Hebrews 9:18-23 sits inside this longer paragraph.
11But Christ having come as a high priest of the coming good things, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, 12nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the Holy Place, having obtained eternal redemption. 13For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify to the cleanness of the flesh, 14how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without defect to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, since a death has occurred for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, that those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16For where a last will and testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him who made it. 17For a will is in force where there has been death, for it is never in force while he who made it lives. 18Therefore even the first covenant has not been dedicated without blood. 19For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God has commanded you.”
21Moreover he sprinkled the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry in the same way with the blood. 22According to the law, nearly everything is cleansed with blood, and apart from shedding of blood there is no remission.
23It was necessary therefore that the copies of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ hasn’t entered into holy places made with hands, which are representations of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest enters into the holy place year by year with blood not his own, 26or else he must have suffered often since the foundation of the world. But now once at the end of the ages, he has been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27Inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this, judgment, 28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, without sin, to those who are eagerly waiting for him for salvation.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv18, 20, 22, 23 18. Whereupon neither the first, etc. It hence appears…
18. Whereupon neither the first, etc. It hence appears that the fact is what is mainly urged, and that it is not a question about the word, though the Apostle turned to his own purpose a word presented to his attention in that language in which he wrote, as though one, while speaking of God’s covenant, which is often called in Greek μαρτυρία, a testimony, were to recommend it among other things under that title. And doubtless that is a testimony, μαρτυρία, to which angels from heaven has borne witness, and of which there have been so many illustrious witnesses on earth, even all the holy Prophets, Apostles, and a vast number of martyrs, and of which at last the Son of God himself became a surety. No one in such a discourse would deem any such thing as unreasonable. And yet the Hebrew word, תעודה will admit of no such meaning as a covenant; but as nothing is advanced but what is consistent with the thing itself, no scrupulous regard is to be paid to the meaning of a word.
The Apostle then says, that the old testament or covenant was dedicated with blood. He hence concludes, that men were even then reminded, that it could not be valid and efficacious except death intervened. For though the blood of beasts was then shed, yet, he denies that it availed to confine an everlasting covenant. That this may appear more clearly, we must notice the custom of sprinkling which he quotes from Moses. He first teaches us that the covenant was dedicated or consecrated, not that it had in itself anything profane; but as there is nothing so holy that men by their uncleanness will not defile, except God prevents it by making a renewal of all things, therefore the dedication was made on account of men, who alone wanted it.
Read full note →
He afterwards adds, that the tabernacle and all the vessels, and also the very book of the law, were sprinkled; by which rite the people were then taught, that God could not be sought or looked to for salvation, nor rightly worshipped, except faith in every case looked to an intervening blood. For the majesty of God is justly to be dreaded by us, and the way to his presence is nothing to us but a dangerous labyrinth, until we know that he is pacified towards us through the blood of Christ, and that this blood affords to us a free access. All kinds of worship are then faulty and impure until Christ cleanses them by the sprinkling of his blood.
For the tabernacle was a sort of visible image of God; and as the vessels for ministering were destined for his service, so they were symbols of true worship. But since none of these were for salvation to the people, we hence reasonably conclude, that where Christ does not appear with his blood, we have nothing to do with God. So doctrine itself, however unchangeable may be the will of God, cannot be efficacious for our benefit, unless it be dedicated by blood, as is plainly set forth in this verse.
I know that others give a different interpretation; for they consider the tabernacle to be the body of the Church, and vessels the faithful, whose ministry God employs; but what I have stated is much more appropriate. For whenever God was to be called upon, they turned themselves to the sanctuary; and it was a common way of speaking to say that they stood before the Lord when they appeared in the temple.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv18, 19, 23 There must be a proportion between those things which…
There must be a proportion between those things which purify, and those which are purified: Under the Law all those figures were earthly, the Tabernacle, the book, the vessels, the sacrifices, although they were the figures of heavenly things. Therefore it was requisite that all those should be purified with some matter and ceremony of the same nature, to wit, with the blood of beasts, with water, wool, hyssop. But under Christ all things are heavenly, an heavenly tabernacle, an heavenly sacrifice, an heavenly people, an heavenly doctrine, and heaven itself is set open before us for an eternal habitation. Therefore all these things are sanctified in like sort, to wit, with the everlasting offering of the quickening blood of Christ.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv18–23 18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without…
18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
Ver. 18. Was dedicated] Or initiated to holy use, Lev 16:15-16, εγκεκαινισται.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Forasmuch as all testaments are put in force by…
Forasmuch as all testaments are put in force by the death of the testator, and all covenants are most strongly confirmed by death and blood in God’s own judgment, thence it is that the Mosaical covenant was confirmed by them.
Dedicated; egkekainistai, strictly taken, signifieth made new, or renewed. It is not used in the New Testament but in this place, and Heb 10:20; the Syriac translate it here confirmed, or ratified. In the Old Testament the Septuagint use it to express the Hebrew הנכו Deu 20:5. In which law, for a man who had built a house, and was called out to the wars, to return and dedicate it, was to take possession of it, and secure it from the claim of another. Here it is properly used to make sure, firm, and inviolable; and that by blood, typical of Christ’s, which is the highest and most solemn ratification. So were the covenants before ratified, but especially under the law, and the Mosaical covenant itself, as appears by instance, Gen 15:9,10,17,18; 31:44,54; compare Exo 24:5,7,8.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On vv18, 23 Our apostle heving entered upon a comparison between the…
Our apostle heving entered upon a comparison between the first and second covenant in the former verses, he goes on to prosecute it in these; showing that both of them were dedicated, that is, confirmed by blood.
The first covenant which God made with Israel in Horeb, had not its sanction without typical blood and life for the observation of them. Now that the covenant between God and Israel was thus solemnized, and received its confirmation by blood, the apostle makes appear from the history of Moses, Exodus 24 unto which he appeals; where we find the sprinkler to be Moses, the sprinkling to be blood the things sprinkled were the book wherein the covenant was written, and the people who engaged themselves in the covenant.
Read full note →
Now the use and end of this sprinkling upon of it upon the altar was the confirmation of God’s part. And the words added to the action were, this is the blood of the covenant; that is, this is the blood by which the covenant is confirmed, and made inviolable betwixt God and you: He calls is the blood of the covenant, because it was a sign of it, and a seal confiming it.
In like manner, the new covenant was confirmed by blood, ever by the blood of Christ, as is evident from his own words. Luk 22:20. "This cup is the new testament in my blood for remission of sins."
Remission of sin is one principal blessing promised in the new covenant; but this promise had been in vain, if Christ’s blood made it remissible: So that the blood of Christ is the firm and immoveable basis and foundation upon which the new covenant was fixed. This is the first part of our apostle’s design in these words: Namely, to prove the necessity of Christ’s blood for confirmation of the new covenant.
Next, he proves the efficacy of that blood for taking away of sin; telling us, that the tabernacle, the vessels, and all the utensils thereunto belonging, yea, all the things which were purified, were ceremonially purified by blood; and that as without shedding of blood then there could be no remission, so no acceptance with God now without the shedding of the blood of Christ.
Learn hence, That in all things wherein we have to do with God, and whereby we approach unto him, it is the blood of Christ, and the application of it to our consciences, that gives a gracious acceptance with God; without this all is unclean and defiled now, as without shedding of blood there was no purification then.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v23 In this last part of the chapter, the apostle…
In this last part of the chapter, the apostle goes on to tell us what the Holy Ghost has signified to us by the legal purifications of the patterns of the things in heaven, inferring thence the necessity of better sacrifices to consecrate the heavenly things themselves.
I. The necessity of purifying the patterns of the things in heaven, Heb 9:23. This necessity arises both from the divine appointment, which must always be obeyed, and from the reason of that appointment, which was to preserve a proper resemblance between the things typifying and the things typified. It is observable here that the sanctuary of God on earth is a pattern of heaven, and communion with God in his sanctuary is to his people a heaven upon earth.
Read full note →
II. The necessity that the heavenly things themselves should be purified with better sacrifices than of bulls and goats; the things themselves are better than the patterns, and must therefore be consecrated with better sacrifices. These heavenly things are the privileges of the gospel state, begun in grace, perfected in glory. These must be ratified by a suitable sanction or consecration; and this was the blood of Christ. Now it is very evident that the sacrifice of Christ is infinitely better than those of the law. 1. From the places in which the sacrifices under the law, and that under the gospel, were offered. Those under the law were the holy places made with hands, which are but figures of the true sanctuary, Heb 9:24. Christ's sacrifice, though offered upon earth, was by himself carried up into heaven, and is there presented in a way of daily intercession; for he appears in the presence of God for us. He has gone to heaven, not only to enjoy the rest and receive the honour due to him, but to appear in the presence of God for us, to present our persons and our performances, to answer and rebuke our adversary and accuser, to secure our interest, to perfect all our affairs, and to prepare a place for us. 2. From the sacrifices themselves, Heb 9:26. Those under the law were the lives and blood of other creatures of a different nature from the offerers - the blood of beasts, a thing of small value, and which would have been of none at all in this matter had it not had a typical respect to the blood of Christ; but the sacrifice of Christ was the oblation of himself; he offered his own blood, truly called, by virtue of the hypostatical union, the blood of God; and therefore of infinite value. 3. From the frequent repetition of the legal sacrifices. This showed the imperfection of that law; but it is the honour and perfection of Christ's sacrifice that, being once offered, it was sufficient to all the ends of it; and indeed the contrary would have been absurd, for then he must have been still dying and rising again, and ascending and then again descending and dying; and the great work had been always in fieri - always doing, and always to do, but never finished, which would be as contrary to reason as it is to revelation, and to the dignity of his person: But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. The gospel is the last dispensation of the grace of God to men. 4. From the inefficacy of the legal sacrifices, and the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice. The legal sacrifices could not of themselves put away sin, neither procure pardon for it now power against it. Sin would still have lain upon us, and had dominion over us; but Jesus Christ by one sacrifice has made an end of sin, he has destroyed the works of the devil.
III. The apostle illustrates the argument from the appointment of God concerning men (Heb 9:27, Heb 9:28), and observes something like it in the appointment of God concerning Christ.
1. The appointment of God concerning men contains in it two things: - (1.) That they must once die, or, at least, undergo a change equivalent to death. It is an awful thing to die, to have the vital knot loosed or cut asunder, all relations here dropped at once, an end put to our probation and preparation state, and to enter into another world. It is a great work, and it is a work that can be but once done, and therefore had need to be well done. This is matter of comfort to the godly, that they shall die well and die but once; but it is matter of terror to the wicked, who die in their sins, that they cannot return again to do that great work better. (2.) It is appointed to men that after death they shall come to judgment, to a particular judgment immediately after death; for the soul returns to God as to its judge, to be determined to its eternal state; and men shall be brought to the general judgment, at the end of the world. This is the unalterable decree of God concerning men - they must die, and they must be judged. It is appointed for them, and it is to be believed and seriously considered by them.
2. The appointment of God concerning Christ, bearing some resemblance to the other. (1.) He must be once offered, to bear the sins of many, of all the Father had given to him, of all who should believe in his name. He was not offered for any sin of his own; he was wounded for our transgressions. God laid on him the iniquity of all his people; and these are many, though not so many as the rest of mankind; yet, when they are all gathered to him, he will be the first-born among many brethren. (2.) It is appointed that Christ shall appear the second time without sin, to the salvation of those who look for him. [1.] He will then appear without sin; at his first appearance, though he had no sin of his own, yet he stood charged with the sins of many; he was the Lamb of God that bore upon him the sins of the world, and then he appeared in the form of sinful flesh; but his second appearance will be without any such charge upon him, he having fully discharged it before, and then his visage shall not be marred, but shall be exceedingly glorious. [2.] This will be to the salvation of all who look for him; he will then perfect their holiness, their happiness; their number shall then be accomplished, and their salvation completed. Observe, It is the distinguishing character of true believers that they are looking for Christ; they look to him by faith; they look for him by hope and holy desires. They look for him in every duty, in every ordinance, in every providence now; and they expect his second coming, and are preparing for it; and though it will be sudden destruction to the rest of the world, who scoff at the report of it, it will be eternal salvation to those who look for it.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Whereupon neither the first testament,.... Or the first administration…
Whereupon neither the first testament,.... Or the first administration of the covenant of grace under the law:
was dedicated without blood; or "confirmed" without it, that dispensation being a typical one; and that blood was typical of the blood of Christ, by which the new covenant or testament is ratified; see Exo 24:7.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Whence neither was the first - The Jewish covenant,…
Whence neither was the first - The Jewish covenant, originally transacted without the blood of an appointed sacrifice.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Verse 18. Whereupon] οθεν. Wherefore, as a victim was…
Verse 18. Whereupon] οθεν. Wherefore, as a victim was required for the ratification of every covenant, the first covenant made between God and the Hebrews, by the mediation of Moses, was not dedicated, εγκεκαινισται, renewed or solemnized, without blood-without the death of a victim, and the aspersion of its blood.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv18, 21, 23 Heb 9:18-20. Whereupon — On which principle we may…
Heb 9:18-20. Whereupon — On which principle we may observe; neither was the first — Covenant, of which we have been speaking, I mean that of Moses; dedicated without blood — Namely, that of an appointed sacrifice. “In the original, the word covenant is wanting; and our translators, by supplying the word testament, have made the Sinai covenant or law of Moses, of which the apostle is speaking, a testament, than which,” says Macknight, “nothing can be more incongruous. The word to be supplied is not testament, but covenant. For when Moses had spoken every precept — The precepts of the law which Moses read to the people on this occasion, were chiefly those contained in Exo 20:-23., as is evident from Exo 24:5. See the margin. To all the people according to the law —
The will, appointment, or express order of God; he took the blood of calves, &c., with water. The blood was mixed with water, to prevent its growing too stiff for sprinkling, perhaps also to typify the blood and water which should issue out of Christ’s side, signifying the expiating and cleansing virtue of his sufferings. And scarlet wool and hyssop — All these circumstances are not particularly mentioned in that chapter of Exodus, but are supposed to be already known from other passages of Moses; and sprinkled both the book — Which contained all he had said; and all the people — Who were near him. The book was sprinkled to show, 1st, That the law itself was not able to reconcile them to God, and give life without the blood of Christ added to it. 2d, That atonement was to be made by blood for sins committed against the law. 3d, That every thing is unclean to us that is not sprinkled with the blood of Christ. Saying, (Exo 24:8,) This is the blood of the covenant, &c. — This sprinkling of the blood is a ceremony instituted by God to signify the mutual consent of both parties to the terms of the covenant; or, this is the blood whereby the covenant is ratified on both sides; which God hath enjoined unto you — Hath required me to deliver unto you or, hath commanded with respect to you, as ης ενετειλατο προς υμας literally signifies, requiring you to declare your consent to the terms of it.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Whereupon - Ὅθεν Hothen - “Whence.” Or since this…
Whereupon - Ὅθεν Hothen - “Whence.” Or since this is a settled principle, or an indisputable fact, it occurred in accordance with this, that the first covenant was confirmed by the shedding of blood. The admitted principle which the apostle had stated, that the death of the victim was necessary to confirm the covenant, was the “reason” why the first covenant was ratified with blood. If there were any doubt about the correctness of the interpretation given above, that Heb 9:16-17, refer to a “covenant,” and not a “will,” this verse would seem to be enough to remove it. For how could the fact that a will is not binding until he who makes it is dead, be a reason why a “covenant” should be confirmed by blood? What bearing would such a fact have on the question whether it ought or ought not to be confirmed in this manner? Or how could that fact, though it is universal, be given as a “reason” to account for the fact that the covenant made by the instrumentality of Moses was ratified with blood?
No possible connection can be seen in such reasoning. But admit that Paul had stated in Heb 9:16-17, a general principle that in all covenant transactions with God, the death of a victim was necessary, and everything is plain. We then see why he offered the sacrifice and sprinkled the blood. It was not on the basis of such reasoning as this: “The death of a man who makes a will is indispensable before the will is of binding force, therefore it was that Moses confirmed the covenant made with our fathers by the blood of a sacrifice;” but by such reasoning as this: “It is a great principle that in order to ratify a covenant between God and his people a victim should be slain, therefore it was that Moses ratified the old covenant in this manner, and “therefore” it was also that the death of a victim was necessary under the new dispensation.” Here the reasoning of Paul is clear and explicit; but who could see the force of the former?
Read full note →
Prof. Stuart indeed connects this verse with Heb 9:15, and says that the course of thought is, “The new covenant or redemption from sin was sanctioned by the death of Jesus; consequently, or wherefore (ὅθεν hothen) the old covenant, which is a type of the new, was sanctioned by the blood of victims.” But is this the reasoning of Paul? Does he say that because the blood of a Mediator was to be shed under the new dispensation, and because the old was a type of this, that therefore the old was confirmed by blood? Is he not rather accounting for the shedding of blood at all, and showing that it was “necessary” that the blood of the Mediator should be shed rather than assuming that, and from that arguing that a typical shedding of blood was needful? Besides, on this supposition, why is the statement in Heb 9:16-17, introduced? What bearing have these verses in the train of thought? What are they but an inexplicable obstruction?
The first testament - Or rather covenant - the word “testament” being supplied by the translators.
Was dedicated - Margin, “Purified.” The word used to “ratify,” to “confirm,” to “consecrate,” to “sanction.” Literally, “to renew.”
Without blood - It was ratified by the blood of the animals that were slain in sacrifice. The blood was then sprinkled on the principal objects that were regarded as holy under that dispensation.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv20, 22, 23 This is the blood of the testament, which God…
This is the blood of the testament, which God hath enjoined unto you; (Exodus xxiv.) that is, this is to confirm that testament. Christ made use of the like words, when he bequeathed us the divine legacy of his Body and Blood, at his last supper, saying: (Matthew xxvi. 28.) This is my blood of the new testament. And as the words of Exodus were understood of the true blood of the victims offered, so the words of Christ signify the true blood of Christ, there really present in the sacrament, in a spiritual manner, and to be shed in a bloody manner upon the cross. (Witham) --- The correspondence of words, in dedicating both testaments, proveth the real presence of blood in the cup or chalice.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v23 The necessary, yet never repeated sacrificial death of Christ…
IV
The necessary, yet never repeated sacrificial death of Christ has introduced a perfectly satisfactory propitiation
Read full note →
Heb_9:23-28
23It was therefore necessary that the patterns [copies] of the things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ is not entered [did not enter] into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures [counterparts] of the true [genuine, ἀληθινῶν]; but into heaven itself, now to appear [to be manifested, ἐμφανισθῆναι] in the presence of God 25for us: Nor yet [and not, οὐδέ] that he should [may] offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others: 26For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now [as it is, νυνί] once in the end of the world [ages, αἰώνων] hath he appeared [been manifested, πεφανέρωται] 27to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself [by means of his sacrifice]. And as [in so much as καθ̓ ὅσον] it is appointed [reserved, ἀπόκειται] unto men once to die, but after 28that the judgment: So [also]14 Christ was once [for all] offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
[Heb_9:23.—τὰ μὲν ὑποδείγματα, the copies indeed; or while the copies. ὑπόδειγμα something shown or exhibited under in subordination to, something else, whether as a pattern, or a copy; here clearly the latter; though perhaps it may be better to take ὑπό as lessening, lowering down, the signification, thus faint sketch, delineation, outline.
