Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded

What does Hebrews Chapter 9 mean?

The book of Hebrews seeks to reassure persecuted Jewish Christians that Christ, not the Old Testament Law, is God’s ultimate plan for their salvation. This is presented mostly by showing how God made clear, in Scripture, His intent to bring about a new covenant. Up to now, the writer of Hebrews has proven his case using various examples and quotations from the Old Testament. In particular, the example of Melchizedek was used to demonstrate that God’s final solution for sin was not tied to the priests descended from Aaron. In chapter 8, a quotation from the book of Jeremiah showed how God promised a new covenant free from the limitations of the existing arrangement.

Chapter 9 continues to explain the preeminence of the new covenant by focusing on two aspects: First is the superiority of where the sacrifice for sin is applied in the new covenant. Second is the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice, compared to that of the old covenant. This leads, in chapter 10, to a summation of this part of the book of Hebrews.

The instructions God gave to Moses in the Old Testament involved the construction of a tabernacle, or a tent, which was used as a movable temple by the people of Israel. This building contained several artifacts, as well as two rooms. The purpose of these items was symbolism: they were meant to be “shadows” of the future (Hebrews 8:5; 10:1), when Christ would completely fulfill God’s plan (Hebrews 9:23–24). According to this chapter, the symbolism here is mostly meant to show how the old covenant is limited. The curtains which designated the Holy Place and Most Holy Place symbolized man’s separation from God (Hebrews 9:8). The earthly nature of the temple, as well as the limited nature of the animal sacrifices, pointed to the need for a more permanent, spiritual solution to sin (Hebrews 9:9–10).

Since Christ serves as a high priest in heaven, not on earth, His service is in the “true” holy places (Hebrews 9:11–12). Rather than being a shadow or symbol, Christ’s actions are the “real deal.”

Christ’s sacrifice is also superior to the old covenant’s use of animal sacrifices. Priests had to continually offer sacrifices, not only for the sins of the people, but for their own (Hebrews 9:7). Ultimately, the death of an animal could only provide for easing feelings of guilt and ceremonial purity (Hebrews 9:9–10). Animal blood cannot accomplish a change of man from the inside.

In contrast, Christ’s sacrifice was perfect and free from sin (Hebrews 7:26). His life was entirely human (Hebrews 4:15). This makes His sacrifice perfect, and an act which only needs to be performed once. This single sacrifice, then, is not only applied in a better “temple” than that on earth, it is also a more effective and more perfect atonement for our sin.

The writer ends this particular section with an analogy about the relationship between death and judgment (Hebrews 9:27–28). Each man, contrary to what other religions teach, experiences a single death and a subsequent judgment. In a parallel way, Christ came to earth in order to die—once for all—and when He comes again, it will not be as a sacrifice. Rather, it will be to finalize God’s salvation for those who accept Christ, and the judgment of all those who do not.

Chapter Context
Chapter 9 continues the writer’s explanation of the superiority of Christ. In chapter 8, this focused on the idea that God had promised a new covenant, even as the old covenant was still in effect. This not only means that the new covenant must be different, but that the old covenant must be flawed. Here in chapter 9, the writer focuses on the fact that the old covenant featured aspects which were meant only as symbols of the ”true” high priesthood of Christ. Since Christ’s sacrifice is more powerful, and performed in a better place, it is more effective in securing our salvation than the sacrifices of animals. Chapter 10 will continue this discussion by wrapping up these various ideas about the superiority of the new covenant.

Verse by Verse

Verse 1. Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness.

Leading up to this chapter, the writer of Hebrews emphasized that God had always intended a “new covenant” to replace the system of priests and temple sacrifices (Hebrews 7:11). In this section, he seeks to explain exactly how the elements of the “old covenant” serve as symbols of the ministry of Jesus Christ. To begin with, the writer reviews the components of the temple and the sacrificial system, while also explaining how those elements are imperfect and flawed. Since the writer’s intent is to explain the meaning of these articles, not their exact arrangement, the description is intentionally brief (Hebrews 9:5).

Here, the writer points out that the location for worship is earthly. That is, it is in only one place at any given time. This means that the benefits it offers are only available to people in a certain area, rather than to the entire world. As Jesus pointed out to the woman at the well, God’s real intent is for people to worship God in a spiritual way, independent of any earthly temple (John 4:22–24). This also corresponds with the writer’s quote of Jeremiah, who spoke of God writing His law on His people’s hearts (Hebrews 8:7–13).

