heb10_observe.htm

HEBREWS CHAPTER 10

I) REVIEW OF HEB 9:24-28 BELOW]:

or jump to the beginning of Hebrews chapter 10

[(Heb 9:24-28) BSM On Heb 9:24-28]:

(Heb 9:24 NASB) For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

Whereupon Heb 9:24 NASB, which reads, "For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;" explains that Christ did not enter a holy place which was made with human hands, such as the Tabernacle, or the Temple, which place was a mere / ineffective copy of the true one, but He did enter into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us - as a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, (1 Jn 2:2).

(Heb 9:25 NASB) nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.

[Heb 9:25 goes on to say that Christ did not offer one time or have to offer Himself more than one time like the priests under the Mosaic Law had to do year by year and with blood that was not his own - which offer by the Mosaic Law priests was ineffective in making provision for the reception of forgiveness of sins unto eternal life. Although it was basic for the priests to their ministry under the Law of Moses to offer sacrifices repeatedly, it was basic to Christ's ministry that He did not do so repeatedly, but to offer Himself once for all mankind for all time. The reference in v. 25 to entering "the Most Holy Place every year" shows that the sacrifices of the priests under the Law of Moses mainly in mind are those of the Day of Atonement. So only Christ's offering can put away sin. The sins of those who lived in old times were dealt with by Christ's one offering. The reasoning is that if that offering had not been sufficient, Christ would have had to offer himself "again and again." No other offering is in view when it is a matter of really putting sin away. When the high priest entered the Most Holy Place he did so "with blood that is not his own, which disqualified the effectiveness of his sacrifice. The superiority and effectiveness of Christ's offering is seen in that He does not press into service some external means, like the blood of some noncooperating, noncomprehending animal. He uses his own blood and with it makes the one sufficient offering.

Christ was appointed as High Priest of the New Covenant to represent sinful people in heaven itself, that is, in the presence of God. So His sacrifice had to be greater than that which allowed entrance into a mere man-made sanctuary that was only a copy (antitypa) of the true one. Nor could Christ offer repeated sacrifices as in the Levitical institution, for that would have required Him to die many times since the Creation of the world. Instead, as is obvious, the heavenly ministry of Christ called for a thoroughly sufficient, one-time sacrifice. This is precisely why He appeared once for all (hapax, cf. v. 28; also cf. ephapax in 7:27; 9:12; 10:10) at the end of the ages to do away with sin, which the priests in the old arrangement could not do. By the phrase "end of the ages" the writer evidently meant the climax of the Old Testament eras as well as the imminency of the climax of all things. He will shortly refer to Christ's second advent.

(Heb 9:26 NASB) "Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."

[(Heb 9:25-26) BSM On Heb 9:25-26]:

(Heb 9:25 NASB) "nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.

(Heb 9:26 NASB) Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."

[Heb 9:25 indicates that Christ was appointed as High Priest of the New Covenant to represent sinful people in heaven itself, that is, in the presence of God. So His sacrifice had to be greater than that which allowed entrance into a mere man-made sanctuary that was only a copy (antitypa) of the true one. Nor could Christ offer repeated sacrifices as in the Levitical institution, for that would have required Him to die many times since the Creation of the world. Instead, as is obvious, the heavenly ministry of Christ called for a thoroughly sufficient, one-time sacrifice. This is precisely why He appeared once for all (hapax, cf. v. 28; also cf. ephapax in 7:27; 9:12; 10:10) at the end of the ages to do away with sin, which the priests in the old arrangement could not do. By the phrase "end of the ages" the writer evidently meant the climax of the Old Testament eras as well as the imminency of the climax of all things. He will shortly refer to Christ's second advent.

Whereupon in Heb 9:26 Christ would have needed to suffer often since the beginning of the foundation of the world multiple times; but instead with the consummation of the ages Christ put away sin completely and forever by the once for all sacrifice of Himself. There is no other way of dealing with sin than Christ's own offering of Himself. If His one offering was not enough, he would have had to suffer over and over. "Suffer," of course, is used in the sense of "suffer death." The reference to "creation" carries the idea right back to the beginning. No one would ever have been saved without the offering made by Christ.

[(Heb 9:26) Expositor's On Heb 9:26]:

"26 What is implied in v. 25 is made explicit here. "Then" is perhaps not the best translation of epei, which, as often, introduces an elliptical construction, with a meaning like "for [if it were different]" or, as BAG (s.v.) puts it, "for otherwise he would have had to suffer many times." Again, the implication is that there is no other way of dealing with sin than Christ's own offering of himself. If his one offering was not enough, he would have had to suffer over and over. "Suffer," of course, is used in the sense of "suffer death." The reference to "creation" carries the idea right back to the beginning. No one would ever have been saved without the offering made by Christ.

"Now" (nyni) is not temporal; this is an example of its use "introducing the real situation after an unreal conditional clause or sentence, but, as a matter of fact" (BAG, s.v.). Once again the author emphasizes the decisive quality of Christ's sacrifice with his "once for all." It matters a great deal to the author that Christ made the definitive offering and that now that it has been made there is no place for another. Many take "at the end of the ages" to mean that the author thought he was living in the last days and that Christ would return very speedily to bring this world to an end. So his sacrifice on the cross was made in the world's last days. But whatever he thought about the imminence of the end of all things, the author says little about it. We should probably understand the words here rather in the sense of "the consummation of the ages," or perhaps with NEB, "at the climax of history." If we take it in the sense of "the close of the age," it would mean that the first coming of Christ—and more particularly his offering of himself on the cross—ushered in the final state of affairs.

It is a common thought of the NT writers that God's decisive action in Christ has altered things radically. The Messianic Age has come—the age that all the preceding ages have led up to.

The purpose of Christ's coming was "to do away with sin." Here the expression eis athetesin is a strong one, signifying the total annulment of sin. The word "is used in a technical juristic sense" (Deiss BS, pp. 228-29) with the meaning "to annul" or "cancel." Sin, then, is rendered completely inoperative and this was done "by the sacrifice of himself." It is the self-offering of Christ that is the decisive thing. For the author this is the truth that must be grasped.

[(Heb 9:24-26) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 9:24-26]:

(Heb 9:24 NASB) "For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

(Heb 9:25 NASB) nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.

"9:24-26. Christ was appointed as High Priest of the New Covenant to represent sinful people in heaven itself, that is, in the presence of God. So His sacrifice had to be greater than that which allowed entrance into a mere man-made sanctuary that was only a copy (antitypa) of the true one. Nor could Christ offer repeated sacrifices as in the Levitical institution, for that would have required Him to die many times since the Creation of the world. Instead, as is obvious, the heavenly ministry of Christ called for a thoroughly sufficient, one-time sacrifice. This is precisely why He appeared once for all (hapax, cf. v. 28; also cf. ephapax in 7:27; 9:12; 10:10) at the end of the ages to do away with sin, which the priests in the old arrangement could not do. By the phrase "end of the ages" the writer evidently meant the climax of the Old Testament eras as well as the imminency of the climax of all things. He will shortly refer to Christ's second advent."

(Heb 9:27 NASB) And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

(Heb 9:28 NASB) so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

[(Heb 9:27-28) BSM On Heb 9:27-28]:

(Heb 9:27 NASB) "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

(Heb 9:28 NASB) so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

The final two verses in chapter 9 focus upon man's transitory physical life which leads to God's sovereign appointment to men to die once and then face His judgment. Those who have trusted alone in Christ alone have been judged at the cross of Christ which results in them being saved by grace, through faith unto eternal life. But all others, i.e., those who have not believed in Christ's salvation will be judged on how they conduct their lives as it indicates in 9:27 - the majority of mankind. So the salvation in Heb 9:27-28a which emphasizes that Christ bore the sins of many, i.e., all of mankind is unto eternal life. The Hebrew Christians might have in view eternal life in the Eternal Kingdom of God especially as depicted in the Hebrew / Old Testament Bible which they were familiar with. On the other hand, the second salvation of Heb 9:28 is without reference to sins and stipulates that this salvation is when Christ will appear a second time, i.e., in His Second Coming. This time the salvation has to do with that kind of salvation where sins are not the issue - evidently a kind of salvation / deliverance unto blessings with only believers in view who will receive rewards in the Eternal Kingdom of God because they led relatively faithful lives, i.e., those believers who eagerly await His - Christ's Second Coming which has in view the end of the Tribulation Period. The Hebrew Believers in the Book of Hebrews might view this timeframe as the commencement of the Eternal Kingdom of God which is repeatedly depicted in the Old Testament. And in the New Testament, this Second Coming has in view Christ's arrival to establish / rule over His Eternal Kingdom at the end of the Tribulation Period. So in view are those believers who at Christ's Second Coming will eagerly await to receive this particular salvation which consists of rewards as a result of being relatively faithful during that particular time at the end of the Tribulation period as Christ Comes to begin His Rule in the Eternal Kingdom which the Hebrew Christians might readily be familiar with especially having become familiar with the Hebrew / Old Testament Bible. So certain believers will eagerly await their salvation / deliverance unto blessings / rewards for being faithful and will receive those rewards accordingly. This is to say that there will evidently be believers at Christ's Second Coming who do not eagerly await Christ in the sense of eagerly awaiting their reception receiving rewards for being faithful because they were not faithful and would not be so rewarded. It does not say that believers who were not faithful would not receive eternal life, as some absurdly contend. For salvation unto eternal life is solely and exclusively via a moment of faith alone in Christ alone, not by works - human doing of any kind. It is a free gift of God, (cf. Eph 2:8-9, ).

[(Heb 9:27-28) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 9:27-28]:

(Heb 9:27 NASB) "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

(Heb 9:28 NASB) so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

'''27 This phase of the argument is rounded off with a reference to the one death men die and the one death Christ died. There is a finality about both but very different consequences. Men are "destined to die once." This is not something within their control. A condition of life here on earth is that it ends in death. The "once for all" (hapax) so often used of Christ's sacrifice is here used of man's death. There is a finality about it that is not to be disputed. But if it is the complete and final end to life on earth, it is not, as so many in the ancient world thought, the complete and final end. Death is more serious than that because it is followed by judgment. Men are accountable, and after death they will render account to God.

28 "So" introduces a correspondence with the "just as" at the beginning of the previous verse. The passive "was sacrificed" is interesting because it is much more usual for the author to say that Christ offered himself (cf. v. 26). Some see the thought here that Christ's enemies were in a sense responsible for his death, but it seems more likely that it is the divine purpose that is in mind. Once more we have the adverb "once-for-all" (hapax) applied to the death of Christ. This means a good deal to the author, and he comes back to it again and again.

It is a little difficult to follow NIV in this verse, for an expression meaning "to bear sins" is here rendered "to take away the sins" while later in the verse "not to bear sin" is the translation of an expression that signifies "apart from sin" and has nothing to do with the bearing of sin at all. Sin-bearing is a concept found in the NT only here and in 1 Peter 2:24, but it is quite frequent in the OT, where it plainly means "bear the penalty of sin." For example, the Israelites were condemned to wander in the wilderness for forty years as the penalty for their failure to go up into the land of Canaan: "For forty years—one year for each of the forty days you explored the land—you will suffer for your sins" (Num 14:34; cf. Ezek 18:20, et al.). Many see here an echo of the fourth Servant Song: "He will bear their iniquities" (Isa 53:11); "he bore the sin of many" (Isa 53:12). So the author is saying that Christ took upon himself the consequences of the sins of the many (cf. Mark 10:45).

But this is not the whole story. Christ will come back a second time and then he will not be concerned with sin. The thought is that sin was dealt with finally at his first coming. There is nothing more that he should do. The second time he will come "to bring salvation." There is a sense in which salvation has been brought about by Christ's death. But there is another sense in which it will be brought to its consummation when he returns. Nothing is said about unbelievers. At this point the writer is concerned only with those who are Christ's. They "are waiting for him," where the verb apekdechomai expresses the eager looking for the Lord's coming so characteristic of the NT."

[(Heb 9:27-28) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 9:27-28]:

(Heb 9:27 NASB) "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

(Heb 9:28 NASB) so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

"9:27-28. With this observation, eschatological realities come into focus. Humans are sinful creatures destined to die once, and after that to face judgment. But this danger is turned aside by the fact that Christ was sacrificed once (hapax, cf. v. 26) to take away the sins of many people. The recurrence of "once" (9:26, 28) and of "once for all" (7:27; 9:12; 10:10) stresses the finality and the singleness of Christ's sacrificial work in contrast with the repeated Levite ministrations. In addition, the "once"-sacrifice of Christ (vv. 26, 28) compares with the "once"-death of each person (v. 27). Now those who are waiting (apekdechomenois; used seven times in the NT of the return of Christ: Rom. 8:19, 23, 25; 1 Cor. 1:7; Gal. 5:5; Phil. 3:20; Heb. 9:28) for Him can look forward to His coming, not with a fearful expectation of judgment, but with the anticipation of salvation.

His first advent was to bear sins away—but His second will be not to bear sin (lit., "without [reference to] sins").

Deftly the author implied that "those who are waiting for Him" constitute a smaller circle than those whom His death has benefited. They are, as all his previous exhortations reveal, the ones who "hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first" (3:14). The "salvation" He will bring them at His second coming will be the "eternal inheritance" of which they are heirs (cf. 9:15; 1:14).

II) HEBREWS CHAPTER 10

A) [Heb 10:1]:
(Heb 10:1 NASB) "For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near."

1) [(Heb 10:1) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:1]:
(Heb 10:1 NASB) "For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near."

Heb 10:1 speaks of the Law in the sense of the Law of Moses with particular reference to the sacrificial system and the idea that it is limited in what it can do especially relative to forgiveness of sins and attaining of salvation unto eternal life. It only has a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form - the reality - of such things to come. Shadow in the sense of not the reality of Christ and His salvation unto eternal life. It can never by the same sacrifices which those officiating the Law offer continually year by year make perfect those who draw near in the sense of those who believe they can be saved unto eternal life by their faithful actions, for they will always be imperfect, never perfect.

a) [Compare Heb 7:18-21]:

(Heb 7:18 NASB) "For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness."

Heb 7:18 states, "For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness" indicating that the commandment to keep the commandments of the Mosaic Law is a weak commandment because sinful man cannot / will not keep the commandments, thereby making it useless in attaining eternal life, even in maintaining fellowhip with God or fellowship with fellow Israelites.

The Levitical system prepared the way for the coming of Christ because men could not keep the Law perfectly and thereby receive eternal life because man is sinful and unable to keep God's Law or even be willing to do that. So there had to be another way. And that way was through Christ's once for all sacrifice for the sins of all mankind, (1 Jn 2:2); that through a moment of faith alone in His sacrifice alone one would immediately and forever receive the free gift of eternal life.]

(Heb 7:19 NASB (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.

And in Heb 7:19 it indicates that the reason that the commandments of the Mosaic Law were weak and useless is that the Law made nothing perfect and man was nothing but imperfect / sinful. But on the other hand there is indeed a better hope, through which we may draw near to God]

(Heb 7:20 NASB) "And inasmuch as it was not without an oath"

And the message of a better hope in Christ in Heb 7:19 is reinforced in Heb 7:20 by the fact that this better hope through Jesus Christ was not without an oath as those in the Levitical Priesthood were as follows in Heb 7:21, the oath made by God Himself about His Son - salvation through Him alone - Jesus Christ Who is a priest forever! - of the priestly order of Melchizedek]:

(Heb 7:21 NASB (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him, "THE LORD HAS SWORN AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND, 'YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER'");

Heb 7:21 states, (for they - the Levitical priests - became priests without an oath, but He [Jesus Christ] did become a high priest of the order of Melchizedek with an oath through the One [God the Father] Who said to Him [Jesus Christ, God's one and only Son], "THE LORD [GOD] HAS SWORN AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND, 'YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER' "]

2) [(Heb 10:1) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:1]:

(Heb 10:1 NASB) "For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near."

'''1 "The law" means strictly the law of Moses, but here it stands for the whole OT, with particular reference to the sacrificial system. This is dismissed as no more than "a shadow" (skia). The word is used in conjunction with "copy" (hypodeigma) in 8:5 and in opposition to "body" (soma) in Colossians 2:17. It points to something unsubstantial in opposition to what is real. This is not the Platonic thought of a copy of the heavenly "idea" but rather that of a foreshadowing of what is to come. Here the contrast is with "image" (eikon), which is surprising, as eikon normally means "a derived likeness and, like the head on a coin or the parental likeness in a child, implies an archetype" (A-S, s.v.).

NIV renders a Greek expression meaning "the image itself of the things" as "the realities themselves." Perhaps those exegetes are right who see a metaphor from painting (e.g., Calvin, in loc.). The "shadow" then is the preliminary outline that an artist may make before he gets to his colors, and the eikon is the finished portrait. The author is saying that the law is no more than a preliminary sketch. It shows the shape of things to come, but the solid reality is not there. It is in Christ. The "good things that are coming" are not defined, but the general term is sufficient to show that the law pointed forward to something well worthwhile.

There is a problem in the second half of v. 1. Should we take the expression eis to dienekes, rendered as "endlessly," with what precedes it in the Greek (as NIV) or with what follows, as NEB: "It provides for the same sacrifices year after year, and with these it can never bring the worshippers to perfection for all time [eis to dienekes]"? Technically, the former is possible, but there are reasons for preferring NEB here. The expression eis to dienekes marks "an act which issues in a permanent result" (Westcott, in loc.), a meaning we see when it is repeated in v. 12 (where NIV has "for all time") and v. 14 (NIV, "forever"). The Greek word order also favors NEB (Montefiore [in loc.] thinks that this, along with vv. 12, 14, "forbids" taking the word other wise).

The author is saying, then, that the Levitical sacrifices continue year by year, but they are quite unable to bring the worshipers into a permanent state of perfection. The yearly sacrifices mark another reference to the Day of Atonement ceremonies—ceremonies of which the author makes a good deal of use. "Can never" points to an inherent weakness of the old system: the animal sacrifices are quite unable to effect the putting away of sin. The yearly repetition repeats the failure. The same rites that were unavailing last year are all that the law can offer this year. There is an inbuilt limitation in animal sacrifice. "Make perfect" is used, of course, in a moral and spiritual sense.'''

3) [(Heb 10:1) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:1]:

"10:1. By virtue of its anticipatory character, the Law could never... make perfect those who draw near to worship. By "make perfect" the writer did not mean sinless perfection. As the following discussion shows, he was concerned with that definitive removal of guilt which makes free access to God possible for worshipers who trust in the sufficiency of the Cross."

B) [Heb 10:1-2]:

(Heb 10:2 NASB) Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?"

1) [(Heb 10:1-2) BSM Commentary on Heb 10:1-2]:

(Heb 10:2 NASB) Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?"

Heb 10:1 stipulates that the sacrifices offered continually year by year, had they made perfect those who draw near and participated in them.

And according to Heb 10:2 these sacrifices should have ceased to be offered because the participants would no longer have had consciousness of sins, having been perfected.

2) [(Heb 10:2) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:2]:

(Heb 10:2 NASB) "Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?"

"2 The rhetorical question emphasizes the truth that the very continuity of the sacrifices witnesses to their ineffectiveness. Incidentally, the way it is put seems to accord more naturally with a situation in which the sacrifices were still being offered in the temple than with one in which they had ceased. This may be a pointer to the date of the epistle. Had the sacrifices really dealt with sins, the author reasons, the worshipers would have been cleansed and that would have been that. There would have been no need and no place for repeating them (cf. 9:9). The very necessity for repetition shows that the desired cleansing has not been effected. "An atonement that needs constant repetition does not really atone; a conscience which has to be cleansed once a year has never been truly cleansed" (Robinson, in loc.). The translation "would no longer have felt guilty for their sins" obscures the reference to "conscience." It may be that this rendering gives much the right sense, but we should not miss this further reference to conscience, which means so much in this epistle (see 9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 13:18; in the NT only 1Cor uses the term more often). A really effectual atonement would mean the permanent removal of the worshipers' sins. There would be no need for anything like the annual Day of Atonement ceremonies."

C) [Heb 10:3]:

(Heb 10:3 NASB) "But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year."

1) [(Heb 10:3) BSM commentary on Heb 10:3]:

(Heb 10:3 NASB) "But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year."

But in those sacrifices which people under the Law there is a reminder of sins being committed by those who draw near and make sacrifices year by / after year, yet without becoming perfected.

2) [(Heb 10:3) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:3]:

(Heb 10:3 NASB) "But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year."

"3 The strong adversative "but" (all') puts the truth in sharp contrast with false estimates of what sacrifices might do. Perhaps the flavor of the Greek word anamnesis is better caught with "remembrance" instead of "reminder"; i.e., "in them is a remembrance of sins." Anamnesis is used in the NT only in the accounts of the institution of the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:19; 1Cor 11:24-25) and here. Where the Bible has the idea of remembrance, as Bruce points out (in loc.), action appears to be involved. When people remember sins, they either repent (Deut 9:7) or else persist in sin (Ezek 23:19). When God remembers sin, he usually punishes it (1 Kings 17:18; Rev 16:19); when he pardons, he can be said not to remember sin (Ps 25:7). The author then is using an expression that reminds us that Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19), as he established a covenant in which the central thing is that God says, "[I] will remember their sins no more" (Jer 31:34). The Day of Atonement ceremonies each year reminded people of the fact that something had to be done about sin. But the ceremonies did no more than that."

