Hebrews 7:12

Heb 7:12-14. For, or, wherefore, the priesthood — On account of which the law was given; being changed, of necessity there must be a change also of the law — As if he had said, Since there is such a near relation between the priesthood and the law, and since the whole administration of the law, as the rule of worship, depended absolutely on the Aaronical priesthood, therefore the one being changed, the other must be changed also. “Under the law the offices of the priesthood consisted in offering the sacrifices of beasts, and in performing various rites for purifying the bodies of the worshippers from ceremonial defilement, that they might be fit to join the congregation in the public worship of God. But when the priesthood was changed by raising up from another tribe a priest after the order of Melchisedec, whose services had for their object to purify the conscience of the worshippers, not by the sacrifice of beasts, but by the sacrifice of himself,” and to sanctify their souls by the influences of the Holy Spirit; “the whole law concerning the sacrifices of beasts, and the sanctifying of the flesh of the Israelites by washing, was of necessity entirely abolished.” For he of whom — Or, to whom; these things are spoken — That is, he to whom it was said, Thou art a priest for ever, &c., was of a different tribe, namely, that of Judah; of which no man gave attendance at the altar — Or, was suffered by the law to minister there, so that the priesthood is manifestly changed from one order to another, and from one tribe to another. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah — “That the Messiah was to spring up from Judah is plain from the prophecies concerning his descent: and it is likewise plain that this part of his character was verified in our Lord, whose genealogy Matthew and Luke have traced up to King David from the public tables. For that such tables of their descent were kept by the Jews Josephus testifies, (section 1. of his Life, at the end,) saying, ‘I give you these successions of our family as I find them written in the public tables.’ By these tables Paul knew himself to be of the tribe of Benjamin.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7:12 According to the law given to Moses, the appointed priests were descendants of Aaron (Exod 28:41-43; 29:9). The priesthood is changed because Jesus is now the High Priest. Thus, God himself had changed the law concerning priests.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Heb 7:12. Μετατιθεμένης, being transferred or changed) from order to order, from tribe to tribe.—γὰρ, for) He shows why, in Heb 7:11, he presses the words of the psalm concerning the order of Melchisedec, because it follows from this, that the law was also changed along with the priesthood, and that both are brought to Christ.—νόμου, of the law) Heb 7:5; Heb 7:16; Heb 7:19; Heb 7:28; ch. Heb 8:4. Τάξις, order (not νόμος), is the expression used of Christ.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Heb_7:12. In the parenthesis, Heb_7:11, the author has brought forward in general the close connectedness of the Levitical priesthood with the Mosaic law, and thereby already indicated that if the former is an imperfect and unsatisfying one, the same also is true of the latter; the perishing of the one involves also the perishing of the other. This truth the author now further specially urges, by means of a corroboration of the parenthetical remark, Heb_7:11. So in recent times also Alford and Woerner. Otherwise is the connection apprehended by Bleek, de Wette, Bisping, Delitzsch, Riehm (Lehrbegr. des Hebräerbr. p. 484), Maier, and Moll. They refer γάρ to the main thought in Heb_7:11, and find in Heb_7:12 an indication of the reason why a change of the sacerdotal order would not have ensued without an urgent cause, namely, because such change would have involved also a change of the law in general. But subject-matter and form of expression in Heb_7:12 point back to the parenthesis, Heb_7:11. For in both the author is speaking of the inseparable conjunction of the Levitical priesthood with the Mosaic law; and ἐπʼ αὐτῆς, Heb_7:11, is resumed by τῆς ἱερωσύνης, Heb_7:12; νενομοθέτηται, Heb_7:11, by νόμου, Heb_7:12.

μετατιθεμένης] denotes, like the μετάθεσις immediately following, certainly as to its verbal signification, only a transformation or change, (not specially, as Chrysostom, Piscator, Grotius, Bengel, Heinrichs, Stuart, and others suppose, a transference of the priesthood to another tribe of the Jewish people, or to a non-Aaronides). As regards the thing intended, however,as is manifest from the parallel ἀθέτησις, Heb_7:18,an actual rendering obsolete or abrogation is spoken of. The author thus still expresses himself with delicacy of feeling.