Context Summary
Hebrews 9:1–10 explains how the rooms and artifacts of the temple were only meant as symbols. In fact, those items were specifically intended to show how the old covenant could not remove the barrier between God and man. The use of external rituals can only assuage feelings of guilt, it cannot actually remove sin or change a person’s nature. The existence of the curtains, separating men from the holy places, is also symbolic of how the old covenant leaves us apart from God. This sets up a comparison, in the following passage, showing how Christ’s sacrifice fulfills those symbols and achieves a perfection of our relationship with God.

Verse 2. For a tent was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence. It is called the Holy Place.

In this passage, the writer of Hebrews lays out the elements of the old covenant’s temple and sacrifices. The purpose here has two layers. One is to explain how these components are symbolic of aspects of the new covenant (Hebrews 9:23–24). The other is to imply that these elements are inherently limited and flawed (Hebrews 8:13). The intent here is clearly on the symbolism of these various objects, not their exact placement or arrangement (Hebrews 9:5). The writer’s familiarity with the temple components is one reason many scholars believe that the author was himself Jewish, as would be the case with Paul or Apollos.

The “tent” referred to here is the “tabernacle” which God instructed the people of Israel to construct after the exodus from Egypt. The description in this verse is of the inner area of this movable temple; the first division of this section is called the “Holy Place,” and was where priests went for their daily duties (Numbers 28:1–8).

The lampstand was a golden oil lamp with seven flames (Exodus 25:31–40). The table, known as the table of showbread, was where twelve loaves of bread were kept. Each Sabbath, these twelve loaves would be removed for new ones, and the old were eaten by the priests (Exodus 25:23–30; Leviticus 24:5–9).

Behind an additional curtain, within this room, was another, smaller room, the “Most Holy Place,” which was reserved for a single ritual each year, performed only by the High Priest (Leviticus 16:11–19).

Verse 3. Behind the second curtain was a second section called the Most Holy Place,

The writer of Hebrews is giving a brief description of the old covenant’s system of sacrifices and worship. The purpose is not only to show that the prior system was limited and flawed, but that its elements were meant to be symbols of God’s eternal plan: the ministry of Jesus Christ. That symbolism is the key point of this passage, rather than the minute details of the temple’s arrangement (Hebrews 9:5).

As described in the book of Exodus, the tabernacle—the tent—where God commanded Israel to perform their ritual sacrifices included a particular area separated from the rest of the structure. This “Holy Place” contained a seven-flamed oil lamp (Exodus 25:31–40) and a table which always featured twelve loaves of bread (Exodus 25:23–30; Leviticus 24:5–9).

Also within this section was another, curtained-off room called the “Most Holy Place.” The difficulty of translating from one language to another can make this reference confusing, especially when reading straight through from verse 2 to verse 4. According to the pattern given in the Old Testament, the altar of incense is in the Holy Place. Read as typically translated, in English, this phrasing seems to suggest the altar of incense is in the Most Holy Place. However, the structure of the Greek here suggests a parenthetical statement. It’s entirely possible that verse 3 is meant as an aside, or a footnote, by the writer of Hebrews. This would connect the reference to the “Holy Place” with the golden altar of incense, with the comment made in verse 3 intended as a separate, parallel reference. Alternatively, the Greek term used in verse 4, echousa, is typically a reference to possession, not position. In other words, the writer might have been saying that the altar “belonged” to the Most Holy Place, in the sense that their purposes were connected, not necessarily that one was inside the other. It’s also possible, if not likely, that the priests used more than one altar for various purposes in their daily duties.

Regardless which is the case, the writer of Hebrews makes it clear that his description is very brief (Hebrews 9:5), so any confusion over what is meant should be viewed with that approach in mind. The point of this passage is to show the symbolic meaning of these items, not to give their exact placement or position.

Verse 4. having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron ‘s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant.

The purpose of this set of verses is to explain the symbolism of the old covenant’s ritual objects. The description here is purposefully brief (Hebrews 9:5). This explains why the writer’s language seems vague, even to the point of blurring which objects go where within the temple. The writer’s familiarity with Judaism, as well as the overt remark about a lack of detail, make it clear that such concerns are beside the point. Listing the major pieces is the only goal in mind, for now.

This verse refers to the “golden altar of incense,” in a reference that is often confused. Commentators often wonder about whether the author of Hebrews intends this to mean that this altar is in the Holy Place, or the Most Holy Place, behind the second curtain. First, Scripture suggests that more than one type of incense altar could be used for various purposes (2 Chronicles 26:19; Ezekiel 8:11). Second, this verse uses the Greek term echousa, which normally refers to ownership, not location.

The combined information given in verses 1 through 5 is clearly meant to be brief, general, and not intended for deep analysis. The point is to reference the various objects used in the old covenant, in order to contrast these with the ministry of Jesus Christ.

