Hebrews

Friday, 12 October 2018

As He also says in another place:
“You are a priest forever
According to the order of Melchizedek”; Hebrews 5:6

The words of this verse are based on the introductory words of the previous verse. There it said, “So also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest, but it was He who said to Him.” The “He” there is referring to God. After that, the author cited Psalm 2:7. Now, to continue to confirm that Jesus was selected by God to be High Priest of the New Covenant, he again goes to Scripture by saying, “As He also says in another place.”

He has done this to confirm that it is God who has selected Christ, and the evidence is already recorded in the word of God. This time, it is in Psalm 110:4. How can we know these words are speaking of Jesus? First, he has already used this same Psalm to show that it is fulfilled in Jesus. This was seen in verse 1:13. He will continue to confirm it in this chapter. Further, He will again refer to the words of this psalm, in detail, in Chapter 7. It is obvious, based on the abundant evidence that he has provided and will continue to provide, that this is speaking of Christ Jesus.

As a reminder that this psalm was always considered as messianic in nature, the opening of the psalm says, “The Lord said to my Lord.” In this, the first use of “Lord” is the divine name, Yehovah. In the second, it is the word Adonai. It is a term used when speaking about or to Yehovah, rather than pronouncing His divine name. Both uses are speaking of Yehovah. David is, therefore, making a statement about the Lord appointing Himself to a particular position. In this case, it is the appointment of Jesus the Messiah (who is Yehovah God) to the role of High Priest of a new covenant. This is evident from the words cited by the author which state, “You are a priest forever.”

Here it doesn’t say “high priest.” Though He is called this elsewhere in Hebrews, it is not used here in order to make the comparison to Melchizedek, who was never called “high priest.” Christ Jesus would be a priest, executing priestly functions, on behalf of the people and for Yehovah Elohim, or the Lord God. And this priestly role would be “forever.” This is an explicit note of superiority of Christ over Aaron. Aaron was told he would have an everlasting priesthood (meaning during the duration of the Old Covenant), but that priesthood was not in him personally. Rather, it was through him and then his sons after him. In contrast to that, Christ’s ministry would be through Him personally and forever. Therefore, His priesthood is superior to that of Aaron. This will be evaluated and explained in detail in Chapter 7.

The verse then finishes with “According to the order of Melchizedek.” The author now presents Melchizedek’s priesthood as a priesthood comparable to that of Christ Jesus in that it is “forever.” Whether this is literally true or not, or how he can substantiate this, is not the author’s concern yet. That will not come until Chapter 7. He simply makes the statement that it is so. As David recorded it under inspiration from God, it must be a valid premise, and so our author simply states it as an axiom. Melchizedek’s priesthood is forever, and the priesthood of Christ is according to the order of Melchizedek. Therefore, the priesthood of Christ Jesus is forever.

The author could leave the statement here and go no further and have a case for the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over that of Aaron, but he won’t. He will explain the matter in complete detail as he continues. For now, he is simply introducing Melchizedek in order to show that Jesus’ priesthood is worthy of full attention and that it will fully satisfy the mediatorial role of those who come to Him.

Life application: As Jesus’ priesthood is superior to that of Aaron, and as Aaron ministered under the Mosaic Covenant, then what would be the purpose of going back to a priesthood that had continuously failed to bring priest and people to a state of perfection? The sins of the people continued, and year by year they needed a covering for new sins which entered into their lives. The people died, and a new generation sprang up with the same problems. Life could never come about through adherence to this system. Only in Christ Jesus could it be made possible. And yet, there are innumerable people today who are asking their audiences to turn again to Moses and this failed system. Don’t be lulled into this heretical teaching. Come to Christ – the Mediator of a better covenant. (Note: As always “failed system” when referring to the Mosaic Covenant is not because the law itself was a failure, but because sin in man causes it to fail. Fallen man can never be perfected by this system.)

Lord God, we are granted a marvelous opportunity to be freed from the yoke of the Law of Moses by coming to Christ. In Him, we are granted Your grace, and our sins are not counted against us any longer. How precious is the blood of Christ that purifies us once and forever! Let us come to the cross, receive cleansing, and be forever forgiven for our wrongs! Thank You, O God, for Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.

Thursday, 11 October 2018

So also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest, but it was He who said to Him:
“You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.” Hebrews 5:5

There is a definite article before “Christ” in this verse which is unfortunately left untranslated by most versions. However, the author is making a specific connection to the priesthood of Aaron by comparing it with the priesthood of Christ Jesus. It properly says, “So also the Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest.”

The word “Christ” in Greek is the exact same in meaning as “Messiah” in Hebrew. Both mean “anointed one.” In the books of Leviticus and Numbers, the term “the anointed priest,” or “the priest who was anointed,” is used several times when speaking of the high priest. Just as Aaron was selected by God to be the anointed priest, “So also the Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest.” The comparison is made. Both of those who were so anointed did not choose themselves. Rather, both were chosen by God. This, however, does not mean that Jesus isn’t God. Instead, it is speaking of His humanity which has been the subject of the author’s words, especially since verse 4:15.

