The Two Covenants
I. Hebrews 8:6-9
In the 7th chapter the apostle has demonstrated by irrefutable logic
and upon the authority of Holy Scripture that the priesthood of Christ
has superceded the Aaronic order. Here in chapter 8 he makes manifest
the superior ministry of our great High Priest.
First , He is "seated" (verse 1).
Second , He is seated on the throne of Deity (verse 1).
Third , He is a Minister of the heavenly sanctuary (verse 2).
Fourth , His own person provides the antitype of the tabernacle (verse
2).
Fifth , He is presenting before God a more excellent sacrifice (verses
3-6).
Sixth , He is Mediator of a superior covenant (verse 6).
Seventh , that covenant has to do with "better promises" (verse 6).
That upon which the Holy Spirit would here have us focalize our
attention is the place where our High Priest ministers, and the
immeasurable superiority of the economy which He is now administering.
This 8th chapter of Hebrews treats of two things: the sphere of our
High Priest's ministry and the better covenant with which it is
connected: the one being in suited accord with the other. The 6th verse
gives the connecting link between them. The apostle's object in
introducing the "new covenant" at this stage of his argument is
obvious. It was to the old covenant that the whole administration of
the Levitical priesthood was confined. The entire church-state of the
Jews, with all the ordinances and worship of it, and all the privileges
connected with it, depended wholly on the covenant which God made with
them at Sinai. But the introduction of the new Priesthood necessarily
abolished that covenant, and put an end to all the sacred ministrations
which belong to it. This it is which the apostle here undertakes to
prove. "The question which troubled the minds and hearts of the Hebrews
was their relation to the Levitical priesthood, and to the old
dispensation. The temple was still in Jerusalem, and the Levitical
ordinances appointed by Moses were still being observed. Although the
Sun had risen, the moon had not yet disappeared. It was waning; it was
ready to vanish away. Now it became an urgent necessity for the Hebrew
Christians to understand that Christ was the true and eternal High
Priest in the heavenly sanctuary, and that the new and everlasting
covenant with Judah and Israel was connected with the gospel promise,
and not with the law. God Himself had made the first covenant old by
promising the new. And now that Christ had entered into the holy of
holies by His own blood, the old covenant had passed away; and yet the
promises of God to His chosen people remained firm and unchanged"
(Adolph Saphir).
That God had "changed" the order of priesthood ( Hebrews 7:12) was, as
we have seen, clearly evidenced by His causing Christ to spring from
the tribe of Judah ( Hebrews 7:14). God's raising up of a Priest from
that tribe necessarily excluded those belonging to the house of Aaron
from the sacerdotal office, just as God's raising up David to sit upon
the throne, forever set aside the descendants of Saul from the regal
office. Herein we may discern one reason why Jehovah ordained and gave
such strict regulations for the distribution of Israel into their
tribes, namely, that He might provide for their instruction as to the
continuance of the legal worship among them, which could no longer be
continued than while the priesthood was reserved unto the tribe of Levi.
This Divine change in the order of priesthood necessarily entailed a
change of covenant or economy, as a change of the royal family denotes
a new dynasty, or as a new president involves a change of government.
The economy with which Christ is connected as far excels the old order
of things as His sacerdotal office exceeded that of Aaron's. Thus the
apostle is here really advancing one more argument or proof for the
pre-eminence of our Lord's priesthood. As a Minister or public
functionary Jesus Christ is as far superior in dignity to the Levites
as the dispensation over which He presides is of a far superior order
than the dispensation in which they served.
In approaching the subject of the two covenants, the old and the new,
it should be pointed out that it is not always an easy matter to
determine whether the "old covenant" designates the Mosaic economy or
the covenant of works which God made with Adam ( Hosea 6:7 margin); nor
to decide whether the "new covenant" refers to the Gospel dispensation
introduced by Christ, or to the covenant of grace which was inaugurated
by the first promise made to Adam ( Genesis 3:15) and confirmed to
Abraham (Genesis 17). In each case the context must decide.
We may add that the principal passages where the two covenants are
described and contrasted are found in 2 Corinthians chapter 3,
Galatians chapter 3 and 4, Hebrews chapters 8, 9 and 12. "But now hath
He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the
Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better
promises" (verse 6). "This verse is a transition from one subject to
another; namely, from the excellency of the priesthood of Christ above
that of the law, to the excellency of the new covenant above the old.
And herein also the apostle artificially compriseth and confirmeth his
last argument, of the pre-eminence of Christ, His priesthood and
ministry, above that of the law. And this He doth from the nature and
excellency of that covenant whereof He was the Mediator in the
discharge of His office" (John Owen). "But now hath He obtained a more
excellent ministry." The apostle here introduces his important
assertion by a time-mark, the "But now" signifying at this season. It
points a contrast from the period of the Mosaic dispensation, when
Israel's priests served "unto the example and shadow of heavenly
things" (verse 5). A close parallel is found in Romans 3:21, "but now
the righteousness of God without the law is manifested," which is
defined in verse 26 as "to declare at this time His righteousness: that
He might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus"
(verse 26).
God in His infinite wisdom gives proper times and seasons to all His
dispensations toward His Church. The Lord hastens or consummates all
His works of grace in their own appointed time: see Isaiah 60:22. Our
duty is to leave the ordering of all the concerns of His people, in the
accomplishment of His promises, to God in His own good time: Acts 1:7.
That which is here ascribed unto Christ is "a more excellent ministry."
The priests of old had a ministry, and an excellent one, for it was by
Divine appointment they served at the altar (verse 5). So Christ has a
ministry, and "a more excellent" one. In verse 2 He is designated "a
Minister of the sanctuary." He is called such not with respect unto one
particular act of administration, but because a standing office has
been committed to Him.
The service to which Christ has been called is of a higher order and
more excellent nature than any which Aaron ever discharged. It is a
"more excellent ministry" because it is the real and substantial one,
of which the Levitical was but the emblem; it pertains to things in
heaven, while theirs was restricted to the earthly tabernacle; it is
enduring while theirs was but temporary.
This more excellent ministry Christ is here said to have "obtained."
