The Legal Mind Chapter Eleven

Chapter eleven begins with the author's explanation of the faith mentioned in Hebrews 10:22, 23, and 38. If the “just” should live by faith, which is set in stark contrast to drawing or turning back, we should genuinely want to know what constitutes 'just,' 'faith,' and 'drawing back.' The author asserts what his own experience tells him, he asserts a truth imparted by the Holy Spirit. “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Now, if hope seems insubstantial to any of you, perhaps your sights are set on personal worldly gain. In the sense of the author's assertion, we may view 'substance' as the cumulative body of hopes. A simple list of those hopes from the previous chapter shows us they were not looking for a new car or money in the bank. Their hopes were primarily set on spiritual gains. Salvation, redemption, eternal life; these are things not seen. Contrary to the things we know on our worldly plain, the 'substance' and 'evidence' of faith are as much a part of a higher mental/spiritual plain as the things hoped for. The hopes are internal, the faith is internal, the substance and evidence are internal.

What is a just person? Synonyms for the word 'just' include fair-minded, equitable, open-minded, objective, nonpartisan, unprejudiced, unbiased, and fair (as in actions toward others.) A just person is not easily influenced by material goods, powers, or personal advantage. Things are things, they come and go. For a person of this caliber, health is wealth. Such people are more concerned with their relationships – unions based on integrity, honor, love, and maintained through conscientious effort and virtue. Just people are not saintly in every aspect of their being – they are ordinary people. My Dad, for example, although of limited education, and of the type of his time and culture, was a just man. After the family broke up, he continued to raise me and my brother. He did so at the expense of a personal life. He believed in what was right, he believed in his duty as a father and was unswayed by thoughts outside that framework. Just people are often honored for acts of selfless dedication and heroism.

If drawing back is the opposite of moving forward in faith, is it also the opposite of 'just?' What does being a person who draws back entail? If one is not moving forward, one is either standing still or moving backward. This is a person who has quit. This is one who has lost hope and given up. Being, necessarily, a contributing member of a larger body of believers, the support this member once evinced is retracted, causing the greater body's work of faith to be more difficult. The one who turns back is an Indian giver. By turning back, this person fails in being just and is seen as selfish. There is a certain amount of courage involved in living a faithful life. The man who draws back proves his own cowardice. The faith of which the author speaks is nothing less than courage under fire. This faith thus glorified by the author is the faith of the patriarchs.

Beginning in verse two, the author tells us all the wonderful things that faith affords. Foremost, it was through the substance of things hoped for, and through the evidence of things not seen, that the elders, the patriarchs of old received a “good report.” That is to say, they received fame, renown, honor, etc. Before he continues, the author pauses to let us know that faith and understanding work hand-in-hand. He points out, in verse three, what you and I, indeed, all ordinary people of faith can understand. We know, for instance, that the worlds (plural) were framed by the word of God. There is the visible, corporeal world we are all familiar with. The truth of that world is that it was made to be an extension of the unseen spiritual world.

Continuing from verse four, Abel's faith provided a more excellent sacrifice than that of his brother Cain. By his faith, he obtained the witness of God that he was righteous, “God testifying of his gifts,” and through his faith, even after he was dead, he still spoke. Enoch, by his faith, was “translated” by God that he should not see the usual death of men. He was simply not there. Well before his translation, Enoch obtained the testimony that he “pleased God.” Let us pause on the word translate. The word simply means, 'to move from one location or condition to another.' Synonyms for the word include transfer, transport, and transplant.

From the case of Enoch, we may surmise, as did the author of Hebrews, that since Enoch pleased God through faith, without faith, it is impossible to please God. The author explains why in verse six. Anyone who comes to God must do so by first believing that God exists, that God is real, that he is who he claims to be. By extension, we also believe that God rewards those who “diligently seek him.”

Noah also had faith. Being warned by God of things to come, he believed. Noah was “moved with fear.” He was indelibly impressed. It was Noah's faith that led him to build the ark and save his family. Noah's faith was a condemnation of an unbelieving world. Out of all the people of his entire world, only Noah became heir to the righteousness that faith alone established. Abraham was another patriarch with a good report. His faith was expressed in obedience when he was called out of his homeland to inherit what he knew not. His faith carried him through foreign lands and strange countries all for a promise. Abraham is revered by three world religions for his unerring faith, a faith through which he became the father of nations.

