Keep sharing good news without ads.
Bro. Bill Nichols
Okay, we're going to begin this morning with Hebrews chapter 8, and we're beginning a
section of Hebrews 8 all the way through Hebrews 10 18, where
we have an exposition of the new covenant that was introduced in Jeremiah.
And so I thought I would begin today by reading that section, and then we'll refer to it several times during the
course of the day.
Jeremiah 31, beginning with verse 31.
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of
Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their
fathers in that day that I took them out of the land of Egypt, which my covenant they
break, although I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord.
Now, even at this early date, and this is about 630 BC,
God has made clear that the first covenant was not intended to be permanent.
I'm going to continue.
Verse 33.
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel.
After those days, saith the Lord, and now we get the new covenant, I will put my
law in their inward parts, and I will write it in their hearts, and will be
their God, and they shall be my people.
And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother,
saying, Know the Lord.
For they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the
Lord.
For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Now, that is a glorious statement from God.
Of course, everything that God says is glorious.
But this, if perchance it applies to us, which I'm
firmly convinced that it does, you can say nothing but, wow,
I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Okay, now we're going to jump into Hebrews chapter 8, verse 1.
Now, the things which we have spoken, this is the sum.
We have such a high priest who is set on the right hand of the throne
of the majesty in the heavens.
And let's pray.
Most gracious heavenly Father, thank you for this day, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to meet together
in person, as well as online and through the internet.
Bless us and keep us.
Thank you for providing the services that we have, the abilities that we have to reach out to people
not on site.
And thank you for giving us the Holy Spirit to guide them and to guide us as we worship together.
Bless us and keep us with it through all the services today.
In Jesus' name we pray.
Amen.
Okay, we finished chapter 7 with the conclusion
that what we needed was a new covenant.
A new covenant administered with a new
high priest.
A covenant that did not demand our righteousness to bring reconciliation
between God and man.
A covenant that could lead to our salvation, not merely point out that we
needed salvation.
That's what the old covenant did.
The old covenant was very good at pointing out how much we needed salvation,
but it gave us no real reason or no real pathway to acquiring it.
And so here the writer arrives at his central message.
The fact that we have, that's a current possession, we have right now a
superior high priest.
That's Jesus Christ, who is the fulfillment of all that was
foreshadowed in the Old Testament.
Every high priest that ever lived was only a shadow of the high priest to come,
only a model.
The tabernacle and the temple of the old covenant had many beautiful
furnishings, but interestingly enough, it had no place for the priest to
sit down.
Do you know why?
Their work was never finished.
They were never at a point where they could sit down.
The work of Jesus is finished, at least with regard to his sacrifice.
So where is he now?
He's sitting in the heaven on the right hand of God.
Is he still working?
He's still working.
He is still working, but he has no more sacrifices to give.
The sacrifice part of his work is over.
No, it didn't.
It only says that he received tithes and he blessed.
It didn't say anything about him making sacrifices, but he was a priest, so apparently he did.
But see the difference between if Melchizedek offered a priest a sacrifice, he would have to offer the
sacrifice every time he sinned, and he's a man, so he would sin.
And so that's one of the differences.
No, he's not finished with his work.
He is seated at the right hand of God, still working, but his sacrifice
is sufficient and never needs repeating.
What is he doing now?
Sitting at the right hand of God.
Hebrews 7 .25 told us that last week or two weeks ago.
Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that came unto God
by him, seeing that he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
So what's he doing?
He is an intercessor between us and God.
He is a mediator between God and man.
Now we get to verse two.
A minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched
and not man.
Now Jesus does not serve as a priest in an earthly
tabernacle or in an earthly temple.
He serves in the true, the original tabernacle erected
by the Lord.
The tabernacle of Moses was a copy of this
original heavenly tabernacle, and it was made by man.
So there's a difference in the sanctuary and the tabernacle.
