A Repeated Reminder of Sin – Hebrews 10:1-3

Hebrews 10 and the Problem of Old Covenant Forms

Open to Hebrews chapter 10, and let's pray together.

Before we begin.

Father, we pray that you would teach us your word today and feed us from your holy word, that we may be sanctified by the truth, we may be encouraged in our walk with Christ, and that we may be found to rest fully, completely on his sufficiency of what he has done on the cross on behalf of all those who are his.

We pray that you would be glorified now through our time and our study here in Christ's name, amen. There is an insidious error that crops up in some form in almost every era and every generation of church history, and it is the error that seeks to take elements, features, and forms of the old covenant and drag them into the new.

And you don't have to travel far or be exposed to too many Christian circles before you will run across somebody or some group that commits this error. Some seek to obey the dietary laws and subject themselves to the ceremonial codes of the Old Testament.

Some people seek to observe, sorry, to recognize the Sabbath observances and participate in those, and to somehow take the Lord's day on a Sunday and celebrate it, something akin to how they would have celebrated the Sabbath under the old covenant.

There are some Messianic Jewish groups that try to observe different forms of the old covenant by participating in the Passover and observing that, or observing Yom Kippur, or dressing like the Jews used to dress, or growing their beards out, and just taking these things from the old covenant and dragging them into the new, thinking that in doing so, that they are honoring the Lord by celebrating those elements of the old covenant that clearly have passed away.

There used to be a gentleman in our area who had started a Messianic church. This was some years ago, and I don't even know if he's still in our area, but I ran across him because we were at a pastor's meeting together, and he dressed and looked like an Old Testament Jew, and yet he said he believed in Jesus as the Messiah.

And we had the opportunity to get into just some discussions about, well, if you're part of the new covenant, if you're in the new covenant, then why are you still clinging to the old? Those were fun discussions.

There seems to be this affinity, this affection, this attraction to all of those forms and features, and I don't know if it is the desire to go back to physical representations of their sanctification, or physical expressions of their holiness, or their righteousness, or outward displays of those things, but it is an unhealthy affinity that some Christians have for those things in the old covenant that they embrace, things which have clearly passed away.

And I can at least understand that if you were to transport yourself back into the first century, you could understand that talking with Jews of the first century while the temple was still there, and people were still bringing sacrifices to the temple, and you could still see the priest, and that was still going on, or if you had grown up in that environment as a Jew, and you had been, all of your friends were still practicing elements of the old covenant, all your family was still wrapped up in it, and if you had grown up in it, you'd just become entrenched in it, you couldn't even think of a relationship with God apart from all of those external features and functions of that old covenant.

I can at least understand that because there is a power in tradition, isn't there not? There's things that we grow up with that we just have to continue on even though it might be defunct or not make any sense.

For instance, in our family today, we start listening to Christmas music.

Yeah, I gotcha.

I hear that opposite of the amen.

November 8th.

Now, why November 8th, Jim? Doesn't that seem a bit early? Yeah, it's more than a bit early. You say, why would you do that for two solid months? Why would you subject yourself to that living hell for the next two entire months?

And it all comes back to a tradition. At some point in the past, on November 8th, my mother-in-law, whom I blame for a lot of things, my mother-in-law decided that it felt Christmassy and so she was gonna start listening to Christmas music and that has been a tradition ever since.

Now, if time travel is ever invented and I ever have access to it, that is one of the top five mistakes of history that I will go back and correct is that, but that tradition now has gripped inexplicably all of them and they all start this on November 8th.

Well, same thing with the Old Covenant. If you had grown up in that, I can understand how it would be difficult to let go of that and to embrace something entirely new, to do away with all of the forms and functions.

What I cannot understand is a Gentile who has never grown up with that, never seen an Aaronic priest, never been to the temple and never sacrificed an idol, not an idol, never sacrificed an animal to an idol or to anything else, never sacrificed an animal, going back to those ceremonial forms and functions.

That to me is completely inexplicable and completely unacceptable because that Old Covenant is weak, it is useless, it is unable to do certain things. Those are not my words, those are the words of the book of Hebrews in chapter seven, eight, nine, and 10 and we are in this section now in chapter 10.

