Seventh-day Adventist Bible CommentaryHebrews 8

Sum. Gr. kephalaion, “chief point,” “sum total,” “gist of the matter.” The author sets forth the principal point of what he has so far been saying. Such an high priest. Christ is not an ordinary high priest, such as those in the Aaronic priesthood. They served on earth (v. 4); He serves next to the throne of God. On the right hand. See on ch. 1:3.

Ellen G. White

Minister. Gr. leitourgos, “servant,” “minister” (cf. on Rom. 13:6; cf. Phil. 2:25; Heb. 1:7). The sanctuary. Gr. ta hagia, literally, “the holies,” or “the holy [places].” The feminine hai hagiai is most unlikely here (see on ch. 9:2). Scholars quite uniformly hold that the Greek form is a neuter plural. There are differences of opinion as to the force and function of the plural in this instance. Some believe that the plural designates two apartments in the heavenly sanctuary corresponding to the two apartments in the earthly. Others believe that the plural is an intensive plural denoting simply the concentration of holy things in the sanctuary. The uncertainty arises from the fact that in ch. 9:2, 3 textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) a plural form for the Greek term that describes the first apartment and also for the term that describes the second apartment (see comment there). In view of this, the fact that ta hagia is a plural does not of itself prove that there are two apartments in the heavenly sanctuary. However, that Christ’s work in the heavenly sanctuary is conducted in two apartments, or “two great divisions,” is transparently evident from a comparison of the earthly with the heavenly, for the earthly was “a copy of the true one” (ch. 9:24, RSV) in heaven. See also on Ex. 25:9; Dan. 8:14; cf. Additional Note on Heb. 10. And of. Rather, “that is of.” True. Gr. alēthinos, “genuine,” “real.” The earthly sanctuary was but a type of the heavenly. Tabernacle. Gr. skēnē, “tent.” The terminology of the earthly sanctuary is used for the heavenly. Pitched. A figurative expression, here used because the sanctuary is described as a “tabernacle,” or “tent.” We must not think of a literal tent in heaven, literally pitched by God. Compare Ex. 33:7. The idea of a heavenly sanctuary was not new to the Jews, as shown by the following extracts from their literature of about the 1st century B.C.: “The angel opened to me the gates of heaven, and I saw the holy temple, and upon a throne of glory the Most High” (Testament of Levi 5:1; R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2, p. 307); “Thou gavest command to build a sanctuary in thy holy mountain, And an altar in the city of thy habitation, A copy of the holy tabernacle which thou preparedst aforehand from the beginning” (Wisdom of Solomon 9:8; ibid., p. 549).

Ordained to offer. The work of the priests in the tabernacle consisted mostly in offering “gifts and sacrifices.” They were ordained for that purpose. Morning and evening they offered for the nation, and during the day they offered for individuals. Somewhat also to offer. Compare chs. 5:1; 9:25.

Were on earth. The author is thinking of the time of writing, at which time the Temple was presumably still standing (see p. 389).

Not be a priest. The rules of the Levitical priesthood were strictly enforced, and if Christ were on earth, He would not be able to qualify. Only those of the tribe of Levi were eligible, and Christ belonged to the tribe of Judah. His was an independent and heavenly priesthood, after the order of Melchisedec. Priests that offer. This statement is an argument in favor of dating the writing of this book before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70 (see p. 389). According to the law. That is, the system of law instituted at Sinai.

Example. Gr. hupodeigma, “copy,” “imitation,” “sketch,” “tracing,” “representation.” However, it is necessary to remember that an earthly “copy” can never, in all details, fully represent a heavenly original. For example, all of the various sacrifices for sin that were offered endlessly in the earthly sanctuary met their fulfillment in the one sacrifice of Christ. Shadow. Or, “foreshadowing.” It is possible to understand the phrase “example and shadow” as a figure of speech meaning “a shadowy example.” Admonished. Gr. chrēmatizō, “to impart a revelation,” the agent being God. Make all things. See Ex. 25:40; Num. 8:4; Acts 7:44.

