The divine services of the first covenant: the rites and bloody sacrifices, 1–10; are far inferior to the dignity and perfection of the blood and sacrifice of Christ, 11–28. (81)
“The tabernacle, that place of worship which God appointed to be pitched on earth; it is called a worldly sanctuary, wholly of this world, as to the materials of which it was built, and a building that must be taken down; it is called a worldly sanctuary. …This …moving temple, shadowing forth the unsettled state of the church militant, and the human nature of the Lord Jesus Christ.” M. Henry “The general design of this chapter is to show that Christ as High Priest is superior to the Jewish high priest. This is in reference to the efficacy of the sacrifice which He made, he gives an account of the ancient Jewish sacrifices and compares them with that made by the Redeemer. The essential point is, that the former dispensation was mere shadow, type, or figure, and that the latter was real and efficacious.”— (A. Barnes). “Then verily the first ch. 8:7, 13 had also ver. 10, Lev. 18:3, 4, 30; 22:9, Num. 9:12, Ordinances or ceremonies ver. 10, 11; ch. 8:2. Ex. 25:8, Col. 2:8 of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” Pink A.W. says, “The apostle here begins the comparison which he draws between the old covenant and the new with respect to the services and sacrifices whereby the one and the other was established and confirmed. First, he is so far from denying that the ritual of Judaism was of human invention, that he declares, “verily (of truth) the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine service.” He drew his comparisons between Israel’s prophets and Christ, the angels and Christ, Moses and Christ, Joshua and Christ, Aaron and Christ, he had said nothing whatever in disparagement of the inferior. He legitimately magnified, the greater the glory accruing to Christ when it was proved how far He excelled them. The principal point which an objector would make—why should the first covenant be annulled if God Himself had made it? Before giving answer to this (seemingly) most difficult question, he allows and affirms that the service of Judaism was of Divine institution. Thus, in the earliest ages of human history God had graciously appointed means for His people to use. The expression “ordinances of divine service”. The word which is here rendered “ordinances” (margin “ceremonies”) signifies rites, statutes, institutions. They were the appointments of God, which He alone had the right to prescribe, and which His people were under solemn bonds of observing, and that without any alteration or deviation. These “ordinances” were of “divine service” its verbal form it is found in Heb. 8:5, “to serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.” In Acts 24:14, Phi. 3:3 it is translated “worship.” It signifies to serve in godly fear or trembling, thus implying a holy awe and reverence for the One served—cf. Heb. 12:28. Thus, the complete clause means that under the Mosaic economy God gave His people authoritative enactments to direct their worship of Him. This law of worship was a hedge which Jehovah placed around Israel to keep them from the abominations of the heathen. The “verily the first covenant had also ordinances of Divine worship,” clearly intimates that the new covenant too has Divine “ordinances.” We press this because there are some who now affirm that even Christian baptism and the Lord’s supper are “Jewish” ceremonies, which belong not to this present dispensation. “And a worldly sanctuary “Worldly” is that which belongs to the earth rather than to the heavens. Thus, the force of “worldly” here emphasizes the fact that the Mosaic economy was but a transient one, and not eternal. Note how in Heb. 9:24 the “holy places made with hands” are set in antithesis from “heaven itself.” (Heb. 8:1, 2).
