The Epistle of Hebrews Chapter 9 Commentar y b y G erald Paden 15. The Better Ministry: Hebrews 9:11-22 This chapter will continue to discuss the elements of the new "sanctuary." The writer of Hebrews adds the fact that Jesus has a new "ministry" that grows out of the sacrifice He has offered. The writer draws a parallel between the atonement sacrifices of the Law and the sacrifice of Christ under the "new covenant." It is clear from Hebrews 9:10-11 that the "new order" of Christ has arrived which means that the "good things... are already here." The Sacrifice and Eternal Redemption When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant (Hebrews 9:11-15). Christ did not enter into the old Hebrew tabernacle with its veils of separation. He did not maintain the broken fellowship between God and man. The writer of Hebrews says,
When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation (Hebrews 9:11). This "tabernacle" is "greater and more perfect" because it is heavenly. Jesus is a minister of "the true tabernacle" which is a heavenly "sanctuary" (Hebrews 8:1-2). The old Hebrew tabernacle was a physical "shadow" belonging to the physical creation. Jesus' "sanctuary" is heavenly and therefore greater. It is not "man-made" and does not belong to the physical "creation." There is no earthly "sanctuary" for the residence of God. There is no earthly temple made by human hands. God does dwell in His temple, because His people themselves are the temple (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:19) and He is the creator of His people. The new spiritual temple is the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Apostle John said, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them" (Revelation 21:3). Jesus "came through the greater (heavenly) and more perfect tabernacle." This new "tabernacle" is "perfect" because it has no veils of separation. It restores the original relationship man had with God in the Garden of Eden. They were able to live and dwell in harmony. The new priest inaugurating the new sanctuary brought about this new relationship. The writer of Hebrews will also talk about the fact that the new priest has a new sacrifice and His blood has been sprinkled in the appropriate place in relation to the new sanctuary. In Hebrews 9:7 the writer of Hebrews affirmed that the high priest never entered the Most Holy Place "without blood" and in Hebrews 9:12 he says, "He (Jesus) did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holt Place once for all by his own blood. having obtained eternal redemption." Jesus entered into the Most Holy Place "once for all." The Greek word ephapax means that His sacrifice will never be repeated. "One-timefor-all-time" is the literal meaning of the word. The phrase "by his own blood" stands in contrast with "the blood of goats and calves." It was with that "blood" that Jesus "obtained eternal redemption." Jesus did not have to do as the priests of the Law who entered into the Most Holy Place year after year with the blood of a new sacrifice.
Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins that accomplished what the Hebrew writer calls "eternal redemption." His one sacrifice eternally has the power to redeem and cover sin for all time. There are sins not yet committed by Christians, but they are already potentially covered by the one sacrifice of Christ that has eternal redeeming power. Jesus "entered the Most Holy Place" with His "own blood" to make atonement before God for human sin. The writer of Hebrews summarizes the total effect of all the sacrifices of the Law of Moses when he asks what good "the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a (red) heifer" accomplished when it was sprinkled on those who were defiled in the Old Testament? These actions did absolutely nothing for sin. The only thing it did was remove the physical defilements of the Hebrew worshipper as they offered their sacrifices of praise unto God. The writer says, "The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean" (Hebrews 9:13). The sacrifices that the priests offered removed the physical defilements that would have disqualified them from functioning at the tabernacle. For example, if a priest had touched a dead body or a serpent, he would be ceremonially unclean until he had bathed himself and sprinkled himself with the ashes of a red heifer that had been sacrificed in an appropriate fashion. The Hebrew writer insists that their sacrifices only dealt with ceremonial defilement - it could cleanse only outwardly. Those were "shadow" sacrifices, and they could only give "shadow" cleansing. The sacrifices offered before the "new covenant" were "shadows" of the sacrifice of Christ. Every Hebrew lamb that was sacrificed was a prediction and blue-print of the coming sacrifice of Christ. It helps to build the parallel by recalling the prophecy of Isaiah about Jesus: "... he was led like a lamb to the slaughter" (Isaiah 53:7b). As a "lamb" He did not cry out against the abuse. He was passive in the hands of those that destroyed His life. The sacrifices of the Law did not touch the sin problem. The blood of a thousand goats, the blood of a thousand sheep, bulls, heifers or anything else could not remove the sin of one man. The writer of Hebrews assures his readers that "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins" (Hebrews 10:4). What do goats and bulls know about sin? What do they know about God, about ethics, worship, or