Ellen G. White

More excellent ministry. With this verse the author begins the discussion of Christ as “the mediator of a better covenant.” The ground for the more excellent ministry of Christ is here demonstrated by the fact that He is the mediator of a better covenant established upon better promises. Mediator. Gr. mesitēs, “arbitrator,” “mediator,” one who mediates between two parties to remove a disagreement or to reach a common goal (cf. on Gal. 3:19). The word occurs six times in the NT, four times with reference to Christ. Christ is the mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5), and can lay His hands on both. As God, He understands God and can speak for Him. As man He understands man and can sympathetically minister for him before the Father. Better. The superiority is discussed in vs. 8–12. Covenant. Gr. diathēkē (see on ch. 7:22). Better promises. See on vs. 10–12.

Ellen G. White

First covenant. By this expression the author designates the system in force in OT times since Sinai, of which the Levitical priesthood was an integral part. For the relationship of this system to the covenant made at Sinai see on Eze. 16:60. For the meaning of the word covenant (diathēkē) see on Heb. 7:22. This system with its laws came to an end when Jesus became high priest after the order of Melchisedec (see on ch. 7:12, 18, 19). Faultless. The implication is that it was faulty. Yet the fault was not with the covenant inherently but with the people who misapplied it (see on Eze. 16:60; Eph. 2:15). The law, in and of itself, made nothing perfect (see on Heb. 7:22), but correctly employed, it would have pointed them to the Saviour and salvation. The prophets’ repeated appeals for the people to accept the provisions of the everlasting covenant met with continued failure. For the second. That is, the new (see v. 8).

Finding fault with them. It is possible to translate the passage, “finding fault, he saith to them,” but this is a less natural translation and has found little acceptance. The

weakness of the first covenant was not in the covenant itself; nor did the fault lie in God. It was the people who were faulty (see on Heb. 8:7; cf. Rom. 9:30 to 10:3; Heb. 3:18 to 4:2) The days come. Verses 8–12 are a quotation from Jer. 31:31–34 agreeing with the LXX rather than with the Hebrew, although the differences are slight. Compare the comment on these verses verse in Jeremiah. In their original setting these words constituted a forecast of what God was willing to do for Israel and Judah, if they should learn the lessons from the captivity into which they were about to go, and truly return to God. Ever since Sinai He had been trying to lead the people to a higher spiritual experience such as is represented in the new covenant, but they rebelliously refused to progress beyond their restricted concepts of what constituted true religion. They clung to the belief that salvation could be achieved by a strict adherence to law, particularly laws regarding ceremonial acts and offerings. The occasion was auspicious. Perhaps what they had refused to learn in their own land they would learn from the rigorous discipline of captivity. But even their captivity failed to accomplish a true revival. The great majority of the returning exiles continued under the terms of the old covenant. The spiritual experience under the new covenant was available in OT times, and would have come if the people had complied with the conditions, but the Jews, as a nation, refused it. Now, even though the teaching of Christ and the apostles made doubly clear the “gospel” that the Jews might earlier have accepted (Heb. 4:2), they found it difficult to relinquish the old system of forms and ceremonies. The book of Hebrews was designed to help them make the transition. The author of Hebrews is appealing to prophecy to support his thesis of the high priesthood of Christ and of the introduction of a new order. Jeremiah had predicted a new order; now it was here. New. New with respect to the “first covenant” (v. 7). The coming of Christ and His fulfillment of the types of the ceremonial law put an end to the Levitical system (see on Eph. 2:15). The shedding of His blood ratified the covenant made long ago with Adam and confirmed to Abraham and confirmed to Abraham (see on Eze. 16:60). Covenant. Gr. diathēkē (see on ch. 7:22). With the house of Israel. The new covenant is here mentioned as being made with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, since it was first offered to these two houses (Jer. 31:31–34). When the Jews turned down their religious privileges, “the kingdom of God” was taken from them (see on Matt. 21:33–43). The Christian church is the inheritor of the spiritual privileges and responsibilities that once belonged to literal Israel (see Vol. IV, pp. 35, 36).

