“This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant” (Hebrews 7:22 ESV).

One key aspect of the Old Covenant involves its dependence upon the ability of fallible human beings to fulfill its code of conduct. As the author of Hebrews will point out in the following chapter, even the Old Testament prophets recognized that such a system would eventually need to be replaced with something better. That “something better” is a New Covenant that is secured and validated by Jesus Himself.

One source details the differences between these two covenantal agreements in a manner that warrants a lengthy excerpt…

“Those who follow Christ enjoy the benefits of a ‘better hope’ (Heb. 7:19) and a ‘better covenant’ (7:22) than the Mosaic Law and the sacrificial system described in the Old Testament (7:11–12).

The Mosaic Law:

• Came from God.
• Prepared the way and pointed toward Christ (Matt. 5:17; Rom. 5:20; Gal. 3:19–25).
• Set the standard for holiness in every area of life, not just religious dimensions (1 John 3:4). (For example, Lev. 17–26 and Ex. 21–23 are concentrated collections of what the entire Law teaches. They include laws regarding leaders, the army, criminal cases, property rights and crimes against property, humane treatment, personal and family rights, and social behavior.)
• Helped people know of their need for God because it exposed their bondage to sin (Rom. 7:7, 12, 14–25).
  

The Levitical Priests:

• Came from the tribe of Levi (Deut. 18:1).
• Functioned to: administer the Law to Israel (Mal. 2:6–7); represent the people before God by offering sacrifices (Lev. 4:20, 26, 31); judge matters in the land as a supreme court (Deut. 17:8–13).
• Preserved the Torah, copies of the Law (31:24–26).
• Cared for the temple after it was built.
• Foreshadowed the priesthood of Christ’s followers (1 Pet. 2:9).
  

The writer of Hebrews shows that Christ is superior to the Law and the Old Testament priests. He is God’s provision to unite people directly with God.
Christ:

• Offers a better hope than the Law (Heb. 7:18–20, 22).
• Is a permanent priest, no longer vulnerable to death (7:23–25).
• Always makes intercession for us (7:25).
• Is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens (7:26).
• Has offered the one, final sacrifice for sins on our behalf—Himself (7:27).
  

No wonder we are called to submit to Christ and follow Him (10:19–22). He is our priest and our sacrifice, restoring us to God as beloved children.” ₍₁₎

(1) Word in Life Study Bible, electronic ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1996), Heb 7:19–22

“by so much more Jesus has become a surety of a better covenant” (Hebrews 7:22).

With the possible exception of those who serve within the banking and financial industries, the word “surety” may be an unfamiliar term for many. We can associate this word from Hebrews 7:22 with the idea of a “guarantee.” In fact, that is how “surety” is translated in many Biblical versions of this passage. Several commentators offer insights that help enrich our understanding of this concept…

“The Hebrew background is ‘a pledge put in the hand,’ which implies surety. It came to be used in Greek for collateral on a loan or a jail bond. Also, in Roman law it stood for that which was legally secured. Jesus is the Father’s surety of the effectiveness of the new covenant.” ₍₁₎

“The Greek word used here, engyos, was a legal term within the Graeco-Roman world, referring to someone who assumed an obligation in place of another. This expression parallels 8:6, which describes Jesus as the mediator of a better covenant.” ₍₂₎

“When sin is depicted as a debt, the New Testament calls Christ our Surety (Heb. 7:22). That’s an economic term, just as debt is an economic term. With this language, the Bible tells us that Christ is the One Who cosigns the note. He is the One Who stands there, backing up our indebtedness, taking on Himself the requirement of what must be paid.” ₍₃₎

Thus, Jesus serves as the personal guarantor of our salvation. That brings us to another important concept within this verse: the idea of a covenant. Much like the word “surety,” a covenantal agreement may seem unfamiliar to modern-day audiences. Nevertheless, a covenant it is not unlike certain other kinds of contractual arrangements in certain respects.

For instance, a covenant is like a modern-day contract in the sense that it serves to identify the responsibilities of those who enter it. And like many other types of contractual arrangements, a covenant often contains a list of penalties to be assessed against those who fail to fulfill its terms.

However, a covenant differs from other types of agreements in one important respect: the terms of a covenant are non-negotiable. In other words, the language contained within a covenant cannot be changed or revised to suit the desires of one party. Instead, a covenant must be accepted or rejected in its entirety without amendment. The specific covenant mentioned here in Hebrews 7:22 will go on to become a focus of greater attention as we continue through chapters eight and nine of this epistle.

(1) Dr. Bob Utley, Hebrews 7 [7:22] Copyright © 2014 Bible Lessons International http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL10/VOL10_07.html

(2) John D. Barry, Douglas Mangum, et al., Faithlife Study Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016), Heb 7:22.

(3) Sproul, R.C., The Truth of the Cross © 2007 R.C. Sproul, Reformation Trust Publishing [pg. 42]

“And inasmuch as He was not made priest without an oath (for they have become priests without an oath, but He with an oath by Him who said to Him: “The Lord has sworn And will not relent, ‘You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek'”) (Hebrews 7:20-21).

An “oath” represents a solemn or official affirmation that validates a promise or statement. Of course, an oath is only as good as the person who makes it. That explains why witnesses are placed “under oath” when testifying in a court of law. While liars may not care about the damage to their reputation if they are found to be dishonest, the prospect of going to jail for lying under oath is often enough to motivate those individuals to tell the truth.

Yet, interestingly enough, the members of the Levitical priesthood were never sworn into their priestly offices. As mentioned previously within this chapter, the Levitical priests were selected on the basis of their genealogy. This makes Jesus’ priesthood superior in the sense that it is associated with an oath of God. In other words, the Levitical priests served according to their ancestry. Jesus served according to an oath taken by God Himself.

Unlike fallible human beings, God’s truthful and unchanging nature means He never needs to swear an oath. Nevertheless, “God also bound himself with an oath, so that those who received the promise could be perfectly sure that he would never change his mind” (NLT). Thus, God certified His oath by the greatest authority possible: Himself.

That being said, God’s affirmation of an oath does not mean that we should regularly engage in that practice. For instance, the New Testament letter of James says, “But most of all, my brothers and sisters, never take an oath, by heaven or earth or anything else. Just say a simple yes or no so that you will not sin and be condemned for it” (James 5:12 NLT). In fact, Jesus served as the source of that counsel…

“But I tell you, Do not swear at all… Just let your ‘Yes’ be a simple ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ a simple ‘No’; anything more than this has its origin in evil” (Matthew 5:33, 37 CJB).

As the Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes tells us, “It is better not to vow than to make a vow and not fulfill it” (Ecclesiastes 5:5 NIV). Therefore, we can take comfort in God’s sovereign decision to bind Himself with an oath while following this wise counsel regarding such oaths for ourselves.

“for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God” (Hebrews 7:19).

When faced with a malfunctioning device, a substandard work product, or an incomprehensible set of operating instructions, it’s not unusual to hear people respond with the old saying, “Well, nothing’s perfect…” In one sense, this phrase is also true of the Old Testament Law.

As we continue with our look at the question of a perfect God who enacted an imperfect Old Testament Law, we now come to the insights offered by the following Biblical scholar…

HEBREWS 7:19—Was the Law of Moses perfect or imperfect?

PROBLEM: The psalmist declared that the ‘law of the Lord is perfect’ (Ps. 19:7). It reflects the very character of God (cf. Lev. 11:45). Yet the writer of Hebrews insists that ‘the law made nothing perfect’ (7:19), and thus God brought in a ‘better covenant’ (v. 22). This, he contends, would not have been necessary ‘if that first covenant had been faultless’ (Heb. 8:7). So, who is right? Is the law perfect or imperfect?

SOLUTION: The law was perfect in its nature, but imperfect in its results. It was a perfect expression of God’s righteousness, but an imperfect means of making man righteous. Of course, that is not the fault of the law itself or the purpose for which God gave it. For the law was never given to redeem sinners (Titus 3:5–6; Rom. 4:5), but to reveal sin. As a standard and means of revealing sin, the law was an impeccable norm and teacher. But it was only ‘our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith’ (Gal. 3:24).

Like a mirror, the law was intended to reveal our imperfections as we look into it; but it, no more than the mirror, was intended to correct our imperfections. So the law is perfect in itself, as a rule and revealer of sin, but it is imperfect as a means of empowering us to overcome sin.” ₍₁₎

Therefore, we can close our look at this question by remembering that Jesus’ sacrificial offering did not simply cover sins in the same manner as a sacrificial offering administered by an Old Testament priest. Instead, He takes those sins away. The author of Hebrews will explore this work of Christ at greater length in chapters nine and ten. But first, he will return again to a familiar personality to reinforce his argument that Jesus’ ministry is superior to that of the Old Testament sacrificial system.

Image Credit: Mtunzini1, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Norman L. Geisler and Thomas A. Howe, When Critics Ask : A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1992), 516.

