Hebrews 8:1. We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.
The particular doctrine concerning Christ’s priesthood which the Apostle asserts in these words is: the locality of that priesthood is heaven. All that Paul has hitherto said on this exalted theme runs up into this: heaven itself is the adequate and true scene, or sanctuary, of the priesthood of Jesus. He sums up in this the various statements he has already made concerning the suitableness, efficiency, permanence and value of this gracious office which Christ as Redeemer executes. He carries us gradually, step by step, through the appointment, ordination, sacrifice and success of Christ in the priestly office till he shows us the Son of God exalted, as the High Priest of His people, to the highest throne of heaven. Nor is he content to lay down the pen of inspiration on this lofty topic till he has placed it before our view in the glorified person of the Priest Himself shining in the glories of the immediate presence and manifested majesty of the living God.
But he pauses now. He looks back and says, “Of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: we have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man”. Paul has made many precious and wonderful statements concerning this priesthood. He sums them all up in the doctrine that heaven is the scene of its permanent ministrations.
The doctrine thus asserted throws a very powerful light on various attributes, or characteristics, of Christ’s priesthood. We select the following: (1) its reality, (2) its effectiveness, (3) its perfection, (4) its permanence, (5) its exceeding glory.
1. Reality
That the scene of Christ’s priesthood is heaven demonstrates the reality of His priesthood. The inspired reasoning of this Epistle goes on to show this: “If He were on earth, He should not be a priest” (8:4); His priesthood in that case would be illusory, superfluous and unreal. Had He continued “on earth” for the alleged purpose of carrying on the functions of His priesthood here; had this world been the exclusive scene of His priestly office, it would have evacuated the office itself of all reality. In that case, He could only have had the same rank as the priests of the tribe of Levi, seeing they are the only recognised and consecrated priests “that offer gifts according to the law”. On the part of Jesus, there was no necessity for such a priesthood. Neither was there any scope for it. “For it is evident that our Lord sprang [not out of Levi, but] out of Judah, of which tribe Moses [who was charged with all the arrangements relating to that priesthood] spake nothing concerning priesthood.”
Further, it is a matter of history that our Lord never performed any duty of that priesthood – never offered a single sacrifice according to its rules, or lifted the veil of its holy place, or burned incense, or touched with one finger any of its priestly ceremonies. “No man taketh this office unto himself but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” It was to another species of priesthood that Jesus was called when God glorified Him, saying, “Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee”; “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek”.
The functions of the Levitical priesthood were confined to this world. The earth was the only scene of that priesthood. When Aaron died, he was no longer a priest. He did not carry his priesthood with him into heaven. He was expressly, by special divine arrangement, stripped of his priestly robes and he left them all behind, for he left his office behind. The reason was that the whole government with which his priesthood was connected was earthly, arbitrarily appointed by God, on a limited scale, confined to Israel, and designed to last only for a limited time. That government, in which God was King in Israel, and Moses His cabinet minister, was not the universal, necessary and eternal moral government of God – in whose one and all-embracing sweep Jehovah “doeth according to His will among the armies of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth”.
He could not arbitrarily set up that universal government at the mere good pleasure of His will, for it is a government of necessity and not of grace. Nor could He limit it to Israel, for it is necessarily universal. Nor could He abdicate and set it aside, for of necessity it endures for ever. Among Israel He erected under Himself a sovereignly-appointed, special, limited and local government – temporary also, and inserted as a mere parenthesis into the history of His one moral government of the race. The scene of that government or kingdom was Judea, Immanuel’s land.
Offences against that government – such as being unclean by touching a dead body or a bone – might be expiated by the services of a priesthood which, corresponding to the kingdom, was local and temporary. The scene of its functions was earth, and earth alone. All its procedure, relations and effects were confined to earth; and when its priests were translated to heaven they were Levitical priests no more. To this priesthood Christ did not belong. He was descended from another tribe in Israel. And if earth was the only adequate scene of His priesthood, He would have had none whatever, as He did not have their priesthood.
But He had a priesthood, and a real one; and its reality is illustrated and proved by its heavenly home and seat, at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. For Christ’s priesthood appertains to that universal and eternal moral government which God exercises from His throne in the heavens, not over the 12 tribes of Israel, but over all responsible agents. The sins which Jesus came to expiate were against the moral law and moral government of the Most High. The offences which Aaron and his priests could expiate were against merely “the law of a carnal commandment” – the merely-arbitrary transgressions, such as any king on earth may please to say he will not tolerate in his court. God, as King in Israel, was pleased to say that various things, in themselves indifferent – so far as the moral law is concerned – were intolerable to Him as tabernacled in the camp of Israel, and in the holy place of His kingly court and the temple worship there.