The altar of incense was the staging area for coals used to burn incense specially crafted for use in the temple (Exodus 30:34–35). This material was taken behind the veil by the high priest yearly as part of the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:12–14).

The ark of the covenant was the ornate box used to hold the written Law on stone tablets inside (Exodus 25:10–22). Those are the “tablets of the covenant” mentioned here. The top of this chest included statues of two cherubim—angels—whose wings were swept forward over the top. This was the “mercy seat” where blood would be sprinkled as part of Israel’s ongoing sacrifices.

Also within the ark was a container of manna, the strange food which God had provided for Israel during their time in the wilderness (Exodus 16:32).

Aaron’s staff was also kept there (Numbers 17:10). This was a relic of God’s response to a rebellion within Israel. When the people challenged Aaron’s family right to the priesthood, each tribe was instructed to provide a staff with their leader’s name written on it. Aaron’s staff, and only his, miraculously sprouted leaves, flowers, and almonds, confirming God’s arrangement for the priesthood (Numbers 17:1–9).

Verse 5. Above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

This verse makes a point often lost when interpreting verses 1 through 4. The purpose of this section is to summarize the main components used in the old covenant’s sacrificial system. Later, these will be explained as symbols of the ministry of Jesus Christ. The writer is not seeking to give a deep, detailed explanation of exactly where each of these items is located. Rather, given more pressing concerns, the writer “cannot now speak in detail.” Earlier verses listed temple artifacts such as the ark of the covenant, Aaron’s staff, a container of manna, and so forth. These first five verses focus on such objects, while the next five focus on actions.

The last items mentioned here are the cherubim of the ark of the covenant. The ark was a wooden box, overlaid in gold, containing the tablets on which God had written the Law (Exodus 25:10–16). The cherubim mentioned here were small golden statues of angels with their wings swept forward, “overshadowing” the top of the ark (Exodus 25:17–22). This was the place where blood would be sprinkled as part of Israel’s sacrifices for sin. Symbolically, this represents how the blood of a sacrifice is “seen” by God, rather than the broken and limited law written on the stone tablets.

Verse 6. These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties,

This verse moves from a description of the items used in the temple to an explanation of how these objects were used. The purpose here is to set up an important comparison. The artifacts and rituals of the old covenant were all meant to symbolize the ultimate, future, eternal covenant which God had promised. Later in this chapter, the writer of Hebrews will explain how Jesus’ actions as our high priest will fulfill that symbolism.

The “first section” referenced here is the Holy Place, behind the first curtain of the temple. This was a place where priests would go on a daily basis, in order to offer various sacrifices and offerings. This was a section separated from most people, but accessible to those whom God had installed as priests. The Holy Place, then, is a physical barrier to the people symbolic of their separation from God. The second curtain, however, designated the Most Holy Place, and this was an area which only the high priest could enter, and only once per year, and only bearing a sacrifice of blood. As performed under the old covenant, this symbolizes the separation of God and man, and our need to be forgiven in order to be in His presence (Hebrews 9:7–8).

Verse 7. but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.

The inner area of the temple was built with a curtain designating a Holy Place. This was a section which could only be entered into by priests. This was part of their daily duty, but this division also symbolized the separation between God and men. Inside of this Holy Place was a second curtain, which blocked off an even more exclusive room: the Most Holy Place. This was an area where only the high priest could enter, at a designated time, for a designated reason, with a designated sacrifice.

The main purpose of this sacrifice was atonement for the people of Israel (Leviticus 16:15; Exodus 30:10). Earlier verses in Hebrews made the point that sacrifice for sins needed to be done constantly under the old covenant (Hebrews 7:27–28). Likewise, the high priest who made this sacrifice had to offer atonement for his own sins, as well as those of the people (Hebrews 5:3). Once per year, the high priest would enter into the Most Holy Place, behind the second curtain. Just as the first curtain created a division which only priests could pass, the second curtain formed another barrier between men and God.

As the writer of Hebrews will continue to point out, this separation carries heavy symbolic meaning. The purpose of this symbolism is a primary point of this section of the book of Hebrews.

Verse 8. By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing

Prior verses explained how the old covenant included two rooms, one inside the other, within the temple. The first curtain designated a line which only the priests could cross. Inside that same room was another curtain, walling off an area where only the high priest could go, and only once per year, and only when bearing the proper sacrifice.