The Shadow and Substance of Hebrews 10:1

See, one of the questions that I would ask somebody who wants to go back to that Old Covenant, I would ask them this, what do you lack in Jesus that you think the shadow fills in for you? What do you lack in Jesus that you think the shadow provides for you?

Because that difference between shadow and substance is the very difference that is elucidated here in Hebrews chapter 10. That's really what the author is already describing. And last week or last time when we were together, when we talked, we're looking at Hebrews 10, we got into verse one and we saw that he says that that Old Testament sacrifices, the animal sacrifices and the attachments of the Old Covenant, those are the shadows of the good things to come and not the very form of the substance of those things.

And the author here in Hebrews 10 is explaining to us why it is that Jesus had to come and suffer and die to deal with the sin issue and then why he is going to return again a second time, not to deal with sin, but instead to bring salvation to all those who eagerly await him.

And the reason that Jesus had to come and do this is because the Old Testament animal sacrifices were completely unable to accomplish that. You see, if it were possible for animal sacrifices, for the Aaronic priesthood, for that temple and all of the things attached to that Mosaic Covenant, if it were possible for them to give us those good things, then the death of Jesus would have been entirely unnecessary.

But since those things could not provide those good things to come, the death of Jesus has provided those good things to come. The death of Jesus and his life, his ministry and what he has accomplished is the substance and the animal sacrifices were merely the shadow of those things.

Well, that's the first reason and there are two more that are listed here in verses two, three and four. The second one is that those sacrifices had to be repeated and the third one is that those sacrifices were merely animal sacrifices.

Those two things demonstrate the inadequacy of those Old Testament sacrifices. So let's look at that one in verses one through three, again, that these sacrifices had to be repeated. Let's read verse one for the law, since it is only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of those things, that's what we looked at last time, it is a shadow and not the substance.

It can never by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered because the worshipers having once been cleansed would no longer have had consciousness of sins.

But in those sacrifices, there is a reminder of sins year by year. This is the inadequacy of the old covenant sacrifices that they had to be repeated. Now, one of the most striking contrast between the death of Jesus and the sacrifice of animal sacrifices in the Old Testament.

One of the most striking contrast is this, that animal sacrifices went on indefinitely, always, they were repeated constantly, and the death of Jesus happened one time. This is something that a Jew would not even really have been able to get his mind entirely around because the Jew was never used to thinking of sacrifices as being a one-time sacrifice.

In fact, to speak of a once for all sacrifice would seem to a Jew as if it is a contradiction in terms. What do you mean a once for all sacrifice? How do we know what a once for all sacrifice looks like?

And yet this singular nature of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is what the author of Hebrews is going to camp on all the way through to the end of verse 18 in chapter 10. This becomes now the major theme and the major focus for all of chapter 10.

He has mentioned it a couple of times prior. He mentioned it back in chapter seven, verse 27, saying that Christ does not need daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifices first for his own sins and then for the sins of the people.

But this he did once for all when he offered up himself. And he just mentions it there. He mentions it again later in chapter nine, verse six. Now, when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle, performing the divine worship.

And that of course is in distinction and contrast to Jesus who just enters into the tabernacle once. That is the true tabernacle in heaven. And there has taken a seat at the father's right hand. And then remember, this is how chapter nine ended.

We noticed the language at the end of chapter nine. Look up at verse 25. Nor was it that he would offer himself often as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that's not his own.

Otherwise he would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world. But now once at the consummation of the ages, he has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And in as much as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin to those who eagerly await him.

Notice all of that language, often once, often once. He's contrasting something. This is so distinct from everything the Jews knew. They couldn't even conceive of a once for all sacrifice. They would have said, we have sacrifices in the morning.

And then we have sacrifices in the evening. And then guess what? The next morning we have more morning sacrifices. And the next evening we have more evening sacrifices. Then we have one time event sacrifices, like the dedication of the temple or the dedication of a king.

And then we have monthly sacrifices and we have personal sacrifices and we have yearly sacrifices, like Passover and the day of atonement. We're always doing sacrifices. In fact, we have had more sacrifices than any of us could count in an entire lifetime.

