HEBREWS
Book 2

The description of the great features of Christ’s Priesthood which has been given in the last division of the Epistle is naturally followed by a view of the fulfillment of His office. This includes the final answer to the disappointments and doubts of the Hebrews. It has been shown that:

The writer therefore goes on to indicate how He discharges the duties of this supreme and absolute Priesthood, and how it involves of necessity the abrogation of the Mosaic ritual.
To this end he first marks the scene and the conditions of:

He then compares:

While he significantly suggests that we are still waiting for the Return of Christ from the Presence of God to announce the completion of His Work.

In conclusion he brings forward the consideration which is at once the foundation and the crown of his argument:

This has been rendered perfectly by the Incarnate Son of God; whose sacrifice of Himself in Life and Death avails for ever for that humanity which He has taken to Himself. Through His Work the Covenant of grace finds accomplishment  (Heb. 10:1-18).
These three sections:

Complete argument of the Epistle; and show that the Mosaic system, with its great memories and consoling institutions, has no value for the Christian.  

A General View Of The Scene And The Conditions Of Christ's High-Priestly Work  (8:1-13)

Before discussing in detail the High-priestly work of Christ,  the writer gives a general view of its character in relation to:

The Dwelling 
The most common single name is that which expresses generally  ‘a habitation.  The Hebrew root word is used of ‘settling,’  ‘resting,’  ‘dwelling,’ and that both of man and beasts (so of the glory of God –the Shekinah in later language – Exodus 24:16).  The Hebrew word suggests nothing more than a ‘dwelling-place’ (of men,  Numbers 16:24,27; and of the Temple in Psalms),  and,  as it is expressed definitely,  ‘the dwelling-place of Jehovah’
Lev. 17:4; Num. 16:9 etc.

The Tent
A second name  ‘tent,’  is more definite,  and describes the characteristic dwelling of the wilderness,  though it was used also in later times (Ps. 15:1; 27:4).  This name is used sometimes alone (Exodus 26:9,11,36; etc.),  but more frequently in combination with other words (‘the tent of meeting,’  ‘the tent of the witness’ [testimony]).  The ‘habitation’ (‘dwelling’)  and the ‘tent’ are clearly distinguished  (Ex. 26:7; 35:14 etc).

More commonly, however, the Tabernacle is described by a compound title. The simple terms ‘habitation’ and ‘tent’ are defined by the addition of some other word as  ‘witness’ (testimony)  or ‘meeting’; and these two designations express two distinct aspects of the Tabernacle. 

The Tabernacle was the place where God made Himself known (Exodus 25:8,22),  speaking to the representatives of the nation (Exodus 29:42; Numbers 17:4 [19]);  and it could not truly be said that the people were assembled in ‘the tent’  (yet see Matthew 23:38).  The  ‘tent of meeting’  was so completely identified with the revealed Presence of the Lord  that it is said to  ‘dwell with the people in the midst of their uncleanness’ (Lev. 16:16).
Taking then these general titles of the Tabernacle we see that the structure was held to represent provisionally in a sensible form three truths:

It is scarcely necessary to add that the idea of a  ‘dwelling’  of the Lord in no way tended to confine His Presence to one spot: it simply gave a distinct reality to the fact of His Presence.

The Building And Fabric Of  The Tabernacle

If now we consider the account of the building and arrangement of the Tabernacle we shall recognize that it was fitted to convey most impressively the three lessons which it embodied:

So the people confessed that if God is to be known, He must reveal Himself.

Again:  it was framed substantially out of free-will offerings (Ex. 25:2).  There was indeed ransom-money,  equal in amount for every one,  which was used in the structure (Ex. 38:25),   but this was employed for definite purposes; and the narrative emphasizes the willingness with which the people contributed to ‘the work of the tent, and all the service thereof’ (Ex. 35:20; 36:5). A revelation comes from God only,  but it is for man to embrace it from the heart and give form to it.

The Three-Fold Division  Of The Tabernacle

The general plan of the Tabernacle suggested,  even to the simplest worshipper,   the Majesty of God,  Who hides Himself even when He comes among men.  The three divisions of the whole:

marked stages in human approach to Him;  and the increasing richness of the material in the successive parts suggested thoughts of His immeasurable dignity. 

The chamber (Holy of Holies)- the perfect cube (compare Rev. 21:16)-which expressed His most immediate manifestation, was in itself wholly dark.  For man perfect darkness and perfect light (I Tim. 6:16) are in effect the same. We,  in our weakness, can see objects only when the two are mixed. Compare Psalms 18:11; I Kings 8:12.

So also the limitations in the right of entrance to each part showed that as yet God could not be fully known by men even with the knowledge to which they could attain.  The way to His presence was not yet open (Heb. 9:8).  

The Furniture Or The Tabernacle

The furniture of the different parts still further illustrated by intelligible symbols the conditions and the limits of the approach to God. 

The author's argument, it will be seen, meets indirectly difficulties which were felt as to:

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(1) Now a summary of the things being spoken of [is], such we have a high priest, who sat down on [the] right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens;  (2)  of the Holies minister, and of the tabernacle true which pitched the Lord and not man. (3) For every high priest for to offer both gifts and sacrifices is constituted; whence [it is] necessary to have something also [for] this one which he may offer. (4) If indeed for he were on earth, not even would he be a priest, there being the priests who offer according to the law the gifts, (5) who [the] representation and shadow serve of the heavenly, according as was divinely instructed Moses being about to construct the tabernacle; for, see, says he, thou make all things according to the pattern which was shown thee in the mountain. (6) But now a more excellent he has obtained ministry by so much as also of a better he is covenant mediator, which upon better promises has been established.

8:1 & 2 -  A general statement of Christ’s High-priestly work, as He is King at once and Minister.

8:1 

Now a summary of the things being spoken of
Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is….
The word  now a summary  or you could say  Summary sum  or  Chief point, main matter. 
The second sense  (chief point)  falls in best with the context. What follows is not so much a summary of the Apostle’s teaching, as an indication of the central thought by which it is inspired.  If this sense be taken the question still remains whether  now a summary  refers to any new subject,  as that of the spiritual sanctuary in which Christ fulfils His office, or to the whole sentence, in which the idea of the sanctuary is only one element in many.

The general construction of the sentence favors the latter view.
The thought of a High-priest who has taken His seat on the right hand of God, who is King as well as Priest, is clearly the prominent thought in the sentence. It has not found distinct expression before; and it is the main point in the whole discussion on Christ’s High-priestly work, from which the conviction of the efficacy of His one sacrifice follows. His session on the divine throne shows that He is sovereign of the Kingdom which He has established by His Death; and at the same time this fact explains what seems to men His delay in the Sanctuary (Heb. 10:13).

Of the things being spoken of
In the case of,  in the consideration of,  the things which are now being said,  in the argument which we are now conducting.
The reference is to the whole subject of Christ’s High-priesthood which is still under discussion, and not to what has been advanced before.

Such….who sat down
The pronoun  (such)  may be taken either as

The parallel in Heb. 7:26 is not decisive either way.  The context however seems to require that Christ’s kingly dignity in the exercise of His priestly office should be specially emphasized, so that the second sense is to be preferred: ‘We have a High-priest who fulfils His office in royal dignity, not as priests on earth; and the scene of His ministry is heaven.’

Who sat down
Compare Heb. 10:12; 12:2  (sat down).
The image is taken from Psalms 110.  The writer of the Epistle is at length able to repeat,  after gaining a full view of the significance of the statement,  what he had said at the beginning in Hebrews 1:3  sat down on right hand of the greatness on high.

The idea of  ‘taking the seat’ is distinct from that of  ‘sitting’.
In this connection the full meaning of passages like Revelation 3:21 becomes clear. Christ makes His people also kings and priests.

A striking illustration is quoted from the Hebrew Talmud Shemoth R. Pg. 8 (Wunsche. P. 74). 
‘A king of flesh and blood does not set his crown on another, but God (Blessed be He) will set His crown on King Messiah: Cant. V. 11; Psalms 21:3.’

On the right hand of the throne of the greatness
‘The power’  was a common Rabbinic name for God in His Majesty: ‘we heard it from the mouth of the Power.’ Compare Mark 14:62  at right hand of power.

The phrase  ‘the throne of the Divine Majesty’ is chosen with reference to the Glory which rested on the Mercy Seat in the Holy of Holies: Lev. 16:2; compare Ex. 25:22.

The patristic interpretation of  ‘the Majesty’  is uncertain but the Early Church Fathers carefully avoid all  humanization in their treatment of  ‘the right hand of God.'   This Session declares under a natural figure that the Son of man has entered on the full and permanent participation of the divine glory and power.’

8:2

Of the Holies minister
A minister of the sanctuary.  The phrase  of  the Holies  is unquestionably neuter: see Hebrews 9:8,12, etc.  It describes  ‘the Sanctuary,’   and specially what is elsewhere (Heb. 9:3) called 'the Holy of Holies.’

There is a significant contrast between the Session of Christ and His ‘serving’.

Of the tabernacle true…..not man
The action of Christ’s Priesthood extends to all parts of the divine Dwelling.  Thus the more general word tabernacle is added,  but no local distinction can be pressed in regard to the heavenly antitype (archetype). Compare Revelation 15:5; (13:6).

The general thought is that of

This  ‘Tabernacle,’  which Christ serves and through which God is made known to men,
is the ideal ‘Tabernacle’ of which the earthly Tabernacle was only a symbol.

The Lord
Compare v. 11  (Know the Lord)  and also  Jeremiah 31:34 from the LXX.  ‘And they shall no more teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother,  saying,  Know the Lord……’  
Elsewhere in the Epistle  ‘the Lord’ (Jehovah)  is always represented by Lord  (eleven times)  while the Lord is used of Jesus Christ.

8:3,4  -  The fact and the scene of Christ’s High-priestly work.

8:3

For every high priest
Compare Heb. 5:1
The fact that the Lord is High-priest- a minister of the sanctuary- involves of necessity and rests upon His performance of  High-priestly functions;  for every High-priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. He must therefore have both:

Whence…..which he may offer
Whence it was necessary that this High-priest also should have something to offer.
This offering is described as made once for all  (he may offer  contrasted with  he should offer of Hebrews 9:25; compare also Hebrews 7:27  to offer up).   The one sufficient offering was made by Christ as the condition of entrance into the sanctuary through His own blood (Heb. 9:12).  On this His intercession is based. That intercession knows no end or interruption;  and therefore no second offering is required, as in the case of the Levitical High-priest, who made a fresh offering every year in order that he might again enter and repeat the intercession which had been made before.

The necessary condition of the entrance of our High-priest into the Presence of God throws light upon the difficulty which the Hebrews felt as to His death. Through no less an offering than that of Himself could He come before God for His people.

To have something
That is  ‘Himself’ (Heb. 7:27  to offer up;  Heb. 9:14,25 offered)  
or His ‘Body’ (Heb. 10:10 offering). 

