Albert Barnes Commentary Hebrews 9

Chapter Nine.

Analysis of the Chapter.

The general design of this chapter is the same as the two preceding: to show that Christ as High Priest is superior to the Jewish high priest.

The apostle had already shown this to be true regarding His rank and the dispensation of which He was the "Mediator."

He now proceeds to show that this was also true concerning the efficacy of the sacrifice He made. To do this, he gives an account of the ancient Jewish sacrifices and compares them with that made by the Redeemer.

The essential point is that the former dispensation was mere shadow, type, or figure, and that the latter was real and efficacious.

In illustration of this general idea, the chapter comprises the following points:

1. A description of the ancient tabernacle and of the utensils that were in it (Hebrews 9:1–5).

2. A description of the services in it, particularly that performed by the high priest once a year (Hebrews 9:6–7).

3. All this was typical and symbolical, and was a standing demonstration that the way into the most holy place in heaven was not yet fully revealed (Hebrews 9:8–10).

4. Christ has now come—the substance of which that was the shadow, the real sacrifice of which that was the emblem (Hebrews 9:11–14). He pertained, as a Priest, to a more perfect tabernacle (Hebrews 9:11); He offered not the blood of bulls and goats, but His own blood (Hebrews 9:12); with that blood He entered into the most holy place in heaven (Hebrews 9:12); and if the blood of bulls and goats was admitted to be efficacious in putting away external uncleanness, it must be admitted that the blood of Christ had an efficacy in cleansing the conscience (Hebrews 9:13–14).

5. His blood is efficacious not only in remitting present sins, but it extends in its efficacy even to past ages and removes the sins of those who had worshiped God under the former covenant (Hebrews 9:15).

6. The apostle then proceeds to show that it was necessary that the Mediator of the new covenant should shed His own blood, and that the blood thus shed should be applied to purify those for whom the sacrifice was made (Hebrews 9:16–23). This he shows by the following considerations:

   1. He argues it from the nature of a covenant or compact, showing that it was ratified only over dead sacrifices, and that of necessity the victim that was set apart to confirm or ratify it must be slain (Hebrews 9:16–17).

   2. The first covenant was confirmed or ratified by blood; and therefore it was necessary that, since the "patterns" of the heavenly things were sprinkled with blood, the heavenly things themselves should be purified with better sacrifices (Hebrews 9:18–23).

7. The offering made by the Redeemer was to be made only once. This arose from the necessity of the case, since it could not be supposed that the Mediator would suffer often, as the high priest went once every year into the most holy place. He had come and died once in the last dispensation of things on earth, and then had entered into heaven, and could suffer no more (Hebrews 9:24–26).

8. In the close of the chapter, the apostle adverts to the fact that there was a remarkable resemblance, in one respect, between the death of Christ and the death of all men. It was appointed to them to die once, and only once; and so Christ died only once. As a man, it was in accordance with the universal condition of things that He should die once; and in accordance with the same condition of things, it was proper that He should die only once. In like manner, there was a resemblance or fitness regarding what would occur after death. Man was to appear at the judgment; he was not to cease to be but would stand hereafter at the bar of God. In like manner, Christ would again appear. He did not cease to exist when He expired but would appear again that He might save His people (Hebrews 9:27–28).

Then truly. Or, moreover. The object is to describe the tabernacle in which the service of God was celebrated under the former dispensation and to show that it had a reference to what was future and was only an imperfect representation of the reality.

It was important to show this, as the Jews regarded the ordinances of the tabernacle and of the whole Levitical service as of Divine appointment and of perpetual obligation.

Paul's object is to prove that they were to give place to a more perfect system, and therefore it was necessary to discuss their real nature.

The first covenant. The word "covenant" is not in the Greek but is not improperly supplied. The meaning is that the former arrangement or dispensation had religious rites and services connected with it.

Had also ordinances. The margin suggests Ceremonies. The Greek word means laws, precepts, or ordinances; the idea is that there were laws regulating the worship of God. The Jewish institutions abounded with such laws.