Jews couldn't even think of a one time, once for all sufficient sacrifice that accomplishes what it was done and never has to be repeated. Such a thing seemed like a contradiction in terms. And they would have wondered what possible good could such a sacrifice be?

They would have thought that this is the very thing that would signal the inadequacy of Jesus' sacrifice.

What do you mean?

It only happened once?

Only once?

What kind of a sacrifice only happens once? It must not have been any good if it only happens once. And yet the very thing that they would have assessed as being an inadequacy in the sacrifice of Christ is the very thing that demonstrates just how sufficient it is, that it only had to happen once.

And this is what the author is just going to hammer for the rest of chapter 10. Well, not the rest of chapter 10, but all the way through chapter 10, verse 18. He's gonna return to this time. And again, to show that the fact that the Old Testament sacrifices were repeated demonstrates that they were unable to do what Jesus Christ has done.

In those sacrifices, they can never, look at the language in verse one, they can never by the same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. They can never do it.

I want you to imagine for a second, I want you to stop and think about this word never for just a second. I want you to imagine, transport yourself mentally back into the first century. And then think to yourself, first century you, you're back there outside of the temple and you're about ready to observe the day of atonement.

And you've been, your family has been doing this since as early as you can remember. Your people have been doing this for 15 centuries, 1500 years since the time of Moses. This has been going on with only brief periods of time when the temple wasn't functioning.

I understand that. But basically for 1500 years, this covenant had been in place. And it was God's expectation that they offer sacrifices yearly and morning and evening, et cetera, as prescribed by the law of Moses.

So it's been going on for 15 centuries. And I want you to imagine that you're standing and thinking about that. You're about ready to observe the day of atonement. And I walk up to you and I say to you, how much longer do you think we're going to have to do this?

And he said, how much longer? Like, what do you mean how much longer? Well, we've been doing this for 15 centuries. Our people have been doing this for 15 centuries. Do you think that there's any possibility that this day of atonement, the sacrifice that the priest is about to make, that this might be the very last one?

Do you think that's possible? You think that this bull and this goat might be able to accomplish a salvation, the forgiveness of sins? Could this be the very last day of atonement? What would you say?

No, it can't possibly be the last day of atonement because we're commanded to do this again next year.

Why?

Because sin is still a reality and we will still sin and sin is still an issue. And I guess these bulls and these sacrifices are not going to take care of it just in one year. This one sacrifice is not going to do it.

And then I might reason with you and say, well, we've been doing this for 1 ,500 years. Do you think that maybe another 10 years, test 10 more sacrifices, will that do it? Maybe a hundred more Yom Kippur sacrifices, would that be enough to atone for sin?

Would a hundred be able to do it? Let's take 1 ,500 years and let's just add 1 ,500 more. If we had done this for 3 ,000 years, we can go 1 ,500 years into the future and we can look back on 3 ,000 years of these sacrifices, would 3 ,000 years be enough to atone for sin?

What if we took that 3 ,000 years and we doubled it and made it 6 ,000 years? Would 6 ,000 years of Yom Kippur, Passover, personal morning and evening sacrifices be enough to atone for sins? Could it possibly do it?

When do you think we will ever bring the sacrificial system to an end because the sacrifices have accomplished redemption and put away sin entirely? See, just that mental exercise helps you to understand that if you cannot accomplish it in 1 ,500 years, those same sacrifices offered year after year can never put away sin.

And the fact that they are offered year after year is the evidence itself. It is built into the system. The evidence of the inadequacy of those sacrifices is built right into the system itself. This is to go on forever, indefinitely.

It was always to happen. There was never a point where you ever offered the final sacrifice, never the final Passover, never the final Yom Kippur, never the final personal sacrifice, never a final morning sacrifice and never a final evening sacrifice.

There was no provision in that old covenant for it to ever come to an end after X number of animals had been sacrificed. And that very fact alone and that it is repeated was evidence that this can never accomplish what it is picturing.

It is picturing the atonement of sin, but it itself can never accomplish it because we have to do it all over again next year. It can never make perfect, the text says in verse one, those who draw near.