It seems necessary to supply that object which is elsewhere used with  offered  in the same connection. Many have interpreted the 'something' of  ‘the Blood.’  But the Blood was not properly  ‘offered’ in the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement  (yet see Hebrews 9:7).

It was used as the means of entrance and purification. Even so Christ entered into the Divine Presence ‘through His own Blood’ (Heb. 9:12),  and by that purifies ‘the heavenly things’ (Heb. 9:23)  and the people (Heb. 13:12);  but we do not read that He ‘offered’ it.  The indefinite pronoun,  as contrasted with both gifts and sacrifices,  indicates the mysteriousness of the offering.

8:4  

If indeed….not even would he be a priest
Now if He were still upon earth, He would not be a priest at all, and therefore still less High-priest
The argument is direct to show that, since Christ as High-priest must do characteristic service,  the scene of His service must be heaven and not earth.  The wish therefore which many entertained for some priestly work of Christ on earth was really fatal to their noblest faith.  It is assumed that there cannot be two divinely appointed orders of earthly priests.  The actual existence and service of one order therefore excludes the possibility of the coexistence of another.

There being….who offer
Seeing there are…. 
The tense of the principal verb fixes the translation of the participle to the present.  This offering is made ‘according to law,’  not  ‘according to the Law.’  The idea is that of the authoritative character of the institution generally, and not of the specific form of the institution.  Compare Hebrews 10:8 (according to the law).

The gifts
Not  ‘gifts’  in the abstract,  but ‘the gifts’  which God requires.  The simple term is here used to include offerings of all kinds  (Heb. 11:4; Matthew 5:23; 23:18.)

8:5,6  -  The earthly Levitical service points to that which corresponds with a better covenant.

8:5

Who
The qualitative relative  (compare Heb. 2:3; 8:6  which)  emphasizes the character of the Levitical priesthood: priests such as serve that which is a copy and shadow.

Like our word  ‘copy’  the word  representation  expresses 

Of the heavenly
Of the heavenly order.
The Tabernacle presented, in figures, the ideas of the Divine Presence and the realities of heaven.

The general idea of the phrase is that of  ‘the heavenly order,’  the scene of the spiritual life with the realities which belong to it.  The abstract term is used here and in Heb. 9:23 to guard (as it seems) against the danger of transferring to another world the local conditions which belong to the earthly tabernacle.

According as was divinely instructed Moses
Even as Moses is warned of God.
The verb  divinely  is used in the active tense of giving a formal answer to an inquirer (as by an oracle), and then of giving an authoritative (divine) direction generally: Jer. 26 (33:2); see Heb. 12:25;  so divine answer Rom. 11:4. Hence the passive is used of the person who receives such a direction: Matthew 2:12,22; Luke 2:26  divinely communicated; Acts 10:22; Heb. 11:7. 

Being about to construct
When he is about  (as destined by the divine counsel: Heb. 11:8)  to put into execution, to make (rather than to complete).  See Heb. 9:6; 2 Cor. 7:1; I Pet. 5:9.

For see, says he, thou make
For See, saith he (meaning God), thou shalt make…  Ex. 25:40 (compare 25:9;27:8). 
All had a prescribed character and  (it is implied)  a divine meaning.

The construction of  thou make  is uncertain.  
It may either go closely with :’See that thou make…’
Or it may be a distinct command:  ‘See, regard attentively, the pattern which is shown; thou shalt make’…as appears to be the sense of the original. 
The  see  belongs to the argument and not to the quotation.

According to the pattern
Compare Acts 7:44.   It is not to be supposed that even Moses saw ‘the heavenly things’ as they are.  He saw them as he had power to see them,  i.e. according to human apprehension.  So Paul heard the divine voice in ‘Hebrew’.  The heavenly things on which Moses was allowed to look took for him a shape,  under the divine guidance,  which could be reproduced on earth.

8:6  

But now a more excellent
But now, as it is, as the case really stands, he hath obtained.
A covenant generally,  and obviously a covenant between God and man,  requires a mediator,  one who standing between the contracting parties shall bring them duly into fellowship.  

Of a better covenant describes the action of Christ at the establishment of the New Covenant, as surety  
(Heb. 7:22)  describes the position which He holds towards men by assuring them of its validity.
The use of the term suggests a point of superiority in Christ over the Aaronic High-priests.
(From my notes in Leviticus – Paul the learner.)

The Levitical priesthood  (generally)  was incapable of effecting that at which a priesthood aims,  the ‘perfecting’ of the worshipper;  an end which the Priesthood of Christ is fitted to secure.  This is established by the fact that the Levitical priesthood was:

Moses was the ‘mediator’ of the Law  (Gal. 3:19)  but Christ who is the High-priest is also the Mediator of the new ‘Law.’  He combines the office of Moses and Aaron. Compare Heb. 3:1.

The limited office of  ‘the Mediator of a Covenant’  suggests the thought of the wider work of a Mediator,  which occupied the minds of early speculators on the relation of God to Creation.  Philo, for example, gives a noble picture of the Word standing between the creature and the Father of all,  the messenger of divine order and the inspirer of human hope: (ref. Quis rer. Div. Haer. Pg. 42 (i. 502 M.)

The most perfect example could be Numbers 16:48.

So Jesus now stands between the living (born again believers) and the dead (those who have not accepted his sacrifice), saying ‘come unto me all that are weak and heavy laden and I will give you rest’.

Perhaps there is no finer view of the relation of the world to its Maker possible apart from the Incarnation.

Which…..has been established
The superiority of the New Covenant is shown by the superiority of the promises on which its conditions are founded  (‘such that it is,’  ‘seeing that it is,’).  A Covenant necessarily imposes conditions.  And a Covenant made by God is  ‘enacted.’  Thus the Gospel itself,  though in one sense opposed to the Law;  but in itself the ‘perfect Law’ (James 1:25).  Freedom is the absolute consummation of Law.

Upon better promises
Such as are contained in the divine description which follows of the spirituality and efficacy of the new relation of man to God, based upon complete forgiveness. 

The Levitical system corresponded with a Covenant which was recognized by the prophets as imperfect and transitory, for they spoke of the divine purpose to establish ‘a new Covenant.’   The section consists of

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(7)  Or if that first [one] were faultless, not for a second would be sought place.  (8)  For finding fault, to them he says, Lo, days are coming, saith [the] Lord, and I will ratify as regards the house of Israel and s regards the house of Juda a covenant new;  (9)  not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in [the] day of my taking hold of their hand to lead them out of [the] land of Egypt; because they did not continue in my covenant, and I disregarded them saith [the] Lord.  (10)  Because this [is] the covenant which I will covenant with the house of Israel after those days, says [the] Lord, giving my laws into their mind, also upon hearts their I will inscribe them; and I will be to them for God, and they shall be to me for people.  (11)   And not at all shall they teach each neighbor his, and each his brother. Saying Know the Lord;   because all shall know me, from [the] little [one] of them to [the] great [one] of them. (12) Because merciful I will be to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawlessness in no wise will I remember more.  (13)   In the saying New, he has made old the first; but that which grows old and aged [is] near disappearing.

8:7

The teaching of the prophets  (Jer. 31:31) bears witness to the superiority of the New order over the Old which has been affirmed in the last verse, for if the first Covenant had completely fulfilled the purpose to which a Covenant between God and man is directed, then there would have been no room for another. The argument is parallel to that in Hebrews 7:11.

For if…..were faultless
For if that first covenant had been faultless,  fulfilling perfectly the purpose to which it pointed.
Compare Heb. 7:18.

The Law itself is not blamed:  the fault lay with those who received it  (v. 8).  None the less the Covenant did fail,  so far as it brought no consummation of man’s true destiny.

The Covenant is called  first  in contrast with  for a second  by common Greek usage. 
Compare Heb. 9:6;10:9; Acts 1:1.   The addition of the pronoun (first) presents the Old Covenant as occupying the mind of the readers. Compare 2 Cor. 7:8; Matt. 18:32.

Not for a second would be sought place
A place would not have been sought for a second.
God made known His purpose to establish a second Covenant;  but for this,  in the order of His Providence,  fitting conditions were required.  Hence it was not the Covenant itself for which men sought,  but the place for it,  the circumstances under which it could be realized.  The feeling of dissatisfaction,  want,  prompted to a diligent inquiry; and to this the words addressed to Jeremiah - the prophet of the national overthrow and exile - bear witness.
The two imperfect  for were…not for a second  mark a continuous state.  While the first Covenant remained in force,  there was yet searching for something more.  This thought is expressed by:  ‘If the first were….would not be sought.’ Compare Heb. 11:15.

8:8

For finding fault, to them
The existence of failure -fault- is established by the language of the Lord to Jeremiah: for finding fault with them, he saith.  
The people were not yet prepared to receive the revelation which God designed to give. 
The Law had not had its perfect work with them. 
They had not lived up to that which they had received.
The reference  in them  (the Israelites)  is supplied from a knowledge of the circumstances.
Compare Heb. 4:8; 11:28.

He says
See also Jeremiah 31:31-34 (chapter 38).
The speaker is the Lord Himself,  not the prophet.  The quotation (Heb. 8:8-12)  is taken, with some variations, from the LXX.,  which,  in the main,  agrees with the Hebrew.  Philo in a remarkable passage places Jeremiah in connection with Moses  (ref. De Cher. Pg. 14; i. 148M.).

The context of the quotation gives it a special force. Jeremiah, at the crisis of national calamity,  pictures the final result of the discipline of the exile into which Judah was now going:

This issue is summed up in the establishment of a New Covenant, by which the fulfillment of the whole of God’s purpose is assured, when trial has done its work. Under this Covenant, grace not law is the foundation of fellowship. God comes to man as giving and not as requiring.

The whole situation is Messianic (the age of the Messiah),  no less than the special words.  The time of national humiliation is the time of ardent hope.  The fall of the Kingdom,  which was of man’s will,  is the occasion of a great promise.  And nowhere else in the Old Testament is the contrast between the Law and the Gospel so definitely traced back to its essential principle.

The promises of the New Covenant are developed in due order.

Lo days are coming
Behold days come - The phrase is singularly frequent in Jeremiah. Jer. 7:32;9:25;16:14;19:6;23:5,7;30:3;31:27etc. Compare Amos 8:11; 9:13; Isa. 39:6.

So Philo (Greek historian),  as has been already noticed,  dwells with special emphasis on the prophetic gifts of Jeremiah.

These ‘last days’ mark a period of trial and judgment.  At the close of them the Divine Covenant is established in its glory.

As regards the house of Israel and as regards the house of Juda
Once again the divided and exiled people shall be brought together (compare 8:10).  The schism which had brought ruin on the kingdom is to have no existence under the new order. See Ezekiel 37:15-23.

To this issue the other great prophets point:  Isaiah xliii;  Ezekiel 16:60.

8:9

Not according to the covenant
The Lord having fixed the breadth of His New Covenant, as embracing the whole people, goes on to describe its character, and first negatively (8:9). It is not  according to, after, the pattern  of that which was made at the Exodus. The Covenant was to be not only a second one,  but one of a different type (see Galatians Appendix 1).  For the use of according compare  I Pet. 1:15; Eph. 4:24.

