Hebrews 7
THE PRIEST AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.
The exposition of Christ’s heavenly priesthood is now at
length taken up and
carried out. It extends to ch.10:19, forming the central part of
the whole Epistle;
and
in the course of it is set forth also how the whole Jewish economy did
in
fact only prefigure and prepare for this one availing priesthood of
THE TRUE HIGH PRIEST OF MANKIND! The peculiar thesis of
this chapter is “after the order of Melchizedek,” the question being —
What is signified by this designation of the Messiah in the
hundred and
tenth psalm? The remarkable import of that psalm, in that it assigns
priesthood as well as royalty to the Son, was noted under ch.5:6.
His being Priest at all implies a different order of
royalty from that of the
theocratic kings. But what further is meant by His priesthood being
after
the
order, not of Aaron, but of Melchizedek? Is it that Melchizedek, being
King of Salem as well as priest of the most high God, is therefore
selected
as
the most suitable type of the great Priest-King to come? Yes; but there
is
more in it than this, as the writer goes on to show. To get at the full
import of the expression in the psalm, he analyzes what we are
told about
Melchizedek in Genesis 14. (the only other passage from
which anything is
known of him), and considers what could be meant in the psalm by
“a
priest after his order,” and that “for ever.” Both the actual history and the
ideal of the psalm are in his view together; and from the two
combined he
deduces the intended idea of “a
priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.”
Bearing this in mind, we shall have no need to understand
anything implied
as
to Melchizedek himself beyond what we learn from Genesis. Some
commentators, on the strength of what is here said of him, have
supposed
him
to have been some superhuman being; and many theories have been
propounded as to who and what he was. All such views have arisen from
a
misconception of our writer’s drift; from regarding the representation
of
the
ideal which Melchizedek typified as part of the account of what he
actually was, the actual and the ideal being, in fact, somewhat
blended in
the
exposition. That no more is implied about the man himself than what is
recorded in Genesis may be concluded, not only from the purport
(rightly
understood) of the passage before us, but also from the analogy of
the rest
of
the Epistle, throughout which the arguments are based on the contents
of
the Old Testament itself, as it was read and received by the Hebrew
Christians. For example, neither David, nor Solomon, nor
Isaiah are
adduced as having been other than what the sacred record
represents them
to
have been, though it is shown that what is said of them in the spirit of
prophecy points to AN
IDEAL beyond them.
1 “For
this Melchisedec, king of
met Abraham returning from the slaughter of
the kings, and blessed him;
2 To whom
also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by
interpretation King of righteousness, and
after that also King of
Salem, which is, King of peace; 3 Without
father, without mother,
without descent, having neither beginning
of days, nor end of life; but
made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.”
For this
Melchizedek, King of
high God, who met
Abraham returning from the slaughter of the
kings, and blessed
him; to whom also Abraham divided a tenth part
of all (this description
belongs to the subject of the sentence, being merely
a recapitulation of the facts recorded in Genesis, the
language of the Septuagint
being used; what follows belongs properly to the predicate,
being of the
nature of a comment on the facts recorded); first, being by interpretation
King of righteousness (which is the meaning
of the name Melchizedek),
and then also King
of
of himself and his kingdom are significant (compare Psalm
85:10; 72:3;
Isaiah 32:17; Romans 5:1); where righteousness and peace
are the
characteristics of the Messiah’s kingdom; this
significance, however, is not
afterwards made a point of, being merely noticed by the
way); without
father, without
mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning
of days nor end of
life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a
priest
continually. It is this language especially that has been supposed to
involve something more than human about the historical
Melchizedek. But
we have only to enter into the mind of the writer to see
that it is not so.
For it is the ideal of the psalm, conceived as suggested by
the historical
type, that gives its color to the language used. And,
indeed, how strangely
suggestive is that fragment about the priestly king
(Genesis 14:18-21)
so unexpectedly interposed in the life of Abraham! In the
midst of a history
in which such a point is made of the parentage and descent
of the
patriarchs of
them, one suddenly appears on the scene, a priest and king,
not of the
peculiar race at all, his parentage and ancestry unrecorded
and unknown,
who blesses and receives tithes from Abraham, and then as suddenly
disappears from view. We hear no more of him; as about his origin, so
about his end, Scripture is silent. And so he “abides” before the mind’s eye,
apart from any before or after, the type of an unchanging
priesthood. For
the meaning of the word ἀγενεαλόγητος – agenealogaetos - (in itself denoting
the absence, not of ancestors, but of a traced genealogy),
compare v.6 - ὁ δὲ
μὴ γενεαλογούμενος ἐξ αὐτῶν – ho de mae genealogoumenos ex auton – but he
whose descent is not counted from them. That of ἀπάτωρ, ἀμήτωρ
– apator,
amaetor – fatherless;
motherless - is illustrated by the Latin
expression,
“Nullis majoribus
ortus.” On “made
like (ὁμοιωμένος – homoiomenos –
made like) unto the Son of God,” Chrysostom says, “We know of no
beginning or end in either case:
o
in the one, because none
are recorded;
o
in the other, because they do not exist.”
The idea seems to be that Melchizedek is thus assimilated
to Christ in the sacred
record, by what it leaves untold no less than by what it
tells. It is not said that
he is like Him (ὁμοιος – homoios – in like
manner ), but
made like (ὁμοιωμένος –
homoiomenos – made
like); i.e. represented in such wise as to
resemble Him.
It may be here remarked that, though the term “Son of God” is
used in the
Epistle generally to denote the Messiah as manifested in time, His
essential
eternal being is here, as elsewhere, distinctly intimated; also that “the
Son of God”
is regarded as the archetype of the comparison.
4 “Now
consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch
Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.” The typical significance
of Melchizedek
is now further seen in what passed between him and
Abraham, in respect to tithe
and blessing.
The inference, that πηλίκος οὗτος – paelikos houtos
– this
eminent one -
referring as it does, not to the antitype, but to the man
himself, implies some mysterious greatness beyond what
appears in the
original record, does not follow. Of one who simply blessed
and received
tithes from the great patriarch, the expression is not too
strong. Observe
the emphatic position, at the end of the Greek sentence, of
ὁ πατριάρχης
–
ho patriachaes equivalent to “he,
the patriarch.” Abraham’s being this, the
father and representative of the chosen race, is
what is shown in what follows
to give peculiar significance to the transaction.
The word ἀκροθινίων –
akrothinion – spoils;
booty (properly, “the chief spoils”), which is not in the
Septuagint, seems introduced to enhance the picture:
5 “And
verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office
of the priesthood, have a commandment to
take tithes of the people
according to the law, that is, of their
brethren, though they come
out of the loins of Abraham: 6 But he
whose descent is not counted
from them received tithes of Abraham, and
blessed him that had the
promises.
7 And without all contradiction the less
is blessed of the better.”
As much as to say, “Let
it not be said that the tithing of Abraham by Melchizedek
implies no higher
priestly prerogative than the tithing of Abraham’s descendants
by the sons of
Aaron; for there is this difference: They, in virtue only of a
special ordinance
of the Law, not of original right, were allowed to tithe
their brethren,
though descended from the same great ancestor;
he,
though not of them
or of the race at all, in virtue of his own inherent
dignity, tithes
the whole race as represented in its patriarch.” (We observe
how, in place of the aorist ἔδωκε – edoke - gave, used when the mere historical
incident was referred to (Genesis 14:20), we have here the
perfect δεδεκάτωκεν –
dedekatoken - has tithed - (as also εὐλόγηκεν – eulogaeken – has blessed -
in what follows, and δεδεκάτωται – dedekatotai – has been
tithed -, in v.
9),
denoting a completed act, of which the effects and
significance remain;
Melchizedek, who represents the priesthood after his order,
being viewed in
permanent relation to Abraham, who represents the chosen
race.) And hath
blessed him that hath (i.e. the holder of) the promises. But,
without all
controversy, the less is blessed of the better. The superiority evidenced by
bestowal of blessing no less than by receiving of tithe
having been thus
noticed, the contrast with the Levitical
priesthood is continued in the
following verses.
8 “And here
men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth
them, of
whom it is witnessed that he liveth.” And here (in the case of the Levitical
priesthood) men that die (literally, dying
men) receive tithes; but there
(in the
case of Melchizedek) one
of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. The difference
here noted is between a succession of mortal priests and
one perpetually
living, who never loses his personal claim, which is
inherent, in himself. But
how so of Melchizedek? For it is to him, and not to Christ
the Antitype,
that the words evidently apply. Is it at length implied
that he was more than
mortal man? No, if only for this reason; that the witness
appealed to
(μαρτυρούμενος – marturoumenos – one
being witnessed )
must be that of
Scripture, which nowhere bears such witness of the
historical Melchizedek.
The words, μαρτυρούμενος ὅτι ζῇ - marturoumenos hoti zae – witnessed
that he is living - are, in fact,
only a resumption of what was said in v. 3:
“having neither beginning of days nor end of life;” and bear the same
meaning; viz. (as above explained) that he passes
before our view in Genesis
with no mention of either death, birth, or
ancestry, and thus presented the
ideal of “a
priest for ever” to the inspired psalmist
(Psalm 110:4). The witness
referred to is that of the record in Genesis, viewed in
the light of the idea of
the psalm.
