority, which have ????? , leaving the reader to supply ??????? , covenant, from the preceding verse. This reading our translators likewise have adopted. Had ceremonial ordinances of outward worship, and a worldly, that is, a visible, material sanctuary, or tabernacle. The meaning of the apostle is, that the Sinai covenant had these things annexed to it when it was first made, as its privileges and glory. For in the whole discourse he has continual respect to the first making of the covenant, and the first institution of its administrations; and this was that part of divine worship about which God had so many controversies with the people of Israel, under the Old Testament. The law of this worship was a hedge that God had set about them to keep them from superstition and idolatry. And, if at any time they brake over it, or neglected it, they failed not to rush into the most abominable idolatries. On the other hand, oftentimes they placed all their trust and confidence for their acceptance with God, and reception of blessings from him, on the external observance of its institutions. And hereby they countenanced themselves, not only in a neglect of moral duties and spiritual obedience, but in a course of flagitious sins, and various wickednesses. To repress these exorbitances, with respect to both extremes, the ministry of the prophets was, in an especial manner, directed. Hebrews 9:2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary. Hebrews 9:2 . For there was a tabernacle made — Namely, the first part of it of which he speaks, of boards and curtains, pillars and coverings, which constituted a little apartment, as a kind of ante-chamber to the oracle; wherein was the candlestick — Of pure gold, with its seven lamps perpetually burning with pure oil, and so giving light to all holy administrations. This undoubtedly represented the fulness of spiritual light which was to be in the Messiah, and by him to be communicated to his whole church; and the table and show-bread — That is, the bread shown continually before God and his people, consisting of twelve loaves, according to the number of the tribes, and placed on this table in two rows, six upon one another in each row. As the candlestick typified the light, so the bread seems to have been an emblem of the spiritual food provided in Christ, especially in his doctrine, merits, and Spirit for the support of the spiritual life, health, and strength of believers. This is set forth at large, John 6:27-58 . There was also in this first tabernacle the golden altar of incense placed at the west end of it, where the veil opened into the most holy place. On this incense was burned every morning and evening, emblematical doubtless of the prayers of God’s people, and especially of the efficacy given to them by the mediation and intercession of Christ. Hebrews 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; Hebrews 9:3 . And after the second veil — That is, with respect to them who entered into the tabernacle; for they were to pass through the whole length of the first part before they came to this: nor was there any other way of entering into it. This veil divided the holy place from the most holy, as the first veil did the holy place from the courts; and they are both here called veils, because by the first, the people were hindered from entering or even looking into the first part of the tabernacle, into which the priests entered daily; and by the second, the priests who performed services in the holy place were prohibited from entering, or even looking into the most holy. The tabernacle which is called the holiest of all — “This represented heaven, not only because in it the glory of the Lord, or visible symbol of his presence, rested between the cherubim, whereby the angelical hosts, surrounding the throne of God in heaven, were typified, but because this tabernacle was hidden from the eyes of all who frequented the outward tabernacle; even as heaven, the habitation of God, is hidden by the veil of their flesh from the eyes of all who live on the earth.” Hebrews 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; Hebrews 9:4-5 . Which had the golden censer — Used by the high-priest only on the great day of atonement. “The apostle may have learned from the priests that this censer was of gold, and that it was left by him in the inward tabernacle, so near to the veil, that when he was about to officiate next year, by putting his hand under the veil he could draw it out to fill it with burning coals, before he entered into the most holy place to burn the incense, agreeably to the direction,” Leviticus 16:12-13 ; where see the note. And the ark of the covenant — This, with the mercy-seat wherewith it was covered, was the most glorious and mysterious utensil of the tabernacle, and afterward of the temple, the most eminent pledge of God’s presence, and the most mysterious representation of the divine attributes in Christ. This being the heart, so to speak, of all divine services, was