Hebrews 4

Hebrews 4:11-16

XXIX AND SPECIAL All New Testament exhortation is based on antecedent statement of doctrine. In Hebrews the whole letter is a succession of doctrines and exhortations – first a doctrine, then its application. In some respects, then, is it a model in homiletics.

1. It shows the relation between dogma and morals. There can be no morals apart from dogma. To leave out dogma undermines morality.

2. Dogma, as a mere theory, is valueless. Its power lies in its application to practical life, governing thought, emotion, imagination, words, and deeds in all of life’s relations to God home, country, and the universe.

The present-day ministry has deteriorated in the power of exhortation based on vivid conceptions of great and definitive doctrines concerning God, law, sin, salvation, heaven, and hell.

The first exhortation in this letter is an exhortation to earnest attention: “Therefore, we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we drift away from them. For if the word spoken through angels proved stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard?” (Hebrews 2:1-3). The doctrinal basis of this exhortation is all chapter I, setting forth our Lord’s threefold sonship, by eternal subsistence, by his incarnation, by his resurrection, and his threefold superiority over the universe, over the angels, and over the prophets. The precise tendency against which this exhortation warns is to “drift away” from great truths. Any steady lateral pressure which insidiously swerves a floating object from a given direction, and causes drifting, as a prevalent wind, an ocean current or undertow, rapids in a river leading to a fall, or the suction of a whirlpool. Inherited depravity, the course of this world, the temptations of Satan, the increasing power of evil habits until they become second nature – in a word, the world, the flesh, and the devil constitute the drifting power, or trend away from salvation.

The danger of neglecting this exhortation is that we are carried away unwittingly until there is no escape forever. The great majority of life’s irreparable disasters are brought about by “drifting away” through “heedlessness” and “neglect.”

The element of the greatness in this salvation is deliverance of the entire man, soul and body, forever, from the guilt, defilement, love, and dominion of sin, into an eternal and most blessed state of reconciliation and companionship with God. The historical argument against any hope of escape if this salvation be neglected is that from Sinai to Christ’s advent every word of the law disposed by angels proved steadfast, and every transgression was justly punished. The historical instances of this penalty of the law and of the prophets are numerous. The applied logic of this history is as follows:

By so much as Christ is greater than angels or prophets; by so much as his revelation is more complete and the light of his gospel brighter; by so much as it is better accredited; by so much as it is final where theirs was transitional and educational – by that much is its penalty surer and severer. The second exhortation (Hebrews 3:8) is against “hardening the heart.” There is a relation between “drifting” and “hardening:” “Drifting” precedes and tends toward “hardening,” which is a more dangerous state. By “hardening” is meant a blunting of the moral perceptions, a growing callousness to spiritual sensations, tending to the condition of “ past feel- ing." According to the context “an evil heart of unbelief” operating through the “deceitfulness of sin” causes hardening. This deceitfulness consists in misconstruing the grace of delay in punishment as immunity altogether, as saith the prophet: “Because sentence against an evil deed is not speedily executed, the heart of the sinner is fully set in him to do evil.”

The third exhortation is found in Hebrews 4:11 thus: “Let us labor therefore to enter into the rest.” The doctrinal basis of this exhortation is that as God rested from creation, commemorating it by a sabbath day, so Jesus rested after the greater work of redemption, commemorating it by appointing a new day for sabbath-keeping.

The fourth exhortation (Hebrews 4:14) is this: “To hold fast to our confession.” The doctrinal basis is the fact that Jesus, our High Priest, has entered into the heavenly holy of holies to make atonement and intercession for us.

The fifth exhortation (Hebrews 4:16) is to come boldly to the throne of grace for mercy and help in every time of need. The doctrinal basis of this exhortation is the fact that our High Priest is touched with a feeling of our infirmities, having been in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.

The occasion for the sixth exhortation is that they were in a state of arrested development, remaining “babes in Christ” when they ought to have been teachers, and so not only unprepared to receive the higher grades of Christian knowledge, but they were unable to discern between good and evil because their spiritual senses had not been exercised; hence they were continually tempted to try to rub out and make a new start from the very beginning (see Hebrews 5:11-14). This reminds us of the three classes into which our Lord divided his flock: (1) Lambs, Greek: arnia, i.e., new converts; (2) Sheep, Greek probata i.e., mature Christians; (3) Little sheep, Greek (best manuscript): “probatia,” i.e., Christians stunted in growth (see John 21:15-19). These Hebrews were “little sheep.”

