159 - The Finished Work of Christ [B]

Hebrews Lesson 159  May 14, 2009 

^NKJ Isaiah 40:31 But those who wait on the LORD Shall renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles, They shall run and not be weary, They shall walk and not faint.

We're in Hebrews 10, verse 8. Last time we focused on the Doctrine of the Humanity of Jesus and went through the passages from Genesis 3:15 all the way up into the New Testament talking about and emphasizing the humanity part of Jesus. That is what's emphasized in this section because only as a man could He stand as our substitute. I want to point out a couple of verses as we think about this. Go back to verse 4. 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible

Some translations say it is impossible.

that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

That's the point. No one other than a human being could die as a substitute for the human race. So that emphasis is on the substitutionary death of Christ.  But then another part of it has to do with the qualification that comes from Jesus' willingness to submit Himself to Father's will, the Father's plan. 

To emphasize this, the writer quotes from Psalm 40:5, 6 and 7 in chapter 10. He quotes from Psalm 40:6 and then he repeats himself. When he gets down to verse 8, he reiterates these same verses and states them again to make the point. So I want to start this evening by going back to verse 8, looking there, and then moving forward from there. What we'll see here is that 4 of the 5 offerings in Leviticus are mentioned in this quote from Psalm 40:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:8 Previously saying,

(in terms of the quote form Psalm 40:6)

"Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings,

Two different terms 

and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the law),

This is a quote from Psalm 40:6 - sacrifice and offering. Because of the word that is used this refers to the grain offering. 

^NKJ Psalm 40:6 Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; My ears You have opened. Burnt offering and sin offering You did not require.

Now, that first word that is translated sacrifice isn't a technical word for a specific sacrifice. It's used for several of them. It's the Hebrew word zebach which simply means a sacrifice. The Greek word that's used in the passage is thusia, which refers to a sacrifice on any kind of offering, but it was a word that was primarily used for the grain offering. 

Then you have the word mincha which would refer to the meal offering followed in the Greek for it prosphora which usually refers to the same thing. We tend to translate the mincha offering. 

Then, the burnt offering (which was the offering for complete dedication commitment) went to God where everything in the sacrifice went up to God. 

This is in Leviticus 1. This is the olah offering translated by the Greek word holakatoma. This is where we get our word holocaust, something that is completely burnt up or destroyed. That's the derivation of that. 

Then the last is the sin offering which is the offering for sin. There is no mention of the trespass offering in here. It's not meant to be an exhaustive list; but it's a representative list. The point that the writer is making is simply to summarize the fact that all of the Levitical offerings and sacrifices all of what they pointed to were fulfilled at the cross; and there's no longer any need for any kind of Levitical sacrifice or offering to continue.

So in Hebrews 10:9 it goes on to quote from Psalm 40:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God."

This is the thinking that characterized the Messiah at the incarnation. He is completely subordinate to the will of God. So through that the writer then says:

He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

That is the first covenant (the Mosaic Covenant) to replace it with the second. That is a major theme that has run through this section from chapter 8 where he talks about the New Covenant quoting from the Old Testament that the old covenant is replaced with the New Covenant. Therefore, the very fact that he uses that terminology shows that the first covenant (the Mosaic Covenant) was a temporary covenant and that God had a future plan to resolve the sin problem completely with a permanent sacrifice. That is what is accomplished when Jesus dies the sacrificial death on the cross that is the foundation for the New Covenant.

Then in verse 10 the writer states:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

"That will" here refers to the will of the Father. 

Remember verse 9.  Jesus says:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

The will that is being spoken of in context is the will of the Father, the plan of the Father.

So verse 10 says: 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:10 By that will

That is the will of God the Father.

we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

That is a finished and a completed work. 

Now one thing I want to draw your attention to here. The key words that you should focus on in verse 10 are the words "we have been sanctified." It is the Greek word hagiosmenoi. It's a periphrastic participle, which means it starts with a finite verb from eimi (to be) with the participial form indicating a present reality. "We are sanctified." It's an aorist participle, which indicates that it is a past or completed action. We have been sanctified and that is completed through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 

The covenantal idea is going to be picked up later on in the chapter. This concept of the sanctification is going to be picked up later in the chapter. In verse 16 there is another quote from the Old Testament emphasizing the New Covenant.