first formed; all other things in the Jewish worship had a relation to it, Exodus 25:10-11 . Sometimes it is called the ark of the testimony, because God called the tables of the covenant lodged in it by the name of his testimony, or that which testified his will to the people, and which, by the people’s acceptance of the terms of it, was to be a perpetual witness between God and them. On the same account it is called the ark of the covenant, and lastly, it is called the ark of God, because it was the most eminent pledge of the special presence of God among the people. As to its fabric, it was ???????? , every way, within and without, overlaid with plates of beaten gold. This being the most sacred and glorious instrument of the sanctuary, all neglects about it, and contempt of it, were most severely punished. From the tabernacle it was carried into the temple built by Solomon, wherein it continued until the Babylonish captivity, and what became of it afterward is altogether uncertain. Wherein was the golden pot that had manna — The monument of God’s care over Israel. When the manna first fell, every one was commanded to gather an omer for his own eating, ( Exodus 16:16 ,) and God appointed that an omer of it should be put into a pot, and kept in the tabernacle before the Lord, Exodus 16:33 : there it was miraculously preserved from putrefaction, whereas otherwise it would have putrefied in less than two days. The pot was to be made of that which was most durable, as being to be kept for a memorial throughout all generations. Because it is said, 1 Kings 8:9 , there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone, the words ?? ? , here used by the apostle, may be translated, nigh to which. Or the difficulty may be removed by supposing that the pronoun ? , which, relates to ????? , tabernacle, in which tabernacle also was the golden pot: or because it is said, Deuteronomy 31:26 , Take this book of the law and put it in the side of the ark, we may conjecture that the book was put into some repository fixed to the side of the ark, and that the pot of manna was laid up before the Lord in the same manner. Aaron’s rod that budded — The monument of a regular priesthood. The apostle affirms only that it budded, but in the sacred story concerning the trial about the priesthood, recorded Numbers 17:2-10 , it is added, that it brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded almonds, being originally cut from an almond-tree. This rod Moses took from before the testimony when he was to smite the rock and work a miracle, of which this was consecrated to be the outward sign; and the tables of the covenant — The two tables of stone on which the ten commandments were written by the finger of God; the most venerable monument of all. And over it — Over the ark; the cherubim of glory — “Cherubim being the name of an order of angels, ( Genesis 3:24 ,) the figures called cherubim, placed on the sides of the mercy-seat, with the glory of the Lord resting between them, represented the angels who surround the manifestation of the divine presence in heaven. These figures, therefore, were fitly termed the cherubim of glory; and by this glory constantly abiding in the inward tabernacle, and by the figures of the cherubim, that tabernacle was rendered a fit image of heaven.” Shadowing — With outspread wings; the mercy-seat — And represented as looking down upon it; a posture significative of the desire of angels to look into the mysteries of man’s redemption, of which the mercy-seat, or propitiatory, being a plate of gold covering the ark, was an emblem, 1 Peter 1:12 . See also notes on Exodus 25:17-22 , where the making and frame both of the mercy-seat and the cherubim are described, Hebrews 9:5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly. Hebrews 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God . Hebrews 9:6 . Now when these things were thus ordained — ??????????????? , prepared. Having given an account of the structure of the tabernacle in the two parts of it, and the furniture of those several parts distinctly, to complete his argument, the apostle adds the consideration of their sacred use; the priests went always — Every day; into the first tabernacle — Termed the holy place; accomplishing the service of God — Performing what was there to be done, namely, burning the incense at the morning and evening sacrifice, dressing the lamps and supplying them with oil, changing the show-bread every sabbath morning. Added to this, as the principal part of the service of this tabernacle, the priests brought into it the blood of the sin-offerings, and sprinkled it before the veil, Leviticus 4:6 . At all other times they entered into it without blood, for the blood of the burnt-offerings was sprinkled about the altar, Leviticus 1:11 . Hebrews 9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: Hebrews 9:7 . But into the second — The holy of holies; went the high-priest alone — And no other person; and he was to be so alone as