The phrase “by reason of use” is illustrated by the senses or faculties, or muscles which increase in power by use, or go into bankruptcy by disuse. Certain Chinese families, training the sense of touch for generations, can tell colors of cloth fabrics in the dark by feeling. It is said also that certain Japanese dentists, by long training of the muscles of thumb and forefinger, extract teeth, using the hand alone as forceps. Again, the prophet, referring to the second nature of long continued evil habits, says “As the Ethiopian cannot change his skin nor a leopard his spots so one accustomed to do evil cannot learn to do well.”

This sixth exhortation is to leave the first principles, not attempting the relaying of foundations, but go on to maturity, (Hebrews 6:1). The first principles of Christian oracles are the foundation of repentance and faith, the teaching of baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment (Hebrews 6:2).

Repentance and faith are called a foundation because without them one can neither be a Christian nor be saved. Therefore the folly of attempting to relay this foundation, since it is never laid but once, which Paul hypothetically states thus: “For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance” (Hebrews 6:4-6).

This passage has several interpretations as follows:

1. John Bunyan held that the “enlightening,” “tasting,” and “partaking” of this passage refer to illumination and conviction by the Holy Spirit which did not eventuate in regeneration. This view the author rejects because the passage also supposes genuine repentance as well as “illumination” and “conviction,” else why say it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance? Moreover, he disconnects the force of “being made partakers of the Holy Spirit” and “tasting of the powers of the world to come.”

2. Dr. Wilkes, a Methodist preacher, as the author heard him say, held that the passage certainly taught two things: (1) A genuine Christian may lose regeneration; and (2) if he does he can never be converted again.

3. The author holds that “the enlightening,” “tasting,” and “partaking” are equivalent to regeneration, and that the passage does teach that if regeneration were once lost it could never be regained, because, having exhausted the benefits of Christ’s crucifixion in the direction of regeneration, another regeneration would call for another crucifixion, but Christ, as a sin offering, dies but once; he is offered once for all. So the passage teaches “‘Seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame.” It would be an open shame to Christ if a beneficiary of his salvation should lose it and thus vitiate the certainty of the Father’s promise to him and covenant with him. But that the statement is hypothetic appears from the apostle’s added words: “But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak”; “But we are not of them that shrink back unto perdition; but of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul.” The object of the exhortation is so to influence the Christian to move on and not spend a lifetime as the foundation, for in any event this is folly.

To illustrate: Being present, as a visitor, at a Methodist meeting, I was invited to talk to some of the mourners. I approached a man who seemed to be weeping in great distress, and asked what was his trouble. His reply was, substantially: “I have been converted several times, but I always lose it.” I assured him he was mistaken on one or the other of two points – either he was never genuinely converted, or he had never lost it – both could not be true. He replied: “I know I was converted, and I know I lost it.” Then said I: “Why are you wasting time here; why shedding fruitless tears? If you are right on both points, then you are forever lost. You have exhausted the plan of salvation.

Your only chance is for Christ to come and die again and send the Holy Spirit again, of which there is no promise, and even in that case there is no certainty for you unless he and the Holy Spirit should do more efficient work next time. I don’t desire to shake your positive, infallible knowledge that you have been regenerated and that you have lost it, but merely point out that in such case you are forever lost, just as certainly as if you were in hell now. Here, look at Hebrews 6:4-6, and see that I can do you no good, and so will pass on to cases not hopeless.” “Don’t leave me,” he said, “maybe I am mistaken on one of those points.”

“Baptism” here is in the plural and there is a reference here, (1) To baptism in water (Matthew 28:19); (2) to baptism in fire, or eternal punishment (Matthew 3:10-12); (3) to baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5); (4) to baptism in suffering (Mark 10:39).

“The teaching of laying on of hands” refers: (1) To conferring of miraculous power by the laying on of hands of the apostles (Acts 8:17; Acts 19:6), which, accrediting of the apostles passed away with the apostles; (2) to the abiding requirement of laying on of hands in the ordination (1) for deacons (Acts 6:6), (2) for evangelists (Acts 13:3; 1 Timothy 4:14); and (3) for other preachers (1 Timothy 5:22).

