|















| |
INDEX
PREVIOUS
NEXT
|
COLLECTIONS
Commentaries,
Word Studies, Devotionals, Sermons, Illustrations
Old and New Testament. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hebrews
9:15
For
this
reason He is
the
mediator of a
new
covenant,
so that, since
a
death has
taken
place for the
redemption of
the
transgressions
that
were committed
under the
first
covenant,
those who
have been called
may receive the
promise of the
eternal
inheritance.
(NASB:
Lockman) |
|
Greek:
Kai
dia
touto
diathekes
kaines
mesites
estin,
opos
thanatou
genomenou
eis
apolutrosin
ton
epi
te
prote
diatheke
parabaseon
ten
epaggelian
labosin
oi
keklemenoi
tes
aioniou
kleronomias.
Amplified: [Christ, the Messiah] is therefore the
Negotiator and Mediator of an [entirely] new agreement (testament,
covenant), so that those who are called and offered it may receive the
fulfillment of the promised everlasting inheritance—since a death has
taken place which rescues and delivers and redeems them from the
transgressions committed under the [old] first agreement.
(Amplified
Bible - Lockman)
Barclay: It is through him that there emerges a new covenant
between God and man; and the purpose behind this new covenant is that
those who have been called might receive the eternal inheritance which
has been promised to them (Westminster
Press)
NLT: That is why he is the one who mediates the new covenant
between God and people, so that all who are invited can receive the
eternal inheritance God has promised them. For Christ died to set them
free from the penalty of the sins they had committed under that first
covenant. (NLT
- Tyndale House)
Phillips: Christ is consequently the administrator of an
entirely new agreement, having the power, by virtue of his death, to
redeem transgressions committed under the first agreement: to enable
those who obey God's call to enjoy the promises of the eternal
inheritance. (Phillips:
Touchstone)
Wuest: And because of this, of a testament new in quality
He is mediator, in order that a death having taken place for the
redemption of the transgressions under the first testament, those who
have been divinely summoned [into salvation] might receive the promise
of the eternal inheritance. (Erdmans)
Young's Literal: And because of this, of a new covenant
he is mediator, that, death having come, for redemption of the
transgressions under the first covenant, those called may receive the
promise of the age-during inheritance, |
|
|
|
|
AND FOR THIS
REASON HE IS THE MEDIATOR OF A NEW COVENANT: Kai dia touto diathekes kaines mesites
estin (3PAI): (Heb
7:22;
8:6;
12:24;
1 Timothy 2:5)
(8:8;
2 Corinthians 3:6)
For this reason
- refers to Messiah's efficacious offering
and cleansing from sin so that the believer might worship the living God.
Wuest explains
that...
After comparing the relative merits of
the blood of the First Testament and that offered under the New Testament,
and showing that the blood of Messiah cleansed from actual sin, whereas the
blood of animals could only cleanse from ceremonial defilement, the writer
arrives at his conclusion, namely, that that was the reason why Messiah
became the mediator of the New Testament.
(Wuest,
K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans
or
Logos)
Mediator (3316)
(mesites
from mésos = middle, in midst) is one who
stands in the middle between two people and brings them together. It is
basically a neutral and trusted person in middle (mesos), a so called
"middle Man". It is one who works to remove disagreement and thus a
mediator, go-between or reconciler. In short, Jesus is the Mediator,
the One Who stands between men and God to bring them together.
Three of the
five NT uses of mesites are in Hebrews...
But now He has obtained a more
excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a
better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.