Then in verse 14 there is a statement:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

When we get to those passages in a little while, we understand their significance because of what we see in verse 10. So this sets the stage that we're not talking about ongoing sanctification. Remember we have three phases of sanctification, just like we talk about three phases of salvation.

1. Phase 1 when we're justified or we are saved from the penalty of sin. That takes place in a moment of time when we believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins. 
2. Then we have experiential or progressive sanctification or spiritual growth. This is when we're being saved from the power of sin as we advance in the spiritual life. 
3. Then phase 3 is when we are saved from the presence of sin and we're glorified and we're face-to-face with the Father. 

So we have to look at the text and say, "What kind of sanctification are we talking about here?"

The completed idea indicates that this is talking about phase 1 and that relates of course to what Christ did on the cross. The payment of the sin penalty and all of the offerings and sacrifices foreshadowed different aspects and different facets to the work Christ on the cross to solve that sin problem.

That brings us to the next paragraph, which is verse 11 down through 18. The emphasis in this section is on the finality of what Christ did on the cross. 

Sometimes we lose because we're so comfortable with the idea. We're so familiar with it (that Christ completed the work) that we don't really feel the impact of that as a fresh idea as these Jewish (formerly Jewish priests) would have heard it because they're going into the Temple. They have participated in the various courses of priests, the various groups of priest that would serve in the Temple. And they had that experience of going into the Temple, serving in the Temple, standing on their feet all day long, sacrificing one lamb after another, smelling the blood, hearing the bleats of the lambs. All of this they would have heard. When the lambs died, they would have heard all of this and smelled all the smells and seen everything and done it day after day after day. That is what the writer of Hebrews states in verse 11.

He said:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

Now the word translated stands is a perfect active indicative verb that indicates that it's completed action. It's talking about something that is no longer going on but was completed in the past. The word that's translated ministering daily in the New King James is a word leitourgeo, which has to do with the serving, the service at the Temple. 

Then the other word that we emphasized in this passage is the offering, prosphereo, which we've seen one form of that word or another which is translated either as the offering as a noun form or the verb form.

So the point that is being made in verse 11 is in contrast to the point that is being made when we get to verse 12. Verse 11 is emphasizing that ongoing routine of the priest in the Old Testament. Every priest stood daily. They're on their feet all day long sacrificing the animals, offering repeatedly the same sacrifice which can never take away sin. Now the word here that is used for taking away sin is a form of aireo. It's periaireo here which is a form of the word that is used in Hebrews 10:4. So we have the same idea there and we need to keep that in some sort of perspective.

Back in verse 4 he wrote:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

These animals just can't do it because they're animals. Then in verse 11 he returns to that main idea talking about the priests stand daily, offering these sacrifices again and again. It's a repetitive sacrifice idea there, "which can never take away sin". It goes on and on and on, one sacrifice after another and it never really brings about the completion. They're just doing it year after year, day after day; and it never resolves the sin problem. 

The contrast is between the ongoing action of the priests that never accomplishes anything and the completed work of Christ that accomplished everything.  That's in verse 12. So we look at verse 11 and we could paraphrase it that "every priest stood." It's a completed action. It's talking about the past. 

The time of the action is it occurred at the same time as the standing and when he was offering the sacrifices. In contrast you have Jesus:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever,

Instead of the daily idea…

sat down at the right hand of God,

The way the construction is in the grammar, the offering precedes the action of the main verb, which is to sit down. So we see this comparison and contrast going on in this passage that the priest stood; but Jesus when He finishes, sits. The priest does it continually. It's daily. It's repeatedly. Jesus did it once.  The priest offers the same sacrifices time after time. Jesus offered one sacrifice. When the priest offered it, it did not take away sin. But when Jesus' sacrifice was offered, it did take away sin. The priests' sacrifices were ineffectual; but Jesus' sacrifice was once for all and is completely effectual. 

