Let us come back now to the point that the throne at which Christ works as our High Priest is called "the throne of grace" Christ is presented in Hebrews as our great high priest. His credentials are rock solid. The Hebrew writer discusses these credentials around a Messianic prophecy sworn as an oath by God, "You are a priest forever according to
4. Jesus a Priest Like Melchizedek. Melchizedek was a priest of God whose royal priesthood was superior to the Levitical priesthood of the law of Moses. In the same way, Christ is superior in his heavenly priesthood. The arguments in favour of this proposition
There are other lessons on this subject which you may care
The following are the main points that a study of Christ’s superior High Priesthood will discover. I am just listing these for brief attention before we consider three major aspects of the Hebrew writer’s argument for the superior
The main point of the Hebrew writer’s argument is that Christ is not a priest on earth, because after he made his sacrifice he ascended to the true tabernacle, heaven itself, and sat down at the
The tabernacle (the portable temple) was not the true tabernacle. When it was replaced by the great temple erected in Jerusalem, that was still not the true temple. The earthly structures only symbolized or represented the real and heavenly holy place
Christ our High Priest has ascended to heaven, and is now enthroned at the Father’s right hand in heaven. He now officiates in the true tabernacle of heaven
Because there was an earthly priesthood ordained for the earthly tabernacle, and Christ was excluded from that priesthood, it follows that "he would not be a priest if he were on earth"
Christ has no earthly throne, for no earthly throne can be the true throne of God. The
The Hebrew writer points out that Christ officiates at "the throne of grace" which is God’s throne. He has a royal priesthood, that is to say he is a
Christ’s royal priesthood was reflected dimly in the priesthood of the law of Moses by Zechariah’s
Christ’s royal priesthood is much more strongly reflected in the priesthood of Melchizedek king of Salem who was not only a king but also a
Plainly, a priest crowned and on a throne is superior to a priest without a crown and throne. Therefore when God swore an oath, "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek", he was plainly stating the superiority of the priesthood of Christ who is "crowned with glory and honor"
Let us come back now to the point that the throne at which Christ works as our High Priest is called "the throne of grace"
An illustration. Suppose you receive a complimentary packet of seeds from your local store. The packet may have a beautiful picture of flowers or vegetables on it. Was the store’s gift to you the picture on the packet? Or did the store expect you to admire the seeds inside guaranteed to grow? No, you plant the seed and you put the pretty packet on a stick where the seed is planted. Eventually the real flowers or vegetables grow. By that time the seed is no more, and the pretty packet is faded by sun and rain. But you don't mourn the loss of the seed and the packet, rather you rejoice in the real gift of which the picture and the seeds
We might view the priesthood of the law of Moses as the picture, and the priesthood of Melchizedek as the seeds, and the priesthood of Christ as the real thing. That’s where God’s grace is truly found, and that makes Christ’s priesthood superior just like real flowers and vegetables are superior to
Now we turn to a second aspect of Christ’s priesthood which shows it to be superior. The Hebrew writer makes a strong argument regarding Christ’s obedience. This relates firstly to the nature of his appointment as high priest, secondly to his suffering as a sacrifice for sins, and thirdly to
Christ became our great high priest by obedience to God’s command. Jesus "did not glorify himself so as to become a high priest". Rather, he obeyed and submitted to the word of the oath, "You are a priest forever according to the
The Hebrew writer admits that the only way anyone can become a priest of God is to be called to that priesthood by God, just as Aaron was. Anticipating the question, "Well when did God call Jesus to the priesthood?" the Hebrew writer says, "He was designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek" referring to the unchangeable oath in
Whilst the priests of old had a calling from God, it was "without an oath"
When Christ became our great high priest, he was being obedient to a call from God greater than any other call from God to any other person ever. So his call and appointment to the priesthood
The Hebrew writer highlights the obedience of Christ by pointing out that "he learned obedience by the things he suffered"
This refers, of course, to Christ’s sacrifice of himself suffering death on the cross. The Hebrew writer only touches upon this here in
Here in chapter five the Hebrew writer makes reference to the Sonship of Christ. You will note that he prefaces the statement "he learned obedience by the things he suffered" with the qualifying phrase, "although he was a Son..."
A symbolic link between Melchizedek and Christ the Son of God is made in
The Hebrew writer has previously referred to Christ’s obedience as a Son
Now finally, we turn to a third aspect of Christ’s priesthood which shows it to be superior. In the first ten verses of
Abraham was the ancestor (through Isaac, Jacob, and Levi) of Moses the law giver and his brother Aaron the first high priest under that law. Abraham is therefore representative of that
Melchizedek is the one whom God likens to Christ, and he is representative of the new law and the new priesthood. The Hebrew writer shows Melchizedek to be superior to Abraham by drawing upon two things that happened
Since Melchizedek is greater than Abraham, a priesthood "after the order of Melchizedek" must be superior to that of Aaron’s, musn't it? So we should not be surprised at the points of superiority
However remember that Melchizedek was not only a priest but also a king. A king is ruler, and his edicts are law. So it follows that a law "after the order of Melchizedek" would be superior to the law of Moses,
There can be no priesthood without a law to ratify it. Thus the priesthood of Aaron depended on the law of Moses his brother. The Hebrew writer points out that "a change of priesthood necessitates a change of law also"
A new law was necessary so that Christ could be our great high priest. The Hebrew writer acknowledges that "Our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood," and from this tribe "no man has officiated at the altar"
This is an argument from silence. If the old law of Moses was silent about anyone from the tribe of Judah being a priest, then it did not authorise or permit Christ to be a priest. He was of the tribe of Judah. If Christ were to officiate as high priest while the law of Moses was in force, then he would offend against that law because he would officiate without authority.
The Hebrew writer makes the point, therefore, that "a change of priesthood necessitates a change of law also." So there should be no surprise that the
It is, after all, plainly implied in the text "the Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek'". God must, in saying that to Christ, have had in mind the removal of the law or covenant that does not permit Christ to be a priest. Just as plainly, he must have had in mind a new and better law that would permit, and appoint, Christ to be a better