Which I made with their fathers
The original phrase is the same as that rendered just above:  I will ratify as regards (8:8) - (compare 8:10  I will covenant with the house).  These different renderings bring out clearly the conception that the Covenant is a manifestation of the divine purpose of love.  He of His Goodness fixes the terms.

In day of my taking hold of 
The ‘day’ expresses vividly the period which marked the fitting season for the action of God. Compare 2 Cor. 6:2; Jud. 18:30 LXX.

To lead them out of land

Did not continue in
The same original word is used of the Lord annulling His Covenant:  Jer. 14:21.  The LXX rendering expresses forcibly the idea of the constraining, disciplining, power of the Law: ‘Cursed be every man who will not persevere in all the words of this law, to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.’ Deuteronomy 27:26 LXX, (Gal. 3:10).

8:10-12. 

The positive characteristics of the New Covenant, ‘the better promises’ on which it rests, are to be found in:

8:10

Because this……I will inscribe them
Because this is the covenant that I will covenant with the house of Israel…..even putting my laws….and upon their heart will I write them. 

The image is universal. Compare 2 Cor. 3:3.

Philo speaks of the revelation of God Himself as being the highest form of Divine Covenant (ref. De mut. Nom. Pg. 8; i. 587 M.).

The use of the simple dative (I will covenant with the house of Israel.) here as in 8:9 (I made with their fathers) presents God as the disposer, framer, of the Covenant.

The people of God is now again called by its one name ‘the house of Israel.’  The division of Israel and Judah (8:8) has ceased (1948 AD  when Israel again becomes a nation with one people serving one God). 
Compare Acts 2:36; Rom. 11:26; Gal. 6:16; Heb. 4:9; 13:12 note.

After those days
‘Those days’  from the point of view of the prophet correspond with what the writer of the Epistle has spoken of as ‘the end of these days’ (Heb. 1:2).  The phrase is used peculiarly to mark the period of conflict which immediately precedes the final triumph of Messiah (Comp. Matt. 24:9-14).

For more information see my study of Prophecy  ( Paul the Learner).

Giving….their
The participle giving may go with I will covenant:  ‘I will make a covenant even by putting…and I will…’.
Or it may be taken with also upon hearts their I will inscribe: “I will make a covenant even thus, putting my laws….I will also write them….’ 
On the whole the former construction is the more natural. For the transition from the participle to the finite verb compare Moulton-Winer page 717.

And shall be….people
The end of the New Covenant is the same as that of the old. In both cases the purpose of God was to form a people truly His own.   Exodus 6:7.

This end was accomplished externally and typically by the separation and training of the Jewish people; but more than this was required.  The type had to find its fulfillment.  To this fulfillment the prophets looked;  and the apostles proclaimed it:  Revelation 21:3 ; 2 Cor. 6:16.
Nothing is said directly in the prophets or in the Epistle of the admission of the Gentiles into ‘the Commonwealth of Israel.’  This fact is included in the recognition of the essential spirituality of the new Covenant.
Compare Hos. 1:9; 2:1; Isa. 61:9; Zech. 13:9; Heb. 2:17 (of the people)

8:11

A second characteristic of the new Covenant follows directly from the first. The people are brought into true fellowship with God, and this involves an immediate knowledge of Him.  No privileged class is interposed between the mass of men and God.  All are true scribes (John 6:45)  in virtue of the teaching within them (I John 2:20,27). All have immediate access to the divine Presence.
The description marks the absolute relation, but does not define how the universal privilege will be in fact realized.

Neighbor….his brother
The more general and the more special relations have their respective obligations.

know…shall know
The Lord will not be a stranger to be first recognized:  all will have an absolute,  inborn,  acquaintance with Him from the least to the greatest.  There will be no distinction of age or station or endowments in respect of this fundamental knowledge.

8:12

The third characteristic of the New Covenant is that which contains the pledge of its efficacy.
It rests upon forgiveness on the part of God,  not on performance on the part of man.
Its foundation is grace and not works (John 1:17).
In this lies the assurance against such failure as the Old Covenant brought to light. Compare Isaiah 59:2.

Because merciful I will be
The New Covenant will be efficacious,  for God Himself says I will be merciful. See Jeremiah 31:34.

See God’s forgiveness of sin: I Kings 8:34; and of men: Num. 14:20; Jer. 5:1,7.

In connection with this promise of forgiveness the prophetic disparagement of sacrifices and ritual as spiritually inefficacious must be noticed. The development of this inward religion begins with I Sam. 15:22; compare Psalm 1:8; Hos. 6:4; Amos 5:21; Micah 6:6; Isa. 1:11.

In the writings of Jeremiah,  on the eye of the long exile,  when the sacrificial ritual became impossible,  it was natural in the order of divine Providence that the realities symbolized by sacrifices should be brought into prominence.  Compare Jer. 7:21-26.

Sacrifice,  however,  had its place in restored Israel:  Jer. 33:11. Compare Isa. 56:7;66:20; Mal. 1:10.

8:13

The conclusion goes beyond that which the prophetic passage was quoted to establish.  The New Covenant is not only better,  and founded upon better promises than the Old;  but,  yet more,  it supersedes the Old.  The characteristics of the New Covenant,  and the very name which it bears,  point to the abrogation of that which has now become ‘the old.’

In the saying
In that he saith. Compare Heb. 2:8; 3:15.

He has made old
By the use of the term ‘new’ in reference to another Covenant God has necessarily placed the other Covenant in the position of ‘old’ relatively.  Even in the days of Jeremiah this sentence stands already written. (perfect). Compare v. 5  divinely instructed.

That which grows old and aged
The divine words spoken to the prophets were accomplished slowly on the scene of life.  The addition of  aged adds a new thought.  When that which is temporal has existed a long time it draws to its natural end.

Near disappearing
Nigh unto vanishing away.  For a time the continuance of the Temple services gave to the Old Order,  an outward semblance of enduring reality even after it was essentially abrogated by fulfillment.

The Old Service And The New
The Atonement Of The Law And The Atonement Of Christ
Hebrews 9

Having pointed out generally the new scene and the new conditions of Christ’s High-priestly work, the writer goes on to consider it in detail in comparison with that of the Levitical system. 

Heb. 9:1-10.  The Sanctuary and Priests under the Old Covenant
This section falls into three sub-divisions:

Heb. 9:1-5

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(1)   Had indeed therefore also the first tabernacle ordinances of service, and the sanctuary, a worldly [one]. (2)   For a tabernacle was prepared, the first, in which [were] both the lampstand and the table and the presentation of the loaves, which is called holy;  (3)  after but the second veil a tabernacle with [is] called holy of Holies,  (4)   a golden having censer, and the ark of the covenant, having been covered round in every part with gold, in which [was the] pot golden having the manna, and the rod of Aaron that sprouted, and the tablets of the covenant;  (5)   and above it [the] cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; concerning which it is not now [the time] to speak in detail.

The Tabernacle - its parts and furniture

For a better understanding on the subject of both the Tabernacle and the work of the Priests of God during that time in history, please study on Exodus and Leviticus, which shows that Jesus in types is pictured not only in the cross in the arrangement of the furniture of the Tabernacle but also in each and every offering which points to Jesus who is our sacrifice.   (Paul the Learner)

9:1

Had indeed therefore also the first
Now even the first covenant had… The past tense  (had)  can be explained in different ways. 

But it seems more likely that the writer is considering the Mosaic system in its divine constitution. 

The particles  indeed therefore  correspond with the things in verse 6.  There were divine and significant elements in the service which corresponded with the first Covenant,  but they were subject to particular limitations in use.  The Christian Order  (9:11  But Christ)  offers a contrast to both parts of this description:

The combination does not occur again in the Epistle; and it is found in Paul’s writings in  I Cor. 9:25; Phil. 2:23.
It is frequent in the Acts (8:4,25 etc.).

If the  also  is retained  (also the first)  it emphasizes the parallel of the Covenants.  Though the first was destined to pass away,  it had,  no less than the second,  ordinances of divine institution.

Ordinances of service
The word righteous justification occurs again in a similar sense in v. 10 setting things right.  Righteous justification expresses the process (Rom. 4:25  our justification; 5:18  justification of life),  corresponding to righteous justification,  to make right  (righteous)  in the widest sense.  
Two main meanings at once arise as the object of the verb is:

And the sanctuary, a worldly
And its sanctuary a sanctuary of this world. 
The peculiar form of expression is chosen in order to recognize the familiar and characteristic place of the Mosaic worship - the Holy place - and at the same time to distinguish it from its antitype (compare Heb. 7:24; I Pet. 4:8). The conjunction the is rarely used by itself in the Epistles: Heb. 1:3; 6:5; 12:2; Rom. 2:19; 16:26; I Cor. 4:21; Eph. 3:19.   It marks something which is not regarded as distinct from and coordinate with that with which it is connected,  but which serves to complete the fullness of one main idea.

The singular   and sanctuary  in the sense of  the sanctuary  is not found elsewhere in the New Testament.  Here it appears to give naturally the general notion of the sanctuary without regard to its different parts.

The Mosaic sanctuary was not only  ‘on earth’,  as opposed to  ‘in heaven’  (v. 23; 8:5;11:16),  but it partook of the nature of the world,  and was therefore essentially transitory.  There does not appear to be any reference to the familiar thought that the Tabernacle was a symbol of the world.  But in connection with this thought it is to be remarked that both Josephus and Philo speak of the Jewish service as having a universal, a ‘cosmically,’ destination.  Such an interpretation however belongs to the later development of Judaism and not prominently to its first institution,  though indeed it had from the first a universal element.

9:2

For a tabernacle….the first
For a tabernacle (tent) was prepared, the first
The  outermost  as approached by the worshipper.  The writer explains and justifies the general statement in v. 1. For this construction by which a noun first regarded indefinitely (‘a tabernacle’)  is afterwards defined (‘the first’), see Heb. 6:7;2 John 7; Acts 10:41; Phil. 3:6.

The two parts of the Tabernacle are regarded as two Tabernacles.

Was prepared
Compare Heb. 3:3. 
The tense points to the first construction of the Tabernacle.  Contrast v. 6  having been prepared.
Note if you will the pieces of furniture that is mentioned:

For further information please study Exodus and Leviticus.  (Paul the Learner)

Which is called holy
Which is called the Holy place.
The qualitative relative  (which)  directs attention to the features of the place which determines its name as  ‘Holy.’ Perhaps it is chosen to fix attention on the character of the sanctuary, as in other cases.  The plural suggests the idea of the sanctuary with all its parts.

Philo interprets the three things in the Holy Place, the Candlestick, the Table and the Golden Altar of Incense, as symbolic of thanksgiving from all parts of creation - heavenly, human, elemental.

9:3 

After but the second veil
And after the second veil
This is the only place in which  after  is used in this local sense in the New Testament.