Heb_9:24.—οὐ γὰρ εἰς χειροποίητα εἰσῆλ., for not into a sanctuary made with hands did Christ enter=for it was no sanctuary made with hands, into which, etc.—Τῶν ἀληθινῶν, the genuine, the archetypal.—ἐμφανισθῆναι to be manifested, not simply to appear.
Heb_9:25.—οὐδ ἵνα—προσφἐρῃ nor that he may (not might) offer himself.
Heb_9:26.—ἐπεὶ ἔδει=ἔδει ἄν, since it were, would be, necessary for him frequently to suffer; ἔδει logical as Heb_2:1,=he must frequently have suffered.* The meaning is not, with Del. and Alf., that His making repeated offerings now in the heavenly sanctuary, would necessitate His having previously frequently suffered on earth, inasmuch as each offering in the sanctuary presupposes a previous suffering on earth. This is a thought altogether too far-fetched for the scope of the passage. The writer argues, in my judgment, simply from the historical fact, or perhaps rather confirms his statement by a reference to the historical fact. If He were entered into the heavenly sanctuary, in order to make, as the high-priest did, repeated entrances into it, it would follow, as a logical conclusion, that there must have been a series of such acts in former ages. If, like the entrances of the Levitical high-priest, His entrance and presentation of Himself were of such a nature as to require repetition, then, of course, there should have been a series of sufferings and entrances in former times. But in contrast with that, and as showing the single and decisive character of His High-Priestly entrance, he has, in fact, (νυνὶ δέ) been manifested but once, and that, once for all, at the consummation of the ages.—διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ, by His sacrifice=the sacrifice which He made. It was, indeed, a sacrifice of Himself, but this is not expressed in the text.
Heb_9:27.—καθ’ ὅσον not simply as (ὡς, or καθώς) but inasmuch as, assigning a ground or reason.—ἀπόκειται, it (lies away) is reserved for, not is appointed.—εἰς σωτηρίαν for salvation is by some connected with the Part. ἀπεκδεχ. but by most better with ὀφθήσεται, will appear for salvation.—K.].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Heb_9:23. It was necessary now, etc.—The nature of the following verse renders it more desirable to supply ἧν (Ebr., Del.), than ἐστίν (Lün.). The ἐπουράνια are not the heavenly blessings (Seb. Schmidt, Ramb., and others); not the Christian Church (Chrys., Theod., Este, Lapid., Calov, Heubn. etc.); but the heavenly εanctuary in contrast with its earthly copy made with hands. The plur. κρείττοσι θυσίαις points not to the sufferings, prayers, and works of love of Christians, in common with the sacrificial death of Jesus (Grot., Paul.). It is the plural of kind, or class. But to transform purification into consecration (Bl., Lün., De W., etc.) is totally unallowable, as is also the substituting in the place of the heavenly sanctuary, the men who belong to the New Test. economy (Thom. Aqu., Beng., Menk., Thol., etc.). But neither is the cleansing in question an actual purging of heaven by the casting out of Satan, which Akersloot would refer to Luk_10:18, Joh_12:31; while Bleek would explain in accordance with Rev_12:7-9. The context demands an expiatory purification, i.e., a doing away of the influence of human sin upon the heavenly sanctuary (Stier, Hofm., Del., Riehm, Alf.).
Heb_9:24. For not into a sanctuary made with hands, etc.—The author is not assigning the ground why there is now need of better sacrifices for the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary (Hofm.), nor giving the proof that Christ has actually entered into the heavenly sanctuary, (Bl., Lün.,) nor illustrating the contrast between the earthly and the heavenly sanctuary (Ebr.), nor is he demonstrating the necessity of better offerings for the heavenly world from the reality of the one which has been furnished and offered to God (Del.). He is confirming the declaration of the previous verse, that the purification argued as necessary, has been actually accomplished. Hofm. now concedes, that the Infin. Aor. ἐμφανισθῆναι constitutes no ground of objection (Win. § 44; Mat_20:26; 1Pe_4:2) to our understanding the νῦν of the permanent presence of Christ before the unveiled face of God in heaven. The position of the ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν at the end of the clause, throws intentional and weighty emphasis upon the soteriological significance of this ἐμφανισθῆυαι, a significance referable in its purpose to the persons of the readers. This word expresses (Act_24:1) strikingly the reciprocal and unveiled face to face manifestation of God and Christ, and is found in no corresponding sense among the technical expressions of the old covenant.
Heb_9:25.—May offer himself, etc.—The προσφέρειν ἑαυτόν refers not to Christ’s offering Himself on earth. In that case it were virtually =παθεῖν, Heb_9:26, which, as Heb_13:12, is to be understood of the suffering of death. But the offering of the blood in the heavenly all-holy presupposes the slaying of the victim outside of the Adyton, and is brought about by the entrance of the high-priest, of whom after his entrance, was required a two-fold offering of different kinds of blood (Heb_9:7), as his entrance was preceded by the slaughter of two different victims. To this refer the expressions of our passage, in which to avoid a misapprehension of the plur. θυσίαις, used in Heb_9:23, the idea is repelled that in the heavenly all-holy, whither Christ has entered, not in alien but in His own blood, He has now to offer Himself at repeated times. Had repeated offerings of Himself been the purpose of His entrance into heaven, which assuredly is in every case to be conceived of as but a single one (Schlicht. and Böhme, Bl., Hofm., Del.), then must also a πολλάκις παθεῖν have preceded, and that indeed “from the foundation of the world,” i.e., Christ would have been obliged to suffer just as many times before His entrance to God, as He now was repeatedly to offer Himself before God (Hofm., Del., Alf.). But this would contradict the fact that Christ has become man, not at the beginning, but at the end of the world. This explanation is far more probable than the common one that Christ would otherwise have been obliged every time to return into the world.
[I do not see much to choose between the two explanations: viz., that which urges the singleness of Christ’s entrance and offering in the heavenly sanctuary, on the ground that otherwise He would have had repeatedly to descend and suffer, inasmuch as every προσφέρειν implied a previous παθεῖν, and that which urges the singleness of His προσφέρειν, on the ground that otherwise He must have gone through a series of sacrificial sufferings while remaining on earth, in order to accumulate, as it were, a stock of sacrificial suffering, on the strength of which He might make an equal number of priestly offerings in the heavenly sanctuary. Or rather it seems to me that the latter view, though supported by Del., Alf., and Moll, is much the harsher and more improbable of the two. For although it is undoubtedly true, as Del. urges, that the author takes his stand on the assumption of only a single presentation of Christ in heaven, yet it is equally true that this is based on the actually existing state of facts, viz., on the singleness of Christ’s sacrificial suffering on earth. For it surely is not more monstrous to assume a series of descents to earth and reëntrances into heaven after suffering death, than to assume a series of deaths continuously occurring on earth to be followed subsequently by as many successive high-priestly entrances into the heavenly sanctuary. The latter seems to me, considering the analogy of the Jewish rites, much the more unnatural of the two. In point of fact I do not believe that the writer had in mind precisely either of the above ideas, though that which he had comes much nearer to the first than the second. The question is not in his mind a question of the relation between a supposed series of priestly offerings in heaven, and a corresponding series of sufferings on earth. It is simply a logical deduction from a matter of fact. If Christ’s entrance into heaven were of the nature of the Jewish priest’s entrances into the Mosaic sanctuary, such, viz., as to involve a repetition of His entrances, and offerings from time to time, this must have led inevitably to, and manifested itself in, His repeated sufferings in the successive ages of the world. But there has been no such manifestation. He has, in fact, (νυνί) appeared and suffered but once, and that at the very close of the old period, and when the former age is about to merge into the new. This fact is in itself decisive of the nature of His priesthood. It at once grows out of, and demonstrates the fact, that His priesthood, unlike that of the Levitical priests, is one in which one act of suffering on earth, and one priestly entrance into and offering in heaven, accomplish the whole work.—K.].
The πεφανέρωται refers not to the appearance in heaven before God, (Grot., Schultz, etc.), but to the φανέ ρωσις ἐν σαρκί, 1Ti_3:16; 1Pe_1:20; 1Pe_5:4; 1Jn_2:28; 1Jn_3:5; 1Jn_3:8. The expression ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων is in sense=ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων Heb_1:1; and like the Pauline (1Co_10:11) τὰ τέλῃ τῶν αἰώνων, is a translation of the Heb. קֵץ הָעוֹלָם. The connection of the words διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ with πεφανέρωται (Grot., Carpz., Böhme, Thol. etc.), is unnatural, “since θυσία appears much rather as expressing the end of the manifestation of Christ than the means of that manifestation.” (Del.). These words are thus to be closely connected with εἰς ἀθέτησιυ ἁμαρτίας, which gives the object of Christ’s appearance on the world’s theatre of action, viz., “the doing away, absolutely, and beyond the need of being supplemented with any second similar manifestation, of all that is sinful.”
Heb_9:27. And inasmuch as it is reserved, etc.—Καθ̓ ὅσον constitutes not, like καθώς, merely a comparison, but at the same time a reason, in this case for the fact that in Christ also, along with His death, the work of His first appearance on earth has been once for all completed, and admits no repetition; but that something corresponding to the judgment is still also in reference to Him to be looked for. This reason lies in His real assumption of human nature. The author for this reason also employs the Pass. προσενεχθείς, “being offered,” because in this comparison the sacrifice of Christ is regarded not as a voluntary offering, but as a suffering appointed to Him, as something befalling Him (Hofm.). We must therefore not, with Chrys., supply ὑφ’ ἑαυτοῦ, by Himself. Ἀνενεγκεῖν is understood by the Pesh., Chrys., Œc., Theoph., Michael., of the presenting and offering up of sins in sacrifice; by Luth., Schlicht., Grot., Bl., Hofm. (Schriftb. 1 Ed.), Lün., etc., of the taking them away=ἀφαιρεῖν, Heb_10:4; by Hofm. in 2 Ed. of Schriftb., in its classic sense of bearing up under, sustaining, enduring them; by Jac. Cappell., Calov, Beng., etc., of bearing them to the cross, according to 1Pe_2:24; by August., Este, Seb. Schmidt, Böhme, De W., Bisp., Del., Riehm, Alf., of vicarious bearing, according to Isa_53:12, where it is said of the Servant of Jehovah: αὐτὸς ἁμαρτίας πολλῶν ἀνηνεγκε. This latter view, now also ably defended by Ebr. (Allg. Kirchenzeit., 1856, Nr. 116–127) has specially in its favor the declaration that Christ, at His second coming will appear χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. Chrys., Theod., Grot, and others refer erroneously this latter expression to the redeemed, who will then be entirely perfected. It refers to the person of Christ. Even in His first appearance His person was sinless, and sin was not in Jesus in the form of concupiscentia, as maintained by Dippel, Menken, Irving. But it partly assailed Him in the form of temptation, Heb_4:15, partly lay upon Him in the form of punishment, 2Co_5:21. The expression χωρὶς αμαρτίας stands in antithesis to the εἰς τὸ πολλὰ ἀνενεγ. ἁμαρτ. Thus in the main rightly Œc., Theophyl., Carpz., De W., Bisp., Hofm., Del. and others. We need not, however, for this reason take ἁμαρτία as sin-offering (J. Capp., Storr, etc.), or as punishment for sin (Klee, Thol., etc.), or (with Schultz) having to do with sin. Unauthorized alike by the language and by the fact, is the view of Theodor. Mops., Theodoret, Bl., that the phrase in question implies that there will then be no realm of evil and of sin which could require the work and agency of the reappearing Christ. A visible return is indicated by the ὀφθήσεται, and it is characterized as the second appearance, because the appearances to the disciples, which took place after the resurrection and before the ascension, belong to the period of Christ’s first coming to earth. The reading διὰ πίστεως either after or before εἰς σωτηρίαν (adopted by Lachm. after A. 31, 47, but in 1850 again expunged), is a gloss. Still less are we authorized to connect εἰς σωτηρίαν with ἀπεκδεχομένοις (Primas., Camerar., Klee, Stein, etc.). It elongs to ὀφθήσεται, and points to final deliverance from all misery.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. In the death of Christ that has been really fulfilled which the sprinkling of the sacred book and of the sacred vessels of the temple with blood, symbolically represented. The sanctuary originated in reference to human guilt and sin, but has been purified from the guilt of the general corruption, by the fact that the Son of God, who, by the establishment of the covenant with sinful men, has, although from pure grace, yet assumed the obligation of their ransom, has actually and all-sufficiently offered Himself as a vicarious offering.
2. By Jesus Christ’s single and unrepeated, yet all-sufficient offering of Himself, the guilty relations of collective humanity are objectively removed, at whatever time its members may live upon the earth; so that neither does a repeated presentation of Himself take place in heaven (which would presuppose a corresponding repetition of the sufferings of Christ, since the beginning of the world), nor is the second coming of the Messiah, which is in the certain future, for the purpose of a second vicarious suffering. By virtue of the true deity of the Saviour, His single offering is for ever sufficient; by virtue of His true humanity He is incapable of rendering it more than once.
3. The “now” of the manifestation of Christ on our behalf before the face of God in heaven, so that no veiling cloud intervenes, such as was in the Mosaic sanctuary, Lev_16:2, is the present period of salvation, which, as the closing period, lasts until the parousia, and has, as its condition and historical commencement, the appearance of Christ in the flesh with His single and final offering.
4. Christ has not merely entered, from love and compassion, into the fellowship of human suffering, but He has taken upon Himself the burden of human sin; and this burden, under which men were in danger of utterly succumbing, He has been able to lift from them in no other way than by voluntarily enduring for them the punishment of sins which they had deserved, and by His vicarious death taking it from all the guilty—who here, as Heb_2:10, are called many, not in the particularistic sense of an exclusion of some from salvation merely by virtue of the electing purpose of God, nor in reference to the failure of some to fulfil the condition of a participation in salvation, but, as Mat_20:28; Mat_26:28; Luk_22:20; Mar_14:34, with reference to the fact that the single offering of the one God-man, is forever efficacious for humanity in all its manifold members. To the application of the doctrine of vicarious suffering to the passage before us, it cannot, with Hofm., be objected, that an expiatory bearing of sin cannot be designated as the aim and object of His offering of Himself. With entire correctness Del. replies to the objection: “Atonement for sin was not indeed the purpose of men in bringing upon Him this infliction; but might be none the less the purpose of God in subjecting Him to it, and his own in submitting to it.”
5. The earlier opinion, still held by Heubner, that for individuals judgment follows immediately upon their death, but that after the resurrection follows the manifestation of the judgment in relation to all, cannot at least be deduced from our passage. The contemporaneousness of the judgment and of the second coming of Christ, follow clearly from Heb_10:25; Heb_10:37 ff.; and the decision according to which the lot of the one class is perdition (ἀπώλεια) and that of the other περιποίησις ψυχῆς, is mentioned Heb_10:38 ff., as a consequence of the coming of Christ. Nevertheless, when the Judge in our Epistle is expressly designated (Heb_10:30 ff; Heb_12:23; Heb_12:25; Heb_12:29; Heb_13:4) not Christ, but God is named, which might stand connected with the fact (D. Schultz) that God is the being that makes the enemies of Christ His footstool. Since, however, the glory and majesty of Christ, are elsewhere strongly emphasized in our Epistle, it might at first seem surprising that the judgment is no where expressly ascribed to Christ. From this, however, we may not with Bleek, deduce the inference that that Divine judgment which destroys the adversaries, precedes the parousia. This may, with Riehm, be more simply and satisfactorily explained, from the fact that the exalted Christ stood before the author’s mind as a heavenly High-priest, and it was therefore entirely natural to regard as the object of His reappearance upon earth, merely the consummation of His high-priestly work, i.e., the complete salvation of believers, and on the other hand, to ascribe to God Himself the accompanying judgment, and the punishment of the adversaries.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
The appearance of Jesus Christ on earth terminates one, and opens another section of the history of the world.—How does the entrance of Christ into heaven stand related to the object of His appearance on earth?—The likeness and the unlikeness of the death of Jesus Christ, and of the dying of the children of men, 1, in their causes, 2, in their results.—The divine ordering in the connection of sin, death, and judgment.—How does the second appearance of Jesus Christ in the world distinguish itself from the first? 1, in respect to His person; 2, in His relation to sin; 3, in His influence on the world.—In Christ we experience that there is a contact with sin, which does not defile, but which annihilates sin.—The doing away of the hinderances to our blessedness.—The looking forward of believers to the appearance of the Lord, 1, in its authorization; 2, in its satisfaction; 3, in its obligation.
Starke:—There are, indeed, many offerings made to the Lord, but the most from hypocrisy, and although such have great outward show, yet they do not please Him. The sacrifices which please God, are a broken heart and a contrite spirit, Psa_51:19.—The appearance of Christ in the presence of God is not merely the presentation and holding forth of His person and of His propitiatory sacrifice; but extends also to a true, glorious, and powerful intercession, in the strictest sense of the word. But He prays no longer thus humbly as when He was upon earth; for His prayer belongs to His state of exaltation, and is a fruit of His sitting at the right hand of God, the Father.—Men are at no time so holy as to be absolutely beyond sinning; but since we daily sin much, and deserve punishment, we always need purification through the blood of Jesus.—The single offering of Christ upon the cross, takes away sin.—Only once has He been sacrificed, and more than once He may not be sacrificed, and therefore not in the sacred Supper.—The last judgment is as certain as death.—Observe, that upon death follows the judgment. Look to it, then, and strive with the highest industry, that thou die happy, and that thou mayest await with joy the appearance of thy Saviour for thy salvation.—To await Christ’s coming unto salvation is the prerogative of believers, who have received for this, in a living hope, the first fruits of the Spirit; who love the appearing of the Lord, and, in order that they may hold themselves in readiness for a blissful death, deny the world and say: Even so, Come Lord Jesus, Rev_22:20.—The ungodly will not be looking for the coming of Christ at the final judgment, although He will appear unto them, whether they will or no; and this undesired appearing will to them be full of sadness (Judges 15, Rev_1:7).—Only when Christ shall appear will believers become perfectly blessed, Col_3:4.
Rieger:—The heavenly sanctuary which Christ has entered in His appearing before God, is also the goal to which He will bring all who come to God by Him.—Whosoever learns from the Gospel the cause and fruit of the appearance of Jesus in the flesh, and of His offering for sin, and learns it with a loving knowledge, he may look with joy for His appearance in glory, and for the consummation of His own blessedness.—What a difference between the two appearances of Jesus, in weakness and in glory! then, under the burden of our sins, with the accompaniments of shame, the cross, and death; now, in His endless life, in the power of God and His revelation in glory.