That, further, νόμος is to be limited, neither, with Beza, Pareus, Piscator, Grotius, Wittich, Chr. Fr. Schmid, Zachariae, Whitby, Schulz, to the law of the priesthood, nor, with Calvin, Cornelius a Lapide, Jac. Cappellus, Carpzov, Kuinoel, Klee, and others, to the ceremonial law, but is to be interpreted of the Mosaic law in general, is self-evident.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Heb 7:12 . μετατιθεμένης γὰρ .… “For if the priesthood is changed, there is of necessity a change also of the law”. Or, This change of priesthood being made, as it is now being made, a change of the law is also being made. The connection is: What need was there for a new priesthood? It must have been a crying need, for to change the priesthood is to change all. It means nothing short of revolution. Chrysostom rightly τοῦτο δὲ πρὸς τοὺς λέγοντας , τί ἔδει καινῆς διαθήκης ;

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He showeth how that by the institution of the new Priesthood, not only the imperfection of the Priesthood of Levi was declared, but also that it was changed for this: for these two cannot stand together, because that first appointment of the tribe of Levi, did shut forth the tribe of Judah, and made it also inferior to Levi: and this latter doth place the Priesthood in the tribe of Judah.

Of the institution of Aaron.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

For--the reason why Paul presses the words "after the order of Melchisedec" in Psa 110:4, namely, because these presuppose a change or transference of the priesthood, and this carries with it a change also of the law (which is inseparably bound up with the priesthood, both stand and fall together, Heb 7:11). This is his answer to those who might object, What need was there of a new covenant?

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 12. The priesthood being changed] That is, The order of Aaron being now abrogated, to make way for that which had preceded it, the order of Melchisedec.

There is made of necessity a change also of the law.] The very essence of the Levitical law consisting in its sacrificial offerings; and as these could not confer perfection, could not reconcile God to man, purify the unholy heart, nor open the kingdom of heaven to the souls of men, consequently it must be abolished, according to the order of God himself; for he said, Sacrifice and offering, and burnt-offering, and sacrifice for sin, he would not; see Ps 40:6; Ps 40:7, compared with Heb 10:5-10, and with Ps 110:4, where it is evident God designed to change both the law and the priesthood, and to introduce Jesus as the only Priest and Sacrifice, and to substitute the Gospel system for that of the Levitical institutions. The priesthood, therefore, being changed, Jesus coming in the place of Aaron, the law of ordinances and ceremonies, which served only to point out the Messiah, must of necessity be changed also.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. For the priesthood being changed, or, transferred, etc. As the authority of the Law and the priesthood is the same, Christ became not only a priest, but also a Lawgiver; so that the right of Aaron, as well as of Moses, was transferred to him. The sum of the whole is, that the ministry of Moses was no less temporary than that of Aaron; and hence both were annulled by the coming of Christ, for the one could not stand without the other. By the word Law, we understand what peculiarly belonged to Moses; for the Law contains the rule of life, and the gratuitous covenant of life; and in it we find everywhere many remarkable sentences by which we are instructed as to faith, and as to the fear of God. None of these were abolished by Christ, but only that part which regarded the ancient priesthood.

For Christ is here compared with Moses; whatever then they had in common, is not to be taken to the account, but only the things in which they differ. They in common offer God’s mercy to us, prescribe the rule of a holy and godly life, teach us the true worship of God, and exhort us to exercise faith and patience, and all the duties of godliness. But Moses was different from Christ in this respect, that while the love of the Gospel was not as yet made known, he kept the people under veils, set forth the knowledge of Christ by types and shadows, and, in short, accommodated himself to the capacity of ignorant people, and did not rise higher than to puerile elements. We must then remember, that the Law is that part of the ministration which Moses had as peculiarly his own, and different from that of Christ. That law, as it was subordinate to the ancient priesthood, was abolished when the priesthood was abolished. And Christ, being made a priest, was invested also with the authority of a legislator, that he might be the teacher and interpreter of the new covenant. At the same time, the word Law is applied, though not in its strict sense, to the Gospel; but this impropriety of language is so far from having anything harsh in it, that on account of the contrast it adds beauty to the sentence, as we find in the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Romans