The way whereby the Lord Jesus entered on the whole office and work of
His mediation has been expressed in Hebrews 1:4 as by "inheritance":
that is, by free grant and perpetual donation, made unto Him as the Son
-- compare our comments on that verse. There were two things which
concurred unto His obtaining this ministry: first, the eternal purpose
and counsel of God, decreeing Him thereunto ( 1 Peter 1:20, Revelation
13:8). Second, the actual call of God ( Hebrews 5:4,5), which carried
with it His unction of the Spirit above measure ( Psalm 45:7), for the
holy discharge of His whole office. Thus, Christ obtained this ministry
not by any legal constitution, fleshly succession, or carnal
ordination, as did the Levitical priests. The exaltation of the human
nature of Christ into union with His Deity, for the office of this
glorious ministry, depended solely upon the sovereign wisdom, grace,
and love of God. "But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry,
by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant." The
particular point which the apostle here makes, or rather the conclusion
which he here draws from the premises laid down, had been anticipated
and intimated in what he said in Hebrews 7:20,22. There he had declared
that the excellency of the covenant of which Christ has been made
Surety and Mediator has a proportion with the pre-eminence of His
priesthood above that of Aaron's.
His being made a Priest by Divine oath (which the Levites were not)
fitted Him to be the Surety of a better economy. Conversely, the
covenant of which He is Surety must needs be better than the old regime
because He who was the Surety of it had been made so by Divine oath.
Thus, the dignity of Christ's priesthood is demonstrated by the
excellency of the new covenant, and declaratively the new covenant sets
forth the dignity of Christ's priesthood. "He is the Mediator of a
better covenant." It is most important to recognize that Christ is a
sacerdotal Mediator. This is made clear by Timothy 2:5, 6, "For there
is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." The
mediating Priest intervenes with sacrifice and intercession for the
reconciling of God and sinners. As we shall (D.V.) yet see, Hebrews
9:15 expressly declares that Christ's priestly work was the very
purpose of His being appointed Mediator. So in Hebrews 12:24 His
sacrifice is again made prominent in connection with His mediation.
Thus the sacerdotal character of His mediation cannot be scripturally
gainsaid.
Christ has obtained a more excellent priestly ministry corresponding to
the superior dispensation of which He is the Mediator. "But now (in
this Christian dispensation) hath He (as 'Priest') obtained (from God)
a more excellent ministry (than Aaron's) by how much also He is the
Mediator of a better covenant." He is not only Priest, but Mediator;
Priest because He is Mediator, Mediator because He is Priest. It is by
His priestly office and work that He exercises His mediatorship,
standing between two parties and reconciling them. He thus combines in
His own person what was divided between two under the old economy,
Moses being the typical mediator, Aaron the typical surety. As "Surety"
Christ pledged Himself to see that the terms of the covenant were
faithfully carried out; as "Mediator," He is negotiating for His
people's blessing. The word "covenant" in this chapter signifies an
arrangement or constitution of things, an economy or dispensation. The
"old covenant" was that peculiar order of things under which the Jewish
people were placed in consequence of the transactions at Sinai. The
"new" or "better covenant" is that order of things which has been
introduced by Jesus Christ, namely, the Christian dispensation. "He is
the Mediator of a better covenant." A mediator is a middle person
between two parties entering into covenant, and if they be of different
natures, a perfect mediator would have to partake of each of their
natures in his own person. This Christ has done. Such mediation
presupposes that the two parties are at such variance they cannot treat
directly with the other; unless this were so, a go-between would be
needless. See this fact illustrated in Deuteronomy 5:23-27. In
voluntarily undertaking to serve as Mediator, two things were required
of Christ: first, that He should remove whatever kept the covenanters
at a distance, taking away the cause of enmity between them. Second,
that He should purchase and procure, in a way suited to the glory of
God, the actual communication of all the good things prepared and
proposed in this covenant (grace and glory) unto those on whose behalf
He acts as Surety. Finally, He who is this Mediator must be accepted,
trusted, and rested in by both parties entering into covenant.
On God's part, He has openly declared that He is "well pleased" with
Christ ( Matthew 3:17); on the part of His elect, they are made willing
"in the day of His power" (Psalm 110:3). "Which was
established upon better promises." Every covenant between God and man,
must be founded on and resolved into promises. Hence, essentially, a
promise and a covenant are all one, and God calls an absolute promise
founded on an absolute decree, His covenant, Genesis 9:11.
And His purpose for the continuation of the course of nature to the end
of the world, He calls His covenant with day and night, Jeremiah 33:20.
The being and essence of a Divine covenant lies in the promise. Hence
are they called 'the covenants of promise,' Ephesians 2:12. Such as are
founded on and consist in promises. And it is necessary that so it
should be" (John Owen). "Which was established upon better promises."
The word "established" here is important to note, for it plainly
intimates to us that the apostle is not here treating of the
Everlasting Covenant absolutely, and as it had been virtually
administered from the foundation of the world in the way of a promise;
but relatively, as it had been formally introduced on earth as a new
dispensation or economy. In the Divine administration of the
Everlasting Covenant it has now been reduced to a fixed statute or
ordinance. The term "established" signifies legally established,
formally established as by a law. All is now fixed in the Church by
Divine arrangement and secured by inviolable sanctions. In Hebrews 7:11
the Greek verb here rendered "established" is translated "received the
law" -- compare our comments thereon. "The covenant to which the
priesthood of Christ refers has been also established by law. It has
been promulgated by Divine authority. The truth with regard to it has
been 'spoken by the Son of God, and confirmed to us by those who heard
Him; and God has borne witness with signs and miracles, and gifts of
the Holy Spirit,' according to His own will" (John Brown). "Established
upon better promises." Caution requires to be exercised and great care
taken at this point lest we err in our understanding of the particular
contrast which is here pointed by the word "better." "The promises in
the first covenant pertained mainly to the present life. They were
promises of length of days; of increase of numbers; of seed time and
harvest; of national privileges, and of extraordinary peace, abundance
and prosperity. That there was also the promise of eternal life, it
would be wrong to doubt; but this was not the main thing. In the new
covenant, however, the promise of spiritual blessings become the
principal thing. The mind is directed to heaven; the heart is cheered
with the hopes of immortal life; the favor of God and the anticipation
of heaven are secured in the most ample and solemn manner" (A. Barnes).
Observe well the two words which are emphasized in the above quotation.
In Old Testament times God "commanded the blessing, life forever more"
(Psalm 133:3), not only temporal life in Canaan; while
His people in New Testament times have "promise of the life that now
is," as well as "of that which is to come" ( 1 Timothy 4:8)!