From a peculiar interpretation of Heb 6:1-2 there arose a sect known as the “Six-Principle Baptists” who practiced laying hands on those who were baptized as an essential part of the form of the ordinance.

1. What the New Testament method of exhortation?

2. In what respects, then, is it a model in homiletics?

3. Wherein has the present-day ministry deteriorated?

4. What is the first exhortation in this letter, and what is its doctrinal basis?

5. What is the precise tendency against which this exhortation warns?

6. What are the causes of drifting?

7. What, in plain terms, constitute the drifting power, or trend away from salvation?

8. What is the danger of neglecting this exhortation?

9. What is your estimate of the relative proportion of life’s irreparable disasters brought about by “drifting away” through “heedlessness” and “neglect”?

10. What the element of greatness in this salvation?

11. What is the historical argument against any hope of escape if we neglect this salvation?

12. Cite historical instances of this penalty (1) of the law and (2) of the prophets.

13. What is the applied logic of this history?

14. Against what is the exhortation in Hebrews 3:8?

15. What is the relation between “drifting” and “hardening?”

16. What do you understand by “hardening?”

17. What do we find in the context as a cause of “hardening?”

18. In what does deceitfulness consist?

19. What is the exhortation relative to rest, and what its doctrinal basis?

20. What is the exhortation relative to confession, and what its doctrinal basis?

21. What is the exhortation relative to our need, and what the doctrinal basis?

22. What is the occasion of the exhortation relative to perfection?

23. Into what three classes did our Lord divide his flock, and of which class were these Hebrews?

24. Ex-pound the phrase “by reason of use.”

25. What, then, is the exhortation relative to perfection?

26. What are the first principles of Christian oracles?

27. Why are repentance and faith called a foundation?

28. What is the folly of trying to relay this foundation, and what the doctrine involved?

29. How does Paul hypothetically state this?

30. What are the several interpretations of this passage?

31. Give an incident of the use of this passage by the author.

32. What is the meaning of “baptisms” used in this passage?

33. What is the meaning of “laying on of hands?”

34. What sect of Baptists arose from a peculiar interpretation of Heb 6:1-2, and what their construction of “laying on of hands?”

XXX AND SPECIAL The seventh exhortation in this book is as follows: “Let us draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith – let us hold fast the confession of our hope that it waver not – let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works, not forsaking our own assembling together, exhorting one another” (Hebrews 10:22-25). The doctrines that underlie this manifold exhortation are, (1) Christ has rent the veil hiding the holy of holies by his death, and dedicated for us a new and living way. (2) We have a great High Priest over the house of God. (3) The day of his final coming is rapidly approaching (Hebrews 10:19-21).

Here a question arises, Does “having our bodies washed with pure water” (Hebrews 10:22) refer to water baptism, and if so, what the bearing of the teaching? It is not clear that it has such reference. But if it does, it strongly supports the Baptist teaching, to wit: Our souls are cleansed by the application of Christ’s blood by the Holy Spirit in regeneration. Baptism in water only washes the body, and hence can only externally symbolize the internal cleansing. In this way Paul, internally cleansed, could arise and wash away his sins symbolically in baptism (Acts 22:16), or as Peter puts it: “Water, even baptism, after a true likeness doth now save us, not putting away the filth of the flesh [i.e., the carnal nature] but the answer of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). In other words, it is a figurative salvation, and the figure or likeness is that of a resurrection (see Romans 6:4-5). Paul’s reason for the seventh exhortation is expressed in the famous passage (Hebrews 10:26-29), the whole of which is an explanation of the eternal, unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit, very different from the gradual, unconscious sins of “drifting” and “hardening.” Its conditions and characteristics are:

1. There has been great spiritual light and knowledge, thoroughly convincing the judgment of the truth of the gospel, and strongly impressing the mind to accept it.