Not only men are known for faith. We find Sara in verse eleven. Her faith carried her from barren old age to childbirth past her age. “It is said that she judged him faithful who had promised.” Through the faith of Sara and Abraham, two elderly people near death, so many children sprang forth that they numbered in multitude like the stars of heaven. All of those the author listed died in their faith before they received the promise. They saw them afar off, they were thoroughly persuaded, embracing the promise and confessing they were merely strangers and pilgrims on the earth. Their minds were on a far country yet to be reached. If the country from which they came was on their minds, they surely could have returned, but they pressed on. They desired something better, something higher, that is to say, a heavenly country. That is why, says the author, God is not ashamed to be called their God. That is why, the author claims, God has prepared a city for the faithful.

Continuing from verse seventeen, we are made aware of the depth of Abraham's faith, that he would even sacrifice his only begotten son. He approached the sacrifice of his son, believing that God would raise him from the dead. This is because Abraham had already been told that through his son Isaac God's promises to Abraham would be effected. Abraham believed every word of God. The sacrifice of Isaac did not happen. All God wanted from Abraham was faith, but the near-sacrifice of Isaac was intended only as a figure of the true sacrifice of God's only begotten son.

Isaac, being another patriarch of faith, blessed his two sons in matters of “things to come.” Then Jacob, one of Isaac's sons, when he himself grew old, blessed the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim, and Manasseh. Faith continued through Joseph, who, at his death, made mention of the departure of the children of Israel and gave instructions for the disposition of his bones. So it goes, the issue of faith is argued all the way to verse forty.

Faith is more than an opinion or personal inclination. It is a quality that also exists independently. Such faith is ascribed to Moses before he was able to reason. At the age of three, Moses, by the faith of his parents, was hidden from the Pharaoh's decree. They saw that Moses was no ordinary child, and in hiding him, they put their own lives at risk. Moses ended up raised by the Pharaoh's own daughter. He was in a position to live a privileged life, but his faith brought him to a divergent choice. His choice was for the people of God. Rather than “enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season,” Moses pledged himself to God's chosen people and suffered affliction with them.

Moses believed the reward at the end of it all would compensate him for all his losses. The author of Hebrews worded the faith of Moses in light of the fact that God and Jesus are one. He said it this way, “Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt.” By his faith, he turned his back on Egypt, disregarding both the Pharaoh's anger and military might. He endured as one who could see the invisible God. Through faith, Moses kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, to protect the chosen people. Moses is a man whose faith is legendary, and he is revered alongside Abraham in the three major religions. Moses passed through the Red Sea and interceded for the chosen people of God for forty years before passing the mantle to Joshua.

The list of faith is long and hallowed. Faith took down the walls of Jericho. Faith saw the saving of Rahab for her dealings with the spies. Gideon is honored for his faith, likewise Barak, Samson, Jephthae, David, Samuel, and the prophets. The list of deeds through faith is impressive. All of these people, through the faith they evinced, subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, turned weakness into strength, fought valiantly, and put to flight the foreign armies. Women received their dead raised from death, while others would not accept deliverance from torture and certain death so they might obtain a better resurrection. Suffering cruel trials, mocking, scourging, imprisonment, stoning, and horrible forms of execution, they resisted temptations and wandered about disenfranchised. They slept in caves, holes in the earth, mountains, and deserts, dressed in skins, being destitute, afflicted, and tormented.

They were heroes of faith, and none of them received the promise in their lifetime. The world, according to the author, is not worthy of such people. All of them have, through their faith, received a good report. Now, it might seem sad that these folks have endured such sorrows, but God has provided for them something far superior when it comes to rewards. The faithful continue to this day, yearning for the promised reward. When, at last, that reward unfolds, we shall see it in the company of all those who came before. Hand in hand, we shall accept the prize, saints, patriarchs, and prophets alike. We shall be made perfect together.

Throughout chapter eleven, we were introduced to the various heroes of faith. They were ordinary people called into extraordinary lives. They were beacons in their generations, inspiring countless others to persevere. We begin chapter twelve with this great company of champions, and how they pertain to the author's case. Life is a challenge to all of us, not only to those who have gone before but to ourselves in the here and now. In a legal sense, Hebrew law required only two or three witnesses to establish a matter as truth. The author has provided many more than three. To us, the jury deciding the case, the weight of so many reputable witnesses is an established truth against giving up. The case presents us with a challenge to continue in our own faith, to be strong in the face of adversity that is in no wise new to our generations. Our forefathers stood strong against the same trials, hope and faith never waned. 