Heubner:—Only in eternity shall we see from what an abyss Christ has rescued us, and into what glory He translates us.—Redemption was, in the mind of God, virtually effected from eternity, 2Ti_1:9. There was, then, need of no appearance in the presence of God; but that appearance of the crucified One which has taken place in time, was made to reveal the counsel of God to the world of spirits.—The duration of the world is limited to a fixed period of time. As surely as it has a beginning, so surely will it have an end.—Waiting is the Christian’s art. He waits for the appearance of Christ, whereby the truth of faith is victoriously confirmed, and Christ is manifested to be the Being whom Christians regard Him.
Steinhofer:—Jesus, the founder of the new covenant, has gathered up the sin of the whole world, together with all its evil fruits, upon the cross, and has, once for all, so completely driven them away, that, under the testimony of the Gospel, we need make no further distinction in respect of many, or of great sins.
Menken:—If even the earthly figures of heavenly things were desecrated and defiled by the communion which sinful men had with them, and could, therefore, remain in connection with them only on account of offered sacrifices, and only by means of certain holy expiations and purifyings, how much less could we anticipate an immediate, unconditional, unobstructed communion of dying and sinful men with heavenly things!
Hahn:—The heavenly things flee before us in our impurity, and thither may no impure person come; and yet all the treasures of the suffering and death of Christ are deposited there, and thence must we obtain them. If we wish anything therefrom, we must again be reconciled with the sanctuary. But this is accomplished only through the blood of Christ.—Happy is he who has laid the foundation of his faith in the first appearing of Christ; he will behold Him with joy in the second.
Footnotes:
[14]Heb_9:27.—καί is to be read after οὕτως, according to the united testimony of the Uncials.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv18–23 Whereupon--rather, "Whence."
Whereupon--rather, "Whence."
dedicated--"inaugurated." The Old Testament strictly and formally began on that day of inauguration. "Where the disposition, or arrangement, is ratified by the blood of another, namely, of animals, which cannot make a covenant, much less make a testament, it is not strictly a testament, where it is ratified by the death of him that makes the arrangement, it is strictly, Greek 'diathece,' Hebrew 'berith,' taken in a wider sense, a testament" [BENGEL]; thus, in Heb 9:18, referring to the old dispensation, we may translate, "the first (covenant)": or better, retain "the first (testament)," not that the old dispensation, regarded by itself, is a testament, but it is so when regarded as the typical representative of the new, which is strictly a Testament.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv18–23 18. Whereupon—In accordance with this demand of death for…
18. Whereupon—In accordance with this demand of death for a testament, the emblem of death, namely, blood, is freely shed and abundantly used.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv18–23 18. Whereupon] Rather, “Wherefore;” because both “a covenant” and…
18. Whereupon] Rather, “Wherefore;” because both “a covenant” and “a testament” involve the idea of death.
neither] “not even.”
Read full note →
was dedicated] Lit. “has been handselled” or “inaugurated.” The word is from the same root as “Encaenia,” the name given to the re-dedication of the Temple by the Maccabees (Joh_10:22. Comp. Deu_20:5; 1Ki_8:63; LXX.). The perfect is used by the author, as in so many other instances.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv18–23 (18) Whereupon.—Better, Wherefore not even has the first (covenant)…
(18) Whereupon.—Better, Wherefore not even has the first (covenant) been dedicated (or, inaugurated) without blood. (See Exo_24:6-8.)
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv18, 19, 21, 22, 23 Wherefore neither hath the first (testament, A.V; or, covenant)…
Wherefore neither hath the first (testament, A.V; or, covenant) been dedicated without blood. Here the blood of slain victims, which had been essential for the first inauguration of the old diayhkh , is referred to as expressing the principle of vers. 16, 17, viz. that there must be death for a diayhkh (in whatever sense the word may be intended, whether as a testament or as a covenant between God and man) to take effect. Whichever view we take of the intended import of the word, the reference is equally apposite in support of the introductory proposition of ver. 15; which is to the effect that Christ"s death (yanatou genmenou ), fulfilling the symbolism of the old inaugurating sacrifices, qualified him as Mediator of a new diayhkh .
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v22 Without shedding of blood is no remission
Heb_9:22
Without shedding of blood is no remission
Read full note →
No remission without blood
I.
ESTABLISH THE FACT.
1. The observances of the ceremonial law show that men were saved by blood under the Mosaic dispensation.
2. The same way of salvation still obtains under the gospel. The typical sacrifices are indeed superseded by the one sacrifice of Christ. But it is through His sacrifice, and through it alone, that any man is saved.
(1) This is capable of direct proof from Scripture (1Sa_2:17; 1Sa_2:25; Heb_10:26-27).
(2) It may be yet further proved by arguments, which, though of an indirect nature, are not the less satisfactory than the foregoing, a. If salvation be not by blood the whole Mosaic ritual was absurd, b. If salvation be not by blood, the prophets grossly misrepresented their Messiah (Isa_53:1-12.; Dan_9:24; Dan_9:26; Zec_13:1; Joh_1:29).
3. If salvation be not by blood, the declarations of the apostles, yea, and of Christ Himself, are fax more likely to mislead than to instruct the world. Christ expressly told His disciples that His blood was shed for the remission of sins (Mat_26:28). And the apostles uniformly declare that God purchased the Church with His own blood (Act_20:28); that our reconciliation to God (Eph_2:16; Col_1:20), and our justification before Him (Rom_5:9), together with our complete redemption (Eph_1:7; Rev_5:9), are by blood, even by the blood of Christ, that spotless Lamb (1Pe_1:19).
II. IMPROVEMENT.
1. The evil of sin.
2. The folly of self-righteousness.
3. The encouragement which the gospel affords to sinners.
4. The wonderful love of Christ. (Theological Sketch-Book.)
On the atonement
I. The mercy of God, however dispensed to sinners, ARISES SOLELY FROM THE BENIGNITY OF HIS OWN NATURE. It is not to be considered as moved and excited by the means which they must use to obtain it. These are only the channel of its communication.
II. GOD HAVING PROVIDED A PARTICULAR WAY IN WHICH HE WILL MANIFEST HIS GRACE, THAT WAY DERIVES ITS EFFICACY FROM HIS APPOINTMENT.
III. We may remark, THAT THE METHOD IN WHICH GOD DISPENSES HIS MERCY DOES NOT SUPERSEDE THE NECESSITY OF REPENTANCE.
IV. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE MUST ALSO OBSERVE, THAT OUR REPENTANCE DOES NOT SUPERSEDE THE NECESSITY OF FAITH.
V. I PRESUME NOT EVEN TO ATTEMPT ANY EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS WHICH INDUCED THE ALMIGHTY TO CHOOSE THIS PARTICULAR MODE FOR THE DISPENSATION OF HIS MERCY TO SINNERS. It becomes us rather humbly to acknowledge our ignorance, and adore the depth both of the wisdom and goodness of God. He has ordained it, and let us be satisfied and thankful. We are permitted, however, to discover some reasons which prove the propriety of such a mode of dispensing mercy. It manifests exceedingly the grace of God, by showing that our salvation is wholly owing to it. Boasting is thus entirely excluded. And who can say whether it may not be suited to the Divine purity and justice, to confer salvation on man, only by subjecting him to the deepest humiliation, by constraining him to feel his own entire inability to save himself, and thus compelling him to ascribe his salvation solely to the Divine mercy? (J. Venn, M. A.)
The atonement
I. ITS NECESSITY arises
1. From mans sin, and its necessary consequences.
2. Mans utter incapability to atone for himself.
3. The demands of the law cannot be relaxed with honour to the lawgiver.
II. THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. The person atoning must
1. Be of superior dignity to the persons for whom the atonement is made.
2. He must possess the same nature as the offender.
3. He must have a right to dispose of his own life, and freely offer himself to this end.
4. He must approve of the law, and recognise the justice of its claim.
5. He must be free from all charges of personal guilt.
6. He must answer all the demands of the law, and endure its curse.
III. THE EFFECTS OF THE ATONEMENT.
1. All the perfections of Jehovah have been illustriously displayed.
2. The atonement leaves the impenitent without excuse.
3. The atonement has rendered mans salvation possible.
Application:
1. Let the subject of the atonement be Scripturally investigated, that it may be rightly understood.
2. Let it be cordially received, by a hearty faith (Rom_10:9).
3. Let a Scriptural knowledge, and a cordial reception of it, fill the soul with hope and joy.
4. Let not the dying sinner reject the only way of salvation. (J. Burns, D. D.)
On the atonement
I. THE FACT OF HUMAN GUILT, AND MANS NEED OF MERCY. Remission signifies the forgiveness of a debt, or the withdrawal of the sentence of punishment, which has been pronounced upon a convicted offender.
II. SIN IS REMISSABLE. It may be pardoned. Forgiveness is attainable. The guilt of sin can be cancelled, and the sentence of condemnation may be repealed.
1. Upon this ground the sacrifices of the law were instituted. Every victim that bled, every sacrifice of blood upon the altar of the tabernacle and temple, was a conclusive testimony to the pardoning grace of God.
2. The language of Scripture is quite decisive on this great question. It tells us that with the Lord there is mercy--that He is ready to forgive--slow to anger--plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon Him,
3. Scripture facts prove the doctrine which our text includes. If there were no collateral proof, the mission of Christ into the world as the Prophet and Priest of the Church would be quite enough. He came to save sinners.
4. We may also look at examples. Sin had been remitted, or forgiven. Paul says, I obtained mercy. The penitent thief was pardoned and taken to paradise the same day,
III. WHILE SIN MAY BE PARDONED IT IS ONLY THROUGH THE SHEDDING OF BLOOD. Some impurities might, under the law, be removed by water and fire, but the stain of sin could be removed only by blood. It is on this principle that the plan of salvation by the death of Christ is placed, and on this that God, in fact, bestows remission of sins. (J. E. Everitt.)
Remission of sins by substitution
I. REMISSION OF SINS IS NECESSARY FOR THE RECONCILIATION OF MAN WITH GOD. It is the first necessity. Till sin is totally removed there can be no agreement between God, the Holy One, and man, His creature. Sin first separated them, and the alienation has grown with every generation where sin has reigned. And so long as sin is present, they must remain separate, both in purpose and action. You will see then, further, it is not a question of only forgiveness. God, in His sovereign mercy, might forgive the sin of our life--He does forgive it--but that does not take the sin away. The heart is still a sinful heart; it has forfeited its rights, and though God forgives, these rights are not restored. If, then, we are at any time to be reconciled with God, and be the recipients of His favour, it must be on the one condition that our consciences are purged from evil. Sin in its action will be removed only as sin in its source is taken away; and only as that is done can the soul have peace with God, or can God return to the soul. When sin is taken right away, there remains no barrier between the creature and his God. The soul, desiring to do right, loving the truth, desires to do what God would have it. The will of the creature, however feeble its action may be, is one with the will of God. Nothing remains, therefore, to prevent Him rendering the help of His favour and strength. And this, we are told, He will do.
II. REMISSION OF SINS IS ONLY POSSIBLE BY SUBSTITUTION; THAT IS, ONE LIFE PAYING PENALTY FOR ANOTHER LIFE. This is the declaration of the sacrifices and services of the temple. It is not our province to explain, it is simply our duty to describe and tell, as well as we are able, Gods plan for removing sin away from us, so that we might receive His Divine gifts. The animal thus sacrificed was the substitution for the life of the offerer. He died, as it were, for sin, in the beast who had been put into his place. The penalty being thus paid, he was free from sin, and now could stand before God as one who had become reconciled to Him. But of course you will observe, in thus acting, the sinner acknowledges the authority and power of God. He has put aside his own thoughts and purposes, and has done Gods, thus indicating in the very act of sacrifice that there is a change of his heart. This finds its entire fulfilment in Jesus Christ. The fact was shadowed as a principle of the Divine purpose in redemption--without the shedding of blood, the substitution of life for sin, there could be no remission. We may and must look at His death on the Cross as the substitution of His life for the life of each one for whom He died. That death can have no other meaning, and when we put it side by side, as the apostle does here, with the Old Testament teaching, I dont see how we can doubt Gods intention and method in the death of His Son. Gods purpose is thus revealed. Sin is not simply forgiven, but it is taken away. The soul is cleansed from its guilt; the conscience is cleared. When the time comes for it to stand stripped of the material and mortal nature of the present, in presence of the seen and known Eternal One, it will be purified, and fit in its sympathies, thoughts, and feelings for companionship with the absolutely holy God. Thus freed from sin, it will for ever be pure, no sin ever again finding place in it, because it will be with God and like God.
III. Having stated the principle, WE SAY A WORD AS TO ITS APPLICATION. This substitution appropriated by faith secures our acceptance with God. Jesus died for and in the place of sinners; then are sinners freed from sin? Is there nothing more for us than to eat and drink and go on our way? It is not so. He died for sinners, it is true, but only for sinners who have, so to speak, presented Him to God as their sacrifice. (H. W. Beecher.)
Spiritual blood-shedding
I. SPIRITUAL BLOOD-SHEDDING OR SELF-SACRIFICE IS ESSENTIAL TO DELIVER OUR OWN SOULS FROM SIN.
II. SPIRITUAL BLOOD-SHEDDING IS ESSENTIAL TO DELIVER THE SOULS OF OTHERS FROM SIN.
1. The necessary qualification of a spiritual reformer.
2. The spirit which has governed all genuine reformers.
3. The power of Christ in prosecuting His mission. (Homilist.)
The necessity of atonement
Atonement always supposes a party offending and a party offended. It supposes that the offended holds the offender justly bound to suffer penal consequences as merited by the offence. The question proposed for present discussion regards the necessity of the atonement of Jesus Christ, in order to Gods remitting the sins of men. As a preliminary, we are constrained to protest against the adducing of any facts as bearing upon this question, which belong to the present gracious methods of Gods dealing with the human race. The question is, whether, in order to the adoption of those gracious methods, an atonement was not necessary? The evangelical doctrine of atonement is founded in the independent, essential mercy of God. It originated in His infinite mercy. It was an expedient, devised by boundless wisdom, and furnished by boundless love, to supersede the rigorous execution of justice. The forgiveness of sin essentially depends on the whole character of God, on His moral views and feelings respecting sin, and on the reasons which render its punishment necessary. It is here that we should look for all the obstacles, if there be any, which obstruct the exercise of grace, and oppose the remission of sin, and for all the reasons which render an atonement in behalf of sinful men, with a view to their receiving that blessed benefit, indispensable. Here, then, let us commence the discussion. The doctrine which I propose to illustrate and establish is contained in the following proposition: The great moral reasons which require the punishment of sin render the atonement necessary in order to its forgiveness.
I. I am to show that there are GREAT MORAL REASONS WHICH REQUIRE THAT SIN SHOULD RE PUNISHED.
1. Gods holiness and justice form the first moral reason. This is the ground pillar and chief buttress of my argument. If He is a holy and a righteous God, it is impossible that sin should pass unpunished. You ask me what is Gods holiness; what is His rectitude? His holiness is an essential part of His eternal character. It is His immutable disposition toward all points that involve morality. I would say it is His most perfect perception of right and wrong: it is His most perfect approbation of right; it is His most perfect abhorrence of wrong. And His justice is also inherent and essential. It is the disposition of His nature to act, in all worlds, on all occasions, in the most exact conformity to His moral sense. In heaven, earth, or hell, no being shall ever have ground of complaint, that in His treatment of him, God has forgotten His own holiness and justice.
2. I proceed to state a second moral reason, intimately connected with the preceding, why sin should not be permitted to pass unpunished. It is necessary, as the means of leading intelligent beings to reverence and honour God as a Being essentially holy and righteous. We contend that even the benevolence of God demands that sin should not be permitted to pass unpunished. To Him the created universe looks up as the Parent of eternal holiness, order, and well being. These are to be found and enjoyed only in subjection to God, and in perfect, undeviating obedience to His laws. That He should enforce such subjection and obedience by holding the transgressor responsible for his misdeeds, and so administering His government as that sin shall not pass unpunished, is required by the best interests of the created system.
II. THESE MORAL REASONS WINCH REQUIRE THE PUNISHMENT OF SIN, RENDER THE ATONEMENT NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ITS FORGIVENESS. NO substantial reason can be given why a Being infinitely benevolent as well as just, who has been pleased to ordain the redemption of guilty men, should not, when the ends of justice are satisfied, remit their doom. And these ends are most fully secured in the atonement. With an efficacy which to that heart which contemplates it in its just light must prove irresistible, the atonement exhibits God as a Being infinitely holy and righteous, regarding Himself as supremely worthy of the entire homage, love, and obedience of all moral existences, whose rectitude is such that He can give no other laws than those which are founded in eternal and immutable right, can administer no other government but that which is conducted on principles of justice and judgment, can hold no communion with rational beings who are unholy, cannot mark sin but to abhor it, and as the Sovereign Ruler, to manifest towards it His abhorrence, cannot pardon it without bearing testimony, heard with astonishment by heaven, earth, and hell, that it is an endless evil. And what inducements does the atonement hold out to moral agents to esteem, admire, adore, and obey, the Most High and Holy God, and to persevere in this exalted and exalting course? As the attainment of a supreme regard for holiness and an entire detestation of sin must produce the most pure and enduring happiness, what measure could so directly and so powerfully tend to promote and extend the highest happiness of the created system as the atonement? (John De Witt, D. D.)
Atonement by blood
It is asserted by historians that there is not a nation mentioned in history, the blood of whose citizens has not been poured out on its altars as an atonement for their sins, or to propitiate their deities. Even in this nineteenth century, it is said that there is a custom, carefully kept secret by Mussulmen, which shows they believe that without shedding of blood is no remission of sin. In time of great trouble and sorrow, when dreading the death of a favourite child, it is their custom to secretly kill a lamb and sacrifice it, crying, Allah, take the life of this lamb for the life of my child. The flesh of the lamb is then carefully removed, and given to religious beggars, while the skeleton is buried without breaking a bone. (C. W. Bibb.)
The blood:
The collector of railway tickets did not look to the character or education of the holder of the ticket, but to the ticket itself. In like manner the blood was a token which typically indicated the way they were to be saved. (D. L. Moody.)
The doctrine of blood:
Some people said they did not understand the doctrine of blood. It was very offensive to the natural man. He knew a man to say that whenever he heard a minister speak of the blood in his sermon, he took up his hat and quietly walked out. But just as the bitterest medicine cured, so the doctrine of blood found that man and he was saved. (D. L. Moody.)
Without shedding of blood there is no remission:
An aged Jew said: I have fasted for seven and twenty hours, praying with all possible earnestness, and trembling too, and after all I feel that my sins have not been atoned for. No; without shedding of blood there is no remission. The only plank between the believer and destruction is the blood of the incarnate God. To make light of the blood, therefore, is to make light of salvation, and miss it for ever. The patterns of things in the heavens
Drama of heaven:
The life of Jesus Christ was a celestial drama which has revealed to mankind the nature of heaven.
