§15 The True High Priest and His Ministry (Heb. 8:1–6)
In this passage the author sums up his argument thus far but also brings it to a new stage. He continues to expound the definitive character of Christ’s work, now drawing the contrast in a new and fascinating manner by using the language of shadow and reality.
8:1 / The point of the argument centers on the actual reality and sufficiency of our high priest. He has been able definitively to accomplish what the levitical priesthood pointed toward in anticipation. He now has assumed his rightful place at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven (this is a circumlocution for “God”; cf. 1:3). Once again the wording alludes to Psalm 110:1. Jesus is where he is because of who he is—both Son (cf. 4:14) and high priest (cf. Ps. 110:4).
8:2 / We have a high priest who serves (lit., a “servant” or “minister”) in the sanctuary, that is, in the temple. This is described as the true tabernacle (lit., “tent”), one set up by the Lord, not by man (NIV changes the original active voice to a passive construction). The same point is made in verse 5, where the levitical priests are said to have been concerned with only a copy or shadow of “heavenly” realities. There has been considerable discussion of the possible influence of Greek dualism upon the author in his argumentation here and in succeeding passages (e.g., 9:23f.; 10:1; see note on 8:2).
Does the author believe in the existence of an actual sanctuary somewhere “in heaven” of which the earthly sanctuary is a copy? Although the language indeed sounds like that of the Greek philosophers, it is much more probable that the author takes his idea from the OT where Moses is instructed about building the tabernacle and its furniture by being shown patterns or models. (In addition to Exod. 25:40, which the author quotes in v. 5, see Exod. 25:9; 26:30; 27:8.) The issue here is not the existence of a heavenly tabernacle but rather Moses’ faithfulness to God’s intended purpose. In our passage the point being made is that true and finally efficacious atonement transcends the tabernacle and its ritual because now God’s purpose has been realized. What took place in that ritual of the historical tabernacle only through pictures and symbols actually takes place in the sacrificial work of Christ. The work of our high priest, therefore, concerns not pictures or symbols, but ultimate reality—the reality of God himself. What preoccupies our author is not a vertical dualism, but a historical progression from promise to fulfillment. The final and definitive character of the fulfillment is underlined by the fact that our high priest sits at the right hand of God, now fulfilling his ministry of intercession (7:25). The words “set up by the Lord” are possibly an allusion to the LXX of Numbers 24:6, where the tents of Israel (cf. Num. 24:5) are said to have been pitched by the Lord. The language is figurative and poetical.
8:3–4 / The opening words, every high priest, are exactly the same as in 5:1 where the high priests are described as “appointed … to offer of gifts and sacrifices.” Since it has been already established that Jesus is the high priest spoken of in Psalm 110:4, it is obvious that it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. Although the author has already indicated what that “something” is (“himself” in 7:27), he also here anticipates what he will argue in chapters 9 and 10. But the priesthood of Jesus is categorically superior to that of earthly priests: his distinctive offering is not made on earth, … prescribed by the law. This is no denial of the death of Christ in history, but rather a way of saying that his work of atonement is of eschatological or ultimate meaning and hence “heavenly” in contrast to the “earthly” work of the levitical priesthood. This is forcefully conveyed in the following verses.
8:5 / The inferiority of the work of the levitical priesthood is now stressed by noting that it concerns but a copy and shadow of the heavenly realities. This is but another way of saying that their work only prefigured the definitive atoning work of Jesus, which alone is of ultimate significance. This is further substantiated by reference to the words spoken to Moses as he was about to build the tabernacle (lit., “the tent”). He was told to follow the pattern shown you on the mountain (Exod. 25:40). This alone indicates that the tabernacle (and it successor, the temple) with its sacrificial ritual (stipulated through Moses) was not itself the ultimate reality, but only a reflection of it. The contrasting of the earthly and temporal with the heavenly and ultimate occurs again in 9:23 and 10:1. Paul can use very similar language, as in Colossians 2:17, where, speaking of certain items of the Mosaic legislation such as dietary and Sabbath rules, he writes: “These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”
8:6 / NIV omits the opening word nyni, “now,” by which the author intends to sharpen the contrast between the Mosaic era and the new circumstances now in force. In his typical fashion he now writes: But the ministry Jesus (lit., “he”) has received is superior (NIV adds to theirs). This is the first of three comparatives used in this verse. The second occurs in the statement that Jesus “is the mediator of a better covenant” (cf. 7:22). Here and in other occurrences of mediator (9:15; 12:24) the meaning intended is that the sacrifice of Jesus is itself the means or agency by which the new covenant (the word “new” is added in 9:15 and 12:24) becomes a reality. The new covenant is something he effects, since it is absolutely dependent on his person and work. The third comparative refers to better promises upon which the new covenant is founded (lit., “[legally] enacted,” cf. NEB “legally secured”). These promises will be the focus of attention in the quotation from Jeremiah 31, which will take up the remainder of chapter 8. Thus our high priest is concerned with matters altogether superior to the old covenant. His priestly work itself, the new covenant resulting from it, and the promises to which that new covenant points—in all of this the old pales in comparison to the greater excellence of the new.
