The New Covenant, Part 3

Hebrews 9:15-28

     Turn in your Bibles tonight to Hebrews, chapter 9.  In Hebrews 9, we are continuing in our study of the new covenant.  And I realize that this is difficult to be understood.  That's just exactly the way the writer of Hebrews felt, that it was hard material, that it was impossible for an unbeliever to understand.  Even for a new believer, next to impossible. 

     A preacher asked me this week, he said, "When you teach the Bible," he said, "you always seem to teach with such amount of depth."  He said, "Don't you ever take into consideration the new Christians in your congregation who don't understand all you're saying?"  And that's a very good question, and I replied with the only answer that I can think of.  The answer is, "Yes, of course.  But my commitment is to teach the Word of God as God wrote it." 

     And I've learned a wonderful thing.  For some, they understand it.  For others, they don't, and that frustrates them.  And that's exactly what we would like to do, is create such a frustration that there is a great desire to learn.  For that which you do not understand, we hope and pray that you say to yourself, "I've got to understand that," and that that becomes motivation for your own further study.  That's the point.

     And on the other hand, it is also true that as we teach the Word of God, it has so much in it, and there are so many truths in every passage, that, like water, it tends to find its own level in the mind of everybody who hears it.  There are certain of you who are really clued in to the little nuances of the Greek and the little things that maybe a dozen of us get.  And then it goes on from there according to the time that you've known Christ and your knowledge of the Word of God.  But it seems as though the Word of God, in a wonderful way, can meet the level of every individual with certain truth that is applicable.

     And do not feel frustrated if you cannot comprehend it all and you have not been able to remember everything.  I even listen to my own tapes, because I can't remember what I did with certain passages in the past.  So don't expect to remember it all.  But we pray to God that you learn, and that after you've learned you have had a refreshed and a new appetite to learn even more.  And that's our desire.  So we trust that we're not leaving you in the dust, but allowing the Spirit of God to be your teacher and to teach you what it is that you can understand in your frame of reference. 

     I asked a young man, I said, "Do you get what I've been teaching in Hebrews?"  And he said, "Oh, yes.  You're talking about the fact that Jesus Christ is the most important person in the universe."  That's exactly what I'm talking about.  Now, he's a brand new Christian and doesn't know much, but he got that message.  And that's where the Spirit of God is instructing him.  So at whatever level the Spirit is teaching you, accept that as His instruction.

     All right, now, let's look at Hebrews 9, and verses 15 through 28 will be our text for tonight.  Hebrews does, in fact, teach us about the superiority of Jesus Christ.  The writer of the Book of Hebrews is, in writing to this Jewish community, endeavoring to show them that they can leave Judaism, that they can abandon all the sacrifices, the priesthood and all of those rituals that went along with the covenant, and they can come to Christ.  In order for them to do that, He must prove to them that Christ is superior to Judaism, that Christ's covenant is better than the old covenant, that Christ's priesthood is superior to the Aaronic or Levitical priesthood which constituted the Judaistic priesthood, and He must prove to them that Christ's sacrifice was superior to all of the others. 

     And that is the approach of the book, first of all, in the first few chapters, to present the superiority of Christ as a person, then the superiority of Christ as a priest, then the superiority of Christ as the maker of a new covenant, then the superiority of Christ as a sacrifice. 

     The old covenant, as we have learned all along, was unable to bring access to God.  That is what everything is designed to do in the new covenant, bring men to God.  The old covenant was unable to do it.  It only provided for a limited relation between man and God, a relationship which was not permanent.  It only existed until the next sin, and then sacrifice had to be made all over again to reorient the relationship.  Jesus comes along and brings a better covenant that gives full access to God on an eternal basis.

     The old sacrifices, you'll remember, were not able to wipe away sin.  They only covered it up temporarily.  And thus they had to be repeated all the time.  Jesus brought a perfect sacrifice that was only done once, and it took care of an eternal redemption, covering and removing, blotting out, all sin.

     The Old Testament priesthood was imperfect.  They were willing, but they weren't able.  They desired to really mediate for the people in the fullest sense and bring them to God, but they could not.  So Jesus comes along, and in the heart of the Book of Hebrews He brings, according to the writer, a better priesthood, a better sacrifice and a better covenant. 

     Now, that's what we've been studying.  And you'll remember that, beginning at the end of chapter 4, He began to talk about His better priesthood.  Then, as we moved into chapter 8, He began to talk about His better covenant.  Now, as we come to 9, He is moving from the covenant to the better priesthood, and it's all tied together.  He's been talking about the covenant that is better, and now He's going to talk about the better priesthood.

