Hebrews 9 · The Lantern

The Earthly Tabernacle

Therefore the first indeed also had regulations of worship and the earthly Holy Place.

The brothers assembled at evening as was their custom. For in all seasons, when they had finished their modest meal, it was their habit to assemble and for each one to pronounce what he knew of the holy Scriptures.… The brother who had returned from the north spoke and said, "Allow me, my brothers, to tell you the saying and its commentary which I heard from a righteous man.

the blessed Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews has declared that the first Tabernacle was a pattern of this world, for he says: For the first had also ordinances of divine service and a worldly sanctuary; for there was a tabernacle made; the first wherein was the candlestick, and the table and the shew-bread, which is called the Sanctuary.

413. – Having showed in general the dignity of the New Testament as compared to the Old, the Apostle now shows the same in particular by reaching down to the individuals in each Testament.

For a tabernacle was prepared, the first room, in which were both the lampstand and the table and the presentation of the bread — which is named the Holy Places.

Concerning this tabernacle the divine Scriptures make mention indeed in many places and seem to indicate certain things which human hearing could scarcely be capable of; yet above all the Apostle Paul, concerning the understanding of the tabernacle, discloses to us certain tokens of a more exalted knowledge, but, in some way — perhaps regarding the frailty of his hearers — he i…

The first, you say, as to the holy of holies, since it was not the first, but the middle. For the first was where the bronze altar of the sacrifices and the burnt offerings was. This is the second, concerning which it is said, "in which were the lampstand, the table, and the showbread." The third, in which is a golden censer, and the Ark of the Covenant.

416. – Then when he says, For a tent was prepared, he explains what he has said: first, in regard to the disposition of the tabernacle; secondly, as to the ministry of the priests (v. 6). 417. – In regard to the first, to understand the literal meaning, it should be noted that the Lord commanded a tabernacle to be made in the desert.

And behind the second veil was a tabernacle which is named Holies of Holies,

"And after the second veil" (There was then not one veil only, but there was a veil without also) "the tabernacle, which is called holy of holies." Observe how everywhere he calls it a tabernacle in regard of God's encamping there.

Do you see that there was a first veil, which Scripture calls a curtain, since it was rolled up and drawn together — this veil separated the court, into which everyone in general entered and upon which they offered sacrifices on the bronze altar, from the tabernacle, which was accessible to the priests who performed the daily services.

420. – Then when he says, Behind the veil the second tabernacle called the Holy of Holies, he describes the things that were in the second tabernacle, namely, the ark of the covenant made of incorruptible sethim wood, covered about on every part, i.e., inside and outside, with gold.

having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered around in every part with gold, in which was the golden jar having the manna, and the staff of Aaron which had budded, and the tablets of the covenant;

The pledge and earnest of a perpetual priesthood, furnished no contemptible symbol of thy supernatural child-bearing. On thy account, and the undefiled Incarnation of God, the Word, which by thee had place for the sake of that flesh which immutably and indivisibly remains with Him for ever.

"the Ark of the Covenant." It carries the symbols of the covenant, such as the tablets of the law and the others. "having a golden censor." All these were in the Ark, rebuking the ingratitude of the Jews. "the rod", because of the insurrection against the priesthood. the tablets, because the Jews had a ploy to break the first commandments.

The Ark of the Covenant is called so because it contained the tablets bearing the law (Exod. 40:20). All these things served as memorials of Jewish ingratitude. "The golden pot of manna" — in remembrance of the fact that, while being miraculously fed by it, they murmured (Exod.

and above it were cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat — concerning which it is not now the time to speak in detail.

Now these things thus prepared, into the first tabernacle indeed the priests enter at all times, accomplishing the sacred services;

"Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle accomplishing the service of God." That is, these things indeed were there, but the Jews did not enjoy them: they saw them not. So that they were no more theirs than ours for whom they prophesied.

Figuratively, the curtain in the temple represents the same curtain that the apostle declares openly to the Hebrews, in the place where he also explains properly, according to the allegorical sense, the reason that "the priests go continually into the outer tent, performing their ritual duties, but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not witho…

424. – Having described the things which pertain to the Old Testament so far as the disposition of the tabernacle was concerned, the Apostle now continues with the office of the ministers: first, with those who look to the holies; secondly, with those who look to the holy of holies (v. 7). 425.

but into the second only the high priest enters once in the year, not without blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of ignorance of the people;

"But into the second the High Priest went alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people." Thou seest that the types were already laid down beforehand?

Do you see the very prototypes, already set forth here? Lest they say: the sacrifice of Christ was offered once, how then did it sanctify all? He shows that this was so from ancient times, for even the most holy and awesome sacrifice in the Old Testament was offered by the high priest once.