Rightly did Adolph Saphir point out, "The contrast between the old and
the new would be viewed in a false light, if we forgot that in the old
dispensation spiritual reality and blessings were presented, and were
actually embraced in faith by the people of God. The law had a positive
or evangelical aspect, although herein also it was elementary and
transitory, it acted as a guardian and a tutor; as the snow is not
merely an indication of winter, and a contrast to the bright and genial
sunshine, and the refreshing verdure of summer, but is also a
beneficent protection, cherishing and preparing the soil for the
approaching blessings from above. But now the winter is passed, the
fullness has come."
The "better promises" are described in verses 10-13: they are summed up
in justification and sanctification, or more briefly still, in
redemption. "But what he adds is not without some difficulty, -- that
the covenant of the Gospel was proclaimed on better promises; for it is
certain that the fathers who lived under the Law had the same hope of
eternal life set before them as we have, as they had the grace of
adoption in common with us, then faith must have rested on the same
promises. But the comparison made by the apostle refers to the form
rather than to the substance; for though God promised to them the same
salvation which He at this day promises to us, yet neither the manner
nor the character of the revelation is the same or equal to what we
enjoy" (John Calvin).
Thus, the "promises" with which the new covenant is concerned are
"better" in that they mainly respect spiritual and eternal blessings,
rather than earthly and temporal ones; in that they have been ratified
by the blood-shedding of Christ; in that they are now openly proclaimed
to God's elect among the Gentiles as well as the Jews. "For if that
first covenant had been faultless then should no place have been sought
for the second" (verse 7).
The covenant which is here referred to is that into which Jehovah
entered with Israel at Sinai: see Exodus 19:5; 34:27, 28; Deuteronomy
4:13.
Israel's response is recorded in Exodus 19:8, 24:3. It was ratified by
blood: Exodus 24:4-8. This was not the "first" covenant absolutely, but
the first made with Israel nationally. Previously, God had made a
covenant with Adam ( Hosea 6:7), and in some respects the Covenant at
Sinai adumbrated it, for it was chiefly one of works. So too He had
made a covenant with Abraham, which in some respects adumbrated the
Everlasting Covenant, inasmuch as it was one purely of grace. Prior to
Sinai, God dealt with Israel on the basis of the Abrahamic covenant, as
is clear from Exodus 2:24; 6:3, 4. But it was on the ground of the
Sinaitic covenant that Israel entered Canaan: see Joshua 7:11,15;
Judges 2:19-21; 1 Kings 11:11; Jeremiah 34:18,19. "For if that first
covenant had been faultless then should no place have been sought for
the second." The connection between this and the preceding verse,
intimated by the opening "For" is as follows: there the apostle had
affirmed that the Christian covenant is superior to the Judaic; here,
he demonstrates the same thing by arguing from the fact that the old
covenant must have been defective, otherwise the new had been
superfluous. It is an inference drawn from the facts of the situation.
If there was need for a second, the first could not have been perfect,
failing to secure that which was most desirable. A parallel is found in
Galatians 3:21. "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then
should no place have been sought for the second." Wherein lay its
"faultiness?" It was wholly external, accompanied by no internal
efficacy. It set before Israel an objective standard but supplied no
power to measure up to it. It treated with men in the flesh, and
therefore the law was impotent through the weakness of the flesh (
Romans 8:3). It provided a sacrifice for sin, but the value thereof was
only ceremonial and transient, failing to actually put away sin. It was
unable to secure actual redemption. Hence because of its inadequacy, a
new and better covenant was needed. "Every work of God is perfect,
viewed in connection with the purpose which He means it to serve. In
this point of view, the 'first covenant' was faultless. But when viewed
in the light in which the Jews generally considered it, as a saving
economy, in all the extent of that word, it was not 'faultless.' It
could not expiate moral guilt; it could not wash away moral pollution;
it could not justify, it could not sanctify, it could not save. Its
priesthood were not perfected -- they were weak and inefficient; its
sacrifices 'could not take away sin,' make perfect as concerning the
conscience, or procure 'access with freedom into the holiest of all.'
In one word, 'it made nothing perfect'" (John Brown). "For finding
fault with them, He saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house
of Judah" (verse 8).
The opening "For" denotes that the apostle now confirms what he had
just affirmed in verses 6, 7: the proof is found in what immediately
follows. The "finding fault" may refer either to the old covenant, or
to the people themselves who were under it: finding fault "with it" or
"with them." In view of what is added in verse 9 the translation of the
A.V. is to be preferred. It was against the people that God complained
for their having broken His covenant. "He saith, Behold, the days
come," etc. The word "Behold" announces the importance of what follows,
and calls to a diligent and admiring attention of the same. "Behold"
bids us be filled with wonderment at this marvel of grace. It is indeed
striking to observe that the apostle did not rely upon logical
deductions and inferences, conclusive though they were. A change of
priesthood necessarily involved a change of covenant, or dispensational
administration. Nevertheless, obvious as this was, Paul rested not
until he proved his assertions with a definite and pertinent "thus
saith the Lord." He would not have the faith of the Hebrews stand in
the wisdom of man, but in the power of God. Blessed example for God's
servants today to follow.
Alas that so many people are contented with the dogmatic assertions of
some man who "ought to know what he is saying," instead of demanding
clear proof from the Scriptures.
The text which the apostle here quotes in proof of his assertion is
taken from Jeremiah 31:31. It is most blessed to note the time when God
gave this precious promise to His people. Beautifully has Adolph Saphir
pointed out, "It is in the night of adversity that the Lord sends forth
bright stars of consoling hope. When the darkest clouds of woe were
gathering above Jerusalem, and the prophet himself was in the lowest
depths of sorrow, God gave to him the most glorious prophecies of
Judah's great redemption and future blessedness. The advent and reign
of Messiah, the Lord our righteousness the royal dominion and
priesthood of Israel's Redeemer, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the
renewal and restoration of God's chosen people, the days of unbroken
prosperity and blessedness -- all the golden Messianic future was
predicted in the last days of Jerusalem, when the magnificent fabric of
its temple was about to sink into the dust, and its walls and palaces
were about to be thrown prostrate on the ground."
This new covenant God promised to make with "the house of Israel and
with the house of Judah." The word, "Israel" is used in the Scriptures
in no less than four distinct senses.
First , it is the name which God gave to Jacob when he wrestled with
the angel and prevailed as a prince ( Genesis 32:28).
Second , it denotes his fleshly descendants called "the children of
Israel," that is, the Jewish nation.