Now he moves on in his argument to verse 12. He says:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:12 But this Man,

Now that's how the New King James has it. I don't know how some of the other versions may translate it. Literally in the Greek it's "but this one." It's not emphasizing His humanity here. It just says, "But this one."

after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God,

So the emphasis there is on the completion of this act, and it handles the sin problem forever – at the cross, not when somebody is saved. The sin problem is resolved at the cross, not when they're saved. What happens when they're saved is the consequences of the sin problem for them personally are what is resolved. 

Remember three things have to be resolved for a person to get into heaven. First of all, the legal penalty has to be paid. The legal penalty was spiritual death.  But when Adam died spiritually, it meant that all of his descendents would be born spiritually dead and they would be born unrighteous. Now when the sin penalty is paid, that doesn't mean that their condition, the individual's condition of being spiritually dead and unrighteous is resolved; only that the legal penalty in relation to God's judicial demands are resolved. 

So God in terms of His judicial demands that His righteousness be satisfied, looks at the cross and sees the perfect spotless Lamb of God on the cross bearing the sins of the world. His justice is satisfied because that legal penalty is paid. That resolves all those universal statements about Christ dying for all, redeemed all. The world is propitiated. 

But the individual personal condition is not resolved because of that. That means that something has to happen to change a person from being spiritually dead to being spiritually alive and from being unrighteous to being righteous. That is resolved at the point of belief, faith in Christ. 

So at the cross, the one man Jesus after He had offered one sacrifice for sins - that's all that needs to be done. That completed it. He sat down at the right hand of the Father. This is a purely passive posture. He is not doing anything more. This is a major contrast. 

This was a major emphasis during the Reformation time because the Roman Catholic theology celebrated a re-crucifixion that was ongoing whenever the mass was observed. Their view of the Lord's Table is what's called transubstantiation. In transubstantiation the bread and the wine would literally be transformed into the body and the blood of Jesus. It's a mystical thing based on Aristotelian concepts and substance and accidents. But there is constant re-crucifying of the Savior; there is no finishing of the work.

You see this whenever you go to a Roman Catholic Church. You drive by a Roman Catholic Church. You always see Jesus on the cross. You don't go to a Roman Catholic Church and ever see Jesus off the cross. He's constantly on the cross because He's being crucified again and again and again for sins. It's not really completed. One of the results of that is you can't ever be sure that you're saved. You don't know that the work is finished and the sin problem is once for all resolved. 

So this goes against the whole Roman theology. In the Reformation period this was a battle cry for the Reformers, for the Protestants. They weren't going to re-crucify Jesus again and again and again. People understood that. Today people don't understand much theology at all. You're lucky if you get the gospel straight. But during the time of the Reformation because of the fact that it was – especially in England – you might have one year it was a death penalty to be a Roman Catholic. The next year it might be the death penalty to be a Protestant. You'd better understand these things because your life would depend on it. 

So they understood the significance of this that there was one sacrifice for sin and the fact that Jesus sat down at the right hand of the Father meant that the work was completed and the sin problem was completely resolved with the result that He is waiting now. He's in a posture of waiting. 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool.

Now this is a verse that we've seen several times quoted and alluded to in Hebrews. It's from Psalm 110:1, that:

^NKJ Psalm 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool."

The idea here is that it is the Father who is eventually going to bring history to a point where the enemies of Christ are going to be ready for that defeat. That is when we connect Psalm 110 to Psalm 2 and you see that the world powers and nations are in an uproar against God. The Lord scoffs at them in Psalm 2. He sends His Son (the Messiah, the Anointed One) there in Psalm 2 to defeat these enemies. This is what occurs at the Battle of Armageddon. 

So Jesus is in this posture of waiting until the right times comes. When that right time comes that's the imagery that we see in Revelation 4 with the Lamb coming before the throne and the Father gives Him the scroll which is the title deed and begins to enact the whole series of events that occur in the Tribulation period when Christ's enemies are made His footstool.

The picture there is a footstool is under your feet. It's a picture of domination and a picture of defeat. So Jesus is in a position of waiting right now until the Father's plan for the Church Age comes to fruition. This is contrasted to that ongoing activity of the priest in the Old Testament.