2. It is a distinct and wilful rejection of the well-known light and monition of the Holy Spirit.

3. It is a culmination of sin against every person of the Trinity. (1) It is a sin against the Father in deliberately trampling under foot the Son of his love. (2) It is a sin against the Son in counting the blood of his expiation an unholy thing. (3) It is the sin against the Holy Spirit in doing despite to his grace who has furnished complete proof to the rejector’s conscience that it is God’s Son who is trampled under foot, and that the blood of his vicarious sacrifice alone can save.

4. Once committed, the soul is there and then forever lost, having never forgiveness in time or eternity, and knows that for him there is no more sacrifice for sin, and expects nothing but judgment and fiery wrath which shall devour the adversaries.

5. Let the reader particularly note that this sin cannot be committed except in an atmosphere, not merely of light and knowledge, but of spiritual light, knowledge and power, and that it is one wilful, malicious act arising from hate – hating the more because of the abundance and power of the light. The eighth exhortation is, “Cast not away your boldness” (Hebrews 10:35). The exhortation is based on appeal to their remembrance of the triumphs of their past experience. They had patiently endured a great conflict of suffering just after their conversion; they had been made a gazing stock both by reproaches and afflictions cast on them and by their sharing in the afflictions of their leaders. This is evident from the history of Paul’s labors among men. There was nothing in their present afflictions severer than those they triumphantly endured in their earlier experience.

The ninth exhortation is, “Therefore, let us also, seeing that we are compassed about by so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising shame, and hath sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider him that hath endured such gainsaying of sinners against himself, that ye wax not weary, fainting in your souls” (Hebrews 12:1-3). The imagery here is that of a foot race, such as these people had often witnessed in the Isthmian Games at Corinth, or in the great amphitheater at Ephesus. “The race set before us” – the great example upon whom the runner must fix his eye – is Jesus, the author (or captain) and perfecter of our faith.

The force of the example of Jesus in Hebrews 12:2 is this:

He is set before us as the one perfect model or standard. A joy was set before him as a recompense of reward that when attained would make him the gladdest man in the universe. For this he voluntarily became the saddest man in the universe. Thus “the Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief” was “anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows;” “He saw of the travail of his soul and was satisfied.” Here we are confronted with this double question: Does the phrase, “author and perfecter of our faith,” mean that Jesus first inspires and then completes our individual faith – i.e., what he begins he consummates – or that he is the captain and completer of the faith in the sense that his completed victory is both cause and earnest of our own victory, as in Hebrews 2:10? The latter best accords with the import of the Greek word, archegos, used both here and in Hebrews 2:10, and with the whole context.

The word “witnesses” in Hebrews 12:1 means martyrs whose examples should excite our emulation, and accords with the meaning and usage of the Greek word marturos, which makes them witnesses to the truth and not spectators of what other people may do. Moreover, the biblical evidence is scant, if there be any at all, that departed souls are allowed to sympathetically intervene in the struggle of those left behind. Yet, by rhetorical license, in the exercise of the imagination, a poet, orator or writer may summon the dead to appear before the living for dramatic effect. But we go far when we seek to construct doctrine on rhetorical license. What is the “besetting sin” in Hebrews 12:1? It may not be the same in all cases. It is the sin to which one most easily yields whether pride, lust, covetousness, anger, vanity, or any other.

The tenth exhortation (Hebrews 12:4-13,) is, “Regard not lightly the chastening of the Lord, because (1) chastening is an evidence of sonship. (2) If we have borne arbitrary chastening from earthly parents, much more we will bear disciplinary chastening from our Heavenly Father. (3) While grievous at first, it yieldeth afterward peaceable fruit or righteousness, if rightly received.

Here come up the Creationist theory of the origin of human spirits and the Traducian theory. The Creationist theory is that the spirit of every human being born into the world is a direct creation of God, and only the body is derived from the earthly parent. The Traducian theory is that every child, in his entirety, spirit and body, is derived from his earthly parents, begotten in the likeness not only of bodily features but in spiritual state, otherwise man could not propogate his species, and every child would, in his inner nature, be born holy, not subject to inherited depravity and not needing regeneration until he became an actual transgressor hence needing only proper environment and training to grow up in holiness.

The passage in question is not decisive for either theory. God is the Father of spirits in that originally the spirit of man was not a formation from inert matter, but a special creation (see Genesis 2:7). Thus the whole race, body and spirit, was potentially in the first man, died body and spirit in him when he fell, and after his fall he “begat children in his likeness” body and spirit.