426. – Then (v. 7) he mentions the office of the ministers in regard to the holy of holies. Here it should be noted that, as it says in Leviticus (16:30) on the day of atonement (which occurred on the tenth day of the seventh month, namely, September, which is the seventh month after our March, which coincides with part of our April, when the Jewish year begins: 'This month sha…

by this the Holy Spirit was signifying that the way into the Holy Places has not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle still has a standing;

Inserting thus the particle of present time, "And now," He shows that He had made for a time, and at present, a prolongation of man's life. Therefore He did not actually curse Adam and Eve, for they were candidates for restoration, and they had been relieved by confession.

We are being taught through figures, he is saying, that the law bears of this life and is appropriate for those who still have a moral nature.… He also clearly taught us in these words that he does not reject the law as a whole—only the regulations about eating and drinking, menstruation, leprosy, childbirth and periods; they washed themselves and purified themselves with sprin…

428. – Hence, he continues: the Holy Spirit signifying this, where he explains what is signified by this: first, in regard to the Old Testament; secondly, in regard to the New (v. 11). In the first part he does two things: first, he describes the office of the ministers in regard to the first; secondly, he gives the reason (v. 9). 429.

which is a parable for the time being present, in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered, not being able in regard to conscience to make perfect the one worshiping,

"Which" (he says) "was established as a figure for the time then present." What does he mean by "the time present"? That before the coming of Christ: For after the coming of Christ, it is no longer a time present: For how could it be, having arrived, and being ended?

What he said above, the apostle now affirms, namely, that the tabernacle into which the priests always entered was a parable, that is, a figure and shadow of the present time according to the law, the time before the coming of Christ: during this time such sacrifices are offered, and ones so weak, that they cannot "in conscience," that is, according to the inner man, make perfe…

430. – Then (v. 9b) he states the reason why the entrance into the holy of holies was closed during the state of the Old Law. For no one enters into it, unless he is perfect: 'It shall be called the holy way: the unclean shall not pass over it' (Is. 35:8). Hence, where there was no cleansing and no perfection, there was no entrance into it.

consisting only in foods and in drinks and in various washings — ordinances of the flesh being imposed until the time of reformation.

"only." By hyperbaton [ὑπερβατὸν], the word imposed is to be joined: "in foods and drinks." The sacrifices and worship offered, he says, could not render anyone perfect concerning the soul, but only had power regarding the flesh and carnal matters: and in this, they satisfied the offerers so that they would eat this and not eat that, and that they would be washed with water tho…

They, he says, were established only for the people of that time and are connected with instructions concerning foods and drinks. Eat this, but do not eat that. Why did he say "drinks"? For the law said nothing about distinctions in drinks.

432. – But why did they not cleanse the conscience? Because they consisted only in food and drink. But that which is altogether corporeal does not cleanse the soul, because it does not act on the soul.

Redemption through His Blood

But Christ, having appeared as high priest of the good things that have come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made by hands — that is, not of this creation —

For we now affirm: This is lawful to the Lord alone: may the power of His indulgence be operative at the present day! At those times, however, in which He lived on earth we lay this down definitively, that it is no prejudgment against us if pardon used to be conferred on sinners-even Jewish ones.

Concerning Christ it is written, "He was to us the first-fruits of the good things which are to come," and Christ the first-fruits hath an affinity with us, and with the good things which are to come unto us, for He became man, and with the good things which are about to be unto us, which by the fore-knowledge of the Father were prepared aforetime for us, for He was God, and He…

435. – Having shown the signification of things pertaining to the Old Testament and the first tabernacle, the Apostle now describes the condition of things pertaining to the second tabernacle, which represented the New Testament. Here he does two things: first, he sets forth that signification; secondly, he proves something he had presupposed (v. 13). 436.

nor through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered once for all into the Holy Places, having obtained eternal redemption.

For if the blood of goats and of bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the defiled, sanctifies for the purification of the flesh,

"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the Blood of Christ, who through the Holy Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works, to serve the living God." For (he says) if "the blood of bulls" is able to purify the flesh, much ra…

Since, perhaps, it seemed incredible to many that through a single sacrifice and the blood of one, eternal redemption is granted, he confirms this and shows its plausibility on the basis of the Jews' own belief.

442. – Then (v. 13) he proves one of the things he had supposed, namely, the statement, having obtained eternal redemption. As if to say: I have said that He wrought eternal redemption by His own blood, in which His greatest efficacy appears.

how much more the blood of the Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, will purify our conscience from dead works in order to serve the living God.

We ought to examine not merely one single form of self-control in sexual matters but the other objects which our soul self-indulgently desires, not content with bare necessities but making a fuss about luxury. Self-control means indifference to money, comfort and property, a mind above spectacles, control of the tongue, mastery of evil thoughts.

