The Suffering Son's Sacrifice

Mike Leake

Hebrews • Sermon • Submitted 5 years ago

Hebrews 5:1–10

0 ratings

· 16 views

Notes

Transcript

Sermon Tone Analysis

Emotion

Language

Social

View more →

The story of the Bible begins with God putting humanity in a Garden to work it and keep it. His presence is there with them. They are his image-bearers. They have as good of access as creatures can have with an infinite and holy God. But it’s not long before these image-bearers have a new identity. They now become rebels. Finite and sinful human beings. From the moment they take of the forbidden fruit---the moment they put their own will and desire before the will and desire of their Good Father—they realize they’ve messed up. They for the very first time feel this strange thing called shame. They feel their nakedness. It’s not a beautiful thing in this moment—it’s embarrassing—shame inducing.

So they sew together for themselves fig leaves and try to cover themselves. But it doesn’t do the trick. The shame remains. They hide behind a bush but it doesn’t do the job either. The gaze of God finds them. They are exposed. And then the blame game begins. It ends with them being booted from the garden. Access denied.

Now fast forward to the time of Moses and Aaron. We’re now well into the second and third book of the Bible. Quite a bit of time has passed. And God has, surprisingly, continued to relate to humanity. He has made a way for them to continue to have at least some access. It’s not free and wonderful and Garden of Eden type of access but it’s the best at this point that can be offered to finite sinful humanity. But we should have seen this coming from . Because even though their fig leaves don’t cover we see that God made clothes for them. “The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.” Something dies to cover their shame. That’ll come up again.

And so now we have Aaron as a high priest. Now I will confess that I don’t tend to be a detail person. So reading through some of these lengthy passages in Exodus and Leviticus is really tough for me. It’s so much detail. I mean a TON of detail. Like very detailed descriptions of what specifically Aaron is supposed to wear in order to come into the presence of God. Specifically the way that the animals are to be slaughtered. How you are specifically supposed to deal with the blood. What to burn and how. So much detail.

And you can read some of these things and think why in the world does that matter? Consider this small section out of a lengthy chapter in Exodus.

Exodus 28:31–35 ESV

“You shall make the robe of the ephod all of blue. It shall have an opening for the head in the middle of it, with a woven binding around the opening, like the opening in a garment, so that it may not tear. On its hem you shall make pomegranates of blue and purple and scarlet yarns, around its hem, with bells of gold between them, a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, around the hem of the robe. And it shall be on Aaron when he ministers, and its sound shall be heard when he goes into the Holy Place before the Lord, and when he comes out, so that he does not die.

Exodus 28:31-35

And this stuff is very serious too. Because in we read that Aaron’s sons decide one day that they’ll mix things up a bit and they take what’s called “strange fire” or what the ESV calls “unauthorized fire before the Lord, which he had not commanded them.” And you know what happens? These guys…high priests…get consumed by fire. I emphasize that they are high priests because that’s important. They had to come from the line of Aaron. A high priest had to be one of his kids…and then their kids…and then so on. Aaron only has so many kids.

Silly illustration but it’s like if a couple of star players on your basketball team does something bad. But the coach only has like 9 players on his team and these are a couple of the best ones. So what does he do? Sit them a quarter or two? No. In this instance he’d boot them off the team completely.

But that’s a silly illustration because we aren’t talking not being able to play basketball we are talking not being able to live anymore. So why does God take this so serious? Because he is communicating that He is holy and there is a certain way to approach him. Like that’s not him just playing games it’s legit reality. Our God is a consuming fire…we will read that later in Hebrews. And so if He lovingly says don’t approach me that way it’s kind of like telling a child, don’t put your hand in the oven and grab the pizza pan. Don’t get close to that because you are going to get burned. If you are going to stick your hand in the oven put on an oven mitt.

If I’d been in the Garden of Eden, it would have been a bit like this:

God: “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Me: “Why? Why would I die from that? This seems like a really dumb rule that doesn’t make any sense at all. Explain to me your thought process here and I’ll gladly obey. But I don’t obey dumb rules that don’t make any sense.”