D) [Heb 10:4]:

(Heb 10:4 NASB) "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins."

1) [(Heb 10:4) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:4]:

(Heb 10:4 NASB) "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins."

With a view to the many sacrifices made under the Law, the conclusion is made that it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. No single sacrifice ever served to take away a single sin.

2) [(Heb 10:4) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:4]:

(Heb 10:4 NASB) "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins."

"4 The yearly ceremonies were ineffective because "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." The word "impossible" is a strong one. There is no way forward through the blood of animals. "Take away" (aphaireo) is used of a literal taking off, as of Peter's cutting off the ear of the high priest's slave (Luke 22:50), or metaphorically as of the removal of reproach (Luke 1:25). It signifies the complete removal of sin so that it is no longer a factor in the situation. That is what is needed and that is what the sacrifices could not provide."

3) [(Heb 10:4) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:4]:

(Heb 10:4 NASB) "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins."

"10:2-4. The continuous sacrifices of the old order which are "repeated endlessly year after year" (v. 1) testify to the Law's incapacity to "perfect" its worshipers. Far from enabling them to achieve a standing before God in which they would no longer have felt guilty for their sins, the yearly rituals (of the Day of Atonement) served as a kind of annual reminder of sins, since animal blood has no power to take away sins."

E) [Heb 10:5]:

(Heb 10:5 NASB) '''Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;'''

1) [(Heb 10:5 NASB) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:5]:

(Heb 10:5 NASB) '''Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;''

Animal sacrifices could not take away the sins of the people. But it was the will of God that sin be atoned for. Christ's perfect sacrifice of Himself fulfills God's will as animal sacrifices could never do. This the author sees foretold in Psalm 40:6-8 which is an Old Testament prophecy which recorded the words of the One who would do what God really wanted. This psalm prophetically anticipated some of Christ's words at his First Advent. The phrase a body You prepared for Me is one Septuagint rendering / interpretation of the Hebrew expression "You have dug ears for Me." The Greek translator whose version the author of Hebrews used (obviously translating with the help of the Holy Spirit), construed the Hebrew text as a kind of figure of speech (technically called synecdoche) in which a part is put for the whole. If God is to "dig out ears" He must "prepare a body." Here is another rendering of Ps 40:6a: "Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired: My ears You have opened." Now the author of Hebrews renders these words which Ps 40:6a have with "a body you have prepared for Me." Note that the Septuagint translates this verse as "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require. Thus, the author of Hebrews didn't change anything. He simply quoted from the translation his readers were already familiar with, a translation that had been produced by Jewish scholars long before the time of the New Testament. Translated literally, the Hebrew words mean "you have dug out ears for me." The NASB has it well rendered, "my ears you have opened." The Septuagint translators seem to have understood "you have dug out ears for me" to be a reference to God's creation of the Psalmists ears (and, by extension, of his body). God "dugout" ears when He made or formed the ears. Thus, the LXX translators tried to clarify the point for non-Hebrew readers by generalizing it. Rather than praising God only for the creation of ears, they go from the parts to the whole and write "a body You have prepared for me." This, they believed, was a paraphrase of the Psalmist's essential point.
This interpretation is both valid and correct as its quotation in Hebrews proves. In the "body" which He assumed in Incarnation, Christ could say that He had come to achieve what the Old-Covenant sacrifices never achieved, the perfecting of New-Covenant worshipers. In this sense He did God's will.

1) [Compare Ps 40:6a]:
(Ps 40:6 NASB) "You have not desired sacrifice and meal offering. You have opened my ears.
i.e., blood sacrifice. Lit: "dug" or "pierced"

2) [Compare Mt 9:13 - Jesus quotes from the Septuagint Ps 40:6-8 applying it to Himself]:
(Mt 9:9-13 NASB)
"As Jesus went on from there, He saw a man called Matthew, sitting in the tax collectors booth; and He said to him, "Follow Me!" And he got up and followed Him. Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, 'Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors?' But when Jesus heard this, He said, 'It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. But go and learn what this means:
[Ps 40:6-8: Jesus quoted God's prophecey in Ps 40:6-8 about Jesus: He applied it to Himself. God does not take delight in sacrifices, Jesus indicated that He takes delight in doing God's will.]: I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.']

F) [Heb 10:6]:
(Heb 10:6 NASB) "IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE."

1) [(Heb 10:6) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:6]:
(Heb 10:6 NASB) "IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE."

So God took no pleasure in whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin. This verse is a continuation of a quote from Psalm 40:6-8. The writer of Hebrews is pointing out how the repetitive animal sacrifices of the old covenant could never truly cleanse mankind from sin. Instead they only served to remind man that he was a sinner in need of a Savior. The various rituals and symbols of the old covenant were meant to foreshadow the new covenant, and explain our need for the Messiah.

G) [(Heb 10:7)]:
(Heb 10:7 NASB) "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"

******
1) [(Heb 10:7) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:7]:
This verse concludes a quotation from Ps 40:6-8 quoted from the Septuagint - a Greek translation of the original Hebrew Scriptures which quotation is a slightly different phrasing in English here in this verse than is found in the old testament.
a) www.bibleref.com/Hebrews/10/Hebrews-10-7.html#scripture
"This quotation is given to support the writer's most recent point. Namely that the animal sacrifices offered under the old covenant - the Law - could never solve the problem of our sin. The very fact that they had to be repeated over and over proves that they only temporarily covered sin, they could not permanently cleanse it (Heb 9:8-10). This, according to the writer, is part of God's intention, we were meant to look for a single, once-for-all sacrifice, and this is what Christ provided...
As in earlier passages, the writer of Hebrews provides Old Testament quotations to prove his point. This emphasizes the claim that these are not new ideas - this was exactly what God has always promised. Rather than on depending upon the use of offerings and sacrifices, Psalm 40 suggests the need for a body created by God to complete His will. This is used here in Hebrews as a prophecy about the bodily ministry of Jesus Christ."

2) [(Heb 10:5-7)] Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:5-7]:

(Heb 10:5 NASB) "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;

(Heb 10:6 NASB) IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE.

(Heb 10:7 NASB) "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"

"5-7 The inferential conjunction "therefore" (dio) introduces the next stage of the argument: Because the Levitical sacrifices were powerless to deal with sin, another provision had to be made. The writer does not say who the speaker is nor whom he spoke to, but TEV gives the sense of it with "When Christ was about to come into the world, he said to God...." The words of the psalm are regarded as coming from Christ and as giving the reason for the Incarnation. The preexistence of Christ is assumed. The quotation is from Psalm 40:6-8 (LXX, Ps 39:7-9), with some variations that, however, do not greatly affect the sense. This psalm is not quoted elsewhere in the NT, and this reminds us once more that the writer of this epistle has his own style of writing and his own way of viewing Holy Writ.

In the passage quoted, the LXX reads "a body you prepared for me," whereas the Hebrew has "ears you have dug for me." Some MSS of the LXX, it is true, read "ears." Moreover, some scholars hold that this reading is original and that the reading "body" arose from accidental error in the transmission of the text. But it seems more probable that the LXX gives an interpretative translation (with "ears" substituted in some MSS by scribes who knew the Hebrew). Some see a reference to the custom of piercing the ear of a slave who did not wish to avail himself of the opportunity to be set free preferring to remain enslaved to his master for life (Exod 21:6; Deut 15:17). But the language makes this unlikely. It is more probable that the LXX translators are giving us a somewhat free rendering. They may wish to express the view that the body is the instrument through which the divine command, received by the ear, is carried out (so, for example, Westcott). Or, taking the part for the whole, they may be reasoning that "the `digging' or hollowing out of the ears is part of the total work of fashioning a human body" (Bruce, in loc.).

(Heb 10:6 NASB) "IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE."

The verb "prepare" is an unusual one to use of a body, but in this context it is both intelligible and suitable.
The words "sacrifice" and "offering" are both quite general and might apply to any sacrificial offering, whereas the "burnt offering" and the "sin offering" are both specific. Actually, in the Hebrew the first two are a trifle more precise and may be differentiated as the sacrifice of an animal (zebah) and the cereal offering (minhah). The four terms taken together are probably meant as a summary of the main kinds of Levitical sacrifice. The classification is not exhaustive, but the ones listed sufficiently indicate the main kinds of sacrifices under the old covenant.
The psalmst says that God did not "will" (so rather than "desire," ethelesas) or "take pleasure in" such offerings. This does not mean that the offerings were against the will of God or that God was displeased with them. The meaning rather is that considered in themselves as simply a series of liturgical actions, they were not the product of the divine will nor did they bring God pleasure. They might have done so if they had been offered in the right spirit, by penitent people expressing their state of heart by their offerings. But the thrust of the quotation emphasizes the importance of the will.

"Then" means "in those circumstances" rather than "at that time." Since sacrifice as such did not avail before God, other action had to be taken. That action means that Christ came to do the will of God. In his case, there was no question of a dumb animal being offered up quite irrespective of any desires it might have. He came specifically to do the will of God, and his sacrifice was the offering of one fully committed to doing the will of the Father.

(Heb 10:7 NASB) "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"

7 The reference to the "scroll" is not completely clear, but probably the psalmist meant that he was fulfilling what was written in the law. The author sees the words as emphasizing that Christ came to fulfill what was written in Scripture. The words that immediately follow in the psalm are "your law is within my heart," and they show what this expression implies. The author uses the word "will" (thelema) five times, always of the will of God. It was important to him that what God wills is done. Christ came to do nothing other than the will of God."

3) [(Heb 10:5-7)] Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:5-7]:

(Heb 10:5 NASB) "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;

(Heb 10:6 NASB) IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE.

(Heb 10:7 NASB) "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"

"10:5-7. It was precisely for this reason that an Old Testament prophecy (Ps. 40:6-8) recorded the words of the One who would do what God really wanted. This psalm prophetically anticipated some of Christ's words at his First Advent. The phrase a body You prepared for Me is one Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew expression "You have dug ears for Me." The Greek translator whose version the author of Hebrews used (obviously translating with the help of the Holy Spirit), construed the Hebrew text as a kind of figure of speech (technically called synecdoche) in which a part is put for the whole. If God is to "dig out ears" He must "prepare a body." This interpretation is both valid and correct as its quotation in Hebrews proves. In the "body" which He assumed in Incarnation, Christ could say that He had come to achieve what the Old-Covenant sacrifices never achieved, the perfecting of New-Covenant worshipers. In this sense He did God's will."

******
4) [Compare "Reading Psalm 40 Messianically"]:

Reading Psalm 40 Messianically

Brandon D. Crowe
Associate Professor of New Testament
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia

I. Introduction[1]
What makes a Psalm messianic? This is the question we have been tasked to answer. In this essay I will focus on the messianic interpretation of Psalm 40, specifically as it is used in Hebrews 10 in reference to the bodily sacrifice of Jesus Christ.[2] Given the explicit use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10, I will not need to argue that Psalm 40 is used messianically in Hebrews, but instead I will focus on how and why Psalm 40 is interpreted messianically by the author of Hebrews.

To state my argument briefly, the author of Hebrews reads the words of the Psalms to be prophetic,[3] and Jesus himself speaks the Psalms in Hebrews.[4] This is consistent with the Christology and eschatology of Hebrews,[5] but also reveals an eschatological[6] outlook in the Psalms in accord with their inspiration by the Holy Spirit.[7] If we interpret Scripture with Scripture,[8] then Hebrews provides crucial hermeneutical guidance for readers of the Psalms today. Yet I will also argue that Hebrews does not infuse alien meaning into Psalm 40, but unpacks what is already there in Psalm 40. This means that we also should read the Psalms eschatologically, especially as focused on the anointed one, David’s greater Son [= Jesus Christ].

These preceding observations anticipate the argument that follows. First, I will look at Psalm 40 in context. Second, I will consider the use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews. Third, I will conclude by considering some implications of the way Hebrews uses Psalm 40.

II. Considering Psalm 40

Context of the Psalter [= Psalms]
As we consider Psalm 40, it will be helpful to mention a few preliminary matters that bear on interpreting individual psalms. First, Psalms 1–2 should be viewed as the introduction to the entire Psalter.[9] Therefore, the themes of Psalms 1–2 provide an important framework for understanding both individual psalms and the scope of the whole Psalter. Whereas Psalm 1 emphasizes the blessing of the law of the Lord, Psalm 2 focuses on God’s messianic king. Indeed, the LORD’s kingship as exercised through his anointed, royal son is one of the major themes of the entire Psalter. We therefore should expect that the covenantal promises to David and his house will figure prominently in the Psalter.[10] The anointed son rules on behalf of the LORD, and his kingdom will ultimately prevail.[11]

Second, the kingship of the anointed of David’s house is also idealized in the Psalter in a way that draws upon, but seems to transcend, David’s historical experiences.[12] Thus, David provides the prototype for the anticipated messianic king, but David’s kingship/kingdom was not itself the consummate realization of the kingship/kingdom envisioned in the psalms; the ideal kingship/kingdom belongs to a future beyond David.

Third, we should give careful attention to the context of each psalm in the structure of the Psalter.[13] Psalm 40 is the penultimate psalm of Book 1 of the Psalter (Psalms 1–41), which is particularly focused on the conflict facing the Davidic king(dom) in light of the Lord’s covenantal promises given to David.[14] Those who oppose David are opposing God’s anointed representative, and are therefore opposing God himself. This gives further reason for us to view the conflict of Psalm 40 preeminently as the conflict faced by the Lord’s anointed one.

Exegesis of Psalm 40
In light of these preliminary matters, we turn to Psalm 40 itself. In Psalm 40 David[15] expresses thanks for the Lord’s provision and protection of him in the past (40:1–3, 5, 9–10), and expresses confidence that the LORD would deliver him again in the future (40:11, 17), despite the iniquities that threaten to overtake him (40:12). Since David is identified as the author of Psalm 40, the deliverance in view is first of all the deliverance of God’s anointed.[16] Readers are not told what specific event(s) in David’s life may be in view, but it seems likely that intense opposition, and quite possibly a brush with death, is in view (40:2). By delivering David the LORD was demonstrating faithfulness to his covenantal promises, and provided assurance that he would continue to be faithful in the future. And by delivering David, as the anointed one, the LORD was also providing deliverance for his people. Thus we could say as the king goes, so go the people.[17] Deliverance for the king is deliverance for God’s kingdom, and therefore deliverance for the people of God’s kingdom.

Thus in Psalm 40 David thanks God for past deliverance, even as he looks forward in hope to a future deliverance. This brings us to an important observation for Psalm 40, and indeed all the psalms: by looking to God for future deliverance, Psalm 40 necessarily has an eschatological focus. In fact, we can even see this in microcosmic form in Psalm 40: David’s past deliverance was not the final deliverance.[18] So long as opposition to David and David’s kingdom persisted, final deliverance had not come. Inasmuch as final deliverance had not come, David looks forward to God’s intervention for redemption in the future. In light of this, we seem to have a view in the Psalter that final deliverance would coincide with the inheritance of the land and dwelling in perfect peace, when David’s enemies (and therefore God’s enemies) would no longer pose a threat.[19] The Psalter is an eschatological book. Indeed, as Geerhardus Vos has memorably stated: “A redemptive religion without eschatological outlook would be a contradiction in terms.”[20]

In light of this eschatology, we turn to Psalm 40:6–8, which is the strophe cited explicitly in Hebrews 10. The Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT)[21] can be translated as follows, which is the translation of the ESV:

In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required. Then I said, “Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me: I delight to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.

These words of David recall several passages in which God’s delight is not primarily in cultic ritual, but in those whose hearts are truly committed to the Lord.[22] A frequent problem among God’s people throughout Scripture is the dichotomy between obedience and sacrifice. Where true obedience is lacking, sacrifice is unpleasing to the LORD. In light of this, David positions himself as one who is truly obedient, truly righteous before the LORD, and is not only paying lip service to the LORD via hollow sacrifice.[23]

And yet we can say more. Just as the eschatology of Psalm 40 encourages us to look beyond God’s deliverance of David in the past to the full, final deliverance in the future, so can we see how the obedience of David in Psalm 40:6–8 also looks ahead to the fuller realization of the obedience of God’s anointed [= Jesus Christ]. Just as the deliverance God provided in the past was not the consummation of his deliverance, the obedience manifested by David (sincere though it was) was not the consummate realization of the obedience envisioned in Psalm 40. Thus, for example, the problems that persisted for David in 40:12 were due to his own iniquities, and he needed to be delivered from them. It is not difficult to see, then, how the need for future deliverance in Psalm 40 is also coupled with the problem of imperfect obedience.

Therefore, in light of this future-orientation to Psalm 40, we do well to read Psalm 40 in light of God’s dealings with David more broadly. The Davidic Covenant[24] is the assumed background for the Davidic, kingly focus of Book 1.[25] The messianic son of Psalm 2 is the royal son from the house of David, and the role of this figure a major thrust of the entire Psalter. The full redemption anticipated in the Psalms is portrayed in a variety of ways as coming through the rule of this anointed figure, which was anticipated by David but not realized in David himself.

But what specifically is intended in Psalm 40:6–8? The open ear[26] of 40:6 must refer to the sincere obedience of David in contrast to bare ritual.[27] Perhaps more intriguing in Psalm 40 is what David intends in 40:7: “Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me.” The author of Hebrews applies this to Jesus, but in what sense has David come in accord with what was written in the scroll? The most likely option for this book is the laws for the king in Deuteronomy 17:14–20.[28]
David is thus speaking explicitly and specifically as the LORD’s anointed king, and he recognizes his own role as the one who must lead and protect the people of God against her enemies (cf. Deut. 17:20). David’s royal awareness also illuminates his “I have come” statement. David recognizes the role he plays as God’s anointed in the administration of God’s kingdom and God’s purposes.[29] Additionally, the king in Deuteronomy 17 must maintain trust in the LORD without pretension; for the people to prosper and the kingdom to persevere, the king must remain obedient to Torah. David’s actions as the anointed one are therefore not to be seen in light of his own interests, but as an anointed representative who leads the people of God. If David has in view Deuteronomy 17 in Psalm 40, then it further fits well with the opening two pillar-psalms of the Psalter (focusing on God’s law and God’s king). In this case, God’s king must know and meditate on God’s law. Likewise, in Deuteronomy 17 the king must know and assiduously adhere to the precepts for the king, and this as a part of God’s law more broadly. In other words, Deuteronomy 17 is not all that the king must know and do; but adherence to Deuteronomy 17 was to be one particular and significant way in which the king was to understand and meditate on God’s entire law.[30]

In Psalm 40 we see that, as God’s king, David knows the law and understands that as God’s anointed, he has a key role to play in the congregation of God’s people (cf. 40:9–10). Implicit in David’s recognition of the importance of the law for him is the recognition that his deliverance and the people’s deliverance does not come through the autonomous strength of the king, but through the king’s trust in the LORD who brings deliverance.[31]

III. Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10[32]

Eschatology in Hebrews

In light of the eschatological outlook of Psalm 40, we turn now to the use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10. One encounters a myriad of issues when looking at the use of the Old Testament in Hebrews, but the following discussion will be limited to the author’s hermeneutical rationale for reading Psalm 40 in relation to Jesus as messiah. One of the keys here is the eschatology of Hebrews. The author of Hebrews begins his letter by observing that we are living in the last days (1:2) which is evident because of the climactic work of the Son as royal priest (1:3–4).

In Hebrews 10 we come to the portion of the argument where the nature of the new covenant sacrifice of Christ, as Son and Great High Priest, is exposited. The one sacrifice of Christ inaugurates the new covenant, which is a better covenant (Heb. 8–9), having been perfected once and for all by the perfect priest who did not need to offer a sacrifice first for himself before making it for others (10:1–4, 10–14). This sacrifice was possible because of the Great High Priest’s full-fledged obedience, being wholly without sin. The portion of the argument that invokes Psalm 40 is therefore focused on the uniqueness of the sacrifice of Christ as the truly effectual sacrifice. Thus Hebrews has a strong eschatological emphasis since the greater day has come.

Textual Issues

In light of this eschatology, we come to Hebrews 10:5–7, which reads:
Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’” (ESV)
Careful readers will observe several differences between the quotation of Hebrews and the Hebrew text noted earlier (along with the LXX). These are mostly minor, but one difference that has received most attention is Hebrews’s use of body (sōma) in place of ears (MT:ʾoznayim; LXX: ōtia). It is not entirely clear whether the author of Hebrews has modified the MT/LXX ʾoznayim/ōtia and inserted sōma, or if perhaps the Greek Vorlage [= original language version] utilized by the author of Hebrews already read sōma instead of ōtia.[33] Establishing the Vorlage, [= orignal language version] however, would not solve all the issues, since the question would remain whether sōma is a legitimate rendering of ʾoznayim. To this question—whether body is a legitimate rendering of ears—I would respond in the affirmative, based on synecdoche. As a figure of speech, synecdoche is commonly used to refer to a part that represents the whole or, in this case, the whole that represents a part. Put simply, body is a legitimate rendering of ears because ears are a part of the body. If one’s body is prepared and dedicated to God, this includes one’s ears.[34]

The Son’s Better Sacrifice
The emphasis on the body of Jesus in Hebrews 10 allows us to consider in more detail how the author of Hebrews relates Psalm 40 to Jesus as High Priest. Throughout Hebrews Jesus is seen to be superior, which is concomitant with the eschatology of Hebrews. And as the Great High Priest, Jesus’s sacrifice is better—indeed, more effectual—than the repeated sacrifices of Israel’s priesthood. Beyond this, Jesus’ “betterness” is preeminently seen in his divinity which is emphasized from the beginning of the letter. Thus the Son is better than the angels because the Son is the divine Son of God. He is the Son who is heir of all things and through whom the world was made (1:2). Moreover, he is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of his nature, even upholding the universe by his word (1:3). As divine Son he has taken his seat at God’s right hand, having made purification for sins. Thus already in the opening verses of Hebrews Jesus’ divine sonship is linked with his consummate sacrifice for final purification.

