Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6

7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6

1/16

H E B R E W S 9:6-10: T H E " P A R A B L E '

O F T H E T A B E R N A C L E

by

STEVE STANLEY

Phoenix, AZ

The autho r of Heb rew s offers his readers a in the mid

dle of ch. 9, apparently to clarify for them certa in aspects of the old

and new convenant systems. Wh ether or not it had this effect for

the original readers, this presents considerable difficulties

for the modern exegete. Even the most basic questions concerning

the extent and me an in g of the prove preplexing at first.

This study, therefore, is an attempt to answer these questions.

I. The Material for the

The Use of in 9.1-14

The first verse of ch. 9 develops a theme from ch. 8 (vv. 7,13)

using the term (" fi rs t" ), an imp ort ant term for under

standing v. 8. The meaning of this term in 9:1, however, is some

wh at ambiguous.1

Here seems to refer to the first covenant,

coming after its use in the previous verse (8:13) where it has this

meaning, so the reader naturally makes this connection, at least

initially. This interpretation of works well within 9:1 itself,

understanding the first covenant as involving regulations for service

and a sanctuary, [] ('' the ref ore, the first was also having regulations

for service and the earthly holy place"). But in 9:2 the author goes

on to talk about "the first tent", and then in v. 3 of a "tent called

the Holy of Ho li es " . In v. 2, then , refers to the first tent

over against ano ther (second) tent, so that the sense has shifted

between ch. 8 and 9:2. This may cause the reader to question

1

Some manu scri pt s (e g 47, 73, 74, 80, 137, 139) add to specify that the"f ir st " refers to the tabern acle


2/16

386 STEVE STANLEY

whether the initial understanding of in v. 1 as referring to

the first covenant holds up under further scrunity. In fact, the shift

in the use of from its reference in ch. 8 to the first covenantto its reference in ch. 9 to the first tent does not occur until after

9:1. It is clear that is used in v. 2 to describe a , but

it would be awkward to un ders tand in 9:1 as referring to

the tent, since the verse would then read: "Therefore, the first[tent]

was also having regulations for service and the earthly holy place".

It would be strange to understand the first tent as having an "earth

ly holy place", because the first tent is itself an "earthly holy

pl ac e" . Therefore , on account of the awkwardness of refer-

ing to the tent in v. 1, the close gram mat ical connection between

8:13 and 9:1 ()2

and the lack of any marker of shift in the usage

of the term unti l 9:2, it seems best to underst and as having

th e same referent and usage in 9:1 as in 8:13, e. the first

covenant3

When the author of Hebrew uses to describe the tent in

ch. 9, his usage does not necessarily carry the same polemical force

as it does when he applies it to the new covenant. That is,

is used with in the context of one covenant being replaced

by another, so tha t the first belonged to a previous order, while its

counterpart, the new, belongs to the present order In the context

of the tents, when the counterpart of the first is the holy of holies,

bo th the first and second belong to the same orde r Yet here there

is also an aspect of the first tent that makes it inferior to the second

tent or holy of holies, just as the first covenant is inferior to the new

2Cf H Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Hermeneia Philadelphia Fortress

Press, 1989), 2313 Attridge (Hebrews, 230) says, " ' Co ve na nt ' is clearly im pl ie d" Many

others agree, including J Moffatt, The Epistle to the Hebrews (ICC, Edinburgh

& Cl ar k, 1924), 112, F F Bru ce, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews

( N I C N T , Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1990), 197, F Delitzsch, The Epistle to the

Hebrews, vol 2 (E di nb ur gh and Cla rk, 1887), 47, S Kisten mak er,

Hebrews (New Testament Commentary, Grand Rap id s Baker, 1984), pp 238,

239, W Lane, Hebrews 9-13 (Word Biblical Commentary, Dallas, T X Word

Books, 1991), 214, H Montefiore, 77z* Epistle to the Hebrews (New York Harper

& Ro w, 1960), 143, E Rig gen bac h, Der Brief an die Hebrer (Wuppertal

Brockha us, 1987 [orig 1913]), pp 236, 237, Wei, Der Brief an die Hebrer

(Gotti ngen Vande nhoec k and Rupr ech t, 1991), 449, See Delit zsch, Hebrews,

vol 2, 47 , or a treatment o the textual history relevant to this issue, including

the reading of the lextus Receptas, G Buchanan (To the Hebrews

[Anchor Bible Series, Garden City, NY Dou ble day , 1972], 139) reads " first

"


3/16

THE "PARABLE" OF HEB 9:6-10 387

covenant (cf. 9:6, 7). This relationship between the first and

second, and the use of similar terminology with regard to the

covenants and the tents is creatively used to illustrate the relationship between the old and new order in 9:8, the author playing on

th e ambiguities created at the beginning of the chapter.