Satan: “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?

Me: “Yes, he did. And then he didn’t explain to me why. He just said don’t do it. Which doesn’t make a bit of sense to me. “

Satan: “That’s because God is holding out on you. He didn’t want to tell you the whole story because he is trying to rip you off. You saw right through it, oh, wise one. You don’t have to follow dumb rules that don’t make any sense. If God really loved you then He would tell you everything.

Me: *chomps down on forbidden fruit*

—

I’d have chomped on that fruit because unless you explain the full reason for the rule and I agree with it too I’m not going to just obey. But that really was the point of the tree in the Garden.

Why am I telling you all of this? Because it seems to me that this same question is what the author of Hebrews is working towards answering. How do we have access to God? And connected with this is the question of whether or not we can pinch hit for Jesus. Does it really matter if we offer strange fire? I mean it’s the heart right? Does Jesus have to be absolutely qualified? Does it have to be only Jesus?

There is a question that often lingers out there when we tell kids the story of Creation and the Fall. At some point we all ask the question. Why in the world did God put that tree there in the first place? If it was so important not to eat from it, then why in the world even have it there. If he didn’t want them to eat of it—then why even create the thing? Why give an opportunity?

But that’s really the whole point of the tree. They didn’t have to understand all the intricacies of the tree in order to decide whether or not they should obey. They didn’t need to deliberate about whether or not it was wise for them to obey. They simply should have obeyed because God knows best and He is a good Father. If he says don’t eat, that should have been the end of the story. But my late ancestors had the same heart that I still find in myself—they weren’t going to just obey.

If I’m being honest there are some things in the Scriptures that I simply do not get. I do not understand why God set things up the way he did. As an example, I believe the Bible teaches complementarianism. And I’m even one of those out-dated people who believe the pulpit is reserved for men. That’s how I read the Scriptures. But I’m a bit uneasy with the complementarian position. Many of the reasons some people give for why God set things up this way seems to me to be a bit demeaning towards women. But I cannot get around the Scriptures and so I hold a position which makes me a bit uncomfortable.

There are other positions of which I’m convinced are biblical but they make me a bit uneasy too. I simply do not understand why God set these things up the way that He did. But I’m asked to obey them nonetheless. And it feels a bit like I am back in the Garden of Eden with God saying something like, “Don’t eat the fruit…if you do you’ll die” but not really giving me reasons for the rule.

And I don’t like rules without reasons. I was taught to call such a thing legalism. And I think for the most part that’s true—but I also believe on occasion God does just that. He gives us rules and commands without fully explaining why we can or cannot do a certain thing. It might not make a ton of sense to our fallen or finite sensibilities but the command is still there.

I’ve blown it. My sin carries with it the sentence of death. I don’t have access to God. BUT God has graciously provided for me a way in which I can again have access. So how am I trying to “get in” to the party? Is it through Jesus…uniquely qualified? Or am I pretending like there is another way to get in? is going to be making the argument that Jesus is uniquely qualified to be the eternal source of salvation.

So I’m confronted daily with the same choice as our first parents. Am I going to say, “Well, that’s a dumb rule” and go about pretending like I’ve got the power to change reality? Or am I going to stop pretending like God’s Word is made of wax and simply obey even if I don’t really understand why I’m obeying?

READ TEXT

So what does it take to get to heaven? That’s really not the best way to phrase that question. Because if our conception of heaven is all messed up then we aren’t going to really get this. And so I think it might be better to talk about Garden of Eden type stuff. Again the great issue with humanity after being booted from the Garden is that we don’t have access to God. I mean sure, there is a high priest, a day of atonement but that’s one guy for one day of the year. You couldn’t just come into the presence of God. No walking in the cool of the morning. There’s a neat little story that we sometimes like to tell about the high priest having to tie a rope around his ankle so that if he dies in the presence of God they can drag him out. It kind of helps for preaching but it’s really not accurate. I mention it only to say that one of the reasons why it’s likely not accurate is because of how think the curtain/the veil was between the Holy of Holies and where the people would go. It’s that thick to symbolize that because of sin humanity is no longer safe in the presence of God.

