In John 2 we read of the first miracle that the Lord Jesus Christ performed. It involved a wedding and included wine. Both of these are significant elements in the life and work of our Lord.
First, the miracle was performed at a wedding, and this is in perfect keeping with His incarnational purpose. He came to purchase His Bride (see Ephesians 5). The wonder of the gospel, amongst other manifold wonders, is that the Lord Jesus loves His Bride, those whom He has called out from the world of sin and Satan. In fact, Jesus loves His Bride so much that He sacrificed His body and blood for her. No groom has ever paid such a bride price for such an unworthy bride. Yet this manifests the great love of our Saviour for us. That is good news; that is gospel.
A wedding therefore was the most appropriate of venues for the first public manifestation of His glory (John 2:11). In fact, it was here that for the first time we read that His bride (disciples) “believed in Him” (v. 11).
But note also the particular miracle. We know that the Lord enjoyed doing miracles involving food, for on several occasions He multiplied a small meal into enough to feed multitudes. His Father often performed “food miracles” in the Old Testament days, and like Father, like Son. So why wine?
Was it to create a debate over tee-totalling? Well, as interesting and perhaps as important as that debate might be, the answer is no. The reason for the Lord turning water into wine was because the metaphor of wine was perfectly in line with the Lord’s mission. He came to put new wine into new bottles.
In Matthew 9:14–17 the Lord revealed that His ministry was very different than that of John the Baptist. John represented the old covenant, whereas Jesus was the One who would bring in the new covenant. He therefore likened His new covenant gospel to new wine. He made the point that the “new” (in the sense of being different than the former) to drawing near to God could not possibly be contained in the former structures of what we call the “old covenant.” Though there was continuity, nevertheless at the same time there was a huge discontinuity.
In other words, the former approach to God, which entailed a particular location (the tabernacle or temple), a hereditary priesthood, ritual ceremonies, and sacrifices could never be compatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ. After all, He is the Place where God meets man; He is the Priest; He is the fulfilment of all ceremony; and He is the Sacrifice, once for all, for sinners. You cannot contain who He is and what He has done in a religious system; no matter how good that system may be. The wine of the gospel of Jesus Christ, like the wine that He made at that wedding, is better. In the words of the master of that wedding feast, in Christ, God has “kept the good wine until now.” The old was indeed “inferior” (John 2:10).
This is precisely the point of the writer to the Hebrews. He has been making this point for seven chapters and in chapter 8 he makes it abundantly clear. The new is better (8:6; see also 7:19). It is new and better in comparison to what preceded it.
As we have come to understand, the ones to whom this epistle was addressed were struggling with the huge transformation that the coming of Christ has brought to the world. And for these Jewish believers, it was especially an upheaval. After all, for 1,500 years they had lived their lives under the structures of the Mosaic covenant that was established on Mount Sinai. Their theocratic heritage literally was centred on the tabernacle approach to God. The levitical priesthood, the ceremonial washings, the yearly festivals, the sobering days of Passover and Yom Kippur, along with the daily sacrifices, was their religious paradigm. This well-trodden path to being right with God was indelibly written into their psyche. Now enter Jesus.
The ritualistic heritage that pervaded the religion of the Jews was of course designed by God and therefore was good, holy and just (Romans 7:12). However, it was all of this because it was pointing to the promised Messiah. Messiah would one day come to earth and fulfil all that Judaism had pointed to. And when He did, the shadows would give way to the substance, to the Saviour. This was Jesus’ point in Matthew 9. The old system and structures could not coexist with the new wine of the person and work of Jesus Christ. And as late as the early to mid-60s AD, many Jews still did not get it. So this letter was penned. Jewish members of the church were in very real danger of losing the gospel. They were facing the very real danger of the new wine being spilled and wasted while at the same time destroying what should be maintained from the “old wineskins.” They needed to appreciate both that the new was better and that much of the old was good and must be maintained. And many in our day need the same lesson.