The Tabernacle and Its Ceremony

H e b 9:6-10 comprises just one compound and complex sentence.

The initial may cause the reader to remember the at the

beginning of 9:1, but there is no grammati ca l conncection between

these two words4

since vv. 6-10 are still describing part of what wasintroduced by in 9:1, the regulations for service.

5In order for

this to refer back to the of 9:1 there would have to be a con

trast between the two statements, and there clearly is not. Accord

ing to 9:1, the first, "on the one hand", had regulations and a

place, and having described the place in vv. 1-5, the author talks

about the regulations in vv. 6-10, still leaving the reader to

anticipate the rest of the contrast introduced by (the second part

not being introduced until v. 11.) Therefore, the in v. 6 must be

unders tood in a continuative sense, and is best translated " a n d " .6

However, is also used in v. 6, anticipating the at the begin

ning of v. 7 and establishing a contrast between the priests ' entry

into the first tent and the high priest's entry into the second. The

priests enter the first tent ota , and in the light of the contrast

between the two si tuations, with the priest going into the second

tent ("o nc e a ye ar"), probably means

something like "continually" or "daily".7

The closest cor-

4Against C Spicq, UEpitre aux Hbreux, vol 2 (P an s Librair ie Lecoffre,

1952), 2475

Buchanan (Hebrews, 146) and Wei (Hebrer, 449) poin t out that the

appearance of in vv 1 and 10 forms an inclusw This marks out these

verses as a uni t6

Dana and J Mant ey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament

(Toronto Mac mill an, 1957), 2447

Th e Niv has "r eg ul ar ly " BA GD translates Sta "Always, continually,

constantly" , s A, I I, 1 Philo (Sacr 127) uses this phrase in a temporal sense

in contrast with as it is here, as does Plutarch (Stephanus 830 E 8) Jo sep hu s

(Ant 2 216 7) uses the ph rase "al l the t ime") Also see

use d in a cultic context in, for examp le, Ex 25 30, 27 20, 28 30, 38, 30 8,Lev 6 6, 13, 24 2, 8, Nu m 4 7, 28 10, 15, 23, 24, 31 Cf also Kist emaker ,

Hebrews, 246


4/16

388 STEVE STANLEY

respondence in the Pentateuch to the material in 9:6-10 occurs in

Leviticus 1-7 and 16, so it is probable that out author relies on these

chapters for his description in these verses.8

In chapters 1-7

Leviticus describes the more co mmon offerings, while chap ter 16

describes the Day of Atonement sacrifice.

When the author says that the priests go in

(" to complete the ser vic es" 9: 6), he is using a phrase

unknown to the LX X. But readin g the Pent ateu ch' s instructions

for the priests' offering of sacrifices, and the penalty for failing to

fulfil these demands, it is not surprising that Hebrews speaks in

these terms. Under the old system there were certain rituals that the

priests were required to perform ( could also be

translated "the ceremonies"), here referred to as

("Regulations for service"9:1), and it is the work of the

priests in following these regulat ions that our author describes as

"completing the servic es". It is only thr ough the shedding of

animals' blood that the priests were able to fulfil their duty, in con

trast to the readers' ability to serve the living God (

9:14), made possible by the cleansing power of the blood of

Christ.Accor ding to 9:7, only the high priest was allowed into the

second tent, only once a year, and not without blood. Num. 29:7-

11 gives a short description of this Day of Atonement ceremony,

but Leviticus 16 gives much more detailed instructions. It is in the

Leviticus account that we learn of the requirement that the high

priest mak e an offering for his own sins and for those of his

household before m ak ing ato neme nt for the sins of the people (cf.