Jesus’ one sacrifice is therefore better than all previous sacrifices because Jesus is divine. But along with this, Jesus’ sacrifice is better because of the perfection of Jesus’ obedience. This is emphasized already in Hebrews 2:10 (cf. 2.9–14), where Jesus is said to have been made perfect through suffering. Indeed, in his earthly life Jesus learned obedience through what he suffered (5:8). This suffering also entails the true humanity of Jesus, which is the burden of much of Hebrews 2. Jesus is not only the divine Son of God, but is also our brother, the one who is made like us in every way, yet without sin. He is therefore uniquely qualified to be a great and merciful high priest.

Therefore, in light of the surpassing greatness of Jesus as divine Son of God, and in light of the surpassing greatness of his role as Great and Merciful High Priest, Jesus’ sacrifice is the ultimate, final sacrifice. This brings us back to Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10.[35] Jesus, the pre-existent Son (cf. 10:5), came according to what was written of him in the book.[36] That is, he came to be fully devoted to God’s will, which prominently included his role as serving himself (as the Great High Priest) as the final sacrifice, and by so doing, he eradicated the disparity between obedience and sacrifice that was so often a snare for God’s people.[37]

Key in Hebrews’s understanding of the work of Christ, then, is the body of Christ as Great High Priest. In his body Jesus was fully obedient to the will of God, and he offers himself fully—including his body—on behalf of his people. We see this summarily in 10:10: “And by [God’s] will we have been sanctified through the once-for-all offering of Jesus’ body” (my trans.). Note, then, the emphasis on the body of Jesus as in connection with this one, final, effectual sacrifice. By offering his body as the final sacrifice, Jesus “eradicated the disparity between sacrifice and obedience”[38] as the one who was always and fully committed to the obedience required in the Torah. In David we meet a man after God’s own heart, who delighted to keep the law of God. Yet in David we also encounter a man who was not able to bring final deliverance, nor was he immune from the problems that he brought on himself. David needed sacrifices for himself (cf. Ps. 51:15–16). Jesus is greater than David because he does not need a sacrifice for himself, nor did Jesus ever face a problem resulting from his own sinfulness.

This unity of the offerer and the sacrifice that is embodied in Jesus also points to a more extensive understanding of doing God’s will, deriving from Psalm 40. The ability of Jesus to offer the final, perfect sacrifice assumes the perfection of his humanity, which includes, but is not limited to, his once-for-all new covenant sacrifice on the cross. Instead, it includes all the ways he suffered throughout his life, and all the obedience he rendered.[39] This must be the case because God’s law not only demands absence of sin, but also demands the positive accomplishment of God’s will.[40] Whereas David delighted in God’s past deliverance, he also had to look ahead to future deliverance because to that point no perfect, final sacrifice had been offered. Though David came to do the will of God, especially in accord with Deuteronomy 17, he did not fully conform to all of God’s requirements, thus he required sacrifices for himself. In contrast, Jesus was fully committed to God’s law in every way, requiring no sacrifices for himself.[41] Thus the delight to do God’s will in Psalm 40, as it is used in Hebrews 10, points to the perfect sacrifice of Christ, but also his full conformity to Deuteronomy 17 and all the Torah by implication.[42]
By being at once the perfect offering and the perfect offerer, Jesus by his one act of shedding blood puts an end to the repetition of sacrifices. And by implementing this once for all sacrifice, Jesus institutes the ultimate redemption that David was looking forward to in Psalm 40. Redemption comes through the one who has come to do God’s will fully, which includes Torah conformity and also serving, in his own body, as the final, effectual sacrifice.[43]

IV. Conclusion: What Makes a Psalm Messianic?

As I conclude, I would like to summarize briefly some implications of my argument, and suggest a working explanation for what makes a psalm messianic. These should be considered provisional in the sense that much more needs to be said, but these are intended to serve as points on which to marinate, in order to get the exegetical juices flowing.

First, Psalm 40 is messianic as part of the Spirit-inspired eschatological outlook of the Psalms that anticipates a greater Son of David.[44] It is through this anointed figure that final salvation comes, though it is also through the mighty intervention of the LORD. These are united in the work of Christ, who was the faithful human, but also the divine Son of God. This also assumes the supernatural character of OT revelation.

Second, we should linger over the significance of the LORD’s anointed in the Psalter, established already in Psalm 2. It is therefore highly significant that Jesus is identified as the anointed Christ in Hebrews and throughout the New Testament. As anointed, one most naturally thinks of Christ as king. But anointed figures could be prophets, priests, or kings. Thus in Hebrews Christ is not only the royal Son, but also the anointed priest (after the order of Melchizedek), and the one through whom we encounter greater revelation. In Hebrews 10 Jesus is particularly portrayed in priestly terms, since he is both the offerer and the offering whose sacrifice inaugurates the new covenant. Thus in Hebrews Jesus fulfills the roles of prophet, priest, and king.[45] These are valuable categories to lean upon to consider ways in which Jesus relates to the Old Testament.[46]

Third, in addition to the Spirit-inspired eschatology of the Old Testament, we must consider the implications of preexistence Christology in Hebrews. It is quite striking that in Hebrews the Son is identified as the speaker of (at least some of) the Psalms.[47] This phenomenon may provide further support for the notion of an inherently forward-looking thrust to the Psalter.

To end with the question posed at the beginning of this essay, “what makes a psalm messianic?” I conclude with this (provisional) answer:
Given the Spirit-inspired eschatology of the OT, as part of God’s unified and unfolding work of redemption, all psalms are messianic because they anticipate, in various ways, God’s ultimate salvation that comes through his anointed one; we can also say, however, that some psalms have a heightened sense of messianic focus and anticipation.

To ask the question “what makes a psalm messianic,” then, is not simply to ask an ex post facto question, but one that was already intended from the beginning.[48]

1.    This essay arises out of the IRLBR Young Scholars Summit at Tyndale House, Cambridge (2015), subsequently presented at a special session at the annual SBL meeting (Atlanta, 2015). I am grateful to IRLBR for the opportunity to participate, and to Andrew Abernethy, Mariam Kovalishyn, and Michael McKelvey for their insights and warm collegiality.

2.    The verse numbering of the MT is different from English versions. Psalm 40:6–8 in English is Psalm 40:7–9 in Hebrew. Additionally, Psalm 40 is Psalm 39 in the LXX. Given the intended audience of this essay, I will use the English chapter and verse numbering.

3.    By which I also mean predictive.

4.    Hebrews has a Trinitarian view of God’s speech, including the psalms. See Jonathan I. Griffiths, “Hebrews and the Trinity” in The Essential Trinity: New Testament Foundations and Practical Relevance, ed. Brandon D. Crowe and Carl R. Trueman (London: IVP, 2016), 122–38. For the Father: see, e.g., Psalm 2; 45; 104; the Son: Psalm 22; 40; the Holy Spirit: Psalm 95. Also note that David is the one spoken through (Heb. 4:7).

5.    See the classic essay by C. K. Barrett, “The Eschatology of the Epistle to the Hebrews,” in The Background to the New Testament and its Eschatology: Studies in Honour of C. H. Dodd, ed. W. D. Davies and David Daube (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956), 363–393.

6.    By eschatological I mean a forward-looking posture that anticipates a greater day of redemption in accord with God’s promises regarding the blessings of the “latter days.”

7.    The author of Hebrews uses the Psalms extensively. See the classic study of Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Wed. G. Van Soest, 1961). On the eschatology of the Psalter, see Geerhardus Vos, “The Eschatology of the Psalter,” PTR 18 (1920): 1–43; O. Palmer Robertson, The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering their Structure and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2015), 48, 129.It is noteworthy that one frequently finds the superscription eis to telos in the LXX Psalter (including Psalm 39 LXX [=40 MT]), which seems to imply some sort of future orientation. See Richard B. Hays, “Christ Prays the Psalms: Israel’s Psalter as a Matrix of Early Christology,” in The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as an Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker Eerdmans, 2005), 107; Martin Karrer, “LXX Psalm 39:7–10 in Hebrews 10:5–7,” in Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception, ed. Dirk J. Human and Gert Jacobus Steyn, LHB/LOTS 527 (London: T&T Clark, 2010), 134; see also Joachim Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, WUNT 2/76 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995).

8.    See WCF 1.9. This is a key tenet of the Reformation (“analogy of faith”).

9.    See Bruce K. Waltke with Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 870–874; Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 13–15, 54–61; Mark D. Futato, Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 59–95. Note that Psalms 1–2 do not have superscriptions.

10.    As we will see, this is true of Psalm 40.

11.    Robertson (Flow, 59, 60–61, 168–70) argues that the Psalms often fuse together the kingship of the Lord and his anointed messiah.

12.    The language of “idealized” comes from Futato, Interpreting the Psalms, 76–77.
13.    See further Robertson, Flow of the Psalms.

14.    Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 53–83.

15.    In the MT Psalm 40 is identified with David by means of a lamed, likely denoting authorship. I am not able to argue for the authenticity of the superscriptions in this essay, but I believe the burden of proof is on those that would deny their authenticity. No human author of Psalm 40 is identified in Hebrews, but David is explicitly identified as the author of Psalm 95 in Heb. 4:7 (even though no specific superscription is given in Psalm 95). Davidic authorship of the Psalms looms even larger in Acts (cf. Acts 2:30).

16.    This is not to undermine the legitimacy of the “every person” interpretation of Psalm 40, but it is to recognize that the focus on the LORD’s anointed permeates the Psalter, consistent with the guidance of Psalm 2 and other internal clues. However, David is also a sinner in need of redemption, as we all are. Further, we read in the NT that all of God’s people are kings in Christ (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9–10 [and also prophets and priests!]), which provides further basis for the “every person” interpretation. But this approach stands alongside the focus on the LORD’s anointed; it is not an either-or dichotomy. Thanks to Andrew Abernethy for his response to an earlier draft of this essay where he highlighted this question.

17.    This point is also made by Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 63.

18.    Thus compare 40:1–3 with 40:13–15.

19.    See, e.g., Psalm 37:11; 122; 125.

20.    Vos, “Eschatology,” 3; cf. 9. See also John Calvin, Inst. 2.10.3, 16.

21.    It is well known that Hebrews generally cites something like what we know today as the LXX for OT quotations. It is nevertheless prudent to look at the Hebrew of the MT as part of the overall picture of how Psalm 40 is used in Hebrews, especially in light of the purpose of this paper, which is to trace out how and why psalms were read messianically among the early Christians.

22.    Cf. 1 Sam. 15:22; Ps. 51:15–16; Prov. 21.3; Hos. 6:6.

23.    On the unity of heart motive of the offerer and ritual sacrifice in Leviticus, see Nobuyoshi Kiuchi, “Spirituality in Offering a Peace Offering,” TynBul 50 (1999): 23–31.

24.    See 2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17; Ps. 89; 132.

25.    See, for example, Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 47–49, 53–83.

26.    The Hebrew is a bit unusual, speaking of ears that are hewn or hollowed out (ʾoznayim kārîtā lî).

27.    See also Isa. 6:9–10; 50:5; Jer. 5.21. One can also see the contrast with Saul’s disobedience (1 Sam. 15:22). Whereas Saul as God’s anointed performed sacrifice in disobedience to God, David as God’s anointed demonstrated true devotion to God, which was better than Saul’s sacrifice. See similarly Hosea 6:6.

28.    This view is also shared by many commentators.

29.    We also encounter an eschatological outlook in Deuteronomy 17—a text that anticipates a king who, to that point, had not yet come.

30.    Note the 176 verses of Psalm 119, where David considers all the ways and manners in which he meditates and acts in accord with God’s law. Clearly his concern with the law went well beyond Deuteronomy 17.

31.    Deliverance language is prominent in Psalm 40. See, e.g., 40:2, 5, 9–11, 13, 16–17. We see something similar earlier in Book 1 of the Psalter. In Psalm 20 David notes the distinction between those who trust in horses and chariots (cf. Deut 17:16) and those who trust in the name of the LORD their God (Ps. 20:7). King David recognizes that he plays a central role in leading God’s people, yet his prayers for God’s intervention reveal his conviction that deliverance ultimately comes from the LORD alone.

32.    Karrer (“LXX Psalm 39:7–10”, 136) argues that there are no known citations of Psalm 40 in early Jewish literature. For possible allusions, see George H. Guthrie, “Hebrews,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 976–977. He argues that 2 Enoch 45.3 (J) is an allusion to Psalm 40 (though dating 2 Enoch cannot be done with certainty), and similar teachings are found in Judith 16:16; Sirach 34:18–35:12. Guthrie also notes allusions to Psalm 40 in the later Targum on the Psalms and in the Talmud (b. Giṭ. 60a; b. Yebam. 77a).

33.    LXX witnesses א, A, B read sōma. For the view that the Vorlage of Hebrews read sōma, see Gert J. Steyn, A Quest for the Assumed LXX Vorlage of the Explicit Quotations in Hebrews, FLANT 235 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 289–92, 295. Steyn’s detailed study shows how difficult the textual questions are. See also Karrer, “LXX Psalm 39:7–10,” 142–43. For the view that the author of Hebrews has modified the LXX, see Guthrie, “Hebrews,” 977; Karen H. Jobes, “Rhetorical Achievement in the Hebrews 10 ‘Misquote’ of Psalm 40,” Bib 72 (1991): 387–96. Jobes observed in 1991 that most commentators on Hebrews viewed the author’s Vorlage to read sōma (388).

34.    It was noted in our conversations in Cambridge that ears in Psalm 40 is already a synecdoche: the point is not just that David’s ears are committed to the Lord in obedience, but David himself was entirely committed to the Lord. Hebrews 10 is simply an expansion of what is already there in Psalm 40.

35.    Karrer (“LXX Psalm 39:7–10,” 128–129) argues for an inclusio focusing on Jesus’s obedience in Heb. 2:12–13 and Heb. 10. In both contexts, it is the Son who speaks the Psalms.

36.    Cf. Geerhardus Vos, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. and ed. Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., 5 vols. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012–16), 1:75; 2:85; Mark Jones, Knowing Christ (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2015), 26–27.

37.    See similarly William L. Lane, Hebrews 1–8, WBC 47A (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991), cxxxiv; idem, Hebrews 9–13, WBC 47B (Dallas: Word, 1991), 266. Note also the messianic/priestly emphasis of Psalm 40 in Richard P. Belcher, Jr., The Messiah and the Psalms: Preaching Christ from all the Psalms (Fearn, Ross-shire: Mentor, 2014), 177.

38.    Lane, Hebrews 1–8, cxxxiv; idem, Hebrews 9–13, 266.

39.    Harold Attridge also focuses on the obedience/faithfulness of Jesus in Hebrews, in “The Psalms in Hebrews,” in The Psalms in the New Testament, ed. Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, NT and the Scriptures of Israel (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 197–212, esp. 210–211. See also Kistemaker, Psalm Citations, 126–28.

40.    In rabbinic tradition the 613 commandments of the Torah included 248 positive commandments (b. Mak. 23b–24a).

41.    Kistemaker (Psalm Citations, 126–27) argues that Hebrews assumes the necessity of perfect obedience, which necessitated Christ’s final sacrifice.

42.    Notably in Hebrews Jesus is a royal priest (cf. Ps. 110:4; Heb. 5:6; 7:17, 21). Herman Bavinck synthesizes the obedience of Christ well: “Scripture regards the entire work of Christ as a fulfillment of God’s law and a satisfaction of his demand. As prophet, priest, and king, in his birth and in his death, in his words and in his deeds, he always did God’s will. He came into the world to do his will. The law of God is within his heart [Ps. 40:8]. His entire life was a life of complete obedience, a perfect sacrifice, a sweet odor to God.” Quoted from Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 394.

43.    See also Belcher, Messiah, 176–77.
44.    Similar points have been made by many. See Edmund Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013), 16, 142, 162–68; F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 232; see also Irenaeus, Demonstration 73, which illustrates Hays, “Christ Prays the Psalms,” 110–11.
45.    Indeed, Jesus is presented as prophet, priest, and king already in Hebrews 1:1–4.
46.    This, of course, is not a new approach; it is a classic way to describe the offices of Jesus. See recently Richard P. Belcher, Jr., Prophet, Priest, and King: The Biblical Roles of Christ in the Bible and Our Roles Today (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2016).
47.    See Psalm 22:22 (Heb. 2:12); Psalm 40:6–7 (Heb. 10:5–9).
48.    Thanks to Carlton Wynne for providing informal feedback on this essay.

H) [(Heb 10:8-9)]:
(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

1) [(Heb 10:8-9) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:8-9]:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) "After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second."

After saying what was stated in the previous verses 5-7 and adding the comment that the sacrifices, offerings and whole burnt offerings are [to be] offered according to the Law in the sense of the specific Law of Moses which was given and commanded by God of the people of Israel, albeit to be done in a manner of obedience - in a manner according to having the right spirit, by penitent people expressing their state of heart by their offerings. But this they largely did not evidence with the right, penitent state of heart. So God did not take pleasure in those sacrifices. So then the author wrote in Heb 10:9, "then He [Christ] said, 'Behold, I have come to do your will.' which redeclares that Christ has come to do your [God's] will and thereby take away the first [the need for faithful keeping of the Law] to establish the second [Christ's once for perfect sacrifice for the sins of all of mankind which is wholly effective for all of mankind to believe and have eternal life].

2) [(Heb 10:8-9) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:8-9:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) "After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),"

'''8 "First" that is "above" "as he said above" refers to what came earlier not to what was spoken first of all. It is not clear why the references to sacrifices are all plural here. In v. 5 both "sacrifice" and "offering" are singular and while "burnt offerings" in v. 6 is plural in most MSS of the LXX it is singular as is the underlying Hebrew throughout. Probably all we can say is that the plural makes it all very general. Multiply them how you will and characterize them how you will God takes no pleasure in sacrifices as such. Indeed this is so even though the law requires them to be offered and the law is from God. Westcott sees a significance in the absence of the article "the" with "law" (nomos), which indicates to him that the stress is on the character of the sacrifices as legal rather than Mosaic (in loc.). But even if the grammatical point be sustained it is not easy to see how this helps.
We should see the statement concerning the necessity of sacrifice as another illustration of the attitude consistently maintained by the author that the OT system is divinely inspired but preliminary. He holds it to be effective but only within its own limited scope. The sacrifices were commanded in God's law and therefore must be offered. But they were not God's final will nor God's answer to the problem of sin. They were partial and they pointed the way. Even though they came as part of the law we are to recognize their limitation.

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

'''9 "He said" (eireken) is perfect whereas "I said" (eipon) in v. 7 to which it refers is aorist; the change of tense emphasizes the permanence of the saying ("the perfect of a completed action=the saying stands on record," Moffatt in loc.). The words about doing the will of God are there for all time. On this occasion the omission of the parenthesis means that they stand out in their simplicity and strength. The verb "sets aside" (anairei) is used only here in Hebrews. It means "take away" and is used sometimes in the sense of taking away by killing that is murdering and this shows that it is a strong word. It points to the total abolition of the former way. By contrast the second way is "established" "made firm." Neither "the first" nor "the second" is defined but clearly the way of the Levitical sacrifices and the way of the sacrifice of Christ are being set over against each other. These are not complementary systems that may exist side by side. The one excludes the other. No compromise is possible between them.'''
I) [Heb 10:8-10]:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

(Heb 10:10 NASB) "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

1) [(Heb 10:10) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:10]:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

(Heb 10:10 NASB) "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

So by this - by the once for all sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ - we in the sense of all of mankind have all been sanctified in the sense that all mankind has been set apart to Christ. For all of mankind now have available eternal life / forgiveness of sins through each one's expression of a moment of faith in His sacrifice for them. Once that moment of faith is expressed, that individual has been permanently and forever sanctified unto eternal life, set apart to Christ as part of His body.

2) [(Heb 10:8-10) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:8-10]:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

(Heb 10:10 NASB) "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

"10 We must translate en ho thelemati in some such way as "by that will." But the preposition en is "in" and it may be that our author sees the sanctified as "in" the will of God. That will is large enough and deep enough to find a place for them all. We should notice a difference between the way the author uses the verb "to sanctify" (NIV "made holy") and the way Paul uses it. For the apostle sanctification is a process whereby the believer grows progressively in Christian qualities and character. In Hebrews the same terminology is used of the process by which a person becomes a Christian and is therefore "set apart" for God. There is no contradiction between these two; both are necessary for the fully developed Christian life. But we must be on our guard lest we read this epistle with Pauline terminology in mind

[BSM: Note that there are no quarantees that all believers will reach full, i.e., progressive sanctification, i.e., full maturity as Paul wrote about; but their permanent positional sanctification / being set apart to Christ is permanent and forever unto eternal life].

