but into the second, the high priest only, once a year, not without blood, which he offers for himself and for the errors of the people
The writer has just described the two rooms of the tabernacle, and now he draws attention to who could enter the inner one. Everything about the arrangement was designed to say something — and the message was not welcome news.
One writer notes that the limits themselves carried the message.
Nothing showed more forcefully that the way into the holiest was not yet made known than facts like these. None but priests could enter the holy place. Those very priests, serving there day after day, could never pass on into the holiest. And the high priest himself must not enter the holiest "at all times", but only "once a year". ... Its holy places were not open even to those who had services to do there. No one was free to go in and out. There was no way to the mercy seat that was open to all, or open at any time.
The phrase "not without taking blood" is the hinge of the verse. One writer counts how few could come near, and on what terms even they came.
In all the earth there was not one man fit to come into the presence of the holy God without the blood of a slain victim. No, not one; not even the high priest of Israel. Once a year the people of God stood as one nation out of all the nations of the earth. Out of that nation stood one man. Yet even that one man must not come into the presence of God without blood.
Another writer explains why the blood mattered so much:
And why not without blood? Because nothing else shelters sinful man from the wrath of God but the blood; for nothing else remits sin. It would have been death to Aaron to enter the holiest of all without blood.
One writer describes what that blood did once it reached God's throne.
He put it on the throne of God. The cherubim, the supporters of His throne, looked down to the mercy seat, so they could see it and gaze on it. And he left it there. This was enough for God. The moment He saw it, the throne held back. Otherwise its action would have gone out in righteous judgment... No one ever wiped off the blood of the sin offering placed on the mercy seat in this way. It stayed there all year, always before God.
The high priest brought blood "for himself" as well as for the people. That phrase separates Aaron from the priest this letter points to.
In Aaron's case he was "obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people." Here again we find contrast, not comparison... There is all the difference in the world between Aaron offering FOR himself and Christ offering HIMSELF.
The word translated "errors" or "ignorance" is not a soft word for sin in general. It marks a limit built into the whole sacrificial system.
Under the law the only sins that were provided for were those of ignorance. If a man sinned presumptuously, he was to die without mercy. The law gave no sacrifice for that. In Psalm 19 David says, "Keep back your servant from presumptuous sins" — that is, sins done knowingly. "Who can discern his errors?" There are sins of ignorance. "Declare me innocent from hidden faults" — that is, faults I know nothing about, and yet they are there all the same.
The day came round every year, and that repetition carried its own verdict.
The very nature of the sacrifices shut out the thought of one eternal redemption. Repeating them showed that sin was still there, or there would have been no need to repeat them. The one sacrifice for sins has now been made, and that shows the sins are entirely carried away.
The verse describes a door that was almost always shut. Set that against what believers have now.
What was forbidden to Aaron, apart from a little on one day in the year, is now granted always to every Christian... We are ever welcome there, and welcome in that way.
- Barred. One man, one room, one day a year. The limits themselves said that the way to God was still closed.
- Blood. No one was fit to enter without it; not the nation, not the priests, not even the high priest who carried it in.
- Throne. The high priest put the blood on the mercy seat and left it there. It held back the judgment that would otherwise have gone out.
- Himself. Aaron had to offer for his own sins first; Christ, needing nothing for Himself, offered Himself.
- Open. That one sacrifice never needs repeating. What Aaron was allowed for a moment once a year now belongs always to every believer.
the Holy Spirit shewing this, that the way of the [holy of] holies has not yet been made manifest while as yet the first tabernacle has [its] standing;
The tabernacle was not just furniture and ritual: it was a message, and this verse names the One who spoke through it. The closed inner curtain said "not yet" — and the question is whether anything has changed since.
The meaning of the sanctuary is not left to guesswork.
What then are we to learn from the tabernacle and its services? We are not left to work out our own interpretation. We are told outright that the Holy Spirit has signified their true meaning. First, the services of the tabernacle showed plainly that, under the law, the way into the presence of God was not yet opened.