(see note
Hebrews 8:6)
(But you have come to Mount
Zion...) and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant,
and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of
Abel. (see note
Hebrews 12:22)
Paul writes...
there is one God, and one mediator also
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for
all, the testimony borne at the proper time. (1Ti 2:5-6)
Wuest observes
that a mediator...
refers to one who intervenes between
two, either to make or restore peace and friendship, to form a compact, or
to ratify a covenant. Here the Messiah acts as a go-between or Mediator
between a holy God and sinful man. By His death on the Cross, He removes the
obstacle, sin, which caused an estrangement between man and God. When the
sinner accepts the merits of Messiah’s sacrifice, the guilt and penalty of
his sin is his no more, the power of sin in his life is broken, he becomes
the recipient of the divine nature, and the estrangement between himself and
God, both legal and personal, disappears.
(Wuest,
K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans)
Covenant
(1242)
(diatheke from dia = two + tithemi = to place) pictures
that which is placed between two and thus a covenant is something placed
between two, an arrangement between two parties. Diatheke speaks of an irrevocable decision which cannot be cancelled
by anyone.
Diatheke was a
commonly used in the Greco-Roman world to define a legal transaction in
settling an inheritance and would correspond with our modern term of a
"final will and testament" which defines how that which belongs to the owner
(the one who makes the will) will be divided among the heirs. Obviously a
prerequisite of its effective disposal requires the death of the disposer.
In reference to the
divine covenants, such as the Abrahamic covenant, diatheke is not a covenant
in the sense that God came to an agreement with fallen man as if they were
signing a contract. To the contrary, when God entered a diatheke with
Abraham it involved His declaration of His unconditional promise to make
Abraham and his seed the recipients of the covenant blessings.
IN ORDER THAT SINCE A DEATH HAS TAKEN PLACE
FOR THE REDEMPTION OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS THAT WERE COMMITTED UNDER THE FIRST
COVENANT: hopos thanatou genomenou (AMPMSG) eis apolutrosin
ton epi te prote diatheke parabaseo:
(Heb
9:6,28;
2:14;
13:20;
Isaiah 53:10-12;
Daniel 9:26) (12;
11:40;
Romans 3:24-26;
5:6,8,10;
Ephesians 1:7;
1 Peter 3:18;
Revelation 5:9;
14:3,4)
(1;
8:7,13)
A death has taken
place - Past tense. This speaks of a historical event, the Cross and introduces the
subject of the death of the promised Messiah. The truth of a suffering
Messiah has always been a "scandal" to the Jews...
we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a
stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness (1Cor 1:23).
In light of this ever
present theological impediment, the writer of Hebrews proceeds to give three
reasons the Messiah had to die...
(1) a testament demands death
(2) forgiveness demands blood
(3) judgment demands a substitute
Redemption (629)
(apolutrosis
from
apo = marker of dissociation or separation + lutroo = to
redeem <> from lútron = ransom <> from lúo = loosen what is
bound, loose any person tied or fastened) is the payment of a price to
ransom (lutron = money for a ransom = ransom or price paid for a
slave who is then set free by the one who bought him), to release
(of someone from the power of someone else), to buy back or to
deliver one from a situation from in which one is powerless to liberate
themselves from or for which the penalty was so costly that they could never
hope to pay the ransom price. In other words, the idea of redemption
is deliverance or release by payment of a ransom.
From
Ephesians 1:7 (note)
and
Colossians 1:14 (note) we have a wonderful definition of redemption as
that which effects the forgiveness of sins
- sin incurs a debt payable only by death = blood (Lev 17:11, see notes
1 Peter 1:18;
1:19)] &
Jesus paid the price in full Jn 19:30). As discussed more below this full
payment would also take care of any sins committed under the Law.