The sanctification meant here is one brought about by the death of Christ. It has to do with making people Christian not with developing Christian character. It is important also to notice that it is the offering "of the body" of Christ that saves.

Some exegetes have been so impressed by the emphasis on doing the will of God over against the offering of animal sacrifice that they suggest that the actual death of Jesus mattered little. What was important, they say, is the yielded will, the fact that Jesus was ready to do his Father's will at whatever cost to himself. The death was incidental; the will was primary. But this is not what the author is saying. The will is certainly important, and unless we see this we misunderstand the author's whole position. Yet it is also important to realize that the will of God in question was that "the body of Jesus Christ" be offered. Calvary, not Gethsemane, is central, important though the latter certainly was. The contrast is not between animal sacrifice and moral obedience. It is between the death of an uncomprehending animal and the death in which Jesus accepted the will of God with all that it entails.
The offering of Jesus' body was made "once for all." Here again we have the emphatic ephapax. It matters immensely that this one offering, once made, avails for all people at all times. This contrasts sharply with the sacrifices under the old covenant as the author has been emphasizing. But it contrasts also with other religions. Hering (in loc.), for example, points out that this distinguishes Christianity from the mystery religions, where the sacrifice of the god was repeated annually. In fact, there is no other religion in which one great happening brings salvation through the centuries and through the world. This is the distinctive doctrine of Christianity.
"
3) [(Heb 10:8-10) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:8-10]:

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

(Heb 10:10 NASB) "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

"10:8-10. The writer then expounded the text he had just quoted. In the words He sets aside the first to establish the second (v. 9), the author referred to the setting aside of the Old-Covenant sacrifices which did not ultimately satisfy God. What was established was God's will, and it was by that will that we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all (ephapax; cf. 7:27; 9:12).
The words rendered "made holy" involve a single Greek word (hēgiasmenoi) often rendered "sanctify" (cf. 10:14, 29). Here it occurs in a tense that makes it plain, along with the rest of the statement, that the sanctification is an accomplished fact. Nowhere in Hebrews does the writer refer to the "progressive sanctification" of a believer's life. Instead sanctification is for him a functional equivalent of the Pauline concept of justification. By the sanctification which is accomplished through the death of Christ, New-Covenant worshipers are perfected for guilt-free service to God (cf. 2:11)." [BSM: In the sense that all sins are forgiven unto eternal life; but the believer's service to God is not going to be perfect]

J) [Heb 10:11-14]:

(Heb 10:11 NASB) "Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

(Heb 10:12 NASB) but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

(Heb 10:13 NASB) waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.

(Heb 10:14 NASB) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

1) [(Heb 10:11-14) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:11-14]:

(Heb 10:11 NASB) "Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

(Heb 10:12 NASB) but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

(Heb 10:13 NASB) waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.

(Heb 10:14 NASB) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

The author of Hebrews restates in another way that every priest especially including the Levitical priests stands as they always do and performs his ministry, time after time offering the same sacrifices without success. Not a single sacrifice they perform can take away sins; whereupon the author refers to Christs one offering which He as perfected for all time.

(Heb 10:11 NASB) "Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

In Heb 10:11, The author of Hebrews restates in another way that every priest especially including the Levitical priests stands as they always do and performs their ministry, time after time offering the same sacrifices without success in forgiving sins unto eternal life. Not a single sacrifice they perform can take away sins.

(Heb 10:12 NASB) but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

(Heb 10:13 NASB) waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET."

So the author continues the thought of Heb 10:11 of the priests continually performing ineffective offerings to take away sins to the next verse, Heb 10:12 which reads as follows, "but He [meaning Jesus Christ] having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time;" evidently that one sacrifice being totally successful in paying for the sins of all mankind for all time, because what follows in Heb 10:12-13 is a quotation from Psalm 110:1 which quotes as follows: "SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD," indicating complete and total success in His sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. And in Heb 10:13 which states, (Heb 10:13 NASB) "waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET" referring to the last half of Psalm 110:1:

a) [Compare Ps 110:1]:
(Ps 110:1 NASB) "The LORD says to my Lord: 'Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.' "

And finally comes Heb 10:14 which reads:
(Heb 10:14 NASB) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified," which indicates that by one offering - the offering of Jesus Christ, He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified meaning forever set apart to Christ, this is via a moment of faith alone in His sacrifice for sins alone, (ref. Heb 6:1).

b) [Compare An Excerpt from Hebrews chapter 6 on the issue of salvation]:
(Heb 6:1 KJV) "Therefore, [having left] the [beginning] principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection [completion, maturity]; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead [useless] works, and of faith in God,"

REPENTANCE FROM DEAD [USELESS] WORKS LEADING TO FAITH IN GOD - IN A MOMENT OF FAITH ALONE IN HIS SON ALONE UNTO ETERNAL LIFE IS THE FOUNDATION OF SALVATION UNTO ETERNAL LIFE. ONCE EXPRESSED IT IS NO LONGER NEEDED TO BE LAID

"Not laying again the foundation of faith in God" =

Having repented of dead / useless religious rituals, i.e., having changed one's mind about performing religious rituals [or any human doing, cf. Eph 2:8-9] in order to achieve eternal salvation and instead expressing ones faith in God's plan of salvation, one then has laid the "foundation" of their salvation unto eternal life.

Here in the context of this passage, "faith in God" refers to a specific kind of faith = a faith in God in His plan of salvation which is a moment of faith alone in His Son alone unto salvation unto eternal life, (Heb 4:1; 5:9; 6:1; 1 Jn 5:9-13).

2) [(Heb 10:11-14) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:11-14]:

(Heb 10:11 NASB) "Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

(Heb 10:12 NASB) but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

(Heb 10:13 NASB) waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.

(Heb 10:14 NASB) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

"11 The author brings out the finality of Jesus' sacrifice from another angle as he considers once more the continuing activity of the Levitical priests. Actually he does not confine the continual activity to those priests, for he uses the quite general expression "every priest." It is characteristic of the activity of a priest that he stands and ministers day by day. But of course the writer has the Levitical priests especially in mind. And it is true of them (as of other priests) that they keep offering sacrifices that can never take sins away. Standing is the posture appropriate to priestly service, and in the tabernacle or temple the priests of Aaron's line never sat during the course of their ministry in the sanctuary.
The word translated "performs his religious duties" (leitourgon) is that from which we derive our word "liturgy." Originally it meant "perform a public service" and was used of a wide variety of activities. In the Bible, however, it is confined to service of a religious character. Here it clearly applies to all the services a priest performs. Yet despite all their activity, priests cannot deal with the basic problem—that of removing sin.
12 Jesus' work is contrasted to that of priests. He offered one sacrifice—just one alone (there is emphasis on "one"). Then he sat down. The author mentioned this before (e.g., 1:3; 8:1), but he put no emphasis on it. Now he stresses Jesus' posture, contrasting it to that of the Levitical priests, and the contrast brings out an important point for understanding the work of Christ. Levitical priests stand, for their work is not done but goes on. Christ sits, for his work is done. Sitting is the posture of rest, not of work. That Christ is seated means that his atoning work is complete, there is nothing to be added to it. The expression "for all time" (eis to dienekes) is so situated in the Greek that it can be taken either with "offered" (as NIV) or with "sat down" (as Moffatt, in loc.). There is no grammatical reason for either course, but on the whole it seems best to take it with the words about offering. This seems more consistent with the way the author is unfolding his thought.
We should notice further that to be seated at God's right hand is to be in the place of highest honor. Even angels are not said to have attained to this; they stand in God's presence (Luke 1:19). When Jesus claimed this place for himself, the high priest tore his robe at what he regarded as blasphemy (Mark 14:62-63). The author is combining with the thought of a finished work the idea that our Lord is a being of the highest dignity and honor.
13 His work accomplished, the Lord now waits. The remaining words of this verse are a quotation from Psalm 110:1, with slight alterations to fit the grammatical context. The "enemies" are not defined, and the meaning appears to be that Christ rests until in God's good time all evil is overthrown. In other parts of the NT we read of God's enemies as being defeated at the end time (notably in Rev), but this is not a feature in Hebrews; and we have no means of knowing precisely what enemies he has in mind. There is possibly a hint of warning to the readers—viz., they should take care that they are not numbered among these enemies.

14 Once more the writer emphasizes that Christ has offered one offering that saves men. Clearly this is of the utmost importance for him. So he comes back to it again and again. The conjunction "because" introduces the reason for the statement in v. 13. As in v. 12, "one" is in an emphatic position; the perfecting of the saints came by one offering and by one alone. The writer does not say that Christ's sacrifice perfects the people but that Christ does this. His salvation is essentially personal. We have seen a number of times that the author is fond of the idea of "perfecting." He applies it to Christ (see comments on 2:10) and also to his people. The process of salvation takes people who are far from perfect and makes them fit to be in God's presence forever. It is not temporary improvement he is speaking of but improvement that is never ending.
As in v. 10, the author uses the concept of sanctifying, or making holy, to characterize the saved. The present tense (hagiazomenous, "those being made holy") poses a small problem that has been solved in more than one way. Some see it as timeless; others think of it as indicating a continuing process of adding to the number of the saved, others again of those who in the present are experiencing the process of being made holy. The last-mentioned view is not likely to be correct because, as we have noticed, the idea of sanctification as a continuing process does not seem to appear in Hebrews. But either of the other two views is possible. Those Christ saves are set apart for the service of God and that forever. The writer, then, is contemplating a great salvation, brought about by one magnificent offering that cannot and need not be repeated—an offering that is eternal in its efficacy and that makes perfect the people it sanctifies."

3) [(Heb 10:11-14) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:11-14]:

(Heb 10:11 NASB) "Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

(Heb 10:12 NASB) but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

(Heb 10:13 NASB) waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.

(Heb 10:14 NASB) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

"10:11-14. The truth just stated is reinforced by a contrast with the Levitical priesthood. Levite priests could never sit down on the job since their sacrificial services were never completed. But Christ's sitting at the right hand of God (cf. 1:3; 8:1; 12:2) is both a signal that His sacrifice was offered for all time and also that He can now confidently await final victory over His enemies. The words "for all time" (eis to diēnekes) are translated "forever" in verse 14 (see comments on 7:3). Thus by a single sacrifice (one sacrifice, 10:12, 14)—in contrast with the many sacrifices offered by the priests day after day and again and again... He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. The translation "are being made holy" sounds like a continuing process. But this ignores the force of the expression "made holy" in verse 10. A better rendering is, "them who are sanctified" (tous hagiazomenous; cf. v. 29). "The sanctified" have a status in God's presence that is "perfect" (cf. 11:40; 12:23) in the sense that they approach Him with the full acceptance gained through the death of Christ (cf. 10:19-22)."

K) [Heb 10:15-17]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

1) [(Heb 10:15-17) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:15-17]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

The author of Hebrews reminds us that it is the Holy Spirit who has inspired the words of the Bible when he writes in Heb 10:16 quoting from Jeremiah 31:33 ,THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: 'I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM

a) [Compare Excerpt from New Covenant study

]:

(Jer 31:31 NASB) 'Behold, days are coming,' declares the LORD, 'when I will make a New Covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, [crefs Jer 32:40; 33:14; Ezek 37:26]

(Jer 31:32 NASB) not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day [of My taking] them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,' declares the LORD.

(Jer 31:33 NASB) But this [is] the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,' [Jer 32:40] declares the LORD, 'I will put My law within them [in the sense of within their minds] and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people [Jer 24:7; 30:22; 32:38].

(Jer 31:34 NASB) They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me [Isa 11:9; 54:13; Jer 24:7; Hab 2:14], from the least of them to the greatest of them,' declares the LORD, 'for I will forgive their iniquity [Jer 33:8; 50:20; Ezek 36:22-27 ], and their sin I will remember no more [Isa 43:25].

Note that the word "know" here indicates a knowledge of the LORD in the sense of believing in Him for salvation unto eternal life, i.e., regeneration - corroborated by those who know the LORD will have the Law of God within them, written on their heart and have been forgiven of their iniquity: results of regeneration unto eternal life.

2) [(Heb 10:15-17) EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY ON HEB 10:15-17]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

"15-17 The writer consistently regards God as the author of Scripture and, as we have seen, ascribes to God words uttered by Moses and others. He does not often speak of the Holy Spirit as responsible for what is written. (See 3:7 and here; in 9:8 he sees the arrangement of the tabernacle, which of course is recorded in Scripture, as due to the Spirit.) But this is consistent with the writer's general approach, and we should not be surprised at it here. The Spirit, he says, "testifies." The choice of word implies that there is excellent testimony behind what he has been saying about Christ. There is a small grammatical problem because the quotation is introduced with "First he says," though there is nothing to follow this up. NIV supplies the lack with "Then he adds" in v. 17; and this seems to be the sense of it, even though there is nothing in the Greek corresponding to these words.
Once more the writer quotes from Jeremiah 31:33ff. (words he quoted at length in 8:7ff.). This time he does not begin his quotation so early (in ch. 8 it began at Jer 31:31), and there is a big gap (with the omission of the end of Jer 31:33 and most of 34). The reason for this appears to be that he quotes enough to show that it is the "new covenant" passage he has in mind and then goes straight to the words about forgiveness. Since his real interest lies here, he omits all else. The quotation has a considerable number of minor differences from the LXX, though none that greatly affects the sense. But there are so many of them that most commentators think the writer is here quoting from memory and giving the general sense of Jeremiah's words. The effect of all this is to emphasize the fact that Christ has established the new covenant and that he has done so by providing for the forgiveness of sins."

[BSM: Note that although it has been established that Christ's once for all sacrifice for sins includes all mankind, the passage in Jer 31:31-34 only has the house of Israel and the house of Judah in view. Not all of mankind will experience the same transformation while in their mortal bodies, and inherit the promised land]

3) [(Heb 10:15-17) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:15-17]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

L) [(Heb 10:18)]:
(Heb 10:18 NASB) "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."
******

1) [(Heb 10:18) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:18]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

(Heb 10:18 NASB) "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."

So in view in Heb 10:15 is the announcement that what follows in the next three verses is the testimony of the Holy Spirit to us the readers which has the Hebrew Christians as the main focus relative to the new covenant. Yet Hebrew Christians are not party to the new covenant because they are part of the church, not a future generation of Israel which Jer 31:31-34 clearly indicates

. So far that generation has not yet appeared on the scene in history. Hence the New Covenent has not yet been fulfilled. Albeit in the first century Jesus Christ by His work on the cross empowered the New Covenant so that in the future time it will be fulfilled. Although these verses are about God's future making of a new covenant with a future generation of Israel, nevertheless the fulfillment of the new covenant with a future generation of Israel has provided benefits for all mankind, not the least of which is Christ's payment in the first century for the sins of all mankind, (cf. 1 Jn 2:2). So God will put His laws upon the hearts of a future generation of Israel, and on their mind(s). And He will write those laws in the sense that they will act righteously all the time, i.e., that future generation will be transformed to be without sin. Futhermore in Heb 10:17, God will remember their - Israel's - sins and lawless deeds no more in the sense of totally forgiving them. So it will be for a future generation of Israel who will not be part of the church. Consider all of those of Israel throughout history who have lived and died in their unfaithfulness, albeit there is always a remnant of Israelites throughout history - all their generations - who have trusted in the future promise of God of eternal life through His Son, Jesus Christ. These have benefitted from what Jesus Christ did for them in the first century by paying for the sins of all mankind, not just that future generation of Israel. In view of Heb 10:15-17, Heb 10:18 says, "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin." Since Christ's sacrifice for sins provided for the provision of eternal life for all mankind each one through a moment of faith alone. This new covenant has been enabled through Christ's once for all sacrifice for the sins of all mankind including the Hebrew Christians who would be very familiar with the as delineated in Jer 31:31-34

and elsewhere in the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So with Christ's once for all sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, there is no longer needed any offering for sin. So once again, the author of Hebrews reminds the fallen away Hebrew Christians who have gone backward to perform the totally ineffective sacrifices for sin under the Mosaic Law, that there is no longer needed any offering for sin other than the once for all time sacrifice of Jesus Christ which they have trusted in for the sins of that future generation of Jews and for all of mankind as well.

2) [(Heb 10:18) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:18]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

(Heb 10:18 NASB) "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."

"This short verse emphatically conveys the utter finality of Christ's offering and the sheer impossibility of anything further. Where sins have been effectively dealt with there can be no further place for an offering for sin. The author sees this as established by Scripture
[BSM: for all mankind as well as a future generation of Israel],

and this is consistent with his normal use of the OT. He cites the Bible to show that since the new covenant is established
[BSM: for a future generation of Israel outside of the church which relative to forgiveness of sins is effective for all mankind, albeit the covenant is between God and a future generation of Israel],
there is no room for any further sacrifice for an individual

[BSM: whatever age he has lived in].

This is the word of the prophet and must be accepted by any who see the OT as Scripture. So, the author reasons, now that the new covenant spoken of by the prophet is a reality, the prophetic word itself rules out the possibility of any further sacrifice."

3) [(Heb 10:15-18) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:15-18]:

(Heb 10:15 NASB) "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

(Heb 10:16 NASB) "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,

(Heb 10:17 NASB) "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

(Heb 10:18 NASB) "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."

"10:15-18. Reverting to his basic text on the benefits of the New Covenant (cf. 8:8-12), the author requoted a portion of it (in 10:16 he quoted Jer. 31:33; and in Heb. 10:17, Jer. 31:34) to drive home his point. The text is a testimony given by God's Holy Spirit, and shows that final forgiveness, such as the New Covenant promised, meant that there was no further need for any sacrifice for sin. As the writer will shortly show, a person who turns from the one sufficient sacrifice of Christ has no real sacrifice to which he can turn (cf. Heb. 10:26)."

M) [(Heb 10:19-22)]:
(Heb 10:19 NASB) "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,

(Heb 10:20 NASB) by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh,

(Heb 10:21 NASB) and since we have a great priest over the house of God,

(Heb 10:22 NASB) let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water."

1) [Heb 10:19-22) BSM Commentary On Heb 10:19-22]:

(Heb 10:18 NASB) "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."

(Heb 10:19 NASB) "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,

(Heb 10:20 NASB) by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh,

(Heb 10:21 NASB) and since we have a great priest over the house of God,

(Heb 10:22 NASB) let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water."

In view of Heb 10:15-17, Heb 10:18 says, "Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin." Since Christ's sacrifice for sins provided for the provision of eternal life for all mankind each one through a moment of faith alone, this new covenant has been enabled through Christ's once for all sacrifice for the sins of all mankind including the Hebrew Christians who would be very familiar with the new covenant as delineated in Jer 31:31-34

and elsewhere in the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So with Christ's once for all sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, there is no longer needed any offering for sin. So once again, the author of Hebrews reminds the fallen away Hebrew Christians who have gone backward to perform the totally ineffective sacrifices for sin under the Mosaic Law, that there is no longer needed any offering for sin other than the once for all time sacrifice of Jesus Christ which they have trusted in for the sins of that future generation of Jews and for all of mankind as well.

The next verse, Heb 10:19 reads as follows, (Heb 10:19 NASB) "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus," indicating that we, meaning everyone / anyone may express confidence to enter the holy place
in the sense of entering into the very presence of God. And they may express confidence to enter the presence of God because that entrance is by virture of the "blood of Jesus" simply through their expressing a moment of faith in Him - His sacrificial death for their sins - the shedding of His blood unto His death for sins on the cross.

Whereupon verse 19 continues into Heb 10:20: (Heb 10:20 NASB) "by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, through His flesh," Note the imagery of the tabernacle, for it was through the veil, i.e., through His flesh by a new and living way in the sense by the completely new and once for all sacrifice of the flesh of Jesus Christ instead of dead animals. And this sacrifice is described as "living" in the sense of Christ's living sacrifice on the cross Who was raised from the dead unto a living sacrifice for the sake of all mankind which is indissolubly bound up with the Lord Jesus Himself Who is alive, living and eternal; and not the way of the dead animals of the old covenant or the lifeless floor over which the Levitical high priest walked. It is the living Lord himself.

And Heb 10:21 NASB continues: "and since we have a great priest over the house of God," where the term rendered "great priest" refers to what is understood as "high priest" (cf. Num 35:25, 28; Zech 6:11); it also refers to references to Jesus such as "a son over God's house (3:6) and as a high priest. So we have two frames of reference about Jesus juxtaposed to one another: He has taken a lowly place, (see v. 20), which refers to His flesh by which died to make a way to God for men. And on the other hand He is declared to be "over" God's household - His domain, i.e., all of creation in v. 21.

So in v. 22 which reads as follows: (Heb 10:22 NASB) "let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." First of all, verse 22 tells believers, especially Hebrew Christian believers: let us make every effort to draw near [to God] with a sincere heart in the sense of making an effort to be wholly honest and forthright with God especially in prayer / conversations with Him and our actions in the light of who we are in Christ - Whom we represent. That is to say that we are commanded to make every effort to do this; albeit our nearness to God will be imperfect because we are imperfect and still sinful beings. On the other hand, when we simply express full assurance of faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice we will draw near to God simply because of our faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice and not in anything we have done.

