Past Sins and Future Inheritance – Hebrews 9:15-17

Hebrews 9 and the New Covenant Mediator

Let me turn to Hebrews chapter nine, please. Hebrews chapter nine, and we're gonna read together verse 11 through verse 17. Hebrews nine, verse 11. But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, he entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, he entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

For this reason, he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never enforced while the one who made it lives. Let's pray together.

Our Lord, our worship has been sweet and our fellowship refreshing. We're so grateful that we can be here in this place and to enjoy the worship of our great God for all that he has done, and our minds have reflected upon the intercessory work of the Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf, and now this passage deals again with the salvation that is provided in Jesus Christ.

And so we pray that you would open our eyes and our hearts to understand what is written here, and to apply what is written here, that you by your grace would encourage us, exhort us, transform us, and mold us and shape us into the image of Jesus Christ, your son.

We know that you will do this through your truth, your word is truth, and we thank you for that sanctifying work and your sanctifying power. Accomplish your purposes in our hearts today, we pray in Jesus' name, amen.

How Old Testament Saints Were Saved

Several years ago when we were running our Awana ministry over at the old church building, one thing that we would occasionally do, and it would be two, three, four times a year or so, is we would have an ask the pastor night.

So we would get together with the fourth to sixth graders, the TNT club, truth and, no, truth. Well, it's not truth and territory, it's something different.

What is it?

Truth and training, that's right. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. We'd get together with the truth and training kids, the fourth and sixth grade age group, and they would ask questions, and then I would answer them, somebody else would take over games, because I ran games at the time.

And after those Q &A sessions, Dave and I would always marvel at the depth and profundity of the questions that some of those kids were asking. For fourth to sixth graders, they would ask questions that were just, you could tell that they were thoughtful, they were considerate, they were really considering some deep theological issues.

And there were questions that would come up sometimes every week, sometimes there were questions that would come up every few weeks. The devil always got his due during question and answer time because one kid would always, is that mine?

Sorry, that's mine. Somebody texted me. Texting me the answer to the, what's TNT? Thank you, whoever that was, thank you, appreciate that. Okay, so the devil would always get his due. Somebody would always ask a question about why God created the devil if he knew the devil was gonna fall.

Or they would ask, how did the devil fall? If God created imperfect, how was their sin found in the devil? When did the devil fall? What influence or effect does the devil have on us? Tons of questions about the devil.

Sometimes there would be a whole night where just all we talked about was the devil. And I'll always at the end of that try and swing it around into a gospel presentation for the kids. But there was another question that always seemed to come up, because this introduction is really not about the devil.

There was always a question that would seem to come up at least every year. And they would ask this question, how were people saved before Jesus came to earth? That was always a good question. The kids would ask it in a number of ways.

Sometimes they would say, were there Christians before Jesus came? Or they would say, were people able to go to heaven before Jesus came? Or how were people forgiven for their sins before Jesus came and offered a sacrifice on the cross?

At least once a year that question would be asked in some form or another. It's not a silly question. It's not a stupid question. It's actually a question that demonstrates a profound understanding of the nature of the death of Christ.

Because the kids have to be thinking in their minds that the animal sacrifices that were offered by Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and David and Noah and others, that those animal sacrifices could not have paid the price for sin.

And so when Jesus came and offered the sacrifice that saves us, if his sacrifice saves us, on what basis were the Old Testament saints saved? And that's a question that comes up not just in Truth and Training, and I wanted to say it again, in Truth and Training Club, but it's a question that has come up in adult Q &As that I have done as well.

It is a good question, and it is one that our text today actually answers. You and I are not the first ones to ask this question. We're not the first ones to wonder about this. You know who the first Christians to wonder about this were?

The first Christians. Yeah, because if you came out of, the first Christians were Jews, and they were used to going to the temple and offering their sacrifice, and the priest interceding for them, they would offer the animal sacrifice, they would be there for Yom Kippur, and they would see the priest go into the tabernacle, and he would go behind the veil, and they knew what went on behind the veil, and the animal sacrifices were offered, and they would come back.

