Chapter 8

The doctrine of the high priesthood of Jesus Christ

1. There are three priesthoods in the scripture. The first is in the dispensation of the Gentiles, the second in the dispensation of Israel, and the third in the dispensation of the Church. Each dispensation has a priesthood.

2. As high priest Jesus Christ is a minister of spiritual things — Hebrews 5:1. Therefore, all spiritual things which pertain to us in this dispensation are related to Jesus Christ.

3. Jesus Christ is appointed high priest by God the Father — Hebrews 5:4-10; 6:20.

4. Jesus Christ offered Himself a sacrifice of the priesthood — Hebrews 9:26,27. In other words, our high priest is greater than all high priests that ever went before because He offered Himself as a sacrifice. Basically He did two things. When Jesus Christ went to the cross as our high priest He solved the problem of the old sin nature. He solved this problem by bearing our sins in His own body on the tree. At the same time He completely disassociated Himself with all human good of any kind.

5. Jesus Christ has an eternal and untransmissable priesthood — Hebrews 7:20, 21, 24. In other words, He will always be the high priest and we will always be a kingdom of priests, always be royalty.

6. Because of positional sanctification — union with Christ — every believer is a priest — 1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6.

7. Christ as high priest performs a ministry of intercession for believers on the earth — Hebrews 7:25.

8. The believer priest in phase two possesses a different sacrifice from the Levitical code. In the Levitical code you would take to the altar a lamb or a goat. But not any more. All of the animal sacrifices ended with the operation of the Levitical priesthood, so now we have three basic sacrifices: a) As priests we have the sacrifice of the believer’s body — Romans 12:1. This is rebound. b) The sacrifice of praise — Hebrews 13:15. This is based on supergrace capacity and category #1 love response. That, of course, is based on doctrine. c) A third sacrifice is production and giving — Hebrews 13:16. These are sacrifices of the priesthood. d) A fourth one, which is very rarely ever heard of, is obedience — Hebrews 13:17.

There are three basic principles taught in Hebrews chapter eight. The subject of the chapter is the superiority of Jesus Christ as high priest, and this passage denotes three superiorities: a) Christ is superior because He has an heavenly ministry — Hebrews 8:1-5. b) Christ is superior because He has a better ministry — Hebrews 8:6. c) Christ is superior because He has a new covenant ministry — Hebrews 8:7-13. So we have the three superiorities of the high priesthood of Christ over all other priesthoods.

Verses 1-5, the heavenly ministry of Christ. The first verse talks of the glorification of Christ and acts as a transitional verse between what we have in the seventh chapter and what we now have in the eighth chapter.

Verse 1 — “of the things which we have spoken this is the sum” is not correct. The first word “Now” is the Greek particle de used as a transitional particle. This is a conjunctive particle. It is never used first in the sentence, it always follows. It is used here with the word kefalaion. Kefalaion is used by Pindar and Demosthenes not as the sum but as the main point. So de plus kefalaion means “Now the main point.” We have come to the main point in Hebrews and we have a summary of everything. This is a transition summarising what we have had and then going on to what is ahead.

Next we have “of the things which we have spoken”, and it is incorrect. We have a prepositional phrase with the participle as the object of the preposition — e)pi plus the locative plural present active participle of legw. The present tense is a static present used for perpetual communication of God’s Word. The passive voice: doctrine of the superiority of Christ as high priest is now being communicated in summary. The participle is telic. The telic participle acts as a transitional one to denote the purpose of what is coming related to what has just been said. It should be translated “Now the main point on what has been said is this.” That is the way the verse actually starts, or “the main point on what is being communicated is this.”

Then, “We have such an high priest.” “We have” is the present active indicative of the verb e)xw. It means to have and to hold, to have and possess. The present tense is a static present, we always will have. The active voice: every person who believes in Jesus Christ will always have Christ. We are forever saved. “We keep having such a high priest”, but it isn’t “such a high priest.” It is “such a category of high priest.” There is only one but He falls in a separate category. And the word for high priest: a)rxierouj which means the ruling priest.

Literally then: “Now the main point on what is being communicated is this: We keep on having such a category of high priest”.

“who” — the relative pronoun o(j refers to the Lord Jesus Christ; “has sat down.”

The doctrine of the priesthood

1. Definition: A priest is a member of the human race representing the human race to God. The priest of the Old Testament was always taken from the male population of the human race but never from angels and never from women. The exception is the Church Age where every women, the moment she believes, becomes a priest too. The priest must partake of the nature of the person or persons for whom he acts. That is, he must be a member of the human race — Hebrews 5:1; 7:4,5, 14, 28. This is one reason why Jesus Christ had to be a member of the human race, As God He could not be a priest — Hebrews 10:5, 10-14.

2. The sphere of the priesthood function: The priest and high priest must function in the sphere of spiritual phenomena. Therefore, he is appointed for man’s benefit in spiritual things. This means the royal priesthood of the Church Age is related to Bible doctrine. If you and I are going to have spiritual benefit in spiritual things then as members of the priesthood we must live on Bible doctrine. The only food for a priest is doctrine — Matthew 4:4.

3. The categories of the priesthood: The first category is the battalion of the royal priesthood. The pattern of that battalion is Melchizedek who was both a king and a priest. He became a king by conquest; he became a priest by divine appointment. The Lord Jesus Christ is in that battalion. He was born a King, He didn’t require kingship by conquest. Salem or Jerusalem is His future headquarters. The Lord Jesus Christ is a King as of birth, descended from David through Solomon. This is the only battalion authorised today. So the first battalion is made up of the royal priesthood and that refers to every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. The second battalion is the Levitical priesthood, authorised by the Mosaic law which is now defunct. The Levitical priesthood is no longer authorised. You had to be in the family of Aaron. The concept of the priestly ministry in spiritual things is found for this priesthood in Numbers 16:5. They were commissioned, they were holy, they were allowed to “come near” to the altar. This priesthood was perpetuated through the natural line of Aaron and specifically through his surviving sons. Everything was a shadow. In the third priesthood, the family priesthood, the patriarch of the family functioned as the high priest. And the second and third battalions are defunct, only the first battalion has survived.

4. We have a royal high priest in the Church Age, the Lord Jesus Christ. He is appointed forever by divine decrees — Hebrews 5:6. He was appointed to the royal priesthood — Hebrews 5:10. He was assigned to the Melchizedek battalion — Hebrews 6:20. His appointment was accompanied by divine oath — Hebrews 7:21.

5. The royal priesthood of the Church Age. All believers of this dispensation are priests — 1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6.

6. The purpose of the royal priesthood in the Church Age is to reach supergrace and maximum divine blessing. Everything else is incidental. Hebrews 6:17-20; Ephesians 3:17-21; 4:11-16.

7. The function of the royal priesthood. It will be delineated in Hebrews chapter 13.

We have started a study of the superiority of our high priest, Jesus Christ. The superiority of Jesus Christ as high priest is the subject of this chapter. He is superior because of His heavenly ministry: 8:1-5; because of His better ministry: 8:6; because of His new covenant ministry: 8:7-13.

We possess Jesus Christ as a high priest forever. There is no way we can lose our salvation. The relative pronoun “who” refers to the unique person of the universe, the Lord Jesus Christ, our saviour, the King of kings and Lord of lords, the one who is the object of category #1 love, the one who is responsible for everything that will ever be worthwhile in our lives.

He is said to be “set” — incorrect. The aorist active indicative of the verb kaqizw does not mean to be set but to be seated. It should be translated, “who has sat down.” The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the action of the verb in its entirety but it emphasises the existing results of the strategic victory of the Lord Jesus Christ in being seated at the right hand of the Father. The session is the result and so we have a culminative aorist. The Lord Jesus Christ having been seated is in the place of strategic victory. The active voice: Jesus Christ demonstrated His superiority by sitting down in heaven. This is in contrast to the high priest who always stood as he ministered in the tabernacle. He never sat down. The indicative mood is the unqualified assertion of the principle of doctrine that Jesus Christ has won the strategic victory.

The doctrine of ascension & session

1. The resurrection body of Jesus Christ was capable of space travel, just as ours will be. The resurrection body of the humanity of Christ travelled through all three heavens — John 20:17.

2. The fact that Jesus Christ was seated in heaven at the request of God the Father, and the fact that this is the place of honour, is the subject of many scriptures, including Psalm 110:1 where it was first prophesied; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3,13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22. Notice that this prophecy is more frequently quoted in the epistle to Hebrews because the epistle to Hebrews gives us the power, the glory, the strategic victory, of our high priest, the Lord Jesus Christ. All of these verses confirm the fact of the acceptability of the humanity of Christ in heaven. This guarantees our acceptability in a future day, according to Ephesians 1:6.

3. The ascension and session of Christ forms the basis of victory in the angelic conflict — Hebrews 1:3-13. 4. The ascension and session of Christ begins a new sphere of the angelic conflict — Ephesians 1:20,22; 4:7-10. Therefore the believer of the Church Age is involved in the intensification of the angelic conflict. And this is why the Age of Israel was never completed but interrupted. It will be completed in the future. The first dispensation of history, the Age of the Gentiles, was interrupted never to be completed. The second dispensation, the Age of Israel, was interrupted to be completed at the Tribulation. The third dispensation, the Church Age, will never be interrupted. It will be completed at the point of the Rapture of the Church without interruption. This is because the royal family in heaven is being completed at the present time.

5. The ascension and session begin operation footstool. This was prophesied in Psalm 110:1. It was quoted in Luke 20:42,43; Acts 2:33,34; Hebrews 1:13. Operation footstool merely means that all of our Lord’s enemies, angelic and human, will be annihilated at the second advent.

6. The second advent of Christ will conclude operation footstool, according to Daniel 7:13,14; Zechariah 13:2; Colossians 2:15; Revelation 20:1-3.

7. The ascension and session of Christ completes His glorification in hypostatic union. He is now in permanent hypostatic union as the God-Man — Acts 2:33; 5:31; Philippians 2:9; 1 Peter 3:22.

8. The ascension and session explain the uniqueness of the Church Age — John 7:37-39.

9. The ascension and session is the key to the victory of the angelic conflict — Hebrews 1:4.

10. The ascension and session of Christ after resurrection make possible the second high-priestly function of Christ, namely making intercession for each one of us. Jesus Christ prays daily for every member of the royal family on earth. That means there is one person praying for you every day. He is in heaven, He is at the right hand of the Father — Hebrews 7:25.

Verse 1 — “Now the main point on what is being communicated is this: We have such a category of high priest who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.”

The word “majesty” is a descriptive genitive of megalwsunh. The word emphasises the total glorification of the Lord Jesus Christ as high priest. He is the only high priest to function in a resurrection body forever.

Summary

1. The right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens places the Lord in a totally superior place for the function of His high priesthood. He is in contrast to the Levitical priesthood in this sense.

2. The Levitical priesthood: The high priest died and ceased to function as a high priest. Christ as our high priest died on the cross but continues to function in resurrection. The Levitical priesthood was composed of sinners who had to offer sacrifices for their own sins, they had to offer sacrifices for the sins of the people. Our high priest always was, always will be, totally impeccable.

3. The Levitical high priest operated on the earth, while our high priest operates in heaven.

4. The Levitical high priest operated under an inferior authorisation from the Mosaic law. He was authorised to function under the Mosaic law, a covenant which has been nullified by the change in dispensation.

5. The Levitical high priest was neither a mediator nor a saviour. Jesus Christ is both a mediator and a saviour.

6. Furthermore, his ministry terminated with physical death in contrast to our Lord’s ministry which continues after death in resurrection and forever.