about atonement? They know absolutely nothing, but that is not so concerning Christ. The writer of Hebrews says, How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God cleanse our conscience from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! (Hebrews 9:14). He draws a strong contrast between the dumb animals of the Law and the loving, caring sacrifice of Christ. Those sacrifices could eliminate "shadow" defilements but could not touch the soul of a man. If a priest was ceremonially defiled, it took the blood of goats and calves and the ashes of a heifer to remove those impurities. By way of contrast "the blood of Christ," who was a loving, caring, knowing, deliberate, self-sacrificing Savior, can "cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!" Notice the wonderful things the writer of Hebrews says about the blood of Christ. In Hebrews 10:1 he calls these "the good things that are coming." First, he says that Jesus offered His blood according to the directives of the Holy Spirit. Jesus lived His entire life under the direction of the Holy Spirit. When God wanted Jesus to do something, He simply informed Him through Holy Spirit inspiration and the instructions were followed with total devotion. In this way the Father guided His steps through the Holy Spirit. Jesus offered His sacrifice by the guidance and directions of the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 9:14 affirms that Jesus "offered" the sacrifice of "himself." This verse says that Jesus was the priest that was ministering at His own crucifixion at Calvary. Christ "offered himself unblemished to God." Evidently He is heaven's gift to man, but Calvary is also Jesus' gift to God. He was man's gift, because He was a man, and He offered "himself" as an innocent man who was able to make atonement because He had no sins. The sins for which He died were not His, they were ours. Jesus offered Himself unto God "unblemished" by sin. That means He was never guilty of mortal imperfection which made it possible for His sacrifice to be a substitute for all Christians. If He had committed only one sin, He could not take the penalty for the sins of anyone because He would have been under the penalty for His own wrong doing. He would not have been
able to cover their sins because He could not even cover His own sin. Being innocent, He did not owe His life to the penalty for His sin. so He could give His life for others. The dead cannot give their life for the dead, and everyone who has committed sin are spiritually dead. Jesus was "unblemished," and therefore, He could give His life for us by taking our death and granting us His life. Jesus' blood can "cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve (and worship) the living God." Christians can offer acceptable worship to God with a cleansed conscience. The "blood of Christ" can cleanse the conscience of a man. His blood removes sin and gives a clear conviction of personal innocence in Christ Jesus. This is a gift of divine grace. Under the Law worshipers were not admitted into the immediate presence of God. They always stood at a distance worshiping through the intervention of the priests as mediators. Every time they came to offer a sacrifice they knew they were not in the same relationship with God that Adam had in the beginning. The veils of separation kept them from the immediate presence of God. The writer of Hebrews insists that "the blood of Christ" has removed the veils lifting Christians to the position and privilege of priests whose worship is now acceptable to God. The grand purpose of the forgiveness of sins through "the blood of Christ" is not to be seen as an end within itself, but rather a means to a greater end. Innocence for the guilty is a beautiful gift from Christ. It is the most glorious condition that a man can enjoy. It is a by-product of the sacrifice of Calvary, but that is not an end within itself. The end purpose in the removal of sin is "so that we may serve the living God" (Hebrews 9:14b). The removal of his sin makes the Christian a qualified and acceptable worshiper of God. The Apostle Peter told the people on the day of Pentecost to "repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). Clearly the "remission of their sins" is a prerequisite to the reception of the "gift of the Holy Spirit." The "gift of the Holy Spirit," a seal of inheritance, is the prize of repenting and being baptized (cf. Acts 2:38). The remission of sins is a pre-condition to the reception of the "gift," which is the indwelling person of the "Holy Spirit." It is that indwelling person of the "Holy Spirit" that gives confirmation that Christians are God's people (cf.
Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6, Ephesians 1:13, 14). The remission of sins is a precondition to the reception of the Holy Spirit, but in this context the forgiveness of sins and the cleansing of "our conscience" is a precondition to acceptable worship of God. When the Christian's conscience has been cleansed, he knows that there is absolutely no debt between him and God. There are no barriers of separation between the Christian and God because that is how completely and perfectly innocent the blood of Christ has made every Christian in the presence of God. A Christian is not innocent by his own performance but innocent by imputation, innocent by gift, and innocent by the blood of Jesus Christ. The information below is provided by me concerning the above remarks about the "gift of the Holy Spirit." Alan Cox THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN REDEMPTION I want to answer several questions about this subject before I even attempt to explain anything about it. 1. Why bring up the subject of what has been commonly referred to in the past as the non-miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit. or as it is now more currently called the gift ordinary of the Holy Spirit. or the ordinary indwelling of the Holy Spirit? Answer: As a teacher I find it impossible to explain many passages of scripture when many have this particular understanding in mind since it simply will not fit within the context of what is happening or to whom a particular thing is being said. Miraculous gifts were part of the first century scene and that is recognized by all. Many Christians had differing gifts and they were able to use them readily. "Non-miraculous" or "ordinary" descriptions of an indwelling of the Holy Spirit is at the very least elusive if not overtly deceptive. I will give examples of what I'm talking about shortly to the best of my ability and with the help of others. Let me also say that this "non-miraculous indwelling" is what I was first taught and I do not consider the topic a matter of false teaching... only a lack of understanding because once taught we don't change our minds easily or search much farther sometimes. 2. I believe after years of study on the subject that our biggest problem stems, first of all, from our misunderstanding of Acts 2:38b (38 And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. RSV) and the insistence on bending other scriptures to fit our preconceived ideas on this verse. When we keep the promise within the context of Acts Chapter 2 and the direct operation of the Holy Spirit in the 1st century we have no problem. However... when we try to force fit verses spoken to people during this miraculous age into the time following when the miraculous gifts had ended and a complete revelation had been accomplished we run into difficulties. Sometimes... we hear the phrase... God said it, I believe it, and that's the end of it... when we should be hearing context, context, context! (There's no doubt about what God says most of the time... but do we understand what s being said within the proper context is the real question.) First century gifts did not go on forever but they were active then. 3. What the Holy Spirit may or may not do for us as opposed to us has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Whatever we may believe concerning the providence of God, the involvement of the Holy Spirit in prayer, etc. is a separate discussion and will only be touched on as necessary in the first part of this discussion. I will talk about some of these things later on in this discourse. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Review the Miraculous in Acts Chapter 2 1. Acts 2:1 to 4 is miraculous. - Acts 2:1-4... 1 When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. ESV 2. The question asked of the apostles in Acts 2:12 is a question about the miraculous. - Acts 2:12... 12 And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, What does this mean?. ESV 3. The quotation of Peter from Joel is a reference only to the
miraculous. - Acts 2:14-21... 14 But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them:.men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 15 For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:. And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. 19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; 20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. 21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.. ESV 4. Acts 2:33 speaks only of the miraculous. - Acts 2:33... Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. ESV Does it not seem unusual that every reference to the Spirit from the first verse to 33 speaks of the miraculous, and then Peter, without explanation, passes to the non-miraculous in verse 38. Place yourself in the audience on that Pentecost day. You have seen the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit. You ask for an explanation of the miraculous. The preacher quotes a passage that mentions only the miraculous and then you are promised the Spirit as a nonmiraculous indwelling. What would be your reaction? In the days of miraculous manifestations, for an apostle to promise the Spirit and one receive no spiritual gift, would have made that person question the credibility of the apostle. Surely, Peter would not, in his first sermon, make a promise that would have completely denied his credibility as an apostle. Since the people had heard and seen the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit (Acts 2:33), just suppose that Peter baptized one for the remission of sins, and following his baptism, the person inquired of Peter, "What about the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit that you made?" Can you not visualize the reaction? Since the apostles had the Spirit miraculously, would not the ones