Not some high priest offered Christ as a sacrifice, but He Himself offered Himself, and not by means of fire, like heifers, but by the eternal Spirit, which is why He also made eternal both the grace and the redemption. And "without blemish," that is, without sin. For in the Old Testament as well it was required that the heifer be without blemish.

444. – Then when he says, how much more the blood of Christ... cleanses our conscience, he lays down the consequent. As if to say: If blood and ashes can do this, what could Christ's blood do? Certainly much more. Then the Apostle mentions three things, which show the efficacy of Christ's blood: first, he shows whose blood it is, namely, it is Christ's.

And because of this he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, death having taken place for redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, those called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

It was probable that many of those who were more weakly would especially distrust the promises of Christ because He had died. Paul accordingly out of a superabundance introduced this illustration, deriving it from common custom. Of what kind is it? He says, "indeed, on this very account we ought to be of good courage." On what account?

Obviously, the death of Christ troubled many of the weaker ones: if He died, they say, then how will He give what He promised? Now Paul, removing this trouble, shows that it is precisely because He died that His testament is firm, for one does not speak of a testament of the living.

447. – Having explained things done in the Old Testament and disclosed their mystical explanation, the Apostle now uses these facts to prove his thesis, namely that the New Testament is preferred to the Old, because it can do what the Old could not. In regard to this he does two things: first, he states the intended conclusion; secondly, he proves something he had presupposed.

For where there is a covenant, it is necessary for the death of the one having made it to be established;

"there must also of necessity be the death of the one who made it," This is what disturbs them, the death of Christ. For how, he says, can the one who has died give us the promises? Therefore, he turns and shows that we can only receive the inheritance and the promise if Christ has died.

450. – Then (v. 16) he proves what he had supposed, namely, that the New Testament was confirmed by the death of Christ: first, he proves this on the authority of human law; secondly, on the authority of divine law (v. 18). 451.

for a covenant is affirmed after death, since it is never in force when the one having made it is living.

Wherefore neither has the first been inaugurated apart from blood.

And he established this no longer from common custom only, but also from what happened under the old [Testament]: which especially influenced them. There was no one who died there: how then could that [Testament] be firm? In the same way (he says). How? For blood was there also, as there is blood here.

What he said, he proved not only by general custom, but also by the events of the Old Testament, which was even more convincing to the Hebrews. "Wherefore," he says, that is, since it is necessary for death to precede a covenant, therefore the first covenant "was not dedicated without blood." Blood is a symbol of death.

452. – Then (v. 18) he proves the same thing on the authority of divine law, by something in the Old Testament: In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows the agreement between the two testaments; secondly, their difference (v. 23). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he made the statement; secondly, he proves (v. 19). 453.

For when every commandment according to the law was being spoken under Moses to all the people, having taken the blood of the calves and of the goats with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, he sprinkled both the book itself and all the people,

One of these goats was bound with scarlet, and driven by the people out of the camp into the wilderness, amid cursing, and spitting, and pulling, and piercing, being thus marked with all the signs of the Lord's own passion; while the other, by being offered up for sins, and given to the priests of the temple for meat, afforded proofs of His second appearance, when (after all si…

"For when every commandment had been spoken." For after he spoke the commandment, then Moses sprinkled the blood. "according to the law." As He says, God legislated, according to the law of God. Or of every command according to the law, these, of the legislated one.

454. – Then (v. 19) he proves his statement, namely, that that testament was not confirmed without blood. He proves this in regard to three things in which blood was used: first, in the setting forth of the Law; secondly, in the consecration of the tabernacle (v. 21); thirdly, in the expiation of the vessels (v. 22). 455.

saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded unto you.”

And the tabernacle also, and all the vessels of the ministry, he likewise sprinkled with the blood.

"Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is no remission." Why the "almost"? why did he qualify it? Because those [ordinances] were not a perfect purification, nor a perfect remission, but half-complete and in a very small degree.

And this was a foreshadowing: for the tabernacle is us, according to the following words: "I will dwell in them, and walk in them" (2 Cor. 6:16). We are also "vessels in the great house of God," some golden, others silver (2 Tim. 2:20). Thus, we were sprinkled with the true Blood of Christ and sanctified, having been baptized into His death.

458. – Then when he says, the tabernacle also and all the vessels used in worship, in the same way he sprinkled with blood, he describes the consecration of the tabernacle. But because the tabernacle had not yet been constructed, the command to consecrate the tabernacle was not given until Exodus (chap. 25).

And almost all things are purified with blood according to the law, and apart from blood-shedding there is no forgiveness.