As explained here, this was meant to symbolize an inherent weakness of the old covenant. The writer of Hebrews has been careful to point out that the old covenant is not “wrong,” it is merely “imperfect” (Hebrews 7:11; 8:7). More to the point, this letter has gone to great lengths to show how this new covenant, through Jesus Christ, has always been God’s ultimate plan. The two-room arrangement described in this passage is part of the symbolism God intended with the old covenant. In that arrangement, man is separated from God, and the rituals of the priesthood can only temporarily satisfy the requirements of God’s justice.

This symbolism is key to a unique event during the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. According to Matthew 27:50–51, when Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross was complete, the curtain separating God and men was torn—from top to bottom. At that point, both symbolically and literally, there was no longer a barrier separating the Creator from His creation.

However, just because the barrier has been removed by God does not mean man is incapable of creating one of his own, acting as if that barrier still exists. As the writer of Hebrews points out, those who still try to seek God under the old covenant are denying themselves the benefit of the new covenant, which includes access to “the holy places.”

Verse 9. (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper,

In this passage, the writer of Hebrews has listed several components of the temple. These rooms and artifacts were used under the old covenant as priests made sacrifices to God. The purpose of this description is to show how these components were meant to be symbolic. Rather than being God’s final plan, those items were intended to point the way to God’s true final solution for our sin, which was Jesus Christ (Hebrews 8:6–7). In the prior verse, the writer pointed out that the two rooms of the temple, each separated from the people by a curtain, were symbolic of the old covenant’s inability to offer man free access to God.

Here, the writer makes a comment about how this arrangement—man separated from God, with the path to the holy places closed off—is symbolic of the “present age.” This terminology is intended to be taken from the perspective of “past as present.” In other words, speaking as those who were functioning under this law since Moses, the writer indicates that the symbolic separation is related to this very process of priests and sacrifices and curtained rooms. When Jesus was crucified, this temple veil was torn—literally—and the separation between man and God was eliminated (Matthew 27:50–51).

Along those lines, the writer returns to the idea that the sacrifices offered under this old covenant are purely external. Physical rituals can soothe the conscience of the participant (1 Peter 3:21), but they cannot actually change it. In order to be changed, on the inside, something more than external ritual is required.

Verse 10. but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.

The writer of Hebrews has pointed out that the original setup of the temple symbolizes man’s separation from God. The use of curtained-off rooms demonstrates how the old covenant could not remove the barrier between the Creator and His creation. The rituals and artifacts used were meant to highlight the external, temporary nature of the old covenant. Since those actions were external, they could not change the consciences of the ones who participated.

In the prior verse, it was pointed out that gifts and sacrifices could not “perfect” the conscience. Feelings of guilt can be assuaged by sacrifice, but external rituals can never change who or what a person is on the inside (1 Peter 3:21). Only a “rebirth” through the power of God can accomplish that (John 3:5–7).

Here, the writer specifies that the ultimate use of these old covenant sacrifices was merely for ceremonial purposes, and only until the moment when God introduced the new covenant. This has been a theme of the book of Hebrews: that God’s intent was never to keep the old covenant forever. Instead, God clearly promised a better, more complete arrangement. The external, imperfect rituals of the old covenant would give way to the perfect, written-on-the-heart salvation offered through Jesus Christ (Hebrews 8:10).

Verse 11. But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)

Prior to this verse, the writer of Hebrews has explained that the old covenant is flawed. Not only that, but it is not God’s final plan for mankind’s salvation. Instead, as promised in the Scriptures, God has always intended to provide a new covenant, separate from the system of priests and sacrifices. According to the writer of Hebrews, the components of the old covenant were meant to prove their own limitations, and to symbolize the upcoming ministry of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:23–24).

Most recently, the argument has been made that the physical rituals of the temple were flawed; they could only resolve ceremonial purity, and that only temporarily.

Here, however, Christ’s sacrifice is shown to be superior. Jesus has already been referred to as our High Priest (Hebrews 4:14–16), since He fulfills all of the requirements for that office. In fact, Jesus has been described as part of a superior priesthood: that of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:15–17). Likewise, the place where Christ intercedes for us is said to be superior, since it is eternal and heavenly, instead of earthly and temporary (Hebrews 8:2). In this verse, those ideas are all summarized in the idea of Christ serving as high priest in a “more perfect tent,” one in heaven instead of one made by men (Exodus 35:30–35).

Context Summary
Hebrews 9:11–28 continues to explain how the new covenant in Jesus Christ is superior to the old covenant. This passage focuses on two main advantages of this arrangement: that Christ serves in a better temple, and that Christ offers a superior sacrifice. The physical temple, and its implements, were meant to be symbols of Christ’s ”true” place of service in heaven. Unlike limited sacrifices of animals, Jesus’ single death was able to completely save us from sin.