1. The heavenly life is spoken of as a transparency. The densest thing we know is the pavement on which we walk. In heaven it is transparent; it is a pavement, but you can see through it like glass. You may recollect reading that a celebrated Roman once came before his fellow-citizens for their votes, saying that he Wished there was a window in his breast, so that they might see the purity of his motive and the goodness of his heart. An old Puritan minister, on recording this incident, adds, Poor creature, were he to have had such a window, he would at once have prayed God to give him a shutter to hide his nature from his fellow-men. Now, if you would take a part in heavens drama, you are to learn to be transparent, that is sincere. Your daily life is to be so much above the board, as we understand those words, that everybody can see, if they will but look with unprejudiced eye, that your words and actions are inspired by pure and honest motives.
2. We are told that the pavement of heaven is of the most valuable material, of pure gold. if, therefore, we take part in the drama of heaven, let us see that our life rests on the purest foundation; let our character be as genuine as the purest gold. Though your outward dress be of the poorest material, see that your inward character is of pure gold. Cultivate within yourself a love for the good and the true, and become a man whose thoughts and feelings are inspirations of God. How beautiful is this peach, with its silken and crimson colour! yet is there not a hard bitter stone at the core? The world spends too much time now-a-days in seeking to be beautiful outside. Let us, who show the drama of heaven on the stage of the earth, seek to be beautiful within.
3. From the description given by John we learn that the light of heaven is superb and effulgent. It is not the blaze of the sun, nor the brilliant flash of electricity; it is the light of the Lamb. By what rule do you walk? Is it by the maxims of society? The light which guides the inhabitants of heaven is -the spirit of the life of Jesus Christ; that sacred nature illumines heaven. The more men know the holy, loving God, whose human body was given for their redemption, the more will they abhor and forsake sin. The drama, therefore, which you and I have to play is to show men the character of God.
4. Notice, next, the clothing of the inhabitants of the land of light and love. It is said that they wear white robes. White is the emblem of purity and innocence. In order to exhibit heavens drama on earth, we have to put on the white robes of Christian charity and self-denial. We are to wear the crown of a king, not the shackles of a slave. We should regulate our passions as a king is supposed to govern his kingdom--for the good of the whole. We have to dare to do pure deeds and to venture on humane exploits.
5. Then remember that in the drama of heaven, you are to show the palms of victory which are waved in the hands of the white-robed in paradise. Let it be seen that you can fight on until you conquer. You may have fallen in past conflicts, but in this drama of heaven you are to show that while we live on earth, God can save us from our sins. I have not time to tell you all the other glorious characteristics of heaven, how we shall hunger no more and thirst no more. Heaven is a state of satisfaction; nothing will be wanting. This life is full of wants, real or imaginary. (W. Birch.)
Into heaven itself
On the ascension of Christ
I. It is remarkable that the Jews, as we learn from Josephus and the writings of the Hebrew doctors, considered THE OUTER COURTS OF THE TABERNACLE AS SYMBOLICAL OF THE EARTH, AND THE HOLY OF HOLIES AS AN EMBLEM OF HEAVEN. When, therefore, our Lord had by the sacrifice of Himself upon the Cross made expiation for the sins of the whole world, it became Him, as the great High Priest of mankind, to enter into the holy of holies, not made with hands, even into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.
II. It appears from many accounts, that while the high priest was making intercession in the most holy place, THE PEOPLE WERE WITHOUT, CONFESSING THEIR SINS, AND PROFESSING THEIR ALLEGIANCE TO THE ALMIGHTY. Among the uses which have been assigned to the golden bells, which were ordered to be suspended around the bottom of the pontifical robe, it has been supposed, with much probability, that they were to give notice when the high priest entered within the veil on this solemn business, that the people might behave with correspondent sobriety. In like manner, while our Master is in heaven, we in this earth, this outer court of Gods universal tabernacle, have our work to do. There are conditions of the covenant on our part to be fulfilled. Christ hath instructed His Church to live here, in the exercise of faith and repentance, of patience, devotion, and charity, while He is interceding for them with the Everlasting Father.
III. It belonged exclusively to the priests, under the Mosaic dispensation, TO BLESS THE PEOPLE IN BEHALF OF GOD. In like manner, our High Priest hath received of the Father all gifts and blessings for His Church. With the voice of His ministers, He dispenses to the penitent assurances of the pardon of their sins. (Bp. Dehon.)
The ancient holy of holies, a type of heaven
1. The holy of holies was the dwelling-place of Jehovah, where He manifested Himself in visible glory. Even so in the upper sanctuary does Jehovah manifest the brightness of His glory to the innumerable hosts of holy angels and blessed spirits, by whom He is unceasingly worshipped.
2. The ancient holy of holies was the most splendid and magnificent part of the tabernacle and temple. In this respect also it was but the type and shadow of heaven. Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God! It is represented as the paradise of God, where grows the tree of life. It is spoken of as Mount Zion, the antitype of the earthly hill on which were erected the temple of Jehovah and the palace of Judahs kings, and which David celebrated as beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth. It is described as a city, the New Jerusalem, the city of the great King, whose foundations are garnished with all manner of precious stones. A still more impressive idea of the unrivalled magnificence of heaven is given us when it is described as the peculiar workmanship of the Almighty--as a place which His infinite power has been exerted to beautify, and which His boundless beneficence has been called forth to gladden and bless. Unlike the holy places in the ancient tabernacle and temple, this sanctuary has not been made with hands; it was not erected by any creature, neither was it formed out of any pre-existent matter, but created immediately by God Himself. It is the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man; the sanctuary, not of this building; the city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
3. The ancient holy of holies was, by Divine appointment, entirely concealed from the view of those who worshipped in the outer courts. With the most vigilant care it was kept sacred from all intrusion. Even from the holy place where the priests were wont to minister, it was separated by a thick curtain or veil of curiously embroidered tapestry, while the holy place itself was hidden from the people at large, who worshipped in the courts without, by means of a second veil of a similar description. There can be no question that all these arrangements were primarily designed to be emblematic of the particular character of that dispensation with which they were directly connected, as signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing. At the same time, however, they present us with a beautiful type of the physical concealment which invests the heaven of heavens. For no man hath ascended up to heaven but He that came clown from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. Between these, the outer courts of the temple, and that loftiest shrine of this vast universe, God has been pleased to stretch an impervious and impenetrable veil. It is a great and glorious reality; but it is only by the eye of faith that it can be described on this dim spot which men call earth. Even with all the light which the gospel has shed upon it, it is a glory that yet remains to be revealed.
4. In pursuing the analogy subsisting between the holy of holies and the heaven of heavens, it may be added that the office performed by the Jewish high priest in the former was a most significant emblem of the function to be discharged in the latter by Jesus, the anointed High Priest of our profession. (Peter Grant.)
Encouragement from Christ glorified
The ascension of our Lord into heaven is a subject not only of admiration, but also of infinite importance to us. Its consequences are countless in number, immeasurable in extent, and endless in duration. Man is actually in the highest glory of the divine majesty at the right hand of God, the same glory in which the blessed Son of God dwelt before He came into the world. It cannot but excite our admiring wonder to contemplate human nature so highly exalted. For where He is, there shall we be also, if we are His true disciples, and shall behold His glory, and be ourselves clothed with a body of resplendent light like that of the Lord. But when we compare what we ought to be, and what we really must become in order to our being permitted to follow Christ into His glorious kingdom, with what we actually are, we may be disposed to say, Who then can be saved? The great subject now before us comes to our relief in this awful question, cheering our anxious hearts with hope. Christ, saith the apostle, entered into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us. For us means in our behalf, in order to take our part, to stand on our side. But who is this our Advocate? Is He likely to act in our favour with any effect? Is He likely to have influence with the Father? Has He any power of His own? Hath He yet done anything for us? That the influence of Christ with the Father is all-prevailing we cannot doubt, when we consider that He is the only, the beloved Son of God. We shall be strengthened in this confidence if we call to mind that the blessed God gave Him for the very purpose of saving us Joh_3:16). And not only this, but also He hath made a covenant engagement, wherein He has graciously promised to receive all those for whom His Son pleads. The desire then of accomplishing His own benevolent purpose, the gracious love which He has for us, and His unfailing truth and faithfulness, all combine to strengthen our assurance that He will favourably hear the intercession of His beloved Son in our behalf (Joh_16:26-27). Will not the consideration of this blessed truth encourage us to return to God, to humble ourselves under His mighty hand, to implore that mercy promised to us through Christ, and render His Father favourable to us? Yes, if we seem as far from God as earth is from heaven, sunk as low in sin as the utmost depths of the ocean, yet when we look up and see One at the right hand of God ready to take our part, we may feel a cheering hope (Heb_6:19-20; Heb_7:25). But has this our blessed Saviour any power of His own? (Mat_28:18; Rev_1:18; Php_2:9-11. Col_2:9-10; Heb_7:25; Php_2:12). Most important is this view of the Saviours almighty power to the anxious Christian, who is working out his own salvation with fear and trembling. Thoughtless people, who are not engaged in the struggle against sin, may not perceive its importance. They do not feel deeply concerned about their salvation. They allow their enemies undisputed possession of their heart. Wherefore passively acquiescing in their dominion, they do not feel their claims. But let a man endeavor to rule himself after Gods Word, and he will immediately find that he has powerful enemies to resist (Rom_7:15; Rom_7:21-23). He finds strong tendencies to sin, dispositions, tempers, passions, disposing and urging him to unchristian language and ungodly practices, and withholding him from the due and faithful discharge of his duty. But looking to Christ, he finds that he has reason to thank God that sin shall not have dominion over him. And thus having felt that of himself he could do nothing, he finds himself enabled to say, I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. But we shall feel greater confidence that the glorified Jesus will act in our behalf, if we can find that He hath already done anything for us. Now surely the Lord hath done great things for us already. He has come clown from heaven to earth for us men and for our salvation. He has endured the miseries of this sinful world for our sake. He has laid down His life for us. When we know that the blessed Son of God has clone and suffered so much for us, what can there be which He will not do for our sake? St. Paul puts this argument very strongly (Rom_5:6-9). Great therefore may be our hope when we think that we have One in heaven on cur side, whose peculiar care we are, who has taken upon Himself our nature, and dwells in our form; who has made our cause His own; One of all-prevailing influence with our heavenly Father, who graciously desires to listen to His intercession in our favour; One of infinite might and dominion; One who has already done and suffered great things for us, exercised mighty power, wisdom, and love for our protection, guidance, and salvation. As each person is able to see what this blessed Saviour has done for his soul, he will experience proportionate encouragement. (R. L. Cotton, D. D.)
Presence of Christ incarnate in heaven
The presence in heaven of Christ incarnate is perhaps the sublimest doctrine to which a rational faith can reach. It is an extension of His atoning life and death on earth, and the renewal of the eternal glory (once briefly suspended) with the Father in heaven. Considering also how it affects us in the present time by its immediate influence, as distinct, I mean, from His acts in the past and future, it is strange that it does not more often fill our thoughts. There is in the human breast an inextinguishable longing for present sympathy. Love cannot bear separation: it is not content with memory, or expectation! As the heart feels the burden of the passing hour, so does it for every hour want its portion of sympathy and love. Thus the presence in heaven of Christ in the glorified Body is a truth most fruitful in thoughts of the dignity of human life, and in ministries of comfort to those who walk upon the earth. I shall recall some passages in Scripture which throw light on the question of a body possibly existing in heaven, then of Christs Body in particular; and secondly, remark on the influence of His incarnate presence upon us:
I. To BEGIN WITH THE FIRST CREATED BODY. If Adam had kept his estate of innocence, he would not have died, nor would he, we imagine, have continued for ever in Paradise, among the trees and beasts of the earth. We believe that he would have been translated in his body, glorified, to heaven. Enoch was thus removed, and afterwards Elijah. Next, coming to the Person of our blessed Lord. His Body after the resurrection was the same which had died, though the life to which He rose was not a return to that which had expired on the Cross. His Body was the same, but endued with new powers and living under other conditions. Again, angels declared that as He was taken up into heaven, so in like manner should He come. If so, in what state does He pass the interval between the ascension and the judgment, that is, the present time? Surely in the same spiritual, glorified Body. Moreover, He has been seen once, and heard once, since His ascension. Is it not too often the case, that Christ is regarded as existing in heaven only as God, in a certain omnipresent nature, as He was from all eternity? Do not men argue, that as a day will come when He shall put aside His mediation that is when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, so also He will then escape from the confines of His humanity, and return to simple God? Is it sufficiently taken into account that His condition there is altered by His Incarnation, and if His condition, then His influence over us?
II. To the evidence of Scripture and our Church formularies, I WILL ADD A FEW REMARKS ON SELF-EVIDENT SEASONS, WHY IT SHOULD BE SO. The Word was made flesh; the manhood of Christ was made perfect. He took not on Him the form of angels, but the seed of Abraham. It is a characteristic of human nature, that once man is man for ever. If then Christ is perfect Man, He is Man for ever. Not only that, but re, elation informs us that man will rise in the body, and live in his body for ever. If Christ has risen according to the laws which govern our resurrection (and this Scripture declares), He now lives, and will live for ever, in the Body with which He rose. What else is meant by Christ being the first-fruits of them that slept, the first-Begotten of the dead, and, in contradistinction from Adam, The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit, unless it be that Christ in His resurrection is the cause of our resurrection, and gives the law by which ours is determined? Once more, He is our Mediator. A mediator is one who represents both parties. In this case one party is God, the other is man. None can represent God but God, and Jesus is God; none can represent man but man, and Jesus is Man. If therefore we have need of a mediator in heaven now, He must be now, as heretofore, God and Man.
III. I have now to speak of THE INFLUENCE WHICH THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST INCARNATE IN HEAVEN HAS UPON MAN BELOW; AND OF THE PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE WHICH THIS DOCTRINE CAUSES IN OUR ESTIMATE OF HIS WORK FOR US. IS Christ omnipresent? Some persons will answer broadly, Yes, and go on to say that it is a mans faith which makes Him present everywhere--that no possible thing is needed but faith; therefore, that all attempts to give the Saviours grace a local habitation is wrong; that particular ordinances and outward means of grace are superfluous, therefore superstitious. On the other hand, it is the creed of the Church that Christ has ordained that virtue shall go forth from Him in special and particular channels; and these we call outward means of grace. The sacred enclosure, within which these streams of grace are dispersed, is the Church. Now there is of course great diversity between these two views; but does not the difference arise chiefly from the advocates of the former view losing sight of the continuous agency of the Man Jesus Christ, and thinking that His manhood is now absorbed in His divinity. Would it not clear away doubts and misgivings from many, who sincerely love Christ, if they considered this point; viz., our blessed Lord is still in His Body, and many of His blessings He dispenses through the Body, being the fruits of the great things which He did and suffered in the Body. So far as He dispenses these through the Body, His dispensation of grace is not omnipresent, but regulated by orders of time, place, and conditions, as His will ordains. The participation of Christ through faith and obedience is not diminished by the act, which has attached to a particular ordinance a special grace of intimate communion with Him in the Lords Supper. These particular ordinances are the mysterious pathways, down which the several rays, which issue from His glorified Body, travel to earth. Nor is it any objection to this view that the influence of His Body is spiritual. In ordinary language body means matter, and an immaterial body seems to be a contradiction of terms. We cannot explain it; but to some extent it is intelligible that a body should be present only spiritually. For instance, when our Saviour said to the nobleman, Thy son liveth, was He not present by that sick-bed, though His natural Body was elsewhere? And remember, while Christ acts by virtue of His Incarnation, and is to some extent guided in His operations by the laws of His human nature, yet the Body which acts, acts more mightily because of the Godhead which possesses it. Lastly, if Christ be not really and spiritually present in the ordinances which He has instituted, in a sense of more close and intimate communion than can be applied to the generally diffused mercy and power of God, then the idea of any Church is a fiction; then the very acts in which we have been engaged to-day are vain; the gifts of bread and wine, which Christ has bidden us prepare for His consecration of them, convey no grace, but are merely stimulants, by outward signs of the feelings of our hearts; then all means of grace whatever are solely our acts to God, not His acts towards us. How different is the truth! Angels in heaven see in His dispensations of grace within the Church signs of the power of Christ unto salvation, of which without the Church they would not be aware, that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God. Thus our acts of worship are not fictions, our sacraments are not representations. There is an electric current ever circulating from Christ Incarnate through the members of His Body, which is the Church. (C. W. Furse, M. A.)
Christ the intercessor
I. THE THINGS SUPPOSED BY THE ENTRANCE OF CHRIST INTO HEAVEN ARE THE SAME AS THOSE SUPPOSED BY THE ENTRANCE OF THE HIGH PRIEST INTO THE MOST HOLY PLACE; namely, that heaven and earth are at variance, that sin has occasioned the feud, that blood is the alone price of expiation, and that this price must be laid upon the altar of the Holy One before He will ever look kindly upon man again. The difference in the case of the two dispensations lies in the application of any permanent and satisfactory relief to the sinners conscience. And this higher form of mediation, argues the apostle, we have in Christ, whose blood is no more to be compared to the blood of bulls and goats than is the heaven into which He has carried that blood to be compared with the holy place of the tabernacle. Christ is gone, therefore, to appear in the presence of God for us; gone to display a memorial of that sacrifice by which He has obtained eternal redemption for us; gone to exhibit the living virtue of His own blood, and to claim the crowns of immortality for those for whom it was shed.
II. Christ has gone to appear in the presence of God for us, says the text; that is, AS THE INTERCESSOR, THE ADVOCATE, THE GREAT UNDERTAKER OF HUMAN CAUSES IN THE COURT OF HEAVEN. Let us consider some of His special qualifications for so great a work.
1. As, first, it is an intercession founded on right. Christ appearing as the slain man is a direct appeal to the righteousness of God. It is the pledge of a price paid, a ransom accepted, a claim substantiated, a covenant signed and sealed. Christ pleads His sufferings no doubt, but this He does not to move pity nor to ask favour, but just to assert His right over all the dispensations of mercy, His boundless and eternal prerogative to forgive.
2. But, secondly, we should have comfort in this mediation of the ascended Saviour, from knowing that He orders all our spiritual affairs with consummate prudence. We often ask and have not, but we little think why. Our Intercessor has been asking for us the direct contrary of that which we have asked for ourselves. He saw that which we did not see, namely, that in the then temper of our minds and spirit the good sought would be no longer good.
3. Further, there is that in the appearance of Christ in heaven which should suggest to His believing people the thought of an individual and personal remembrance. If any man sin--any one man--he has an advocate with the Father. That which I desire to realise, is that the eye, the thoughts, the solicitudes of Jesus are concentrated and fixed on me; my needs to supply, my infirmities to help, my cause to order, my decaying members to revive, my rising corruptions to subdue.
4. But, once more, this appearance of Christ in heaven is an affectionate, earnest, deeply interested appearance. His heart is in the cause. He is a merciful High Priest as well as faithful. In undertaking the cause of believers He is not content to have an eye to see their afflictions, or an ear to listen to their complaints, or a tongue to promote their suit; but casts His lot in with them. He is afflicted in all their afflictions.