8:1 / The point (kephalaion) can be understood to refer to a summary or to a new main point. Both aspects seem present in the opening verses of this chapter. Majesty (megalosynē) occurs in the NT only here, in 1:3, and in Jude 25. The expression such a high priest is found also in 7:26. For high priest, see note on 2:17. In heaven is, in Hebraic fashion, literally a plural, “in the heavens.”
8:2 / The sanctuary is literally “the holies” (tōn hagiōn) and can have three possible meanings: “holy things,” “holy ones,” or “holy place,” i.e., sanctuary. The last is preferable because this is the obvious meaning of the same words in 9:2, 8, 24; 10:19; 13:11. “Holy place” can, according to context, indicate the “Holy of Holies” (as in 9:12, 25; for the full expression see 9:3). The word “servant” or “minister” (leitourgos) occurs elsewhere in Hebrews only in 1:7 in reference to angels and in the NT in Rom. 13:6 (referring to authorities of the state), Rom. 15:16 (Paul), and Phil. 2:25 (Epaphroditus). The cognate verb (leitourgeō) is used frequently in the LXX to refer to the priestly work of the Levites. For the cognate noun “ministry” (leitourgia), see 8:6 and 9:21.
The word tabernacle or “tent” (skēnē) here and in 9:11 has been taken to refer to the humanity of Christ (Calvin), to the church (Westcott), and to the heavenly regions through which Christ passed on the way to the Holy of Holies (Spicq, Héring). Despite John 1:14 (where the cognate verb [skēnoō] occurs), and other NT references to the body as a “tent” (e.g., 2 Cor. 5:1, 4), the suggestion that the humanity of Christ is in view is hardly compatible with the statement in 9:11 that the tent “is not a part of this creation.” The same must be said concerning the view that “tent” refers to the heavens. The argument that the church is in view depends on being able to equate “church” and “tent” (an equation found nowhere in the NT) on the basis of a third term, “body,” common to both—a rather tenuous connection at best. Sanctuary and true tabernacle are best taken as referring to the same thing, the very presence of God (see 9:24). For a full discussion of this problem, see the excursus in Hughes, pp. 283–90. The word “tent” (skēnē) is used in Hebrews far more than in any other NT book. It almost always refers to the tabernacle, the predecessor of the permanent temple (see 8:5; chap. 9; 13:10), and invariably is shown to be inferior to the reality it foreshadowed. For a discussion of the use of this word in Hebrews, see W. Michaelis, TDNT, vol. 7, pp. 375–77.
The Greek dualism often mentioned as the background to this passage derives from the philosophy of Plato wherein every earthly object is said to be the manifestation of a corresponding archetypal “idea” or “form” that can only be known through the intellect. This dualism between earthly and “heavenly” reality was influential in the Hellenistic world, especially in such a center as Alexandria, where it can be detected in Philo, the Hellenistic Jew (who was a contemporary of Christ). Some indeed have seen a considerable influence of Philo upon the author of Hebrews, and this has given rise to the speculation that the book was written from Alexandria, and even that Apollos, with his Alexandrian background (Acts 18:24), was the author. Although the debate concerning the influence of Philo upon our author has not ended, R. Williamson has presented a very convincing case that the author of Hebrews is not at all influenced by Philo. See Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Williamson also denies the influence of Platonism upon Hebrews’ author, arguing that the stress on the importance of history, as well as the temporal sequence of promise and fulfillment, is quite alien to Plato. See R. Williamson, “Platonism and Hebrews,” SJT 16 (1963), pp. 415–24. The “dualism” in Hebrews is not of a metaphysical kind but of an eschatological kind, and the author’s background is more Jewish than Hellenistic.