Verse 2 — Christ has the best temple. The word “minister” is not the usual word for minister which is diakonoj, used for the pastor of a church and sometimes for deacons. It means those who wait on tables. The word here is the word leitourgoj. This word was originally used in the Greek language before it came to the New Testament. It was used in a most disparaging, derogatory way. It was used to indicate a government official or one who holds a public office. It was used for a politician and there is nothing that has caused us more trouble than politicians. But in the ancient world the public officials had a great deal more respect than we are able to five to our politicians today. The word leitourgoj had a higher meaning in those days in that it connoted a government official who used his authority properly and served the people. He regarded himself as a servant of the people. It was also used when the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek — the LXX, the Septuagint. Leitourgoj was used for the Jewish high priest in the sense of his rulership of the nation. And it is used here in the same idea of the Lord Jesus Christ as our high priest ruling us. There are two concepts in our relationship with God. We are royal family. That means ruler. We are also priests, and that means function. Leitourgoj brings the two together, a ruler who is also a priest. It was used for the high priest in Israel and therefore it becomes a very significant word when used for the Lord Jesus Christ because it describes Him not as a high priest but as the royal high priest.

So He is a minister of the “sanctuary”, the genitive plural of a(gioj, used for the parts of the tabernacle covered by the tent. The descriptive genitives set up a correlation to the parts of Israel’s tabernacle. The two areas in which the royal family is now located, heaven and earth, are analogous to the two parts of the Jewish tabernacle. They are generally called the holy place and the holy of holies. One is analogous to the believer on earth and the other to the believer in heaven. So it became a shadow pointing to the royal priesthood of our day. And who is the minister of this? The Lord Jesus Christ. He rules today through Bible doctrine. “A minister of the holy places” would be better than “the sanctuary.”

“and of the true tabernacle” — this is a descriptive genitive from skhnh which means tabernacle or tent. A tabernacle means a large tent. We also have a genitive of apposition, a)lhqinoj, meaning the real one. Heaven is the real tabernacle, the genuine one. The tabernacle was a shadow pointing to reality. The reality is heaven itself. Jesus Christ is called “a minister of the holy places, and of the tabernacle, the real one”.

“which” — accusative feminine singular from the relative pronoun o(j. The antecedent is also in the feminine — skhnh.

“the Lord” — o( kurioj, refers to the Lord Jesus Christ, and it refers to Him as the creator.

“pitched” is the aorist active indicative of pegnumi. The word is used in Isaiah 42:5 for the creative activity of God regarding the heavens and the earth. Here again we have a perfect illustration. Pegnumi meant to pitch a tent, but when they came to translating from the Hebrew to the Greek when they came to Isaiah 42:5 they used this Greek word. It also means to fix, to put together, or to build. It is a constative aorist and it contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety — the action of creating the heavens. The creation of the heavens is gathered into a single whole. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb in creating the heavens — John 1:3; Hebrews 1:10; Colossians 1:16. The indicative mood is the reality and certainty of Christ as the creator, the builder of the true tabernacle, the a)lhqinoj, the genuine tabernacle. Moses was the “contractor”, he had men working under him and they built the tabernacle according to the specifications in Exodus, but the Lord Jesus Christ built the genuine tabernacle in heaven.

Therefore we have the phrase, “and not man” — o)uk a)nqrwpoj. “Not man” refers to the tabernacle on earth constructed by man. Man had nothing to do with constructing heaven. That is a very significant point. There is no member of the human race who ever lifted a finger to build any part of heaven. Does that tell you something? The people who go to heaven never lifted a finger to be saved. The whole concept of grace is in view. All you have to do is to see the analogy. After all, we are members of a royal priesthood. Our high priest is in heaven and some day we are going to be in heaven, as royal priests, members of the royal family of God. And we are going to serve in heaven forever and ever and ever. So this is important. What did you ever do to construct heaven? What did you ever do to build up the billions and billions of light years of space? Nothing! What did you ever do for salvation? Nothing! What did you ever do to merit anything from God? Nothing! And you understand, therefore, that all of us are nothings made something by God’s grace. It was grace that caused a genuine tabernacle to be built, the whole construction of heaven. Christ did it, the same Jesus Christ who saved us, the same Jesus Christ who makes us members of the royal family forever, and we are in His priesthood forever.

Translation: “A minister of the holy places, and of the tabernacle, the real one which the Lord put together, and not man.”

We must stop and at least get a thumbnail sketch of what the tabernacle is all about. This is merely a summary to teach certain principles related to the tabernacle.

The tabernacle was set up as the basic principle of worship in Israel

1. The tabernacle in general as a part of the ordinances or the spiritual code of the Mosaic law. The tabernacle is a picture of the incarnate person of Jesus Christ, the unique high priest, the unique saviour, the unique person. The tabernacle in scripture often speaks of the human body, as in 2 Corinthians 5:1,4. It also speaks in terms of a representation of something, as in Hebrews 9:1-11. The tabernacle in Israel, according to Exodus 25:1-9, was specified as God’s dwelling place and the whole concept was the grace principle, God fellowshipping with men. The tabernacle represents the place where we meet the God of heaven. It is God fellowshipping with man and man fellowshipping with God on the basis of salvation. The tabernacle reminds us in a general way that nothing was made by guess or by the will of man or by the plan of man. It was strictly by divine design.

In the 25th chapter of Exodus where the specifications are all given it is strictly what God says and there is no guess work. And so it is with Bible doctrine. Bible doctrine doesn’t put anything in the area of speculation of guess work, it is all laid out very perfectly for us under the principle of grace. God does the work, we stand by and enjoy the benefits.

The tabernacle is by way of application a picture of the believer in union with Christ. Remember that only a priest could enter the tabernacle. Today every believer is a priest, every believer is inside the tent. And while the Jews didn’t know it every time a Levitical priest went inside it was a shadow of things about to come, the universal priesthood of the royal family in the Church Age. The principle of the specifications of the tabernacle: Everything is given in great detail as a reminder also that God’s plan is unchanged. God’s plan for man has existed long before we existed. And God has a plan for your life, and that plan is older than you are. That plan means simply this. If God has a plan for your life, and if that plan is older than you are and existed long before you did, what are you worried about? God knew every problem you would ever have and God has made provision for it. The tabernacle represents the plan of God, the decree of God. And the principle of God’s plan is unchanged.

The tabernacle was divided into three parts. There was the outer court which represented the earth. Then there was the holy place and then the holy of holies. The holy place represents heaven as it relates to our experience, and the holy of holies represents the very presence of God, the very throne room of God. All of the articles of furniture have great significance.

2. The location of the tabernacle. It was located in the very centre of the camp. And that is important. All around the tabernacle we have tribes of Israel: three tribes to the north, three to the south, three tribes west and three east. That should be a reminder of something. All of us spend time on the outer periphery — north, south, east, or west. All spend time on the peripheral activities but the thing that is most important is Bible doctrine. That is the message of the location of the tabernacle. Your life is nothing without doctrine in the soul, and the fact that the tabernacle represents doctrine as the thinking of Christ, and the fact that it is located in the centre of the bivouac of Israel is extremely important. It is a reminder of the importance of Bible doctrine.

3. Exodus 25, one of several passage dealing with the specifications of the tabernacle, begins by specifying not the outer court as we would but it gives the specifications of the holy of holies. This is to remind us that salvation starts with God and not with man. The first specs that are given in Exodus 25 deal with the holy of holies which represents heaven and the presence of God, and all blessing comes from God, and God did the initiating in grace. The first thing to be described is the holy of holies because in grace God initiates everything.

4. The court is a picture of the earth. It was a perfect oblong, 100 cubits by 50 cubits. God specified exactly what it would be. If we reduce it to English measure it was 175 feet long, 87.5 feet wide, and 8 feet nine inches high. It was always that way and it never changed, a reminder of the fact that God never changes. That is why Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. In building the outer court there are 60 pillars of brass — not 59. The 60 pillars have to have 60 brass sockets — brass, not gold. There were 20 pillars on the north and on the south, ten on the east and on the west. All pillars were connected by the bar of silver. Hanging upon the pillars were 490 feet of fine twined line, colour white except the gate which was blue. There is always a right place to enter and the fact that you enter where it is blue is a reminder that there is only one way to be saved. There are many lessons which come out of this. For example, the brass sockets: the brass speaks of sin and its penalty. The brass pillar is the cross: Christ judged for our sins. The white linen is for the righteousness of Christ, and once you walk through the blue gate you’re behind the white linen which means imputation and justification. Throughout the tabernacle brass always represented judgement — Christ being judged for us, or our spiritual death. Silver always speaks of redemption. While linen speaks of the +R of God, His perfect righteousness. The gate is a reminder the Christ is the only way of salvation. It was 35 feet wide. It was specified — not 34 feet, not 32. God provides exact specifications for everything, including eternal salvation.

To go through the gate all you had to do was push on the blue, and there were three other colours that you passed by on the way in. The blue speaks of the deity of Christ. The next colour as you were going in was purple which speaks of the royalty of Christ, the Kingship of Christ. Then there was scarlet for redemption and then linen for the righteousness of Christ. And by the time they had passed through they didn’t know it but they were representing the fact that in this dispensation every believer is a member of the royal priesthood. There were four pillars on the gate and they, too, had significance.

5. Materials. These pillars were made of boards, acacia wood, and they were overlaid with gold. That is the order of most of the building materials. Nearly everything was made of acacia wood and that was the only wood used. It was then overlaid with gold. The boards were placed in sockets of silver and each socket weighed 125 lbs, two sockets per board. They were placed in the sockets by a tenon or a projection with fitted into the socket or the slot. In other words, everything had great significance. The entire foundation of the tabernacle weight six and a quarter tons. The thing that is important all the way through is that you constantly find wood overlaid with gold. The acacia wood speaks of the humanity of Christ, the gold speaks of the deity of Christ. And always, everywhere you turn in the tabernacle and see these materials you have something which represents the uniqueness of the person of Christ. They didn’t have the doctrine of the hypostatic union as we have it in the Bible and they couldn’t read it as we read it. They read it in all of these materials which were constructed. The roof was covered with four different types of covering. They had badger skin as an outer covering, ram skin dyed red, goat’s hair and fine linen. The goat’s hair was always the white hair of the goat. Everything was secured by tent pins and nails driven into the ground to which cords were attached, and so on.

The estimated cost, before inflation, was US$1,500,000 for the entire construction. This is why God told Moses to have Israel ask for 400 years back-wages from Egypt, not so they could make golden calves but so they could construct this tabernacle.

6. The roof of the tabernacle. The badger skin which was the top one was a seal or a porpoise skin really, it wasn’t a badger skin at all. It was a very durable leather and it was also used by the Jews for shoes. It speaks of the humanity of Christ. The ram skin dyed red: the rams were sacrificed on the brazen altar and then they were dyed. This speaks of Christ dying for us. Then there was a curtain of goat’s hair. It was white, speaking of the perfection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then you have curtains of white linen speaking of the perfect humanity and impeccability of Christ.

7. The tabernacle had two altars. The brazen altar was at the entrance of the first veil and the golden altar was at the entrance of the second veil. The golden altar speaks of prayer, but first of all we have the cross — no one prays until they are saved. Both altars were in front of the veils and both altars signified entrance through that veil. The first veil represents salvation by faith in Christ, the second veil is the principle of intercession as a priestly ministry.

8. The laver. The laver stood between the altar and the actual entrance to the tabernacle. This was the place where the priests washed their hands. Every believer today is a priest and our brazen laver is the rebound technique. The brazen altar was made out of brass because Christ had to bear our sins before we could name our sins and be forgiven. And it doesn’t cost us a thing to rebound. All we do is name our sins and we are forgiven immediately because Christ was judged for every sin ever named in the rebound technique.