A tabernacle which [is] called holy of Holies
A tabernacle (tent) was prepared which is called the Holies of Holies. 
This innermost sanctuary is also called simply  holy place  in Leviticus 16:2.  The Holy of Holies was a cube, like the New Jerusalem in the vision of the Revelation: Revelation 21:16.

9:4 

A golden having censer
Having a golden alter of incense  -  The word  censer  has two distinct meanings:

And from very early times each has been adopted here.

External evidence of Philo and Josephus makes this the Altar of incense and not just a censer.

According to Westcott: 

Rev 8:3-4

And thus they are placed in significant connection in the Pentateuch (5 books of Moses): Exodus 30:6; compare Leviticus 4:7; 16:12,18 (before the Lord).

In one passage indeed (I Kings 6:22) the Altar of incense is described in language closely resembling that which is used here as ‘belonging to the shrine’

1 Kings 6:22

On the whole therefore it appears that both the evidence of language and the evidence of the symbolism of the passage are in favor of the sense ’Altar of incense’.  This sense is given by the Old Testament.  The Syriac is ambiguous:  incense-vessel (lit. house of perfumes).
It may be added that in the service of the Day of Atonement the Golden Altar was treated in the same manner as the Holy of Holies by the sprinkling of blood: Exodus 30:7-10.

Ex 30:7-10

In prophetic imagery also there is an altar in heaven (Isaiah 6:6; Revelation 8:3).  The type of heaven therefore could not be without its proper altar;  though it was not placed locally within it.

Isa 6:6

Rev 8:3

Perhaps it is worthy of notice that in the legend mentioned in 2 Macc. 2:5 (see Catholic Bible) Jeremiah hides the Ark and the Altar of incense in the cave.

The ark of the covenant
The writer of the Epistle,  as has been noticed before,  fixes attention on the Mosaic type,  the Tabernacle. The Ark,  which had belonged to the Tabernacle,  was placed in Solomon’s Temple (I Kings 8:1);  but in the later Temple the Holy of Holies was entirely empty  (see Josephus History).  The site which the Ark should have occupied was marked by  ‘the stone of foundation’  which was a raised platform on which,  according to a late tradition,  the sacred Tetragrammation  (YHWH – Special name of God spoken only on the Day of Atonement by the High Priest)  was inscribed. Compare Buxtorf, Lex. S.v.

Having been covered round in every part with gold
This clause is added predicatively: ‘the Ark of the covenant, an Ark overlaid all round about with gold,’

Pot
Exodus 16:32.  The epithet,  ‘a golden pot,’  is an addition to the Hebrew text which is found in the LXX.  (Exodus 16:33).  In the Pentateuch the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod are said to be laid up ‘before the Testimony’ (Exodus 16:34; Numbers 17:10; compare Exodus 25:16,21) and not definitely in the Ark.

The significance of the Manna is indicated in Revelation 2:17.

Rev 2:17

Golden…gold…..golden
The solemn repetition of the word emphasizes the splendor of this typical sanctuary.  Gold was the characteristic metal of the Holy of Holies.  Compare I Kings 7:48.  It is remarkable that Ezekiel in describing the Temple of his vision makes no mention of the materials of which it was constructed.

The pot of manna and Aaron’s rod are not mentioned in Scripture except in the places of the Pentateuch referred to,  and here in Hebrews.  When the Ark was removed to the Temple of Solomon it contained only the Tables of the Law  (I Kings 8:9; compare Josephus Ant. 3.6,5).

1 Kings 8:9

 Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Book 3 Chap. 6 # 5 Page 73:

Chrysostom remarks that those memorials in the Ark were monuments of the rebellious spirit of Israel.

9:5 

And above it
And above it, i.e. the Ark,  Cherubim of glory  (Exodus 25:18),  not simply ‘glorious Cherubim,’ as if the epithet characterized their nature,  but ‘Cherubim of glory’ ministering to the divine revelation.  The divine glory, the revelation of God’s majesty, was in a peculiar sense connected with them.  God revealed Himself  ‘from between them’: Ex. 25:22; Num. 7:89; I Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2; 2 Kings. 19:15; Isa. 37:16.

9:5 

Overshadowing
The Cherubim are treated as living creatures (Revelation 4:6). Compare Exodus 25:20.
This rendering was taken from use made of the  ‘covering’   on the Day of Atonement when it was sprinkled with the atoning blood:  Leviticus 16:15.

After speaking of the material arrangements of the Sanctuary,  the writer goes on to show the significant limitations which determined the use of it.  The priests entered day by day into the holy place: 

The people could only approach him through their representatives;  and these had only a partial right of drawing near to Him. 

Though there was an august array of typical instruments and means of service,  the access to the Divine Presence was not yet open.

Thus the Tabernacle witnessed constantly to the aim of man and to the fact that he could not as yet attain it. He could not penetrate to that innermost sanctuary to which he necessarily looked,  and from which blessing flowed. The same institutions which brought forcibly to the soul of the Israelite the thought of Divine Communion made him feel that he could not yet enjoy it as it might be enjoyed.

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
 (6)  Now these things thus having been prepared, into the first tabernacle at all times enter the priests, the services accomplishing;  (7)  but into the second once in the year alone the high priest, not apart from blood, which he offers for himself and the of the people sins of ignorance:   (8)  this signifying the Spirit the Holy, [that] not yet has been made manifest the of the Holies way, still the first tabernacle having a standing;  (9)  which [is] a simile for the time present, in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered, not being able as to conscience to prefect him who serves, [consisting]  (10)  only in meats and drinks and divers washings, and ordinances of flesh, until [the] time of setting things right imposed.

The priestly service of the Sanctuary

9:6 

Now these things
But when these things have been thus prepared
The perfect tense in the Greek  having been  expresses that the historical foundations (v. 2  was prepared)  issued in an abiding system (compare 9:8  has been made manifest  and 9:18  has been inaugurated).

Into the first tabernacle…enter….accomplishing
Into the first  (v. 2) tabernacle,  the Holy place, the scene of spiritual,  symbolic worship,  the priests enter continually accomplishing the services….

The present  (accomplishing)  expresses the ideal fulfillment of the original Mosaic institution. The writer here deals only with the original conception realized in the Tabernacle,  though elsewhere (Heb. 8:4)  he recognizes the perpetuation of the Levitical ritual;  and the existing Temple system was naturally present to his mind as the representation of it. 

The services accomplishing
Accomplishing the divine services,  such as:

The Service Of  The Day Of Atonement

9:7 

But into the second….high-priest
But into the second tabernacle,  the tabernacle beyond  ‘the second veil’ (v. 3),  the symbol of the immediate Divine Presence,  the High-priest alone,  once in the year,  that is, on one day in the year,  though on that day he entered twice  (Leviticus 16:12), or, according to the later tradition,  four times (Mishnah Joma v. 1,7,4).

The words,  once….alone the high-priest,  emphasize the restrictions with which the approach was beset.  There was only one occasion of entrance,  and the entrance was allowed to one representative of the people only.  And even he entered only in the power of another life  (compare Heb. 10:19  by the blood).

Not apart from blood……sins of ignorance
The High-priest first took the blood of the bullock, which was a sin-offering for himself, within the veil, and sprinkled it seven times before the Mercy seat (Lev. 16:11).

Lev 16:11

After this he offered the goat which was a sin-offering for the people,  and brought the blood of this within the veil, and did with it as with the blood of the bullock  (Lev. 16:15).

Lev 16:15

This sprinkling of the blood is regarded in a wider sense as an  ‘offering’ (Lev. 1:5)  which he makes for himself and for the ignorance’s of the people.  The most general phrase is used in regard to the High-priest.

The lesson of the restrictions of the service

The restrictions which limited the approach of priests and High-priest to God contained an obvious lesson. There was no way to God opened by the Law. The Law had a symbolical, disciplinary, value and looked forward to a more perfect system.

9:8

This signifying the spirit the Holy
There is a divine meaning both in the words of Scripture and in the ordinances of worship. The spirit which inspired the teaching and fixed the ritual Himself discloses it, and this He does continuously as long as the veil rests over any part of the record.

Not yet has been made manifest
That the way into the Holy place hath not yet been made manifest while the first tabernacle hath still an appointed place.  It is evident that this phrase ‘the Holy place’ must include ‘the Holy of Holies,’ the symbolic Presence of God (v. 12; 24; 10:19), even if it does not mean this exclusively.  Perhaps however a general phrase is chosen by the Apostle to include both:

The Pre-Christian Idea Of Sacrifice

9:9

Which a simile….present
Which is (seeing it is) a parable,  a figure,  and nothing more,  for the season now present,  ‘the present age,’  that period of preparation which will be followed by  ‘the age to come’  for which we look.  The sense of  for the time present  is established beyond all doubt. 
In technical language all time was divided into ‘the past, the present and the future’.

It may therefore be reasonably laid down that  for the season now present  must be taken in connection with that which the writer of the Epistle speaks of as ‘future’:

If then, as is beyond doubt, ‘the future,’ in the vision of the writer, is that which is characteristic of the Christian order, ‘the present’ must be that which is characteristic of the preparatory order, not yet outwardly abolished (compare Galatians 1:4), that which is commonly called in other writings, ‘this age,’ or ‘the present age’; and in the present context stands in opposition to  time of setting things (9:10),  and parallel with ‘these days’ in Heb. 1:1.
Thus ‘the present season’ must be carefully distinguished from the fullness of the Christian time,  though in one sense the blessings of Christianity were already realized essentially. 

The Levitical system then,  represented by  ‘the first Tabernacle,’  is described here as a parable ‘to serve for’ or,  perhaps  ‘to last as long as’  for present season.  It conveyed its lessons while the preparatory age continued up to the time of change.  It did indeed foreshadow that which is offered in the Gospel,  but that is not the aspect of it which is here brought forward.  As a parable (Heb. 11:19) it is regarded not so much in relation to a definite future which is directly prefigured (‘type’) as in regard to its own power of teaching.

Not being able….him who serves
For the idea of  perfect  ‘a bringing to perfection’  according to some assumed standard, see Heb. 7:11.
Here that standard is said to be ‘according to’  ‘as touching the conscience.’  The Levitical offerings were able to secure an outward perfecting,  the admission of each worshipper to a full participation in the privileges of the ancient commonwealth of God, which depended on the satisfaction of ceremonial conditions. But they could not bring a spiritual perfecting.  They could not,  to notice one aspect  ‘cleanse the conscience from dead works to serve a living God’ (9:14).

The Idea Of Conscience

The conception of  ‘the conscience’ which is not developed in the Old Testament (compare Ecclus 10:20).

Ecclesiastes 10:20

This comes into clear prominence in the New Testament.

Rom 2:14-15

His  ‘conscience,’  as the power directing this process,  is regarded apart from himself  (Rom. 9:1; 2:15).  The conscience may be imperfectly disciplined and informed  (I Cor. 10:25; 8:7;   contrast Acts 23:1; I Tim. 3:9; 2 Tim. 1:3; I Pet. 3:16,21).

The man is responsible for the character which his conscience assumes.