Third , it is employed of the ten tribes, the kingdom of Samaria or
Ephraim, in contradistinction from the kingdom of Judah, and this,
after the Nation was rent asunder in the days of Jeroboam.
Fourth , it is applied spiritually to the whole of God's people (
Galatians 6:16). To which we may add, Fifth , in Isaiah 49:3 (note the
verses which follow) it appears to be applied to Christ Himself, as
identified with His people. Personally, we believe that it is the
second and the fourth of these usages that obtain in our present
passage.
The law of first mention helps us here. The initial occurrence of any
expression or word in Scripture defines its scope and fixes, very
largely, its consequent significance. So it is in this case. The name
"Israel" was first given to Jacob: from that point onwards he is the
man with a double name, sometimes being referred to as Jacob, sometimes
as Israel, according as the "old man" or "new man" was uppermost within
him. This more than hints at the double application of this name;
oftentimes it is applied to Jacob's natural descendants, at other times
to his spiritual brethren. When Christ affirmed of Nathanael "Behold an
Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile" ( John 1:47), it was the same as
though He had said, "Behold a true Israelite, a spiritual prince with
God." To insist that "Israel" always signifies the fleshly descendants
of Jacob betrays excuseless ignorance: why does the Holy Spirit speak
of "Israel after the flesh" in 1 Corinthians 10:18 if there be no
Israel after the spirit!
The writer has no doubt whatever in his mind that the time is not far
distant when God is going to resume His dealings with the Jewish
people, restore them unto their own land, send back their Messiah and
Redeemer, save them from their sins, and fulfill to them His ancient
promise through Jeremiah. Nevertheless, we are fully assured that it is
a serious mistake to limit the prophecy of Jeremiah (or any other
prediction) to a single fulfillment. It is abundantly clear from 2
Corinthians 3 that Christians in this dispensation are already enjoying
the good of the new covenant which God has made with them. Moreover,
are we not reminded at the Lord's table of our Savior's words, "This
cup is the new testament," or "covenant in My blood" ( 1 Corinthians
11:25)?
It should be pointed out that Old Testament Israel were typical and
mystically significant of the whole Church of God. For that reason were
the promises of grace under the old economy given unto the saints of
God under the name of "Israel," "Judah," etc. (carefully compare Romans
2:28,29), because they were types of those who should really and
effectually be made partakers of them. Hence it is that in 2
Corinthians 1:20 we are told that "All the promises of God in Him
(Christ) are Yea, and in Him Amen, unto the glory of God by us." Hence
it is we read that "Jesus Christ was a Minister of the circumcision for
the truth of God, to confirm the promises unto the fathers, and that
the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy" ( Romans 15:8,9).
And hence it is that the apostle Paul writing to Christians says,
"Having therefore these promises" -- the preceding verses quoting from
Leviticus 26:12, etc! For the same reason in Hebrews 13:6 the Christian
is assured that the promise which the Lord made to Joshua belongs to
him too.
Thus, by "the house of Israel" and the "house of Judah" in Hebrews 8:8
we understand, first, the mystical and spiritual Israel and Judah;
second, the application of this covenant to the literal and fleshly
Israel and Judah in the day to come. In other words, we regard those
expressions as denominating the whole Church of elect believers,
typified of old, by the fleshly descendants of Abraham. Nor is it
without reason that the Holy Spirit has here used both these names: we
believe His (veiled) design was to take in God's elect among the Jews
and the Gentiles. Our reason for believing this is because that in the
very first inspired sermon preached after the new covenant had been
established, Peter said to the convicted Jews, "the promise is unto
you, and to your children (descendants) and to all that are afar off,
as many as the Lord our God shall call" ( Acts 2:39).
It is indeed remarkable that the two emphasized words have a double
reference.
First , they applied to the literal house of Israel, who were then
outside the land, in the dispersion ( Daniel 9:7); Second , to elect
Gentiles, away from God: see Ephesians 2:13!
At the time God announced His purpose and promise through Jeremiah, the
fleshly descendants of Abraham were divided in two hostile groups.
They had separate kings and separate centers of worship. They were at
enmity with one another. As such they fitly adumbrated the great
division between God's elect among the Jews and the Gentiles in their
natural and dispensational state. There was a middle wall or partition
between them ( Ephesians 2:14). There was "enmity" between them (
Ephesians 2:16). But just as God announced through Ezekiel ( 37:16, 17)
that the diversified houses of Judah and Israel should "become one," so
His elect among the Jews and the Gentiles are now one in Christ (
Ephesians 2:14-18)! Therefore are all born-again believers designated
the "children" and "seed" of Abraham ( Galatians 3:7,29), and thus are
they "blessed with faithful Abraham" ( Galatians 3:9). "Not according
to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took
them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they
continued not in My covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord"
(verse 9).
The contrast between the two covenants is first expressed negatively:
"not according." The differences between them are many and great. The
former was mainly typical, the latter has the substance. The one was
administered under an imperfect priesthood, the latter under a perfect
one. The one had to do, primarily, with that which was external; the
other is, mainly, internal.
The Mosaic covenant was restricted to one nation, the Christian is
international in its scope.
The old covenant is spoken of as dating from the day when the Lord took
Israel, "by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt." This
language emphasizes the woeful and helpless condition that Israel was
then in: unable to deliver themselves out of their bondage, like
children incapable of walking unless supported and led. As Deuteronomy
1:31 says, "The Lord thy God bare thee, as a man doth bear his son, in
all the way that ye went." So in Hosea 11:3 God says, "I taught them to
go, taking them by the arms." Such expressions also accentuate the
infinite condescension of God toward His people: that He should (so to
speak) bow down Himself to reach them in their lowly estate. "But they
continued not in My covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord."
"They soon forgat God's works, they waited not for His counsel" (Psalm
106:13). The principal reference is to Israel's
conduct at Sinai, when during the absence of Moses in the mount, they
"thrust Him from them" ( Acts 7:39), and made and worshipped the golden
calf. That was but prophetic or indicative of their whole history.