that none were to attend in order to assist him in any part of the service; yea, no one was allowed to be in the other part of the sanctuary where he might so much as see the veil opened, but all the priests, as well as the people, were kept without the sanctuary, Leviticus 16:2 ; Leviticus 16:17 ; Leviticus 16:32 . Hence it was always provided, in case of the sickness or occasional pollutions of the actual high-priest, the next in succession should perform this office, who was therefore called the second priest. From whence, in times of disorder and confusion, they had two high-priests at once. This entrance was a type, both of the entrance of Christ into heaven, and of our entrance by him to the throne of grace, Hebrews 9:24 ; Hebrews 10:19-20 . And this was the veil which, in the temple, was rent from top to bottom upon the death of our Lord. For by his death the way was laid open to the most holy place, and the gracious presence of God discovered to all that come to God by him. Once every year — That is, on one day only, namely, the day of expiation, Leviticus 16:2 ; but on that day he went in several times: not without blood — To signify that there is no entrance into God’s gracious presence but by the blood of Christ. After the high-priest had filled the holy place with a cloud of incense, he returned to the altar of burnt-offerings without the tabernacle, where the sacrifice had been newly slain; and while the blood of the beasts was fresh, and, as it were, living, he took of it in his hand, and entering again into the most holy place, sprinkled it seven times with his finger toward the mercy-seat. Which he offered — Where or when he offered it is not expressed: in the holy place there was no use of blood but for the sprinkling of it, but the sprinkling of blood was always consequential to the offering properly so called. Probably by the word ????????? , here used, he intends only bringing, and not properly offering. For himself and the errors of the people — The apostle refers to the distinct sacrifices that were to be offered on that day, the first of which was of a bullock and a ram, which were offered for the high-priest himself; such being the imperfection of their state, that they could have no priests to offer sacrifices for the sins of the people, but he must first offer for himself. By the errors of the people, are meant their sins of ignorance, to which only, and not to sins presumptuously committed, those atonements extended. They were offered for the whole nation, to make atonement for the sins which they had ignorantly committed during the preceding year, and to open the tabernacle for their acts of worship during the succeeding year. And to show this, the high-priest carried the blood of these sacrifices into the inward tabernacle, and sprinkled it before the symbol of the divine presence. Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Hebrews 9:8-10 . The Holy Ghost — By whom the Mosaic ritual was prescribed; signifying — By this difficulty of entrance, and the necessity of the incense-cloud and the atoning blood; that the way into the holiest of all — Namely, into heaven, the place of God’s immediate presence, represented by the inward tabernacle; was not yet made manifest — Not so clearly and fully revealed; while the first tabernacle, and its service, was yet standing — Retained its station and use: or, in other words, while the Jewish economy lasted. This lasted, according to the mind of God, until the death of Christ, and no longer: until which time both Christ himself, and all his disciples, continued to observe all its services, for he was made under the law of it. So long it continued by divine appointment. Its abolition, however, was, properly speaking, not declared until the day of pentecost, when, by the extraordinary effusion of the Holy Ghost, the foundation of the gospel church, with its state, order, and worship, was solemnly laid; and a new way of worship being established, the abrogation of the old was shown. But through the patience of God, the Jewish worship, though no longer acceptable to him, continued until the destruction of the temple, city, and people, some years after. Which tabernacle, with all its furniture and services, was a figure — ???????? , a parable, that is, a parabolical or emblematical instruction; for the time then present — During the continuance of that service and way of worship. Or, as the original may be interpreted, Which figure (or parabolical instruction) continues till this present time, namely, in the like service performed in the temple; according to which, namely, time, or during which, gifts and sacrifices, ???????????? , are offered, ?? ????????? , which cannot make him who does the service, ??? ?????????? , the worshipper, whether the priest, or him who brings the offering, perfect — As to his conscience, so that he should be no longer conscious of being under the guilt or power of sin, or should have a full assurance that his sins are forgiven. Doddridge