For the redemption
of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant -
Perhaps you have wondered "How were individuals saved in the OT since Christ
had not yet come and died as a substitute for sinners and payment for their
sins?" From Genesis 15:6 (cp Hab 2:4) we know that Abraham believed
God and God credited him with perfect righteousness. In a sense Abraham was
"saved on credit", and when Christ died, His death paid off the debt finally
and fully. In a very real sense in the economy of God, Jesus' death was
effective retroactively. In a sense the Jewish Day of Atonement was a
foreshadowing of this effect, because on that day the blood of an animal
covered the sins that had been committed by the Jews during the previous
year. In other words the Day of Atonement also had a retroactive effect,
albeit only temporary and imperfect in contrast to the eternal and perfect
efficacy of the blood of Christ. Paul also taught a similar truth in Romans
3 explaining that sinners are...
justified (declared righteous) as a gift
(freely given) by His grace (unmerited favor) through the redemption (price
paid to set captives and slaves free) which is in Christ Jesus; 25 Whom God
displayed publicly as a propitiation (satisfactory sacrifice) in His blood
through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the
forbearance (Explaining why God did what He did. He exhibited as it were
"divine self-restraint" refraining from enforcing the death penalty that was
due for even one sin! See word study on
anoche)
of God He passed over the sins previously committed (Clear reference to the
sins committed under the Old Covenant, the covenant under which Abraham
lived and believed in Messiah); 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His
righteousness at the present time, that He might be just and the justifier
of the one who has faith in Jesus. (See notes
Romans 3:24;
25;
26)
God
passed over the sins of Old Covenant saints, those who lived before the Cross. God was satisfied when a man in
the OT put his faith the Messiah. Because Christ's blood was not shed until
hundreds or thousands of years after many Old Testament believers died,
their salvation was as stated, so to speak, on credit. God was forbearing and patient,
(see note
Romans 2:4)
until the true perfect sacrifice was made. However, up until that time
whenever God saw a heart of genuine faith in an OT man or woman, He passed
over their sins. In a deeper sense, the sacrifice had already been made in
God’s mind long before it was made in human history, because Christ’s works were finished from the foundation of the world (see note
Hebrews 4:3; cf.
see notes
1 Peter 1:19;
20;
Revelation 13:8). From the human perspective, however, the Old Testament saints
could only look forward to salvation. And so you may be asking "Why the OT
sacrifices? What effect did they have if they could not make a person
righteous?" This is not the full answer, but clearly the Old Testament sacrifices were
never prescribed as a means of salvation, but only as markers of faithful obedience and
as symbols pointing to the one perfect sacrifice that would be the means of
salvation, so great a salvation!
Under the first
covenant - A T Robertson writes that...
Here there is a definite statement that
the real value in the typical sacrifices under the Old Testament system was
in the realization in the death of Christ. It is Christ's death that gives
worth to the types that pointed to Him. So then the atoning sacrifice of
Christ is the basis of the salvation of all who are saved before the Cross
and since.
Wuest notes
that...
Messiah became the Mediator not
only in order that He might pay the penalty of sinners who live since the
Cross, but also that He might do so for those who lived before the Cross. Sinners who were saved under the First
Testament were actually saved, not by it or by any sacrifice offered under
its jurisdiction, but through the atoning work of Messiah under the New
Testament. (Ed note: They were saved by faith just as Abraham was).
(Wuest,
K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans)
THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN CALLED MAY RECEIVE THE PROMISE OF THE ETERNAL INHERITANCE: hoi keklemenoi (RPPMPN) ten epaggelian labosin
(3PAAS)...tes aioniou kleronomias:
(Heb
3:1;
Romans 8:28,30;
9:24;
2 Thessalonians 2:14)
(6:13;
11:13,39,40;
James 1:12;
1 John 2:25)
(Psalms
37:18;
Matthew 19:29;
25:34,36;
Mark 10:17;
Luke 18:18;
John 10:28;
Romans 6:23;
2 Timothy 2:10;
Titus 1:2;
3:7;
1 Peter 1:3,4;
5:10)
Those who have been
called - Who are the called?
These are the "heirs" of the new covenant. As the term the called is
used by the writer of Hebrews and by Paul Jude and John, it refers to those
who have heard the Gospel and responded by exercising saving faith. In this
understanding "the called" are virtually synonymous with "the elect".
Theologians refer to this as the effectual call.
