Chapter 7: is dealing with the failure of Israel's priesthood, the law concerning

priesthood "perfected nothing". Only in the virtue of a "better hope" can any draw nigh

unto God. Chapter 9: 26-28 is dealing with the failure of Israel's sacrifices, the law

concerning sacrifices was a shadow and could not "perfect" those who drew nigh. Only

in the virtue of a "better sacrifice" can any draw nigh to God. The parallel is complete.

Moreover both sections deal with the removal and failure of the old covenant:--

It may be objected that where we have inserted "sin-offering" the A.V. says "sin", but

it is recognized by all students of Scripture that the word "sin" often stands for the

"offering of sin", and consequently may be so understood here. Heb. 9: 26 is not

dealing with the forgiveness or the putting away of sin, it deals with the abrogation of the

sin-offering, a fact absolutely necessary if Israel were to believe on the Son of God, and

leave the shadows of the old covenant. "He appeared to set aside the sin-offering by the

sacrifice of Himself." The reader has only to read Heb. 10: 4-9 to find abundant

confirmation of this interpretation.

The idea that has been read into this verse that the offering of Christ was "for the

repudiation of sin at the conclusion of the eons" does violence to the order of the words

in the original and fails to give the true meaning of athetesis. There is not one single

instance in either the N.T. or the LXX where the word is used in connection with "putting

away sin", whereas the consistent usage compels us to see that here, in Heb. 9: as in

Heb. 7:, the disannulling of a weak and profitless symbol is entirely in harmony with

the context and aim of the epistle. Verses 27 and 28 must be read together, as they are

two members of one simile indicated by the words "as" and "so". Some intended

likeness must be discovered, for if a contrast were intended we should get the expression

used in Rom. 5: 15.

Now what is the intention of the writer when he says, "and as it is appointed unto men

once to die, but after this the judgment"? The majority of commentators take it to refer to

mankind in general, and that the offering of Christ "once" is set over against the dying

"once" of verse 27. While this contains truth, we are not persuaded that it is the true

meaning of the passage. For one thing there is hardly a deviation from the one great

theme discernible in the whole of chapters 7:, 8: and 9: Every effort and argument

is brought to bear upon the one absorbing theme, the superiority of the priesthood and

offering of Christ, and the typical teaching of the types and shadows of the law.

"It is appointed to the men once to die." The priests of the order of Aaron are

definitely called "dying men" (Heb. 7: 8), and "men having weakness" (Heb. 7: 28).

So that, to say the least, we may admit the probability that in the context that speaks of