In Hebrews 12:12-13, “hands hanging down,” “palsied knees,” and “crooked paths” refer to the physical effects of spiritual depression or terror, the inner man acting on the outer. See case of Belshazzar (Daniel 5:6), and recall cases coming under your own observation in which discouragements or despondency of the spirit enfeeble the body. Some men, morally brave, are physically timid. A famous French marshal always trembled at the beginning of battle. On one occasion his officers rallied him on his shaking legs. He answered, “If my legs only knew into what dangers I will take them today, they would shake more than they do.”

The eleventh exhortation (Hebrews 12:14 ff) is, “Follow after peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord.” There are two hazards attending obedience to this exhortation, against which there are special cautions, as follows: (1) The springing up of a root of bitterness to defile many. (2) The spirit of profanity, or the despising of sacred things.

In our own experience or observation, cases arise of a single root of bitterness disturbing the peace of communities and retarding the sanctification of hundreds.

Profanity here means, not so much swearing as it does a spirit of irreverence in speaking of sacred things, and, sometimes interested lost souls are completely sidetracked by the levity and foolish jestings, and the questionable anecdotes of preachers in their hours of relaxation.

The author having often, in his early ministry, witnessed the wounding and shocking of sober-minded Christians and the loss of interest in awakened sinners caused by the foolish jestings in the preacher’s tent concerning sacred things, and sometimes by obscene anecdotes, entered into a solemn covenant with Dr. Riddle, the moderator of the Waco Association, never to tell nor willingly hear a doubtful anecdote. This covenant was made while camping out one night on the prairie in the light of the stars.

The twelfth exhortation and its doctrinal basis are found in Hebrews 12:28-29 : “Wherefore, receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us have grace, whereby we may offer service well-pleasing to God with reverence and awe: for our God is a consuming fire.

I will group in classes the exhortation of Hebrews 13 as follows:

1. Love to brethren, strangers, and those in bonds.

2. Honor the sanctity of marriage.

3. Eschew the covetous spirit.

4. Hold in kind remembrance your leaders that have passed away.

5. Bear the reproach of Christ, even if it ostracises from worldly society.

6. Offer spiritual sacrifices of praise, confession, contribution, and prayer.

In closing this exposition there are two things worthy of note: First, The bearing of Heb 13:8 on the preceding verse, which means that preachers may come and go, but Jesus is ever the same. Second, The controversy arose over Hebrews 13:10, a controversy as to what is the Christian altar. Was it the cross on which Jesus was crucified? Then how can the altar be greater than the gift on the altar, as Christ taught? Was it Christ’s divinity on which his humanity was sacrificed? This controversy was a refinement of foolishness, because the altar under consideration is not supporting the expiating sin offering of which the priests were never allowed to have a part, but the altar to which non-expiatory offerings were brought, such as meat offerings, thank offerings, tithes etc.

Of these the priests and Levites might partake. The meaning is simply this – that Christianity provides in its way for the support of its laborers through the voluntary offerings to Christ’s cause (see 1 Corinthians 9:13-14).

1. What is the exhortation in this book relative to faith, hope, and love?

2. What doctrines underlie this manifold exhortation?

3. Does “having our bodies washed with pure water” (Hebrews 10:22) refer to water baptism, and if so, what the bearing of the teaching?

4. How do you interpret Paul’s reason for this exhortation as expressed in Hebrews 10:26-29, which refers to the eternal sin?