“For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness” (Hebrews 7:18).

A toolbox usually holds a variety of tools that are designed to complete various tasks. The fact that a toolbox often holds many different tools reminds us that one tool is insufficient for every job. For instance, a tool that is perfectly adequate for one purpose may be woefully inadequate for another. This simple illustration offers some insight into our text from Hebrews 7:18.

You see, there is a troublesome question hidden away within this verse. Notice that this passage tells us that the Old Testament Law was annulled due to its “weakness and uselessness” (ESV). Yet what does that say about the God who gave us that Law? How could a good God enact a system that is characterized in such a manner?

We can address that question by noting that Hebrews 7:18 uses the term weakness (and not worthless) in describing the Law. Much like a tool in a toolbox, the Law is perfectly adequate when used to perform its intended task. The New Testament book of Galatians identifies that task for us…

“What, then, was the purpose of the Law? It was added in order to show what wrongdoing is, and it was meant to last until the coming of Abraham’s descendant, to whom the promise was made…” (Galatians 3:19 GNT).

If we are seeking to demonstrate that human beings cannot live without doing wrong, then there is no greater tool in the spiritual toolbox to accomplish that task than the Old Testament Law. But as good as the Law is in revealing sinful behavior, it can do nothing to change the internal hearts and attitudes of those who live under it. Thus, it is weak and unprofitable for that purpose.

One source offers some additional insight regarding this passage…

“The Levitical Law did its job well, pointing out the sinfulness of mankind and condemning us for it. But, as powerful as it was in that regard, it was powerless in another way. Hebrews 7:18–19 tells us that the old Law was set aside ‘because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect).’ The Law had no way of changing our sinful nature. We needed something better to accomplish that. In fact, Hebrews goes on to say that the Law was ‘only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never . . . make perfect those who draw near to worship’ (Hebrews 10:1).” ₍₁₎

We’ll continue with another perspective on this question next.

Image Credit: Toolbox_icon.jpg: Tanemoriderivative work: ויקיג’אנקי, CC BY 2.1 JP, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) GotQuestions.org, What was the purpose of the Levitical Law? Retrieved 25 June, 2022 from https://www.gotquestions.org/Levitical-Law.html

“For He testifies: ‘You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek'” (Hebrews 7:17).

The word “order” can be defined in several ways. For instance, this word might take the form of a command or directive. It might refer to a pattern, sequence, or arrangement. Then there are computer scientists and mathematicians who use this word to identify structures and equations, while others might use it to describe business transactions with financial brokers.

Although the word “order” possesses several different meanings, Hebrews 7:17 uses this word in a very specific manner. In this context, “order” refers to…

• The post, rank, or position that one holds in civic or other affairs. ₍₁₎
• A distinctive class. ₍₂₎
• The likeness or manner of something ₍₃₎

The Amplified Bible draws our attention to this definition in its translation of this verse: “…You are a Priest forever after the order (with the rank) of Melchizedek” (AMPC).

You see, the Levitical priests served within the limits of their order. For instance…

• They were selected based on their genealogy.
• They had to offer sacrifices to atone for their sins before they could minister on behalf of others.
• They relinquished their roles as priests when they passed from this life.

On the other hand…

• Jesus’ priesthood is associated with God’s oath (as we’ll see in Hebrews 7:20-21), not His human genealogy.
• His sinless nature ensured that He never had to present a sacrifice for His sins (Hebrews 4:15, 7:26-27).
• Jesus’ priestly ministry will never end, as we’re told in the passage quote above.

This has led one source to offer the following insight…

” In the book of Hebrews, Jesus is shown as a priest whose status is far greater than the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:1-8:1). As a part of that presentation the passage cites Psalm 110, which declares Christ to be a “priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:4; Heb. 7:17) In doing so, the author of Hebrews declares the Psalm passage to be a prophecy fulfilled in Christ.

He is not alone in citing this Messianic Psalm: Jesus quotes its first verse when he challenges the Pharisees to reflect on what they think about the Messiah, and Peter in his sermon at Pentecost quotes that verse as a credential for identifying Jesus as the promised Messiah (Matt. 22:41-46; Acts 2:32-36). The Psalm as a whole presents a king-priest of a very high order, acting on God ‘s authority, and its reference to Melchizedek, a king of righteousness and peace as well as a mysterious priest, shows an Old Testament type reaching far beyond its original historical context to a fulfillment in Christ.” ₍₄₎

(1) G5010 taxis Thayer’s Greek Definitions https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g5010/rsv/tr/0-1/

(2) G5010 taxis Mounce Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/taxis

(3) “Order” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D.D., General Editor

(4) Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell, PhD, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, [pg. 214] © 2017 Josh McDowell Ministry

“And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life” (Hebrews 7:15-16).

We can build upon the foundation of this passage by returning to some questions from earlier in this chapter: “Why would God create a different priestly order? If the Levitical priesthood was adequate to meet human spiritual need, then why execute this change to a new priesthood in the likeness of Melchizedek?”

In response, we can say that the Levitical priesthood never served to perfect anyone in God’s sight. In this context, “perfection” refers to the ability to draw near to God and enjoy a perfect relationship of fellowship with Him. In other words, the old Levitical priestly order could never entirely remove the barrier of sin that stood between God and humanity. Therefore, a new kind of priesthood was necessary; a new order of priestly ministry represented by Melchizedek.

Unlike the members of the Levitical priesthood, Jesus’ priestly ministry was not tied to His birth into the “right” family. On the contrary, this passage from Hebrews 7:16 stresses the independent nature of Jesus’ priesthood apart from any ordinance related to his ancestry. In addition, one could never say that a Levitical priest held an endless priesthood. Every member of the Levitical priestly class served a limited term- and once he passed from this earthly life, another priest rose to take his place.

In contrast, Jesus’ priestly ministry is of an entirely different order. He serves according to the “…power that comes from a life that cannot be destroyed (GW) and “…not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi” (NLT) as we’re told in the passage quoted above. One Biblical commentator expands upon this idea with the following insight…

“Jesus’ priestly authority does not rest in what tribe/family He descended from, but from His possession of eternal, indestructible life (i.e., Melchizedek’s parents are not named in Genesis 14 and the word “forever” is used in Ps. 104:4). Jesus has the endless life of God (as well as the oath and promise of God).” ₍₁₎

Therefore, as another source concludes, “God’s declaration that the Messiah belongs to another order of priesthood in Psalm 110:4 Jesus’ priesthood is not based upon law or heredity (a fleshly commandment), but upon the power of God’s endless life.” ₍₂₎

(1) Dr. Bob Utley, Hebrews 7 [7:16] Copyright © 2014 Bible Lessons International http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL10/VOL10_07.html

(2) Guzik, Dave, Hebrews 7 – A Better Priesthood, A Better High Priest (15-17) https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/hebrews-7/

“For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood” (Hebrews 7:13-14).

Psalm 89:14 poetically describes two aspects of God’s character: “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne…” (NIV). When used in relation to God, these references tell us that God always does what is true, honest, good, and just. In addition, the Biblical Scriptures also use the word “holy” to describe God’s character. In other words, God is morally perfect and completely distinct from anything that may be wrong, corrupt, or impure (see Isaiah 6:1-5).

In light of these characteristic qualities, we can say that God never “breaks the rules” as He interacts with His creation. He consistently acts with integrity and always does what is ethical and right (Psalm 11:7). These attributes should guide our understanding of this passage from Hebrews 7:13-14.

You see, the fact that Jesus’ human lineage prevented Him from entering the Levitical priestly order was an issue that had to be addressed lawfully. Because of this, the Law had to be changed to accommodate this new (and better) High Priest. One commentary details the practical challenges associated with that change…

“As long as the Mosaic law was operative, the fact that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah created an insurmountable obstacle. The Law never honored or allowed one from that tribe to function as priest. Conversely, when King Uzziah, a Judahite, took that role to himself, God judged him with leprosy (2 Chr 26:16–21).

As long as the Law was functional, Jesus could not serve as priest. But the Law promised another priest, one after the order of Melchizedek, who would replace the insufficient levitical priesthood and its law.” ₍₁₎

Another source adds…

“It was from the tribe of Judah that our Lord was descended. The Mosaic legislation never authorized anyone from that tribe to be a priest. Yet Jesus is a Priest. How can that be? Because the law has been changed.” ₍₂₎

Finally, the Law itself provided for this amendment, as mentioned earlier. Therefore, God did not act capriciously in executing this change to a new and better priesthood. While the benefit of hindsight allows us to better understand that change, few could have anticipated the depth and breadth of God’s act of reconciliation in Christ before it took place.

(1) Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, eds., KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 2554.

(2) William Macdonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary Edited by Arthur Farstad Thomas Nelson Publishers (2 Corinthians 5:10) p.2179

“For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law” (Hebrews 7:12).