And a worldly sanctuary. The word sanctuary means a holy place and is applied to a house of worship or a temple. Here it may refer either to the temple or to the tabernacle.

As the temple was constructed after the same form as the tabernacle and had the same furniture, the apostle's description may be regarded as applicable to either of them, and it is difficult to determine which he had in view.

The term "worldly," applied to "sanctuary," here means that it pertained to this world; it was contrasted with the heavenly sanctuary not made with hands, where Christ has now gone (compare Hebrews 9:11, 24).

It does not mean that it was worldly in the sense in which that word is now used—as denoting the opposite of spiritual, serious, or religious—but worldly in the sense that it belonged to the earth rather than to heaven; it was made by human hands, not directly by the hands of God.

For there was a tabernacle made. The word "tabernacle" properly means a tent, a booth, or a hut, and was then given preeminently to the tent for public worship made by Moses in the wilderness. For a description of this, see Exodus 25. In this place, the word means the outer sanctuary or room in the tabernacle; that is, the first room that was entered—called here "the first." The same word—skēnē—is used in Hebrews 9:3 to denote the inner sanctuary, or holy of holies.

The tabernacle, like the temple afterwards, was divided into two parts by the veil (Exodus 26:31–32), one of which was called "the holy place," and the other "the holy of holies." The exact size of the two rooms in the tabernacle is not specified in the Scriptures, but it is commonly supposed that the tabernacle was divided in the same manner as the temple was afterwards; that is, two-thirds of the interior constituted the holy place, and one-third the holy of holies. According to this, the holy place, or "first tabernacle," was twenty cubits long by ten broad, and the most holy place was ten cubits square. The whole length of the tabernacle was about fifty-five feet, the breadth eighteen, and the height eighteen. In the temple, the two rooms, though of the same relative proportions, were of course much larger. For a description of the temple, see Barnes' Notes on Matthew 21:12.

In both cases, the holy place was at the east, and the holy of holies at the west end of the sacred edifice. The following cut will furnish a good illustration of the tabernacle when set up, with the principal coverings removed.

The first. The first room on entering the sacred edifice, here called the "first tabernacle." The apostle now proceeds to enumerate the various articles of furniture that were in the two rooms of the tabernacle and temple. His object seems to be, not for information, for it could not be supposed that those to whom he was writing were ignorant on this point, but partly to show that it could not be said that he spoke of that of which he had no information, or that he undervalued it; and partly to show the real nature of the institution, and to prove that it was of an imperfect and typical character, and had a designed reference to something that was to come.

It is remarkable that, though he maintains that the whole institution was a "figure" of what was to come, and though he specifies by name all the furniture of the tabernacle, he does not attempt to explain their particular typical character, nor does he affirm that they had such a character.

He does not say that the candlestick, the table of shewbread, the ark, and the cherubim were designed to foreshadow some particular truth or fact of the future dispensation, or had a designed spiritual meaning. It would have been happy if all expositors had followed the example of Paul, and had been content, as he was, to state the facts about the tabernacle, and the general truth that the dispensation was intended to introduce a more perfect economy, without endeavoring to explain the typical import of every pin and pillar of the ancient place of worship.

If those things had such a designed typical reference, it is remarkable that Paul did not go into an explanation of that fact in the epistle before us. Never could a better opportunity for doing it occur than was furnished here. Yet it was not done. Paul is silent where many expositors have found occasion for admiration.

Where they have seen the profoundest wisdom, he saw none; where they have found spiritual instruction in the various implements of divine service in the sanctuary, he found none. Why should we be wiser than he was? Why attempt to hunt for types and shadows where he found none?

And why should we not be limited to the views which he actually expressed regarding the design and import of the ancient dispensation? Following an inspired example, we are on solid ground and are not in danger. But the moment we leave that, and attempt to spiritualize everything in the ancient economy, we are in an open sea without compass or chart, and no one knows to what fairy lands he may be drifted. As there are frequent allusions in the New Testament to the different parts of the tabernacle furniture specified here, it may be a matter of interest and profit to furnish an illustration of the most material of them.