The original tabernacle erected by the Lord, the tabernacle of
Moses, a copy made by man.
In fact, in Exodus 25 verses eight and nine, the Lord
is telling Moses, and let them make me a sanctuary
that I may dwell among them.
According to all that I show you after the pattern of the tabernacle and the
pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall you make it.
So Moses's tabernacle was a copy.
The sanctuary was a copy.
The temple was a copy.
The true tabernacle is in the heavenlies,
and that's where Jesus is now.
Verse three,
that people have seen.
Well, John saw it in his vision when he was in,
yes, and apparently Moses was shown enough of it that
he could make copies of it.
And then the temple itself was a little bit different, but it was modeled after the tabernacle.
It was just an elaborate, more elaborate version of it.
So I think people have seen it, or will see it, and certainly all of us in the
future will see it,
except for John for certain, and maybe Moses, probably Moses,
and maybe Paul when he visited.
So maybe those three may have actually seen it, but the rest of us,
Aaron and all the others,
he was given a blueprint of it, but he was given enough of a blueprint of it that he could make everything
just like he was told to make it.
Okay, verse three, for every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices.
That would be kind of the answer to Ben's question because Melchizedek was
not a high priest after the order of Levi, but every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and
sacrifices, wherefore it is necessary that this man have somewhat also to
offer.
Now this man he's talking about is Jesus, the new high priest.
Sacrifice for sin is essential to the concept of priesthood.
Jesus represented a superior priesthood, and he offered a superior sacrifice.
He laid down his own life to atone for sin.
He never offered a sacrifice according to the law of Moses, but he did offer a better
sacrifice.
He never sacrificed an animal on the altar.
Never once in his life did Jesus offer a sacrifice of an animal because he
wasn't a priest.
He wasn't qualified to be a priest.
He was of the wrong tribe.
He was the tribe of Judah, not of the tribe of Levi, so he couldn't be a priest.
So he couldn't offer a sacrifice, at least under the law of Moses, but he did offer a
better sacrifice.
His better sacrifice was the sacrifice of himself, and he did that.
He offered it one time, and it never needs to be repeated.
I know I've repeated that two or three times today, but that's an important thing.
The sacrifice that Jesus made was a once and for all sacrifice never to be repeated.
Now verse 4 just continues on with that same thing.
For if he were on earth, that it was Jesus, well, while he was on earth, you could say, while
Jesus was on the earth, he was not a priest, but he didn't need to
be a priest.
For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests, and I added this,
and plenty of them that offer gifts according to the law.
There are plenty of priests.
There were some at sworn count, 80 high priests and numerous other priests,
all of which had the ability to offer sacrifices and gifts
according to the law.
Jesus was not qualified to be a Levitical priest because he was not of the tribe of
Levi.
Now it says there are priests.
That's present tense, isn't it?
That means when this letter was written, the
Levitical system was still in operation.
So it must have been before 70 AD because
at 70 AD, the temple was destroyed and the Levitical system collapsed because there was no
place to offer their sacrifices.
So it indicated that the writing had to be before the destruction of the
temple in 70 AD.
And then we go on to verse 5, which is, again, just an extension of what's already said,
who serve unto the example.
Now these are the priests, the many priests who serve unto
the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was
admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle.
For see, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern
showed thee in the mount.
So when it says, showed thee in the mount, I don't know whether he actually saw it or just had a blueprint of it.
But certainly, if he had a blueprint of it, and a description of it, it was a clear and definitive
set of instructions.
Now there were plenty of priests on the earth they could serve in the copy and in the shadow on earth,
but Jesus is the only one qualified to serve in the superior
heavenly priesthood.
The earthly service, that of the priest and the high priest, though it was glorious in the eyes of man,
was in reality only a copy and a shadow of the superior
That's the difference between an original and a copy.
And they were serving a copy, and Jesus was serving the original.
Verse 6,.
And now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much
also is he the mediator of a better covenant, which was established
on better promises?