In Romans 6:14 we read, “For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” Hebrews 7:12 clarifies that passage in helping to explain why we are no longer under the law.

To begin, we should recognize that there are three aspects to the Old Testament law: civil, ceremonial, and moral. The civil law defined lawful and unlawful activities and various types of contractual arrangements for the people of ancient Israel. The ceremonial law prescribed the manner in which sinful human beings could approach God under the Old Covenant sacrificial system. The moral law explained the difference between right and wrong.

In changing the arrangement through which human beings could approach their Creator, the ceremonial law had to be modified to accommodate that change. Since a new High Priest from outside the Levitical priesthood had come as a result of God’s promise, the priestly order also underwent a change. Under the old covenant, a human priest presided over the death of a sacrificial animal to atone for the sins of others. Under the new covenant, the High Priest sacrificed Himself to atone for the sins of others.

So what purpose did the Law serve? Well, the New Testament letter to the Galatians supplies the answer…

“Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor” (Galatians 3:24-25).

The Biblical book of Romans adds…

“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (Romans 10:4).

One source expands upon this idea as it relates to our passage from Hebrews 7:12…

“This verse is one of the clearest single statements in the New Testament indicating that God had terminated the Mosaic Law (Covenant; cf. Rom. 10:4)… Paul went on to say that Christians, therefore, are not under the Law (Rom. 6:14-15; Gal. 3:24-25; 5:1; 6:2; 2 Cor. 3:7- 11). That is, the Mosaic Covenant is not what God has given to regulate the lives of Christians.” ₍₁₎

Finally, it’s important to note that we still carry a moral obligation to honor God in our personal conduct, even though we are no longer under the civil and ceremonial requirements given to us in the Old Testament Law. Since the Law provides us with the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20), the general moral principles we find there are just as valid today as they were when they were originally written.

(1) Constable, Thomas. DD, Notes on Hebrews 2022 Edition “The imperfection of the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic Law 7:11-14” [7:12] https://www.planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/html/nt/hebrews/hebrews.htm

“Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?” (Hebrews 7:11).

On the timeline of Biblical history, there is a multi-century gap between Abraham’s encounter with Melchizedek and the next mention of Melchizedek’s name in Psalm 110. In between those references came the beginning of the Levitical priesthood. That leaves us with the following sequence of events…

• Abraham meets Melchizedek and responds by giving him “…a tenth of everything” (Genesis 14:18-20).
• The Old Testament Levitical priesthood begins (Exodus 28).
• Psalm 110 makes the following statement regarding the Messiah: “The Lord has sworn And will not relent, ‘You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek'” (Psalm 110:4).

The author of Hebrews uses this chronology to make an important point with a relatively simple question: “…if the priesthood of Levi, on which the law was based, could have achieved the perfection God intended, why did God need to establish a different priesthood, with a priest in the order of Melchizedek instead of the order of Levi and Aaron?” (NLT).

Jesus also touched upon the superior nature of that priestly order in an exchange with the religious leaders of His day. After successfully fielding several questions that were designed to entrap Him, Jesus responded with a question of His own from Psalm 110…

“Then, surrounded by the Pharisees, Jesus asked them a question: ‘What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?’ They replied, ‘He is the son of David.’

Jesus responded, ‘Then why does David, speaking under the inspiration of the Spirit, call the Messiah ‘my Lord’? For David said, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit in the place of honor at my right hand until I humble your enemies beneath your feet.’ Since David called the Messiah ‘my Lord,’ how can the Messiah be his son?’

No one could answer him. And after that, no one dared to ask him any more questions” (Matthew 22:41-46 NLT).

So Jesus holds a position that is greater than any Levitical priest, but He also holds a position that exceeds the one held by Israel’s greatest political leader: David, the king of Israel. Because of this, we can say that Jesus overcomes the inadequacies that may exist within those religious or political orders that are led by mere human beings.

“Here mortal men receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives. Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him” (Hebrews 7:8-10).

The New Testament book of Hebrews contains a number of advanced spiritual teachings, and this portion of Scripture is no exception. However, we can gain a better understanding of this passage if we break it down into its constituent elements…

Here mortal men receive tithes. This refers to the generations of those who served as Old Testament priests and then passed from this earthly life. As our author will observe later in this chapter, “There were many priests under the old system, for death prevented them from remaining in office. But because Jesus lives forever, his priesthood lasts forever” (Hebrews 7:23-24 NLT).

but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives. Unlike the members of the Levitical priesthood whose lives were reflected in a genealogical record, Melchizedek’s birth and death were never recorded. Thus, Melchizedek symbolically engages in a never-ending priesthood. This builds upon the description of Melchizedek given to us earlier in this chapter: “…having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually” (Hebrews 7:3).

Even Levi, who receives tithes. The Biblical book of Numbers details the rules and responsibilities concerning tithes: “The Lord said to Aaron, ‘You will have no land or property of your own as the other Israelites will have. I am your possession and your property among the Israelites. ‘I am giving the Levites one-tenth of every Israelite’s income. This is in return for the work they do at the tent of meeting'” (Numbers 18:20-21 GW). The important thing to notice from this passage is that the Levites received tithes, not the other way around.

paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak. Like all Israelites, the Levites traced their ancestral history back to Abraham. When Abraham gave a tithe to Melchizedek, Levi did so as well in a sense. Our author will explain how he came to that conclusion next…

for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him. Every member of Israel was genetically represented in Abraham. His decision to offer a tithe to God through Melchizedek established a relationship through which his descendants (including the Levitical priests) participated in that offering.

These observations will serve to prepare us for the conclusion that follows next.

“But Melchizedek, who was not a descendant of Levi, collected a tenth from Abraham. And Melchizedek placed a blessing upon Abraham, the one who had already received the promises of God. And without question, the person who has the power to give a blessing is greater than the one who is blessed” (Hebrews 7:6-7 NLT).

The word “truth” can be defined as “that which corresponds (or conforms) to reality.” A “self-evident truth” is a truth that is so obvious and undeniable that it requires no further explanation or support other than itself. The author of Hebrews identifies one example of a self-evident truth when he says, “Without question, the less important person is blessed by the more important person” (CEB).

With this in mind, let’s reconsider what transpired between Abraham (then known as Abram) and Melchizedek upon Abraham’s return from a significant military victory…

“King Melchizedek of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was a priest of God Most High. He blessed Abram, and said, ‘Blessed is Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth. Blessed is God Most High, who has handed your enemies over to you.’ Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything” (Genesis 14:18-20 GW).

Our author uses that historical event to reiterate the self-evident truth mentioned earlier: “…it is beyond all dispute that the one who blesses has higher status than the one who receives the blessing” (CJB). The following commentators identify several important repercussions that emerge from this passage…

“Now if Abraham is greater than Levi and Abraham subordinated himself to Melchizedek, then it means that the priest Melchizedek is greater than Levi and the entire line of Levi. The conclusion is clear. The priesthood of Melchizedek is a higher order of priesthood than the Levitical priesthood. This gives supreme dignity to the high priestly office of Christ.” ₍₁₎

“When one man blesses another man, it is understood that the superior blesses the inferior. This does not signify any personal or moral inferiority, of course, but simply an inferiority of position. As we read these arguments based on the OT, we should try to picture the reactions of the Hebrew readers. They had always revered Abraham as one of their greatest national heroes, and rightly so. But now they learn that Abraham acknowledged a non-Jewish priest as his superior. Just think! This was in their Bible all the time and they had never noticed it.” ₍₂₎

(1) Sproul, R. C. (1986). Chosen by God. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers. Page 35-36.

(2) William Macdonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary Edited by Arthur Farstad Thomas Nelson Publishers (Hebrews 7:7)

“And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham” (Hebrews 7:5).

It often helps to consider where we began in order to determine where we are going. In the case of the Jewish Christians addressed here in the Biblical book of Hebrews, there was an incident that took place in the life of their ancestor Abraham that presented them with a proverbial fork in the road. One fork led back to the Levitical priesthood, and all it represented. At the other fork stood Melchizedek, the ancient priest-king of God Most High.

The Old Testament book of Numbers records the following directive from God concerning the people of ancient Israel: “I give to the Levites all the tithes in Israel as their inheritance in return for the work they do while serving at the Tent of Meeting” (Numbers 18:21 NIV). In light of this, it is interesting to consider the relationship between these members of the Old Testament tribe of Levi (who were descended from Abraham) and Melchizedek.

Even though Abraham served as the forefather of the Levitical priestly class, he did not receive a tithe from Melchizedek. Instead, it was the other way around- Abraham gave a tithe through Melchizedek. Now before we continue, we should remember that Abraham was no ordinary person. In fact, the New Testament book of James refers to him as “…the friend of God” (James 2:23). Yet Abraham acknowledged Melchizidek’s superiority through his decision to submit a tithe to God through him.

