References to the necessity of a sacrifice for sin are not limited to any one epistle.

Paul's epistles, both before Acts 28: and after, contain many such references, yet

never throughout the course of his ministry as God's appointed Preacher, Teacher and

apostle of the Gentiles, does he ever use the word "Priest" or "High Priest", either of the

believer or of his Lord! But, when he comes to write the epistle to the Hebrews, he

breaks entirely new ground, using the word "Priest" fourteen times, a number that we

have already noticed earlier in this series, "Great Priest" (megan), once (Heb. 10: 21); and

"High Priest" seventeen times, and so interwoven with the theme of Hebrews is this

thought of "Priesthood" that the teaching of chapters 5: and 7: to 10: demand continual

reference to "priests", while chapters 2: to 9: and 13: necessitate continual reference

to the "High Priest".

Words are counters, they are index fingers; their inclusion or exclusion from any

reasonable piece of writing indicates its general trend. Any treatise, letter or book

dealing with such matters as war, finance, religion or logic would of necessity include

certain specific terms and exclude others, and if the treatise, letter or book were of the

length of either Hebrews or Ephesians, the subject matter of the title could be deduced

from a collation of the distinctive words employed. If the theme of Hebrews necessitated

the constant use of the words "Priest" and "High Priest", that fact would go a long way to

indicate the character of its teaching. If to this it is added that Ephesians contains neither

of these words, that additional fact would go a long way to indicate that the essential

theme of Ephesians differed from Hebrews. Further, if it is observed that in the whole of

Paul's other writings (thirteen epistles) there is not one occurrence of the word "Priest" or

"High Priest", the evidence for the difference between his apostolic ministry as covered

by the thirteen epistles and this letter to the Hebrews is still further increased, and when

we remember that the same writer, Paul, is responsible for the use, or non-use, of these

words, and that the use, or non-use, is controlled not only by Paul's reasonableness, and

faithfulness, but by inspiration of God (II Tim. 3: 16; II Pet. 1: 21), then the evidence

for the difference in calling and sphere of Hebrews and Ephesians becomes

Before we can appreciate the use or non-use of the word "Priest" in these epistles, it

will be necessary to consider the testimony of Scripture concerning the office of the

Priest and its relation to Israel and the nations. The epistle to the Hebrews itself provides

evidence that long before Israel's time, the idea of priesthood was entertained by the

nations, for Melchisedec was a "King-Priest" at the time of Abraham (Gen. 14: 18-20).

There is much to be said concerning the Melchisedec priesthood (Heb. 5: 11), but the

present is not the time for it.  There were priests in Egypt in the days of Joseph

(Gen. 46: 20) and in Midian in the days of Moses (Exod. 2: 16), yet, out of the 725

occurrences where the word kohen is translated "priest", at least 700 refer to the

priesthood of Israel. If under the law of Moses the offering of sacrifice and the building

of an altar are the work of a priest, this was by no means the case before the introduction

of the "law of commandments and carnal ordinances" introduced after the breaking of the

tables of stone of the Covenant at Sinai.