Having shown the superiority of Melchizedek to Abraham and Levi, the writer proceeded to point out the superiority of Melchizedek’s priesthood and Jesus’ priesthood. He did so to clarify for his readers the inferiority of the Mosaic Covenant and its priesthood. Not only was Melchizedek greater than Aaron, Melchizedek also replaced Aaron.
Genesis 14:17–20 now falls into the background, and Psalm 110:4 becomes dominant.[236], pp. 16–20.
Note also the keywords “perfection” (v. 11) and “perfect” (vv. 19, 28). These two words not only form an inclusio but begin and end the argument of the pericope. Perfection did not come through the Old Covenant priests but through the Son. Why would God replace the Levitical priesthood? Four reasons follow.
The imperfection of the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic Law 7:11–14
7:11 The writer’s point was that since God promised in Psalm 110:4 that the coming Messiah would be a priest after Melchizedek’s order, He intended to terminate the Levitical priesthood because it was inadequate. If the Levitical priesthood had been adequate, the Messiah would have functioned as a Levitical priest.
7:12 The priesthood was such a major part of the whole Mosaic Covenant that this predicted change in the priesthood signaled a change in the whole Covenant. This verse is one of the clearest single statements in the New Testament indicating that God has terminated the Mosaic Law (Covenant; cf. Rom. 10:4). Paul went on to say that Christians, therefore, are not under it (Rom. 6:14–15; Gal. 3:24–25; 5:1; 6:2; 2 Cor. 3:7–11).
“So by his own independent line of argument our author reaches the same conclusion as Paul: the law was a temporary provision, ‘our tutor to bring us unto Christ … but now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor’ (Gal. 3:24f.).”[238]
7:13–14 Further confirmation of this change is the prophecy that Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah, not from the priestly tribe of Levi (Gen. 49:10; Mic. 5:2; Isa. 11:1).
The need for a better replacement 7:15–19
The author points that it is a well known fact that our Lord came from the tribe of Judah (see Matt 1:1–2; Luke 3:33; Rev 5:5).
7:15–17 A third proof that God made a change in the priesthood is that God predicted that Messiah would live forever (Ps. 110:4). Jesus Christ did not become a priest because He met a physical requirement, namely, was born into the priestly tribe and qualified by his descent to serve as high priest. He became a priest because He would not die. In this He showed Himself to be a member of Melchizedek’s “order” since Melchizedek appears from the scriptural record to have lived forever. Jesus is a priest forever because of His resurrection.[239]
7:18–19 These verses summarize the argument that God has superseded the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic Law (Covenant). He has replaced the old system with a system that can do what the old one could not do, namely, bring us into intimate relationship with God.
“The term athetesis, ‘annulment,’ is a stronger term than metathesis, ‘alteration’ (v 12).”[240]
The “better hope” we have is the assurance that this relationship is now possible for us to experience thanks to our great High Priest.
The inviolability of God’s oath 7:20–22
Verses 20–25 draw out the pastoral implications of the conclusion that the writer reached in verses 18–19.
7:20–21 Another oath from God (Ps. 110:4) launched Messiah’s priesthood. The Levitical priesthood had no such origin, another indication of its inferiority.
7:22 Because God promised on oath to install Messiah permanently as our priest, the writer could say that Jesus is the guarantee of a better covenant. Since the old priesthood was the heart of the Old Covenant, and God terminated both of them, a new priesthood must accompany the New Covenant that is superior to the Old Covenant. Since the new Priest has come, so must the New Covenant have come (cf. Luke 22:20).
This is the first mention in the epistle of the word “covenant” that will play a major role in the writer’s argument to follow.
“Hebrews develops the theme of the new covenant more fully than any other NT writer, the epistle accounting for just over half the occurrences of diatheke [“covenant] in the NT.”[241]
The writer used this word (Gr. diatheke) 17 times, far more than it occurs in any other New Testament book. He preferred this word to the more common syntheke (“covenant”) evidently because syntheke suggests an agreement made on relatively equal terms. Diatheke has the idea of a more absolute will, such as a last will and testament.
“Surety - guarantor” appears only here and comes from a private law - somebody who guarantee for you (see Sirach 29:15 - same Greek word).
The mortality of the Levitical priests 7:23–25
7:23–24 The Levitical priests had to succeed one another because they kept dying, but Jesus Christ needs no successor because He will not die.
7:25 The fact that Christ will not die and need replacement by another priest means that He can see His work of delivering His people through to the end. He can deliver completely (better than “forever,” v. 25) in the sense of seeing us through to the realization of our full salvation, our rest (inheritance) in God’s presence (cf. 1:14).
“Here the author is not referring to His saving work as the salvation of sinners from judgment and death, but rather using the words to save in the sense of ‘to bring to God’s desired end’ …”[242]
What a comfort and assurance it is to realize that Jesus Christ Himself is praying for us constantly! (cf. Rom. 8:33–34).
“In Hebrews ‘salvation’ is presented as a future eschatological inheritance (1:14; 5:9; 9:28).
“Just as Christ’s priesthood is permanent, so is the salvation which he makes possible.”[246]
The summary conclusion concerning Christ’s superiority as a person 7:26–28
7:26 - The priests and levites of the OT also had to be different from the people (Ex 30:19–21; Lev 10:21; 22:2–9).
In view of His superior ministry it is only fitting that our High Priest should be a superior Person. “Holy” (Gr. hosios) stresses blamelessness. (Another word translated “holy,” hagios, stresses separateness.) “Innocent” means without guile or malice. “Undefiled” looks at His absolute purity. “Separated from sinners” probably refers to His being in a different class from sinful people.[247] Jesus was not only inherently pure, but He remains pure in all His contacts with sinners.[248]
7:27 In Israel’s daily sacrifices, the priest had to offer a sacrifice for his own sins before he could offer one for the sins of others (Exod. 29:38–46; Lev. 4:3–12). Also on the Day of Atonement the high priest would offer a sin offering for expiation for himself and then another one for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:6–10).
Jesus Christ does not need to offer up periodic sacrifices to atone for sin either for His own sins or for those of His people. His one sacrifice of both worship and expiation on the cross completely satisfied God. No subsequent sacrifices are necessary for that purpose. The writer proceeded to develop this thought more fully in 9:11–14 and 10:1–15, after introducing it initially here.
7:28 Jesus Christ is superior because He is a Son rather than a mere man, because God appointed Him more recently than He appointed the Levitical priests, and because God appointed Him with an oath (v. 21).
He is “perfect” because He offered one sacrifice for sin that was adequate to satisfy God completely (cf. 2:10; 5:8–10; 7:28; 12:2; 1 John 2:2). Because He is perfect He can intercede effectively for us. Consequently we can go to Him confidently any time we need His help in overcoming trials and temptations, specifically those trials that might result in our apostatizing. “Perfect forever” has the idea of not being subject to defects. He will never fail us, and another high priest will never replace Him.
In view of the superior order of priesthood that Melchizedek foreshadowed and that Jesus Christ fulfilled, why would anyone want to go back to the old Aaronic order? The person of our high priest is superior. The order of His priesthood is superior. Christ is completely adequate in His person and preeminent in His order. We should worship His person and rely on His intercession because of His order. And we should not abandon Him.[251],” Bibliotheca Sacra 162:647 (July-September 2005):331–43.