Where We Are Going
In this study, we will revisit Hebrews 8 for the purpose of gaining a greater appreciation that the new covenant is a new wine that is better than the wine of the old covenant. Yet at the same time I want us to also appreciate that the wine of the old covenant is still to be savoured. In fact, drinking from that glass will help us, in a greater way, to enjoy imbibing from the goblet of the new covenant gospel.
The Reason for the New Covenant
The author begins this particular passage by stating the reason for the new covenant: “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them…” (v. 7–8a).
Because the former covenant was unable to achieve God’s ultimate salvific purpose, there was a need for a new (different) covenant. “Redemptive grace reaches its zenith in the full and final realisation of this promise through Christ.”1
Two things must be noted.
First, God did not make a mistake with the first covenant. That is, the new covenant was never Plan B in case Plan A failed. The Mosaic/Sinaitic covenant was never intended to be a means of salvation. That covenant was never actually a legalistic one. It too was a covenant grounded in grace, as is clear by the reference in Exodus 20 to God leading them out of the land of Egypt. The covenant was predicated on their deliverance. The law was given after this act of grace (Exodus 20:1–2ff). As Thomas Schreiner writes, “The Lord took the initiative in rescuing His people, and they were called upon to respond with faithful obedience.”2
Salvation has never been by works but always by grace. But the evidence of saving grace was covenant-keeping. The same is true under the new covenant. As James says, “faith without works is dead” (2:20, 26).
Second, and related to the above, the covenant of grace undergirded the Mosaic covenant. That is, God saved people who lived in the days of the Sinaitic covenant and they were always saved in the same way that you and I are: by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. But in their case they were looking forward to Christ as foreshadowed in the old covenant system. In other words, the old wineskin contained the germ of the fullness of the new wine of the gospel.
Third, the fault was not with the covenant but rather the moral fault line ran deep within the people with whom the covenant was made. As Guthrie points out, “he is not suggesting that the law was faulty, but only that man’s experience under it was faulty.”3
In fact, it was for this reason that they were eventually carried captive by the Assyrians and by the Babylonians. Verse 8 makes this abundantly clear: “For finding fault with them….” Again, the law is holy, just and good (Romans 7:12). What the people needed was a power to fulfil this law-covenant. And this is why a “second” was needed. According to Galatians 3:19–25, the entire covenantal structure—including the tabernacle, priesthood and sacrifices, etc.—was designed by God to “school” the nation of Israel in their need for the Saviour. God was working according to His schedule. If you ask why it took so long, then the only reasonable answer is, God knows.
In summary, the old covenant was morally faultless, but because of those to whom it was applied, it was unable to achieve God’s redemptive, salvific purpose of sinful men and women, boys and girls being drawn near to Him (see 7:19).
The Revelation of the New Covenant
In the main body of our particular passage, we have the revelation of the new covenant:
Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbour, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”
In these verses, the writer quotes verbatim from Jeremiah 31:31–34, which famously tells of the new covenant era, of the new age where the new indeed is better.
The new covenant was prophesied by Jeremiah. This is what the author means when he writes, “When he says.” This prophecy came in the days following King Josiah’s temporary reformation and revival. Unfortunately, the kingdom of Judah slid back into apostasy. As you read the book of Jeremiah you see the horrific idolatry to which the nation had succumbed. This and their violation of the Sabbaths (there is always a connection between these sins) were the factors that brought forth God’s judgement. The Lord had graciously brought them out of slavery in Egypt, but now because of their covenantal disloyalty they would suffer bondage again—this time in Babylon.
After this seventy-year captivity, the Jews never again had a wide scale problem with open idolatry. Yet the Lord well knew that the Mosaic covenant would never be the means of their redemption. Though they would no longer bow to stones, they nevertheless needed His grace to bow to His Son. It is in this context that, even before their actual captivity, the Lord promised them, through the prophet Jeremiah, that the day was coming when a new covenant would replace the existing one.
The “I wills” in the passage (vv. 8, 10, 12) highlight the sovereign grace and power behind the prophecy. They were to go into captivity hanging on to this gospel. The new would be better than the old. And eventually, some four hundred years later, a people would be prepared to drink this new wine.