That brings us to the fork in the road mentioned earlier. When faced with a decision to pursue the Old Testament means of relating to God though the Levitical priesthood, or the New Testament means of relating to God through Christ, the question becomes, “which is better?” The author of Hebrews responds to that question with a bit of inductive reasoning here within this passage.

Even though the “…descendants of Levi who are priests are commanded by the Law to collect one tenth from the people of Israel” (GNT), there is a sense in which they paid tithes through their ancestor Abraham. Much like an Olympic athlete who represents his or her country, Abraham similarly represents those who follow him- including the members of the Levitical  priesthood.

So the fact that Abraham’s tithe passed through Melchizedek served to demonstrate his preeminence. Since Jesus is our High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek, that makes His priesthood superior to any other.

“Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils” (Hebrews 7:4).

In Hebrews 7:4, the author of Hebrews will invite us to journey with him as he considers the priestly order of Melchizedek and Jesus’ superiority over the Levitical sacrificial system.

It is no coincidence that the first portion of that journey mentions “…the patriarch Abraham.” The word “patriarch” is comprised of the words patri (or “father”) and arche (meaning “first”) in the original language of this passage. This concept thus serves to distinguish Abraham as the “first father” of the Jewish people. It also means that Abraham’s interaction with Melchizedek held some critical implications.

You see, it is important to remember that Abraham’s relationship with Melchizedek predated the Levitical priesthood by several centuries. Yet, Abraham recognized Melchizedek’s authority as priest and king and responded by giving ten percent of his plunder to God through him. One theologian explains the significance of that act in a helpful and succinct manner…

“Since Abraham paid a tithe to Melchizedek, and Melchizedek blessed Abraham, it is clear that Melchizedek was superior to Abraham. By extension, Abraham’s position in the Hebrew lineage made him greater than his son Isaac, and Isaac was greater than his son Jacob, and Jacob was greater than his sons, which included Levi.

So if Abraham was greater than Levi, and if Melchizedek was greater than Abraham, then obviously Melchizedek was greater than Levi. Therefore, if Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, His priesthood is not inferior to the Levitical priesthood but superior to it. That is how the author of Hebrews argues.” ₍₁₎

This helps explain why this reference to “a tenth of the spoils” has found its way into the Biblical record. It also leads us to the following conclusion: it would be wrong to return to the service of an earthly priest when the “first father” of those who seek God in faith recognized someone greater. The same is true of anyone who seeks to gain acceptance with God through their individual efforts today.

That also includes those who seek to gain favor or acceptance with God through a mediator other than Christ. As we are told in the Biblical books of 1 Timothy and Acts…

“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).

“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12 NIV).

(1) Sproul, R. C. (2014). Everyone’s a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology. Reformation Trust Publishing. Page 116.

“He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever” (Hebrews 7:3 ESV).

Before we leave this portion of of Scripture, we should make some final observations regarding this somewhat enigmatic statement: “[Melchizedek] is without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life…” (Mounce).

As mentioned previously, this passage has led some to conclude that Melchizedek was a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ (or an Old Testament appearance of Jesus prior to His physical birth). One commentator who holds that position explains his reasoning…

“This unique description surely implies far more than a mere failure to mention Melchisedec’s genealogy, as the standard naturalistic explanation of this passage has it. The only one of whom these statements could actually be true is God Himself, appearing to Abraham in a theophany…

No mere earthly king was ever ‘made like unto the Son of God,’ nor was there ever one who ‘abideth a priest continually’ (same word as ‘forever’). It is difficult to see how these descriptions could be properly applied to anyone but the Lord Jesus Christ, who came to encourage Abraham in this unique pre-incarnate experience, assuming a human form ‘like unto’ that which He would assume forever when He became the incarnate Son of God. For the first time He founded and implemented forever the priestly order of Melchisedec.” ₍₁₎

Another scholar adds…

“The author of Hebrews also says Melchizedek had no mother or father (v. 3). The statement of his lack of parentage could simply mean that there was no genealogical record of his background, or, as some commentators believe, it could mean he was not of normal human descent but was perhaps a preincarnational appearance of Christ. This is a very popular theory.” ₍₂₎

Nevertheless, one source reminds us that the simplest answer is often the best as we seek to formulate our view of this passage…

“Melchizedek is described in Scripture as being like the Son of God, not as being the Son of God Himself (Hebrews 7:3). It seems best to view Melchizedek as an actual historical person-a mere human being-who was a ‘type’ of Christ. A type is someone (or something) that prophetically foreshadows someone (or something) else.

The reason some Old Testament persons or things foreshadow someone or something in the New Testament is that God planned it that way. In the revelatory process, God in His sovereignty so arranged the outworking of history that certain individuals, things, events, ceremonies, and institutions foreshadowed Christ in His person or ministry. This, I believe, is the case with Melchizedek.” ₍₃₎

(1) Institute for Creation Research, New Defender’s Study Bible Notes (Hebrews 7:3) https://www.icr.org/bible/Hebrews/7/3/

(2) Sproul, R. C. (2014). Everyone’s a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology. Reformation Trust Publishing. Page 116.

(3) Ron Rhodes, The Complete Book Of Bible Answers Copyright © 1997 by Ron Rhodes, Harvest House Publishers. Page 124

“Without father, without mother, without genealogy, he has neither beginning of days nor end of life but is like the son of God, and he remains a priest for all time” (Hebrews 7:3).

The Old Testament book of Ezra chronicles the return of a group of Israelites who had been deported from their ancestral homes by the ancient Babylonians (see Ezra 1:1-3). However, one group of Israelites who made that return trip were prohibited from resuming their former duties…

“Three families of priests… also returned. …They searched for their names in the genealogical records, but they were not found, so they were disqualified from serving as priests” (Ezra 2:61-62 NLT).

This brief excerpt illustrates the importance of an ancestral registry in respect to the Old Testament priesthood. That priesthood was established in the Biblical book of Exodus based on God’s directive to Moses…

“Now take Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister to Me as priest, Aaron and Aaron’s sons: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar” (Exodus 28:1).

This is an important point in the context of Hebrews chapter seven. The Old Testament priesthood was limited exclusively to the descendants of Levi through the family of Aaron. Everyone else was excluded. On one occasion when someone who was not genetically linked to Aaron attempted to fulfill a priestly role, the results were disastrous (see 2 Chronicles 26:16-20).

Because of this, it is important to note that Melchizedek’s priesthood was based on a different order from the one held by those who were descendants of Aaron. Unlike the members of the Levitical priestly class, Melchizedek’s priesthood did not depend upon a specific genetic lineage. One source explains the nature of that priestly ministry…

“…it is the reverse of the rules which governed the Aaronic priesthood which depended entirely on descent. Under Jewish law a man could not under any circumstances become a priest unless he could produce a certificated pedigree going back to Aaron. Character and ability had nothing to do with it; the one essential was that pedigree.

…On the other hand, if a man could produce a pedigree reaching back to Aaron, apart only from certain specified physical blemishes nothing on earth could stop him being a priest. Genealogy was literally everything. So then, the first difference between the two priesthoods was this–the Aaronic priesthood depended on genealogical descent; the priesthood of Melchizedek depended on personal qualification alone. Melchizedek’s priesthood was based on what he was, not on what he had inherited.” ₍₁₎

(1) Barclay, William. William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, “A Priest After The Order Of Melchizedek (Heb 7:1-28)”

“without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually” (Hebrews 7:3).

Much like a skilled illusionist who suddenly appears in a puff of smoke, Melchizedek entered the Biblical record seemingly out of nowhere: “He is without father or mother or any family. He has no beginning or end of life…” (CEB). However, this account presents several challenges if we accept Melchizedek as an ordinary human being.

For instance, it seems unlikely that Melchizedek was a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ, given that he was “…made like the Son of God.” ₍₁₎ This is important because human beings are finite- and any finite thing must have a cause to explain its existence. This is not only true of someone like Melchizedek; it is also true of every human being who has ever lived.

Neither can we say that Melchizedek caused his own existence. In order for Melchizedek to cause his own existence, it would have been necessary for him to exist before he existed. This is a logical impossibility, for something that has a beginning cannot exist before it exists. Therefore, we can dismiss the possibility that Melchizedek created himself.

While these observations may seem irrelevant to our discussion of Hebrews 7:3, they have an impact that far exceeds a simple investigation of Melchizedek’s life. For example, we can view these questions regarding Melchizedek’s lack of parentage as scaled-downed versions of a much larger question: “If everything needs a cause, then who or what caused God?”

The premise of that question requires careful attention before we attempt a response. You see, we’re not saying that everything needs a cause; we’re saying that every finite thing needs a cause. In other words, everything that begins to exist must have a cause for its existence. As an eternal (or non-finite) being, God is the self-existent, uncaused, first cause who explains the existence of every finite thing. Therefore, God is excluded from the premise of that question by necessity.