Moreover, the impiety of the Pope is extremely arrogant, who has inserted this article in his decretals, that he himself is now invested with the same authority as Aaron formerly had, because the Law and also the priesthood have been transferred to him. We see what the Apostle says; he maintains that ceremonies have ceased since the time when Christ came forth with command to proclaim the new covenant. It is then absurd hence to conclude, that anything has been transferred to the ministers of Christ; for Christ himself is alone contrasted here with Moses and Aaron. Under what pretext then can Antichrist arrogate to himself any such authority? I do not indeed speak now for the sake of disproving so gross an arrogance; but it is worth while to remind readers of this sacrilegious audacity, that they may know that this notorious servant of the servants of Christ wholly disregards the honor of his Master, and boldly mangles the Scriptures, that he may have some cloak for his own tyranny.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(12) This verse connects itself with the parenthesis in Heb_7:11. “For if the priesthood is changed there takes place also of necessity a change of law.” It is no light matter to speak of the order of Aaron as set aside: this carries with it a change of law.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. being changed] He here uses the comparatively mild and delicate term “being transferred” When he has prepared the mind of his readers by a little further argument, he substitutes for “transference” the much stronger word “annulment” (Heb_7:18). It is a characteristic of the writer to be thus careful not to shock the prejudices of his readers more than was inevitable. His whole style of argument, though no less effective than that of St Paul in its own sphere, is more conciliatory, more deferential, less vehemently iconoclastic. This relation to St Paul is like that of Melanchthon to Luther.

of necessity] The Law and the Priesthood were so inextricably united that the Priesthood could not be altered without disintegrating the whole complex structure of the Law.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For he of whom these things are spoken,.... In Psa 110:4 and in the type of him Melchizedek, in the preceding verses; for not Melchizedek is here meant, but the Lord Jesus Christ, as appears by what follows; the antitype of Melchizedek, the Lord our righteousness, the Prince of peace, the priest of God, that lives for ever, without father, without mother, &c.

pertaineth to another tribe; the tribe of Judah, and not the tribe of Levi:

of which no man gave attendance at the altar; either of burnt offering or of incense; that is, no man waited there, or took upon him and exercised the priest's office that was of the tribe of Judah: no man might lawfully do it; Uzziah, indeed, thrust himself into the priest's office, who was of that tribe, and went into the temple and burnt incense upon the altar of incense; but then he had no right to do it, and was punished for it.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Ver. 12. A change also of the law] "For we are not under the taw, but under grace." The gospel is post naufragium tabula, a plank after shipwreck, and hath its remuneration, Heb 11:6, viz. of grace and mercy. By law here some understood only the law of priesthood.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the priesthood being changed - According to the prediction in Ps. cx., that it would be. When that occurs, the consequence specified will also follow.

There is made of necessity a change also of the law - The Law so far as it grew out of that, or was dependent on it. The connection requires us to understand it only of the Law “so far as it was connected with the Levitical priesthood.” This could not apply to the ten commandments - for they were given before the institution of the priesthood; nor could it apply to any other part of the moral law, for that was not dependent on the appointment of the Levitical priests. But the meaning is, that since a large number of laws - constituting a code of considerable extent and importance - was given for the regulation of the priesthood, and in reference to the rites of religion, which they were to observe or superintend, it followed that when their office was superseded by “one of a wholly different order,” the Law which had regulated them vanished also, or ceased to be binding. This was a very important point in the introduction of Christianity, and hence, it is that it is so often insisted on in the writings of Paul. The argument to show that there had been a change or transfer of the priestly office, he proceeds to establish in the sequel.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

After giving a decided preference to Melchisedech, and his priesthood, over the Levitical priesthood, St. Paul proves the abrogation of the latter, and even of the law, by the introduction of a new priesthood, according to the order of Melchisedech.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

For the priesthood being changed: for refers to the expiration of the Aaronical order, to which these Hebrews now were not bound, for that a better priesthood and law were to fill up their room in the church. The Levitical priesthood was changed and abolished to make way for this; God designing that to continue for a time, and then to expire, when the truth perfecting it should take place.

There is made of necessity a change also of the law; the mutation of the priesthood indispensably requireth the change of the law, i.e. the legal dispensation of the covenant of grace, and the bringing in with another priesthood a better hope, Gal 3:17-27; compare Heb 7:18,19 of this chapter; even the covenant of grace in the gospel dispensation of it. This was made necessary by the decree of God, who determined, that both priesthood and law should expire together, and accordingly hath fulfilled it. For when Christ, the gospel High Priest, had in his person and work perfected all of it in heaven, he roots out that order of priesthood, abolisheth the law, scatters the people which would cleave to it; demolisheth the temple and city to which he confined the administration, so as all designs and endeavours of Jews, or of apostate Christhins, to repair, or to restore it, have been ineffectual to this day.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. A change of the priesthood so predicted necessitated a change also of the law of succession, limiting it no longer to the tribe of Levi.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For - One of these cannot be changed without the other.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