And now those first century Christians have come out of that Judaism, and they've turned their back on and abandoned all of the sacrifices of the tabernacle and that priesthood, and now they have come to Christ, and so they would be asking the same question that you and I would ask.

How is it then that all of those people who lived for 1 ,500 years under that old covenant, who offered the animal sacrifices, on what basis were they saved, if indeed the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin?

If the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin, what about those who offered the blood of bulls and goats? Were they saved, and if they were saved, on what basis were they saved? That's a good question.

So our text today answers that in verse 15, and I'm not gonna spoil the ending. Well, I am gonna spoil the ending for you. In verse 15, the author answers it by showing us that Jesus Christ atoned for those past sins.

That's the short answer to it. That's verse 15. Then in verses 16 and 17, he gives an illustration using a play on words there with the word covenant. He gives an illustration that shows that Jesus Christ, having atoned for those past sins, also has secured all of the future blessings that those under the old covenant also hoped to inherit.

So read with me again verses 15 through 17, and then we'll work our way through it and see first how Christ atoned for those old sins, those sins committed under the first covenant. For this reason, he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Christ atoned for those Old Testament sins, those old covenant sins. You'll notice he begins by saying for this reason, and what is he doing there? He's actually hearkening back to the reasons which he has already described in the context, so it's the previous verses that are in view there.

He's entrusting that we're gonna remember what is in verses 11 through 14. Do you remember what it was that we covered several weeks ago in 11 through 14? Since Christ came as a high priest, and since he entered into the heavenly tabernacle, and since he shed his own blood and not the blood of an animal sacrifice, and since he has obtained eternal redemption, since his sacrifice, remember the five qualities of the sacrifice?

Since his sacrifice was a Trinitarian, voluntary, blameless, effectual, and fruitful sacrifice, since his sacrifice is infinitely more glorious, infinitely more powerful, infinitely more valuable than any and all of the Old Testament animal sacrifices, since that is the case, for this reason, he is the mediator of a new covenant.

It is because of all of the value of his sacrifice and what he has done, and how different he is from all the sacrifices under the old covenant, for that reason, he is the mediator of a new covenant. So that he might take the value of that sacrifice and apply it to the transgressions committed under the old covenant, that's the idea.

Because of the value of who he is, in his doing and in his dying, his sacrifice is able to atone, not just for the sins of all who are here, but also all who have ever lived who will trust in that sacrifice.

It is that valuable. So it becomes then a retroactive sacrifice, and I would just remind you of the meaning of the word mediator. A mediator, it's been a while since we talked about this, a mediator was one who stood between two parties who were entering into an agreement, and the role of the mediator was to secure the promises and the fulfillment of that covenant, or that agreement, between the two parties.

And the mediator stood between that, he mediated the terms of the covenant, and made sure that each person on each side of that agreement would fulfill the terms of that covenant, that's what a mediator did.

So for this reason, because Christ has offered this sacrifice, he then has become the mediator, the go-between, the stand-in, this covenant that God has made with us, and that is a new covenant, and the new covenant, in our context again, is contrasted with the old covenant, which was the Mosaic covenant.

He's not talking about the Abrahamic covenant, or the Noahic covenant, or the priestly covenant, or the Davidic covenant, he is talking about specifically the old covenant, the Mosaic covenant, the covenant made with Moses.

That covenant which was described and explained in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, the Pentateuch, that book of the law, the Old Testament, moral law, the civil law, the ceremonial law, all the elements of that, those things constituted the old covenant.

The tabernacle, the priesthood, the animal sacrifices, and all of the ceremonies that went on with the religious worship of the nation of Israel, that constituted the old covenant. All of that has been abrogated, it has become obsolete, it is set aside because of what God has done for us in Christ in the new covenant.

And so that sacrifice then of Christ, on the basis of that, he has become the go-between of this new covenant, and the blessings, the salvation blessings, we enjoy today, even though we look forward to the future blessings that will come even still.