that were promised the Spirit expect to receive a miraculous manifestation? What would have happened in the period of the miraculous for one to have claimed to have the Spirit, but no manifestation? This is even a valid challenge to those who claim the miraculous today. Do we not say to them, "Since you claim the miraculous, produce a manifestation (that is, restore sight to one blind from birth, or make one that is lame from birth walk.)" Note: This is taken from Franklin Camps 2nd edition book, "The Work of the Holy Spirit in Redemption," pages 152-153. The text of the scripture references are added by me for ease of study. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The second "good thing" (cf. Hebrews 10:1) the writer of Hebrews lists for his readers because of the cross of Christ is the mediation of Christ. Hebrews 9:15 says, For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. Not only does Christ's blood cleanse sins and make all Christians acceptable worshipers in the presence of God, but His blood also makes it possible for Him to mediate a "new covenant" relationship between Christians and God. The "new covenant" with all its new ingredients was discussed in Hebrews 8. The fact that God totally changed their whole system of religion would be a matter of concern for the Hebrew people. The Jew might feel that since God had eliminated the sacrifices of the Law of Moses, dismantled their tabernacle, and taken away the Levitical priesthood that He would also abandon the Old Testament saints. The Hebrew people probably felt God had left them outside His purposes leaving them deserted and without hope. The writer of Hebrews assures his readers that Christ died to cover their sins also. Christ's death removed the veil of separation not for Christians, but "that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance... to set them free from the sins
committed under the first covenant" (Hebrews 9:15b). The veil of separation only existed under the old system, but Christ tore that veil from top to bottom and removed it (cf. Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:30, John 19:23). From that moment forward there has never been a veil of separation in this new heavenly sanctuary. The torn veil symbolized the fact that Christ has perfected those that lived under the old system through His sacrifice. By His blood the Jews were granted "the promised eternal inheritance." That means that their relationship with God was changed at Calvary. The way it was changed is open to speculation, but it is clear from Hebrews 11:40 and 12:23 that those Old Testament saints have now been "made perfect." Jesus removed the veil of separation for them, not for Christians. The Greek text says that Christ's blood obtained "redemption of the transgressions committed under the first covenant." It is important to remember that God forgave the sins of people under the Law of Moses in view of Calvary. He knew that Jesus was going to die. He knew that He would cover the sins of those people under the old system, and therefore, He was able to forgive the people of the Old Testament. He did so by writing Himself a promissory note and committing Himself to cover those sins later. When Christ died He covered the sins that were committed under the first covenant. It would be good to compare Hebrews 9:15 with Romans 3:25-26 where Paul taught the same basic concept. He said, God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished - he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. When Christ died He covered the sins that were forgiven before Calvary under the Mosaic covenant. He also died to cover sins that would be committed afterwards. It has always been on the basis of the Cross that God has forgiven sins. The blood covers the sins of all men in all ages. And therefore, when God eliminated the old Hebrew system, priests, sacrifices, covenant, and tabernacle, He did not
leave those people that lived back in that age without a system of redemption. Their sins were forgiven before Calvary, but were not covered until Christ paid the penalty due them. Because of His blood, "Christ is the mediator of a new covenant." A "mediator" is one who arranges a relationship between two parties - one who mediates is one who coordinates. He is a peacemaker between two parties that have been alienated from each other. The cause of the alienation was sin. And the two parties are God and man. Christ is the bridge that spans the abyss between the two. There was an enormous chasm caused by human sin. By removing the sin, the abyss (separation) was removed and God and man can now be brought back together in perfect harmony. To be able to accomplish all these benefits for the Hebrew people of ages past, a death had to take place. Death was the Law's imposed penalty for sin. That is why Jesus "died as a ransom to set them free from the sins (and therefore the penalty of sin) committed under the first covenant." Jesus "set them free" when He mediated a "new covenant." His sacrifice gave the children of God "the promised eternal inheritance." Through Christ's death on the cross, their status before God was changed. He "perfected" them (cf. Hebrews 10:14, 11:40, 12:23). The Sacrifice of Christ and the New Covenant In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. He said, 'This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.' In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (Hebrews 9:16-22).