The absolute use of the word conscience presents various functions which the conscience fulfils:

In one passage the conscience is placed in a most significant relation with  ‘the heart’  and  ‘faith’  (I Tim. 1:5).  The end of the Apostolic charge is love  ‘out of a pure heart,  and a good conscience,  and faith unfeigned.’  Purity of personal character,  rectitude of moral judgment,  sincerity of trust in the unseen,  form the triple foundation of active Christian work.

9:9b,10 

In accordance with which (and after this parable, or teaching by figure) gifts and sacrifices are offered such as cannot make the worshipper perfect as touching the conscience (in conscience), being only ordinances of flesh, resting upon meats and drinks and divers washings, imposed until a season of reformation. 

Two things are stated of the Levitical sacrifices:

Three points in this complicated sentence require consideration:

9:10

Only in meats….divers washings
These offerings were unable to satisfy man’s destiny  being only ordinances of flesh -
Combined with,  resting upon meats and drinks and divers washings. 
They serve to limit and explain the character of the Mosaic institutions. These institutions were only ordinances of flesh, ordinances which dealt with that which is external  (compare Heb. 7:16);  and the accompaniments of the sacrifices, the personal requirements with which they were connected, indicated their purely outward significance.
The mention of  ‘drinks’  has caused difficulty,  for the Law gave no universal directions in this respect. 
Theophylact suggests that the reference may be to the conditions of the Nazarite vow (Num. 6:3), or to the injunctions laid upon the ministering priests (Lev. 10:9). Compare Col. 2:16.

Until [the] time of setting things right imposed
The provisional character of the Levitical institutions illustrates their enactment.  They were imposed until a season of reformation.  The word  setting things right  is not found elsewhere in biblical Greek. It is used in late Greek writers for the reformation of laws, institutions, states. Compare Acts 24:3.

Acts 24:3

The verb is used in the LXX of  ‘amending ways’: Jeremiah 7:3,5.  
And also of ‘setting up,’ ‘establishing’: Isaiah 16:5. 
The thought of ‘making straight, erect’ passes naturally into that of ‘making stable.’
Under different aspects this  ‘reformation’  is spoken of as a  ‘restitution’  (Acts 3:21 of restoration ), and a ‘regeneration’  (Matthew 19:28  regeneration ).
The anarthrous form of the phrase (time of setting things right ) marks the character of the coming change. 
The very nature of the Law showed that it was indeed transitory,  if it did not show the definite issue to which it led.

The High-priestly Atonement under the New Covenant   (9:11-28)

The work of the Jewish High-priest has been indicated as the climax of the old system (9:7);  and the High-priestly work of Christ is now considered in contrast with it. The comparison is instituted in respect of that which was the unique and supreme privilege of the Levitical High-priest,  the access to God on the Day of Atonement. Thus two main points come into consideration:

Under this aspect the work of Christ is:

A summary description of Christ’s High-priestly work 9:11,12

Question: How do I know that the blood of Jesus was accepted?
Answer: Three ways.

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(11)  But Christ being come high priest of the coming good things, by the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by hand. (that is,) not of this creation. (12)  nor by blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, entered once for all into the Holies, eternal redemption having found.

In contrast (But Christ)  with the repeated entrance of the Jewish High-priest into the Holy of Holies through the blood of appointed victims Christ once for all entered into the true Sanctuary, the actual Presence of God, through His own blood, and obtained not a temporary but an eternal deliverance. Thus the contrast extends to the system, the place and mode of the Atonement. In all these three points the ‘parable’ finds fulfillment.

9:11

But Christ
But Christ having come a High-priest of good things realized…see v. 23-26; 3:6.

Heb 9:23-26

Heb 3:6

Being come
Christ has not only become High-priest as one of an appointed line,  He has made His presence as High-priest felt among His people as sent from another realm to fulfill the office in part on earth.

Rev 3:14

John 17:5

John 1:1

John 1:14

High priest of the coming good things
The title of Christ at once marks His absolute supremacy.

The same blessings can be spoken of as

In this place it seems natural that  ‘the good things’  should be spoken of as realized from the divine side.
Even if men have not entered upon their inheritance,  it is already gained.

9:11b,12

The Majesty of Christ’s title  (‘High-priest of the good things realized’)  is justified by a description of His Work. In the circumstances and the effects of His High-priestly service He offers the heavenly counterpart of that which was exhibited under an earthly figure in the Mosaic system. This is shown first in respect of the Tabernacle ‘through which’ Christ fulfils His work.

By the greater……nor by blood…..but by
Though the greater…nor yet through blood….but through his own
It seems to be best to take the preposition in each case in the same general sense and to join both  by the greater and more perfect tabernacle  and  but by his own blood  with entered.  Christ employed in the fulfillment of His office  ‘the greater Tabernacle’  and  ‘His own Blood’  (compare the corresponding though not parallel use of  but  in I John 5:6).

1 John 5:6

The local sense which has been given to  but  in the first clause  (‘passing through the greater….tabernacle into the Presence of God’)  does not give a very clear thought.  It is true indeed that the High-priest passed through ‘the first tabernacle’ (the Holy Place) to the Holy of Holies,  but no such stress is laid on this ‘passage through’ as to make it the one thing noticeable in the Sanctuary.

The outer Sanctuary was not merely a portal to the Holy of Holies but the appointed place of priestly service. And on the other hand the idea conveyed by this limited (local) sense of ‘through’ is included in the wider (instrumental) sense of ‘through’ which describes that which Christ used in His work.  In this work it must be observed that Christ is said to make use not of  ‘a greater tabernacle,’  but of  ‘the greater tabernacle,’  ‘the true, ideal, tabernacle’ (Heb. 8:2).

The thought of the reader is thus carried back to the heavenly pattern which Moses followed  (Heb. 8:5; Exodus 25:9).  The earthly Tabernacle witnessed not only to some nobler revelation of God’s Presence,  but definitely to the archetype after which it was fashioned.

What then is this heavenly Tabernacle?  Some preparation will be made for the answer if we call to mind the two main purposes of the transitory Tabernacle:

The heavenly Tabernacle must then satisfy these two ends in the highest possible degree. 

Being in both respects eternal, spiritual, ideal  (true Heb. 8:2).

In seeking for some conception which shall satisfy these conditions it is obvious that all images of local circumscription must be laid aside, or, at least, used only by way of accommodation. The spiritual Tabernacle must not be defined by the limitations which belong to ‘this creation’.   We may then at once set aside all such interpretations as those which suppose that the lower heavens, through which Christ passed, or the supra-mundane realm,  or the like,  are ‘the greater tabernacle.’ We must look for some spiritual antitype to the local sanctuary.

And here we are brought to the patristic interpretation which it requires some effort to grasp. The Fathers both Greek and Latin commonly understood the greater Tabernacle to be the Lord’s ‘flesh,’ or ‘humanity.’
In this connection Chrysostom and Theophylact notice how the Lord’s  ‘Body’ and ‘heaven’ are each spoken of as  ‘a veil’ and as  ‘a tabernacle.’  As far as the Lord’s historical work on earth is concerned this interpretation is adequate. He was the perfect revelation of the Father and the way to Him. But in considering the ideal antitype, or rather archetype, of the Tabernacle we must take account of the Lord’s ministry in heaven. In this (Heb. 8:1) the heavenly High-priest and the heavenly Tabernacle are in some sense distinguished; and the Lord acts as High-priest in His human Nature (compare Heb. 4:14).

Bearing this in mind we may perhaps extend the patristic conception so as to meet the difficulty, though, with our present powers of conceiving of divine things we must speak with the most reverent reserve. In this relation then it may be said that ‘the greater and more perfect Tabernacle’ of which Christ is minister, and in which the Saints worship, gathers up the various means under which God reveals Himself in the spiritual order, and through which men approach to Him.

9:12

Nor by blood of goats and calves
Nor yet through blood of goats and bulls
The  Nor  seems to be due to the preceding  not made by hand.

The plural generalizes the thought. 

But by his own blood…the Holies
But through His own blood (He) entered once for all into the Holy place, the immediate Presence of God in heaven (see v. 8 note).

The use of  but  as marking the means, but not defining the mode,  is significant when taken in connection with
9:7 ( not apart from).  The earthly High-priest took with him the material blood: Christ ‘through His own blood’ entered into the Presence of God.

Once for all
See Heb. 7:27 note.  Christ did not need (like the Jewish High-priest) a double entrance, even as He did not need to repeat His entrance.  One entrance left the way open for ever. The ‘veil was rent’ (Matthew 27:51).

Matt 27:51

Note: It was torn from top to bottom  (from God to man).
There was no longer any obstacle interposed between the worshipper  –  for all are now priests (Revelation 1:6) – and the Object of his worship.

A third element in the absolute supremacy of Christ’s High-priesthood lies in the abiding efficacy of His One priestly act.  He obtained an eternal Redemption in contrast with the limited, recurrent, redemption of the yearly Atonement.

Eternal redemption having found
Having obtained eternal redemption. 
‘Christ entered ……therein obtaining’  or  ‘Christ entered….having already obtained.’
The choice between these senses will be decided by the meaning given to  ‘redemption.’  If  ‘redemption’  is the initial work,  the conquest of death (Heb. 2:14),  then this was completed in the Passion and Resurrection; but it seems more natural to find the fullness of the word satisfied in the Triumph of the Ascension.

9:13-22    The truths taught by the shedding of Christ’s Blood

The thoughts springing out of the fulfillment of Christ’s High-priestly work which have found a summary expression in vv. 11,12 are developed in the remainder of the chapter. The efficacy of Christ’s Blood is:

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(13)  For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and ashes of a heifer sprinkling the defiled, sanctifies for the of the flesh purify,  (14)   how much rather the blood of the Christ who through [the] Spirit eternal himself offered spotless of God, shall purify conscience your from dead works for to serve God [the] living! 

A sense of difficulty might arise at the prospect of the vast claim which has been made for Christ’s work. How, it might be asked, can it avail for ever?  The Mosaic institutions furnish the answer.

The conclusion rests upon the comparison of a twofold relation:

9:13

Two typical examples of the purificatory Levitical sacrifices are taken in illustration: 

Of bulls and of goats
Compare v. 12 note. In this case the blood of the sacrifice was also burnt: Numbers 19:5.

Sprinkling the defiled, sanctifies
Sprinkling them that have been defiled, who by a definite act have contracted some stain, sanctifieth unto the cleanness of the flesh.
The idea is that of the ceremonial purity which enabled the Jew to enjoy the full privileges of his covenant worship and fellowship with the external Church of God. 
The force of the words speak of - 

9:14  

How much rather
The superior efficacy of Christ’s Blood is based generally on the considerations that His Sacrifice was:

John 10:14-18

The blood of the Christ
The blood of Christ stands parallel both to the blood of goats and bulls and to the ashes of the heifer, as the means:

It will be observed that it is not the death of the victim as suffering, but the use of the Blood (that is, the Life) which is presented here as the source of purification.
The efficacy of Blood – the life, Lev. 17:11 – is regarded in different aspects in this passage. Now one aspect predominates and now another. It is a means of atonement, and it is a means of purification: it has a power retrospectively and prospectively. Death again, which makes the blood available, is the seal of the validity of a covenant. But no one view exhausts the meaning of that which is the fullness of a life made available for others. 
See I John 1:7.