Their shameful conduct is mentioned here for the purpose of magnifying
that marvelous grace that shall yet make the new covenant with such a
people. "I regarded them not" refers to God's governmental dealings
with Israel: the severity He exercised, consuming them in the
wilderness. In view of which we may well heed that searching word,
"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (
1 Corinthians 10:12).
II. Hebrews 8:10-13
The subject of the two covenants supplies the principal key which
unlocks for us the meaning of God's dispensational dealings with His
people here on earth. Its importance and blessedness is not surpassed
by anything within the entire range of Divine revelation. Yet, sad to
say, it is something which is scarcely known at all today by the
majority of professing Christians. Covenant-relationship has always
been the basis on which God has dealt with His people. The foundation
of all is the Everlasting Covenant, a compact or agreement which God
made with Christ as the Head and Representative of the whole election
of grace. We would refer the interested reader unto two articles upon
it, which appeared in the January and February 1930 issues of this
magazine. What we shall here endeavor to treat of is the
administration of that covenant, as it was made known by God, and
the various forms in which it was established among His saints.
There was an original covenant made with Adam and all mankind in him:
see Hosea 6:7 margin. This consisted of an agreement between God and
man concerning obedience and disobedience, reward and punishment. To
that covenant were annexed promises and threatenings, which were
expressed in visible signs or symbols; the first, in the tree of life;
the latter in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. By these did
God establish the original law of creation as a covenant. On the part
of man, it was required that he should accept of this law. It was a
covenant of works, and had no mediator. That arrangement or
constitution formed the basis on which God dealt with Adam, but it
ceased as soon as sin entered the world.
God had provided a way of salvation for His own elect apart from their
personal obligation to sinless obedience as the condition of life, and
that through their Surety discharging all their responsibilities in His
own person.
This was made known in the first promise God proclaimed: Genesis 3:15.
All who receive the grace which is tendered through the promises of the
Gospel, are delivered from the curse of that covenant which Adam, their
legal representative, broke.
But though this first earthly covenant is no longer administered as a
"covenant," nevertheless, all those of Adam's descendants who receive
not the grace of God as it is tendered to them in the promises of the
Gospel, are under the law and curse of the Adamic covenant, because the
obedience which it requires of the creature unto the Creator, and the
penalty which it threatens and the curse it pronounces upon the
disobedient, has never been met for them by a substitute. Therefore, if
any man believe not, the wrath of God (not "cometh," but) abideth on
him ( John 3:36), and this, because the command and curse, which result
from the relation between man and his Maker, and the inflexible
righteousness of God as the supreme Governor and Judge of all mankind,
must be fulfilled.
Now the children of Israel were not formally placed under the Adamic
covenant absolutely, as a covenant of life, for, from the days of
Abraham the promise (a renewal of Genesis 3:15; see Genesis 12:1-3,
17:6-8, etc.) was given unto him and his seed. Let it be carefully
noted that in Galatians 3:17 the apostle proves that no "law" would
afterwards be given, nor covenant made, that should or could disannul
that promise. Had Israel been brought under the Adamic covenant of
works it would have disannulled the promise, for that covenant and the
promise of Grace are diametrically opposed. Moreover, had Israel come
formally under the Adamic covenant of works they were all under the
curse, and so had all perished eternally.
That there were other federal transactions between God and His Church
before the giving of the law at Sinai, is abundantly clear from the
book of Genesis. God entered into covenant with Abraham, making him
promises on behalf of his descendants, and appointing a solemn outward
seal for its confirmation and establishment. That covenant contained
the very nature and essence of what is termed the "new covenant." Proof
of this is found in the fact that the Lord Jesus is said to be "a
Mediator of the circumcision, for the truth of God to confirm the
promises made to the fathers" ( Romans 15:8). As He was the Mediator of
the new covenant, so far was He from rescinding the promises which God
made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that it belonged to His office to
ratify and establish them. But it was at Sinai that the Lord entered
formally into covenant with Israel as a nation ( Hebrews 8:9), a
covenant which had all the institutions of Divine worship annexed to it
( Hebrews 9:1-6).
In contrast from the covenant which God made with Israel at Sinai,
Christ is made "the Mediator of a better covenant" ( Hebrews 8:6). This
is the covenant of grace, being so called in contrast from that of
works, which was made with us in Adam. For these two, grace and works,
do divide the ways of our relation to God, being opposite the one to
the other ( Romans 11:6). Of this covenant of grace Christ was its
Mediator from the beginning of the world, namely, from the giving of
the first promise in Genesis 3:15, for that promise was given in view
of His incarnation and all that He should accomplish by His future and
actual mediation. Christ was as truly the Surety of Abel as He was of
the apostle Paul, and God had "respect unto" (was favorable toward and
accepted) the one on the ground of Christ's surety-ship as much as He
did the other. To this it may be replied, If such be the case, then
wherein lies the superior privilege of the Gospel-dispensation over
that of the Mosaic?
In seeking an answer to the above question, it is needful to recognize
(as was pointed out in our last article) that the "new covenant"
referred to in Hebrews 8 is not the new covenant absolutely considered,
and as it had been virtually administered from the days of Genesis 3:15
in a way of promise. For considered thus it was quite consistent with
the covenant that God made with Israel at Sinai: in Galatians 3:17 the
apostle proves that the renewal of the covenant (as a promise) to
Abraham, was in no way abrogated by the giving of the law. Instead, in
Hebrews 8 the apostle is treating of such an establishment of the new
covenant as demanded the revocation of the Sinaitic constitution. What
this "establishment" was, is made clear in Hebrews 9 and 10: it was the
ordinances of worship connected with it.
When Christianity had been formally established by God, not only was
the old covenant annulled, but the entire system of sacred worship
whereby it was administered, was set aside. When the "new covenant" was
first given in the way of a promise ( Genesis 3:15, renewed Genesis
12,17, etc.), it did not introduce a system of worship and privileges
expressive of the same. But the promise of the new covenant was
included in the Mosaic covenant, nor was it inconsistent with its
rights and ceremonies, nay not even with them composed into a yoke of
bondage. And why? Because all those rites and ceremonies were added
after the making of the covenant in Exodus chapters 19 and 24;
nevertheless what was added did not and could not overthrow the
promise. As the Mosaic system was completed, then all the worship of
the Church was to proceed from it and to be conformed to it.
No sinner was ever saved but by virtue of the new covenant and the
mediation of Christ therein. The new covenant of grace (in contrast
from the old covenant of works made with the human race in Adam) was
extant and effectual throughout the Old Testament era. Then what is the
"better covenant" with its "better promises" which the death of Christ
has inaugurated? We say again, it is not a new covenant absolutely
considered.