^NKJ Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

The offering of course is Christ on the cross. The "perfected" here is the Greek word teleioo (the verb)indicting completion. It is the idea that by this one offering He has brought to completion forever those who are, not "being sanctified", that indicates a present ongoing action. That would be phase 2. But this is a tense that indicates the completedness, especially based back on verse 10 that:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

…those who are already saved. We might paraphrase it that way. So again we have the familiar words here for offering – prosphora. It means sanctified (the present active participle of hagiazo). Here it has an article with it so it's translated as if it is a noun. It really doesn't have that much of a verbal idea to it. It is just saying – it's like saying "to believers." "He has perfected forever believers." You could paraphrase it that way because the Greek participle when it functions as a noun. You can just translate it as if it's a noun when it has the article with it. So He has completed those who are saved, those who are justified, and that is completed by His work on the cross so that is complete and whole. 

Now this takes us, especially the verb teleioo takes us, to the use of the perfect passive indicative, third person singular of the verb in John 19:28 and John 19:30. The scene is the cross. When Jesus has been hanging on the cross, paying the penalty for our sins, and they've been imputed to Him for three hours; He comes to the end of that time period. Now it's after 3 o'clock in the afternoon and John writes:

^NKJ John 19:28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst!"

The words "now accomplished" are the same verb, same tense, voice mood, person and number that you have in verse 30 – it is finished. 

After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now finished.

See that's one of those places where I get a little irritated at translators because in English - when you go to study writing, they tell you a good English writer will vary his vocabulary. He won't use the same word more than once in a paragraph. And this has gone on. I've been reading a number of books lately on the characteristics of translations, the history of the English Bible. This has been part of English translation theory since at least time of the Reformation. 

So you have passages like this. Sometimes you have the same Greek word and it'll vary in meaning as you go through the passage. Like 1 Corinthians 2 has pneuma, which is the word translated spirit or wind or breathe. It has three or four different meanings in that passage. It has a meaning of the human spirit in one verse, Holy Spirit in another verse. You have that kind of variation so it's important to recognize that when you translate. But in a passage like this, the Holy Spirit is emphasizing the completedness and the finished aspect of what Christ did on the cross. When you translate that word tetelestai with two different English words, accomplished in verse 28 and finished in verse 30, you lose what the Holy Spirit's doing there. He has twice stated in three verses, "It is finished"- same word emphasis Christ's work on the cross. 

So John says in verse 28:

^NKJ John 19:28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst!"

Then in John 19:30:

^NKJ John 19:30 So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

It's finished in both statements indicating the completion. Now that word tetelestai that Jesus uttered was also a word that was used in an economic context. Now we've talked about the fact that at the cross Jesus paid the penalty for sin. That is an economic idea - redemption. We also talk about the fact that our sins when they were imputed to Him, that certificate of debt (Colossians 1:13-14) was cancelled when it was nailed to the tree. That was how that was forgiven. Forgiveness in that context when talking about the cancellation of debt is also an economic idea. So when you take tetelestai and link it to these theological concepts that are on the cross, you see that God is using this whole economic idea that what was accomplished on the cross completely paid the bill. In the ancient world when a bill was due and somebody paid it (We would write "Paid in Full" or somebody would stamp it "Paid in Full" on the bill), they would write tetelestai at the bottom of a bill and it meant paid in full. It's completed. It's done. Nothing more can be paid. So this emphasizes that completed work of Christ on the cross. 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

^NKJ Hebrews 10:15 But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before,

So then we're going to have a quote coming from Jeremiah 31:33-34 dealing with the New Covenant. Now the New Covenant is made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah when we look at that passage. 

Turn back three or four pages to Hebrews 8. Hebrews 8 has the complete quote from Jeremiah 31:31-33.

^NKJ Hebrews 8:8 Because finding fault with them,

That is with the old covenant, the first covenant as it's identified in verse 7.

He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah --

^NKJ Hebrews 8:9 "not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD.

That is a reference to the first covenant, which was the Mosaic Covenant. 

^NKJ Hebrews 8:10 "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,

Those days here is a reference to their time of worldwide dispersal, the time that they're under the fifth cycle of discipline, the current Church Age period when they're scattered, plus the time of the Tribulation.

says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts;

Now that hasn't happened today. We're living in the Church Age and we recognize that Jesus was the sacrifice that establishes the New Covenant; but the New Covenant hasn't been enacted yet because neither you nor I have the laws, have the Word of God, the doctrine written in our minds and written on our hearts. That is what the text says. 