The Legal Mind Chapter Ten

Beginning at verse one, the law through Moses is explained by contrasting it with the heavenly. The law provides only a shadow of good things to come. They are not the true image of those “good things.” For that reason, those who approach the law, which provides only the band-aide solution of yearly sacrifices, can never obtain perfection. Had any person obtained perfection thereby, the sacrifices would have ceased to be offered. With the goal of perfection obtained, there is no longer a need for purging. The effective sacrifice purges once, and after that, the worshiper has no more “conscience of sins.” It is precisely on the issue of “conscience of sins” that worldly sacrifices fail. As verse three explains, worldly sacrifices retain the “remembrance” of sins from year to year. The conclusion, found in verse five, is that it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to abolish sin.

The author turns his attention to the area of redemption where it rises above the law. The author uses the 'law and prophets,' the written word of God, to make his case against the law. This is seen in verses five through nine. Referring to Psalms 40:6-8, we are shown the establishment of a new plan. We are shown the advent of the one who is written of in “the volume of the book.” Through the prophet, David, the son of God converses with God. It is the son who says to the father, “Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.” All of the sacrifices and burnt offerings, according to the son of God, were offered by the law.

Compare Hebrews to Psalms. “Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” We clearly see the point the author is making in verse nine. The point is this: the son of God took away the first and established the second. “Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God,” is the author's paraphrasing of Psalms 40:8.

Verse ten uses the phrase, “By the which will,” establishing a predetermination on the parts of God and his son, as shown through texts the Hebrews, themselves, used commonly to establish truth. The author's point was that old testament truth established new testament truth. Put in modern thought, Jewish truth proves Christian truth, that truth being that we are sanctified, once for all time, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ.

Continuing at verse eleven, the author shows us that even though the worldly priest does his work daily, even though he sacrifices the same animals over and over and over, his work will never permanently erase sin. In stark contrast, Jesus, with his single sacrifice that covered all sin forever, took his rightful place on “the right hand of God.” The right hand signifies the power of God, and in that power, Christ set a work in motion that will ultimately bring all enemies of the truth under his feet. In contradiction to the enemies of truth, the sanctified are perfected and exalted by a single offering. For them, the work is sealed with a guarantee that is eternal. These are the claims, but don't take his word for it: there is a witness.

The author calls forth a trusted witness. A witness is called that the Hebrews revere. The mind, the word, the will of God is called to the witness stand. The Holy Ghost comes forth to give irrefutable testimony. In verses fifteen through seventeen, the witness testifies, “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.” This is the truth, not for the enemies of truth, but exclusively for the sanctified. The same laws, once externalized on tablets and in physical customs, will for the sanctified be internalized.

By the work of Jesus, we, as bold priests, now enter into “the Holiest,” a place formerly reserved and not within common reach, a place out of bounds and off-limits. We now enter the Holiest by a “new and living way,” which the High Priest has consecrated just for us. He has set a special place for the sanctified, an exalted place for his own. We may pass through the veil into the presence of God. What is the veil? Formerly, it was a covering to a room in the tabernacle which God entered. Now, it is the flesh of the son of God, beyond which God is ever-present.

In verses twenty-one through twenty-three, the author commends that we draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith because we, as the lesser priests, have a High Priest who is in charge of the house of God. A true heart and a full assurance of faith stem directly from our sanctification. In other words, having our hearts sprinkled and our bodies washed with the purest of water, our evil conscience has been taken away. We are clean, we are sanctified. Now, it is up to us to “hold fast the profession of our faith,” and be as faithful as he who promised. The sanctified have a job. Our daily course involves consideration of one another, helping one another to achieve love and good works, coming together in single-minded self-maintenance of all who are sanctified, and exhorting one another so much the more as we approach the goal of our faith. These works are brought forth in verses twenty-four and twenty-five.

The sacrifice of Jesus was the final sacrifice. If, after receiving the knowledge of the truth, and being set free from an evil conscience; if, after being sanctified and exalted, we fall back and sin willfully, there is no further remedy. We have been given a one-time gift, precious and irreplaceable. It is a flame we can ill afford to lose. For us, the flame is warmth, light, and life. We can not let it go out. If we do, all we can look forward to is the judgment and fiery indignation that will devour all the enemies of the truth.

A point of reference is brought forth. It only took two or three witnesses to condemn, without mercy, a person who rejected the law that Moses delivered. The author asks a sobering question. If we, who have been sanctified by the son of God, should act hatefully and disdainfully against the Spirit of grace that we have been shown, if we should grind Jesus beneath our heel and count the blood he shed on our behalf as common and vulgar, what greater condemnation and punishment will we be thought worthy of?

Verses thirty and thirty-one put on display the Hebrew national consciousness. It was and is a matter of recorded history. They were uniquely acquainted with their God. They knew him well. He was the one who said 'vengeance belongs to me.' He not only said it, he made good on it. He said 'I will recompense,' and 'the Lord shall judge his people.' All of that vengeance, and recompense, and judging is in their written history. As history, it is not isolated in the past, it crosses over into current events. The author touched on current events that his audience knew well. They lived it, as did the author. Verses thirty-one through thirty-five connects history to current events. The Hebrew national consciousness knew it was a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. They are exhorted, however, to call into memory their own experiences, their former days just after their spiritual illumination.