9. The table of shewbread. This table was made of acacia wood and overlaid with gold. On top of it is what is called the shewbread, one for each of the tribes minus Levi. The shewbread is literally “the bread of the face” or “the bread of the presence”. The table itself speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ. The loaves of bread represent the supergrace blessings that come from the intake of Bible doctrine. (Doctrine is often analogous to bread) The bread was made from fine flour without leaven. It was baked with a fire and frankincense. All of these things had meaning. The eating of the bread by the priest is a picture of GAPing it in this dispensation. Each loaf was placed under a crown, and that meant that the Lord Jesus Christ was the ruler of Israel.

10. The golden candlestick. The represents Christ the light of the world. It had seven lights. Seven is the number of perfection and also represents blessing. As we have occupation with the person of Christ we enter into the supergrace blessings. This was the only light in the holy place.

11. The oil in the lamp (fuel). This represented the ministry of God the Holy Spirit and the principle by which we become enlightened with regard to the Lord Jesus Christ.

12. The two veils. The first veil is the entrance to the holy place and the second veil is the entrance to the holy of holies. There is great detail as to how they were constructed. Each one of these veils was supported by five pillars — five is the number of grace. All entrance into relationship and blessing comes from the principle of grace. The colours of the veil: blue for deity, purple for the rulership of Christ, scarlet for salvation, the white linen refers to imputation and justification. The veils also had cherubs on them representing the essence box, and everything that is worthwhile is based upon divine essence. The tearing of the veil or the splitting of the veil indicated the end of the significance of the holy of holies. When Christ was bearing our sins, after it was over He said “Finished.” Then, of course, the veil was split.

13. The ark and the mercy seat. These represent propitiation and how God comes to love us without compromising His character.

Going back to verse 2 — the Lord Jesus Christ is said to be a minister of the holy places, “the sanctuary.” As a minister of the sanctuary He is in heaven at the right hand of the Father — “and of the tabernacle” which is in apposition — “the real tabernacle which the Lord put together, and not man.” He gave all the specifications, every detail was specified by the Lord just as with every detail of your life God has provided for it.

Verse 3 — the sacrifice. Christ is a better high priest because He offered a better sacrifice. This is the comparison between the person of Christ and the animals of the Levitical offerings.

The first word is “For.” This is a conjunctive particle gar used to express a continuation and a further explanation. In verse 1 Jesus Christ is a superior high priest because He is seated at the right hand of the Father. In verse 2 He is a superior high priest because he sits in the real tabernacle. And no one could enter the holy of holies in the tabernacle, only the high priest once a year on the day of atonement when he entered twice.

Now we move into the field of offerings, says gar, and once more we have the phrase “every high priest” — paj a)rxiereuj, which refers to the Levitical high priests who succeeded one another on the death of the previous high priest. The eldest surviving son who was a priest became the high priest. They also went through an ordination which is now mentioned: “is ordained” — present passive indicative of the verb kaqisthmi which means to appoint or to ordain. The present tense is an iterative present which describes what occurred historically at successive intervals. The successive intervals means simply the death of the high priest. The first one was Aaron. When he died he was succeeded by his eldest surviving son, Eleazar. And so on down the line. So the present tense here represents successive intervals, this is the present tense of repeated action. No Levitical high priest could minister beyond his death. This in itself is a great contrast for the Lord Jesus Christ continued to minister after His death and resurrection. The passive voice: the Levitical high priest received appointment on the death of the previous high priest. The indicative mood is declarative describing an historical reality.

“to offer” — present active infinitive of the verb prosferw which means to offer animal sacrifices and refers specifically to Levitical offerings. This, however, is not iterative but a customary present which denotes that which habitually occurred historically. It represents a state or an act assumed to be true in the past, in the future, and in the present when so authorised. Hence, it was historically true throughout the age of Israel. The active voice: the Levitical high priest produced the action of the verb. The infinitive is an infinitive of purpose and it has with it a preposition which denotes purpose. The preposition is e)ij. It should be translated “For every [Levitical] high priest is appointed to offer.”

Now we have “both gifts and sacrifices — after e)ij we have the word “gifts and sacrifices, ” both in the accusative: dwron and qusia. Dwron refers to the food offering; qusia refers to the animals sacrifices. Basically, this is simply a study of the Levitical offerings[1]. By way of summary: The burnt offering of Leviticus chapter one is propitiation with emphasis on the work of Christ; the food offering of Leviticus chapter two is propitiation with emphasis on the person of Christ; the peace offering of Leviticus chapter three is reconciliation or the removal of the barrier between God and man; the sin offering of Leviticus chapter four is rebound, with emphasis on the unknown sins; the trespass offering of Leviticus chapter five is rebound with emphasis on the known sins.

“wherefore” is an adverb — o(qen, which means “for which reason”; “of necessity” is “necessarily.” “Therefore, it is concluded necessary” would be the best way to translate it.

“that this man”

1. This is an accusative masculine singular from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj. The demonstrative pronoun gives great emphasis and it should be translated “this one.” “Therefore it is concluded necessary that this one.”

2. The demonstrative pronoun refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as different, unique, and superior high priest.

3. The accusative is a part of the accusative of general reference. That means that somewhere there is an infinitive and the accusative acts as the subject of the infinitive, or better yet, it describes the person who enters into the action of the infinitive. The person is the Lord Jesus Christ.

4. In effect, the accusative becomes the subject of the infinitive which comes up next.

“that this one have” — present active infinitive of e)xw. This one as a demonstrative pronoun refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. The present tense is an aoristic present for punctiliar action in present time. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action. The infinitive is a result. There are three types of result expressed by an infinitive. The first of these is an actual result, the second is a conceived result, the third is an intended result. Here we have the actual result infinitive.

“somewhat” — tij means “something”; “also have something to offer.” If high priests on special days like the Passover and like the Feast of the Atonement, and at other occasions, always had to offer special animal sacrifices and if Christ is superior to all those high priests then He has to offer a superior sacrifice. And He does. He offers Himself. Therefore He is superior by the very offering that He brings to the altar.

“to offer” is an incorrect translation. The nominative singular neuter of the relative pronoun o(j means “which”; plus the aorist active subjunctive. It should be translated “something which he might offer.” We have prosferw again, we have the constative aorist which contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. The constative aorist takes up the last three hours of the cross when all of our sins were poured out upon Christ and judged. The active voice: Christ produced the action, He offered Himself for our sins. The subjunctive mood indicates the potentiality and so it should be translated “which he might offer”.

The implication

1. If Christ is a superior high priest to any high priest in the Levitical battalion He must have a superior sacrifice.

2. The implication demands a conclusion.

3. The conclusion is found in the efficacious sacrificial offering of Himself. Jesus Christ offered Himself in hypostatic union as the God-Man.

4. This anticipates Hebrews 9:11-14.

5. Every high priest before Christ dabbled in shadows but the shadows must be replaced by reality. Christ is the reality.

6. Animal sacrifices can only portray, they cannot be an efficacious sacrifice. No animal is an efficacious sacrifice, they can only teach, portray, represent the efficacious sacrifice. That is why the animals bled to death and why Christ did not bleed to death for our sins, He bore our sins in His own body on the tree.

7. Animal blood can illustrate but cannot atone for sin.

8. The reality of the cross is superior to all shadows of the cross.

9. Jesus Christ is infinitely a superior high priest, having offered a superior offering. He could offer no greater than Himself.

Verse 4 — “For” is an affirmative particle and rarely used in this type of a situation: men. This particular particle is one of the commonest in the Attic Greek but it is used very rarely in the New Testament — a total of 182 times. It is generally translated “indeed.” But more than that, it simply says this. In the first three verses we have enough information or enough ammunition to recognise that Jesus Christ is totally superior to any high priest who ever lived or ever will live, that Jesus Christ is absolutely unique, that He is eternal God and has never changed and cannot change. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to day and forever. He is also true humanity, perfect humanity, impeccable humanity, and as the God-Man He went to the cross and offered the perfect sacrifice, the only efficacious sacrifice where He bore our sins in His only body on the tree. In addition to all of this, anything that is now said is superfluous. But there is no such thing as a superfluous statement in the Word of God, it all has meaning and purpose and definition. If you have missed the superiority of our high priest in the first three verses you won’t miss in the next two. It all goes together to point out one factor: our objective in living on this earth is to reach the point of occupation with Christ, to reach the point at which these passages have real meaning and purpose and understanding in our lives. Too often we are distracted by other things. We are distracted from the Word of God. We spend our time, as it were, fighting apostasy, becoming involved, social action, getting involved in the devil’s program which is welfare, socialism, and communism; getting involved in things that are totally apart from our purpose in being alive. Each one of us has a soul, each soul has a potentiality of love, and the love of the Lord Jesus Christ who is unseen is the highest peak that the soul can reach. “For we look not at the things which are seen but the things which are unseen, for the things which are seen are temporal but the things which are unseen are eternal.” And we have the privilege as a part of the supergrace life of being occupied with the person of Jesus Christ. And with this status in supergrace everything else in this life which is worthwhile, which is provided through grace, becomes wonderful and meaningful. All of that is tied up in this one particle.

“For if” — the condition particle e(i introduces a second class condition. The first two words, then, are translated “If indeed.” And since it is a second class condition — that means contrary to fact — we have to recognise that the full translation says “If indeed but it isn’t.”

“he were” is the imperfect active indicative of the verb e)imi, the absolute status quo verb. The imperfect tense is a part of the protasis of the second class condition or unreality. E)i plus the imperfect is used to indicate a second class condition. This is also a customary imperfect which denotes what regularly occurs in past time. The active voice: Christ would produce the action of the verb but it isn’t so. The indicative mood is declarative.

Then we have with this, “on earth” — the preposition e)pi plus the genitive of gh which is the object of the preposition. It refers to the land or to the earth. Here it refers to the entire earth.

So far then we have, “If indeed he [Christ] were on the earth” — second class condition, but He isn’t. In other words, if He were functioning right now as a high priest on the earth there would be a serious problem now mentioned.

“he should not be” introduces the apodosis of the second class condition. And in introducing this we should notice several things. First of all, the Greek text includes a negative conjunction o)udh — “not even” instead of “not”. There is also a Greek particle which introduces the apodosis of the second class condition, and that is a)n. With this we have the imperfect active indicative of the verb e)imi. When you put all of this together it is translated in the English Bible “he should not be”, but it is literally “he would not even be a priest”. Why?

“seeing that there are” — present active indicative, again, of e)imi [third use of this verb in the sentence]. The present tense is a historical present. At the time of writing of this epistle, 67 AD, the Church Age had begun but the Levitical priesthood was still functioning in Jerusalem, specifically in the temple at Jerusalem which would be destroyed in three years. The Levitical priesthood was no longer authorised but would continue for another three years until Rome conquered Judea, followed by Jerusalem, followed by the temple. What this passage means, then, is that Christ would not be a Levitical priest of He were still on earth. Actually, the writer is setting up a contrast between the function of the Levitical priesthood in the temple and the function of the Lord Jesus Christ at the right hand of the Father. The active voice of this verb indicates that the Levitical priesthood produces the action of the verb by illegally functioning on the earth, while Christ legally functions in heaven. The participle is a temporal participle and therefore it should be translated “while there are priests who keep on offering on the earth”. In other words, as long as the Levitical priests are functioning in the temple this is illegal. Christ at the right hand of the Father is the legitimate high priest. And when the Lord Jesus Christ was seated at the right hand of the Father, after His resurrection and ascension, this interrupted the Age of Israel. Why? Because there was a new high priest, a legitimate high priest. He is a King priest. The Levitical priests were not related to royalty in any way. The royal family in Israel is the tribe of Judah, the family of David. The Levitical priests and the high priest are from the tribe of Levi and the family of Aaron, the brother of Moses. Therefore, once Jesus Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father we find the Levitical priesthood continuing to function and into the Church Age. The writer of Hebrews is writing in 67 AD and for 37 years now this has been going on and it is about to end. And he is pointing out why. This priesthood cannot continue, it is an illegitimate priesthood, it is not recognised by God, it no longer has a function, there is a new dispensation. The new dispensation demands a new priesthood. As a matter of fact it is very interesting to note that even in Jerusalem during that period of forty years you have many believers in Jesus Christ, and all of those believers were members of the royal family of God and were also of the royal priesthood. And they were functioning legitimately in Jerusalem while the Levitical priesthood was functioning in an illegitimate manner. There cannot be two priesthoods authorised by God functioning at the same time on the earth.