And he has become the mediator of this new covenant so that since a death, his death, has taken place, verse 15, for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant. And before I explain what that means, I want you to see how it is that our entire context serves to raise this very issue of what happened with the Old Testament saints.

That is why he addresses it here. This is the exact place where we would expect somebody to address this question, how then were Old Testament saints saved? Because in the context, since the end of chapter six, all of chapter seven, and all of chapter eight, and now all the way through chapter nine up to this point, he has been making this argument that the Old Covenant was inferior.

In fact, you remember, he used the word useless at one point. Why was it useless? It wasn't useless in doing what it was intended to do. What it was intended to do, it did very well. It fulfilled that purpose, which it was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.

It showed our need for a savior. It illustrated the salvation that was to come. All of those things it was intended to do, it did that well. But in terms of our salvation, that agreement made with Moses and Israel, what the animal sacrifices and the atonements and the tabernacle and the priesthood, it was useless to save us.

It could not make perfect the worshiper. Do you remember that? It was inadequate. It was powerless to save because the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins. And so he has made that contrast and he's been contrasting the Old Covenant with the New Covenant.

And he has said quite explicitly that all of the priests who oversaw that sacrificial system, all of those priests continued to die. And they died and they stopped interceding. And they would offer not a powerful sacrifice, but a sacrifice that had to be repeated, sometimes day after day, sometimes year after year.

Those sacrifices continued to go on. And they had this ministry that they performed in the tabernacle. Daily they went in to perform all of these functions in the tabernacle. And so this was a never-ending worship, a never-ending sacrifice that was going on in the nation of Israel.

It was inadequate and powerless to save the sinner. And so he has made the argument that all of those things were merely symbols. Christ has entered into the real tabernacle, the one in heaven, not one made with hands, not a transitory one, not a temporary one, not a temporal one that is destined to pass away.

But he has entered into the true tabernacle in heaven. So he has, without disparaging any of it, he has simply shown that all of those things were inadequate to the task of making perfect the worshiper, of drawing us near to God and actually providing salvation for our sins.

It could not cleanse the conscience. It could not make us perfect before God. It could not declare us righteous. It could not remove guilt. It could not forgive sins. It could not perfect us. And it could not gain us access to God.

Because even after those sacrifices were made, the veil between the presence of God and the people still stood. A constant reminder that though the sacrifice was made, there was no access to God. Because those sacrifices could not bring us near to God.

They could not perfect us. So that's the case he's been making for chapters. Doesn't that just quite naturally raise the question? What about those who made those sacrifices?

See how that comes up?

What about those who made those sacrifices? For 1 ,500 years, our forefathers made these sacrifices, beginning in the wilderness. Year after year, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Day after day, morning sacrifices.

Day after day, evening sacrifices. Passover after Passover after Passover for 1 ,500 years. What then did those sacrifices do? How could those men be declared righteous if those sacrifices could not merit them righteousness?

See, it's really this simple. If the animal sacrifices could pay the price for sin, then the death of Christ was unnecessary. If the animal sacrifices could pay the price for sin, if they could remove guilt and make one righteous, then the death of Christ was unnecessary.

There was no need for Christ to die because we would have just continued to offer animal sacrifices if indeed animal sacrifices could take away sin. But if animal sacrifices cannot take away sin, then the death of Christ is necessary to deal with the sin issue.

It's very similar to the argument that Paul makes with the law. If righteousness and salvation could come by keeping the law, then Christ died in vain because then God would have said, just keep the law.

But the law can't save us. The law only shows us that we can't keep the law. And therefore, no man can be justified by the works of the law. So if righteousness could come by keeping the law, then Christ died needlessly, pointlessly.

But if righteousness cannot come by keeping the law, then the death of Christ is necessary. So it is the same thing with animal sacrifices. If animal sacrifices could pay the price for sin, then the death of Christ was unnecessary.

