A Study Of The Apostle Paul’s Letter To The Hebrews

Don’t fall away! Don’t Depart! Don’t neglect your salvation! Don’t cast away your confidence! Don’t harden your heart! Don’t drift away! AStudyOf TheApostlePaul’s LetterTo The Hebrews How can we neglect so greata salvation? ~ Hebrews 2:3

Hebrews: Christ Is Superior! Superior Person (1:1—4:13) Superior to Prophets (1:1-3) Superior to Angels (1:4—2:18) Superior to Moses (3:1-19) Superior to Joshua (4:1-13) Superior Priest (4:14—7:28) Superior to Aaron (4:14—6:12) Superior to Melchizedek (6:13—7:10) Superior to Levi (7:11-28)

Hebrews: Christ Is Superior! Superior Pact to Moses’ (8:1—10:18) Superior Promises (8:1-13) Superior Sanctuary (9:1-15) Superior Sacrifice (9:16-28) Superior Results (10:1-18) Superior Principle (Faith) to Moses’ (10:19—13:25) Superior Things (10:19-39) Superior Actions (11:1-40) Superior Relationship (12:1-29) Superior Way of Life (13:1-25)

Starting in chapter 8:1, Paul began dealing with the superiority of Jesus’ Law or covenant over that of Moses’: chapter 8 concerned the better pro-mises of Christ’s covenant, while chapter 9 concerned the better sanc-tuaryand sacrifice of Christ’s cove-nant. Now…   

In chapter 10:1-18 Paul referred to the superior results of this better covenant. The first paragraph, consisting of verses 1-10, teaches that, unlike OT sacrifices, Christ’s sacrifice actually and eternally removes sin, creating clear consciences in us, taking us back to the point found in 9:14.

Hebrews 10:1 For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

At the end of chapter 9 Paul was speaking specifically about the finality of Christ’s one sacrifice—one of the things that made His sacrifice better; this is why Paul began this verse with the word because. For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

This is from a term that refers to some-thing verygeneralinnature, something lacking the details necessary to obtain a clear vision or comprehension. On the other hand… For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

This is from a phrase that refers to some-thing specific in na-ture,somethingpos-sessing the details necessary to obtain a clear comprehen-sion. So…    For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

Instead of Moses’ Law portraying a very specific outline of the good things to come, it provided only a very generic outline of them. (Think of the OT as the skeleton and the NT as the skeleton once it has been fleshed out.) For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

This reminds me of the blind man of Bethsaida: after Jesus touched him the first time, he said that people looked like trees; then after Jesus touched him the second time, he saw them clearly (Mark 8:22-25). (Perhaps thisincidentwasmeanttopicturethevery point we’re making here?) Peter wrote that Moses’ Law was so vagueinitsforeshadowingsthateven angels didn’t comprehend what God was up to (1 Pet. 1:12; cf. Mat. 13:16f).

TheideathattheLaw was only a shadow —an abstract of something real—is the main thing that made the Law of Moses and its sacri-fices inferior to the Law of Christ and His sacrifice; in fact, the word shadow is emphaticin the ori-ginal. For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

By saying this Paul was implying that the Law did not con-sist of those good things, good things such as the salva-tion of 9:28 (cf. 8:4-5 & 9:9)! For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

Tocomehereisfrom mellowhich(as men-tioned at least 3 times before:2:5,6:5,&9:11), refers to something about to come or on the verge of taking place. Why on the verge? Because the law hadn’t been ful-filled yet (cf. Mat. 5: 18);notethepresent tense in having and are in Col. 2:16-17. For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

The very fact that the sacrifices were offered continually indicated that the Law was comprised of nothing but types and shadows of something real and eternal or some-thing needing no repetition. For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

This simply refers to forgiveness (see once purged in next verse), the primary good thing that the Law couldn’t provide. For the Law, hav-ing a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who ap-proach perfect.