So we read, “If indeed [Christ] were on the earth [but He isn’t] he would not even be” — The word “priest” is not found in the original — “one of those who keep offering”.

“offering” — the present tense of prosferw which means to function at a legitimate altar, and not only to function at the altar but to offer sacrifices portraying Christ. The present tense is retroactive progressive for something begun in the past but continuing throughout the dispensation of Israel by the Levitical priesthood. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood produces the action of the verb. This is a circumstantial participle, it is in the genitive case, the descriptive genitive.

Literally, “If indeed he were on the earth [but he isn’t], he would not even be a priest [of the Levitical order] whole there are ones offering the Levitical gifts according to the law.” The Levitical gifts refer to the sacrifices of the temple ritual.

“according to the law” is very important because this prepositional phrase tells us the authorisation for the Levitical priesthood, an authorising agent which was strong enough to keep the Levitical priesthood functioning for over four hundred years. We have kata plus the accusative of nomoj for the Mosaic law.

Summary

1. The interruption of the Jewish dispensation has nullified the Levitical priesthood. Therefore it has set aside the Mosaic law as an authorising agency.

2. However, the Levitical priesthood, no longer authorised, continued to function in Jerusalem leading astray many reversionistic believers — Hebrews 5:11-6:6.

3. Two points of superiority are not in this context. First, Christ functions in heaven in contrast to the Levitical priesthood on the earth. Heaven is infinitely superior to the earth. Second,

Christ functions under the authorising agency of the eternal decrees which cannot be revoked.

4. The Levitical priesthood, on the other hand, functions under the authorising agency of the Mosaic law which has been abrogated or annulled.

5. The interruption of the Jewish dispensation countermands the Mosaic law as an authorising agency.

6. The annulment of the Mosaic law rescinds the Levitical priesthood.

7. Therefore, Christ functions legitimately in heaven under the authorising agency of the eternal decrees, while the Levitical priesthood functions illegitimately on the earth under an abrogated law.

8. A revoked priesthood is inferior to an established priesthood. Therefore, once again, the superiority of Jesus Christ as high priest.

Now the issue reaches its peak on verse 5 where we have the superiority of the reality over the shadows. The Levitical priests were functioning in the Church Age illegitimately. But what is even worse, they were dealing with shadows after the reality had come. The reality is Jesus Christ, born of a virgin, going to the cross in status impeccability, bearing our sins in His own body on the tree, taking our place, being resurrected, ascended, being seated at the right hand of the Father. This is the reality. Every portion of the tabernacle, and later on the temple, spoke of this particular reality. The reality has occurred, the Levitical priests are still functioning under shadows. This demonstrates the blindness of the blackout of the soul and the terrible distortions that come to those who suffer from scar tissue of the soul. Blackout of the soul and scar tissue of the soul are the fourth and fifth stages of reversionism, and therefore the Levitical priesthood were practicing reverse process reversionism. They were dealing with shadows when the reality was here. They were functioning as priests when they were no longer authorised, except by regeneration.

Verse 5 — “Who” is a nominative plural of the qualitative relative pronoun O(stij, and it refers to a category here — “Who are such a category as to perform worship service”.

“serve” — present active indicative of latreuw which means to perform worship service. The present tense is a customary present which denotes that which habitually occurs in worship function of the Levitical priesthood. They were actually using animal sacrifices, they were actually wearing a certain type of uniform, they were actually standing before a certain type of altar, and all of these things are shadows pointing to the reality. But the reality has come. They are still dealing with shadows even though there is now reality. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood produces the action of the verb, namely the performance of worship functions with shadows. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative which represents the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality.

”unto the example” means “as a model.” This is the dative singular from u(podeigma which means a model or a pattern. The dative is dative of indirect object which indicates the one in whose interest the action of the verb is performed. In other words, it was in the interests of the Levitical priesthood and it was in the interests of Israel for the Levitical priesthood to continue in their own dispensation. This is the way in which doctrine was communicated to the people. Everything connected with the superiority of the person of Christ, everything related to the saviourhood of Christ, everything related to the new covenant and how Christ would fulfil it to Israel; all of these things were specified in the function of the Levitical priesthood. Therefore it became a model, and the indirect object indicates that it was in the interests of Israel to know these things, it was in the interests of the Levitical priesthood to function in this way.

Next we have the words “and shadow.” This is also a dative singular from the noun skia, one of the many words in the Greek for shadow. It means a shadow in contrast to reality. We have both the dative of indirect object and the dative of advantage in the use of this word, this noun grammatically. The dative of indirect object indicates, again, the one in whose interest the action of the verb is performed. And, again, it is in the interest of the Levitical priesthood and of Israel in their own dispensation to understand doctrine through the shadows, through the performance of these activities. These activities were not the reality but they portrayed the reality before it occurred historically. In other words, until Christ went to the cross. The Levitical sacrifices were a copy or a pattern or an example of doctrine in the field of soteriology and Christology before they occurred. It was to the advantage of Israel to have this copy, this was the way they learned the pertinent doctrine. As a matter of fact no Jew could be occupied with the person of Christ until he understood the ritual activity which was performed by the Levitical priesthood. Even David himself learned a great deal of doctrine in the field of Christology by watching the function of the Levitical priesthood. This is why David always had a very wonderful relationship with the priesthood and with the tabernacle simply because he came to the place of occupation with Christ through the constant observance of ritual. Ritual was a teaching aid in the Old Testament; ritual is not a teaching aid today. The only teaching we have through ritual today is one factor alone, the communion table, the communion which commemorates the person of Christ. But ritual today depends upon doctrine already in the soul.

“of heavenly things” — this is a descriptive genitive plural from the noun e)pouranioj which plus the definite article should be translated “of the heavenly things.” Notice again that here is the superiority of the Lord Jesus Christ who ministered in heavenly things, while the Levitical priesthood only ministered in copies and shadows of heavenly things. Therefore, we have the superiority of the reality over the shadows, the superiority of the heavenly over the earthly. The rest of this verses indicates that Moses received His instructions for the tabernacle, for the Levitical priesthood, and so on, from God the Father who was in heaven.

The doctrine of shadows

1. Shadows were used for hospitality in the Old Testament — the shadow of a tree. People in the ancient world would often sit under the shadow of a home or the shadow of a wall of a home and the people who owned the home would invite them in. This was the concept of hospitality and is taught in Genesis 19:8. It indicates the principle of love, the relaxed mental attitude, the spiritual growth of the soul that extends hospitality to a stranger.

2. Shadows are used for life in contrast to eternity — 1 Chronicles 29:15; Job 8:9. In other words, the shadow of this life is nothing compared to the reality of eternity for the believer. If life can be so wonderful and still be a shadow, how fantastically glorious eternity must be, and it is something that all of us contemplate with great anticipation. For physical death means absent from the body, face to face with the Lord. It means no more sorrow, no more tears, no more pain, no more death, the old things have passed away. It means having an incorruptible inheritance from God Himself. And all these things cannot be explained except in terms of shadows. Life at its best is a shadow; eternity at its worst for the believer is a reality of great blessing and happiness.

3. Shadows are also used, then, for dying grace. One of the greatest blessings that comes to the believer in this life is the experience of dying grace — Psalm 23:4. Death is a shadow to the believer in dying grace. He knows where he is going, he knows where he has been. No matter how great the pain, how prolonged the dying, he is in the valley of the shadow of death, and therefore the dying does not have that disastrous reality that it portrays for the unbeliever or for the reversionistic believer minus Bible doctrine. So the shadow portrays the principle of dying grace.

4. The shadow is used for protection from the source God. All of us face known and unknown dangers in our lifetime. Life is filled with many dangers for the believer because once you accept Christ as your saviour you enter into the intensified stage of the angelic conflict. There are many invisible and unseen dangers in your life, there are many pressures which the unbeliever does not have. There are many pressures of this life which belong to the human race in common but the shadow of God protects from all — Psalm 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 63:7; 91:1. This was David’s wonderful testimony of how God cast His shadow over him in all circumstances of life. David had that supergrace confidence that the Lord was protecting him.

5. The shadow is also used in a contrasting thought. The shadow is used in the Bible for empty, superficial, and disastrous type living — Psalm 144:4; Ecclesiastes 8:13; 6:12.

6. The shadow is used for the love protection of right man over right woman. The right woman always is protected by the one she loves, even when he is absent — Song of Solomon 2:3.

7. The shadow is used for instability — James 1:17. In other words, the instability concept is that a shadow keeps moving. The instability factor comes from the fact that a shadow may be in one spot one moment and it is in another spot the next. So the shadow for instability often portrays the fluffy-headed female who can’t make up her mind about which one she loves.

8. The shadow is also used for bad foreign policy — Isaiah 30:2,3.

9. The shadow is used for pressure destroying the normal functions of life, as in Job 17:7; Psalm 102:11; 109:23.

10. The shadow is used for the ritual of the Old Testament, a ritual which was meaningful at the time. The people of the Old Testament learned much of their doctrine through the observation of ritual. Therefore, the Levitical priesthood functioned in ritual to teach doctrine. So the shadow is used for the ritual of the Old Testament which has no function or substance in our dispensation, the Church Age — Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:5; 10:1.

Now we come in the middle of our verse to an adverb, the word “as” — kaqwj, “as” or literally, “since.” Used in its causal sense it means “since.”

“Moses was admonished” — perfect passive indicative of xrhmatizw. In the active voice this verb means to impart revelation or a warning. In the passive voice it means to be revealed or to receive instruction. Here it should be translated “since Moses had received divine instruction.” Moses is the human writer of the first five books of the Bible, the writer of the Mosaic law which is the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood. Moses received his instructions from heaven where the Lord now ministers as a royal high priest. The Levitical priesthood ministers in the pattern or the copy, while Christ ministers with the reality. The Levitical priesthood in the past ministered on earth while Christ ministers in heaven. The perfect tense of this verb is intensive. The intensive perfect indicates the completion of the action in the past with results continuing. The existing results indicate the superiority of the Lord Jesus Christ as our high priest. The passive voice: Moses received divine instruction, therefore setting up the principle of an inferior authorising agent. Moses is inferior to God. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative stating an absolute and unqualified principle of doctrine.

“of God” — not found in the original. Furthermore, it is unnecessary since xrhmatizw in the passive means to receive divine instruction.

“when he was about” — present active indicative of the verb mellw, which means to be about to do something. The present tense is aoristic present which refers to punctiliar action in present time. The aorist itself indicates punctiliar action in the past time, here we have present time. The active voice: Moses produced the action of the verb. The participle is temporal and is therefore preceded by “when.”

“to make” — the present active infinitive of e)pitelew which means to complete something through construction. The present tense is a futuristic present, it denotes an action or event which has not yet occurred but is regarded as so certain that it will occur in the future. It may be contemplated as already coming to pass because it is so certain. Moses, when he received the instructions, had not constructed but he definitely did so at a later time. The active voice indicates that Moses is the contractor. The infinitive denotes God’s purpose in appointing Moses the contractor with specific instructions. The word for “tabernacle”, skhnh, means a large tent — literally, “when he was about to construct the tabernacle.”