The writer of Hebrews discussed some of the new elements of the "new covenant" in Hebrews 8. In this passage he introduces some new thoughts about the covenant that were not clearly explained in Hebrews 8. He says that Christ died to inaugurate the new covenant because "a will" requires "the death of the one who made it." The Greek word for a covenant is diathekes. That is the same word that is translated as "a will" in Hebrews 9:16 and 17. There are biblical covenants that do nor require the death of the "one who made it," but since this covenant required death, it becomes a special kind of covenant that takes on the nature of a "testamentary covenant." A "testamentary covenant" involves the concept of a "will" made by a father to his heirs in which he makes provision for the distribution of his properties upon his death. An example of the way a last will and testament functions would be when a father makes out his will and promises to leave his possessions to his children. The father has the right to attach some conditions to his will. Perhaps he has five farms and five children and he wants to make sure each child receives a farm. He may want each child to respect and accept the conditions he has attached. When the father prepares his will which is an expression of his desires for his heirs, the will is recorded and signed before a legal representative and placed in the court records. When the father dies, his will becomes effective and it cannot be changed. The father cannot change it because he is dead. That is the reason it is called a "last will and testament." As long as the father is alive he can change the will, but his death seals the portions going to each heir and binds the conditions he has established in his will. After the father's death some of the children may look at the conditions he has set aside and decide they do not want to accept the father's conditions. Other children may look at the property and decide they are willing to accept the conditions so that they can receive their inheritance. The children who reject the conditions attached to the father's last will and testament will not receive their inheritance because their will/desires are not in harmony with the father's "will." This means that there is not a "covenant" between the father and his children. There is simply a one sided will and a disappointed father. When the child chooses to accept the
conditions in order to inherit the possessions and property of the father this is the basis of a "covenant." It becomes a two way agreement that is binding on both parties. An important observation needs to be made from this whole context. God has a "will" with every person on the face of the earth. The apostle Paul told Timothy that God "... wants (wills) all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4). Certainly not all men will "be saved," but God still "wills" that they be. God does not want anyone to perish, but wants everyone to come to repentance (cf. 2 Peter 3:9). God has a covenant with those who have ratified His "will" and have accepted His conditions. He has a covenant only with those who have His law written upon their minds and hearts and who know those laws and abide by them. He has a covenant only with those who abide with Him and become one house with Him so that they reflect the Father's "will." God has a "covenant" with the man who accepts His "will," but He has a "will" with the entire universe. God wants every man to be saved. That is the reason He commissioned the church to preach the gospel to every man on the face of the earth (cf. Matthew 28:19-20). It is through the gospel that men learn of God and of His inheritance, but only by fulfilling the conditions in the covenant can they become heirs. If men are lost it will be because they have not ratified the "covenant" that God has made for them through Christ Jesus. Jesus died to confirm and make the covenant "will" of God unchangeable. The writer of Hebrews confirms that this is a testamentary covenant when he says, "because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living" (Hebrews 9:17). Every man has the option of ratifying (to accept, approve or confirm, Ed.) and probating (the official proving of a will, Ed.) for himself. When man submits himself to keep the conditions of the covenant, then he will be a saved man and enjoy all the privileges that go with that covenant relationship. The writer of Hebrews draws a parallel between the inauguration of the old and new covenants. He says, "This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood" (Hebrews 9:18). The word "even" strongly suggests that the major topic under discussion relates to the fact that the "new covenant" was
"put into effect" with "blood." It is evident from the verses following that the same is true of the old covenant. Considering the nature of these "covenants," it takes "blood" to inaugurate each of them, so the writer wishes to make two or three points concerning the parallel between the inauguration of the Mosaic covenant and the inauguration of the covenant of Christ. The writer of Hebrews refers to the days of Moses: When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people (Hebrews 9:19). The Hebrew leader read every commandment of the Law to all of the people. He must have read the Ten Commandments, the other 613 ordinances and statutes contained in the covenant, and all of the assignments that God had made to His people. When the reading was done, he took the blood of a calf and a goat and used scarlet wool and hyssop to sprinkle four things: "the scroll, all the people,... the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies" (Hebrews 9:19, 21). The things used in the tabernacle ceremonies involved all the vessels of worship, the altars of incense and burnt offerings, the golden candle stick, and the table of shewbread. As Moses performed this initial cleansing, "He said, 'This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep" (Hebrews 9:20). The old "covenant" was inaugurated with animal blood. The "scarlet wool and branches of hyssop" were used to sprinkle the blood on the items listed. There was only a symbolic value attached to these activities of Moses. The system he thus inaugurated was the "shadow" system of which Christ is the reality fulfillment. The "blood of the (old) covenant" can compare only in symbolic or shadow form with the "blood of Christ" which mediated the "new covenant" (Hebrews 19:15). Remember that animal blood could only cleanse the external, physical defilements of the people or objects to which it was applied. That blood did not relate to their forgiveness of sin. The writer of Hebrews adds details that were not given in the Exodus 24:3-8 account when he says,
I the same way, he sprinkled with the blood the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (Hebrews 9:21-22). The sprinkling of the tabernacle and its vessels of worship did not take place at the same time the covenant was inaugurated because the tabernacle did not exist then. The sprinkling of the tabernacle and its vessels probably took place at a later date during the dedication of the tabernacle. According to the Law, blood was used in almost all cleansing ceremonies with a few exceptions. Some things were cleansed by water, some by fire, and some by scarlet wool and hyssop. But when it came to remission of sins, according to the Law of Moses, there were no exceptions. The shedding of blood was always prerequisite to the forgiveness of sin. Atonement with animal blood was always demanded (cf. Leviticus 4, 5 and 6).