understands the verse in a rather different sense, thus: “Which, far from being the grand and ultimate scheme, is only a kind of allegorical figure and parable, referring to the glorious displays of the present time: in which, nevertheless, there is hitherto a continuance of the temple-service; so that gifts and sacrifices are still offered, which yet in the nature of things, are not able to make the person who performs the service perfect, with respect to the conscience; as they refer not to the real expiation of guilt, but only to averting some temporal evils which the law denounces on transgressors.” This, he adds, I take to be of the greatest importance for understanding the Mosaic sacrifices, namely, “that they were never intended to expiate offences to such a degree as to deliver the sinner from the final judgment of God in another world; but merely to make his peace with the government under which he then was, and furnish him with a pardon pleadable against any prosecution which might be commenced against him in their courts of justice, or any exclusion from the privilege of drawing near to God, as one eternally at peace with him, in the solemnities of his temple worship.” Which service stood, or consisted, only, or chiefly, in meats and drinks — Or in divers ceremonious observances concerning these things; in the distinction between different kinds of meats, clean or unclean, and drinks, some of which were allowed, and others denied, to priests in some circumstances, and to Nazarites in others; and divers washings — Either of the whole body, or of a part of it, in water, as different occasions demanded; and carnal ordinances — Various injunctions relating to the purification of the flesh, imposed on them as necessary to be observed; until the time of reformation — Namely, of the worship of God by Christ, who was to abolish the Levitical services, and to introduce a worship in spirit and in truth, which might be performed in every place. Hebrews 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Hebrews 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. Hebrews 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Hebrews 9:11-12 . But Christ being come — As if he had said, Though the types and legal ceremonies could not make the worshippers perfect, yet Christ, the antitype and truth, can. Here he comes to interpret and show the end of the typical services he had spoke of; a high-priest of good things to come — Described Hebrews 9:15 ; that is, a dispenser of those benefits and advantages which were prefigured by the Mosaic institutions, but could only be obtained for us, and bestowed upon us, by the Messiah. By a greater and more perfect tabernacle — That is, not by the service of the Jewish tabernacle, ( Hebrews 9:23 ,) but by a service performed in a greater and more perfect tabernacle above; not made with hands, that is, not of this building — Namely, the building of this worldly sanctuary, or not making any part of this lower creation. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, &c., did he procure a right to enter and minister in that tabernacle, but by his own blood — By the merit of his death; he entered in once into the holy place above — That is, once for all: not once, or one day every year, as the Jewish high-priest into the holy place of the emblematical tabernacle: having obtained — By his one perfect sacrifice; eternal redemption and salvation for us — Of which all the remissions, and all the benefits procured by the ministration of the Aaronical priesthood, were but very imperfect figures. Beza, Pierce, and many others, by the greater and more perfect tabernacle, understand our Lord’s human nature. In support of which notion Beza says, that his human nature may as properly be called a tabernacle as his flesh is called a veil, Hebrews 10:24 . “But, not to dispute about the propriety of the figure, it appears an absurdity to say that Christ entered into the holy place through his own human nature, as through a tabernacle. He entered into heaven clothed with his human nature, and not through it, as through a place: for, on that supposition, he did not carry his human nature with him into heaven.” — Macknight. Hebrews 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us . Hebrews 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: Hebrews 9:13-14 . For, &c. — The truth intended to be confirmed in these verses, is that which the apostle had asserted in the two preceding, namely, That Christ by his blood hath obtained for us eternal redemption. And his words contain both an argument and a comparison, to this effect: “If that which is less can do that which is less, then that which is greater can do that which is greater; provided also that less, in what it did, was a type of what was greater in that greater thing which it was to effect. The apostle takes for granted, what he had proved before, namely, 1st, That the Levitical services and ordinances were in themselves carnal, and had only an obscure representation of things spiritual and eternal; and that the office and sacrifice of Christ were spiritual, and had their effects in eternal things. 