The candlestick. For an account of the candlestick, see Exodus 25:31-37. It was made of pure gold and had seven branches, that is, three on each side and one in the center. These branches had on their extremities seven golden lamps, which were fed with pure olive oil and were lighted to give light over against it; that is, they shed light on the altar of incense, the table of shewbread, and generally on the furniture of the holy place.

These branches were made with three "bowls," "knops," and "flowers," occurring alternately on each one of the six branches; while on the center or upright shaft, there were four "bowls," "knops," and "flowers" of this kind. These ornaments were probably taken from the almond and represented the flower of that tree in various stages. The "bowls" on the branches of the candlestick probably meant the calyx or cup of that plant from which the flower springs. The "knops" probably referred to some ornament on the candlestick mingled with the "bowls" and the "flowers," perhaps designed as an imitation of the nut or fruit of the almond. The "flowers" were evidently ornaments resembling the flowers on the almond tree, wrought, as all the rest were, in pure gold. See Bush's Notes on Exodus 25.

The following beautiful cut, drawn on this supposition, will probably give a tolerably correct view of the ancient candelabrum or candlestick. I introduce this cut as being a fine illustration furnished by Professor Bush of the candlestick itself; however, I have no sympathy with the views he has expressed of its spiritual reference. The candlestick was undoubtedly designed to furnish light in the dark room of the tabernacle and temple and, in accordance with the general plan of those edifices, was ornamented after the most chaste and pure views of ornamental architecture of those times.

But there is no evidence that its branches, bowls, knops, and flowers each had a peculiar typical significance. The sacred writers are wholly silent as to any such reference, and it is not well to attempt to be wise above that which is written. An expositor of the Scripture cannot have a safer guide than the sacred writers themselves. How should any uninspired man know that these things had such a peculiar typical signification?

The candlestick was placed on the south, or left-hand side of the holy place as one entered, the row of lamps being probably parallel with the wall. It was at first placed in the tabernacle and afterwards removed into the temple built by Solomon. Its subsequent history is unknown. Probably it was destroyed when the temple was taken by the Chaldeans. The form of the candlestick in the second temple, whose figure is preserved on the "Arch of Titus" in Rome, was of somewhat different construction. But it is to be remembered that the articles taken away from the temple by Vespasian were not the same as those made by Moses; and Josephus says expressly that the candlestick was altered from its original form.

And the table. That is, the table on which the shewbread was placed. This table was made of shittim-wood, overlaid with gold. It was two cubits long, one cubit broad, and a cubit and a half high; that is, about three feet and a half in length, one foot and nine inches wide, and two feet and a half in height. It was furnished with rings or staples, through which were passed staves, by which it was carried. These staves, we are informed by Josephus, were removed when the table was at rest, so that they might not be in the way of the priests as they officiated in the tabernacle. It stood lengthwise east and west, on the north side of the holy place.

And the shewbread. On the table just described. This bread consisted of twelve loaves, placed on the table every Sabbath. The Hebrews affirm that they were square loaves, having the four sides covered with leaves of gold. They were arranged in two piles, of course with six in a pile (Leviticus 24:5–9).

The number twelve was selected with reference to the twelve tribes of Israel. They were made without leaven and were renewed each Sabbath, when the old loaves were then taken away to be eaten by the priests only. The Hebrew phrase rendered "shewbread" means, properly, "bread of faces," or "bread of presence." The Seventy render it artouv enwpiouv (foreplaced loaves).

In the New Testament it is, h proyesiv twn artwn—the placing of bread; and, in Symmachus, "bread of proposition," or placing. Why it was called "bread of presence" has been a subject on which expositors have been much divided. Some have held that it was because it was before, or in the presence of the symbol of the Divine Presence in the tabernacle, though in another department; some, that it was set there to be seen by men, rather than to be seen by God.

Others maintain that it had an emblematic design, looking forward to the Messiah as the food or nourishment of the soul, and was substantially the same as the table spread with the symbols of the Savior's body and blood. See Bush, in the passage cited. But of this last-mentioned opinion, it may be asked, where is the proof?