Jesus, as a human, was selected by God for this mediatorial role which would confirm Him as “the Christ,” and who would also “Himself become High Priest.” The author then confirms this by showing that Jesus was the subject of the 2^nd Psalm by saying, “but it was He who said to Him.” The “He” is speaking of the Lord (Yehovah); the “Him” is speaking of Jesus, who is the incarnation of Yehovah. This is first seen in Psalm 2:2 –

“The kings of the earth set themselves,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying…”

The Lord (Yehovah in Hebrew) is mentioned along with “His anointed.” The words “His anointed” are from the Hebrew word mashiakh, or “messiah.” As noted already, the term “messiah” in Hebrew means “Christ” in Greek. The author is showing that the One who fills this role was chosen by God. However, the next verse (5:6) will show that this same One is also Yehovah, the Lord. Both are Yehovah. To set that up so that there can be no mistake about it when he gets to that verse, he finishes his thought of this verse by quoting Psalm 2:7, just as he did in Hebrews 1:5 –

“You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.”

This emphasis and highlight in using these same words, both in verse 1:5 and now here, is that verse 1:5 is in relation to the Christ being the anointed King. For example, in verse 1:8 it speaks of the throne and scepter of Jesus (showing kingly authority), the Son of God. Just as Jesus is the Anointed King referenced in Psalm 2:6, and which was then confirmed by those same words in verse 2:7, so He is the anointed Priest. The proclamation which says, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You,” had been used to confirm in the Christ both the office of King and High Priest. That the One to fill both of these roles is also Yehovah, and thus God, will be seen in the words of the next verse.

However, even without the words of the next verse, the deity of this One has already been made evident several times in Hebrews so far. We should have no doubts in our theology of the deity of Christ Jesus. When we worship Him, we are worshiping God.

Life application: The author is using words, carefully selected from the Old Testament, to build His case in the superiority of the New Covenant faith in Jesus over the Old Covenant system. He is greater than Moses. He is greater than Aaron. He is greater than the angels. And so on. As the Old anticipated rest for the people of God, and as the Old pointed to faith in Christ Jesus, then the author is directing them to come to Christ, enter into His rest, and enjoy harmonious union with God, through Him, for all time. It is error to deny the deity of Christ, and it is error to fall back on the Law of Moses in hopes of being reconciled to God. There is only one way for this reconciliation to come about, and that is by coming through Jesus, the God/Man who is the anointed King and the anointed High Priest.

Lord God, the Bible makes such a definitive case for the deity of Christ that there is absolutely no excuse for us to deny this most important tenet. If we fail to acknowledge Him in this capacity, we fail to honor You for having come in this capacity. We cannot say that we will follow You, worship You, and adore You without giving that same honor to Jesus. Help us to rightly honor You by honoring the Son. Amen.

Wednesday, 10 October 2018

And no man takes this honor to himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was. Hebrews 5:4

This statement is tied to verse 5:1, which says, “For every high priest taken from among men is appointed…” After saying that, the state of such an appointed priest was noted. The author now returns to the fact that the high priest is, in fact, appointed by saying, “And no man takes this honor to himself.” In these words, he is speaking of a legitimate high priest in the line of Aaron and for the role of mediation of the Mosaic law.

Aaron was specifically chosen, and the priesthood was given to him and to his line after him. Only those who met this qualification could rightly stand in this capacity. Further, Aaron and his sons, after selection, went through a lengthy and precise ordination process which then made them suitable to minister in this way. The honor wasn’t taken upon themselves, and the ordination process wasn’t invented by them. Instead, it was all by God’s choosing and by His instruction. Nothing concerning mediation between Himself and the people was left up to man. It was solely a work of God. This is then confirmed by the words, “but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was.”

It is not of man who wills, but of God who chooses and appoints. There were usurpers to the priestly duties who are recorded in the Bible. For example, when the ten northern tribes broke away from Judah, the king of Israel appointed his own priests to minister at his own high places. This is recorded in 1 Kings 13:33, 34 –

“After this event Jeroboam did not turn from his evil way, but again he made priests from every class of people for the high places; whoever wished, he consecrated him, and he became one of the priests of the high places. ³⁴ And this thing was the sin of the house of Jeroboam, so as to exterminate and destroy it from the face of the earth.”