That leaves us with two options regarding Melchizedek’s origin: either he was a direct creation of God (which is unsupported by the text) or he had human parents. So why would Hebrews 7:3 make this kind of statement? We find the answer in the difference between Melchizedek’s priestly ministry and the priesthood held by the ancient tribe of Levi…

“…Melchizedek appears in history with no record of a genealogy or ancestral line, no record of his birth, and no record of his death. The point is, Melchizedek appears to transcend earthly existence; this makes him a type of Christ, who truly does transcend earthly existence as the eternal King-Priest who has no predecessor and no successor in His high office.” ₍₂₎

(1) We will address this possibility at greater length later in this series

(2) GotQuestions.org, What is the order of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 7:17)? Retrieved 06 June, 2022 from https://www.gotquestions.org/order-of-Melchizedek.html

“This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means ‘king of righteousness’; then also, ‘king of Salem’ means ‘king of peace.'” (Hebrews 7:1-2 NIV)

Genesis 14:18 tells us how Melchizedek served bread and wine following Abraham’s military victory over a coalition that held his nephew as a prisoner of war. Those familiar elements served as a precursor to the events that took place at Jesus’ last supper with His disciples…

“While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, ‘Take and eat; this is my body.’ Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins'” (Matthew 26:26-28).

One source examines these elements and makes the following observations…

“Further details link Melchizedek with Christ. When Melchizedek meets Abraham, he presents ‘bread and wine’ (Gen. 14:18). This anticipates the emblems of bread and wine that Jesus spoke of when he used them at his last Passover supper, saying that they represent his body and blood, broken and shed for us for the remission of sins. (Matt. 26:26-28) Presenting a sacrifice is a priestly role, and Melchizedek is also called ‘priest of God Most High’ (Gen. 14:18).” ₍₁₎

This portion of Scripture also mentions how Abraham gave Melchizedek “…a tenth of everything.” That ten percent portion is commonly defined as a “tithe.” Another commentary examines that offering in a contemporary framework…

“One of the first standards of giving found in the Bible is the tithe, a word which means ‘tenth.’ Abraham tithed in Gen 14:20 after returning from the daring rescue of his nephew Lot from four enemy kings. He encountered the priest Melchizedek and voluntarily surrendered to him one-tenth of all the spoils he had taken from his enemies. It’s often said that the tithe is Old Testament ‘legalism,’ but Abraham tithed some 430 years before the Law was given to Moses.

…Like every other facet of serving God, all giving (including the tithe) should be done with the right attitude. When giving is viewed as a rule and done out of a sense of duty, it becomes legalism. But it is not legalistic to give if we do so in thanksgiving to the Lord… we have plenty to be thankful for, including our ability to work.” ₍₂₎

(1) Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell, PhD, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, [pg. 214] © 2017 Josh McDowell Ministry

(2) Introduction – Tithing, Copyright © 1999 by Christian Financial Concepts. All rights reserved. https://www.crown.org/

“For this Melchizedek– King of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham and blessed him as he returned from defeating the kings, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything; first, his name means king of righteousness, then also, king of Salem, meaning king of peace” (Hebrews 7:1-2 HCSB).

There are several points of similarity between Melchizedek and Christ that are worthy of a closer look. For example…

• Melchizedek was the king of Salem (a word that means “peace”). Romans 5:1 tells us, “…we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
• The name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness.” 1 Corinthians 1:30 says Jesus “…has become… our righteousness.”
• Melchizedek was a priest. As we read earlier in Hebrews 4:14, “we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God.”
• When the Roman governor Pontius Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus replied, “It is as you say” (Matthew 27:11). So, like Melchizedek,  Jesus is both a priest and a king as well.
• Melchizedek was a priest, but he fell outside the ancestral lineage of those who were called to serve God in that capacity. In a similar manner, Jesus’ human genealogy did not derive from the priestly tribe of Levi. The author of Hebrews will address that subject at greater length in verses 14-19.
• As we’ll see in the following verse, Melchizedek is seemingly “…without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life.” In much the same way, Jesus is the eternal Son of God who has no beginning of days nor end of life in regard to His divine nature.
• In Hebrews 7:4, our author will invite us to consider how great Melchizedek was. Titus 2:13 similarly references “…the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
• The following verse will also tell us that Melchizedek held a position that was superior to that of the famous Old Testament patriarch Abraham. This recalls the following exchange between Jesus and the religious leaders of His day: “Then the Jews said to Him… ‘Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?’ …Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM'” (John 8:52-53, 58).

These comparative qualities will be helpful to remember as our author engages this subject throughout the rest of this chapter.

“Now this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him. To him also Abraham apportioned a tithe of everything. His name first means king of righteousness, then king of Salem, that is, king of peace” (Hebrews 7:1-2 NET).

Following his successful military campaign against a coalition of four city-states, Abraham (then known as Abram) received visits from two different people. The first visitor was the king of Sodom. While that visit is not relevant to this portion of Scripture, Abraham’s second visitor was critical to this discussion of Jesus’ priestly ministry. That second visitor’s name was Melchizedek.

As mentioned earlier, Melchizedek is something of a mysterious figure. In addition to his position as the king of Salem, he also served as a priest of the most high God. The Biblical book of Genesis mentions nothing concerning Melchizedek’s origin, why he came to visit Abraham, how he became a priest of God, or how Abraham knew him. We only know that Melchizedek was there with Abraham, he brought out bread and wine, and Abraham responded by giving Him ten percent of his plunder.

We’ll consider some potential answers to those mysteries as we move through our text from Hebrews chapter seven. But for now, let’s direct our attention to what we do know. First, we’re told that Melchizedek was the king of Salem. “Salem” is a word that means “peace,” and is thought to be the oldest name for the city of Jerusalem. ₍₁₎ In light of this, we can say that Melchizedek was the “king of peace.”

The name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness.”₍₂₎ Thus, Melchizedek held the dual role of priest and king, a rare combination in any era. In addition, Melchizedek brought out bread and wine, two elements that achieved greater significance in the New Testament account of Jesus’ life (see 1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

This information makes it possible to draw several comparisons between Melchizedek in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament. Those comparative qualities have led many to conclude that Melchizedek was a Christophany, or an Old Testament appearance of Christ prior to His physical birth. This seems unlikely, for Hebrews 7:3 will later tell us that Melchizedek was “…made like the Son of God.” Nevertheless, we can say that Melchizedek was a type (or symbol) of Christ at the very least.

We’ll take a closer look at these comparisons between Jesus and Melchizedek next.

(1) See “Salem” The Online Bible Thayer’s Greek Lexicon and Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4532/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) “Melchizedek” Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright © 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers

“For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace” (Hebrews 7:1-2 ESV).

Genesis chapter fourteen continues with some additional background information concerning this reference to Melchizedek in Hebrews chapter seven…

“Now the Valley of Siddim was full of asphalt pits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled; some fell there, and the remainder fled to the mountains. Then they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. They also took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.

Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, for he dwelt by the terebinth trees of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner; and they were allies with Abram. Now when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his three hundred and eighteen trained servants who were born in his own house, and went in pursuit as far as Dan” (Genesis 14:10-14).

So Abram mobilized his 318-member army in order to execute this rescue mission…

“He divided his forces against them by night, and he and his servants attacked them and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is [d]north of Damascus. So he brought back all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot and his goods, as well as the women and the people” (Genesis 14:15-16).

As a result of this great military victory, we’re told that a representative of the people who were liberated by Abram sought him out to express his appreciation. But someone else visited Abram as well- and that person turned out to be someone who far different than Abram’s first visitor…

“After Abram returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings allied with him, the king of Sodom came out to meet him in the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley). Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, and he blessed Abram, saying, ‘Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And blessed be God Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand.’ Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything” (Genesis 14:17-20).

We’ll continue with our look at these historic events next.

Hebrews chapter seven picks up on a topical discussion that initially began in chapter five. At that time, our author was diverted by his audience’s inability to grasp anything more than the ABCs of Christianity. However, he is now ready to continue his review of Jesus’ role as our High Priest by turning to a mysterious, shadowy figure who first appeared in the Old Testament book of Genesis…

“For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated ‘king of righteousness,’ and then also king of Salem, meaning ‘king of peace'” (Hebrews 7:1-2).

So who was Melchizedek? Well, other than what we read here in the book of Hebrews, all that is known of Melchizedek is found in two Old Testament passages. The first reference to Melchizedek occurred in Genesis 14:18-20 and the second came centuries later in Psalm 110:4. If it were not for the valuable teachings that are given to us here in Hebrews chapter seven, these references would likely serve as little more than obscure historic footnotes.

We can begin our consideration of this enigmatic figure with a look at the events that surrounded his initial appearance in Genesis 14:18-20. This period encompassed the life of the Biblical patriarch Abraham (then known as Abram). During that time, many Biblical lands were ruled by independent communities or “city-states.” Genesis chapter fourteen relates the account of five kings who ruled city-states in the region of Sodom and Gomorrah and chronicles their decision to revolt against a ruling coalition of four other city-states.