But God has graciously made a way to once again dwell with humanity. So what is required for us to once again have the dwelling of God with man?

So what is required for us to once again have the dwelling of God with man?

First, the right guy has to make the sacrifice. You couldn’t just have some random dude serve as a high priest. It’s not a position you volunteer for. Nor is it something where the high priest could say, “I’m feeling a bit sick today, Wally can you fill in for me.” Nope. The guy has to be appointed by God to do this thing.

First, the right guy has to be

Secondly, the sacrifice that he makes has to be acceptable. That’s part of what happened with Aaron’s sons. You couldn’t just make the rules up as you go along. If the sacrifice required a bull you couldn’t show up with your donkey and sacrifice him because he just bit you the other morning and you’d like to give him what’s coming to him. No it had to be animal without blemish. The sacrifice had to be acceptable.

And the last thing—we will see this even more later on in Hebrews—if we’re talking about an eternal party then you have to have someone who is going to give you eternal access. His priesthood has to be eternal and his sacrifice has to be eternal. Otherwise you have to just keep doing it again and again. So what we see here in is that Jesus fulfills all of this.

So why do you care about this? Why does this matter? Because it’s about access…

Jesus can give us access to God because he is a qualified high priest

5:1-6 Jesus can give us access to God because he is a qualified high priest

In verses 1-4, there are three qualifications. First, the high priest has to be selected by God from men. As I said earlier, you don’t just volunteer for this thing. God appoints you to it. There is a story that you might write down and read about Korah’s rebellion in . He was jealous that Aaron was the high priest and that nobody else could be. But that’s the point. You have to be selected by God. That’s verse 4.

So does Jesus qualify there? The author of Hebrews says that he does. He actually combines two verses and . And it’s a bit of an interesting combination here but what he is doing is showing how Jesus is a priest-king. The author of Hebrews is taking two passages which pointed to someone greater to come and he is saying that Jesus fulfills these. He is the one appointed by God. God picked him for this job.

And there’s a side point here, I believe, that God still calls leaders. But we had better not be hasty in taking this upon ourselves. God appoints. God calls.

Secondly, we see that the high priest had to be sympathetic with humanity. Or as we read in verse 2 he was able to “deal gently with the ignorant and wayward because he himself is beset with weakness.” The word there for beset with weakness means that he is surrounded by weakness. The high priest was sinful himself. And so he understood what it was like—it caused him to deal gently with the ignorant and wayward because he himself knew it was like to be sinful.

So does Jesus fit the mold here? Absolutely. This is the point the author of Hebrews is making in verses 7-9 and the point he just made in . Jesus can fully identify with humanity. He was fully human yet was without sin.

Hebrews Qualifications of a Priest

This also seems to recall the Old Testament distinction between, on one hand, those who sin in ignorance and weakness and, on the other, those who commit high-handed or openly rebellious sins (see Num. 15:22–31; Lev. 22:14–16; and Ps. 95:7–11). The difference today would be between believers who, despite their faith in Christ as Savior, still struggle with sin, and those who reject the gospel and sin without repentance. Sinning believers are forgiven through the saving work of Jesus. But unrepentant, unbelieving sinners have no one to bear their sins but themselves. How wonderful that “the ignorant and wayward” find a compassionate high priest who will gently lead them into God’s grace.

Third, the high priest has to do his job of making a sacrifice for humanity. There are two parts to his work here. He offered gifts. And he offered sacrifices. The gifts is likely a reference to the meal offering—the only bloodless offering in the NT. It was an offering of thanksgiving to God. But the main part of his work was the sin offerings. And you’ll notice that I said “sin offering(s) plural.

It’s not a singular act. It’s not a once and done thing. We’ll see this come up later in Hebrews. But he cannot do away with the principle of sin. But he makes atonement for sins. But this had to be repeated over and over and over again. And this is really the point of much of the section on Hebrews here. Jesus’ sacrifice was actually greater than all the others.

