All right, that text again is
Hebrews chapter 9, 13. And let's read all the way through
the 22nd verse, please. Hebrews 9, 13 through 22. You
can see that the author is engaged in
a contrast between the blood of the Old Covenant and the blood
of Christ. And in verse 13, for if the blood
of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling
the unclean sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, how much
more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience
from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause,
he is the mediator of the new testament or covenant, that by
means of death for the redemption of transgressions that were under
the first testament or covenant, they which are called might receive
the promise of eternal life. For where a testament or a covenant
is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator,
for a testament is a force after men are dead. Otherwise, it is
of no strength at all while the testator liveth. whereupon neither
the First Testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses
had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law,
he took the blood of calves and goats with water, scarlet wool,
hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people saying,
this is the blood of the Testament which God hath enjoined unto
you. Moreover, he sprinkled with blood
both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by
the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is
no remission." Now eventually, we will come to the testator
of the covenant, and our Lord's part in that. But before we consider
that and work our way to that very rich passage of scripture,
let's consider the various and the multiple aspects that Christ
himself sustains to what we call the everlasting covenant. And that his death, his shedding
of blood, and his resurrection was in accordance or by the everlasting
covenant. In Hebrews chapter 13 and verse
20, you have that. That he died according to covenant
arrangement. That our Lord's death was after
a covenant fashion. And just so that we understand
where we're going here, as Witsius wrote in his very enlarged book
on the covenants between the father and the son, he said this,
quote, there is a compact, that is a covenant, between the father
and the son, which is the foundation of our salvation, unquote. The words of Witsius. and thus
his blood is the blood of the everlasting covenant. Matthew 26 and verse 28. Mark
14 24 and Hebrews 13 and verse 20 declares that this is my blood of the covenant our lord said
at the last supper not only so but the lord jesus christ is
also the mediator of the covenant hear the verses hebrews 8 and
verse 6 9, 15, and 12, 24, that the Lord is
the mediator of the covenant. Now, the word mediator is in
the New Testament, I believe, about seven times. And the word
mediator is a combination of two words that are put together
to make the one. One of those words is middle,
and the other one is to go. In other words, to go or to get
in the middle. That is the meaning of a mediator. A mediator is one who stands
between two that are estranged that he might affect again their
reconciliation. By the way, there is only one
mediator in all of creation. There's not two or more. There
is one and only one Mediator between God and men, 1 Timothy
chapter 2 and verse 5. And of course that Mediator is
the Lord Jesus Christ. the God-man, the man, Christ
Jesus. And the mediator had to be both
God and man to affect the reconciliation with God. But again, in the book
of Hebrews, not only is he the mediator, but we learn again
in Hebrew that he is the surety of the covenant. Hebrews chapter
7 and verse 22. By so much is Jesus the surety
of the New Testament. Now, a surety is a sponsor. A surety is one who pledges himself
to answer or pay the debts of another when they cannot. And
our Lord became the surety of the covenant, that he would answer
our debt of sin, that he would pay our debt, and that he would
pay it to the proper one, that is, unto the almighty God. Again, our Lord is the high priest
of the covenant. We have a new and everlasting
covenant and the Lord himself is the high priest of the covenant. He is the one who offered himself
without spot to God. He offered up himself and shed
his blood, and his blood as a high priest redeemed. It sanctifies
forever, and it satisfies the justice of God and brings them
into an everlasting salvation that cannot miscarry. His blood
redeems them, and concerning the everlasting covenant It must
be viewed, I believe, from a dual standpoint. And again, I'd like
to bar the distinction made by Herman Witsius of Old. Number one, that there is a covenant,
and that covenant is between the Father and the Son, between
the Holy Three, the Trinity, and that this covenant was made
or established proposed before the world ever began. It is an everlasting covenant. And secondly, again, quoting
with you, that testamentary dispensation by which God bestows by an immutable
covenant, eternal salvation, and everything there unto relative,
unto the elect, unquote. And God willing, It is the second
of those which we propose to consider in this study, how the
inheritance in the everlasting covenant passes onto the chosen
and appointed heirs of an eternal inheritance. Now we jumped in
here at Hebrews chapter 9 and verse 13. It follows that statement
in verse 12 concerning Christ who by his own blood obtained
eternal redemption. And we notice that the author
here keeps up a comparison and a contrast between the blood
of beasts, that was the blood of the old covenant, and the
blood of Christ, that is the blood of the new covenant. So look at verse 12. Neither
by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood. Then verse
13 and 14. There's a contrast here between
the efficacy of the blood of beast of goats and bullets and
the blood of Christ. And again, contrasting the two
bloods, verse 13, the blood of bulls and of goats in verse 14,
