Exegesis of Exegesis of Heb. 8:7-13 — John Murray

We proceed now with our subject, which is, if I'm not mistaken, the unity of the commoners today. In case I forget at the end of the hour, will those who have to take re-examination please meet with me after the hour, in order to try to arrange a time for re-examination.

The Impossibility of Righteousness by Works of Law

Please do that. It may not be that we can get one now, that would be suitable for all, but we should try. Please try to see me in you. I believe you're all here. Now, with our topic, I have come to the fourth point in connection with the passage in Galatians 3, 17 -22, and that concerned the second part of verse 21.

I was just dealing with that at the close of the hour. For if a law had been given which was able to make alive, verily, from law, righteousness would have been. Now, the obvious implication is that it is impossible to attain to righteousness of life by works of law.

But what we have to take particular account of is the reason for which Paul appeals to that principle in this instance. Because of its truth, we are not to find in the Mosaic economy the enunciation or proposal of any such arrangement.

Note the connection between the first part of verse 21 and the second part. Against the promises of God, God forbid, if a law had been given which was able to make alive, verily, from law, righteousness would have been.

What Paul is saying in effect is that we must not interpret the Mosaic economy in terms of a principle antithetical to promise and grace for a simple reason. But anything antithetical is an impossibility.

The Unified Witness of Scripture to Grace

God, therefore, did not promulgate a dispensation on the basis of what is another impossibility. It does not find its organizing and operative principle in a covenant of works. Now five, and finally, we look at verse 3, Galatians 3 .22, which reads,.

But the Scripture has shut up all things under sin in order that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. Galatians 3 .22. You see, Paul here is appealing to Scripture in support of his interpretation of the Mosaic economy or the Mosaic covenant.

He's appealing to Scripture, I say, in support of his interpretation of construction. And by Scripture, he must mean the Old Testament. And since he has no qualification, he must mean the Old Testament in its entirety.

Quite obviously, Paul finds in the Old Testament the principles which govern the gospel of grace. He finds in the Old Testament as a unit the principles that govern the gospel of grace. If I can look at the verse, isn't that what he's saying expressly?

The Scripture has shut up all things under sin that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Don't you think that it would be feasible for the apostle to appeal glorifiedly to the Old Testament in order to support the principle of grace and of faith?

Such a large segment, such a large testament, historical, that is the very opposite of grace. I think you can see the impossibility of verse 22 on any other basis than that the unified witness of the Old Testament is the case argument of the apostle all the way along the line from verse 17.

And again, verse 22, I have been presenting any other constituent which the mosaic sustains to the Abrahamic covenant is the fabric of the mosaic ritual and ordinance. Let's take verse 23 on to the end of the chapter and into chapter 4, 6 to get additional confirmation of all this.

The Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant in Hebrews

Now, the next passage is what you find in the epistles of the Hebrews, particularly related to Hebrews 8, 7 -15, 16 and 17. However, these two passages in the epistle to the Hebrews, you have a contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant.

A reiteration in Jeremiah 31, a reiteration, a quotation to a large extent of Jeremiah 31, 31 -34 in the mosaic covenant and the new covenant. Most of the passages make that quite clear between the mosaic and the new covenant.

The thing that we should find in this epistle would be most pertinent to our question. Of course, if in Galatians 3, 17, following, the question is the relation of the mosaic covenant to what went before, namely the Abrahamic and the other direction.

It's the relation of the mosaic covenant to the new, to what follows. So you have an admirable sequence here. From the very question is the proper principle saying covenant, which goes before in relation to the new covenant, which follows.

Here we are. Legal principle, which is the antithesis of grace. One plays into expatiation the basic inadequacy, the basic faultiness, defectiveness of the mosaic economy. If he's going to the heart of the question, he must say legal governing.

The epistle to the Hebrews, dealing so repeatedly with the defectiveness, faultiness of the mosaic covenant of the same point of view. He would be compelled to say the same thing. The dispensationalists did not say the same thing.

He was evading the issue. Mosaic covenant. According to dispensationalists, what the faultiness would have been enunciated to be if the writer, now we come to the question, what do we find? That he institutes a dog.