It is not found in the account of it in the Old Testament, and there is not the slightest intimation in the New Testament that it had any such design. The object for which it was placed there can be only a matter of conjecture, as it is not explained in the Bible; and it is more difficult to ascertain the use and design of the shewbread than of almost any other emblem of the Jewish economy.

Calmet. Perhaps the true idea, after all that has been written and conjectured, is that the table and the bread were for the sake of carrying out the idea that the tabernacle was the dwelling-place of God, and that there was a propriety that it should be fitted up with the usual furnishings of a dwelling.

Hence there was a candlestick and a table, because these were the common and ordinary furniture of a room; and the idea was to be kept up constantly that that was the dwelling-place of the Most High by lighting and trimming the lamps every day, and by renewing the bread on the table periodically.

The most simple explanation of the phrase "bread of faces," or "bread of presence," is that it was so called because it was set before the face, or in the presence of God in the tabernacle. The various forms that it has been supposed would represent the table of shewbread may be seen in Calmet's Large Dictionary.

The preceding cut is the usual illustration of it. If the loaves were piled one above another, as they are represented in the cut, they were probably separated by thin plates of gold, or some other substance, to keep them from molding. The Jews say that they were separated by plates of gold.

Which is called the sanctuary (a marginal note offers "or, holy"). That is, the holy place. The name sanctuary was commonly given to the whole edifice, but strictly speaking, pertained only to this first room.

And after the second veil. There were two veils for the tabernacle. The one which is described in Exodus 26:36-37 was called the hanging for the door of the tent and was made of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine-twined linen, suspended on five pillars of shittim-wood overlaid with gold. This served as a door for the whole tabernacle.

The second or inner veil, referred to here, divided the holy from the most holy place. This is described in Exodus 26:31-33. It was made of the same materials as the other, though it would seem in a more costly manner and with more embroidered work. On this veil, the figures of the cherubim were intricately worked. The design of this veil was to separate the holy from the most holy place; its symbolic meaning is clear, for the apostle Paul himself explained it in this chapter (Hebrews 9:8 and following).

The tabernacle. That is, the inner tabernacle, or that which was more properly called the tabernacle. The name was given to either of the two rooms into which it was divided, or to the whole structure.

Which is called the Holiest of all. It was called "the Most Holy Place," "the Holy of Holies," or "the Holiest of all." It was called this because the symbol of the Divine Presence—the Shekinah—dwelt there between the cherubim.

Which had the golden censer. The censer was a fire-pan, made for the purpose of carrying fire in order to burn incense on it in the place of worship. The forms of the censer were various. Some difficulty has arisen concerning Paul's statement here that the "golden censer" was in the most holy place. This difficulty stems from the fact that no such utensil is mentioned by Moses as belonging to the tabernacle, nor is any account of it given in the description of Solomon's temple, which was modeled after the tabernacle. However, the following considerations will probably remove the difficulty.

1. Paul was a Jew and was familiar with what related to the temple, giving a description of it that would accord with what actually existed in his time. The fact that Moses does not expressly mention it does not prove that, in fact, no such censer was kept in the most holy place.

2. Aaron and his successors were expressly commanded to burn incense in a "censer" in the most holy place before the mercy-seat. This was to be done on the great day of atonement, and only once a year (Leviticus 16:12–13).

3. There is every probability that the censer used on such an occasion was made of gold. All the implements employed in the most holy place were made of gold or overlaid with gold, and it is highly improbable that the high priest would use any other on so solemn an occasion (Compare to 1 Kings 7:50).

4. Since the golden censer was to be used only once a year, it would naturally be stored in some secure location—and no place would be as obvious as the most holy place. There it would be perfectly safe. No one was permitted to enter there except the high priest; and being preserved there, it would always be ready for his use. Paul's statement, therefore, has the highest probability and undoubtedly accords with what actually occurred in the tabernacle and the temple. The object of the incense burned in worship was to produce an agreeable fragrance or smell. See the notes on Luke 1:9.