Verse 12. he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

Earlier, the writer of Hebrews compared the continual sacrifice of the temple priests with the offering a true, heavenly high priest would offer (Hebrews 7:22–28). In doing so, two separate Greek words were used. The term referring to the priests implied a present, ongoing action. The term referring to Jesus used a completed, once-for-all action. Here, that same idea is once again attached to Jesus’ sacrifice. The phrases used in this verse echo the same points made earlier in Hebrews about Jesus.

The earthly high priests of the old covenant offered sacrifices on a yearly basis (Hebrews 9:7), taken from mere animals, in a temporary sacrifice, including atonement for their own sins (Hebrews 7:27), which only served to assuage external factors, and could not change the hearts of men (Hebrews 9:9–10).

The heavenly high priest of the new covenant—Jesus Christ—offered a single sacrifice, once and for all, taken from His own perfect and sinless life (Hebrews 4:15), completely saving mankind from their sins (Hebrews 7:25), changing them from the inside out (Hebrews 8:10).

Another point being made here is that animal blood can never fully atone for human sin—only the blood of a man can do that, and this is exactly what Jesus provides.

The next verses will emphasize and expand on the difference between the sacrificial blood of animals and that of Jesus. Prior emphasis was on the limitation of those animal sacrifices; as this passage continues, the emphasis will be on how Christ’s blood possesses far greater power than that of any animal.

Verse 13. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh,

The running theme of the book of Hebrews is that the new covenant, in Jesus Christ, is superior to the old covenant, represented by the priests and sacrifices of the temple. Most recently, the author pointed out how components of the temple sacrifices pointed out their own limitations, and symbolized the future ministry of Jesus. A major aspect of this is the difference between the effectiveness of the sacrifices in each covenant. In the old covenant, priests offered repeated sacrifices for sins, including their own. Christ offered a single, perfect sacrifice, without Himself having any sin to be forgiven of (Hebrews 7:26–28; Hebrews 9:12).

In verses 13 and 14, the author turns his prior argument a bit upside down. Rather than arguing the faults of old covenant sacrifices, he points out that those sacrifices did have a measure of power. They could provide ritual purity to the physical flesh. If animal blood can provide that kind of benefit to a man, the power of Christ’s blood would be immeasurable. As pointed out earlier, the old covenant could not resolve man’s inner sin; the blood of Jesus can do just that.

Verse 14. how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

The old covenant sacrifices were not completely useless. They were flawed, and the writer of Hebrews makes this clear (Hebrews 8:7). However, they did serve a purpose. They served as symbols of the future ministry of Jesus Christ. And, they were able to provide a measure of purity. Of course, that purity was entirely external, ceremonial, and temporary. Animal blood, and sacrifices by sinful priests, could never permanently change the inner nature of a man. In verse 13, the author introduced the point that the blood shed by these animals had some power.

Here, the blood shed by Christ is said to have the kind of power missing from that of animal sacrifices. Interestingly, the writer invokes all three persons of the Trinity when explaining how this sacrifice fulfills the entire purpose of the new covenant. God the Father can receive our service, because God the Son offers Himself as sacrifice, as guided by God the Holy Spirit. Mention is made, once again, that Jesus’ life is “without blemish,” a reference to His sinless life (Hebrews 4:15).

The result of the power of Jesus’ sacrifice is dramatic. The “dead works” of rituals and laws left something un-resolved in our spirits. Christ’s blood cleans us, spiritually, in a way those animal sacrifices never could. This is the same idea echoed in Hebrews 6:1, where attempts to be reconciled to God through deeds and rituals are also described as “dead works.”

Verse 15. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

The writer of Hebrews has been very careful to point out that God’s plan was always to provide a “new covenant” for His people. Melchizedek’s priesthood is one such proof (Hebrews 7:11). God’s own decree to Jeremiah is another (Hebrews 8:8–9). The flaws and drawbacks of the old covenant were not an accident; rather, those were meant, by God, to help us understand the need for the new covenant (Hebrews 8:7). In recent verses, the writer has indicated that animal sacrifices have value, but that value is limited. They can provide ritual purity, but cannot change us on the inside. Those sacrifices cannot really remove the penalty of sin. The sacrifice of Christ, on the other hand, can accomplish what those other sacrifices cannot.

This makes the new covenant the “promised eternal inheritance” which God has always intended for mankind. The original audience of this letter was persecuted Jewish Christians. This reference to inheritance reminds them that following Christ is not an abandonment of their Jewish roots. Instead, it is a fulfillment of that heritage. The sacrifice of Christ, in fact, is the event which actually provides for forgiveness of all sins—including those which occurred during the ages before His birth.