5. What is the exhortation relative to boldness, and on what is it predicated?

6. What is the exhortation relative to weights, sins, etc., what its imagery, and what its elements?

7. What is the force of the example of Jesus in Hebrews 12:2?

8. What does the phrase “author and perfector of our faith” mean?

9. What is the meaning and import of “witnesses” in Hebrews 12:1?

10. What is the “besetting sin” in Hebrews 12:1?

11. What is the exhortation relative to chastening, and what its reasons?

12. What are the theories relative to the origin of human spirits, and what the bearing of this passage on the subject?

13. What is the meaning and force of “hand hanging down,” “palsied knees,” and “crooked paths?”

14. What is the exhortation relative to peace and sanctification?

15. What two hazards attending obedience to this exhortation?

16. Do you know of a case of a single “root of bitterness” disturbing communities and hindering sanctification?

17. What is the meaning of profanity here, and what illustration of the effect of such profanity given?

18. In what did Esau’s profanity consist?

19. What is the meaning of Heb 12:17? So, What the exhortation relative to grace, and what its doctrinal basis?

20. Group in classes the exhortations of Hebrews 13.

21. What is the bearing of Heb 13:8 on the preceding verse?

22. What controversy arose over Hebrews 13:10?

23. Why was this controversy a refinement of foolishness?

Hebrews 4:14-8

XXI JESUS CHRIST, HIGH PRIEST OF THE NEW , GREATER THAN AARON, HIGH PRIEST OF THE OLD Hebrews 4:14-8:5.The letter to the Hebrews is an inspired exposition of the Sinaitic covenant, and particularly of the book of Leviticus. Our analysis and exposition of the Sinaitic covenant (Ex. 19:1-24:9) shows that this covenant consisted of three distinct elements:

1. God and the normal man, or the moral law (Exodus 20:1-17) as a way of life; not simply an obligation but a condition of life – they that do these things shall live, they that do them not shall perish.

2. God and the nation, or the ordinances that set forth the principles of civic righteousness (Exodus 21:1-24:9); in obedience to which the nation lives, and in disobedience dies.

3. God and the sinner, or the Law of the Altar (Exodus 20:22-26), or the way of the sinner’s approach to God in order to find mercy.

We learn that all subsequent statutory legislation in the Pentateuch was developed from these constitutional elements or principles. Deuteronomy was developed from the first and second, and from the third was developed the last sixteen chapters of Exodus, all of Leviticus, and most of the legislation in Numbers. The Altar part, or God and the sinner, was typical of the new covenant, and contained in figures the way of grace and mercy, and revealed the only way by which Parts 1-2 could be kept. Hence it was the most important element of the Sinaitic law.

In the Pentateuch we find also these elements of the law of the sinner’s approach to God:

1. The sanctuary, holy of holies, or a place where the sinner might find God.

2. A means of approach to God in the sanctuary, or vicarious, expiating sacrifices placating the divine wrath against sin.

3. A mediator to go between the sinner seeking mercy, and God bestowing mercy. This mediator, or priest, took the blood of the vicarious expiation and carried it behind the veil and offered it upon the mercy seat, where God dwelt between the cherubim. That mediator, on the basis of that offered blood, made intercession for the people.

4. Times in which to approach God are set forth elaborately in that book – daily, weekly, monthly, annually, septennially, and every fiftieth year. Those were the times that they could go before God, but the heart of Leviticus, as well as the heart of Hebrews, was a particular time, to wit: On the great day of atonement, when the people appeared before God to receive through an offering presented by the priest, the remission of their sins, we find a prescribed ritual that gave the steps involved.

5. Then we find what place there was for penitence, faith, and prayer. We find penitence to indicate that the man approaching God came as a confessed sinner. We find faith set : forth by the laying on of hands upon the head of the victim – the victim to take his place. We find the prayer part to be the petitions that went with the high priest and were presented by him when he made the offering. All that ia, presented in the book of Leviticus.

So we find that the sanctuary of God was that part which was called the holy of holies, and that there God was visibly manifested, according to all Jewish interpretation, in the Shekinah of fire between the cherubim on the mercy seat. We find the victims to be bullocks, goats, and lambs. We find the mediator to be, and particularly upon the great day of atonement, Aaron. We find the sacrifices constantly repeated every year; on the ‘great day of atonement the priest bad to go for the people, carrying the names of the tribes on his breastplate, going for them into the holy of holies. In the letter to the Hebrews, which expounds the Altar part of the Sinaitic covenant, Paul does not discuss the Temple of Solomon, nor of Zerubbabel, nor of Herod, but the tabernacle of Moses, because his plan is to go back to origins, and to the dignity of founders. It would have been incongruous if after discussing angels, Moses, Aaron, and the prophets, he had skipped to the ritual of the Herodian Temple.

He makes this argument: AB Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is greater than the prophets, greater than the angels, greater than Moses, greater than Joshua, so he is greater than Aaron. We do not discuss in this chapter superiority of the new covenant over the old, but the superiority of Jesus Christ over Aaron as high priest.