Be aware that Matthew uses the term
called (kletos)
slightly differently than it is used in the epistles. In a parable Jesus
said many were "called" to the "wedding feast" but few were "chosen" (Mt
22:1-13,14). In this context the term "call" is clearly not
synonymous with an "effectual call" to salvation.
Called (2564)
(kaleo) speak to another in order to bring them nearer, either
physically or in a personal relationship. Kaleo has several different
nuances of meaning depending on the context and here clearly refers to God's
(effectual) invitation to salvation.
Called is in
the
perfect tense
which speaks of an action completed in past with present continuing effects/benefits. Literally
this reads “the
ones having been called” and looks back to those under the Old Covenant who
were called to salvation by God on the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus
Christ to come long after most of them had died. The reference, as always in
the NT epistles, is to the effectual calling related to salvation (see
note
Hebrews 3:1),
which in this context refers to OT believers.
Even those in the OT who sinned under the Law but
believed in the Promise of
Messiah, now were set free even from Abraham's bosom in Sheol (see Luke
16:19-31) and were taken
to Heaven to be present with their Messiah and receive their inheritance
(see notes on
Ephesians 4:8).
Promise
(1860)
(epaggelia from epí = intensifies verbal meaning + aggéllo
= to tell, declare) originally referred to an announcement or declaration
(especially of a favorable message) but in later Greek came to mean a
declaration to do something with the implication of obligation to carry out
what is stated (thus a promise or pledge). Epaggelia was primarily a
legal term denoting summons, a promise to do or give something,
but in the NT speaks primarily of
the promises of God, and here refers to "the" (specific) promise of
salvation in the New Covenant which was made available by the blood of
Christ, the Messiah.
May receive the promise - Robertson writes that this refers to
"God's purpose in the rites and symbols."
Barnes
writes...
That is, the fulfilment of the promise;
or that they might be made partakers of eternal blessings. That blood is
effectual alike to save those under the ancient covenant and the new-so that
they will be saved in the same manner, and unite in the same song of
redeeming love.
The eternal
inheritance - Speaks of salvation in its fullness (see notes
Hebrews 6:12;
1Peter 1:3;
1:4;
1:5).
Inheritance (2817)(kleronomia
from kleros = lot +
némo = give or distribute) is literally that which is distributed by
lot and so refers to a portion which one receives by lot in a general
distribution and then, in a more general sense means to possess oneself of,
to receive as one's own, to obtain. In other words it can refer to property
already received as well as that which is expected. Although kleronomia
is an inheritance which one receives by lot, in the NT the idea of chance
associated with the lot is not found. Here the inheritance is based on a
promise from the "non-lying" God and thus it is trustworthy. To the Jews who
were "waffling", the point was clear that they could "stake their life" on
the promise of this inheritance! And so can we dear reader.
All praise to God Who is not a man that He can lie.
ETERNAL
Eternal is a key word in Hebrews: blood of eternal covenant (Hebrews
13:20). He
offered Himself through His eternal Spirit (see note
Hebrews 9:14) and has become the
Author/Source of eternal salvation (see note
Hebrews 5:9). He has obtained eternal
redemption (see note
Hebrews 9:12) and enables men to receive of the eternal inheritance
(see note
Hebrews 9:15;
13:20).
Ray Stedman explains that...
The passage from 9:15 through 9:28 takes
a slightly different slant. Though the same term covenant is used as in
Hebrews 9:1-14, it is now treated more as a bequest being administered by a
living executor after the death of the will-maker. However, Christ is seen
both as the will-maker who dies, and the executor who administers the
estate, just as he was both the offering for sin and the high priest who
offered it. The phrase For this reason, which introduces verse 15,
looks back to the close of verse 14, that we may serve the living God.