Heb. 5:3; 7:27). Hebrews uses an unusual term to describe these

sins, ("ignorances, errors"). This term is used in thePentateuch only in Gen. 43:11 (43:12 LXX)

9where Jacob refers

8Actually, it is practically impossible to tell whether our author is relying on

his own recollection of Leviticus self, or on teaching based on Scripture but

han ded down within Jewi sh and/ or early Chris tian tradition In either case, since

the allusions to scriptural content so far have been largely consistent with Scripture

as we have it today, and since Scripture is the ultimate source of these allusions,

whether by direct or indirect contact, we can compare the descriptions in Hebrews

to Scripture with profit and speak in terms of scriptural allusions9

In the enti re lxx, it is only used seven times, and only in Gen 43 12 in theHebr ew canon Howev er, the verb is use d in Lev 4 13, which shows that

Leviticus probably does form at least part of the background for this part of


5/16

THE "PARABLE " OF HEB 9:6-10 389

to Joseph's replacing of the silver into his son's bags as a possible

(''mistake"NIV). By using this term as he does, our

author is probably distinguishing between sins committed inignorance and deliberate sin, as does Num. 15:22-31. This is

especially likely in the light of his reference to wilful sin in 10:26.1 0

The earthly tabernacle was the place where those under the old

covenant were made right with God, and where their connection

with God was maintained on a cont inual basis as well as on special

occasions. After the au th or 's clear and forceful rejection of the

validity of the old covenant for his readers in ch. 8, one may wonder

wha t possible significance for his rea ders our author would want to

give to the particulars of the old covenant, including the tabernacleand its ceremony. Nevertheless, in vv. 8-10 the author establishes

that the earthly tabernacle does hold some significance for his

readers.

II . The Meaning and Extent of the

Identifying the

For the aut hor of Heb rews, the tabernacle ( v. 8,

the antecedent of in v. 9)1 1

stood as a ("type, illustra

tion, pa ra bl e" ) for those in the new age. Like the te rm

( " t y p e " ) , is used in a non-technical sense in Hebrews,

lacking the meaning and significance of its theological heir,

"parable". According to LSJ, is used in Hebrews with

th e meaning " type",1 2

but there are uses cited outside Heb rew s

which lie closer to the word's etymology, "comparison, juxtaposi

t i o n " , and other uses with meanings such as "illustration,

analogy".1 3 However one understands the term in

Hebrews, our author clearly means to communicate, at least, that

there is something in the old to be learned about the new. This,

10

Leviticus 4, 5 also describe what offerings should be made when uninten-

tional sins are committed, Num 15 30, 31 demand that the person who sins

defiantly should be cut off from the people Cf Montefiore, Hebrews, 148, D

Hagner, Hebrews (San Francisco Harper & Row, 1983), pp 129, 130nCf , for example, Hagner, Hebrews, 134, Delitzsch, Hebrews vol 2, pp 67,

6812 Also see Calvin, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews (Edinburgh The

Calvin Translation Society, 1853), 199, Wei, Hebrer, pp 458, 45913

LSJ s


6/16

390 STEVE STANLEY

then, is another way of conceiving and expressing the typological

relat ionship between the old and new sys tems .14

H e b . 9:9 does not contain the only use of in the book;

it also appears in 11:19. In this context the readers are told of the

faith of Ab rah am who offered up his only son, even in the light of

th e promise that he would have descendants through Isaac. Our

author reconciles the dilemma faced by Abraham by extrapolating

that he must have expected God to laise Isaac from the dead.

Nowhere does Scripture say that this was on Abraham's mind, but

it may be deduced from the facts given in Scripture. If God had

promised to give Abraham an offspring through Isaac, and if healso instructed Abraham to kill Isaac, then there is only one

apparent resolution to these two contradictory purposes, other than

for one of the two purposes to be abandoned: Isaac would have to

rise from the dead and live on to bear offspring. It is possible that,

on the basis of such logic, our author extrapolates that Abraham

had faith in God's ability to raise Isaac from the dead, and because

of such faith, in a "parabolic" sense Abraham also received Isaac

back (from the dead). Our author sees Abraham's receiving back

of Isaac as standing in a typological relationship to resurrection ingeneral, but more than this, he wants to hold the experience of

Abraham alongside the readers' understanding of re surrect ion so

that what they knew about the one they could apply to the other in

an illustrative or analogical way. In the case of Abraham, our

author expects the readers' theology of resurrection to inform them

with regard to the experience of Abraham, because it is the st rength

and profundity of Abraham's faith that the author is labouring to

communicate. But, having established this relationship, it is possi

ble to learn something about each by comparison with the other, sothat the typological or parabolic relationship becomes a two-way

arrangement. Speaking of this two-way connection between Jesus

and the Mosaic system, Ha gn er correctly observes:

Just as light is shed upon the work of Christ by its anticipation in the old

cove nant, so a knowledge of the fulfillment bro ught by C hri st illumina tes the

significance of the tabernacle and the levitical sacrifices1 5

1 4Delitzsch (Hebrews, vol 2, 66) rightl y takes the rel ationship descr ibed by

as typological


7/16

THE "P AR AB LE " OF HEB 9:6-10 391

When speaking of relationships such as those of the " ra i s ing" of

Isaac to resurrection in general, and the earthly to the heavenly

sanctuary, our author could have chosen to use terms more usuallyassociated today with typology, and in fact at times he does (8:5),

but even these te rms imply that the type and anti type each have

something to teach about the other. However, by using a term such

as , our author is making explicit what would have been

implicit, and is drawing attention to what may have been taken as

merely incidental. He is spelling out in no uncertain terms that not

only is there a historical correspondence between the old and the

new in general and between at least some of the corresponding

details associated with each, but also, and very significantly, he isindicating that there is a conceptual correspondence there as well.

In other words, with the use of the term the reader is left

in no doubt that, according to Hebrews, there is something to be

learned about the new by looking at and understanding the old, and

vice versa. It is one thing to find continuity in biblical history by

showing a typological correspondence between the details of the old

and new age, it is something more to explore the implications of this

continuity by attempting to understandeach age and its details in the

light of these points of correspondence. So, for our author, the oldis an illustration of the new, and because of this conceptual relation

ship, the readers' understanding of both their own age and the age

gone by can be enhanced.

Sur round ing the use of in 9:91 6

we are given more

details of how our aut hor conceives of this term than in 11:19.

Looking at vv. 8-10, it is imp ort ant to remem ber that they are

grammatically part of one complex sentence stretching from v. 6 to

v. 10, and th at there are two main clauses, making this a compound

sentence as well The first main clause is in 6, (" into the first tent the priests

enter co nt in ua ll y" ); the second main clause is in v. 7,

("but into the second

only the high priest [enters] once a year") Everything in vv. 8-10,

1 6Many interpreters do not give enough attention to the fact that 9 8-10 is

presented as a , and that any un der sta ndi ng of these verses should be

guided by this foundational observation Wei (Hebrer, pp 447-449) and Spicq

(Hbreux, vol 2, pp 253, 254) are both exceptions, and their inter preta tion of

these verses is very similar to mine


8/16

392 STEVE STANLEY

therefore, is ultimately connected to at least one of these main

clauses. The first issue encountered in vv. 8-10 is the role of the

Holy Spirit:

8 ,

, 9.

, '

, 10.

, (8 the Holy

Spirit making this evident, the way into the Holies not yet having been

revealed while the first tent has a sta nding, 9 which is an illustrati on for the

present time, according to which both gilts an d sacrifices ar e offered which

are not able to perfect the conscien ce of the worship pers , 10 only touch ing

upon foods and drinks and various washings, fleshly regulations imposed

until a time of improvement )

According to v. 8, the Holy Spirit has made something evident, but

it is not readily evident to the reader what that is. Our author uses

a similar concept in 10:15 where he says,

("and the Holy Spirit bears witness to us"), and

then he goes on to re-quote part of the Je re miah 31 passage which

he first used in ch. 8, and to give his own interpretation of itssignificance in the light of what Christ had done. Th e introduction

to the quotation of Psalm 95 in Heb. 3:7 also indicates that

Hebrews sees Scripture as equivalent to the words of the Holy

Spirit , , ("wherefore, just as the

Holy Spirit says"). In 9:8 what the Holy Spirit has made evident

is related to the author's summary of scriptural teaching on the

priests' entry into the inner and outer tents. The phrase in ques

tion, ("the Holy Spirit

making this evident"), is a genitive absolute, and is grammaticallyunconnected to the two main clauses; however, it is conceptually

connected to both main clauses. This conceptual connection lies in

how the Holy Spirit makes "this" evident, which is through the

scriptural account of the functions and manner of the levitical

priests. So, in 9:8 (as in 3:7 and 10:15) the Holy Spirit's revelation

comes through Scripture indicating that Hebrews sees the message

of Scripture as being equal to a revelation of the Holy Spirit; but

Lane is correct in pointing out that our authorsees the involvement

of the Holy Spirit as going beyond the inspiration of Scripture, andincluding "special insight which was not previously available to the