According to this passage, animal sacrifice cannot fully atone for human sin. This is one reason that the priests of the old covenant had to constantly offer sacrifices. And, a sinful human priest has to offer sacrifice for his own sin. Christ, in contrast, offers a sacrifice which is completely human, completely sinless, and completely effective in what it accomplishes.

This is one of three places in the book of Hebrews where Jesus is described using the term mediator (Hebrews 8:6; 12:24). A mediator resolves a conflict between two sides.

Verse 16. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.

In this passage, the writer of Hebrews is explaining why the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is superior to that of the old covenant. Animal sacrifice can only do so much to cover human sin. In truth, those sacrifices can only provide ritual purity—they cannot remove the penalty of sin. Jesus, as a man (Hebrews 2:17–18), and one who is sinless (Hebrews 4:15), can offer a single, once-for-all sacrifice which actually covers the penalty for all human sin. This truth is not something which rejects the old covenant. Instead, this is a fulfillment of it. God’s intent for the old covenant was as a sign and symbol of things to come (Hebrews 9:23–24).

This verse uses the same Greek word used for terms such as covenant and testament. However, in context, it refers to a slightly different idea. The ESV translates this term as a “will,” which is less prone to confusion. The point being made here is that certain legal agreements only take effect upon the death of the one who wrote the will. Verses 16 and 17 both reference this point, leading to the writer’s broader goal. The purpose of this statement is to show that sacrifice—represented by blood—has always been necessary to confirm a covenant with God, and to forgive sins. Once again, this demonstrates that the components of the old covenant were meant as symbols of the new covenant.

Verse 17. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

The term will in this verse is from the same Greek term translated as covenant or testament. In context, though, this is something different than the covenants and testaments which the writer has been discussing. The meaning here is much more like a will: a legal document indicating what is to happen upon the death of the will’s author. In prior verses, the writer of Hebrews pointed out that animal sacrifice was required by God under the old covenant. This temporarily covered the sins of mankind, but could not remove that sin entirely. The sacrifice of Jesus, on the other hand, can fully cleanse us from sin and do so permanently.

The point of verses 16 and 17 is to lead into the next idea presented: that without bloodshed there can be no forgiveness. The binding agreement between God and man—the new covenant—takes effect only upon the death of Jesus Christ.

Verse 18. Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood.

This passage of Scripture explains how the physical aspects of the old covenant were meant as symbols of the new covenant. The limitations of the temple, priests, and sacrifices were all intended to point towards God’s ultimate, final plan. As told by God in His Word, this new covenant would be eternal and perfect, rather than temporary and limited. Leading up to this verse, the writer of Hebrews pointed out that the blood of animals could only accomplish limited atonement for sin. That did not make animal sacrifices worthless, but it did mean that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who was fully human, can achieve what prior shedding of blood could not.

Verses 18 through 20 remind the readers of how the very beginning of the old covenant involved bloodshed. These verses refer to incidents described in Exodus chapter 24, where Moses sprinkles sacrificial blood in order to “inaugurate” the covenant between God and Israel (Exodus 24:6–8).

Verse 19. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people,

Blood is an important aspect of both the old and new covenants. In the old covenant, animal blood was used in order to temporarily cover the sins of the people. Since that blood could never fully pay for human sin, and had to be offered repeatedly, it was not God’s ultimate plan for our salvation. Instead, God planned to use the human, perfect, once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ in order to completely remove our sin. Recent verses have pointed out how blood was a necessary part of all of the old covenant rituals, and that those were always meant to be symbols of the new covenant.

Verses 18 through 21 refer back to the very beginning of the old covenant, when Moses first introduced God’s commands to the people. This is described in various places in the Old Testament, but most clearly in passages such as Exodus 24:6–8. The point being made is that this blood sacrifice was necessary, even from the very start of God’s established laws for Israel. This leads to two ideas which will be made in upcoming verses. First, without bloodshed—sacrifice—forgiveness of sins is impossible. Second, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ not only fulfills this requirement, it does so perfectly and permanently.

Interestingly, Jesus used language similar to that of Moses when He introduced the new covenant (Matthew 26:28).

Verse 20. saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.”

This is part of a reminder that even the old covenant was “inaugurated,” or begun, with an understanding of the importance of a blood sacrifice. Verse 18 began this reference, which speaks of the time when Moses first brought the commands of God to the people. Then, Moses used sacrificial blood in something like a dedication ceremony. Blood would be a central part of the old covenant, as repeated animal sacrifice was necessary to temporarily cover the sins of the people. This, of course, is a limited and flawed system. God’s ultimate intent was not to continue this way; rather, the old covenant was meant to be symbolic of the new covenant.