The promised Messiah administers the New Covenant to those who are called
in order that they may be equipped to serve the living and true God. That
equipping capability of the New Covenant is called the promised eternal
inheritance. We have already seen that it consists of an inner
understanding of the nature of both good and evil; an intimate, Father-child
relationship with God; and a total and continuing forgiveness of sins. This
is the inheritance which our Mediator offers to us whenever we come
to the throne of grace (see note
Hebrews 4:16) to receive it by faith. Just as the heir of a
fortune may draw from its resources at any time, so we are expected to draw
from this great bequest, as it is now available to us after the death of the
testator. (Hebrews 9:1-28 The
True Tabernacle)
(Copyright © 1972
Discovery Publishing,
a ministry of
Peninsula Bible Church.)
><> ><> ><>
A Good Will - God . . . has
begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
—1 Peter 1:3 - Perhaps you know someone who didn't receive the inheritance
intended by a parent because of a faulty will. In an article titled "Money &
The Law," attorney Jim Flynn says that if you want your estate to go to your
chosen recipients instead of to members of the legal profession, you should
avoid do-it-yourself wills. Such documents are usually legal but they are
often unclear and fail to make provisions for unforeseen situations. Flynn
advises having a formal will to be sure your wishes are carried out.
Man-made wills can fail, but there is no ambiguous language about the
inheritance God has in store for us. The apostle Peter affirmed that God
"has begotten us again to a living hope
through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance
incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven
for you" (see notes
1 Peter 1:3;
1:4)
No fluctuation in the economy can reduce
this inheritance. It is not subject to review by the courts nor to debate by
squabbling families. No amount of suffering or trials can diminish or change
what God has in store for us. Our inheritance is certain and eternal
(Hebrews 9:15). And as we live for Him, we are assured that His will for our
lives today is "good and acceptable and perfect" (see note
Romans 12:2).—David
C. McCasland (Our
Daily Bread, Copyright RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, MI. Reprinted by
permission. All rights reserved)
Why do we live like paupers,
When riches we possess?
We have become joint heirs with Christ
With blessings measureless. —Sper
The Christian's inheritance is guaranteed forever!
><> ><> ><>
Today in the Word - D. L.
Moody was determined that a lack of finances should not deter any
student who wanted to come to his new Bible school in Chicago. So Mr.
Moody instituted the policy of not charging student tuition--a
tradition that continues to this day at Moody Bible Institute! Mr.
Moody told the young man who would later become the school's first
graduate:
"You come to my school in Chicago,
and God will provide the funds."
The writer who gave us the book of
Hebrews would have concurred with Dwight Moody's faith. In fact, this
anonymous author argued something very similar in relation to Christ's
finished work:
"You come to Christ, and He will
provide the necessary payment for your sins."
This is the "will" or covenant that
Jesus has mediated for us. Its wonderful provisions are in force
because the One who drew up the will died to put it into effect.
Although a covenant and a will are not exactly the same, the "outcome"
is the same. Christ's death provided "the promised eternal
inheritance" (Hebrews 9:15) to all of those who are called by His name
and who are His heirs. This inheritance is salvation in all of its
fullness--past, present, and future.
Once again, Moses and the ""first covenant"" he received from God are
set in contrast to what we have in Christ. We have been told that the
Law's endless sacrifices could never deal with sin once and for all.
Here we are reminded of the reason for that inability. The blood
offered under the old system was the "blood of calves" (Hebrews 9:19)
and other animals that could never take away sin once and for all, but
cover it only temporarily.
It was necessary that another blood sacrifice be made, since God
requires that blood be the means of atoning for sin and providing the
forgiveness that sinful people need so desperately (Hebrews 9:22).
Jesus' death fulfilled these requirements perfectly and permanently.
His death put His ""will"" in force, so that those who are trusting in
Him can receive everything promised both in this life and in the age
to come when Jesus appears a second time.
TODAY ALONG THE WAY - It's hard to imagine a greater blessing than
knowing that we can look forward to Christ's return, not with ""a
fearful expectation of judgment"" (Heb. 10:27) but as heirs receiving
an inheritance!