What does the word perfect mean there? We, you and I tend to think of the word perfect. It's important that we understand this. You and I tend to use the word perfect to describe a qualitative distinction, some quality.

It's without error, it's perfect.

You know what I'm talking about.

It's without error. It is without imperfection. It is without blemish. It sometimes is used to refer, we sometimes use the word perfect to refer to a moral perfection or a quality perfection, but that's not what this word means.

This word perfect is a word that means finished or completed. It refers to something that has reached its intended goal. It is brought to a finished state. It has been brought to its appointed end. The word is used to describe something that is a fulfillment or a completion.

Now, earlier in Hebrews, we saw the author make mention a couple of different times that the law and the priesthood of the old covenant were unable to make us perfect or to perfect us. For instance, Hebrews 7 .11.

Now, if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood, for on the basis of it, the people received the law, what further need was there for another priest to rise according to the order of Melchizedek and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

And there, the author is simply pointing out that priesthood was unable to perfect the worshiper. What Aaron did was unable to perfect the worshiper. Therefore, another priest of another priesthood was necessary.

Later on in chapter seven, verse 19, he says, the law made nothing perfect. And on the other hand, there was the bringing in of a better hope. And there he's contrasting the provisions and promises of the law with the provisions and promises of the new covenant.

And since the old covenant, the law was unable to perfect people, something else had to be brought in, a new covenant, which was able to perfect the worshiper. So he's already used this concept of being made perfect.

And in it, he is simply describing us being brought to God in the context of Hebrews, in the context of worship, being perfected in this sense, means to be brought into the presence of God, made at peace with him, reconciled to him, so that we can be brought into his presence and all of our sin can be taken away.

We can be declared righteous and God can be propitious or gracious to us on the basis of what Christ has done. We are unable to draw near to God without Christ. And in this context of Hebrews, that's what being made perfect is, to finally be brought to its completed end.

What was the goal of the sacrifice? You came and you offered an animal, you brought in, you atone for that sin. What was the picture goal? The picture goal was the satisfaction of divine justice so that God could be gracious to the sinner, bring the sinner in and draw him near to him.

That was the pictured goal. But those animal sacrifices never accomplished it, which is why as a Jew, when you offered a sacrifice, you couldn't go in and offer an animal, watch the blood be shed, and then march behind the curtain and hang out at the Ark of the Covenant in the presence of the Shekinah glory.

You could never do that, why? Because you could never be brought near to God. You could never have those sins atoned for and taken out of the way. Access to God was pictured, but never actually made possible under the old covenant.

And so the old covenant was unable to perfect this. So those same sacrifices which are offered year by year, the people would offer those sacrifices. And on the basis of those sacrifices, because they offered them in faith, believing that in an act of faith.

And in an act of obedience,.

God would see that sacrifice, recognize their faith, and make them acceptable or accept them and be gracious to them on the basis of that sacrifice. But that sacrifice didn't actually accomplish that.

That sacrifice looked forward to another sacrifice that would actually accomplish that act. And yet God was gracious to them on the basis of those sacrifices because of what those sacrifices pictured was coming in the future.

Once you skip ahead just a few verses in chapter 10, if you will, look down at verse 11. Once you notice the repeated language where the author brings these two themes together, what Christ has done, as opposed to the Old Testament sacrifices, the inability of the Old Testament sacrifices to perfect us, et cetera.

Look at verse 11. Every priest stands daily, ministering and offering time after time, the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But he, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until his enemies be made a footstool for his feet.

For by one offering, he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. Look at that last phrase. For by one offering, he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. The law could not perfect a worshiper.

The Aaronic priesthood could not perfect a worshiper. Those sacrifices could not perfect a worshiper. But Jesus, in giving us a better covenant and being a better priest and offering a better sacrifice, has done what?

He has perfected. He has brought near for all time those who are his, those on whose behalf he has suffered, he has brought them near and he has perfected them. The meaning, he has taken away their sin debt.

He has made them righteous in the sight of God. He has removed their guilt and their guilty conscience, and he has brought them near to God so that God can be gracious to them, all because of the work of what Christ has done.

