Lesson 13: A New Covenant
Hebrews 8:1-13
Now the main point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent that the Lord, and not any mortal, has set up. For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; hence it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. They offer worship in a sanctuary that is a sketch and shadow of the heavenly one; for Moses, when he was about to erect the tent, was warned, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one.
God finds fault with them when he says:
“The days are surely coming, says the Lord,
when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah; not like the covenant that I made with their ancestors,
on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt;
for they did not continue in my covenant,
and so I had no concern for them, says the Lord.
This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, says the Lord:
I will put my laws in their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
And they shall not teach one another
or say to each other, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.”
In speaking of “a new covenant,” he has made the first one obsolete. And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear.
The point! Why did the preacher marshal the Melchizedek material in Genesis 14:18-20 and Psalm 110:4 in the previous chapter? It was to make this point, the “main point”—it is the principal confession of this didactic section in Hebrews (perhaps the whole sermon): we have an immortal high priest seated at the right hand of God who serves in the heavenly sanctuary. He is a priest forever in the manner of Melchizedek rather than a priest in the Levitical order.
Hebrews 8:1-8a compares the earthly high priestly service of the Levitical priesthood with the heavenly high priestly service of Jesus, the Son of God, who is the Messiah. In Hebrews 8:8b-13 the preacher reminds his listeners that God had promised a new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and it is this new covenant that perfects believers through the indestructible life of the Messiah.
The preacher’s main point is the identification of the high priest of the new covenant and the ministry that person provides in the heavenly sanctuary.
Hebrews 8:1-8a
The below chart identifies some of the key comparisons the preacher makes between the Levitical high priesthood and the Messianic (Jesus the Messiah) high priesthood. Both priesthoods “offer gifts and sacrifices.” The nature of the offerings is discussed in Hebrews 9:1-10:18, but here the emphasis is on where the offering is made! And this where makes a critical difference between the two priesthoods. Their ministries are both liturgical; they are leitourgos. They minister in the sanctuary of God, one on earth and the other in heaven. Their offerings, however, are also different, as we will see in Hebrews 9.
Whereas the Levitical priesthood offers “gifts and sacrifices” in an earthly sanctuary, the Messianic priesthood makes its offering in the heavenly sanctuary. The two are related but differentiated. The earthly tabernacle is an analogue (“sketch;” replica or copy) and “shadow” of the heavenly sanctuary. The earthly tabernacle was patterned after the heavenly one. The preacher quotes Exodus 25:40 to make this point. Moses, it seems, saw the heavenly sanctuary himself, and he was instructed to produce an analogue or replica of what he saw. The earthly sanctuary is an earthly representation or imitation of the heavenly sanctuary.
Consequently, the heavenly sanctuary came first. It is the original sanctuary of which the tabernacle on earth is a copy. In other words, the preacher is careful to note that the earthly sanctuary, though good and important, is not the “true” or original sanctuary because that staus belongs to the heavenly sanctuary. The earthly sanctuary imitates the original sanctuary.
I presume this was not news to many within Second Temple Judaism. It was a widespread belief that angels served as priests in the heavenly sanctuary, God’s heavenly temple. For example, Wisdom of Solomon 9:8, which refers to Exodus 25:40, says, “You said to build a temple on your holy mountain, and in the city of your dwelling an altar, a copy of the holy tent that you prepared from the beginning.” 1 Enoch, Philo of Alexandria, and Qumran documents depict angels serving in the heavenly temple. In particular, the Testament of Levi (3:4-6) identifies the Holy of Holies as the heavenly dwelling of God where archangels serve and offer sacrifices.[1]
The point is that the earthly service of the Levitical priesthood reflected what was happening in the heavenly temple. The heavenly service did not reduce the Levitical ministry to insignificance or render it superfluous. On the contrary, the Levitical was an ongoing witness to the reality of the ministry in the heavenly temple. Consequently, Second Temple Judaism spoke of two simultaneous priestly ministries: one in heaven and one on the earth.