5. He has gone to appear in the presence of God for us as the Conqueror. Thou hast ascended on high; Thou hast led captivity captive; Thou hast received gifts for men. He who died as a Lamb rose as a Lion. With the head of the spiritual Goliath in His hand, the Son of David entered the streets of the New Jerusalem, there to appear in the presence of God for us.
6. Again, as a pledge and assurance that He both can and will order all things for the good of His Church, He appears in the presence of God for us. In describing His own session to the high priest, He tells him, Ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power; power to execute wrath, power to cast down every high thing and every strong thing and every opposing thing that could exalt itself against the knowledge of Himself; power to direct and save; power to reward and bless. Let me note one or two practical thoughts, in conclusion, with which to associate the entrance of our Forerunner into the most holy place, there to appear in the presence of God for us. Thus we cannot but be impressed with a sense of the exceeding great honour which is put upon our human nature, in that one, in our likeness, should be the object of highest adoration to all the heavenly world. We are made more than conquerors in Christ Jesus, because Christ Himself was more than conqueror over all the misery He came to remedy, and all the enemies He came to subdue. And this suggests a kindred thought--the honour reserved for ourselves in that future world. We have a portion in that flesh and blood which is so highly exalted, and which now appears in the presence of God for us. Our interest with our Divine Head is one. If Christ reign, we shall reign; if He be taken up into glory, we shall not be beyond the circle of its diffused and effulgent rays. Lastly, how should our Lords leaving us, to enter into the most holy place, remind us that we have no continuing city here. Christ did not sit down in heaven until He had finished His work on earth: and we must finish our work as Christ did His. He who now appears in the presence of God for us knew no rest, does not know it even now. He ever liveth to make intercession, to sprinkle consciences, to send down grace, to restrain the power of the evil one, to keep the feet of His saints, to suffer no weapon formed against them to prosper. This is Christs work in heaven now, and will be for a time, and times, and a half a time, till the end of redemption is come. Then will come the great Sabbath; the Sabbath that shall sanctify the risen natures, the Sabbath that shall release our Great High Priest from all further appearance for us in the holy place, even the everlasting rest that remaineth for the people of God. (D. Moore, M. A.)
Christ the only Mediator:
I. THE TEMPLE IN WHICH HE MINISTERS.
II. THE MINISTRY WHICH IN THAT TEMPLE HE CONTINUES TO EXERCISE.
1. The ministry of a sympathising friend.
2. Rendering acceptable to God all our worship and service.
III. THE INFLUENCE WHICH THE KNOWLEDGE OF THESE TRUTHS OUGHT TO EXERCISE ON OUR FAITH AND CONDUCT, Let us hold fast our profession.
1. As respects the writing on which it is based.
2. As regards the consolations which it affords.
3. As regards the hopes which it naturally encourages. (W. Cadman, M. A.)
The sacrifice, intercession, and sympathy of Christ in heaven
The sacrifice and intercession of Christ are of course distinct in idea, but in fact are so united, that it is more convenient to consider them together. Sacrifice is intercession, not in word, but in act. It makes atonement for man to God; that is, sets God and man at-one. It comes between; that is, in the literal sense of the word, intercedes, mediates between the two, reconciles them; all of which terms apply with equal propriety to the one office as to the other, sacrifice and intercession. Minds unused to meditation on the continuance of these offices in heaven are inclined to the opinion that the whole work of the Atonement was concluded in the sacrifice of the Cross, and to so complete an extent that nothing remains for Christ to do till He returns to gather in His elect. Their thoughts linger around such texts as these, which at first sight seem to imply that at the moment in which the Saviour said, It is finished, His work was ended till the Judgment Day (Heb_10:12; 1Pe_3:18). And all the passages in the Epistle to the Hebrews which draw out the contrast between the repeated sacrifices offered by the Jewish priests and the one oblation once made by Christ, favour the same opinion. The question is, do such words oppose the view that our great Mediator is ever working on behalf of mens souls in heaven --My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Do they contradict the doctrine that Christ Jesus in His glorified body continues to exercise the virtue of His holy incarnation? Not in the least. The sacrifice once for all offered on the Cross is being perpetually represented and exhibited in heaven. This indeed is the meaning of the word in the text, inadequately translated appear. It is not merely that Christ stands and is seen before the Fathers throne; but He is arrayed in the vesture belonging to the Mediator, invested with all the symbols of His office as the Saviour of man, continually presenting to the eternal Father the sacrifice once for all made, interceding, pleading, advocating our cause. Hence it is, that in the Book of Revelation He is described as a Lamb as it had been slain; with the marks of death, the scars of the sacrifice upon Him, though His wounds are healed, and His body raised in glory. And it may be observed, once for all, that every description of His high-priesthood establishes the truth that it is exercised now continually in heaven. The great difference in this respect between the continual sacrifice offered day by day and year by year by the Jewish priests, and that offered by Christ, is that theirs was repeated, His is represented; theirs was begun afresh, as if nothing had yet been done; His is the oblation of the Body sacrificed once for all. There are some who say, and profess to believe, that it is enough to know that Christ once died for sinners; but they do not speak the language of the human heart. Does not the sense of sin pierce them even now? Does not the shame and dread of sin overwhelm at times even those for whom Christ died? Do they not spread their hands abroad in vain, and look out for help against themselves, and seek for some place where they may hide themselves from the confusion and reproach which their own hearts cast upon them?--that is, they need a present Mediator and Advocate. Again, the effect which the continued intercession of Christ must exercise over our destiny cannot be measured by any estimate of ours. His prayers are uttered night and day, hour by hour, whether men pray or whether they sleep. And then, as to their secondary effect, that is, their influence upon us--conceive how great a motive it is for men to pray, that their prayers may vibrate along the chords of His! Lastly, consider what comfort exists in the possession of the sympathy of Christ; and in the knowledge that He exists in the body of man, alive to all the human wants and natural infirmities of the heart. Has not the disciple to bear his cross; to rejoice in suffering; to fill up what is behind of the afflictions of Christ in His flesh for His bodys sake which is the Church; to bear the marks of the Lord Jesus; to be crucified with Him; to be buried with Him; to be raised up together and made to sit together in heavenly places in Him; to have our vile body changed that it may be like unto His glorious body? And all this while there is His painless sympathy with pain in the least as in the greatest things. Many a thought of trouble, too slight or too. Lender to be worth exposure to the nearest friends, is, we may believe, marked by Him and remembered in His prayer, especially if it be one (as all the most inexplicable troubles are) entangled with our own folly or sin. For we have not an High Priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities. But sympathy alone and in excess induces softness. Self-control and hardihood, a lofty carriage as of one born to great dignity, a resolute temper that will neither bend or break--these are as much the Christians attributes as a childlike reliance and a looking out for love. How greatly does it add to the dignity of our life to see its perfection in the glorious body of Him who is the Head of the human race! (C. W.Furse, M. A.)
To put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself
The sacrificial work of Christ
I. THE SACRIFICE OF THE SAVIOUR, WHICH WE COMMEMORATE, WAS THE OFFERING OF HIMSELF. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. Not the Sanhedrim, not Annas, not Caiaphas, not Pilate, not Judas, not the Roman Guard, not the excited mob took away the Redeemers life; had they done so, Christs would have been only a martyrs death. For this cause came I into the world.
II. THE SACRIFICE OF THE SAVIOUR WAS NOT ONLY THE OFFERING OF HIMSELF, BUT THE ONE OFFERING OF HIMSELF. The earth can see no second
Gethsemane or Calvary! Never in the history of the human race can such another event be recorded, it stands alone as a monument of the august majesty of Divine law and the pitiful depth of Divine love.
III. THE SACRIFICE OF THE SAVIOUR, WHICH WE COMMEMORATE, CONTRASTS WITH THE JEWISH LAW. They had the ceremonial and symbolical: we have the spiritual and the substantial.
IV. THE SACRIFICE WE COMMEMORATE TEACHES US THAT NOT ONLY COULD THE SAVIOUR BE OFFERED BUT ONCE, BUT THAT HE COULD SUFFER BUT ONCE.
V. THE SACRIFICE WE COMMEMORATE TEACHES US THAT CHRIST APPEARED TO PUT AWAY SIN. Ponder well the words--He appeared. Salvation was accomplished in connection with Christs incarnation. There could be no doubt of the actuality of the atonement: it was in the body that He assumed that He died for our sins, and we can test the validity of the sacrifice by the reality of the incarnation. (W. M. Statham, M. A.)
The one perfect offering
I. Such is THE ABSOLUTE PERFECTION OF THE ONE OFFERING OF CHRIST, THAT IT STANDS IN NEED OF, THAT IT WILL ADMIT OF, NO REPETITION IN ANY KIND. Hence the apostle affirms that if it be despised or neglected there remains no more sacrifice for sin. And this absolute perfection of the one offering of Christ ariseth
1. From the dignity of His person (Act_20:28).
2. From the nature of the sacrifice itself.
(1) In the gracious actings of His soul; He offered Himself unto God through the Eternal Spirit. Grace and obedience could never be more glorified.
(2) In the punishment He underwent, answering and taking away the whole curse of the law; and further offering for atonement is highly blasphemous.
(3) From the love of the Father unto Him and delight in Him. As in His person, so in His one offering, the soul of God resteth and is well pleased.
(4) From His efficacy unto all ends of a sacrifice. Nothing was ever designed therein, but was at once accomplished by this one offering of Christ.
II. This one offering of Christ is ALWAYS EFFECTUAL UNTO ALL THE ENDS OF IT, EVEN NO LESS THAN IT WAS IN THE DAY AND HOUR WHEN IT WAS ACTUALLY OFFERED. Therefore it needs no repetition, like those of old, which could affect the conscience of a sinner only for a season. This is always fresh in the virtue of it, and needs nothing but renewed application by faith for the communication of its effects and fruits unto us.
III. THE GREAT CALL AND DIRECTION OF THE GOSPEL IS TO GUIDE FAITH AND KEEP IT UP UNTO THIS ONE OFFERING OF CHRIST, AS THE SPRING OF ALL GRACE AND MERCY. In the preaching of the Word, the Lord Christ is set forth as evidently crucified before our eyes; and in the ordinance of the Supper especially is it represented unto the peculiar exercise of faith.
IV. WHATEVER HAD THE GREATEST GLORY IN THE OLD LEGAL INSTITUTIONS CARRIED ALONG WITH IT THE EVIDENCE OF ITS OWN IMPERFECTION, COMPARED WITH THE THING SIGNIFIED IN CHRIST AND HIS OFFICE. The entrance of the high priest into the holy place was the most glorious solemnity of the law. Howbeit, the annual repetitioin of it was a sufficient evidence of its imperfection, as the apostle disputes in the beginning of the next chapter. (John Owen, D. D.)
The all-sufficient sacrifice
I. THE PERIOD WHEN In the end of the world, or, rather, the ages. It refers to the several dispensations which have gone before, and which were brought to a close by Christs appearing in the flesh.
II. THE PURPOSE. To put away sin, to render sin a legal nullity, so that in respect of condemnatory power it should be as though nonexistent, and the law should cease to recognise its claims or inflict its penalties.
III. THE MEANS BY WHICH THIS END HAS BEEN ATTAINED. By the sacrifice of Himself.
1. It was not accomplished without means; it was not at once and offhand that this result was attained.
2. The means employed had reference to the thing necessary to be done.
(1) It had to be done by sacrifice--the substitution of one life for another.
(2) The sacrifice was Christ Himself. The penalty once borne can never again be inflicted. The curse was not causeless when it came, for guilt had entailed it; but neither is the taking it away causeless, for Christ hath redeemed us, &c. The reason is as valid in the one case as in the other; the removal of the wrath is as righteous as the manifestation of the wrath, and the whole universe is the witness to the reality and vitality of the stupendous deed. (Thos. Main, D. D.)
The Christian era
I. THE CHRISTIAN ERA IS GODS LAST DISPENSATION WITH MEN ON EARTH.
II. THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST IS THE GREAT FACT OF THIS ERA.
1. Self-immolation.
2. Self-immolation for all ages.
3. Never to be repeated.
III. THE GREAT END OF CHRISTS SACRIFICE WAS THE PUTTING AWAY OF SIN. This fact serves
1. To correct theological errors.
2. To determine the value of our religion.
3. To show the true aim of philanthropy.
4. To foreshadow the happy state of the world when Christianity shall have accomplished its work. (Homilist.)
The one sacrifice of Christ sufficient:
I. IT WAS INCONSISTENT WITH THE WISDOM, GOODNESS, GRACE, AND LOVE OF GOD THAT CHRIST SHOULD OFTEN SUFFER IN THAT WAY WHICH WAS NECESSARY UNTO THE OFFERING OF HIMSELF, NAMELY, BY HIS DEATH AND BLOODSHEDDING. It was not consistent with the wisdom of God to provide that as the ultimate means of the expiation of sin which was insufficient for it; for so it would have been if the repetition of it had been necessary. Nor was it consistent with His unspeakable love unto His Son that He should frequently suffer an ignominious death. And, moreover, it would have been highly dishonourable unto the Son of God, giving an appearance that His blood was of no more value than the blood of beasts, the sacrifice whereof was often repeated.
II. IT WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GLORY OF HIS PERSON, ESPECIALLY AS IT WAS NECESSARY TO BE DEMONSTRATED UNTO THE SALVATION OF THE CHURCH. That He once emptied Himself that He might be obedient unto the death of the Cross, proved a stumbling-block unto the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles. The faith of the Church was secured by the evident demonstration of His Divine glory which immediately ensued thereon. But as the frequent repetition hereof would have been utterly inconsistent with the dignity of His Divine person, so the most raised faith could never have attained a prospect of His glory.
III. IT IS ALTOGETHER NEEDLESS, AND WOULD HAVE BEEN USELESS. For, as the apostle demonstrates, by one offering of Himself, and that once offered, He took away sin, and for ever perfected them that are sanctified.
V. THE ASSURED SALVATION OF THE CHURCH OF OLD, FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, BY VIRTUE OF THE ONE OFFERING OF CHRIST, IS A STRONG CONFIRMATION OF THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH AT PRESENT TO LOOK FOR AND EXPECT EVERLASTING SALVATION THEREBY.
VI. IT IS THE PREROGATIVE OF GOD AND THE EFFECT OF HIS WISDOM TO DETERMINE THE TIMES AND SEASONS OF THE DISPENSATION OF HIMSELF AND HIS GRACE TO THE CHURCH. Hereon it depends alone that Christ appeared in the end of the world, not sooner nor later, as to the parts of that season. Many things do evidence a condecency to Divine wisdom in the determination of that season.
1. He testified His displeasure against sin in suffering the generality of mankind to lie so long under the fatal effects of their apostasy without relief or remedy (Act_14:16; Act_17:30; Rom_1:21; Rom_1:24; Rom_1:26).
2. He did it to exercise the faith of the Church, called by virtue of the promise, in the expectation of its accomplishment. And by the various ways whereby God cherisheth their faith and hope was He glorified in all ages Luk_1:70; Mat_13:16; Luk_10:24; 1Pe_1:10-11; Hag_2:7).
3. To prepare the Church for the reception of Him, partly by the glorious representation made of Him in the tabernacle and temple with their worship; partly by the burden of legal institutions laid on them till His coming (Gal_3:24).
4. To give the world a full and sufficient trial of what might be attained towards happiness and blessedness by the excellency of all things here below.
5. To give time to Satan to fix and establish his kingdom in the world that the destruction of him and it might be the more conspicuous and glorious.
VII. GOD HAD A DESIGN OF INFINITE WISDOM AND GRACE IN HIS SENDING OF CHRIST AND HIS APPEARANCE IN THE WORLD THEREON, WHICH COULD NOT BE FRUSTRATED. He appeared to put away sin.
VIII. SIN HAD ERECTED A DOMINION, A TYRANNY OVER ALL MEN AS BY A LAW. Unless this law be abrogated and abolished we can have neither deliverance nor liberty.
IX. NO POWER OF MAN, OF ANY MERE CREATURE, WAS ABLE TO EVACUATE, DISANNUL, OR ABOLISH THIS LAW OF SIN.
X. THE DESTRUCTION AND DISSOLUTION OF THIS LAW AND POWER OF SIN WAS THE GREAT END OF THE COMING OF CHRIST FOR THE DISCHARGE OF HIS PRIESTLY OFFICE IN THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF. No other way could it be effected.
XI. IT IS THE GLORY OF CHRIST, IT IS THE SAFETY OF THE CHURCH, THAT BY HIS ONE OFFERING, BY THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF ONCE FOR ALL, HE HATH ABOLISHED SIN AS TO THE LAW AND CONDEMNING POWER OF IT. (John Owen, D. D.)
The manner, time, and end of Christs appearance
I. CHRISTS APPEARANCE IS
1. His incarnation.
2. The manifestation of Him incarnate.
3. The presenting of Himself as a Priest, having sacrificed Himself and His Heavenly Father, without which His incarnation and manifestation had been to no purpose.
He appeared from the foundation of the world, in the word of the promise, and in types and figures; yet this was but obscure. At length He appeared really, when the Word was made flesh, died, and, as a Priest, offered Himself unto God the Supreme Judge for the sin of man.
II. THE TIME of His appearance was the end of the world, which is opposed to the foundation of the world. This end of the worm is called the fulness of the time (Gal_4:4), because, as some tell us, the time appointed by God was fully come; all things, which were decreed to be before His coming, were fully accomplished. And though we understand not the reasons, yet the end of the world was the fittest of all others for this appearance; and though the last times seem to have the greatest benefit of His exhibition, yet the first times were not without it, for the virtue of this sacrifice extended to all times.
III. THE END OF this appearance was to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. Where we have two ends, the one subordinate to the other: the first was the sacrificing of Himself, the second by this sacrifice to put away sin. This putting away was not the abrogation of the law transgressed, but a taking away the moral effects and consequents of sin committed against that law, and principally of guilt. The effect of sin is to Tender the party sinning obnoxious and liable to punishment and Gods vindicative justice, and by this virtue of the commination of the law. God, to make way for pardon, by a transcendent extraordinary power, makes Christ mans surety, and Christ voluntarily submits Himself, out of love to His brethren, to Gods will, so far as to suffer death for mans sin, and offers Himself as being slain to the Supreme Judge. Upon His submission He becomes one person with sinful man, as a surety with the principal, and so is liable to that punishment which sinful man should have suffered, as a surety becomes liable to pay the debt of the principal. (G. Lawson.)
Jesus putting away sin
I. THE TIME OF THIS GREAT PUTTING AWAY OF SIN, in the end of the world, or the age--in these last days, as one of the apostles words it. Why was that time selected?
1. Was it not in order to exercise the faith of ancient saints, who, like Abraham, saw Christs day in vision--saw Him and were glad? They rested in confidence in the Messiah that was to come, and their faith received its reward.
2. Did not God place the putting away of sin at the close of the age, in order to glorify His Son, by letting us see that the very anticipation of His death was sufficient for the salvation of men?
3. Was not this sacrifice placed at the end of the world to be, as it were, the crown of all Jehovahs works? The great Master of the feast hath kept the best wine until now.