There are many plain passages in the Psalms and the Prophets which show
that the Church of old knew and believed the blessed truth of
justification and salvation by Christ, and walked with God in the faith
thereof: compare Romans 4:3-9. Let those who have access to the
incomparable and immortal "Institutes" of Calvin read carefully
chapters 9–11 in book 2. "The Church under the Old Testament,
had the
same promise of Christ, the same interest in Him by faith, remission of
sins, reconciliation with God, justification and salvation by the same
way and means that believers have under the New. And whereas the
essence and substance of the covenant consists in these things, they
are not said to be under another covenant, but only a different
administration of it. But this was so different from that which is
established in the Gospel after the coming of Christ, that it hath the
appearance and name of another covenant" (John Owen).
The leading differences between the two administrations of the covenant
of grace may be reduced to the following heads.
First , the manner in which the love of God in Christ is made known.
The miracle recorded in Mark 8:23,24 illustrates and adumbrates the two
states. The Old Testament saints had sight, but the Object set before
their faith was seen at a distance, and through clouds and shadows. The
New Testament saints "with open face behold the glory of God in a
mirror" ( 2 Corinthians 3:18).
Second , in its more plentiful communication of grace unto the Church:
John 1:16. Old Testament believers had grace given to them ( Genesis
6:8, etc.), but we an "abundance of grace" ( Romans 5:17).
Third , in our access to God. The revelation of God at Sinai filled the
people with terror; His revelation of Himself in Christ, fills us with
joy.
They were shut out from the holy place; we have freedom to approach His
throne ( Hebrews 4:16).
Fourth , the extent of the dispensation of Divine grace. Under the Old
Testament it was restricted to one nation; now it extends to all
nations.
The covenant of grace was the same, as to its substance, from the
beginning. It passed through the whole dispensation of times before the
law, and under the law, of the same nature and efficacy, unalterable,
everlasting, "ordered in all things and sure." The covenant of grace
considered absolutely was the promise of grace in and by Christ Jesus (
2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2), and that was the only way and means of
salvation unto the elect from the entrance of sin. Absolutely, in Old
Testament times, the covenant consisted only in promise, and as such is
referred to in Acts 2:39, Hebrews 6:14-16. The full and lawful
"establishment" of it ( Hebrews 8:6), whence it became formally a
"covenant" unto the whole Church, was future only. Two things were
needed to change the "promise" into a "new covenant": the shedding of
the blood of the only Sacrifice which belonged to it, and the
institution of that worship in keeping therewith.
Whilst the Old Testament Church enjoyed all the spiritual benefits of
the promise, wherein the substance of the covenant is contained, before
it was confirmed and made the sole rule of worship unto the Church, it
was not inconsistent with the holiness and wisdom of God to bring His
people under any other covenant, or prescribe unto them what forms of
worship He pleased, for they did not render ineffectual the promise
before given.
Nor did the institutions of the Mosaic covenant divert from, but rather
led to, the future establishment of the promise. Yea, the laws and
worship of the Mosaic economy were of present use and advantage to the
Church while it remained in its state of minority (Galatians 4). For
much of the above we are indebted, under God, to the writings of John
Owen (1670 A.D.). We now turn again to our passage. "For this is the
covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,
saith the Lord; I will put My laws into their minds, and write them in
their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to Me a
people" (verse 10). "The design of the apostle, or what is the general
argument which he is in pursuit of, must still be borne in mind, while
considering the testimonies which he produceth in the confirmation of
it. His design is to prove that the Lord Christ is the Mediator and
Surety of a better covenant, than that wherein the service of God was
managed by the high priests according to the law. For hence it follows,
that His priesthood is greater and far more excellent than theirs. To
this end he doth not only prove that God promised to make such a
covenant, but also declares the nature and properties of it, in the
words of the prophets. And so, by comparing it with the former
covenant, he manifests its excellency above it. In particular, in this
testimony, the imperfection of that covenant is demonstrated from its
issue. For it did not effectually maintain peace and mutual love
between God and the people; but being broken by them, they were thereon
rejected of God. This rendered all the other benefits and advantages of
it, useless. Wherefore, the apostle insists from the prophet, on those
promises of this other covenant, which infallibly prevent the like
issue, securing the people's obedience forever, and so the love and
relation of God unto them as their God" (John Owen).
The apostle is here contrasting the Christian dispensation from the
Mosaic.
Having in the previous verse declared in general the abrogation of the
old covenant, because of its inadequacy through the weakness of the
flesh, he here describes the new covenant which has supplanted it. He
shows it to be so excellent in its constitution that none should object
against its substitution in place of the old: such is the force of the
opening "For." The formal "this is the covenant" announces that it is
the duty of Christians to make themselves distinctly and fully informed
in the privileges belonging unto them. It was for this very end that
the writings of the evangelists and apostles were added to those of the
prophets. This new covenant is made with "the house of Israel," which
we understand mystically, comprising under it all the people of God. It
is taken spiritually for the whole Church, the "Israel of God" (
Galatians 6:16). "After those days" is in antithesis from "in the day"
of verse 9, which was an indefinite expression covering the interval
between God's sending Moses into Egypt and the arrival of Israel before
Sinai. "After those days" means, following the Old Testament era. The
dispensation which succeeds that is called "the time of reformation" in
Hebrews 9:10. Now just as God's making of the first covenant with
Israel was preceded by many things that were preparatory to the solemn
establishment of the same -- such as His sending of Moses to announce
unto them His designs of grace, His delivering them out of the house of
bondage, His miraculous conducting of them through the Red Sea, His
making known His law at Sinai -- so the new covenant was gradually made
and established, and that by sundry acts preparatory for it or
confirmatory of it. As this is so little understood we must enter into
details.
First , the introduction of the new covenant was made by the ministry
of John the Baptist ( Luke 16:16). He was sent to prepare the way of
the Lord. Until his appearing the Jews were bound absolutely unto the
covenant at Sinai, without any alteration or addition to any ordinance
of worship. But John's ministry was "the beginning of the Gospel" (
Mark 1:1,2). He called the people off from resting in the privileges of
the old covenant ( Matthew 3:8-10), and instituted a new ordinance of
worship, baptism. He pointed away from Moses to the Lamb of God. Thus,
his ministry was the beginning of the accomplishment of God's promise
through Jeremiah.