The preacher in Hebrews identifies Jesus, the Son of God, as the one who assumed a role greater than the angels to officiate in the heavenlies for the deliverance of God’s people. Jesus is our great royal high priest, seated at the right hand of the Father as king, who serves in the heavenly sanctuary for our sake not only to offer himself but to continually make intercession for the people of God.
Jesus is not an earthly priest; “if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all.” The priests on earth are Levitical “according to the law.” Rather, he is a priest, in the manner of Melchizedek, empowered by an indestructible resurrection life and has passed through the heavens into the heavenly sanctuary of God, the Holy of Holies of the cosmos.
High Priests Compared
| Levitical | Messianic |
| A Copy/Shadow Sanctuary | True Sanctuary |
| Earthly Sanctuary | Heavenly Sanctuary |
| Type (the Copy) | Antitype (the Original) |
| Good Ministry | More Excellent Ministry |
| Earthly Ministry | Heavenly Ministry |
| Good Covenant | Better Covenant |
| Good Promises | Better Promises |
This heavenly ministry is more excellent or superior to the earthly ministry because the earthly ministry is a type of the true ministry in the heavenly temple. This heavenly servant, the royal Son who is high priest, has become the “mediator of a better covenant” which has legally enacted (nenomothetetai) better promises.
In Hebrews 7:18, the Levitical priesthood was identified as “weak and ineffectual” because the Levitical priests were mortal and sinful, and thus their ministry did not bring perfection (or, the fullness of what God intends humans to become in the resurrection). This is the “fault” that lies behind the preacher’s language in Hebrews 8:7. The Levitical priesthood, as part of the “first covenant,” could not effect the better promises of a “second” covenant. In other words, it could not provide what is promised in the “new covenant.” It is, after all, only a type of the true sanctuary in heaven.
The Levitical weakness of mortality and sinfulness is the fault that generates the need for a “new covenant.” God did not find fault with the covenant per se, but God found fault with “them” (plural; 8:8a). The people broke the covenant, death is the penalty for breaking the covenant (cf. Hebrews 10:28), and the sinfulness of the priests as well as their own mortality rendered their services ineffectual for “perfection.” The broken covenant and the ineffectuality of the Levitical priesthood meant another path was needed.
Consequently, there was a need for a “better” covenant grounded in “better promises.” In other words, we needed a priestly ministry that could perfect humanity. This is effected through a better mediator with a more excellent ministry—the ministry of the Messianic priesthood according to the manner of Melchizedek. This is the incarnate Son, who as glorified and resurrected human, was called to serve as a priest forever in the heavenly sanctuary. His ministry in heaven is able to perfect us because he himself “has been made perfect forever” (Hebrews 7:28).
Hebrews 8:8b-13
New Covenant! The quotation from Jeremiah 31:31-34 sets up the argument in chapters 9:1-10:18. This is the longest quotation from the Hebrew Bible in Hebrews, and he returns to Jeremiah at the conclusion of this didactic section (Hebrews 10:16-17). Jeremiah 31, then, bookends the significant discussion of priestly offerings in Hebrews 9:1-10:15. We might say, then, Jeremiah’s promise of a new covenant is, at least in part, about the forgiveness of sins, and Hebrews 8-10 explains that point in some detail.
The better covenant with better promises is what Jeremiah describes as “a new covenant.” Some suggest that the new covenant replaces the old covenant en toto such that the new covenant is a totally different covenant. Sometimes this is expressed as the new law replaces the old law, though the language of old/new law nowhere appears in the New Testament. In other words, according to this view, the Mosaic covenant, with all its requirements, is replaced with the Messianic covenant. This sometimes appears in arguments that suggest that if it is in the “Old Testament” (or the Mosaic covenant, or the Law–where law and covenant are confused rather than differentiated), it cannot function as authority for the New Testament Church. For example, instrumental music in the Psalms (part of the “old covenant”) cannot justify inclusion in the worship of the New Testament church because it is part of the “Old Testament.”
