And they have been many priests, on account of being hindered from continuing by death;
Hebrews is comparing two priesthoods. Here it names the plain fact that settled the matter: the priests of Israel kept dying. Why should that disqualify a whole system, and what does it tell us about the Priest who replaced it?
The verse does not accuse the old priests of failure. It names a limit no one could get past. One writer points out that this limit is what built succession into the system.
Another proof that our Lord Jesus is greater than the Levitical priesthood is His lasting triumph over death. Neither Aaron nor his successor escaped death any more than other men did. They all died, and that is why their priesthood had to pass from one man to the next just to exist at all.
The word "many" is not vague. History puts a number on it, and that number shows how short each man's turn was.
Historians tell us that eighty-four men served as high priest. Simple arithmetic gives eighteen years as their average time in office. They "were prevented by death from continuing in office." But the new Priest continues for ever, so He has an unchanging priesthood.
Part of a priest's value lay in what he knew about the people who came to him. Death did not just empty a post. It erased that shared history and handed the work to a man who had not lived it.
A priest could sympathise with the people he served and help them, as far as he was able. But death cut him off, and another priest took his place. That new priest was a stranger to the sorrows of those who had drawn near to the man before him. With Christ it is completely different. He has triumphed over death, so He continues for ever in an unchangeable priesthood.
Succession also carried a risk. Nothing guaranteed that the next man would be like the one who died. One writer points to the sons of Eli, priests who used the office to take more than their share.
There might be a merciful and faithful priest, but he would still die. The next man might be one who made people despise the offering of the Lord, as Eli's sons did. They used their office to squeeze out their dues, and more than their dues, but they did not help the worshipper. This always goes with an office tied to a line of men appointed by a fleshly command.
The Old Testament shows this handover once in public view. Aaron died on a mountain. His garments came off him and went onto his son — a picture of an office that must be handed on.
The priesthood of Aaron belonged to earth, so it could be passed on, because the priests "were prevented by death from continuing in office." This was the first time the priesthood had to be handed on. God arranged it in a very public way, so no one could challenge Eleazar's new position. But the picture is nothing next to the One it pictures. The priesthood of the Lord Jesus is heavenly. As the next verse in Hebrews tells us, it is "unchangeable," or untransferable.
Verse 24 turns on one Greek word, which older translations render "unchangeable." Commentators read it in two ways, and both bear on succession.
Theodoret and other early Greek writers take it to mean "unsuccessional," which makes excellent sense. But usage points more to "unchangeable" — a priesthood that cannot be handed on or transferred.
Death ended that order. No death can end Christ's. So rebuilding a line of earthly priests puts back what God removed. One writer is blunt about what that means.
For Christian people, a human priesthood on earth is a falling away from the truth of the Son. He has been perfected for ever, and He serves on high by the power of a life that cannot be dissolved. Such a priesthood brings back the dead Aaronic order, cancelled because it was weak and useless. In effect it denies the gospel of salvation itself. That gospel announces to all who believe that the blood of Jesus blots out their sins at once, and brings them near to God in a nearness that never breaks — far beyond anything Aaron and his sons ever knew.
- Continue — one word carries the argument. The old priests could not, so the office kept changing hands.
- Many — eighty-four men held it, about eighteen years each. The number measures weakness, not strength.
- Stranger — every death handed your case to a priest who knew nothing of your sorrows, and might turn out to be like one of Eli's sons.
- Stripped — Aaron's garments passed to Eleazar's shoulders. Christ's priesthood cannot be handed on, so no other shoulders are waiting.
- Finished — death cancelled that order. Setting up earthly priests again reverses what God has done.
but he, because of his continuing for ever, has the priesthood unchangeable.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
Whence also he is able to save completely those who approach by him to God, always living to intercede for them.
Hebrews 7:25 draws a conclusion from the verses just before it. A Priest who never dies can save without limit, and the salvation lasts as long as His life.
The verse opens by pointing back to the old priests, whom death kept removing one by one. Against them stands One whose office never changes:
Aaron and his descendants held their office one after another and died. The Lord Jesus remains forever. So His priesthood is unchangeable — it never passes to another. Verse 25 states the happy result that flows from this. Those who make use of His priestly services, coming to God by Him, are saved "to the uttermost," or "completely." This is because He always lives to make intercession for them. The salvation spoken of here is that daily, moment-by-moment salvation from every power set against us, which every believer needs all the way home to glory.
His endless life sets the measure of the salvation:
The power by which He lives forever is the guarantee of a matching salvation (verse 25). For if the priests, the sons of Aaron, could not save themselves from death, still less could they save others.
