TEXT: Hebrews 9:25-10:18

SUBJECT: Exposition of Hebrews #11: The Finality of Christ's Work

The central argument of Hebrews is Christ Over Aaron and what he stands for: the priesthood of Israel. This was a hard case to sustain, for the Jewish respect for their priests verged on worship. And understandably: the priests served among the holy things, and one--the High Priest--saw the glory of God. Thus more than seven chapters are spent in making this one argument. In the words before us, the writer offers his last piece of evidence to support his case. It is also the best. The finality of Christ's work proves the superiority of His priesthood. Let me illustrate: You have a recurring migraine. The doctor suggests two medicines: one must be taken each time your head hurts, the other cures you for life. Which is better? Can anyone argue against the latter? Why? Because, while the one offers periodic relief, the other provides a permanent cure. The same is true of our Great High Priest.

The finality of His work is stated in 9:25-28.

Negatively, He did not die time and again, vv.25-26a: "not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Holy Place every year with the blood of another--He then would have had to suffer since the foundation of the world..." The death of Christ was for the sins of His people. His people, of course, sin every day. Abel did; we do; our grandchildren will. Thus, if the Lord's death was only partial, He must be crucified every day. The Roman Catholic Mass teaches just that; the Bible says otherwise. The Lord's Supper recalls that death; it does not repeat it.

Positively, He died but once, v.26b: "...but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself". This "sacrifice of Himself" refers to the crucifixion. On that day, He became "the sin offering" for His people. He died, "the just for the unjust".

This occurred (past tense) at "the end of the ages". Now, this seems to be a contradiction. The "ages" have not ended, have they? And yet, He "appeared at the end of the ages". What does this mean? It must be viewed from the perspective of the Old Testament. It looked forward to Messiah's Coming as "the climax of history". And rightly so. The "New Age" which is consummated at the Second Coming is begun at the Incarnation. The Kingdom has come!

The "sacrifice of Himself" had a design. It was "to put away sin". Philip Hughes comments: "...the supreme purpose of His appearing was `to put away sin', that is, to deal, root and branch, with the problem of sin which is the very center of the human predicament. This Christ does by `the sacrifice of Himself'; for it is on the cross, where He dies the sinner's death, that the tyranny of sin is overthrown. Its consequences are absorbed by Him and thereby removed from us; its force is nullified. This nullification, moreover, is comprehensive: it covers sin in its totality, without qualification, in every form and degree and also in every age of human history, retrospectively as well as prospectively".

And so, Christ died--not often--but once. His death was the offering of His priesthood, which, therefore, must be far better than Aaron's--which were offered annually.

To illustrate, the writer reminds us of our Lord's full humanity and how it bears upon His priesthood, 9:27-28: "And as it is appointed for man to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eager wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation".

The Lord Jesus is a man. And men die, not often, but once. Therefore, the Lord must have died but once. Do men ever come back to life? They do. Not to die again, but to stand for judgment. Did Christ come back to life? He did. But was it to die again? No. He came back to life to bring His people to the fulness of their salvation. Their sins are remitted by His death; they are removed by His Second Coming. At some time in the future, He will return--not to put away sin again--but to complete work He began on "The Old Rugged Cross".

To this point, the writer has just stated the character of Christ's work. In 10:1-18, he compares this finality to the incomplete work of Aaron and his priesthood.

In the first place, He compares the two priestly systems.

The first he calls "the law", vv.1-4. It was never meant to be final, v.1: "For the Law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect".

Why wasn't the "the Law" final? Because, v.2, it could never reach the sinner's conscience! "For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purged, would have no more consciousness of sins". The offering of bulls, goats, and sheep blessed the devout Hebrew, but it did not remove his guilt. Hence, he could never quite shake his fear of death and judgment.

"The Law", so far from removing his guilt, would actually recall it, v.3: "But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of guilt every year". Each time he saw the slain beast, he thought: "That could be me". Why? Because he was loaded down with a feeling of sin and misery. And he was not being neurotic. He was guilty. And he knew it.

V.4 is a summary: "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins". Why was it "not possible"? Because God is just. And man is made in His image. An animal's suffering is not comparable to a human's. Why not? Because there is no guilt involved. The animal feels pain of body, but not of soul. Thus, its death, be if ever so tortured, can never be equal to a sinner's death. And so, to accept the death of a bull in the place of a sinner is unjust. The punishment does not fit the crime. God knows it; so do we. Therefore, neither can be satisfied with Aaron's priesthood.

The sacrifice of Christ is then compared to the offerings of the Law, vv.5-10.

The Lord did not come to offer conventional sacrifices, vv.5-7: "Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

"Sacrifice and offering You

did not desire,

But a body You have

prepared for Me.

In burnt offerings and

sacrifices for sin

You had no pleasure.

Then I said, `Behold, I have

come--

In the volume of the book it

is written of Me--

To do You will, O God'"

Why should He? God was not satisfied with them! He chose another sacrifice, a better one than anything Aaron could offer. What was it? "Behold, I have come to do Your will" informs v.9. What was God's "will" for Christ? It was to die for sinners! By doing this, He superseded everything Aaron ever did and replaced him as "Our Great High Priest".

The result of His work: "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all", v.11. Aaron's offerings consecrated the people in an external sense. The Lord's sacrifice makes us--truly--"A chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, and a peculiar people". In short, "What the Law could not do, God did".

In vv.11-18, one final comparison is made between the Lord's priesthood and Aaron's. And, oddly enough, it has to do with the posture of each.

Aaron and his men are "standing", v.11. Why? Because their work is never done. "And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins".

The Lord Jesus is "sitting", v.12: "But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God". Why did He "sit down"? Because His work is done! On the cross, He shouted: "It is finished". And so it is.

The work He did there will have two effects: (1) It will "make His enemies His footstool", v.13. The cross deals the deathblow to our Lord's every opponent. It condemns Satan and bad men; it destroys death, hell, and the grave. (2) It will also "perfect forever those who are being sanctified", v.14. This means that it is His death--alone--that secures the full and final salvation of His people.

How do we know? Because the Holy Spirit has told us, vv.15-18. God had promised to save His people under the terms of a New Covenant. It would remit their sins and make them holy. When Christ died, the New Covenant was put into effect. Therefore, "there is no longer an offering for sin". Why not? Because we don't need one. The offering of Christ is sufficient. It is sufficient to cancel your guilt; it is sufficient to clear your conscience; it is sufficient to make you holy; it is sufficient to bring you to glory. In short, "There is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved". No other name. Christ alone.

"There is one God and one Mediator between man and God: the man Christ Jesus".