Yet, the preacher does not use this kind of language to describe the change (adjustment, transformation) he is noting. It is a transition or transformation rather than replacement, and the object is not the law but a particular commandment within the law, that is, the requirement of legal descent from Levi in order to be a priest. This is required because Israel broke the covenant and this prevents the perfection of humanity within a Levitical system.
Instead of replacement, the language is renewal. A “new covenant” is not a totally new creation out of nothing but a renewal of the first and including the provision of the high priesthood of the Messiah according to the order of Melchizedek. This provision is necessary because the Levitical system could not effect perfection, but the Messianic priesthood of Jesus can. The change in the law is a change in priesthood for the purposes of accomplishing God’s goal which was obstructed because Levitical priests sin and die while the Messiah is sinless and lives forever. They could not redeem the brokenness of the covenant; their ministry was ineffectual in that regard.
The same God of the “first” covenant renews covenant with the same people (Israel and Judah) by writing the same law on their hearts with the same promise (lines 1-4 in the chart below). There is a fundamental continuity between the “first” and “second.” The fault of the first lies in the mortality and sinfulness of the people—it does not lie within the covenant itself. This covenant, however, is renewed through an adjustment in the law that locates redemption in the offering and ministry of the Messiah who is both sinless and eternal. This “new covenant” promised renewal through God’s redemptive work.
This redemptive shift in priesthood means that (1) Yahweh’s laws will be written on the heart whereas it was written on stones at Sinai, (2) there will be no need to teach anyone to know God whereas teaching is how people came to know God in Israel, (3) everyone will know God intimately whereas in Israel not everyone knew God, and (4) sin will be remembered no more whereas Israel remembered its sins annually (at least) on Yom Kippur. The below chart illustrates the continuity and discontinuity between the first and second (“new”) covenant.
| First Covenant | Continuity/Discontinuity | Second (“New”) Covenant | |
| 1 | Says Yahweh (the Lord) | Same God | Says Yahweh (the Lord) |
| 2 | House of Israel and Judah | Same People | House of Israel and Judah |
| 3 | “my laws “ | Same Law (e.g., Ethics) | “my laws” |
| 4 | “I will be their God and they shall be my people” | Same Promise | “I will be their God and they shall be my people” |
| 5 | Law written on stone with a call to circumcise the heart to serve God but broke the covenant | Different Reality | “I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts” so that they will never again break the covenant |
| 6 | Teach each other and say to each other, “Know the Lord” | Different Outcome | No need to teach each other or say “Know the Lord” |
| 7 | Not everyone knew the Lord | Different Intimacy | “They shall all know me” |
| 8 | Remembrance of sin | Different Relationship | No remembrance of sin |
But a problem arises as we reflect on these promises. The differences between the first and second in lines 5-8 in the above chart have not yet been fully realized in the present age. We still need to teach people; we still break the covenant (sin); not everyone knows God; and we constantly remember our sins. These results are still not yet fully in effect. Their full realization is yet future; the results are eschatological in nature. They are the promise of our life with God in the new heaven and new earth. We certainly experience the reality, outcome, intimacy, and relationship in the present but not fully. Only when we are perfected through the perfection of Jesus will we fully experience the blessings of the new covenant. This is the vision Ezekiel has of the renewal of Israel as well in Ezekiel 36:22-32, and it is what God always intended, that is, circumcised hearts that would obey God and love God with their whole heart (Deuteronomy 30:6-10).