8:3–4 / The expression gifts and sacrifices (cf. Lev. 21:6), which occurs also in 5:1 and 9:9, is unique to this epistle in the NT. The phrase is a general reference to a variety of sacrifices offered by the priests. In describing this work of the priests, the author uses the present tense prospherō, the regular word for “offer”), implying the necessary repetition (and also possibly the existence of the sacrificial ritual at the time the author writes); but in referring to the offering this one must offer he uses the aorist tense, implying the once-and-for-all character of his high-priestly work. The argument that if Jesus were an earthly priest (in contrast to one whose work is “heavenly” or ultimate) he would not have anything to offer harks back to the admission that Jesus was not a member of the tribe of Levi—of which alone Moses spoke when he instituted the sacrificial ritual (7:14). If then he is a high priest, his offering must be of an entirely different order.
8:5 / The word for copy (hypodeigma) and the word for shadow (skia) sound like the language of Hellenistic philosophy, but the ultimate reality to which they point is not something perceived only by the intellect, but something which occurred in the historical process: the cross of Christ. Copy occurs in the same sense in 9:23. See H. Schlier, TDNT, vol. 2, pp. 32f. Shadow is used similarly in 10:1 (and in Col. 2:17). See H.-C. Hahn, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 553–56. Related to these two words is another key word in this verse, which occurs in the quotation: pattern (typos). Although this is the only occurrence in Hebrews, the counterpart “antitype” (antitypos) is found in 9:24 (see note on this verse), where the earthly sanctuary is described as “a copy of the true one.” On typos see L. Goppelt, Typos, translation of 1939 German original (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982); L. Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 8, pp. 246–59.
What is in heaven is lit., “the heavenlies,” which can mean the “heavenly things” (cf. ASV, NASB), as it is translated in 9:23, or the “heavenly sanctuary” (on the analogy of “the holies” as in 8:2). The difference is of little consequence. The earthly ritual is but a pointer to the definitive and ultimate atoning work of Christ. “Above all, the vertical typology, which is all-important in Philo, is in Hb. merely an aid to the presentation and characterisation of the horizontal” (L. Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 8, p. 258). Moses was warned comes from the verb chrēmatizō, which occurs also in 11:7 and in 12:25, where it also refers to matters of especially serious importance. After the words see to it in the quotation, the Greek contains a common formula used to indicate the quotation of Scripture: phēsin, “He says” or “it says” (cf. 1 Cor. 6:16). For tabernacle, i.e., “tent” (skēnē), see note on v. 2. Exodus 25:40 is also utilized in Stephen’s speech (Acts 7:44).
8:6 / The word for priestly ministry (leitourgia), which is common in the LXX, occurs again in 9:21. The word is generally spiritualized in the NT to refer to Christian ministry (see 2 Cor. 9:12; Phil. 2:17, 30), but in Luke 1:23 the original sense is retained. See K. Hess, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 551–53. On the importance of the word better (kreittōn) for our author, see note on 1:4. The word mediator (mesitēs) occurs first in this verse and reappears in 9:15 and 12:24 (cf. 1 Tim. 2:5). The word involves more than the idea of a “middleman.” It connotes the accomplishment of salvation and is close to the meaning of “guarantee” in the parallel phrase of 7:22, “the guarantee of a better covenant.” See A. Oepke, TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 598–624. On covenant (diathēkē), see note on 7:22. See also J. Schildenberger, “Covenant,” in EBT, pp. 140–46. The Greek word underlying founded (or “legally enacted”) is nomotheteō, which occurs also in 7:11, where it refers to the Mosaic legislation (see note on 7:11). The new covenant thus possesses the same authoritative and binding character in God’s will as did the old. “Better promises” not only anticipates the content of the quotation from Jer. 31, which follows, but also alludes to such eschatological realities as true sabbath rest (4:3, 9), an unshakable kingdom (12:28), and the heavenly Jerusalem (12:22). See E. Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 68–74.