Hebrews 9:25

9:25-26 Under the old covenant, the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement had to be made again and again (Lev 16:29-34). Christ’s superior sacrifice was made once for all time.

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

Heb 9:25. Οὐδʼ ἵνα) He did not enter for this purpose, viz. that.

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

Heb_9:25. Οὐδέ] nor yet, sc. εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν.

προσφέρειν ἑαυτόν] denotes not the presentation of Himself with His blood before God in the heavenly Holy of Holies (Böhme, Bleek, Delitzsch, Alford, Kurtz, and others; comp. also Riehm, Lehrbegr. des Hebräerbr. p. 474), but the offering of Himself as a sacrifice upon earth. The sense is: Christ entered into the heavenly Holy of Holies, not that He might presently leave it again, in order afresh to offer Himself as a sacrifice upon earth.

ὁ ἀρχιερεύς] the Levitical high priest.

τὰ ἅγια] the earthly Holy of Holies.

ἐν αἵματι ἀλλοτρίῳ] with blood not his own.

ἀλλοτρίῳ] opposition to ἑαυτόν.

Heb_9:25-28. Renewed (comp. Heb_7:27-28, Heb_9:12) emphasizing of the manifestation once for all (and thus the full sufficiency) of the sacrifice of Christ.

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 9:25 . οὐδʼ ἵνα πολλάκις … “Nor yet [did He enter in] in order to offer Himself repeatedly,” that is, He did not enter in for a brief stay from which He was to return to renew His sacrifice. Westcott holds that the “offering” corresponds with the offering of the victim upon the altar, not with the bringing of the blood into the Holy of Holies. He refers to Heb 9:14 ἑαυτὸν προσήνεγκεν , to Heb 9:28 , and also to Heb 10:10 . Similarly Weiss and others. But in Heb 9:7 προσφέρει distinctly refers to the bringing in and application of the blood in the Holy of Holies, and the context of the present passage seems decidedly to make for the same interpretation. The sequence of the ἵνα clause after εἰσῆλθεν ; the analogy presented in the clause under ὥσπερ ; and the consequence stated under ἐπεὶ (Heb 9:26 ) all combine in favouring this meaning. The High Priest enters the Holiest annually, but Christ’s entering in was of another kind, not requiring repetition. The reason for the reiterated entering in of the High Priest, as well as the possibility of it, is given in the words ἐν αἵματι ἀλλοτρίῳ . ἐν : “The High Priest was, as it were, surrounded, enveloped, in the life sacrificed and symbolically communicated” (Westcott). It is safer to take ἐν in its common instrumental sense: the blood was the instrument which enabled the High Priest to enter. The reason why the entrance had to be annually renewed is given in Heb 10:4 . The same contrast between αἷμα ἀλλότριον and αἶμα ἴδιον is found in Heb 9:12 . A sacrifice of blood not one’s own is necessarily imperfect, Christ’s entrance to God being διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου αἵματος and διὰ πνεύματος αἰωνίου had eternal efficacy.

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

Another double comparison: the Levitical high Priest offered other blood, but Christ offered his own: he every year once iterated his offering: Christ offering himself but once, abolished sin altogether, both of the former ages and of the ages to come.

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

As in Heb 9:24, Paul said, it was not into the typical, but the true sanctuary, that Christ is entered; so now he says, that His sacrifice needs not, as the Levitical sacrifices did, to be repeated. Construe, "Nor yet did He enter for this purpose that He may offer Himself often," that is, "present Himself in the presence of God, as the high priest does (Paul uses the present tense, as the legal service was then existing), year by year, on the day of atonement, entering the Holy of Holies.

with--literally, "in."

blood of others--not his own, as Christ did.

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 25. Nor yet that he should offer himself often] The sacrifice of Christ is not like that of the Jewish high priest; his must be offered every year, Christ has offered himself once for all: and this sacrificial act has ever the same efficacy, his crucified body being still a powerful and infinitely meritorious sacrifice before the throne.

