VII.
A New and Better Covenant (continued) (8:1–10:39)
G.
The Law a Shadow (continued) ()
2.
() The rhetorical question here emphasizes the truth that the very continuity of the sacrifices witnesses to their - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Had the sacrifices really dealt completely with sins, the author reasons, the worshipers would have been cleansed and that would have been that. There would have been no need for repeating them (cf. ). The necessity for repetition shows that the desired cleansing and an - - - - - - - - - have not occurred. The translation "cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience" () shows the lack of permanent - - - - - - - - - . A reference to "conscience" is noted so often in this letter (see also (already read), ; ; ). An effectual atonement would mean the permanent removal of the worshipers' sins, perfecting their consciences, and eliminate the need for the annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
3.
() The author now contrasts false estimates of what sacrifices might do. "Reminder" (lit., "remembrance") is a word that usually involves action. (; ) When people remember sins, they either repent or persist in sin. When God remembers sin, (; ) He usually punishes it; when He pardons, () He no longer “- - - - - - - - - sins” (). This verse () uses an expression that recalls what Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of Me" (), as He established a covenant in which the central thing is that God says, "Their sin I will remember no more" (). The Day of Atonement ceremonies each year reminded people of the fact that something had to be done about sin. But the ceremonies did no more than serve as a - - - - - - - - .
4.
() The yearly ceremonies were ineffective because "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." The word "impossible" is a strong one. There is no way forward through the blood of - - - - - - - . (; ) "Take away" is used of a literal taking off, as of Peter's cutting off the ear of the high priest's slave, or metaphorically as of the removal of reproach. It signifies the complete - - - - - - - of sin, so it is no longer a factor in the situation. That is what is needed and that is what the sacrifices could not provide.
H.
One Sacrifice for Sins ()
Again, the author rounds off and clinches his argument by appealing to Scripture as proof of the correctness of the position he has advocated. Animal sacrifices could not take away the sins of the people. However, it was the will of God that sin be - - - - - - for. Christ's perfect sacrifice of Himself fulfills God's will as animal sacrifices could never do. This the author sees foretold in . Then, as he goes on to bring out something of the utter finality of the offering of Christ, he returns to the quotation from Jeremiah he had used in chapter 8 to initiate his discussion of the - - - - - - - - - - - - . His argument up till now has been the negative one that the animal sacrifices of the old covenant were unavailing. Now he says positively that Christ's sacrifice, which established the new covenant, was effectual. It really put away sin!
1.
() "Therefore" introduces the next stage of the argument. Because the Levitical sacrifices were powerless to deal with sin, another - - - - - - - - - had to be made. The writer then quotes from most of , words that he sees as coming from Christ and as giving the reason for the - - - - - - - - - - - . The preexistence of Christ is assumed here. This psalm is not quoted elsewhere in the New Testament, and this reminds us once more that the writer of this letter has his own - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - and his own way of viewing Holy Writ.
a.
In the passage quoted (already read ), the LXX reads "a body you prepared for me," whereas the Hebrew has "ears You have opened." Most likely the LXX gives an interpretative translation of the original Hebrew. It may be expressing the view that the body is the instrument through which the divine command, received by the ear, is carried out. Or it may be taking a part of the body (the "ears") as meaning the whole body. Also, the words "sacrifice" and “offering" (vs. ) are both general and might apply to any offering, whereas the "burnt offerings" and the "sacrifices for sin" (vs. ) are both specific. () The four terms taken together are probably meant as a summary of the main kinds of Levitical sacrifices under the old covenant.
b.
The psalmist says that God did not "will" (NASV "desire") or had "taken no pleasure" in such offerings. This does not mean that the offerings were against God's will or that God was displeased with them. Rather, considered in themselves as a series of liturgical actions, the offerings did not bring God - - - - - - - - . They were preparatory for the atonement that would remove sin from saved or to-be-saved people. God’s pleasure was in dealing with the sin problem by Christ, but not in the sacrifices of the Old Testament priests, which did not end - - - - - - - - of those who brought pure animals to be sacrificed by the priests.
c.
"Then" (vs. ) means "in those circumstances" rather than "at that time." Since sacrifice as such did not avail before God, other action had to be taken. That action means that Christ came to do God's will. In His case, there was no question of a dumb - - - - - - being offered up quite irrespective of any desires it might have. He came specifically to do the - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , and His sacrifice was the offering of One fully committed to doing that will.
d.
The reference to the "scroll" is not completely clear, but probably the psalmist meant that He was fulfilling what was written in the law. The author of Hebrews sees the words as emphasizing that Christ came "to do" what was written in - - - - - - - - - . The words that immediately follow in the psalm ("Your Law is within my heart" []) show what this expression implies. The author uses the word "will" six times, always of the will of God, in his , Old Testament quotations. It was important to him that what God wills is done. Christ came to do nothing other than the - - - - - - - - - - - .
2.