I remember when I first went to seminary and I listened to somebody teach something in Acts related to the New Covenant and you would get different views from different professors. 

But I would hear some professors say, "Well, there is an application of this to the church; and that when we learn the Bible, then God writes it on our hearts"

But that's not what this is saying. That is really a distortion of the text. This has been a problem for many people trying to understand how the New Covenant relates to the church. As I pointed out when we went through a lengthy study of this, the New Covenant relates to the church by virtue of the fact that you and I as Church Age believers are in Christ. His priesthood is established by the New Covenant. He is the High Priest; we are in Him so our relationship to the New Covenant is by virtue of that relationship to Him as the High Priest of the New Covenant. We are not part of the house of Israel or the house of Judah. 

If you interpret that verse literally, God is saying, "I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their heart." 

Well, who's the "their"? The "their" in context is the house of Judah, the house of Israel, the remnant, the regenerate members of Israel, those who have accepted Jesus as the Messiah during the Tribulation period, those who survive and go into the Millennial Kingdom. At that point God is going to write that on their hearts and on their minds. 

A couple of weeks ago we went through the stages of the Battle of Armageddon. This takes place at the end of that campaign following the judgment, the separation of the sheep from the goats following the judgments that relate to the 10 virgins, which pictured the Jews - 5 who aren't prepared. Those are the Jews who aren't prepared for the Messiah, not ready to go into the kingdom and the 5 that are. So this relates to those that are ready to go into the kingdom. 

When Jesus establishes the kingdom, it's at that point that the new Covenant is enacted. This is not talking about regeneration. There are a lot of people who you will hear who will say that this passage is talking about regeneration. At the point of regeneration that's when God writes His law upon your heart. But that is not at all what the context indicates.

Verse 10 says:

and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Once again it's talking about Israel. There's no application here whatsoever to the church. 

^NKJ Hebrews 8:11 "None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for all shall know Me,

Wow! Isn't that going to be an interesting situation? It's talking about Jews. It indicates that none is going to need to teach the Law to another Jew. This is talking about the initial generation of regenerate Jews (the Tribulation saints) who survive the Tribulation and go into the Millennial Kingdom. Their children will be born spiritually dead and in need of salvation. This is just speaking of the initial generation that's still mortal, still in their mortal bodies. 

from the least of them to the greatest of them.

See, all of Israel will be saved at that point. Then the passage goes on to say in verse 12:

^NKJ Hebrews 8:12 "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more."

Now that is a statement from Jeremiah 31:31-33. All that the writer of Hebrews does from all those verse that he quotes - in Hebrews it's broken down to 5 verses – all that the writer of Hebrews is going to apply is the phrase "the New Covenant." 

^NKJ Hebrews 8:13 In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

That's an interesting way in which the Jews often applied the word. You go into Acts and you'll see the same kind of thing happen where three or four verses are quoted from the Old Testament, but then the only thing that is applied is one phrase or one verse.

Okay, let's go back to our passage in Hebrews 10:16.

^NKJ Hebrews 10:16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD:

This is that same covenant. The future covenant that God is going to have with the surviving remnant of Israel when God says:

I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,"

^NKJ Hebrews 10:17 then He adds, "Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more."

So he is applying here the significance, the impact of Christ's death for the New Covenant and its application to the Jews that survive the Tribulation. So He is going to draws an application from that. In the same way that God has said that when He applies the New Covenant to them and will remember their sins no more, that shows that what the writer is saying is:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:18 Now where there is remission

Or forgiveness

of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

If there's a complete forgiveness of their sin and no more of an offering, then the same thing would be true of us because if the point of forgiveness was what that offering on the cross. It applies in one way to that future generation of Judah and Israel that receives the New Covenant when that's enacted, but it applies in the same way to us because once a final sacrifice is made, sins are forgiven. 

This is a message that I'm not sure how it plays today. I think people still recognize at some level that they're sinners. But in the morally relative environment in which we live now in our culture, I'm not sure how many people are struggling with a sense of guilt before God. They have so covered this over in resistance to God. They've covered this over by suppressing the truth in unrighteousness that it only seems to pop out when some Christian says something like this young lady who was the Miss California in the Miss USA pageant.