Now Moses was the mediator of the old covenant because he brought the two parties together, God and man.
Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant, a better covenant bringing us to
God the Father.
Jesus is the mediator that Job cried for in Job 16
.21.
There was also another place when he called for a daysman, but here
is better.
Job 16 .21, O that one might plead for a man with God.
Who's he calling for?
Someone to stand between man and God that has standing with man and has standing with
God, that one might plead for a man with God.
This is Job's cry as a man pleadeth for his neighbor.
He knows that when a few years are come, then I shall go the way whence I shall not
return.
He knows his time is limited, and he is crying out for a mediator
And who is that mediator?
It wasn't any of the high priests that went before it that went after Job, but before Jesus.
It was only Jesus.
So Job had to wait like all the other Old Testament saints had to wait until
Jesus ascended to the right hand of God, sat down, and
became the mediator for all of us.
Verse 7,.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the
second.
So if the first covenant actually did provide a mediator that could
stand between God and man and bring man to God, there would be no need for the second
covenant.
But it didn't, and so they were.
But understand, the first covenant was incomplete,
imperfect, and intended to be temporary.
It was never intended to be permanent.
In fact, at the very beginning when we started, some of you weren't in here,
in Jeremiah, it said, I'm going to go back and read that just so we have a a full
understanding of what I'm talking about.
Just a second.
Behold, the day shall come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of
Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers
in that day that I took them by hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which my
covenant they break.
That's what we're talking about.
A new covenant that does have the ability to bridge the gap between man and
God, and nothing up until Jesus was able to do that.
Okay, if you take perfect in the way that we mean perfect, exactly what it was meant to do,
it was intended to be temporary, and it was temporary, and it was replaced.
But if you take it to be complete, if it was not complete because it left
open that one bridge that needed to be the bridge between God and man, that's what it
didn't have, and it would have required a perfect man
to bridge the gap between man and God, and there was only one perfect man.
That is correct.
That's correct.
So the first covenant was incomplete, and imperfect
is a repetition of that word, and intended to be temporary.
Verse 8, finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the
days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of
Judah.
I wish I'd just read one more verse, and I could have not had to go back to Hebrew, to
Jeremiah.
What's happening here is the writer of Hebrews is recording or quoting the very verse
that we were in, that I went back to.
The days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.
Now, are there two Greek words?
I'll show you my knowledge of Greek.
I don't have any knowledge of Greek.
I just look it up.
Life is so much better now when you can go to the internet, and you get all kinds of words.
It looks them up for you.
Two words that describe the concept of new.
Neos, N -E -O -S, maybe is the way you pronounce it.
I don't know.
Describes newness with regard to time.
Something may be a copy of something old, but if it's recently made, it can be called
new.
So if you copy a copy of the Mona Lisa, you don't have the Mona Lisa.
You only have a copy of it, but since you made that copy yesterday, it's a new copy, but it's a new copy of an old
thing.
There's another Greek word, Kanoas, and that's the word
used here in Hebrew.
A new covenant, that's the word.
It describes something that is not only new with regard to time, but truly new in
the sense that it is not a repetition, a new reproduction of an old thing.
It's not simply a new reproduction of an old thing.
It is something that is altogether new, and at least in some parts,
different.
Are there any of the things in the New Covenant that are the
same as things in the Old Covenant?
In some sense, the answer is yes, but in the central sense, the answer is no.
There is no bridging in the Old Covenant that will take us from God
to man and bring us near to man.
Now in Jeremiah 31, God showed that something was lacking in the Old Covenant because the New
Covenant was promised.
In the days of Jeremiah, the New Covenant was still in the future
because he wrote, Behold, the day is coming.
He didn't say, Behold, the day is now.
He says, Behold, the day is coming.
Now from its context, Jeremiah's prophecy probably came during the
days of Josiah's renewal of the covenant after he found the laws
hidden away and brought them out, dusted them off, and read them, and reintroduced the law.