Moses wrote the plans down. The verse looks behind him to the One using him.
Here we have the Spirit again spoken of as Author, though the human instrument is in this case well known. Moses gave exact directions for building the tabernacle and for the worship in it. He committed it all to writing, which we have to this day. But here we see Who made use of Moses — the Holy Spirit.
Three curtains stood between a man and God, and each said something different.
The first entrance-curtain, the wide Gate of the Court, seemed to say, "Come", to all. The second entrance-curtain, the Door of the Holy Place, seemed to say, "Come", to any priest who had washed his hands and feet at the basin. But the third entrance-curtain, the Veil of the Holiest of all, seemed to say, "Not yet". By that Veil, which shut them out, the Holy Spirit taught men that the way into the holy places was not yet opened.
The elaborate ritual pointed forward, but its immediate lesson was negative.
What did it all mean? No doubt it pointed forward to the blood of Christ as the only ground of approach to God. Yet in the whole arrangement the Holy Spirit was saying that under the old order there was no real approach to God at all. The way in was not yet opened… But as long as the first tabernacle had a standing before God, the rule was: no admittance.
Even the one man who could enter came in on terms that proved nothing was settled.
The high priest could not go into the holiest of all whenever he liked, as the priests could go into the holy place. And he did not enter as a worshipper purged once for all. He went in on the very ground that sin had not been put away for ever.
"The first tabernacle" means more than a tent.
Here "the first tabernacle" means Judaism as a system. It is identified with the first part of the tabernacle, and that part was open only to the priests of the nation. The second part — that is, the sanctuary — only showed, by everything connected with it, that there was no access to God.
Two rooms, kept apart, marked the old worship — and the letter speaks of them as still in use.
Having the two rooms, and keeping them, put the worshipper at a distance from God… As long as God recognised the two, the way into the Holiest was not opened… The present tense reminds us that the Temple service was still going on when the letter was written.
A shut door is evidence about the sacrifices offered at it.
Second, if the way into the Holiest was not yet open, that was clear proof that the sacrifices were not enough. They could not make the offerer perfect in conscience… Under such a system God was shut in and man was shut out. The Jewish system could neither open heaven to us nor fit us for heaven.
What the verse denies to the old order, the death of Christ supplies.
Hebrews 9 declares that Christ has come and His blood has been shed to make atonement. So blessing is now for faith, and it lasts for ever. What was forbidden to Aaron, except a little on one day in the year, is now granted always to every Christian. The way into the holy places has been opened, and it stays open.
Because the veil is torn, there is no longer an outer room to linger in.
The tearing of the veil is what makes both tabernacles one. So the first tabernacle has no standing — no existence as such. If we have come into the true tabernacle at all, we have come into the holiest… There is only one entrance, by the blood of Jesus.
- Speaker. The Holy Spirit spoke through Moses, and He tells us what the tabernacle meant.
- Message. The inner curtain preached one word — "Not yet" — while the outer two said "Come."
- System. "The first tabernacle" stands for Judaism as a system. While it stood before God, the rule was: no admittance.
- Proof. A closed way proved the sacrifices could not perfect the conscience. God was shut in; man was shut out.
- Reversal. The torn veil ends the "not yet". What Aaron was denied all year is now open always to every believer, through one entrance — the blood of Jesus.
the which [is] an image for the present time, according to which both gifts and sacrifices, unable to perfect as to conscience him that worshipped, are offered,
The verse pauses the description of the tabernacle to say what the whole arrangement meant. It was a picture for its own time, and its offerings had a fixed limit: they could not settle the worshipper's conscience. So why could animal sacrifices not reach that deep, and what makes a conscience perfect?
The tabernacle was a teaching picture. Its offerings dealt with outward things, and they came with an end date.