() It is not clear why the references to sacrifices are all plural here, while at least two of them ("sacrifice" and "offering" in vs. ) are singular. Probably all we can say is that the plural makes it all very general. Multiply sacrifices and offerings how you will and characterize them how you will, God still takes - - - - - - - - - - - in them because they do not wipe out sin forever. Indeed, this is so even though the law requires them to be offered and the law is from God.
a.
We should see this latter statement as another illustration of the attitude consistently maintained by the author that the Old Testament system is divinely - - - - - - - - but preliminary. He holds it to be effective but only within its own limited scope. The sacrifices were commanded in God's law and therefore must be offered. But they were not God's final will nor God's answer to the problem of sin. They were - - - - - - - and they pointed the way to the final answer.
3.
() The words that Christ spoke through the psalmist about doing God's will are there for all time and express what Christ did. The verb "takes away" is used sometimes in the sense of taking away by killing, i.e., murdering; it is therefore a strong word that points to the total - - - - - - - - - of the former way. By contrast, the second way is "established" or "made firm." The way of the Levitical sacrifices and the way of the sacrifice of Christ are being set over against each other. These are not complementary systems that may exist side by side. The second way excludes the other way. No - - - - - - - - - - is possible between them.
4.
() "By this will" may also be translated as "in this will." It may be that our author sees the sanctified as "in" the will of God. That will is large enough and deep enough to find a place for them all. We should point out a similarity between the way this author uses the verb "sanctified" and the way Paul uses it. () For the apostle, sanctification is a process whereby the believer - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - in Christian qualities and character. In Hebrews, the same terminology is used of the process by which a person becomes a Christian and is therefore "set apart" for God. There is no contradiction between these two; both are - - - - - - - - - for the fully developed Christian life. The sanctification meant here is one brought about by the death of Christ. It has to do with making people Christians by the offering of Christ's body on the cross, not with developing Christian character. Also, the offering of Jesus' body was made "once for all" (). It matters immensely that this one offering avails for all elect people at - - - - - - - - - . This contrasts sharply with the sacrifices under the old covenant, as the author has been emphasizing. But it contrasts also with other religions. No other religion speaks of one great event that brings salvation through the centuries and through the world. This is the distinctive - - - - - - - - of Christianity.
5.
() The author now brings out the finality of Jesus' sacrifice from another angle as he considers once more the continuing activity of particularly the Levitical priests. He does not actually confine the continual activity to those priests, for he uses the quite general expression "every priest." A priest normally stands and ministers day by day and keeps offering sacrifices that can never - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Standing is the posture appropriate to priestly service, and in the tabernacle or temple the priests of Aaron's line never sat during the course of their ministry in the sanctuary. The word translated "ministering" is related to the word "serve" in . The Bible uses it only for service of a religious character. Here it clearly applies to all the services a priest performs. Yet despite all their religious activity, priests cannot deal with the basic problem — that of - - - - - - - - - - - - .
6.
() Jesus' work is contrasted to that of priests. He offered “one sacrifice” — just one alone. Then He "sat down." The author mentioned this before (e.g., ; ), but he put no emphasis on it. Now he stresses Jesus' - - - - - - - (), contrasting it to that of the Levitical priests, and the contrast brings out an important point for understanding the work of Christ. Levitical priests stand, for their work is never done but goes on. Christ sits, for His atoning work is done; there is nothing to be - - - - - - - - - - - .
a.
Furthermore, to be seated at God's right hand is to be in the place of highest honor. () Not even angels are said to have attained to this, for they stand in God's presence. () When Jesus claimed this place for Himself, the high priest tore his robe at what he regarded as - - - - - - - - - . The author is combining with the thought of a finished work the idea that our Lord is a being of the highest dignity and honor.
7.
() His work accomplished, the Lord now is "waiting". The author then quotes from , with slight alterations to fit the grammatical context. The "enemies" are not defined, but the meaning appears to be that Christ rests until in God's good time all evil is - - - - - - - - - - . The “enemies” were present in A.D. 66-70, when the nation of Israel was invaded by the Roman empire. Who were these enemies of God — They were the same Israelites who hated God’s Son and crucified Him because of their - - - - - - of Him. There is a hint of warning to the readers — i.e., they should take care that they are not numbered among these enemies, with slight alterations to fit the grammatical context. If the readers mix first century Christianity with first century Judaism, they will face the wrath of Almighty God.
8.
() "For by" introduces the reason for the statement in verse 13. Again, the divine writer emphasizes that Christ has offered "one" offering that perfects the saints. So important is this for him that he comes back to this theme over and over. The writer says that Christ's sacrifice - - - - - - - - the people. His salvation is essentially personal. We have seen a number of times that the author is fond of the idea of making "perfect". He applies it to Christ (see ) and also to His people. The process of salvation takes people who are far from perfect and makes them fit to be in God's presence forever. It is not temporary improvement that He is speaking of but improvement that is - - - - - - - - - - - - .