Verse 22 goes on to indicate that despite our imperfection we nevertheless have the position in Christ of expressing full assurance of faith that what He has promised to us - salvation unto eternal life, deliverance from that which we need to be delivered from, etc., etc. will be done in accordance with His sovereign will and not ours - despite our imperfections. And through all of this we are to keep in mind and express full assurance that as believers by the grace of God our hearts have been sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water - our hearts in the sense of our inner conscience within our minds have been sprinkled clean by the sovereignty and grace of God from an evil conscience in the sense of forgiveness of sins such that our conscience is no longer held accountable for our sins through our moment of faith alone in the once for all sacrifice of sins by Jesus Christ. And what follows is the phrase rendered, "and our bodies washed with pure water" signifying an exhortation to lay hold consciously / express full assurance of the cleansing benefits of Christ's Cross from inward and outward, from the inward mentality to the outward physical body - and thereby draw near to God, putting away inward guilt and outward impurity because Christ has done it all the moment we believed in His once for all sacrifice - through the pure water, i.e. through God the Holy Spirit within us. And for those moments that we do express full assurance of our position of forgiveness through Christ alone, we draw near to God.

a) [Compare Jn 3:5]:

(Jn 3:5) "If any one [is] not ...born [out] of water [figurative for being given a newborn spirit and cleansed from sins by the work of God the Holy Spirit Who indwells every individual who believes in Christ, (Ez 36:24-27; Eph 1:13-14)], and spirit [i.e., out of the spiritual realm] he is not able to enter into the [Kingdom] of God."]

Note that the Greek noun "pneumatos" which is "pneuma" in the genetive case, can mean wind, breath; spirit, soul, self; disposition, spiritual realm or state; spirit (angelic, demonic, human), the Spirit (the Holy Spirit), depending upon the context. It is best rendered "out of the spiritual realm" in Jn 3:5 for the following reasons:

Since Jn 1:12-13 stipulates that one who believes in Jesus' name is born again from above by God to become an eternal child of God in the Kingdom of God; and since Jn 3:3 stipulates that any one who is not born again from above is not able to see the Kingdom of God; then the phrase in Jn 3:5, "If any one [is] not ...born [out] of water [figurative for God the Holy Spirit Who gives everyone who believes in Christ a newborn spirit and cleanses them from sins, (Ez 36:24-27; Eph 1:13-14)], and spirit [i.e., out of the spiritual realm] he is not able to enter into the [Kingdom] of God" makes being born again from above through God to enter the Kingdom of God equivalent to being born out of water [= via the work of the Holy Spirit] and spirit [= of the spiritual realm] from above through God to enter the Kingdom of God. So Jn 3:5 refers to a spiritual birth of receiving a newborn spirit and cleansing from all sins from above through God, implying that it takes place exclusively in the spiritual realm. So the saving work of God excludes anything of the physical world such as physical birth and physical water baptism.

2) [(Heb 10:19-22) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:19-22]:

(Heb 10:19 NASB) "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,"

'''19 The address "brothers" is affectionate, and the writer exhorts them on the basis of the saving events. "Therefore" links the exhortation with what has preceded it. These saving events give the Christian a new attitude towards the presence of God. Nadab and Abihu died while offering incense (Lev 10:2), and it had become the custom for the high priest not to linger in the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement lest people be terrified (M Yoma 5:1). But Christians approach God confidently, completely at home in the situation created by Christ's saving work. They enter "the Most Holy Place," which, of course, is no physical sanctuary but is, in truth, the presence of God. And they enter it "by the blood of Jesus," i.e., on the basis of his saving death."

[BSM: And not including on the basis of any human doing]

(Heb 10:20 NASB) "by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, through His flesh,"

'''20 The way to God is both "new" and "living." It is "new" because what Jesus has done has created a completely new situation, "living" because that way is indissolubly bound up with the Lord Jesus himself. The writer does not say, as John does, that Jesus is the way (John 14:6), but this is close to his meaning. This is not the way of the dead animals of the old covenant or the lifeless floor over which the Levitical high priest walked. It is the living Lord himself. This way to God he "dedicated" (NIV, "opened"; the word is that used of dedicating the old covenant with blood, 9:18), which hints again at his sacrifice of himself. The "curtain" goes back once more to the imagery of the tabernacle, for it was through the curtain that hung before the Most Holy Place that the high priest passed into the very presence of God.

There is a problem as to whether we take "that is, his flesh" (NIV, "body") with "curtain," which is the more natural way of taking the Greek, or whether we take it with "way." The difficulty in taking it with "curtain" is that it seems to make the flesh of Christ that which veils God from men. There is a sense, however, in which Christians have always recognized this, even if in another sense they see Christ's body as revealing God. As a well-known hymn puts it, "Veiled in flesh the Godhead see." The value of this way of looking at the imagery of the curtain is that it was by the rending of the veil—the flesh being torn on the cross—that the way to God was opened. The author is saying in his own way what the Synoptists said when they spoke of the curtain of the temple as being torn when Christ died (Matt 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The flesh (NIV, "body") here is the correlate of the blood in v. 19. The alternative is to see in the equation of "flesh" and "way" the thought that the whole earthly life of Jesus is the way that bring us to God. This is not impossible, but the grammar favors the former view.

(Heb 10:21 NASB) and since we have a great priest over the house of God,

'''21 The term "great priest" is a literal rendering of the Hebrew title we know as "high priest" (see, e.g., Num 35:25, 28; Zech 6:11). We have had references to Jesus as "a son over God's house" (3:6) and as a high priest. Now the two thoughts are brought together. The author does not forget Jesus' high place. He has taken a lowly place (cf. the reference to his flesh, v. 20), and he has died to make a way to God for men. But this assumption of the role of a servant should not blind us to the fact that Jesus is "over" God's household. Once again we have the highest Christology combined with the recognition that Jesus rendered lowly service.'''

(Heb 10:22 NASB) "let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water."

'''22 Now come three exhortations: "Let us draw near," "Let us hold unswervingly" (v. 23), and "Let us consider" (v. 24). The contemplation of what Christ has done should stir his people into action. First, we are to draw near to God "with a sincere heart." The "heart" stands for the whole of the inner life of man, and it is important that as God's people approach him, they be right inwardly. It is the "pure in heart" who see God (Matt 5:8). In view of what Christ has done for us, we should approach God in deep sincerity. The "full assurance of faith" stresses that it is only by trust in Christ, who has performed for us the high priestly work that gives access to God, that we can draw near at all.

[BSM: So in v. 22 which reads as follows: (Heb 10:22 NASB) "let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." First of all, verse 22 tells believers, especially Hebrew Christian believers: let us make every effort to draw near [to God] with a sincere heart in the sense of making an effort to be wholly honest and forthright with God especially in prayer / conversations with Him and our actions in the light of who we are in Christ - Whom we represent. That is to say that we are commanded to make every effort to do this; albeit our nearness to God will be imperfect because we are imperfect and still sinful beings. On the other hand, when we simply express full assurance of faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice we will draw near to God simply because of our faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice and not in anything we have done.

Verse 22 goes on to indicate that despite our imperfection we nevertheless have the position in Christ of expressing full assurance of faith that what He has promised to us - salvation unto eternal life, deliverance from that which we need to be delivered from, etc., etc. will be done in accordance with His sovereign will and not ours - despite our imperfections. And through all of this we are to keep in mind and express full assurance that as believers by the grace of God our hearts have been sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water - our hearts in the sense of our inner conscience within our minds have been sprinkled clean by the sovereignty and grace of God from an evil conscience in the sense of forgiveness of sins such that our conscience is no longer held accountable for our sins through our moment of faith alone in the once for all sacrifice of sins by Jesus Christ. And what follows is the phrase rendered, "and our bodies washed with pure water" signifying an exhortation to lay hold consciously / express full assurance of the cleansing benefits of Christ's Cross from inward and outward, from the inward mentality to the outward physical body - and thereby draw near to God, putting away inward guilt and outward impurity because Christ has done it all the moment we believed in His once for all sacrifice - through the pure water, i.e. through God the Holy Spirit within us. And for those moments that we do express full assurance of our position of forgiveness through Christ alone, we draw near to God]

[Expositor's cont.]:

The references to the sprinkled hearts and the washed bodies should be taken together. The washing of the body with pure water is surely a reference to baptism, despite the objection of Calvin, who sees it as meaning "the Spirit of God" (in loc.). But the thing that distinguished Christian baptism from the multiplicity of lustrations that were practiced in the religions of the ancient world was that it was more than an outward rite cleansing the body from ritual defilement. Baptism is the outward sign of an inward cleansing, and it was the latter that was the more important. So here it is mentioned first. The sprinkling of the hearts signifies the effect of the blood of Christ on the inmost being. Christians are cleansed within by his shed blood (cf. the sprinkling of the priests, Exod 29:21; Lev 8:30).
and is not used to clean the body or heart. It is symbollic of the work of the Holy Spirit of God within.

[BSM: Water baptism cannot be in view because water baptism water is not pure as God is pure]

3) [(Heb 10:19-22) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:19-22]:

(Heb 10:19 NASB) "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,

(Heb 10:20 NASB) by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, through His flesh,

(Heb 10:21 NASB) and since we have a great priest over the house of God,

(Heb 10:22 NASB) let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water."

"10:19-22. The central assertion of these verses is in the words, Therefore, brothers (cf. 3:1, 12)... let us draw near to God. The intervening material, beginning with the word since, gives the basis for the author's call to approach God. The readers are New-Covenant people ("brothers") who should have confidence (parrēsian; cf. 3:6; 4:16; 10:35) to come into the very presence of God. This idea is enriched by the use of Old-Covenant imagery.

[BSM: No they are not New-Covenant people. They are brothers in Christ - brothers in the Church as part of the body of Christ - Jews and Gentiles together. The New-Covenant people as the author and Jer 31-34

quote are yet future, not part of the church, but a future generation of Israelites who will all choose to believe in Christ to a man and be transformed into perfect mortal human beings - without sin - just as He arrives once more on earth to begin His millennial rule, wherein those particular Israelites will co-rule with Christ over His Kingdom, fully knowing the Word of God, living for hundreds of years - Jer 31:31-34

]

[Bible Knowledge Commentary, cont.]

"God's presence in the most holy place and the curtain that once was a barrier to man is now no longer so. It symbolized Christ's body, so the writer may have had in mind the rending of the temple curtain at the time of Christ's death (Matt. 27:51). At any rate His death gave believers the needed access and route to God, aptly described as new (prosphaton, "recent," occurring only here in the NT) and living, that is, partaking of the fresh and vitalizing realities of the New Covenant.

But in addition, the call to draw near is appropriate since we have a great Priest over the house of God with all that this entails in the light of the writer's previous discussion. So the approach of believers should be with a sincere (alēthinēs, "true, dependable," from aletheia, "truth") heart in full assurance of faith. There ought to be no wavering in regard to these superlative realities. Rather each New-Covenant worshiper should approach God in the conscious enjoyment of freedom from guilt (having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience) and with a sense of the personal holiness that Christ's sacrifice makes possible (having our bodies washed with pure water). The writer's words are probably an exhortation to lay hold consciously of the cleansing benefits of Christ's Cross and to draw near to God in enjoying them, putting away inward guilt and outward impurity. These verses approximate 1 John 1:9."

[BSM]:
'''Verse 22 reads as follows: (Heb 10:22 NASB) "let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." First of all, verse 22 tells believers, especially Hebrew Christian believers: let us make every effort to draw near [to God] with a sincere heart in the sense of making an effort to be wholly honest and forthright with God especially in prayer / conversations with Him and our actions in the light of who we are in Christ - Whom we represent. That is to say that we are commanded to make every effort to do this; albeit our nearness to God will be imperfect because we are imperfect and still sinful beings. On the other hand, when we simply express full assurance of faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice we will draw near to God simply because of our faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice and not in anything we have done.

Verse 22 goes on to indicate that despite our imperfection we nevertheless have the position in Christ of expressing full assurance of faith that what He has promised to us - salvation unto eternal life, deliverance from that which we need to be delivered from, etc., etc. will be done in accordance with His sovereign will and not ours - despite our imperfections. And through all of this we are to keep in mind and express full assurance that as believers by the grace of God our hearts have been sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water - our hearts in the sense of our inner conscience within our minds have been sprinkled clean by the sovereignty and grace of God from an evil conscience in the sense of forgiveness of sins such that our conscience is no longer held accountable for our sins through our moment of faith alone in the once for all sacrifice of sins by Jesus Christ. And what follows is the phrase rendered, "and our bodies washed with pure water" signifying an exhortation to lay hold consciously / express full assurance of the cleansing benefits of Christ's Cross from inward and outward, from the inward mentality to the outward physical body - and thereby draw near to God, putting away inward guilt and outward impurity because Christ has done it all the moment we believed in His once for all sacrifice - through the pure water, i.e. through God the Holy Spirit within us. And for those moments that we do express full assurance of our position of forgiveness through Christ alone, we draw near to God.'''

M) [(Heb 10:23-25)]:

(Heb 10:23 NASB) "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He Who promised is faithful;

(Heb 10:24 NASB) and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,

(Heb 10:25 NASB) not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near."

1) [(Heb 10:23-25) BSM Commntary On Heb 10:23-25]:

(Heb 10:23 NASB) "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He Who promised is faithful;"

The author of Hebrews uses the first person plural imperative (command) in a formal form - a formal command. He commands the Hebrew Christians of his day and by dint of the context, all believers of all ages, to hold fast in the sense of continue to be confident in professing their confession of their hope in the sense of their assurance of their faith in Christ to deliver them unto eternal life without wavering in the sense of losing confidence or even turning their back on Christ to deliver them unto temporal and eternal blessings and eternal life. This they ought to do out of gratitude because He Who promised is faithful - which Scripture everywhere and history supports. This command implies that Christ indeed will deliver all believers unto eternal life whether or not they do hold fast; nevertheless there will be consequences in accordance with how faithful they do hold fast to that confession, albeit, never loss of salvation because He Who promised is faithful to His promise of eternal life for all those who believe in Him for it, regardless of how believers live their temporal lives as the Book of Hebrews and the rest of Scripture stipulate.

(Heb 10:24 NASB) and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,

And the author continues in verse 24 with "and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds," which goes one step further than just to hold fast to our confession of our hope of eternal life by commanding believers to stimulate others to express agape godly love toward one another even doing godly good deeds. This out of gratitude for the salvation that Christ has promise to given them and is faithful to that promise.

(Heb 10:25 NASB) not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near."

And the subject of verse 24 of "let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds" continues with two participial phrases in verse 25 providing examples of fulfilling this command: "not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day [of the LORD drawing near, i.e., when the endtime will commence and creschendo at His coming to begin His reign on earth. Recall that this statement was made by the author of Hebrews way back in the first century. Today it is even closer]

2) [(Heb 10:23-25) Expositor's Bible Commentary On Heb 10:23-25]:
(Heb 10:23 NASB) "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He Who promised is faithful;"

"23 The second exhortation is to hold fast the profession of hope. The author has already used the verb katecho in urging his readers to "hold on to" their confidence and their glorying in hope (3:6) and the beginning of their confidence (3:14). With a different verb (krateo), he has told them, to "hold firmly" to the confession (4:14). Now he wants them to retain a firm grasp on "the confession of the hope," or, as NIV puts it, "the hope we profess." This is an unusual expression, and we might have expected "faith" rather than "hope" (this is actually the reading in a few MSS). But there is point in referring to hope. It has already been described as an "anchor for the soul" (6:19). Westcott comments, "Faith reposes completely in the love of God: Hope vividly anticipates that God will fulfill His promises in a particular way" (in loc.). Christians can hold fast to their hope in this way because behind it is a God in whom they can have full confidence. God is thoroughly to be relied on. When he makes a promise, that promise will infallibly be kept. He has taken the initiative in making the promise, and he will fulfill his purposes in making it."

[BSM: There are no guarantees that a believer's faith will repose completely in the love of God, nor is there a guarantee that a believer's hope will vividly anticipate that God will fulfill His promises nor do this all the time. Think about the Hebrew believers in this letter that departed from the faith. All mortal beings have a sin nature which contaminates everything they do. Believers must focus on what is eternally important and persevere in the faith through daily, constant study and acting upon what they have learned; albeit believer's lives will be imperfect until they receive their perfect resurrection bodies]

(Heb 10:24 NASB) "and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,"

"24 The third exhortation is to consider one another. This is the only place where the author uses the expression "one another" (allelous), though it is frequently found in the NT. He is speaking of a mutual activity, one in which believers encourage one another, not one where leaders direct the rest as to what they are to do. The word rendered "spur" is actually a noun, paroxysmos, which usually has a meaning like "irritation" or "exasperation." It is most unusual to have it used in a good sense, and the choice of the unusual word makes the exhortation more striking."

Christians are to provoke one another to love (agape), a word found again in Hebrews only in 6:10. It is the characteristic NT term for a love that is not self-seeking, a love whose paradigm is the Cross (1 John 4:10). This is a most important Christian obligation, and believers are to help one another attain it. It is interesting that this kind of love is thus a product of community activity, for it is a virtue that requires others for its exercise. One may practice faith or hope alone, but not love. (For the conjunction of faith, hope, and love, see comments on 6:11.) The readers are to urge one another to "good deeds" as well as to love. The contemplation of the saving work of Christ leads on to good works in the lives of believers.

[BSM: Contemplation of the saving work of Christ does NOT necessarily lead on to good works in the mortal lives of believers who still have natures which contaminates everything that they do]

The expression is left general, but the writer selects as especially important love and (in the next verse) the gathering together of believers—an interesting combination."

(Heb 10:25 NASB) not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near."

"25 Though NIV might give the impression that this is a fourth exhortation, this is not so. The construction is a participial one, carrying on the thought of the previous verse, not giving up "meeting together." "Some" were doing this. The word is quite general, and we have no way of knowing who these abstainers were. Though it would be interesting to know whether they were from the same group as the readers, we know no more than that the early church had its problems with people who stayed away from church. It was a dangerous practice because, as Moffatt says, "Any early Christian who attempted to live like a pious particle without the support of the community ran serious risks in an age when there was no public opinion to support him" (in loc.). The attitude may mean that the abstainers saw Christianity as just another religion to be patronized or left alone. They had missed the finality on which the author lays such stress.

[BSM: There are no guarantees that a believer's faith will repose completely in the love of God, nor is there a guarantee that a believer's hope will vividly anticipate that God will fulfill His promises nor always - think about the Hebrew believers in this letter that departed from the faith. Believers must focus on what is eternally important and persevere in the faith through daily, constant study and acting upon what we have learned faithfully, albeit believer's lives will be imperfect until they receive their perfect resurrection bodies]

The writer goes on to suggest that Christians ought to be exhorting one another and all the more as they see "the Day" getting near. Some think this Day was that of the destruction of Jerusalem, signs of which may have been evident even as this letter was being written. But it is more in accordance with NT usage to see a reference to the Day of Judgment, though, as many commentators point out, it must have been difficult for Christians in those early days to separate the two. The main thing, however, is that the writer is stressing the accountability of his readers. They must act toward their fellow believers as those who will give account of themselves to God."

3) [(Heb 10:23-25) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:23-25]:

(Heb 10:23 NASB) "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He Who promised is faithful;

(Heb 10:24 NASB) and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,

(Heb 10:25 NASB) not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near."

"10:23-25. This kind of confident access to God necessarily entails that believers hold unswervingly to the hope we profess with full confidence in the reliability of God's promises. The writer revealed in these verses that his concern for fidelity to the faith is not an abstraction, but a confrontation with real danger. There was an urgent need for mutual concern and exhortation (toward love and good deeds) within the church he wrote to. His readers were not to abandon meeting together, as some were doing. Already there seemed to have been defections from their ranks, though his words might have applied to other churches where such desertions had occurred. In any case their mutual efforts to spur one another on should increase as they see the Day approaching (cf. v. 37; a well-known NT trilogy is included in these vv.: faith, v. 22; hope, v. 23; love, v. 24).

[BSM: The sentence above, "This kind of confident access to God necessarily entails that believers hold unswervingly to the hope we profess with full confidence in the reliability of God's promises," is not going to happen in this mortal life amongst believers because they have flawed / sin natures. Nevertheless they will be rewarded by the grace of God in accordance with their efforts relative to rewards in heaven. And since eternal life is a free gift given at the moment of faith alone in Christ alone.]

3 cont.) [(Heb 10:23-25) Bible Knowledge Commentary On Heb 10:23-25 cont.]:

"In referring again to the Second Advent, the writer left the impression he was concerned that genuine believers might cease to hope for the Lord's coming and be tempted to defect from their professions of faith in Christ (cf. comments on 1:13-2:4; and comments on 6:9). They must treat their future expectations as certainties (since He who promised is faithful). If they would only lift up their eyes, they could "see the Day approaching."

[BSM: The Lord's Second Coming cannot be in view because the Hebrew Christians and all believers of the Church Age will be with the Lord at His Second Coming having been raptured / caught up to the Lord Who is the clouds above the earth

. So they won't be lifting up their eyes to see Him, but looking down to the surface of the earth as they accompany the Lord when He comes down to the surface of the earth in His Second Coming.