Second , the incarnation and ministry of the Lord Jesus was a further
advance unto the same. His appearing in the flesh laid an axe to the
root of the whole Mosaic dispensation ( Matthew 3:10), though the tree
was not immediately cut down. By His miracles and teaching Christ
furnished abundant proof that He was the Mediator of the new covenant.
Third , the way for the introduction of the new covenant having been
prepared, it was solemnly enacted and confirmed in and by Christ's
death: thereby the "promise" became a "testament" ( Hebrews 9:14-16).
From that time onwards, the old covenant and its administration had
received its full accomplishment ( Ephesians 2:14-16, Colossians
2:14,15), and it continued to abide only in the longsuffering of God,
to be taken out of the way in His own time and manner.
Fourth , the new covenant was further established in the resurrection
of Christ. The old covenant could not be abrogated till its curse had
been borne, and that was discharged absolutely when Christ was "loosed
from the pains of death" and delivered from the grave.
Fifth , the new covenant was promulgated and confirmed on the day of
Pentecost, answering to the promulgation of the law at Sinai, some
weeks after Israel had been delivered out of Egypt. From Pentecost
onwards the whole Church of God was absolved from any duty with respect
unto the old covenant and the worship of it (although it was not
manifest as yet unto their consciences), and the ordinances of worship
and all the institutions of the new covenant now became obligatory upon
them.
Sixth , the question was formally and officially raised as to the
continuance of the obligatory form of the old covenant, and the
contrary was expressly affirmed by the apostles under the infallible
superintendence of the Holy Spirit: Acts 15:1-29.
But at this point a difficulty, already noticed, may recur to our
minds: Were not the things mentioned in Hebrews 8:10-13, the grace and
mercy therein expressed, actually communicated to God's elect both
before Sinai and afterwards? Did not all who truly believed and feared
God enjoy these same identical blessings? Unquestionably. What then is
the solution? This: the apostle is not here contrasting the internal
operations of Divine grace in the Old and New Testament saints, but as
Calvin rightly taught, the "reference is to the economical condition of
the Church." The contrast is between that which characterized the
Judaic and the Christian dispensations in the outward confirmation of
the covenant. While there were individuals like David and Daniel,
perhaps many such, in whom the Spirit wrought effectually, yet it is
evident that the great majority of Abraham's natural descendants had no
experimental acquaintance with the external revelation God had given.
"I will put My laws into their minds, and write them in their hearts."
That this is not an experience peculiar to Christians or restored
Christians is clear from Psalm 37:30,31, "The mouth of the righteous
speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment. The law of His God
is in his heart." So, too in Psalm 19:7,8, we read, "The law of the
Lord is perfect converting the soul... the statutes of the Lord are
right, rejoicing the heart."
But that the major portion of Israel, or even a considerable number of
them, were regenerated, at any period in the lengthy history of that
nation, there is nothing whatever to show: instead, there is very much
to the contrary. This experience is enjoyed by none save God's elect,
and in every age they have been but a "little flock." "I will put My
laws into their minds." These words have reference to the effectual
operations of the Spirit in His supernatural and saving illumination of
our understandings, whereby they are made habitually conformable unto
the whole law of God, which is our rule of obedience in the new
covenant.
The carnal mind is enmity against God, and is not subject to His law,
neither indeed can be ( Romans 8:7). But when we are renewed by the
Spirit, He works in us a submission to the authority and revealed will
of God. As the Lord opened the heart of Lydia "that she attended unto
the things which were spoken of Paul" ( Acts 16:14), so in the miracle
of the new birth, the Christian is given an ear to heed and a mind to
perceive the holiness, justice, and goodness of God's law. Yea, that
law is effectually applied to him, so that it becomes the former of his
thoughts, the subject of his meditation, and the regulator of his ways.
The preacher may announce the law of God to the outward ear, but only
the Spirit can engrave it on the mind. The realization of this fact
ought to drive every minister to his knees. No matter how diligently he
has prepared his sermon, no matter how clearly and faithfully he
expounds God's truth, no matter how solemnly and searchingly he
endeavors to press it on the individual's conscience, unless God
Himself gives His Word an entrance into the soul, nothing spiritual and
eternal is accomplished. Nowhere is the deadness of the "churches" more
plainly evidenced today than by the absence of concerted and definite
prayer immediately before and immediately after the Word is preached:
the "song service" has been substituted for the prayer service. O that
God's own people might be aroused to the need of their coming together
and crying, "Lord, open the eyes of these men" ( 2 Kings 6:20). "And
write them in their hearts." It is this which renders the former part
actually effectual. The "heart" as distinguished from the "mind"
comprises the affections and the will. First, the understanding is
informed, and then the heart is reformed. An active principle of
obedience is imparted, and this is nothing else than a love for God
Himself. Where there is a real love for God, there is a genuine desire
and determination to please Him. The heart of the natural man is
"alienated" from God and opposed to His authority.
That is why, at Sinai, God wrote the commandments upon stones -- not so
much to secure the outward letter of them, as to represent the hardness
of the hearts of the people unto whom they were given. But at
regeneration God takes away the heart of stone, and gives a heart of
flesh ( Ezekiel 36:26) -- pliable, living, responsive.
Let each reader pause here and lift up his or her heart to God, asking
for grace and wisdom to honestly examine themselves in the light of
this verse.
You may sit under a sound and scriptural ministry every Sabbath, but
what effect has it upon your inner man? You may be well acquainted with
the letter of the Word, but how far is it directing the details of your
daily walk? Does your mind dwell most on temporal or eternal things,
material or spiritual? What engages your thoughts in your seasons of
recreation? Is your heart fixed upon God or upon the world? There are
thousands of professing Christians who can talk glibly of the
Scriptures, but whose lives give no evidence that God has written His
laws in their hearts. Are you one of this class? "And I will be to them
a God, and they shall be to Me a people." This expresses
covenant-relationship. It is placed in the center of these promises
because it is the spring from which the grace of the other blessings
doth proceed. The wicked are living in this world "without God, and
without hope" ( Ephesians 2:12), but unto the righteous He says, "I am
thy Shield, thy exceeding great Reward" ( Genesis 15:1). "Happy is that
people, that is in such a case, happy is that people, whose God is the
Lord" ( Psalm 144:15). When He says "I will be to them a
God" it means that He will act toward His people according to all that
is implied in the name of God. He will be their Lawgiver, their
Counselor, their Protector, their Guide. He will supply all their
needs, deliver from all dangers, and bring them unto everlasting
felicity. He will be faithful and longsuffering, bearing with their
frailties, never leaving nor forsaking them. "And they shall be My
people" expresses both a dignity and a duty. Their dignity is set forth
in 1 Peter 2:9; their duty in the verses which follow. "And they shall
not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying,
Know the Lord: for all shall know Me, from the least to the greatest"
(verse 11).