If you want a really solid reason to thank the Lord, you won't find a
better one than this. Think of it: Jesus kept our appointment with
judgment (Hebrews 9:27) when He died on the Cross for our sins. That's
good news worth praising God for today--and it's worth sharing with
someone else. (Copyright
Moody Bible Institute. Used by permission. All rights reserved) |
|
|
Hebrews 9:16 For
where a
covenant
(will, testament)
is,
there must of
necessity be
the
death of the
one who
made it.
(NASB:
Lockman) |
|
Greek:
opou
gar
diatheke,
thanaton
anagke
pheresthai
tou
diathemenou;
Amplified: For where there is a [last] will and testament
involved, the death of the one who made it must be established
(Amplified
Bible - Lockman)
Barclay: but this could happen only after a death had taken place,
the purpose of which was to rescue them from the consequences of the
transgressions which had been committed under the conditions of the
old covenant. (Westminster
Press)
CEV: In fact, making an agreement of this kind is like writing
a will. This is because the one who makes the will must die before it
is of any use.
ESV: For where a will is involved, the death of the one who
made it must be established.
GWT: In order for a will to take effect, it must be shown
that the one who made it has died.
KJV: For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be
the death of the testator.
NET: For where there is a will, the death of the one who
made it must be proven.
NIV: In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death
of the one who made it
NLT: Now when someone dies and leaves a will, no one gets
anything until it is proved that the person who wrote the will is
dead. (NLT
- Tyndale House)
Phillips: For, as in the case of a will, the agreement is
only valid after death. (Phillips:
Touchstone)
Weymouth: For where there is a legal 'will,' there must also be
a death brought forward in evidence—the death of him who made it.
Wuest: For where a testament is, a death must of
necessity be brought in, the death of the testator, (Erdmans)
Young's Literal: for where a covenant is, the death of the
covenant-victim to come in is necessary, |
|
|
FOR WHERE A COVENANT IS
THERE MUST OF NECESSITY BE THE DEATH OF THE ONE WHO MADE IT: hopou gar diatheke thanaton anagke pheresthai (PPN)
tou diathemenou (AMPMSG):
Covenant
(1242) (diatheke from dia =
two + tithemi = to place pictures that which is placed between two
-- a covenant is something placed between two, an arrangement between two
parties) was a commonly used in the Greco-Roman world to define a legal
transaction in settling an inheritance and thus would equate with our modern
day concept of a will or testament (as in someone's "last will and
testament"). Diatheke generally denoted a transaction that was
irrevocable could not be cancelled by anyone. As discussed more fully
below, a will does not come into effect until the one who made the will
dies. It is not until the testator's death that the benefits and provisions
of the will become reality. Prior to the testator's death, the stipulations
in the will are only promises.
John MacArthur
writes...
Being very much aware of that
theological blind spot, the writer of Hebrews proceeds to give three reasons
it was necessary for the Messiah to die: a testament demands death,
forgiveness demands blood, and judgment demands a substitute.
(MacArthur,
John: Hebrews. Moody Press
or
Logos)
Necessity
(318)(anagke
from ana = up, again, back,
renewal, repetition, intensity, reversal + agkale = arm when bent)
refers to any necessity or compulsion, outer or inner, brought on by a
variety of circumstances. It can mean necessity imposed either by external
conditions or by the law of duty.
Death (2288)
(thanatos) is
literally a physical separation of the soul from the body. Every form
of death in the NT is treated not as a natural process but always as a
destroying power related to sin and its consequences. This is even
true in the case of the sinless God Man...
He (God the Father) made Him (Jesus
the Son) Who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become
the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Cor 5:21)
Spurgeon writes...