Who…..himself offered spotless to God
Who through His eternal spirit offered Himself without blemish to God. 
The sacrifice upon the altar of the Cross preceded the presentation of the blood. The phrase  himself offered  clearly fixes the reference to this initial act of Christ’s High-priestly sacrifice through Spirit eternal.  
In virtue of His inseparable and unchangeable Divine Nature:

The absence of the article [the] from  spirit eternal  marks the spirit here as a power possessed by Christ,  His ‘Spirit.’  It could not be said of any man absolutely that his spirit is eternal;  but Christ’s Spirit is,  in virtue of His Divine Personality, eternal.  By this, while truly man, He remained in unbroken connection with God. Though this He had ‘the power of an indissoluble life’ (compare Hebrew 7:16).
The truth will become clearer if we go yet a step further. In men the ‘spirit’ is that by which they are capable of connection with God.  But in Christ, who did not cease to be God by becoming man, the ‘spirit’ is to be regarded as the seat of His Divine Personality in His human Nature.
A good example of this is found in Matthew 17:1-3.

Matt 17:1-3

This ‘eternal spirit’ obtained complete sovereignty at the Resurrection (I Cor. 15:45);  and it is probably by reference to this fact that the difficult passage of  2 Cor. 3:17 is to be explained. See also I Pet. 3:18.

Another more obvious thought lies in the phrase.
Other sacrifices were wrought by the hand, being outward acts of flesh, but this was wrought by that which is highest in man’s nature whereby he holds fellowship with God, being a truly spiritual act.
The epithet  spotless  describes Christ as a perfect victim. That which was required outwardly in the Levitical victims was satisfied absolutely by Christ.  The connection in which it stands shows that it refers here to the conditions and issue of the Lord’s earthly life.

Shall purify…..God living
(Shall) cleanse our (your) conscience from dead works to the end that we (ye) may serve a living God.
The action of the blood of Christ is not to work any outward change but to communicate a vital force. It removes the defilement and the defiling power of  ‘dead works,’  works which are done apart from Him who is ‘the life’ (compare Hebrew 6:1 note).
These stain the conscience and communicate that pollution of death which outwardly  ‘the water of separation’ was designed to remove. The Levitical ritual contemplated a death external to the man himself - here the effects of a death within him are taken away.

For to serve God living!
Purity is not the end but the means of the new life.  The end of the restored fellowship is energetic service to Him Who alone lives and gives life. The thought of performing certain actions is replaced by that of fulfilling a personal relation.

Heb 15-22. 

From the thought of the efficacy of Christ’s Blood as the means through which He entered into the Divine Presence and cleanses the individual conscience the writer of the Epistle goes on to show that through the shedding of His Blood came the inauguration of a new Covenant.

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
( 15)   And for this reason of a covenant new mediator he is, so that, death having taken place for redemption of the under the first covenant transgressions, the promise might receive (he or who) have been called of the eternal inheritance.  ( 16)   (For where [there is] a testament, [for the] death [it is] necessary to come in of the testator.   ( 17) For a testament in the case of [the] dead [is] affirmed, since in no way it is of force when is living the testator.)  ( 18) Whence neither the first apart from blood has been inaugurated.  ( 19)   Having been spoken for every commandment according to law by Moses to all the people, having taken the blood of calves and of goats, with water and wool scarlet and sysop, both itself the book and all the people he sprinkled,  ( 20)   saying, This [is] the blood of the covenant which enjoined to you God.  ( 21)   And the tabernacle too and all the vessels of the ministration with blood in like manner he sprinkled;  ( 22)   and almost with blood all things are purified according to the law, and apart from blood-shedding there is no remission.

9:15

And for this reason…..mediator he is
And for this reason,  even that the Blood of Christ purifies the soul with a view to a divine service,  He is mediator of a new covenant … The transition from the thought of the one all-efficacious atonement to that of the corresponding covenant is natural.  The new internal and spiritual relation of man to God established by Christ involved of necessity a New Covenant  (see Jer. 31:31).  The Blood – the Life – of Christ, which was the source and support of the life,  was the seal of the Covenant.

The words  of a covenant…mediator  go back to the prophetic promise found in Hebrews 8:8 (which is taken from Jeremiah 31:31),  which found its fulfillment in Christ.  The emphasis lies on the phrase  new covenant. 
It is of interest to notice the variation of emphasis found in 2 Cor. 3:6.

2 Cor 3:6

So that death having taken place…..the promise might receive
That a death having taken place for redemption from the transgressions that were under the first covenant they that have been called may receive
The Old covenant had been proved incapable of bringing men to perfection. God therefore provided them with fresh and more powerful help. At the same time He opened to them a nobler view of their end.  In place of a material inheritance He showed them an eternal inheritance. And the aim of the New Covenant was the attainment of the spiritual realities shadowed forth in the temporal blessings of Israel.

Jer 31:34

But the establishment of a New Covenant, a new and permanent relation between God and man, required as its preliminary condition the discharge of man’s existing obligations.

Christ at last offered the sacrifice, perfect in efficacy and moral value, to which they only pointed.
This sacrifice was the characteristic basis of the New Covenant  (see Hebrews 8:12).

Thus the death of Christ appears under a twofold aspect:

The phrase  for the redemption of the … transgressions  is remarkable: for redemption from the transgressions….from their consequences and their power. 
The genitive in the Greek expresses in a wide sense the object on which the redemption is exercised  (‘redemption in the matter of the transgressions,’  ‘transgression-redemption’).  So it is that elsewhere the genitive is used for that which is delivered: See Rom. 8:23  the redemption of our body.  Eph. 1:14  to the redemption of the acquired possession.

The transgressions are spoken of as ‘the transgressions that were under the first covenant.’
The phrase is general in its application. 

‘Under’ expresses the conditions,  the accompanying circumstances, under which anything takes place. See v. 10.
In this connection the covenant with Abraham (Acts 3:25) does not come into consideration. It was of the nature of a universal promise.

When the necessary condition has been satisfied then scope is given for the positive fulfillment of the Covenant, that they that have been called may receive in fact what had been promised before. 
Compare Heb. 6:12;15;10:36;11:13,39; Gal. 3:14.

The blessing is no longer limited to a particular people.  It is for all to whom the invitation has been sent (Acts 2:39; compare Heb. 3:1).

The promise…..of the eternal inheritance
The position of the genitive in the Greek is dependent on the promise and is due to the fact that it is added as a further definition of the promise (compare Heb. 12:11).  The sentence stands essentially complete without it: that they that have been called may receive the promise (compare Heb. 6:15).  But the explanation is naturally suggested by the thought of the contrast of the Old and the New. Moses secured to the people an ‘inheritance,’ which was however only a figure of that which was prepared (compare Exodus 32:13).

Ex 32:13

9:16,17

The mention of a ‘new covenant’ and of ‘death’ in close connection suggests a fresh thought. 
The Death of Christ fulfilled two distinct purposes:

In any case a covenant is ratified by the death of a representative victim. But here Christ died in His own Person; and by thus dying He gave absolute validity to the covenant which He mediated: the preceding thought of the atonement shows how such a covenant was possible.

The Death of Christ was the chief difficulty of the Hebrews, and therefore the writer presents it under different aspects in order to show its full significance in the Christian dispensation.

The Meaning Of  "Covenant"

9:16 

For where…..testator
For where there is a covenant the death of him that made it must needs be presented. 
The circumstances under which the New Covenant was made implies death. He who makes the covenant ‘must die,’ and that his death must be ‘brought forward,’ ‘presented,’ ‘introduced upon the scene,’ ‘set in evidence.’ 

He who makes the covenant (the testator) is, for the purpose of the covenant, identified with the victim by whose representative death the covenant is ordinarily ratified. In the death of the victim his death is presented symbolically.
In the case of the New Covenant Christ in His Divine-human Person:

A Covenant so made could not fail. 

9:17 

For a testament……testator
For a covenant is sure where there hath been death, since it doth not ever have force when he that made it liveth.  The statement which has been made is supported by an explanation which is borrowed from ancient usage and language.

The idea which is involved in the symbolic act is intelligible and important.

John 3:18

John 7:26

9:18-22

The great, inaugurating, sacrifice of the Old Covenant embodied the same thought that death marks the immutability of the terms laid down (Exodus 24.); and yet more: 

The blood was sprinkled 

Thus the law which was enacted for the yearly access of the High-priest to the Divine Presence  (v. 7 not apart from blood)  was observed when the people entered into the Divine Covenant.

In relation to this thought it is important to observe that it is not said of the first covenant that it was inaugurated ‘not without death’  but  ‘not without blood.’  By the use of the words ‘not without blood’ the writer of the Epistle suggests the two ideas of  atonement  and  quickening  (by imparting new life)  which have been already connected with Christ’s work (vv. 14,15).

9:18 

Whence….has been inaugurated
Since every absolute, inviolable, covenant is based upon a death, and, further, since every covenant of God with man requires complete self-surrender on the part of man, not even hath the first covenant, though it failed in its issue, been inaugurated without blood.

9:19 

Having been spoken for
The ceremonies connected with the establishment of the Law-Covenant emphasize the ideas already seen to be involved in ‘blood’;  for when every commandment had been spoken according to the Law by Moses … taking the blood… 

These sacrifices were offered by young men of the children of Israel, representatives of the fullness of the people’s life (Exodus 24:5).  The ordinances of the Levitical priesthood were not yet given (Exodus 28);  though some form of priesthood still remained (Exodus 19:22). Compare Exodus 19:6.

It is of interest to notice that ‘sprinkling of persons with blood’ is noticed in the Old Testament only on one other occasion- the consecration of Aaron  (Exodus 19:21).

The words  according to the law  go with  spoken.  Every commandment was spoken by Moses  ‘according to the tenor of the Law’ in which they were included.  The Law represented the sum of the whole revelation made to Moses.  The separate fundamental commandments which preceded the conclusion of the covenant were fashioned after its scope.

Having taken the blood of calves and of goats
Goats are not directly spoken of in the Mosaic narrative (Exodus 24:5).
The addition is the more remarkable because the offering of a goat is never prescribed in the Law except as a sin-offering;  while the sacrifices in Exodus 24 are described as ‘burnt-offerings’ and ‘peace-offerings.’ 
Yet see Numbers 7:17,23,29,35.
These sacrifices were not made according to the Mosaic ritual. They were initiatory sacrifices offered not by priests but by the ‘young men,’ representing the people, and so partook of the patriarchal type. Under this aspect it is noticeable that in the record of the original covenant-sacrifice of Abraham ‘a heifer of three years old and a she goat of three years old’ are specially mentioned (Genesis 15:9).