And the ark of the covenant. This ark or chest was made of shittim-wood; it was two and a half cubits long, one and a half cubits broad, and the same in height (Exodus 25:10). It was completely covered with gold and had a lid, called the "mercy-seat," on which rested the Shekinah, the symbol of the Divine Presence, between the outstretched wings of the cherubim.

It was called "the ark of the covenant" because within it were the two tables of the covenant, or the law of God written on stone tablets. It was a simple chest, coffer, or box, with little ornamentation, though rich in its materials. A golden crown or molding ran around the top, and it had rings and staves in its sides by which it could be carried (Exodus 25:12–16).

This ark was regarded as the most sacred of all the furnishings of the tabernacle. Containing the law and being the place where the symbol of the Divine Presence was manifested, it was considered exceptionally holy. In the various wars and revolutions in the Hebrew commonwealth, it was guarded with particular care.

After the crossing of the Jordan, it remained for some time at Gilgal (Joshua 4:19), from where it was removed to Shiloh (1 Samuel 1:3). From there, the Israelites took it to their camp, apparently to inspire them in battle, but it was captured by the Philistines (1 Samuel 4). The Philistines, however, oppressed by the hand of God, resolved to return it and sent it to Kirjath-Jearim (1 Samuel 7:1).

In the reign of Saul, it was at Nob. David conveyed it to the house of Obed-Edom and then to his palace on Mount Zion (2 Samuel 6). At the dedication of the temple, Solomon placed it in the Holy of Holies, where it remained for many years.

Subsequently, it is said, the wicked kings of Judah, abandoning themselves to idolatry, established idols in the most holy place itself. Consequently, the priests removed the ark and carried it from place to place to secure it from profanation (Calmet). When Josiah ascended the throne, he commanded the priests to restore the ark to its place in the sanctuary and forbade them to carry it about from one place to another as they had previously done (2 Chronicles 35:3).

The subsequent history of the ark is unknown. It was probably either destroyed when the city of Jerusalem was captured by Nebuchadnezzar or carried with other spoils to Babylon. There is no good reason to suppose it was ever in the second temple; indeed, it is generally admitted by the Jews that the ark of the covenant was one of the things missing there. Abarbanel says that the Jews hope that it will be restored by the Messiah.

Wherein. This means in the ark, as the construction naturally requires. In 1 Kings 8:9, however, it is said that there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb. Consequently, some have supposed that the pot of manna and Aaron's rod were not in the ark but were in containers or on ledges made on its sides for their safekeeping, and that "wherein" should be rendered "by the ark." However, the apostle uses the same language concerning the pot of manna and Aaron's rod as he does for the two tables of stone. Since the tables were certainly in the ark, the fair construction here is that the pot of manna and Aaron's rod were also in it.

The account in Exodus 16:32-34 and Numbers 17:10 states that these items were kept in the most holy place, before the testimony. There is no improbability whatever in the supposition that they were in the ark. Indeed, that would be the safest place to keep them, as the tabernacle was often taken down and moved from place to place.

It is clear from the passage in 1 Kings 8:9 that these items were not in the ark in the temple. However, there is no improbability in the supposition that before the temple was built, they might have been removed from the ark and lost. When the ark was carried from place to place, or during its captivity by the Philistines, they were probably lost, as we never hear of them afterward.

The golden pot. In Exodus 16:33, it is simply called a "pot," without specifying the material. In the Septuagint, it is rendered "golden pot;" and as the other utensils of the sanctuary were of gold, it can be fairly presumed that this was also.

That had manna. This refers to a small quantity of manna preserved as a perpetual remembrance of the food they had eaten during their long journey in the wilderness and of God's goodness in miraculously supplying their needs. Since the manna itself would not keep (Exodus 16:20), the fact that this portion was to be kept and preserved from age to age was a perpetual miracle, proving God's presence and faithfulness. On the subject of the manna, see Bush's Notes on Exodus 16:15.