Genesis 14:4 tells us that the citizens of these five city-states had been subject to a man named Kedorlaomer. Kedorlaomer held dominion over these cities for twelve years and apparently served as the leader of the four-city confederacy. That decision to revolt effectively served as a declaration of war, and it’s easy to guess what happened next…

“Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) marched out and drew up their battle lines in the Valley of Siddim against Kedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of Goiim, Amraphel king of Shinar and Arioch king of Ellasar–four kings against five” (Genesis 14:8-9 NIV).

So what did these political alliances have to do with Abram and Melchizedek? Probably not much- that is, until one of Abram’s relatives became entangled in their dispute.

The term “high priest” has already appeared eight times within the first six chapters of the Biblical book of Hebrews. This phrase will also go on to appear eight additional times over the final seven chapters of this letter. Therefore, we can say that this subject is one of primary importance- and Hebrews chapter seven serves as the center point in discussing Jesus’ role as our high priest.

Despite the gravity of this subject however, the author of Hebrews questioned whether his audience was ready to grasp its importance…

“Even though Jesus was God’s Son, He learned obedience from the things He suffered. In this way, God qualified Him as a perfect High Priest, and He became the source of eternal salvation for all those who obey Him. And God designated Him to be a High Priest in the order of Melchizedek. There is much more we would like to say about this, but it is difficult to explain, especially since you are spiritually dull and don’t seem to listen” (Hebrews 5:8-11 NLT).

In this respect, we may view the author of Hebrews in the same way we might view a faithful coach who pushes an athlete to exceed his or her limitations. Thus, our author will press forward in this important discussion with the beloved members of his audience here in chapter seven.

Nevertheless, there are several spiritual and intellectual concerns that might impact our view of Jesus as our High Priest. Our author will address those objections throughout this chapter with several counterpoints, including…

• The priestly order to which Jesus belongs is superior to the priesthood held by Aaron and his successors under the Old Testament Law.
• The Old Testament provided for the establishment of this superior priesthood.
• There were certain inadequacies within the Law itself that brought about the need for something better.
• The ministry held by priests who served under the Old Testament Law was limited or temporary.
• Unlike the Levitical priests, Jesus did not need to atone for his sins before engaging in His ministry on behalf of others
• Jesus’ ministry continues eternally.

Therefore, as one source concludes…

“Here begins the longest single expository passage in the epistle. Its very length suggests its importance. Its theme is the core theme of Hebrews. The real resource of the readership, in the midst of their pressures, is the high priesthood of Christ. They must realize the greatness of that priesthood, its superiority to the Levitical institutions, and the perfect access they have to it on the basis of Christ’s death.” ₍₁₎

(1) John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Bible Knowledge Commentary, C. The greater Priest and His greater ministry (7:1-10:18)

“We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, where our forerunner, Jesus, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 6:19-20 NIV).

Much like an aircraft pilot who has been circling the runway upon which he or she wishes to land, the author of Hebrews has been edging toward a discussion concerning one particular individual since the end of chapter five. That individual is Melchizedek, the mysterious Old Testament king and priest.

You may recall that our author attempted to open that discussion earlier within this letter. But just as a tailwind often prohibits an aircraft from making direct approach to a runway,  an obstacle prevented him from bringing that subject in for a landing…

“[Jesus] was appointed by God to be a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. We have a lot to say about this topic, and it’s difficult to explain, because you have been lazy and you haven’t been listening” (Hebrews 5:10-11 CEB).

While the original audience for this epistle may have preferred something less spiritually challenging than a dissertation on the subject of Melchizedek’s priesthood, that will not deter our author from addressing that subject in the following chapter. With this in mind, we can say that the author of Hebrews was clearly invested in the spiritual health and development of his audience. Thus, he will not be dissuaded from engaging in a discussion regarding this seemingly obscure figure.

In like manner, the Scriptures often present us with teachings that may be difficult to grasp and apply. While we may not agree on the meaning and application of these complex subjects, everyone can surely agree that spiritual immaturity is not a desirable option. Indeed, Jesus once rebuked His own disciples for their inability to grasp the deeper significance of His teachings. This is something we can largely avoid by dedicating ourselves to prayerfully studying the Biblical Scriptures and regularly attending a church where the Word of God is taught expositionally.

And with that, the following commentator prepares us to enter Hebrews chapter seven and the important teachings contained there…

“The writer of Hebrews was now ready to proceed to serve the ‘solid food’ he had mentioned previously, that he said his readers needed to eat (5:14—6:1). This spiritual meat was specifically the exposition concerning the present high priestly ministry of Jesus Christ” ₍₁₎

(1) Constable, Thomas. DD, Notes on Hebrews 2022 Edition “B. The Basis for Confidence and Steadfastness 6:13-20” [6:19-20] https://www.planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/html/nt/hebrews/hebrews.htm

“We have this hope as an anchor for our lives, safe and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain. Jesus has entered there on our behalf as a forerunner, because He has become a high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 6:19-20 HCSB).

The word “forerunner” is commonly defined as “someone or something that comes before another.” ₍₁₎ However, one Biblical commentator offers an intriguing definition of this word as it relates to our text from Hebrews 6:20…

“The Greek word for forerunner was used in the second century A.D. of the smaller boats sent into the harbor by larger ships unable to enter due to the buffeting of the weather. These smaller boats carried the anchor through the breakers inside the harbor and dropped it there, securing the larger ship.

Forerunner presupposes that others will follow. Thus, Jesus is not only the believer’s anchor but He is like a runner boat that has taken our anchor into port and secured it there. There is thus no doubt as to whether this vessel is going into port. The only question, is whether it will go in with the sleekness of a well-trimmed sailing vessel or like a water-laden barge. Believers who have such a hope in the presence of God should come boldly before the throne of grace (4:14–16).” ₍₂₎

This notion of a high priest who interceded on behalf of others was undoubtedly familiar to first-century Jewish audiences. Nevertheless, the high priests of that era always entered the inner sanctuary (or Most Holy Place) alone. Therefore, the image of a high priest who could usher others into God’s direct presence was something completely new.

So, the idea that Christ opened the door for others to follow in this manner must have been a revolutionary concept to the members of our author’s original audience. The same may hold true for contemporary audiences as well…

“Christians too are to be brought into that same sacred area. This was indeed a startling statement, for though the ancient high priest was his people’s representative he was never their forerunner- they were never allowed to follow him within the curtain.

But the key-note of Hebrews is that the new high priest guarantees to every believer the privilege of confident access into this most holy place-the very presence of the living God, and it is summed up in one carefully chosen word: ‘forerunner’. Jesus has ‘gone that we may follow too.'” ₍₃₎

(1) “forerunner” Def. 1. The Britannica Dictionary Retrieved 31 May, 2022 from https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/forerunner

(2) Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 1645

(3) New International Bible Commentary general editor G. C. D. Howley, consulting editors F. F. Bruce, H. L. Ellison. Copyright© 1979 by Pickering & Inglis Ltd [pg. 1518]

“We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, sure and steadfast, which reaches inside behind the curtain, where Jesus our forerunner entered on our behalf, since he became a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 6:19-20 NET).

This portion of Scripture references the “…the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf” (NIV). The Gospel of Mark underscores the gravity of this statement with the account of an event that took place following Jesus’ crucifixion: “And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last. Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Mark 15:37-38).

We’ll discuss this subject at greater length when we reach Hebrews chapter nine. For now, we can say that one person was authorized to enter the innermost part of the temple known as the Most Holy Place. That person was the Jewish High Priest. He was permitted to enter this area once a year on the Day Of Atonement (also known as Yom Kippur), when a sacrifice was offered for the sins of the nation (see Leviticus chapter sixteen).

To access God’s direct presence within that room, the High Priest first had to pass through a great curtain that separated this area from the rest of the Temple. This curtain was said to be ninety feet (27m) tall, but Mark’s Gospel tells us that this enormous veil was immediately torn from top to bottom upon Jesus’ death. This detail is significant, for the fact that this curtain was torn in that direction indicates that God was responsible for orchestrating that event.

This action also served to demonstrate that access to God’s dwelling place was now freely available to all through Jesus’ sacrificial work on the cross. Unlike the limited access afforded to the High Priest exclusively through the Old Testament sacrificial system, anyone can now approach God and enter His direct presence through Christ. One Biblical scholar weaves these diverse threads together in the context of our passage from Hebrews…

“The anchor of the believer is, therefore, fastened within the veil of the Holy of Holies of heaven. We have some rich figures here. This present life is the sea; the soul, a ship; the hidden bottom of the sea, the hidden reality of the heavenly word. The soul is seen as storm-tossed on the troubled sea of life. The soul of the believer, as a tempest-tossed ship, is held by the anchor within the veil, fastened by faith to the blessed reality within the veil.” ₍₁₎

(1) Kenneth S. Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament [Hebrews 6:19] Copyright © 1942-55 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

“This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 6:19-20).