Many hear the phrase as depth — that no sinner is too far gone. One writer marks off a different sense:
"He is able" — His power is complete. So He saves those who come to God by Him "to the uttermost," completely, to the last step of the wilderness trial. "To the uttermost" does not mean the depths in which the worst of sinners may be — precious as that fact is. It means completely, to the end, no matter what the future may hold for us.
Commentators differ on how much this salvation covers. One takes it as wide as it will go:
This is salvation in its fullest and widest sense. It is not only the first salvation of the soul, nor only present salvation from the evils and traps that line the Christian path. It is both of these, as well as future salvation out of this world and into eternal glory. That is a blessed fullness, and it rests entirely on Him who "ever lives to make intercession." Does that mean we depend on Him forever? Yes — and we should not want it otherwise, for we depend on One who is eternally dependable.
The verse names a group: those who draw near to God through Him. Older translations read "come to God by Him," and one writer argues from that word that these are people already brought near, not people still outside:
Who does He make intercession for? Not for the unconverted, but for those who "come to God by Him." And who are they? Saints of God, perfected forever by the "one offering." The expression "come to God" has given many the idea that it means a sinner coming to God for salvation. But that is not the thought in this passage. The word "come" is the same as "draw near" in Hebrews 10:22, which speaks of saved ones. A sinner could not "draw near" in his sins to a holy God.
Notice the direction of travel in the verse. The Priest is not the destination:
We do not come to Him (the Priest); He goes to God for us, and we go to God by Him. As Lord, we came to Him; but as Priest, not. He intercedes, and brings us back when we have failed. He is watching always — thinking of us when we are not thinking of Him.
Since He always lives, the intercession never stops. What is it about?
His intercession as our High Priest is not about our sins, but about our need. So we are told: "Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need." (Hebrews 4:16)
That help covers the whole road:
He carries us through all the snares, difficulties and dangers of the way, and through Satan's power. He restores our souls if we have failed. He gives grace to help in time of need, as well as restoration. All this is because He ever lives to make intercession for us, and is on high, always the same, to carry on our cause.
- Because He lives — death kept removing the old priests. He remains, so His office never passes on, and the salvation He gives lasts as long as His life.
- Therefore complete — "to the uttermost" means completely, to the end. It covers the last step of the journey, not just the depth a sinner is lifted from.
- For those who draw near — the ones in view come to God through Him; He is not the stopping place but the way in.
- About need, not sins — His intercession deals with weakness, danger and failure along the road. The "one offering" already dealt with sins.
- So none is lost — the unbroken priesthood guarantees that every believer arrives. We stay dependent, yes, but on One who is eternally dependable.
For such a high priest became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and become higher than the heavens
Hebrews here describes the high priest we needed. The surprise is that the description says as much about our calling as about His character. The verse says five things about Him. Four tell us who He is; the fifth tells us where He is now.
The ESV says such a high priest was "fitting" for us. Older translations read, "such a high priest became us." Both mean He suits us. One writer sets this beside an earlier line in the letter about what suits God.
The Apostle closes this portion of the letter by showing us that "such a high priest" becomes us. In Hebrews 2:10 we learn that such a high priest becomes God; here we learn that He "becomes us." Because of who God is in all His holiness, none less than Christ as great High Priest would be suitable for God. Because of what we are in all our weakness, none less than Christ would be enough for us.
The four descriptions are not loose synonyms for goodness. Each carries its own weight in the original language.
The word "holy" deserves a closer look. In Greek, as in Hebrew, two words are used. One (hagios) implies being set apart for God, away from evil. The other (hosios) means graciousness: said of God it means His mercy, said of man it means his piety. It is the second word that is translated "holy" here — a holiness full of loving-kindness. Next, akakos is badly translated "harmless." In Christ it rises to a total absence of evil found in no one else. "Undefiled" declares Him untainted by the corruptions that surrounded Him when He was here below. There His moral beauty shone on all who had eyes to see, and above all in His Father's eyes, who bore witness from heaven.
"Separated from sinners" does not mean He kept away from people. He was their friend. The separation was in heart and life, and God set His seal on it.
We are invited here to dwell on that wonderful Person. He is "holy" — as unstained as the white linen garment of the priest pictured Him. He is "harmless," or guileless: not a breath of deceit, as perfect outside as within. He is "undefiled" by contact with all that surged around Him. Though He was the Friend of sinners, in heart and life He was completely "separate" from them. And God's seal on this perfection is that He has been glorified on high.