In some respects Aaron and Jesus Christ are alike – neither one took the honor to himself. Aaron did not appoint himself high priest to go before God, and Jesus Christ did not appoint himself to be mediator. The Father appointed them. Aaron was one of the people. Christ was like Aaron in that respect – he was one of the people. He took upon himself the nature of man and became as one of those who became his brethren.

So we have not yet arrived to the point of discrimination between Christ and Aaron, but we do now come to the dividing line: Aaron being a priest under the covenant made upon Mount Sinai, was himself of the tribe of Levi. Jesus Christ did not belong to that tribe. He was of the tribe of Judah, therefore the priesthood of Christ does not come within the law of the covenant established by Moses on Mount Sinai. It was not his office to go to the Temple at Jerusalem and there officiate as priest. He had no such place there. That is a distinction. It shows that the priesthood of Christ must be according to an entirely different covenant, otherwise he would have to be a son of Levi to be a priest.

In getting to this point of distinction, Paul takes up a fragment of the history of Genesis, about an ancient king of Jerusalem – Melchizedek. Before Abraham had any possession there, this man was both a king and a priest of God – before the call of Abraham, before the segregation of the Jewish nation, when there was no distinction between Jew and Gentilei He had no pedigree of which there is any record, but when we come to Aaron’s time, no man could officiate as an Aaronic priest unless he could trace his Levitical descent. Melchizedek had no such genealogy, and therefore in a genealogical sense’ he is said to be without father or mother, and held his office as king and priest directly from God. He was recognized as greater than Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, for when Abraham was returning from the victory over Chedorlaorner he paid tithes to the king of Salem and received a blessing from him.

In the days of the psalmist a reference is made to that history: “The Lord hath sworn, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” This makes another distinction – Christ, not Aaron, was made priest by oath of God. So a distinction between Christ and Aaron is that Aaron is after the order of Levi and his priesthood is under the Mosaic covenant made upon Mount Sinai, and Jesus Christ is a priest after the order of Melchizedek anterior even to Abraham, much less Moses, and greater than Abraham, receiving tithes from the whole Jewish people in the person of Abraham, and inducted by the oath of God. It shows, too, that no scripture is of private interpretation. The prophets spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, and when you go to interpret a passage of Scripture which the Holy Spirit indicted, you get the meaning through the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

The next point is that when Aaron, under the Levitical law was preparing to offer a sacrifice for the sins of the people, he must first offer for himself because he was a sinner, and before he offered for others he must himself be cleansed; but this Man was holy, “tempted in all points as we are tempted, yet without sin.” That distinction in character is very strong between the two persons – between the two orders of priesthood. Aaron was a sinner; our priest was not a sinner. No man ever convicted him of sin.

Then Aaron died and could not continue to live to intercede for the people, but this priest ever liveth to make intercession for his people.

We now take up the general superiority of the New Covenant, and it embraces items 10-12 of the analysis, only in expounding this I will follow a more orderly and logical method than we have in the analysis. This section extends from Hebrews 8:5-13:16, and it even includes one verse of Hebrews 7.

So far, our exposition has had to do with the person and most of the offices of the Mediator of the new covenant, but here we contrast the covenants themselves. Notwithstanding the previous statements of the elements of the Sinaitic covenant, we must restate them here briefly in order to clearness in this exposition. The old covenant is set forth in Exodus 19:1-24:11, and consists of three distinct elements:

1. The Decalogue, or God and the normal man.

2. The fundamental principles of civic righteousness, or God and the theocratic nation.

3. The altar, or God and the sinner, or the law of the sinner’s approach to God.

From the first and second elements are derived a part of Numbers, and all of Deuteronomy; from the third element, God and the sinner, or the law of the altar, are derived the last 16 chapters of Exodus, the whole of Leviticus, and a part of Numbers.