Examples such as this, and examples of disobedient priests even from the line of Aaron (as recorded in both testaments), show us that something more precise was needed, The false priesthood of Israel, and the fallible nature of the Aaronic priesthood even in Judah, were incapable of bringing about perfection of the people. But to be restored to God, perfection is necessary. As the priesthood of Aaron was deficient in this manner, so is the law which brought about Aaron’s priesthood. This does not mean that the law which was given was not good, but rather it was sin in man which made it impossible to bring about that which was necessary to wholly restore man to God. A new calling would be necessary. That calling would be of a perfect Man, through a new covenant, and with an everlasting priesthood.

Life application: If the priesthood ministered by Aaron could not bring about perfection, and as it is superseded by the priesthood of Jesus, why would anyone go back to the law (of which Aaron ministered) in order to attempt to be pleasing to God? It shows either the height of stupidity to reject the greater priesthood, or it shows the utterly arrogant nature of the individual to want to work towards a rest which has already been granted by God through faith in Christ. The implication is that such a person believes that what Jesus did wasn’t good enough and that they can do a better job than Him. Don’t show yourself either stupid or arrogant. Instead, show that you are wise in Christ, and totally reliant on Him alone!

Lord God, only through the finished work of Christ can we enter into Your rest. When He shed His blood, He cried out, “It is finished!” Everything needed to restore us to You came about through what He has done. And so why would we ever revert back to a law which could never bring us to perfection? In Him, we are justified. In Him, we are sanctified. In Him we are glorified. Help us to not assume we can do it better than He did. Thank You for the finished work of Christ, and for the rest which is made available through it. Amen!

Tuesday, 9 October 2018

Because of this he is required as for the people, so also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins. Hebrews 5:3

The words, “Because of this,” are given to explain the words of the previous verse, which said when speaking of the high priest, “since he himself is also subject to weakness.” The high priest was not a sinless person. He was born into humanity from a human father, and thus he received his first father’s original sin. Further, he was subject to weakness, meaning he incurred guilt through committed sin as well. This made him able to be compassionate towards those who went astray, but it also meant that he required his own offering for sin just “as for the people.”

The book of Leviticus details the many sacrifices required under the Mosaic law, including offerings for sin. In the ordination of Aaron and his sons, and which would be required for any new priest after them, there was the necessity to offer a sin-offering. This is noted in Leviticus 8:2. The process of making this offering is then detailed later in the same chapter. The sin offering was required each day of the ordination process, and then when they were fully ordained, only then could the priests offer for the sins of the people, as is noted in Leviticus 9:7 & 9:15.

This is explained with the words, “so also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins.” The very fact that the priests had to offer for their own sins, including the high priest himself, shows us the fallible nature of the Aaronic priesthood. They were tainted with sin, and they needed to have a substitute die in place of their failings before they could sacrifice for others.

And more, this didn’t just occur one time and then purify them forever from the need for a sacrifice for sin. Rather, each year on the Day of Atonement the high priest had to sacrifice a sin-offering for himself before he could offer one for the people. This was a clear indication that his ordination did not reckon him as sinless at all. Examples such as these show the fallible nature of the priesthood of Aaron.

But the most poignant example of all is found actually occurring on the final day of the priestly ordination of Aaron and his sons. On that day, after they had accomplished the sacrifice for their own sins, they sacrificed for the sins of the people. The priests were to then eat that sin-offering, thus symbolically taking the sins of the people upon themselves and purging them. However, two of the sons of Aaron died on that day, even after the sacrifices were complete. Later, Moses came and found that Aaron and his two remaining sons had not eaten the sin-offering, but had burnt it up. The following analysis of those verses from Leviticus 10 shows the absolute inability of the Aaronic priesthood to actually accomplish the purification of sin for themselves and for the people –

¹⁸ See! Its blood was not brought inside the holy place; indeed you should have eaten it in a holy place, as I commanded.”

Two different things are intended with the word “holy” in this verse. The first is speaking of the blood being brought into the holy place within the tent of meeting. This did not happen with this sacrifice, and therefore the meat was to be eaten, not burned up. The place where it was to be eaten is in a holy place, meaning within the sanctuary, but not within the holy place of the tent of meeting.

¹⁹ And Aaron said to Moses, “Look, this day they have offered their sin offering and their burnt offering before the Lord, and such things have befallen me!

Almost all scholars tie Aaron’s words in with his grief, and the grief of his sons, as being the reason for not eating the sin offering of the people, something prescribed by the law. However, this is not the case. Aaron will ask a conditional question based on what he has just noted to Moses, which is that the sons had offered their sin offering, and they had offered their burnt offering before the Lord. And further, they had done it before Nadab and Abihu had died. The offerings were on behalf of all the sons, not just the two living ones. And yet, two of them still died in sin on that day!

How could they eat the sin offering of someone else when they had not attained to the state of holiness which kept them from dying in their own sin? It is a giant mark upon the Aaronic priesthood, coming on the last day of the ordination process, which shows its completely fallible nature. It couldn’t even perfect its priests. As this is so, how could it be expected to perfect those who came to the Lord through those priests? Indeed, something much greater was needed for that to come about.