9 “And as
I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in
Abraham.
10 “For he was yet in the loins of his
father, when Melchisedec
met him.”
Or, in other words, “Nay, further, Melchizedek may be said to have
tithed Levi
himself and his priestly tribe.” For,
inasmuch as the whole position
of Levi and his tribe, in the old dispensation, came by inheritance from the great
patriarch who received the
promises, the subordination of the patriarch to one
above himself involved
that of all who so inherited, it is not simply the physical
descent of Levi from
Abraham, but the peculiar position of the latter as “the
patriarch,” that
justifies the assertion that Levi paid tithes
through him.
And thus, while we remember how Abraham is elsewhere viewed
in
Scripture as the representative of the chosen people, and
also how the lives
of individual patriarchs (notably so in the case of Jacob
and Esau) are so
told and referred to as to prefigure the positions and
fortunes of the races
they represent, we may recognize in this assertion no mere
rabbinical fancy,
but an interpretation true to the spirit of the Old
Testament. Be it further
observed that the original significance of Abraham’s action
as bearing upon
his descendants is enhanced by the fact that, while it was after
the receiving
of the promise, it
was before the birth of Isaac.
He, and consequently his
descendant Levi, was yet (ἔτι – eti – yet; still) in
the loins of Abraham!
Melchizedek (vs. 1-10)
The author here returns from his long digression, and
enters upon the
central theme of the treatise.
Ø As a man.
o
From Scripture statements. (vs. 1-2.) All that
the sacred
historian records of him is
contained in three verses (Genesis
14:18-20). Yet we read in
these, as in the passage before us,
of Melchizedek’s
illustrious personality, his twofold office,
his double designation, his
sudden appearance, his priestly
blessing, and of Abraham’s
acknowledgment of his dignity.
o
From Scripture silence. (v. 3.) It is evident
that the writer
believed the Old Testament
to be inspired, not merely in its
general drift, but also in
its minutest details. He is persuaded
that even the omissions
from the narrative had been arranged
by the Holy Spirit. From
this passage, therefore, we learn our
duty, not only to survey
the Bible in its broad landscapes of
truth, and to study its
general structure as the literary record
of a supernatural revelation,
but, alongside of that, to subject
individual passages, as we have
opportunity, to microscopic
analysis. The omissions about
Melchizedek are so important
that v. 3
reads almost like a riddle. Such omissions respecting
a personage so exalted are
contrary to Oriental custom. The points
which the Holy Spirit has
studiously concealed about
Melchizedek are — his personal
parentage, his priestly pedigree,
and the dates of his birth and
death.
Ø
As a type. (v. 3.) The brief notice of Melchizedek in the Book of
Genesis has been framed so as to
exhibit in him as striking as possible
a prefiguration of Christ. Melchizedek was “made like unto the Son
of God,” at once in the events of his personal career, and in the shape
given to the Bible narrative
respecting him. The Lord Jesus
Christ is
both “King of
righteousness” and “King of peace;”
He dispenses
spiritual peace upon a basis of
righteousness. He is a royal Priest,
wearing both the miter and the diadem. He had no predecessor in
His office, and He
shall have no successor. His
priesthood is of
older date, and of superior
dignity to that of Levi. In all these respects
Melchizedek was a type of
Christ.
THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD.
(vs. 4-10.) “Consider” this, says the
apostle. Although the theme is
recondite, and hard of interpretation” (ch. 5:11),
it deserves careful study, since
it concerns the dignity and glory of the Son of
God (Psalm 110:4).
Ø
Melchizedek is superior to Abraham, the ancestor of the
Levites.
(vs. 4-7.) No Old Testament
name is more illustrious than that of
Abraham, the patriarch; no
heraldic escutcheon could boast marks
of greater honor than that
which bears the arms of “the father of
the faithful” —
“the friend of God.” (James 2:23) Yet we see this
venerated founder of the
Hebrew nation humbly acknowledging
the superiority of
Melchizedek.
o
Abraham paid tithes to
him (vs. 4-6). Under the Levitical law
tithes were due from the people
to the priests, priests and people
being brethren by race; but here
we have a Gentile pontiff receiving
tithes from Abraham, the
patriarch offering them spontaneously.
o
Melchizedek pronounced
a blessing upon Abraham (vs. 6-7). This
also implied Abraham’s spiritual
inferiority. The head of the
chosen nation, to whom God had
given “the promises,” stood
humbly before this Hamite priest to receive his blessing.
Ø The Levitical priests were dying men; Melchizedek appears only as a
living priest. (v. 8.) Aaron’s sons obtained the sacerdotal dignity by
descent; they died and succeeded
one another. But Melchizedek’s
priesthood was inherent and underived. He is exhibited on the inspired
page only as a living priest, in
order that his office may the more suitably
prefigure the intransferable priesthood of
Christ.
Ø
The Levitical priests
virtually paid tithes to Melchizedek.
(vs. 9-10.)
All the sacred honor with which Aaron
and his sons were invested was
derived from Abraham, as the
head of the nation; and so, when
Abraham confessed the religious
superiority of Melchizedek, the long
line of Aaronical
priests may in a sense be said to have done so also.
Ø
The unparalleled
majesty and glory of the Lord Jesus.
Abraham was
greater than Aaron; Melchizedek
was greater than Abraham; but Christ
is infinitely
greater than Melchizedek.
Ø
Christ’s priestly
benediction is more efficacious than
that of
Melchizedek. He has been sent “to bless us, in turning away every
one of us from
our iniquities” (Acts 3:26).
Ø
If Abraham gave
Melchizedek a tithe of the spoils, should not we
dedicate to the
Lord Jesus Christ, not our tithes only, BUT OUR
ALL?
11 “If therefore
perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for
under
it the people received the law,) what
further need was there that
another priest should rise after the order
of Melchisedec, and not be
called after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood
being changed,
there is made of necessity a change also of
the law.”
If then perfection τελείωσις – teleiosis – perfection
- were
through the
Levitical priesthood for
under it (rather, upon it, on the ground of it) the
people hath
received the Law), what need was there that another (rather,
a different) priest should rise after the order of
Melchizedek, and not be
called after the
order of Aaron. For the priesthood being changed, there
is made of
necessity a change also of the Law. Here a further thought is
introduced. So far the superiority of the
priesthood after the order of
Melchizedek to the
Aaronic has been shown. The new thought is that the
very mention in the
psalm of a different order of priesthood implies that the
old order, and with
it the whole legal dispensation which depended on it,
was imperfect AND TO BE SUPERSEDED!
This
is the general drift of
vs. 11-12, though the
sequence of thought in their several clauses is not easy
to follow. Ideas in
the writer’s mind, not expressed, seem necessary to be
understood. In the
parenthetical clause of v. 11, ἐπ’ αὐτῆς – ep autaes -, and
νενομοθέτηται – neomothetaetai – on her
had been placed under the law - are
decidedly to be preferred, on the ground of authority, to ἐπ’ αὐτῆ and
νενομοθέτητα of the Textus Receptus. ‘The meaning of the clause
(whatever be the precise thought connecting it with the
sentence in which it
stands) is that the whole Law rested on the institution of
the priesthood;
not the priests only, but the whole people (ὁ λαὸς – ho
received their Law as grounded on it. On the same idea
depends v. 12,
where it is said that a change of the priesthood involves
of necessity a
change of the Law.
The verses next following serve to remove all doubt that there is a complete
change of the priesthood; the proofs being, not only the patent fact that
the Messiah is of the tribe, not of Levi, but of
for more abundant evidence of the Divine purpose, that
significant utterance,
again adduced, about His being after the order, not of
Aaron, but of
Melchizedek (vs. 15-17).
13 “For He
of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another
tribe,
of which no man gave attendance at the
altar. 14 For it is evident that
our Lord sprang out of Juda;
of which tribe Moses spake nothing
concerning priesthood.”
For He of whom
these things are spoken pertaineth to (μετέσχηκεν –
meteschaeken -: literally, He hath partaken of; compare
μετέσχεν – meteschen –
has partaken, ch. 2:14, with reference, as there, to Christ’s assumption of humanity)
another tribe, of
which no man hath (ever) given
attendance at the altar. For it
is evident that
our Lord hath sprung out of
Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood (ἱερέων –hiereon – priests -
being a better-supported reading than the Textus Receptus ἱερωσύνης –
hierosunaes - priesthood). This is spoken of as evident (i.e. plain to all,
πρόδηλον – prodaelon – it it evident), not only because
of the well-known
prophecies that the Messiah was to spring from David, but
still
more (as is shown by the perfect ἀνατέταλκεν – anatetalken – sprang;
has risen –
pointing to an accomplished fact,
and by the expression, ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν
– ho
Kurios haemon – our
Lord,) because
Jesus, recognized
by all Christians as the
Messiah, was known to have so
sprung. For it is to Christian believers, with
whatever Jewish prejudices, not to unbelieving Jews, that the
Epistle is addressed.