The Lord would make this new covenant “with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” (v. 8).
You will remember that, many years earlier, there had been a massive division between these two kingdoms. But the promise here is that the Lord would sovereignly and graciously bring a unification between them through the new covenant. This no doubt was true in the early days of the new covenant era (see Acts 2, 11, etc.) but, according to Romans 11, this prophecy will be fulfilled in even a greater way one day—in space-time history.
Jeremiah was originally speaking to Jewish people and the writer of Hebrews is, of course, addressing Jews. This explains the Jewish emphasis. Yet as we compare Scripture with Scripture, it becomes clear that the recipients of this new covenant are in fact “the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) regardless of their ethnicity. We are biblically justified to read out of this prophetic statement that God will unify His people—Jewish and Gentile—by the new covenant. As Paul so magnificently writes in Ephesians 2, the wall dividing peoples has been torn down in Christ Jesus, the Mediator of the new covenant.
We should take heart from this that the new covenant is for all and sundry whom the Lord God shall call (Acts 2:39). This is another reason why the new covenant is better than the old. It is far more comprehensive. One reason for this is that it is not localised in Jerusalem. This is why the idea of a rebuilt temple and Jerusalem as the centre of worship is completely wrongheaded. Jesus, by the new covenant, tore down barriers that hindered worldwide worship. He certainly will not oversee them being rebuilt!
Pastorally, we should appreciate the ethnic diversity of the new covenant and therefore the blessing of new covenant-driven racial harmony. The church is to demonstrate this.
Verses 9–12 turn our attention to the content of the new covenant with special reference to its specific promises.
It is Graciously Radical
According to vv. 9–10a, the new covenant was “not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord…”
“The New is therefore more fully and plainly a covenant of grace than the Old. It cannot be broken and it will not be replaced.”4 This covenant would be very different from the previous covenant. In fact, the Jews of Jeremiah’s day should have been struck with God’s amazing grace that He would even bother making a new covenant. After all, He had “disregarded them” (v. 9) with just reason. Why make another one? Because God’s grace is radical; in fact, revolutionary. God’s new covenant would be far more advantageous to them than was the former covenant. In a sense, God is saying, “If you thought that I was gracious when I brought you out of Egypt, just wait until you see how I will bring multitudes out of bondage to sin!”
Since we live by a quid pro quo approach to life, we would assume that rebellion will be punished fully and finally. In fact, that is what we deserve from God. They may have been justified to think that they had broken the last straw and that the Lord would, in response, be done with them forever. However, as they headed into captivity, they did so with the gracious promise that He would make a new covenant with them; not to destroy them but to save them! In spite of what they deserved, God revealed the radical nature of His sovereign grace. It is radical because it goes to the root of our problem.
Israel’s major problem in Egypt was Egypt! It was Israel. Their biggest problem was not the sin of Pharaoh. Their major problem was their own sin and their own sins. The new covenant would take care of that problem.
Likewise, your biggest problem is probably not what you have identified as your biggest problem. Your biggest problem is you. In the immortal words of Pogo, “We have met the enemy, and it is us.”
It is Graciously Renewing
The new covenant would be one of renewal: “I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (v. 10b). Something radical was needed: a spiritual heart operation.5
The promise here is the promise of a new heart. It is the promise of God’s regenerating grace. It is God’s promise that He will provide what sinners need to love the Lord. It is a promise of spiritual power. It is a powerful promise because it is a promise of power. “A better covenant was necessary because the old covenant could only point the way forward; it could not provide man with the power to meet its requirements…. The old law was but a signpost to direct man; the new covenant supplies the power to make the journey.”6 You will recall that the Mosaic covenant was written in stone—literally. The priests were to teach the people the law and the fathers were to catechise their children in the law (Deuteronomy 6). But of course, apart from a renewed heart, apart from a heart that desired to obey the law, and apart from a mind enlightened by the Spirit to understand the law, there was no way that the law could be obeyed. As Paul wrote, apart from the power of the gospel of Christ our hearts are darkened and we cannot comprehend the Lord to whom the law points (Ephesians 2:1–3; 4:17–18). It is essential that we understand this fundamental revelatory purpose of the law of God. The law is God’s self-disclosure. But our sinful hearts blind us from seeing the glory of God. It will require supernatural power for the law written in stone to become the loving desire of our hearts. But this is precisely what the new covenant does (see 2 Corinthians 3:7–18).