It was necessary then for the copies of the things in the heavens to be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

"It was therefore necessary that the Patterns" (he says) "of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." And how are they "patterns of things in the heavens"? And what does he mean now by "the things in the heavens"? Is it Heaven? Or is it the Angels? None of these, but what is ours.

The statement that "he entered into the heaven itself" must be taken by common agreement as this: "And so that he might not offer himself often, he entered into the very heaven." For it is characteristic of those entering the "antitypes of the true things" to bear sacrifices "often" and "with blood," but not of the one entering "into heaven itself."

461. – Having shown what is common to the Old and New Testaments, the Apostle now shows the difference between the two. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows that there is a better cleansing in the New; secondly, that it is more complete (v. 25).

For Christ has not entered into Holy Places made by hands, antitypes of the true ones, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

The church being spiritual, was made manifest in the flesh of Christ, signifying to us that if any one of us shall preserve it in the flesh and corrupt it not, he shall receive it in the Holy Spirit. For this flesh is the type of the spirit; no one, therefore, having corrupted the type, will receive afterwards the antitype.

for Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us. In this last passage he says that heaven is the true tabernacle, while the things which were prepared by Moses are antitypes.

465. – Then (v. 24) he shows that heavenly things are cleansed by better sacrifices. For the high priest expiated the sanctuary which was made with hands, but Christ has entered into the Holies not made with hands, for they were not, so far as they were concerned, the patterns of the true one, but into heaven itself, which He expiated not in itself but in regard to us, as has b…

nor that he may offer himself repeatedly, just as the high priest enters into the Holy Places every year with the blood of another —

"Nor yet that He should offer Himself often, as the High Priest entereth into the Holy place every year with blood of others." Seest Thou how many are the differences? The "often" for the "once"; "the blood of others," for "His own." Great is the distance. He is Himself then both victim and Priest and sacrifice.

"now to appear." With the flesh, he says, it appears. "in the presence of God." What do you say? Unless he had entered into heaven, he would not appear in the sight of the Father, who is present everywhere and fills all things? Do you see that these are humble matters of privilege?

468. – Then (v. 25) he shows that the cleansing effected by the New Testament is more complete than that of the Old. But he shows this in two ways: first, by the fact that the former were repeated every day, but this only once. Likewise, as to its effects, because the former could not remove sin, but this one can.

otherwise it was necessary for him to have suffered repeatedly from the foundation of the world. But now once, in the consummation of the ages, he has been revealed for the putting away of sin through the sacrifice of himself.

Therefore, by means of the wide licence of those days, materials for subsequent emendations were furnished beforehand, of which materials the Lord by His Gospel, and then the apostle in the last days of the (Jewish) age, either cut off the redundancies or regulated the disorders.

What is, "He hath appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself"? What is this "putting away"? it is making contemptible. For sin has no longer any boldness; for it is made of no effect in that when it ought to have demanded punishment, it did not demand it: that is, it suffered violence: when it expected to destroy all men, then it was itself destroyed.

470. – Then when he says, For then he ought to have suffered repeatedly since the foundation of the world, he proves that it would have been unbecoming to do the same thing in the New Testament, because the greatest impropriety would follow, because since Christ entered with his blood, it would follow that He would have to have suffered frequently from the foundation of the wor…

And in as much as it is apportioned to men once to die, and after this judgment,

His first advent had John the Baptist as its forerun-her; and His second, in which He is to come in glory, will exhibit Enoch, and Elias, and John the Divine.

It is appointed by God unto all men once to die, as saith the Apostle, speaking of them in general; for neither do all die, nor did Lazarus and others whom the Lord raised die only once, but he refers to all men that are in this state of existence, and are mortal as God created them.

473. – Then (v. 27) he explains the two reasons: first, the second one; secondly, the first one (chap. 10). He explains the second by reason of a likeness to other men; hence, he does two things: first, he shows what has happened to other men; secondly, what happened to Christ (v. 28). 474.

so also the Christ, having been offered once in order to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, apart from sin, to those awaiting him for salvation.

"So Christ was once offered." By whom offered? evidently by Himself. Here he says that He is not Priest only, but Victim also, and what is sacrificed. On this account are the words "was offered." "Was once offered" (he says) "to bear the sins of many." Why "of many," and not "of all"? Because not all believed.

Though He is the High Priest, He is also the offering and the sacrifice. As at the Liturgy we bring up sins and say: voluntarily and involuntarily we have sinned, forgive — that is, we first recall our sins, and then ask for forgiveness — so He Himself also said to the Father: "for their sakes I sanctify Myself" (John 17:19).

476. – 477. – Then (v. 28) he shows how three things fit Christ. In regard to the first he says, and so Christ having been offered once, in which He agrees with the others.

Hebrews9

The Earthly Tabernacle

Redemption through His Blood