It is important to observe that the Davidic descent
of our Lord is spoken of as an
acknowledged fact, not merely as an inference
from prophecy. We have here a
most significant proof that the descent of
Jesus from the tribe of
well and universally known fact before the destruction of
The verb ἀνατέταλκεν (sprang) may have been specially suggested by
the prophetic figure of the Branch from the root of Jesse
(see Isaiah 11:1;
and Zechariah 3:8; 6:12, where the Septuagint has Ἀνατολήν
– Anatolaen – for ‘Branch:’ Ἀνατολὴ
ὄνομα αὐτῷ καὶ ὑποκάτωθεν αὐτοῦ ἀνατελεῖ -
Anatolae
onoma auto kai hupokatothen autou anatelei – the
man whose
name
is The Branch and He shall grow up our of His place - though the
figure
of the sunrise is more frequently meant by the word when
applied
to Christ’s appearance (compare Numbers 24:17; Isaiah 9:1;
15
And it is
yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of
Melchisedec
there ariseth another priest, 16 Who is
made, not after
the
law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.
17
For he
testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of
And
it is yet more abundantly evident (i.e. the proposition of v. 12), if after
the
likeness of Melchizedek there ariseth another
Priest, who is made,
not
after the law of a carnal commandment,
but after the power of an
endless (indissoluble) life. For it is testified (of Him), Thou art a Priest
forever
after the order of Melchizedek. This is a resumption of what has
been
already seen, put so as to
be effective for the present stage of the
argument.
The old priesthood, and consequently the Law, is
changed and
superseded,
not only because the Priest of the new order of
things is of the
tribe
of Judah, but still more evidently
because His priesthood is witnessed
to
as being one of a different kind, and of a kind so
much higher and diviner.
It
is evident that the Antitype of Melchizedek, the
subject of Psalm 110,
rather
than Melchizedek himself, suggests here the language used.
(Observe
the contrasts between νόμον – nomon – law and
δύναμιν - dunamin -
power,
σαρκίνης
– sarkinaes – fleshly; carnal and ἀκαταλύτου
– akatalutou –
endless;
indissoluble , ἐντολῆς – entolaes – commandment and
ζωῆς – zoaes –
life. The idea of ch.9:8-15 is in these few pregnant words briefly
anticipated,
after
the manner of the
Epistle.)
The
Constitution of Our Great High Priest (v. 16)
“Who
is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power
of an endless life!” In this verse
there is a triple antithesis; law is antithetical to
power, commandment to life, and carnal to indissoluble. This
suggests the
following observations concerning the priesthood of Jesus
Christ.
OF HIS SPIRITUAL “POWER.” Law in the text is the Levitical
Law,
with the fulfillment of which the Jewish priests had so much
to do. It was a
thing of the letter — a written thing; it possessed no
inherent power; it
could impart no spiritual power. By this law the priests of
the Judaic
economy were constituted. But our Lord was constituted a
priest, not by
this law, but because of His
own spiritual energy. He was in Himself
perfectly fitted for the high functions of this holy office.
Because He was a
Divine
Being, He had power to represent God to man; because
He was a
human being, he had power to represent man to God. Inexhaustible
spiritual strength is in Him for the renewal of the lost
moral power of those
whose High Priest He is. Because
He has power to redeem, sympathize
with, succor, and save men, He was
made the great High Priest for men.
INHERENT LIFE? The “commandment” is that part of the Levitical
law
which ordered the institution and succession of the
priesthood. By this
statute the descendants of Aaron were appointed priests,
irrespective of
their personal character and qualifications for the office.
But Jesus was
made a priest, not by that commandment, but contrary to it,
seeing that He
was not of the tribe of Levi, but of Judah. It was because
of His inner life
that He was constituted the High Priest of humanity. Being
what He was
and is, He could do no other than take
up our cause, suffer for us, die for
us, and appear as our
Representative with the Father. Vicarious sacrifice
belongs to no office or undertaking outside of holy
character, but to holy
character itself. Such is love that it must insert itself
into the conditions,
burden itself with the wants, and woes, and losses, and even
wrongs, of
others. It waits for no atoning office, or any other kind of
office. It undertakes
because it is love, not because a project is raised or an
office appointed. It goes
into suffering and labor and painful sympathy, because its
own everlasting
instinct runs that way The true and simple account of
Christ’s suffering is, that
He
had such a heart as would not suffer Him to be turned away from us, and
that He suffered for us even as love must willingly suffer
for its enemy. The
beauty and power of His sacrifice is, that He suffers
morally and because of
His
simple excellence, and not to fill a contrived place in a scheme of legal
justification. He scarcely minds how much He suffers or how,
if only He can
do love’s work.”
Because of His perfect purity, and infinite
love and
unspeakable compassion, he necessarily became the great High
Priest of
RELATION. They
who were made priests “after the law of a carnal
commandment” were priests only for a time. One generation performed the
duties of the office for a number of years, and then was
succeeded in those
duties by another generation, which in its turn would also
pass away. “But
after the power of an indissoluble life” our Savior was made a priest. He is
“a Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” By its nature His life is
perpetual; and He continues forever as our Representative
with God
(compare vs. 23-25). Because of the
perfection of this priesthood, human
salvation in glorious fullness is attainable. Laws and ceremonies alone could
not work out for us any real deliverance from sin, or work
in us any true and
progressive spiritual life. We need vitality and power in
any system or
person who would render to us effective help. And in this
aspect the
priesthood of Christ,” is graduated by the wants and measures of the human
soul; the endless life in
which He comes matches and measures the endless
life in mankind whose fall he is to restore; providing a
salvation as strong
as their sin, and as long or lasting as the run of their
immortality. He is able
thus to save UNTO THE UTTERMOST them
that come unto Him! His life
is reproductive. His power is communicable. He imparts
spiritual energy to
those who by faith are one with Him. APART
FROM HIM WE CAN DO
NOTHING
(John 15:5)
BUT WE CAN DO ALL THINGS THROUGH
HIM
THAT STRENGTHENETH US!
(Philippians
4:13)
The Power of
an Endless Life (v. 16)
FLESH.
Here the particular institution is that of priesthood; but the truth
obtains with regard to
all institutions dependent on the limits of fleshly
human nature and the
faculties of fallen human nature. The law of the
Jewish priesthood
was a law that had to take particular notice of the
limitations of human life. The office was held by a man whose term of
office at the longest was but brief, and his death had to be
prepared for,
and his successor duly initiated. That successor was a
son, and who should
say what sort of man he would turn out? There are certain things law can
do and certain other things it cannot do. A law could be
made setting apart
a tribe for holy service, and a family for priestly
service; but there the
power stopped. No law can secure character. No law can
secure willing,
hearty, devoted service. Indeed, there might even be a show of
fairness in
men belonging to the
tribe of Levi saying, “Why should we be tied down,
willing or unwilling, to
this work of the altar?” Note how power is
contrasted in this verse
with law, as much as to intimate the necessary
feebleness of law. Its very
strength in one direction helps to constitute its
feebleness in another. It
has nothing to fall back upon but the caprices and
fluctuations of natural
character. It brings to men knowledge, indeed; but,
bringing that, brings only
too often little but exasperation, irritation,
depression. How many things
there are in which the law of the fleshly
commandment fails! The good king is succeeded by the bad one. The
father uses his possession wisely; the son comes in to
squander, neglect,
and alienate. The father makes a fortune through frugality and industry;
the son scatters it all
to the winds.
Aaronic priest stands as
the great representative of service limited by the
necessary boundaries of human nature. Jesus stands forward as One whose
service is unlimited save
by the negligence or the unbelief of those whom
He seeks to save.
My fellowman can only serve me as long as he is in the
world, and even while
in the world he may be cramped in many ways so
that his service
becomes an almost ineffectual thing. But Jesus has an
endless, that is an
indissoluble life. Duration is not
the only thing to be
thought of. There might be
an immense duration of comparative
USELESSNESS! To say that the life is indissoluble means
that its fullness
continues unimpaired in the
slightest degree. It is not a matter of ebbings
and flowings; summer fullness of sap, and winter subsidence.
Wherever we
find death
in the service of the brother man, we find life in the service of
the Man Christ
Jesus. It is so in:
18
“For there is verily a disannulling of the
commandment going before
for
the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
19 For the law made nothing
perfect,
but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh
For
there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the
weakness
and unprofitableness thereof (for the Law made nothing perfect);
but [there is on the other hand] a bringing in thereupon of a better
hope,
through
which we draw nigh unto God. Such is certainly the construction
of
the sentence (not as in the Authorized Version); οὐδὲν
γὰρ – ouden gar –
for
nothing - in v. 19 being
parenthetical, and ἐπεισαγωγὴ
- epeisagogae -
the
bringing in; superinduction - depending
on γίνεται
– ginetai – there is
becoming
- in v. 18. We have here the conclusion of the argument of
vs.
11-18, with a further expression of the inherent
insufficiency of the Law,
given
as the reason of its supersession; reminding us of similar views of what
the
Law was worth frequent in Paul’s Epistles (compare Romans 8:3;
Galatians
3:10, etc.). The final clause, δὲ ….
δι. ἧς ἐγγίζομεν τῷ θεῷ - de…
di
haes eggizomen to Theo – yet…..by the which we
draw nigh to God, leads
directly
up to the main subject in the writer’s view, viz. the
exposition of
Christ’s
eternal priesthood.