2d, That those other carnal earthly things were divinely-appointed types and resemblances of those which were spiritual and eternal. From these suppositions the argument is firm: as the ordinances of old, being carnal, had an efficacy to their proper end, to purify the unclean as to the flesh; so the sacrifice of Christ hath a certain efficacy to its proper end, the purging of our consciences, &c. The force of the inference depends on the relation that was between them in the appointment of God. Nay, there was evidently a greater efficacy in the sacrifice of Christ, with respect to its proper end, than there was in those sacrifices, with respect to their proper end: the reason is, because all their efficacy depended on a mere arbitrary institution, having in their own nature neither worth nor efficacy; but in the sacrifice of Christ there is an innate glorious worth and efficacy, which, suitably to the rules of eternal reason and righteousness, will procure and accomplish its effects.” — Owen. Therefore the apostle says, How much more shall the blood of Christ, &c. These things being observed, the explication of the apostle’s words will not be difficult. As if the apostle had said, That Jesus, by his death, should procure an eternal pardon and deliverance from all the consequences of sin for us, is reasonable; for if the blood of bulls and of goats, of which I have just been speaking, when presented to God, with the appointed circumstances, on the day of general expiation by the high-priest, and, in cases of personal pollution, the ashes of a heifer, (namely, the red heifer, of which see Numbers 19:17-19 ,) consumed by fire, as a sin-offering, being sprinkled on them who were legally unclean, did sanctify to the purifying of the flesh — Had so much efficacy in consequence of the divine institution, as to reconcile God to the whole Jewish people, in the former instance, and in the other to introduce persons legally unclean to the liberty of approaching him in his sanctuary, which would otherwise have been denied them; how much more reasonable is it to think that the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit — Supporting the infirmities of his human nature, and animating him to the exercise of all those graces which shed such a lustre round all the infamy of his cross; offered himself voluntarily, without spot, a most acceptable sacrifice, to God — How much more, I say, shall that blood of his avail to purge our consciences from dead works, (of which see on Hebrews 6:1 ,) that is, from the pollutions we have contracted by works of sin and death; to serve — That is, that we may freely approach, and acceptably worship and serve the living God? — How surely shall it appease that consciousness of guilt, which might otherwise be very distressing and discouraging to us, and introduce us to present our prayers, praises, and other services in the divine presence, with assurance of acceptance and regard. It is justly observed by Macknight here, that “the ceremonial institutions mentioned, sanctified the bodies of the polluted, not by any natural efficacy, (for they rather defiled them,) but by the appointment of God, who, considering them as acts of obedience, was pleased, on their account, to remit the punishment, which, as their political ruler, he had a right to inflict on the polluted; but the shedding of the blood of Christ, both by the appointment of God, and by its own efficacy, availeth to the procuring an eternal pardon for penitent sinners. The sanctification effected by the legal rites being the sanctification of nothing but the body, it was, in a religious light, of little use, unless it was a representation and pledge of some real expiation. Now, what real expiation of sin is there in the whole universe, if the sacrifice of Christ is excluded? We must therefore acknowledge that the Levitical rites, which sanctified the flesh, derived their whole virtue from their being, as the apostle affirms, figurative representations of the real atonement which Christ [made upon the cross and] was to make in heaven, [by presenting his crucified body there,] for sanctifying the soul of the sinner. Christ is said to have offered himself through the eternal Spirit, because he was raised from the dead by the Spirit, ( 1 Peter 3:18 ,) consequently he was enabled by the Spirit to offer himself to God.” Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Hebrews 9:15 . And for this cause — ??? ????? , on this account, that Christ’s blood is so efficacious; or for this end, that he might die and thereby procure redemption, and an eternal inheritance for us; he is the mediator — Between God and man, making peace between them; of the new testament — Or covenant rather, as the word ??????? is generally rendered in the New Testament, answering to the Hebrew word berith, which all the translators of the Jewish Scriptures have understood to signify a covenant. It is, however, such a covenant, as, having been procured for us, and confirmed by his death, is thereby become a testament. For through it we receive the blessings which Christ, by his will, designed for, and declared should be conferred upon believers through faith in his blood. “Thus when he said, for their sakes I sanctify myself, John 17:19 ; that is, I offer up myself as a piacular victim, that they might be sanctified, or truly purged from their sins; he adds, as his last will and testament, Father, I will that those whom thou hast given me be with me where I am. So here he is become a high-priest of good things to come, purchasing eternal redemption for us by his blood: and the mediator of that new covenant, in which God promises to be merciful to our transgressions, and to remember our sins no more, Hebrews 8:12 ; procuring the remission of them by the intervention of his death, that they who believe in him might receive the promise of an eternal inheritance — Which he died to entitle them to, and confer upon them; whence it is styled the purchased possession, Ephesians 1:14 . This therefore was his will and testament, that they, for whom he died, should live through him. And this testament could not be confirmed but by his death: he, therefore, was at once the mediator in whom the new covenant, promising to us remission of sins, was made, and the testator by whose death the testament, that they who believed in him should have eternal life, was ratified.” So Dr. Whitby, who, however, observes, that the paragraph, to the end of Hebrews 9:20 , will admit of a fair interpretation without supposing that any thing is said in it either of a testament or testator. See on the next verse. That by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions — That is, for the redemption of transgressors from the guilt and punishment of those sins which were committed under the first covenant. In other words, He suffered for this end, that he might procure deliverance, not only from the condemnation due to the sins which have been committed since his death, but from that due to those which were committed during the former dispensation and state of the church, which could not be fully expiated by any of those sacrifices which belonged to the first covenant. They which are called — And obey the call, or are made partakers of the grace of the gospel; might receive the promise of eternal inheritance — The things promised in the new covenant, namely, not a temporary, earthly inheritance, such as the land of Canaan, promised in the first covenant, but that eternal glory which is promised in the new covenant. Hebrews 9:16 For where a testament is , there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. Hebrews 9:16-17 . For where a testament is — That is, where there is a covenant, which is also a testament; there must of necessity be the death of the testator — As if he had said, The reason why there was a necessity that Christ should die, is taken from the nature of the covenant whereof he is Mediator, which covenant is also a testament, and therefore could not be of force but by his death. For a testament is of force — Has validity; after men are dead — When, and not before, the legatees may claim their legacies. Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth — And therefore hath power to alter his will at pleasure. But it is not necessary that the expression ??? ?????????? , at the end of Hebrews 9:16 , should signify a testator, properly so called: it may mean only a promiser, and one that confirms his promise with his own blood. For ????????? , according to Phavorinus, is, I promise, I covenant; and ??????????? ???????? is very commonly in profane authors, to enter into covenant; and in the same sense the phrase is used in the Old Testament; and therefore the participle ?????????? , derived from the same verb, must probably have the same signification here, in which it is continually used by the LXX., and which it always bears in the New Testament. Thus, Acts 3:25 , Ye are the children, ???????? ?? ??????? , of the covenant which God made with our fathers; Luke 22:29 ; ???? ?????????? ???? , and I appoint to you a kingdom, ????? ??????? , as my Father hath appointed to me. So in this epistle, Hebrews 8:10 ; Hebrews 10:16 , ???? ? ??????? ?? ?????????? , This is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel. And because covenants were usually made victimas cædendo, by sacrifices, as the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin expressions used in the making of covenants show; accordingly, the new covenant was established in the blood of Jesus. Hence the apostle speaks thus of this covenant, and the appointed disposer or maker of it. This sense of the passage is defended at large by Dr. Macknight, in a note too long to be here quoted. His pa

Expositor's Bible Commentary Hebrews 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.