She says almost apologetically that, "Well, I believe and the way I was raised and this is what I always…"

She just qualified it in so many ways that marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. Yet the hostile reaction that this has received and it's been on the news and it's been one thing after another related to what she said just shows where the unbelieving world is today. They have worked so hard to try to suppress any sense of moral absolutes. And they've managed to create environments where they can live their lives without anybody ever telling them that something is wrong. But it's just beneath the surface. It's like there's this pressure that's keeping this down. 

As soon as somebody raises their head a little bit and says, "There really is a God," they just go berserk. 

This is the kind of reaction that we're going to see among the earth dwellers in the Tribulation period. This irrational hatred of anyone who represents God because what happens is whenever you raise your hand and say, "Wait a minute. Maybe there's a God or maybe there's an absolute out there. Or maybe there's just an intelligent designer." I mean how neutral a concept can you get that we're just going to believe in an intelligent design? Maybe it's Buddha; maybe it's God; maybe it's just an intelligent force out there. We're not going to say it's God. It's so convicting, it tweaks that suppression mechanism and it blows it away just enough to where all this anger just explodes from people. 

So I think there is some way when we're witnessing to people this is the whole doctrine of forgiveness is a doctrine to emphasize that whatever you've done it was paid for by Christ on the cross. It is paid for. The forgiveness is already there. The cancellation of that debt is already there. It's not that you're rubbing somebody's nose in their sin, which is of course a technique that fundamentalists have tried to use in the past in evangelism. You need to make sure if somebody knows they're a sinner. People need to know that they're spiritual dead. People need to know there's a penalty; but the emphasis needs to be on the forgiveness aspect: that their sins are forgiven and there's no guilt before God and there is a free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ. He paid the penalty.

But I think that as we do that we're going to see more and more antagonism because we're living in the same kind of a era that is very much characterized by the hardness of pharaoh's heart, except we're living among neighbors and politicians and news people all around us who have hardened their hearts. It's just another term for that suppression of truth in unrighteousness. They have hardened their hearts and hardened their hearts. Then when we come along and make some statement, they go berserk in anger against us. So I think we're going to see more and more resistance and hostility towards Christians and those who are public in their message about Jesus Christ and redemption. 

Now the writer is going to apply this in the next verse in a very important way. I want to look at this, 19 through 25. I want to cover it in sort of a survey fashion tonight and then we'll come back and look at some of the details next time. But this is the end of a section.

The section started back in chapter 7. Chapter 7 through 10:39 is this whole section. The section down through 24 is the teaching section. This has been a very long really section. We've been in this section well over a year because we took so much time to go back to really understand all those Old Testament allusions. We had to understand the Tabernacle. We had to understand all of the sacrifices, the burnt offering, the fellowship offering grain offering, sin offering, and trespass offering. We had to understand all the elements of the Day of Atonement and all of these things because we have to get our heads into the thinking and the experiential framework of these Jewish believers that the apostle is writing to here in Hebrews. 

When he writes this he has gone through all of this detail again and again dealing with the covenant, dealing with the priesthood, dealing with the sacrificial contrast. He comes to verse 19 and what does he say?  Therefore…

This is the conclusion. I find it somewhat interesting. We all know we live in this era people go to church and just want superficial feel good sermons. They want something practical. "Give me something to take home today. Give me 5 points of something I can do today."

People live at this level of superficiality. We've had a writer here in Hebrews go through all of this Old Testament detail building this very tight logical case that draws together all the sacrifices, all the functions of the priesthood, the different kinds of priesthood, the different covenants and finally he's going to say, "Now this is what it means."

He covers the application in 7 verses. Look how much time he had to take to get to application. See application comes out of what you think. Application isn't just "go out and do these 5 things" as if they don't stand on a bedrock of a system of thought. He has to build that system of thought and rationale in such a way that when he gets to the conclusion, it makes sense. 

With these Jewish believers this should have been almost like a slap in the face. This is profound. It should have rocked them in their understanding of their whole relationship with God because he's going to draw out three implications and applications from what we've seen about the completedness of Christ's work on the cross. 