Let me summarise. The new covenant is better because it is all about a renewed heart that is keen to know and love the law of God—because it loves the God of the law. It is zealous to know and to submit to the Word of God. As Jones says, “The New Covenant is an internal constraint to obey, whereas the Old was often no more than an external restrain on disobedience.”7 The new heart is motivated away from destructive autonomy as it is directed to loving dependence on the Lord and His will. In fact, that is why the new covenant family prayer is, “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”
Without too involved a discussion, the point needs to be made that there is little difference between the law that God writes on our hearts with the law that He wrote on stone; at least, there is little difference when it comes to their principles. As William Lane points out, “The quality of newness intrinsic to the new covenant consists in the new manner of presenting God’s law and not in newness of content.”8
The Law of God and the Law of Christ
There is a particular theological construct referred to as “new covenant theology.” It lays great stress on the teaching that all that was a part of the old covenant has been abrogated with the instituting of the new covenant—including the Ten Commandments and all the subsequent case laws. In its place, so it is claimed, is the “Law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2) or the “law of liberty” (James 2:12). It is claimed that this law of Christ is found in Matthew 22:37–40, where Jesus taught that it is our duty to love God with all our heart, soul and mind and to love our neighbour as we love ourselves. This, we are told, is the only law that we are under. It is claimed that, since we are no longer “under law” but are rather “under grace” (Romans 6:14–15), love is to guide us rather than law. But such teaching is, for several reasons, wrongheaded.
First, the law versus love category is a false dichotomy. Just ask any parent. Ask Jesus, who said, “If you love me keep my commandments” (John 14:15).
Second, the law of Christ (the law taught by Him) is the same as the law under the former covenant. Jesus made this very clear in Matthew 5:17–20. He came to fulfil it (that is, to restore it to its former glory having been tarnished by Pharisaic perversion). In other words, whatever “fulfil” means, it certainly does not mean ignore.
Third, love is like a river and, like a river, it requires boundaries. Without these, love overflows into subjective sentimentality, morphing eventually into licentiousness. Biblical love has objectively absolute parameters. And where do we find these? In God’s law!
Finally, when Paul said that we are no longer under law he was teaching that the gospel frees us from our sinful legalistic approach to God, which always enslaves us. Being “under grace” puts us in the sphere of Christ’s power to actually obey the law of God (Romans 8:1–4). Andrews highlights with reference to this passage, “The mind of the regenerate person is profoundly engaged with the things of God, not least with his holy requirements as set out plainly in Scripture.”9
In fact, we must not miss the point that the most strenuous law ever laid down to man came from the lips of Jesus: Love God with all of your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbour as yourself. That law is condemning to anyone but to those who have experienced the saving grace of God in the new covenant. Only by the power of Christ, who fulfilled the law in our place, can we then obey the law. This is the glorious teaching of Romans 8.
So, the law written on our hearts speaks of a divinely given desire to obey the Lord and we are not left in the dark as to what that obedience looks like. Read the former covenant!
It might be objected that the old covenant was not exhaustive when it comes to defining love for God and for man. Agreed. But the case laws are for that very reason. They are cases from which we apply principles to similar situations. I want to emphasise that, if you remove the law revealed under the old covenant and replace it with “spiritual impressions,” chaos will result. Since the Holy Spirit inspired God’s Word (law), it is reasonable that He will move us in accordance with His law. And so when it comes to “what does love look like?” and to “what would Jesus do?” thankfully we are not left to conjecture.