the blood of Christ. But here we see again. the contrast
of the efficacy of the two respective sorts of blood of sacrifice,
that of beast and that of our Lord, the blood of goats, bulls,
heifers, lamb, and such like under the old covenant. Now notice
something in verse 13, what these do and the extent of their efficacy
or their effect. Sanctify to the purifying of
the flesh. Now we need to get that. We need
to understand how far and how far only they are able to reach. They sanctify only to the purifying
of the flesh. and the blood of Christ purges
the conscience from dead works to serve the true and the living
God. That's in verse 14 of this chapter. Now the first, the extent and
efficacy of the Levitical sacrifices sprinkled upon those who were
ceremonially unclean or ceremonially were polluted in some way. It was unto the purifying of
the flesh, that is, animal blood shed and sprinkled upon them,
made them only ceremonially clean. It sanctified to the purifying
of the flesh. It removed ceremonial defilement
and pollution. Now such blood could not perfect
the worshipper, and that's stated in Hebrews 10 and verse 1. Nor it could not take away their
sin, and that's stated in Hebrews chapter 10 and verse 4. But this,
it was never intended to do. Not from the very first was it
ever intended to take away or to redeem or to save everlastingly,
but to be a type, picture, and shadow of the coming one, the
Lord Jesus Christ. But when one was in some way
under Moses' law, ceremonially defiled. I'll give you some example. One could be ceremonially defiled
by touching a dead body. If you remember that, Leviticus
21 verse 11, Numbers chapter 6 and verse 6, the touching of
a dead body actually ceremonially defiled. Another thing was having
leprosy and you see that in Leviticus chapter 13 discussed at great
length. Leprosy because it is a great
type of sin. Or one seeking familiar spirits
or fortune tellers or witches or whatever in Leviticus Chapter
19. And thereby, because of that,
they could not approach unto God or mingle with the congregation
in their worship. Had to have a sacrifice offered
for their ceremonial defilement in order that it might be taken
away. And washed themselves, oftentimes,
in water sprinkled with the ashes of an heifer was another way
that they put that upon themselves. Now, this is very interesting
to read in Numbers chapter 19. And as John Brown put it, it
removed ceremonial defilement. And we need to keep that in our
mind. That's as far as it could go,
and it could go no further. On the other hand, The Hebrew
writer said, the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is able to
purge the conscience from dead works. Hebrews chapter 10 and
verse 22. It cleanses from an evil, bad,
accusing, condemning conscience. And the blood of Old Testament
sacrifices fitted one to engage in external worship by removing
the ceremonial defilement that they had contracted, while the
blood of Jesus, our great high priest, removes moral defilement
and sanctifies them unto God and fits one for worshiping God
in spirit and in truth. Now, if you look with me at the
opening words of the 15th verse in Hebrews chapter 9, and for
this cause, and then the explanative clause that is annexed to it
that completes the thought, and for this cause, He is the mediator
of the New Testament. Or the word is covenant. I don't
know why the translators translated it testament unless they had
their eye upon verse 16 and verse 17. Now, verse 15 opens with
the conjunction and, which some say means one and the same thing,
also, or moreover. also and moreover he is the mediator
of the new covenant and that introduces the assertion for
this cause he is the mediator of the new covenant and the reason
is then given why he is the mediator of the new covenant for the redemption
of the transgression under the first covenant and the way that
which sins were redeemed by means of death or literally death having
occurred. Death having occurred There is
remission of sin. And the ultimate end, therefore,
they which are called, that is, the ones having been called,
might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Now, emphasize
the word inheritance. Might receive the eternal inheritance. Now, let's focus on that promise. the relationship to the redemption
of the transgression under the First Testament or Covenant. Of course, the death having taken
place, the death of our Lord Jesus Christ. Or verse 12, by
his own blood having obtained eternal redemption. Now the phrase,
or rather the phrase, is very significant because it shows
that there is but one way forever and one sacrifice forever that
is able to save the sinner. Now it might be a lesser analogy
But remember how the Apostle Peter in Acts 15 and verse 11
said to the council, we believe that through the grace or faith
in the Lord Jesus Christ, they, the Gentiles, shall be saved
even as we, the Jew. One being a covenant people, and the other not. Those were
under the law and some were not, but are saved in one and the
same way by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Now the words of
Peter in Acts 15 and verse 11, even as they are literally after
or according to the manner. According to the manner? According
to the manner which they are saved is by faith in the Lord
Jesus Christ. This is not one way to be saved
for the Jew and another way to be saved for the Gentile. Not
one way for some to be saved and another to be saved in another
way. but all that are saved are saved
by through Christ and by faith in him. Even so, there is one
sacrifice for sin for those under both of the covenants and that's
the blood of Christ. Why does the apostle In Hebrews
9 and verse 15, place this emphasis upon the transgression, quote,
under the first testament or covenant, unquote. Why does he
not mention the sin under the new covenant as well? For as
Owen said upon this verse, the redemption or expiation of sin
is confined under those under the First Testament. That's what