Why Repeated Sacrifices Could Never End the Need for Another Offering

Now, in verse two, the author tackles the subject from a bit of a different angle. And he asks a question. The obvious answer to the question is yes. That is the intended answer to it. And just a moment's reflection on the question demonstrates what he is saying.

Verse two, otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered? What is he talking about? The Old Testament sacrifices. Would they not have ceased to be offered because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?

Wouldn't those Old Testament sacrifices eventually come to an end if they were able to accomplish the removal of guilt and the removal of sin from the worshiper? If those sacrifices were able to perfect the worshiper in this sense, then there would have come at some point where we just say, I think that's it.

It's all done. Last sacrifice has been made. Let's take down the tabernacle. Let's take down the temple. Let's stop this, disband the priesthood. We'll all go get other jobs, and that's it. That's enough.

But those sacrifices could never cease to be offered because they never actually accomplished salvation, the putting away of sin. This is what is meant in Hebrews chapter 10, verse 18, when he says, now where there's forgiveness of these things, there's no longer any offering for sin.

See, if forgiveness is accomplished by those sacrifices, then there's no offering for sin. If you have to continue to give a sacrifice, you only continue to give a sacrifice because you are implicitly saying, my sin has not been forgiven, it's not been dealt with, so I have to give another sacrifice and another sacrifice.

But if forgiveness is granted, if it is complete, and the sinner is declared righteous, and his sins are forgiven, and he is cleansed, if that has taken place, then there's no need for any other sacrifice, no more sacrifices, which means two things.

I'm gonna apply this principle in two ways here this morning. First, it would mean that no Jew could ever approach the temple or the tabernacle, having made a profession of faith in Christ and trusting in Christ, with a reason, he could never approach the temple or tabernacle with a reason to give another sacrifice.

In other words, this really is addressed to Jews who might've been thinking to themselves, I think Jesus is great, and that's fantastic. One sacrifice is a great sacrifice. He's the Messiah, he fulfilled the Old Testament demands for the Messiah, and he offered up his life in my stead.

I believe that, I'm trusting in that, that that atones for my sin, but I've still got my lamb, and I'm still heading to the temple on Saturday to offer this sacrifice to God, to atone for my sins. No Jew could ever do that.

You could never, if Jesus Christ has accomplished redemption, that no other sacrifice is necessary to add to his sacrifice, do you get that? This addresses Jews who are on the fence. I think Jesus is great, but I wanna make sure I got the animal sacrifices just in case, just in case it's not enough.

Just in case it's not sufficient, I'm gonna cover all of my bases so that if one doesn't work, the other one will avail for me on the day of judgment. If Jesus Christ's death is sufficient, then there is no need for any animal sacrifice.

Secondly, and I just wanna mention this here because we're gonna deal with this when we get down toward the end at verse 18. Secondly, this would also, this brings us, I should say it this way. This brings us to the point where we have to recognize the distinction between the teaching of scripture regarding the death of Christ and what he has accomplished and the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church regarding the mass.

And I'm just mentioning it here because it's germane to this subject. And it is something that I want you to be aware of as we work our way through this entire passage, because when we get down to verse 18, we're gonna dive into this in a little bit more detail after we've looked at everything that it says here about the one-time nature of the sacrifice of Jesus.

But the Roman Catholic teaching on the mass is that the mass, which is their version of communion or the Eucharist, that ceremony they refer to as the sacrifice of the mass because Rome believes and Rome teaches that every time a priest goes through the functions of the Eucharist and says his words, his Latin words over those elements, that they turn into the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ, and they become yet another sacrifice of Christ on the altar of the mass.

That's Roman Catholic teaching. They refer to it as an unbloody sacrifice, but it is called the sacrifice of the mass. So their belief is that every time the mass is done in a Roman Catholic church by a Roman Catholic priest, anywhere on the planet in every time zone, no matter what day it is, that the sacrifice of Christ is made again and again and again and again.

Compare that, if you will, to the teaching of this passage, which says that it happened once and for all. There is no need for any other sacrifice. That's the point of Hebrews 10. There's no need for any other sacrifice.