d f th O T b t hi h h l ifi d th i d


9/16


of the cultic provisions for Israel in the light of the fulfilment in

C h r i s t " .1 7

What is it that the Holy Spiri t has made evident through th epractices of the levitical priests? The answer comes in the latter half

of v. 8: as long as the first tent stands, the way of the holy of holies

is not revealed.1 8

At first this does not seem like much of a revela

tion, but then v. 9 goes on to expla in tha t this is an illustrat ion for

the present t ime . Some have ar gued that at the begi nni ng of

v. 9 refers to the preceding context as a whole as if its form were

, and that its case has been attracted to that of .19

Others

ar gu e that simply refers to at the end of v. 8.2 0

The latter position seems the most natural way to understand thesentence, but there is really little difference in the outco me of these

two positions if has a reference to the earthly tent (see

be low). The earthl y tent and its significance for the minist ry of the

priests cannot be separated in this context, so if refers to one

it naturally includes the other. There is also some debate concern

ing the reference of the "present",2 1

but it seems best to under-

1 7

Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 223 Cf also Att ridg e, Hebrews, 240, Delitz sch,Hebrews, vol 2, 66, D Guthrie, The Letterio the Hebrews (TDNC, Grand Rapids

Eerdmans, 1983), 183, R Mil hga n, Epistle to the Hebrews (Gr and Rapi ds Eerd-

ma ns , 1982), 2491 8

Gen 3 24 ( ) an d J u d g 40 42 (

) ar e ex am ples of t he

genitive used with to indic ate the way t o som eth ing See also Lev 16 16, 17,

20, 23, 27 for examples of (tthpn) as a shor tene d reference to the holy of

holies1 9

E g Bru ce, Hebrews, 209, Mont efiore, Hebrews, 1492 0

E G Attrid ge, Hebrews, 241 , Moffatt, Hebrews, 118, Rigg enba ch,

Hebrer, 2522 1

Moffatt (Hebrews, 118) sees the ' ' pr es en t" as referring to " t h e periodina ugu rat ed by the advent of Jes us with his new ", in which the writer and

his readers lived W Manson, (The Epistle to the Hebrews An Historical and

Theological Reconsideration [Lon don Ho dd er and Sto ught on, 1957], 132) uses the

phrase " a parable bearing on the present crisis" Gut hri e (Hebrews, 183)

be lieves th e " ' p r e s e n t ' ag e was that whi ch prepared for the appearing of C h r i s t "

Fo r Lane (Hebrews 9-13, 224), the "pre se nt ag e" is the age of the earthly taber

nacle, superseded by the "a ge of co rre ct ion " of 10 R Rend ali (The Epistle to

the Hebrews [Lo ndo n Ma cM il la n and Co , 1883], 70) believes the au th or is con

trasting "the time beingwith the time of reformation" J Ebrard (The Epistle to the

Hebrews [Edi nbur gh and Clar k, 1862], 277) follows the majority text at

9b , which reads ' ov inst ead of ' H e un de rs ta nd s the ante ced ent of

ov to be , and inte rprets the " p r es en t " as referring to templewo rs hip contemporary wi th the time of wri tin g on the ba si s of th is grammatical

connection with the levitic al sacrifice in 9b


10/16

394 STEVE STANLEY

stand the "present time" as referring to the age of the new cove

nant, in which the writer and his readers took part, as Moffattasserts, since Hebrews avoids reference to the then current practice

of Ju da is m an d the temple rites, preferring to speak in scriptural

terms.2 2

(If this reference does refer to the ''present" practices of

the temple, and not the age of the new covenant, then it is unique

in Hebrews.) Although some do relate the ''present time" to the

practice of Ju da is m at the time of wri ting,2 3

for our author the new

covenant and the Christian church are the proper concern of the

"p res ent t im e, " not Jud ais m. Therefore, the autho r's "par able for

the present time" refers to the way in which the tabernacle functioned under the old covenant in order to teach his readers some