At this point we have documentation of this. A second sentence is added in this verse. The documentation is a quotation from Exodus 25:40.

We begin with the explanatory use of the conjunction gar, which means “for”.

“for he says” — the word for “says” is a different one, it is a present active indicative of fhmi. We are accustomed to seeing legw but it is not used in this passage. Fhmi is in the aoristic present for punctiliar action at that time. The active voice: God the Son who talked with Moses produced the action of the verb. Jesus as God is infinitely superior to Moses, He gave him instructions for the tabernacle which would portray Him. So we have again the superiority of Jesus Christ as high priest. He gave Moses a copy of the very area where the Levitical priesthood functioned. The indicative mood is used for the reality of a quotation which is used to prove a point or principle and to establish what has already been said, therefore fhmi.

The quotation begins with the word “See” — the present active imperative of o(raw means to understand or perceive. Blepw also means to see, it means to see with the eye. We are not to see this with the eyes, we are to see this with the mind or to understand it. So the aorist active indicative of o(raw means to understand with the mind, to perceive, to take note of. The present tense is tendential present, it is used for an action which is purposed or about to take place — you are about to understand this. The active voice: Moses is commanded to produce the action of the verb. The imperative mood indicates a command: “be taking note”.

The next phrase should be translated “thou shalt make,” the future active indicative of poiew. The future tense here is an imperative future, it is a command. The active voice indicates that Moses is the contractor and he must produce the action of the verb. The indicative mood is called a cohortative indicative, it is used to express a command in the future tense.

“all things” — refer to three chapters which are found in the Bible: Exodus chapters 25-27.

“according to the pattern” — kata plus the accusative of tupoj which means “blueprint.” The word “shewed”, the aorist passive participle of deiknumi means “having been explained.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it gathers into one ball of wax the entire specifications of the tabernacle. The passive voice: Moses as the contractor received an explanation and he received it from Christ. The participle is circumstantial, and it is antecedent to the main verb, “be taking note” or “learn”.

“to you” — dative of indirect object. It was to Moses’ advantage to understand exact specifications.

“in the mount” — e)n plus the locative of o)roj means “on the mountain”. The mountain refers to Mount Sinai.

Translation: “Who [Levitical priesthood] perform worship services as a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, since Moses had received divine instruction when he was about to construct the tabernacle: for he communicates, Be taking note, you shall make all things according to the blueprint having been explained to you on the mountain.”

Summary

1. This verse is a contrast between the copy and the original, between the shadow and the reality, between earth and heaven.

2. In each contrast Christ as our high priest is superior.

3. Christ is the original and the reality now ministering for us in heaven.

4. Furthermore, Christ provided the doctrinal information and authorising information for Moses.

5. Once again, Christ is infinitely superior as a high priest to any aspect of the Levitical priesthood.

6. A similar contrast has been previously studied in Hebrews 3:1-6.

Why is this information given to us. Not only to avoid the problems of legalism in Judaism, not only to avoid all of the problems that are connected with us as believers when we face false teaching, but to give us what many do not have and that is sound common sense with regard to religion. Religion comes in many forms.

Verse 6 — the better ministry of Christ our high priest. We begin with the word “But” which is a conjunctive particle de. As go the particles so goes the change of argument, the development of conclusions, the categorical principles of doctrine which are found throughout the Word of God. Here we have the conjunctive particle used to emphasise a contrast between shadows and reality.

“now” — the adverb nun, used to indicate the dispensation of the Church in contrast to the dispensation of Israel. This adverb is used to indicate that there is an interruption in the Age of Israel, that the Levitical priesthood no longer functions. The Levitical priesthood was based upon human birth but our universal priesthood of the believer is based upon regeneration. We have a universal priesthood and this means that every believer is in full time Christian service. This means that God has a purpose for your life and this means that no matter what you do in life you are in full time Christian service. Therefore, as per Colossians 3:15,16 you do your job as unto the Lord.

The interruption of the Age of Israel deactivates the priesthood which dealt with the copy and not the original, which dealt with shadows and not reality, which dealt with function on earth but never function in heaven.

“he hath obtained” — the perfect active indicative of the verb tugxanw. The imperfect tense is the intensive perfect, it indicates a completed action with emphasis on existing results. When special attention is directed to the results of the action stress upon the existing fact is intensified, and here we have the intensification of the superiority of our Lord Jesus Christ as the high priest forever. The active voice: Jesus Christ as the high priest produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for unqualified and dogmatic assertion of doctrine. “a more excellent ministry” — two words in the Greek are used for the phrase. Both of them are in the genitive case. The first one is a genitive singular comparative from diaforoj which means more outstanding or more excellent. With this we have a genitive singular from the noun leitourgia which means a priestly service or a priestly ministry. He has and always will possess a more excellent or more outstanding priestly ministry. Both of these genitives are possessive in that Christ possesses these characteristics forever. He has a more outstanding public ministry, a more outstanding priestly service over anyone who ever existed in the Levitical order. These are also objective genitives to complete that part of the sentence.

“by how much” — an instrumental singular neuter of a correlative relative pronoun, which always indicates something existing categorically, 0(soj. There are three ways in which this word is used in the Greek. It is used first for space and time, and when it is so used it is translated “as long as.” It is also used for a quantity or a number, and is translated “as many as”. It is used for measure and degree, and translated “as mush as”. Here it is translated “by as much as”; “also” is a adjunctive use of kai — “by as much as also.”

“he is” — present active indicative of the verb e)imi, the absolute status quo verb — “he keeps on being.” This is a static present which means He always will be, there never will be an exception to this. The active voice: Christ produces the action of the verb as the superior high priest, the unique high priest. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic assertion of doctrine.

“the mediator” — this is a predicate nominative from the noun mesithj. This could be translated “mediator”, also it could be translated “referee.” Here it means mediator.

“of a better covenant” — two word are involved in the phrase “better covenant” in the Greek. The first is a genitive singular from kreitton, and it is the comparative of a)gaqoj, and is therefore correctly translated “better”. And with this we have the genitive singular of the noun diaqhkh which can be translated “testament” but is correctly translated “covenant.” Diaqhkhis equivalent to the Hebrew berith, and therefore it should be translated here “covenant” rather than “testament. The noun berith indicates what God decrees and the regulations which are based upon divine decrees. The better covenant refers here to the new covenant to Israel which is found in Jeremiah 31:31-34. The old covenant in Israel was the Mosaic law; the Mosaic law authorised the Levitical priesthood. The old covenant was temporal and conditional. The new covenant or better covenant is permanent and eternal. Each priesthood is authorised by a covenant. The Levitical priesthood was authorised by the Mosaic law, the Mosaic covenant. The royal priesthood is authorised by the new covenant to the Church.

The doctrine of mediatorship

1. The earliest and most basic concept of mediatorship is found in Job 9:2,32,33. The word “daysman” in Job is the hiphil participle of jackach, and this word in the hiphil [being causative active] means to arbitrate. In the participial form it means an arbitrator. The arbitrator, by the way, is a technical word in the participial form and it means someone who can lay his hands on both. The original form, mokiach, means someone who reaches out and puts his hands on both. This technically means someone who is equal with both parties in the mediation, and this is the problem that Job states — party of the first part, God; party of the second part, man. Obviously, then, this sets up the hypostatic union for Jesus Christ is truly man and He is God, and therefore He is qualified as the only mediator.

2. A mediator removes disagreement or estrangement between two parties and brings them to a common goal. A mediator interposes between two parties as equal or the friend of each. By so doing reconciliation is effected. Mediatorship results in reconciliation of God and Man. The Father is propitiated by the mediator; man is reconciled on the basis of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross.

3. The mechanics of mediatorship are found in 1 Timothy 2:5,6.

4. Relationship to the Mosaic law. The relationship between mediatorship and the Mosaic law is discussed in Galatians 3:19,20. The Mosaic law served as a temporary measure until Christ could become incarnate. Jesus Christ had to become man, and as the God-Man in hypostatic union He went to the cross and took our place and bore our sins. The Mosaic law was merely a temporary measure until the mediator became incarnate. In the meantime the Mosaic law under the supervision of the mediator was taught by angels to Israel.

5. The identification of the mediator of the new covenant — Hebrews 9:15,16. Christ is identified as the mediator. His mediation was accomplished through His work on the cross.

6. We have relationship of the blood to the mediator in Hebrews 12:24. The blood of animal sacrifices were shadows portraying the work of Christ in bearing our sins and providing reconciliation between man and God.

7. Obviously, therefore, a conclusion is called for and the conclusion is found in our passage, Hebrews 8:6. Christ our high priest is the mediator of a better covenant which deals with realities rather than shadows. The shadow covenant anticipated the coming of Jesus Christ but the new covenant is the coming of Jesus Christ to die on the cross for our sins as an efficacious sacrifice. In other words, He fulfilled His own priestly ministry.

The word “which” is a nominative feminine singular from the categorical qualitative relative pronoun o(stij which means “which category of”.

“was established” — the perfect passive indicative of nomoqetew, which means to be legally enacted, to be established by law, to be legislated, to be ordained. While “legally enacted” is closest to the etymology God produces the action here, and in keeping with the consistency of the theological concepts it should be translated “ordained”. The intensive perfect means that the action is completed and emphasises existing results. When special attention is directed to the results of the action stress upon the existing fact is intensified by the perfect tense. The passive voice: the better covenant receives the action here by enactment of better promises. For example, we are under a better covenant and therefore we have better promises. Our better promises are all designed to take us from phase one, the point of salvation, all of the way to the supergrace life. And we do this by GAP, by the intake of doctrine daily. Through the ministry of the Spirit and the teaching of the Word of God we can reach the supergrace life characterised by occupation with the person of Christ, characterised by supergrace capacity — that is the cup in the soul — followed by supergrace blessings. So we have better promises based upon a better covenant. The same thing is true for Israel in the future.

“upon better promises”, a prepositional phrase — e)pi plus the locative of the comparative adjective kreitton, plus the word for promises, e)paggelia — “on the basis of better promises. But e)paggelia means promises of blessing, never of cursing. For example, the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ was designed by God to remain on this earth in order to reach the supergrace status. He has better promises. He has promises of material prosperity, of promotion, promises related to sharing the happiness of God. We have a better covenant; we have better promises. The life of each believer has meaning and purpose and definition because we are born members of the royal family of God.

Translation: “But now he has obtained a more excellent priestly ministry, by so much as he also is the mediator of a better covenant, which category of covenant has been ordained on the basis of better promises of blessing.”

Summary

1. The better promises are related to the royal priesthood and the royal family. We have blessings for time, we have blessings for eternity.

2. The purpose of Hebrews is to bring the royal priest through the normal function of his priesthood to entrance into the supergrace life.

3. We have in verse 6 the argument for reaching the goal of supergrace. It is very difficult in these days of apostasy for people to understand the objective stated in the New Testament scriptures. The objective is based upon attitude toward doctrine. The objective of doctrine is to bring the believer into the supergrace status, the only place that he in his priesthood can glorify the Lord Jesus Christ.

4. The believer must understand that this is the dispensation of reality in contrast to the dispensation of shadows. The Age of Israel was and age of shadows. In the Age of Israel they had special days. In Romans chapter 14 we regard every day alike and we live one day at a time. They had to have a tabernacle and a temple as their sanctuary; our sanctuary is the body of every believer which is the temple or the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit. They had to portray heaven with earthly things, we portray earthly things with heavenly doctrine through the Word of God.