Although the writer was concerned that believers might cease to hope for the Lord's coming [in the rapture - NOT His Second Coming] and defect from their profession of faith as a number of them had already defected back to keeping the Law; they were never in danger of losing their salvation for the author had repeatedly stated that God is faithful to His promise of providing eternal life for all who believe - and that without demanding some kind of faithfulness to fulfill His promise. For the context of the letter to the Hebrew Christians which included those that did defect from faith alone in Christ alone to keeping the Law of Moses once again - that context did not include any indication that they had lost or could lose their salvation. Albeit they very well might suffer discipline for being unfaithful, the degree of punishment depending upon the extent of their unfaithfulness. So in order to secure their salvation it is NOT true that, "They must treat their future expectations as certainties (since He who promised is faithful)," as the Bible Knowledge Commentary states above. For individuals in their mortal bodies are not capable of being perfect, our best hope is to make every effort to be faithful and be grateful for the grace of God making up the difference of our short comings; keeping in mind that the consequences for being imperfect depending upon the degree of such may very well be discipline but never loss of salvation. Heb 10:26-39 which follows DOES deal with this issue]
66667777

99999999999999999999999999999999999
Hebrews 10:1-39 (NASB)
1 For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, those who draw near.
2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?
3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year.
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;
6 IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE.
7 "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"
8 After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),
9 then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.
14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,
16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,
17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.
19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,
20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh,
21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God,
22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful;
24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,
25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.
26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.
28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
29 How much severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE."
31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
32 But remember the former days, when, after being enlightened, you endured a great conflict of sufferings,
33 partly by being made a public spectacle through reproaches and tribulations, and partly by becoming sharers with those who were so treated.
34 For you showed sympathy to the prisoners and accepted joyfully the seizure of your property, knowing that you have for yourselves a better possession and a lasting one.
35 Therefore, do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward.
36 For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised.
37 FOR YET IN A VERY LITTLE WHILE, HE WHO IS COMING WILL COME, AND WILL NOT DELAY.
38 BUT MY RIGHTEOUS ONE SHALL LIVE BY FAITH; AND IF HE SHRINKS BACK, MY SOUL HAS NO PLEASURE IN HIM.
39 But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.

999999999999999999999999 EXPOSITOR'S 9999999999999999999999999999999
1 "The law" means strictly the law of Moses, but here it stands for the whole OT, with particular reference to the sacrificial system. This is dismissed as no more than "a shadow" (skia). The word is used in conjunction with "copy" (hypodeigma) in 8:5 and in opposition to "body" (soma) in Colossians 2:17. It points to something unsubstantial in opposition to what is real. This is not the Platonic thought of a copy of the heavenly "idea" but rather that of a foreshadowing of what is to come. Here the contrast is with "image" (eikon), which is surprising, as eikon normally means "a derived likeness and, like the head on a coin or the parental likeness in a child, implies an archetype" (A-S, s.v.).
NIV renders a Greek expression meaning "the image itself of the things" as "the realities themselves." Perhaps those exegetes are right who see a metaphor from painting (e.g., Calvin, in loc.). The "shadow" then is the preliminary outline that an artist may make before he gets to his colors, and the eikon is the finished portrait. The author is saying that the law is no more than a preliminary sketch. It shows the shape of things to come, but the solid reality is not there. It is in Christ. The "good things that are coming" are not defined, but the general term is sufficient to show that the law pointed forward to something well worthwhile.
There is a problem in the second half of v. 1. Should we take the expression eis to dienekes, rendered as "endlessly," with what precedes it in the Greek (as NIV) or with what follows, as NEB: "It provides for the same sacrifices year after year, and with these it can never bring the worshippers to perfection for all time [eis to dienekes]"? Technically, the former is possible, but there are reasons for preferring NEB here. The expression eis to dienekes marks "an act which issues in a permanent result" (Westcott, in loc.), a meaning we see when it is repeated in v. 12 (where NIV has "for all time") and v. 14 (NIV, "forever"). The Greek word order also favors NEB (Montefiore [in loc.] thinks that this, along with vv. 12, 14, "forbids" taking the word other wise).
The author is saying, then, that the Levitical sacrifices continue year by year, but they are quite unable to bring the worshipers into a permanent state of perfection. The yearly sacrifices mark another reference to the Day of Atonement ceremonies—ceremonies of which the author makes a good deal of use. "Can never" points to an inherent weakness of the old system: the animal sacrifices are quite unable to effect the putting away of sin. The yearly repetition repeats the failure. The same rites that were unavailing last year are all that the law can offer this year. There is an inbuilt limitation in animal sacrifice. "Make perfect" is used, of course, in a moral and spiritual sense.
2 The rhetorical question emphasizes the truth that the very continuity of the sacrifices witnesses to their ineffectiveness. Incidentally, the way it is put seems to accord more naturally with a situation in which the sacrifices were still being offered in the temple than with one in which they had ceased. This may be a pointer to the date of the epistle. Had the sacrifices really dealt with sins, the author reasons, the worshipers would have been cleansed and that would have been that. There would have been no need and no place for repeating them (cf. 9:9). The very necessity for repetition shows that the desired cleansing has not been effected. "An atonement that needs constant repetition does not really atone; a conscience which has to be cleansed once a year has never been truly cleansed" (Robinson, in loc.). The translation "would no longer have felt guilty for their sins" obscures the reference to "conscience." It may be that this rendering gives much the right sense, but we should not miss this further reference to conscience, which means so much in this epistle (see 9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 13:18; in the NT only 1Cor uses the term more often). A really effectual atonement would mean the permanent removal of the worshipers' sins. There would be no need for anything like the annual Day of Atonement ceremonies.
3 The strong adversative "but" (all') puts the truth in sharp contrast with false estimates of what sacrifices might do. Perhaps the flavor of the Greek word anamnesis is better caught with "remembrance" instead of "reminder"; i.e., "in them is a remembrance of sins." Anamnesis is used in the NT only in the accounts of the institution of the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:19; 1Cor 11:24-25) and here. Where the Bible has the idea of remembrance, as Bruce points out (in loc.), action appears to be involved. When people remember sins, they either repent (Deut 9:7) or else persist in sin (Ezek 23:19). When God remembers sin, he usually punishes it (1 Kings 17:18; Rev 16:19); when he pardons, he can be said not to remember sin (Ps 25:7). The author then is using an expression that reminds us that Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19), as he established a covenant in which the central thing is that God says, "[I] will remember their sins no more" (Jer 31:34). The Day of Atonement ceremonies each year reminded people of the fact that something had to be done about sin. But the ceremonies did no more than that.
4 The yearly ceremonies were ineffective because "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." The word "impossible" is a strong one. There is no way forward through the blood of animals. "Take away" (aphaireo) is used of a literal taking off, as of Peter's cutting off the ear of the high priest's slave (Luke 22:50), or metaphorically as of the removal of reproach (Luke 1:25). It signifies the complete removal of sin so that it is no longer a factor in the situation. That is what is needed and that is what the sacrifices could not provide.
Notes

1 Instead of οὐκ αὐτὴν τὴν εἰκόνα (ouk auten ten eikona, "not the image itself"), P46 reads καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα (kai ten eikona, "and the image"), which solves some problems by making the text read, "For the law, having a shadow and the image of the good things...." But support for this reading is slight and the construction of the sentence seems to imply that εἰκων (eikon, "image") is contrasted with σκιά (skia, "shadow"), not joined with it as of similar meaning. It seems an attempt to remove a difficulty and should be rejected.
Another textual problem is whether to take the singular δύναται (dynatai, "it can") or the plural δύνανται (dynantai, "they can"). NIV is almost certainly correct in favoring the singular, for the plural involves leaving νόμος (nomos, "law") as a nominativus pendens, which the author normally avoids. Εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς (eis to dienekes) is found in NT only in 7:3; 10:1, 12, 14. A-S derives the adjective from διήεγκα (dienenka), the aorist of διαφέρω (diaphero), and gives it the meaning "unbroken, continuous." The present expression he sees as meaning "continually, perpetually, forever" (s.v.). Westcott distinguishes it from εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (eis ton aiona, "forever") in that "it expresses the thought of a continuously abiding result. The former phrase looks to the implied absence of limit while εἰς τὸ διηνεκές affirms uninterrupted duration in regard to some ruling thought" (in loc.). Προσέρχομαι (proserchomai) has a curious distribution. It is found in NT eight-seven times, of which no less than fifty-two are in Matt, ten in Luke, ten in Acts, and then seven in Heb. It occurs but once in all the Pauline corpus and similarly once in all the Catholic Epistles. The word means "approach," "draw near," and may be used of drawing near to God (7:25; 11:6) or to the throne of grace (4:16). Here, as in v. 22, we have the absolute use, with "God" understood. The participle "those who draw near" means "the worshipers."
2 We must understand an ellipsis after ἐπεί (epei) to give the meaning "since [if it were not so]," "otherwise," "if it could."

H. One Sacrifice for Sins (10:5-18)

It is the author's habit to clinch his argument by appealing to Scripture. In the preceding sections, however, he has been arguing without such appeals. Now he rounds off this stage of his theme by showing that the Bible proves the correctness of the position he has advocated. Animal sacrifices could not take away the sins of the people. But it was the will of God that sin be atoned for. Christ's perfect sacrifice of himself fulfills God's will as animal sacrifices could never do. This the author sees foretold in Psalm 40. Then, as he goes on to bring out something of the utter finality of the offering of Christ, he returns to the quotation from Jeremiah he had used in chapter 8 to initiate his discussion of the new covenant. His argument up till now has been the negative one that the animal sacrifices of the old covenant were unavailing. Now he says positively that Christ's sacrifice, which established the new covenant, was effectual. It really put away sin. And it was foreshadowed in the same passage from Jeremiah.
5-7 The inferential conjunction "therefore" (dio) introduces the next stage of the argument: Because the Levitical sacrifices were powerless to deal with sin, another provision had to be made. The writer does not say who the speaker is nor whom he spoke to, but TEV gives the sense of it with "When Christ was about to come into the world, he said to God...." The words of the psalm are regarded as coming from Christ and as giving the reason for the Incarnation. The preexistence of Christ is assumed. The quotation is from Psalm 40:6-8 (LXX, Ps 39:7-9), with some variations that, however, do not greatly affect the sense. This psalm is not quoted elsewhere in the NT, and this reminds us once more that the writer of this epistle has his own style of writing and his own way of viewing Holy Writ.
In the passage quoted, the LXX reads "a body you prepared for me," whereas the Hebrew has "ears you have dug for me." Some MSS of the LXX, it is true, read "ears." Moreover, some scholars hold that this reading is original and that the reading "body" arose from accidental error in the transmission of the text. But it seems more probable that the LXX gives an interpretative translation (with "ears" substituted in some MSS by scribes who knew the Hebrew). Some see a reference to the custom of piercing the ear of a slave who did not wish to avail himself of the opportunity to be set free preferring to remain enslaved to his master for life (Exod 21:6; Deut 15:17). But the language makes this unlikely. It is more probable that the LXX translators are giving us a somewhat free rendering. They may wish to express the view that the body is the instrument through which the divine command, received by the ear, is carried out (so, for example, Westcott). Or, taking the part for the whole, they may be reasoning that "the `digging' or hollowing out of the ears is part of the total work of fashioning a human body" (Bruce, in loc.).

(Heb 10:6 NASB) "IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE."

The verb "prepare" is an unusual one to use of a body, but in this context it is both intelligible and suitable.
The words "sacrifice" and "offering" are both quite general and might apply to any sacrificial offering, whereas the "burnt offering" and the "sin offering" are both specific. Actually, in the Hebrew the first two are a trifle more precise and may be differentiated as the sacrifice of an animal (zebah) and the cereal offering (minhah). The four terms taken together are probably meant as a summary of the main kinds of Levitical sacrifice. The classification is not exhaustive, but the ones listed sufficiently indicate the main kinds of sacrifices under the old covenant.
The psalmst says that God did not "will" (so rather than "desire," ethelesas) or "take pleasure in" such offerings. This does not mean that the offerings were against the will of God or that God was displeased with them. The meaning rather is that considered in themselves as simply a series of liturgical actions, they were not the product of the divine will nor did they bring God pleasure. They might have done so if they had been offered in the right spirit, by penitent people expressing their state of heart by their offerings. But the thrust of the quotation emphasizes the importance of the will.
"Then" means "in those circumstances" rather than "at that time." Since sacrifice as such did not avail before God, other action had to be taken. That action means that Christ came to do the will of God. In his case, there was no question of a dumb animal being offered up quite irrespective of any desires it might have. He came specifically to do the will of God, and his sacrifice was the offering of one fully committed to doing the will of the Father.

7 "THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"

The reference to the "scroll" is not completely clear, but probably the psalmist meant that he was fulfilling what was written in the law. The author sees the words as emphasizing that Christ came to fulfill what was written in Scripture. The words that immediately follow in the psalm are "your law is within my heart," and they show what this expression implies. The author uses the word "will" (thelema) five times, always of the will of God. It was important to him that what God wills is done. Christ came to do nothing other than the will of God.

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

8 "First" that is "above" "as he said above" refers to what came earlier not to what was spoken first of all. It is not clear why the references to sacrifices are all plural here. In v. 5 both "sacrifice" and "offering" are singular and while "burnt offerings" in v. 6 is plural in most MSS of the LXX it is singular as is the underlying Hebrew throughout. Probably all we can say is that the plural makes it all very general. Multiply them how you will and characterize them how you will God takes no pleasure in sacrifices as such. Indeed this is so even though the law requires them to be offered and the law is from God. Westcott sees a significance in the absence of the article "the" with "law" (nomos), which indicates to him that the stress is on the character of the sacrifices as legal rather than Mosaic (in loc.). But even if the grammatical point be sustained it is not easy to see how this helps.
We should see the statement concerning the necessity of sacrifice as another illustration of the attitude consistently maintained by the author that the OT system is divinely inspired but preliminary. He holds it to be effective but only within its own limited scope. The sacrifices were commanded in God's law and therefore must be offered. But they were not God's final will nor God's answer to the problem of sin. They were partial and they pointed the way. Even though they came as part of the law we are to recognize their limitation.

(Heb 10:8 NASB) After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),

(Heb 10:9 NASB) then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

9 "He said" (eireken) is perfect whereas "I said" (eipon) in v. 7 to which it refers is aorist; the change of tense emphasizes the permanence of the saying ("the perfect of a completed action=the saying stands on record," Moffatt in loc.). The words about doing the will of God are there for all time. On this occasion the omission of the parenthesis means that they stand out in their simplicity and strength. The verb "sets aside" (anairei) is used only here in Hebrews. It means "take away" and is used sometimes in the sense of taking away by killing that is murdering and this shows that it is a strong word. It points to the total abolition of the former way. By contrast the second way is "established" "made firm." Neither "the first" nor "the second" is defined but clearly the way of the Levitical sacrifices and the way of the sacrifice of Christ are being set over against each other. These are not complementary systems that may exist side by side. The one excludes the other. No compromise is possible between them.
10 We must translate en ho thelemati in some such way as "by that will." But the preposition en is "in" and it may be that our author sees the sanctified as "in" the will of God. That will is large enough and deep enough to find a place for them all. We should notice a difference between the way the author uses the verb "to sanctify" (NIV "made holy") and the way Paul uses it. For the apostle sanctification is a process whereby the believer grows progressively in Christian qualities and character. In Hebrews the same terminology is used of the process by which a person becomes a Christian and is therefore "set apart" for God. There is no contradiction between these two; both are necessary for the fully developed Christian life. But we must be on our guard lest we read this epistle with Pauline terminology in mind. The sanctification meant here is one brought about by the death of Christ. It has to do with making people Christian not with developing Christian character. It is important also to notice that it is the offering "of the body" of Christ that saves.

Some exegetes have been so impressed by the emphasis on doing the will of God over against the offering of animal sacrifice that they suggest that the actual death of Jesus mattered little. What was important, they say, is the yielded will, the fact that Jesus was ready to do his Father's will at whatever cost to himself. The death was incidental; the will was primary. But this is not what the author is saying. The will is certainly important, and unless we see this we misunderstand the author's whole position. Yet it is also important to realize that the will of God in question was that "the body of Jesus Christ" be offered. Calvary, not Gethsemane, is central, important though the latter certainly was. The contrast is not between animal sacrifice and moral obedience. It is between the death of an uncomprehending animal and the death in which Jesus accepted the will of God with all that it entails.
The offering of Jesus' body was made "once for all." Here again we have the emphatic ephapax. It matters immensely that this one offering, once made, avails for all people at all times. This contrasts sharply with the sacrifices under the old covenant as the author has been emphasizing. But it contrasts also with other religions. Hering (in loc.), for example, points out that this distinguishes Christianity from the mystery religions, where the sacrifice of the god was repeated annually. In fact, there is no other religion in which one great happening brings salvation through the centuries and through the world. This is the distinctive doctrine of Christianity.
11 The author brings out the finality of Jesus' sacrifice from another angle as he considers once more the continuing activity of the Levitical priests. Actually he does not confine the continual activity to those priests, for he uses the quite general expression "every priest." It is characteristic of the activity of a priest that he stands and ministers day by day. But of course the writer has the Levitical priests especially in mind. And it is true of them (as of other priests) that they keep offering sacrifices that can never take sins away. Standing is the posture appropriate to priestly service, and in the tabernacle or temple the priests of Aaron's line never sat during the course of their ministry in the sanctuary.
The word translated "performs his religious duties" (leitourgon) is that from which we derive our word "liturgy." Originally it meant "perform a public service" and was used of a wide variety of activities. In the Bible, however, it is confined to service of a religious character. Here it clearly applies to all the services a priest performs. Yet despite all their activity, priests cannot deal with the basic problem—that of removing sin.
12 Jesus' work is contrasted to that of priests. He offered one sacrifice—just one alone (there is emphasis on "one"). Then he sat down. The author mentioned this before (e.g., 1:3; 8:1), but he put no emphasis on it. Now he stresses Jesus' posture, contrasting it to that of the Levitical priests, and the contrast brings out an important point for understanding the work of Christ. Levitical priests stand, for their work is not done but goes on. Christ sits, for his work is done. Sitting is the posture of rest, not of work. That Christ is seated means that his atoning work is complete, there is nothing to be added to it. The expression "for all time" (eis to dienekes) is so situated in the Greek that it can be taken either with "offered" (as NIV) or with "sat down" (as Moffatt, in loc.). There is no grammatical reason for either course, but on the whole it seems best to take it with the words about offering. This seems more consistent with the way the author is unfolding his thought.
We should notice further that to be seated at God's right hand is to be in the place of highest honor. Even angels are not said to have attained to this; they stand in God's presence (Luke 1:19). When Jesus claimed this place for himself, the high priest tore his robe at what he regarded as blasphemy (Mark 14:62-63). The author is combining with the thought of a finished work the idea that our Lord is a being of the highest dignity and honor.
13 His work accomplished, the Lord now waits. The remaining words of this verse are a quotation from Psalm 110:1, with slight alterations to fit the grammatical context. The "enemies" are not defined, and the meaning appears to be that Christ rests until in God's good time all evil is overthrown. In other parts of the NT we read of God's enemies as being defeated at the end time (notably in Rev), but this is not a feature in Hebrews; and we have no means of knowing precisely what enemies he has in mind. There is possibly a hint of warning to the readers—viz., they should take care that they are not numbered among these enemies.

14 Once more the writer emphasizes that Christ has offered one offering that saves men. Clearly this is of the utmost importance for him. So he comes back to it again and again. The conjunction "because" introduces the reason for the statement in v. 13. As in v. 12, "one" is in an emphatic position; the perfecting of the saints came by one offering and by one alone. The writer does not say that Christ's sacrifice perfects the people but that Christ does this. His salvation is essentially personal. We have seen a number of times that the author is fond of the idea of "perfecting." He applies it to Christ (see comments on 2:10) and also to his people. The process of salvation takes people who are far from perfect and makes them fit to be in God's presence forever. It is not temporary improvement he is speaking of but improvement that is never ending.
As in v. 10, the author uses the concept of sanctifying, or making holy, to characterize the saved. The present tense (hagiazomenous, "those being made holy") poses a small problem that has been solved in more than one way. Some see it as timeless; others think of it as indicating a continuing process of adding to the number of the saved, others again of those who in the present are experiencing the process of being made holy. The last-mentioned view is not likely to be correct because, as we have noticed, the idea of sanctification as a continuing process does not seem to appear in Hebrews. But either of the other two views is possible. Those Christ saves are set apart for the service of God and that forever. The writer, then, is contemplating a great salvation, brought about by one magnificent offering that cannot and need not be repeated—an offering that is eternal in its efficacy and that makes perfect the people it sanctifies.
15-17 The writer consistently regards God as the author of Scripture and, as we have seen, ascribes to God words uttered by Moses and others. He does not often speak of the Holy Spirit as responsible for what is written. (See 3:7 and here; in 9:8 he sees the arrangement of the tabernacle, which of course is recorded in Scripture, as due to the Spirit.) But this is consistent with the writer's general approach, and we should not be surprised at it here. The Spirit, he says, "testifies." The choice of word implies that there is excellent testimony behind what he has been saying about Christ. There is a small grammatical problem because the quotation is introduced with "First he says," though there is nothing to follow this up. NIV supplies the lack with "Then he adds" in v. 17; and this seems to be the sense of it, even though there is nothing in the Greek corresponding to these words.
Once more the writer quotes from Jeremiah 31:33ff. (words he quoted at length in 8:7ff.). This time he does not begin his quotation so early (in ch. 8 it began at Jer 31:31), and there is a big gap (with the omission of the end of Jer 31:33 and most of 34). The reason for this appears to be that he quotes enough to show that it is the "new covenant" passage he has in mind and then goes straight to the words about forgiveness. Since his real interest lies here, he omits all else. The quotation has a considerable number of minor differences from the LXX, though none that greatly affects the sense. But there are so many of them that most commentators think the writer is here quoting from memory and giving the general sense of Jeremiah'sf words. The effect of all this is to emphasize the fact that Christ has established the new covenant and that he has done so by providing for the forgiveness of sins.
18 This short verse emphatically conveys the utter finality of Christ's offering and the sheer impossibility of anything further. Where sins have been effectively dealt with there can be no further place for an offering for sin. The author sees this as established by Scripture, and this is consistent with his normal use of the OT. He cites the Bible to show that since the new covenant is established, there is no room for any further sacrifice. This is the word of the prophet and must be accepted by any who see the OT as Scripture. So, the author reasons, now that the new covenant spoken of by the prophet is a reality, the prophetic word itself rules out the possibility of any further sacrifice.
Notes

5 Προσφορά (prosphora) is found nine times in the NT, five of them in this chapter (vv. 5, 8, 10, 14, 18). The word means originally "the act of bringing" and thus "what is brought," or "offering." Here it is practically equivalent to "sacrifice."
6 This is one of the few cases in which the verb εὐδοκέω (eudokeo, "be pleased") takes a direct object (v. 8; Matt 12:18).
7 Κεφαλίς (kephalis), here only in NT, is a diminutive of κεφαλή (kephale) and it is used for such things as the capital of a column. It is often said that its use here comes from its application to the little knobs at the end of the sticks on which scrolls were wound. Though this is not improbable, Westcott points out that no example of this usage of κεφαλίς (kephalis) is cited (in loc.). Be that as it may, here the word must mean "scroll." The genitive of the articular infinitive, τοῦ ποιῆσαι (tou poiesai, "to do"), normally denotes purpose, as here.
13 This is the one occurrence of λοιπός (loipos) in Hebrews (55 times in NT). The word means "remaining" and the neuter singular is used adverbially with or without the article in the sense of "from now on," "in the future," "henceforth" (BAG [s.v.] translates here as "then waiting"). From the time that Christ sat down, his saving work completed, he waited.
15 Some regard ἡμῖν (hemin) as a dative of advantage, "bears witness for us" rather than "to us." But the difference is not great.