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

25. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, etc. How, then, is he a priest, one may say, if he offers no sacrifices? To this I reply that it is not requited of a priest that he should be continually sacrificing; for even under the Law there were days appointed for the chief sacrifices every year; they had also their hours daily morning and evening. But as that only true sacrifice which Christ offered once for all is ever efficacious, and thus perpetual in its effects, it is no wonder that on its virtue, which never fails, Christ’s eternal priesthood should be sustained. And here again he shows how and in what things Christ differs from the Levitical priest. Of the sanctuary he had spoken before; but he notices one difference as to the kind of sacrifice, for Christ offered himself and not an animal; and he adds another; that he repeated not his sacrifice, as under the Law, for the repetition there was frequent and even incessant.

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.

(25) Nor yet that he should—i.e., Nor yet (did He enter into heaven) that He may offer Himself often. The connection has been pointed out already in the last Note. The “offering “which is here in thought does not correspond to the actual sacrifice of the sin-offerings on the Day of Atonement, but to the presentation of the blood in the Holiest Place. In this really consisted the presentation of that sacrifice to God. That this is the meaning here is shown by the contrast in the latter part of the verse, where we read of the high priest’s entering the Holy Place (i.e., the Holy of Holies; see Note on Heb_9:2) “with blood not his own,” and by the argument of Heb_9:26.

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

25. entereth into the holy place every year] In this entrance of the High Priest once a year, on the Day of Atonement, into the Holiest Place culminated all that was gorgeous and awe-inspiring in the Jewish ritual. The writer therefore purposely chose it as his point of comparison between the ministrations of the Two Covenants. For if he could shew that even the ceremonies of this day—called by the Jews “the Day”—were a nullity compared with the significance of the Gospel, he was well aware that no other rite would be likely to make a converted Hebrew waver in his faith. The Day of Atonement was called “the Sabbath of Sabbatism” or “perfect Sabbath.” It was the one fast-day of the Jewish Calendar. The 70 bullocks offered during the Atonement-week were regarded as a propitiation for all the 70 nations of the world. On that day the very Angels were supposed to tremble. It was the only day on which perfect pardon could be assured to sins which had been repented of. On that day alone Satan had no power to accuse, which is inferred by “Gematria” from the fact that “the Accuser” in Hebrew was numerically equivalent to 364, so that on the 365th day of the year he was forced to be silent. On the seven days before the day of Atonement the High Priest was scrupulously secluded, and was kept awake all the preceding night to avoid the chance of ceremonial defilement. Till the last 40 years before the Fall of Jerusalem it was asserted that the tongue of scarlet cloth tied round the neck of the goat “for Azazel” (“the Scape Goat”) used to turn white in token of the Remission of Sins. The function of the High Priest was believed to be attended with much peril, and the people awaited his reappearance with deep anxiety. The awful impression made by the services of the day is shewn by the legends which grew up respecting them, and by such passages as Sir_50:5-16; Sir_45:6-22. See an Excursus on this subject in my Early Days of Christianity, ii. 549–552.

with blood of others] Namely of the goat and the bullock. See Heb_9:22. A Rabbinic book says “Abraham was Circumcised on the Day of Atonement; and on that Day God annually looks on the blood of the Covenant of the Circumcision as atoning for all our iniquities.”

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.

Nor yet that he should offer himself often,.... Or at all again; which shows the perfection of his sacrifice, for justice was satisfied, the law fulfilled, sin done away, and complete salvation obtained at once; which lies against the errors of the Socinians, who say he offers himself now in heaven; and of the Papists, who pretend to offer the body of Christ daily in their mass:

as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; not his own, nor other men's, but the blood of goats and calves; but Christ entered into heaven with his own blood, he having been altar, priest, and sacrifice: the high priest went into the most holy place every year, but Christ has entered into heaven once for all, where he sits down and continues, having done his work effectually.

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

25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Ver. 25. Not that he would offer] As Popish mass-mongers will have it. Eamus ad communem errorem (said Domitius Calderinus to his friends, when they persuaded him to go to mass, A.D. 1442), Let us go to the common error.