An anchor is a weighted device that enables a sailing vessel to remain stationary or maintain stability in rough sea conditions. Thus, it serves as an excellent illustration for this portion of Scripture.

Consider the word-picture behind this passage: “…an anchor of the soul.” If we drop an anchor from a sailing vessel, it falls to the bottom of the water and out of sight. In most instances, we can’t see the anchor below the surface, but we can gauge its effectiveness by the stability of the vessel to which it is attached.

This analogy applies to our spiritual lives as well. In this illustration, our lives are the sailing vessels and the sea represents the world in which we live. God is the unseen seabed below the surface of the water and the anchor is Christ. Thus, if the vessels of our lives are tossed like a ship at sea, we must prayerfully ensure that we are tethered to our Anchor.

This brings us to a practical discussion regarding this reference to the soul from Hebrews 6:19. As mentioned previously, the New Testament word for soul is psuche in the original language of this passage. This word survives today as the root of such modern-day words as psychology or psychoanalysis. In this context, the soul refers to the human being as an individual personality. It also conveys an emotional component that encompasses the things we love, hate, or feel indifferent about.

In light of this, we may further associate this illustration with the worries and anxieties of daily life. One of the best ways to anchor our lives in this regard involves Jesus’ counsel from Matthew 6:33-34…

“But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” (NIV).

As one source concludes…

“Throughout history, anchors have served as a much-needed device for sailors. In the Bible, an anchor is used as a symbol of our hope in Jesus that gives us stability and steadfastness in life. In ancient days, the anchor was used in artwork and engravings as a symbol of Christianity. Anchors appear in the Roman catacombs on the tombs of Christians, showing the Christians’ steadfast hope in eternal life.” ₍₁₎

(1) GotQuestions.org, What is the significance of the anchor in the Bible? Retrieved 26 May, 2022 from https://www.gotquestions.org/anchor-in-the-Bible.html

“So God has given both His promise and His oath. These two things are unchangeable because it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, we who have fled to Him for refuge can have great confidence as we hold to the hope that lies before us” (Hebrews 6:18 NLT).

We can find a good example of a false argument as it relates to the existence of an omnipotent God in the form of the following question: “Can God make a rock so big that He can’t move it?” This question appears to present an insurmountable dilemma for those who seek to answer it. For example…

• If God can make a rock so big that He can’t move it, then He is not all-powerful.
• If God can’t make a rock so big that He can’t move it, then He is not all-powerful.

Since God is all-powerful by definition, this question seems to eliminate the possibility of an omnipotent Being. Thus, it appears to preclude the existence of an all-powerful God.

Although this may seem to be a reasonable question, a serious flaw emerges if we consider it more closely. For instance, how big a rock is necessary to prevent God from moving it? Well, a rock of that magnitude would have to surpass the infinite power of God. So, in essence, the questioner is asking if God can create a rock that is greater than His infinite ability to lift it. This creates a scenario where the following conditions exist:

• A Being with infinite power (God).
• An object possesses something greater than infinite power, at least in one respect (a rock).

In other words, this question encompasses a logical impossibility- a situation where God holds the most power but does not hold the most power at the same time. As mentioned in our previous study, this basic idea is sometimes rephrased in the following manner: “Can God move an immovable object?” The problem is that the ability of an immovable object to remain stationary must exceed God’s infinite power to move it. Since nothing exceeds infinite power, the question is inherently self-defeating. ₍₁₎

We should also remember that rocks are not infinitely heavy by nature. While we may debate the characteristics of a rock, an infinitely heavy rock would no longer be a rock; it would be something else. The same is true for any other material object we might choose to substitute for a rock.

So, these types of questions are internally self-destructive. Therefore, a person who asks them in seeking to eliminate the possibility of an omnipotent God should reconsider their self-defeating nature.

(1) We might attempt to escape this conclusion by redefining God as a Being with less-than-infinite power. However, such a being would no longer be God. He/she/it would then be a demigod, or a being with superhuman power or ability.

“so that we who have found refuge in him may find strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us through two unchangeable things, since it is impossible for God to lie” (Hebrews 6:18 NET).

The Gospel of Mark presents us with the following statement from Jesus: “Jesus said to him, ‘If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes'” (Mark 9:23).

For many, a statement like “…all things are possible to him who believes” may sound like a child’s fairy tale or an irrational response to the harsh realities of life. It might also sound like a substitute for intelligent, rational thought that exchanges reason and intellect for wishing and hoping. In fact, those who seek to use that statement against Jesus might do so in the following manner…

• Jesus said that all things are possible to him who believes. Can I make a square circle if I only believe?
• Could I create an irresistible force that could move an immovable object if I only believe?
• Is it possible to make something true and false at the same time and in the same way if I only believe?

The short answer to each of these questions is “no.” To understand how and why that answer intersects with Jesus’ seemingly ironclad promise in Mark 9:23, we need to consider the nature of these questions.

For example, the question regarding a square circle conceals a logical error. The error is this: whenever we attempt to place a corner on a circle in order to make it a square, the circle immediately ceases to be a circle. Because of this, the question logically precludes any possibility of an answer.

The same is true when looking at the “irresistible force vs. the immovable object” question. This question assumes that two distinct entities possess the greatest power or ability. Since only one of those entities can be the “greatest,” this question reveals an internal inconsistency. It then attempts to increase the power of one of them through belief. This potentially introduces a third “greatest power.”

We can see a similar concept in the “true and false” question as well. This question creates a condition where something is true and not true at the same time and in the same way.

So, each of these questions contains an inherent contradiction. For this reason, we can confidently dismiss them in seeking to apply Jesus’ promise from Mark 9:23. Our next study will conclude our look at Hebrews 6:18 by addressing such objections in light of another familiar challenge: “Can God make a rock so big that He can’t move it?”

“so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us” (Hebrews 6:18 ESV).

Hebrews 6:18 offers an opportunity to address what some view as an inconsistency within the Scriptures and/or God’s nature. We can state that premise with two points and a conclusion:

• Matthew 19:26 quotes Jesus as saying, “…everything is possible for God” (GW).
• Hebrews 6:18 says, “it is impossible for God to lie” (see also Titus 1:2).
• Therefore, God and/or the Biblical Scriptures are inconsistent.

One source offers a brief, but thorough analysis of that proposition…

“The answer lies in a proper understanding of God’s omnipotence. Omnipotence does not mean God cannot exercise self-limitation. The biblical God has limited Himself only to acts that are consistent with His righteous, loving character. Therefore, God’s power is self-restrained. He cannot do evil and He cannot do anything irrational. He cannot go back upon His Word. He is all-powerful when it comes to doing things that are right, but He has no power to do things wrong.

…being omnipotent means that God is able to do anything that is consistent with His holy character. Nothing can stop Him from doing whatever He decides to do. However, there are certain things which He cannot do. The Bible actually lists a number of specific things which God cannot do. For example, He is not able to lie. This means the God of the Bible always tells the truth. Lying is not something which He is capable of doing. Neither is God able to do anything sinful. He cannot personally sin. Again, Scripture says that committing a sin is impossible for God…

The fact that there are certain things which God cannot do does not limit His power. Indeed, the fact that He has certain self-limitations does not take away from His power and majesty. He can do everything that is holy and wise.” ₍₁₎

Another commentator adds…

“The context in Matthew indicates that Jesus is speaking of what is humanly impossible, whereas, Hebrews informs us that some things (e.g., lying) are actually impossible for God. Note that in the former passage, Jesus said, “with men this is impossible,” indicating that He was only speaking of what was humanly impossible, but not divinely impossible” ₍₂₎

We’ll continue our look at this topic by highlighting Mark 9:23 and Jesus’ promise that “…all things are possible to him who believes” next.

(1) Stewart, Don. If God Is All-Powerful, Then Does It Mean He Can Do Anything? Are There Any Limits To What God Can Do? Retrieved 26 May, 2022 from https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/the-attributes-of-god-that-belong-to-him-alone/13-can-god-do-anything.cfm

(2) Norman L. Geisler and Thomas A. Howe, The Big Book of Bible Difficulties © 1992 [pg. 351]

“that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us” (Hebrews 6:18).

As mentioned earlier in our look at Hebrews chapter one, Hebrews 6:18 involves the Biblical doctrine of God’s immutability. The word “immutable” can be defined as something that does not change. Thus, God’s promises to us are reliable, trustworthy, and unchanging. While there is little debate concerning the immutability of God’s promises, there is a variety of opinion regarding the exact nature of the “two immutable things” referenced here within this verse.