II. THE PERSON ACCOMPLISHING THE WORK. Once, in the end of the world, hath He appeared. Recollect who it was that came to take away sin, that you may find solid ground for comfort. He who came to take away sin did not come unsent. He was appointed and delegated by God. He came in His Fathers name, clothed with His Fathers authority: I do not Mine own will, said He, but the will of Him that sent Me. This ought to give us richest consolation. Attentively observe the constitution of His person. He who came to save men is no other than God; therefore capable of viewing sin from Gods point of view, capable of understanding what was due to God: by bracing His Godhead to His manhood He was capable, in His twofold nature, of sustaining pangs which humanity could not have endured apart from Godhead. Can you not trust Him? I have felt like John Hyatt who, when dying, said he could not only trust Christ with one soul, but he could trust Him with a million souls if he had them.
III. THE APPEARANCE MENTIONED. Now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin. The way by which God has put away sin is one which is not obscure, concealed, recondite, inexplicable, but one which is eminently plain and manifest.
IV. THE SACRIFICE ITSELF. Once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin--how? By the sacrifice of Himself Christ did not come into the world merely to put away sin by His example. Jesus did not come into the world merely to put away sin by His teaching; but we are told in the text that He came to put away sin by sacrifice. God comes into the world as Man--the Mediator dies. Now, what merit there must be in the blood of Him who, while He is Man, is nevertheless God!
V. THE THOROUGHNESS OF THE WORK WHICH WAS CONTEMPLATED. In the end of the world Christ was revealed to put away sin. He did not come into the world to palliate it, but to put it away. Observe, He not only came to put away some of the attributes of sin, such as the filth of it, the guilt of it, the penalty of it, the degradation of it; He came to put away sin itself, for sin is the fountain of all the mischief. He did net come to empty out the streams, but to clear away the fatal source of the pollution. He appeared to put away sin itself, sin in its essence and being.
VI. THE EVIDENT COMPLETION of this work demands a word because of its being rendered conspicuous by the word once. Once in the end of the world He hath appeared to put away sin. If He had not put away sin, He would have Come again to do it, for Jesus Christ never leaves His work unfinished. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The putting away of sin
I. IT IS A VERY HARD THING TO PUT AWAY SIN.
1. All the Jewish sacrifices could not do it.
2. Repentance itself cannot do it.
3. No form of suffering in this world can do it.
4. Nor any form of self-denial.
5. Nor holy living.
6. Nor death.
7. Nor hell.
II. CHRIST HAS PUT AWAY THE SIN OF ALL HIS PEOPLE. By what image shall I set forth the abolishing of sin! I do not know what metaphor to use about it, but one suggests itself which is far from complete. When Pompey was killed, Julius Caesar obtained possession of a large casket, which contained a vast amount of correspondence which had been carried on with Pompey. There is no doubt, whatever, that in that casket there were many letters from certain of Caesars followers making overtures to Pompey, and had Caesar read those letters it is probable that he would have been so angry with many of his friends that he would have put them to death for playing him false. Fearing this, he magnanimously took the casket and destroyed it without reading a single line. What a splendid way of putting away and annihilating all their offences against him! Why, he did not even know them, he could not be angry, for he did not know that they had offended. He consumed all their offences and destroyed their iniquities, so that he could treat them all as if they were innocent and faithful. The Lord Jesus Christ has made just such an end of your sins and mine.
III. How SIN WAS PUT AWAY.
1. The text tells us that our Lord put it away by a sacrifice. Substitution is the very pith and marrow of the revelation of God.
2. Notice that the text tells us what His sacrifice was, it was Himself. Sin was not put away by the offering of His living works, nor by the incense of His prayer, nor by the oblation of His tears, nor even by the presentation of His pains before God, but by the sacrifice of Himself. The Lord Christ gave up for you His human body and soul and spirit, all that constituted Himself was given up freely to the death that the punishment due to our sin might be borne. This leads you to remember who He was. He was God over all, blessed for ever; the Maker of all worlds, but He gave Himself. See the majesty of His sacrifice, He gave Himself; and then behold the infinite merit that there must be in that sacrifice. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Will evil be everlasting?
I. EVIL NEED NOT BE EVERLASTING IN THE INDIVIDUAL.
II. EVIL WILL NOT BE EVERLASTING IN THE WORLD.
III. EVIL MAY NOT BE THERE IS THE HIGHEST PROBABILITY THAT IT WILL NOT BE--EVERLASTING IN THE UNIVERSE.
1. Because of the infinite forces of which our text speaks.
(1) The infinite force in the Being who is putting away sin. There is no limit to His resources.
(2) The infinite force in His case for the work He has undertaken.
2. Because of the very nature of evil.
3. Because of the character of God. (Homilist.)
The sacrifice and satisfaction of Christ:
I. I SHALL PRODUCE SOME PLAIN TESTIMONIES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE, WHICH DECLARE THAT THE SON OF GOD, IN ORDER TO THE EFFECTUAL EXPIATION OF SIN, SUFFERED IN OUR STEAD, AND BORE THE WRATH OF GOD FOR US, AND MADE A PERFECT ATONEMENT FOR SIN, AND OBTAINED ETERNAL REDEMPTION FOR US. This the Scripture declares to us in great variety of expressions; as, that Christ died for us, and for our sins; that He was a sacrifice for us, and a propitiation for the sins of the whole world; that He bare our sins in His own body on the tree, and appeared to take away sin by the sacrifice of Himself; that we are justified in His blood, and redeemed by the price of it. It is evident then from Scripture, that Christ died not only for our advantage but in our stead; as truly as any man ever did or can die for another, who lays down his own life to save another from death. For if Christ had not died, we had perished everlastingly; and because tie died, we are saved from eternal death and misery. And though this be nowhere ill Scripture spoken of by the name or term of satisfaction, yet it is said to be the price of our redemption; which surely is the same in effect with satisfaction.
II. SHOW THAT THE EXPIATION OF OUR SINS WAS MADE BY THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST, FROM THE NATURE AND INTENTION OF EXPIATORY SACRIFICES, BOTH AMONG THE JEWS AND HEATHENS, to which the death of Christ is in the New Testament so frequently compared, and in point of virtue and efficacy to take away sin infinitely preferred to it.
III. VINDICATE THIS METHOD AND DISPENSATION OF THE DIVINE WISDOM FROM THE OBJECTIONS WHICH ARE BROUGHT AGAINST IT, and to show that there is nothing in it that is unreasonable or anywise unworthy of God. I shall mention four objections which are commonly urged in this matter, and I think they are all that are considerable.
1. That this method of the expiation of sin by the sufferings of Christ seems to argue some defect and want of goodness in God, as if He needed some external motive, and were not of Himself disposed to forgive sinners. To which I think the answer is not difficult; namely, that God did not want goodness to have forgiven sin freely and without any satisfaction, but His wisdom did not think it meet to give encouragement to sin by too easy a forgiveness, and without some remarkable testimony of His severe displeasure against it; and therefore His greater goodness and compassion to mankind devised this way to save the sinner, without giving the least countenance and encouragement to sin.
2. How can our sins be said to have been forgiven freely, if the pardon of them was purchased at so dear a rate, and so mighty a price was paid for it? In answer to this I desire these two things may be considered
(1) That it is a wonderful grace and favour of God to admit of this translation of the punishment which was due to us, and to accept of the sufferings of another in our stead, and for our benefit, when He might justly have exacted it from us in our own persons.
(2) It was in effect freely, too, notwithstanding the mighty price which was paid for our redemption. Because this price was not of our own procuring, but of Gods providing.
3. It is yet further objected that this seems to be more unreasonable than the sacrificing of beasts among the Jews, nay, than the sacrificing of men among the heathen, and even of their own sons and daughters, because this is the offering up of the Son of God, the most innocent and the most excellent person that ever was. To which I answer, that if we consider the manner and the design of it the thing will appear to be quite otherwise.
(1) As to the manner of it, God did not command His Son to be sacrificed, but His providence permitted the wickedness and violence of men to put Him to death. And then His goodness and wisdom did overrule this worst of actions to the best of ends.
(2) And then if we consider the end of this permission of Christs death, and the application of it to the purpose of a general expiation, we cannot but acknowledge and even adore, the gracious and merciful design of it. For by this means God did at once put an end to that unreasonable and bloody way of worship which had been so long practised in the world; and after this one sacrifice, which was so infinitely dear to God, the benefit of expiation was not to be expected in any other way, all other sacrifices being worthless and vain in comparison of this; and it hath ever since obtained this effect of making all other sacrifices to cease in all parts of the world where Christianity hath prevailed.
4. The last objection is the injustice and cruelty of an innocent person suffering instead of the offender. To this I answer, that they who make so great a noise with this objection do seem to me to give a full and clear answer to it themselves, by acknowledging, as they constantly and expressly do, that our Saviour suffered all this for our benefit and advantage, though not in our place and stead. For this, to my apprehension, is plainly to give up the cause, unless they can show a good reason why there is not as much injustice and cruelty in an innocent persons suffering for the benefit and advantage of a malefactor, as in his suffering in his stead. (Abp. Tillotson.)
Self-sacrifice:
I. I wish to fix your thoughts on THE EXAMPLE INVOLVED IN THE SACRIFICE WHEREBY CHRIST REDEEMED THE WORLD. I would press on you the duty, the blessedness, the happiness of self-sacrifice, and the present and urgent need for it. I would ask you to consider whether God does not summon all of you to the sacrifice of self to help the world, and some of you to such self-sacrifice in its fullest forms, as the very law of your highest life.
II. You know well HOW THOROUGHLY HIS GREAT SAINTS AND SERVANTS HAVE LEARNED THIS LESSON. They have not been satisfied with the easy compromise and full-fed prosperity of a worldly, popular, and successful religionism. Instead of being content to swim with the easy streams of fashionable orthodoxy, they struck out vehemently against them. Instead of trimming their sails to the veering wind, they were ready to drive their frail shallops into the very teeth of the storm. Instead of answering the world or the Church according to their idols, they smote those idols in the face. Like the apostles, they held not their lives dear unto themselves; they left father and mother and lands and ease; they counted all things but dross, in comparison with the love of Christ their Lord.
III. DOES CHRIST, THEN, CALL US TO AGONY AND RUIN, AND TO ALL THAT WE LEAST LOVE? Yea, and nay. Yea, in so far as brief agony and apparent ruin may lie in the path of duty and holiness; and yea, in so far as that which we least love ought rather to be what is dearest to us; but nay, inasmuch as the cross borne gladly is itself the secret of blessedness. You pity the hated prophet, the burning martyr, the persecuted saint? And do you think that he needs your pity, rather than the man who, rich and successful, is torn, day and night, by the many-headed monster of unruly passions, which, the more they are gratified, ravin the more clamorously for gratification? Do you pity Gods martyrs, and do you not rather pity those who, living to indulge their own vilest impulses, have, as the devils martyrs, made their own bodies and minds a very curse to themselves and to all the world? Nay, you are wrong. It is Nero on his gilded chair who is to be pitied, not St. Paul in his rags and wretchedness. That man is blessed, blessed even in the dungeon or at the stake, who is pure, and just, and loving, and innocent.
IV. BLESSEDNESS IS A LOFTIER AND A DEEPER THING THAN HAPPINESS; but I go further, and say that in self-sacrifice you will not only find blessedness, but even a joy, a happiness, a gladness such as the world can neither give nor take away. Disenchantment in success, weariness in riches, satiety in self-indulgence, inward wretchedness amid outward prosperity, are the heritage of the world. Tiberius is tristissimus, ut constant hominum; and Severus cries, Omnia fui, et nihil expedit; but joy in the Lord, joy in the Holy Ghost, joy in believing, joy unspeakable and full of glory, joy even amid much affliction, has ever been the unique and miraculous paradox of Christianity. Read the Epistle to the Philippians, written by a hunted fugitive in prison with weak eyes, in wretched health, a spectacle of shame; his name a hissing, the chain which coupled him to the rude soldier clanking with every motion of his hand: then read the Tristia of Ovid, or the letters of Cicero, or the Consolation ad Polybium of Seneca, written in an exile incomparably less trying, and you will see that while the poet, and the orator, and the stoic are full of base adulation and womanish complaints, the letter of this poor, sick, deserted Jewish prisoner bursts again and again into irrepressible music, flashes from line to line with gleams of indomitable joy.
V. So THEN, WHEN CHRIST CALLS YOU TO SELF-SACRIFICE, HE CALLS YOU TO JOY AS WELL AS TO BLESSEDNESS. He takes from you no single element of natural and innocent joy: neither the joy of nature, nor of art, nor of youth, nor of healthy life; nay, He would illuminate, He would intensify ever) one of these by expanding them to infinitude: or, if indeed He love you so much as to ask you for His sake to sacrifice them all, even then He gives you in the place of them a beatitude which no one can conceive save he who possesseth it. And yet, alas! how few accept this call; how many prefer the sin, which can only be got rid of by the sacrifice of self. (Archdeacon Farrar.)
Putting away sin
How is it possible for any ordinary man to grasp this whole question of sin--what it is in its essence as well as in its consequence -and to show how the death of Christ puts away sin? I cannot tell you everything contained in the word sin; but I can tell you enough to make it criminal for you to be a persistently wilful sinner. I cannot explore the deepest depths of redemption, but I can make it appear that redemption is an act in accord with our highest intuitions of what the Divine character should be; that assuming the Bible revelation that God is love, redemption will be to that fact as consequence to cause. Now, it has been said, and with very good reason, that our views in regard to the fact of sin will affect everything else in our theology. In men generally we find two opposite conditions of feeling on this matter of sin. With one class the world is so full of sin that they can see nothing else greater than it. It fills their whole sphere of vision. Man is a sinner--more a sinner than a man. The world is black with sin, and this is the one overwhelming impression which the world makes upon them. At the opposite extreme we find a large class of men who make next to nothing of sin. The article of their creed most frequently proclaimed is, that there is a soul of goodness in all things evil. They try philosophically to evaporate the fact of sin in some such way as this. The body, being body, cannot sin, and the spirit, being an incorruptible essence, cannot sin, and, therefore, we have made a grand mistake. We are already in a sinless world. One cannot well believe that this kind of theological jugglery is very satisfactory even to those who practise it. Now they who see nothing greater than sin in the world must live lives of perpetual gloom bordering on despair. And they who make sin to be to the race as measles to the child can have no very adequate view of anything to which the word redemption can be properly applied. Sin is not by any means the greatest fact in this worlds history, but it is a fact momentous and terrible, whether we regard it in relation to the individual, or to the race. If it were what the first class of whom I have spoken make it, would it not be a sufficient reason for arresting the further propagation and development of this race of man? But what I believe the providence of God teaches us, and what Scripture suggests, is this--that in every one born into this world there is more of man than of sin. No man is all sinner. It is not a convertible term, and, therefore, it seems to my own mind that the gloomiest views of man in his relation to sin are just as unrighteous, just as far astray from the truth, as those lax and shallow views which make sin to be as involuntary in its character as is physical disease. The men whose individuality Gods Spirit specially prepared, that through it the voice of God might be heard in human tones, often speak of sin and the sinner--but how? Even in this wise--All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us; The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men; I find a law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into subjection to the law of sin which is in my members. These, and many other passages that we might quote, all tend to show this--that sin is as much a spiritual fact as disease is a physical fact--a fact dark and dismal--not to be set aside as of little account, not to be explained away asthough it were a mere figure of speech; but in Scripture there are other facts put alongside of sin, facts greater than sin, facts of mans relation to God, and Gods relation to man, which make it impossible for the careful Bible student to despond, much less despair. Man is never identified with his sin as though it were a part of his very life. Man is a composite being, and sin is referred to as being an element that has entered into his nature altogether foreign to it--with which mans nature is, in some form or other, always at war--a poisonous element which his nature seeks to cast out, which it cannot assimilate. St. Paul was the spokesman for them all when he cried out, Oh, wretched man that I am; who shall deliver me? To him sin was a state of captivity from which man could not deliver himself. Therefore the cry for a deliverer. Therefore the assurance in his own soul that Jesus Christ was such a deliverer as he and all men needed. Theologians have been accustomed to speak of sin under two divisions, , original and actual. I will not trouble you with any such exposition of those terms as might be agreeable to speculators. I dont know that we can improve upon them. By original sin we mean that which belongs to us as being joined to a past sinful parentage--for who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing? Actual sin is that which belongs to us personally--which is our own. The tendency to sin was born in us; there can be nodenial of that fact. That we have indulged the tendency is undeniable, too. Whence did we get this propulsion? From past generations. Some ancestor stood behind us with his vices, and pushed us forward. It seems unfair that we should be linked to the vices of the past, and we complain of it--perhaps try to shift our responsibility on to the fathers who are dead, perhaps excuse ourselves to ourselves by the consideration that the evil we recognise is not of our own origination. Let us remember that the channel down which the vice which plagues us has come was originally constructed for the transmission of virtue. The pipes laid from a great reservoir to a large city for the purposes of health may, by neglect, become the channel of disease; but who shall say that the original conduits were not constructed on principles of beneficence, and for purposes which justified themselves? No faculty of man was so made that it could sin and not suffer. The suffering that sooner or later follows sin, that suffering proclaims that some law of God has been broken. The more earnestly we penetrate into them, the more thoroughly are we convinced that Gods ways justify themselves. The Creator has made this race of ours so much a unit, that if one member suffer all the members suffer with it, and if one member rejoice all the members rejoice with it. That separateness of man from man, that absolute individualism which is at the base of much practical religious error, is more an imagination than a fact. As one has well put the matter, No creature is, so to speak, merely itself in the world. It is where it is, or what it is, as the result of an indefinite advance and appropriation of preceding forms of existence. We cannot throw the blame of our actual transgressions on any ancestor. It is our own. We feel it to be our own. This linking of man with man, of father with child, of one generation with another, is Gods grand provision and protest against that selfish individualism which is ever trying to assert and justify itself at the expense of all our social affections. The philanthropies of society are set going by the presence of pain and woe. And thus a new and higher life is manifested as operative in society--a spirit not legal, not of the nature of naked justice, not an exacting, but a self-sacrificing, spirit. And mark, this philanthropic spirit is evoked outside, as well as inside, the areas of religious profession. Let us be thankful that in this, as in other ways, pain is a sort of unlicensed evangelist in the world inducing men to act Christianly who are averse to thinking Christianly. I always cherish the most sanguine hopes in respect to philanthropic men. Those who go with us a mile have always a slumbering disposition to go with us twain. Such persons cannot do the good they do without getting good. Neither can they go into the battle with pain and suffering without having the inquiry started in their own minds as to what all this suffering means. And surely at times the truth about its origin must flash across their spirits. A man or woman who goes about doing good must, all the time, be approaching nearer and nearer to those central truths which lie at the heart of things. We are thrown back upon the fact of sin in us, of a disorder not curable by the patient, not curable by any man or any body of men--curable, if at all, only by God. When it is put away as sin, it still remains in its consequences as disease. God has forgiven it as sin, for Jesus hath put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. Accepting Christ Jesus as our Lord and Redeemer, we begin to realise that sin, as sin, is forgiven. But we still feel its power; it is a disorder within. But a disorder in the Great Physicians hands, who has forgiven it, will deliver us from it. So that the very hopelessness of our case is the source of our confidence. We cannot forgive our own sin; therefore God our Father, out of His own nature, for His own sake, is sure to forgive when we apply for forgiveness. We cannot cure sin, and, therefore, He who always delights to help the helpless is sure to take the cure into His own hands. (Reuen Thomas.)