And Aaron's rod that budded. This rod budded and blossomed as proof that God had chosen Aaron to minister for Him. The leaders of the tribes were inclined to rebel and to question Aaron's authority. To settle the matter, each one was required to take a rod, or staff of office, and bring it to Moses with the name of the tribe to which it belonged written on it. These were kept by Moses in the tabernacle. On the next day, it was found that the rod marked with the name of Levi had budded, blossomed, and produced almonds. In perpetual remembrance of this miracle, the rod was preserved in the ark (Numbers 17). Its subsequent history is unknown. It was not in the ark when the temple was built, nor is there any reason to suppose it was preserved to that time.

And the tables of the covenant. These were the two stone tablets on which the ten commandments were written. They were expressly called the words of the covenant in Exodus 34:28. On the word covenant, see the notes on Exodus 34:28.

These two tables were in the ark at the time the temple was dedicated (1 Kings 8:9). Their subsequent history is unknown. They probably shared the fate of the ark and were either carried to Babylon or destroyed when the city of Jerusalem was captured by Nebuchadnezzar.

See also the notes on Hebrews 9:6 and Hebrews 9:17 of this chapter.

And over it. That is, over the ark.

The cherubim of glory. This is a Hebrew mode of expression, meaning the glorious cherubim. The word cherubim is the Hebrew form of the plural, of which cherub is the singular. The word glory, used here in connection with "cherubim," refers to the splendor or magnificence of the image, as being carved with great skill and covered with gold.

There were two cherubim on the ark, placed on the lid in such a manner that their faces looked inward toward each other and downward toward the mercy-seat. They stretched out their wings on high and covered the mercy-seat, or the lid of the ark (Exodus 25:18–20; compare to 1 Kings 8:6–7; 1 Chronicles 28:18).

In the temple, the cherubim were made of the olive tree and were ten cubits high. They were overlaid with gold and were so placed that the wing of one touched the wall on one side of the holy of holies, and that of the other the other side, and their wings met together over the ark (1 Kings 6:23–28).

However, it is not probable that this was the form used in the tabernacle, as wings thus expanded would have made it inconvenient to carry them from place to place. Much has been written about the form and design of the cherubim, and much of it is the mere creation of fancy and the fruit of wild conjecture.

Their design is not explained in the Bible, and silence regarding it would have been wisdom. If they were intended to be symbolical, as is certainly possible , it is impossible now to determine the object of the symbol. Who is authorized to explain it? Who can give to his speculations anything more than the authority of pious conjecture?

And of what advantage, therefore, can speculation be where the volume of inspiration says nothing? Those who wish to examine this subject more fully, with the various opinions that have been formed on it, may consult the following works, namely: Calmet's Dictionary, Fragment No. 152, with the numerous illustrations; Bush's Notes on Exodus 25:18; and the Quarterly Christian Spectator, volume viii, pages 368–388. Drawings resembling the cherubim were not uncommon on ancient sculptures. The preceding winged figure, taken from the sculpture at Persepolis, may perhaps have been a rude image of the ancient cherub. The common representation of the ark and cherubim is something like the following, which may perhaps be as correct as it is possible now to provide.

Shadowing. Stretching out its wings so as to cover the mercy-seat.

The mercy-seat. This was the cover of the ark, on which rested the cloud or visible symbol of the Divine Presence. It was called "mercy-seat," or propitiatory—ilasthrion—because it was this which was sprinkled over with the blood of atonements or propitiation, and because it was from this place, on which the symbol of the Deity rested, that God manifested himself as propitious to sinners.

The blood of the atonement was that through or by means of which he declared his mercy to the guilty. Here God was believed to be seated, and from this place he was believed to dispense mercy to man when the blood of the atonement was sprinkled there.

This was undoubtedly designed to be a symbol of his dispensing mercy to men, by virtue of the blood which the Savior shed as the great sacrifice for guilt .

Of which we cannot now speak particularly. That is, it is not my present design to speak particularly of these things. These matters were well understood by those to whom he wrote, and his object did not require him to go into a fuller explanation.