Not according to. For a discussion of the old covenant see on Eze. 16:60. They continued not. This is a cursory summary of the history of the Israelites as recorded in the OT. The people “mocked the messengers of God … till there was no remedy” (2 Chron. 36:16), and God cast them off.

Put my laws. At Mt. Sinai the Lord wrote His laws on tables of stone (Deut. 4:13), and in a book (ch. 31:24, 26). He intended that these laws should also be written on the hearts of the people. But the Israelites were content to regard these statutes simply as an external code and their observance a matter of outward compliance. God did not intend that His laws should be thus regarded. He offered His people the experience of a new heart (see on Eze. 36:26), but they were content with only an external religion.

Under the new covenant men’s hearts and minds are changed (see on Rom. 12:2; 2 Cor. 5:17). Men do right, not by their own strength, but because Christ dwells in the heart, living out His life in the believer (see on Gal. 2:20). They are born of the Spirit and bear the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22, 23). The change can be effected only by divine power. Only God can “put” His law in the hearts of His followers, though, of course, not without man’s consent and cooperation (Rev. 22:17; cf. MB 142). I will be to them a God. This is the objective of all God’s covenants (cf. Ex. 6:7). God will have His rightful place, and the people will acknowledge Him as their God.

They shall not teach. There would be no need of continual admonition and counsel, for men would have a personal religious experience. Christians could now have direct access to God without an intermediary, the Levitical priesthood. They would be “led by the Spirit of God” (Rom. 8:14), “taught of God” (1 Thess. 4:9), and would have “an unction from the Holy One, and … know all things” (1 John 2:20). From early times Christians have had the entire canon of Scripture to teach them about God. However, this does not rule out the need of spiritual instructors. As gifts God has given to the church “pastors” and “teachers” (Eph. 4:11). Compare GC 485. All shall know me. That is, all Christians will have a personal knowledge of God, no matter what their age, social standing, or mental equipment.

I will be merciful. When Jeremiah spoke these words on the eve of the Captivity, they were a promise of what God was willing to do for His wayward people if they would return to Him. For the Christian they are a promise of forgiveness full and free through the blood of Jesus, without the shedding of the blood of animals as under the Levitical system. Remember no more. That is, God will no longer hold these sins against the transgressor (cf. on Isa. 65:17). God will cast all our sins behind His back (Isa. 38:17). He will cast them into the depths of the sea (Micah 7:19).

Covenant. This word is supplied, and correctly so, as the Greek indicates. The adjective translated “new” is in the same gender and number as the word for “covenant.” That “covenant” is correctly supplied is further shown by the fact that “he saith” refers back to the quotation cited in vs. 8–12 (from Jer. 31:31–33), which employs the phrase “new covenant.” Hath made the first old. The quotation from Jeremiah (cited in vs. 8–12) clearly shows that the new was to replace the old, not to be in addition to it. This was a difficult point for the Hebrew Christians to grasp. Decayeth. Or, “is growing old.” The question may be raised as to why this word is in the present tense if the old covenant passed away at the cross. Some commentators think that the reference is to the time that Jeremiah uttered his prophecy concerning the new covenant (Jer. 31:31–33). However, it is possible to understand the reference also to the time when the book of Hebrews was written. It is true that the ceremonial system was fulfilled when Jesus died on the cross (see on Eph. 2:15). However, even for devout Christians, the transition from the old to the new system was gradual (see on Heb. 9:9; cf. on Rom. 14:1). Ready to vanish away. Readers of the epistle are being prepared for the time when the old system would be done away completely (see on ch. 9:9).