But since animal sacrifices cannot pay the price for sin, therefore the death of Christ was essential. So you can see how everything that we've covered up to this point quite naturally raises this question.

All the contrast between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant just bring it right to the forefront. What then about those Old Testament saints, on what basis were they saved? Here's the answer in verse 15.

He's the mediator of a new covenant so that what? Since a death, that is one death, not multiple deaths of animals, but a death, that is the death of Christ, since a death or the death of Christ has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the First Covenant.

Now the reason I believe that he's talking about the death of Christ there and not animal sacrifices or animal deaths is because he has been continually contrasting the repeated sacrifice of the animals with the one-time sacrifice of Christ.

We've seen that all the way through chapter eight and chapter nine and even in chapter seven. The animal sacrifices were offered year after year after year after year. Christ died one time, once, for sinners.

The just in the stead of the unjust that he might bring us to God. So that's been the contrast. So now he's not talking about an animal sacrifice, he is talking about one death, a death, which has redeemed the transgressions that committed under the Old Covenant.

One death that has taken care of, redeemed or removed the guilt of those who sinned under the Old Covenant. Because see, the sinners under the Old Covenant, Moses and Abraham and Noah and Jacob and David and all of those men and women, they had just as much of a sin debt as you and I have.

God knew their sins, they knew their sins, they were aware of it. And so they were fully aware of the guilt and depravity in their own hearts and they were fully aware of the righteous requirements of God's law and those men and women knew that they needed a sacrifice for sin as well.

And God could not just simply overlook in the sense of not dealing with the justice of Old Covenant, Old Testament sinners. He couldn't just say, well, you guys didn't know as much back then so I'm gonna wipe your slate clean on the basis of nothing at all and I'm just going to impute righteousness to everybody who believes from the point of the sacrifice of Christ forward because there's a sin debt under the Old Covenant that needed to be taken care of.

And if God were to simply ignore it, he would not be just because every violation of God's law must be punished. It is either punished in Christ who died as a substitute for sinners or it is punished on the head of the impenitent and rebellious sinner in eternal hell.

Those are the two options. But every sin will be punished. Every last transgression, every last iniquity, every sin will be punished. So God's not gonna simply just wipe away all the Old Testament sins on the basis of, well, do we have any more distractions today?

We're not just gonna wipe away the Old Testament sins on the basis of nothing at all. Justice has to be done. A payment has to be reckoned to that so that those sins can be forgiven, so that righteousness can be imputed to them, so that their guilt can be removed and they can enter into their eternal inheritance as well.

On what basis did that happen? Since a death, since a death, verse 15, has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions committed under the first covenant, those Old Testament saints who have been called, they may receive the promise of their eternal inheritance.

So the death of Christ then is a retroactive sacrifice, a retroactive sacrifice. And this is pictured somewhat in Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, when that priest, we've talked about it in recent weeks quite thoroughly, when that priest would go into the tabernacle and apply the blood at the horns of the altar of incense and then step behind the veil and apply the blood there on the mercy seat and then come back out, do another sacrifice, and then with the scapegoat and all of that, fast-forwarding through a whole bunch of stuff.

On that Yom Kippur Day of Atonement, that was prescribed to pay for or to symbolize the payment for, not future sins but past sins. So Yom Kippur always looked backwards to sins previously committed as a payment for that.

So in the sacrifice of Christ, in him coming into the tabernacle of God and applying, as it were, in a metaphorical or symbolic sense, the merits of his blood to those whom he has redeemed, that sacrifice is both forward-looking and retroactive-looking.

The death of Christ atoned or paid the price for all of those Old Testament saints. So they looked forward to the sacrifice that would pay the debt for their sin. We look backwards to the sacrifice that has paid the debt for our sin.

They knew and had to know coming in that offering that animal sacrifice was not gonna save them. They knew that, why? Because they knew that next year they would have to do the same thing all over again.

So they could have no confidence that that animal sacrifice was gonna totally take away their sin and remove their guilt and they were therefore righteous on the basis of offering the blood of an innocent lamb or a goat.

