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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
"
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
9/16
THE "PARABLE " OF HEB 9:6-10 393
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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)
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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.
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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 "
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
15/16
THE "PARABLE " OF HEB 9:6-10 399
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.
7/31/2019 Parable of Tabernacle - Heb 9.6
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.