he's discussing right here in this particular play. Why? Is not Christ's death and blood
for the redemption of those under the new covenant? Of course it
is. And the one and only. But I think
The answer to this question, if it's a question in your mind,
is to be found in the surrounding context and the things that he
is discussing. In this epistle, Hebrews, is
written especially from the standpoint of those whose fathers and ancestors
worshipped under the Old Testament or Covenant, and who themselves
wish to continue worshipping according to that Old Covenant
even after Christ had came. But, you see, the Apostle in
Hebrews has stripped the Jew and their sacrifices of any efficacy
to take away sin. He has stripped those sacrifices
of any ability to take away sin. And Hebrews Chapter 10 and verse
4. The blood of Christ is able to
purge the conscience. It's able to perfect the worshipers,
Hebrews 10, 1 and 2. What then of the many sin of
the saint who lived under the old economy? This would be a
question particularly for the Jewish mind of that day. So, in Hebrews 9 and verse 9,
in which, that is, in the first tabernacle, which was a figure,
were offered both gifts and sacrifices which could not make him that
did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience. He came with
his sacrifice, but it could not perfect him. It could not cleanse
his conscience and that forever and for good. So the apostle
treats the situation with regard to those transgressions under
the First Testament, because it particularly is of interest
to the Jew. And he must have that question
answered in his mind. Can refer to either the time
when such sins were committed, or the testament against which
they were committed. Now granted, the redemption of
transgression is clearly explaining a paying of a ransom for the
remission of sin, to free from the deserved penalty which is
everlasting destruction. For their transgressions were,
by their own bloody animal sacrifices, actually unatoned for, nor did
they stand them in the way of the eternal inheritance. So the purpose or end of the
redemption of the transgression under the first testament was
or is that the called ones might receive, they might receive the
promise, they might receive the realization, they might receive
the fulfillment of the promise inherited for the children of
God. But more about the redemption
of the transgression under the first covenant. There's a passage
from Paul in Romans chapter 3 verse 25 and 26. I won't turn there,
but it talks about those who have passed through the forbearance
of God but now are summed up in the Lord Jesus Christ. In
Romans 3, 25 and 26, we note some parallels and let's note
them. First of all, in Romans chapter
3 and verse 25, whom God set forth a propitiation, and then
look at Hebrews 9 and verse 15, that by means of death, God set
forth Christ a perpetuation by means of death for those under
or against the first. Again, the contrast, Romans 3
and verse 25, the remission of sins that are passed through
the forbearance of God. And Hebrews 9, 15, for transgressions
under the first covenant. Now, the text in Hebrews is especially
pertinent, I say again, to the Jew. And as John Gill said, the
sins of the Old Testament saints are meant. And John Brown, that
Hebrews 9 and 15 refers, quote, to the sins which remain unexpiated
under the covenant, the transgression which its sacrifice could not
make an atonement for. And yet God, we know, saved a
great multitude of sinners before Christ died upon the cross. Yet not by the blood of sacrifices,
and not by the observance of the law, not by the inferior
sacrifices that they offered again and again. For Christ is
the sacrifice for Abel, and for Enoch, and for Sarah, and Abraham,
and Noah, as well as for Peter, and Paul, and John. And how was
their salvation carried if their sacrifices could not put away
their sin and if Christ had not yet died? And yet they were fully
justified. Abraham was justified by faith. we read in Genesis chapter 15
and verse 6. And Gil said this, takes in all
the iniquity of each and every kind committed by them. The Puritan Thomas Goodwin put
it this way, that the expression For the redemption of transgression
under the First Testament means that the world had gone upon
the score with God. He had not received one penny
for all the fathers that he had saved up till the death of our
Lord. That Jesus had not yet bought
or paid the redemption actually, but in the purpose and decree
of God it stands immutable. He calleth those things which
are not as if they were, and God is able to do that. That though their Levitical sacrifices
could not save them, yet they were also saved by the blood
of Christ as the lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Christ is the sin bearer of all
of the elect, the Lord laying upon him the iniquity of us all. That's no greater a mystery than
to think that our Lord died for our sin before we were alive,
And before we ever committed them, our Lord died for those
sins. Before we ever had committed
them, our Lord had died for them. So how wonderful is the great
redemption that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. So, this has
caused some to believe that the idea is that that some of the
Old Testament saints, therefore, must need to go to a place, a
holding place, and wait there until the Lord died and then
came back and get them and take them at last into that glorious
presence of the Lord and Savior. Now, let's look at v. 16 and v. 17 of Hebrews 9, where
we twice meet the word testatar in the scripture. And this same
word is five more times used in the New Testament. And it
is always interesting to take all the ways that it is used
and all the ways that the Greek word is translated and look at
it that we might come to its meaning. Now five more times
it is found in the New Testament. In Luke, 2229, it is translated,
at least in King James, appoint and appointed. That's the same
word. I appoint unto you a kingdom. That's the word we're looking.