In Exodus 24:6–8, Moses indicates that the use of blood was meant to introduce this covenant to the people of Israel. During the Last Supper, Jesus used similar language when instituting the new covenant (Matthew 26:28). This verse is part of a developing idea, completed in verse 22: that blood is a necessary component of forgiveness. That leads into a discussion of why, and how, Jesus’ sacrifice was not only necessary, but can completely accomplish our salvation.

Verse 21. And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship.

This verse refers to a time in the Old Testament when Moses first introduced God’s commands to the people of Israel. This is found in Exodus 24:6–8, as well as portions of chapter 29. Even from the very beginning, blood was necessary to “inaugurate” a covenant. This is mentioned for two purposes. First, this idea leads into the summary given in verse 22, that bloodshed is absolutely required for forgiveness of sins (Leviticus 17:11). Second, the blood shed by Jesus Christ accomplishes what the blood of animals never could.

Previously, the writer of Hebrews had mentioned that the animal sacrifices used in the old covenant were imperfect. They could temporarily cover the sins of the people. But those sacrifices could not change a person’s nature, or completely remove the penalty of their sin. Christ’s sacrifice, on the other hand, was a once-for-all shedding of blood, which can perfectly and permanently save mankind. This new covenant is exactly what God had intended all along, and had promised in His own Word. The old covenant was intended to symbolize this ultimate plan.

Verse 22. Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

Under the old covenant, sacrificial blood was required to sanctify almost everything. Forgiveness for sins, in particular, was dependent on the death of an animal. Up to this point, the writer of Hebrews has been pointing out that the old covenant was always intended, by God, as a symbol of the new covenant. The physical rituals and artifacts of the temple were given by God specifically to point towards the ministry of Jesus Christ. In many cases, those components of the old covenant were meant to be seen as limited specifically as proof that God intended to provide a more permanent solution.

Immediately prior to this verse, the writer has pointed out that even at the very beginning of the covenant between God and Israel, blood was shed in order to establish that arrangement.

Here, the writer makes it clear that the blood which was spilled in both the old and new covenants is necessary—forgiveness from sin is not possible without it. Under the old covenant, this meant repeated offerings of animal sacrifices (Hebrews 7:27). In the new covenant, this means a single, perfect, once-for-all shedding of blood by Christ. Upcoming verses will focus on how this sacrifice by Jesus fulfills the symbolism of the old covenant and resolves the weaknesses of the temple rituals.

Verse 23. Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Earlier, the writer of Hebrews explained how the components of the old covenant were meant to symbolize the truths found in the new covenant. At the same time, those sacrifices and rituals had drawbacks which, themselves, were meant to point towards a better resolution to our sin. Since God promised a new covenant, it stands to reason that the new covenant is superior to the old. Key to that symbolism and comparison is the shedding of blood. As prior verses indicated, blood is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. Animal sacrifice, however, can only go so far in atoning for human sin. Christ’s sacrifice can completely save, since it has power which animal blood does not.

When this verse refers to the “copies” of heavenly things, this is another reference to how the physical components of the old covenant are meant to be symbolic of the ministry of Jesus Christ. In short, both covenants were established by the shedding of blood, but the sacrifice of the new covenant is a superior sacrifice (Hebrews 9:9–14), and it is offered in a superior place (Hebrews 8:2).

Verse 24. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

This verse summarizes a key point made in chapter 9. The earthly temple built by Moses was a physical place, filled with physical objects, and used as a center for physical rituals. These rituals were necessary, and important, but could not completely save mankind from their sins. Rather, these were always intended by God as a copy of the new covenant: a shadow of the “real” method God intended to use for our redemption.

The holy places referenced here are those of the temple which God instructed Moses to build. These represented a barrier between God and men, since only certain people could enter (Hebrews 9:6–8). The sacrifices offered there represented the weakness of animal sacrifice, since they could only temporarily and partially atone for sin. Anything made with hands, or accomplished by human hands, is inherently temporary and limited.

Christ, in contrast, serves as our high priest in the “real” holy places, in heaven, rather than here on earth. As the next verses will explain, this perfect sacrifice not only occurs in a better place, it has a greater power. Jesus only had to die once, for all sin, rather than follow the limited, repeated nature of animal sacrifices.

Verse 25. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own,

Under the old covenant, God instructed Moses to build two rooms inside the tabernacle—a tent used as a movable temple by the people of Israel. The first was called the Holy Place, and inside it was the second: the Most Holy Place. These areas were restricted to only certain priests at certain times; this was meant to symbolize the separation between God and men. These areas were also used as the location for animal sacrifices, which were necessary for the forgiveness of the sins of the people of Israel. Unfortunately, those sacrifices could not change the people from the inside, and could only offer a temporary reprieve.

