Hebrews 7:11–28

Section Overview: A Priest Forever

Psalm 110:4 draws out the implications of the Genesis narrative about Melchizedek, who blessed the patriarch Abraham, interpreting that ancient king-priest as a pattern for a better order of priesthood than that of Levi’s descendants. The psalm’s mention of this Melchizedek-like priestly order implies that the Levitical order could not achieve “perfection”—complete cleansing from defilement, enabling worshipers to draw near to God (Heb. 7:11, 18–19).

Two features in Psalm 110:4 show that the Melchizedek-like priest is superior to Levi and his offspring: (1) The Melchizedek-like priest ministers “forever,” having been appointed not because of genealogical descent from Levi but “by the power of an indestructible life” (Heb. 7:11–19). This claim is established through a closely reasoned argument, in which the conjunction “for” (gar) links propositions in a chain, each statement supporting what precedes it (vv. 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19). (2) The appointment of the Melchizedek-like priest, unlike that of the Levitical priests, is secured by God’s unchangeable oath (7:20–22). Because the Melchizedek-like high priest lives forever, he prays perpetually for “those who draw near to God through him” (7:25). His flawless purity qualified him to offer himself as their once-for-all atoning sacrifice (7:23–28).

TABLE 1.2: Hebrews 7:16 in Greek Word Order: A Different Criterion of Priestly Selection

The “fleshly commandment” (“requirement concerning bodily descent”; ESV) authorizing Aaron’s sons to be priests had to do with physical genetics, but it was also “fleshly” in the sense of being weak and vulnerable to death (7:18, 23, 28). By contrast, the priestly credential of the Melchizedek-like priest announced in Psalm 110:4 is the power of a life utterly impervious to destruction. Our High Priest experienced both weakness and death “in the days of his flesh,” and these shared sufferings qualified him to be our compassionate High Priest (Heb. 2:14–18; 4:15; 5:2, 7). Now, however, since Christ has arisen (in the sense both of “coming on the scene” and of “rising from the dead”²), his indestructible life (as well as God’s unchangeable oath; 7:20–22) secures his eternal tenure as priest, to pray perpetually for others (7:24–25).

7:18–19 In the immediate context the “former commandment” (proagousēs entolēs) is the “legal requirement” (nomon entolēs; v. 16) stipulating Aaronic genealogy as the criterion of priestly appointment. That commandment’s being “set aside” (athetēsis = “annulment” or “removal”) makes way for the introduction of a better hope imparting access to God. But the setting aside of that specific regulation is symptomatic of a far-reaching removal of the covenantal system mediated through Moses (8:8–13), including its sanctuary, its sacrificial rituals, and its sanctions for breach of covenant (9:1–10:18, 26–31).

The genealogical criterion sanctioning Aaron and his descendants was “weak” because it presupposed the succession of deaths, generation by generation, that prevented those high priests from ministering in perpetuity (7:23, 28). This law was “useless” because priests descended from Aaron and the sacrifices they offered could not “perfect” anything (restating the point of verse 11: “perfection” was not attainable through the Levitical priests). The blood of slain animals did have a ritual function, to “sanctify for the purification of the flesh,” thus removing ceremonial defilement (9:13), but they could not “perfect the conscience of the worshiper” (9:9). The cleansing of worshipers’ consciences so that they could “draw near to God” (7:19) would be achieved only by the blood of Christ, offered “once for all” to secure complete atonement, eternal redemption, and unimpeded access to God’s presence (9:12, 14).

The “better hope” introduced by the arising of the “forever” (7:17) priest imparts confidence of God’s welcome as we “draw near” through Jesus. This is the “hope set before us” (6:18) that has entered into the “inner place,” God’s true sanctuary in heaven, where Jesus is conducting his high priestly ministry on our behalf (6:18–20; cf. 7:26; 8:1–2; 9:11–12, 24).

7:20–21 Psalm 110:4 has already appeared repeatedly in this sermon (Heb. 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:3, 11, 15, 17), but now for the first time the preamble is quoted, which asserts the unchangeable “oath” by which God secured his declaration to the priest in Melchizedek’s order: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind.” The permanence of this priest’s tenure is secured not only by his indestructible life (7:16) but also by the oath God has sworn, invoking himself as witness and enforcer of his commitment. Earlier we considered the unchangeable oath, secured by his unchangeable life, by which God guaranteed his promise to Abraham. That oath-bound promise was not only for Abraham’s benefit. To all who flee for refuge to Abraham’s covenant-keeping God, that oath gives “strong encouragement to hold fast” in persevering faith (Heb. 6:17–18). Now Psalm 110:4 shows us an even more foundational oath, hinted at in 6:17–18, on which God’s oath to Abraham and all believers rests. Believers like Abraham have every reason to rely on God’s promise of blessing because God has installed as their intercessory high priest his “Son who has been made perfect forever” (Heb. 7:28). God has sworn to this Son that his priestly ministry will never end (v. 24).