God was pleased to appoint, by the ministry of an earthly priesthood, the shedding of blood for putting away these offences that were not moral – although it “could not put away sin”, or moral defilement. He that came down from heaven had no share in this humble priesthood and its services. And had His priesthood never been carried into heaven, He could really have had no priesthood at all. But sin, as transgression of the everlasting moral law, is committed, not against the temporary King of Israel, but against the everlasting God of heaven, considered as the King whose “kingdom ruleth over all”. To expiate this, Jesus became a priest after the order of Melchizedek. Though He died on earth – for the scene of sin’s occurrence must be the scene of sin’s expiation – the reality of His priesthood is illustrated by the fact that in heaven, the palace of the moral universe, He is a priest for ever at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty above.
2. Effectiveness
The fact that heaven is the native home and scene of the priesthood of Christ illustrates its effectiveness, its success. In what consists the effectiveness of priesthood? Priesthood is designed to reconcile, to remove obstructions to communion, so that worship may be acceptable. But the worship of a king is around his throne. Access to his throne must therefore be secured by priesthood, if priesthood is to be effective or successful.
When Jehovah was pleased to erect His theocracy in Israel – to become for a time the national king in Jeshurun, with Moses as His chief minister of state, entrusted with the whole administration and executive – He erected in Israel His palace, which was also His temple; and in its most holy place He set up His sacred throne. The mercy seat was Jehovah’s throne in Israel. The Shechinah glory dwelt between the cherubim – an earthly manifestation, as the whole government was earthly, that Israel’s Shepherd-King was among them. Concerning this throne in the holy place, Jehovah said: “There I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims” (Ex 25:22). Israel was wont to say, “Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, Thou that leadest Joseph like a flock; Thou that dwellest between the cherubims, shine forth. Before Ephraim and Benjamin and Manasseh stir up Thy strength, and come and save us” (Ps 80:1,2).
If Israel’s priesthood was to be truly effective, if their service were to be successful, if they were truly to “accomplish the service of God”, if they were not utterly to fail in the whole object and design of their office, it behoved them to secure access into the tabernacle, unto the very throne of their King. On the great day of atonement they did so to the uttermost. Theirs was, within its own limits and in its own place, an efficient and successful priesthood – thoroughly efficient and successful within its own sphere. Its sphere was not the universal moral government of God; and it is impossible that the blood of bulls and of goats could take away sin – which is transgression of that moral law by which the universal moral government of God is carried on.
Within its own legitimate sphere in the limited and national and temporary theocracy among the chosen people, it was strikingly and perfectly successful. Otherwise it would have been a very poor type of Christ’s priesthood. On the great day of atonement, the blood of the appointed victim procured entrance for the high priest within the veil. The innermost part of the temple; the most sacred, most secret dwelling of the King; His most immediate presence; His very throne became accessible to Israel in the person of Israel’s high priest. Israel’s divine King unveiled His glory to His people. He shone upon them from between the cherubim. He lifted upon them the light of His countenance. He proclaimed His good pleasure in them, His blessing, and His love. He answered the prayer of their inspired liturgy: “God be merciful unto us, and bless us; and cause His face to shine upon us: that Thy way may be known upon earth, Thy saving health among all nations” (Ps 67:1,2). And this was through the efficiency and success of the priesthood He had established in Israel.
Within the limits and sphere of this priesthood, even Jesus, the Son of God – had He partaken of its office and ministry – could not have been more successful. Indeed He was not endowed with that priesthood. But the priesthood into which He had been called must, if successful, have a similar index of its success. It was a priesthood that was related to the everlasting and universal moral government of God. The throne of that government is pitched in no worldly tabernacle made with hands. It is not fixed upon the earth, but high above all heavens. Clouds and darkness are round about it. No created glory flames upon it, as between the cherubims; no representative material splendour is enthroned there; but the King eternal, immortal and invisible personally sits upon it, and ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, wait upon Him, hearkening to the voice of His commandment.
If His priesthood is to be crowned with success, ministering in what pertains to moral law and universal moral government, it must secure for His brethren access through all the ranks of the holy ones in heaven. The priest’s clients must obtain admission there, if He can minister efficiently in their cause and service. They must be able to say, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is Christ that died; yea, rather, that is risen again; who is even at the right hand of God.” They have reason and right to say so. Their Priest has been successful in His priesthood. “We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens”.
1This is the first part of a sermon reprinted with editing from The Family Treasury for 1870. It is hoped to print the second part next month and a second sermon on this text at a later date. Martin was then minister of Free Greyfriars church in Edinburgh.