But two proofs are first to be given of Christ’s
priesthood
being, unlike the Aaronic, thus eternally availing TO BRING US
NEAR
TO GOD! These proofs are to be
found in the Divine oath which
established it, and the expression, “forever,” in Psalm 110, once more adduced.
The Inability and Capability of
the Law. (v. 19)
“For
the Law made nothing perfect,” etc. The Law spoken of is the
ceremonial Law, as we see from the preceding verse. The
moral Law is not
disannulled in
Christianity. (“Think not that I am come to destroy the law,
or the
prophets: I am not come to destroy but
to fulfill. For verily I say
unto you, one jot
or one tittle shall in not wise pass from the law,
till all
shall be
fulfilled." (Matthew
5:17-18) Its authority is maintained, its
sanctions
are corroborated
by our Lord. But the ceremonial Law was abrogated by
Christ.
It found its fulfillment, and so was done away in Christianity.
Ø It
awakened the consciousness of guilt, but it had no power to remove
that consciousness. Its sacrifices proclaimed man a sinner and needing
atonement with God; but they would not ease the conscience
of its sad
sense of sin, or inspire the peace of forgiveness in the
troubled breast.
Ø It
showed the necessity of mediation between God and man, but it made
no satisfactory
provision for theft necessity. The
people had to approach
the Most High through the priests; the priests alone must
offer their
sacrifices; the priests alone had access to the holy place
of the tabernacle
and the temple. The office of the priesthood exhibited the
need of
mediation, but it was not an adequate answer to that need.
The Judaic
priests were themselves sinners; they needed to offer
sacrifices for
themselves; they were mortal and passed away by death, even
as other
Ø It
presented a true ideal of life and conduct, but it afforded no help for
the attainment of
that ideal. The Law condemns
sin; it commands
righteousness. But how shall we obey its commands? “To will is present
with me, but to do that which is good is not. For the good
which I would
I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I practice.” (Romans
7:17-18) Can the law help us in this need? Can it
inspire us with strength
to do the true and the good? It has no power to convert, or strengthen,.
or sanctity the soul. It shows us our
obligation, but it affords us no help to
discharge it. “What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through
the flesh,” etc. (Romans 8:3-4).
but it was the bringing in of a better hope, by which
we draw nigh unto
God.” We adopt
the rendering of the margin of the Authorized Version,
and the interpretation of Calvin, Ebrard,
et al., that the Law made nothing
perfect, but it prepared the way for the better hope.
This
hope is the
gospel hope; the hope which has been brought in by
our great High Priest.
The Law led the way to this. “The Law was our schoolmaster to
bring us
unto Christ.” (Galatians
3:24)
A large picture-book was put before
the scholars in the splendid objects of the Levitical institute. The series of
things included in this was like a series of prints
arranged in order, bound
and gilded, and spread before the young, wondering
eyes of a number of
children. The altar with its fire and blood; the
laver with its purifying
contents; the sacrifice with the penitent putting
upon it his sin, or lifting his
eyes and his hands to heaven; the priest in the
garments expressive of
humiliation, or in his gorgeous robes of ‘glory and
beauty; ‘-these things,
with many others that might be specified, were all
like so many significant
objects, vividly portrayed on the several leaves of
an immense picture book.
By familiarity with them the minds of the learners
were gradually to
open to the spiritual idea contained in each; or were
to be prepared for
apprehending it when, ‘in the fullness of time,’
(Ibid. ch. 4:4) it should be
revealed With new views of the central figure, so
much the theme of prophetic
song, and the object of national desire, the whole of
the Levitical system
undergoes a change. It comes to have an intention, to
be looked at as
constructed for a purpose, which gives to it a deeper and diviner significance
than was at first suspected. Priest and
sacrifice, altar and propitiation, cease
to be realities; they
are understood to be only shadows and signs of what was
to be found substantially in the person and work, the
acts and offices of the
great High Priest of our profession.” This hope, for
which the Law
prepared the way, was better than any which the Law
could inspire.
Ø It is clearer as
to its object. The Christian hopes
for perfection of being;
for holiness of heart and life here, and for heaven hereafter.
These
things are brought into clearer light in this gospel
age than they were
Ø It is firmer in
its foundation. It rests
upon Jesus
Christ. He
is the Rock
upon which our confidence and expectation are based.
He has revealed
God the Father unto us. He has rendered perfect
obedience to the holy
Law. He offered Himself a Sacrifice for sin, of infinite
and perpetual
efficacy. He ever liveth to represent us in heaven, whither He has entered
as our Forerunner. He is “a tried Stone, a sure
Foundation” for the hopes
of men to rest upon. (Isaiah 28:16)
Ø It is more blessed
in its influence. “Through which we draw nigh
unto
God.” The Judaic
priesthood tended to make men feel their distance from
God, and to keep them at a distance. The priesthood of
Jesus
Christ brings
men near unto Him!
We need not now the human priest and
the bleeding
victim for our acceptable approach to the Divine
Father. Through the
Savior we may draw nigh unto Him in our penitence for
sin, and obtain
forgiveness; in our consecration to Him, and meet
with gracious
acceptance; in the presentation of our needs to Him,
and receive suitable
and abundant supplies; and in hallowed communion with
Him, and find
in it the foretaste and
earnest of heaven.
The Law
Failing, the Gospel Succeeding (vs. 18-19)
It is very
necessary here to turn from the ordinary version to the revised
one, for the ordinary
version utterly hides the antithesis which is the very
essence of the meaning.
On one side there is a disannulling of the Mosaic
commandment with respect to
priesthood, but on the other side there is the
bringing in of a better
hope. These two elements of the antithesis have,
therefore, to be separately
considered.
fleshly commandment,” as it is called in v. 16. A reason is given for the
disannulling: The changes in
the Divine economy are never arbitrary.
Reasons are not always given for these changes; but
when we can
understand them they are
given, and thus we are helped to believe in the
wisdom of changes which
we have not knowledge enough to understand.
The reason has a twofold aspect. A general principle
is stated, and there is
a particular
illustration of it. The general principle is that the Law makes
nothing perfect,
completes nothing; the particular illustration is found in
the weakness and
uselessness of the commandment which called into
existence the Aaronic priesthood, No institution can plead a commandment
of God for its
existence when it has manifestly lost its use. The
commandment was useless
because it was weak; and then the uselessness
reacted on the weakness
and made it weaker still. Men ceased to look to
the priesthood for
any good and helpful thing, though the priesthood kept
its formal place, because
there was nothing as yet to act as a substitute.
Then the question may be asked — Why give a
commandment which was
weak and useless? The
answer lies in that word “foregoing.”
That which
goes before implies
something coming after. The Law was weak and
useless for certain
things, but not, therefore, weak and useless for all
things. The Law came
like light shining on human spiritual darkness,
revealing dilapidation and
corruption, and there it stopped; it showed the
thing needing to be
done, and in the very showing indicated how some
agency would come in due
time to do it.
change of term here as
in v. 16. There we read of the former priest
according to the law of
a fleshly commandment, and the new abiding Priest
according to the power of
an indissoluble life. So here, that which is put
away is a commandment; that which is
brought in is a hope. The old
commandment, weak and
useless, left men in despair as far as their natural
faculties were concerned.
The new Priest steps upon the scene, needing no
commandment. His functions
are the appropriate outcome of the fullness of
His life. And, coming among
men, He comes as the visible immediate
stimulator of hope.
Manifestly He has relations with God, channels of
connection with the Infinite
Purity, such as not all the sum of Aaronic
priests taken together
had. As men drew near to some of the old priests,
steeped in selfishness,
pride, arrogance, they veritably drew nearer to the
devil from whom it
behooved them to flee; but drawing near to Jesus it was
not possible that
they should do anything else than in the same movement
20
“And inasmuch as not without an oath He was made
priest:
21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but
this with an oath
by
Him that said unto Him, The Lord swear and will not repent,
Thou
art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)
22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better
testament.”
And
inasmuch as not without an oath [properly, swearing of an oath,
ὁρκωμοσίας
– horkomosias
– oath-swearing] (for they indeed have been
made
priests without an oath; but He with an oath by Him that
saith
unto Him, Thou art a Priest for ever); by so much of a
better
covenant hath Jesus become surety. The significance of the Divine oath,
in
connection with the promise to Abraham, has been dwelt on above: the
oath
of Psalm 110 is here similarly referred to, as imitating a priesthood
that
rests on no mere temporary ordinance, but on the
immutable Divine
counsels. (Observe the first occurrence
here of the word διαθήκης –
diathaekaes
– covenant;
testament, introducing in
the way of hint (as is
usual
in the Epistle) an idea to be afterwards expanded, as it is in chapters
8
and 9. The meaning of the word
will be considered below.)
ATTESTED
BY THE SOLEMNITY OF HIS APPOINTMENT. The
priests of the Mosaic Law
were placed in their office by an act of the
Divine will, and the order of their consecration was prescribed by the
lawgiver, who probably
superintended the process which fitted them to
enter upon their
duties. There was no oath proclaimed on the occasion.