Hebrews 10:2-4   For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year. Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

I.e., if Moses’ Law could’ve or did re- solve the fellowship issue between God and man, wouldn’t they have stopped offering those sac-rifices? This is a rhetorical question demanding a “Yes” answer. E.g….,  For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year. Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

Oncewe’vepaid off our cars,wedon’t continue making a payment on them; besides, repetition contradicts finality. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year. Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

The answer would also be “Yes” be-cause if the people had been once-for-all forgiven, then they wouldn’t be reminded of those past sins. But… As verse 3 goes on to say…    For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year. Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

In those sacrifices they were reminded of those sins which had not yet been forgiven forever, nevertoberemem-bered again (which is what we’ll talk more about in verse 17). For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year.Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

It’s interesting that instead of Paul saying that inthosesacrifices thereis remission of sins every year, he said, in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. (The use of sins plur-al shows that Paul really was referring to thesinstheyhadcommittedbeingbrought back up, not just to the idea that they were sinners in general.) So…   

How sad to have been a Jew: whereas there was no clear or cleansed consci-ence for them, we today do (or at least can) have such, first through obedience to baptism (1 Pet. 3:21), then afterward through a not-so-strenuous walk with God (1 John 1:7 & 9). Isn’titgreattoberemindedin the Lord’s supper of Christ’s death which took our sins away as opposed to being remind-ed in some animal sacrifice of our sins which have not been taken away?

The reason sins were not removed under the OT is simply because the blood of animals couldn’t effect the removal of sin. The question arises, however, “Why can’tanimal blood effect the removal of sin?” Here are some possible an-swers:    For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more con-sciousness of sins. But in those sacri-fices there is a re-minder of sins every year. Forit isn’t possible that the blood of bulls/goats could take away sin.

1.To offer something for our sin that doesn’t belong to us (Psa. 50:10), that’s of a lower order than we are (Gen. 1:26-28), and that’s not even accountable for its own actions is clearly unreasonable! So, and let’s consider this as number… 2.There’snorelationat all betweenour moral defilement and material sacrifices, animals or not animals (Psa. 51: 16-17& Mic. 6:7). Now, although thissoundsrational,Ipersonallylean toward answer number…   

3.Thesamereason that gettingdunked inwatercan’teliminatesinisthesame reasonthatanimalbloodcan’telimi- nate it—they bothdependonor point toward the only object that can ulti- mately eradicateit—thebloodof theChrist!Nevertheless… It seems that all we can know for sure is that the nature of God’s justice could only be satisfied with a perfect, human sacrifice—a sacrifice, of course, that could only be supplied by deity!

Hebrews 10:5-7   Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

This prophecy is from Psalm 40:7-9, the theme of which is that deliverance from sin is not pro-cured by animal sacrifices, but by onewhowouldper-fectly discharge & satisfy the will of God. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

These, of course, refer to the workof the Levitical priest-hood. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

This doesn’t mean that they weren’t part of His will for them,fortheywere (cf. v. 8);it rathermeans that there was no satisfaction for sin available in those shadows. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

This implies two things: (1) that Je-sus,unlikeanimals, obeyed God’s will and,unlikehumans, obeyed it perfectly even unto death (Php. 2:8), and (2) His incarnation and sacrifice were car-riedoutvoluntarily. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

This phrase also clearly teaches two things: (1) that Je-sus, unlike you and I, existed before this incarnation & (2) that God Him-self supplied the sacrifice. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

Our word volume(which, by the way, is thecorrecttranslation of the original term here) is from the Latin volvo—to roll; so volume came to refer to a large sc-roll,inthiscasepro- bablythevolume of the five books of Moses, since very little else had yet been written by the time of David. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

The Torah not only includedprophecies, but also shadows &types of the coming Messiah.Thereason Paul used this OT prophecy was the samereasonheused suchallthroughHe-brews(e.g.vv.16-17) —to demonstrate that even their own Scriptures proved what he affirmed. Therefore when He came into the world He said, “Sacrifice & offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt of-ferings & sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then Isaid, ‘Behold, I have come (in the volume of the book it is writ-tenofMe)todoYour will, O God.’”