^{19 (continues)} If I had eaten the sin offering today, would it have been accepted in the sight of the Lord?”

The answer to his question is obvious, “No.” If the sin offering and the burnt offerings, which were intended to take care of the sins of the priests before they tended to the sins of the congregation, were tainted by what occurred, thus meaning the priests were also tainted, then how could they take on the sin of the people in order to purify them? Aaron’s logic is impeccable, and it shows us how vastly inferior this priesthood is to that of Christ – infinitely so.

The sin of man could never be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats – case in point is the death of Nadab and Abihu. Add into that the future death of Aaron, and then the death of Moses who performed the installation of Aaron, and you have a completely failed system. However, the system itself is not the failure, it is the people within the system. And within the people is the true failure, sin. Contemplating David’s words of the 51^st Psalm shows to us the seed of failure contained within the Law of Moses –

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.” Psalm 51:5

David shows us that sin is, in fact, inherited. This was the case with Aaron and his sons, and the Law of Moses could not make them sinless. Only in the coming of Christ could this come about.

Life application: The analysis of the verses of Leviticus provided in this commentary is an abbreviated form of the sermon, Absolute Zero, given by Charlie Garrett of The Superior Word. To understand the entire context of what is presented in those verses, please take the time to watch this video of the sermon – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwIpH6a4H7A

Lord God Almighty, we learn from the Bible that the Law of Moses could never adequately deal with the sin problem in man. Only in the coming of Christ could our sin nature be properly dealt with. Thank You for the surpassing greatness of the New Covenant which comes through the shed blood of Christ. Thank You for Jesus our Lord! Amen.

Monday, 8 October 2018

He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness. Hebrews 5:2

As noted in verse 5:1, every high priest is taken from among men. The stress of that thought was on the bond of humanity. We can see here the reason why this is so necessary. It is so that “he can have compassion.” The word used is a unique compound word, metriopatheó. Helps word studies defines it as –

“…(from metrios, ‘mediating,’ derived from metri, “an instrument for measuring” and páthos, ‘feeling’) – properly, to feel appropriately, i.e. with divinely-measured intensity (‘God-controlled moderation’).”

The high priest was not a stoic who was without feeling toward those he mediated for, nor was he overbearing in accusation, finding fault in every misstep made by them. Instead, because he shares in their humanity, he was to empathize with the people without being too tolerant of their faults that they should be wholly overlooked, nor should he be too severe that he finds a reason to have them ejected from the congregation for even the slightest mistakes. The high priest possesses feelings appropriate to the situation with a “God-controlled moderation” which is directed toward “those who are ignorant and going astray.”

The word “ignorant” is not necessarily speaking of one who is stupid. Rather, it is someone who simply doesn’t know about or recognize his wrongdoing. It may be from a lack of intelligence, or it may be from a lack of information. A distinction between intentional and unintentional sins is made in Numbers 15:22-29. The word now translated as “ignorant” would fall under the “unintentional” category there. The term “going astray” is the same one used in Hebrews 3:10, planaó. It is where the word “planet” comes from, because planets, unlike stars, seem to wander through the heavenly realm. It would then signify a person caught in sin by roaming into error, or by being misled.

In such cases, the high priest is able to see their wandering and have a moderated sense of their failing because “he himself is also subject to weakness.” The word here for “subject to” gives the idea of being hung or surrounded by. Thus, it is something that encompasses. The high priest is, like those he ministers for, encompassed by weakness. And that is exactly the word used to describe what Jesus did for the people in Matthew 8 where the words of Isaiah 53 are cited –

“When evening had come, they brought to Him many who were demon-possessed. And He cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all who were sick, ¹⁷ that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying:
‘He Himself took our infirmities
And bore our sicknesses.’” Matthew 8:16, 17

As can be seen, verses 5:1 & 2, which began with the word “For,” are given to explain what was stated as Chapter 4 closed out. As it said in verse 4:15, “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” The notable difference is that the high priest of Israel was encompassed with his own weakness, whereas Christ carried the infirmaries of the people for them. The difference between the two will lead us to the thought of the coming verses concerning the weakness of the high priest of the Old Covenant.

We are being shown the compassion of God towards fallen sinners in the Person of Jesus Christ. Because He shared in our human limitations, He is able to effectively mediate as one who can empathize with our failings.

Life application: Thank God for Jesus Christ our Lord.

Lord God, it sure is wonderful that Jesus came into humanity. In this, He took on our infirmities and He bore our sicknesses. As a Man, He can fully empathize with our failings and faults, and He can then effectively mediate between You and us. We have a High Priest who is able to use the proper measure when we go astray, knowing personally who we are and what limitations we possess. Thank You for this wonderfully comforting knowledge. Amen.