It should not be missed that the longest chapter in the Bible—Psalm 119—is all about loving God’s law as a means to loving God, loving others and living to the glory of God. As the Christian reads this, he is moved to want to obey. The Spirit-renewed heart of the Christian longs to live according to God’s beautiful, holy, just and good law.
In summary, the new covenant is better than the former covenant because God provides the power to do His will. We can confidently pray with Augustine, “Lord, command what you will and give what you command.”
It is Graciously Relational
In the light of the new covenant benefit of a renewed heart and love for the Lord the next benefit is to be assumed: it provides a close and personal relationship with God: “I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbour and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest” (vv. 10–11).
This is not a new concept in this epistle. We have been reminded that we can come near to the throne of grace and that can draw near to God (4:15–16; 7:19). But here the familiar covenantal language is used: “I will be their God and they shall be My people.” This is elaborated further with the words, “all shall know me, from the least [youngest?] to the greatest [eldest?].” Clearly, the new covenant is better than the former because of this emphasised personal element.
We would be wrong to assume from this that this element was excluded from regenerate believers in the former covenant. In fact, if you read the Psalms it is quite evident that men like David had a very close and intimate relationship with the Lord. God’s dealings with Abraham were very personal and the list is long with others who could attest to God’s personal involvement in their lives. In fact, Daniel wrote of those (assuming an autobiographical slant) “who know their God” (Daniel 11:32).
However, the emphasis of the new covenant is that this personal relationship with God will be enjoyed corporately. That is, contrary to the days of the former covenant, the privilege of a personal relationship with the Lord will not be for the few but rather, under the new covenant, it will be the Spiritual birthright of many.
When God brought Israel out of Egypt, He stated His purpose to have this close and personal covenant relationship with the people (Exodus 6:7), but it never materialised because of the people’s defiant rebellion (see 8:9). But under the new covenant things are different. God’s people will be empowered to keep covenant (Jude 24–25) and the whole mass of God’s people will together enjoy being God’s people and having God as theirs.
Mixed Versus Pure
Under the old covenant, the people of God was nationalistic and it therefore included both regenerate and unregenerate. In other words, “very few Israelites had a personal, saving knowledge of God because very few shared Abraham’s faith in the coming Christ.”10 It was therefore a mixed multitude. Under the new covenant, God’s people are all born again. It is for this reason that the church will not need to evangelise itself for “all show know Me.” In fact, even the young ones in the congregation will experience this. This is what evangelical egalitarianism looks like!
Please note that this personal relationship is corporate. Enough cannot be said about this reality. Does Proverbs 18:1 describe you with reference to others who “know the Lord”? Romans 14:12 is true but so is Hebrews 10:24–25. (In fact, Romans 14:12 is in the context of corporate concern! The Christian desires that his brothers and sisters be able to “stand” before The Lord.)
The new covenant blessings are designed to be experienced within the covenantal community (see Acts 2:42–43 with v. 47). We should expect that every member of our local church manifest evidence that they “know the Lord” and that they are committed to knowing Him better. We should expect that children know the Lord and therefore that parents are raising their children to know the Lord. The new covenant is relationally about a lot more than merely your own family.
It is Graciously Redemptive
Verse 12 shows us that the new covenant is graciously redemptive: “For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.”
God has always been merciful. In fact, this was the basis of His former covenant with Israel (Exodus 20:6; 33:19; 34:7). But under the new covenant this mercy is magnified in that God promises to put away the sins of His people once for all.
As the writer will demonstrate in subsequent chapters, under the former covenant there was a constant reminder of sins. The yearly Day of Atonement perpetually reminded the people that sin was covered but not cleansed. How could it ever be removed? Well, under the new covenant it is.
The covenant promise was that, when it comes to the sins of God’s people, He “will remember no more.” As Andrews helpful comments, “This does not mean that God has amnesia, but that he no longer requires satisfaction for his people’s sins at their own hands.”11 It is a promise rooted in God’s steadfast love that He wills to forget, He refuses to remember the sins of His people against Him. But this, of course, is grounded in the person and work of God’s dear Son.