Verse 7 — the word “For” is a conjunctive particle gar and it is used to express inference.

“For if the first” — the word “if” is a conditional particle, it introduces the protasis of a second class

condition — if, and it is not true. Conditional clauses are very important in the interpretation of the

New Testament. The Greek first class condition; if and it is true — “If thou be the Son of God [and you

are].” The second class condition: if and it is not true — “If you will fall down and worship me [but you

won’t].” The third class condition has possibilities and it is still open to volition: “If we confess our

sins [maybe we will and maybe we won’t]”. The fourth class condition: “If, [ wish it were true but it

isn’t] — Peter uses this: “If you are suffering for righteousness sake [I wish you were but definitely you

are not].

Now we have a second class condition — “If that first”. The word here for “first”, prwth indicates the Mosaic law as the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood during the dispensation of Israel. “For if that first had been faultless [but it was not].”

The doctrine of the Mosaic law

1. The Mosaic law is divided into three parts. The first section, Codex #1, is the moral code. It includes the decalogue which relates morality to freedom and makes it possible for us to understand the true concept of freedom. The ten commandments are not trying to define morality or even to define sin as such — for that would be very limited — but they are the clearest and best and foremost delineation of what freedom really is and how it relates to various aspects of life. In addition to the ten commandments we have hundreds of others which form the moral code. The moral code indicates the basis for the function of the laws of divine establishment. Codex #1 defines morality in terms of not only absence of sin but in terms of patriotism, loyalty, capacity for love, relationships in life, and so on.

The second part of the Mosaic law, Codex #2, is the spiritual code. This is called in the scripture, the ordinances. It is a complete Christology designed to present Jesus Christ as the only saviour. The presentation of the Lord Jesus Christ through the tabernacle is one of the many areas of Codex #2. In addition, Codex #2 has a complete list of holy days, including the Passover, Firstfruits, Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, and Tabernacles. All of these portray some aspect of the Person of Christ. In addition, Codex #2 portrays the Levitical offerings, the modus operandi of the Levitical priesthood. And again, basically speaking, all Bible doctrine in the Old Testament was portrayed through ritual as well as through the written page and its communication.

Codex #3 is the social code known in the scripture as the judgements. It presents the laws of divine establishment which are designed for the freedom, the privacy, and the continuation of the human race in the angelic conflict. It includes the function of the divine institutions plus diet, sanitation, quarantine, soil conservation, taxation, military service, and so on.

2. The recipients of the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law has various names. It is called the covenant, the first covenant, the covenant to Israel, the law, and so on. It is therefore specifically given to Israel, not to the Church — Exodus 19:3; Leviticus 26:46; Romans 3:19; 9:4. It is not given to the Gentiles — Deuteronomy 4:8; Romans 2:12, 14. It is not given to the Christians, they are not under the law — Acts 15:5, 24; Romans 6:14; Galatians 2:19.

3. Christ fulfilled the law — Matthew 5:17. He fulfilled Codex #1 by living a perfect life on earth during the incarnation. Impeccability fulfils Codex #1. Codex #2 was fulfilled by His death on the cross. Codex #3 was fulfilled by both the patriotism of our Lord plus His observation of the laws of divine establishment, as per Matthew 22:21.

4. Christ is therefore the end of the law for the royal family of the Church Age — Romans 10:4.

5. Believers in the Church Age are under the higher law of spirituality, the law of the filling of the Spirit — Romans 8:2-4; Galatians 5:18, 22,23; 1 Corinthians chapter 13.

6. The limitations of the Mosaic law. There are four specified. a) The Mosaic law cannot justify — Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:20, 28; Acts 13:39; Philippians 3:9. b) The Mosaic law cannot give life — Galatians 3:21. c) The Mosaic law cannot provide the Holy Spirit — Galatians 3:2. d) The Mosaic law cannot solve the problems of the old sin nature — Romans 8:3. The Mosaic law can reveal the existence of the old sin nature, as per the tenth commandment, but it cannot solve any problem regarding it.

7. The present purpose of the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law is no longer the authorising agency for the Levitical priesthood. We no longer have the ritual, we now have the reality. With Christ dying on the cross, rising again, being seated at the right hand of the Father, we now have that glorious, wonderful reality which is so beautifully recorded for us in the New Testament scriptures. So since the Mosaic law is recorded in the scripture, what is its present purpose? Codex #1 is designed to convince by divine standard that the unbeliever is a sinner and needs a saviour — Romans 3:20, 28; 1 Timothy 1:8-10. Codex #1 is also designed to define the principles of freedom as related to the laws of divine establishment, and to define further the responsibility of every individual in the field of freedom, and where freedom and discipline meet. Codex #2 is designed to communicate God’s grace both in salvation and in rebound. Codex #3 is to provide national function and freedom under the laws of divine establishment, to preserve nations under the principle of divine institution #4. The past purpose of the Mosaic law was an authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood — Hebrews 7:11,12.

8. The Mosaic law is called the book of the covenant. It is not only known as the first covenant but it is also called the book of the covenant — Exodus 24:7,8; 34:27,28; Deuteronomy 4:13, 16, 23, 31; 8:18; 9:9, 11. In Deuteronomy 29:1 to the end of the book we have an addendum to the Mosaic law. We also have the prophecy of the breaking of the covenant in Deuteronomy 31:16,20. This book of the covenant is the subject of Jeremiah chapter 11, and it is not to be confused with the New Covenant to Israel — Jeremiah 31:31-34.

9. The keeping of the law is not a way of salvation. It is a way of human freedom and prosperity under the laws of divine establishment but it is not the way of salvation — Galatians 2:16.

“For if that first” — the word for “that”, e)keinoj, is a demonstrative pronoun. It refers to the Mosaic law as the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood in the dispensation of Israel.

“had been” — imperfect active indicative of the absolute status quo verb e)imi which means “to be” in the past here. “If it had been in the past.” We have in the imperfect tense linear aktionsart in past time. The active voice: the subject, the Mosaic law, produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is the declarative indicative in which the absolute assertion of doctrine is made.

“faultless” — a compound adjective, a)memptoj. The word actually means “blameless.” It can be translated “faultless” as well, either one will do here. This is the protasis of a second class condition, therefore it is contrary to fact, it is not true.

“then” — the particle a)n used to introduce the apodosis of a second class condition; “no”, the objective o)uk denying the reality of an alleged fact; “place” — topoj. The problem here is that the negative doesn’t go with the word topoj here. We have o)uk topoj and the negative goes with the verb, not with the word for place, topoj. The translation gets fouled up because that has been ignored — “a place would not have been sought for the second”, there is where the “not” goes. In the KJV it is “no place … had been sought”, and that is incorrect.

“have been sought” — the imperfect passive indicative of zetew. The imperfect tense here is a progressive imperfect, it denotes the action in progress in past time. The process actually presents something as actually going on in past time and it is sometimes called an imperfect of description. The passive voice: the subject receives the action of the verb, the subject is the Mosaic law. The indicative mood is declarative recognising the reality of constantly seeking a place for a second or new covenant for Israel.

“for the second” is a genitive of description. The Greek word is deuteroj.

Translation: “For if that first [the Mosaic law] had been faultless [but it wasn’t], a place would not have been sought for the second.”

Notice now the words “new covenant.” There are two new covenants in the Bible. The first new covenant is the one in our context, the new covenant to Israel.

The new covenant to Israel

1. Where is it found in scripture? Jeremiah 31:31:34. It is quoted in Hebrews 8:8-12. It is mentioned in Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 10:15-18.

2. The new covenant to Israel was designed to demonstrate to the Jews the fact that the first covenant, the Mosaic law, was temporary and was to be replaced. The Mosaic law was designed for the Age of Israel, from the time of Moses to the time of the cross, resurrection, ascension and session. At this point we have the interruption by the Church Age in which God calls out a royal family for the Lord Jesus. Then the Age of Israel continues with the Tribulation and concludes with the second advent. The new covenant for Israel was designed for the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ as well as for eternity. But specifically, then, the old covenant was designed for the age between Moses and Christ. The new covenant is designed for the Millennium.

3. The new covenant to Israel was designed to carry Israel in the Millennium. The old covenant was designed to carry Israel in that part of the dispensation of Israel from Moses to Christ.

4. The new covenant to Israel was designed to authorise the form of worship and the priesthood of Israel in the Millennium. The old covenant to Israel was designed to authorise the form of worship and the priesthood to Israel between Moses and Christ.

5. The new Covenant to Israel was designed for Israel during the Millennium only.

6. The new covenant will not be fulfilled until Jesus Christ returns to the earth at the end of the Tribulation.

7. In this sense the new covenant is like the other unconditional covenants to Israel. There are three: the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic. There are three unconditional covenants that existed in the Old Testament: the Abrahamic — Abraham is promised a nation forever; the Palestinian — the geographical location of that nation; the Davidic — that the son of David would rule that nation forever. Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of that. The new covenant is like these three in that it is unconditional and will not be fulfilled until the Millennium.

8. The Mosaic law, or the first covenant in context, is designed for the Age of Israel. The second covenant, the new covenant to Israel, is designed for the dispensation of the Millennium. Therefore, it must be clearly understood that the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Hebrew 8:8-12 is the new covenant to Israel to be fulfilled in the Millennium and not the new covenant to the Church. It was inevitable that the Levitical priesthood should be replaced by a change of dispensation. The interruption of the dispensation nullified the Levitical priesthood as it nullified the Mosaic law as the authorising agent.

The new covenant to the Church

1. It is found in Hebrews 9:15; 10:29; 12:24. It is also found in Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 7:22.

2. The new covenant to the Church recognises the interruption of the Jewish Age and the need to replace the shadows with reality. A specialised priesthood must be replaced by a universal priesthood.

3. The strategic victory of Jesus Christ on the cross, followed by His resurrection, ascension, and session, demands the replacement of the first covenant in our context with the second covenant to the Church. The second covenant is not found in Hebrews chapter eight. We do not have it until Hebrews chapter nine.

4. In the new covenant to the Church the royal priesthood is authorised while in the new covenant to Israel we have the fulfilment of the Millennium but not a royal priesthood authorised.

5. The new covenant to Israel is fulfilled in the Millennium; the new covenant to the Church is fulfilled in the dispensation of the Church. The new covenant to the Church only operates on the earth during the Church Age.

6. Notice that in the book of Hebrews both new covenants are discussed.

7. To understand these covenant passages we must be able to distinguish between the new covenant to Israel and the new covenant to the Church. The are entirely different in content, they are in different dispensations, and certain passages in Hebrews cannot be properly understood without this distinction being previously in your mind.

Verse 8 — the quotation of the new covenant to Israel. Starting in the middle of the verse with the word “Behold” and going down to verse 12 we have a complete quotation of the new covenant to Israel in Jeremiah 31:31-34.

Again we begin our verse with the explanatory particle gar used as a conjunction, and here it should be translated “for you see.”

“finding fault” — present middle participle of the verb memfomai. The word means exactly how it is translated in the KJV, except it should be translated as a participle — “when finding fault.” It is a temporal participle and “when” is used to translate a temporal participle. This is the present tense of duration or the retroactive progressive present in which something begun in the past continues into the present time. The middle voice or the deponent verb: middle in form but active in meaning.

“with them” — the accusative plural from the intensive pronoun a)utoj. A)utoj refers to Israel at the time of their great apostasy and reversionism in the time of Jeremiah. The new covenant of Israel was given just before the first administration of the fifth cycle of discipline to the southern kingdom. This occurred in 586 BC. Israel was destroyed as a nation in 586 but even though they were destroyed they are going to become a nation again. And they will continue to be a nation. Even though, once more, in 70 AD, they will go out under the fifth cycle of discipline they will again become a nation and as a nation in the Millennium they will be the centre of all spiritual blessing for the perfect environment of planet earth during the one thousand years of the reign of Jesus Christ.