Christs sacrifice
I. THE PERSON WHO APPEARED, AND THE MANNER OF HIS MANIFESTATION TO THE WORLD. The original dignity of His nature we cannot fitly express but in the language of the sacred Scriptures, which testify concerning Him. There He is declared as the only begotten Son of God, the brightness of the Fathers glory, the express image of His person, the Word, that was God, by and for whom all things were created. This is that glorious Person whose manifestation in the world is celebrated in all the churches. When this Person condescends to visit the earth, He comes not apparelled in the majesty of Jehovah; no voice of thunder proclaims His descent from heaven, no clouds form themselves into chariots, no lightnings flash around Him; the hills melt not at His presence--all His glory is laid aside. Fulfilling the most gracious and friendly design for man, He appears in the likeness of man, that He may converse familiarly with his brethren, and with a most winning grace accomplish the generous ends of His mission.
II. THE DESIGN OF THE SACRIFICE--to put away sin. For the redemption of a sinful world did the Son of God appear and suffer. There is no other way that we can fully account for our Lords humiliation and death but the Scriptural fact that He appeared to put away sin by His sacrifice. What mean the presentiments of approaching evil which were expressed in the mournful complaint, My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death? What the exclamation on the cross, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? These violent agitations and horrors, in a mind so pure, so firm, so devout, and so magnanimous, must be ascribed to some awful cause; and to what other cause can we trace them, consistently with His character, than this, that He bore the sins of many, and that it pleased the Father to bruise Him with that anguish of soul which the guilt of a rebellious world deserved? Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. The just, being made sin for us, suffered the penalty which the unjust might have been called to pay. It remains to be observed that Christ appeared to put away sin not only in its punishment, but in its guilt and dominion, that He might be a complete Saviour, and recover mankind from all their degeneracy, their corruption, their vice, that they might become worthy of the Divine favour, might enjoy all the felicity of which their nature is made capable, and be fit for the fellowship of the glorious spirits, who, as they excel in strength, excel in faithful obedience to the will of their Father, who loveth righteousness, and whose command is holy, just, and good.
III. THE TIME OF THIS DISPENSATION. Now once in the end of the world. It pleased the wisdom and mercy of the Almighty, by various and progressive discipline, and dispensations of religion, to prepare the world for the appearance of the Messiah. This is called the last days, the fulness of the time, the end of the world, literally, the end or perfection of the ages. The condition of the Church under the personal administration of the Son of man is the last of all, the most glorious and perfect, and is therefore called the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven. No propitiation shall supersede that of Jesus. No advocate rises after Him to plead our cause. There is no refuge for the unbelieving, who obey not the truth; the wrath of God abideth in them. Their obstinacy cannot set aside the statute of heaven, whereby Jesus is ordained to be both Lord and Christ. Their rejection of Him as a Redeemer cannot save them from appearing before Him as a Judge. Were the gospel but the beginning of a system, the opening of a plan; were it in anything imperfect; did its language indicate alteration and improvement at a subsequent period, then there might be reason to fear that if ever this alteration did take place, when the improvement was engrafted on the original design, some change might be necessary in your conduct; much, perhaps, to unlearn; something new to acquire, after your habits were fixed and your powers decayed; that your faith might be vain; that the principles of your conduct, and the life formed on them, might be unavailing to your spiritual comfort and eternal welfare. No such cause of uneasiness can ever agitate the Christians mind. The gospel comes to wind up the gracious plan of heaven. Through many intermediate parts it has advanced to indestructible perfection. From the faint light dawning without the gates of paradise it has brightened to the splendour of noonday, whose sun shall never set; even the Sun of Righteousness, whose beams are the healing of the nations. (L. Adamson, D. D.)
Do and done:
Said a lady to an unhappy man, There is a great difference between your religion and mine; yours consists of two letters, D-O, and mine consists of four, D-O-N-E. (J. H. Brooks, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain On vv18–23 18–22. Neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.…
18–22. Neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. The death and shedding of the blood of Christ was necessary to the inauguration of the New Testament, as has just been shown. Even when the First was inaugurated, Christ died in type and blood was shed. I believe that the apostle means to say that even in the inauguration of the Old Testament death was necessary, the death of a victim, which pointed to Christ's death.
B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv18, 23 Heb_9:18. The first covenant.—Reverting to the older and safer…
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES
Heb_9:18. The first covenant.—Reverting to the older and safer term. Heb_9:16-17, are a sort of aside, a sudden thought that came to the writer, somewhat in the Pauline manner. Dedicated.—Or “initiated.” There was a foreshadowing of the death of Christ in the blood-sealings of the covenant.
Read full note →
Heb_9:19. Spoken.—Read aloud the commandments which were the covenant requirements and conditions. Of calves and of goats.—A general expression for the “sacrificial victims.” Goats are not especially mentioned on this occasion (Exo_24:5). Scarlet wool, and hyssop.—Not mentioned in Exodus 24. “The water (itself an emblem and means of cleansing) was designed to prevent the coagulation of the blood, and to increase the quantity of the purifying fluid. The ‘scarlet wool’ may have been used to bind the hyssop to the stick of cedar-wood, which was the instrument of sprinkling” (Moulton). The book.—Not specially mentioned in Exo_24:6-8. (“This is one of several instances in which the writer shows himself learned in the Jewish legends, Hagadoth.) Book and people may be taken as representing the two parties to the covenant.
Heb_9:21. Tabernacle.—Nothing is actually said of their being so sprinkled; only of their being anointed with oil. Josephus, however, confirms the text. See Exo_11:9-10.
Heb_9:22. Almost all.—Some were cleansed by water (Lev_16:26; Lev_16:28; Num_31:22-23). The cleansing efficacy of blood is a symbol, not a fact. Is no remission.—The writer does not say “of sins,” and these words should not be added to the verse. He is stating a historical fact with regard to the old Mosaic system, and refers entirely to ceremonial offences. The Rabbins have a proverb, “No expiation except by blood.”
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Heb_9:18-22
The Blood of the Covenant.—The word “testament” used in the previous verses is supplied in Heb_9:18, and it would have been better to have put in the old and familiar term “covenant.” This is done in the R.V. Any arrangement made between two parties for their mutual benefit, which may be ratified by some common act, is called a “covenant.” In the simple society of the ancient East, covenants could only be ratified by the taking of mutual vows and pledges, or by the sharing together in some symbolical and suggestive act. Sometimes a bargain was ratified by the two parties joining hands, before witnesses, in the gate of the city; at other times by mutually raising a heap of stones, and calling it by a particular name. There was also a custom of this kind: Wine was poured into an earthen vessel, and the contracting parties, cutting their arms with a knife, let some of the blood run into the wine, with which they stained their armour, and of which both parties drank, uttering at the same time the most dreadful curses upon the party that violated the treaty. In this passage the ratification of the Old Testament covenant with God is in part described. The great leader and lawgiver, Moses, had been in the mount with God, had received the law as from the Divine hand, and on his return to the camp he had gathered the tribes in a solemn assembly, and received from them the emphatic declaration of their resolve, “All the words which the Lord hath said will we do.” Then Moses prepared for a solemn act of ratification. He built an altar under the hill; that altar was to represent Jehovah, the one party to the covenant. He also set up twelve pillars, according to the number of the tribes of Israel. These represented the people, the other party to the covenant, the party to whom the covenant terms were offered. Then Moses slew certain animals, and divided the blood that flowed from them, sprinkling some on the altar, in token of God’s making a vow to observe and keep all that He had pledged and promised in the covenant. The other half of the blood he kept back awhile, until he had again read to the people the covenant terms and the covenant sanctions, and had again received the people’s acceptance in their united exclamation, “All that the Lord hath said unto us will we do, and be obedient.” Then he took that half of the blood, and sprinkled it on those twelve representative pillars, expressing thus the solemn vow of the people, and making the vow take this impressive form: “We pledge our very life to our obedience. If we fail to keep this covenant, let our life be forfeited, let that life be taken, as has been taken the life of these beasts.” Now in this ancient and formal Jewish covenant we are to see the model of the spiritual covenant which God makes with man in creating him, and arranging his sustenance and circumstance—the covenant which man makes with God in accepting life at His hands. Nobody is obliged to live: to choose to live is to accept God’s covenant terms. We may not, as individuals, be able to appeal to a personal scene of ratification. That was done for our humanity by our first human father, Adam—just as it was done for all the Jewish race by that one Mosaic generation. And it was broken for us by that first father, as representing us. So we all come into the world with the claims of the everlasting covenant as strong upon us as upon Adam, but with all those disturbed conditions about us which have followed upon breaking the covenant, and with our life forfeit (as part of the life of humanity), in accordance with the solemn vow and pledge of that covenant. If then we are to be restored to gracious relations with God, we need—
I. That God should be honoured by the surrender of the life that was pledged, if the covenant was broken.—The Israelites sealed their covenant with blood. They thus expressed their readiness to surrender their own blood if they broke the covenant. They did break it, and their lives we forfeited. God might have demanded the life of every Israelite, in vindication of His broken covenant. The fact that it was a covenant of mercy offered by God, and freely accepted by man, only makes the conditions more solemn. God can righteously demand one of two things—obedience to the covenant conditions, or the yielding of the forfeit. No man can save his honour, if he permits a covenant made with him to be broken, without taking any notice of the forfeit or penalty. Meeting us in our human sphere, and graciously using our human language, God shows us that He could not. The life of all Israel stood forfeited unto God. In this we have a model—a representation in material things of spiritual realities—of the great human covenant. To that also life is vowed and pledged. And that covenant too is broken. Our life, our whole life, is forfeit unto God. God cannot pass by that dishonoured covenant of His mercy. The penalty to which man pledged himself to submit must be exacted. Covenant-breakers must die,—die the death of the Divine absence from them; die the second, the spiritual death. Or else such satisfaction must be offered as shall uphold the Divine honour, declare the righteousness and worth of the Divine covenant in a most glorious manner, and so allow the penalty to be remitted. God can make no new covenant with men until, in some altogether satisfactory way, the old is honoured. And this every man feels is necessary to meet his deepest sense of right. How then has the difficulty been met? God has been pleased to permit the penalty to be exacted from one person only, a great race-head, a second Adam. Instead of demanding the forfeited life of every man, He required only the death of the representative man. And then comes in the marvel of all marvels. The God of the broken covenant was willing Himself to provide that one representative man. Here is a glimpse at least into the mystery of Christ’s death. God saw humanity in Him—God accepted Him as the yielded life that was forfeit by the terms of the broken human covenant. In that one God-man’s voluntary death the old covenant is honoured, even while it is put away for ever. We could have no sure ground of hope, if that old covenant had not been so gloriously vindicated and honoured, or if God had not released the Sin-bearer from the grave, and accepted Him as the great human representative.
II. We need that the covenant should be newly made and newly ratified.—And that also is done for us in Christ. He who bears for us the forfeit of the old is the gracious Mediator of the new. And the new covenant is a better covenant,—a covenant not of formal terms, but of gracious promises; not of particular deeds, but of the inner heart, and of the whole life. And this second, or new, covenant was also ratified by blood-shedding. It was taken under the same tremendous vows as the old; it was sealed by an infinitely more worthy sacrifice. “The patterns of things in the heavenlies were purified with blood of bulls and goats, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.” Yielding His life, as at once the forfeit of the old covenant and the solemn vow of the new, behold God and man are now one again, in Christ. “Ye who sometime were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.”
III. The new covenant must be definitely accepted by each individual.—We must personally and voluntarily enter into covenant. Its reconciliation, its access, its privileges, its status, cannot be ours until we willingly and lovingly accept the covenant made for us, and sealed for us, by the Lord Jesus Christ. He stands for men; by his own act of surrender each man must ensure that He stands for him, and is his Representative, his Mediator, and his Lord. But each must enter into the covenant for himself. No man can do it for him. No covenant of any fellow-creature will stand for him. Those who are within the privileges and responsibilities of the new covenant are counted one by one.
The Blood is the Life.—The warm blood of men, and of quadrupeds and birds, seemed to contain the very soul or life of the living earthly creature—to be almost identical with his soul. Now when the life and the soul were held to be something sacred, and the more tender feelings of certain nations took this view very early, it would follow that the blood too must be considered a sacred thing, and be regarded quite differently from the rest of the body. The sight of that which was held to be the soul itself carried the mind immediately to thoughts of God, placed directly before it something full of mystery, and filled it with profound awe.—Ewald.
Death for Remission.—How can the death of Christ be a condition of the remission of sins? This the crux of the whole subject.
1. The writer never suggests that Christ liberates us from liability to punishment by being Himself punished in our stead. It is true he said that Christ “was offered to bear the sins of many” (Heb_9:28), but he does not say that this was to bear the punishment of sins; on the contrary, he carries our thoughts away to ideas of sacrifices in his use of the word “offered.”
2. Neither does the writer teach that the value of the Atonement was derived from the amount of pain endured by our Lord. As we have seen, he attaches great importance to the sufferings of Christ, but this is in regard to His priesthood, not His sacrifice. He became a perfect priest, fully able to sympathise with His people, by means of the things which He suffered. Certainly the spirit of surrender requisite where much suffering has to be faced is proportionately greater than where the sacrifice is easily made. Thus suffering comes to enhance the value of sacrifice. But it does this indirectly, and it is not the suffering itself, but the refusal to shrink from it, which is valued. In the Hebrew ritual the death of the victims was as painless as possible; there is not a hint that their sufferings entered into the consideration of the worshippers. The real sacrifice was made by the offerer in the surrender of his property. The case of our Lord is entirely different—for one thing, because He appears in the two functions of sacrificing priest and sacrificial victim. It is in regard to the former of these functions, as the priest making the offering, that His sufferings come to be considered with supreme interest.
3. Where, then, is the specific value of His sacrifice? The author emphatically contrasts the tabernacle sacrifices with the sacrifice of our Lord, affirming that the former could only have a subjective influence on the worshippers as reminders of sin, not any objective efficacy in expiration thereof, because “it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins” (Heb_10:4). That is to say, he saw quite clearly that no animal sacrifice could constitute a real atonement. Coming to the very different sacrifice of Christ, he quotes from Psalms 40, “Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body didst Thou prepare for Me” (Heb_10:5). The first step, then, is the Incarnation. Christ comes in a human body. The following words in the quotation from the psalm are cited to indicate the purpose of the Incarnation in this connection: “Lo, I am come (in the roll of the book it is written of Me) to do Thy will, O God” (Heb_10:7). Christ was incarnate in order that, among other things, He might be subject to obedience. We are reminded of St. Paul’s thought that He took on Him the “form of a servant” when He was “found in fashion as a man” in order that He might become “obedient even unto death” (Php_2:7-8). Further on the author tells us distinctly that our sanctification—and the whole course of the argument shows that by this he means our consecration to God in the cleansing of our consciences, i.e. the effecting of the Atonement—is accomplished by our Lord doing the will of God: “By the which will we have been sanctified” (chap.Heb_10:10). The whole of our Lord’s life was a course of perfect obedience to the will of God; that obedience was most severely tested, and, standing the test triumphantly, reached its crown and climax at the cross. We need not search through regions of theological speculation; the truth is writ large upon the plain facts of our Lord’s history. He would have been false to His mission if He had turned aside at the last, and fled into some safe retreat out of the reach of His enemies to end His days in obscurity. He was a martyr to His mission. His death was more than martyrdom, because He was more than man, and so through martyrdom could effect what no merely human martyr ever accomplished. His obedience was a superhuman obedience in a human life. Hence its supreme value. Can we not understand how God would accept this as the most precious of all offerings? Primitive man presents fruits from his farm and animals from his flock. These are simple, childlike gifts. Christ offers the one real sacrifice God cares for. God has no delight in blood. Mere death cannot be any satisfaction to Him. But He rejoices in obedience to His will; and when that obedience climbs to its highest pinnacle in an unflinching submission to death, He has the greatest offering that can be made. It is in response to such an offering, the obedience unto death of His own Son, that God grants remission of sins. This seems to be the idea of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, and I venture to say it is a nearer approach to a theory of the Atonement than is to be found anywhere else in the New Testament.—Prof. W. F. Adeney, M.A.
SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES
Heb_9:22. No Remission save by Blood-shedding.—Heathen and Jewish sacrifices rather show us what the sacrifice of Christ is not than what it is.—Jowett.
Repentance insufficient.—By the general prevalence of propitiatory sacrifices over the heathen world, the notion of repentance alone being sufficient to expiate guilt appears to be contrary to the general sense of mankind.—Bishop Butler.
Taking the Blood.—The death of the victim, instead of being a vicarious punishment, was no essential part of the transaction, but merely incidental as a means of affording the blood. The essence of the whole sacrificial service was the sprinkling of the blood, as the bearer of the life, upon God’s altar, thus symbolising the giving away of the offerer’s life to God; in other words, his returning back again to God, by repentance and faith and self-dedication, after being separated from Him by sin.—Bähr.
The Blood as a Type.—Nearly all things were purged with blood; certainly without blood was no remission—that peculiar thing “remission” was inseparable from blood. Sin-offerings were not merely tokens of the restoration of friendship between God and the offender; but the blood was the type of the great propitiation, and an acknowledgment, on the part of the offerer, that he had himself deserved death. It showed also that the death and suffering, not of the offender, but of one perfectly guiltless and incapable of sin, alone could procure remission.—Webster and Wilkinson.
Sin and Trespass were atoned for, in a civil and ecclesiastical point of view, by appropriate sacrifices which bore the like names. But in this case the remission was only from a temporal penalty or calamity. It was not possible that such sacrifices could atone for sin, as viewed by the righteous governor of the world. God, as the head and king of the Jewish nation, granted remission of the penalty which Jewish law inflicted in many cases, on certain conditions. But this had respect merely to this present world, and not to the accountability of transgressors before the tribunal of the universe, in the world above. Even temporal forgiveness could not be obtained without shedding of blood—so the necessity of atoning blood which possessed a higher virtue than that of beasts, in order to remove the penalty against sin, that was threatened in respect of a future world.—Moses Stuart.