The place our Priest now holds tells us where we have been called.
So "such a high priest became us." Glorious thought! We are called to be in the presence of God, to be in relationship with Him in the heavenly glory, to draw near to Him on high, where nothing that defiles can enter. So we needed a High Priest in the very place we have been given access to. We needed such a One as the glory and purity of heaven required. What a demonstration that we belong to heaven, and how exalted our relationship with God is!
His exaltation also serves us. It puts everything at His disposal for those He blesses.
But fifthly, He must be "made higher than the heavens." A priesthood at the earthly level would not do. He must hold a position higher than all others, with everything under His authority. Then He can use all things for the good of those He is appointed to bless.
Where our Priest helps us from matters as much as the help itself.
In the glorious place which our Priest occupies, He is completely separate from sin. He took this place after accomplishing a perfect redemption on earth. He abolished sin and overcame Satan and death. From the heights of His glory He helps His distressed saints on the earth, but He Himself is never in distress.
- Fitted. He suits us. What God's holiness required and what our weakness required met in one Person.
- Character. "Holy" here carries the sense of gracious piety. "Harmless" means a total absence of evil. "Undefiled" means untouched by the corruption He walked through.
- Separate. He was the Friend of sinners, yet never stained by them. His glory on high is God's seal on that perfection.
- Higher. A priest at the earthly level would not do. His place above shows where we now draw near. It also puts all things under His authority for our good.
- Untroubled. His redemption is already complete. So He helps distressed believers from a place where He Himself is never distressed.
who has not day by day need, as the high priests, first to offer up sacrifices for his own sins, then [for] those of the people; for this he did once for all [in] having offered up himself.
Israel's high priests had to offer for their own sins first, and they had to keep offering, day after day. This verse breaks that pattern: it names a Priest with no sins of His own, and one offering that never needs repeating.
Under the law, a sacrifice lost its value when the day ended. So the priest returned to the altar the next morning.
Under the law, there was a daily need for sacrifice, and a daily offering of the same sacrifices. The priest of Israel offered up the daily sacrifice, and its blood was good only for that one day. It neither covered past sins nor future sins. Fresh sins called for fresh blood. The blood shed had no lasting value. The sins of each day needed the sacrifice of that day. But the person who came to God never had a settled conscience. He was always remembering sins, and always coming to God to have them put away.
So repetition was not a strength. It was proof that the need remained.
A priest who must sacrifice daily could never meet the need of our souls. The daily repetition only shows that the need remains.
The old priests offered "first for his own sins." One small word, "for," marks the whole distance between them and Christ.
They offered up daily sacrifices, not only for the sins of the people but for their own sins as well. He offered one sacrifice, and He offered it once for all. It was for the people truly, but it was not for Himself. It was "HIMSELF," instead of being for Himself. He was the Sacrifice as well as the Offerer!
The old sacrifices involved three parties: the person who brought the animal, the animal itself, and the priest who handled the blood. The cross gathers all three into one.
Here we read of the offerer, the offering, and the priest, all three separate. The offerer, for whom the sacrifice was brought, killed the animal himself. But the true sacrifice offered up Himself. In reality the offerer, the offering, and the priest are one and the same person seen in three different characters. Christ offered Himself, being the Lamb of God, and the high priest, who has entered into heaven by His own blood. So everything the sacrifice required, He has done, and done once for all. That leaves man the only part he can take in it: to identify with the sacrifice. He owns it as the offering made on his behalf, and so shares in the rich results that flow from it.
The word "daily" raises a real question.
Much question has arisen about what this refers to, when the writer mentions the high priests offering up sacrifice for sins daily. At the time of the letter, the high priest did not usually serve in that way each day. One of the other priests served at the altar morning and evening… And since the daily burnt offering was not a sin offering, the reference cannot be to that.
One suggestion is that the writer looks back to the week that set each new high priest in office.
We believe he had in mind the week of consecration that the law of Moses required of a high priest. In God's order, he could not take up the duties of that high and holy office until that week was complete… Each day a sin offering was offered up for him and for his sons… Sacrifice came before their full consecration. Sacrifice preceded His.
The word "once" does more than block repetition. It also shuts out any ongoing offering.
The passage speaks of the actual offering, as a sacrifice to God. He did this once for all. In contrast to the Jewish sacrifices, the apostle insists on this: one single act of sacrifice did the work effectively and finally. It was done once and completely, once and for all. That rules out a continual offering, a later offering, and a repeated offering.
One act covers everything because of the worth of the One who made it.