And that renewal was a good renewal, and that happened at the time of Jeremiah, but it wasn't
good enough because Jeremiah is still looking forward to a new covenant.
Verse 9, Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day
when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, because they continued not
in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Now as
the elder said, the Old Covenant, the problem was not
in the weakness of the Old Covenant.
The problem was in the weakness and the inability of man
to meet the requirements of the Old Covenant.
There was only one man that ever did that, and that was Jesus Christ.
That's why the Old Covenant didn't work.
The Old Covenant didn't work because men could not continue in
the covenant.
They couldn't fulfill all the obligations of the covenant, even if they tried, they could.
Verse 10,.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after these days,
or those days, saith the Lord.
I will put my law into their mind and write them in their hearts,
and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.
Now I tried to stress a I will, I will, and an I will,
and I also tried to stress the phrase, and they shall be.
Now the New Covenant definitely began with Israel, but it was never intended to
end with Israel.
We know that from several places.
I picked two.
In Matthew 15 -24, Jesus is talking to the Pharisees who think, as Brother
David has said many times in the recent, a group of people who did not
believe a Gentile could be saved.
They didn't believe a Gentile could be saved, and he's talking to those, and here's what he says.
He answers them, and he says, but I am not sent but unto the lost sheep
of the house of Israel.
Do you think he is talking to the Pharisees about the Pharisees?
He's talking about other people, Gentiles, who were not of the
house of Israel.
It's more clear in Acts.
In Acts 1 -8 -9, talking about receiving the power of the Holy Spirit,
but you shall receive power, and after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and you
shall be witnesses unto me.
Where?
Both in Jerusalem, and in all of Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the
uttermost parts of the earth.
You see, some of Jesus's sheep are Gentiles, and so
back in the beginning when I said, if that pertains to us that he will forget
our sins, he will forgive our iniquities and forget our sins.
If that pertains to us, then our only response can be, wow, what a great
Lord we save, we serve.
The new covenant was from God.
It was initiated by God, and in no way depends upon anything that man does.
Man is not capable of doing enough to bridge the gap.
The new covenant provided that new bridge.
Now I want to compare, and I should have done this a little bit earlier, compare the old covenant to the new
covenant, and I've got a section out of Exodus 19 -5.
I'm going to just read it.
Now therefore, if you will obey me, if you will obey me,
obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar
treasure unto me above all people, for all the earth is mine.
That's the old covenant.
If you will, if you will, if you are able to,
and if you will, then you shall be.
It's conditional.
Now compare that to this covenant.
Well, this is a covenant that I will make with the house of Israel.
After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their mind
and write them in their hearts.
I will be to them a priest, and they shall be
to me a people.
What of that depends upon what men do?
Nothing.
There is nothing there that depends upon what.
I will make a new covenant.
I will put my laws in their mind and write them in their hearts.
I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.
Nothing depended upon what they did.
If you will, you shall be.
That's conditional.
Then I will, I will, I will, they shall be.
That's all unconditional.
That's the new covenant, and that's the difference, a difference between the two.
We'll find out that there's about 17 major differences between the old covenant and the new covenant.
I said 17.
That's a list that I took and we'll get to shortly, but I'm sure there's many more than that
17.
Verse 11, this is still, this is still quoting
And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother saying, know the
For they shall all know me from the least unto the greatest.
Why?
As Jeremiah 31, 33 said, I will put my law in their inward parts and
write it in their hearts.
That's God talking about His people.
He will put the law in their hearts, in their inward parts, and He'll write it in their hearts.
They will know their law.
They will all know His law.
They will not need anyone to tell them what His law is.
Verse 12, for I will be merciful to the unrighteousness
and their sins and their iniquities.
I will remember no more.
And again, probably now that we've established that that
statement does pertain to us, probably one of the most,
probably one of the most glorious statements ever made to a man.