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.

Nor yet that he should offer himself often - The Jewish high priest entered the most holy place with blood once every year. In this respect the offering made by Christ, and the work which he performed, differed from that of the Jewish high priest. It was not needful that he should enter the holy place but once. Having entered there, he permanently remains there.

With the blood of others - That is, with the blood of calves, and goats. This is a second point in which the work of Christ differs from that of the Jewish high priest. Christ entered there with his own blood; notes on Heb 9:12.

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

Should offer himself, &c. He takes notice that Christ, by virtue of his sacrifice, and his dying once on the cross, satisfied for the sins of all men that even were from the beginning of the world. It was decreed from eternity that the Son of God should come to redeem mankind: the ransom that was not yet paid was accepted; and all might be saved who believed in their Redeemer, who was to come, and who, by the graces that God offered and gave them, lived well. (Witham) --- Christ shall never more offer himself in sacrifice, in that violent, painful, and bloody manner, nor can there be any occasion for it; since by that one sacrifice upon the cross, he has furnished the full ransom, redemption, and remedy for all the sins of the world. But this hinders not that he may offer himself in the sacred mysteries in an unbloody manner, for the daily application of that one sacrifice of redemption to our souls. (Challoner)

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).

The excellency of Christ’s sacrifice beyond the Aaronical is argued here from its singularity; it needs no repetition, as their multiplied sacrifices did.

Nor; oude, introducing it, is but inferring this excellency of Christ’s sacrifice, by denying in it that weakness which was annexed to the legal ones; there was no need that he should die yearly, to fulfil the type of the often yearly sacrifices of the legal high priest, who entered with the blood of bulls and goats, strange blood to him, and not his own, into the holy of holiest in the tabernacle, and entered so every year once, to show the virtue of his sacrifice to be only signal, typical, and passing, to make room for a better, that single, individual one of Christ, in respect of sacrifice and oblation.

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

25. The true sacrifice was once for all, as the typical were repeated and often.

Offer himself—This offer is parallel to the entereth of the high priest; it, therefore, does not here mean to sacrifice himself, but to present himself in heaven, as the high priest presented himself in the holy place. Yet in both cases a previous sacrifice takes place.