Our first question now arises: What are the faults of the old covenant, for our text says that God found that old covenant faulty? If we know what the faults are, we can then ’ consider the superiorities of the new covenant. Evidently the one supreme fault of the first and second elements, that is, the moral code and the national code, was the inability of a fallen, sinful people to keep the law, as a way of life for the individual, or a way of life for the nation. The reason is that the moral element was written outside of the people and on tablets of stone; they had no internal personal knowledge – spiritual knowledge – of the law. So written, it discovered sin and condemned sin, but there was nothing in it to overcome this inability and render the obedience efficacious. The normal man – Adam before his fall, and his descendants – could have kept the Decalogue if he had not fallen and corrupted their nature derived from him, could have constituted a successful theocratic nation. But after the fall no lineal descendant from I Abraham, nor circumcision of the flesh, could impart a new nature.

And now what the faults of the third part of that covenant – that is, the Levitical code – the last three chapters of Exodus, the whole of Leviticus, and a part of Numbers? The faults of that element were:

1. It was in whole and in all its parts but a shadow merely of heavenly things to come; in its nature and in its intent it was only transitory and educational.

2. The lack of intrinsic merit in the expiating sacrifices to atone for sin.

3. The emptiness of its nonexpiatory sacrifices arising from the want of the heart back of them.

4. Conforming to it could never relieve the conscience from the sense of sin, guilt, and condemnation, and give peace and rest.

5. The repentance of the sinner on human go-betweens, or third parties in making offerings, and in the administration of cleansing ordinances, the limitation of one fixed place to meet God, and the further limitation of set times in which to meet God – that is, the sinner could not for himself directly approach God at all times, in all places, and in all emergencies.

From these faults what our text declares necessarily and inevitably followed, to wit: “They continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.” Their whole national history is but the record of a series of breaches of the covenant on their part, and of God’s disregard of them on his part. They broke the covenant first in the very shadow of Sinai, before its tablets were completed, in the matter of the golden calf. They broke the covenant again at Kadesh-barnea, and the whole generation of adults were disregarded and perished. They broke the covenant again throughout the period of the judges, and at the close of that period their rebellion culminated in the rejection of God as King, and in the demand for a human monarchy. After that monarchy was established, the ten tribes broke the covenant at the very start in erecting the calves to worship at Dan and Bethel, and kept on breaking it without cessation until they perished. The Judah part of the monarchy, while more faithful than the ten tribes, repeatedly broke the covenant, and finally, at the downfall of the monarchy by Nebuchadnezzar, they were swept away.

The hierarchy which, through the clemency of Persia, succeeded the monarchy and continued throughout the Grecian and Roman supremacies, repeatedly violated the covenant, and the culmination of their rebellion was in the days of our Lord when they rejected him and killed the Prince of Glory, bringing upon themselves the terrible denunciation in Matthew 21-23 – the gravest judgment that was ever assessed against a people. This on account of the faults in that covenant. In every period of their probation they broke it and disregarded it.

This review of the faults enables us to sum up in one sweeping, inclusive generality the superiority of the new covenant, to wit: Our text says, “It was enacted on better promises,” so that our next question arises: What are these better promises? Here it is all important to make no mistake. If we do not discern these better promises clearly and retain them permanently in our hearts, we will utterly fail to master the priceless lessons of this book. Notwithstanding the importance of discerning and retaining these promises, what a sad thing it is, that if the preachers of Christendom were called up and asked to state what these better promises are, probably not more than one in a hundred could give them correctly, and three-fourths of so-called Christendom have never seen them. I will give them to you in the next chapter.

1. Hebrews is an exposition of what covenant, and what Old Testament book in particular?

2. Where is the record of the old covenant, and what are its constituent elements?

3. What subsequent parts of the Pentateuch developed from each of these elements?

4. What are the elements of the law of the sinner’s approach to God, and what the particulars of each?

5. What do we find as to the sanctuary, the victims of sacrifice, the mediator, the times and the work of the high priest under the old covenant?

6. Why does the author of the letter to the Hebrews discuss the tabernacle of Moses and not the Temple of Herod?

7. In what respects are Aaron and Christ alike?

8. In what particulars is Christ greater than Aaron? (See analysis.)

9. Who was Melchizedek, and how does he illustrate the order of Christ’s priesthood?

10. What are the fault of the first and second elements of the old covenant?

11. What are the faults of the third element of the same covenant?

12. From these faults what necessarily and inevitably followed, and what particular illustrations of this in the history of Gods people, Israel?

13. Sum up in a sweeping generality the superiority of the new covenant and show its importance.