I. The Sequel—The Right Way (10:19-25)
We have now concluded the solid doctrinal section that constitutes the main section of the epistle. As Paul often does, the writer of Hebrews exhorts his readers on the basis of the doctrine he has made so clear. Because the great teachings he has set forth are true, it follows that those who profess them should live in a manner befitting them. There are resemblances between the exhortation in this paragraph and that in 4:14-16. But we must not forget that the intervening discussion has made clear what Christ's high priestly work has done for his people. On the basis of Christ's sacrifice, the writer exhorts his readers to make the utmost use of the blessing that has been won for them.
19 The address "brothers" is affectionate, and the writer exhorts them on the basis of the saving events. "Therefore" links the exhortation with what has preceded it. These saving events give the Christian a new attitude towards the presence of God. Nadab and Abihu died while offering incense (Lev 10:2), and it had become the custom for the high priest not to linger in the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement lest people be terrified (M Yoma 5:1). But Christians approach God confidently, completely at home in the situation created by Christ's saving work. They enter "the Most Holy Place," which, of course, is no physical sanctuary but is, in truth, the presence of God. And they enter it "by the blood of Jesus," i.e., on the basis of his saving death.

20 The way to God is both "new" and "living." It is "new" because what Jesus has done has created a completely new situation, "living" because that way is indissolubly bound up with the Lord Jesus himself. The writer does not say, as John does, that Jesus is the way (John 14:6), but this is close to his meaning. This is not the way of the dead animals of the old covenant or the lifeless floor over which the Levitical high priest walked. It is the living Lord himself. This way to God he "dedicated" (NIV, "opened"; the word is that used of dedicating the old covenant with blood, 9:18), which hints again at his sacrifice of himself. The "curtain" goes back once more to the imagery of the tabernacle, for it was through the curtain that hung before the Most Holy Place that the high priest passed into the very presence of God.
There is a problem as to whether we take "that is, his flesh" (NIV, "body") with "curtain," which is the more natural way of taking the Greek, or whether we take it with "way." The difficulty in taking it with "curtain" is that it seems to make the flesh of Christ that which veils God from men. There is a sense, however, in which Christians have always recognized this, even if in another sense they see Christ's body as revealing God. As a well-known hymn puts it, "Veiled in flesh the Godhead see." The value of this way of looking at the imagery of the curtain is that it was by the rending of the veil—the flesh being torn on the cross—that the way to God was opened. The author is saying in his own way what the Synoptists said when they spoke of the curtain of the temple as being torn when Christ died (Matt 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The flesh (NIV, "body") here is the correlate of the blood in v. 19. The alternative is to see in the equation of "flesh" and "way" the thought that the whole earthly life of Jesus is the way that bring us to God. This is not impossible, but the grammar favors the former view.
21 The term "great priest" is a literal rendering of the Hebrew title we know as "high priest" (see, e.g., Num 35:25, 28; Zech 6:11). We have had references to Jesus as "a son over God's house" (3:6) and as a high priest. Now the two thoughts are brought together. The author does not forget Jesus' high place. He has taken a lowly place (cf. the reference to his flesh, v. 20), and he has died to make a way to God for men. But this assumption of the role of a servant should not blind us to the fact that Jesus is "over" God's household. Once again we have the highest Christology combined with the recognition that Jesus rendered lowly service.
22 Now come three exhortations: "Let us draw near," "Let us hold unswervingly" (v. 23), and "Let us consider" (v. 24). The contemplation of what Christ has done should stir his people into action. First, we are to draw near to God "with a sincere heart." The "heart" stands for the whole of the inner life of man, and it is important that as God's people approach him, they be right inwardly. It is the "pure in heart" who see God (Matt 5:8). In view of what Christ has done for us, we should approach God in deep sincerity. The "full assurance of faith" stresses that it is only by trust in Christ, who has performed for us the high priestly work that gives access to God, that we can draw near at all.
The references to the sprinkled hearts and the washed bodies should be taken together. The washing of the body with pure water is surely a reference to baptism, despite the objection of Calvin, who sees it as meaning "the Spirit of God" (in loc.). But the thing that distinguished Christian baptism from the multiplicity of lustrations that were practiced in the religions of the ancient world was that it was more than an outward rite cleansing the body from ritual defilement. Baptism is the outward sign of an inward cleansing, and it was the latter that was the more important. So here it is mentioned first. The sprinkling of the hearts signifies the effect of the blood of Christ on the inmost being. Christians are cleansed within by his shed blood (cf. the sprinkling of the priests, Exod 29:21; Lev 8:30).
23 The second exhortation is to hold fast the profession of hope. The author has already used the verb katecho in urging his readers to "hold on to" their confidence and their glorying in hope (3:6) and the beginning of their confidence (3:14). With a different verb (krateo), he has told them, to "hold firmly" to the confession (4:14). Now he wants them to retain a firm grasp on "the confession of the hope," or, as NIV puts it, "the hope we profess." This is an unusual expression, and we might have expected "faith" rather than "hope" (this is actually the reading in a few MSS). But there is point in referring to hope. It has already been described as an "anchor for the soul" (6:19). Westcott comments, "Faith reposes completely in the love of God: Hope vividly anticipates that God will fulfill His promises in a particular way" (in loc.). Christians can hold fast to their hope in this way because behind it is a God in whom they can have full confidence. God is thoroughly to be relied on. When he makes a promise, that promise will infallibly be kept. He has taken the initiative in making the promise, and he will fulfill his purposes in making it.

24 The third exhortation is to consider one another. This is the only place where the author uses the expression "one another" (allelous), though it is frequently found in the NT. He is speaking of a mutual activity, one in which believers encourage one another, not one where leaders direct the rest as to what they are to do. The word rendered "spur" is actually a noun, paroxysmos, which usually has a meaning like "irritation" or "exasperation." It is most unusual to have it used in a good sense, and the choice of the unusual word makes the exhortation more striking.
Christians are to provoke one another to love (agape), a word found again in Hebrews only in 6:10. It is the characteristic NT term for a love that is not self-seeking, a love whose paradigm is the Cross (1 John 4:10). This is a most important Christian obligation, and believers are to help one another attain it. It is interesting that this kind of love is thus a product of community activity, for it is a virtue that requires others for its exercise. One may practice faith or hope alone, but not love. (For the conjunction of faith, hope, and love, see comments on 6:11.) The readers are to urge one another to "good deeds" as well as to love. The contemplation of the saving work of Christ leads on to good works in the lives of believers. The expression is left general, but the writer selects as especially important love and (in the next verse) the gathering together of believers—an interesting combination.

25 Though NIV might give the impression that this is a fourth exhortation, this is not so. The construction is a participial one, carrying on the thought of the previous verse, not giving up "meeting together." "Some" were doing this. The word is quite general, and we have no way of knowing who these abstainers were. Though it would be interesting to know whether they were from the same group as the readers, we know no more than that the early church had its problems with people who stayed away from church. It was a dangerous practice because, as Moffatt says, "Any early Christian who attempted to live like a pious particle without the support of the community ran serious risks in an age when there was no public opinion to support him" (in loc.). The attitude may mean that the abstainers saw Christianity as just another religion to be patronized or left alone. They had missed the finality on which the author lays such stress.
The writer goes on to suggest that Christians ought to be exhorting one another and all the more as they see "the Day" getting near. Some think this Day was that of the destruction of Jerusalem, signs of which may have been evident even as this letter was being written. But it is more in accordance with NT usage to see a reference to the Day of Judgment, though, as many commentators point out, it must have been difficult for Christians in those early days to separate the two. The main thing, however, is that the writer is stressing the accountability of his readers. They must act toward their fellow believers as those who will give account of themselves to God.
Notes

19 The construction παρρησίαν εἰς τὴν εἴσοδον (parresian eis ten eisodon, "confidence to enter") is unusual, and Hering refers to it as "rather strained." Εἰς (eis) apparently denotes the end or aim, "confidence leading to."
23 Strictly ἀκλινῆ (akline, "unswervingly") refers to ὁμολογίαν (homologian, "confession"), but NIV and most translations transfer it to those who do the confessing, a reasonable procedure, for it is the people who must hold unwaveringly to the confession.
25 "Meeting together" here is ἐπισυναγωγή (episynagoge), a very unusual word used again in the NT only at 2 Thess 2:1. Some argue that the ἐπι (epi) is important and means "in addition." They think that some Jewish Christians worshiped in the synagogue and also in the Christian "episynagogue." In that case, ceasing to attend the "episynagogue" would leave them simply as Jews. But this is reading a lot into the prefix, and the word does not seem to be used in this way elsewhere. The Jews held firmly to the importance of meeting together, there is a well-known saying of Hillel's, "Keep not aloof from the congregation" (M Aboth 2:5). There is also a less-well-known one in which he says that God said, "To the place that I love, there My feet lead me: if thou wilt come into My House, I will come into thy house; if thou wilt not come to My House, I will not come to thy house" (Tal Sukkah 53a).

J. The Sequel—the Wrong Way (10:26-31)
The issues are serious. While the writer continues to express confidence that his friends will do the right thing, he leaves them in no doubt as to the gravity of their situation and the terrible consequences of failing to respond to God's saving act in Christ. God is a God of love. But he is implacably opposed to all that is evil. Those who persist in wrong face judgment.
26 It is clear that the writer has apostasy in mind. He is referring to people who "have received the knowledge of the truth," where "truth" (aletheia) stands for "the content of Christianity as the absolute truth" (BAG, s.v.), as it frequently does in the NT. The people in question, then, know what God has done in Christ; their acquaintance with Christian teaching is more than superficial. If, knowing this, they revert to an attitude of rejection, of continual sin (cf. the present participle hamartanonton rendered "keep on sinning"), then there remains no sacrifice for sins. Such people have rejected the sacrifice of Christ, and the preceding argument has shown that there is no other. If they revert to the Jewish sacrificial system, they go back to sacrifices that their knowledge of Christianity teaches them cannot put away sin (v. 4). The writer adopts no pose of superiority, but his "we" puts him in the same class as his readers. While he emphasizes the danger of others, he does not forget that he too is weak and liable to sin.
27 Far from any sacrifice to put away the sins of the apostates, "only a fearful expectation of judgment" awaits such people. The nature of this expectation is not defined, and the fact that the fate of these evil persons is left indefinite makes the warning all the more impressive. The adjective phoberos ("fearful") is unusual; it occurs elsewhere in the NT only in v. 31 and 12:21 and conveys the idea of "frightening." The judgment of the person still bearing his sins is a terrible one. The writer describes it as "raging fire" (possibly borrowed from Isa 26:11), which is a vivid expression for "the fire of judgment that, with its blazing flames, appears like a living being intent on devouring God's adversaries" (BAG, p. 338). The word "enemies" (hypenantious) shows that the apostates were not regarded as holding a neutral position. They have become the adversaries of God.
28-29 An argument from the greater to the lesser brings out the seriousness of the situation. To despise the law of Moses was a very serious matter, but this is more serious still. The law of Moses was held by Jews to be divinely given: anyone who rejected it rejected God's direction. When this happened, no discretion was allowed: the man must be executed. In such a serious matter the charge had to be proved beyond doubt. The testimony of one witness was not sufficient; there had to be two or three. But when there were the required witnesses to say what the man had done then justice took over. There was no place for mercy. He must be executed (Deut 17:6; 19:15).
The writer invites the readers to work out for themselves how much more serious is the punishment of the man who apostatizes from Christ. It must be more severe than under the old way because Jesus is greater than Moses (3:1ff.); the new covenant is better than the old, founded on better promises (8:6) and established by a better sacrifice (9:23).
There are three counts in the indictment of the apostate. First, he has "trampled the Son of God under foot." It is most unusual to have the verb katapateo used with a personal object (elsewhere in the NT it is the literal treading under the feet of things that the verb denotes). "To trample under foot" is a strong expression for disdain. It implies not only rejecting Christ but also despising him—him who is no less than "the Son of God."
The second count is that the apostate takes lightly the solemn shedding of covenant blood. "The blood of the covenant" is an expression used of the blood that established the old covenant (Exod 24:8; cf. Heb 9:20) and also of the blood of Jesus that established the new covenant (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; cf. also Luke 22:20; 1Cor 11:25). The author regards it as a dreadful thing to take lightly the shedding of the blood of one who is so high and holy and whose blood moreover is the means of establishing the new covenant that alone can bring men near to God. The apostate regards that blood as "a common thing" (koinon). That is to say he treats the death of Jesus as just like the death of any other man. The word "common" can also be understood over against the holy and it thus comes to mean "unhallowed." So NIV has the translation "an unholy thing." This stands out all the more sharply when it is remembered that that blood has "sanctified" him. The person who accepts Christ's way is set apart for God by the shedding of Christ's blood. As elsewhere in this epistle the idea of being sanctified refers to the initial act of being set apart for God, not the progressive growth in grace it usually means in the other NT writings. To go back on this decisive act is to deny the significance of the blood, to see it as a common thing.
The third count in the indictment of the apostate is that he has "insulted the Spirit of grace." The author does not often refer to the Holy Spirit, being occupied for the most part with the person and the work of the Son. Nevertheless, he esteems the person of the Spirit highly as this passage shows. It also implies that he saw the Spirit as a person, not an influence or a thing, for it is only a person who can be insulted. His word for "insulted" is enybrizo, from hybris, which Westcott sees as "that insolent self-assertion which disregards what is due to others. It combines arrogance with wanton injury" (in loc.). In the NT there is a variety of ways of referring to the Spirit, but only here is he called "the Spirit of grace" (cf. Zech 12:10). The expression may mean "the gracious Spirit of God" or "the Spirit through whom God's grace is manifested." Willful sin is an insult to the Spirit, who brings the grace of God to man.
30 The appeal to knowledge ("we know") reminds us of Paul who is fond of appealing to his readers' understanding. The author calls God "him who said" words of Scripture. He uses this word for "said" (eipon) six times, four of them being with quotations from Scripture. He is sure that God speaks to men. The author's first quotation here is from Deuteronomy 32:35. It agrees exactly neither with the MT nor the LXX, though it is quoted in the same form in Romans 12:19. It is unlikely that either the Deuteronomy or Romans passage is dependent on the other, and much more probably the authors were both using a Greek text form that happens not to have survived. We usually speak of "the" LXX as though there was but one translation of the OT into Greek, but it is highly probable that there were a number of such translations.
The quotation here emphasizes that vengeance is a divine prerogative. It is not for men to take it into their own hands. But the emphasis is not on that. It is rather on the certainty that the Lord will act. The wrongdoer cannot hope to go unpunished because avenging wrong is in the hands of none less than God. The second quotation, from Deuteronomy 32:36, agrees with the LXX (see also Ps 135:14 [134:14]). It leaves no doubt whatever about the Lord's intervention, for he is named and so is his activity.
The word "judge" may mean "give a favorable judgment" as well as "condemn." In both Deuteronomy 32:36 and Psalm 135:14, it is deliverance that is in mind; and both times RSV, for example, translates it as "vindicate." But in the OT God does not vindicate his people if they have sinned. Vindication implies that they have been faithful in their service and that God's intervention recognizes this. But where they have not been faithful, that same principle of impartial judgment according to right demands that intervention bring punishment. It is this that the author has primarily in mind. That a man claims to be a member of the people of God does not exempt him from judgment. God judges all. Let not the apostate think that he, of all people, can escape.
31 The sinner should not regard the judgment of God calmly. It is "a dreadful thing" to fall into God's hands ("dreadful" renders the word phoberos, which is translated "fearful" in v. 27—i.e., it is frightening). David chose to fall into God's hands (2Sam 24:14; 1 Chronicles 21:13; cf. Ecclesiasticus 2:18). But David was a man of faith; he committed himself in trust to God, not man. It is different with one who has rejected God's way. He must reckon with the fact that hey will one day fall into the hands of a living, all-powerful deity. Such a fate is a daunting prospect, not to be regarded with equanimity.
Notes

27 The word ἐκδοχή (ekdoche), found here only in the NT, usually seems to mean "receiving from or at the hands of another" (LSJ, s.v.). The context here shows that a meaning like NlV's "expectation" is required, but this is not found elsewhere. Hering commends Spicq's translation "prospect," adding, "The question is less of a psychological fact than of an objective future which is drawing nearer" (in loc.).
The expression rendered "raging fire" (πυρὸς ζῆλος, pyros zelos) is more literally "zeal of fire." "Zeal" may be used in a good sense or in the bad sense of "jealousy," "envy." To Montefiore its use here "suggests the passionate jealousy of wounded love" (in loc.).

K. Choose the Right (10:32-39)
As he has done before, after a section containing stern warnings, the author ex presses his confidence in his readers and encourages them to take the right way. He reminds them of the early days of their Christian experience. Then they had experienced some form of persecution and had come through it triumphantly. This should teach them that in Christ they had blessings of a kind they could never have had if they had given way to persecution.
32 "But" (which NIV omits) sets the following section over against the preceding one. The author does not class his friends among those who go back on their Christian profession. He begins by inviting them to contemplate the days just after they had become Christians. The verb translated "received the light" (photisthentes) was sometimes used in the early church in reference to baptism. But it is difficult to find it used with this meaning as early as this, and in any case it is not required by the context. It is the enlightenment the gospel brought that is in mind. This had resulted in some form of persecution that the readers had endured in the right spirit. There should be no going back on that kind of endurance now. The word rendered "contest" (athlesis) is used of athletic competition and is, of course, the term from which we get our word "athletics." It became widely used of the Christian as a spiritual athlete and so points to the strenuous nature of Christian service. On this occasion, the athletic performance had been elicited by a period of suffering they had steadfastly endured.
33-34 This suffering is further explained. "Sometimes... at other times" (so also RSV) is often taken to mean that the one group of people had had two experiences.