I will be merciful to their unrighteousness and their sins
and their iniquities.
In Jeremiah, he said it exactly this way, for I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember
their sin no more.
Well, David said that also back in Psalms 32, verse 1.
Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose
spirit there is no guile.
It is a blessed thing if God doesn't remember your sin.
Fortunately, God the Father never sees your sin,
and God the Son takes your sin upon Himself.
He sees it, but God the Father doesn't see it.
God the Father sees Jesus when He looks at you, and that again is a glorious
Verse 13.
In that He said, the new covenant He hath made in the new covenant,
in that He saith, a new covenant He hath made hath made the first
old.
That was so hard to read.
In that He saith, in with the new, out with the old.
Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away,
and vanish away it did.
We know that the Romans destroyed the temple in 70 AD.
We believe Hebrews was written about 67 AD,
so it appears that about three years elapsed between the writing of this letter and
the end of Levitical worship.
Now, here are 17 things, 17 differences between the old covenant
and the new covenant, and I'm going to tell you, I took this off the Blue Letter Bible, and it was put in there by a
guy by the name of David Gussage, and he is a
fundamental Calvary Chapel pastor, and they're a little bit
more charismatic
than this group is, but they have a lot of things right.
In any case, here's what he says.
17 differences between the old covenant and the new covenant.
They were instituted at different times.
The old covenant, about 1450 BC.
The new covenant was initiated around 33 AD.
What happened then?
33 AD, Jesus died, was resurrected,
and ascended into heaven, and then about 40 years later,
the institute of the Levitical sacrifices came to a halt.
They were instituted at different places.
The old covenant at Mount Sinai.
The new covenant at Mount Zion, and that's not Mount Zion that actually is on the earth near
Jerusalem.
That's the Mount Zion, the heavenly Mount Zion.
That's the heavenly temple site.
They were spoken in different ways.
The Old Testament was spoken by God in
sounds of fury.
Fear and dread overwhelmed the people.
They were all afraid.
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, declared the new covenant with love and grace.
The fourth thing, they have different mediators.
Moses was the mediator of the old covenant.
Jesus is the mediator of the new.
They were different in their subject matter.
The old covenant demanded works by men.
You had to work your way to salvation.
The new covenant fulfills the need for the work through the completed work of
Jesus.
They were different in how they were dedicated.
The old covenant was dedicated with the blood of animals sprinkled on the people.
The new covenant was dedicated with Jesus' blood spiritually
applied to His people.
They were different in their priest.
The old covenant was represented by the priesthood of the laws of Moses and high
priest, all of whom descended from Aaron and Levi.
The new covenant has a priesthood of all believers and a
high priest, Jesus Christ,
of whom Melchizedek was a foreshadowing.
They were different in their sacrifices.
The old covenant demanded endless repetition of imperfect
sacrifices.
The new covenant provides a once and for all perfect sacrifice of the Son of
God Himself.
The ninth difference, they were different in how and where they are written.
The old covenant was written by God on tablets of stone.
The new covenant is written by God on the hearts of His people.
They were different in their goals.
The goal of the Old Testament was to discover sin, to condemn it, and to set a fence around it.
And it met that goal.
The goal of the new covenant is to declare grace, love, and mercy of God, to give
repentance, remission of sin, and eternal life.
And as we've been saying, and to provide a bridge between God and man.
They're different in their practical effect on living.
The old covenant ends in bondage, not because there's anything wrong with the old covenant,
as they said earlier.
It was perfect in what it was intended for.
But it wasn't intended to be the end of all.
And it ends in bondage because only one man could fulfill it.
Everybody else couldn't.
The new covenant provides true liberty.
Not liberty that we earn, but liberty that we were given.
They're different in the way the Holy Spirit is given unto the people.
Here's where I thought I would have a little trouble with Mr. Gussage, but I didn't.