Not this kind of covenant. One on the Levitical priesthood and the priesthood that is after the order of Melchizedek. The Levitical priesthood and the Melchizedek. Just saying that he construes this defectiveness in terms of the Levitical economy.

Sacrifice, Mediation, and Remission Under the Mosaic Economy

The Levitical economy. One thing is obviously this, that the Aaronic priesthood, the Levitical ritual eagles, knows no mediation, no sacrifice for sin, no remission. The ritual connected with it. I say, however imperfect was the Aaronic priesthood and the whole ritual associated with it, they bespoke remission, he says.

In 3, chapter 8, verse 3, every high priest is ordained to offer both gifts and sacrifice. The Aaronic priest, you see, offered sacrifice, first for his own sin and then for the sin of the people. Cleansed by blood, Hebrews 9, 22.

Faultiness of the mosaic covenant resided in the imperfection of its gracious provisions. Not at all in the imperfection that would have arisen. The imperfection of its gracious provisions did provide for sacrifice.

It did provide for mediation. It did provide for remission. It did provide for execution. The contrast here is all together the ambit of grace. The situation derived from the epistle to the eagles. And this is even stronger in refutation of the dispensationalist than the one I just mentioned.

Heavenly Reality and Old Covenant Shadows

Because the relation. Economy sustained to the new covenant. Sustained to the new covenant. That is set forth most clearly in Hebrews 9, 23 and 24. What does the writer say there? It was therefore necessary that the pattern of things in heavens should be purified with these.

But the heavenly things themselves were better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands. Antitypes of the true. Antitupa. Antitupa. Antitypes of the true but into heaven itself now to be made manifest in the presence of God.

So if this isn't clear, nothing can be clear. And we may as well be bold. Political sacrifices. Patterned after the heavenly exemplar. Political sacrifices. Where patterned. Further you can say that the whole political economy patterned after the great exemplar.

Do you find what people tell you? Entered into the holy places not made with hands. Manifest in God's presence. They were, that is the various sacrifices, rituals. They were. Anticipation. To the high priestly ministry.

To the shadow of anticipation. The writer, you see, calls them antitypes. He generally turns it around and speaks of the Old Testament as a type. Christ is the antitype. In theological terminology. Don't be confused by the terms of the diplodocus used.

He calls the Old Testament ritual the antitype. Christ, you see, would be the type. In the sense of the exemplar. That from which the antitypes are copied, you see. That's the usage. But he also uses the term patterns.

You point at him, he uses the term shadows, gear, and so on. That's clear. They were patterns. So in what did the defectiveness consist then? In what did the defectiveness, the faultiness, consist? Which demanded a better sacrifice.

Demanded a heavenly sanctuary rather than a sanctuary of this world. What was the defectiveness? That they were shadows. Shadows. The New Testament. That which is central in the New Covenant. Not a principle of words.

Not legal obedience as the condition of salvation. Which is central in the New Covenant. The condition of grace. Now the mosaic is therefore the foundation. You see. And you see therefore that the Old Prince, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

The foundation of the Mosaic Covenant in contrast with the New Covenant Mosaic. Not bring to final realization. Not bring to perfection. Principle on which it operated. Principle it enunciated. Principle.

This subject I'm going to pass on now to the, which we deal in connection with the Christology. In connection with the Soteriology. We have first of all the plan of salvation. Then we have the interplanetarian economy of salvation.

Then we have the covenant of grace. Which I dealt with only very briefly. And then we have the unity of covenant grace. The unity of the covenants for ages and generations especially. From the Abrahamic covenant on.

But now next logically we have to deal with Christology. Of the person of the locust. The healing doctrine of grace. Which is conditioned by and related to the plan of salvation. The interplanetarian economy.

Last year you dealt with certain phases. The doctrine of Christ. The phases with which you dealt last year under theology proper. The phases which are concerned with the immanent. Immanent, not imminent, but immanent relation.

Persons of the moment. The person of Christ. The other persons of the Godhead. The economies of creation and providence. We are coming into the field of history. For we are dealing with the doctrine of the incarnate.

The bell will ring in a second or two. For stuff of that kind today.