What had they endured for their faith? They were a laughing stock to the unenlightened. They were afflicted, reproached. They suffered abuse even while they banded together for mutual help and self-protection. They suffered loss alongside their companions, and in a statement that suggests the author was Paul, they “had compassion” on the author in his “bonds,” and “took joyfully the spoiling of their goods.” It was not an easy choice they made, but the author was assured that they believed in a “better and enduring substance” in heaven. That faith has persisted through the ages in all the faithful. We are, therefore, exhorted not to cast away our confidence. It will be rewarded.

Continuing at verse thirty-six, The author lays out the long road ahead. In the end, Jesus will come to us. He will not delay. In the end, we will receive the promise. Between now and then is the work of doing the will of God. It is not an issue we may file under 'instant gratification.' We will rise up day after day, and each day, the work will be before us. It is the long game. We can expect callouses and broken hearts. We will lean heavily on our patience. We will do the reps until our patience is muscular and well-defined. When we awake tomorrow and find that the work is still before, that we are not yet done, we may rely on our patience with confidence.

The long game will prove who is who among us. The long and, at times, arduous road ahead, that is to say, our daily lives, will be and must be lived in faith. We are on a road that gives but two directions. We can continue forward in faith to claim the promise, or we can forsake the goal and turn back. If we draw back from the prize, if we turn and face the direction from which we have come, what may we expect at the end of that journey? It will be the very thing from which we first fled. It will be an unfulfilled life and an empty, ignominious death. We fled from perdition and laid our hopes on the promise of God, that at the end of our labors should be the reward. The author ends this chapter by telling us plainly that giving up is throwing away all hope for the salvation of our soul. After you have worked many years toward the saving of your soul, after you have invested so much of yourself into that goal through faith and hard work, giving up leaves nothing in your reach save eternal punishment, and you've no one to blame but yourself.

The Legal Mind Chapter Nine

Chapter nine begins with the trappings of the old covenant. Old religious values are explained. Concerning the old covenant, the author held that, as a matter of fact, the old covenant, like the new, had ordinances of divine service. That is to say that a law was set forth by a governing authority, that the covenant functioned within the framework of an authoritative decree. Also, the first “ordinances of divine service” were furnished with a worldly sanctuary through which said service was rendered. The author points specifically to a tabernacle that was “made.” Within that physical structure could be found a physical candlestick, table, and showbread – all the familiar paraphernalia through which divine services had been carried out down through the ages. Beyond the second veil, there was the “Holiest of all.” In that area could be found the physical golden censer and the ark of the covenant which the tribes of Israel carried with them for generations. In the ark were real items with relevance to the people. They were the gold pot with manna in it, the rod of Aaron, and the tablets of their law.

This list of special structures and special items is found in verses one through five. They are listed as articles of common history. The author continues by pointing to those real people who carried out the divine service. Those people were grandfathers, great grandfathers, and great great grandfathers. The families of those people counted them in their lineage. Their names were listed and remembered with reverence. Everything the author brings into evidence can be corroborated through common knowledge and shared history. Real people went into the real first tabernacle to perform the actual service to God. The regular priests went into the tabernacle but not into the Holiest of all. That was a special chamber reserved for the high priest. Only he entered, and he entered it only once each year. He did so with the blood of sacrifices to stand in the presence of God and plead for the errors of himself and his people.

What was the point of all this? Verse eight provides the answer. “While the first tabernacle was yet standing,” there was no manifest path for the common man into the presence of God. The author's witness, here, is the Holy Ghost, and testimony in regard to the obstructed path comes from that source alone. Both the tabernacle, the author asserts, and the divine service were precursors, mere figures of something far greater than all the generations filled with services that could, by no means, ever bring the high priest to perfection. The yearly gifts and sacrifices failed in that they had to be repeated the next year. It was a matter of conscience that this truth was revealed through the Holy Ghost. If the high priest of the first covenant could, himself, never reach perfection, how could he ever hope to help the people? The divine services of the first covenant never reached a higher spiritual level. They never pulled free from the physical and worldly aspects of the human condition. They remained firmly rooted in the physical activities of a mortal framework – meats and drinks, bathing, and washing of hands. The services performed were carnal, and imposed as a placeholder until the time of reformation.