thing about the nature of the old and new systems. This lesson con

sists partly in the apparent inability of the levitical offerings to

prepare the people to enter the presence of God, that is, the holy

of holies.2 4

Verses 9 and 10 describe the superficial effect of the

levitical sacrifices, which the tabernacle ritual makes apparent by

its exclusion of the worshippers. If those sacrifices had been able to

perfect the worshippers, they would have enjoyed the privilege of

entering the holy of holies and the presence of God.T h e importance of coming into God's presence was illustrated by

th e high priest's entry into the holy of holies on behalf of the people,

which was the cultic high-point of the year . But as it was, the people

had to be satisfied with a superficial and temporary cleansing that

did not afford them direct and intimate access to God.2 5

As long as

the old covenant remained valid, direct access to God was " n o t

yet" () revealed (v. 8), and this shows that the author under

stands the old covenant as temporary and emphasises the time

element in the progression of God's covenant dealings. The oldcovenant inherently involved a far more substantial "not yet"

quality than the new covenant for our author, since the old cove

nant left a gap in provision and not just in realisation. That there

was a greater provision than this to come is clear, because at some

point the people would have to be made fit for the presence of God,

and for our author the presence of God (heaven) is the destiny of

2 2With the possible but unlikely exception being 13 10, 11

2 3

E g Lane , Hebrews 9-13, 224, Montef iore, Hebrews, 1492 4Cf Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 223, G Cai rd, " T h e Exegetical Met hod of the

Epistle to the Hebrews", CJT 5 (1959), 44-51 , ( 50)


11/16

THE "P ARA BL E" OF HEB 9:6-10 395

th e people of God (10:19, 20; 11:13-16).26

The structure of the old

system itself implies that the provisions of the Mosaic covenant are

limited and anticipatory, and this becomes most clear from the

perspective of the new, Christian age. The age of the new covenant

would incoporate what the old covenant arrangement could " n o t

yet " (9:8) provide, that is, open access to God.

Interpretingthe

The above understanding of the author's , however,

does not conclude the issue because it does not exhaust the implica

tions of the use of or its connection to the present time.These two issues, and the general approach of Hebrews to the rela

tionship between the old and new, indicate that the author is

describing a typological relationship at this point.2 7

In his "illustra

t i o n " , the author comes back to the ambiguity he has created with

the term (first) in 9:1, 2.2 8

The illustration or parable works

because of the ambiguit ies of the terminology he uses to describe

what the Holy Spirit reveals in v. 8b.2 9

Read with one set of defini

tions, the way of the holy place (the earthly holy of holies) is con

cealed while the first (outer, earthly) tent is in place. Read withanother set of definitions, the way of the holy place (the heavenly

sanctuary) is concealed while the first tent (the earthly sanctuary)

has standing.3 0

Which is the proper way to read this clause? They

both are, since the full significance of the is understood

by substitut ing correspond ing referents for the two ambiguous

terms. The first, outer tent, in its concealing of the earthly holy of

2 6See M. Isaacs' (Sacred Space [Sheffield: Sheffield Academi ec Pre ss, 1992] , pp .

205-219) discussion "Heaven as the Eschatological Goal of the People of G o d " .2 7

Attridge ( Heb rews , p. 240) recognises that ourauthorexploits the typological

significance of the high priest's yearly entry into the holy of holies.2 8

Lane (Hebrews 9-13, pp. 223, 224) follows a similar approach.2 9

See Lane, Hebrews 9-13, p. 216, for a discussion of the disputed meaning of

, for exa mpl e. Cf. also J . B rown , An Exposition of Hebrews (New York:

Carter and Brothers, 1862), pp. 385, 386; Hagner, Hebrews, p. 133; Kistem aker,

Hebrews, pp. 243, 244; Riggenbach, Hebrer, p. 249. Attridge (Hebrews, p. 271)

makes a com ment with reference to 10:1 that applies equally here: " O u r aut hor

indulges to the full his penchant for dramatically exploiting the polyvalence of his

language."30

Milligan (Hebrews, p. 250) articulates both of these possible "readings"precisely, and comes very close to the view I am espousing of affirming the validity

of both readings.