So he says: 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus,

We've seen that boldness that we can go into the presence of God because of the completed work of Christ on the cross. 

^NKJ Hebrews 10:20 by a new and living way which He consecrated for us,

This "new and living way" is the New Covenant. Because of His death on the cross, that veil has been torn and there's direct access into the presence of God.

through the veil, that is, His flesh,

Here he makes an application that the veil is related to the flesh of Jesus, the body of Jesus (His humanity), because it's in His humanity that He dies on the cross. It's in His humanity that He pays the penalty for sin on the cross. And by paying that penalty that which separated us from God is now permanently removed. The sins problem is solved. 

So He's inaugurated this new way. We now have a High Priest over the house of God. That means three things.

First of all verse 22:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith,

That's a command; it's not a suggestion. It's a first person command, first person plural. The idea is a command, let us. The writer is including himself. 

having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience

See he's using that Old Testament imagery of sprinkling the blood on the furniture in the Tabernacle to sanctify it and set it apart for the service of God. 

So he says now we can draw near to God with full assurance of faith because that sprinkling that application of Christ's death to us is like the sprinkling of the blood and it has completely cleansed and set us apart to service to God.

from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.

What you'll see when you read the commentaries on this is a discussion that this is talking about baptism. I do not think this is talking about baptism at all.  This comes out of the imagery that we've seen in the Old Testament ritual. The sprinkling is when they sprinkled the blood. The high priest would on the Day of Atonement especially would take the blood from the lamb and go in and sprinkle it in front of the Ark of the Covenant. At the initial consecration of the Tabernacle, the priest took the blood and he went in and he sprinkled the blood on everything. That indicated that it was now sanctified; it was now set apart for the service of God. 

The other thing that happened at the inauguration of the high priest's ministry is that he was washed from head to toe. We see that same allusion in John 13 when Jesus is talking to Peter about washing his feet. This idea of washing here is the participle, the perfect participle of louo (omega, it's the perfect participle there) indicting the completed action there. It's a once for all completed action in the past with results that go on. It's that picture of the priest who is washed from head to toe as a picture of his complete separation and sanctification when he is set apart to the service of God. Both of these images picture what happens at the instant of salvation. So because of that, because of the completed work of Christ, we can draw near to God with a true heart. The conscience has been cleansed by the work of Christ.

Verse 23 is the second application, the second command – first person command.

^NKJ Hebrews 10:23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope

What he means by "confession of our hope" is our belief in the future return of Christ, our future destiny with Jesus Christ. 

"Let's not give it up and go back into Judaism," which is what they were threatening to do. They were wavering. 

So he says, "Let us hold fast the confession, the admission, the acknowledgment of our hope."

Some of you have been around long enough to remember that often doctrinal statements used to be referred to confessions. Sometimes denominations would be referred to. 

"What confession do you belong to?"

That would be an older form of English coming out of the Reformation. The reformed church had a doctrinal statement. It would be a confession. This is what they believed. The Anglican Church would have a confession. So the term confession refers to a body of doctrine or belief system. So that's how the word is used here.

^NKJ Hebrews 10:23 Let us hold fast the confession

That is the doctrinal convictions.

of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful.

It's built on the promise of His coming and He is faithful.

Then in verse 24 we read:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:24 And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works,

This is a mental term for thought and consideration of one another in the body of Christ. This is an important aspect that members of the body of Christ don't just show up in Bible class and take notes and have blinders on and not look at anybody else and not talk to anybody else and not build relationships and friendships with other people. Now you can't build relationships and friendships with everybody. And you can't get to know everybody. But in a body of believers you are going to get to know some and some are going to become closer friends than others. Not everybody is going to know other people well enough to encourage them in their spiritual life because you don't know what other people are going through. But that will happen as we build friendships and build relationships with other believers. As we get to know each other, then part of our responsibility is to encourage one another and to stimulate one another and to motivate one another. We know that when we have friends who are believers when they're down, when they're feeling discouraged when they feel like their lives are hopeless. They're going through extremely difficult times. Then it is an opportunity for us to remind them of what the Word says and to encourage them and help strengthen them. That's the idea here. 

in order to stir up love and good works,

This isn't good works to do stuff.  This is the application of doctrine in the believer's life. You can't do this if you're not involved in a local church or a local assembly of believers. 