For example…

“The (1) death and resurrection of Christ and (2) His ascension and intercession for us are the two immutable things.” ₍₁₎

“The two immutable things are God’s Word and God’s oath. Since God does not lie and since He is all-powerful, He will fulfill all His promises. This unchanging nature of God is the believer’s consolation and encouragement.” ₍₂₎

“What are the ‘two things’? Calvin says the two things are, (1) what He says; and (2) what He swears is immutable. Some suggest the two things are: 1. The promise, 2. The oath. Others say two oaths are referred to. 1. The promise – the oath made to Abraham respecting a Son, the Messiah. 2. The second refers to Christ’s priesthood, recorded in Ps. 110:4: ‘Jehovah has sworn and will not repent. Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” ₍₃₎

Regardless of the differences between these views, one thing we can say is that God will certainly make good on all His promises. This offers hope and assurance as we seek to meet the challenges of daily life.

In another sense, our relationship with God in Christ is not unlike the cities of refuge that God established when the people of Old Testament Israel entered the land of Canaan. Hebrews 6:18 alludes to this idea in speaking of those “…who have fled to Him for refuge” (NLT).

The Biblical book of Joshua identified six cities where an accused criminal could find safety and protection while the accusations against him were examined and judged. In a similar manner, those who accept God’s offer of reconciliation through Christ have entered a place of safety and protection from the judgment that will ultimately fall upon those who reject their Creator. Thus, a person who comes to God through Christ serves to exemplify the words of Psalm 18:30…

“As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless. He is a shield for all who take refuge in him” (NIV).

(1) J. Vernon McGee, Thru The Bible with J. Vernon McGee, “Hebrews 6:1-20” Copyright 1981 by J. Vernon McGee

(2) Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 1645.

(3) Boatman, Don Earl Helps from Hebrews, College Press, Joplin, Missouri p.197

“For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath” (Hebrews 6:16-17).

The act of swearing an oath to verify the truth of a statement or commitment to a course of action is a practice that takes many forms. For instance, we place legal witnesses “under oath” when giving testimony in court. We also have the example of those government officials, law enforcement officers, and other formal authorities who are “sworn into” their various ranks of service. However, these contemporary oaths differ greatly from their ancient counterparts.

For example, some Old Testament contracts and legal agreements were formalized through a ceremony that involved the death of one or more animals. The parties involved in ratifying an agreement cut each animal in half and placed the halves opposite to one another on the ground. Both parties then proceeded to walk between the pieces of the sacrificed animals. We can find a detailed example of this type of oath in Genesis chapter fifteen.

While this practice may seem barbarous to modern-day audiences, it communicated something that is easy to understand. This ceremony declared that if either side failed to uphold the terms of their agreement, the guilty party would be subject to the same fate as the animal that had been sacrificed.

We can find another type of ancient oath in Genesis chapter 24…

“[Abraham] said to the chief servant in his household, the one in charge of all that he had, ‘Put your hand under my thigh. I want you to swear by the Lord, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you will not get a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I am living, but will go to my country and my own relatives and get a wife for my son Isaac'” (Genesis 24:2-4).

Abraham was so determined to find the right marriage partner for Isaac that he told his servant, “Put your hand under my thigh… (and) swear…” It has been suggested that this action means, “May my descendants take action against you if you fail to fulfill this oath.”

Unlike fallible human beings, God’s truthful and unchanging nature means He has no need to swear an oath. Nevertheless, “God also bound himself with an oath, so that those who received the promise could be perfectly sure that he would never change his mind” (NLT). We’ll consider the immutability of that promise next.

“For when God made a promise to Abraham, since he had no one greater by whom to swear, he swore by himself, saying, ‘Surely I will bless you and multiply you'” (Hebrews 6:13-14 ESV).

This portion of Scripture refers to a historic event that took place in the life of Abraham, the well-known Biblical personality and man of faith. That account is chronicled for us in the Old Testament book of Genesis. It involves a son that had been born to Abraham as God promised earlier in Genesis 15:1-6. That son was named Isaac, and he represented the fulfillment of God’s promise to provide Abraham with an heir.

However, there came a time when Isaac was involved in a significant test of Abraham’s faith…

“Then God said, ‘Take your son, your only son, whom you love–Isaac–and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you’

…When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son.

But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, ‘Abraham! Abraham!’ ‘Here I am,’ he replied. ‘Do not lay a hand on the boy,’ he said. ‘Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son'” (Genesis 22:2, 9-12 NIV).

That event forms the basis for our passage from Hebrews 6:13-14 and God’s response to Abraham’s act of faith…

“‘…By Myself I have sworn, says the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son— blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies. In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice'” (Genesis 22:16-18).

This has led one Biblical commentator to conclude, “God’s oaths and promises can be depended on (cf. Heb. 6:16-17). This is the theological thrust of the paragraph. Our hope is in the unchanging character of God (cf. Ps. 102:27; Mal. 3:6) and Jesus (cf. Heb. 13:8) and promises of God (cf. Isa. 40:8; 55:11).” ₍₁₎

(1) Dr. Bob Utley. Free Bible Commentary, [Hebrews 6:13] Copyright © 2014 Bible Lessons International http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL10/VOL10_06.html

“For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, saying, ‘Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you'” (Hebrews 6:13-14).

In seeking to provide us with a good example to follow, the author of Hebrews turned to Abraham, the great Old Testament patriarch and man of faith.

Abraham lived approximately two thousand years before the birth of Christ, and Genesis chapters eleven through twenty-five detail the events of his life. That portion of Scripture tells us that God called Abram (as he was then known) at age seventy-five to leave his home and travel to another land that God would later reveal to him (see Genesis 12:1).

In addition, God told Abram, “I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing” (Genesis 12:2 NIV). Although Abram and his wife were well beyond normal child-bearing age, He took God at His word and “…departed as the Lord instructed him…” (Genesis 12:4).

Abram continued his long journey until he finally reached the land of Canaan (Genesis 12:4-8), an area that generally corresponds with the modern-day nation of Israel. Although Abram was quite wealthy by the time he arrived in Canaan (Genesis 13:2), he was an elderly man in an unfamiliar environment with few friends and many prospective enemies. Those enemies included several potentially hostile neighbors, such as the Canaanites and another local people group known as the Perizzites (Genesis 13:7).

So, other than his servants, his possessions, and a nephew named Lot (who would later make an ill-fated decision to leave his uncle and establish a new residence near Sodom), Abram had little more than a promise from God- a promise that he accepted and believed by faith. Because of this, Genesis 15:6 tells us that “(Abram) believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness” (NIV).

In time, God gave Abraham a son just as He promised (see Genesis 15:2-5, 17:19, and 21:1-7). As we’ll see in our next study, we’ll also find that Abraham was ready to present his beloved son as a sacrificial offering as a further demonstration of his faith (Genesis 22:1-19). In light of this, we can say that Abraham demonstrated the faith and perseverance referenced earlier in Hebrews 6:12 through his external actions. Thus, he represents a fitting example for the original readers of this epistle and contemporary audiences alike.

“And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope until the end, that you do not become sluggish, but imitate those who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (Hebrews 6:11-12).

This passage offers a subtle clue to indicate that our author was speaking to different members of his audience over the past few verses: “We want each of you to show this same diligence…” (NIV). This implies that there were some who did not show “diligence and full assurance of hope until the end.” Those individuals likely served as the target audience for Hebrews 5:12-6:8. Our author then followed by directing Hebrews 6:9-10 toward a different group, namely those who demonstrated a greater degree of spiritual maturity.

This reference to “diligence” conveys the attributes of perseverance, tenacity, persistence, and effort. Some of those who originally received this epistle had already exhibited those characteristics in their ministry to others. Now our author is prompting his readers to demonstrate those traits in emulating “…those who are going to inherit God’s promises because of their faith and endurance” (NLT). We’ll find several examples of such diligence later in Hebrews chapter eleven.

While these spiritual characteristics often involve demanding qualities such as patience and discipline, we are certainly well-acquainted with those values in other areas of life…

“…trusting in others and waiting for them to deliver is hardly foreign to us. Most of us face that every day in the workplace. We accept contracts for products and services weeks, months, or even years in advance of actual delivery. Are you asking God to deliver on your time schedule? God wants to grow you rather than just give to you. He cultivates faith and perseverance by doing His work in our lives in His way and in His time.” ₍₁₎

As another commentator observed regarding the original audience for this letter, “They had already become sluggish in their hearing (5:11); they must now be diligent, lest such sluggishness characterize their whole life.” ₍₂₎

Finally, this passage reminds us that it is important to guard against spiritual lethargy and indifference in a world that features a multitude of demands that compete for our attention. Thus, as we are reminded in the New Testament book of 1 Thessalonians, “Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober” (1 Thessalonians 5:6). It is in this manner that we can be “…imitators of those who inherit the promises through faith and perseverance” (CSB).

(1) Word in Life Study Bible, electronic ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1996), Heb 6:12–15.

(2) Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, eds., KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 2551.