     Let's look at verse 15 and just kind of pick up where we left off last time, as an introduction.  "And for this cause He is the mediator of the new testament," or covenant, "that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they who are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." 

     Now, I want to untangle that verse in a moment.  But what He's saying here is this.  "For this cause," which goes back to what He has said before, because of the sacrificial death of Christ, or by virtue of His death, He has become the mediator of a new covenant by means of death.  He has become, by His death, the mediator of a better covenant.  That's the only way He could provide for men what He wanted to provide.  The word "mediator" is mesates.  It has to do with a go-between.  Jesus, by the act of death, became a go-between from God to man. 

     Now, you remember that God made certain standards which said "the soul that sinneth, it shall die," and the only way that somebody could come to God was if they had paid for their sin.  When Jesus died and paid for sin, He then opened the way.  Jesus' death was payment for sin, which became a bridge to God.  His death, then, was the primary act of mediation that opened the way.  And Jesus Himself said, "I am the way."

     The Old Testament priest could not become a go-between in the fullest sense.  The veil was always there.  He couldn't mediate fully.  Jesus became a perfect mediator, bringing men to God, a mediator of a better testament, and He did it by death.  He removed the barrier of sin.  "The wages of sin is death."  That was the barrier.  Sin put up a barrier of death.  Christ died, thus removing the barrier and giving access to God.

     Now, I want you to notice something.  Very important.  It says that in His death, as a mediator of a new covenant, He brought about redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament.  Now, what is the first testament, or the first covenant?  It's the Old Testament.  Do you know that when Jesus died, He redeemed those under the first covenant?  That's what it's saying.

     People inevitably will ask, in a question and answer time, "How were people in the Old Testament saved?"  They were saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ.  They were saved by the death of Christ on their behalf.  Read it again.  "For this cause He is the mediator of a new covenant."  What cause?  "That by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they who are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."  By His death, then, He brought redemption to those under the first covenant.

     Messiah became the mediator not only in order that He might pay the penalty of sinners who lived since the cross, but that He might pay the penalty of sinners who lived long before the cross.  When Jesus died, He gathered up all the sinners from the beginning of time to the end of time in that one sacrifice.  That's the point that He's making. 

     And the point is obvious in reference to Israel.  He's preaching to Israel.  He must, therefore, give them some indication of what the sacrifice of Christ means to them.  And so He simply says, "It is the sacrifice of Christ not only that redeems from now on, but that goes all the way back and covers redemption for everybody who's ever lived and who has believed throughout time."

     Now, in order to give you another look at this, turn to Romans, chapter 3.  Romans 3, verse 25, says this, talking about Christ Jesus in verse 24, "being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that's in Christ Jesus."  Verse 25, "whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation," that's helasterion, that means a covering or a mercy seat, one who provides satisfaction, "through faith in His blood," in other words, God is satisfied when a man puts his faith in the shed blood of Christ, but watch it this way, "whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood," here's the purpose, "to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God."

     Now, you say, "Well, I don't understand what that's saying."  Well, I don't blame you.  It's very difficult to understand on the surface.  What it means is this.  God, now watch it, it's a powerful point, God set forth Christ to be the satisfaction for sins in order to declare God's righteousness because of the remission of sins that are past.  You say, "What is...that doesn't help."  All right.  I'll take it slow.  God required death to be satisfied.  But "the blood of bulls and goats shall not take away," what?  "Sin."  So they didn't do it.  They were simply symbolic acts, whereby a man's faith was made visible. 

     But the blood could not be...the blood of animals could not be that which satisfied God.  You say, "Well, then, if that is true, how come God kept forgiving sins in the Old Testament?"  Now, the word "remission" means forgiveness.  What gives God the right to go around forgiving everybody's sin if the blood of bulls and goats didn't pay for their sin?  God is unrighteous.  If we declare God to be a righteous God who cannot tolerate sin, and then we say that God, just because He wanted to, forgave everybody's sin, when the blood of bulls and goats didn't really do it, then God is unrighteous. 

     If He'd have been righteous, what would He have done?  He'd have just killed them all.  He wouldn't have forgiven anybody.  If the blood of bulls and goats can't take away sin, then, when God forgave it in the Old Testament, under the economy of the blood of bulls and goats, God was unjust.  God violated His own justice.  That's exactly the question that comes up.

     But here, let's look at it now with that in your mind.  When God set forth Christ to be the satisfaction, He therefore declared His righteousness in forgiving sins in the past.  And He illustrated that it was only forbearance, or patience.  Now, that may bring it a little closer to home.