12. For the priesthood being changed. The law as given “under the Levitical priesthood” (verse 11), and was all grouped around the priesthood as its very center. Of course, if the priesthood was changed the law of the old priesthood, the law of Moses, must go with it, and give place to a new law.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

12. μετατιθεμένης. He here uses the comparatively mild and delicate term “being transferred.” When he has prepared the mind of his readers by a little further argument, he substitutes for μετάθεσις the much stronger word “annulment” (ἀθέτησις, Heb 7:18). It is a characteristic of the writer to be thus careful not to shock the prejudices of his readers more than was inevitable. His whole style of argument, though no less effective than that of St Paul in its own sphere, is more conciliatory, more deferential, less vehemently iconoclastic. His relation to St Paul is like that of Melanchthon to Luther.

ἐξ ἀνάγκης. The Law and the Priesthood were so inextricably united that the Priesthood could not be altered without disintegrating the whole complex structure of the Law.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12.] For if the priesthood is changed (better thus than E. V., “the priesthood being changed,” which gives the reader the idea of μετατιθείσης), there takes place of necessity a change of the law (not ‘of law,’ which would be decidedly wrong, and would require τοῦ νόμου, as in a general sentence, implying ‘the law’ of the particular case in view; νόμου, anarthrous, means that law, which had already begun to be used as a proper name, the well-known law of Moses) also (viz. of that law, which, as above, is legislated upon the ground of that priesthood: not, as Beza, Grot., al., of the law of the priesthood only, nor as Calvin, a-Lapide, Jac. Cappell., Böhme, Kuinoel, al., of the ceremonial law only. Chrys. says rightly: εἰ δὲ ἕτερον δεῖ ἱερέα εἶναι, μᾶλλον δὲ ἑτέραν ἱερωσύνην, ἀνάγκη καὶ νόμον ἕτερον εἶναι· τοῦτο δὲ πρὸς τοὺς λέγοντας· τί ἔδει καινῆς διαθήκης; The connexion is with the parenthesis in ver. 11, which was inserted to prepare the way for our verse. Bleek, De Wette, al. deny the reference to the parenthetical clause in ver. 11, and regard our verse as preparing the way for what follows: “It lays down the ground, why not without urgent cause a change of the priesthood took place” (De W.), that cause being that the law itself was to be abrogated. The Writer as yet expresses himself mildly and cautiously: the μετάθεσις here in fact amounts to the ἀθέτησις in ver. 18, but is not yet so expressed).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Being changed [μετατιθεμενης] . Or transferred to another order. See on Gal 1:6.

A change [μεταθεσις] . A transfer to a new basis. Only in Hebrews. See ch. Heb 11:5; Heb 12:27. The inferiority of the Levitical priesthood is inferred from the fact that another priesthood was promised. If perfection was possible at all under the Mosaic economy, it must come through the Levitical priesthood, since that priesthood was, in a sense, the basis of the law. The whole legal system centered in it. The fundamental idea of the law was that of a people united with God. Sin, the obstacle to this ideal union, was dealt with through the priesthood. If the law failed to effect complete fellowship with God, the priesthood was shown to be a failure, and must be abolished; and the change of the priesthood involved the abolition of the entire legal system.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. μετατιθ. ydp.. «γίνεται) For when the priesthood ts changed...Tho yap may refer to the main thought of 5.11 or to the parenthesis (ὁ λαὸς γάρ... The former connexion appears to be the more natural. The change of priesthood involves the change of Law. Such a change must have been called for by an overwhelming necessit

The change of the priesthood is presented as the transference, the removal, of the priesthood from one order, one line, to another: translatum esteacerdotium detribu in tribum, de sacerdotali videlicot ad regalem

4 ⸗ , καὶ νόμον μετάθεσις γίνεται.

pres. partic, (μετατιθεμένης) makes the two processes absolutely coincident (this thought is lost in the Vulg. translato enim).

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901), The Epistle to the Hebrews (1889) and The Epistles of St John (1883) — public domain (pre-1929). Text recovered from Internet Archive / Google Books OCR scans. Westcott’s Gospel of John commentary is not included (its OCR lost the chapter running-heads required for reliable verse-keying). Some Greek quoted in the Hebrews volume is imperfectly rendered by the OCR.