So in sum, Jesus is absolutely qualified as a high priest. He has been sent by God, appointed by God, to offer sacrifice on behalf of humanity. And He can fully identify with us. He can offer sacrifices on our behalf. But would they be acceptable?

Now before we get there I think it’s helpful for us to take a look at these words “ignorant and wayward”.

This might shock you but in the OT there is absolutely no provision made for the deliberate and defiant law-breaker. You see the purpose of the sacrifice isn’t some mechanical thing you do in order to cover your bases and keep yourself from getting struck by lightning. It’s not meant to be a fig leaf to merely keep you away from the punishment or consequence of sin. The sacrifice for sin is meant to restore relationship. But where there is deliberate and defiant law-breaker there was no provision made. Now let that sink in for just a moment. If you really are you might be thinking...”oh man, I think I’ve maybe done that. I was a defiant rebel. I intentionally blasphemed and cursed God.”

We’ll come to in a couple of weeks but consider this, ““For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins…” So the author of Hebrews is saying that if we continue in this defiant, eyes-wide opened, rebellious reaction to the God of the Universe, then there is no sacrifice that will cover that. And so you’re thinking oh man, I think I might have sinned knowingly. I knew that it was against God’s law and I did it anyways. So does that mean there is no sacrifice left for me?

Well thankfully when the Bible talks about sins of ignorance or being wayward it means far more than just knowledge or a lack of knowledge. My friend Jeff, a pastor in Hannibal, MO has put it this way:

What were the sins of ignorance? Well, let me say that it meant more than simply a lack of knowledge. It was not just a lack of knowledge. That was included, but the sins of ignorance also involved those in which a man was swept away in a moment of impulse, swept away by anger or passion, or mastered by some overwhelming temptation. Any and all of those sins for which a man repented and was sorrowful were the sins of ignorance. You say then what are the sins of presumption? Is there anything left? Indeed there is. The sins of presumption were the cold, calculating deliberate sins for which a man was not sorry.

You see if you are thinking, oh man that’s not okay with me. I don’t want to have that relationship with God broken. Oh God, help me. Cleanse me. Heal me. Restore me! If that’s your heart cry then that’s the very type of sin that was covered. But if your heart attitude toward sin is something like, “ah, I’m sure I’ll be forgiven. That’s what God does. It’s his job. No big deal. If you are defiantly rebelling against God and you are continuing to rebel and disobey then what Jesus has done does not cover you. It’s not yours. You aren’t reaching out and grabbing that. I like how one commentator put it:

Hebrews Qualifications of a Priest

Surely this includes every believer. It is in our ignorance and waywardness that we sin against God. This also seems to recall the Old Testament distinction between, on one hand, those who sin in ignorance and weakness and, on the other, those who commit high-handed or openly rebellious sins (see Num. 15:22–31; Lev. 22:14–16; and Ps. 95:7–11). The difference today would be between believers who, despite their faith in Christ as Savior, still struggle with sin, and those who reject the gospel and sin without repentance. Sinning believers are forgiven through the saving work of Jesus. But unrepentant, unbelieving sinners have no one to bear their sins but themselves. How wonderful that “the ignorant and wayward” find a compassionate high priest who will gently lead them into God’s grace.

That’s all well and good that Jesus is a faithful high priest who has died to make a sacrifice for humanity to cover our sin once and for all. But is it acceptable to God?

And that’s what we see prominently in verses 7-9.

Jesus can give us access to God because his sacrifice is acceptable

And the priest existed to open the way back to God only for the sinner who repented, the sins of ignorance. Any sin could become a sin of ignorance if a man repented and turned his heart to God.

The sacrifice is meant to restore that relationship, but one thing is very important. Sacrifices for sins could only atone for the sins of ignorance or unintentional. Now there are two kinds of sin that the Old Testament talks about. Sins of presumption, of which David says "Lord, keep thy servant back from presumptuous sins and sins of ignorance." For the sins of presumption there is no sacrifice.