By His own death, Christ broke
that evil power which brought death into the world with its long trail
of woe. He did this, not by His example, not even by His life, but by
His death. Therefore let those who speak slightingly of His atoning
sacrifice see their folly, for it is through death that Christ
destroys “him that had the power of death, that is, the devil“ (see
note
Hebrews 2:14)
Must of necessity
be the death - The writer emphasizes the objective necessity of the Lord's death for
undoubtedly
some in his readers have a doubt or question about why the
Messiah had to die.
Although not all covenants require death on the part of the one making the
covenant before the covenant comes into force, the particular type of
covenant involved in a will does, and this is the type of covenant in view
here.
As we have alluded to
earlier, it is clear that Christ's sinless life qualified Him to be the
perfect, fully satisfactory sacrifice for sin, but it was His death that made the payment for sin. The first covenant made by God with man (at least first actually called
covenant) was the unconditional covenant made with Noah after the flood
(Ge 9:9,11,12,13, 15,16,17) following the sacrifice of clean animals when
they came out of the ark (Ge 8:20,21,9:9).
Similarly, His unconditional covenant with Abraham was associated with a
sacrifice of five animals (Ge 15:9,10,17,18). When God gave the law to Israel on Mount Sinai, He made a
conditional covenant (dependent on obedience) with them
(Ex 19:5,6) and this was accompanied by burnt
offerings and peace offerings and the sprinkling of "the blood of the
covenant" (Ex 24:5-8).
However, all of these offerings of animals were only temporal and served to
prefigure about the eternal offering of the blood of Christ and the new covenant.
Note that in each the aforementioned covenants made by God with man, death was associated with bringing them into
operation. In that sense both the Mosaic covenant and New Covenant were "testaments" or wills.
For this reason, the translators (NASB retains the word "covenant", but
almost every other version uses will or testament -
see technical note by Vincent) appropriately used this word
will or testament under these circumstances. The purpose of
the writer in using the illustration of a
will that is not effective until the death of the testator is
to teach the readers that the death of Christ is a necessity in order that
the New Covenant (the
new "will") might become effective and efficacious.
John MacArthur
adds that...
Building on verse 15, he is saying that
God gave a legacy, an eternal inheritance, to Israel in the form of a
covenant, a will. As with any will, it was only a type of promissory note
until the provider of the will died. At this point, no mention is made of
who the testator is or of how Christ fills that role in life and death.
(MacArthur,
John: Hebrews. Moody Press
or
Logos)
Steven Cole as
a helpful sermon on Hebrews 9:15-22 entitled...
Forgiveness
Through Christ’s Blood
Since the time of Christ, people have
stumbled over the doctrine that Christ had to shed His blood to atone for
our sins. When Jesus announced to the twelve that He had to go to Jerusalem
where He would suffer and die, the apostle Peter rebuked Him, saying, “God
forbid it, Lord! This should never happen to You!” (Matt. 16:21-22). The
apostle Paul wrote, “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who
are perishing….” He went on to say, “but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews
a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the
called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God”
(1 Cor 1:18, 23-24).
Liberal theologians hate the idea of Christ’s blood paying for our sins.
They have called such views “slaughterhouse religion.” They ridicule
Christians who believe in a God who would be petty enough to be angry over
our sins, and pagan enough to be appeased by blood. The playwright, George
Bernard Shaw, bitterly attacked the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, saying,
“It is saturated with the ancient-and to me quite infernal-superstition of
atonement by blood sacrifice, which I believe Christianity must completely
get rid of, if it is to survive among thoughtful people” (cited in “Our
Daily Bread,” 8/79).
But from the start of human history, God has made it plain that forgiveness
of sins is only possible through the shed blood of an acceptable substitute.
When Adam and Eve sinned, they became aware of their own nakedness and sewed
fig leaves together to try to cover their guilt and shame. But God did not
accept their approach. Instead, He clothed the guilty couple with the skin
of a slaughtered animal (Gen. 3:21). In so doing, God demonstrated in a
graphic way the horrific penalty of sin, but also His great mercy in
providin | | |