As the last verse indicated, Christ’s service as our high priest occurs in a better place. In fact, it occurs in the “true” holy places, which the earthly ones were only meant to symbolize. Here, the writer of Hebrews points out that Christ’s sacrifice is superior to that offered by the earthly priests. Instead of coming over and over, sacrificing Himself again and again, Christ is able to offer a single, perfect, permanent shedding of blood in order to cover human sin. This point is continued in the next verse.

Verse 26. for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

A major drawback of the old covenant was the need for constant sacrifice. The blood of animals was only enough to give a temporary, imperfect atonement for the sins of the people. In addition, animal sacrifice could not change a person from the inside; it could only provide relief from feelings of guilt and ceremonial purity (Hebrews 9:8–10). This arrangement was part of God’s plan, however, in the way it pointed to the new covenant of Jesus Christ. The physical location of those animal sacrifices was a symbol of the “true” holy places where Jesus acts as high priest on our behalf. As the prior verse pointed out, this sacrifice by Christ does not need to be repeated over and over, as the animal sacrifices did.

Here, in verse 26, the writer of Hebrews explains that a limited sacrifice would require Jesus to die over and over. However, since His sacrifice was perfect (Hebrews 7:27–28), and human (Hebrews 2:17–18), it can completely accomplish our salvation. As such, Jesus offered a single, “once for all” sacrifice to totally overcome the power and penalty of sin.

The reference to the “end of the ages” here can be confusing. In the next few words, the writer of Hebrews will make a reference to the Second Coming of Christ, which is often seen as part of the future “end of the age.” In this context, however, the “end of the age” seems to be a mention of how Jesus arrived for the purposes of His sacrifice, heralding the end of the age of the old covenant.

Verse 27. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,

This verse represents a key component of Christian theology. In contrast to religious systems which teach that man is constantly re-born, or vanishes into nothingness, the Bible is very clear that all men experience a single permanent death. Once this happens, each person is accountable for their actions in life. This verse also, indirectly, reminds the reader that the real judgment for sin comes after death. God can, and does, use earthly circumstances in order to prove His will. Sometimes, that means negative consequences for sin. For the most part, however, God’s real work of judgment on sin happens after this life is over; at that point, each person is held accountable for their own life.

In the context of this passage, the writer is also making a point about the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. As recently mentioned, the sacrifice offered by Jesus is not like that of the old covenant. Animal sacrifices had to be offered repeatedly, since they could not perfectly atone for sin. Christ was able to offer a single, “once for all” sacrifice which absolutely covered the payment required for humanity’s salvation.

Between verses 27 and 28, the point is that Christ’s first appearance, leading to His death, was for the purpose of judgment of sin. Sin was judged on the cross, by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. When Christ comes again, in the future, His arrival will not be for the purpose of atoning for sin. Instead, it will be to apply what has already been accomplished, and to usher in the final judgment (Titus 2:13). Just as man’s one death leads to judgment, so too does Christ’s one death lead to judgment—but for men, rather than for Jesus.

Verse 28. so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

The context of this verse is the often-quoted verse 27, which indicates that each man experiences a single death and subsequent judgment by God. A major advantage to the new covenant promised by God is the fact that Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be repeated over and over, as the animal sacrifices do. Animal blood can only temporarily atone for sin, and cannot change man from the inside. The sacrifice of Christ, however, completely saves from sin, as a “once for all” action. In the prior verse, this was compared to the way in which men die a single time, and that this death leads to judgment.

Here, the writer of Hebrews points out that Christ appeared once, and died once, and this death was for the purpose of judgment on sin. This means His Second Coming, which is yet in the future, will not result in an additional atonement. Just as each man dies once, Christ will only die for sins once. Just as men die, and then are judged, Christ has already died, and will return only to judge the world. Christ’s next arrival will be for the purpose of “saving” those who have trusted in Him. This is meant in the sense that Christ’s ultimate return, in victory, signals the final completion of God’s plan to judge sin and save His people (Titus 2:13).

End of Chapter 9.

Please Note:

The material use in this post, video is from BibleRef.com which is from Got Questions Ministries and is posted here to be read by Immersive reader in the Edge Browser. If you copy this material please follow these rules:

•Content from BibleRef.com may not be used for any commercial purposes, or as part of any commercial work, without explicit prior written consent from Got Questions ministries.

•Any use of our material should be properly credited; please make it clear the content is from BibleRef.com.

•BibleRef.com content may not be altered, modified, or otherwise changed unless such changes are specifically noted.