Because Jesus Christ lived a perfectly righteous life and then died as a substitute sacrifice for sinners the Father has removed all of our guilt—once and for all. He does not hold our sins against us; He does not remember our unrighteousness, sins or lawless deeds. To do so would be to reject the redemptive work of His Son.
Believer, rejoice that Jesus Christ was perfectly pleasing to the Father in all that He did, thought and said. His resurrection was the Father’s vindicating statement of His Son. And so the Father is actually unable to remember our sins. His Son has taken them away, once and for all. “Love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life my all.”
The conclusion is clear: The new covenant fulfilled God’s eternal purpose to redeem sinners, to release us from the guilt and pollution of sin as well as from its power, pleasures and, one day, completely from its presence. The former covenant could never do that. Most surely the new is better.
This brings us to the final verse and the final point of the passage.
The Realisation of the New Covenant
Without belabouring the point, the “first” covenant has been fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is therefore now “obsolete.” Literally, it has been made old because a new covenant has come to pass. “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (v. 13).
The writer goes on and makes the point that the covenant now considered “old” is “ready to vanish away.” It is ready to disappear. And the implication is that the new covenant, now realised, is perpetual. By virtue of the person and ongoing work of Jesus Christ our High Priest, this new covenant is eternally realised. It is in place forever.
Let’s make two observations from this verse.
First, it speaks to the removal of the old structures. I have argued that the old covenant has a continuity with the new covenant. So how then can I hold that position while accepting v. 13? Quite easily.
The entire argument has surrounded the priesthood and the tabernacle/sacrificial system. In fact, the next two chapters will drill deeper into this latter theme. So, when he speaks of the old covenant “vanishing” he is speaking with reference to these ritualistic elements. He is not arguing that the law of God becomes obsolete (in fact, the New Testament epistles assume the ongoing validity of the law.) So what is being argued is that the old structures are no longer necessary, effective or useful. In fact, for those who are hanging on to them they are dangerous. In 70 AD this became very apparent.
An important word of application is in order: Be careful of missing Christ in the midst of religious systems.
Second, this verse speaks to the replacement with the new structure. There a new “structure” that replaces the old structure: the church. That is, the church is now the temple of God. It is through the church that we offer sacrifices to God (Romans 12:1–2; 1 Peter 2). It is by means of the church that God’s presence is made known in this world (Ephesians 3; etc.). It is through the ministry of the church that we experience redemption and therefore reformation. This is vital to grasp. Those who are the new covenant people of God live redemptively. We live as those who have been forgiven and therefore as those who do forgive. We acknowledge our sinful failure and seek to change, empowered by the Spirit who informs our minds and moves our hearts (v. 10). In so many ways, this new structure is better than the old structure.
And so I ask you in closing, have you experienced God’s mercy and grace in the new covenant? Can you testify that the new is better than your old way of trying to earn salvation? Can you testify that the new is infinitely better than the old way of running away from God?
Are you tired of the dirty water of a sinful life? Then come to Jesus Christ and ask Him to miraculously change you. He loves turning water into wine. He loves to manifest His glory by forgiving sinners who will then spend eternity declaring, “The new is better!”
- William L. Lane, Hebrews: Word Biblical Commentary, 2 vols. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991), 1:210. ↩
- Thomas R. Schreiner, 40 Questions about Christians and Biblical Law (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2010), 26. ↩
- Donald Guthrie, Hebrews: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 1983), 177. ↩
- Hywel R. Jones, Let’s Study Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2002), 89. ↩
- R. Kent Hughes, Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul, 2 vols. (Wheaton: Crossway, 1993), 1:218. ↩
- Raymond Brown, The Message of Hebrews: The Bible Speaks Today (Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000), 150. ↩
- Jones, Let’s Study Hebrews, 89. ↩
- Lane, Hebrews, 1:209. ↩
- Edgar Andrews, A Glorious High Throne: Hebrews Simply Explained (Darlington: Evangelical Press, 2003), 225. ↩
- Andrews, A Glorious High Throne, 234. ↩
- Andrews, A Glorious High Throne, 237. ↩