Under the old covenant, the Holy Spirit was given to certain people for certain specific
duties and ended at the time that that task was completed.
So in the old covenant, He would visit, He would give His abilities to
the people, and then He would depart from them.
That's why David prayed, let not your spirit leave me.
Under the new covenant, the Holy Spirit is poured out freely on all who receive
Him by faith.
I did take out one word.
I'll be honest and tell you that.
If you go look this up in the Blue Letter Bible, you will see it will say, all who will receive Him.
I took will out because if you receive Him, it's not because you wanted to.
It's because you had to.
So that's one word I probably had to take out of this.
So I'm going to confess to it right now.
They were different in their idea of the kingdom of God.
Under the old covenant, the kingdom was seen mainly as the supreme rule of Israel
over the nations.
That's what they were looking for in the Messiah, and that's why they missed Him when He came as a
suffering servant, not as a king riding on a horse.
He came in riding a donkey, not riding a white horse.
And He came into Israel riding a white horse, swinging a sword around.
They probably would have accepted Him, but they didn't see Him that way.
Under the new covenant, the kingdom of God is both a present spiritual reality and a
coming literal fact.
Right now it's spiritual, but there will be a time when Jesus Christ will rule
on earth with a rod of iron.
That's after.
They're different in their substance.
The old covenant is full of shadows and models.
The new covenant has all of the reality.
Fifteen.
They're different in the extent of their administration.
The old covenant was confined to descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob according to
the flesh.
The new covenant is extended to all nations and races under heaven.
That's why we feel so good when He says, I will remember their sins no more.
He will remember our sins no more as well as Israel's.
They're different in what they actually accomplished.
The old covenant made nothing perfect or complete.
The new covenant can and will bring in the perfection of God's people.
And the final thing that He lists, they're different in their duration.
The old covenant was designed to prepare the way for the new covenant and then pass away
as a principle of God's dealing with men.
And the new covenant was designed to last forever.
And then I have a quote from John Owen, a Puritan pastor.
And if I can read this, I will.
These guys are hard to read, especially out loud.
Let us observe from these things that the state of the gospel or of the church under the New
Testament being accompanied by the highest privileges and advantages that it is
capable of in this world.
There is a great obligation on all believers unto holiness and fruitfulness in
obedience unto the glory of God.
That was the easy part.
And in the heinousness
of their sin by whom this covenant is neglected or despised is abundantly
manifested.
So if you sin by neglecting or despising
this covenant, it is made abundantly clear.
That's the way I would say it.
But I wouldn't say it nearly as well as John Owen did.
That's it for me.
Any comments or questions at this point?
The law is now in their heart.
That's why I said, is there anything in the new covenant that follows over from the
old covenant that follows in the new?
And the law is there in their heart.
But the observation, the worship, the service of worship, the sacrifice of the
animals by the priest on the altar, that's the old part.
That's the ritual.
That all passed away, and it had to pass away when the temple was destroyed because they no longer had
an altar.
And he said, Jesus said, I come not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.
So the law is still there.
What's right is right, and what's wrong is wrong.
And what is right is what God says is right, and what is wrong is what God says is wrong.
If he says it's wrong, no matter what you think, it's wrong.
And if he says it's right, no matter what you think, it's right.
There's no room for us to make our own set of rules
on what's right and wrong.
When we do that, it's when we get in trouble.
And so, yes, the law is still the law.
Right is still right.
Wrong is still wrong.
God is still God.
God is in heaven, and soon we will be.
I'm sorry.
And it's all made possible through the sacrifice of Jesus.
That's the new part.
That's the new bridge.
Anything else?
Well, let's end with a word of prayer.
Most gracious Heavenly Father, thank you for this day, and thank you for all of our many blessings.
Thank you for being with us this morning, and thank you for continuing to be with us as we go through the rest of the services today.
Keep us always in your will.
Protect us.
Protect our country if you see fit to do so.
And if not, protect us through the times to come.