If the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is sufficient, you need to add no animal sacrifices to it. And if the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is sufficient, then it does not need to happen again and again and again, even in a symbolic way to accomplish anything because in that one sacrifice, he has perfected forever those who are his.

So when we get down to verse 18, we'll dive into that a little bit more. And I'm gonna explain to you what Rome teaches in that regard specifically so that we can compare it to Hebrews chapter 10. And the point is not to bash on Roman Catholics.

That's not the goal of that. You guys know me better than that. The goal is simply to illustrate error or to illustrate, to show the truth and to illustrate it by using error and comparing truth with error.

The Consciousness of Sin and the Reminder of Yearly Sacrifices

Now, what does our text say? Back to the text in verse two. What does our text say here that it could never do? It could never perfect us, those who draw near, because verse two says, the worshipers having once been cleansed would no longer have had consciousness of sins.

This is an interesting phrase. What does it mean that a worshiper, having been cleansed from sin, would no longer have consciousness of sins? Does that mean that once we are saved and we are in Jesus Christ and we are forgiven and redeemed and made righteous, does this mean that we are no longer even aware of our sinfulness?

That we're no longer conscious of sins? Is that what it says? Those sacrifices would cease to be offered because the worshiper having once been cleansed would no longer have consciousness of sins. I certainly have consciousness of my sins, do you?

I'm aware of them. In fact, I don't think, does this text seem to suggest that a Christian would be oblivious to his own sinfulness? That's not my experience and I don't think that's the experience of most Christians.

In fact, I think the experience of most Christians is the opposite of that. I'm more aware of sinfulness in me today than I was the day I first believed. In fact, I now realize that things that I never would have thought were sinful 25 years ago or 30 years ago are sinful and now I see them as being horribly sinful.

And not only am I aware of more sin in myself, I am more acutely aware of sin in myself. I feel sin deeper than I used to feel it. That is the experience of most Christians that I've run into. Not only do you see your sin more clearly, but you feel the weight of your sin more clearly and not only that, but you long to be rid of your sin more clearly.

Well, the text seems to suggest that having once been cleansed, you would no longer have consciousness of sins. And yet having once been cleansed, we are what? Very conscious of our sins, aren't we? So what is this referring to?

It has to be describing the consciousness of sin's guilt and the weight that it would be placed on a sinner by it. It's not saying that we're no longer aware of our sinfulness, but rather that being aware of our sinfulness, being conscious of my sinfulness, I don't feel that guilt because my awareness of my sinfulness, when I am made aware of it, I ought to be, that ought to be immediately swallowed up with the realization that all of that sin was laid upon Christ.

So I bear the wrath for that no more. I bear that guilt no more. Somebody else has paid for that. So it's not that I'm no longer aware of my sinfulness, but it's that my awareness of my sinfulness is swallowed up in the reality of my forgiveness.

So what I am no longer conscious of is that I have a sin debt before God, because though I'm aware of my sinfulness, I'm also aware of something else. That sinfulness is taken away. That sinfulness is dealt with.

That sinfulness is paid for. And I now stand in a right relationship with God, fully forgiven and declared righteous on the basis of what Christ has done. So it's not that I'm no longer aware of any sin, but it is that that awareness is swallowed up in awareness that that sin has been taken away.

Under the old covenant, you did not have that. You could not have that. Again, place yourself back in the mind of a first century Jew who brings his offering to the tabernacle. You bring that offering to the tabernacle, and as you're walking away from the tabernacle, you know that animal was offered for you.

You know what you're consciously aware of at that moment?

You're gonna do it again.

So you've gotta be thinking and planning and anticipating the next sacrifice. Because the next morning and the next evening, there's another sacrifice. And the next Yom Kippur, there's another sacrifice.

The next Passover, there's another sacrifice. And eventually, you're gonna bring a sacrifice for your family in worship again. And when you walk away from the temple with that sacrifice, you're gonna be acutely aware of this.

There's another sacrifice to come. You would never be aware of the fact, you would never have confidence in the fact that all of your sins are put away and that no further sacrifice was necessary. You would never have that realization.