The blood
He used half the blood for the sprinkling: Exodus 24:6.

With water…and hyssop
These details are not given in Exodus. Water is mentioned in connection with blood Leviticus 14:5 (compare Numbers 19:9) in the purification of the leper, when also a sprinkler of  ‘cedar wood and scarlet and hyssop’ was used (Leviticus 14:4: compare Numbers 19:18).

The significance of blood and water is marked  in I John 5:6; John 19:34.

1 John 5:6

Both itself the book
The Book of the Covenant (Exodus 24:7). 
This detail also is an addition to the Mosaic narrative. Though ‘the Book’ was the record of the words of God, it was outwardly the work of man, and so required the application of the purifying, vivifying, blood. Thus in a figure the ‘letter’ received a power of life.  Ex 24:6-8

The blood was divided into two parts:

As several animals were slaughtered, and all of them young oxen, there must have been a considerable quantity of blood obtained, so that the one half would fill several basins, and many persons might be sprinkled with it as it was being swung about.  

The division of the blood had reference to the two parties to the covenant, who were to be brought by the covenant into a living unity; but it had no connection whatever with the heathen customs adduced by Bähr and Knobel, in which the parties to a treaty mixed their own blood together.

For this was not a mixture of different kinds of blood, but it was a division of one blood, and that sacrificial blood, in which animal life was offered instead of human life, making expiation as a pure life for sinful man, and by virtue of this expiation restoring the fellowship between God and man which had been destroyed by sin. But the sacrificial blood itself only acquired this signification through the sprinkling or swinging upon the altar, by virtue of which the human soul was received, in the soul of the animal sacrificed for man, into the fellowship of the divine grace manifested upon the altar, in order that, through the power of this sin-forgiving and sin-destroying grace,  it might be sanctified to a new and holy life.  In this way the sacrificial blood acquired the signification of a vital principle endued with the power of divine grace;  and this was communicated to the people by means of the sprinkling of the blood.

As the only reason for dividing the sacrificial blood into two parts, was that the blood sprinkled upon the altar could not be taken off again and sprinkled upon the people; the two halves of the blood are to be regarded as one blood, which was first of all sprinkled upon the altar, and then upon the people.

In this way the blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and His people, but as the blood of the covenant, it became a vital power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God; and the sprinkling of the people with this blood was an actual renewal of life, a transposition of Israel into the kingdom of God, in which it was filled with the powers of God's spirit of grace, and sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation of Jehovah (Ex 19:6). 

And this covenant was made "upon all the words" which Jehovah had spoken, and the people had promised to observe.  Consequently it had for its foundation the divine law and right, as the rule of life for Israel.
(from Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: New Updated Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1996 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

9:20 

This the blood of the covenant
It is possible that the corresponding phrase at the institution of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28) may have influenced the quotation.

Matt 26:28

The force of the words is: ‘This Blood shed, offered, sprinkled upon you, shows the validity and the power of the purpose of God.’

Enjoined to you
Commanded to you-ward … to be brought to you;  you were the people to whom the Lord looked in the commandments which He gave me. See The Acts 3:25.

Acts 3:25

The sprinkling of the Tabernacle and its vessels took place at a later time. They were not yet made when the Sacrifice of the Covenant was offered.  Moreover it is not recorded in the Pentateuch that the Tabernacle was sprinkled with blood,  though it ‘and all that was therein’ was anointed with oil   (Exodus 40:9. But Josephus, like the writer of the Epistle,  regards the Tabernacle as having been consecrated with blood. (Josephus Antt. 3. 8,6).

9:21 

With blood
With the blood.
The definite form is used to bring out the thought that this was not the ordinary blood of purification, but the blood of the covenant, the blood of inauguration.

9:22  

And almost with blood all things
The position of  almost,  separated from  all things  by  with blood,  shows that it qualifies the whole of the following clause: And , I may almost say, it is in blood all things… 
The position of  with blood is significant.  Blood was the characteristic means for cleansing,  though fire and water were also used.  It is the power of a pure life which purifies.  Under this aspect the Blood becomes the enveloping medium in which (with),  and not simply the means of instrument  through  or  by which,  the complete purification is effected.

The main reference is naturally to the service of the Day of Atonement.
The word almost occurs again in the New Testament in Acts 13:44; 19:26. 

All things
Things and men alike.  The reference is probably to the dress of the priests,  the attendants of the Temple,  the offers of sacrifice.

According to the law…  which was itself thus inaugurated by blood.

Apart from blood-shedding there is no remission
And apart from outpouring of blood there cometh no remission. 
The former statement was general (almost): this is universal  (yet there is an exception found in Leviticus 5:11).

Keil & Delitzsch on Lev 5:11-13

The principle which is here affirmed belongs to the Law; and finds expression in the Pentateuch (Lev 17:11)

Keil & Delitzsch on Lev 17:8-16

(from Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: New Updated Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1996 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

The ‘outpouring’ of blood may be understood in two ways:

Neither idea is in itself complete.  The provision of the blood and the application of the blood are both necessary. Maimonides, in speaking of the Passover,  lays down that ‘the sprinkling of the blood is the main point in sacrifice’ (de Sacr. I.2, 6).

Remission
The absolute use of  remission  is remarkable.  Elsewhere in the New Testament, except Luke 4:18,  the word is always used with a genitive in the Greek.  The absence of further definition here (contrast Heb. 10:18)  leaves it with the broad sense of  ‘release,’  ‘deliverance,’  not so much from special sins as from the bondage of which wrong-doing is a result.  In this sense ‘cleansing’  is to a certain degree opposed to ‘release.’  The one marks the removal of the stain, the other the enabling for action.

The writer of the Epistle goes back now to the consideration of the fulfillment of the work of Christ. 
The exposition of the full meaning of  ‘blood’  as the means of atonement and ratification came in as a necessary parenthesis.  The last illustration - the use of the blood in cleansing all human means of approach to God under the Old Covenant - supplies the transition to: 

The paragraph offers an additional feature in the preeminence of the new order over the old

The truths taught by Christ’s Entrance into the Presence of God

Greek Text according to G.R. Berry
(23)  [It was] necessary then [for] the representations of the things in the heavens with these to be purified, but themselves the heavenly with better sacrifices than these.  ( 24)   For not into made by hands Holies entered the Christ, figures of the true [ones], but into itself heaven, now to appear before the face of God for us:  ( 25)   nor that often he should offer himself, even as the high priest enters into the Holies year by year with blood another’s  ( 26)  since it was necessary for him often to have suffered from [the] foundation of [the] world. But now once in [the] consummation of the ages, for [the] putting away of sin by his sacrifice he has been manifested  ( 27)  And for as much as it is apportioned to men once to die, after and this, judgment;  ( 28)   thus the Christ, once having been offered for of many to bear [the] sins, a second time apart from sin shall appear to those that him await for salvation.

9:23

This verse serves for the return from the line of thought in vv. 13-22  to that indicated generally in vv. 11,12. 
The consideration of the use of blood for cleansing and for remission under the Law throws light upon the significance of Christ’s Blood in connection with His heavenly ministry. 

Necessary then
It was necessary therefore,  since blood is the means of purification for all that is connected with man’s service of God,  that the typical sanctuary,  the copies of the things in the heavens,  should be cleansed with these,  but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.  The fact that such a mode of purifying by blood was enjoined for the material instruments of worship carried with it the inevitable consequence that some analogous and therefore some nobler purification should be provided for the divine archetypes.

In an external system the purification might be external, but in the spiritual order it was requisite that the purification should be of corresponding efficacy, spiritual and not material only.

The whole structure of the sentence requires that ‘cleansed’ should be supplied in the second clause from the first, and not any more general term as ‘inaugurated.’  In what sense then can it be said that  ‘the heavenly things’ needed cleansing?

The necessity for the purification of the earthly sanctuary and its vessels came from the fact that they were to be used by man and shared in his impurity (compare Leviticus 16:16).

Keil & Delitzsch on Lev 16b,17

Agreeable with this view it may be said that even ‘heavenly things,’ so far as they embody the conditions of man’s future life, contracted by the Fall something which required cleansing (compare I timothy 4:4,5 good…sanctified). Man is, according to the revelation in Scripture, so bound up with the whole finite order that the consequences of his actions extend through creation in some way which we are unable to define (compare Genesis 3:17; Isa. 24:5,6; Jer.; 23:10; Rom. 8:18).  And conversely the effect of Christ’s work extends throughout creation with reconciling, harmonizing power: Eph. 1:10; Col. 1:20.

The reference is definite,  to the purification of the earthly sanctuary on the one hand by the High-priest, and of the heavenly sanctuary by Christ. 

With these to be purified
With these ceremonial observances,  that is,  the blood of bulls and goats,  applied according to the directions of the Law.  The Mosaic system was external:  the means of purification were external also.

But themselves the heavenly
This phrase,  as distinguished from the  in the heavens,  expresses those things,  answering to the sanctuary with all its furniture,  which have their proper sphere in the heavenly order (compare Heb. 3:1;8:5 and John 3:12), and not simply those things which are there.

With better sacrifices
The plural is used for the expression of the general idea.  And in point of fact the single sacrifice of Christ fulfilled perfectly the ideas presented by the different forms of the Levitical sacrifices:

9:24-26

The writer shows that Christ has satisfied the requirement which he has described in v. 23. 

9:24 

For not into made by hands
The clause justifies the reference to the purification of the heavenly things.  If we consider what was needed for the due preparation of that spiritual Tabernacle for man’s service and God’s revelation of Himself we shall feel the greatness of the requirements.  For it was  no Holy place made by hands  Christ entered,  and entered once for all, but heaven itself.  He has fulfilled therefore,  necessarily fulfilled,  all those requirements to which the symbols pointed.

Now to appear before the face
Now to appear openly before the face of God.
The open evident appearance of Christ before the face of God is contrasted with the appearance of the High-priest in the dark sanctuary veiled by the cloud of incense (Leviticus 16:12).

So too the ‘face of God’ suggests the idea of a vision direct and absolute,  not like that of  ‘the glory of the Lord’ (Exodus 40:34), or even that granted to Moses (Exodus 33:18).

In this connection it appears strange at first that Christ should be said to have entered the heavenly sanctuary  ‘to appear openly’ before the face of God:  that he should be described as the object of the vision of God and not that God should be spoken of as seen perfectly by Him.  The explanation of the form of thought seems to lie in this,  that everything finally must be referred to God:  that which bears His regard is accepted by Him. Compare Gal. 4:9.

Gal 4:9

This combination appears to:

The manifestation of Christ before God is ‘on our behalf’. 
In Him humanity obtains its true harmony with God, and in Him it can bear the full light of God. 
He can be therefore,  in virtue of His perfect manhood, our Advocate (I John 2:2 Jesus Christ righteous). And each Christian in Christ, as well as through Him,  has access to God: Eph. 3:12 compare Heb. 7:25.

9:25

The writer of the Epistle goes on to meet another difficulty of his Jewish readers while he unfolds the absolute uniqueness of Christ’s Death. 