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

Vers. 25, 26. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others (i.e. blood not his own, allotriw); for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now (probably nuni , not nun , meaning "as it is ") once at the end of the ages hath he appeared (rather, been manifested, pefanerwtai) to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Here (as above noted) the idea of efapax in ver. 12 is taken up. That Christ"s offering of himself is once for all, needing no repetition, follows from the view of it already given, viz. that it is a perpetual presentation of himself, after fully availing sacrifice of himself, before the very face of God. That this is of necessity once for all is now further shown by the consideration that repeated offerings of himself would involve the impossible condition of repeated deaths. Observe that "offer himself" in ver. 25 does not refer to the death upon the cross, but to the intercession before the eternal mercy-seat after accomplished atonement, answering to the high priest"s entrance, with the blood of previous sacrifice, within the veil. The death itself is denoted in ver. 26 by payein ("suffered"). The argument rests on the principle, already established as being signified by the whole of the ancient ritual, that, for acceptable intercession in behalf of man, previous death or blood-shedding is in every case required. But why add "since the foundation of the world"? We must supply the thought of the retrospective efficacy of Christ"s atonement. Ever since sin entered, man needed atonement, signified, but not effected, by the ancient sacrifices. Christ"s one offering of himself has supplied this primeval need, availing, not only for the present and future, but also for all past ages. This view was definitely expressed, with reference to "transgressions which were under the first covenant," in ver. 15, and, though not repeated here, is prominent in the writer"s mind. (cf. Rom_3:25, where God"s righteousness is said to have been shown in Christ with regard to "the passing over of sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God," as well as to justification of believers now; also Ro 5, where the effect of Christ"s obedience is declared to be coextensive with that of Adam"s transgression) This view accounts for "since the foundation of the world," the idea being that, the transgressions requiring atonement having been since then, repeated deaths since then would have been needed had not Christ"s one offering of himself availed for all time, just as repeated sacrifices were needed for the high priest"s symbolical yearly intercessions. The question is not asked, nor is any reason given, why this one all-sufficient offering was deferred till so long after the need began. It is enough to know that such has been, in fact, the Divine will, viz. that not till the fullness of time was come not till the end (or consummation) of the long preceding sinful ages should the Redeemer once for all be manifested for atonement. The phrase, epi sunteleia twn aiwnwn , seems certainly to imply the idea, otherwise known to have been prevalent in the apostolic age, of the end of all things being close at hand; and this expectation further accounts for the reference to the past rather than the future in the expression, "since the foundation of the world." For, with regard to the future, the second coming of Christ was the one great idea present to the minds of Christians, the intervening time being regarded by them as but the dawn of coming day. (see, on this head, what was said under Heb_1:2) The strong expression, eiv ayethsin amartiav , (for the sense of ayethsiv , cf. Heb_7:18, where it means "abrogation used as it here is with reference to all the transgressions of the ages past, though not to be pressed so as to invalidate what is elsewhere said of the future penal consequences of all willful and unrepented sin, may still be cited among the texts supporting the view of those who "trust the larger hope."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Our apostle, in these words, sets forth the excellency of Christ’s sacrifice from its singularity; it needeth no repetition, as their sacrifices of old did: Their sacrifices were repeated often, and their repetition was an evidence of their imperfecton; but Christ’s once offering himself a sacrifice was sufficient, in regard of the infinite worth and dignity of his person: Once in the end of the world, in the gospel-age, the last age of the world, hath he appeared to take away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Here note, That the virtue of Christ’s sacrifice once offered, did extend itself to all times, and purchased pardon for sins committed in all ages, even long before it was offered: For the death of Christ must be considered, not as a natural, but as a moral cause: Not as a medicine that heals, but as a ransom that frees a captive. A captive may be released upon assurance given that a ransom shall be paid, though it be not actually paid.

Thus the death of Christ was available to purchase pardon for believers before his coming, because he interposed as their Surety; and is therefore called the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, not only in respect of God’s decree, but Christ’s efficacy: The salvation we derive form him, was ever in him; Christ’s once offering was sufficient; his sacrifice may be often commemorated, but only once offered. Such indeed is the absolute perfection of the once offering of Christ, that it stands in need of, and will admit of no repetition in any kind.

Note farther, That this once offering of Christ is always effectual unto all the ends of it, now and hereafter, even no less than it was in the day and hour when it was actually offered. This sacrifice needs no repetition like those of old, but is always fresh in the virtue of it, and needs nothing but revewed application by faith for the communication of its effects and fruits unto us; for by one offering he hath forever perfected them that are sanctified. Though the sufferings of Christ were necessary to the expiation of sin, yet he suffered neither more nor oftener than was necessary; to have suffered often was altogether needless, and would have been useless.

Note lastly, The great end for which Christ once became a sacrifice, namely, to put away sin; plainly implying, that sin had erected a dominion, a tyranny over all men, as by a law; that no power of any mere creature was able to disannul or abolish this law of sin; that the destruction and dissolution of this law of sin, was the great end of Chirst’s coming, to discharge his priestly office in the sacrifice of himself: Now in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away, to abolish and destroy sin by the sacrifice of himself.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

25. Nor yet, etc. The high priest entered once a year with the blood of a victim. Not so Christ, our High Priest.

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.

He did not go there

"He did not enter heaven"

year by year

"every year" or "each year"

with the blood of another

This means with the blood of an animal victim, not with his own blood.