When Christ was
appointed there was an oath, which was conveyed to the
knowledge of the Church by
David, the royal prophet. This oath declared
the fixed and
unchangeable purpose of God, that whatever else might
change, the office of the
high priesthood of Christ should never be
abrogated. “For ever His
word is settled in heaven.” It is only on occasions
of special solemnity
that oaths are takes by men when they assume weighty
and important
offices. They are used at coronations of monarchs, and the
appointment of judges and
others who undertake to administer faithfully
the charges which
they assume. God condescends to engage by oath for
the permanence and
glory of the priesthood of Christ that He shall be a
Priest
forever after the order of Melchizedek. Here we see the loving care
of God to invite and
justify our trust in His dear Son. It is a vast and large
confidence which He claims,
and includes the rejection of all other
confidences; our surrender to
Christ of our understanding, will, and
affections; our influence,
time, and property; our present and the vast
future; and, as the
demand is large, there is all evidence and provision to
make our trust in the
High Priest a reasonable service. He is appointed by
oath, and is the
Surety of a better covenant; and so there is a
proportion
and harmony between
the Surety and the covenant itself. In the scheme of
redemption God hath abounded
in all wisdom and prudence. The new wine
is put into new
bottles, and the consistency of all arrangements for our
redemption proves that all things are of
God.
dared to approach Jehovah
in the solemnities of worship without His
express appointment, he
would have been punished for his presumption.
This is proved by
the history of Uzziah (II Chronicles 26:16-21). It is
said
of this king that
his heart was lifted up, and, against the remonstrances
of
the priests, he would
offer incense, and so combine the dignity of the
priesthood and royalty in
himself. “Pride
went before destruction, and a
haughty spirit before a
fall ” (Proverbs 16:18), and he was
confined as a
leper until the day of his
death. The vocation and appointment of Aaron were
disputed by the Reubenites who had lost the priesthood, and the Levites who
were ambitious of
higher dignity; and the case was decided by the punishment
of the revolters, and the miraculous foliage, blossoms, and fruit
of Aaron’s
rod. (Numbers
17) Jesus Christ has the high and
supreme authority of Jehovah
for His appointment,
and the writer quotes the second psalm, which predicts
the regal glory of
the Son, who was “of the seed of David according to the
flesh; but was declared
to be the Son of God with power, according to the
spirit of holiness, by
the resurrection from the dead” (Romans
1:3-4).
Then follows a
quotation from another Messianic psalm, which declares
that He is a Priest
forever after the order of Melchizedek. The order of
Aaron was too
narrow and too imperfect to shadow forth the unrivalled
dignity and worth of Him
who is now set over the house of God. This latter
type will reappear for
further discussion, and therefore we rest upon this
declaration of the eternal will
which appoints the Redeemer to be the High
Priest
for the race of mankind. It is the
will of God, which is declared in
solemn prophecy; and if He speaks, it is
done; “he commands, and it stands
A
PRIEST. The consecration of Aaron and the priests of the
Mosaic Law
was very elaborate
and impressive, but was unaccompanied with any
distress of mind and
suffering of the flesh. The sonship of our Lord was
eternal, and as a Son He
came from heaven to assume our nature and pass
through a career of
sorrow and bitter experience, that He might learn and
prove His obedience to His
Father. “He took upon him the form of a
servant, and became
obedient unto death.” (Philippians
2:8) As He
approached the close of His
public ministry the agonies of His soul began
to multiply in
number and increase in intensity. His prayer in
was probably present
to the mind of the writer, where He was sorrowful
even unto death, and
implored, if it were possible, “that the cup might
pass from Him.” He uttered His prayers with strong crying and tears. The
usual manner of our
Lord’s teaching was quiet and gentle, for He did not
lift up His voice nor
cause it to be heard in the streets (Isaiah 42:2); but in the
dire and inscrutable
distress which came upon Him, like Jacob in his mysterious
wrestling, He wept and made
supplication. He was heard on account of His
godly fear or piety. It
may be — for we would be cautious and reverential —
that He was saved from
death in
great drops of blood
falling to the ground” (Luke 22:44); by the ministry
of a mighty angel
like Gabriel or Michael; or that He was delivered from the
insupportable fear of the death of shame and agony
which lay before Him
on
Whatever mystery
surrounds this solemn fact,
the lesson is obvious that
disciples must learn obedience in imitation of their Master; that, having
overcome, they
may sit down with Him in His throne “even as I overcome
and am set down with
my Father in His throne.” (Revelation 3:21)
“Through much
tribulation we must enter the kingdom.” (Acts
14:22)
Having borne the
sorrow, He has obtained the joy that was set before Him,
and being now consecrated by His sufferings and
death, He is perfectly
fitted for His mediatorial office,
and becomes the Author of eternal
salvation to all His
obedient followers, and leads them
onward to the glory
of an immortal life. This is the highest and most glorious illustration of the
methods of that grace which
was seen in the life of Joseph, into whose soul
the iron entered,
whom the word of the Lord tried; but afterwards he shone
in the light of
wisdom, became the savior of millions from the pangs of
famine and death, kept
alive the chosen seed, and prepared for the higher
revelations of Horeb and
from so profound a
humiliation on the part of Jesus Christ, it is repeated
that he was “called of God a High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.”
23
“And
they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered
to
continue by reason of death: 24 But this
man, because He continueth
ever,
hath an unchangeable priesthood.” Thissecond point of contrast has
already
been twice touched on — v. 8, with respect
to the claim to tithe; and
v.
16, with respect to the order of priesthood:
here it is with especial reference
to
the eternal personality, and hence the
perpetual and complete efficiency, of
our
one Priest. The repetitions are not tautological, having each time different
bearings.
The contrast here, as before, is between
mortal men who succeed each
other
in the office of priesthood, and One who
has the office inherent in Himself
forever.
The word ἀπαράβατον
– aparabaton -
translated “unchangeable”)
is taken by
some
in an intransitive sense, as in margin of the Authorized Version, that doth
not
pass to
another. This, however, is not the proper
force of this late Greek word,
nor
does the sense of the passage of necessity
require it.
25
“Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost
that
come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession
for
them.” We
again observe how, at the end of successive stages of the
argument,
thoughts to be enlarged on afterwards are brought in. Here it is
the perpetual intercession of Christ before the heavenly
mercy-seat. In the
view
of His office thus arrived at there is, in fact, a transition to the main
subject
set forth in the three chapters that follow; viz. the
fulfillment in
Christ
of the ceremonial of the Law, and especially of the high priest’s
intercession
on the Day of Atonement. And thus from
Melchizedek the
train
of thought passes to the high priest. The type of the former has been
sufficiently
shown to be fulfilled in the higher order of Christ’s priesthood;
it
is now to be shown how, being of such higher order, it is the antitype of
the
Aaronic priesthood too, accomplishing what it signified. Hence in v. 26
the
word “high
priest” (ἀρχιερεὺς
–
archiereus) is for the first time introduced,
as
the
keynote of what is coming.
Summary
of the Foregoing Argument
Ø
(vs. 1 - 4.) One not depending on human ancestry,
and One forever
Ø
(vs. 4 -11.) One of a higher order
than that of Aaron; for: o Melchizedek,
being of a race apart, received tithe from o
This
denotes a higher position than that of the Aaronic priests,
who tithed their brethren of the same race with themselves,
in virtue only of a special
ordinance. o
The
blessing of Abraham by Melchizedek is similarly o
The
idea of an ever-living priest with a right to tithe transcends
that of the temporary claims of a succession o
Levi himself virtually paid tithe to
Melchizedek. dispensation
based upon it, is thus shown to have been imperfect and Ø Otherwise a
priesthood of another order would not have been spoken of Ø Which priesthood is evidently distinct from the
Aaronic, our Lord being
of
the tribe, not of Levi, but of Judah. Ø What has been seen (vs. 5 and 8) as to the
Melchizedek priesthood being
not “after the law of
a carnal commandment, but after the an endless life,”
makes this “more abundantly evident.” Conclusion
(vs. 18-20). The Aaronic priesthood (being in
itself unprofitable)
is therefore now superseded by an availing one, “through Ø The Divine oath
(Psalm 110) established it, marking it as resting on the Ø It is (as shown by the same psalm) “unchangeable.” The one Priest Conclusion
(v. 25). We have, therefore, in Him at last, a perfectly availing and
eternal interceding High Priest. Salvation to
the Uttermost (v. 25) The chief point in
this verse is our High Priest’s ability to save, and the guarantee which His
perpetual intercession affords regarding that ability. What does this
continual intercession certify? Four things: His intercession
is just a continual development of the exhaustless efficacy of His
life-work. Our Priest is the eternal Son of God clothed in human
nature. His work on earth
was both active and passive: He obeyed and Hhe
suffered. He perfectly
fulfilled the Law, and He fully endured the penalty due to our disobedience. Upon the union
of this doing and dying the great structure of our Intercessor’s
ability of merit is sustained. The infinitude of His Divine nature invests His
offering with boundless value. By His “obedience unto death” (Philippians 2:8) he sheathed the sword of justice in the
heart of mercy. And, when He had
done this, He went boldly up to heaven, sprinkled the golden altar there with
His blood, and took His place in the midst of the throne. The fact of His
intercession as our risen and glorified Savior shows that the satisfaction which He has
made for sin is PERFECT! appointment from God. So, our
Lord’s session at the right hand of the Father is in
itself an evidence of the validity of His intercession. We know, however, that God
appointed Him to His office with a solemn oath (Psalm 110:4). He
said to Him, on the day when He constituted Him Priest-King, “Ask of me” (Psalm 2:8), thus
expressly authorizing His intercession. We cannot fathom
the mystery of the atonement; but it is enough to know that Christ’s sacred
blood was shed for our salvation BY DIVINE
APPOINTMENT and we are persuaded that, had it
not possessed merit enough for its
purpose, it would never have been shed at all. Jesus sits upon His priestly
throne, and does His priestly work, by Divine right. merit and right, but
also power. He is “a Priest uponHis throne.” And it was more than a mere
external statute that set Him there. Christ is our Intercessor
in virtue of “the
power of an endless life.” These words are emphatic, “He ever liveth.” He conducts our cause in heaven, as our Advocate, in the
strength of the
imperishable life which He has possessed from eternity. Enthroned in glory, He has yet power upon earth, for He
has sent down to us His
Holy Spirit. This gift is the direct fruit of His sacrifice and intercession.