Nevertheless, we already experience these blessings through the presence of the Holy Spirit in our lives. The Spirit creates a new heart in us, mediates intimacy with our Abba, teaches us through the anointing of the Spirit, and we have the confidence of the full forgiveness of our sins. In particular, Ezekiel 36:26-27 speaks of the role of the Holy Spirit in creating and renewing the hearts of God’s people. In the present moment, the indwelling Spirit of God is in the process of doing just that, and the Spirit will complete God’s work in perfecting us when we join Jesus in the resurrection. Then, we will fully experience the blessings of the new covenant. In other words, the new covenant is only fully and finally experienced in the eschaton. The promise of the new covenant is eschatological.
Another way of saying this is that the first and second covenant are not two different covenants but that the second is the renewal of the first. It is second in the sense that it is a renewal and not because it is a different covenant altogether. It is second in the sense that it will fully implement the promises in the eschaton. This renewal suggests a fundamental continuity between the “first” covenant and the “new” one.
In what sense, then, is the first covenant “obsolete and growing old” and “will soon disappear” (Hebrews 8:13). When Jeremiah announced the coming of a new covenant, the ineffectual parts of the first covenant were destined to grow old and wear out. The word “obsolete” means to wear out like a piece of clothing (see Hebrews 1:11). We might even say the first covenant, particularly its mortal and sinful priesthood, could carry the redemptive ball no longer and was never intended to do so because of the brokenness of the covenant. When the renewal of the covenant was promised at the time of Jeremiah with its eschatological promises, it was only a matter of time until the Messianic priesthood would effect the work of eternal redemption at which the Levitical priesthood was ineffectual. It might be that the “wearing out” and “growing old” ultimately refers to the cessation of the Levitical priestly ministry when the temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. The priesthood is the main topic of Hebrews 7:1-10:18.
Or, perhaps (as my friend Bobby Valentine suggests), the preacher is referring to the “broken” covenant that is on the verge of disappearance as the (re)new[ed] covenant is increasingly coming into play headed toward eschatological fulfillment (much like as we see “the Day” approaching in Hebrews 10:25). What is disappearing is the brokenness of the covenant due to Israel’s rejection of the covenant (starting with Mt. Sinai and the golden calf), but God’s faithfulness through the Messiah pursues Israel and renews covenant with them through the Messianic priesthood. In this way, the covenant is not abrogated but renewed with better promises and a better hope based on a better priesthood. In this case, the old broken covenant is renewed as fulfilled by God’s redemptive work; and, thus, it is new.
In either case, this does not mean the Levitical priesthood was replaced or rejected as useless when God began the renewal of the covenant. On the contrary, Jewish disciples of Jesus participated in the temple sacrifices before the temple’s destruction. They gathered in the temple (Acts 2:46), prayed in the temple (Acts 3:1), and Paul himself sacrificed in the temple (Acts 21:17-26). There is no inherent incongruity between two priesthoods operating at the same time; that was already envisioned within Second Temple Judaism as the heavenly and earthly sanctuaries co-existed. The temple cultus, with its priesthood, still has a godly function: remembrance, thanksgiving, and vows among other values.
But it does mean that the Messianic priesthood did what the Levitical priesthood could not do: perfect the people of God. The first covenant was renewed to secure the eschatological blessings God always intended to bestow on the people of Israel and Judah. God renewed covenant with Israel and Judah through writing God’s laws on their hearts and remembering their sins no more. While that is already happening (in process), it is not yet fully realized until the “Day” when God will make all things new, including our hearts, land, and covenantal relationship with God.
[1] I am dependent upon Matthew Thiessen, “Hebrews and the Jewish Law,” in So Great a Salvation: A Dialogue on the Atonement in Hebrews, edited by Jon C. Laansma, George R. Guthrie, and Cynthia Long Westfall (T & T Clark, 2019), 188-189. On new covenant and Jewish law, see also Frederick Holmgren, The Old Testament and the Significance of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), especially chapter 4 and Richard B. Hays, “’Here we Have No Lasting City’: New Covenantalism in Hebrews,” in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology, edited by Richard Bauckham, Daniel Driver, and Trevor Hart, editors (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009).