Now that brings up another issue, which I'll talk about some more next time because we live in a world today where there are many people who live steam.  There are people who listen who are living in communities where frankly they can't find a solid local church to teach the Word. 

Now there are also some who live in communities where they can find a nursery to go to made up of a bunch of baby believers and a pastor who feeds a lot of pabulum. But it's not bad. It's just baby food. But they don't want to go there because they're in some form of spiritual arrogance.

They say, "Well, I need more than that."

But God saved you for a purpose to minister to others in the body of Christ. "We are members of one another," Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12. There is interdependence among members of the body of Christ. I've been teaching this for years. 

I think we got sidetracked back in the 70's where people said, "I can go off and listen to my tape recorder and I'm going to be fine." 

That is not the biblical picture. The biblical picture is we're not a bunch of isolated islanders who are off on our own little island, doing our own little thing before God. 

We are interdependent body of believers. Each believer is given a spiritual gift to use in the body of Christ. If you have the spiritual gift of administration, God didn't give it to you to use it at work. If you have the spiritual gift of helps, God didn't give it to you to use it with a bunch of unsaved people in your family. God gave you those gifts to use in the body of Christ. That's what 1 Corinthians 12 is talking about. There needs to be this ministry within the body of Christ. So we can't carry out this function of considering one another to stir up or motivate love and good works if we're staying at home and listening to live streaming over the computer. 

Now on the other hand, I recognize that we're living in a world where it's harder and harder to find something good. But you can look. I know one man who heard me teach on this a number of years ago now. He ended up looking at about 5 or 10 churches in his area. He found a little country Baptist church and the pastor was fairly good; wasn't well-educated biblically, but he was solid as far as he went. So this man and his family started going to the church. There were some things he didn't quite agree with. The pastor was a little bit lordship. But it wasn't long before the pastor recognized his abilities to teach the Word, and he was put in charge of teaching the adult Sunday school class. He taught them the gospel. He taught free grace gospel. He did some great stuff.  He was there a year before he had to move to another location. So you never know. 

There are people listening to me now and they're going to say, "I've tried 5 churches." 

Well, try 5 more. You never know where you might find some little church somewhere.

But then you might be like one guy who heard me teach on this. I think he felt a little guilty. He lived in a smaller community up in Vermont somewhere I believe. He checked out every church in his town. The best church, the BEST church, didn't believe in a literal physical resurrection of Jesus and didn't believe in substitutionary atonement.

I said, "You know I've taken my children there a couple of times. Robby, I'm not sure that's the thing to do."

I said, "No, it's not."

Don't do that. If you live in an area where you can't find something that is acceptable, don't go there. But don't try to justify some form of isolationism just because there's no church teaching much beyond a pabulum level. Maybe you can be involved in a church that you find somewhat acceptable and have a ministry there. I know how difficult that is. I've had friends of mine, men who are pastors and have been in the ministry and have moved to areas like Fort Worth, Texas and spent years trying to find a decent church and have not found one. But they've gone a year here and year there and a year someplace else.  So it is a challenge. 

The chapter ends that:

^NKJ Hebrews 10:25 not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some,

They were beginning already to isolate themselves and fall away.

but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.

We are to be encouraging one another. And trust me, the days are coming and coming soon. We see the storm clouds on the horizon. I do not think things are going to be very good in the coming years. I think there's going to be increasing hostility to Christians. There's going to be increasing decisions that are made at a political and a legislative level. If Christians do not band together and support each other, then it will be very difficult to survive without that support base of other believers. 

Now other believers aren't going to make spiritual decisions for you. Other believers are not the key to your spiritual growth and spiritual maturity. But there is a role that we are to play in one another's lives. That is critical to moving forward and to supporting one another in our spiritual lives.

We'll come back next time, take a little more detailed look at these three commands. But these three commands all come out of an understanding of the finished work of Christ and the superiority of His priesthood today as opposed to the circumstances under the old covenant.

So let's bow our heads in closing prayer. 

Illustrations