They had to know that because they knew that next year they would be doing the same thing again. They could have no consciousness, no awareness that their sins are removed, that their guilt is taken away on the basis of an animal sacrifice.

So they looked forward to God who would declare them righteous and forgive their sins on the basis of a sacrifice that was to come later. We look backward to that sacrifice and we praise God and we are saved on the basis of the exact same payment for sin.

So that God in Christ paid for the sins of all who believe. He laid on him the iniquity and the wrath and the punishment and the payment of all the sins, every last one of them, past, present and future of all who believe.

And he bore it all. That's a glorious sacrifice. That is a magnificent payment. I've used the illustration for Old Testament saints and I think this is a helpful one and I'm gonna give it to you again.

I used this, I think I looked it up back in November, but I realized that you probably aren't gonna remember this illustration, at least the fullness of it, but here it is again. When you go into a grocery store or a clothing store and you buy something, like say a pair of shoes, you remember this illustration?

You walk up to the counter and you swipe the card, your credit card, you swipe the card at the register and then you are able to, the teller will allow you to walk out of the store carrying your brand new shoes.

Even though no funds have transferred from anybody's account. You're able to walk in, grab a new pair of shoes. If you walk out without paying for it, they'll have you arrested. But if you swipe a card before you walk out, they won't have you arrested.

Even though in the act of swiping a card, no actual funds have transferred at all. A credit card, I'm talking about. Not a debit card, I know you're thinking, well what about a debit card? Okay, just follow me with the illustration.

Now every illustration limps to some degree, okay? So you swipe the credit card, you take out your visa, which is everywhere you need to be, and you swipe that and then you're able to walk out of the store.

No funds have been transferred. No funds have moved from your bank account to their bank account. Because you walk out of that store with a brand new pair of shoes and your bank account reads the same as when you walked into that store.

And there's still as much cash in your wallet as when you walked into that store. No funds have been transferred.

But what has happened?

Why is the teller able to let you leave the store with a brand new pair of shoes even though they have received no funds for it and you have provided no funds for it? Why is the teller able to do that?

Because a third party visa has promised, or MasterCard or American Express, whoever you use, has promised that payment will be made for those shoes. That payment comes at a future time. You're able to walk out of there with new shoes knowing that the payment has been secured by a third party.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the third party who has secured the redemption of the Old Testament saints. God was able to look at David and declare him righteous in spite of his sinful state and not impute to David all of David's sin and in fact to declare David righteous in his sight, not on the basis that any sacrifice had yet been made to pay for David's sin, but on the basis that a future sacrifice must certainly be made which would definitely pay for David's sin.

And not just David, but Moses and Jacob and Abraham and all the Old Testament saints who looked to God. Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. How could Abraham be made righteous in the sight of God?

Was it Abraham's righteousness that he was credited with? No, it was the righteousness of the one who would make a sacrifice 3 ,000 years after Abraham lived that was credited to Abraham. Abraham was credited the righteousness, the blameless righteousness of Jesus Christ on the basis that in the future his sins would be forgiven.

His sins would be paid for, sorry. His sins were forgiven then on the basis that in the future they would actually be paid for because in the mind and purposes of God there was no possible way that Jesus Christ would not give his life as a ransom for many.

No possible way. As Dave mentioned last week in his message where he was stealing all the thunder for this message from 1 Peter that God has predestined it, he has pre-purposed it, he has predetermined it, he has preordained all things that come to pass and so there is no conceivable way that God could be shown to be unjust by declaring Abraham a righteous man even in spite of his sin because God in his plan and purposes knew for certain that his son would die to atone for the sins of Abraham.

So Abraham could be credited righteousness and David could be credited righteousness because they share the same righteousness that you and I enjoy by faith. And salvation has always been on the basis of faith, never on the basis of law for by the works of the law no man is justified in his sight.

So the sacrifice of Christ is a retroactive one. How is it that Old Testament saints were saved? Because in the plans and purposes of God that payment was determined and certain and made even before the foundation of the world.