     Christ's blood, then, satisfied forever the just requirements of God's holy law, which man broke.  The purpose of justification is to declare God righteous.  And the question "How can a just God let sinners go?" is answered by the death of Christ.  He can't.  He can't.  He was merely patient, and He forgave them on credit, if you will, until Jesus made the final payment, which was all made in one installment. 

     Forgiveness under the old economy came on credit, because there was no sacrifice that truly satisfied God.  But God forgave them on the basis of their faith, in the fact that He would have a perfect sacrifice coming in Jesus Christ.  And since God operates in an eternal now, and there is no past, present and future, Christ was the Lamb slain from when?  From before the foundation of the world.  In God's mind, it was already done anyway. 

     And so we cannot look at the Old Testament and say, "If the blood of bulls and goats didn't take away sin, then God was unjust and forgiving."  He was not, because, in His eternal plan, the death of Christ gathered up all sinners from beginning of time to the end of time who put their faith in Him.  Now do you see? 

     Now when you look at the Old Testament don't be confused and think that the sacrifices took away sin.  They did not take away sin.  They were merely acts of obedience that showed that faith was legitimate.  And they were symbols of an act that would satisfy God.  And that's why, as I told you before, the Old Testament saints never really entered the presence of God until the death of Jesus Christ.  When they died in the Old Testament, they went to a place called Sheol, a place called Hades.  There they remained, I believe, until the death of Jesus Christ.  And we'll say more about that in a moment.

     But they could not have full access until that final sacrifice was made which truly satisfied God.  In the past, God overlooked sin until Jesus could bear it away.  Acts 17:30 says this.  "And the times of this ignorance God overlooked, but He now commands all men everywhere to repent." 

     You see, there was a time in God's mind when He saw Jesus' death in behalf of those even who lived before He died.  And so when Christ died, go back to Hebrews, chapter 9, verse 15, He died "for the redemption of the transgressions of those under the first covenant, that they who are called," and who are they who are called?  Well, probably Israel, the chosen nation, "might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."  God had provided the sacrifice that even reached backed and gathered them up who were believing Jews. 

     Now, of course, it was not true of all of Israel.  All of Israel, says Paul, is not Israel in the spiritual sense.  It was true for those who were believing Jews, that their sins were covered by the death of Christ, which, from man's viewpoint, was yet to come, from God's viewpoint was done from before the foundation of the world.  So God did not let sin go, and God is not unjust.  We cannot impugn the justice of God.  Jesus' death satisfied God's justice.

     How, then, were people saved in the Old Testament?  They were saved by God, watch it, knowing Christ would in the future bear their sins.  How are men saved today?  God knowing Christ in the past has borne their sins.  It's just two sides of the same event.  God is righteous.  God is just.  In Romans, chapter 3, he sums it up in verse 26, "to declare, I say, at this time His righteousness."  God is just.  God is righteous.

     The cross not only defends God against a charge that He passed by sin before the crucifixion, but it also demonstrates that when He declares a believing sinner righteous in the present, He is also just.  For mercy is available, since justice has been satisfied by Christ.  And I think that's illustrated so well in 9:26, which we'll see in a minute.  "For then must He often have suffered since the foundation of the world, but now once, in the end of the ages, hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."  One good sacrifice was sufficient for all time.

     So the sacrifice of Christ, then, is retroactive, as is the Day of Atonement sacrifice in Jewish history.  You know, on Yom Kippur last Monday, when they went through the ritual of symbolic sacrifice that atoned for sin, that was retroactive for the sins of the past year.  And so the death of Christ was retroactive clear back to Adam.

     And, as I said, before Christ died, salvation was on credit.  Payment was made at Calvary.  And I believe that...Ephesians, some of you asked this.  Let me just look at it with you for a minute.  Ephesians 4:8 and 9 tells us that it was at the death of Christ that He then took these Old Testament saints, who couldn't have full access until He opened the way, and took them to God.  Ephesians 4:8.  "Wherefore He saith, when He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men.  Now that He ascended," verse 9, "what is it but that He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth." 

     And we believe that Jesus, when He died, went down into Sheol, gathered the Old Testament saints, their spirits, and ushered them into the presence of God, so that they had to be waiting until perfect sacrifice was made on the one final day of atonement, and then were ushered into the presence of God.  The Old Testament saints, then, who were called, could not inherit their promises until sins were done away.  That's what it says at the end of verse 15.  They were under the first testament, but it was only by His death that they were able to inherit their promises.  The first covenant couldn't bring them to God's presence.