The case of the new high priest stands in stark contrast to the old. The coming reformation was achieved in Jesus Christ. He entered into the presence of God, not in the chamber of a physical building, but in a greater and more perfect tabernacle. Rather than entering yearly with the blood of animals, he entered once into the Holy place by his own blood and obtained for us an unfailing redemption. This is found in verses twelve through fourteen. The reasoning is that if the blood and ashes of animals cleansed and purified the flesh of mortal men, how much better was the blood of Christ, “who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God,” to purify our spirits. With dead works purged from the conscience within, the obstructed path is opened to all men to serve the living God. Divine service and the Holiest of all are open to each of us. This, argues the author, is the relevance of Christ as the mediator of the “new testament” – that by means of death and for the redemption of transgressions under the “first testament,” all of us who are “called” can receive the “promise of eternal inheritance.”

The Hebrew term for covenant is berit, meaning “to bond or fetter.” It is translated into Greek as syntheke, “binding together” or diatheke, “will, testament.” In the Bible, then, a covenant is a relationship based upon mutual commitments. It typically involves promises, obligations, and rituals. The terms testament and covenant can be used interchangeably, though covenant tends to be used for the relationship between Jews and God. This explanation is given on learnreligions.com.

The author uses the word testament, here, in the sense of 'last will and testament.' He explains that a testament is without force until after the death of the testator. A death is necessary for the enactment and enforcement of the testament. In that regard, blood was required for both testaments, old and new. In the new, it was the blood of the testator, Jesus Christ. In the old, this explanation is given by the author. Taken from verses eighteen through twenty-one, after Moses revealed the old testament to the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water, and using scarlet wool and hyssop, he sprinkled the book, the people, the tabernacle, and the vessels of the ministry. He said to all the people, “This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.” This may refer to actions noted in Exodus twenty-four, while the reference of the author(s) of Hebrews is not found word for word, but inferred. The less than literal use of the Exodus account stems from Jewish tradition. 

See https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/hebrews-9-19.html

According to Judaic interpretation, almost all offenses and inadequacies are purged by blood. That interpretation concerns the law that binds Israel to God, the law of God as delivered to them through Moses. The consensus is that without the shedding of blood there is no “remission.” For the purpose of this study, we must understand what the author means by the word 'remission.' Turning to online sources, the definition of the word is this: the cancellation of a debt, charge, or penalty. Synonyms for remission include 'repeal,' 'pardon,' 'absolution,' 'forgiveness,' and one might also include a stay of execution. This is said in verse twenty-two, but distinctions are set forth in verse twenty-three. There, we note that the author presents us with, first of all, “heavenly things,” and secondly with the worldly “patterns” of things in the heavens.

As for those patterns, purification necessitated physical applications toward physical ends. That after which worldly objects and actions were patterned required a higher application of sacrifice and of blood. Therefore, the flesh was purified physically, but the spirit achieves remission spiritually. The author, in verse twenty-four, goes on to explain the spiritual application brought about through Christ. Christ did not enter the holy places of a physical building, neither did he engage in handwashing, the sacrifice of animals, or the maintenance of things like the shewbread or the candle. All of those things were mere “figures” of higher truths. Jesus entered into heaven itself, there to place himself in the presence of God as our sacrifice. Verse twenty-five tells us, neither did Jesus offer himself often in the manner of the worldly high priests who entered every year with the blood of “others.” To approach the matter from that angle, Jesus would have had to suffer and be crucified multiple times from the very beginning of the world. The higher application was to appear at the end of worldliness to put away sin with his singular sacrifice. Spiritual absolution is thus granted to the spirit.

Why was remission approached from this angle? Simply because it has been determined that every man must die once in his life. After that death, and not before, comes the judgment. So then, for the one death of many men, after which comes the one judgment of all, Jesus offered himself, once, to bear the sins of those destined to pass from life to face the judgment. For those who look to Jesus, and apparently, only those, Jesus will appear a second time. The judgment comes to all, but the judgment that comes to those who do not look to Jesus will be a judgment in which Jesus is absent. The judgment of those who look to Jesus will be a judgment in which Jesus appears as salvation. Why this point matters goes back to the author's distinctions between the heavenly and the worldly. We are figures of the truth. We are patterned after Jesus. We will see him because we are patterns of his incorruption. It says in First John 3:2, and I paraphrase, “Beloved, now are we the children of God, and while it does not presently appear what we shall be, we know that when he does appear, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” 

The Legal Mind Chapter Eight

Chapter eight begins with a summation of all previous points. The author begins by saying, “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum.” Add it all up and this is what you get. These are the talking points. “We” have such a high priest. Not just to Christians, as a people, the author speaks to the Hebrews, as a people. After all, it was a development in the Hebrew faith, from the Hebrew God to the Hebrew people, that a savior came. The first Christians were Hebrews by natural course. Of the new and improved high priest, the author states that he has been set at the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens. Jesus, top of the top, best of the best, sits at the right hand of God. The right hand of God, according to the Hebrews, was the power and absolute authority of God. This development, then, is seen to proceed from God to God.