This is defiant breaking of God's laws and it's no different than today for a man who rejects God's ways, if a man rejects God's provision for sin, openly defies God and continues in sin, there's no sacrifice.

But for those who sinned in ignorance, there were really two sacrifices. For the sins that he knew he committed, the daily sacrifices. For the ones that he didn't know he committed, the Day of Atonement took care of all of those.

Now in “For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins…” That knowledgeable, defiant, rebellious reaction against God, there is no sacrifice.

OT example . verse 26, "And it shall be forgiven." Now go back to verse 30-31.

God has never provided and does not provide today expiation or forgiveness of sins that are willful in defiance of God. Now let me show you what I mean by that. What were the sins of ignorance? Well, let me say that it meant more than simply a lack of knowledge. It was not just a lack of knowledge. That was included, but the sins of ignorance also involved those in which a man was swept away in a moment of impulse, swept away by anger or passion, or mastered by some overwhelming temptation. Any and all of those sins for which a man repented and was sorrowful were the sins of ignorance. You say then what are the sins of presumption? Is there anything left? Indeed there is. The sins of presumption were the cold, calculating deliberate sins for which a man was not sorry. They were open-eyed, defiant and disobedient to God. And the priest existed to open the way back to God only for the sinner who repented, the sins of ignorance. Any sin could become a sin of ignorance if a man repented and turned his heart to God.

It was that cold, stubborn, repeated defiance of God that was the sin of presumption. And it's no different today. For any man and any woman, whoever they may be, who comes to God and repents of his sin, there is forgiveness. But for that one who defiantly rebels against God, who by his own will disobeys and continues to disobey there is no more sacrifice for sins.

5:7-8 Jesus can give us access to God because his sacrifice is acceptable

Thirdly he has to do his job of making a sacrifice for humanity.

“In the days of his flesh” again this shows us that he’s fully human. That his sacrifice is that of a man who is making sacrifice on behalf of man. And then we see he “offered up prayers and supplications”. That word offered up is the same word used of the priest offering sacrifices. With loud cries and tears.

5:7-8 Jesus can give us access to God because his sacrifice is acceptable

This likely is pointing to the Garden of Gethsemane or to the Suffering Servant in the OT. This is pointing to his sacrifice on our behalf. His prayers and supplications are likely on our behalf. And notice how it says “he was heard because of his reverence.” It’s a word which points to reverent awe in the presence of God. It’s Jesus saying, “not my will but your will be done.” It’s Jesus laying himself on the altar and saying “thy will be done”. He’s the sacrifice. He’s the ram in the thicket. He’s the sacrificial lamb.

Then we read that “although he was a son he learned obedience through what he suffered.” Wait. Learned obedience? Jesus didn’t have to learn anything did he? Or does this mean that at one point he didn’t obey but then all of a sudden he picked it up and started obeying? No, of course not. What it means is that through experience he lived out obedience. And it happened through his suffering. That’s not what you’d expect. Son of God. Silver spoon is his mouth. A prince. But no God set him on a road marked with suffering. This is the best way I’ve heard this put:

Rather, Jesus’ call involved walking obediently all the way to the end of a path to which the Father had appointed him. That he “learned obedience” means that the Son arrived “at a new stage of experience,” having passed through the school of suffering.13 Perfection refers to the Son’s having “graduated” from that school, accomplishing the mission and making it to the end of that path of passion.

Or this:

By making it all the way to the end of his Passion, Jesus was made “complete” in the sense of being able to fulfill his role as our high priest. He finished the course. He drank the full measure of the experience that was needed in order to come before the throne with a sacrifice with which our sins would be addressed. Moreover, that he “learned obedience” means that the Son said “yes” to the Father’s will in an extreme situation that he had not yet encountered.

Then notice verse 9. And being made perfect. That means his sacrifice is acceptable. His job is complete. He became an eternal source of eternal salvation to all who obey him.