     Now, what is the...it says at the end of verse 15 "the eternal inheritance."  What is that?  Well, it certainly has to be salvation.  It has to be all that salvation is, and it came to them in the fullest sense.  Total access to God, perfection in the sense it's used in Hebrews, came when Jesus died.

     Now let me summarize the verse so you understand it.  There are several steps.  God designed an eternal inheritance.  Right?  The title for it came by promise, verse 15.  He promised them eternal inheritance.  The obstacle in the way was sin.  The obstacle must be removed.  The old covenant couldn't remove it.  There must be a new covenant to remove the obstacle.  Christ comes, provides a new covenant, removes the obstacle.  The promise is fulfilled to those who believe.  That's the simple truth of verse 15.

     So He tells His readers that the new covenant was ratified by the death of Jesus Christ and provided the full salvation that Israel had been waiting for since the very beginning.  And this introduces to us the subject of the death of Christ, as He goes on, from now on, through even chapter 10, to get into detail on it.  And this has always been a stumbling block to Israel.  A dead Messiah never fit their theology.  And so proceeding from there, in verses 16 through 28, He gives three great reasons why Jesus had to die, three great reasons why this death was necessary.

     Now, He's already told you that it was that which provided the eternal inheritance promised to them.  And now He goes further yet, to bring you three great reasons why His death was required.  Why did it have to be death that got the eternal inheritance?  Why not something else?  Why did He have to die?  Three reasons.  Number one, a testament demands death.  Number two, forgiveness demands blood.  Number three, salvation demands a victim.  And that can be stated several ways.  Judgment demands a substitute might be better.  Let's put it that way.  Judgment demands a substitute.

     First of all, testament...a testament demands death.  Now, by the word "testament" we're referring to a will.  Let's look at it.  And here the word deafece comes into play again, and we studied it some weeks back, but look at verse 16.  "For where a testament," or a deafece, "is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator."  If there's going to be a will, the guy who gives a will has got to be dead or the will isn't any good.  You don't get the will until the guy dies.  That's a simple point.

     Verse 17 takes it a step further.  "For a testament is of force after men are dead.  Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives."  As long as the guy is alive, you can't collect the will.  Simple point.  God made a legacy to Israel.  God made a legacy to all men, and the legacy was eternal inheritance.  But you cannot receive the legacy of God in inheritance until the one who gave the legacy dies.  That's the point of the verse.

     Now, the word "testament" here is, a little review here, deafece.  The common Greek word for a covenant was sunfece, which means an agreement between equals.  Deafece means somebody makes the rules up here and you either take it or leave it.  And that's the word that's always used with God's covenants, because He always calls all the shots, and men either take it or leave it.  You don't bargain with God and say, "If you'll adjust your covenant a little bit your way, I'll adjust a little my way."  God's truth is absolute.

     And the best way to illustrate the use of the word deafece is the fact that it's used to speak of a will.  A will is not a bargain between two people.  A will is something made out by one person, and the other person either takes it or leaves it. 

     And so He is saying here, God has promised an inheritance.  And that inheritance depends upon the death of the one who made it, in order for it to be received.  That's a simple truth.  And that's really all He's saying.  A will cannot operate until the one who made it dies.  Therefore, Jesus had to die.  He had to die to release the legacy of God to men.  The kingdom of heaven is bequeathed to all believers.  Such is God's will and testament.  And Jesus' death released it to our possession.  And some of it is ours now, and it will be ours in its fullness when we go to be with Him.  So the first reason for death, then, is simply that.  Testament demands death.

     The second reason for the death of Christ, forgiveness demands blood.  Forgiveness demands blood.  Now, this is directly in line with the previous point.  It takes a different shade of meaning, however.  And here we see the word "covenant" used in terms of a covenant, not so much a will.  The will idea exists in verses 16 and 17.  The gears are shifted going into verse 18.  Let's read it.

     "Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without blood."  The word "testament" is in italics.  It doesn't need to be there.  Probably "covenant" would translate.  If you're going to stick something in there, put "covenant" in to make a distinction between a covenant and a will or testament in verse 16 and 17.  "Whereupon then neither the first covenant was dedicated without blood."

     In other words, there's got to be the death of somebody, because it has always been that covenants are ratified by blood.  That's the point.  Blood was a part of the dedication or the ratification of covenants, even the old covenant.  The first was not dedicated without blood.  That's a double negative way of saying the first one was dedicated with blood. 

     In the case of the old covenant, the death of animals, typical and prophetic, looking forward