It is shown from the very nature of the case that He could only die once, and that by this Death He satisfied completely the wants of humanity.

Nor that
Nor yet did He enter in order that He may again often offer Himself, and so enter afresh as the High-priest from time to time. 
The main idea of the writer seems to be:  ‘Christ did not enter in order to secure an access to God which might be available on repeated occasions.’  Then for such a phrase as  ‘in order to repeat His entrance’ he substitutes ‘in order to offer Himself,’ and thus by bringing into preeminence the preliminary condition of entrance he shows the impossibility of repetition.

Often
The parallel is between Christ’s offering and entrance and the High-priest’s offering and entrance as a whole repeated year by year.   The ceremony of the Day of Atonement is treated as one great act.  The thought of the High-priest’s offering for himself is necessarily excluded in the case of Christ (Heb. 7:27).

He should offer himself
Two different interpretations of this offering have been proposed. It has been supposed to correspond with the bringing of the blood into the Holy of Holies, and again with the offering of the victim upon the altar. The general usage of the writer, apart from other considerations,  is decisive in favor of the second view.   It is unreasonable to give a different sense to the words from that which they bear in v. 14 (compare v. 28),  where the reference is to the Passion of Christ.  See also Heb. 11:17;7:27;8:3.
It was only by the offering upon the Cross that the Blood  ‘through which’  the divine High-priest entered into the heavenly sanctuary was made available.
The High-priest was, as it were, surrounded, enveloped, in the life sacrificed and symbolically communicated.  Christ Himself living through death came before God. 

9:26

If the one offering of Christ is (as has been shown from its nature) sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world, then it is evident that its efficacy reaches through all time past and future.  If it had not been sufficient,  then it must have been repeated.  It is assumed that it is God’s will that complete atonement should be made for sin;  and if He had willed that this should be made in detail and by successive acts,  occasion must have arisen in earlier ages for Christ’s sufferings,  a thought in itself inconceivable.  The virtue of Christ’s work for the past in the eternal counsel of God is taken for granted

Since it was
Since in that case, else. See Heb. 9:17; 10:2; Rom. 3:6; I Cor. 5:10.

From foundation of world
A prospect is opened beyond the beginning of the Mosaic system. The divine counsel had a universal scope.

But now
As things actually are,  once for all,  at the close of the ages,  hath He been manifested to disannul (set at naught) sin by the sacrifice of Himself.  Each element in this sentence brings out some contrast between the work of Christ and that of the Levitical High-priests. 

Generally it is made plain that Christ accomplished all that the Levitical Service pointed to.

Once
The absolute oneness of Christ’s offering has been touched upon before, 9:12;7:27.  In proportion as this truth was felt,  the weakness of the Levitical offerings,  shown by their repetition, became evident.

The Death of the Lord, including His Resurrection and Ascension, is essentially the beginning of a new development in the life of man and in the life of the world. It was needful, as we speak, that the ‘natural’ development of man should have had fullest scope before Christ came.

Consummation
The word consummation occurs in the New Testament only in the passages which have been quoted.  It occurs frequently in the LXX.  A characteristic use is found in Exodus  23:16 ‘Thou shalt also keep the festival of the Ingathering of the first fruits of thy labours employed in sowing thy field; and the festival of completion at the end of the year, when thou hast gathered in thy labours from the field.’ LXX Ex. 23:16 

Consummation expresses an end involving many parts. Compare Luke 4:2; Acts 21:27; Heb. 8:8; Luke 4:13.
The whole discipline and growth of creation in time is made up of manifold periods of discipline, each having its proper unity and completeness.

For putting away of sin
This thought goes beyond  ‘the redemption from transgressions’  (9:15).
It is literally ‘for the disannulling of sin’ (Heb. 7:18  A putting away for there is of the going before commandment).  Sin is vanquished,  shown in its weakness,  ‘set at naught’ (Mark 7:9; Gal. 3:15).

Mark 7:9

Gal 3:15

Elsewhere in the Epistle the work of Christ is regarded in its action on the many actual sins in which sin shows itself.
In the connection different phrases are used which present different aspects of its efficacy:

So "sins" are presented as a defilement which clings to man,  a force which separates him from God,  a burden which he bears,  a robe of custom in which he is arrayed.  And only the sacrifice of Jesus Christ can save him from it.

By his sacrifice
The phrase, referring as it does to  with blood another’s 9:25,  cannot mean anything less that  ‘the sacrifice of Himself.’   The word  his sacrifice  is used again of Christ in Heb. 10:12;  and in connection with an offering in 
Eph. 5:2.

He has been manifested
He,  who is our High-priest,  hath been manifested,  hath entered the visible life of men as man.  On the scene of earth,  before the eyes of men,  He has overcome death  (compare I Corinthians 15:54-57).  And more than this: the fact of the Incarnation is regarded in its abiding consequences.  The manifestation of Christ continues in its effects.

1 Cor 15:54-57

In this relation the  ‘manifestation’  of Christ offers a contrast to the veiling of the High-priest in darkness when he was engaged in fulfilling his atoning service. Christ is withdrawn and yet present: hidden and yet seen.

9:27,28

The fulfillment of the work of the Levitical High-priest suggests another thought.  When the atonement was completed the High-priest came again among the people (Leviticus 16:24).  So too Christ shall return.  He shall in this respect also satisfy the conditions of humanity.  His Death shall be followed by the manifestation of His righteousness in the judgment of God.

9:27

The conditions of human life are regarded as furnishing a measure,  by analogy,  of the conditions of Christ’s work as man.  He fulfilled the part of man perfectly in fact and not in figure (as by the Mosaic sacrifices).  For Him therefore Death must be followed by a Divine Judgment.

It is apportioned
Death lies stored in the future, ‘laid up’ for each man:  2 Tim. 4:8; Col. 1:5.

After and this
And after this cometh judgment,  not in immediate sequence of time,  but in the development of personal being. The writer appears to connect the Judgment with the Return of Christ on ‘the Day’: Compare Hebrews 10:25,37.
For the distinction of the act  ( the process)  of judgment,  from the issue of judgment  ( the sentence)  compare Heb. 6:2 with 10:27;  see also John 9:39; I John 4:17.

Thus the
Death finally closes man’s earthly work, and is followed by the judgment which reveals its issue. So too Christ,  as man,  died once only;  and that which answers to judgment in His case is the revelation of His glory. 
The revelation of Himself as He is.

9:28

Once having been offered
The passive form  (contrast v. 25)  completes the conception of the Lord’s offering.  It is on the one side voluntary and on the other side it is the result of outward force.  How this outward force was exerted and by whom is not made known.  It cannot be said directly that Christ was  ‘offered up’  by men;  nor would such a form be used to express the offering of Christ by Himself.  There is a divine law which men unconsciously and even involuntarily fulfill.  This embodies the divine will of love and right.  The Jews were instruments in carrying it out.

For many to bear sins
To carry the sins of many.  This most remarkable phrase appears to be taken from Isaiah 53:6 LXX. ‘We all like sheep had strayed; every man wandered in his way: and the Lord delivered him up for our sins:’ and Isaiah 53:12 LXX  ‘therefore he shall inherit much and divide the spoils of the strong.’

Where the sense is  ‘to take upon himself and bear the burden of sin.’  Hence comes the sense of  ‘offering,’  ‘carrying up to the altar’ (Heb. 7:27;13:15; James 2:21);  and it is difficult to suppose that this idea is not present in the phrase here.  Christ  ‘carried to the cross’  and there did away with sin and sins.

In any case it is essential to the understanding of the passage to keep strictly to the literal statement.  The burden which Christ took upon Him and bore to the cross was  ‘the sins of many,’  not,  primarily or separately from the sins,  the punishment of sins.   ‘Punishment’ may be a blessing to the child conscious of his sonship.

The word ‘many’  does not  imply ‘many out of the whole number of men’;  but  ‘many’  is simply contrasted with Christ’s single person,  and His single entrance.  Compare Heb. 2:10; Matthew 20:28;26:28

Matt 20:28  -  The greatest exemplar of this principle is the Son of man. The supreme display occurred at Calvary, where he gave his life as a ransom to God, against whom men have sinned and were subject to penalty. For many. Christ's death here is clearly substitutionary, "in the stead of" (anti) many. (See A. T. Robertson, Grammar of the Greek New Testament, pp. 572-574). Many does not seem intended to be restrictive here, but is in contrast to the one who died. However, the choice was a happy one in view of the clear teaching elsewhere that not all would avail themselves of the proffered salvation.
(from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1962 by Moody Press)

Matt 26:28  -  Drink ye all of it, i.e., all of you.  The new testament or covenant was put in force by the death of Christ.  The old covenant given by God to Israel required continual sacrifices for sin.  But Christ’s death provided a perfect sacrifice,  and made possible both justification and regeneration (Heb 8:6-13). Shed for many. 
(Cf. Matt 20:28).  Christ's death,  while sufficient in itself to care for the remission of sins for every person,  is here regarded as actually effective only for believers. 
(from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1962 by Moody Press)

A second time…salvation
The  ‘appearance’  of Christ corresponds in the parallel to the judgment of men.  In this case the complete acceptance of Christ’s work by the Father,  testified by the Return in glory,  is the correlative to the sentence given on human life.  He rises above judgment, and yet His absolute righteousness receives this testimony.  For Him what is judgment in the case of men is seen in the Return to bear the final message of salvation.
The fullness of this thought finds more complete expression by the description of Christ’s Return as a return  ‘for salvation’ and not  (under another aspect)  as a return ‘for judgment,’  which might have seemed superficially more natural.

Nothing indeed is said of the effect of Christ’s Return upon the unbelieving.  This aspect of its working does not fall within the scope of the writer;  and it is characteristic of the Epistle that judgment is not directly referred to Christ, whom the writer regards peculiarly as the Royal High-priest.

Apart from sin
Heb. 4:15.  
At His first manifestation Christ took on Him the sins of humanity,  and,  through Himself sinless, endured the consequences of sin.  
At His second coming this burden will exist no longer. Sin then will have no place.
By the use of the word  shall appear  the Return of Christ is presented as a historical fact (compare Acts 1:10). But it is to be noticed that the writer does not use the Greek word that is used in Matthew, 2 Peter, James, Paul or John. 
This revelation will be the completion of the transitory revelations after the Resurrection (I Cor. 15:5).  But,  like those,  it will be for such as wait for Him,  even as the people of Israel waited for the return of the High-priest from the Holy of Holies after the atonement had been made.

For salvation
To accomplish,  consummate salvation,  which includes not only the removal of sin but also the attainment of the ideal of humanity.

The Divine Names in the Epistle

The Names by which the Lord is spoken of in the Epistle throw light upon its characteristic teaching. Speaking generally we may say that:

Jesus

Christ  or  The Christ

Son,  the Son

The Lord

Jesus Christ

The Son of God

Jesus the Son of God

Sometimes the Lord,  though unnamed,  is assumed as the subject of the teaching of the prophets:  Heb. 2:14;10:5,37.