His sacrifice is acceptable. The price has been paid. You are clean. You are free. Guilt doesn’t stand over you anymore. His record is your record.

Closing:

Eternal. It doesn’t have to be made again.

Deliberate, defiant. I can do this on my own. There’s no provision for you. The blood of Christ does not cover you as you stand right now. His sacrifice is not applied to your account. But it can be.

Repent and believe. Changed heart.

If you are in Christ then thank God for what’s taken place here.

Mountain of sin and guilt. Feelings

THE PRIESTLY QUALIFICATIONS:

1. selected by God from men,

2. sympathetic with men, and

3. sacrificing for men.

Then bring near to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the people of Israel, to serve me as priests—Aaron and Aaron’s sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar.

Now here is God very pointedly and very directly choosing His priests. And you know as well as I do that anyone in the Old Testament who ministered apart from having been chosen by God got into a lot of trouble. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram tried to minister in a way that God had not ordained them to minister and the ground swallowed them.

God didn't choose angels to be priests. He didn't choose animals to be priests. He chose men who would act on the behalf of men. Angels don't have the nature of the men. It had to be a man who was subject to the temptations of men. It had to be a man who had experiential acquaintance with suffering like men have in order that they might minister in a merciful way. And only a man could rightly minister for men.

Now remember to whom this Epistle is written, the Jews could not understand the incarnation. That was always a problem in their basic understanding along with the cross which they couldn't understand either why a Messiah would have to die.

And here the Holy Spirit very simply answers the problem of the incarnation in just one application. You see God had to become man or He never could have been the great high priest of men, do you see? Unless God feels what men feel and goes through what men go through, then He has no basis experientially to operate as a high priest for men. If God had never become man, He could never have been a high priest. He could never have been a mediator. He could never have been an intercessor. He could never have offered that sacrifice for the sins of His people which divine justice required. And so the incarnation wasn't an option friends. It was an absolute necessity. It was an imperative if salvation was to be accomplished.

In the OT God was unapproachable. , God drives man out of the Garden and from then on, God is unapproachable. The children of Israel got in the wilderness and what God said out of Sinai was get away, get away, get away. Don't come near. In the tabernacle and the temple, God was behind a veil and men could only get to God through this priest, chosen from them.

And so Jesus Christ having accomplished His great sacrifice, passed through the heavens and entered into the holy of holies in heaven and left the way wide open for us, didn't He? And not only does He enter in for us, but we can enter in on the basis of His merits, and that's a first.

So the first key characteristic of a true high priest, he had to be appointed by God directly. Nobody elected him, he had to be appointed by God Himself.

No man can legitimately act as a high priest unless he's divinely called to that office. And anybody who tries to usurp that office is coming under the judgment of God.

True priests had to be sympathetic, that's verse 2. The word compassion or as it's translated here means to bear gently with because you feel it too. He must able to bear gently with the faults of other men knowing that he's got the same problems. See? A priest must be a man, completely involved in the human situation.

Because Jesus is a

The Greeks and even the Jews always felt that God was a little bit apathetic. A little bit on the indifferent side and far removed. And He didn't really feel what they felt. And so here He tells us but a true high priest has got to be feeling the extremes of human emotion and bearing gently with them because He knows what they're going through.

Now the objects of his gentle bearing are interesting. It says that He has this compassion on the ignorant and wayward. It means he is to have gentle forbearance on those who go astray through ignorance.

And the priest shall make atonement before the Lord for the person who makes a mistake, when he sins unintentionally, to make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven.

a. And this indicates that the function of a priest was broken down at least into two parts. First of all, gifts. Now what are gifts? This could include all of the money that the people gave and all of the various things that they brought to the priest. But I suspect that the direct reference is to the meal offering. Now you remember that in Leviticus there were many offerings that were outlined, but there were five key ones. Only one of those offerings was a bloodless offering and that was the meal offering. It was a bloodless gift of thanksgiving to God and kind of a gift of dedication.