In Acts 3 and verse 25, it is rendered made. The covenant which
God made. Same word. That's Hebrews 9,
15. And in Hebrews 8 and 10, and 10 and 16, the same word
is rendered, will make. I will make a new covenant with
them. Thus, a testator is one who makes
a covenant or a testamentary disposition or inheritance which
he would have done with his goods or his possession when he is
dead. We call it a last will and testament. And you know you don't get it
until there is the dead. So in both verse 16 and 17, Death
is mentioned as a necessary means of giving force and strength
to the testamentary disposition as he uses the general manner
of such testament as they are practiced among men in the world. And the death in verse 16 and
17 no doubt answers to the words In verse 15, that by means of
death, they which are called, and so forth. And death in light
of the covenant. Not just any day, but death in
light of a covenant and the covenant of the testamentary disposition. In order, verse 15b, that those
called may receive the promise inherent. Verse 16, for where
there is a covenant, there is necessity to be offered the death
of the one making covenant. that the one who has made a covenant,
therefore, must die, or is necessary for death. Verse 17, for a testament
is affirmed over the dead, is how it might be rendered, and
since it has no strength, if no force, while the one making
covenant is living. That's very clear, is it not?
So there must be the death of the testator, for there's no
strength in it while he is yet alive. It is in force, they said,
over the dead. You know, you've read wills,
you've seen it, you've had it in a family, you've known others
over the dead at the passing of the one who has made the will
and testament to the disposition of his goods, his property, money,
and such like. It to be sure, for it to be stable,
for it to have force, there must needs be a death. For the force
of the testament depends on the death of the one making the testament,
for it is the thing that one will have done with their goods
and with their wealth at their death. Now, of course, we recognize
in our legal system, we recognize living trust, we recognize gifts
while one is still alive, putting things in the name of children
and such like, but we're talking here about a testator of a covenant. The argument is God has made
a covenant by which he will bestow great spiritual blessing, the
greatest of them being eternal and everlasting life upon the
elect. But a covenant is only in force
over the dead. There must be the death of the
testator. Thus the death of Christ was
necessary to the everlasting covenant, for it stands in blood. As Christ's blood is called the
blood of the everlasting covenant, Hebrews 13 and 20 and 21. By his death, therefore, is the
inheritance legally passed upon the heir that they might come
into the full possession of their inheritance. Now the sum of our
text is this, the death of Jesus Christ was a covenant death,
but it was a necessary death in order for the inheritance
to pass upon those that are called or appointed. John Owen. A great writer wrote, by his
death, Christ made a bequeathment of grace and glory to the elect,
appointing them to be heirs of God and co-heirs with himself,
unquote. and he has willed that and has
sealed that in and by and through his death. His death was necessary
and it gave full efficacy to the inheritance passing to those
for whom it is intended. Jesus is the testator of the
covenant. And having willed that, therefore
his death was necessary, and it passed by means of his death. And will pass upon everyone because
of the covenant and because of the will and the testament of
God, receiving an everlasting inheritance. May God bless these
things. to our heart as we think that
our testator has left us a great inheritance reserved in heaven
that fadeth not away. I believe Peter said.