These words point a contrast from the general spiritual ignorance which
obtained among the Jews: cf. Isaiah 1:3, etc. "The words in the 11th
verse are not to be understood absolutely, but comparatively. They
intimate, that under that covenant there shall be a striking contrast
to the ignorance which characterized the great body of those who were
under the Old Covenant; that the revelation of the Divine will shall be
far more extensive and clear under the new than under the old economy;
and that there shall be a correspondingly enlarged communication of the
enlightened influences of the Holy Spirit. They probably also are
intended to suggest the idea, that that kind of knowledge which is the
peculiar glory of the New Covenant is a kind of knowledge which cannot
be communicated by brother teaching brother, but comes directly from
Him -- the great Teacher, whose grand characteristic is this, that whom
He teaches, He makes apt to learn" (John Brown). "And they shall not
teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know
the Lord." During the Mosaic economy, and particularly in the last
century before Christ, there was an external teaching of the Law, which
the people trusted and rested in without any regard for God's teaching
by the inward circumcision of the heart. Such teaching had degenerated
into rival schools and sects, such as the Pharisees, Sadducees,
Herodians, Essenes, etc., and they made void the Word of God through
their traditions ( Mark 7:13). It was against such the last of Israel's
prophets had announced. "The Lord will cut off... the master and the
scholar out of the tabernacles of Jacob" ( Malachi 2:12).
Or, our verse probably has more direct reference to the general
knowledge of God which obtained during the Mosaic economy, when He
revealed Himself under types and shadows, and was known through
"parables and dark sayings." These were now supplanted by the full
blaze of the Gospel's light. "For all shall know Me, from the least to
the greatest." God is now known in the full revelation which He has
made of Himself in the person of His incarnate Son: John 1:18. As we
are told in 1 John 5:20, "And we know that the Son of God is come, and
hath given us an understanding, that we may know Him that is true":
"know Him" in the sense that we recognize, own, and practically obey
Him as God. This spiritual, experimental, vital, saving knowledge of
God is now communicated unto all of His elect. As the Savior announced,
"They shall be all taught of God" ( John 6:45): taught His will and all
the mysteries of godliness, which by the Word are revealed. This
"knowledge" of God cannot be imparted by any external teaching alone,
but is the result of the Spirit's operations, though He frequently, yea
generally, uses the oral and written ministry of God's servants as His
instruments therein. "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness,
and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more" (verse
12). "This is the great foundational promise and grace of the new
covenant. For though it be last expressed, yet, in order of nature, it
precedeth the other mercies and privileges mentioned, and is the
foundation of the communication of them unto us. This the casual 'for'
at the beginning of the verse doth demonstrate. What I have spoken,
saith the Lord, shall be accomplished, 'For I will be merciful,' etc.,
without which there could be no participation of the other things
mentioned. Wherefore, not only an addition of new grace and mercy is
expressed in these words, but a reason also is rendered why, or on what
grounds, He would bestow on them those other mercies" (John Owen).
In verse 12 a reason is given why God bestows the wondrous blessings
enumerated in verses 10, 11. The word here rendered "merciful" is
propitious, for it is not absolute mercy without any satisfaction
having been taken by justice, but grace shown on the ground of a
propitiation: cf. Romans 3:24,25. Christ died to render God propitious
toward sinners ( Hebrews 2:17), and in and through Him alone is God
merciful toward the sins of His people. Just so long as Christ is
rejected, the sinner is under the curse. But as soon as He is received,
the blessings described in verses 10-12 become his. Note there are just
seven blessings named, which exemplifies the perfection of the new
covenant.
It is to be noted that no less than three terms are used in verse 12 to
describe the fearful evils of which the sinner is guilty, thus
emphasizing his obnoxiousness to the holy God, and magnifying the grace
which saves him. "Unrighteousness" signifies a wrong done unto God,
against man's sovereign Ruler and Benefactor. "Sin" is a missing of the
mark, the glorifying of God, which is what ought ever to be aimed at.
"Iniquity" has the force of lawlessness, a setting up of my will
against God's, a living to please self rather than for His glory. How
marvelous is the propitious favor of God toward those who are guilty of
such multiplied enormities! The apostle's object was to point another
contrast between the covenants. That which characterized Judaism was a
reign of law and justice: that which distinguishes Christianity is the
"Throne of Grace." Note that no "conditions" are here stipulated. But
does not the new covenant require repentance and faith? Assuredly: Mark
1:15. But He who requires these has promised also to work them in His
people: Acts 5:31. "In that He saith, A new, He hath made the first
old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away"
(verse 13).
That the translators failed to perceive the drift of the apostle's
reasoning here is evident from their adding the word "covenant" in
italics. This was not only unnecessary, but its introduction serves to
hide the force of the first half of this verse. In it the apostle draws
an inference from what God had said through Jeremiah. He singles out
one word, "new," and on it bases an argument: because Christianity is
the "establishment" of the new covenant, then the preceding economy
must have grown "old," and "old" is significative of that which draws
near its end! How this shows us, once more, that every jot and tittle
of Scripture is authoritative, full of meaning, and of sufficient
evidence for what may be deduced from it! "Now that which decayeth and
waxeth old is ready to vanish away." Here is the conclusion of the
apostle's argument. If the first covenant had been adequate no place
had been sought for a second (verse 7). But place was sought for the
second (verse 8), therefore the first covenant was not faultless. The
old covenant had continued for fifteen hundred years, from Moses to
Christ; but its purpose had now been served. God gave Israel more than
a hint that the Mosaic economy would not last forever, when his
providence permitted the nation to be carried down into Babylon. Upon
their return from captivity, neither the temple nor its priesthood were
ever restored to their pristine glory. And now, as the apostle wrote,
in less than ten years Jerusalem and the temple were completely
destroyed. If then the Jewish covenant was abolished because it was
"old," how much more ought the "old man" to be put off ( Ephesians
4:24), and the "old leaven" purged out ( 1 Corinthians 5:7)!
* From: AN EXPOSITION OF HEBREWS
by Arthur W. Pink (1954), Chapters 37-38