12/16

396 STEVE STANLEY

holies, corresponds to the first, earthly sanctuary in its concealing

of the heavenly sanctuary, as vv. 9-14 make clear.31

Even the

levitical priests did not have access to the earthly holy of holies as

long as the outer tent was in place, and this was true even for the

high priest, apart from his brief yearly entrance.3 2

Th e ,

then, is in the fact that a restriction applied to the heavenly sanc

tuary similar to the restriction that applied to the earthly holy of

holies: as long as the earthly tent had a standing, access to the

heavenly tent was denied.3 3

Attridge expresses a view very similar

to this:

T he point is that as long as the cultic system connec ted with the oute r porti onof the earthly tabernacle "has standing," the way to both the earthly and

heavenly is blocked3 4

Lane approaches the issue from a time perspective, and although

he defines as re la ting to the old age, his

interpretation recognises that there is a symbolic significance in the

two chambers of the tabernacle that represent an earlier time period

superseded by a subsequent time period:

On c e the first has been invalidated, the second becomes operative (see 10 9)

In the figurative lan guage of the writ er, the front co mp ar tm en t of the tabe rnacle was symbolic of the present age ( ), which

through the intr usio n of the , " t h e t ime of c or re ct io n" (v

10), has been superseded3 5

The obvious implication of the relationship between the two tents

as described by this is that Je su s ' ent ry into and sitt ing

down in the heavenly tent shows that the first tent, the earthly sanc

tuar y, no longer has any sta ndi ng.3 6

3 1 On this point (but not his overall scheme) the position of Ebrard (Hebrews,

pp 275, 276) is very simil ar "As the holy place, in a local resp ect, stand s related

to the holy of holies, so does the latter stand related, in respect of time, to the fulfil

ment of Christ"3 2

N u m 4 20 says that even the non-Aaronic levities were not allowed to see

th e holy thin gs in the taber nac le , lest they die Th ey could only go m as par t of

their express duties related to moving the sacred furniture, and then only after the

furniture had been covered by the Aaronic priests3 3

Cf Riggenbach, Hebrer, 249, D Pete rsen , " T h e Prop hecy of the New

Covenant in the Argument of Hebrews", RTR 38 (1977-78) , pp 74-81 (p 76)3 4

Attridge, Hebrews, 2403 5

Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 2243 6 Cf Spicq, Hbreux, vol 2, 254 Attridge (Hebrews, 240) und ers tan ds the

" s t a n d i n g " of the tabernacle as not referring to its phyical existence but to its

" t i t t "


13/16

THE "PARABLE" OF HEB 9:6-10 397

The significance of the goes even deeper, as outlined in

vv. 9, 10. This further significance comes out of the phrase '

... ("according to which both gifts and

sacr ifices.. ."). Th e most significant issue here is identifying the

antecedent of the relative pronoun. The relative could refer to

in v. 8,37

but this reading is awkward, with gifts and

sacrifices offered the first tent. It could also refer to in

v. 9a,3 8

on the basis of an alternate textual tradition in which the

form of the pronoun is ov, but this requires that "the present time"

be given an unlikely meaning.3 9

The best alternative is to under

stand as the antecedent of ,4 0

which indicates that the

authoris still developing his

.This phrase, ' ,indicates that what follows builds upon the distinction between the

lesser and greater tents and sacrifices described in vv. 7, 8. All year

long the levitical priests would offer gifts and sacrifices in the first,

outer tent, but these only touched upon the most external needs of

th e worshippers, things concerning "foods and drinks4 1

and vari

ous washings, regulations of the flesh".42

But the most spiritually

3 7Peterson, Hebrews and Perfection, 258, n 52, La ne , Hebrews 9-13, 224

3 8Ebrard, The Epistle to the Hebrews, pp 276, 277

3 9 Attridge (The Epistle to the Hebrews, 241) rightly asserts, "n ot hi ng could be

further from our author's perspective than to see the present time in such a

negative ligh t" See also Delitzsch, Hebrews, vol 2, 704 0

See Attridge, Hebrews, 241, Bruce, Hebrews, 206, Delitzsch, Hebrews,

vol 2, 704 1

E g Lev 11 34 Delitzsch (Hebrews, vol 2, 73) rightly un der st an ds these

terms as "general titles for all the Levitical ordinances concerning such matters"4 2