While the Savior intercedes without us, His Spirit intercedes within us. The
work of the “other
Paraclete” is complementary of that of the
first. The Holy Ghost within our minds and hearts bestows all the communications of
grace, and conducts all the preparations for glory; but He does so as the
agent of the Lord Jesus, and His work is dependent upon our High Priest’s
constant pleadings at the bar of God. can sympathize with
us; for our nature was formed in the likeness of our Maker, so that man
belongs to the same order of being as God Himself. But our necessities
demanded more than the sympathy of God. How sweet, then, to remember that
our High Priest is also a man! He is a woman’s Son, and therefore
in a true sense one of ourselves. His earthly life was full of experiences substantially
the same as ours; so that He knows our difficulties and sorrows and
temptations. He is careful to adapt His perpetual intercessions to
the currents of individual experience. Believers can approach Him with
confidence in the spirit of the exquisite lines — “Thou our throbbing flesh hast
worn, Thou our mortal griefs hast
borne, Thou hast shed the human tear: Amidst His
unparalleled exaltation, the Man Christ Jesus does not forget the humblest of His
people. Our High Priest has every name that is dear to Him engraven upon His breastplate — written upon the imperishable
tablet Christ’s
Perfect Power to Save (v. 25) “Wherefore He is able also to
save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them. ”
The text suggests the following
observations: them to the uttermost.” Notice: Ø
The nature of this salvation.
It may be viewed: o
Negatively. It is deliverance from sin; not
merely from the punishment of sin, but from its guilt, its pollution, and
its power. o
Positively. It
is the conference of eternal life. By eternal life we do not mean endless existence, for
that may become a curse; but life — holy, harmonious, progressive,
blessed, perpetual life. “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life.” (John 3:36); “The salvation which is in
Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” (II
Timothy 2:10) Ø
The perfection of this
salvation. “Able to save to the uttermost.” The word rendered “uttermost’
does not refer to the duration, but to the perfection, the
completeness, of this salvation. Both by its etymology and by its place in the argument it is the exact
antithesis of the first clause in v. 19. “The Law made nothing perfect;”
but “He is
able to save perfectly,” or to
completeness, “them that come unto God by Him.”
The perfection of His saving power
authorizes the assertion that He is able to save! o
The most wicked characters. Saul of Tarsus
was “a blasphemer, and
a persecutor, and injurious;” he spake
of himself as chief of sinners; yet he obtained mercy, and became a most devoted disciple and most heroic apostle of Jesus Christ.
The dying thief is another example (Luke 23:42-43).
Degraded drunkards, profane swearers,
groveling misers, willful unbelievers, cruel oppressors, in countless numbers have
been saved by
Him. None are so deeply sunk in the
horrible pit of sin as to be beyond the reach of the long and strong arm of the perfect
Savior. He is “mighty to save.” o
The greatest numbers. On the day of Pentecost
three thousand souls were converted and added
to the Christian Church. John in vision “beheld a great multitude, which no man could
number,” (Revelation 7:9-10). He is able to save countless
millions. Were the number of sinners multiplied a thousand fold He would still be able to save them. o
To the most glorious condition. He does not leave
His work in man incomplete. “He is able to keep that which
I have committed unto Him against that day.” (II Timothy 1:12) “He which began a good work in you
will perfect it until the day of Jesus Christ.” (Philippians 1:6) How glorious must that character be which He has perfected! (“Thou Lord will perfect that which concerneth me.” (Psalm 138:8) “We shall be
like Him.” (I John 3:2) “We shall
ever be with the Lord.” (I Thessalonians 4:17) We shall enter into His joy; we shall sit down with Him upon His throne. PERPETUITY OF HIS PRIESTLY OFFICE.
“Wherefore
also he is able to save them to the uttermost… seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.” The chief meaning of “to make intercession”
is to appear as the representative of another, being moved to do so by
feeling for him or with him. Our Savior’s intercession for us does not mean
that He is pleading our cause with One who is ill disposed toward us, and
needs to be placated by Him; or that He is supplicating blessings for us from
One who is unwilling to bestow them (John 16:26-27). But He does represent
us with the great Father, and He is deeply and tenderly identified with
us in feeling. He represents us because He sympathizes with us. But in
our text the intercession “implies the whole mediatorial
work, which the exalted Savior performs for His own with His heavenly
Father, either by reference to His past death of blood by which He has
bought them for Himself, or by continued intercession for them.
Christ’s perpetual intercession signifies that: Ø
The efficacy of
his work for men is PERPETUAL! The great truths which He enunciated concerning life
and duty, sin and salvation, holiness and God, are vital and
powerful now as ever they were. His redemptive work accomplished upon earth is as efficacious
now as ever it was. His atoning death
for us has lost none of its ancient power to touch and subdue, to convert and
sanctify, the soul of man. “The word of the cross is the power of God” still
to save them that believe. Ø
The efficacy of
his work in men is PERPETUAL! Our Savior makes intercession with us as well as for us. He speaks and
works within us for our salvation. By His Holy Spirit He encourages and
strengthens His people. The Spirit
guards us from error and guides us into truth; He restrains us from the wrong and inspires us for the
right, etc. Here, then, is the guarantee of the abiding perfection of
Christ’s saving power: He is our perpetual representative with the Divine Father;
the
efficacy of His redeeming work and the merit of his sacrificial
death are UNABATED, and by His Spirit He is still a living
presence and power amongst men. THE SIMPLEST CONDITION.
“To save them…
that draw
near unto God THROUGH HIM!” Moral approach to God through the mediation of Jesus Christ is the condition upon which this
salvation is bestowed. It is implied that man is morally remote from God. “Your iniquities have
separated between you and your God.” (Isaiah 59:2) “Ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.” (Ephesians
2:13) If we would be saved we must draw near unto Him. (“Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to you!” (James
4:8) Ø
The nature of this approach.
It is not merely intellectual — the apprehension of the truth concerning Him. It is a sympathetic and vital approach to Him. It is coming to Him in humble
penitence for our sin that we may obtain forgiveness; in grateful
affection to Him for His great love towards us; and in earnest desire
to obey and serve Him. Ø
The medium of this approach. “Through
Him,” i.e. Jesus Christ; because: o
He removes the obstacles which
prevented our approach to God. Our guilty fears, and our
unworthy suspicions concerning the Father, He banishes. o
He presents attractions which
encourage our approach to God. He reveals the willingness of
the heavenly Father to receive and welcome and bless us. “Jesus saith,
I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by Me.” (John 14:6)
Thus our subject supplies strong encouragement §
to the Christian believer to “press on unto perfection;”
and §
to the awakened sinner to draw near unto God through Christ in assured hope of
COMPLETE
SALVATION! The
Priest made Separate from Sinners (v. 26) PRIESTHOOD OF JESUS AND THE
PRIESTHOOD OF AARON. The Aaronic priest was also
made separate from sinners; but he was only separated
officially. The separation lay in nothing more than natural descent and the wearing of priestly vestments. The Aaronic
priest indicated in a feeble symbolic way what a true priest ought to be. In course of time, indeed, he might become separated from sinners in a way not to be desired, fenced round by an artificial sanctity, and superstitiously regarded as if he had in him nothing less than the Power of heaven and hell.
But Jesus comes separated by nature, character, and by many outward manifestations of these things. The nearness of Jesus to men has already been insisted on; how He is a partaker of flesh and blood; how he is in all points tempted as men are. And what is then stated, in a collateral way, so
that it may not be forgotten,
is now, at the proper place, brought out and put to the front. Jesus is nearer to the universal man than any priest
could be; but while so near
there is a separation that goes to the very depths of being. This is what
gives Him His unique power. Moving among men, He hears their cries
and prayers, sees their need; but He receives no infection from their narrowness, selfishness, degrading thoughts. (Thus, I
personally believe God wants us to live in this world
amongst sinners, and that if we will let Him guide us through the mine fields of temptation of daily life, we can also be separate from evil and be the witnesses that He meant for us to be as “the salt of the earth.”