In the “heavens,” the new high priest ministers from the sanctuary. That is to say, that Jesus, at the right hand of God, performs his priestly service from the true tabernacle, pitched not by man, but by God himself. If the wilderness tabernacle was the precursor to the temple of God, then the precursor to the wilderness tabernacle was the heavenly tabernacle that God, himself, established for the purpose of a lifeline between God and mankind. The high priest manages the lifeline that proceeds from the Holy of Holies, the place where God actually is. God established the office of the high priest long before the earthly tabernacle was fashioned after the heavenly tabernacle. The development from the many high priests to the last one we would ever need advanced through all the planned and necessary stages.

The office of high priest that Jesus executes is not different from the historical office. Just as the earthly tabernacle was designed and fashioned after the example of the heavenly tabernacle, so, too, was the office of the worldly high priest modeled on the blueprint for the heavenly high priest. The author explains, in verse three, that every earthly high priest is ordained for the purpose of offering gifts and sacrifices to God on behalf of the people. Since those duties are based on a higher plan, it follows that the heavenly high priest “have somewhat also to offer.” Furthermore, as explained in verse four, Jesus on the earth rather than in heaven could not execute the office as it was already filled by others who offered gifts according to the law of God. The pattern was a clear line that at no point crossed itself. God was not negating his law by replacing the priesthood with Jesus, he was fulfilling his law by bringing things to their natural culmination. Both the priesthood and the tabernacle served as an example only. They were a shadowy and dark prefiguration of things to come. Moses, the author explains in verse five, was admonished by God to make all things according to the heavenly pattern.

The priesthood of the Hebrews was a mere shadow of the true priesthood that God had in mind. The ministry that Jesus obtained was more excellent than the entire history of earthly ministry by many priests. His ministry was not only that much better, the covenant that Jesus was to mediate between God and mankind was a much-improved covenant. Why was the new covenant so much better? It was established on better promises. To understand this, one need only ask the obvious question, 'why a new covenant?' If the first covenant was iron-clad and had no faults, there would never have arisen a call for the second. God found his first covenant wanting, he found fault with the priests and said, “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.”

Let us pause here and examine God's forewarning. The covenant is about the lifeline between God and mankind. It is about the ministry no less than the minister. If the new minister in a 'Hebrew development' is the new high priest in the heavenly tabernacle, Jesus Christ, then the new ministry in a 'Hebrew development' is Christianity. The new covenant and ministry are shown, in black and white, to cover two separate entities. Israel and Judah were divided entities. The upper tribes of Israel took a separate historical path from that of the lower tribes of Judah. Still, Christianity, as ministered by Christ, is meant to cover both houses. Historically, the house of Judah is more closely associated with the Hebrews than is the scattered house of Israel. I want to ask, is the 'Christian' development representative of a 'new' house of Israel, a new 'gathered' Israel? The development, of course, is neither historical nor political so much as spiritual. Therefore, the new Christian mindset may be symbolic of the new spiritual Israel.

The new covenant with the house of Israel is explained in verses eight through eleven. God found fault with the original ministers of his covenant with both houses. Then, the houses took separate paths. God said, “Behold, the days come when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.” Interestingly, Israel is mentioned first in regard to the 'new' covenant. Judah seems to be included as an afterthought. It is explicitly noted in verse nine that the new covenant will be unlike the covenant that was established with the nation's fathers, as in the days when God took the people “by the hand” and led them out of Egypt. As I said, this explanation is explicit and clearly shows that the initiative belonged to God. God did all the work. God maintained the covenant. It was the efforts of God that characterized the first covenant in that the people failed on their part of the agreement. It is clear, also, that God gave up on the first covenant because of the people's notable lack of forward momentum. They did not get that a relationship requires reciprocation.

Verse ten goes on to explain what the new covenant will entail (again, promoting the house of Israel above the house of Judah.) Only one house is specified in verse ten. That house is scattered Israel. By the non-inclusion of the house of Judah in verse ten, importance and relevance are ascribed to the house of Israel. It is seen, then, that the covenant will be administered through the agency of the house of Israel. Unlike the first rescue from bondage, any salvation beyond the house of Israel will be effected through the house of Israel. There is an obvious and striking difference between the first and second covenants. The first was an agreement written in stone. The second is an infusion of the ways of God into the minds and hearts of the people. For that one very important reason, it will be the work of the people to maintain the covenant. Their efforts, stemming from the overflow of their hearts and minds, will characterize the covenant. The relationship will no longer be one-sided.