There is a principle in the original placement of this passage. It was given by Jeremiah to a lot of people who couldn’t care less: people who were bored, indifferent, apathetic, in different stages of reversionism, etc. But there is always a remnant of those who care, those to whom something like this is of great significance.

Every now and then God the Holy Spirit does a very interesting thing. He takes something that is really fantastic and buries it very deep, so deep that most people stop digging before they even get close. Therefore they miss a great blessing, a blessing which will inevitably explode and make them aware at the Rapture of the Church. This is the type of a passage that has a beautiful application to us and a beautiful promise to the nation of Israel.

“For when finding fault with them.” That is, finding fault with Israel in their time of apostasy. The Jews would not go out under the fifth cycle of discipline were it not for the fact that they were in reversionism and there were Jews, therefore, in the reaction stage. They were disillusioned, bored, discouraged, overcome with self-pity, in loneliness and couldn’t handle it, frustrated. And there were those who had the intensification of the reactor factors through mental attitude sins. Then there was the inevitable frantic search for happiness through the old sin nature. It is interesting that the writer of Hebrews would quote the passage from Jeremiah in its entirety three years before it would happen again. Hebrews is the greatest challenge in the Word of God from the standpoint of national disaster, for the fifth cycle of discipline was about to hit Jerusalem and Judea again. So we have the principle of the new covenant to Israel as an encouragement that no matter how bad things get historically, not matter how many areas of pressure and suffering you may face personally, there is always something in the Word of God for you: a source of comfort, a source of blessing, a source of encouragement. And it illustrates again the great principle that all of our true and really great blessings are directly related to our inner sources of the soul, and that there is nothing more important than finding and developing these inner resources through Bible doctrine.

‘he saith” — the present active indicative from legw. Here is one of those Greek words for communication, for speaking, for saying something. Actually, it becomes a picture of Neum Jehovah in the Hebrew — “This saith the Lord”. God communicates for a purpose. The Jews in 586 BC could all trace their history back to BC 1440. That means that we have about 854 years, nearly a Millennium of background. In all of that time they had had the Mosaic law, and having it all of that time they still had found themselves in a state of apostasy. So this is what it means when it says “finding fault with.” There is nothing wrong with the Mosaic law, it is a part of the Word of God. But the Mosaic law was not an instrument to sustain the people spiritually. It was an instrument to sustain the people on the basis of the laws of divine establishment. But in time of apostasy the first thing to go were the laws of divine establishment, so that the laws of divine establishment never stop apostasy. They are a guideline for prosperity and blessing but they never stop apostasy. The only thing that stops apostasy and revolution is Bible doctrine in the soul of the believer. So in finding fault with the Mosaic law it is not that the Mosaic law was at fault but it was not designed to do what was necessary in time of reversionistic apostasy. Therefore it has to be superseded by something which adds the spiritual to the establishment. It is the spiritual factor which preserves the individual and also preserves the nation.

We have come now to the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 as found in Hebrews 8:8-12. In verse 8 the word “Behold” is a demonstrative particle i)dou. It is an aorist middle imperative of the verb o(raw, and “behold” actually means to perceive, understand. It is a command demanding perception. With this word we begin our study of the translation into the Greek language of Jeremiah 31:31-34.

“the days come” — a reference to national crisis. The nominative plural from h(mera refers to a succession of days which will resolve all of Israel’s crises. There is a time coming when Israel will be static as a nation as well as ecstatic as a nation. There is a time coming when Israel will see the fulfilment of every promise that God ever made to them: all of the promises of the Abrahamic covenant, the Palestinian covenant, the Davidic covenant and, of course, the new covenant to Israel. The days, then, refer to a succession of days which add up to nearly 1000 years, the period of time in which the Lord Jesus Christ will reign upon the earth. He will first come back under the principle of the second advent and His first job will be to annihilate the enemy. This will be followed by the removal from the earth of Satan as the ruler of the world, plus all fallen angels. Then will begin 1000 years of perfect environment on the earth. Human history begins with perfect environment; human history ends with perfect environment. In both cases perfect environment simply demonstrates the principle that it is not the solution to man’s problems. The answer to man’s problems lies within his soul. First of all, the soul must be saved by personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Then, the soul must take in doctrine and grow and reach the point of the supergrace status. This is the answer, this is the reason man was created in order to resolve the angelic conflict by responding to grace. So, “the days come”, the present active indicative of the verb e)rxomai. E)rxomai in the present tense is a futuristic present which denotes an event which has not yet occurred but which is regarded as so certain that in thought it is contemplated as already coming to pass. This is the reality of the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ. The active voice: the Millennium produces the action of the verb — it comes. The indicative mood is declarative which indicates an unqualified assertion of doctrine: doctrine of dispensations — last dispensation, the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ.

“when” — the emphatic use of kai means “really”; “I will make”, the future active indicative of suntelew. Suntelew means to carry out, to fulfil, to complete a project. The future tense is a predictive future denoting an event which is expected to occur in the future. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action by the second advent. Again we have a declarative indicative. The verbal idea here is represented from the viewpoint of certainty and actually. We have an unqualified assertion of doctrine, the Millennium is going to occur.

“a new covenant” — this refers to the new covenant to Israel. There must be s distinction between the new covenant to Israel and the new covenant to the Church. This is specifically the new covenant to Israel. The word “new” is actually word kainoj and it means new in the sense of contrast to the old. So this is in contrast to the Mosaic law.

“with the house of Israel” — this new covenant is specifically to the house of Israel. “With the house” is e)pi plus the accusative of o)ikoj. E)pi plus the genitive emphasises contact; e)pi plus the locative emphasises position; e)pi plus the accusative emphasises direction. Therefore it should be translated “to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah.” Israel is the northern kingdom; Judah is the southern kingdom.

Translation: “For when finding fault with them, he [God] communicates, Behold the days come, says Jehovah, in reality I will carry out a new covenant to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah.”

Verse 9 — “Not according to the covenant” — the negative o)u plus the preposition kata plus the accusative of diaqhkh. The word o)u here is very important, it come in three forms — o)u, o)uk, o)ux, depending upon words which precede and follow in the Greek. It is the Greek negative of objectivity. It denies the reality of an alleged fact. It is used with the indicative as a clear-cut, point blank denial of something. It is final, it means that the door is closed. It is used here in connection with a covenant — “not according to the covenant.” Diaqhkh refers to the Mosaic law which authorised the Levitical priesthood and was the basis for the modus operandi of the dispensation of Israel. Each dispensation has covenants and these covenants authorise certain functions from God. For example, the Age of the Gentiles had a covenant called the Noahic covenant. The Age of Israel had the Mosaic covenant. The Church Age has the new covenant to the Church. The Millennium actually has several covenants — the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic, and New covenants to Israel.

“that” is literally “which” — “which I made,” aorist active indicative of poiew. The constative aorist gathers up into one entirety the action of the verb, and it gathers up into one fact the Lord provided for Israel a covenant. This covenant is made up of the laws of divine establishment, made up of spiritual principles related to Christology, and also very practical principles for the function of life. The active voice: God produced the covenant, He gave it to Moses. Again we have the indicative mood for the unqualified assertion of doctrine.

“with their fathers” — ancestors of the Jews to whom this was originally addressed — “in the day” — e)n plus the locative of h(mera refers to the exodus, the time that God delivered the Jews from slavery. Before they can function as a nation they must be free. No nation is truly a nation unless its peoples have the freedom guaranteed by the ten commandments, guaranteed by the laws of divine establishment.

“when I took them” — aorist middle participle of e)pilambanw, the verb which indicates their freedom from slavery. They were in slavery to Egypt. The aorist middle participle is very important. The culminative aorist regards the liberation of the exodus generation in its entirety, emphasising the principle that you can’t function as a nation until you have freedom. The middle voice is an indirect middle, emphasising grace as the agent producing the action of the verb. This is a temporal participle and therefore it should be translated “on the day when I took them by their hand.” The participle is also in the genitive case. With it is a genitive singular of a personal pronoun. The thing together forms what is known as a genitive absolute. A noun plus a participle in the genitive case not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence is called a genitive absolute. The root idea of the genitive absolute is sensation, emotion, sharing, or ruling. Here the participle indicates sharing or ruling as the function of God’s grace in liberating the Jews from slavery.

“when I took them by the hand” is a grace metaphor. It was God who did all of the work in liberating the Jews from slavery. Furthermore, the metaphor indicates that the Mosaic law was given to the Jews in the time of their minority. You take a child by the hand, not an adult. Israel, then, was treated as a minor to be placed under special laws and regulations until maturity occurred. Under this metaphor, all during the Jewish Age the Jews are regarded nationally as immature, just as in the Millennium they are regarded nationally as being very mature. The very nature of the content of the Mosaic law is compatible with the minority metaphor of being taken by the hand. The shadow theology of the tabernacle, of the animal sacrifices, the holy days, the Levitical function, and all of these things, were object lessons just as you would teach the children. That is the way they learned their doctrine. Their system of rewards and punishments, cursing and blessing, in the Mosaic law are typical of the modus operandi of handling children. Furthermore, Galatians indicates that the purpose of the Mosaic law was to be a school bus — Galatians 3:24,25. The Greek paidagwgh means a slave who walks the children to school. So wherever you turn and you study the Mosaic law it is related as it were to a nation in its minority before it becomes an adult nation.

The next word is an infinitive: “to lead them out” is an aorist active infinitive of e)cagw which means to lead out or to bring out. Here it means to bring them out, to bring them out of slavery. The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular in contrast to the present infinitive which indicates a condition or a process. Here we have that which is specific. They were liberated by God apart from any ability of their own from slavery. The Jews in slavery were in a hopeless situation. They had no ability, they had nothing by which they themselves could liberate themselves. God provided everything for them, it was strictly a grace activity. The culminative aorist tense in this infinitive views the exodus in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of results. The results are related to freedom. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb which is the function of deity in providing freedom for Israel. The infinitive is an infinitive of result. Actually, there are three categories of infinitive of result. These are the conceived result, the intended result, and the actual result. Here we have the actual result. All of this is very technical in the Greek for a reason. Whenever you quote a passage in the Old Testament which was written in Hebrew, and you quote it in the Greek, there is always a reason for the quotation under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. And the reason is quite obvious. Already the big discussion is freedom. Just before the Jews lost their freedom in 586 BC Jeremiah, under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit, presented them this passage, and the emphasis is on freedom, that which they are about to lose.

“because” — the conjunction o(ti, a causal conjunction to show what happened, to show why they had to go out under the fifth cycle; “they continued not in my covenant”, the aorist active indicative of e)nmenw plus the strong negative o)uk. E)nmenw means to remain in, to stand firm in, to persevere in, to continue in. Here it means to continue — “because they did not continue in my covenant.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist and it gathers up into one entirety, one ball of wax, the reversionistic failure of Israel over that 400 years prior to 586 BC. During that time they had great periods of apostasy, and the failure is attributed to neglect of doctrine — e)nmenw means to neglect or not to continue in the covenant. The active voice: Israel as a nation failed to stand firm in the Mosaic covenant. The declarative indicative mood indicates the verbal idea which is represented from the viewpoint of reality. This is an historical fact.

“in my covenant” refers to the Mosaic law which provided the basis and the principle for freedom of the national entity of Israel.

“and I” is literally “I also”; “regarded them not” or literally, “I disregarded them.” We have the aorist active indicative of a)melew which means to disregard or to punish.