7:22 Because God’s oath has secured the eternal permanence of Jesus’ priesthood, Jesus has become the “guarantor of a better covenant.” Thus our author anticipates the covenant motif, soon to be explored in an extended interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31–34, quoted at that discussion’s beginning (Heb. 8:8–12) and end (10:15–18). “Covenant” appears more often in Hebrews (17x) than in the rest of the NT combined (16x). The covenant concept structures the book’s understanding of redemptive history and sets the context for this sermon’s interpretation of the OT sanctuary and its sacrifices and the superiority of Christ’s priestly ministry. The “new covenant” that God promised through Jeremiah is “better” than that inaugurated through Moses because the new covenant “is enacted on better promises” (8:6), including the prospect of intimate access to God for all God’s people, “from the least of them to the greatest,” and the complete, once-for-all forgiveness of sins (8:11–12).

In this first appearance of “covenant,” Jesus’ role is characterized as that of the covenant’s “guarantor” (engyos). Neither this term nor its cognates appear elsewhere in the NT. In the LXX this word group describes a third party who accepts responsibility to secure another person’s contractual or covenantal commitment, even at risk to his own property or life (Prov. 6:1; 17:18; 22:26). Later Christ will be described as “mediator” (mesitēs) of the new covenant (Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). But Moses also was a covenant mediator (Gal. 3:19–20), and his experience sadly showed that a mere mediator of even so solemn a bond as a divine-human covenant could not guarantee that both parties would fulfill their commitments (Heb. 8:7–9). Jesus is the new covenant’s mediator, but he is more: through his perpetual priesthood, secured by God’s oath, he guarantees that the new covenant’s blessings will reach their intended recipients.

7:23–25 In case any of his hearers assume that the Levitical priests were better because they were more in number than the solitary priest addressed in Psalm 110:4, our preacher argues that the truth is just the opposite of that assumption. One sober reality explains why both the principle of genealogy and a plurality of priests were needed to sustain the order of Aaron: “They were prevented by death from continuing in office.” Every time a high priest died, his successor had to be identified by genealogy (Num. 20:28; 33:38; Deut. 10:6; 32:50; Josh. 24:33; cf. Num. 35:25). The order of Melchizedek, on the other hand, now belongs to a single priest, for God swore to make him priest “forever.” He “continues forever” because his life cannot be destroyed (cf. Heb. 7:16). The observation that this priest “continues” (menō) in office echoes 7:3, which in turn recalls the quotation of Psalm 102:25–27 in Hebrews 1:10–12: heavens and earth “perish, but you remain [diamenō].” The tenure of this eternally abiding divine and messianic Son in his priestly office is permanent.

The principle of plurality characterizing the OT order revealed its imperfection and incompleteness, whereas the singularity of Christ’s authority and ministry demonstrates that God’s full and final provision for his people’s needs has arrived. In the past God spoke through prophets “at many times and in many ways” (Heb. 1:1), but the plural installments and media of his self-revelation meant that his last, best word had not yet been spoken. Now, “in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,” whose divine glory (1:2–3) and saving message (2:3) have brought God’s special revelation to climax and completion. Likewise, the ceaseless repetition of animal sacrifices in the OT sanctuary (10:1–4, 11) showed that none of them was the final, conscience-cleansing offering. Christ, on the other hand, “offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins. . . . For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified” (10:12, 14). So also the replacement of many mortal priests by one eternally abiding priest means that perfection has arrived.

Christ’s indestructible life and the permanent priesthood he exercises offer a glorious twofold benefit for believers. First, since he is the ever-living High Priest, he makes constant intercession on behalf of worshipers who seek access to God through him. Our author will soon stress that Christ’s atoning task—the offering up of his body as the sacrifice that cleanses consciences and “perfects” worshipers—has been achieved “once for all” (7:27). Therefore, unlike OT priests, who always stood attending to sacrificial tasks that were never finished, he has taken his seat at God’s right hand (10:1–13). Yet he still carries on another crucial priestly role, that of intercessory prayer on behalf of his people. This he does without ceasing. His petitions, uniquely combining suffering-wrought compassion and obedience-demonstrated integrity (2:17–18; 4:14–16), receive God’s approval and positive response (Rom. 8:34).