The provisions of the law were admirable as a witness to man's sinfulness and to a coming Redeemer. But they were only surface-level and temporary. They went no further than outward "meats and drinks and various washings." In keeping with that, they touched no deeper needs than "the errors of the people" (verse 7). They were called here "ordinances of flesh imposed until a time of setting right."
The arrangement pictured something, but the picture itself could satisfy no one — neither God nor the worshipper.
Thirdly, these things during their existence were a figure of things to come. The figures, however, could never satisfy God nor meet the need of man. Under such a system God was shut in and man was shut out. The Jewish system could neither open heaven to us nor fit us for heaven.
The problem lay in the value of what the worshipper brought. A conscience can never rise higher than the sacrifice it rests on.
The former could never give a perfect conscience, simply because they were imperfect in themselves. It was impossible that the blood of a bull or of a goat could ever give a perfect conscience. It might do for a day, a month, or a year, but no longer. So the conscience of a Jewish worshipper was never perfect. He could never say that his conscience was perfectly purged, because he had not yet reached a perfect sacrifice.
The yearly repetition proved the point in the worshipper's own experience.
Here is a poor Israelite. He brings his sacrifice, lays his hands on it and kills it. He sees the priest take the blood, sprinkle it on the altar, and burn the victim. He sees the smoke rise, and the priest says, Your trespass is forgiven. And yet on the day of atonement those trespasses, and all the others, were mentioned all over again. He had to conclude they were not really forgiven at all. In other words, his conscience was not perfect, he did not yet have perfect assurance of acceptance, or forgiveness.
"Perfect" is not about a flawless character. It describes a person fit to stand before God and stay there.
First, the sacrifices offered under the law could never put those who came to them in the place of constant worshippers. That is clearly what "perfect" means in this passage. They failed both because they were ineffective in themselves and because they had to be repeated... Now note, to be perfected as a worshipper is to have no more conscience of sins. Surely this exalts worship very highly, because worship is not at all the means of our justification, but that for which we are already justified.
This purged conscience is not the same as a good conscience.
The purged conscience is one that, being "once purged", has no more conscience of sins (Hebrews 10:2). It assumes a conscience that has been exercised about its sins. That exercise is then met: the believer learns that the precious blood of Christ cleanses him from all sins, and that he will never come under judgment. A good conscience is a conscience free of offence in practical ways and walk.
What the old offerings could not do, one finished work has done. Ease comes because nothing is left for us to do.
No conscience can be at ease before God where anything depends on what the person himself is doing or has to do. Yes, I would say, not even if it now had to depend on what Christ has to do, instead of resting on what He has already done... Christ does not have to enter in again, He has no more sacrifice for sin to offer — no other blood to carry in; for where could any be found of like preciousness? All is done once, and once for all.
The tabernacle was a picture. Copying it as a model for worship turns its lesson upside down.
Christendom, instead of seeing in the tabernacle a figure, has used it as a pattern for its religious services. In doing so, it has lost the "good things" the figures speak of. So the mass of people in Christendom have again set up magnificent buildings. They have again railed off one part of those buildings as more holy than the rest. And they have again set up a priestly class distinct from the ordinary people, who perform religious services on their behalf. So Christendom has adopted a system modelled on the Jewish camp. It keeps people at a distance from God and can never make the conscience perfect.
- Figure — The tabernacle was a picture with an end date. Its rules touched only outward things, and they lasted only until God set things right.
- Ceiling — A conscience can never rise above its sacrifice. Imperfect blood gives an imperfect conscience, and the yearly repeat proved the forgiveness was never final.
- Perfect — "Perfect" here means fit to stand as a constant worshipper, with no more conscience of sins. It is not the means of justification but the fruit of it.
- Once — There is no ease before God while anything still depends on what we, or even Christ, have yet to do. Rest lies in what is already finished.
- Warning — Treat this picture as a model — special buildings, holier zones, a priestly class — and you rebuild the very distance that could never perfect anyone.