Translation: “Not according to the covenant [the Mosaic law] which I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by their hand to bring them out from the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in my covenant, I also disregarded them, says the Lord.”

In other words, the fifth cycle of discipline has been historically administered twice to Israel because they failed to live within the realm of divine establishment. Divine establishment is portrayed by the Mosaic law.

Verse 10 — “For” is literally “Because”, the causal conjunction o(ti again — “this is the covenant that I will make”. Because they failed under the first covenant, the Mosaic law, God speaking through Jeremiah says “I will make a new covenant with you.” “For this the covenant”, there is no verb to be here, it is included to smooth out the translation but it is simply “this the covenant.”

“which I will make” — wrong! “I will assign”, the future middle indicative of diatiqemi. Diatiqemi actually means to decree, to ordain, or to assign. “This is the covenant which I will assign”. The future tense of diatiqemi is gnomic future, it is used for a statement of fact or performance anticipated in the Millennium. The indirect middle voice emphasises God as the agent producing the action. Just as God freed the Jews in the past from slavery from which they could not liberate themselves, so in the future God will provide for them what they could never provide by their own ability. Even though the Jews today are a strong nation in the sense of being one against their enemies, understanding the principles of universal military training, understanding principles of discipline, fighting against hopeless odds and doing extremely well; even though they are very clear in these things, even though they have taken a hard-nosed attitude toward the Soviet Union, they do not have the ability to bring about the very things that God has for them. They will never be able to conquer the land from the Euphrates down to the Red Sea. That land belongs to them by divine promise — everything from the Mediterranean, all the way through Saudi Arabia — but they will never by their own strength be able to carve out this great empire which belongs to them. That remains for the Lord Jesus Christ as the King of kings to conquer for them.

“the house of Israel” is the dative of indirect object and it indicate the new covenant is given in the interests of Israel. When God gives something it is in the interest of the recipient to possess it. And it should be not “with the house of Israel” but literally, “to the house of Israel.”

“after those days” — the preposition meta plus the accusative means not only “after those days” but it is a little stronger than that. The word “those” is the demonstrative pronoun e)keinoj, and e)keinoj in the Greek here is used to make reference back to a previously mentioned or implied fact. The previously mentioned or implied fact is the Millennium.

“I will put” — the present active participle of didomi meaning to give. This is “I will cause to give” actually. The reason it is translated Cause to give” is because it is a causal participle used for the function of GAP in the Millennium. And because the static present represents a condition as perpetually existing throughout the Millennium, and because the active voice is a causative active voice, in this sense God causes the fact to come about — “causing to give”.

“my laws” — the word for “laws” is not laws at all. In this case the accusative plural of nomoj refers to principles — “my principles [my doctrines].”

“into their mind” — e)ij plus the accusative of dianoia. E)ij is a purpose preposition here — “for the purpose of their thinking.” Dianoia refers to thinking in the left lobe. It means the power of thought also, it means the ability to perceive. It means that all will have the ability to perceive doctrine in the Millennium — “causing to give for the purpose of thinking.” Here is the principle that thinking is living. The real capacity for life is in your thought pattern The thought pattern is confined to the soul, to the right and left lobes. The Bible even goes further than that and says that the heart or the right lobe is the area for thinking. “As a man thinketh in his heart, so he is.” Every capacity for life, all living, all ability to enjoy life, is related to the thinking part of the soul. All blessing, all capacity for life, all happiness is based upon this principle. Here is actually the promise of supergrace capacity under the new covenant to Israel.

The next word “and” is the ascensive use of kai and should be translated “even upon their hearts” — e)pi plus kardia in the accusative plural. In other words, everyone will have doctrine to think about and they will also have it in the right lobe.

“I will write” — wrong! The future active indicative of e)pigrafw means “I will engrave.” It is a gnomic future used for a fact anticipated in the Millennial reign of Christ. The active voice is causative active. The declarative indicative is an unqualified assertion of fact. There will be GAP in the Millennium.

“them” — the doctrines. God’s doctrines will be engraved. This indicates the means by which all of this GAP is going to function. God Himself will make it possible for everyone who is alive to understand all the issues.

“also I will be to them a God” — “I will be” is the future active indicative of e)imi, indicating that this is a future fact as it is quoted at this time by the writer of Hebrews. It is going to be a great blessing to many, many Jews who will go down under the fifth cycle of discipline. They will remember this even though they rejected it at the time the epistle arrived. Three years later it will be a great source of blessing to them.

“a God” is the preposition e)ij plus the accusative of qeoj, and it should be translated “I will be their God.” Literally, is it “I will be to them for a God.” It is idiomatic for “I will be their God.”

“and they shall be to me for a people” — literal translation. This refers to Israel under the fulfilment of these covenants.

Translation: “Because this is the covenant which I will assign to the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: causing to give my doctrines for the purpose of their thinking, even upon their hearts I will engrave them: also I will be to them for a God, and they shall be to me for a people.”

Summary

1. In every dispensation divine blessing is related to doctrine in the soul of the believer. There is always some form of GAP in every dispensation, even when Christ is personally reigning on the earth.

2. Doctrine in the soul is the key to the believer’s relationship with God in time.

3. Doctrine in the soul is the means of reaching supergrace and glorifying God. And therefore “the earth will be covered with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters that cover the sea.”

Verse 11 — we have the adjunctive use of kai, translated “also”; “they shall not teach” — aorist active subjunctive of didaskw, and we have about as strong a negative as you can have. We have o)u mh, a double negative, and a double negative in the Greek is stronger, it is an emphatic denial. Translating it literally, it would be “they shall not never teach”, but we simply say “they shall not teach.” But we understand that this is a very strong double negative. The epistolary aorist tense: the writer places himself at the viewpoint of the reader using the aorist to state an event future to him. The Millennial Jewish citizens will produce the action. The subjunctive mood is potential, and sometimes this is called a futuristic subjunctive emphasising future reference rather than contingency.

“each one his fellow citizen,” not “neighbour” as in the KJV. This is polithj; “and every one his brother” is literally “each one his brother”. It not only means brother but it means fellow countryman or intimate friend.

“saying, Know the Lord”, aorist active imperative demanding that you know the Lord. Why? The word “for” is o(ti again, “because all shall know” — future active indicative of o)ida. The word ginwskw is the word for “know the Lord”, and that is a command. They shall not teach “know the Lord” [ginwskw] for everyone shall o)ida. O)ida is the perfect tense used as the present tense for an absolute fact, everyone will know the Lord. But more than that this becomes a futuristic use of the perfect used as a present tense, so it is actually a future perfect. The future perfect is intensive, it refers to the Millennium, and this will be a result in the Millennium, a result that will always exist. There will be a lot of unbelievers before the Millennium is over. Even under perfect environment there will be unbelievers but everyone will clearly understand the issue. So the future perfect intensive indicates the fact there is no such thing as a person in the Millennium who doesn’t have a clear understanding of every issue of life.

“for all [each one] shall know me.” Under perfect environment of the Millennium where you have a chicken in every pot, where everyone has great blessing, where there is no death, where there is perfect health, where the lion and the lamb lie down side by side, where the swords will be turned into plowshares and the spears into pruning hooks and man will learn war no more, and where the desert will blossom like a crocus, in perfect environment you still have and always will have under the perfect reign of Jesus Christ class distinction. The perfect reign of Jesus Christ does not and cannot change the fact that some people are stupid and some are smart, some make it and some don’t, some are least and some are great — “from the least to the greatest.”

“from the least” — a)po plus the ablative of mikroj.

Translation: “Also they shall not teach each one his fellow citizen, and each one his intimate friend, saying, Know the Lord: because all shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them.”

In the perfect environment of the Millennium under the personal reign of Christ there will still be class distinctions and inequalities among people. So there is a principle: Perfect government does not mean equality among people. This is one of the fallacies of the thinking of our day. A perfect government does not mean equality among people, it means that all people are free. It means the least are free and the greatest are free, the humble are free and the mighty are free. Freedom is what a government must guarantee, not equality. We are neither born equal nor do we die equal, nor in between are we equal. People are not born equal, they do not live equal. All will have freedom and equal opportunity but all will not achieve to the same degree either now or in the Millennium.

Verse 12 — “For” is literally “Because”; “I will be merciful” is “I will be gracious”. The predicate nominative is i(lewj which means “gracious.”

“to their unrighteousness” — this is the locative of a)dikia and it should be “in the sphere of their unrighteousness.”. What does “I will be gracious in the sphere of their unrighteousness” mean? It means that evangelism will continue in the Millennium for the purpose of saving subsequent generations of the Millennium. Because of the baptism of fire the Millennium begins with saved people only. Their progeny, however, have to be evangelised. Many of their progeny will be negative and will form the nucleus of the Gog revolution at the end of the Millennium. So this is actually a prophecy of evangelism. And this also explains the previous verse as to how everyone comes to know the Lord in the Millennium.

“and their sins and their iniquities” — the words “and their iniquities” are not found in the original.

“I will remember no more.” The words “no more” is o)u mh again, the strong double negative. The aorist passive subjunctive of mimnhskw, “I will not ever remember”. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist viewing the event in its entirety, regarding it from the viewpoint of existing results. The subjunctive mood plus the double negative puts special stress on the negative proposition and therefore should be translated “any more.”

Translation: “Because I will be gracious in the sphere of their unrighteousnesses, and I will not remember their sins any more.”

This ends the quotation of the new covenant to Israel in the Millennium as quoted in Jeremiah 31:31-34. It is specifically a covenant to Israel, it is in contrast to the new covenant which belongs specifically to the Church. We as members of the royal family of God have our own new covenant and it must be distinguished from the new covenant to Israel. Since the Mosaic law is replaced by two new covenants it is no longer valid either in the Church Age or in the Millennium.

Verse 13 — the significance of the fifth cycle of discipline. “In that he saith” is “In that he cites” actually; “a new”. The word for “new”, kainoj, refers to the new replacing the old. It should be translated, “In his citation of the new, he has made obsolete the first covenant.” We have palaiow in the perfect tense means to make obsolete the first covenant, i.e. the Mosaic law.

“Now that which decayeth” — we have palaiow again, this time in the present tense, and it should be translated “Now the one being superseded [the Mosaic law]” — static present for a condition assumed as perpetually existing. The Mosaic law receives the action verb here, which is abrogation, and this is a circumstantial participle.

“and waxeth old” — literally, “and growing old”; “is near destruction”, not “ready to vanish away”. We have the adverb e)gguj and it is an historical adverb of prophecy. They are three years from the fifth cycle of discipline. Then with that we have the word “destruction.” “Now the one becoming obsolete and growing old [the Mosaic law: the temple, the function of the Levitical priesthood] is near destruction” — a)fanismoj, total destruction, fifth cycle of discipline.

Translation: “I his citation of the new he has made obsolete the first [the Mosaic law]. Now the one [Mosaic law] becoming obsolete and growing old is near destruction.”

Note how Jewish believers in Jerusalem are warned of the coming of the fifth cycle of discipline in their own time, their own generation; in fact, within three years. Notice, they have perfect and adequate warning in the utilisation of the new covenant.

Strangely enough there are two great warnings of the fifth cycle of discipline to the Jews of 70 AD. The first warning is the one we have here, the quotation of the new covenant to Israel. It is always quoted before the fifth cycle. The second was the function of the gift of tongues, and for forty years people evangelised the Jews in Gentile languages as a warning of the coming of the fifth cycle. So there was a spiritual warning and there was an establishment warning, and these two warnings plus the warning of the Lord Jesus Christ in the Gospel of Luke add up to the fact that they had the most perfect warning system the world has ever known, and the greatest opportunity for preparation.

---

^[1] See Thieme, Levitical Offerings, 1973.