He knew that in the unfolding of time it was not possible that Christ would not offer his life as a ransom for many. And so on the basis of that one sacrifice because a death has taken place for the redemption of those transgressions committed under the old covenant they can receive the same eternal inheritance that you and I receive, the same salvation.

Those who are called, you see that in verse 15, those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance and the author here is using the term called in the same way that Paul does in his epistles to describe those who have been effectively called not just a broad proclamation of the gospel but those whom God has chosen and drawn near to himself.

That's what David says. Blessed is the man whom you choose and draw near to yourself. Blessed is that man, why? Because his righteousness. Because righteousness is imputed to him and his sins are forgiven.

It's that sense of being called, drawn to the son. Those under the Old Testament were also called and elect and chosen and drawn to God and granted the gift of repentance and faith. And they were saved and declared righteous and forgiven of their sins and their guilt was removed, not on the basis of animal sacrifices but on the basis of that one death that redeemed the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

And on the basis of that, they have received an eternal inheritance. So Christ bore our sins and he bore David's sins. He took away our iniquities and he took away Abraham's iniquities. Those Old Testament saints looked forward to that sacrifice.

We look backward to that sacrifice but we all look to the exact same sacrifice and we all are saved on the exact same basis, by faith. And we all are imputed the exact same righteousness, the righteousness of Christ.

And we are all forgiven because of the exact same sacrifice, his atoning death on the cross. So glorious was his sacrifice. This is the argument the author's making. So magnificent and glorious and powerful and infinite in value was that sacrifice that that one death has redeemed the transgressions committed under the old covenant.

All those Old Testament saints were saved by the death of Christ in the same way that all of us New Testament saints are saved by the death of Christ. Those of us who are on this side of the cross, because that sacrifice was what it was, they were saved as well as we are saved.

They weren't saved on a different basis and it was always and is by faith. See the Old Testament saints were saved by faith. Doesn't the subject of faith come up a little later in Hebrews? Can you think of a place where that's mentioned once or twice?

What do you think the author is getting at? What is he describing? He knows where he's going with this argument in this book. They're redeemed, their sins are covered, they're imputed righteousness and they are forgiven on the basis of what?

That one death. And so later on he's gonna answer this question, then how were they saved? The answer is the same way that we are saved, by faith. Abraham believed God, it was credited to him as righteousness.

David believed God. Gideon believed God. Rahab believed God. They were credited with righteousness on the basis of Christ in the same way that you and I are. They believed what God said and he credited to them as righteousness.

The Death of Christ and the Eternal Inheritance

Now the mention of death here and the mention of inheritance at the end of verse 15 kind of transitions us into the illustration that occupies verses 16 and 17. Read these two verses with me again. For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it.

For a covenant is valid only when men are dead. It's never enforced while the one who made it lives. The meaning of this is debated a little bit by commentators if you read through commentaries, there's a couple of different ways of understanding this passage.

There are at least two of them and for the sake of time and for the sake of clarity and since which interpretation of these two verses you take really doesn't affect the meaning of the entire passage.

I'm just gonna give you what I think it means. It all hinges upon the meaning of that word covenant that you see in verse 16. For where a covenant is and of course he talks about the new covenant in verse 15, the first covenant in verse 15, then he mentions covenant in verse 16, he mentions covenant in verse 17.

There's a little bit of a wordplay going on here and I think once I sort of unpack the wordplay you'll see what it is that's being described here. Notice the mention of death in verses 15 and 16 and 17.

You'll notice the mention of inheritance in verse 15. This clues us in that the meaning of the word covenant, the meaning for the word covenant that he has in mind in verse 16 and 17 is slightly different than the meaning of the word covenant that he has in mind in verse 15.

So he's using a wordplay and here's the wordplay. It doesn't come out very well in English but it does come out very well in Greek. The word for covenant in the New Testament is diatheke, diatheke and it has a couple of different meanings.