If that had been the case

"If he had had to offer himself often"

to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself

Doing away with sin represents having God forgive it. AT: "to cause God to forgive sins by sacrificing himself" or "to sacrifice himself so that God can forgive sin" (See: Metaphor)

translationWords

high priest

holy place

year

blood

suffer

found

age

reveal

sin

sacrifice

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

25. κατʼ ἐνιαυτόν. In this entrance of the High Priest once a year, on the Day of Atonement, into the Holiest Place culminated all that was gorgeous and awe inspiring in the Jewish ritual. The writer therefore purposely chose it as his point of comparison between the ministrations of the Two Covenants. For if he could shew that even the ceremonies of this day—called by the Jews “the Day”—were a nullity compared with the significance of the Gospel, he was well aware that no other rite would be likely to make a converted Hebrew waver in his faith. The Day of Atonement was called “the Sabbath of Sabbatism” or “perfect Sabbath.” It was the one fast-day of the Jewish Calendar. The 70 bullocks offered during the Atonement-week were regarded as a propitiation for all the 70 nations of the world. On that day the very Angels were supposed to tremble. It was the only day on which perfect pardon could be assured to sins which had been repented of. On that day alone Satan had no power to accuse, which is inferred by “Gematria” from the fact that “the Accuser” in Hebrew was numerically equivalent to 364, so that on the 365th day of the year he was forced to be silent. On the seven days before the Day of Atonement the High Priest was scrupulously secluded, and was kept awake all the preceding night to avoid the chance of ceremonial defilement. Till the last 40 years before the Fall of Jerusalem it was asserted that the tongue of scarlet cloth tied round the neck of the goat “for Azazel” (“the Scape Goat”) used to turn white in token of the Remission of Sins. The function of the High Priest was believed to be attended with much peril, and the people awaited his reappearance with deep anxiety. The awful impression made by the services of the day is shewn by the legends which grew up respecting them, and by such passages as Sir 50:5-16; Sir 45:6-22. See an Excursus on this subject in my Early Days of Christianity, II. 549–552.

ἐν αἵματι ἀλλοτρίῳ. “With blood not his own,” namely that of the goat and bullock. See Heb 9:22. The ἐν expresses that with which any one is furnished. Comp. 1Co 4:21. A Rabbinic book says “Abraham was circumcised on the Day of Atonement; and on that Day God annually looks on the blood of the Covenant of the Circumcision as atoning for all our iniquities.”

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.

25-28.] In ver. 24, His having entered into a mere typical sanctuary was denied: now it is denied, that His sacrifice needs, as those others did, to be repeated continually.

25.] nor yet (Œc. adds, ἀπὸ κοινοῦ ληπρέον,—εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν) that He may (i. e. with this intent, to) oftentimes offer Himself (before God in the holiest place: continue, as those high priests, year by year coming in before the face of God in His sanctuary. This προσφέρειν ἑαυτόν is not to be understood of Christ’s death, nor confounded, as Owen, Thol., De Wette, Ebrard, Lünem., and many others have done, with παθεῖν below: see there), just as (in a manner corresponding to, that which follows. ὥς περ, as ὅς περ, ὅσος περ, and other words lengthened by περ (περί), implies a thorough similitude as far as the thing compared goes: Hartung (i. 340) illustrates such words by the obsolete German adverbs allda, allhier, allwo: cf. Jdg 9:53, “and allto brake his skull”) the (Jewish) high priest enters into the holy (holiest) place year by year with (ἐν, not instrumental, but elemental: he enters, furnished with, as it were clad with, that which follows. We use our ‘in’ of even the lesser articles of personal wear in a similar sense: ‘a man in spectacles’) blood of others (i. e. “not his own,” as Syr., which is an important point of contrast with Christ: see this brought in in the argumentation below):

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

Nor yet that [ου δ ινα] . Supply did he enter. "Nor yet did he enter that he might offer," etc.

He should offer himself often [πολλακις προσφερη εαυτον] . His offering did not need repetition like the Levitical sacrifices. Offer himself refers rather to Christ 's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary and presentation of himself before God, than to his offering on the cross. See on ver. 14. The sacrifice on the cross is described by paqein suffer, ver. 26, and is introduced as a distinct thought. The point is that, being once in the heavenly sanctuary, Christ was not compelled to renew often his presentation of himself there, since, in that case, it would be necessary for him to suffer often. Each separate offering would necessitate a corresponding suffering.

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