His sacrifice is fully complete: "He did this once for all when He offered up Himself." The eternity of His Person gives eternal value to His blessed work. In this the believer has rest… The law appointed high priests who had weakness of their own. A system in the hands of failing creatures must be a failing system. But "the Son" stands in beautiful contrast: raised from the dead, having made propitiation, He is perfected forever.
- Daily — repeating a sacrifice proves the need was never met. Blood that covered one day left the conscience unsettled.
- First for himself — every earlier high priest had to deal with his own sins before he could serve. This Priest had nothing of His own to answer for.
- Himself — He did not offer for Himself; He offered Himself. He is offerer, offering and priest in one Person.
- Once for all — one act, complete. It rules out repeating the offering and continuing it.
- Forever — the eternal worth of His Person gives eternal worth to His work, and in that the believer rests.
For the law constitutes men high priests, having infirmity; but the word of the swearing of the oath which [is] after the law, a Son perfected for ever.
This closing verse pulls the whole chapter into one sentence. On one side stand priests the law appointed. On the other stands a Son, appointed by God's oath. What is wrong with the first arrangement, and what does the word "perfected" mean when applied to the Son?
The law could only appoint priests who were weak like the people they served. One writer shows what that does to the whole system:
Here is more evidence of the weakness of the law: it appointed men who have weakness as high priests. A system in the hands of failing creatures must be a failing system. But "the Son" again stands in beautiful contrast. Having accomplished propitiation, He is perfected forever in resurrection. In His life on earth He proved Himself free from weakness. Now in resurrection He is above death — perfect in every way as High Priest forever.
The verse dates the oath: it came after the law. That order matters, because the later word settles what the earlier one left open:
God made His promise to Christ in Psalm 110 in the days of David. Even then God was showing that the law of Moses was giving way to a new system, with a new Priest. There was no divine oath when Aaron was consecrated, which left room for that priesthood to be set aside. The new system cannot be set aside, for God made David's Lord "a priest for ever," with an oath. When God swears, what He says can never be set aside.
The Greek here has no article. It reads not "the Son" but "a Son." One writer says this is deliberate: the wording points to a relationship, not to a particular person:
"Son" here describes what He is, and so it has no article. He is the Only-begotten, God's one and only Son, but here He is not pointed out as a particular person, so the wording is exactly right. Adding the article would put Himself in front, instead of His nearness to God. The verb form here, as in verse 26, is a perfect passive. It points to a permanent character He has gained, not to a bare fact, which the simple past tense would express. The same is true of His separation from sinners and of His completing all that His priestly place required: each is a finished act with a lasting result.
The word here is also translated "consecrated." Does it mean the Son was somehow incomplete before? One writer keeps the contrast where the verse puts it:
The contrast is between a Son completed and the human high priest who had shortcomings or weakness. The Son being made perfect ruled out any weakness and any need to offer a sacrifice for Himself. But the words do not suggest a contrast between the Son's completed state and His condition before the Cross.
Another writer traces the word back to the ceremony that installed a high priest under the law:
Verse 28 brings in the technical term for consecration, that is, "perfected." So it seems fitting to suppose that this points to the way high priests were consecrated under the law, set against the way the Lord entered His priesthood. Sacrifice preceded their full consecration. Sacrifice preceded His.
If our High Priest has no weakness, can He still feel with ours? The verse itself supplies the answer by placing weakness on the other side of the contrast:
You do not have to be in weakness to sympathize with those who are. What is needed is to be out of it, with a nature able to feel in itself the suffering it brings. The mother sympathizes with the baby in the pain she does not feel. Christ is contrasted in His priestly sympathies with men who have weakness. The high priest taken from among men had compassion because he himself was surrounded by weakness. That was merely man's way of sympathy, for he had to offer for his own sins.
His priesthood never ends. One writer applies that to the standing of Christians as priests:
The Christian priesthood is not a dead thing, nor a merely ritual one. It works by the power of a life that comes from Him — "the Son, who is consecrated for evermore." It all hangs on Him, and the eternal character of His priesthood guarantees that everything He supports stands firm for all eternity.
- Weakness — the law could only appoint men who shared the failings of those they served; a system in failing hands fails.
- Oath — God swore no oath over Aaron, so that priesthood could be removed. The oath of Psalm 110 came later, and it cannot be revoked.
- Son — the wording stresses a relationship, not a title: His nearness to God.
- Perfected — the word marks a lasting result. Sacrifice came first, then the priestly place. Nothing in Him needed repair.
- Forever — because the Priest never ends, everything He upholds stands as long as He does.