Remission and Blood-shedding.—In these words, “apart from shedding of blood is no remission,” we may find a fact stated and a fact suggested. The fact stated is that, under the Old Testament dispensation, the particular thing called “remission” was always attended with “blood-shedding.” The fact suggested is that, under the New Testament dispensation, Jesus Christ did actually shed His blood for the remission of sins. It is possible to sweep away all the deeper meanings of the Jewish sacrifices by regarding them only as expressions of dependence and trust. We have to ask, not what is sacrifice to a man, but what to a sinful man, one who carries the burden of conscious transgression, and the fear of just penalty. In the Jewish sacrifices the sin of the individual or the nation was symbolically transferred, by confession, to the victim that was sacrificed. The Jewish view of sacrifice is thus stated by Abrabanel: “The blood of the offerer deserved to be shed, and his body to be burned, for his sin; only the mercy of the Divine Name accepted this offering from him as a substitute and propitiation, whose blood should be instead of his blood, and its life instead of his life.” In the New Testament is given the historical fact that Jesus did die; or, to use the familiar figure, did “shed His blood.” These two facts, the blood-shedding of Judaism and the blood-shedding of Jesus, answer to each other, as do type and antitype. “The patterns of things in the heavens (spiritual things) were purified with these (the blood of animals); but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these”—even with the life, the will, the surrender, the sacrifice, of a spiritual being. The reality was not found in the Jewish sacrifices. They were but pictures of the reality. They bore relation to ceremonial offences, not to sin, in a spiritual sense. In the Old Testament economy there was a figure and an underlying reality. And in the New Testament sacrifice there is a corresponding outward figure and underlying spiritual reality. The Jewish system required of its worshipper a sacrifice which could have a twofold relation:
(1) Could die as the bearer of his penalty, and
(2) in its spotlessness could be accepted in his stead. That was the figure; but the man who rightly apprehended that ceremonial penalty and pollution saw it to represent the moral penalty under which his sin had brought him, and the moral pollution with which his sin had defiled him. A spiritually minded Jew must have said, “Restored to the tabernacle service, I am not restored to God: looked upon as clean by the priests, I am not looked upon as clean before God. No blood of beasts can touch moral pollution: no death of bulls or goats can carry away moral penalty.” And so in the infinite sacrifice and meritorious blood-shedding of the Son of God there is a figure and an answering reality. If the sacrifice of Jesus had been only a spiritual sacrifice, if it had found no expression in bodily sufferings and bodily death, we men, so imprisoned in the senses, could never have realised it, could never have reached the blessing of it. Christ’s bodily sufferings and blood-shedding are not, in themselves, His great sacrifice. They are the form it took for bodily eyes to see, the body it wore for this mortal sphere, the temple within which the real sacrifice of an obedient will was offered. And as the Jewish worshipper looked past the blood of bulls and of goats, and rested in the spiritual sacrifice, which was to be made in the person of Messiah, so the Christian worshipper now goes in behind the bodily sufferings and human death of our Divine Lord, which are to him somewhat as the outward ceremonies were to the Jew, and discerns the inner, spiritual, infinitely satisfying sacrifice presented by Him when He made “His soul an offering for sin.” Sin is a spiritual thing. It may express itself in deeds done in the body; but, in its essence, it is a thing of the spirit and the will. The sin is a soul-sin. The penalty is a soul-death. The remission can only come by a soul-sacrifice. When we say that Christ, as our sacrifice, bore the penalty for us, we mean the spiritual penalty. It found fitting outward expression in the agonies of an ignominious and violent death, but the infinite depth of suffering lay hidden—in behind—in the Redeemer’s soul. Finding only once what seemed a suitable utterance in human language, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” The chief objection against the truth of our Lord’s substitutionary sacrifice is, that it represents the innocent as suffering for the guilty, which is supposed to override our natural sense of justice. But higher laws do affect lower ones. Abraham in loyal obedience to God put aside parental justice, and assayed to offer his son. Are there no cases in which our sense of justice permits the innocent to suffer for the guilty? Is there any law, in heaven or earth, that prevents an innocent man from voluntarily taking the place of the guilty? Is our sense of justice wronged when a man knowingly and willingly marries an almost bankrupt woman, and makes himself legally responsible for all her debts? And may not the Lord Jesus, knowingly, and willingly, and lovingly, marry this poor bankrupt bride of Humanity, and, with His eternal riches, bear all the burden of her debt? May not the Lord Jesus sustain such a relation to us, of His own free, generous, pitying sympathy, that, most righteously, our penalty should be transferred to Him? In the voluntary sacrifice of Christ; in that yielding of His soul, through the body, to the sinner’s spiritual death, all men may see God’s authority vindicated, God’s honour established, sin exhibited in its hatefulness, sin smitten and broken in its power, and men deterred from loving and seeking it. And since it is God Himself who provided the sacrifice—nay, God Himself who is in the sacrifice—the revelations of the Divine glory and justice do not affright us; the disclosures of the infinite hatefulness of sin do not overwhelm us. The sacrifice of Jesus brings us full remission—holiness and mercy hand in hand: in it “righteousness and peace have kissed each other.”
Christ’s Voluntary Sin-bearing.—When we see the offended God, the injured Sovereign, holy, just, and good—when we see Him at such a cost Himself provide the expiation which the dignity of His own law demands, and actually send His Son to die in our room, it is then that we begin to see the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the beauty and majesty of the Divine character, and the generous tears which suffuse our eyes are the first tears of true repentance which we have ever shed. That cross of Christ, with its great atoning sacrifice, lets me see God to be so great, and man so little—the Sovereign to be so good, and the rebel to be so bad: it shows on the one side such holiness and such love, whilst it shows on the other guilt so heinous, wickedness so inexcusable, and ruin so complete, that we need not wonder though we find man’s pride reject the humbling truth. Orthodox people are charged with teaching that the philosophy of sacrifice consists in the necessity of punishing—that it is justice to let the blow fall somewhere, no matter where; blood must flow. But we never affirm that God visited our sins on the head of one who had no connection with these sins at all. God visited the sin on the head of One who, though personally innocent of it, did nevertheless put Himself voluntarily into such a relationship to the sinners as involved Him in the fullest legal responsibility for the sin. A man is beheaded for crimes that his hands have committed—the body is a whole. So Christ and His Church are one body; He is the Head. When God the Father exacted the penalty of His people’s sins from Jesus, He did so from One who, as the Head of the body, was as righteously responsible for them as if He had committed them all.—Article, “Family Treasury,” August 1868.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 9
Heb_9:22. Propitiation by Sacrifice.—It has often been remarked that the idea of propitiation by sacrifice is to be found in connection with all the sacrifices of heathen nations. This is strikingly illustrated by the following account of one of the festivals of the North American Indians:—Dr. Edward Walsh describes a village, the houses of which surrounded a large green or common, in the centre of which the council-house or temple was erected. “It was lighted,” he says, “by a few small, square apertures, close to the eaves, which also let out the smoke; consequently, it was somewhat dark. The door facing the west had a rude but spacious portico. The roof, which had a high pitch, was propped up within by four strong posts, between which was the hearth, with a large kettle over it. There was a seat all round, and the walls, which were formed of split plank, were half-way up covered with mats. Here we found a great number of Indians assembled. The women were ranged outside the wall, and the men surrounded the fire inside, at the head of whom was the high priest in his pontificals. His face was painted like the quarterings of a coat of arms, and he was furnished with a beard: he wore on his head a high tiara of beaver fur, stuck round with dyed porcupine quills: he had over his chest a kind of stomacher, worked in figures, and ornamented with wampum, which was supposed to represent the Jewish Urim and Thummim; in this, the Indians imagine some little spirit resides, which they talk to and consult in dubious events. Whilst the usual dance or chorus was performing, a dog which had been previously selected and fattened was boiling in the kettle: when cooked, the flesh was cut off, and the bones scraped clean and wrapped up in its skin. The flesh was then divided into small bits, and handed round on a wooden platter, to all those that surrounded the fire: at the same time, the high priest dipped a branch of hemlock pine in the broth, and sprinkled it everywhere, as well on the people as on the walls. The ceremony concluded with the circular dance and chant, in which the women joined. This chant, or hymn, is sung by all the Indian nations in North America, however they may differ in custom and language. Humboldt even heard it in Mexico, and it is supposed to be synonymous with the hallelujah of the Psalms. It was pricked down for me by a gentleman who understood musical composition. To my ears it sounds like the lullaby of the nursery:—
‘Tam le yah al lah le lu lah tam ye lah yo ha wah ha ha hah!’
It must be admitted that this ceremony bears some rude resemblance to the feast of the Passover, substituting a dog for a lamb, of which they have none; but dogs are sacrificed on all solemn occasions.”
Eastern Covenant Customs.—While in Abyssinia, Bruce the traveller wished to go from one place to another, and the sheikh had assured him that the journey might be undertaken with safety. “But,” said Bruce, “suppose your people meet us in the desert, how shall we fare in that case? Should we fight?” “I have told you, sheikh, already,” said he, “cursed be the man that lifts his hand against you, or even does not defend and befriend you to his own loss, even were it Ibrahim, my own son.” Then after some conversation, the old man muttered something to his sons in a dialect Bruce did not understand, and in a little time the whole hut was filled with people, the priests and monks of their religion, and the heads of families. “The great people joined hands, and uttered a kind of prayer—really the oath—about two minutes long, by which they declared themselves and their children accursed if ever they lifted their hands against me in the field, in the desert, or on the river; or, in case that I or mine should fly to them for refuge, if they did not protect us at the risk of their lives, their families, and their fortunes, or as they emphatically expressed it, ‘to the death of the last male child among them’ Medicines and advice were given on my part, faith and promises pledged on theirs; then two bushels of wheat and seven sheep were carried down to my boat.”
Classical Covenant Customs.—An ancient writer relates that Agamemnon, the leader of the Greeks at the siege of Troy, “to confirm his faith sworn to Achilles, ordered victims to be brought. He took one, and with his sword divided it in the midst, placed the pieces opposite to each other, and holding his sword, reeking with blood, passed between the separated pieces.” Livy, the Roman historian, relates that in the time of Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great, it was the custom, at the lustration or purification of the armies, to cut off the head of a dog, and then make the whole army file between the head and the trunk. Compare Jer_34:18.
The Scottish League and Covenant.—The most remarkable modern reproduction of the ancient covenant may be found in Scottish history. It was a confession of faith made in the year 557, A.D., and a mutual agreement to maintain that confession even at peril of death. “As the hour drew near people from all quarters flocked to the spot, and before the commissioners appeared the Greyfriars Church and Churchyard, Edinburgh, were densely filled with the gravest, the wisest, and the best of Scotland’s pious sons and daughters. The long roll of parchment was brought, the meaning and purpose of the covenant explained. Then a deep and solemn pause ensued; not the pause of irresolution, but of modest diffidence, each thinking every other more worthy than himself to place the first name upon this sacred bond. An aged nobleman, the venerable Earl of Sutherland, at last stepped slowly and reverentially forward, and with throbbing heart and trembling hand subscribed Scotland’s covenant with God. All hesitation in a moment disappeared. Name followed name in quick succession, till all within the Church had given their signatures. It was then removed into the churchyard, and spread out on a level gravestone. Here the scene became still more impressive. The intense emotions of many became irrepressible. Some wept aloud; some burst into a shout of exultation; some after their names added the words ‘till death’; and some, opening a vein, subscribed with their own warm blood. And when every particle of space was filled, there was another solemn pause. The nation had framed a covenant in former days, and had violated its engagements; if they, too, should break this sacred bond, how deep would be their guilt! Such seems to have been their thought; for, as if moved by one spirit—the one eternal Spirit—with low, heart-wrung groans, and faces bathed in tears, they lifted, with one consent, their right hands to heaven, avowing by this sublime appeal that they had now joined themselves unto the Lord in an everlasting covenant, which should not be forgotten.”—T. Guthrie.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On v19 19-22. Here we learn that Moses sprinkled the tabernacle,…
ARGUMENT 9
THE TWO BAPTISMS.
Read full note →
19-22. Here we learn that Moses sprinkled the tabernacle, the Pentateuch, and all the people assembled at the tabernacle door, with water tinged with blood, upon the ratification of the Sinai covenant and the dedication of the tabernacle in the wilderness. Washings in Heb 9:10 is baptisms in the Greek. In Heb 9:13 it is said they were performed by sprinkling the bloody water on the bodies of the people for the sanctification of their flesh from ceremonial pollution. In Heb 9:19 the Holy Spirit says Moses sprinkled all the people, i.e., three millions, at the tabernacle door in the use of hyssop and scarlet wool, by which he sprinkled the bloody water on the people and the tabernacle. If you want a case of Scriptural baptism by sprinkling you have it here on a grand scale. When Moses sprinkled three millions of people at the tabernacle door, the Holy Spirit says he baptized them (Heb 9:10). I am no stickler on water baptism. I care nothing about modes. However, it is absolutely certain that they baptized by sprinkling in the days of Moses and the prophets. Water baptism in our day is an eliminated survivor of the copious catharisms peculiar to Judaism, and has nothing whatever to do with salvation. It merely typifies the baptism with the Spirit.
23. “Therefore truly it is necessary that the patterns of things in these heavens be purified, but the heavenlies themselves by greater sacrifices than these.” We have here the Greek epourania, the heavenlies, rendered emphatic by the specific pronoun auta. Now, what are these heavenlies which must be purified by greater sacrifices than the constituencies of the material kingdom, i.e., the tabernacle and the physical bodies of the people? The literal meaning of epourania is the heavenlies, and simply means our immortal spirits, which become heavenly by virtue of this wonderful purification, and are destined to live in heaven forever, associated eternally with celestial entities. Now you are prepared to appreciate this beautiful argument given by the inspired Apollos. Just as it was absolutely necessary under the Mosaic law that the bodies of the people should be sprinkled, i.e., baptized with water and animal blood before they were allowed to enter the visible tabernacle and enjoy its privileges, even so is it pre-eminently essential that our immortal spirits shall be baptized, i.e., sanctified by the Holy Ghost, typified by the water which Moses sprinkled on the people, and the blood of Jesus symbolized by the animal blood, with which Moses sprinkled the people. Here you see the beautiful and powerful analogy between the type and the antitype, the physical and the spiritual, the earthly and the heavenly, Moses and Christ, the water and the Holy Ghost, the blood of bulls and goats and the blood of Jesus. We are fortunate to live in the spiritual dispensation, after the evanescence of all the types and shadows, and the glorious sunburst of the long anticipated Antitype on the world.
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv18, 23 The type of the Old Testament sacrifices:
The type of the Old Testament sacrifices:
v. 18. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
Read full note →
v. 19. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people,
v. 20. saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
v. 21. Moreover, he sprinkled with blood both the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.
v. 22. And almost all things are by the Law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
The statement of the preceding paragraph, that Christ became the Mediator of the New Testament by His death, by the shedding of His blood, is here substantiated by a reference to the type of the Old Testament: Whence neither the first (covenant) has been inaugurated without blood. The children of Israel were received into the covenant of the Lord through death, over the dead bodies of the sacrificial animals as representing the people. The death of these animals was necessary, partly as a means of expiating the sins of the people, partly as indicating that the people died to the past and became wholly the peculiar nation of the Lord. So even the first covenant, imperfect and temporary as it was, was not ratified without the shedding of blood and the resulting death of the animals substituted for the believers.
This fact is shown in one pertinent instance: For when every command according to the Law had been spoken by Noses to all the people, he took the blood of bullocks and of goats with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled it upon the book itself and the entire people, saying, This is the blood of the covenant which God has enjoined upon you. The inspired author here refers to a story with which his readers were familiar. After Moses, in agreement with the command of the Lord, had repeated to all the people all the precepts which God had spoken, when they all had had an opportunity clearly to understand the obligations they assumed on entering the covenant, then Moses impressed the matter upon their minds by a solemn ceremony. The proper animals having been slaughtered, he took blood of bullocks and goats, added water to it, either to prevent coagulation or to symbolize the fact of cleansing, tied some scarlet wool on a stick of hyssop or wild marjoram, which was also associated with purifying, and then used this device for the purpose of sprinkling. See Num 19:6; Lev 14:4-7; Lev 14:49-52. He first sprinkled some of the blood upon the book itself, that is, upon the roll on which he had written the words of the Lord, the terms of the covenant, and then upon the people, as a party to the covenant, saying, at the same time, that this blood was the blood of the testament, that God thereby ratified the covenant between Himself and the nation chosen by Him. See Exo 24:3-8. Note that the words used by Moses are very much like those used by Christ at the institution of the Eucharist, by which the Lord signified that by the shedding of His sacrificial blood alone, for the remission of sins, the everlasting covenant of the New Testament is ratified.
But the author adds another point: And he even sprinkled with blood both the Tabernacle and the vessels of the ministry likewise; and practically everything is purified with blood according to the Law, and without the shedding of blood remission does not take place. What had happened on this occasion was later repeated in just as solemn a manner, Lev 8:15-19, namely, when the Tabernacle was dedicated with appropriate ceremonies, Aaron in this case acting on behalf of Moses, at God’s command. It seems that while Moses attended to the anointing of the Tabernacle and its appointments personally, Exo 40:9-11, and also sprinkled the blood of Aaron’s sin-offering upon the altar with his own hands, the high priest afterward performed the consecration of all the holy vessels used in the work of the Levitical priesthood. The author is right, therefore, in stating that practically all things were cleansed by blood according to the rite of the Old Testament, blood being the symbol or agency of purification. Water was used for cleansing only from certain pollutions. The conclusion, then, is fully justified that without blood-shedding there is no remission of sins. Thus it was in the Old Testament. The application for the new covenant is obvious, namely, that there is no salvation but through the sacrificial death of Christ. He gave His life for the life of the world, and thereby gained eternal life for the world.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv18, 21, 23 So not even the first covenant was established without…
So not even the first covenant was established without blood
This can be stated in active and positive form. AT: "So God established even the first covenant with blood" (See: Active or Passive and Double Negatives)
Read full note →
first covenant
See how you translated this in Hebrews 8:7.
blood
The death of animals sacrificed to God is spoken of as if it were nothing but blood. AT: "the death of animals sacrificed to God" (See: Metonymy)
took the blood ... with water ... and sprinkled ... the scroll ... and all the people
The priest dipped the hyssop in the blood and the water and then shook the hyssop so drops of blood and water would fall on the scroll and on the people. Sprinkling was a symbolic action done by the priests by which they applied the benefits of the covenant to people and to objects. Here the scroll and the people's acceptability to God are renewed. (See: Symbolic Action)
hyssop
a woody shrub with flowers in summer, used in ceremonial sprinkling
the blood of the covenant
Here "blood" refers to the death of the animals sacrificed to carry out the covenant's requirements. AT: "the blood that brings into effect the covenant" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
covenant
blood
Moses
command
law
cow
goat
scroll
command
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv18, 20, 21, 22, 23 9:18-19 was put into effect: Exod 24:3-8 records Moses’…
9:18-19 was put into effect: Exod 24:3-8 records Moses’ inauguration of the old covenant with the blood of the sacrifice. • Hebrews alone among ancient sources states that Moses sprinkled the book of God’s law (cp. Exod 24:6-8). • Hyssop branches have blue flowers and strongly aromatic leaves; they were used with sacrifices for cleansing (Exod 12:22; Lev 14:4; Num 19:6, 18).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.