Delitzsch (Hebrews, vol 2, 74) correctl y describes the view of our author

wh en he says that "o ut wa rd pu ri ty " is not " a matter of indifference", and that

some inward blessing accom panie d the levitical sacrifices when " per fo rme d in a

right spirit" (but internal benefit was not inherent to participating in the levitical

system, as it is for the par tic ipa nt in the sacrifice of Chri st see 95) Th e point

of Hebrews as a whole is not that the old was altogether worthless, but that some

thin g bette r has come Th e term " b e t t e r " implies that the old did have some

va lue, albeit a lesser va lue, an d 9 11 uses the co mp ar at ive forms and

, indicating that the old had the positive qualities of greatness and

perfection (perfection under stoo d in a relative sense) F Nar bor oug h (Hebrews

[The Cla ren don Bible, Oxford Cla ren don , 1943], 116) takes this verse as a

reference to Gnos tic asceticism Th is is very unlikely (against E Kasemann, The

Wandering People of God [Minneapolis Augsburg, 1984, Ge rm an on g 1939], pp

87-96, and with L Hu rs t, The Epistle to the Hebrews Its Backgroundof Thought [Cam

br idg e Cambridge Un ive rs ity Press, 1990], pp 74, 75) since He brew s was wri t

ten before Gnosticism was fully developed, Gnosticism does not seem to be a con

cern of our author in general, this verse can be quite adequately explained overagainst a levitical background, and the context strongly calls for a levitical under

standing here


14/16

398 STEVE STANLEY

significant priestly function had to wait for the Day of Atonement,

which, according to Lev. 16:30, would bring atonement and cleans

ing from sin. In the , those daily sacrifices, paling in

significance before the Day of Atonement offerings, correspond to

the ent ire levitical system, and the Day of Atonement sacrifices,

which came but once a year, correspond to the sacrifice of Ch ris t.

So, in the same way that the priests offered the daily, lesser

sacrifices in anticipation of the Day of Atonement , those under the

old covenant had to make do with the lesser, levitical provision to

tide them over until the time when something better would come,

th e sacrificial ministry of Christ. The difference between the effec

tiveness of the levitical sacrifices as a whole and the sacrificial

ministry of Chr ist is illustrated by the difference in the significance

of the ongoing levitical sacrifices and those performed on the Day

of Atonement (which depends partly on the difference in the

significance of the outer and inner tents as recognised in vv. 6-8).

Therefore, since the time of improvement has arrived and Christ's

sacrifice has been mad e (along with his entry into the heavenly

sanctuary), all of the levitical sacrifices, those of the priests and the

high priest, are obsolete and have been shown unable to perfect the

worshippers with respect to the conscience (cf. 10:1-3).

In this , then, there are two areas of correspondence.

First, the outer tent is to the Holy of Holies as the earthly tent is

to the heavenly tent (according to v. 9 the is for the "pres

ent t i m e " , and v. 11 makes the connection between the "g oo d

things which are" and the heavenly tent). Second, the daily

sacrifices are to the Day of Atonement as the levitical sacrifices

altogether are to the sacrifice of Chris t. These two areas of cor

respondence can be represented graphically as follows:

9:8 The "Parable " of the Sanctuaries

Outer Te nt Holy of Holies

I 1

Earthly Sanctuary Heavenly Sanctuary

9:9,10 The "Parable" of the Sacrifices

Regular Sacrifices -* Day of Ato nem ent

i 1Levitical System Ch ri st 's Sacrifice


15/16


III. The Significance of the

The significance for the readers of the earthly sanctuary and its

sacrifices, then, goes beyond illustrating the superficial and tran

sitory na tu re of the old system and its offerings. It was also able to

teach them something about the heavenly sanctuary and the

sacrifice of Chri st. O n the other han d, Chri st' s entrance into the

heavenly tent shows that the earthly sanctuary no longer has any

sta nding, and that the levitical sacrifices are no longer valid. Not

only should the readers look to heaven instead of the earthly tent

for cleansing from sin, but now, as a result of the un ique effec

tiveness of Je su s' priestly minis try, access to the tru e sanctuary is

more open that was the case even with its copy. All of this the

author develops by making the ministry of the priests within the

earthly tent a for his own time. In fact, it is the divisions

in the functions of the levitical priests within the tabernacle on

which our author depends, divisions re la ted to the architecture of

the tabernacle, and divisions related to the na tu re of its sacrifices.

Our author's genius, then, lies in his handling of the divisions

within the old system itself in such a way as to help his readers bet

ter understand the division between the old, Mosaic system and the

new, Christian system he advocates.


16/16

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission

from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific

work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,

or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American

Theological Library Association.

Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6

Documents

Transcript of Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6