I'll tell you how it worked. The person who wanted to bring the meal offering would bring fine flour and oil and frankincense poured in the oil to make it smell good, and a handful would be burned on the altar. And the remainder would belong to the priests for their own consumption. You could bake it or you could pan fry it.

But it would be given to the priests, and there were some restrictions involved in the pan fried cake or the flour that you brought. There could be no Levin and there could be no honey because the fermented. There was another necessity, it had to have salt because salt preserves. They had to keep out anything that would ferment and put in salt to preserve. Because it was a dedication offering, God wanted the symbol to show a dedication that would not ferment, but one that would remain.

So of all of the offerings, the burnt offering, the trespass offering, the sin offering, and the peace offering, this was the only bloodless offering. And this may be what He's referring to when He talks about gifts for this was offered to God as a dedication. But on top of that He also, in verse 1, offers not only gifts, but what? Sacrifices for sins.

He was not a perfect priest. So what he had to do was go in there and go through the whole rigmarole for himself and then come back and do it for the people. And sacrificing for men including sacrificing for himself. but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. Isn't it wonderful that when Jesus went in, He went without sin? He never had to offer a sacrifice for Himself, did He? Never. Sin estranges men from God.

But notice that the sins of ignorance were the only ones really covered. Now in “For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins…” That knowledgeable, defiant, rebellious reaction against God, there is no sacrifice.

OT example . verse 26, "And it shall be forgiven." Now go back to verse 30-31.

So the high priest then is qualified by being selected by God, sympathetic with men, and sacrificing for men.

Jesus fulfills every one of these qualifications:

1. First of all, selected by God from men. Verse 5, Who chose Jesus to be a high priest? God did. And what's the first qualification for a legitimate high priest? Had to be chosen by God.

There's a wonderful statement by Jesus in If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me…” He didn't seek glory. And God highly exalted Him and gave Him a name above every name. God glorifies the Son.

So Jesus Christ fits the first requirement of a high priest. He's ordained of God. Notice at the end of verse 5, let me read it and into verse 6, The same God that said "Thou art my Son," is the same God that said "Thou art a priest."

Now where did Jesus get His right to be the priest? From God. The Jew knows . And the Jew also knows , which is quoted in verse 6. And the Jew knows that that's referring to the Messiah whose going to be a great king priest. The same God who said, "you're my Son," said, "you're a Priest." And you're not a priest after Aaron's order. You're a priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Who is Melchizedek? Well we'll study a lot about Melchizedek when we get to Chapter 7. I'll give you a little Melchizedekian preview. Melchizedek is spoken of in , because in the Psalmist is kind of prophesying the coming of Messiah. And He uses Melchizedek as an example of Jesus or a type of Jesus. Because Melchizedek was more than the average run of the mill priest.

In the first place, he had a higher priesthood order than did Aaron. He lived before Aaron ever got on the scene. His priesthood superseded the priesthood of Aaron. And he had a very interesting priesthood. We'll get into Chapter 7 and find out about it. He's a great type of Jesus Christ in many ways. And you don't want to miss that study when we get there, because it's really rich. But at this point, let me just say this that in , the Messiah is presented as a king priest.

I get this as a parent. There are times when I simply cannot explain everything to my children. And I don’t need to explain everything to them. At that moment I need their obedience and their trust. Maybe we can talk about it later—but at that moment we don’t need to deliberate or decide if daddy’s rule is a valid one.

So I wonder if some of those theological conundrums are our own forbidden fruits. Has God given us enough in Scripture to hold a position—even if uncomfortably—but not enough for us to really know exactly why he set it up that way?

Perhaps He is still asking His children to trust that He knows best. I’m convinced we are called to take God’s Word as it is. We aren’t called to decide whether or not we like this particular rule or that particular path of obedience. We are called to just obey. Some day it’ll make sense—but that isn’t for now. Now is time for trusting our Father and walking in obedience.

Yes, obedience just because He said so.

But Leviticus

And there are some rea

Fast forward to the time of Moses and Aaron and the building of the tabernacle. It

st forward to the time of Moses and Aaron and the building of the tabernacle. It