One must see the 'newness' of the new covenant as epochal. In both the Judaic and Islamic mindsets, segregation is at work. One must gather one's own into one's enclosures. The walls of the enclosures must be impenetrable. There is an enforced distinction between that which lies within and that which lies without. The practices of those outside the enclosure are viewed as antithetical. The new covenant is unparalleled in that it works from the individual rather than the enclosure. The new covenant is a relationship with God that is empowered to reach beyond enclosures. It is said in verse eleven that the gatherers into enclosures, and the enforcers of walls, will no longer tow the party line of whose God is the true God. The belligerent preaching will end because each and every heart, and each and every mind, will know God. “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.”

The old keyword was exclusion. The new keyword will be inclusion. “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” That will be the new deal to everyone, not just some. There will be mercy. There will be forgiveness. Every heart and every mind that becomes the home of God will show the evidence of it in the inclusive words they speak and the inclusive actions of their new works. There will be one salvation that includes every willing soul. There will be a single new living growing body of God-infused souls. There will be one savior and one high priest to set the stage, and it will be the people who maintain the covenant. It will be a matter of heart and mind rather than works. It will be a matter of conscience. Laws written in stone and crippling legalisms will be a thing of the past.

The author of Hebrews concludes with a comparison between the viability and survival of the new versus the old. Relating a covenant to the human body, the author states that by God saying “a new covenant,” He made the first covenant 'old.' Experience common to all men shows us the truth that anything which becomes old, anything that decays is ready to vanish. The old is on the way out. If the old is a sinking ship and the new is a life raft, the expedient course of action is to let go of the sinking ship and reach for the one thing that will save you. There are the old in spirit who cling to the decaying forms of exclusive ideologies. There are those made new in spirit who serve life from the heart where the power of all-inclusive salvation resides.

The Legal Mind Chapter Seven

Who was Melchisedec? Before the author of Hebrews brings him up, Melchisedec was mentioned by King David in the book of Psalms. The character's original introduction is seen in chapter fourteen of Genesis. Abram had just returned from a successful military campaign and met with several area kings including Melchisedec. So, obviously, by the time Melchisedec is mentioned in Hebrews, he had already been the topic for scholarly and Rabbinic study throughout the middle eastern peoples since the time of Abraham. Read about Melchisedec on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melchizedek#Name. I never knew there were so many writings about him.

“Typological association of Jesus Christ with Old Testament characters occurs frequently in the New Testament and in later Christian writings; thus, Jesus Christ is also associated with Adam (as the "New Adam") and with Abraham. The bread and wine offered by Abraham to Melchizedek have been interpreted by church fathers including Clement of Alexandria as being a prefiguration of the Eucharist.” That comes from the article.

I found it interesting that some scholars associate Melchisedec with Shem, one of Noah's three sons. I also found it interesting that the blessing Abram received ties in with his name change.

“Expressing a kabbalistic point of view, the Zohar commentary to Genesis 14 cites Rabbi Yitzchak as saying that it was God who gave a tithe to Abram in the form of removing the Hebrew letter He from his own throne of glory and presenting it to the soul of Abram for his benefit.” And “The Zohar's commentary on Genesis 14 cites . . . The letter He is the letter God added to Abram's name to become "Abra-ha-m" in Genesis.”

Being an expert and teacher, the author(s) of Hebrews would have been studied in such interpretations. Both Abram and Melchisedec are brought forth as historical characters by the author. Abram, the father of their race, was a man. He won a victory in battle and afterward met with area kings, one of which was Melchisedec. In verse one of chapter seven of the book of Hebrews, the author begins, “For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of kings . . .”

The meeting of two people. Both are relevant to the Hebrew national identity. Both are relevant to the Christian identity. Aside from the many other historical interpretations of the two, the author has settled on an amalgamate Hebrew interpretation. This is his take.

Two persons met physically. Abram was a man. If Melchisedec was not a man, at least he was a person. The author's assessment of Melchisedec attributes to him the qualities of being without parents or children. That, in and of itself, is not beyond normalcy. However, what grabs the attention is, “having neither beginning of days nor end of life.” That really sets Melchisedec apart from normal men. In the author's opinion, Melchisedec had been “made like unto the Son of God.” Was the priest/king a divine being, an angel? In the book of Daniel, chapter three, verse twenty-five, the angel that appeared in the fiery furnace was described similarly, like the Son of God. The author says of Melchisedec that he was, first, “King of righteousness,” and after that, “King of Salem” (maybe a city, or) “King of peace.” As to his priesthood, he remained continually.