Hebrews 10:8-9   Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offer-ing, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), then He said, “Behold, I have cometodoYourwill, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

Paul merely repeated himself in order to demonstrate that the Messiah (a Jew whowasasonofDav-id who wrote Psa. 40) acknowledged that Yahweh’s ultimate pleasure wasn’t to be found in all those OT sacrifices and offerings. So… Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offer-ing, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), then He said, “Behold, I have cometodoYourwill, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

The Messiah will-ingly came to ac-complishthatwhich would provide ulti-mate pleasure to God—He’d live the perfect human life, then become the once-for-all perfect sacrifice and High PriestbetweenGod & men, reconciling them through a new priesthood and new covenant. Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offer-ing, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), then He said, “Behold, I have cometodoYourwill, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

Let’s not fail to see in this context that Paul was not only contrast-ing a perfect sacrifice with imper-fect sacrifices, but He was also contrasting those numerous sac-rifices with Christ’s one sacrifice. (But I guess in a way that to say one is to say the other.)

Hebrews 10:10 By that will we have been sancti-fied through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This refers to the will of God to have Jesus perfectly replace the OT sacrifices; by His fulfilling of God’s will in this matter, Jesus has indeed set the bar high—we simply mustobey, for obe-dience is preferable to every (imperfect) sacrifice ever offer-ed (1 Sam. 15:22). By that will we have been sancti-fied through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This means to be cleansed and thus set apart for and to God; we’ll get more intothisinverse14. By that will we have been sancti-fied through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Just as one sacrifice was contrasted to numerous sacrifices in verse 9, so here theonce-for-all-time sacrifice of Jesus is contrasted to the repeated sacrifices of the OT. So…  By that will we have been sancti-fied through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Paul has shown that the same divine authority that established the Levitical priesthood and its work is the same authority that abolished them; i.e., it’s by God’s own will that the first has been taken away so that the second could be instituted—only Jesus’ one-time sacrifice is now suit-able and acceptable.

Hebrews 10:11-12   Every priest stands ministering daily & offering repeat-edly the same sac-rifices which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offer-ed one sacrifice forsinsforever,sat down at the right hand of God…

As with many other passages already noted in our studies,thisoneindicates that the temple was still open for busi-ness; i.e., the Leviti-calpriestscontinued stubbornly to offer the sacrifices of the OT, even though the Messiah had come & taken their place. Every priest stands ministering daily & offering repeat-edly the same sac-rifices which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offer-ed one sacrifice forsinsforever,sat down at the right hand of God…

Thesesacrificeswere offered repeatedly precisely because theywereimperfect, so imperfect, in fact, that, no matter how many were offered, they’d never reach the desired goal—true atonement of the soul, that which the single sacrifice of Christ achieved. Every priest stands ministering daily & offering repeat-edly the same sac-rifices which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offer-ed one sacrifice forsinsforever,sat down at the right hand of God…

The Law Sacrifices Year After Year Can NeverPerfect The Priests Every Day Sacrifices Can NeverTake Away Note the Parallels BetweenVerse 1andVerse 11

It’s impossible to not notice, of course, that while the OT priestsstoodasrest-less servants, Jesus was pictured as sit-ting at rest (perhaps even reminding them of the rest he wrote of in chapter 4). Every priest stands ministering daily & offering repeat-edly the same sac-rifices which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offer-ed one sacrifice forsinsforever,sat down at the right hand of God…

There’s no term for Man in the original; the word that evi-dently should’ve been supplied here is Priest; i.e., while thosepriests do that,thisPriest did this! Every priest stands ministering daily & offering repeat-edly the same sac-rifices which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offer-ed one sacrifice forsinsforever,sat down at the right hand of God…

Hebrews 10:13 …from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool.

A Study Of The Apostle Paul’s Letter To The Hebrews