- Matthew 5:13 – CY – 2014) Evil passes before Him, but only to stir up into
greatest activity His sympathy
with those who suffer from the evil; that evil prevails not in
the least over His own affections. Ø
His power to keep us is always
manifest. It is impossible to read about Jesus, to contemplate Him in any attribute
whatever, without being struck with
the two united aspects of His person: o
first, association with us; and o
secondly,
difference from us. We are drawn close to Him because of
the manifold fullness of His humanity; and then being drawn,
we are made to feel how strong
His hand is, and what a perennial Fountain of assistance and blessedness He becomes. Ø We have always some one to look at, to lift us above cynical thoughts of mankind. How easy it is to
get into a way of saying that human nature
is a very poor thing at its best! We
cannot get the flaws and meanness
of even good men out of
our recollection. Now HERE IS THE SEPARATED MAN, THE GREAT HIGH PRIEST, to
show what
a glorious thing human nature is when we can see it in its full purity.
Jesus is not only pure Himself, but He can purify the medium through
which He is beheld. Those who come to see Jesus as He is, learn
to think better and more hopefully both of themselves and others. Ø
The ideal is
given which we are to seek and to reach.
The great High Priest stands in the midst of sinful men to whom He
ministers, for the most
practical purpose of making them like Himself. He is separated from
sinners in order that sinners, being transformed and perfected, may
not be separated from Him. When the ideal and real meet in one person, AS IN JESUS CHRIST, then THE BETTER HOPE is indeed brought in. Christ’s Superiority in the Infinite
Perfection of His Personal Character. (vs. 26-28) This
is a second great argument for Christ’s superiority to Aaron.
The reason for
the introduction of this argument here is probably that the writer is still thinking
of Psalm 110. The psalm speaks of Christ exalted to the highest heavenly
position, and as a Priest for ever. Of both these points the echo rings
out here in vs. 26 and 28. Here is sharply drawn the picture of our Lord’s personal perfection
in a few carefully moderate words (for it is a delicate
subject), and the conclusion is apparent. (Note on word “daily”
in v.
27. The high priest did not “daily” offer sin offerings; the morning and evening
sacrifices were not offered by the high priest, nor were they sacrifices
for sin but in a secondary sense, as they were burnt offerings. The great
expiatory sacrifice offered by the high priest was on the Day of Atonement.
The word “daily” here must mean day
after day; one day of atonement
after another.) “Holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners” — so many aspects of THE SINLESSNESS OF JESUS!
The Hebrew
probably saw here what was true of the high priest symbolically, spoken of Jesus literally.
The one had inscribed on his forehead “Holiness unto the Lord,”
which he had in symbol; the other was “THE HOLY ONE OF GOD!” The one was harmless (literally, “without evil”), for he could not offer for others
till his own sin was expiated, but that was only an imputed sinlessness;
the other had no sins to offer for. The one was “undefiled,” obliged to be
ceremonially clean; the other was in Himself “without blemish and without spot.”
The one was “separate from sinners,” excluded for seven days before the Day of
Atonement even from his own family, but this was only physical; the other
was able to say, “I am not of the
world.” Ø The personal perfection of Jesus as seen in His manifested
purity. “Holy,” etc., represents His purity
from different standpoints. “Holy,” as regards His relation to
God; “harmless,”
his relation to man; “undefiled,” His relation to
Himself; “separate
from sinners,”
the sum of the whole. In every direction
Jesus was without sin. And so much was apparent to the men of His
day. His enemies, His relatives, His disciples, all bear witness to this. He could
ask of all, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46) Ø The perfection of Jesus is seen in His personal
consciousness of sinlessness. “Who needeth not…to offer
up…..sacrifice for His own sins.”
Christ offered no sacrifice
for Himself. He always distinguished between Himself and sinners. “If ye
[not ‘we’], being evil” (Matthew 7:11); “I do always those things
which that please Him” (John 8:29); “I have glorified thee on the earth” (Ibid. ch.17:4); “Why hast thou forsaken me?”
(Matthew 27:46). Christ knew He was holy, and that
proves that He was; for confessedly He was, at least, the best of men, and
the holier a man becomes the more sensible he is of failure. Ø
The perfection of Jesus is
seen in the Father’s endorsement of it. “He was made higher than the heavens.” Consider that in
connection with Christ’s claim to be sinless. His resurrection and
ascension and enthronement are the highest pledge of the perfection
He asserted for Himself. (God
asserts that because Christ arose from the dead, that there positively, WILL BE A JUDGMENT!
- Acts 17:31 – CY – 2014) CONSTITUTE A PERFECT HIGH PRIEST.
“Such a
High Priest became us.” Our needs are beyond the help of any one less. Ø
The first function of the high priest
was to offer sacrifice. Then observe how Christ’s holiness perfects Him as
A SACRIFICE! He
could not have atoned for others if He had sins of His own; but
THE
OFFERING OF THE HOLY ONE HAD AN INESTIMABLE WORTH! That, at least, vindicates the Law, and pays the sinner’s
debt, however great. Ø The
next function of the high priest was intercession. Then observe how Christ’s holiness perfects Him as an
Intercessor. We can trust in no mediator till we know he is on good terms with the
king. Because Christ is the Holy One of God, He has perpetual access to the
Father; His will and the Father’s are the same, and the Father delights in
granting His request. Jesus can never be refused. Ø The
third function of the high priest was to instruct. Then observe how Christ’s holiness perfects him as a
Teacher. It is in His holiness we learn what most of all we need to know — God’s will
about us. We look at Jesus, and there it is. Moreover, looking at
Him produces the same holiness in us, for looking we become like. (“Looking unto Jesus the Author and Finisher of our faith!” - ch.12:2) OATH TO BE HIGH PRIEST FOREVER. “The word of the oath,”
etc. Notice how many perfect things are set forth here. Ø
A perfect Sacrifice for sin.
“By one
offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified!” (ch. 10:14 – That is You and That is Me, if we would but TRUST JESUS! - CY – 2014) Ø
A perfect High Priest to
impart the benefits of that Sacrifice. Our tendency is to dwell on Christ’s earthly life, or on
His death; but the Epistles dwell most on His present life. And that
is the view of our Lord He desires us to keep most prominent: “I am He that liveth, and was dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore!”
(Revelation 1:18) “Therefore He is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God BY HIM!” Ø
A perfect promise that Christ
will do all this. “Will,” for all who will let Him, FOR ALL “who come unto God by Him,”
i.e FOR ALL
who take Him to be their High
Priest. GOD PLEDGES HIS OATH FOR THAT! How needlessly men are lost!
They are not called to risk their soul on a trifle! 26
“For
such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate
from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;” Such
a High Priest, it is said, for us was fitting. The same word Ἔπρεπεν – eprepen
– behooved; became - was used in ch. 2:10, where the
humiliation of
Christ was spoken of.
It was there said that to make the Captain of our salvation
perfect through
suffering “became” God — was befitting to what we
conceive of the
Divine nature. It is now said that our High Priest’s being such
as is here described
“became”
us — was befitting to our state and needs. That
He should
be both human and superhuman was in all respects fitting — the one
that He might be our sympathizing brother; the other that His intercession
might avail. The further description of Him in this verse is suggested
by the qualifications of the Aaronic high priest, what they typified
being realized in Christ. The high priest was by his consecration a holy
person, ἅγιος
- hagios – holy; sacred - (Leviticus
21:6, 8, etc.); he bore on his
miter “Holiness to the
Lord” (Exodus 39:30); he must be without personal blemish
(Leviticus 21:17, etc.); he must keep himself continually from all
ceremonial pollution (Leviticus 21. and 22.); he must purify himself by a sacrifice
for himself and by special ablutions before entering the holy of holies
(Leviticus 16.); when there, he was conceived as in God’s presence, apart
from the world of sinners outside. Christ was not only ἅγιος (holy),
but ὅσιος
– hosios - personally and
inwardly holy (Christians in the New Testament are all
called ἅγίοι – hagioi - but not all ὅσιοι - hosioi : for the use of which
word, compare
Titus 1:8;
Acts 2:27; 13:34, where it is applied to Christ, τὸν
ὅσιόν σου - ton
hosion sou – thine Holy One - and
Revelation 15:4;16:5, where it is applied to
God as His special attribute, ὅτι µόνος
ὅσιος – hoti monos hosios - that only art
holy. Christ
was actually free from evil (ἄκακος
– akakos – innocent
) and
(ἀμίαντος - amiantos – undefiled) by any contact of sin; and as such He has
passed to God’s actual presence (compare
διεληλυθότα
τοὺς οὐρανούς
– dielaeluthota
tous ouranous – one having passed through the
heavens – ch.