There is a connection to be made, here, between Melchisedec (“like unto the Son of God”)being a “King of peace” and Jesus being the “Prince of Peace” from Isaiah nine.

To continue in verse four, the author directs the reasoning mind to consider just “how great this man was.” The patriarch of Israel gave a full tenth of all that he possessed. That offering was not to the king but, rather, to the man who had no “beginning of days, nor end of life,” and who “abideth a priest continually.” The author then compares regular priests to this priest of note. In verse five, the author informs us that the regular priests were sons of Levi, a tribe set apart under law to receive the priesthood. They were commanded to take tithes from their own people according to the law of God. The difference between them and Melchisedec lay in the fact that Melchisedec was not a descendant of Abraham, yet, in the office of priest, he received tithes from Abram, and blessed the man that already possessed the promises of God.

The author, in verse seven, used the term, “without all contradiction.” That is akin to saying, 'without a doubt.' It is clear that the author considered Melchisedec greater than Abram. The man was eternal and made like the son of God. He obviously had a high reputation and history – enough so to impress a man who had just returned from slaughtering kings. The author asserts that the lesser, Abram, was blessed by the greater, Melchisedec. The author brings our attention to a common, well-known, everyday truth. Priests under the law were men; they died. On the other hand, Melchisedec had a time-honored reputation for immortality. The author then makes a personal point in verse nine, prefacing his opinion with the words, “as I may say so.” His personal aside was in regard to the man, Levi, the son of Abraham from whom came the priesthood. His point was simple. The priesthood was still in the loins of Abraham when the priest of the most high God met him.

The author challenges the reader about the Jewish national predisposition toward Levitical perfection. What was that? It was a basic, ingrained inclination to think of the priesthood under the law of God as beyond reproach, in other words, God's priesthood was perfect. There was nothing above it or beyond it. If the end-all limit of the priesthood, through which the people received the law, was perfect, the author asked, what further need was there for another priest to rise up after the order of Melchisedec? Why was not Jesus called after the order of Aaron like all other priests under the law?

The author introduces the argument that a change in the priesthood, that leap from the order of Aaron to the order of Melchisedec, necessitated a similar change in the law. He reasons that the man to whom these matters pertain came from a tribe that was not called to minister at the altar. The lineage of Jesus is addressed. He came from the tribe of Judah and not from the tribe of Levi. The law that came through Moses mentioned nothing about Judah having priestly duties. According to the author, the evidence suggests that Jesus, as priest, is similar to Melchisedec in that rather than being a priest by the law of a carnal command, he was a priest in the power of an endless life. His evidence was the very word of God that said to Jesus, “Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.”

It is explained in verse eighteen that there had been a true “disannulling” of the commandment that had gone before. Basically, the previous command was canceled and made void. Why? It was because of the inherent “weakness and unprofitableness” of a priesthood peopled by mortal flesh. A conclusion based on decades of real-life experience expressed the truth that the law made nothing perfect. However, asserted the author, “the bringing in of a better hope did.” By that better hope, men drew close to God. Moreover, that better hope, that new high priest, Jesus, was affirmed by an oath. Regular men of the tribe of Levi were made priests by commandment but not by the oath of God. The author's evidence is the oath of God found written in God's word: “The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.” This is the author's assessment in verse twenty-two: “By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.”

To continue from verse twenty-three, the author points to a well-known truth. Down through the ages, there had been many priests. Having many priests was a necessity due to the fact the men died and needed to be replaced. By comparison, however, Jesus had an “unchangeable” priesthood in that he did not need to be replaced because of mortality. For that one reason, Jesus, the priest forever after the order of Melchisedec, is able to save to the “uttermost” all who come to God by him. Since he lives forever, there is no interruption in his intercession.

Mankind's need necessitated such a high priest as Jesus. We needed something better than a mortal high priest subject to the same sins as all the rest of us. We needed someone who was holy, someone who was harmless, someone who was undefiled, someone who was separate from sinners and made higher than the heavens. We had already had ages of failing mortal priests. You might say, they were only there to keep the seat warm for Jesus. Unlike many ages worth of mortal priests, the new high priest after the order of Melchisedec would not need to daily make sacrifices for his own sins before those of the people. Everything was covered by the single act of offering himself to the cross.

The author concludes his argument. The law made priests of men. Men have infirmities. Priests themselves are guilty of sin and weakness. Then, they die. Unlike the law, the word of God's oath, which came after the law, consecrated the son as priest forever.