Second, because Christ’s priestly intercession is both constant and effective, “He is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him.” He announced salvation and has become the founder and source of that eternal salvation (Heb. 2:3, 10; 5:9). The salvation he imparts is both complete and eternal. Our author has used two Greek phrases, translated “forever” or “for all time”—eis ton aiōna (1:8; 5:6; 6:20; 7:17, 21, 24, 28; 13:8, 21) and eis to diēnekes (7:3; 10:12, 14)—to express ongoing temporal continuity. Here, however, he chooses a third construction (eis to panteles) that, while possibly including reference to temporal duration, conveys comprehensiveness in all respects (hence “to the uttermost”). The salvation this priest provides is complete, addressing every aspect of our spiritual need.

7:26–27 The final evidence of the superiority of Jesus, the Melchizedek-like priest, over the priests descended from Aaron is his absolute purity—“holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners.”

Previously we heard that “it was fitting” for God to lead his sons to glory by “perfecting” (consecrating as their high priest) the founder of their salvation through suffering (2:10). Jesus’ substitutionary suffering to the extreme of death was the only “fitting” way for the holy God to forgive those defiled by guilt and to receive them into his presence. Therefore, what Jesus came to share with sinful humans—their flesh and blood and their experience of suffering and temptation—qualified him to be a “merciful and faithful high priest” and to “make propitiation for the sins of the people” (2:14–18).

Yet, even though the Son of God’s deep sympathy for struggling sinners encourages us, one sharp line distinguishes this priest from his people: though tempted in every way as we are, Jesus was “yet without sin” (4:14–15). Christ’s utter sinlessness—the complete absence of any moral stain or defilement whatsoever—qualified him to offer himself unblemished as the once-for-all atoning sacrifice for others’ sins (9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19; 2:22–24). The high priests in Aaron’s order needed to offer sacrificial blood for their own sins before they could offer atoning blood on behalf of the rest of Israel (Ex. 29:10–14; Lev. 8:14–17; 16:6–19). This two-step process was necessary because those priests shared not only others’ weakness but also their guilt, having succumbed to temptation (Heb. 5:2–3). Here the “daily” morning and evening offering of lambs is in view (Ex. 29:38–42), although the annual Day of Atonement will be discussed later (Heb. 9:25–10:4). Jesus, on the other hand, needed no atonement for his own sins, since he had none.

Because he is the sinless priest who offered himself as the unstained sacrifice, Jesus is now “exalted above the heavens” (7:26). The heavenly venue of his present priestly ministry shows its superiority, as we will soon see: Aaronic priests minister in an earthly copy of God’s true sanctuary, but Jesus serves at God’s right hand in the heavenly original (8:1–5; 9:11–12, 24–28).

7:28 Our preacher concludes with a summary contrasting the Aaronic priesthood with the superior priestly office of the Son, setting the two over against each other in parallel clauses (table 1.3).

TABLE 1.3: Hebrews 7:28: Contrasting the Aaronic Priesthood and the Priesthood of Christ

Here the priestly orders of Levi (Aaron) and Melchizedek are contrasted in three respects:

1. (1) God’s means of appointment. Since high priests cannot be self-promoted but must be God-appointed (5:4–5), God has revealed his selection in two different ways. Levitical priests were designated by the “law” of genealogical descent, while the priest better than they was installed by God’s word of oath (recalling 7:20–22).
2. (2) The high priestly appointees. “Men in their weakness” served in the Levitical priesthood. Superior to them is the Son, extolled as superior to the angels (1:4–14; 4:14; 5:5; 7:3). Obviously the contrast is not intended to deny that the divine Son fully embraced a complete human nature, body and soul. But it calls attention to the Levitical priests’ mere humanity and frailty, in contrast to the Son’s eternal vitality (7:16). They were weak, as moral failures (5:2–3; 7:27), and so were mortal. Because they were mortal, there had to be many of them. The Son alone has been “perfected forever,” withstanding temptation through suffering and now consecrated as a final priest, who needs no successor (7:23–24; cf. 5:7–10).
3. (3) Historical order. One significant exception to strict parallelism in the two clauses of verse 28 is the additional description of the oath as coming “later than the law.” The fact that history is driving toward a climactic conclusion means that what arrives later in the implementation of God’s plan of redemption is superior to that which preceded it (1:1–4; 8:6–13; 9:8–10).

This resounding declaration of the superiority of the Son’s high priestly office has brought the sermon to its main “point” (kephalaion; 8:1), setting up a transition to the theme of the priestly tasks the Son has accomplished and continues to perform on our behalf.