But it seems more likely that we should take it to mean two groups: "Some of you... others of you." The first group had been subjected to verbal attack ("insult") and also to other forms of trouble (thlipsis points to severe pressure and thus to trouble or "persecution" of various kinds). The word "publicly exposed" (theatrizomenoi) is not a common one; its connection with theatron "a theatre" makes it clear that it connotes publicity. The readers had been made a spectacle by being exposed to insult and injury.
The second group had suffered by being associates of the former group. This is explained as sympathizing with prisoners. In the world of the first century the lot of prisoners was difficult. Prisoners were to be punished, not pampered. Little provision was made for them, and they were dependent on friends for their supplies. For Christians visiting prisoners was a meritorious act (Matt 25:36). But there was some risk, for the visitors became identified with the visited. The readers of the epistle had not shrunk from this. It is not pleasant to endure ignominy, and it is not pleasant to be lumped with the ignominious. They had endured both. Attempts have been made to identify the persecution behind these words, but there is not enough information for such attempts to be successful. None of them had been killed (12:4), a fact that rules out Jerusalem, where James had been put to death quite early (Acts 12:2), and Rome after the Neronian persecution. We have no means of knowing what the persecution referred to was.
In addition to identifying with prisoners, the readers had had the right attitude to property. There is a question whether the word rendered "confiscation" (harpage) means official action by which the state took over their goods, or whether it points rather to mob violence. A third possibility is the readers' voluntary surrender of their goods to some Christian community when they joined it (as Buchanan holds possible). But the word harpage makes this unlikely. It is also an unlikely term for the action of officials (unless they were acting in a very "unofficial" manner; the scope for petty officialdom to tyrannize over Christians was immense). On the whole, it looks like mob violence or the like. The readers had taken this in the right spirit. It would not be a surprise if they endured all this with fortitude, but that they accepted it "joyfully" is another thing altogether. So firmly had their interest been fixed on heavenly possessions that they could take the loss of earthly goods with exhilaration.
The reason for their cheerful attitude is not quite clear. NIV gives a very plausible understanding of the Greek. But "yourselves" might be the object and not the subject of the verb, in which case it means "knowing that you had yourselves as a better and lasting possession." This would be in the spirit of Luke 21:19: "By standing firm you will save yourselves." Whichever way we take it, the possession (the word is singular in the Gr.) was both better and longer lasting. The possession in Christ is not subject to petty depredations like the earthly possessions of which they had been robbed. It is an abiding possession.
35 "So" connects what follows with what precedes. There is a reason for the conduct suggested. "Throw away" (apoballo) seems a fairly vigorous verb and perhaps conveys the thought of a reckless rejection of what is valuable. Because the earlier conduct of the readers showed that they knew the value of their possession in Christ, the writer can appeal to them not to discard it. As Christians they had a confidence that was based firmly on Christ's saving work and that would be the height of folly to throw away. What they had endured for Christ's sake entitled them to a reward. Let them not throw it away. The NT does not reject the notion that Christians will receive rewards, though, of course, that is never the prime motive for service.
36 The Greek has the equivalent of "you have need of perseverance"; the word hypomone denotes an active, positive endurance or steadfastness. Christianity is no flash in the pan. "Need" means something absolutely necessary, not merely desirable. This leads to the thought that doing the will of God has its recompense. The author has spoken of Christ as occupied with doing the will of God (vv. 7ff.). Now he makes the point that Christ's people must similarly be occupied in doing that will. He describes the result in terms of receiving the promise, and this safeguards against any doctrine of salvation by works. God's good gift is in mind, and it is secured—though not merited—by their continuing to the end.
37-38 Now the writer encourages his readers by drawing their attention to passages in Scripture that point to the coming of God's Messiah in due course. The "very little while" (cf. Isa 26:20) points to a quite short period. The argument is that the readers ought not let the "very little while" rob them of their heavenly reward. The writer goes on to a quotation from Habakkuk 2:3-4, but he makes a few significant changes from the LXX. The first of them is to precede his quotation with the definite article so that it is "the," not "a," coming one. In other words, the reference to the Messiah is unmistakable (cf., e.g., Matt 11:3; 21:9; John 11:27 for this expression used of the Messiah). The rabbis could interpret this passage messianically as when it was held to teach people patience and warn them against calculating the date when the Messiah would come: "Blasted be the bones of those who calculate the end. For they would say, since the predetermined time has arrived, and yet he has not come, he will never come. But (even so), wait for him, as it is written, Though he tarry, wait for him" (Tal Sanhedrin 97b).
The author has reversed the order of the clauses. He thus finishes with the words about shrinking back, and this enables him to apply them immediately to his readers. We should notice also a difference between the Hebrew and the Greek of this quotation. In the original Hebrew the point is that the faithful must await God's good time for the destruction of their enemies, the Chaldeans. This cannot be hastened, and they must patiently await it. Meanwhile, the faithful man is preserved by his trust in God. In the LXX, however, it is not so much for the fulfillment of the vision that the prophet waits as for a person, a deliverer. If someone appears and draws back, he is not God's deliverer. The author is using the LXX to bring out the truth that Christ will come in due course. In the intervening time, the readers must patiently await him.
The words about the "righteous one" living by faith are used again in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11. In those passages the emphasis appears to be on how the man who is righteous by faith will live, whereas here the author seems to be using the words to convey the meaning that the person God accepts as righteous will live by faith. Paul is concerned with the way a man comes to be accepted by God; the author is concerned with the importance of holding fast to one's faith in the face of temptations to abandon it.
The mention of faith (pistis) leads us into the most sustained treatment of the subject in the NT. The term is mentioned again in the next verse and then throughout chapter 11. The first point made is that faith and shrinking back are opposed to each other.

The passage does not say from what the shrinking back is. In the context, however, it must relate to proceeding along the way of faith and salvation. The quotation from Habakkuk makes it clear that God is not at all pleased with the one who draws back. It is important to go forward in the path of faith.
39 The chapter closes with a ringing affirmation of confidence in which the writer identifies himself with his readers. He takes no position of superiority but sees himself as one with them. He sees two possibilities: on the one hand, drawing back and being destroyed; on the other hand, persevering in faith to salvation. The end result of shrinking back he sees as total loss (apoleia). But that will not be the fate of his readers. Far from being lost, they will go on in faith and be saved.
Notes

34 The readingδεσμίοις (desmiois, "prison") should be accepted, even though it is not read by many MSS. Δεσμοῖς (desmois, "bonds") is read by a few MSS, but it is hard to accept. Most MSS have inserted μου (mou, "my"), perhaps under the influence of the view that Paul was the author.
37 The expression translated "just a very little while" is μικρὸν ὅσον ὅσον (mikron hoson hoson), which is sufficiently unusual for us to identify it with the words of Isa 26:20 with some confidence.
38 The author puts,μου (mou, ("my") after δίκαιός (dikaios, "righteous one"), though there are some MSS that omit it (which seems to be an assimilation to the quotations in Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11, neither of which has the possessive). In this he follows the "A" text of the LXX, while the "B" text places it after πίστεως (pisteos, "faith") There is no reason for thinking that our author has put the pronoun there himself.

9999999999999999999 END EXPOSITOR'S 9999999999999999999999999999

999999999999999 BKC 99999999999999999999999999999
d. The superior effect of the new priesthood (10:1-18)
This is the final subsection of the expository unit that began at 7:1. In chapter 7 the author argued for the superiority of Christ, as a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, over the Levitical priests. In 8:1-10:18 he argued the superiority of Christ's priestly ministry which is based on a superior covenant (8:7-9:15) and entailed a superior sacrifice (9:16-28). Now he argued that the superior sacrifice perfects the New-Covenant worshiper.
10:1. By virtue of its anticipatory character, the Law could never... make perfect those who draw near to worship. By "make perfect" the writer did not mean sinless perfection. As the following discussion shows, he was concerned with that definitive removal of guilt which makes free access to God possible for worshipers who trust in the sufficiency of the Cross.
10:2-4. The continuous sacrifices of the old order which are "repeated endlessly year after year" (v. 1) testify to the Law's incapacity to "perfect" its worshipers. Far from enabling them to achieve a standing before God in which they would no longer have felt guilty for their sins, the yearly rituals (of the Day of Atonement) served as a kind of annual reminder of sins, since animal blood has no power to take away sins.
10:5-7. It was precisely for this reason that an Old Testament prophecy (Ps. 40:6-8) recorded the words of the One who would do what God really wanted. This psalm prophetically anticipated some of Christ's words at his First Advent. The phrase a body You prepared for Me is one Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew expression "You have dug ears for Me." The Greek translator whose version the author of Hebrews used (obviously translating with the help of the Holy Spirit), construed the Hebrew text as a kind of figure of speech (technically called synecdoche) in which a part is put for the whole. If God is to "dig out ears" He must "prepare a body." This interpretation is both valid and correct as its quotation in Hebrews proves. In the "body" which He assumed in Incarnation, Christ could say that He had come to achieve what the Old-Covenant sacrifices never achieved, the perfecting of New-Covenant worshipers. In this sense He did God's will.
10:8-10. The writer then expounded the text he had just quoted. In the words He sets aside the first to establish the second (v. 9), the author referred to the setting aside of the Old-Covenant sacrifices which did not ultimately satisfy God. What was established was God's will, and it was by that will that we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all (ephapax; cf. 7:27; 9:12).
The words rendered "made holy" involve a single Greek word (hēgiasmenoi) often rendered "sanctify" (cf. 10:14, 29). Here it occurs in a tense that makes it plain, along with the rest of the statement, that the sanctification is an accomplished fact. Nowhere in Hebrews does the writer refer to the "progressive sanctification" of a believer's life. Instead sanctification is for him a functional equivalent of the Pauline concept of justification. By the sanctification which is accomplished through the death of Christ, New-Covenant worshipers are perfected for guilt-free service to God (cf. 2:11).
10:11-14. The truth just stated is reinforced by a contrast with the Levitical priesthood. Levite priests could never sit down on the job since their sacrificial services were never completed. But Christ's sitting at the right hand of God (cf. 1:3; 8:1; 12:2) is both a signal that His sacrifice was offered for all time and also that He can now confidently await final victory over His enemies. The words "for all time" (eis to diēnekes) are translated "forever" in verse 14 (see comments on 7:3). Thus by a single sacrifice (one sacrifice, 10:12, 14)—in contrast with the many sacrifices offered by the priests day after day and again and again... He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. The translation "are being made holy" sounds like a continuing process. But this ignores the force of the expression "made holy" in verse 10. A better rendering is, "them who are sanctified" (tous hagiazomenous; cf. v. 29). "The sanctified" have a status in God's presence that is "perfect" (cf. 11:40; 12:23) in the sense that they approach Him with the full acceptance gained through the death of Christ (cf. 10:19-22).
10:15-18. Reverting to his basic text on the benefits of the New Covenant (cf. 8:8-12), the author requoted a portion of it (in 10:16 he quoted Jer. 31:33; and in Heb. 10:17, Jer. 31:34) to drive home his point. The text is a testimony given by God's Holy Spirit, and shows that final forgiveness, such as the New Covenant promised, meant that there was no further need for any sacrifice for sin. As the writer will shortly show, a person who turns from the one sufficient sacrifice of Christ has no real sacrifice to which he can turn (cf. Heb. 10:26).
D. The fourth warning (10:19-39)
In some ways this warning section is the most pointed and stern of all. It is also climactic. It follows the completion of the epistle's exposition of the high priestly role and service of Jesus Christ, so it gathers up the implications of these truths and drives them home with full force. But as usual, the writer mingled a solemn warning with his words of consolation and encouragement.
1. THE BASIC ADMONITION (10:19-25)
10:19-22. The central assertion of these verses is in the words, Therefore, brothers (cf. 3:1, 12)... let us draw near to God. The intervening material, beginning with the word since, gives the basis for the author's call to approach God. The readers are New-Covenant people ("brothers") who should have confidence (parrēsian; cf. 3:6; 4:16; 10:35) to come into the very presence of God. This idea is enriched by the use of Old-Covenant imagery. God's presence in the most holy place and the curtain that once was a barrier to man is now no longer so. It symbolized Christ's body, so the writer may have had in mind the rending of the temple curtain at the time of Christ's death (Matt. 27:51). At any rate His death gave believers the needed access and route to God, aptly described as new (prosphaton, "recent," occurring only here in the NT) and living, that is, partaking of the fresh and vitalizing realities of the New Covenant.
But in addition, the call to draw near is appropriate since we have a great Priest over the house of God with all that this entails in the light of the writer's previous discussion. So the approach of believers should be with a sincere (alēthinēs, "true, dependable," from aletheia, "truth") heart in full assurance of faith. There ought to be no wavering in regard to these superlative realities. Rather each New-Covenant worshiper should approach God in the conscious enjoyment of freedom from guilt (having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience) and with a sense of the personal holiness that Christ's sacrifice makes possible (having our bodies washed with pure water). The writer's words are probably an exhortation to lay hold consciously of the cleansing benefits of Christ's Cross and to draw near to God in enjoying them, putting away inward guilt and outward impurity. These verses approximate 1 John 1:9.

10:23-25. This kind of confident access to God necessarily entails that believers hold unswervingly to the hope we profess with full confidence in the reliability of God's promises. The writer revealed in these verses that his concern for fidelity to the faith is not an abstraction, but a confrontation with real danger. There was an urgent need for mutual concern and exhortation (toward love and good deeds) within the church he wrote to. His readers were not to abandon meeting together, as some were doing. Already there seemed to have been defections from their ranks, though his words might have applied to other churches where such desertions had occurred. In any case their mutual efforts to spur one another on should increase as they see the Day approaching (cf. v. 37; a well-known NT trilogy is included in these vv.: faith, v. 22; hope, v. 23; love, v. 24).
In referring again to the Second Advent, the writer left the impression he was concerned that genuine believers might cease to hope for the Lord's coming and be tempted to defect from their professions of faith in Christ (cf. comments on 1:13-2:4; and comments on 6:9). They must treat their future expectations as certainties (since He who promised is faithful). If they would only lift up their eyes, they could "see the Day approaching."
2. The Renewed Warning (10:26-31)
10:26-27. The kjv translation here, "if we sin willfully," is superior to niv's if we deliberately keep on sinning, as the words "keep on" overplay the Greek tense. As the context shows (cf. v. 23), the author was concerned here, as throughout the epistle, with the danger of defection from the faith. Most sin is "deliberate," but the writer was here influenced by the Old Testament's teaching about sins of presumption (cf. Num. 15:29-31) which lay outside the sacrificial provisions of the Law. Apostasy from the faith would be such a "willful" act and for those who commit it no sacrifice for sins is left (cf. Heb. 10:18). If the efficacious sacrifice of Christ should be renounced, there remained no other available sacrifice which could shield an apostate from God's judgment by raging fire. A Christian who abandons "the confidence [he] had at first" (3:14) puts himself on the side of God's enemies and, as the writer had already said, is in effect "crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting Him to public disgrace" (6:6). Such reprehensible conduct can scarcely be worthy of anything but God's flaming indignation and retribution. This, however, as stated earlier (cf. comments on 6:8), is not a reference to hell (cf. comments on 10:29).
10:28-29. Under the Old Covenant, if an Israelite spurned the Mosaic Law and at least two or three witnesses verified his actions, he was put to death. This being true, the author then argued from the lesser to the greater. If defiance of an inferior covenant could bring such retribution, what about defiance of the New Covenant which, as he had made clear, is far superior? The answer can only be that the punishment would be substantially greater in such a case.
In order to show that this is so, the writer then placed defection from the faith in the harshest possible light. An apostate from the New Covenant has trampled the Son of God underfoot and has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant (cf. "blood of the eternal covenant," 13:20) that sanctified him. The words "sanctified him" refer to true Christians. Already the writer to the Hebrews has described them as "made holy (Gr. 'sanctified') through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (10:10) and as "made perfect forever" through this sanctifying work (v. 14). Some seek to evade this conclusion by suggesting that Christ is the One referred to here as "sanctified" or that the person only claims to be sanctified. But these efforts are foreign to the writer's thought and are so forced that they carry their own refutation. The author's whole point lies in the seriousness of the act. To treat "the blood of the covenant" (which actually sanctifies believers) as though it were an "unholy" (koinon, "common") thing and to renounce its efficacy, is to commit a sin so heinous as to dwarf the fatal infractions of the Old Covenant. To this, an apostate adds the offense of insulting the Spirit of grace who originally wooed him to faith in Christ. This kind of spiritual rebellion clearly calls for a much worse punishment than the capital penalty that was inflicted under the Mosaic setup.
But again the writer was not thinking of hell. Many forms of divine retribution can fall on a human life which are worse than immediate death. In fact, Jeremiah made just such a complaint about the punishment inflicted on Jerusalem (Lam. 4:6, 9). One might think also of King Saul, whose last days were burdened with such mental and emotional turmoil that death itself was a kind of release.
10:30-31. No one should regard such a warning as an idle threat. God Himself has claimed the right to take vengeance and to judge His people. In saying this, the author quoted twice from Deuteronomy (32:35-36), a chapter which most vividly evokes the picture of God's people suffering His retributive judgments (cf. esp. Deut. 32:19-27). Those familiar with this text, as well as other descriptions of God's wrath against "His people," agree: it is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty.
3. The Renewed Encouragement (10:32-39)
But as was his custom after the most severe admonitions, the writer chose to conclude his warning with a distinct note of encouragement.
10:32-34. An effective way to fortify people against future trials is to remind them of the courage they displayed in past ones. This is precisely what the writer did. His readers knew what it was to stand their ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. (The words "stood your ground" [hypemeinate] render the verb usually translated "persevered," as in, e.g., v. 36). They knew what it was to be publicly shamed and persecuted, and also to support others who had such experiences (v. 33). They had shown sympathy for brethren who had been imprisoned, and they had suffered property loss with joy because they had an assurance of possessing heavenly wealth (v. 34). They would do well to recall now their steadfastness in the past. Whatever they might now be facing—and the writer suggested it might be something similar—they would be helped if they would remember those earlier days after they had received the light (cf. "received the knowledge" in v. 26 and "enlightened" in 6:4).
10:35-36. This was no time for them, then, to throw away their confidence (parrēsia, cf. 3:6; 4:16; 10:19). As the author's exposition of the eternal inheritance—the glory of the many sons—had sought to show, that confidence, if retained, will be richly rewarded. What the readers needed, therefore, was just what the writer had often said and implied: to persevere (lit., "you had need of perseverance," hypomonēs echete chreian) so that by thus doing God's will (cf. v. 9) they would receive what God had promised. As much as anything, these words express the central exhortation of the Book of Hebrews.

10:37-38. If their concern was about the delay of the Second Advent, they should rest assured that in just a very little while, He who is coming will come and will not delay. These words and those that follow were adapted by the author from the Septuagint of Isaiah 26:21 and Habakkuk 2:3-4. But they were used freely and were not intended as a precise quotation, since no words such as "He says" introduced them. In the phrase My (or "the") righteous one (only a handful of Gr. mss. read "My"), the author employed Paul's description of a person who is justified by faith. It is likely that the writer of Hebrews understood it similarly. A justified person ought to live by faith, which is what the writer had been urging his readers to do. But, if he shrinks back, that is, if the "righteous one" commits apostasy, denouncing his Christian profession, God's favor cannot rest on his life. By understating the serious consequences, the writer softened his words so that he would not distract from his predominant note of encouragement.

[BSM: If you are righteous, in the sense of being justified by a moment of faith alone in Christ alone, then you are a believer who has possession of eternal life from the point of faith and cannot lose his salvation, albeit he will suffer loss of rewards in heaven. Habakkuk 2:3-4 is worded as follows:

1) [Compare Hab 2:4]:

(Hab 2:4 NASB) "Behold, as for the proud one, (v. 6), His soul is not right within him; [Hebrew and Septuagint Greek word order]: But a righteous man by his faith will live."

The proud one [the one who is self-righteous, the Babylonian, (vv. 6-20)] his soul within him is not right - not righteous - with God. But the righteous soul - the one declared righteous before God through faith in God will live out his temporal life, the years appointed to him and forever in eternity, not so the self-righteous one.

This verse is best rendered from the word order of the Hebrew text wherein a man is not righteous before the exercise of his faith, he becomes righteous by the exercise of his faith in God's promise of eternal life through a coming Messiah / Savior by which faith he will live in the sense of have eternal life; and he will live out his temporal life in a righteous manner as he lives it by that same faith.

And by quoting the Old Testament in Ro 1:17, Paul showed that even during the dispensation of Law, legal obedience was not the basis for a justified standing before God because, as the Prophet Habakkuk wrote, "The righteous by faith will live," (Hab 2:4).

2) [Ro 1:17b Greek Interlinear]:

"Ho dE ...dikaios .............Ek pistEOs zesEtai"

"The but righteous [one] .by faith .....will live"

Note that most versions have "the righteous [one] / the just shall live by faith" [NASB, NKJV, HCSB, ASB, KJV, NIV]. Only a few like the YLT follows the correct word order:

3) [Compare Ro 1:17]:

(Ro 1:17 YLT) "For the righteousness of God in it is revealed from faith to faith, according as it [has] been written, 'And the righteous one by faith shall live,' " [Hab 2:4]

When the improper word order for Hab 2:4 / Ro 1:17 / Gal 3:11 is read as it appears in most versions, it could easily be misconstrued to mean that those that are righteous before God are those who live by being faithful to law, despite the fact that the context of the verses which precede and follow indicates that man cannot faithfully keep the Law or any law and will remain accursed if he tries to be righteous by any kind of human doing.]

10:39. Then he affirmed, But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed. Here the original text has an emphatic "we," which the writer might have intended as an "editorial we," of which he was quite fond (cf. 2:5; 5:11; 8:1; etc.). Then he would mean: "As far as I am concerned, I am determined not to shrink back and experience the ruin which divine retribution would bring." The words "are destroyed" reflect the Greek apōleia, which can refer either to temporal or eternal ruin. In this context the former is correct. Instead of the ruin which an apostate invites, the writer intended to be among those who believe and are saved. The niv rendering should not be misread as a reference to conversion. Though the author's own normal word for salvation does not occur here, the expression "and are saved" somewhat freely translates eis peripoiēsin psychēs. A viable rendering of the last half of verse 39 would be: "but [we are] of faith leading to the preservation of the soul" (cf. comments on 1 Peter 2:9). But "soul" here should be understood in the Hebraic sense of the person himself, or his life, and refers in this context to the way in which persistence in the faith preserves an individual from the calamities that overtake those who "shrink back." Even if the writer was speaking primarily of his own purpose of heart, he clearly intended that to be shared by his readers. Thus the concluding statement of his warning passage (10:19-39) amounts to a call for determination and perseverance.

99999999999999999999999 BKC 99999999999999999999