4:14),
separated forever from the world of sinners. Separated
from Sinners (v. 26) This verse
exhibits in a strong clear light the moral purity of our High Priest, and its
becomingness in relation to the necessities of His people. His boyhood and
youth were stainless. His manhood was one of sinless perfection. His friends
regarded Him as faultless. His enemies testified to His
purity (Pilate, Judas, the devils whom he cast out). Jesus Himself claimed to be holy (John
8:46; 14:30); and He never confessed sin, or begged forgiveness. The voice of His
Father from heaven attested Him, once and again, to be
the Holy One of God. (Matthew 3:17;
17:5). Ø The elements of
His holiness. Three adjectives
are used, referring to three different
departments of moral character. o
“Holy,” i.e. pious in relation to God. Jesus lived the life of ideal godliness. He perfectly obeyed
“the
great and first commandment” — the four “words” of the first table of o
“Guileless,” i.e. just and kind
towards His fellow-men. Jesus perfectly observed the six
precepts cf. the second table. He injured no
one. He “went
about doing good.” (Acts 10:38) o
“Undefiled,” i.e. personally pure; uncontaminated by His constant contact with
sinful men; holy in the midst of sin, Ø The singularity
of His holiness. “Separated from sinners.” This phrase sustains a relation of
contrast to the three adjectives. It indicates the unique character and the
matchless harmony of the Savior’s moral life. It expresses His
solitariness in His holiness. If the human race be divided into two classes — the sinners and the holy — all the rest of
mankind must take rank as
sinners, while
Jesus stands by Himself as the one human being who was
holy (“separate from sinners”). Ø The reward of His
holiness. “Made higher than the
heavens.” His supreme exaltation has
set Him more visibly apart from other men than before. It was conferred
upon Him as the reward of His pure, unworldly, self-sacrificing life. His mediatorial throne has been erected in the new heavens of the new
covenant, and these are higher than any heavens OUR
SALVATION. “Such a High
Priest became us.” In ch.
2:10 we read of what in
this connection “became” God; here, of what “became” man. The purity of the
Redeemer was admirably adapted to the necessities Ø That He might be
a true manifestation of God. A
priest is a mediator or middle-man
between God and men; and it is indispensable that he should be in perfect
sympathy with the purity of the Eternal. Holiness is the crown and flower of the
Divine perfections; and it was needful that our priest should reflect
that holiness in His own character. Ø That his
sacrifice might be an adequate atonement for sin. He must be on the very best of
terms with the God whom we have offended. His expiation must be
satisfactory to Divine justice. It is impossible that Jesus could have
atoned for us had He been Himself morally infirm, like the Jewish high
priest, He could only purchase our reconciliation by offering HIMSELF AS A
VICTIM without spot or
blemish, upon Ø That he might
leave us a perfect example. The
Christian life consists in THE IMITATION OF
CHRIST! Believers follow Him in the three great departments of
moral excellence in which He was so absolutely pure. We ought to copy
Him also in His
separatedness from the world. Indeed, His people should
already be in spirit, through their oneness of character with their risen Lord, “made higher than
the heavens? 27
“Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice,
first for His own sins, and then for the people’s: for this He did
once, when He offered up Himself.” The
expression “daily” καθ. ἡµέραν – kath hameran – to daily) is not in strictness applicable to the high
priest, who did not offer the daily sacrifice. The reference throughout what
follows being to the high priest’s peculiar functions on the Day of Atonement,
κατ ἐνιαυτὸν
– kat eniauton – every year - might
have been expected. There are two tenable solutions: (1)
that the daily offerings of the
priests are regarded as made by the high priest,
who represented the whole priesthood, on the principle, qui facit per
alios tacit per se;
(he who acts through
another, acts himself). (2)
that καθ’ ἡµέραν (as is suggested by its
position in the sentence) belongs
not to οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς – hoi archiereis – chief priests; high priest, but
only to Christ: “who
has no need daily, as the high priests have yearly:” for
His intercession being perpetual, an offering on His part would be needed daily,
if needed at all. This view is supported by the fact that the daily sacrifices
are not spoken of in the law as
including a special one in the first place for
the priest’s own sin. “This he did.” Did what? Offer for his own sins
as well as for
the people’s? No; for,though
it has been seen above (ch. 5:7) how the high priest’s offering
for himself might have its counterpart in the agony, the Sinless One
cannot be said to have offered for sins of His own. And, besides, he having
offered Himself (ἑαυτὸν
ἀνενέγκας – heaton
anenegkas – offered up Himself), the offering could not be for Himself.
We must, therefore, take “this
He did” as referring only to the latter
part of the preceding clause, while (ἑαυτὸν
προςενέγκας – heaton prosenegkas- offering Himself - answers to the former
part;or as implying
generally, “did all that was needed for atonement.” 28
“For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the
word
of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated
for evermore.” For the Law maketh men high priests, having infirmity;but the word
of the oath, which was after the Law, maketh the Son, perfected for
evermore. With men (i.e. a succession of men; compare v. 8) having
infirmity is contrasted the One Son, for ever perfected. The absence of the
article before
υἱὸν (son) does not imply the meaning “a son;” the title denotes here,
as throughout the Epistle, the peculiar Son of prophecy (see under ch.
1:1). There is here no denial of his complete humanity, though He is
plainly regarded as more than man. Nor is His participation in human ἀσθένεια -
astheneia – infirmity - in the sense explained under ch. 5, denied. His implied
freedom from it may mean either that He never had any inherent in Himself, none
due to personal imperfection, or that now, in His exalted state, He is
altogether removed from it. In both these senses the implication is true; and both may be understood; but τετελειωµένον
– teteleiomenon - having been
perfected - being here opposed to ἔχοντας
ἀσθένειαν – echontas astheneian – having infirmity (as υἱὸν
– [Son] to ἀνθρώπους – anthropous – humans; men), the latter sense may be
conceived to have been especially in the writer’s mind. It is,in fact, our ever-living High Priest,
interceding for us above, after passing through human
experience, and after atonement completed, that is now being
presented to our view. It is to be
observed, lastly, that
τετελειωµένον (having been
perfected) in this verse may be intended t o bear, or at any rate to suggest, the
special sense noted under (ch.5:9, and strenuously maintained
by Jackson, and hence to be not incorrectly rendered by “consecrated” in the Authorized Version;
and this notwithstanding Alford’s protest against this
rendering as “obliterating both sense anti analogy with ch.
2:10 and 5:1) Christ
Greater than Aaron (vs. 11-28) This passage is
really just a commentary on the Old Testament oracle contained in Psalm 110:4.
There might appropriately be prefixed to it as a motto the
words, “Behold,
a greater than Aaron is here.” 11-19.) Aaron’s mediation could not All that it could
do was to exhibit a faint adumbration of the ideal
priesthood. The words of Psalm 110:4 suggest this insufficiency, for they contain
the promise of the Messianic priesthood. Ø Jesus was of
other descent. (v. 11-14.) He
belonged to the tribe of Judah; and not, like
Aaron’s sons, to the ecclesiastical tribe of Levi. The act of this
change in itself proves the inefficacy of the hereditary Ø His priesthood is
of everlasting duration. (vs 15-17.) The Jewish priests one by one
succumbed to death; but Jesus Christ is Himself the Life! Life resides essentially and originally in Him. So His
priesthood is abiding; His official
dignity remains “forever.” From this it follows (vs. 18-19) that the Levitical priesthood, and the
entire ceremonial law which enshrined it, have been
abrogated; and in their stead has come the introduction of “a better hope” (v. 19), the hope of an
efficient priesthood, of a dispensation
both spiritual and permanent, and thus of immediate and LEVITICAL. (vs.
20-28.) Jesus is the true Priest of mankind, for whom the nations have been
waiting. (“the
Desire of all nations”- Haggai 2:7). He is the
Apostle of God to men, and the prevailing Intercessor with God for men. This passage
reminds us how infinitely exalted His priesthood is Ø He was
consecrated with an oath. (vs.
20-22.) No Levitical priest was installed thus solemnly.
The Divine oath shows the certainty and importance and immutability
of the thing sworn. It reminds us that the priesthood of our Lord
enters into the
very substance of the Ø His priesthood is intransferable. (vs. 23-25.) The Levitical
priesthood had this defect, that
it required to be conveyed from one man to another. But, although
Christ died, His death did not “hinder him from continuing;” it did not even
temporarily interrupt the exercise of His priesthood. For He died
voluntarily. He laid himself as Victim upon the altar. And, by dying, He
conquered death, through the power of his indissoluble
life. So, His mediatorial
authority is intransferable. Ø His character is
holy. (v. 26.) The Levitical priests had “infirmity,” and needed to offer
sacrifices first for their own sins. Even the most pious men among them had been, of course, morally imperfect; and some of the high
priests — such as Caiaphas — who were not godly men, had been
notorious for their wickedness. But “the High Priest
of our confession” has a pure nature. He lived on earth a stainless life. He was “separated from
sinners;” i.e. He showed on every side of His character that He belonged
to another category
than that of sinners. And His spotless
holiness was in the fullest harmony with our spiritual need; it was, indeed,
indispensably necessary, and in every way most “becoming” and beautiful, in relation to us. (v. 26) Ø His sacrifice is
perfect. (vs. 27-28.) The
Jewish priests had to offer up sacrifices “daily” — “the
same sacrifices year by year” — with laborious and wearisome
iteration. But the one sacrifice of Christ is His blood has
virtue to atone, for it is THE BLOOD OF GOD! Ø He ministers in
the real sanctuary. (vs.
26, 28.) Aaron’s ministry was carried on in a moving
tent of curtain-work and wood-work — a tent,